Women's role

[daffodyllady]

Oh my... I know you are saying... here we go again.

But wait. I really am struggling with this. What exactly is the role of women supposed to be, according to God's Word?

On the one hand, women are told to be silent in the church, obey their husbands, and be submissive.

On the other hand, we are given the record that on the day of Pentecost, when God was the only one in complete charge, He had women prophesying alongside men, in a mixed worship service. If He started the church with women speaking out loud in the assembly, why did He change it later?

Also, when Apollos came preaching only the gospel according to John the baptist, it was not only Aquilla, but also his wife Priscilla, who instructed Apollos more perfectly in the faith. Paul said women are never to be suffered to teach a man! Did God contradict Himself here?

It almost seems like Paul's writings lean toward favoring the fallen male ego... or is it God's will for women to be treated like children in the church setting?

I do not ask for a heated, knock-down, drag-out fight over women's rights. I want a reasoning among us concerning the Scriptures. I want to know if God inspired Paul to tell all women of all time to be 100% silent in the church, forever and ever, amen.

Can we be humble with each other while discussing this?

[burien1]

I can't count the times I'm listening to the Pastor, or someone teaching, and I'm distracted by two women talking.
I always feel like saying to them, " Be quiet, you are distracting me." It is never men. It is always several women. ALWAYS. Or they start passing mints, with very noisy wrappers, and will be 'polite' and ask everyone around them if they want one.
Usually , whoever is teaching, has devoted their time and effort to studying the scriptures, for my edification, and just that one distraction, or two, can make me miss an important point of the lesson.

It always brings this debate to mind.

[Spreading Salt]

Daffy,

To be honest, I saw this thread and was instantly annoyed. Perhaps it is an evil spirit harassing me on a Sunday night. I'll sleep on it and possibly get back to it. In the mean time, bleh.

[mark s]

Narrative passages tell what happened at a particular time and place. These may or may not describe normal activities or situations.

Prescriptive or teaching passages tell what is to be done. These would be applied in a more generalize way, that is, for those sorts of things the passages themselves cover.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[Abiding in His Word]

Misuse of the Word “Role”

[Tevye]

Now this is just an observation...
isn't it interesting how many things have changed
since things did change from how they were for generations.
There are the benefits and destructiveness on both sides of this coin.
For the single mother it has opened up doors that were previously shut.
For the fathers of many families, it means that the doors previously
open wide for supporting their home, are not as they once were.
Is the change from the Lord? Or as the times have changed
has this change come from the enemy aimed at the destruction of the family?
People can see things so differently yet, the Lord will reveal what was, and what will be.
It is sad that many suffer on both sides for the sake of what the world sees as good
in the past as well as now. A day is coming when the Lord will establish His perfect way.
Until then we work together and care for the needs of others, be it moral support
or opening doors for whoever needs to take care of those who can't care for themselves.

[Abiding in His Word]

Is the change from the Lord? Or as the times have changed
has this change come from the enemy aimed at the destruction of the family?

Hello Tevye,

If I could put it this way....God's concern is always for individuals; married or single; black or white; male or female; Jew or Greek; slave or free, etc. He is a God who is not partial and shows no personal favoritism. He always deals with us as individuals; each having to give an account for our lives. Families are a segment of the population, true. But families are made up of individuals, each of whose welfare and nourishment are of primary importance to Him. While it appears the family may be the focus or target of the enemy, it can only be accomplished by attacks on individuals...and that by a myriad of methods; i.e. passivity of one, over importance of another causing an imbalance or unhealthy unit. That's where the great apostasy/deception comes in....overemphasis of one to the marginalization of the other.

[Spreading Salt]

Daffy,
After some much needed rest, here are some thoughtful nuggets of scripture for you:

1 Timothy 2:11
11 Let a woman learn in peace, fully submitted;

12 but I do not permit a woman to teach a man or exercise authority over him; rather, she is to remain at peace.

1 Corinthians 11:3
3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is the Messiah, and the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of the Messiah is God.

Ephesians 5:21-24
21 Submit to one another in fear of the Messiah.

22 Wives should submit to their husbands as they do to the Lord;

23 because the husband is head of the wife, just as the Messiah, as head of the Messianic Community, is himself the one who keeps the body safe.

24 Just as the Messianic Community submits to the Messiah, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Titus 2:5
5 to be self-controlled and pure, to take good care of their homes and submit to their husbands. In this way, God's message will not be brought into disgrace.
1 Peter 3:1
1 In the same way, wives, submit to your husbands; so that even if some of them do not believe the Word, they will be won over by your conduct, without your saying anything,

Genesis 3:16
16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pain in childbirth. You will bring forth children in pain. Your desire will be toward your husband, but he will rule over you."

It’s interesting that just yesterday, an elderly gentleman bent my ear for several minutes. We were conducting a fundraiser by cutting hair and accepting donations from the congregation in an effort to fund some teen girls to attend the teen Women of Faith event called Revolve. I lead the middle school class at our church. Turns out this gentleman usually volunteers at the WOF groups and in fact greatly enjoys listening to the women speakers as they have so much wonderful information. He previously attended a church where the women were speakers to the congregation.

Now that I look at yesterday’s interactions and seeing your post, I think God is yet again moving in His Church as none of it was coincidental but clearly planned.

Here is how I interpret God’s Word in the above mentioned scriptures. God is an orderly highly respectful God. He has established an authoritative order in His Church: Messiah – Men – Women. To me, this is His “chain of command” and authoritative line-up in His Church.

As a former SGT in the Army, I am quite familiar with the military chain of command. Teaching people to respect authority and the order of said authority is an obstacle in and of itself. Our human nature wants to refute and go against people telling us what to do. However, the authority is put in place for the good of many and to establish order and organization. When this realization sinks in, it makes it more palatable I guess to follow the command chain instead of bucking and bawling the system. Plus, it makes it much easier on an individual if he goes with the authority instead of rebelliously fighting it. That will only lead to trouble.

The scriptures say that women should not instruct men, at least, that is how I interpret them. I realize in the above mentioned scriptures that all the women referenced our married. Does that mean that a single woman should have authority in the church? I don’t think so. Majority rules here and all these verses clearly show women are under the men out of respect for God’s authoritative order in the church. It doesn’t say women should not instruct women.

I believe that if you are attempting to or are leading men in the congregation (as a woman), you are disrespecting God and disgracing His Church. Not my words, but His.

Hope that helps some,

SS

[Abiding in His Word]

God is an orderly highly respectful God. He has established an authoritative order in His Church: Messiah – Men – Women. To me, this is His “chain of command” and authoritative line-up in His Church.

As a former SGT in the Army, I am quite familiar with the military chain of command

Helllo Spreading Salt,

Of course, "chain of command" is a military-type term that is nowhere found in scripture. Since you used your personal experience as a former SGT in the military, I would ask this. Must a private remain a private forever and remain static in this position? Or can he/she advance through the ranks to attain the position you evidently did and possibly beyond?

