Tuesday, January 12, 2021

Fake COG Prophet Still Butthurt Over Tina Englebart And Role Of Women In The Church




In 2017, Tina Englebart wrote and had published in The Journal, a series of well-written articles on women in ministry and speaking in church. 

She wrote:
Corinthians 14:34-35. Here are the two verses in the King James Version. “Let your women keep silence in the churches; for it is not permitted unto them to speak, but they are commanded to be under obedience [Gr. hupotasso], as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame [Gr. aischros] for women to speak in church” (Emphasis added). 
First, some observations: The italicized phrase “they are commanded” was an addition by the translators; it is not in the original Greek. Further, hupotasso is more correctly translated “submission” rather than “obedience.” And the word translated as “shame” in verse 35 is the Greek word aischros— the same word translated as “ filthy” elsewhere, as in “ filthy lucre” (1 Timothy 3:8). 
Most churches, and most Churches of God, and Mr. Mokarow say this means women must be silent in the church. UCG specifically said in their paper “The Biblical Role of Women”: “‘ Women should not speak,’ ” that is, preach or teach before the congregation” (emphasis added). It is interesting that women are allowed to sing before the congregation, which is not exactly being silent. … 
There is only one law that specifically forbids women to speak in the assembly — and that is the Oral Law of the Jews, later written down and known as the Talmud. 
What a shame that our churches, in imposing the silence injunction on our women, are actually following the dictates of the Talmud instead of the Apostle Paul!

These comments sent our self-appointed prophet, Bob Thiel, into a major meltdown. Thiel likes nothing better than to mansplain to women why they are not worthy of doing anything in the church. Only masculine he-men like him are to do the work of the church.   

Let me make a few points. 
 
First, while Tina Engelbart is entitled to her opinion about what she thinks the Greek means, the reality is that there is no record of Christian women preaching in either the New Testament nor in early Christian writings. While it is possible that the apostate Simon Magus may have had a female preach, and maybe did some other apostates, people who understood koine Greek at the time apparently did not feel that the Apostle Paul was allowing women to preach. 
 
Second, UCG is correct that women should not be preaching. This is confirmed by the following passage that is in the Bible (hence, even allowing for a different translation of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, this is not something only to be derived from the Talmud as Tina Engelbart indicates): 
 
11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. 12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. (1 Timothy 2:11-12). 
 
Third, as far as the Talmud goes, Tina Engelbart needs to consider that the Jews DID allow women to sing and hence the prohibition they had related to women speaking before the assembly did not include singing. That is the same in the Christian church as well. 
 
In the (improperly named) Continuing Church of God we do not believe that women are to preach.

These comments made by Tina were rehashed by the discredited prophet yesterday due to the Pope's recent announcement that women could perform liturgical duties in the church, i.e. serve in positions of service and read scriptures. That disgusted apostate Thiel to no end. How dare women read bible verses to men!  How dare they!

Women have a certain place in the improperly named "continuing" Church of God and that mainly is in the kitchen, performing secretarial duties, singing occasionally, and do a little writing. The Bobster writes these because this is what his wife is doing for him now. Since he only has 99 caucasian members in the entire North American Continent, his wife has to step up to the plate and do Bobster's dirty work as he is too busy waving his hands and bouncing in his chair and/or posting to his countless blog and news sites where he spreads his disjointed message across on.

In the Continuing Church of God we do not believe that women are to preach nor to read services (although if there are no men available, they can read announcements, etc.). 
 
Women have other roles. Some are deaconesses. Some, for the CCOG, edit, manage websites, manage Facebook pages, do translations, assist with festival planning and coordination, maintain our online radio presence, and/or host groups where we have no males. They also sing, provide music, help put together items related to the Study the Bible Course, and do some writing.

It should come as no shock to those of us on this blog that there are women in the church, and some who post here, that are more Biblically literate about scriptures that the Great Bwana is. They put him to shame.

Perhaps it is time for Bobiniah to repent of his mansplaining and let women preach in his church. They would do a FAR better job and might actually be more interesting than Bobiniah leading them to draw in new members for him. But no, women have a certain place in the improperly named "continuing" Church of God and they need to acknowledge that.






36 comments:

Anonymous said...

Women in the Continuing Church of God must take full responsibility for the care of their developmentally disabled children, because the children's fathers have more important things to do.

Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix said...

You have to wonder at times if these Neanderthals have ever bothered to read the New Testament. Do you honestly think that Priscilla baked cookies, entertained and sang to her husband's converts? And, if Paul really believed that women had nothing of spiritual value to contribute to men, then why did he instruct Timothy to remember what his mother and grandmother had taught him? The fact that Christianity continues to be saddled with the legacy of ancient Jewish paternalism is obscene! There are plenty of women out there who would put most male pastors to shame in terms of their ability to deliver a cogent/interesting sermon and compassionately shepherd a flock.

