Making a case for women in leadership

[Blain]

IMHO it was so good, I copied it into my notes, with Dino's tag.

he also was the one who provided scripture in my other thread that basically proved my point and it has yet to be refuted by those who opposed the gifts being in operation he is very wise and I think would make a good teacher

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

I respect you and agree with most of your posts. On this matter, we differ, and I have chosen not to engage with you directly. However, you have crossed a line here. Don't demean yourself by making ad hominem remarks that have no bearing on the matter. Feminism is a completely different issue.

This topic has often popped up on these forums. I've not ever seen anyone change sides.

What it all boils down to is whether people believe what God has clearly and plainly set about authority and hierarchy among men and women.

Your feminist group are literally disobeying God on this.

Claiming I'm making ad hominem remarks is an attempted distraction so that none of you won't have to address obeying God on this matter.

So your fine with women speaking but only if they are not in a position of authority is that correct? because if so then that isn't what paul said if we take what he said from women not ebing aloowed to teach or speak in the church then he basically said for them to be silent he didin't say they could teach or speak as long as they aren't in authoirty also if we take his wrods literally then your breaking your own rules

You're just nitpicking to draw attention away from the fact that you don't believe what God says about this in the Bible. That's the real issue. You're encouraging women to disobey God and usurp the man's rightful authority in the church or family, as well encouraging men to disobey God by abdicating that authority to women in the church and family.


🎻

 

[Beckworth]

I have a question if you are a women and since a church is the body not a vuilding should you not keep silent according to your logic? Should you not be teaching either?

Let’s remember that 1 Corinthians 14:34 is talking about a church ASSEMBLY. Verse 23 says, “…if the whole church comes together in one place…” and again in verse 26, “Whenever you come together…” this is the church assembled together. Paul is governing what they do in public worship. I think we have already established that women May teach privately—-even men. See Acts 18. At best, the ones engaging in discussion on this site could be called the church DISPERSED; but never the church ASSEMBLED in a worship service.

 

[Snackersmom]

The problem here is the Greek word authentein. It appears just this one place in all Scripture, so there aren't other uses to compare. Further, its use in contemporary Greek shows about 50 nuances of meaning. One must consider the cultural context to get at the meaning Paul intended. There is no reason in the context to conclude that merely "having authority" was the problem.

Thank you for this information! I just looked it up in Strongs' and the etymology was very interesting!

According to Strongs, the implication is heavily towards self-appointed authority, rather than authority in general..... which explains the usage of *usurp" in the KJV. Here is a link for anyone who is interested:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...CBcQAQ&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw1_fGdRco772pIoiomUM7Nw

This is a very contentious issue that I generally will not argue for OR against, I think God will hold us all accountable to however He gifts and calls us as individuals. I try to just focus on what God is calling me personally to do, knowing that I only truly answer to Him.

But for the record, I have never held an official church leadership position or title, nor do I ever plan to. I attend a fairly conservative church that would never allow such a thing. But they do allow me to use my gifts, and have never gotten in the way of what I felt God was telling me to do. That's all I really need. *shrug*

 

[Mem]

Let’s remember that 1 Corinthians 14:34 is talking about a church ASSEMBLY. Verse 23 says, “…if the whole church comes together in one place…” and again in verse 26, “Whenever you come together…” this is the church assembled together. Paul is governing what they do in public worship. I think we have already established that women May teach privately—-even men. See Acts 18. At best, the ones engaging in discussion on this site could be called the church DISPERSED; but never the church ASSEMBLED in a worship service.

What's the difference if you're "usurping authority" but just not "officially"?

 

[Beckworth]

O wish we could make a sticky attatched to threads this was very insightful and shows a great deal of understanding

If “man” in 1 Cor. 11:3 does not mean “mankind” but just One man, please tell me who or which man is Paul talking about when he says that man is the head of woman. And which woman? And if, because the word “man” is singular and does not mean “mankind”, then Christ is not the head of all men but only one man. because the same “man”, singular, is the one who has Christ as his head; as the “man” singular who is head of the woman. But you say that does not mean ALL men so that makes Christ not the head of all men but only one—since “man” is singular.