You see, the body of believers is not a military organization with military-style ranks. Nor is it a corporation with CEO's, middle managers, etc. who micro-manage employees. It's a spiritual body with members who are endowed with a variety of talents, acquired abilities, and giftings distributed by the Holy Spirit.

Using a popular "cut & paste" method of theology, by lumping all scriptures together without employing the context, is what leads to unscriptural results. See this example of cutting & pasting to arrival at a biblical method of acquiring a wife:

Top 10 Biblical Ways to Acquire a Wife

10. Find a prostitute and marry her. (Hosea 1:1-3)

9. Purchase a piece of property, and get a woman as part of the deal. (Ruth
4:5-10)

8. Find an attractive prisoner of war, bring her home, shave her head, trim
her nails, and give her new clothes. Then she’s yours. (Deuteronomy 21:11-13)

7. Go to a party and hide. When the women come out to dance, grab one
and carry her off to be your wife. (Judges 21:19-25)

6. Cut 200 foreskins off of your future father-in-law’s enemies and get his
daughter for a wife. (I Samuel 18:27)

5. Become the emperor of a huge nation and hold a beauty contest. (Esther 2:3-4)

4. Find a man with seven daughters, and impress him by watering his
flock. (Exodus 2:16-21)

3. When you see someone you like, go home and tell your parents, “I have
seen a woman; now get her for me.” If your parents question your decision,
simply say, “Get her for me. She’s the one for me.” (Judges 14:1-3)

2. Agree to work seven years in exchange for a woman’s hand in marriage.
Get tricked into marrying the wrong woman. Then work another seven years
for the woman you wanted to marry in the first place. That’s right. Fourteen
years of toil for a woman. (Genesis 29:15-30)

1. Have God create a wife for you while you sleep. Note: this will cost you
a rib. (Genesis 2:19-24)

That may sound absurd (and it is, of course), but this is the danger in failing to see scripture in context. Only that way can we discern the reason for the apparent prescriptive verse and also those that contradict it. Then and only then can we rightly divide the truth behind the scripture.

Just as a private in the military need not remain a private by virtue of being born to that end, and just as children need not remain under the auspices of their parents by virtue of being born a child, neither are females delegated to living under authority simply by virtue of having been born a female. The subordination of one race, one ethic group, one spiritual group, or one gender to another is totally unscriptural UNLESS you employ the popular "cut & paste" method of interpretation.

By extracting individual verses from their context, we can prove almost anything from scripture.

[Tevye]

Is the change from the Lord? Or as the times have changed
has this change come from the enemy aimed at the destruction of the family?

Hello Tevye,

He is a God who is not partial and shows no personal favoritism.

Hello Abiding.
I respect your opinion, and respectfully disagree.
God did chose one over another on many occasions.
(and will in the future with the nations)
"If the family of Egypt will not come up and enter in, they shall have no rain;
they shall receive the plague with which the Lord strikes the nations
who do not come up to keep the Feast of Tabernacles."
Zechariah 14:18
God chose Jacob over Esau. David to be king. Mary to be the mother of Yeshua.
He chose to make Adam before Eve. He could have made them at the same time, but He didn't.

What I'm wondering is... are the changes in our time (over the last 100 years or so)
the changes made by humanity, from the Lord, or from the enemy as an attack upon humanity?
We live in a fallen world, and the world as we know it now is so different than it was 50, 60 or so years ago.
Given the chance to continue in this path, one would wonder if the family as designed at creation, would survive.

[drdos]

One Thing I can say for certain on this subject is that God Never Changes, and that I do not need to make excuses for the Word of God. These are not problematic scriptures. The language is plan. We are Equals in Christ but we have different roles. God loves us male and female equally. What we need to remember is how Christ treated woman. They were some of the Most important followers and supports of his ministry. They actually worked and made money to fund his ministry, yet Christ chose 12 men to take His gospel to the nations. I think if we, male and female believers just keep our eyes on Jesus we'll get it right. Once we start going down the road of power struggling in the church the enemy gets a foothold.

[Abiding in His Word]

I respect your opinion, and respectfully disagree.
God did chose one over another on many occasions.

Hi Tevye,

Of course, God chose individuals for particular reasons. But were they based on gender, size, outward appearance, ethnicity? No. He clearly told us He does not see individuals on the basis of these things. He chooses according to their ability.

Surely you would agree that if He chose by gender, age, marital status and/or performance, and reading scripture we would have no male worthy of being His choice. That is the understanding of God's not being partial. My point is we must avoid cutting & pasting and refer rather to the context to discover who is being spoken, how it would be understood by them, and the reason for the scripture.

Hope that clarifies my post.

[Abiding in His Word]

One Thing I can say for certain on this subject is that God Never Changes

Hi drdos,

When we say that God never changes, we mean that His inherent character, His attributes, His integrity, etc. cannot change. Nothing outside of Himself influences or changes Him. But, he does change His accommodate (for lack of a better word) Himself to meet the situation - always with the intent of sanctification of His people.

For example:

Genesis 18:26 So the LORD said, "If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare the whole place on their account."

Exodus 32:14 So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Numbers 27:7 "The daughters of Zelophehad are right in their statements. You shall surely give them a hereditary possession among their father's brothers, and you shall transfer the inheritance of their father to them.

Jeremiah 26:19 "Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him to death? Did he not fear the LORD and entreat the favor of the LORD, and the LORD changed His mind about the misfortune which He had pronounced against them? But we are committing a great evil against ourselves."

So when we say God never changes, that too must be understood based on scripture.

[drdos]

One Thing I can say for certain on this subject is that God Never Changes

Hi drdos,

When we say that God never changes, we mean that His inherent character, His attributes, His integrity, etc. cannot change. Nothing outside of Himself influences or changes Him. But, he does change His accommodate (for lack of a better word) Himself to meet the situation - always with the intent of sanctification of His people.

For example:

Genesis 18:26 So the LORD said, "If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare the whole place on their account."

Exodus 32:14 So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Jeremiah 26:19 "Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him to death? Did he not fear the LORD and entreat the favor of the LORD, and the LORD changed His mind about the misfortune which He had pronounced against them? But we are committing a great evil against ourselves."

So when we say God never changes, that too must be understood based on scripture.

Yes that is what I meant(God Never Changes. I didn't say that He has never changed his mind. Like in the book of Jonah). Anyway, Sorry for the general statement. We need to not make excuses for what God's word says. Many today want to change God's word to support their agenda. Like changing Father to (Mother) Jesus (To Child) and Spirit to (Womb)

[Tevye]

The language is plan. We are Equals in Christ but we have different roles. God loves us male and female equally. What we need to remember is how Christ treated woman. They were some of the Most important followers and supports of his ministry. They actually worked and made money to fund his ministry, yet Christ chose 12 men to take His gospel to the nations. I think if we, male and female believers just keep our eyes on Jesus we'll get it right. Once we start going down the road of power struggling in the church the enemy gets a foothold.

Amen! ...encouraging words brother.