Anonymous said...

Imagine ever belonging to a religion where the afterlife experience features meeting a God who says to you, "Yo, I HEARD you spreading My word in church down there. Y'all bitches need to keep your mouths shut. GTFO."

Tonto said...

I remember hearing HWA , being there in person, having a "tizzy fit" , because a woman on the PT Staff was deciding what was going to be the photograph for the cover of the Plain Truth Magazine. He promised that "from here on out, a MAN will be deciding what is on the cover"!

Anonymous said...

There is actually a good case for calling for women to be silent.
AOC,Maxine Waters,Pelosi,Palin, Rahida Tlaib,Ayanna Pressley IIhan Omar etc etc etc .........
The very names that undoubtedly strike fear into any self respecting COG minister.
I rest my case,lol.

Anonymous said...

"there is no record of Christian women preaching in either the New Testament nor in early Christian writings"

And is there any record of someone starting their own church and whining about being criticized and not being taken seriously as a prophet?

Anonymous said...

Irresponsible dolts

Anonymous said...

Without Loma Armstrong, there would have been no Radio Church of God and then no Worldwide Church of God, and then no Continuing Church of God.

Anonymous said...

I truly feel sorry for Thiel's wife. Imagine being married to such a ridiculous guy who is incapable of doing any physical work other than banging away on a keyboard with his so-called prophetic wisdom. I wonder if he has ever dirtied his hands by doing any manual labor?

There have been a lot of fools that have set themselves up over COG's in the last 3-4 decades but none of them are as foolish and sad as Bob. Imagine running a ministry that can only gather 299 members from the Americas and Europe. 299 people. What a pathetic number. Some witness that is! Even Ron Weinland does better with Bob and brings in more money.

Anonymous said...

Poor Bob. Even the women here are better than he is. Imagine being such a sad little man that women intimidate him so. Whatever happened to real men being COG leaders?

Anonymous said...

What about the four daughters of Philip, and each of them had the gift of prophecy? What about Joel and Peter who predicted that your sons AND YOUR DAUGHTERS shall prophesy? I don't think Queen Esther was silent. Wasn't there a New Testament woman who stoodd up in the congregation and prophesied/spoke of a persecution to come upon the church? Here is an interesting clip about prophetesses in the Bible from:

https://www.cbeinternational.org/resource/article/mutuality-blog-magazine/who-are-women-prophets-bible

"The label “prophetess” or “woman prophet” (něbī’āh) is attributed to five women in the Old Testament: Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4:4), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chron. 34:22), Noadiah (Neh. 6:14), and “the prophetess” (Isa. 8:3). Its significance is clear. Miriam claims the Lord “has spoken” through her (Num. 12:2). Deborah says to Barak: “Look, the Lord, the God of Israel, has commanded” (Judg. 4:6). Huldah similarly uses the prophetic introductory formula: “Thus says the Lord God of Israel…” (2 Kings 22:15). Scripture, then, describes a woman prophet as someone through whom God speaks to his people. In this regard, a “prophetess” is no different than her male counterpart, the “prophet” (nābī’). For this reason, I prefer the translation “woman prophet.”
Women Prophets in the New Testament
Luke presents Anna as a “woman prophet” (prophētis), which is the same Greek word the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, uses to translate the Hebrew něbī’āh (Luke 2:36). Like the prophet Simeon who is paired with her (2:25–27), Anna is led by the Holy Spirit to speak about Jesus “to all who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem” (2:38). The masculine gender of the signifiers describing her intended audience suggests Anna prophesies to both men and women. Elsewhere, Luke uses the feminine signifier to define an audience of women only (15:9).
Luke’s depiction of Anna as a prophet anticipates Pentecost, when Mary the mother of Jesus and other women prophesy (Acts 1:14; 2:17). Luke makes another link between Anna and early Christian women prophets when he introduces Philip’s daughters as “virgins who prophesy” (Acts 21:9)
In Revelation, specifically in the letter to Thyatira (Rev. 2:18–29), Jesus criticizes a woman who calls herself a woman prophet—the same word Luke uses for Anna—for “teaching and deceiving my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols” (v. 20). The woman is clearly a leader in the church of Thyatira. But is she a genuine prophet? The prophet Jeremiah makes personal holiness and purity a litmus test for genuine prophecy (Jer. 23:9–40). Jesus, similarly, advises his disciples to expose false prophets by drawing attention to their behavior (Matt. 7:15–23). Unfortunately, the character and behavior of the woman from Thyatira did not meet the litmus test of a genuine prophet. Yet what is often missed is that Jesus does not attack the woman for being a leader, but for being an immoral one."


