Was Paul Right About Women In Church?

[CadyandZoe]

Obviously you are another one of those who pick and choose verses to support your error. So let me educated you into the finer points of scripture.

First, praying and prophesying are not to be spoken of in the same breath as preaching. As I studied the NTC for my Ph.D. it became very clear that women were given the gift of prophecy. No one can deny that. However, that does not mean they were given the gift of teaching. That is pure supposition.

Only a person not skilled in interpreting scripture would say that women are conflicted by Paul's instruction to keep silent and the fact that they prophesied. The keep silent bit is dealing with another subject, not prophesy or prayer.

So it is not nonsense just your interpretation that is nonsense.

I didn't say anything about teaching, did I? I don't think I did. The issue here, in this thread, is whether women are allowed to speak.

But you raise an interesting point. This forum gives us the opportunity to practice our interpretation skills. I noticed, for instance, that you were critical of a couple of issues that I never raised. I never said that women were conflicted. I didn't say anything about teaching. Before being critical of the interpretation skills of others, perhaps you should hone your own skills? Maybe?

But if I may make an observation. I have been speaking on message boards for almost 20 years. In all that time, I have noticed a particular difference between female posters and male posters, with regard to boldness. I find female posters to be refreshingly humble in their opinions and delivery. Rather than saying, "this is how it is", they say things like "Isn't this how it is?" Male posters could learn a lot about the humble, non-pretentious presentation of truth.

Let's use this opportunity to practice our interpretive skills with each other, actually listening to each other and then, perhaps, we will get better at interpreting scripture since we use the same skills for both.

 

[Grailhunter]

ok, ....how in the world does that relate to Complementarianism, or Egalitarianism?

The Bible says a lot of things...now if you are going to see "man is the head of woman" as a static statement, why are you not follow the others in the same way?

 

[Grailhunter]

But of course you meant scripture that people abused not that there was anything wrong with the scripture itself. Am I right? Just checking.

No...but I will explain as we go along. Catch up on the conversation and join in...the more the merrier.

 

[soul man]

You can Google it, but I don't recall any such verse. I would say no, that no one has read such a verse.

I can think of two verses that sound similar but are unrelated to the spiritual gifts.

(BTW, why are you asking this in a Patriarchy thread...?

)

That is how I see, (Ephesians 4:8-15).

 

[Grailhunter]

ok, ....how in the world does that relate to Complementarianism, or Egalitarianism?

Complementarianism is a theological view in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, and religious leadership. The word "complementary" and its cognates are currently used to denote this view.

Egalitarianism
The doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

Of these terms Complementarianism attempts to put a positive spin on subjugation and social religious degradation. Notice the religions it apply to.

You keep proving the hardness of your heart and I keep pointing it out.

To be forthright I am not a fundamentalist---I do not believe in the static meaning of the scriptures. I believe in the Living Word that can still teach us new things...even different things. And I believe that ability is seen in the scriptures were beliefs and the prescribed moral behavior changes as the time periods progress, so does moral understanding. The Spirit and heart of Christ is the key to understanding this.

 

[soul man]

Complementarianism is a theological view in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, and religious leadership. The word "complementary" and its cognates are currently used to denote this view.

Egalitarianism
The doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

Of these terms Complementarianism attempts to put a positive spin on subjugation and social religious degradation. Notice the religions it apply to.

You keep proving the hardness of your heart and I keep pointing it out.

To be forthright I am not a fundamentalist---I do not believe in the static meaning of the scriptures. I believe in the Living Word that can still teach us new things...even different things. And I believe that ability is seen in the scriptures were beliefs and the prescribed moral behavior changes as the time periods progress, so does moral understanding. The Spirit and heart of Christ is the key to understanding this.

I like your comment. I'm going to guess you came out, coming out of strick law religion in one form or another?

 

[Grailhunter]

I like your comment. I'm going to guess you came out, coming out of strick law religion in one form or another?

Well, the point is not about the "the Law" I am not a Jew. It is about the social religious status of women and that the Living Word still has things to teach us. And it is a progression and you can track it in the Bible.

 

[Sabertooth]

Of these terms Complementarianism attempts to put a positive spin on subjugation and social religious degradation.

That use of "complementarianism" is hyper-patriarchy in "sheep's" clothing.

 

[Wrangler]

That use of "complementarianism" is hyper-patriarchy in "sheep's" clothing.

And there’s nothing wrong with that, like hyper-good stuff. ;-)

Revealing how a thread about the Word of God, aka the Bible, applying to putting some people (women) in their place turns into implied criticism of men and the wonderful institution known as the patriarchy.

Talk about Appeal to Diversion!

 

[Sabertooth]

Hyper- = "too much" or "exaggerated" (That is not a good thing.)

Maybe radical patriarchy would be a better term...?

 

[Wrangler]

You keep proving the hardness of your heart and I keep pointing it out.

There is nothing hard of heart in pointing out how different things are different. Equality is evil, which is why there is scant reference in the Bible. The Bible emphasizes the importance of the unequal at nearly every turn, i.e., Holy.


The greatest inequality is to hold unequal things as equal.
Aristotle, 380 BC.

 

[Wrangler]

The Bible says a lot of things...now if you are going to see "man is the head of woman" as a static statement, why are you not follow the others in the same way?

What Bible verses are NOT ‘static statements? And what makes you think. DNB does not follow the Bible properly?