I was just thinking of the story of Samuel, Saul and the Amalekites
(slightly related to the topic)

Samuel also said to Saul,
“The Lord sent me to anoint you king over His people, over Israel.
Now therefore, heed the voice of the words of the Lord.

Thus says the Lord of hosts: ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel,
how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt.
Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them.
But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”
1 Samuel chapter 15

From the Lord's own word He chose Israel to survive
over all of the people of Amalek.
("both man and woman, infant and nursing child")
In the above passage there was no difference
Men equally died alongside women.
Maybe we see the Lord through our experiences in life
and find it difficult to see Him at face value for who He really is.

Hi Tevye,

Of course, God chose individuals for particular reasons. But were they based on gender, size, outward appearance, ethnicity? No. He clearly told us He does not see individuals on the basis of these things. He chooses according to their ability.

Surely you would agree that if He chose by gender, age, marital status and/or performance, and reading scripture we would have no male worthy of being His choice.

Hi.
I understand what you're saying...
but I still disagree...
God did choose by gender, for certain jobs, roles or whatever...

Mary was chosen because she was a woman to bear Jesus.
Abraham was chosen because he was a man, to be the father of a people/nation.
God chose Moses as a man to lead God's people to the promise land.
Jesus choose 12 men to be His disciples. He choose them by their gender
He didn't choose women to be of the 12. But that doesn't mean He did not care about women.

No one is worthy of being chosen, we all carry the stain of sin
God chooses according to His desire, not by our merit.

For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh,
not many mighty, not many noble, are called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world
to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things
which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen,
and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence.
1 Corinthians 1

God cooses people, men and women alike, according to His design.
Not to say women are any less to Him then men are to Him.
I would say it's just how He wants it to be.
Like a house built a certain way with certain plans.
If humanity comes along and changes those plans
then they are not in harmony with the creator.

[Spreading Salt]

Must a private remain a private forever and remain static in this position? Or can he/she advance through the ranks to attain the position you evidently did and possibly beyond?

OK Abiding. To continue the train of thought with “does a private stay a private or move up in the ranks”…..

The rank itself does not change. A Commander in Chief rank is always such. Ultimately, it’s the position in the chain of command that we are addressing, not the individuals in each rank. God will always be God. Men will always be men. Women will always be women. In His Assembly, He established an order.

In your thoughts above, you are discussing the people who are in the rank. That works in the military chain, but not so much in the aspect I am trying to express. Probably not a good analogy, but one I can relate too nonetheless.

God above men, men are above women. Are you suggesting that women could surpass men and then even God? Are you suggesting that men could surpass God? I don’t think you are, but in your break down, that in essence is what would happen.

There was God. He made man. He made woman from a man. God – man – woman.

When it comes to His Church and instruction in the body, it seems clear to me that women are not supposed to instruct the men.

It's about the instruction piece, not the worship or spiritual gifts. I think it's how each individual uses them in the Assembly of His Church. Order was established by God for us and any bystanders. It is meant for good.

Just my 2 cents.

SS

[Abiding in His Word]

OK Abiding. To continue the train of thought with “does a private stay a private or move up in the ranks”…..

The rank itself does not change. A Commander in Chief rank is always such. Ultimately, it’s the position in the chain of command that we are addressing, not the individuals in each rank. God will always be God. Men will always be men. Women will always be women. In His Assembly, He established an order.

In your thoughts above, you are discussing the people who are in the rank. That works in the military chain, but not so much in the aspect I am trying to express. Probably not a good analogy, but one I can relate too nonetheless.

OK, I hope we can eliminate the military analogy as the body of Christ is not a military body nor a corporation and should not be treated as such.

God above men, men are above women. Are you suggesting that women could surpass men and then even God? Are you suggesting that men could surpass God? I don’t think you are, but in your break down, that in essence is what would happen.

I was responding to your "chain of command" in military terms and ranks. God didn't enter into that military analogy.

There was God. He made man. He made woman from a man. God – man – woman.

Are you suggesting that first is better or that there is an entitlement by virtue of being formed first? Because if you read Genesis 1:26-27, there is no hint whatsoever of that. Both were created in the image of God, both were to rule over the earth, and both were to multiply after their own kind.

It's about the instruction piece, not the worship or spiritual gifts. I think it's how each individual uses them in the Assembly of His Church. Order was established by God for us and any bystanders. It is meant for good.

No question that an orderly assembly is necessary. Each member of the body is to express their gift in an orderly manner.

1Cor. 14:26 What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

When it comes to His Church and instruction in the body, it seems clear to me that women are not supposed to instruct the men.

Would you provide scripture in it's context please, along with scriptural qualifiers; i.e. men instructed to teach women, ages women are allowed to teach, where they are supposed to teach, and the reason you might have for this supposed instruction. That would help. Thanks!

[Spreading Salt]

Hi Abiding,

Let's look at some context.

1 Timothy 2
Instructions on Worship
1 I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. 7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.
8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Pretty clear according to the scripture that women are not to teach men.

Are you suggesting that first is better or that there is an entitlement by virtue of being formed first? Because if you read Genesis 1:26-27, there is no hint whatsoever of that. Both were created in the image of God, both were to rule over the earth, and both were to multiply after their own kind.

Also clear to me that God considers the order of his creation important, clearly distinguishing that Adam came first.

I don't see anywhere in scripture where it states the ages women can teach. I do know that scripture states that men are not to be taught by women in the Assembly. So, does that include smaller groups and Bible studies? Sunday School? I think to be safe, as a woman, and out of respect to God and His order, I will continue to lead the children.

This seems to be such a huge area of contention in the Church and the devil has a hay day with it, tapping into the pride of human beings. If we are dying to selves each day and living for Yeshua, does it really matter that as a woman, men are considered above us? It doesn't make us any less valuable in His kingdom or of any less use. Oh to be a guilded mirror instead of a cast iron pot? Who are we to argue with God and His order? Very slippery slope IMO

SS

[Abiding in His Word]

Pretty clear according to the scripture that women are not to teach men.

Hi Spreading Salt,

It's really not pretty clear evidently, or we would not be discussing it and Daffodyllady would not have expressed some confusion about certain issues pertaining to women.

Also clear to me that God considers the order of his creation important, clearly distinguishing that Adam came first.

You didn't reply to the Genesis account of creation that states both were created in God's image and likeness, both given rule over the earth, and both given the mandate to multiply. Nothing is said that Adam was given any entitlement of authority because he was formed first. It's simply not there.

What was Paul saying by referencing the order of formation then? In context, Paul is concerned as he always was (in every church) about false teachers. He opens his letter to Timothy immediately expressing that concern:

As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith. But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions. 1Tim. 1:3-7

He goes so far to name two men in particular whom he has turned over to satan because they have not kept the faith:

.... keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith. Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme. 1Tim. 1:19-20

Then he corrects those men who are evidently causing wrath and dissension among the church members. Further, he corrects those women whose apparel is evidently placing the emphasis on outward appearance rather than inner beauty. Following that, in keeping with his corrections, he is not now allowing "a woman" to teach because she must learn first. The reason she must learn first is so that like Eve, she will not be deceived nor teach false doctrine. He makes the case for allowing women to teach (after learning) is because men (Adam) was spiritually "formed" and now it's the woman's needs spiritual formation prior to teaching.

