There will always be men that put women down and use the scriptures to do it. But what God has given to us no mere man can take away.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I sum up the OP like this - "Should Christians teach the Bible?". The answer is "yes".There will always be men that put women down and use the scriptures to do it. But what God has given to us no mere man can take away.
Galatians tells us there is now no distinction.
And Priscilla taught Apollos.
Right, the church says, if you won't work you can't eat.
Have you heard of "welfare Cadillacs"?
We need to be gentle as doves, and wise as serpents, so I like to watch "Maury" and the Steve Wilcos show to get an idea of where the moral pulse of the nation is at. Especially on the Maury show, some of the men seem to brag about how many children they have - all by different mothers. Some up to 15. And the women believe having babies is part of dating. One woman had been on the Maury show about 13 times bringing on different men each time to give them DNA tests, and still hasn't found her child's biological father!
That's what the politicians are doing to us here in California.
Nothing against immigrants, but there is an agenda here, they are flooding us with people who come here to exploit America, not immigrants who want to work and acquire the American dream through hard work, blood and sweat.
You are referring to Galatians 3. The context there is equality in terms of the Promise, not conduct within the church or among the members of the Body.
Paul presents nothing contrary to Jesus' words. What Paul separates from the Lord's command (Paul's opinion) is in terms of application. This is not bondage (Paul merely says he believes it best to focus on Christ than be yoked with the burdens associated with specific relationships which can, in Paul's view, be an unnecessary distraction...and this, says Paul, is his opinion).
The rest of Paul's words are specifically God's words. Some place Paul's words in contrast to Christ's words, which only shows an ignorance to Christ's words. Paul not only reaffirms freedom in Christ but he explains our liberation from sin and death. Unfortunately some also want to be free of Christ as well. As Paul states, all things are lawful but not all things are profitable.
You’re a fine lady, God bless you.Don't put "free of Christ" in a response to me, as I'm anything but totally devoted to Him and keeping his commandments. My husband who left me for the wife of his best friend and married her, is still the last man I kissed before the divorce. Why? Because he is still alive. He can sin all he wants to and live in perpetual adultery, but I will NOT!
Hi,We went to a strict Presbyterian church one time and I adopted at least some of their values: they were very strictly against women teachers in accordance with Paul's admonition that he "does not allow a woman to teach." Yet we see more and more women teachers.
What is your take on this?
Hi Willie,Galatians tells us there is now no distinction.
And Priscilla taught Apollos.
Mary,Priscilla and Aquila took Apollos aside and explained the Way of God to him more accurately. It was not done in the Church (synagogue).
I am not sure but it seems (by your reply) that you have misread my post to suggest you want to be "free of Christ". That was neither stated nor implied.Don't put "free of Christ" in a response to me, as I'm anything but! I am totally devoted to Him and keeping his commandments. My husband who left me for the wife of his best friend and married her, is still the last man I kissed before the divorce. Why? Because he is still alive. He can sin all he wants to and live in perpetual adultery, but I will NOT!
Except that it begs the question. Should women teach the Bible within the local church (or even publicly on radio or television)? And the answer from Scripture is an unequivocal "NO". Totally unacceptable.I sum up the OP like this - "Should Christians teach the Bible?". The answer is "yes".
Yes. (And yes).Except that it begs the question. Should women teach the Bible within the local church (or even publicly on radio or television)? And the answer from Scripture is an unequivocal "NO". Totally unacceptable.
God had His reasons for these injunctions, and Christians are well advised to obey God in this matter, as in all other matters.
The answer again is "yes". We cannot extend Scripture beyond its bounds. In a local church women are prohibited from a position over men. This does not mean women are not to be ministers of the Word - only that they are not to be teachers appointed over men. Insofar as TV or radio - that is evangelistic and not addressed in the passages you reference but in Christ's command that we disciple others as we go about our lives.Except that it begs the question. Should women teach the Bible within the local church (or even publicly on radio or television)? And the answer from Scripture is an unequivocal "NO". Totally unacceptable.
God had His reasons for these injunctions, and Christians are well advised to obey God in this matter, as in all other matters.
I've hesitated to jump into this discussion, and I haven't had time to read all of the comments, but here goes....We went to a strict Presbyterian church one time and I adopted at least some of their values: they were very strictly against women teachers in accordance with Paul's admonition that he "does not allow a woman to teach." Yet we see more and more women teachers.
What is your take on this?
Except that it begs the question. Should women teach the Bible within the local church (or even publicly on radio or television)? And the answer from Scripture is an unequivocal "NO". Totally unacceptable.
God had His reasons for these injunctions, and Christians are well advised to obey God in this matter, as in all other matters.
I've hesitated to jump into this discussion, and I haven't had time to read all of the comments, but here goes....
Surely, Paul wasn't saying that he didn't allow women to teach AT ALL. Why would he object to women teaching other women? It has been pointed out in this thread that Paul mentioned "usurping authority" with his statement about women teaching.
I am in agreement with Paul that women shouldn't usurp authority delegated to men--in the church or in the home. But this doesn't mean that women aren't given any authority at all. Authority in the church is delegated by the leaders of that church, whether it's delegated to men or to women. Of course, all authority originates from God, who is the Supreme Authority.
As far as women having authority in the home, of course we have authority over our children! Otherwise, how would we run our households? As a widow, I have been given the authority normally delegated by God to the father. Believe me, I would just as soon not have to wield this authority. It's hard enough being a mom, but having to function as mom and dad is very difficult!
Please don't get me wrong. God is my husband at present, so my whole family is under His perfect protective umbrella of authority. And that's what His authority over His children does--it protects us! I say my "whole family," but I have to exclude my oldest, who has taken herself out from under my and God's authority. Please pray for her!!!
.