Woman can't teach in the congregation

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

The simple fact that in our today´s Bibles there is no such Law doest not prove anything. We are 2000 years after Paul, 4000 years after the Law was written. No surprise some OT texts are lost or changed. Also, most commentaries link it to Gen 3:16.

A simpler conclusion is that Paul didn't write the verse. There is compelling evidence for that, but zero evidence for what you are suggesting.

 

[tourist]

What epistle verse has Paul saying he doesn't permit women to wear pants in church?

"This then is what I mean. Let your lives be guided by the Spirit, and then you will certainly not indulge the cravings of your lower natures." Galatians 5:16
We're judged by the work we do that is of God. Not by the clothing we wear.

A couple years ago there was a long running thread about the role of woman in church and whether it was proper for a woman to wear pants in church. Also, at the same time there was another thread about whether it was acceptable to play musical instruments in church because the bible did not specifically say that it was acceptable to do so. Both threads were amusing and provided high entertainment value for many weeks.

Of course, being in the BDF there were heated arguments and the usual name calling bur that goes with the territory.

Your a relative new member so it may be hard to follow some of the posts from long time members who have been through a lot of stuff here on this site. Around that same time there was also the Office Max thread regarding transgenders being allowed to use either the men or women restroom regardless of one's sex. That one was a riot

 

[joaniemarie]

I think it presumptuous for human prejudices to presume to speak and say that God would never call a woman to preach simply because she was born female. All things operate according to God's planning and for the sake of his glory. The Christian, male or female, is to perform the work of God as God leads them through the calling and inspiration of his holy spirit.
Man's prejudice does not supersede God's planning. And when the scriptures were written culture in those times was patriarchal. We can't forget the influence of politic on what arrives today as the canon.

Furthermore, of course a woman can lead. Any Christian man who thinks not and has a female for a boss should quit first thing come Monday morning. Walk the talk.
And if a Christian man is in the military they better not look too hard or they'll find at least one female General in the ranks.

For Christ's sake, literally, a woman led the Apostles to the empty tomb to show the promise Jesus made to arise from death after three days was accomplished.
That right there should settle the matter.
If it doesn't, well, that's just too bad. Because God isn't beholding to our prejudices that are sins as soon as they sprout to life in our mind.

Amen SaintMichaels. Very much agree with you today. Liked what you said about gun ownership in the other thread too. I often think about people who are sick or in a dire situation and the man in the scenario is not one given to prayer., but the woman in the scenario is. Yet some SILLY person will tell the woman not to pray... good grief Godly truth and sense goes out the window when man made reasoning comes in.

 

[tourist]

Do any topics reach 100% agreement?

Typically, any given topic, especially in the BDF will have a 100% disagreement rate.

 

[joaniemarie]

Just a note., SO WHAT if this or other topics have already been posted here on CC. The new people who come on CC posting subjects that interest them have not been exposed to the discussions here. So they ask just as the older Christians here have done.

So to you old people..... remember these NEW people were not here at that time those threads were going so this subject is not old news to them. Their threads ARE valid and good and worthy of discussion.

 

[joaniemarie]

A couple years ago there was a long running thread about the role of woman in church and whether it was proper for a woman to wear pants in church. Also, at the same time there was another thread about whether it was acceptable to play musical instruments in church because the bible did not specifically say that it was acceptable to do so. Both threads were amusing and provided high entertainment value for many weeks.

Of course, being in the BDF there were heated arguments and the usual name calling bur that goes with the territory.

Your a relative new member so it may be hard to follow some of the posts from long time members who have been through a lot of stuff here on this site. Around that same time there was also the Office Max thread regarding transgenders being allowed to use either the men or women restroom regardless of one's sex. That one was a riot

I look forward to the day when believers stop the nonsense and it's not part of the "territory" I missed the Office Max thread LOL. (thankfully) But did happen upon the pants thread.... really stupid thread but amusing for those of us who are not taking the wearing of pants seriously. I feel bad for the ones who actually believe pants are forbidden for woman. How do woman paint their houses, mow their lawns..., swim., and lay tile in a skirt???? LOL. I'd be in a real mess if God forbid me to wear pants.

