LET THE WOMAN LEARN IN SILENCE - WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS MEANS?

[Dino246]

It is true that Deborah had a temporary position of leadership. But even she indicated that it was more proper for a man to have her position. She only took it, because there were no men willing to take it.

From where in Scripture do you get these ideas?

 

[MyrtleTrees]

It's because of what you said. People don't want to socially ostracize themselves within their group by being contrary, being disagreeable, challenging the group, being intimidating.

If that's the route someone goes with people then they run a big risk of creating a reputation for themselves as being a dissenter causing disruptions and preaching the "doctrine of demons." as some people say over any minor disagreement.

Next thing they might be questioning that person's status as a true Christian, privately branding them a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Truth is many people just aren't ready to receive any sort of debate or constructive criticism to their deeply held beliefs, even if you come with good intentions.

It's about authority and whether your opinion on scripture interpretation is of more value than anyone elses. People generally have to find the truth for themselves through prayer, Holy Spirit guidance, and studying the scripture.

I think women need to do what feels comfortable with them, plus keep in mind how others there may react. And be willing to refrain from speaking if one's don't respect that. At least if the majority don't respect it - it would be uncomfortable, could make men have a wrong view of them - I think. However, men I believe should try to speak of spiritual things as much as is possible in church, regardless of disapproval, that is - if the job gave them is to be a public teacher or preacher, at least. Not all men have the courage to be capable of doing that public kind of speaking. We all have different personalities and abilities. But I'd like to see more men speaking of spiritual things in church and in daily life. I'd like to see women (non-public) to speak more of spiritual things with others than they do too. But lots of Christians feel uncomfortable discussing spiritual things in person with others unless in a small group - with family or people they know well and feel comfortable around. But it's different in Africa, I've observed. People are a lot more talkative there - including on spiritual things. I think it's personality difference. I think they are the friendliest race of people there are, and it must be due to their genes.

 

[lenna]

I think women need to do what feels comfortable with them, plus keep in mind how others there may react. And be willing to refrain from speaking if one's don't respect that. At least if the majority don't respect it - it would be uncomfortable, could make men have a wrong view of them - I think. However, men I believe should try to speak of spiritual things as much as is possible in church, regardless of disapproval, that is - if the job gave them is to be a public teacher or preacher, at least. Not all men have the courage to be capable of doing that public kind of speaking. We all have different personalities and abilities. But I'd like to see more men speaking of spiritual things in church and in daily life. I'd like to see women (non-public) to speak more of spiritual things with others than they do too. But lots of Christians feel uncomfortable discussing spiritual things in person with others unless in a small group - with family or people they know well and feel comfortable around. But it's different in Africa, I've observed. People are a lot more talkative there - including on spiritual things. I think it's personality difference. I think they are the friendliest race of people there are, and it must be due to their genes.

yeah, even an ox could have the muzzle removed but women should always be ready to shut up

you can see and even read some of the responses on this thread made by certain men in which women, certainly myself for example, have been told they are liberals or lesbians or anti men or other similiar monikers simply because we exercise both our freedom to speak and even more, our freedom in Christ

these same men REFUSE, utterly and adamantly REFUSE to acknowledge any interpretation other than there own and will respond with ad hominim attacks, assaults on whether or not you are actually a Christian and then the name calling

This is not God and not how a man who wishes to portray the character of Christ should behave. All you have to do is try to say women in the Bible did in fact serve in the congregation, point to scripture that PROVES that is true and the fight is on

this isn't Africa...never been there, so I don't know but I guess I'll take your word for it, this is the USA and there are some crazy denominations here that insist women wear their hair in a bun, long dresses to the ground, no make up, and no smiles to go with all the preceeding

You don't have to follow some man made dress code to be aware you should not wear a bikini to church, but it seems there is always always men willing to put a faceless woman in clothing that basically creates a non person

To me, it is partly just common sense and following scripture for the age in which we live. Paul never ever said that all women should remain silent. That is nonsense if you are aware of the NT as a whole and not just a secluded and out of context verse with no understanding of why it says what it does

So I guess things will stay that way and if a person has to be in isolation and seclusion in order to make some happy, then that is sadly their problem. I view that type of thing more cultish in behavior than Christian

 

[sherryt]

It doesn't look good if a preacher is too rich, as it looks like money (god of this world) has some control over him. He can have one really expensive home in a posh neighborhood and maybe a couple of fancy cars and maybe a boat, but definitely not multiple rich homes, a jet, etc. He certainly shouldn't become rich from church tithings and offerings. If he is rich from other business that is fine. If he is getting rich from other business which relates to God's work like book sales, he shouldn't get too rich from that either. That is a bit like offering. Being a preacher, he should give a lot of his wealth to charity, etc.

