Actually, it was Paul that said the he does not permit this but it does not say that God forbids this. Since the beginning God has appointed many women in positions of authority. Paul says that if a woman has any questions she should wait until she gets home and ask her husband. Yeah, the thing is, what if she doesn't have a husband. Personally, I believe that Paul was lacking as far as instruction of marital relations. I believe that Paul offered his opinion on the role of women in church and home, and while his counsel should wisely be considered it is in no way scriptural doctrine set in stone.
Woman can't teach in the congregation
- Thread starter Affltr
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Actually, it was Paul that said the he does not permit this but it does not say that God forbids this. Since the beginning God has appointed many women in positions of authority. Paul says that if a woman has any questions she should wait until she gets home and ask her husband. Yeah, the thing is, what if she doesn't have a husband. Personally, I believe that Paul was lacking as far as instruction of marital relations. I believe that Paul offered his opinion on the role of women in church and home, and while his counsel should wisely be considered it is in no way scriptural doctrine set in stone.
Eve did sin first, but she was deceived into sinning. And she did not "cause" Adam to sin, he sinned willingly.
Nobody chooses to be deceived.
Gen 3:
13) And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
1 Tim 2:
14) And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
But we should try and determine the truth in what is written.
Ps. I don't belong to any denomination as the bible clearly says that there is only one congregation in every city. There were no names for congregations with early Christians.[/QUOTE]
Initially they were referred to as followers of " the Way ", then later as Christians.
I'm curious as to where the bible states there is only one congregation per city?? Historically, when the " group " became to large, for where they were meeting, they would break off into smaller groups with elders as leaders.
You do not belong to a denomination, OK, do you attend church?
Initially they were referred to as followers of " the Way ", then later as Christians.
I'm curious as to where the bible states there is only one congregation per city?? Historically, when the " group " became to large, for where they were meeting, they would break off into smaller groups with elders as leaders.
You do not belong to a denomination, OK, do you attend church?
Your error, as it usually is on this subject, is to ignore context. You took my first statement here has a complete doctrinal statement, which it wasn't.
The import of my statement was not the temporal order of events, as you so vitriolically assert, but the attribution of them. The sin of humankind is attributed to Adam, not to Eve.
Did she offer Adam the fruit? Did he know what she had already done to herself? Did he choose to be her accomplice?
If a person knows that something is not righteous, but tries to get another person to participate, is that not "causing" the other person to sin?
Really? What about all the unhinged Left-Liberals attacking Trump without any valid reason?
When you carefully study the narrative you discover that (a) Eve DELIBERATELY misrepresented the commandment of God and (b) she yielded to every lust that mankind is subject to -- the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.
It would have been difficult for Paul to concieve of women teaching in a mixed group. Jews always had men to head the religious teaching in the family. It is the order God established for the family.
So if women were not to speak in the congregational meeting would that have prevented them from speaking in tongues?
For the cause of Christ
Roger
1. You have now lost focus on the issue because you are on my case
2. I don't think 'clueless' is an insult because it is my assessment based on what you say here (things like; Eve did not sin first).
It's like a student who was given low marks on their report by a teacher because they actually failed. The student can't tell the teacher to stop insulting them and focus, the low marks was a true assessment.
3. If you felt that was an insult, i truly regret it.
Yes.
He knew she disobeyed God. I doubt either of them knew the consequences yet.
He willingly chose to disobey God.
You're forgetting that Eve was deceived.
Many of them are deceived. Deceived people do not know they are deceived. To be deceived is to "believe something that is not true". Similar to how some here are deceived into placing the blame for all mankind's woes on women....
The Bible explicitly states that she was deceived. In Gen 3:13, Eve said the serpent beguiled her, and in 1 Tim 2:14, Paul states she was deceived. This does not excuse the fact that she sinned, but she allowed the devil to deceive her into disobedience. 1 Tim 2:14 also says that Adam was NOT deceived. He KNEW he was being disobedient (sinning).
How could they not know the consequences, when God had already spelled it out? "Thou shalt surely die" was plainly stated.
Eve chose to be deceived. Yes she was deceived but she chose to listen to Satan, and also chose to deceive herself. She knew the commandment but altered the words so that she could go ahead and disobey God.
Let's take an example closer to home. Right now President Donald Trump is doing an outstanding job to put America first and to make America great again. Yet there is NOT A SINGLE LEFT-LIBERAL who has commended Trump for his efforts and his achievements. They have chosen to be self-deceived and instead have called him every vile name you can think of.
Indeed it was. But Eve believed the serpent, "ye shall not surely die". And there were more consequences to their sin than death. The world became cursed, animal nature changed, the ground became cursed, thorns and thistles, childbearing became painful, and more.
People do not choose to be deceived. That's part of the meaning of deception. Yes, Eve changed what God had actually said, added words "neither shall ye touch it", and so forth. She should have stood firm. But she didn't. She was deceived into listening to the devil, deceived into disobedience.
People may BE deceived, but people do not choose to be deceived.
Hey, I'm a pretty far right leaning conservative who voted for Trump. And I agree that the media is for the most part TOTALLY against him and everything he does. They always present everything he does in the worst possible light.
That said, Trump is not without issues...
I love when this topic comes up because women to would like not to teach but, the men are not stepping up. if it were not for women all of those small minsteries would not have happend::
childrens
womens
missions outreach
Missionary
theological schools
sunday school
marriage counciling
evangelism
and that is just a few small ones
So do you believe that what Paul wrote was just his own ideas? Or, at best it was just his opinion and if it fits your doctrine then use it!? For myself, I believe that what Paul wrote was divinely inspired. What else do you throw out? What keeps a person from saying then that the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-10) is just Paul's opinion?
absalutely Paul writing's are from God . All of them . And they need to be in context to how they were given.
many men seem to overlook the context of Love your wives as Christ loved the Church as gave HIMself for it. They only seem be submissive , and be quiet. LOL then wonder why they have been on wife two and three .
how about 1cor 11:5
"5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.
is this in the Home?
and Paul goes on to say even more
13 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given [a]to her for a covering. 16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.
As we continue Paul provides more instruction for orderly condduct in the Church setting. Can a women pray , Prophecy, and speak in Church under the covering of her husband & Pastor ? YES.
Yes we should and ALL of it too. those divorced should not remarry . That too is in black and Red
Oops getting silent in here now That's all well and good Chester but the thing is that there are a lot of concepts and spiritual principals in the bible so why choose to focus on what he is trying to convey in this regard rather than tackle perhaps more pressing spiritual issues?
In my opinion, while I have no doubt that what Paul wrote was inspired by the Holy Spirit, there remains some question as to what is really required and expected from a woman. To me, when he says what he 'permits' is not quite on the same level as to the true meaning of what is meant in a practical spiritual sense. It is more of his own personal opinion based on his upbringing and the cultural trend at the time it was written.
Personally, I don't consider it a sin if a woman is moved by the Holy Spirit to teach or preach. It's a good thing and not a bad thing. Same thing with a wife who is suppose to obey her husband and submit to his every whim and desire. Husbands are told to love their wives and not rule over them making sure that they are doing what he wants. Regardless, I would rather have a happy wife than a fearful one who must walk on egg shells while her husband watches her every move. Seems more like abuse to me rather than submissiveness, but that's just me.
If my wife wants to teach or preach that's a very good thing in my book, and probably in the Good Book too. Besides, I have a lot to learn and she is in the best position as my wife and best friend to teach me a few things that I need to know.
To your question " Why almost all denominations allow the Woman to Teach.?"
I Think it has to do with missinterpreting the scripture and running with the timespirit. The scripture in this is clear, but if you claim this, you will called backwooded.