Anonymous said...

It’s all about power. The men in the COG’s need to have some feeling of power, someone to lord over. Because if they don’t, they’ll start seeing that they have been made completely powerless, mentally castrated, by the COG leadership.

What the COG leaders do is throw the men in the ‘church’ a bone to keep their minds and testosterone occupied.

Anonymous said...

As usual, well thought out responses from readers here make mincemeat of Thiels rantings. Poor guy can’t do anything right.

nck said...

I can't comment on the topic since I haven't studied the topic well enough.

It does seem that even the Old Testament God did approve of women being judges.

Also in protestant mythology the beating of the Spanish Armada is portrayed as a benevolent act of the protestant God. This was at a time when a female leader served as head of the military coalition supporting God's storm of wrath.

nck

Anonymous said...

Miller Jones
A woman 'compassionately sheperd a flock?' This is laughable. Since you missed it, the greatest power in the universe is called God the FATHER, not God the mother. A father says 'obey these rules or l'll make you suffer.' What too many people need is a good whipping, rather than "compassion."
Your position is found in many recent Hollywood movies and series where by a slight woman beats the crap out of men built like gorillas. Where's reality? Woman pastors are not capable of dealing with church loonies and crazies. Only men can do that.
Women do have an important role in society and in the church, but mental and physical differences put limits on their role.
Btw, women were forbidden to evaluate other women in spokeswomen club since since they were found to be "catty."

Hoss said...

Without Loma Armstrong

Well, Bob again posted about dreams, and wrote that part of Loma's dream was about him. Apparently the time between HWA's death and the Bob's founding of the CCOG was a transitional phase between HWA's work and Bob's final phase.

Anonymous said...

well, Dr. Bob is right on this one....methinks you are ones "butthurt"....

Anonymous said...

For the RCG ministers that go back to the founding of their "college," Dave used to tell us that most (or many) of the women in the church would make better preachers, counsellors and were stronger biblically than most of the men. Having heard their sermonettes, I believe him!

Most of the ministry there was simply chosen because the person "carried themselves like a minister," gave common (this is a big one), were less weird/twiggy than others in their congregation, or had some sort of business profession/higher profile. It wasn't based of previous training, aptitude, interest, or even a desire to help people. No wonder they have a mess on their hands.

Earl said...

I generally am disgusted by the nonsense and lack of logic in the COG sermons and sermonettes. I might as well be okay with some women providing the same.

Anonymous said...

There is an issue here that extends beyond the role of women in Christianity. It is a matter of the Bible itself and how it was written. While an unbiased reading of the NT supports the importance of women in the ministry of Christ and the formation of the early church, there is a patriarchal theme that is prominent. The role of women in authority seems to be an intimation that must be teased out of the text.

What I am going to write next is going to at first seem disconnected but it is not. In the first chapters of Genesis, the creation of the Cosmos is portrayed. It is cast in terms of ancient Middle Eastern beliefs about how it happened. That was the accepted "science" of the day. It is not what you now find in the M.I.T. Department of Astronomy. But God permitted this formative event to be viewed through that ancient Semitic lens. In the Second Temple Period this scenario could have been edited by scribes and supplanted with the Greek model. The ancient Semitic model was retained. Christ did not go through the OT with his followers and edit out all the period material in it. This is an enormous issue for those arguing a certain kind of literalism of the Bible but that is another question for another time.

The cultural environment in which the early Church developed was patriarchal. The Church reflected its milieu. The Church was able to carry out its mission in that milieu but not without some influence from it. We live in a different culture in the United States - one that is moderately patriarchal - one that sometimes does not exclude women from roles of authority over men. If the NT were written in this time, it would look different as regards cultural references. But it would retain the important, essential and fundamental spiritual principles - the core message of salvation.

The question is what in the Bible is cultural history and what is essential spiritual principle? Usually this is readily discerned. Sometimes it is not. Denominations, as always, differ. It is a matter of spiritual maturity and careful exegesis to make the best decision in such a case.

******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer

Anonymous said...

Hmmmm, let's see, one of many names of God is "El Shadday" which means the many breasted one. God supposedly inspired the bible writing, right? God has no gender but obviously has both female and male characteristics (Thank goodness). So let's have some fun. El Shadday representing a woman inspired the bible teachings yet within the writing it say for women are to keep quite and no reading. Sounds to me we may have interpretation issue or maybe better stated an EGO issue here.

