Freeme2.co.za

You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free

(Previous page)                                        ©  COPYRIGHT NOW UNBANNED PUBLICATIONS

 

Þ Hence, under the New Testament Covenant of God, at the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, Jesus fulfilled His Old Testament promise in Joel 2:28-29, which declared, “In the last days, [under the New Covenant,] I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh, [or on all believers from all races and genders, either rich or poor,] (Jn. 3:16.)  Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy… And My menservants [ministers or servant-slaves] and on my maidservants [ministers or servant slaves...] will prophesy,” (Mark 16:15-18.)  Strong’s Concordance, no. 5650 and 8198: “Menservants and maidservants are men and women slaves, (humble servants or ministers) as members of [the same spiritual] household [or the same one and only body of Christ.]” (Eph. 4:11; Kjv.)   

1. It is clear that the woman was created female only for her “own” male husband [singular] in the marriage covenant, just as the man was created male only for his “own,” wife [singular] in the marriage covenant to produce a Godly family for God, (Gen. 2:18, 24.)  No other man, angel, or anyone else has any say in the marriage covenant, where only Jesus Christ is the Head of them both.  Just as the different members in the spiritual body of Christ, in marriage too, both husband and wife are commanded to “submit to one another,” of course, in everything good, Godly, and true, (Eph. 5:21.) 

2. But in secular and in the spiritual body of Christ, God made both male and female to minister together to manage His physical creation and spiritual body of believers in conjunction with one another, (Gen. 2:27-28; Mt. 19:3-10; Acts 2:17-18.) The woman’s femininity means absolutely nothing outside the marriage covenant, and likewise also the masculinity of the man.  However, willfully rejecting God’s creation principles to execute their misogynist sin “lawfully,” discrimination against women on all levels of life continued throughout church history, as also in the secular world. 

Ignoring God’s unchangeable creation principle for male and female to “manage the earth [and everything else outside the marriage covenant] together,” (Gen. 2:27-28; Acts 2:17-18,) misogynists made all females subject to the sinful rule of all males in general, as if they all have marriage privileges to all women. No wonder polygamy, adultery, violence against women and children, rape, child molestation, etcetera, have been rampant in all patriarchic societies throughout the ages.  

Look at where the millions of male leaders of their false church systems brought the body of Christ with their deceptive doctrines, pagan church norms, forms, and unbiblical church rule, which they have brutally and deceptively forced onto Jesus’ spiritual body, bride, or the sons of God for nearly two millennia. 

Oh, I can hear those unrepentant misogynists now, “You are ignoring everything Paul has said because, as all women who try to teach God’s Word, you have the spirit of Jezebel in you!  Go read what Paul said about women like you who do not know their place! Women must bear children to be saved, and are not even allowed to open their mouths to speak!” 

Þ We will get to exactly what Paul has said.  But according to the truth of Scripture, the misogynist ‘spirit of Jezebel’ dogma is another ‘neat’ piece of male witchcraft, which has nothing to do with women per say, or with female teachers and preachers in the Kingdom of God - just read this passage in Revelation Chapter 2 in context. 

Þ In fact, misogynist male witches have the spirit of Jezebel in them, according to the truth of God’s Word, for they “call themselves prophets, but they teach and seduce God’s servants” to follow false doctrine and to cling to Christianized, pagan norms and forms in churchesThe women who spread fallacies in churches such as in Seventh Day Adventism and the Pentecostal-Charismatic Movement, were merely embroidering on the false doctrines and pagan church systems that were established by their male supremacists.  Thus, in the full scope of church religion, false church dogmas that really originated from women are nearly non-existent! 

