SLAIN IN THE SPIRIT?

[marksman]

And yet, Paul commended several women who served in the church, even naming one gal an apostle...

Rom 16:1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:

Rom 16:3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:

Rom 16:6 Greet Mary, who bestowed much labour on us.

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

Rom 16:12 Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which laboured much in the Lord.

Rom 16:15 Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them.

Gee, evidently, Paul knew lots of gals who taught men.

Not one of these verses say that they taught men. You are getting real desperate, that is obvious. Take a look, a real look at Romans 16:15. If Paul told them to salute, which means to enfold them in the arms or greet, these women he also told them to do the same with all the saints with them. So according to you Paul telling them that they are to hug them and greet them means that they are teachers then it means that all the saints that he is referring to are teachers.

Lets face facts, that is you are able to. Your ability to exegete scripture is nil. I mean, the qualification to be a teacher is to hug people. Roll of the eyes.

 

[marksman]

BARRD.... I believe, to the depths of my being, that "slain in the spirit" is a false teaching. There is nothing in the Bible at all anything like it, and there would be, if it were a real spiritual experience.

ME...And I beleive to the depths of my being that being slain in the Spirit is NOT false teaching and I believe that from the depths of my heart that you are not interested in what the scripture says, ONLY what you think it says because Paul said he forbade a woman to teach and you are OK with buildings when the scripture DOES NOT mention buildings and you pathetic attempt to justify them with mention of the OT temple and synagogues which were jewish, not christian is further proof that you pick and choose to suit your own theology.

BARRD....But I honestly believe that Charismatics are filling up on cotton candy...no nourishment, no substance...just empty puffs of sugar.
A wicked generation, seeking after a sign, believing in false teachers with signs and wonders that, if it were possible, could deceive even the elect...

ME....But I honestly believe that Charismatics are not filling up on Cotton Candy and are getting nourishment and substance from people like Derek Prince and they are not just empty puffs of sugar. Have you read any of Derek's 60 books? If not start reading them now. No, maybe that is not a good idea as you will have to ditch all your accusations against the body of Christ and you could not handle that.

I honestly believe that they are not a wicked generation and when you say that you are sailing close to the wind so be careful. And I honestly believe that they are not seeking after a sign, nor believing in false teachers (I think you are).

BARRD....The point is, Stan, that I am not stupid.

ME...​The point is bardd, you may think you are not stupid , but your comments would suggest otherwise the way you slander the body of Christ. Slandering the body of Christ is the same as slandering Christ himself.

BARRD....I seem to recall having read somewhere that we would know "by their fruits". Obviously, one cannot gather grapes from thorns...

ME...​I have given you several examples of people who have become alive in Christ as a result of their spiritual encounter which included falling, but according to you it was a work of satan. That comment alone shows you what little ability you have to discern the work of God and the fruit that results.

It seems that God cannot do anything unless he does things your way. I have got news for you. God does things the way he wants to do them, not the way you want them done ands until you come to terms wiht that, you are going to lead a very dreary, deluded life.

 

[marksman]

Not a gift of the Holy Spirit....okay, fair enough. So, where did it come from?


Of course, NOT ONCE, please note NOT ONCE have you shown me even one example of a believer being knocked off of his or her feet by the power of God in the Bible...

And not once does the scripture mention a believer going to a meeting in a car so that means they are not of God and we should all walk.

 

[marksman]

The Holy Spirit does not perform on cue, like some sort of circus act. I'd find it more plausible if I were told that someone was overwhelmed and fell over unexpectedly...perhaps when the light of the gospel finally broke through. But the notion of people lining up at an altar to be "slain"....well, that just reeks of the stench of sulfur and brimstone to me. I can almost hear the gales of demonic laughter...

​Once again you are casting aspersions on the body of Christ and in so doing you are casting aspersions on Christ himself. Again, you are sailing close to the wind as you are attributing the work of the Spirit to satan. That is blasphemy according to scripture and the unforgivable sin so you need to watch your words.

There has NEVER been the stench of sulphur and brimstone when I have prayed for people and they have gone down under the POWER OF THE SPIRIT without any help from me and until you can PROVE it is otherwise, not just your opinion, which is all you have given us so far, I suggest you keep your weird and wonderful thoughts to yourself.

 

[marksman]

But you know what I do not see in this passage of scripture?
I do not see Apollos et. al. falling over as Paul lays hands on them.
Is that because Paul had neglected to provide "catchers" or bring along blankets for them?

And I do not see the body of Christ putting up a building and worshiping in it but you are OK with that despite the fact that it is NOT in scripture.

 

[marksman]

So, tell me how you think I am "focusing on the bad parts of Christianity". And tell me about the "good parts".

Your question is a complete joke. All you have done is rubbish the working of the Holy Spirit because he doesn't do things according to your theology. If that is not focusing on the so called bad parts I don't know what is especially as you have called the work of the Holy Spirit the work of satan.