 

[Grailhunter]

What Bible verses are NOT ‘static statements? And what makes you think. DNB does not follow the Bible properly?

There is nothing hard of heart in pointing out how different things are different. Equality is evil, which is why there is scant reference in the Bible. The Bible emphasizes the importance of the unequal at nearly every turn, i.e., Holy.

What Bible verses are NOT ‘static statements? And what makes you think. DNB does not follow the Bible properly?

Depending on the interest of people this conversation is going to get very deep. Static statements...if the Bible was just paper that men wrote on...it would definitely be static.

Equality is evil....did Hitler believe that? There were things that Christ and the Apostles could not tackle. For example, Christ and the Apostle could not denounce or stop slavery. Slavery was woven into the construct of the economy and the culture...worldwide, nearly every kingdom or reign. Nearly every religion had slaves, including Judaism and Christianity. It would have been the end of Christianity. As we look at slavery today...it is seen as horribly cruel and evil. And for some it is hard to believe that Christ and the Apostles did not denounce it or ban it, or at least forbid Christians from having slaves...but that did not happen.

Same for the male dominance thing...All members of the Trinity have to be male....many believe that all Angels are male. All the Apostles had to be male....Writers of the Bible had to be male...Church leaders have to be male...preachers have to be male...then there is the social side of it...it is not just Judeo-Christians ...Roman emperors and generals were male. This is hard and solid...if Christianity would have tried back then to change this...it would have been rejected.

Then there is the selective quoting of the Hebrew Bible...The New Testament at times quotes the Hebrew Bible...But only passive scriptures...For example they did not quote the Mosaic Law that said if God gives you "land" you should kill all that breaths and do not forget the babies. This type of wordage is not going to come out of Christ's mouth, but He did not indorse it, then again He did not denounce it.

Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices became more advanced within the Bible and because the Word of God has a Spirit that lives on it continues to advance and teach us.

 

[teamventure]

Complementarianism is a theological view in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, and religious leadership. The word "complementary" and its cognates are currently used to denote this view.

Egalitarianism
The doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

Of these terms Complementarianism attempts to put a positive spin on subjugation and social religious degradation. Notice the religions it apply to.

You keep proving the hardness of your heart and I keep pointing it out.

To be forthright I am not a fundamentalist---I do not believe in the static meaning of the scriptures. I believe in the Living Word that can still teach us new things...even different things. And I believe that ability is seen in the scriptures were beliefs and the prescribed moral behavior changes as the time periods progress, so does moral understanding. The Spirit and heart of Christ is the key to understanding this.

Sounds like progressive Christianity.
He doesn't change and his word is just as relevant today as before.
I'm sorry but I'm out like a trout.

 

[DNB]

The Bible says a lot of things...now if you are going to see "man is the head of woman" as a static statement, why are you not follow the others in the same way?

Exegesis requires such a discernment, when to differentiate between a literal text, and one that employs literary devices like hyperbole, metaphor, parable, analogy, anthropomorphism, ...

 

[DNB]

Complementarianism is a theological view in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, and religious leadership. The word "complementary" and its cognates are currently used to denote this view.

Egalitarianism
The doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

Of these terms Complementarianism attempts to put a positive spin on subjugation and social religious degradation. Notice the religions it apply to.

You keep proving the hardness of your heart and I keep pointing it out.

To be forthright I am not a fundamentalist---I do not believe in the static meaning of the scriptures. I believe in the Living Word that can still teach us new things...even different things. And I believe that ability is seen in the scriptures were beliefs and the prescribed moral behavior changes as the time periods progress, so does moral understanding. The Spirit and heart of Christ is the key to understanding this.

Nothing is more fundamental than ! Timothy 2:13

1 Timothy 2:12-14
2:12. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

 

[Grailhunter]

Exegesis requires such a discernment, when to differentiate between a literal text, and one that employs literary devices like hyperbole, metaphor, parable, analogy, anthropomorphism, ...

What I would use as an examples are obvious...no mystery.
Taking you guys through complicated theology and history, just does not work on this forum.

 

[Grailhunter]

Nothing is more fundamental than ! Timothy 2:13

1 Timothy 2:12-14
2:12. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

Bottom line is that the Bible from cover to cover is a progression of understanding....beliefs...new moral concepts. Not hard to see. The Gospels give us an insight to the significance of women in Christ's ministry and the role they would play.

 

[DNB]

What I would use as an examples are obvious...no mystery.
Taking you guys through complicated theology and history, just does not work on this forum.

Why in the world can you not tell the difference between a fundamental assertion, and a cultural or circumstantial statement???

Complicated theology, you're not qualified Grailhunter. Read the context of the male chauvinistic text, understand the author's disposition, his innate wisdom and uncompromising fortitude. Where in the world do you get the idea that the inspired writer's impartations were temporal, subject to change, or superficial or subjective?

 

[DNB]

Bottom line is that the Bible from cover to cover is a progression of understanding....beliefs...new moral concepts. Not hard to see. The Gospels give us an insight to the significance of women in Christ's ministry and the role they would play.

You're flippant Grailhunter, stop the frivolous nonsense.
These were inspired and formidable men who wrote the Bible, not shallow children that only spoke on a superficial level. They spoke of angels, the beginnings of creation, the demonic realm, and principles that transcend the flesh. Where in the flippin' world do you get the idea that the precepts that they imparted to us, were subject to cultural and historical change?
You're talking foolishness Grailhunter.