Hi TIG: I think you "hit the nail on the head"when you stated "It looks like...…" How can we pass judgment on someone because God has blessed them? I do not believe God wants us to live in poverty. My gosh look at the individuals in the Bible that God blessed. My husband and I have sown seeds (financially for over 40 years)

No we do not live in a mansion (its reserved in heaven) but we have NEVER gone without and believe me we have had many lean years when we were first married but again NEVER WENT WITHOUT. We have sown seed believing God would return it "...pressed down, running over...." God has blessed us with a comfortable lifestyle. Neither of us were called into the ministry, Joyce Meyer was. Just because she has a mulit-million dollar income I don't believe we should condemn her. Her ministry is world wide, feeding the poor, seeing that wells are built for fresh water, sending doctor's and surgeon's to those in 3rd world countries.

There are those I am sure who may take advantage of people but I m not in the belief Joyce Meyer is one of them. Just my opinion.

 

[sherryt]

Your trying to tell me to shut up be silent, and stop exposing the evil deception of the prosperity gospel as seen in Joyce Myer

She will be exposed presently, and she will face God at her judgement day, how about that

Please answer" How do you know, KNOW that Joyce Meyer is "evil deception of the prosperity of the Gospel?" AND as far as judgment if I'm not mistaken we will all give account (not just Joyce Meyer) of our actions while we were on earth. I was just wondering how you came to this conclusion. Respectfully

 

[lenna]

NONE of this has anything to do with the topic of the thread. How about you take your personal beef with Mrs. Meyer up with her personally instead of spewing filth here.

haters gonna hate

when you have that much hot air inside of you, it has to explode on occasion I guess

anything to do with women it seems. wondering at this point if the dude had a really bad divorce or what

 

[TheIndianGirl]

Hi TIG: I think you "hit the nail on the head"when you stated "It looks like...…" How can we pass judgment on someone because God has blessed them? I do not believe God wants us to live in poverty. My gosh look at the individuals in the Bible that God blessed. My husband and I have sown seeds (financially for over 40 years)

No we do not live in a mansion (its reserved in heaven) but we have NEVER gone without and believe me we have had many lean years when we were first married but again NEVER WENT WITHOUT. We have sown seed believing God would return it "...pressed down, running over...." God has blessed us with a comfortable lifestyle. Neither of us were called into the ministry, Joyce Meyer was. Just because she has a mulit-million dollar income I don't believe we should condemn her. Her ministry is world wide, feeding the poor, seeing that wells are built for fresh water, sending doctor's and surgeon's to those in 3rd world countries.

There are those I am sure who may take advantage of people but I m not in the belief Joyce Meyer is one of them. Just my opinion.

When people give tithes and offerings they expect the pastor/church to use it for bills and the poor. Same applies for megachurches, pastor should not get rich off their givings. If they get rich doing other God's work such as selling Christian self-help books, I consider this as part of ministry and pastors/authors should not get rich from this either. While I believe pastors should get a comfortable salary, let's not forget that Paul made a living by being a tentmaker and did not draw a salary from ministry work. He would have had something to say about rich pastors or rich diciples. In OT God blessed people with material wealth, but Jesus had different things to say about money and wealth, including the dangers of wealth, in the NT. You can tell how wealth eventually gets into the bloodstream and corrupts, such as Joel Osteen and his wife spending a lot of money on plastic surgery instead of aging naturally.

I believe God blesses people with money. And I think it is fine to get rich from non-ministry professions, but always watchful that money doesn't corrupt us. I believe Joel Osteen and Joyce Meyers make all their money from ministry. It is also unethical for rich pastors to charge a lot of money for Christian "conferences" to get even more rich.

 

[FlyingDove]

It is true that Deborah had a temporary position of leadership. But even she indicated that it was more proper for a man to have her position. She only took it, because there were no men willing to take it.

The word, "prophecy" doesn't always mean the public type of preaching or teaching. I believe Philip's daughters did not do public preaching - but rather spoke personally in contacts with a few people at a time. And the great majority of preachers and spiritual teachers in the Bible have always been men.