 

[marksman]

Then, you were going to tell me about the "good parts" that I am apparently missing? What good parts would these be? You have caught me in a pretty good mood....show me these "good parts", please.

I have given you many examples of the good parts but all you have done is call the work of the Holy Spirit the work of satan.

 

[marksman]

I'm afraid that is a bad misconception marksman. What you refer to in 1 Tim 2 is in the context of marriage, or do you really think women are saved by having babies?

Paul said;
Submit to one another... Eph 5:21
Teach one another...Col 3:16
Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus....Rom 16:3

The issue is not that women can teach, it is what ANYONE teaches, man or woman.

Here the whole chapter in the literal translation.....

First of all then, I exhort that petitions, prayers, supplications, and thanksgivings be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all the ones being in high position, that we may lead a tranquil and quiet existence in all godliness and dignity.

For this is good and acceptable before God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to a full knowledge of truth.

For God is one, also there is one Mediator of God and of men, the Man Christ Jesus, the One having given Himself a ransom on behalf of all, the testimony to be given in its own time, to which I was appointed a herald and apostle (I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie), a teacher of the nations, in faith and truth.

Therefore, I desire the men to pray in every place, lifting up holy hands without wrath and doubting.

So also the women to adorn themselves in proper clothing, with modesty and sensibleness, not with plaiting, or gold, or pearls, or expensive garments, but what becomes women professing fear of God, through good works.

Let a woman learn in silence, in all subjection. And I do not allow a woman to teach nor to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived has come to be in transgression; but she will be kept safe through the childbearing, if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with sensibleness.

1. Paul emphasises the importance of prayer and why.

2. He then confirms that God has made him an apostle and a teacher.

3. He then reiterates his call to pray.

4. He then addresses how women should dress.

5. He tells them that a woman should learn in silence and not teach which is a sign of subjection which means a woman teaching is exercising authority she doesn't have.

No mention of marriage anywhere and as the letter is dealing with church matters, that is where the instruction is meant for.

 

[StanJ]

1. Paul emphasises the importance of prayer and why.

2. He then confirms that God has made him an apostle and a teacher.

3. He then reiterates his call to pray.

4. He then addresses how women should dress.

5. He tells them that a woman should learn in silence and not teach which is a sign of subjection which means a woman teaching is exercising authority she doesn't have.

No mention of marriage anywhere and as the letter is dealing with church matters, that is where the instruction is meant for.

Well I guess that depends on how well you study the Greek, and IF you include all other references to woman NOT teaching, which will be hard to find because there isn't any. You basically just ignored what I posted and failed to address the points I did make.

γυνή (gynē) isn't eh Greek for 'married woman'. If used as a reference to ALL women, the Greek uses ὦ γύναι. It is no different with the Greek ἀνήρ (anēr), which conveys a married man. This is obvious as Paul compares them to Adam & Eve, who were also a husband and wife couple. The fact that women did teach and have those positions in the OT cannot be ignored, or at least should not. Paul as a learned scholar knew this and would not teach against women being teachers, especially as he had them as CO workers, NOT subordinates. Nowhere else in scripture does Paul tell women to be subordinate to men in a collective setting. Your POV is typical of male dominated churches that use this verse in a misogynistic style to keep women in the same place that Islam does. Women are help mates under God, NOT subordinates or human beings of a second class nature.

 

[Barrd]

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

So, using Paul's list, let's look at some of the ladies of the New Testament.

Paul starts off his list with apostles.
And we have an example of a female apostle in Junia.

The first time someone pointed her out to me (it was a man, by the way), I was, to say the least, astonished. All of my life, I had been taught, as Marksman says, that we gals are supposed to keep our mouths shut in church, and have no part of the leadership....unless it is to teach Sunday School to other women or to kids.
But here was a lady that Paul refers to as an apostle....just as he was, himself....putting her on the same level as Peter or John, or Phillip, or any of them. And he says that she and Adronicus, who were both in prison with him, were "of note" among the apostles.
The sad thing is, that for a very long time, the church has tried to keep Junia and her role as an outstanding apostle on the down-low....even adding an "s" to the end of her name to try to disguise her as a boy. Honestly, fellas...get over yourselves. God loves His daughters just as much as He loves His sons....and He does not put a difference between them.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.


Next, Paul lists prophets. Are there any female prophets in the Bible?

Yes, there are.
As a matter of fact, there are at least four of them:

Act 21:8 And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.
Act 21:9 And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.

I'd like to find out more about those gals...I'll bet their story was thrilling. Evidently Eusebius mentions them in his writing, describing them as “mighty luminaries” and ranking them “among the first stage in the apostolic succession.”

Evangelists next. Any from the distaff side?

Well, there is Phoebe, of course.