Þ It is also an immovable fact that God did not prevent evil men from adding to, or changing His Word, (Mark 7:13.)  In addition, Paul was not a god, as the Roman Catholic Church and most Protestants see him.  Not one of the apostles or anyone else except Jesus was “infallible.”  They were all ordinary humans, who , just like all of us, had to be born again through faith in Christ, and learn how to know and follow Jesus.  Jesus Himself Was, Is, and always Will Be God, but in His complete humanity, the Man Jesus Christ “offered up prayers and supplications with vehement cries and tears to Him Who was able to save Him from death, and was heard because of His Godly fear.  Though Jesus was [God in the form of a Man,] yet, [as a Man,] He learned obedience by the things which He suffered…”  Jesus was The Perfect Human Being, but Paul was not.  So, after Paul’s rebirth on the road to Damascus, He also had to grow grace and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ, (Heb. 5:7-11; 2 Pt. 3:18.) So, these misogynists must stop hammering on unscriptural things “Paul” allegedly wrote, and focus on the Truth of God’s contextual Word. In fact, in the context of Scripture, God gave me the grace to refute all the nasty things “Paul” allegedly taught about women in ministry. 

 

GOD MUST VIOLATE HIS OWN WORD IN ACTS 2:17-18 TO EXCLUDE WOMEN FROM MINISTRY, AND CHANGE HIS ENTIRE NEW COVENANT TO MAKE WOMEN INTO LESSER BEINGS THAN MEN

To get to the Scriptural truth of the role of women in ministry, (as in everything else in this world,) one needs to study the Bible with the context of Scripture and church history in mind.  The devil is always in the details.  The entire context of Scripture applies to the following questions:  How does a particular verse, chapter, epistle, or book relate to the rest of Scripture?  For example, Was it written in the Old or the New Testament, (does it pertain to the Old Hebrew nation, or to New Covenant believers?)  How did the particular Gospel or Epistle fit into the historical customs and mind-sets of the writers, and most importantly, how is it relevant to the overall or “entire” truth of New Testament Scripture

The traditional dress-codes, customs, and conventional beliefs of 1st century Hebrews and Gentiles, (those believers from non-Hebrew nations,) cannot be forced onto the 21st century, born again body of Christ, (1 Tim. 2:15; 1 Cor. 11:5.)  For instance: replacing the cultural, traditional, 1st century wearing of a veil as still seen in the Islamic religion, with the wearing of a hat, is simply ridiculous, (1 Cor. 11:10-16.) 

We must remember that God did not dictate the Bible word-for-word.  All true Scripture was inspired by the Holy Spirit and filtered into our modern Bibles through the minds of men, polluted by traditional misogyny, and also through misogynist Roman Catholic and masonic Protestant translators of the Bible.  While no one can obliterate the Truth, Jesus Himself, The Entire Contextual Word of God, these very bad men did write some of their false dogmas into Scripture, as Jesus Himself warned in Mark 7:13. 

There is not one contextual, truly God-breathed verse in the Bible that subjects women to all men in general, or give men a licence to “rule” over them to make women less human than men.  For every verse that commands wives to submit to the Godly leadership of their “own” husbands in the marriage relationship, there is another that commands husbands to “love, honor” and cherish their “own” wives - which have nothing to do with other men and women, the church, the angels, the true body of Christ, or life in general, (Gen. 2:27-28.)   

 

SO, WHY DOES THE BIBLE SPEAK ONLY ABOUT MALE DEACONS, PASTORS, AND “BISHOPS?” 

It is impossible to think that when the Spirit called “elder[ly],’ ministers, or servant-slaves,  He did not call females.  If this were true in Paul’s days, why would God Himself, Paul, and the other apostles totally disregard the Old Testament and New Testament fact that, at Pentecost, “God poured out His Spirit” on both His male and female ministers in the body of Christ? (Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-18.)  It is impossible that God would nullify His own Word.  So, if it were really Paul himself who contradicted God’s unwavering promise and New Covenant fulfilment thereof to teach completely unscriptural, uncontextual, misogynist statements such as “women must be saved by bearing children,” (1 Tim. 2:15,) and “woman are not allowed to speak in the assemblies,” he had to also make himself a forked tongue liar by contradicting his own teachings and statements in the Epistles.  For instance, he commanded in Rom. 16:1-2 “I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant, [minister, hand-maiden of God, or servant-slave leader of Christ.]  Assist her in whatever business she has need of you…”  “For [in the spiritual Kingdom of Jesus,] there is neither male nor female, but we are all one in Christ…”  “Test all things [to see if they are from God.]  Hold fast what is good and abstain from every form of evil,” (Gal. 3:28.; 1 Ths. 5:21.) 