I agree though, that the wearing of head covering, for women, were cultural back then. And not required to be duplicated throughout all history. The same goes as to the practice of kissing in greeting one another. Now that is seen as improper, as it means something different in modern times. The head covering had been used to show respect to their husbands, as being in authority over them. That respect, I believe is still required by God.

It's true Paul sometimes did things differently when in different cultures. But I'm sure he never allowed himself to do anything that he believed was sin. Examples of how he did differently when with Jews, for one example - was his going to make a vow in the temple. And his going to participate in Passover meals sometimes. But there are ways he behaved differently when with gentiles. And he said that gentile Christians didn't need to be circumcised.

Although I don't see God's Word as approving of women preaching or teaching publicly, in most cases except for maybe in some where as in Deborah's time - there were no men willing to do the job.

Although it looks to me like it is ok for women to answer questions that are publicly asked by a preacher, I think it is better not to do so if one is in a Christian group who sincerely believe that women shouldn't speak at all in meetings. As I said, Paul did some things differently in some groups than he allowed him to do in other groups. Also think of his directions on what to do if someone disapproved of eating meat that had been served on pagan altars. He said not to do it if in the presence of those who sincerely believed it was wrong to do that.

Hello Myrtle,
To your 1st comment my thought is & point was, God himself placed a women in leadership & Paul did as well.

2ndly: I did say primary use & separated the thought with the traditional OT meaning.

I completely agree with your view on respect. And believe we can balance scripture with scripture OT (Gen 3:16 & NT 1 Cor 11:3 & Eph 5:23). Two verses later (Eph 5:25) God tells the man, not the woman, to put higher value on his wife's life then on his own. Telling me God doesn't see the woman as 2nd class or of lessor value.

Back to what you said about Deborah. Hagar was mistreated & left Abrahams house . God told her to go back. Jonah tucked & ran & God grab him & sent him to Nineveh anyway. God wanted Deborah in a leadership role. Amen

I believe the fundamental purpose of every Christian is to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. And anyone that gets in the way, try's to impede that. Is doing injustice, to God, themselves & the lost person that remains lost.

Finally, I personally see no problem with a women prophet, preacher, deacon, teacher. However, I still vacillate over a woman as pastor. If the Holy Spirit doesn't help be with that answer. I be sure to Ask Jesus when I soon see him. Best wishes, FD

 

[sherryt]

When people give tithes and offerings they expect the pastor/church to use it for bills and the poor. Same applies for megachurches, pastor should not get rich off their givings. If they get rich doing other God's work such as selling Christian self-help books, I consider this as part of ministry and pastors/authors should not get rich from this either. While I believe pastors should get a comfortable salary, let's not forget that Paul made a living by being a tentmaker and did not draw a salary from ministry work. He would have had something to say about rich pastors or rich diciples. In OT God blessed people with material wealth, but Jesus had different things to say about money and wealth, including the dangers of wealth, in the NT. You can tell how wealth eventually gets into the bloodstream and corrupts, such as Joel Osteen and his wife spending a lot of money on plastic surgery instead of aging naturally.

I believe God blesses people with money. And I think it is fine to get rich from non-ministry professions, but always watchful that money doesn't corrupt us. I believe Joel Osteen and Joyce Meyers make all their money from ministry. It is also unethical for rich pastors to charge a lot of money for Christian "conferences" to get even more rich.

Thank you TIG for your reply, as with many in this room we are all allowed to express our beliefs and views even through we may differ.

 

[Mem]

From where in Scripture do you get these ideas?

It in the OGV, the old grapevine edition.

 

[Bbrdrd]

yeah, even an ox could have the muzzle removed but women should always be ready to shut up

you can see and even read some of the responses on this thread made by certain men in which women, certainly myself for example, have been told they are liberals or lesbians or anti men or other similiar monikers simply because we exercise both our freedom to speak and even more, our freedom in Christ

these same men REFUSE, utterly and adamantly REFUSE to acknowledge any interpretation other than there own and will respond with ad hominim attacks, assaults on whether or not you are actually a Christian and then the name calling

This is not God and not how a man who wishes to portray the character of Christ should behave. All you have to do is try to say women in the Bible did in fact serve in the congregation, point to scripture that PROVES that is true and the fight is on

this isn't Africa...never been there, so I don't know but I guess I'll take your word for it, this is the USA and there are some crazy denominations here that insist women wear their hair in a bun, long dresses to the ground, no make up, and no smiles to go with all the preceeding

You don't have to follow some man made dress code to be aware you should not wear a bikini to church, but it seems there is always always men willing to put a faceless woman in clothing that basically creates a non person

To me, it is partly just common sense and following scripture for the age in which we live. Paul never ever said that all women should remain silent. That is nonsense if you are aware of the NT as a whole and not just a secluded and out of context verse with no understanding of why it says what it does

So I guess things will stay that way and if a person has to be in isolation and seclusion in order to make some happy, then that is sadly their problem. I view that type of thing more cultish in behavior than Christian

The vitriol with which some approach this issue is quite shocking at times.