A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 1Tim. 2:11 (again this refers to a singular woman; not women in the plural)

He continues to strongly express his concerns about false teaching:

But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. 1Tim. 4:1-3

Always, always, Paul's admonishments, corrections, and concerns in his epistles are against false teachings. Honestly, if you read all the instances of men teaching false doctrine in his letters (against this one mention of "a woman") he technically should have prohibited men from teaching.



This is the only instance in the whole Bible where a woman is disallowed to teach and in context, it's apparent she is teaching before she has learned. Also in context, Paul is correcting both men and women in particular areas. But we can't make an all-time, all women, doctrine from this one verse any more than we can make it a doctrine that all men must pray with his hands uplifted or that women can't wear braids or gold wedding bands.

Context is everything.

[daffodyllady]

Abiding, I know you usually take a very anti-establishmentarian stance toward male headship. Understanding where you stand does not mean I agree with you. I really do not want to argue with you on this.

Abiding, I beg you, please do not take this thread over, and dominate it with your strongly held opinions! We already know your stance on this subject.
I would like to hear from some others, please.

We have heard this very vocal argument so many times, and it helps no one. (We do not need to go down rabbit trails into such no-man's-lands as Old Testament ways of acquiring a wife!) So, again, I beg of everyone, let's not argue! Let us rather approach the Word in a humble way, in a manner that is "easy to be entreated." Okay?

What I want, is a clear explanation of what the Word means, when it says "Let your women keep silence in the churches."

And there are many such Scriptures.

I would like to understand how these scriptures are to be understood. If God meant for women to keep absolute silence in the assembly, then what about testimonies and/or singing? If we say that God didn't mean absolute and permanent silence, then does that mean God didn't mean what He did say?

What about I Corinthians 11, where women were instructed to cover their heads to prophesy? Was this talking about prophecy within the assembly, or in a private setting? [If so, what constitutes a private setting?] If God was addressing women prophesying in the assembly, then obviously, women were not supposed to keep silence.

[Abiding in His Word]

Abiding, I know you usually take a very anti-establishmentarian stance toward male headship. Understanding where you stand does not mean I agree with you. I really do not want to argue with you on this.

I never mentioned headship, daffodyllady. And I'm sorry you perceive my participation in this thread as an argument. The question was posed in the debate forum and I've provided scripture that I felt supported the issues involved in your OP.

Abiding, I beg you, please do not take this thread over, and dominate it with your strongly held opinions! We already know your stance on this subject.
I would like to hear from some others, please.

All members are most certainly free to participate, daffodyllady. Several others have stated equally strong opinions I think, or can certainly refute my scriptural understanding. That's how we learn from one another, isn't it?

We have heard this very vocal argument so many times, and it helps no one.

Why would you say that, daffodyllady? Is it because you don't like or agree with my understanding of scripture? When other members are vocal in an area of their understanding and as a result of their studies, do we tell them that their very vocal arguments are not helping?

(We do not need to go down rabbit trails into such no-man's-lands as Old Testament ways of acquiring a wife!)

That example made a very valid point about the erroneous result of pasting a list of scriptures together without taking each in the context. It wasn't originally mine, btw, but I saved it as a reminder of how we (including me) can arrive at faulty conclusions by using this method of interpretation to arrive at a desired agenda.

So, again, I beg of everyone, let's not argue! Let us rather approach the Word in a humble way, in a manner that is "easy to be entreated." Okay?

Again, I apologize if you see debating as arguing. A debate is an exchange between a number of people who present their findings or facts and others are allowed to refute them and persuade them to see another facet of the subject. It's an excellent way to learn to consider other's perspectives and hopefully broaden our understanding in a variety of areas.

What I want, is a clear explanation of what the Word means, when it says "Let your women keep silence in the churches."

I would like to understand how these scriptures are to be understood. If God meant for women to keep absolute silence in the assembly, then what about testimonies and/or singing? If we say that God didn't mean absolute and permanent silence, then does that mean God didn't mean what He did say?

What about I Corinthians 11, where women were instructed to cover their heads to prophesy? Was this talking about prophecy within the assembly, or in a private setting? [If so, what constitutes a private setting?] If God was addressing women prophesying in the assembly, then obviously, women were not supposed to keep silence.

I'm glad that you've posted scripture (let's not forget 1 Cor. 14:26) that seem to contradict Paul's statement about silence for women. That being the case, it should lead us to the probability that we are misunderstanding that particular verse as it is not in harmony with the rest of scripture, right?

Sometimes the apparent "plain" reading of a text removed from it's context leads to an erroneous conclusion as the verse in question does for exactly the reasons you've stated, daffodyllady.

P.S. I noticed 5 other members who have joined the discussion and I'm certain there will be others. But it's not really fair (imho) to exclude one member who is trying very hard to be scriptural in responding to your questions.

[burien1]

Off topic here for a minute, but I will not let this go unchallenged;

Let us rather approach the Word in a humble way, in a manner that is "easy to be entreated." Okay?

Whether I agree with Abiding, or disagree on any topic, I have seldom ever seen anyone here, who handles every topic in a more "easy to be entreated manner." A lot of us hold strongly held opinions. That does not disqualify anyone from debate.

[mark s]

A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 1Tim. 2:11 (again this refers to a singular woman; not women in the plural)

Hi Abiding,

Just a quick question to clarify something . . .

You are saying that this verse was referring to one particular person that was in that particular church?

Love in Christ,
Mark

[mark s]

Oh my... I know you are saying... here we go again.

HI daffodyllady,

For what it's worth . . .

(I'm not planning on debating any of this, but you had asked what others think. I'll try to put it in a nutshell. Not that I've ever really had the knack for brevity!)

On the one hand, women are told to be silent in the church, obey their husbands, and be submissive.

And in fact it does.

On the other hand, we are given the record that on the day of Pentecost, when God was the only one in complete charge, He had women prophesying alongside men, in a mixed worship service. If He started the church with women speaking out loud in the assembly, why did He change it later?

I think that the day of Pentecost was an exceptional event. Consider this . . . even if there had been only men present, they were still "out of order" according to Paul's instructions, that each wait their turn. But they were all apparently speaking at once, all 120 of them.

Should we say that the entire church body, whether men or women, may speak in tongues at the same time?

This is some of what I was referring to when I pointed out the difference between narrative and prescriptive passages.

Also, when Apollos came preaching only the gospel according to John the baptist, it was not only Aquilla, but also his wife Priscilla, who instructed Apollos more perfectly in the faith. Paul said women are never to be suffered to teach a man! Did God contradict Himself here?

Look exactly at what Paul said . . .