I refuse to believe that Paul nullified the Word of God and his own word, and that he would not “abstain from every form of evil,” of which the crime of misogamy is one of the worst, (Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-18.)  We do not see the “official” calling and “appointment” of female apostles, pastors, evangelists, teachers, and prophets in the official church system, which replaced the Godly assemblies of Jesus’ believers in homes as described in the Book of Acts, because the evil men in charge simply refused to obey the Spirit to keep hierarchic male control over their totally unscriptural, Christianized paganism, called “church,” (Eph. 4:11.)

In the light of New Covenant Scriptural truth, it is not God or the apostles that inaugurated this male supremist structure of the church system.  Neither did God or the apostles write verses and passages into Scripture to deceive and control the masses.  That was the dirty handiwork of the many masonic Bible translators, who all belonged to the Church of Rome while pretending to lead people into “Sola Scriptura” or “the Bible only.”  The Catholic Church, which began to swallow the “ecclesia” or assemblies of Jesus by the end of 100 A.D., launched the prejudiced, extremely male chauvinist church age, as well as the false authority of the many official church posts that believers still bow to

If we look at misogynist passages that were reportedly written by Paul, it is totally unacceptable, in the light of the entire New Covenant Gospel, which Paul understood and taught so very well, that Paul would corrupt the New Covenant Gospel of Christ to teach passages like 1 Tim. 3, where he did “not allow women to the church post” of elder.  Although some see 1 Tim. 3:11 as a concession to allow women to “the office” of deacon, others believe Paul was only referring to the wives of elders, for in his religious, male-dominated world, female elders would have been completely unacceptable.  Knowing Paul from the Scriptures, it is impossible to think he would have tolerated the opinion of misogynists instead of obeying God’s truth. 

While God appointed “Deborah as judge over the whole of Israel” during an utterly dark, Old Testament time, Christ called only male apostles during His ministry on earth, (Judges 5:7.)  This proves that we cannot explain the Theocratic decisions of God.  However, we must take into account that the man Jesus Christ lived and ministered on earth before the New Testament Covenant was established after His resurrection and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.  But logically, it seems that practicality motivated Jesus’ decision to call twelve male apostles.

The man Jesus Christ was a bachelor.  During this extremely conservative age, it would have been socially unacceptable for Him to travel, and closely associate with women; unnecessarily hindering the spreading of the Gospel.  This might also have been the reason why female apostles were unheard of during the evangelism of Paul and the other Bible writers.  But to believe that Jesus, the God Who promised and then manifested His promise to “pour out His Spirit on all [believing] flesh” at Pentecost, would violate His own Word by  exclusion of women in ministry is unthinkable, to say the least. 

 

PAUL THE MISOGYNIST, OR PAUL THE ADVOCATE OF COMPLETE SPIRITUL FREEDOM IN CHRIST? 

As said, it is really strange to find that Paul dreadfully discriminated against women in Scripture.  Was Paul confused about the truth of Jesus’ New Covenant Gospel for both genders, or did masonic Bible translators force him to exhibit severely unstable, misogynist behavior to bring believers back to tradition, legalist Judaist culture, and sinful patriarch control?  We must remember that it was Paul who commanded in 1 Ths. 5:21-22, “Test all things [verses from the Bible as well,] hold fast what is good.  Abstain from every form of [distorted and unscriptural] evil.” 