Rom 16:1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:

Interestingly, the word here translated "servant" is actually diakonos. Ordinarily, this word is translated "deacon".

From the Strongs:

G1249 (Strong)

διάκονος

diakonos

dee-ak'-on-os

Probably from διάκω diakō (obsolete, to run on errands; compare G1377); an attendant, that is, (generally) a waiter (at table or in other menial duties); specifically a Christian teacher and pastor (technically a deacon or deaconess): - deacon, minister, servant.

Total KJV occurrences: 30

And finally, we have pastors and teachers.

And here is Priscilla, wife of Aquilla, who, together with her husband, taught the already learned and eloquent Apollos “the way of God” (i.e. theology) more accurately.

Act 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
Act 18:25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.
Act 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

So, here we have a Biblical example of a woman teaching a man.
How 'bout that...

 

[Barrd]

I've heard that same phrase I have highlighted above, used many times by Mormon Missionaries. It's NOT a valid or acceptable reason as I'm sure you would concur with. You were given a few examples of what God has done in the Bible, so why would you assume that He couldn't or wouldn't do that with those that really sought Him? When I see people go down hard and have no "catchers", hit carpeted cement floors with a bang and have NO residuals after effects other than pure peace in God, I am not inclined to conclude those people were faking it, and I do not judge just because the Bible doesn't depict the exact same thing. John 20:30 should give you a perspective on just how much the Bible needs to tells us.

We all start on milk Barrd, and move on from there. That was Luke's who point about moving on TO MATURITY.

I can't MAKE you see logical conclusions if you don't want to Barrd and being obtuse, deliberately or not, does not imply one is stupid. Maybe you should read the definition.

You're absolutely right, we DO know them by their fruits, or obvious lack thereof, but we also know good fruit from bad fruit.

I'm not going to try and force you to accept anything but the following link has some good info....IF you are open to read it.
If not, you won't ever be.
http://www.charismamag.com/spirit/supernatural/17935-the-biblical-support-for-falling-out-in-the-spirit

Stan, I have been accused of a great many things in these threads....but this is the first time I've ever been accused of being a Mormon.

I am reading your link now.
Let me ask you...no offense intended, I promise....have you read this link?

 

[marksman]

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

So, using Paul's list, let's look at some of the ladies of the New Testament.

Paul starts off his list with apostles.
And we have an example of a female apostle in Junia.

The first time someone pointed her out to me (it was a man, by the way), I was, to say the least, astonished. All of my life, I had been taught, as Marksman says, that we gals are supposed to keep our mouths shut in church, and have no part of the leadership....unless it is to teach Sunday School to other women or to kids.
But here was a lady that Paul refers to as an apostle....just as he was, himself....putting her on the same level as Peter or John, or Phillip, or any of them. And he says that she and Adronicus, who were both in prison with him, were "of note" among the apostles.
The sad thing is, that for a very long time, the church has tried to keep Junia and her role as an outstanding apostle on the down-low....even adding an "s" to the end of her name to try to disguise her as a boy. Honestly, fellas...get over yourselves. God loves His daughters just as much as He loves His sons....and He does not put a difference between them.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.


Next, Paul lists prophets. Are there any female prophets in the Bible?

Yes, there are.
As a matter of fact, there are at least four of them:

Act 21:8 And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.
Act 21:9 And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.

I'd like to find out more about those gals...I'll bet their story was thrilling. Evidently Eusebius mentions them in his writing, describing them as “mighty luminaries” and ranking them “among the first stage in the apostolic succession.”

Evangelists next. Any from the distaff side?

Well, there is Phoebe, of course.

Rom 16:1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:

Interestingly, the word here translated "servant" is actually diakonos. Ordinarily, this word is translated "deacon".

From the Strongs:

G1249 (Strong)

διάκονος

diakonos

dee-ak'-on-os

Probably from διάκω diakō (obsolete, to run on errands; compare G1377); an attendant, that is, (generally) a waiter (at table or in other menial duties); specifically a Christian teacher and pastor (technically a deacon or deaconess): - deacon, minister, servant.

Total KJV occurrences: 30

And finally, we have pastors and teachers.

And here is Priscilla, wife of Aquilla, who, together with her husband, taught the already learned and eloquent Apollos “the way of God” (i.e. theology) more accurately.

Act 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
Act 18:25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.
Act 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

So, here we have a Biblical example of a woman teaching a man.
How 'bout that...

More rubbish from you as I will clearly show.

Female apostle Junia. There is doubt that she is a she. As it is not conclusive, no one can make a case using her/him.

Saying "honest fellas, get over yourself" is not exactly a sign that you have developed a thing known as grace.

No one has said God does not love female saints but I know this, you do not have to be an apostle for God to love you.