It seems to me Paul's primary concern in the passages that are often used in defense of the silencing women position is often not understood by those who quote those passages. For example, in one the context implies that there was disturbances in the church where primarily women were interrupting mass gatherings for irrelevant questions. So for the peace of the church they are instructed to hold their questions and address them with someone privately rather than blurting them out in the mass gatherings.

It would be as if there was a contingent of women who in the middle of sermons were shouting out questions for the pastor, they would be advised to be silent because it is a disruption.

Other places, Paul emphasizes the transmission of the gospel above personal rights. If the gospel is hindered because of women using their freedom contrary to culture in such a way that it creates a scandal it is better they not use that freedom.

Yet to use these verses to subjugate women violates the very principle Paul laid them out for. The gospel is hindered in the west because religious belief is seen as misogynistic and when these men insist on their "rightful position" even if such a thing is true hinder the gospel through such insistence. They scandalize the church using verses that were intended to keep the church from scandal.

 

[lenna]

The vitriol with which some approach this issue is quite shocking at times.

It seems to me Paul's primary concern in the passages that are often used in defense of the silencing women position is often not understood by those who quote those passages. For example, in one the context implies that there was disturbances in the church where primarily women were interrupting mass gatherings for irrelevant questions. So for the peace of the church they are instructed to hold their questions and address them with someone privately rather than blurting them out in the mass gatherings.

It would be as if there was a contingent of women who in the middle of sermons were shouting out questions for the pastor, they would be advised to be silent because it is a disruption.

Other places, Paul emphasizes the transmission of the gospel above personal rights. If the gospel is hindered because of women using their freedom contrary to culture in such a way that it creates a scandal it is better they not use that freedom.

Yet to use these verses to subjugate women violates the very principle Paul laid them out for. The gospel is hindered in the west because religious belief is seen as misogynistic and when these men insist on their "rightful position" even if such a thing is true hinder the gospel through such insistence. They scandalize the church using verses that were intended to keep the church from scandal.

I agree. And I will go so far as to state that the application of all women should always keep silent at all times in all churches sadly appeals to a certain type of personality wherein subjugating women has a certain allure.

 

[Bbrdrd]

I agree. And I will go so far as to state that the application of all women should always keep silent at all times in all churches sadly appeals to a certain type of personality wherein subjugating women has a certain allure.

What's particularly interesting about the silence in church thing is actually reading the letter dispels that notion. The gatherings discussed weren't modern church gatherings with an orator and a silent audience but gatherings for the purpose of prophesying to each other with both men and women prophesying...kind of hard to be silent and prophesy at the same time. Which implies that the "women should be silent in church" is directed not at all women at all times in the gatherings but the specific contingent of women who were asking disruptive questions.

Of course, reading the context clues and understanding the Bible in its own context takes far more effort than quoting random passages as absolute commands.

 

[lenna]

What's particularly interesting about the silence in church thing is actually reading the letter dispels that notion. The gatherings discussed weren't modern church gatherings with an orator and a silent audience but gatherings for the purpose of prophesying to each other with both men and women prophesying...kind of hard to be silent and prophesy at the same time. Which implies that the "women should be silent in church" is directed not at all women at all times in the gatherings but the specific contingent of women who were asking disruptive questions.

Of course, reading the context clues and understanding the Bible in its own context takes far more effort than quoting random passages as absolute commands.

there also has to be a huge appeal to ignorance and also the fact some people just want to make an impression in the same chair every Sunday am

 

[MyrtleTrees]

Hello Myrtle,
To your 1st comment my thought is & point was, God himself placed a women in leadership & Paul did as well.

2ndly: I did say primary use & separated the thought with the traditional OT meaning.

I completely agree with your view on respect. And believe we can balance scripture with scripture OT (Gen 3:16 & NT 1 Cor 11:3 & Eph 5:23). Two verses later (Eph 5:25) God tells the man, not the woman, to put higher value on his wife's life then on his own. Telling me God doesn't see the woman as 2nd class or of lessor value.