1 Timothy 2:11-12 NKJV
(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.

Paul did not actual forbid that a woman teach a man. He said that he did not permit it. Might there be an exception to that? Perhaps. Should that be the rule? What did Paul think?

and fwiw . . . I don't see the escape clause that this no longer applies "once she's learned . . ."

Consider elders . . . (not to invoke this great debate)

Paul's instructions were that elders be married men who had successfully raised families. Does that mean that God could not raise up an elder who did not fit that description? I would imagine not. I believe He could, and might. But should I seek out someone to be an elder who does not fit that description? I would not.

It almost seems like Paul's writings lean toward favoring the fallen male ego... or is it God's will for women to be treated like children in the church setting?

I think that there are certain roles each of us perform. Not all are apostles, not all are prophets, not all are teachers, and not all work miracles.

I think that this is intertwined with the matters of headship. Now, by headship I don't mean authority. The Bible says that I am the head of my wife, but that doesn't mean I have the task of ordering her about. Jesus asks that I serve Him voluntarily, and He is my example. But as my head, the direction He goes is the direction I go. As the head of my wife, the way I go is the way my family goes. It's just the way things work.

Yes, God is concerned about individuals - of course! However, not all are apostles, not all are prophets, not all are teachers, not all work miracles . . . God gives different people different places in the body, and just because He does so does not mean that we're not all important, or equal in the sense of being individuals before God. That God declares me to be the head of my wife in no wise makes her less important.

Anyway, you had asked what others think, these are some of my thoughts. As I said, I'm not interested in debating this, but I don't mind answering questions if someone want to know more about what I think.

Love in Christ,

Mark

PS . . . I always recommend letting God choose your mate for you, but, if you want to do it yourself, I recommend #5, become the ruler of a mighty nation and hold a beauty contest. You can be rich, powerful, and married to a beautiful wife all at once!

[brandon]

Hi Daffy,

In reading your post, it seems apparent that what you're struggling with is your desire to walk in obedience to God's established order (which is good!) and your feelings about what that order means on you as a person. Our culture would say that you're allowing yourself to be degraded and treated like a child, and it seems to be that's what is causing you to feel torn.

I don't think I know anyone who wants to feel like they're of lesser value than another person. It's worth saying that God values very different things than we do. He values submission and servanthood amongst His people, and Jesus exemplifies what pleases God through His life and teaching.

Jesus clearly had authority and power. He could have called down a legion of angels and destroyed His enemies. I can tell you that's what I would have done with that power. I'd have been like the disciples, saying "let's call down fire from heaven!" Instead, Jesus gave Himself entirely to the work of the Kingdom, having no home and dying at 33 for the crime of being the Son of God.

Now look at Paul and what he says about the apostles, treated like the scum of the world and enduring impossible hardships for the Kingdom and the Gospel proclamation. Oh yes, they had authority and power, but for building the church up, not bossing people around.

The leader of all is the slave of all.

It's a mistake that we make when we think our value is determined by the level of authority we have. Your feelings (in obeying God's word, am I worth less?) and the way sometimes authority is abused (I'm a man and have authority, so I'm worth more) show that this is not a subject most people don't properly understand. Authority and headship are necessary to the role and function of all aspects of human life, starting with the family unit, to the church, to work life, to secular government. These concepts come from the Trinity, where the Son submits to the Father, and the Spirit submits to the Father and Son in all things, although they are all of equal value.

For a deep study on this, I would start in 1 Peter, then Ephesians, Colossians, Titus, 1 Timothy, and finally 1 Corinthians. We are all called to be subject to different kinds of authority, inside of the home, outside of the home, in the church, and outside of the church. In the kingdom of God, humbly being subject to authority is an incredible honor, and a pure and quiet spirit the pinnacle of beauty.

[Tevye]

How about looking from another angle?

...as a husband, and father of both girls and boys I've seen a natural God given order in my family.
No matter what happens in their life, they seem to be like the pre-formed shapes that appear to be
intended to only fit within the designated spaces. A natural order in the chaos of life.
The boys like boy stuff, and the girls like girl stuff....

Just an observation of life...

[Abiding in His Word]

OK, then....

Daffodyllady has asked twice for this:

What I want, is a clear explanation of what the Word means, when it says "Let your women keep silence in the churches."

So I will attempt to address her question.

And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even more quiet (G2271); and he *said....., Acts 22:2

Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet (G2271) fashion and eat their own bread. 2 Thessalonians 3:12

First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet (G2271) life in all godliness and dignity. 1 Tim. 2:2

A woman must quietly (G2271) receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 1 Timothy 2:11

But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet (G2271). 1 Timothy 2:12

but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet (G2272) spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. 1Peter 3:4

….. and to make it your ambition to lead a quiet (G2270) life and attend to your own business and work with your hands, just as we commanded you. 1Thess. 4:11

G2271

hēsuchia; from G2272; stillness: - quiet (2), quiet fashion (1), quietly (1).

By reviewing these scriptures, we see that Paul is enjoining all believers to live their lives in a quiet, tranquil manner. To ascribe quietness or silence to women only is to employ a false method of interpretation. Regardless of the venue, believers are to refrain from being combative, boisterous, unruly, etc. so as to not reflect negatively on the body of Christ.

We also know that Paul did not mean complete silence because in addressing the whole assembly, he reminds them that they can prophecy one by one, speak to one another in psalms, share a teaching, or a revelation, or a tongue and interpretation. Women are not excluded from vocal participation in assemblies. 1 Cor. 14

Now there are scriptures that seem to mean “complete” silence; i.e. do not say a word, but that silence is not a forever silence but only in a particular situation for a particular time. You can look up these scriptures if you are interested.

Matthew 26:63; Mark 3:4; 9:34; 14:61; Luke 1:20; 9:36; 14:4; 19:40; 20:26; Acts 8:32; 12:17; 15:12; 18:9; 21:14; 1 Corinthians 14:28,30

There is one other passage that at first glance appears to command silence in women and that is 1 Cor. 14:34-35.

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, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 1Cor. 14:34 -35

1) First we note that there is no such law that is referred to that women must be silent in church.
2) This command would only apply to married women were there to be such a law.
3) The rest of the chapter contradicts shame being associated with assembly participation by women

and last but not least,

4) Paul's response to these two verses:

What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 1Cor. 14:36

He expresses a very emotional rebuttal to that! The fact that those two verses reference the law, we can safely assume it was the Judaisers who were demanding the silence of women as was commanded in their Oral law. We know that throughout the letter to Corinthians, Paul is correcting situations he has received either by verbal reports or letters sent to him regarding immorality, dissension, false teachings, etc. This is most likely from one of those reports where the Jewish converts are still trying to spy out the freedom that believers have in Christ to bring them under the law of silence (for women) and circumcision for men.

The "What" emotional rebuttal expression is one that Paul has used in a total of 14 times in 1 Cor., but translators have ignored it in all but 4 verses in the newer translations. Here are the 4:

What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. [1Co 6:16 KJV]

What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? [1Co 6:19 KJV]

What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. [1Co 11:22 KJV]

What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? [1Co 14:36 KJV]

I hope this helps clarify the question of women being silenced in assemblies.