As for female prophets, another mistake. The fact that you prophecy does not make you a prophet. The word for prophesy is profateyooo in Acts 21:9. In Ephesians 4:11 the word for prophet is profaytace. Although they sound similar they are not. I have prophesied many times but have not functioned as a prophet. On other occasions I have prophesied and functioned as a prophet, evidenced by the content of the prophecy.

​And there is nothing in scripture to suggest a deacon is a teacher. In fact in the book of Acts deacons were appointed to look after the widows and orphans. No mention of teaching.

As for Priscilla and Aquilla, you have got it all wrong...again. In Ephesians 4:11 the word for teacher is didaskalos, a teacher. The word used for what Priscilla and Aquila did is ektithaymee which means to expose or declare. The fact that the Greek uses a different word clearly shows they were not considered teachers. All they did is what I would expect every believer to do and that is to give an account of the hope within us as found in 1 Peter 3:15.

And "the way of God" does not mean theology. It means going on a journey.

I don't think that I have come across someone who has made so many mistakes in interpreting the scriptures. That being the case, do you really think that we would listen to you for advice? If you do, then you definitely have delusions of grandeur.

 

[Barrd]

More rubbish from you as I will clearly show.

Female apostle Junia. There is doubt that she is a she. As it is not conclusive, no one can make a case using her/him.

Saying "honest fellas, get over yourself" is not exactly a sign that you have developed a thing known as grace.

No one has said God does not love female saints but I know this, you do not have to be an apostle for God to love you.

As for female prophets, another mistake. The fact that you prophecy does not make you a prophet. The word for prophesy is profateyooo in Acts 21:9. In Ephesians 4:11 the word for prophet is profaytace. Although they sound similar they are not. I have prophesied many times but have not functioned as a prophet. On other occasions I have prophesied and functioned as a prophet, evidenced by the content of the prophecy.

​And there is nothing in scripture to suggest a deacon is a teacher. In fact in the book of Acts deacons were appointed to look after the widows and orphans. No mention of teaching.

As for Priscilla and Aquilla, you have got it all wrong...again. In Ephesians 4:11 the word for teacher is didaskalos, a teacher. The word used for what Priscilla and Aquila did is ektithaymee which means to expose or declare. The fact that the Greek uses a different word clearly shows they were not considered teachers. All they did is what I would expect every believer to do and that is to give an account of the hope within us as found in 1 Peter 3:15.

And "the way of God" does not mean theology. It means going on a journey.

I don't think that I have come across someone who has made so many mistakes in interpreting the scriptures. That being the case, do you really think that we would listen to you for advice? If you do, then you definitely have delusions of grandeur.

You know, I'm starting to get the feeling that you don't like me.
It's cuz of my hair, isn't it? You don't like the color of my hair...

 

[mjrhealth]

Must agree With Barrd

Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Different body same spirit

 

[StanJ]

Stan, I have been accused of a great many things in these threads....but this is the first time I've ever been accused of being a Mormon.

I am reading your link now.
Let me ask you...no offense intended, I promise....have you read this link?

This is EXACTLY what I mean by your dishonest way of replying. I didn't accuse you of being a Mormon, so either you really don't understand or you deliberately prevaricate.

Why would I post a link if I didn't think it was relevant to the discussion, and how could I know it was relevant if I didn't read it?

Happy New Year.

 

[Barrd]

This is EXACTLY what I mean by your dishonest way of replying. I didn't accuse you of being a Mormon, so either you really don't understand or you deliberately prevaricate.

Why would I post a link if I didn't think it was relevant to the discussion, and how could I know it was relevant if I didn't read it?

Happy New Year.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. You said that you heard the phrase I had used from Mormon Missionaries. It's a phrase I heard a lot growing up in upstate New York. But I never so much as met a Mormon missionary until a couple of years ago.

Okay, so...you say you've read this link.
Do you think that Adam is a valid example of someone who has been slain in the spirit, as he sleeps the deep sleep that God caused? I would say that, if a surgeon started to operate on one of the faithful after he's been lowered to the floor by his "catchers", there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth for sure....and yet, the example given in your link has Adam sleeping through God opening him up and removing a rib and then closing him up again. The writer even wonders if Adam was left with a scar.

Next, the writer goes to Genesis 15:12-
Gen 15:12 And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.
Am I to understand that this is what "resting in the Lord" means? I'll take the deep sleep, but hold the horror of great darkness, please.

Next, if you will believe it, is Balaam...the false prophet.
Num 24:2 And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel abiding in his tents according to their tribes; and the spirit of God came upon him.
Num 24:3 And he took up his parable, and said, Balaam the son of Beor hath said, and the man whose eyes are open hath said:
Num 24:4 He hath said, which heard the words of God, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open:
Num 24:5 How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, and thy tabernacles, O Israel!