Anonymous said...

@Anon 2:44 AM

You forgot one basic fact: the bible was written by men and from a man’s point of view. Talking about a bias.

As far as ‘mental differences’ are concerned, you are right. Women have way more mental capacity than men!

Earl said...

meh. was not aware of that meaning. It seems to be a speculative meaning, though it would signify God as nurturer if accurate. Christ compares actions He would like to take in caring for His people to the actions of a hen (female), but God refers to Himself as male. I'll just go with Him as male. I'm sure I'll learn more one Glad Day.

Anonymous said...

Way back my mother accepted an invitation by a Mormon Elder to attend services. One of the speakers was a woman, and my mother commented that Paul wrote against that. The elder's response was "Paul didn't like women".
Something similar happened when I was invited to a SDA service...

nck said...

Earl.

I think the entity they call God cannot be "man" solely. Some characteristics that traditionally define a man have no use without females around.

God must be a kind of transgender.
That would be logical

Nck

Anonymous said...

God is not a man..............Numbers 23:19

Anonymous said...

God is not male or female or transgender. Those are metaphors that are rooted in the Armstrongist idea that God in his essence has a body. (Armstrongists believe that God is a Caucasian male as was Jesus. He not only has gender but race.)

In Christianity, God is seen as transcending the anthropomorphic language of the Bible. In theophany he is male but in essence he is genderless. There are places in the Bible where both God the Father and Jesus couch the description of their activities in feminine figures of speech. They do not seem to be particular. English speakers commonly conclude that God refers to himself as masculine but the situation is more complex than that. From Wikipedia:

"The consistent use of feminine nouns and verbs to refer to the Spirit of God in the Torah, as well as the rest of the Jewish Scriptures, indicates that at least this aspect of Elohim was consistently perceived as feminine."

Both men and women were created in the image of God. This means that the essence of God may be given incarnate expression as either male or female. This also renders gender superfluous to the essence of God.

******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer

Anonymous said...

Modern women are slutty. Who would want one? They should get off their asses and get jobs. Men pay 2/3 of all taxes. ISLAM has the right approach to women. The bible is for girly men.

Anonymous said...

Bob is a loser, but somebody is envious of Bob.

Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix said...

Dear Anonymous Male Chauvinist,

Your notions about women in Christian leadership roles are quaint. You need to study Scripture a little more closely.

Some more of my own thoughts:

https://godcannotbecontained.blogspot.com/2014/02/does-god-have-penis.html

https://godcannotbecontained.blogspot.com/2016/05/god-as-mother.html

Anonymous said...

Anon, January 13, 2021 at 12:08 PM, said:
******
"God is not a man..............Numbers 23:19"
******

However, we may also read:

"The LORD [is] a man of war: the LORD [is] his name." Exodus 15:3


Which is true? One or the other? Both?

Time will tell...

John

Anonymous said...

Oh look, a COG minister! Welcome to the blog!

Earl said...

Nck,
Maybe we are so warped that we don't see the beauty in the structure of the male body and even the seemingly unseemly parts for simply aesthetic reasons. I believe I will remain warped in this manner. lol. Just having fun. God continually describes himself as the Father and other male descriptions. Does this really bother people?? If God used feminine descriptions, it would not matter to me. Repentance, reconciliation, and salvation would still remain as the prime directive.


John,
You are smart. I think you can fashion an explanation for these two verses that leaves the Father as male gendered, but He's fully capable of all great expressions.

nck said...

Earl

You are indeed a Greek unto the Greek.

Interesting observation if God had used feminine descriptions for himself.
I don't think it would bother me either. Only if the artists would be producing Viking type effigies it might cause some cognitive dissonance with me.

My grandmother was a fervent Mary "idolatrist" I thought in my WCG days. Until I discovered the personal history of many women and the need to be able to relate.

I payed good money to see Michelangelo's David in Florence. I love it and everything associated with the Renaissance. To have a copy in my backyard would soon annoy me I think.
I would clothe him like "Little Pissing Man" at the heart of the Beast Power, gracing the city center of Brussels. My David would be a smart dressed slayer of Goliath.

nck

Anonymous said...

"It’s all about power. The men in the COG’s need to have some feeling of power, someone to lord over. Because if they don’t, they’ll start seeing that they have been made completely powerless, mentally castrated, by the COG leadership."

It's like a dick measuring contest with these goons. Since women don't have one,...well there you go. "No woman named Peg is going to p... lord over me!"

Anonymous said...

8:15pm If one Richard is 5'11" and the other is 6'1" just how does that relate?