Even stranger, can it really be Paul who alleged, “A man must not cover his head when he prays or prophecies, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man… [not of God?] (1 Cor. 11:7-9.)  Remember, this passage does not address the marriage covenant, but spiritual ministry in the assemblies!  Could Paul really have referred long hair and a legalistic, so-called ‘symbol of authority because of the angels’ such as a veil, (hats were unheard of in his day,) to the spiritual authority of true, born again believers in Christ, who are “all one in Jesus,” because spiritually, gender now suddenly existed again?   Scripture is plain on the matter of spiritual authority. 

Þ The constant anointing of the indwelling Holy Spirit constitutes God’s full authority to accomplish the commission of Jesus through the lives of all those, whom He called to minister His truth of Scripture, (1 Jn. 2:20; 27.)  Gender, marriage, veils, the length of hair, and hats have absolutely nothing to do with this.   Jesus commanded in Mt. 28:18-20, “...All authority was given to Me in heaven and on earth.  [Thus I give you the authority to] go, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them [in water as per My own example] in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.  And lo, I Am with you always, even to the end of the world.” 

In reality, Paul’s whole life in Christ was a fight against ceremonial Judaist and temple legalism.  How could he nullify Jesus’ Word and commandments, as well as his own teachings, to discriminate against women in the assemblies just because they were created female for their “own” husbands in the marriage covenant? 

Þ Paul allegedly also wrote in 1 Cor. 11:9, “Man was not created for the woman but the woman for the man…”  In God’s Word and also in Paul’s own words, this is an outright lie, (Gen. 1:28-29.)  Paul himself wrote in 1 Cor. 7:4, “[In marriage] ...The husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wide does.”  Wow! Was the husband now suddenly not created male for his own wife anymore?  Did God falter when He decided in Gen. 2:18, I will make him a helper comparable [equal, similar, akin] l to him?”   Maybe Paul believed that the man was created male for all women in general as if the marriage covenant only pertains to the wife?  Or maybe Paul was insinuating that man was originally created for another man not for his own wife, like pederast patriarchs believe? 

Þ Could Paul have been disobediently ignoring God’s original commandment for male and female, who were both created in the image of God, to make the woman into a ‘lesser being,’ to, contrary to God’s commandment in Gen. 1:27-28, forbade her to manage secular life (the whole earth and spiritual life in the assemblies) together with the man?  Could Paul also, after teaching so insistently about the marriage covenant between one husband and one wife, now suddenly submit all women to all men on all levels of life, while also making women slaves to Judaist culture and ceremonial law? (Gal. 2:20-21.)  

In the context of the whole New Testament, these strange passages, supposedly written by Paul, are wholly against the blood-covenant of Jesus in the place of all personally believing humanity, (Jn. 3:16.) These passages so clearly contradict the overall Gospel of salvation for every person on earth, (Jew, Greek, slave, free, male and female,) that sane believers must reject the notion that it is Paul speaking here.

 

SHOULD ALL WOMEN HAVE A MALE ‘HEAD;’ EVEN IF IT’S A STRANGE MAN LIKE THE PASTOR?  DO THEY NOT KNOW THAT THIS IS “SPIRITUAL HUSBANDRY,” WHICH IS A DEMONIC PRACTICE? 

In 1 Cor. 11:4-15, Paul apparently proceeds in what looks like pure religious legalism, “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonours [Christ.] But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered, dishonors [her husband…]” 

This copies the notion of Binitarianism, (two gods in one, ) to make the wife believe she cannot pray to the “Big God” except through her ‘covering,’ the husband, her “little god,” and so, the veil or hat — the token of respect for the “little god,” will  force the Big God to hear her prayers. 

What pagan mumble-jumble is this? 

Peter corrected this fallacy in 1 Pet. 3:7, “[As the wife must respect her good, Godly husband, as no one can respect an adulterer, wife-beater, and lazy person,] so the husband must also honor his own wife. [The “weaker vessel” means the physically weaker woman opposed to the physically stronger man, as God created the woman to be “comparable” to the man in every other aspect, (Gen. 2:18.] For they are heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered.”  