Falling into a trance? Is that standard "slain in the spirit" stuff? You do know that falling into a trance is not the same thing as falling down, or "falling out".
And again:

Num 24:16 He hath said, which heard the words of God, and knew the knowledge of the most High, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open:

Evidently, Balaam, "the man whose eyes are open", falls into a trance whenever he has a message from God.


Next up, we have Ezekiel.
Eze 1:28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.

Now, I don't know about you, but if I had just seen the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord, I believe that I would fall down, too. Ezekiel is not being knocked over in this verse. He is assuming a position of worship. God is not knocking him down. He is choosing to fall down and worship.
But see what happens next:

Eze 2:1 And he said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak unto thee.
Eze 2:2 And the spirit entered into me when he spake unto me, and set me upon my feet, that I heard him that spake unto me.

Far from knocking Ezekiel down, here we see God setting him on his feet.
And this is what I've been saying all along, Stan. God doesn't knock people over. He lifts them up.

Next, the writer tells us:
During a trance experience, Daniel heard the voice of an angel speaking about the end of time. Daniel 8:27 states that when the trance was over, Daniel fainted and was sick for several days.

Being a curious monkey, I just had to check into Daniel's trance experience:

Dan 8:16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.
Dan 8:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.
Dan 8:18 Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright.
Dan 8:19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

Here again, Gabriel sets Daniel upright.

It isn't until the vision is over that Daniel faints and is sick.
Somehow, this just doesn't sound terribly pleasant to me.

This is a very interesting link, Stan...I'm definitely learning from it.

 

[Barrd]

This is EXACTLY what I mean by your dishonest way of replying. I didn't accuse you of being a Mormon, so either you really don't understand or you deliberately prevaricate.

Why would I post a link if I didn't think it was relevant to the discussion, and how could I know it was relevant if I didn't read it?

Happy New Year.

Now the writer turns to the New Testament. His first example, predictably enough, is the Mount of Transfiguration.
Peter, James, and John, confronted with the sight of the Lord communing with Moses, representing the law, and Elijah, representing the prophets, fell on their faces. They weren't being knocked over, they were assuming a position of worship.
And what does Jesus do?

Mat 17:7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid.

Once again, God doesn't knock these men over. Rather, He lifts them to their feet.

Next, the writer takes us out to Jesus' tomb. He wants to talk about the soldiers who were supposed to be guarding the tomb. They see the angel of the Lord come down from heaven, and they are frightened:

Mat 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

Well, that's understandable. I'm fairly sure that these guys had never been confronted with an angel before, and we know from a couple of other accounts that they can be rather intimidating.
The writer goes on to tell us
"Notice that in the presence of God’s power, both believers and unbelievers seem to be unable to stand."

But, at least in this particular case, this is not strictly true.
Consider the ladies who had come to anoint the body of Christ:

Mat 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
Mat 28:6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
Mat 28:7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
Mat 28:8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

They evidently could stand in the presence of the angel...indeed, they departed with fear and great joy....and did run...

Next, we go out to Gethsemane, to see the men who came to arrest Jesus falling over:

Joh 18:3 Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.
Joh 18:4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?
Joh 18:5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.
Joh 18:6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

Amazingly, these guys climb to their feet and continue with the arrest. In fact, even after Peter pulls his sword and clips the leaders' ear off, and Jesus heals him, they still continue with the arrest. That's just unbelievable to me...but, hey...perhaps this is one time when Jesus truly did slay these men in their spirit. They had to have been spiritually dead...

I am always amazed when someone uses this one as Biblical support for what is going on in the Pentecostal church. Of all people, these are the men who came to arrest Jesus....including Judas, who betrayed Him. I would have to say, Jesus was not bestowing a blessing on these guys....and I don't think I want to share their experience...

Next comes Saul. He was on his way to Damascus with letters from the Sanhedrin giving him authority to arrest any Christians he might find and bring them back so that they could be sentenced to death. This story is familiar, I think, to all of us. This was a one-time event in Saul's life...it was his conversion experience. As you know, of course, Saul was blinded.
Somehow, I'm pretty sure Paul would not have wanted to come back next week to repeat his experience...

But the writer is not quite through with Paul.

Act 22:17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;

As the writer tells us, there is no indication that Paul fell down here.

Next, we examine Peter's roof experience:
Act 10:9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
Act 10:10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
Act 10:11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
Act 10:15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
Act 10:16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

This is the first time I've ever seen this one used as support for the "slain in the spirit" phenomenon. Peter was praying. He was hungry, and he "fell into a trance". There is no indication that he fell down. As the writer tells us:
God was making Peter ready for a new ministry to the Gentiles.
And the rest, as they say, is history.

Finally, the writer tells us that:
The whole book of Revelation is a vision of God’s glory to the beloved apostle John.
I can't argue with that.

But look:
But Revelation 1:17 gives us a compelling piece of information: “And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, ‘Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last’”

Once again, Jesus doesn't knock John over...He lifts him up.