[daffodyllady]

Mark s and brandon, thank you for your responses... I need to meditate on them for a while.

Abiding, I need to ask for a clarification on something. To set the context, let me first post the passage:

1Co 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
1Co 14:34 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, as also saith the law.
1Co 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
1Co 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

Just to clarify... Are you saying that verses 34 and 35 are actually a quote from Judaizers, and not actual instructions from Paul?

Because it seems to me that if verse 36 naturally follows verse 35, then we must also say that verse 34 naturally follows 33.
If we say that verse 36 helps to clarify what Paul meant in verse 35, then we must also allow that verse 33 lays the foundation for verse 34.

It seems to me that Paul is dealing throughout this passage with one central problem: There were prophets (probably prophetesses) who tried to dominate the assembly, not allowing others to contribute. As multiple would-be leaders vied to be heard, it created a confusing scene.

Chapter 14 nowhere deals with Judaizers, that I can find. Therefore, to claim the reference to women was a quote from Judaizers seems a little like twisting the Scriptures to fit a preconceived doctrine.

[Abiding in His Word]

Chapter 14 nowhere deals with Judaizers, that I can find. Therefore, to claim the reference to women was a quote from Judaizers seems a little like twisting the Scriptures to fit a preconceived doctrine.

Not sure what you mean by "preconceived doctrine" daffodyllady, but it is the result of scripture study much the same as we all do. As a result of my study, I may have arrived at a different perspective than others about various passages and that's what I'm posting, but I wouldn't be the least bit offended if you or others disagree. That, to me, is the beauty of examining the scriptures together in a diligent manner as did the Bereans to learn the truth.

In answer to your question about my suggestion that verses 34-35 were most likely quotes by the Judaizers and Paul's emotional/astonishment at this......

One cannot read through the gospel and not see them arguing with Jesus and confronting Him with their references to both the Torah and the Talmud (Oral law) and their racial and social prejudices . Likewise Paul's epistles without reading of the problems the Judaizers caused in their efforts to bring the Christians under Jewish law. Paul defends Christianity against the Judaizers in nearly every one of the newly formed churches; the Corinthian, Galatia, and Romans. Acts 15 describes a rather heated debate caused by the Pharisees insisting the new believers be circumcised and observe the law of Moses. Peter confronts them about "placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?" Their influence is evident throughout the New Testament.

I had saved several segments from the Talmud regarding women speaking, but unfortunately did not save a link to the precise location of them within the Talmud online. I'll post the saved segments along with a link to the entire Talmud, and with over 12,000 pages (pretty sure), I hope you'll understand why I've had great difficulty retrieving a direct link.

Here's the references about women speaking from the Talmud:

"A woman's voice is prohibited because it is sexually provocative" (Talmud, Berachot 24a).

"Women are sexually seductive, mentally inferior, socially embarrassing, and spiritually separated from the law of Moses; therefore, let them be silent" (summary of Talmudic sayings).

The Talmud Called the Voice of a Woman "Shameful"

"It is a shame for a woman to let her voice be heard among men" (Talmud, Tractate Kiddushin)

"The voice of a woman is filthy nakedness" (Talmud, Berachot Kiddushin)

Here are the two links to the Talmud online here and here. Nearly impossible to wade through, but if you do a search about the Talmud and it's references to women, others with a knowledge of Hebrew have found the quotes.

You will remember how the disciples were shocked that Jesus would speak to the woman at the well. They, too, were evidently familiar with the law prohibiting even speaking to a woman on the street:

At this point His disciples came, and they were amazed that He had been speaking with a woman.....John 4:27

Vincent's Word Studies comments on this verse:

The Rabbinical writings taught that it was beneath a man's dignity to converse with women. It was one of the six things which a Rabbi might not do. “Let no one,” it is written, “converse with a woman in the street, not even with his own wife.” It was also held in these writings that a woman was incapable of profound religious instruction. “Rather burn the sayings of the law than teach them to women.”

So....in summary, given the 3 points I mentioned in my previous post:

1) First we note that there is no such law that is referred to that women must be silent in church.
2) This command would only apply to married women were there to be such a law.
3) The rest of the chapter contradicts shame being associated with assembly participation by women

along with Paul's expression of astonishment... "What?" and the fact that you'll not find any such law in scripture inferring it's a shame for women to speak or prohibiting speech, I find the only conclusion is a quote from the Oral law. In addition to the absence of such a prohibition in the Mosaic law, it would contradict Paul's guidelines regarding the use of the gifts among believers in assemblies.

Hope I've answered your question.

[brandon]

Daffy - my opinion on this specific issue is (surprisingly enough!) in partial agreement with Abiding.

The context of 1 Corinthians 14 is the chaos and confusion around the use of spiritual gifts. There have always been prophetesses in God's kingdom, even under the Old Covenant. There is clearly a time and place for the expression of gifts of the Spirit (regardless of the gender of the vessel). Paul is not limiting women to complete silence in the church service, in my view. That would mean that they would not be able to even sing the Psalms!

However, all tongue interpretations and prophetic insights are to be held accountable by the church leadership, and this is where the concepts I discussed previously come into play. The other references in the New Testament revolve around the woman's proper role and need for submission to authority, especially in regards to the judgment of the prophetic.

I think 1 Timothy 2 is probably more enlightening then 1 Corinthians 14, because the command is more obvious within the context of the passage.

[drdos]

I believe the whole quiet reference was for church's in Corinth that there was a problem with woman talking aloud in church(Gossiping/Socializing during the service) . Corinth was a Roman like city that was very worldly and rich. Paul was just helping church leaders deal with this problem. I don't believe he uses this command in any of his other letters besides Corinth.

[daffodyllady]

...listening here... and thinking... praying...

Abiding, you will find direction in Numbers 30:3-16 about how a woman's vows to God could be totally invalidated by her husband or father. Therefore, this is an Old Testament command that women were to be under the spiritual headship of their husbands or fathers.

Also, I Timothy 2:11-13 and I Cor 11:9 both use the order of creation in Genesis 1 as a basis for requiring women to be submissive to male leadership. I Peter 3:5 tells us to be as Sarah, who was in submission to her husband, calling him lord. Therefore, we have many Old Testament foundational scriptures dealing with women being in subjection to male leadership. The only reason someone can't find it there, is because they don't want to.

There are many, many scriptures in the New Testament which indicate how women are to be subservient to male leadership:
1Cor 14:35, 1Cor 11:3, 1Cor 11:7-10; Eph 5:22-24, Eph 5:33; Col 3:18; Titus 2:5;
1Pe 3:1-6; 1Tim 2:11-12
To claim that every one of these passages do not mean what they plainly say, seems to me to do violence to the Word of God. This is a lot like how the JW's handle the scriptures that point out the divinity of Christ.

