09 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillDo Paul's words (below) in the New Testament conflict with, trump, or overrided the Old Testament verses you list above. In general, are their unresolvable contradictions in the Bible. And how do women in their everyday lives apply Paul's words below.
Female equality is presumed in the following passages of the Bible, of which Paul of course was familiar. A question is added for the doubter that these passages exhibited male - female equality:
1.) Genesis 1:27 - "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; MALE AND FEMALE He created them"
Why didn't Genesis just say only ng out the equality of men and women intended by God His creation.
34 let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law.
35 And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church.
09 Feb 12
Originally posted by ASRPEESo is it clear according to Paul that it is a sin and shameful for a woman to preach.
If you look at the context, these verses are talking about women speaking a message from God (i.e. prophesying). This is not to restrict a woman from saying anything, but rather to keep women from usurping the position that God has given to man (i.e. that of preaching to the congregation). This therefore matches with the other scripture mentioned that says a woman must wear a head covering when she speaks in church.
09 Feb 12
Originally posted by moon1969If so, is Paul's basis for this is that Adam was first formed before Eve and was not deceived but the woman was in the transgression. That all women uniquely bear the burden of Eve's transgression. Thus, women should not preach.
So is it clear according to Paul that it is a sin and shameful for a woman to preach.
"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" 1 Timothy 2:11-14.
10 Feb 12
6 edits
Originally posted by moon1969
Do Paul's words (below) in the New Testament conflict with, trump, or overrided the Old Testament verses you list above. In general, are their unresolvable contradictions in the Bible. [b]And how do women in their everyday lives apply Paul's words below.
34 let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to spea ...[text shortened]... ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church.[/b]
Do Paul's words (below) in the New Testament conflict with, trump, or overrided the Old Testament verses you list above. In general, are their unresolvable contradictions in the Bible. And how do women in their everyday lives apply Paul's words below.
I don't think Paul's words trump the attitude of the cases I enumerated, at least not devastatingly. For one, Paul also broke down the possibility of gender oppressive stratification by teaching that in Christ there was neither male or female:
"For as many as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There cannot be Jew nor Greek, there cannot be slave nor free man, there cannot be male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:27,28)
Notice social stratification between "male and female" is classed with other typical oppressive relationships - "Jew nor Greek", "slave nor free man"
Notice also that Paul is not saying a magnanimus "there SHOULD not be". Ie. "You all OUGHT not to behave that way." Rather he writes "There CANNOT be ...". In other words if we want the normal church life, there is no possibility that we can go along with the social oppressive stratifications, In Christ, there CANNOT be, and there is no possibility that there could be these oppressive relationships.
We must choose one or the other. If you want free man over slave or vica versa then you cannot have the normal Christian church.
If you want Greek over Jew or vica versa then you cannot have the normal Christian church.
And if you insist to hang on to male over female or vica versa you also cannot have the normal Christian church experience.
In our meetings the women disciples speak, pray, prophesy, and function freely. We find it a great blessing of the Holy Spirit. I guess we will just have to bear the responsibility before Christ someday that we encouraged this freedom.
In my Recovery Version Bible the end of that section read thus:
"But if anyone ignores this, let him ignore it." (1 Cor. 14:38)
Some English versions read "let him be ignored". Either way, this could mean that he did not make it so legal requirement of a Christian assembly that nonconformity to his word called for excommunication or some other extreme reaction.
And the fact that this passage is in Galatians, the book that chops at the root of legalism, also may be signigicant.
10 Feb 12
Originally posted by ASRPEESo with your interpretation, is it clear according to Paul that it is a sin and shameful for a woman to preach?
If you look at the context, these verses are talking about women speaking a message from God (i.e. prophesying). This is not to restrict a woman from saying anything, but rather to keep women from usurping the position that God has given to man (i.e. that of preaching to the congregation). This therefore matches with the other scripture mentioned that says a woman must wear a head covering when she speaks in church.
10 Feb 12
Originally posted by jaywillInteresting points. I see you recognize you may a price for allowing (and even encouraging) women to speak in church. Paul's words clearly state that it is SHAMEFUL for a woman to speak in church.
I don't think Paul's words trump the attitude of the cases I enumerated, at least not devastatingly. . . . There cannot be . . . male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:27,28) . . . Notice also that Paul . . . if we want the normal church life, there is no possibility that we can go along with the social oppressive stratificatio ...[text shortened]... t have to bear the responsibility before Christ someday that we encouraged this freedom. . .