Because that is what God does. He doesn't knock people down. He lifts them up.

Amen.

 

[StanJ]

Now the writer turns to the New Testament. His first example, predictably enough, is the Mount of Transfiguration.
Peter, James, and John, confronted with the sight of the Lord communing with Moses, representing the law, and Elijah, representing the prophets, fell on their faces. They weren't being knocked over, they were assuming a position of worship.
And what does Jesus do?
Mat 17:7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid.

Once again, God doesn't knock these men over. Rather, He lifts them to their feet.

Next, the writer takes us out to Jesus' tomb. He wants to talk about the soldiers who were supposed to be guarding the tomb. They see the angel of the Lord come down from heaven, and they are frightened:
Mat 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

Well, that's understandable. I'm fairly sure that these guys had never been confronted with an angel before, and we know from a couple of other accounts that they can be rather intimidating.
The writer goes on to tell us
"Notice that in the presence of God’s power, both believers and unbelievers seem to be unable to stand."

But, at least in this particular case, this is not strictly true.
Consider the ladies who had come to anoint the body of Christ:
Mat 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
Mat 28:6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
Mat 28:7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
Mat 28:8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

They evidently could stand in the presence of the angel...indeed, they departed with fear and great joy....and did run...

Next, we go out to Gethsemane, to see the men who came to arrest Jesus falling over:
Joh 18:3 Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.
Joh 18:4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?
Joh 18:5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.
Joh 18:6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

Amazingly, these guys climb to their feet and continue with the arrest. In fact, even after Peter pulls his sword and clips the leaders' ear off, and Jesus heals him, they still continue with the arrest. That's just unbelievable to me...but, hey...perhaps this is one time when Jesus truly did slay these men in their spirit. They had to have been spiritually dead...

I am always amazed when someone uses this one as Biblical support for what is going on in the Pentecostal church. Of all people, these are the men who came to arrest Jesus....including Judas, who betrayed Him. I would have to say, Jesus was not bestowing a blessing on these guys....and I don't think I want to share their experience...

Next comes Saul. He was on his way to Damascus with letters from the Sanhedrin giving him authority to arrest any Christians he might find and bring them back so that they could be sentenced to death. This story is familiar, I think, to all of us. This was a one-time event in Saul's life...it was his conversion experience. As you know, of course, Saul was blinded.
Somehow, I'm pretty sure Paul would not have wanted to come back next week to repeat his experience...

But the writer is not quite through with Paul.
Act 22:17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;

As the writer tells us, there is no indication that Paul fell down here.

Next, we examine Peter's roof experience:
Act 10:9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
Act 10:10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
Act 10:11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
Act 10:15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
Act 10:16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

This is the first time I've ever seen this one used as support for the "slain in the spirit" phenomenon. Peter was praying. He was hungry, and he "fell into a trance". There is no indication that he fell down. As the writer tells us:
God was making Peter ready for a new ministry to the Gentiles.
And the rest, as they say, is history.

Finally, the writer tells us that:
The whole book of Revelation is a vision of God’s glory to the beloved apostle John.
I can't argue with that.

But look:
But Revelation 1:17 gives us a compelling piece of information: “And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, ‘Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last’”

Once again, Jesus doesn't knock John over...He lifts him up.

Because that is what God does. He doesn't knock people down. He lifts them up.

Amen.

Not surprising you continue to resist, but you can take it up with the author...I have NO problem with understanding his points or his analogies. If you have never received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, I can't expect you to understand, even though I desire you would.

 

[OzSpen]

You silly, silly woman. Not one of these verses say that they taught men. You are getting real desperate, that is obvious. Take a look, a real look at Romans 16:15. If Paul told them to salute, which means to enfold them in the arms or greet, these women he also told them to do the same with all the saints with them. So according to you Paul telling them that they are to hug them and greet them means that they are teachers then it means that all the saints that he is referring to are teachers.

Lets face facts, that is you are able to. Your ability to exegete scripture is nil. I mean, the qualification to be a teacher is to hug people. Roll of the eyes.

marksman,

I find it disturbing on this Christian forum that you would give that kind of flaming comment to a woman who is made God's image. You have made other derogatory comments in this thread to Barrd and I think it's time some moderator on this forum took you to task for your brazen, inflammatory comments to her.

I wouldn’t be as dogmatic as you are here with your adamant statement, 'Not one of these verses say that they taught men '. It can be challenged with the following kind of information.

Is Junias a female (Rom 16:7) and an apostle among the larger group of apostles (beyond the 12)? Where is the biblical evidence that apostles only ministered to males?

What about apostles after the time of the 12 apostles? Do they have authority in the church?

Let’s examine Romans 16:7. This verse reads: “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me” (ESV). The NIV translates as: “Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.”