 

[Beckworth]

What's the difference if you're "usurping authority" but just not "officially"?

I was referring to 1 Cor. 14:34 in my comments. Specifically restricting a woman from public preaching, teaching, or speaking. And yes, “usurping authority over a man “ is much broader in meaning in 1 Timothy. It seems it would apply to every situation in or out of the church.

The question was asked about women discussing on this site; whether they should or not. My point was as long as this is not a public assembly of the church and as long as women on here are careful not to usurp authority over the men, there is no scripture that I know of that forbids it. Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, helped teach Apollos in Acts 18 in a private setting. This is very similar to that.

 

[Mem]

I was referring to 1 Cor. 14:34 in my comments. Specifically restricting a woman from public preaching, teaching, or speaking. And yes, “usurping authority over a man “ is much broader in meaning in 1 Timothy. It seems it would apply to every situation in or out of the church.

The question was asked about women discussing on this site; whether they should or not. My point was as long as this is not a public assembly of the church and as long as women on here are careful not to usurp authority over the men, there is no scripture that I know of that forbids it. Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, helped teach Apollos in Acts 18 in a private setting. This is very similar to that.

Why wouldn't this appear to be a double standard. That is, for what reason would it be okay in private if it is not okay in public?

 

[Snackersmom]

The question was asked about women discussing on this site; whether they should or not. My point was as long as this is not a public assembly of the church and as long as women on here are careful not to usurp authority over the men, there is no scripture that I know of that forbids it. Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, helped teach Apollos in Acts 18 in a private setthis is very similar to that.

How on earth is this not a public assembly? Anyone with an internet connection can view our comments, you don't even need a membership. Most modern church settings would seem downright cloistered compared to this.

 

[Mem]

Most modern church settings would seem downright cloistered compared to this.

I was just noticing there was about 3.5K and some people online, and right at this moment just little over three thousand! ... Hi EVERYB

*timed out again! I saw and explanation (if you are the owner) "something is likely hogging the resources on your server"

...now 3,205 online

Hi EVERYBODYYYY!!

 

[timemeddler]

I think it's talking about discrimination, not roles in the church.

 

[DavidLamb]

How on earth is this not a public assembly? Anyone with an internet connection can view our comments, you don't even need a membership. Most modern church settings would seem downright cloistered compared to this.

But we are not members of one another, like members of a local church are or should be. Members of Christian Chat don't actually meet together, worship God and study His word together like a local church does. And no member is in a position of authority over other members - there's no equivalent of a pastor or elder here.

 

[Blain]

But we are not members of one another, like members of a local church are or should be. Members of Christian Chat don't actually meet together, worship God and study His word together like a local church does. And no member is in a position of authority over other members - there's no equivalent of a pastor or elder here.

yes but a church is not a building it is the body of Christ meaning all of us and we do discuss and study together perhaps debate much more but it is still a church of sorts

 

[Blain]

If “man” in 1 Cor. 11:3 does not mean “mankind” but just One man, please tell me who or which man is Paul talking about when he says that man is the head of woman. And which woman? And if, because the word “man” is singular and does not mean “mankind”, then Christ is not the head of all men but only one man. because the same “man”, singular, is the one who has Christ as his head; as the “man” singular who is head of the woman. But you say that does not mean ALL men so that makes Christ not the head of all men but only one—since “man” is singular.

I am not sure what that has to do with his post what exactly is the point of your question about the meaning of man?

 

[DavidLamb]

yes but a church is not a building it is the body of Christ meaning all of us and we do discuss and study together perhaps debate much more but it is still a church of sorts

I fully agree that a church is not the bricks and mortar, but the members. I don't agree that Christian Chat is a church, even "of sorts".

 

[Blain]

I fully agree that a church is not the bricks and mortar, but the members. I don't agree that Christian Chat is a church, even "of sorts".

the church is the body of Christ yes?

 

[Snackersmom]

But we are not members of one another, like members of a local church are or should be. Members of Christian Chat don't actually meet together, worship God and study His word together like a local church does. And no member is in a position of authority over other members - there's no equivalent of a pastor or elder here.

