Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Women are to be silent when the Church assembles!
- Thread starter carlos123
- Start date
Stormcrow wrote: ''do kyou have a problem with women disrupting services in your church, or do you just have problems with women in general?"
As for me, no. I attend a congregation which is after the pattern of the NT. Just as Moses was told by the Lord to make the tabernacle after the pattern shown him in the mount the church in the NT is made after the pattern given in the NT. In it the women in keeping with the pattern remain silent in the assembly, not because they are harrased by men but because they love God and respect His word.
Do I have a problem with women? No! I am married to a lovely women who loves and respects God and His word. Today I am about to go and baptize a women with whom I have been studying God's word with for several weeks now. There are many women who know more Bible than many men and women who could make a more eloquent sermon than some men but realize such is not the role God has given the woman in the church.
webb
As for me, no. I attend a congregation which is after the pattern of the NT. Just as Moses was told by the Lord to make the tabernacle after the pattern shown him in the mount the church in the NT is made after the pattern given in the NT. In it the women in keeping with the pattern remain silent in the assembly, not because they are harrased by men but because they love God and respect His word.
Do I have a problem with women? No! I am married to a lovely women who loves and respects God and His word. Today I am about to go and baptize a women with whom I have been studying God's word with for several weeks now. There are many women who know more Bible than many men and women who could make a more eloquent sermon than some men but realize such is not the role God has given the woman in the church.
webb
Jethro Bodine
Member
If you understand that women are not to operate in an authoritative way over men you won't have a problem discerning this matter. It's all about whatever authority a woman is trying to have in the church.
Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ." (1 Cor. 11:3 NASB)
But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet." (1 Timothy 2:12 NASB)
Maybe it's so hard for the church to understand this subject because church authority really doesn't exist anymore. I'd say most of us in the church aren't very familiar at all with what it means for a pastor/ elder to operate in real spiritual authority.
Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ." (1 Cor. 11:3 NASB)
But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet." (1 Timothy 2:12 NASB)
Maybe it's so hard for the church to understand this subject because church authority really doesn't exist anymore. I'd say most of us in the church aren't very familiar at all with what it means for a pastor/ elder to operate in real spiritual authority.
Jethro Bodine
Member
I'm reading fast, but I, along with Reba, don't have any problem with this either.
But I do if this means a woman can never encourage me, or share an insight out of the scriptures, or pray for me, etc. As long as it's done in a non-authoritative manner from a non-authoritative position in the church, so be it. And may God bless the wonderfully gifted women in the church.
Jethro Bodine
Member
The only time I, for example, would have authority over you is if I was an elder or pastor and you were in my care. Outside of that, it is true, a man has authority over the woman who is his wife, alone.
I'm curious is the 'a' in 'a woman' literally there in the original Greek? Just curious, of course, lol.
Jethro Bodine
Member
A beautifully spiritual Jewish woman who loved Jesus prophesied something to me once. It came true. I cherish God's activity in my life through this woman.
I've forgotten a lot of neat things that I've experienced with my brothers and sisters over the years, but I have never forgotten that moment. Prolly never will.
I've forgotten a lot of neat things that I've experienced with my brothers and sisters over the years, but I have never forgotten that moment. Prolly never will.
handy
Member
Carlos, thanks for taking the time to address my posts! 
A few points and then I think I'm going to wrap up my involvement in this thread...
First of all, you quoted the Amplified Bible... frankly, I don't care for that as a translation at all. One must recognize that it is a study bible and that it superimposes the thoughts of man on the scriptures. I realize that some truly like it...but I find it to be untrustworthy in how some things are interpreted.
I had already addressed this elsewhere...here it is:
Then in verse 2, he transitions saying, "Now i praise you because you remember me in everything, and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them up to you." What are the "traditions" Paul speaks of here?
Greek word, "paradosis" meaning: "of the body of precepts, esp. ritual, which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence"... (Strong's via Blue Letter Bible)
The body of precepts, especially ritual. Given the context of the next 4 Chapters, most scholars understandably recognize the "paradosis" as the rituals that were to be observed during the assemblies.