These two different translations show some of the dimensions of the difficulties in translating this verse. Literally, the Greek reads, word-for-word (English translation): ‘Greet Andronicus and Junia the kinsmen of me and fellow-captives of me who are notable among/in/by the apostles who also before me have been in Christ’.

The controversy surrounds the gender of Junia, relating to the phrase, ‘among the apostles.’ If Junia is feminine and she is among the apostles, this makes her a female apostle.

So is Junia a male or female apostle? See my article: Are there apostles in the 21st century?

I’m not as convinced as you are that women are excluded from public ministry in the church. We’d be in a sad state on many a mission field if women were denied public ministry to a mixed audience. But practicalities should not dictate theology. The Bible determines our stance on women or no-women in public ministry to a mixed gathering.

I recommend a read of this article by Gordon Fee. He’s no novice as an exegete:

Fee, G D 1985. Reflections on church order in the pastoral epistles, with further reflection on the hermeneutics of ad hoc documents. Journal of the evangelical theological society, 28(2), June, 141-151. Available at: http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/28/28-2/28-2-pp141-151_JETS.pdf (Accessed 2 January 2016).

In addition, we know that women prophesied in a mixed gathering. We learn from 1 Cor 11:4-5 (NIV), 'Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head – it is the same as having her head shaved'. So in the Corinthian church, women prophesied.

Where did men AND women prophesy according to 1 Corinthians? We learn from 1 Cor 14:3 (ESV) that 'the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation'.

To whom does the woman who prophesies speak? It is 'to people'. Whenever anthropoi is used in a mixed group (i.e. the church) it refers not to male men, but to men and women. That's why the ESV, a formal equivalence translation, translates as 'people' and the NIV, a dynamic equivalence translation, also translates as 'people' because that's the meaning - men and women who prophesy are exercising their ministry among people, both male and female.

Many of God's gifted women in public speaking/preaching ministry have been closed down by your kind of pejorative language, 'You silly, silly woman. Not one of these verses say that they taught men'. I urge you to retract this, with sincere apologies to Barrd.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

BARRD.... I believe, to the depths of my being, that "slain in the spirit" is a false teaching. There is nothing in the Bible at all anything like it, and there would be, if it were a real spiritual experience.

ME...And I beleive to the depths of my being that being slain in the Spirit is NOT false teaching and I believe that from the depths of my heart that you are not interested in what the scripture says, ONLY what you think it says because Paul said he forbade a woman to teach....

marksman,

A leading NT exegete, Dr N T Wright, has a very different take on 1 Tim 2:12 (ESV) than you do. He wrote:

When people say that the Bible enshrines patriarchal ideas and attitudes, this passage, particularly verse 12, is often held up as the prime example. Women mustn’t be teachers, the verse seems to say; they mustn’t hold any authority over men; they must keep silent. That, at least, is how many translations put it. This, as I say, is the main passage that people quote when they want to suggest that the New Testament forbids the ordination of women. I was once reading these verses in a church service and a woman near the front exploded in anger, to the consternation of the rest of the congregation (even though some agreed with her). The whole passage seems to be saying that women are second-class citizens at every level. They aren’t even allowed to dress prettily. They are the daughters of Eve, and she was the original troublemaker. The best thing for them to do is to get on and have children, and to behave themselves and keep quiet.

Well, that’s how most people read the passage in our culture until quite recently. I fully acknowledge that the very different reading I’m going to suggest may sound to begin with as though I’m simply trying to make things easier, to tailor this bit of Paul to fit our culture. But there is good, solid scholarship behind what I’m going to say, and I genuinely believe it may be the right interpretation.
When you look at strip cartoons, ‘B’ grade movies, and ‘Z’ grade novels and poems, you pick up a standard view of how ‘everyone imagines’ men and women behave. Men are macho, loud-mouthed, arrogant thugs, always fighting and wanting their own way. Women are simpering, empty-headed creatures, with nothing to think about except clothes and jewellery. There are ‘Christian’ versions of this, too: the men must make the decisions, run the show, always be in the lead, telling everyone what to do; women must stay at home and bring up the children. If you start looking for a biblical back-up for this view, well, what about Genesis 3? Adam would never have sinned if Eve hadn’t given in first. Eve has her punishment, and it’s pain in childbearing (Genesis 3.16).
Well, you don’t have to embrace every aspect of the women’s liberation movement to find that interpretation hard to swallow. Not only does it stick in our throat as a way of treating half the human race; it doesn’t fit with what we see in the rest of the New Testament, in the passages we’ve already glanced at.

The key to the present passage, then, is to recognise that it is commanding that women, too, should be allowed to study and learn, and should not be restrained from doing so (verse 11). They are to be ‘in full submission’; this is often taken to mean ‘to the men’, or ‘to their husbands’, but it is equally likely that it refers to their attitude, as learners, of submission to God or to the gospel – which of course would be true for men as well. Then the crucial verse 12 need not be read as ‘I do not allow a woman to teach or hold authority over a man’ – the translation which has caused so much difficulty in recent years. It can equally mean (and in context this makes much more sense): ‘I don’t mean to imply that I’m now setting up women as the new authority over men in the same way that previously men held authority over women.’ Why might Paul need to say this?