 

[tourist]

Jesus said not Besides, they did not come down from heaven

Very interesting response.

Jesus did say that no man as ascended into heaven and yet it appears that Enoch and Elijah did just that. Moses too. Of course, maybe they were not in heaven but in another place that Jesus dwells occasionally.

There is also the verse where it appears that Jesus is saying that if He wants the apostle John to remain alive until He returns what is it to Peter. Then a saying went out among the other apostles that Jesus said that this apostle (John) would not die, but actually what Jesus said was that if He wanted this apostle (John) to remain alive until He returns what is it to Peter.

I believe the lesson in this is that you have to be careful in what you read in scripture and not draw hasty conclusions but rather allow the Holy Spirit to led you in study and contemplation regarding spiritual matters and concerns.

It is my own personal opinion that the apostle John is still alive, either here on earth or some other place and that he will be one of the two witnesses for 3 1/2 years during the end time events, also, the other witness will be Elijah because it has been prophesied that he also will return.

Jesus is returning too. Sooner rather than later.

Praise God.

 

[joaniemarie]

Very interesting response.

Jesus did say that no man as ascended into heaven and yet it appears that Enoch and Elijah did just that. Moses too. Of course, maybe they were not in heaven but in another place that Jesus dwells occasionally.

There is also the verse where it appears that Jesus is saying that if He wants the apostle John to remain alive until He returns what is it to Peter. Then a saying went out among the other apostles that Jesus said that this apostle (John) would not die, but actually what Jesus said was that if He wanted this apostle (John) to remain alive until He returns what is it to Peter.

I believe the lesson in this is that you have to be careful in what you read in scripture and not draw hasty conclusions but rather allow the Holy Spirit to led you in study and contemplation regarding spiritual matters and concerns.

It is my own personal opinion that the apostle John is still alive, either here on earth or some other place and that he will be one of the two witnesses for 3 1/2 years during the end time events, also, the other witness will be Elijah because it has been prophesied that he also will return.

Jesus is returning too. Sooner rather than later.

Praise God.

Agree... always allow the Holy Spirit to lead you in study and contemplation regarding all matters. Amen!

 

[star]

OK, if there are those who feel this thread has gone on long enough, simple solution; stop posting under it. Personally, I hope this thread continues as I have learned quite a lot from it. I'll keep responding on it as long as it stays up.

 

[garee]

Garee, where are you originally from?

My home church when I first heard the gospel and believed God is called the PLymouth bretern .I hold to many of their teachings but disagree with a few

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.

Men that are moved to bring prophecy is not a reflection of a persons personal opinion. Men in a gathering should counsel with men, and woman with woman . If they have a relationship problem they should ask their own spouse at home .If they have no spouse they should go to the married elders that have experience of two working together.

 

[Dino246]

Of course Paul is giving women a permission to learn.

"For God is not a God of confusion but of peace as in all the churches of the saints. Women should keep silent. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says."

... The simple fact that in our today´s Bibles there is no such Law doest not prove anything. We are 2000 years after Paul, 4000 years after the Law was written. No surprise some OT texts are lost or changed. Also, most commentaries link it to Gen 3:16.

Trof, I'm surprised that you would advance this idea. It is flawed in several ways. First, Paul knew of the alleged verse so we are looking at only 2000 years. Second, if this particular alleged verse is lost, anything could have been lost, so we can't know anything for certain. Third, Genesis 3:16 says nothing about silence. It's grasping at straws to make the Corinthian comment make sense without concluding it is a quotation.

 

[tourist]

My home church when I first heard the gospel and believed God is called the PLymouth bretern .I hold to many of their teachings but disagree with a few



Men that are moved to bring prophecy is not a reflection of a persons personal opinion. Men in a gathering should counsel with men, and woman with woman . If they have a relationship problem they should ask their own spouse at home .If they have no spouse they should go to the married elders that have experience of two working together.