I cannot accept the idea that the directions given in I Cor 14: 34,35 were a quote from false teachers. If it were, Paul would have said it was. Just because it was followed by the word "What?" cannot identify the passage as a quote. This is very unscholarly.
The word "What?" in I Cor 14 seems to me to be an obvious lead-in to Paul's conclusion of the entire discussion about how the gifts are to be used in the assembly.

Therefore, I will not take the bait of Satan, whispering to me that it is not right for men to be in leadership over women. This is an evil spirit that is very actively tearing down the family in our modern society. Ever since the women's rights movement began, we have gone downhill as a society. There is a foundational reason for that. When the mother in the home is rebellious, she fosters in her children a spirit of rebellion as well.

Yes, in Christ, in our spirits, we are no longer male and female. Just like in heaven, where we will be pure spirit. It is obvious that we ARE still males and females on this earth, as long as we inhabit these bodies! The context of the currently famous verse saying that in Christ there is no longer male or female is talking about the availability of salvation to all. It also says that in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek, and neither bond, nor free. Yet, Paul deals with each of those 4 other groups elsewhere, giving direction as to how to interact with each other. Just like he deals with male and female interactions and roles.

Therefore, Galatians 3:28 is not talking about earthly leadership roles. We have other, very plain passages that speak of gender roles as pertaining to leadership within the church and the family. I believe that all Scripture is inspired by God, and God didn't contradict Himself.

[daffodyllady]

Thanks, everyone, for joining in the discussion.

After prayer and soul-searching, I have come to the conclusion that it is my fallen nature that wants to exalt itself which wants to speak in church. If God tells me not to speak, I accept that. If there is something HE wants said in church, HE is able to use the people He chooses to speak through. And according to the Word, HE chooses to use men for that particular setting.

For me, it's about taking up the cross, and choosing death to my self. It is not my spirit that wishes to be heard. It is my ego.

Thanks for helping me study the Word.

[Abiding in His Word]

I'm happy you have arrived at what you see as a comprehensive understanding of the issue of women's speaking or not speaking in the church. But I'm saddened that it appears you consider yourself unworthy to be of service in the expression of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

None of us need worry about transgressing protocol, however, since the Holy Spirit would never impose on anyone who didn't want to be used in a particular area of service. But trust me, Daffodyllady, the ego is never inflated when going about the work of the Lord; it is just the opposite...very humbling.

As for me, I join the prophet Isaiah in saying...."Here am I, Lord. Send me."

Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?" Then I said, "Here am I. Send me!" Isaiah 6:8

It may be that God has a ministry for you outside of the church. I pray you will find an area of service if you haven't already as you seem to have much in the way of talent, giftings, and knowledge of the Word.

Bless you!

[daffodyllady]

I am sorry you see my choice to submit to God, as a feeling of being unworthy to be used. It's not at all an issue of unworthiness. It's simple death to self, willing to be used as God chooses, in silence, even though I may wish to be seen and heard.

It's a little like how David said, "My soul is quieted as a weaned child." In other words, it is growth and maturity, to be able to quiet the soul, not demanding attention on the basis of personal need or personal worth.

[Tevye]

This is an evil spirit that is very actively tearing down the family in our modern society. Ever since the women's rights movement began, we have gone downhill as a society. There is a foundational reason for that. When the mother in the home is rebellious, she fosters in her children a spirit of rebellion as well.

Yes, in Christ, in our spirits, we are no longer male and female. Just like in heaven, where we will be pure spirit. It is obvious that we ARE still males and females on this earth, as long as we inhabit these bodies!

Intriguing and well thought out observations!
Bless you in the Lord Yeshua sister.

"Love is here." - ((((videolink))))

[AndCanItBe]

There are many, many scriptures in the New Testament which indicate how women are to be subservient to male leadership:

I think we probably agree and just word things differently, but I just want to point out, that, in scripture, women are commanded to be submissive to their church leadership (as are men) and their husband, not any and all males. With the exception of government (which may come in the form of men or women), I do not think any of those commands were intended to apply outside the church or marriage. We have to deal carefully and kindly with other men, just as we would with women, but we certainly don't have to submit to anyone by virtue of the fact that they are male.

THIS idea is a large part of what many women's liberation movements were reacting to, IMO, and I do think the idea that all women must submit to all men is completely unbiblical. It's not there in scripture. Submission is a choice, we are asked to make it inside of 3 relationships....government, church, marriage. In the US we have a hand in choosing all three relationships! We aren't told to submit because they are male, as much as we are because of their relationship to us.

[Abiding in His Word]

And we should note that all believers submit to one another. The New Testament clearly teaches that submission is to be an attribute of all believers.

--Rom.13:1,5 -- every person is to be subject to the civil authorities

--1 Cor.14:32 -- the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

--1 Cor.16:15-16 -- believers are to submit to those who lay down their lives for others

--Eph.5:21 -- all Christians are to mutually submit to one another in the fear of Christ

--James 4:7 -- we are all to submit to the Lord

--1 Pet.5:5 -- all of you, be subject one to another

--1 Peter 5:5 --younger believers to older/mature believers

--Titus 2:5 -- Wives to their own husbands

Titus 2:9 Urge bondslaves to be subject to their own masters in everything, to be well-pleasing, not argumentative

Titus 3:1 Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed

Submission is not gender specific but encompasses all believers. We distort the gospel when we overemphasize the submission of women as though it were different than other submissions. All believers submit to one another.

[Mrs. B]

Women"s role....


I Love Jesus because He shun not one person......Women were His followers and He talked openly with them all..
The woman at the well.....I love that he did not turn her away....but she went and called all her friends and Jesus stayed as her town....and there was revival....
Mary, Martha, all that came to Him he did not deny.......
Heaven will be filled with men and woman? oh yea, there is not sex inheaven....I mean no male or female....we'll be like the angels.......but woman was God's Idea....not mans...

Mrs. B I could sign Mr. B and you would think I was a man...right! or maybe you could tell.....

[keithareilly]

We are all responsible for using what we have been given to the best of our ability in service to God.

To say to a brother or sister, "Do not use what God has given you to the best of your ability" is to say "God did not fit each of us to accomplish those good works for which God created each of us."

Keith

[Abiding in His Word]

Paul's Quotes that reference non-scriptural sources:

1) 1Cor. 15:33 Do not be deceived: "Bad company corrupts good morals."

This is a sentence taken out of Menander, an Heathen poet. (John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible)

2) Act 17:28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, 'For we also are His children.'

He (Paul) cites a passage out of Aratus (John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible)

3) Titus 1:12 One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons."

This was Epimenides, in whose poems stand the words here cited; the apostle rightly calls him "one of themselves", since he was a Cretian by birth, of the city of Gnossus (John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible)

4) 1Cor. 14:34 Let your women be silent in the churches; for it is not permitted to them to speak, but to be in subjection, as the Law also says.