Back to what you said about Deborah. Hagar was mistreated & left Abrahams house . God told her to go back. Jonah tucked & ran & God grab him & sent him to Nineveh anyway. God wanted Deborah in a leadership role. Amen

I believe the fundamental purpose of every Christian is to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. And anyone that gets in the way, try's to impede that. Is doing injustice, to God, themselves & the lost person that remains lost.

Finally, I personally see no problem with a women prophet, preacher, deacon, teacher. However, I still vacillate over a woman as pastor. If the Holy Spirit doesn't help be with that answer. I be sure to Ask Jesus when I soon see him. Best wishes, FD

Yes, we all need to seek to interpret all scripture as correctly as we know how to, and if we don't - it means we don't have a right relationship with God, as it shows a lack of wholeheartedness in obedience towards God. On the other hand we can't expect all sincere Christians to be able to sincerely agree on all Bible doctrines. And also none of us can hope to have as much spiritual wisdom while on earth, as compared to as when we get to heaven.

Ok here's a list of the Bible verses you mentioned - I'll start out with that in my commenting:

Gen 3:16

16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
KJV
Comment: So yes, I see it to say that husbands are to "rule over their wives" - "be the boss" - "wear the pants" whatever term one might call it.

1 Cor 11:3
3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
KJV
Eph 5:23
Comment: So God is the top "boss" - and below Him as "boss" is the husband, and under the husband's rule - God has placed the wife.

23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
KJV
Eph 5:25

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
KJV
Comment: Yes, husbands are to be wiling to love and care for their wives, just as Christ loves the church. And we are all to be willing to lay our lives down for other Christians, when and if necessary. Though yes, men are stronger than women - so are better able to protect others, as compared to women.
I got these verses on the subject from the online open bible:
John 15:13
Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.
1 John 3:16
By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers.

I understand that Deborah, for a time, was allowed to be judge over Israel. But it has never happened again in stories of the Bible. And reading the chapter about Deborah and Barak, and taking note of how in the book of Judges, there was always just one person whom God selected to be judge in that period of history. And I've noticed how people always fell away from every time each judge God chose - died. And it was hard to find people who did well spiritually - enough to be capable of being led well by God in a leadership role. it is no surprise that a time finally came, when there wasn't even one man suitable - no not even one solitary "Noah" - to take over this time. So God allowed Deborah to take that role, due to that reason. Though God preferred that a man take that role, I believe. As I said - it is indeed, extremely rare in Bible stories - for women to have been told by God to take a leadership role. Notice how Deborah had to urge Barak to go ahead with what God had told Him to do. He should not have needed all that urging, if he'd had as good of a relationship with God as Deborah had, I believe.

True - Philip's daughters prophesied. But prophesying doesn't have to mean always - public type of preaching or teaching. Think of the woman at the well who spoke with Jesus - how she went home after that conversation and told the people of her town about her unusual conversation with Jesus. It helped to prepare them better for when Jesus finally did come to their town to preach.

And it's true that women were often not treated fairly in Bible stories. But we can be sure that God sees men and women as equal in value, and that God wants all people to be treated fairly.
Gal 3:28

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
KJV

I know that one big reason Christians often sincerely come up with different interpretations of the scriptures - is the difficult wording there is in many parts of the Bible. They are not expressed with the same clearness that modern language expresses things. So again, we are to overlook others' sincere differences of doctrine in things, as long as they agree on the important thing - the way of salvation through Jesus, according to the scriptures. As for ourselves, we are wise to daily rely on God's help in guidance in daily life and in our reading and hearing the scriptures (or preaching). God bless you!

 

[MyrtleTrees]

I agree. And I will go so far as to state that the application of all women should always keep silent at all times in all churches sadly appeals to a certain type of personality wherein subjugating women has a certain allure.

I think verse 11 might just be saying that women should not speak in church meetings without the approval of the man who is in authority over them - husband or father. That sounds reasonable and a good rule to me. However, I feel verse 12 certainly sounds clear in saying that in the case of preaching publicly - that women are not to be allowed to do that. In addition, there are absolutely no examples of women preaching publicly in the temple, tabernacle, or New Testament churches - in the Bible. Though yes, there are examples of prophetesses - both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. Being a prophet doesn't require doing public preaching.

 

[Dino246]

Ok here's a list of the Bible verses you mentioned - I'll start out with that in my commenting:

Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. KJV
Comment: So yes, I see it to say that husbands are to "rule over their wives" - "be the boss" - "wear the pants" whatever term one might call it.