Despite the counsel offered I really don't see any of that happening regarding women. Why should a woman have to go to a married elder as opposed to a single elder if a problem or question should arise? Is this in scripture also? This line of reasoning is starting to get really complicated in a practical spiritual sense. Perhaps you are just offering your own opinion like Paul seemingly did on more that one occasion. It is my opinion, based on my understanding of scripture, that women should not be treated like chattel.

 

[Chester]

Excellent. Then you are one that recognizes women can lead and minister God's truth. Because Paul's letters referred to the women in his ministry in his churches that did just that. And often with the companionship of their husbands.

HA! !!!!!!!!!

 

[Dino246]

In #Ge 3:16, "thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee".

If this is your response to my inquiry regarding the post:

News Flash: Men who do not rule over their wife should not teach. Theology 101.

Then I would encourage you to consider very carefully the rest of the Genesis passage. Was God commanding women to suffer horrible pain in childbirth? Was God commanding men to fight with thorns and thistles while they cultivated crops? Why would God put now-sinful man in leadership over women? Why would He give a command justifying all sorts of abuse in the name of "ruling"? Exactly what kind of a monster do you think God is?

Also, where is there any example (other than this verse as you allege) where God gives a command to person 'A' that person 'B' is to do something to them? It simply doesn't follow any sort of logic.

Consider this instead, that God's words to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3 are statements of certain consequence, not commands at all. Because of what Eve has done, men are now fallen and will rule over women... and it won't be pretty.

 

[Chester]

I really don't have a particular doctrine regarding this. I do believe, as in every word in the bible, that the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to write what he did Also, it is apparent to me that Paul, on certain matters is indeed offering his own unique point of view, but this too is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Personally, I see no issue whatsoever for a woman to teach and preach the Word of God, especially so if she is being led by the Holy Spirit to do so. If she is indeed being led by the Holy Spirit to do these things then there really is no argument that can be made to persuade her to do otherwise.

Will the Holy Spirit ever lead anyone to do something that is clearly against what Scripture teaches? I doubt it - maybe Abraham sacrificing Isaac could be seen as a biblical exception - but God intervened!

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

I was wondering when you'd see that chester!

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Will the Holy Spirit ever lead anyone to do something that is clearly against what Scripture teaches? I doubt it - maybe Abraham sacrificing Isaac could be seen as a biblical exception - but God intervened!

And then he told another man to marry a prostitute...
Pretty sure I can come up with a few more.

That's just the thing chester - what is clear to you is not clear to others. In fact, they looked into it more intently for the reason that it wasn't so clear and they clearly saw that it wasn't!

The very first thing that grabbed a lot of us was...Paul is now teaching the law??? Whuu…?!

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

So to you old people..... remember

Oh! HAHAHA!

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

And then he told another man to marry a prostitute...
Pretty sure I can come up with a few more.

That's just the thing chester - what is clear to you is not clear to others. In fact, they looked into it more intently for the reason that it wasn't so clear and they clearly saw that it wasn't!

The very first thing that grabbed a lot of us was...Paul is now teaching the law??? Whuu…?!

The second thing that then grabbed us was that there WAS no law stating this. Are Gods' laws obscure?

 

[tourist]

Will the Holy Spirit ever lead anyone to do something that is clearly against what Scripture teaches? I doubt it - maybe Abraham sacrificing Isaac could be seen as a biblical exception - but God intervened!

Exceptions tend to set precedents. God may have indeed intervened in the example that you referred to but it was God who first started the chain of events leading up to Abraham being instructed to sacrifice his son Isaac. No, I don't believe that the Holy Spirit will ever lead anyone to do something contrary to what is taught in scripture but then there always seem to be the question as to what exactly scripture teaches pertaining to certain areas or particular situations. God changes not so based on that spiritual premise I must conclude that God does not make exceptions as we commonly perceive the term.