Search results

Who's angry? Your OP read like it became increasingly supportive of the very position you now espouse is the one you opposed. You start off here by asserting that the following were the apostle Paul's teachings, and then proceed to talk about how women are not to speak in church, must keep...

Sophie, you are a child. You think my being put on ignore by you is some sort of punishment? Like I'm somehow now going to be deprived of your "wisdom"? Some punishment. I hope there aren't more members like you around here, because you behave like a four year old. As long as people like you are...

LoL. Ok, point taken. :cool:

So you posted a "boring" to my last post? How respectful, Sophie. If there's a "petty" and "childish" vote around here, I'd be using that, cuz that's all your posts have been so far. No discussion of scripture, just the immature, trite little comments of a child. Whoever is let you into...

Now here is an interesting question. I do think a married woman should be able to teach other men in any context, including on forums. My only stipulation is that if the husband is present, she needs to give way to him to lead, and in a church or small group setting she needs to let him...

If you were reading what I post, you'd know it doesn't "sit badly with me," and you wouldn't be leveling another curt insinuation at me. And you are respecting me in this thread? Your first post addressed me with, "His name is Jesus. have you met Him?" Yet another insult. No actual...

I'm not vindicating myself. I'm trying to discuss this issue in light of scripture. And if we can get over all this petty squabbling maybe we can get on with that, yes?

Too watered down. The text reads: "I suffer not a wife to teach, nor to usurp authority over her husband, but to be in silence." More strictly translated, this sentence reads, "I do not allow a wife to teach, or excercise authority over a husband." That means he would have put someone in their...

No, no. I said his argument was weak. Yes, but God was giving laws from the outset. His first law was right here: 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the...

Comforting, is it not? Now I know why the Spirit had me jump all over that business. Talk about subjugation... it borders on cult mind-control.

This is very good. Never noticed this passage before. It doesn't say only he was teaching Apollos, but that they were. This would not be violating the scriptural command, for they were speaking as one voice unto him (which implies under the husband's headship and approval), and that's a...

Doesn't matter to me what he is. It wouldn't disqualify his theology if to were well founded and logical, but it's not, IMO. No evidence that Paul ever cited Roman law to establish doctrine. He used Jewish Law. No evidence as of yet. Again, I am not averse to the notion. It would carry weight...

What you've had so far, Sophie, are insults. Zero to be proud of yourself over.

Just noticing your post. I can address the rest, but let me ask you this first: Do you really believe it is God's will for Christ to rule over the body of Christ? It has bearing, so I'm curious what your answer would be here, and thanks for the maturity in your post.

I answered your question 24 posts ago. Show yourself to be respectful enough of others and able to have an adult conversation without resorting to insults.

No Sophie, I've never met Him. :rolleyes: Address me with a little more maturity if you want an answer. Otherwise I'll wait for someone who can post others with a little more respect than that.

Yeah. I wear the pants. The trouble is, sometimes she steals them from me, and I end up standing there in my tightie whities, hoping and praying for a little mercy.

Because a husband is head over his wife just as Christ is Head over the church. No, I don't get things from others very often. Most of what I teach is my own.

Nah. It's a weak argument IMO. Paul uses the expression "the law" over one hundred times in his epistles, but never in reference to secular Roman Law. For Paul, νόμος equalled the Jewish law of the Old Testament in general, which included the Ten Commandments (Romans 13:8, 2:20, 7:7), and then...

Greetings, John. Since P_rehbein hasn't returned yet, what would be your response to Post #7; particularly regarding what Law Paul was referring to in 1 Corinthians 14:34.