There are some signs in the letter that it was originally sent to Timothy while he was in Ephesus. And one of the main things we know about religion in Ephesus is that the main religion – the biggest Temple, the most famous shrine – was a female-only cult. The Temple of Artemis (that’s her Greek name; the Romans called her Diana) was a massive structure which dominated the area; and, as befitted worshippers of a female deity, the priests were all women. They ruled the show and kept the men in their place.
Now if you were writing a letter to someone in a small, new religious movement with a base in Ephesus, and wanted to say that because of the gospel of Jesus the old ways of organising male and female roles had to be rethought from top to bottom, with one feature of that being that the women were to be encouraged to study and learn and take a leadership role, you might well want to avoid giving the wrong impression. Was the apostle saying, people might wonder, that women should be trained up so that Christianity would gradually become a cult like that of Artemis, where women did the leading and kept the men in line? That, it seems to me, is what verse 12 is denying. The word I’ve translated ‘try to dictate to them’ is unusual, but seems to have the overtones of ‘being bossy’ or ‘seizing control’. Paul is saying, like Jesus in Luke 10, that women must have the space and leisure to study and learn in their own way, not in order that they may muscle in and take over the leadership as in the Artemis-cult, but so that men and women alike can develop whatever gifts of learning, teaching and leadership God is giving them.

What’s the point of the other bits of the passage, then?

The first verse (8) is clear: the men must give themselves to devout prayer, and must not follow the normal stereotypes of ‘male’ behaviour: no anger or arguing. Then verses 9 and 10 follow, making the same point about the women. They must be set free from their stereotype, that of fussing all the time about hair-dos, jewellry, and fancy clothes – but they must be set free, not in order that they can be dowdy, unobtrusive little mice, but so that they can make a creative contribution to the wider society. The phrase ‘good works’ in verse 10 sounds pretty bland to us, but it’s one of the regular ways people used to refer to the social obligation to spend time and money on people less fortunate than oneself, to be a benefactor of the town through helping public works, the arts, and so on.

Why then does Paul finish off with the explanation about Adam and Eve? Remember that his basic point is to insist that women, too, must be allowed to learn and study as Christians, and not be kept in unlettered, uneducated boredom and drudgery. Well, the story of Adam and Eve makes the point well: look what happened when Eve was deceived. Women need to learn just as much as men do. Adam, after all, sinned quite deliberately; he knew what he was doing, and that it was wrong, and went ahead deliberately. The Old Testament is very stern about that kind of action.

And what about the bit about childbirth? Paul doesn’t see it as a punishment. Rather, he offers an assurance that, though childbirth is indeed difficult, painful and dangerous, often the most testing moment in a woman’s life, this is not a curse which must be taken as a sign of God’s displeasure. God’s salvation is promised to all, women and men, who follow Jesus in faith, love, holiness and prudence. And that salvation is promised to those who contribute to God’s creation through childbearing, just as it is to everyone else. Becoming a mother is hard enough, God knows, without pretending it’s somehow an evil thing. Let’s not leave any more unexploded bombs and mines around for people to blow their minds with. Let’s read this text as I believe it was intended, as a way of building up God’s church, men and women, women and men alike. And, just as Paul was concerned to apply this in one particular situation, so we must think and pray carefully about where our own cultures, prejudices and angers are taking us, and make sure we conform, not to any of the different stereotypes the world offers, but to the healing, liberating, humanizing message of the gospel of Jesus.

How then would I translate the passage to bring all this out? As follows:

So this is what I want: the men should pray in every place, lifting up holy hands, with no anger or disputing. 9In the same way the women, too, should clothe themselves in an appropriate manner, modestly and sensibly. They should not go in for elaborate hair-styles, or gold, or pearls, or expensive clothes; 10instead, as is appropriate for women who profess to be godly, they should adorn themselves with good works. 11They must be allowed to study undisturbed, in full submission to God. 12I’m not saying that women should teach men, or try to dictate to them; they should be left undisturbed. 13Adam was created first, you see, and then Eve; 14and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived, and fell into trespass. 15She will, however, be kept safe through the process of childbirth, if she continues in faith, love and holiness with prudence (N T Wright 2004. Women’s Service in the Church: The Biblical Basis).

Wright has articulated an interpretation of 1 Tim 2:12 (ESV) that is consistent with the teaching of 1 Tim 2 and the remainder of 1 Tim. It goes against your opposition to woman in ministry, but is associated with my NT understanding of the inerrant Scripture of Women wrongly closed down in ministry.

Oz