I consider us to be members one of another, or at least we can be when we are humble enough to accept that ANY of us just might know something the others don't.

I have learned much from discussing the Bible here with other members. I learned something in this very thread, thanks to @Dino246 .

I have also prayed with and for other members, met some members in person, given and received encouragement here, and had my iron sharpened by other members. Also shared testimonies and worship.

Perhaps this site does not function as a church for you personally, if so I respect that. However, I don't think it's plausible to argue that CC isn't a public assembly of believers.

And no member is in a position of authority over other members - there's no equivalent of a pastor or elder here.

The fact that there is very limited oversight should make us all the more careful of what we say, how we "teach", and how we correct each other. I have absolutely no issue with women participating here, I am a woman myself. My issue is with women (or men) who behave as if what they are preaching does not apply to them personally.

 

[Blain]

I consider us to be members one of another, or at least we can be when we are humble enough to accept that ANY of us just might know something the others don't.

I have learned much from discussing the Bible here with other members. I learned something in this very thread, thanks to @Dino246 .

I have also prayed with and for other members, met some members in person, given and received encouragement here, and had my iron sharpened by other members. Also shared testimonies and worship.

Perhaps this site does not function as a church for you personally, if so I respect that. However, I don't think it's plausible to argue that CC isn't a public assembly of believers.



The fact that there is very limited oversight should make us all the more careful of what we say, how we "teach", and how we correct each other. I have absolutely no issue with women participating here, I am a woman myself. My issue is with women (or men) who behave as if what they are preaching does not apply to them personally.

I have learned much from being on here as well and I consider us memebers of the body of Christ a church in regards that we are the body of Christ and this is why I asked @2ndTimeIsTheCharm about her being silent or not teaching it isn't that I am against it it is just she seems to have issue with women teaching or speaking in church but the rules don't apply to her on here and I have respect for her on other topics like the gift of tongues but on this matter we disagree

 

[Dino246]

This topic has often popped up on these forums. I've not ever seen anyone change sides.

What it all boils down to is whether people believe what God has clearly and plainly set about authority and hierarchy among men and women.

Your feminist group are literally disobeying God on this.

Claiming I'm making ad hominem remarks is an attempted distraction so that none of you won't have to address obeying God on this matter.

You just lost my respect. I’m confident that you haven’t done much homework on this subject, and it shows it your closed-minded, insulting arrogance. Pity… you seemed like such a decent person.

 

[Edify]

If “man” in 1 Cor. 11:3 does not mean “mankind” but just One man, please tell me who or which man is Paul talking about when he says that man is the head of woman. And which woman? And if, because the word “man” is singular and does not mean “mankind”, then Christ is not the head of all men but only one man. because the same “man”, singular, is the one who has Christ as his head; as the “man” singular who is head of the woman. But you say that does not mean ALL men so that makes Christ not the head of all men but only one—since “man” is singular.

English Standard Version
1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.
Whenever such a scripture says things like this without any notations to leadership, it's always about husband & wife. Here's another:
1 Timothy 2 NAS
Instructions for Believers

8Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without anger and dispute. 9Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, [g]modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive apparel, 10but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. 11A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12But I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13For it was Adam who was first [h]created, and then Eve. 14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman was deceived and [j]became a wrongdoer. 15But [k]women will be [l]preserved through [m]childbirth—if they continue in faith, love, and sanctity, with moderation.

2 important facts to note:
1. This is to all believers. Nothing is mentioned about any hierarchy or leadership roles.
2. V13-15 specifically starts about Adam & Eve, husband & wife, & finishes with woman's preservation thru childbirth.
The context both above & below speaks only about family matters.
Now for the word usurp(KJV). That means in this context the wife taking illegal or improper authority over her husband.
In layman's terms a controlling wife. The age-old problem in many marriages that has happened for centuries..... A henpecking wife telling her husband what to do.
The husband is the spiritual head, spiritually responsible & answering to God for the marriage & family relationship. This is why Adam was blamed by God instead of Eve.