Unrepentant moral sin, it is very clear, hinders our relationship with God and with each other, not only in the marriage covenant, but in all other relationships as well.  God does not look at headdresses in the New Testament Covenant.  He looks at the blood-cleansed heart and our actions in obeying His Word and Holy Spirit, no matter our physical race, social status, or gender, (Gal. 3:28.) 

Þ Paul, the death-defying defender of the Truth of God’s Word, simply could not have commanded the fully saved, redeemed, and blessed body of Christ to keep such pagan practices, (1 Pt. 2:9-10.)  It is clear that the artificial replica of Jesus’ body or bride, the church clergies and their masonic translators of the Bible, forced this discrimination against women into Paul’s writings, (Mark 7:13.)  According to Binitarianism Christianity, they actually made Paul claim that the husband is the ‘spiritual covering’ of the wife, not the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. 

Þ And so, “the weak [unsaved, deceptive] woman” must allegedly always have a male ‘head’ as her ‘spiritual cover,’ because “a man” is her “cover” not Jesus.  And so, they further allege, if a woman does not have a husband, another male leader must ‘cover’ her - which, most revoltingly, implies husbandry

How can the Holy God of heaven and earth command such spiritual filth among His blood-cleansed body of believers?  Where is this doctrine found anywhere else in the New Testament?  Paul himself wrote in Gal. 3:28, (which fits perfectly into the entire New Testament Covenant Gospel of Jesus,) “There is neither...  male nor female; for you are all one [body and bride] in Christ Jesus.”  And Peter wrote in 1 Pt. 2:9, “[All born again believers in Christ] are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation; His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him, Who called you out of darkness into His marvellous light.” 

Was Paul confused and Peter speaking only to men?  This uncontextual view of spiritual husbandry (having a male head besides a wife’s ‘own’ husband) is demonic not Godly, and jeopardises the woman’s reputation, and her position in the congregation as well as in the Kingdom of God.  What happened to the woman’s own authority in Christ through her personal salvation in Him?  Only a woman’s own husband is the head of their home in marriage, and Only Jesus Christ is the spiritual Cover, or the Protective Banner over them both!  Godly husbands will never assume spiritual power and authority over their wives that belong to Christ.  And Godly men will never assume spiritual or physical husbandry over other women except their ‘own’ wives, as that is spiritual and physical adultery

Þ The serious question also remains, should a woman, as a blood-bought, born again, Spirit-filled, blessed child of God, prove her inward attitude of respect for the “angels,” her own husband, or the congregation by the wearing of a veil and by giving legalistic attention to the length of her hair? 

This sounds more like Islamic rule than Jesus’ true body of believers, who are all subject to only one, inward, New Testament Law: the Moral Law of Love.  The context of New Testament Scripture commands no other outward sign of faith, except the Scriptural baptism of born again disciples, the Lord’s Supper and the anointing of oil in healing as a mere symbol of the Holy Spirit.  (Mt. 28:19; 1 Cor. 11:23-31; Jam. 5:14-16.)

Þ As said, no one can respect a womanizer, adulterer, violent oppressor, drunkard, drug addict, lazy miser, child molester, etcetera, because then you must submit to, and respect all sin.  But unless a woman sinfully or without good cause has no respect for her “own” husband, her femininity, marriage relationship and the spiritual order of her marriage covenant have absolutely nothing do with her calling, giftedness, and ministry in the congregation.

Þ Footnote, Spirit Filled Bible, 1 Cor. 11:5-10: “A proper understanding of this section, [the wearing of long hair and a veil,] is based on understanding Creation Principles, [God’s universal plan for the general management of secular life, versus God’s specific plan for the home,] and Corinthian customs. Uncontextual, outdated Corinthian customs [just as in Judaist and Muslim tradition] dictated that a woman who appeared bareheaded in public was considered to be loose and immoral. [Traditionally], uncovered [or cut] hair, or a shaved head [and they so easily forget all the ‘skinhead’ men in churches,] symbolised a loose, unclean condition.”

 

(Continue)