Posted on 03/29/2024 8:27:53 PM PDT by Morgana
In a recent “sermon,” false teacher Ashley Wilkerson, the self-described “pastor” of Pacific Coast Church posited an extraordinary claim—that the early church was teeming with female apostles whose names were subsequently altered in Scripture to mask their identities and contributions as women. This assertion, while striking, is completely absurd and crumbles under the weight of scriptural fidelity, historical scrutiny, and orthodox understanding.
Firstly, the apostolic office, as delineated in the New Testament, is not a title bestowed lightly. It is marked by direct commissioning by Christ Himself or, as seen in Paul’s case, a clear, divine calling. The primary roles of an apostle included witnessing Christ’s resurrection and teaching with authority conferred by Jesus. To suggest a widespread alteration of Scripture to exclude women from this office is just silly. The office is God-ordained, not humanly manipulated.
Secondly, the historical transmission of the biblical texts does not support Wilkerson’s assertion. The painstaking process of copying manuscripts across centuries was undergirded by a reverence for the Word’s sanctity and an understanding of its divine inspiration. While no historical process is perfect, the suggestion of a deliberate, systematic effort to alter apostolic names and genders lacks both evidence and credibility. The reliability of the scriptural manuscripts, confirmed by countless scholars and textual critics, stands in direct opposition to the idea of such conspiratorial alterations.
To imply that recognition of women’s roles requires altering scriptural identity is to overlook the profound contributions of women as recorded in the Scriptures themselves. Women like Phoebe and Priscilla were indeed important contributors to the early church’s growth and vibrancy. Their roles as supporters and servants are just as important within the New Testament without the need for alteration or misrepresentation.
Wilkerson’s error lies not in acknowledging the significant contributions of women to the early Christian church but in proposing a narrative of deliberate scriptural alteration that undercuts the integrity of the biblical text and the providence of its preservation. Such claims detract from the unity and truth of the gospel and women such as Wilkerson who pervert the gospel, undermine the integrity of God’s word, and make such outlandish claims should be marked and avoided.
VIDEO ON LINK
Anything more than that requires faith.
Women played a major part of the church boy-th prior and afterburner resurrection. Why the need to lie, falsify or embellish the truth.
I am not saying that at all. Constantine decided what books would be allowed and those that would not. He accepted Christianity, but on his terms.
My point is that we can slay with 100% certainty that by as early as 50AD Christians were worshiping Jesus as God and celebrating his Earthly resurrection. If you want to get into the story telling we can see this happen with the gnostic Gospels that came about after ,200AD. Here we see a major divergence in thought and Jesus starts to do things like sin, marry, talk and walk at birth, kill a child and raise him from the dead etc.
Yes and it is doubtful he was born on december 25th. We ridicule muslims because they worship some kind of moon rock yet christians worships Jesus’s death on the phase of the moon.
LOL! Bible “Expert”.
Constantine had nothing to do with the Canon of scripture. That is a myth from The Da Vinci Code. https://historyforatheists.com/2017/05/the-great-myths-4-constantine-nicaea-and-the-bible/
You are not even right about Constantine having anything to do personally with determining the New Testament canon. At most, he asked Eusebius to prepare 50 copies of the New Testament, none of which we are sure have survived. The record is that he was deferential to the “experts” of the church as to the substance of Christianity, not that he was trying to dictate it.
https://biblequestions.info/2019/09/21/did-emperor-constantine-create-the-canon/
There were female disciples. Anyone who follows Jesus as a student is a disciple. Apostles are chosen messengers and given divine duties, in this case, by Jesus Himself. There are several named female disciples in the New Testament. This woman is deliberately trying to deceive believers about recorded historical facts to suit her radical feminist agenda.
Eve was deceived but Adam was not. He knowingly committed his sin.
Today it's a culture, in 200 years from now, it's a religion.
*cult
“...with the gnostic Gospels that came about after ,200AD. Here we see a major divergence in thought and Jesus starts to do things like sin, marry, talk and walk at birth, kill a child and raise him from the dead etc.”
I am friends with a guy that was a corporate lawyer and studied to become a minister. He ended up becoming a minister full time.
I wish I could remember exactly how he put it, but he said everyone early on knew what the original texts and teachings were as laid out by the early church writings. Paul’s letters were shortly after the death and resurrection of Christ (the web says 48 to 64AD). The gospels were written later, presumably when the authors realized that Christ’s return wasn’t emminent, and that the authors better write it down before they died.
Anyway, the early believers knew the originals. It wasn’t until later when the gnostic books came out that the church leaders got together to put a stamp of approval of those books that were already known to be the accepted writings of the NT. But - even Paul was having to deal with false teachers at the time.
He gave a good modern day example but I can’t recall what it was now. Perhaps it was something like the Holocaust, where now we have people writing books denying that it ever happened.
I would also mention myths surrounding people like Washington and Lincoln.
So funny. Novelist probably couldn’t make it up as well as some of these ladies. Or perhaps it’s a trial summary for a new novel and they can see the dollar signs rising now.
All Mary did was give birth to Jesus. He treated her just as he did with everyone else.
It was at Mary's insistence that Jesus performed His first public miracle (at the wedding at Cana), and it was Mary whom He entrusted to John at the Cross, telling her not only to treat John as a son, but for John to treat Mary as his mother.
To say that all Mary did was "give birth to Jesus" (as though that were so small a thing!) is honestly rather gross.
Yep. Women cannot be pastors.
Well, they were actually black transgender women so the so you have to give those ancient scribes a break. The discrepancy is completely understandable.
I reckon we’re all going to find out sooner or later, ain’t we.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.