34 let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law.
35 And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church.
1 Corinthians 14:34-35
I wonder if Paul did not believe it oppressive to prohibit women from speaking in church. After all, Adam was first formed, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived but the woman was in the transgression.
"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" 1 Timothy 2:11-14.
10 Feb 12
4 edits
Originally posted by moon1969I think the attitude of submissiveness was one Paul exhorted all around. His instruction was that all the Christian should submit to one another:
Interesting points. I see you recognize you may a price for allowing (and even encouraging) women to speak in church. Paul's words clearly state that it is SHAMEFUL for a woman to speak in church.34 let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law.
35 t deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" 1 Timothy 2:11-14.
"Being subject to one another in the fear of Christ ..." (Eph. 5:21)
It is ugly and destructive for any Christian to assert a bullying attitude of authority over others.
The Apostle Peter teaches this likewise:
"In like manner, younger men, be subject to elders; and all of you gird yourselves with humility toward one another, because God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble." ( 1 Peter 5:5)
Our sisters prophesy and speak for God in our public meetings.
http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/booklets/beliefs.html
10 Feb 12
Originally posted by moon1969Not in all cases: as I said earlier, the issue being addressed here is the usurpation of the God-given position of man as the spiritual leader of the family/church. In a woman only gathering, I don't see a problem with having a woman preach; also, the teaching of children is a thing that is not specifically spelled out and is thus left to each church to decide.
So with your interpretation, is it clear according to Paul that it is a sin and shameful for a woman to preach?
In the westward expansion, there were times when there were no men who were professing Christians in the area, and in such a case, a woman missionary did preach the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ alone to both the men and women there, and as soon as a man made a profession of faith, she turned the preaching over to him (while discipling him in private).
When a woman stands up to preach despite there being men capable of doing so, not only is it a great shame upon the men (that she was willing when they were not), but also according to Paul a sin.
10 Feb 12
Originally posted by ASRPEEI never understood why so many churches have only one pastor, generally a male, who does most if not all the preaching.
When a woman stands up to preach despite there being men capable of doing so, not only is it a great shame upon the men (that she was willing when they were not), but also according to Paul a sin.
Why not have a few different preachers? It would be more interesting to listen to a variety of preaching styles rather than the same old one week after week. And so what if one of the preachers happens to be a woman? It doesn't necessarily bring shame upon the men - maybe it was just her turn.
11 Feb 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitOne of reasons that churches have only one pastor is finances. Many churches cannot afford to pay multiple pastor's wages.
I never understood why so many churches have only one pastor, generally a male, who does most if not all the preaching.
Why not have a few different preachers? It would be more interesting to listen to a variety of preaching styles rather than the same old one week after week. And so what if one of the preachers happens to be a woman? It doesn't necessarily bring shame upon the men - maybe it was just her turn.
Another more important reason is that these days there are not usually enough men who know the Scriptures well enough to preach. I attend a church that does have several men who are well capable of preaching and they do share the burden of preaching.
The biggest problem with a woman preaching is simply that God declared that it is for man to be the spiritual leader. Reasons can be made for why it is not shameful for a woman to preach; however, I don't believe that the shame of it is very important compared to the fact that a woman preaching is disobedience to the very God she is claiming to represent (that would be hypocrisy).
11 Feb 12
Originally posted by ASRPEEInteresting. Thx for the response.
Not in all cases: as I said earlier, the issue being addressed here is the usurpation of the God-given position of man as the spiritual leader of the family/church. In a woman only gathering, I don't see a problem with having a woman preach; also, the teaching of children is a thing that is not specifically spelled out and is thus left to each church to decid ...[text shortened]... shame upon the men (that she was willing when they were not), but also according to Paul a sin.
11 Feb 12
Originally posted by ASRPEEIs the man (and not the woman) the spiritual leader because of what Paul says in Timothy below, and is the logic/link clear. In other words, is the reason a woman is not to usurp the authority of the man is because Adam was first formed before Eve, and not deceived, but the woman was in the transgression. And that all women bear the unique burden of Eve's transgression?
The biggest problem with a woman preaching is simply that God declared that it is for man to be the spiritual leader. Reasons can be made for why it is not shameful for a woman to preach; however, I don't believe that the shame of it is very important compared to the fact that a woman preaching is disobedience to the very God she is claiming to represent (that would be hypocrisy).
"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" 1 Timothy 2:11-14.