This was a Jewish ordinance; women were not permitted to teach in the assemblies, or even to ask questions. The rabbins taught that “a woman should know nothing but the use of her distaff.” And the sayings of Rabbi Eliezer, as delivered, Bammidbar Rabba, sec. 9, fol. 204, are both worthy of remark and of execration; they are these: “Let the words of the law be burned, rather than that they should be delivered to women.” (Adam Clarke's Commentary)

5) 1Cor. 14:35 And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for a woman to speak in a church.

It may be added here, that on this subject the Jews were very strenuous, and their laws were very strict. The Rabbis taught that a woman should know nothing but the use of the distaff, and they were specially prohibited from asking questions in the synagogue, or even from reading. See Lightfoot. The same rule is still observed by the Jews in the synagogues. (Albert Barnes Notes on the Bible)

*******************************************************
There may be others, but what's important is that when we read one verse that appears to contradictct others, a more in-depth, objective study will clarify the meaning which is out of harmony with the whole Bible. Paul draws on much of his background to reach those who could relate to his use of sporting events, popular Olympic games, military terms, and Pharisaic beliefs. He was the most perfect individual chosen by God to reach both gentiles and Jews with the truth of the gospel and refute erroneous, burdensome traditions. He was a champion of liberty in Christ.

But it was because of the false brethren secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you. Gal 2:4-5

[daffodyllady]

Abiding, are you saying that we can count any verse uninspired by God,
if it seems to contradict our current understanding of other Scripture?

It seems the basic tool you are using, is throwing doubt on the inspiration of some of the Bible.

Do you, or don't you, believe that all Scripture is God-breathed?

[daffodyllady]

We are all responsible for using what we have been given to the best of our ability in service to God.

To say to a brother or sister, "Do not use what God has given you to the best of your ability" is to say "God did not fit each of us to accomplish those good works for which God created each of us."

Keith

Keith,
Why would it be necessary for a woman to speak in the church assembly, in order to use what she has been given, to the best of her ability in service to God?

If God commands her to be silent in the assembly, then it is not service to God that she gives, if she disobeys. She may teach ever so well, and she may expound the scriptures beautifully. But in doing so, she may very well be living in disobedience, and thus not glorifying God by choosing to do it her way.

Example: Nancy Leigh DeMoss. She teaches only women, and has an incredibly inspiring ministry. I highly recommend her.

God does fit us to do His will. Too often though, we as humans have preconceived ideas as to how we should use the gifts we have been given. His Word gives us clear parameters that we must stay inside, in order to bring Him glory in our service.

Service is not service to God if it is done in disobedience to God's Word.

[Abiding in His Word]

Abiding, are you saying that we can count any verse uninspired by God,
if it seems to contradict our current understanding of other Scripture?

It seems the basic tool you are using, is throwing doubt on the inspiration of some of the Bible.

Do you, or don't you, believe that all Scripture is God-breathed?

Of course I believe all of scripture is inspired, Daffodyllady. Paul was inspired to use particular quotes and metaphors to make a point just as Jesus used parables. It's our job as disciples to understand the intended message and purpose behind the them. Just as we know the Holy Spirit isn't a dove, that God doesn't have wings, and great faith isn't really a mustard seed, we know the message behind these things because we see the spiritual through the natural. Likewise, when Paul likened those without love to clanging cymbals, we understand that comparison as spirit-breathed by virtue of the message he intended to convey.

There are some things in scripture that were intended for particular people at a particular time for a particular reason. A simplistic example is when Paul told Timothy to drink a little wine for his ailing stomach. That was inspired, but directed to a particular person for a particular reason. We should take it as it was intended.

The quotes I posted were posted in response to your suggestion that if 1 Cor. 14:34-35 was a quote, Paul would have said so. He also uses metaphors without naming them as such because those who heard them understood what he meant. When Paul tells them to “run the race,” he is referencing Olympic events he was certain the Greeks and Romans were familiar with that. When he mentions that he fights, but not as one who “beats the air,” he is likely alluding to shadow-boxing. Likewise when he mentioned “fighting the good fight” and “finishing the course”. His hearers would have been able to identify with those examples. When he said, “beware of the dogs” in Philippians, he was referring to either gentiles or Judaizers who were evil workers.

Again, it's important that we understand what Paul was saying and why. I hope that will answer your question about whether or not I believe all of scripture is inspired. Most assuredly I do.

[Mrs. B]

Women"s role......


Why did Paul write so strongly to the ladies in the Corinthian church....?
why did he not make this strong teaching in all the churches? why just the Corinthian church?

The Corinthin's were Gentiles......and they were idle worshippers.....Sex was a big part of there worship
the woman shaved their bodies and prostitution was a part of their worship......
The men bowed to the woman.....sex was a part of their worship...
When the people got saved.....they had no bible or law as the Jewish believlers....Cornith was a very bad city...
very ungodly.....So when the people got Saved.....the two books of I and II Corinthinasn....is very powerful'

The women shaved their heads.....So Paul had a lot of detail writting to help them see the Holiesness of the Church and the Families.....Also Worship....He details worship and the Spiritual Gifts.....Giving....He had to teach them all
the ways of God......From Family to Worship....
Why was he so strong on woman? Because in the Bale Religion women were worshiped....sex was a form of worship...
So Paul speaks very strongly to the Corinthin Church or Believers...the woman shaved their bodies and hair....this was the style of the Bale worship and popular in their day.......

Why is this doctrine so strong in Corinth and Not in all the Other Churches......?
Because they had to be taught Basics...Christian morals...
This doctrine is not taught by any other of the apostiles......or church doctrine.....?

Jesus Himself, nor does the Law teach as strong as Paul does to the Corinthian church......why was the doctrine of woman not taught in all the different books? Silance to the woman was because the women in the Bale worship domonated the men.......You can do some research and
I believle this church had a lot of Problems and Paul speaks very strongly to correct the problem......

God has Given us in the Church the Holy Spirit......We are to be lead by His Holy Spirit....His Holy spirit is Holy and Jesus Never rebuked a woman for speaking......I do believe in order in the assembly......and if woman are out of order they should be corrected......but we are not under bondage.....we are free....not to sin or be out of order....But free to obey the Lord......and
Not to cause confussion or disorder but free to obey Jesus and our husbands.....we are not bound but we have liberty to follow Jesus......and to follow the the Holy Spirit that lives in us.....I know when I get out of order and so do each of you...
Jesus set us Free....Not free to sin but Free to follow Him....Mrs. B

[keithareilly]

Daffodyllady,

If I were to listen to a recorded session of Nancy Leigh DeMoss preaching and I learned something, would Ms. DeMoss have sinned? Would you have sinned by recommending her in a response addressed to me? Suppose, after hearing her, I agreed with you and invited a group of men friends to hear what she has to say in an effort to help us understand and love our wives better. Would anyone have sinned? Now suppose instead of getting a recording I invited her to come personally to my home and give a lecture. If she agreed would she have sinned? Suppose there were enough men who wanted to hear her that we could not fit in the house and met in the church building? (After all, the church building is not the church.) Would it matter whether she came in person or we showed the recording in the church building?