Who is receiving the Spirit?

Inspired by God is not written by God. Major difference.

Well .. it's true God didn't dictate, and it was thru the writers own style, but it is still exactly what God wanted to be written. It is unblemished, infallible, inerrant in that way.

Jesus delivered us from the Law so the Law is no longer abiding. But Paul is still using the Law in this example.

Paul writes in 1st Corinthians
34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.

...but in Galatians, Paul writes
25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

So there's a contradiction here.

This clearly shows us the only "perfect to come" is Jesus.

No contradiction..different contexts/sub jects

The Law has no bearing in the structure of today's Church whatsoever.

Hold on.. these are two very different passages.. what is the context/setting of each? For eg.. the Galatians were Jewish Christians who needed to know putting old ways behind them. Giving up Judaism.

The Corinthians were different people who had pagan influence and Paul was admonishing them not to mix paganism with Christianity.. like giving up idols and giving up excess

Yes, but the Law ended with Jesus. So to say we are doing something that is established by Law is incorrect. We do nothing that the Law established. Nothing in our church structure has anything to do with how a Synagogue is ran. Synagogues are "void" of the Holy Spirit. Our churches operate in the Holy Spirit where the Law has no effect.

There is the New Testament law of faith.. the system of serving God in churches. It's not the OT.. but it is a system for running churches. So that is probably part of this.

I believe this is a question that will clear up a lot of confusion about the Holy Spirit's work in an individual and a local church as a corporate gathering.

When a whole group is empowered, or receives the Spirit.. this is not usually about the people in this group getting converted. So, if someone 'believes' then they are eternally saved.. and then scriptures says.. when they were gathered with a group and 'they' received the Holy Spirit.. this is where the confusion comes in. People think the person hasn't received the Holy Spirit yet.

But the group they were with hadn't received the Holy Spirit. This is a different work of the Holy Spirit. Not the same thing.

So Acts 19-

This group of people who were disciples that BELIEVED THROUGH GRACE.. hadn't 'received the Holy Spirit'. This is what Paul had noticed when asking them about their baptism.

Paul asked -- 'Had they received the Spirit since they believed'-- to the whole group.

The assumption is they believed. They were also disciples. They had already also been baptised.

Not knowing whether there is a Holy Spirit.. does not HAVE to mean they weren't already indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

So here is the distinction that we need to work out..

Who is receiving the Spirit? An individual.. or a group?

This will clear up a lot of confusion about baptism and salvation.

Another example is the Galatians being asked if they received the Spirit by works of the law or hearing of faith?

We assume this is talking about salvation, conversion. But who is Paul writing to?

Churches. Entire corporate gatherings. So is it an individual getting saved in question.. or a church having the Holy Spirit come 'in their midst'?

But it's incorrect and we know how Jesus liberated the women to have a voice. Look at Mary. She was charged to report to the Disciples that Jesus had risen. And we see examples of women being used in the Acts churches and beyond.

Well.. yeah.. Jesus was very good to women against the culture of the day. But at the same time, He inspired Paul to write about how a church is run and the right roles in a church for it to run Godly.

In the case of women to be silent in the church.. this is not about not talking at all, but particularly in this chapter.. the gift of tongues. The Corinthians were abusing this gift and practicing it without decency and order. Too many people were trying to speak in tongues and it was more like Pagan gibberish. Paul was admonishing them to have a structure with it so others in the church would be edified, and to have an interpreter so others could be encouraged. So women were part of this, doing it in an unruly way.. so there was Paul's admonishment for women to be silent.

So woman obviously still have teaching roles in the church.. to younger women.. and their own roles in ministry. So it isn't about not speaking at all, which would be ridiculous.

Jesus, who freed us from the Law, would not have Paul use the Law for the new Church.

Paul writes this again in Timothy.
Look what Paul says here, He, not God...12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

This alignment in Church is what Paul wants and he writes it personal as in I do not permit...Nowhere is God mentioned, this is what Paul is wanting.

Jesus, who freed us from the Law, would not have Paul use the Law for the new Church.

Paul writes this again in Timothy.
Look what Paul says here, He, not God...12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

This alignment in Church is what Paul wants and he writes it personal as in I do not permit...Nowhere is God mentioned, this is what Paul is wanting.

I agree.
Paul still fought his Phariseeical tutoring in establishing the Gentiles church while contending with the Jewish disciples whom Jesus chose.

The foundation is built.. then you put away the tools to build the foundation.

Yeah, If you're building a house made of hay instead of laying more stones.

It's quite clear he tends to use his past beliefs when he comes to an impasse.
But thankfully we are well aware that we are held to no part of the Law whatsoever.

his alignment in Church is what Paul wants and he writes it personal as in I do not permit...Nowhere is God mentioned, this is what Paul is wanting.

Paul gave up pharisical teaching big time in his conversion. That's his testimony. Going from Judaism to being a christian. He fully understood being saved by grace through faith in Jesus. Romans is a great book for this. He knew freedom from the OT law.

How was he going back to past beliefs at an impasse?

Not exactly. While Paul expresses it that way (with full apostolic authority), he teaches the silence of women in church meetings from Scripture. The entire Tanakh (the OT) is also called "the Law". And what does Paul refer to? Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the Law. (1 Cor 14:34). Also, he refers to the deception of Eve (recorded in Genesis) as the basis for disallowing women to preach, teach, or usurp authority in the churches.

Who directed Paul to present these teachings other than God the Holy Spirit, who gave us every epistle by divine inspiration? The words in Scripture are the words of God given to men to write down (2 Tim 3:16,17).