If it were a command for husbands to rule their wives, why wasn't it given to the man? It would be the only command given in Scripture to the passive party rather than to the active party. It would be like saying to a donkey, "The farmer shall direct you on the field, and you shall obey." In other words, I honestly think you are incorrect.

1 Cor 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. KJV
Comment: So God is the top "boss" - and below Him as "boss" is the husband, and under the husband's rule - God has placed the wife.

For the sake of discussion I will accept your comment as valid. I must ask though, how does that inform women's roles in the church, as couples have no "marital relationship" beyond themselves?

 

[MyrtleTrees]

Hello Myrtle,
To your 1st comment my thought is & point was, God himself placed a women in leadership & Paul did as well.

2ndly: I did say primary use & separated the thought with the traditional OT meaning.

I completely agree with your view on respect. And believe we can balance scripture with scripture OT (Gen 3:16 & NT 1 Cor 11:3 & Eph 5:23). Two verses later (Eph 5:25) God tells the man, not the woman, to put higher value on his wife's life then on his own. Telling me God doesn't see the woman as 2nd class or of lessor value.

Back to what you said about Deborah. Hagar was mistreated & left Abrahams house . God told her to go back. Jonah tucked & ran & God grab him & sent him to Nineveh anyway. God wanted Deborah in a leadership role. Amen

I believe the fundamental purpose of every Christian is to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. And anyone that gets in the way, try's to impede that. Is doing injustice, to God, themselves & the lost person that remains lost.

Finally, I personally see no problem with a women prophet, preacher, deacon, teacher. However, I still vacillate over a woman as pastor. If the Holy Spirit doesn't help be with that answer. I be sure to Ask Jesus when I soon see him. Best wishes, FD

I don't see the scriptures as approving of women doing any public type of preaching or teaching. Plus I see absolutely no examples of women being allowed to do any of that throughout both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Though, I'll agree that there were prophetesses in both the Old Testament and in the New Testament. To be a prophet, doesn't require in all cases - for the prophet to do public preaching or teaching.
Ex 15:20

20 And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.
KJV

Judg 4:4-5

4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.

5 And she dwelt under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in mount Ephraim: and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment
KJV

2 Kings 22:14

14 So Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asahiah, went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college and they communed with her.
KJV

Neh 6:14

14 My God, think thou upon Tobiah and Sanballat according to these their works, and on the prophetess Noadiah, and the rest of the prophets, that would have put me in fear.
KJV

Luke 2:36

36 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;
KJV

 

[Dino246]

I think verse 11 might just be saying that women should not speak in church meetings without the approval of the man who is in authority over them - husband or father. That sounds reasonable and a good rule to me.

While that sounds reasonable, it fails when you consider that many adult women in the church are not married, and many who are attend church without their husbands. A rule that applies to perhaps 25-50% of women cannot be imposed on all women.

However, I feel verse 12 certainly sounds clear in saying that in the case of preaching publicly - that women are not to be allowed to do that. In addition, there are absolutely no examples of women preaching publicly in the temple, tabernacle, or New Testament churches - in the Bible. Though yes, there are examples of prophetesses - both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. Being a prophet doesn't require doing public preaching.

So women may not preach the gospel, share their personal testimony, or read Scripture? Again, when you examine the implications of your interpretation, it falls apart quickly.

Further, the absence of examples in Scripture does not preclude the practice in the church... unless you're a Church of Christ adherent. Bear in mind that the Bible was written within a patriarchal society.

 

[MyrtleTrees]

From where in Scripture do you get these ideas?

I looked it up the other day. You're right - she never said in words that it was not as good as it would have been for a man to have done the job of judging that she'd done. But I thought it over in the night, and thought of the fact that to be a prophetess and to be a public preacher or Bible teacher are not always the same thing. Since being a prophet doesn't always require public preaching or teaching. I see a good number of prophetesses mentioned in both the Old Testament and in the New Testament. But I see absolutely no mention - either in the Old Testament or in the New Testament - of a woman preaching or doing public teaching or preaching. Plus I Timothy 2:12 as saying quite plainly in my view - that women are forbidden to do public preaching.

1 Tim 2:12-14

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
KJV
Verse 12 doesn't necessarily mean that women were not to ever speak at all in church. It is debatable what that part means about here need "to be silent." To me - it seems much more reasonable in this passage to just mean she should be silent (she shouldn't do this public kind of work in the church) as regards to the roles of public teaching or Bible teaching.