Let me do a little exercise here that will help illuminate this context:
"Now I praise you because you remember me in everything, and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. (Insert instruction here) But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better, but for the worse."
The one instruction isn't completely out of place... it's not something that Paul says... "Oh, let me get back to that, but before I forget I need to mention..." No. The instruction is clearly a part of what Paul is addressing, and what he is addressing is how the Corinthians were holding firmly to the traditions he delivered to them. That they were doing so... yes. But, that they were being rather chaotic and undisciplined about it all, that's what he's addressing and he continues to address the issues for the next 4 Chapters.
Carlos said: The context before the 1 Cor 11 instructions about coverings is a private home.
I disagree for several reasons here. One, whereas verse one may very well continue the context of Chapter 10, Paul makes a clear transition in verse 2 as I've already shown above.
Two, because prophesy is, very specifically, a gift for the edification of the church.
Carlos said:
Head coverings are to be understood as general instructions to Christians in the church. Not as instructions for how they ought to be in an assembly of the church but in general as to how they ought to be overall.
I heartily disagree... one cannot even get this from a simple reading of the text. The headcovering instruction is directed only at women who are praying and prophesying...it isn't a directive to all women nor is it "how they ought to be overall" as if women need to wear headcoverings at all times. It is for women who are praying and prophesying (in the context of church assemblies) in order to show that they are doing so under the authority of the men. I don't believe anyone in the Church fully understands Paul's reference to the angels here, but the context strongly implies that it is because the angels are also beings in submission, not because they are always around.
Carlos: "If women can speak while praying or prophecying in an assembly of the church as long as they wear a head covering and if Paul said that they cannot then we have an irreconcilable contradiction in our Bibles."
No, there really isn't an irreconcilable difference here. It's just that, while you are correct that the context changed, it didn't change in the way that you are describing. The context change is that Paul moved from giving women a directive to wear a head covering as a symbol of authority whilst praying and prophesying to referring to a specific issue of women being disruptive. This is why Paul states for the women to hold their peace and wait until they get home to ask questions.
Carlos: "To definitively say that women can speak with a head covering means we must assume that Paul could not have possibly said for them to be silent (unless we admit to a real contradiction)."
Unless "silent" is being misinterpreted. It's been gone over and over how the word here isn't a command to never speak but rather to hold one's peace.
Carlos: We do not interpret the clear by the unclear but rather the unclear by the clear.
Meaning that if the context is clear regarding when women are to be silent then the context of 1 Cor 11 instructions about head coverings (assuming the inference there is valid about being allowed to speak with a head covering) must be some other context in view of the lack of context in those instructions.
Frankly, it really isn't "unclear" at all... not if one drops the preconceived notion that women are to never speak in the assemblies. Looking at it with no such notion and it's quite clear that Paul's giving two very different instructions to women, covering to very different issues. One is that they need to show submission to proper authority when praying and prophesying, the other is to address the issue of women speaking out of turn, that they need to hold their peace and not disrupt the assembly.
And, with all this, I've gotten to repeating myself, a clear sign that it's probably best to move on. I've appreciated this thread and especially Woodlandapple's and AirDancer's contributions regarding the Greek. No Christian should ever shy away from learning more about the languages our translations are based on. I'm a firm believer in the inerrancy of the Scriptures...but I also know that we, as fallen humans, do make mistakes in our interpretations of the Scriptures... the more we can learn from those gifted as pastors and teachers among us, the better we all are.
A few points and then I think I'm going to wrap up my involvement in this thread...
First of all, you quoted the Amplified Bible... frankly, I don't care for that as a translation at all. One must recognize that it is a study bible and that it superimposes the thoughts of man on the scriptures. I realize that some truly like it...but I find it to be untrustworthy in how some things are interpreted.
Oh but there is! Now, I agree that for those who want to interpret silence (in spite of the Greek and in spite of all what else is written regarding women in the church) as "don't say anything in the assembly...just sing", the context is easily muddied. But, not so muddied that it cannot be found.
I had already addressed this elsewhere...here it is:
Then in verse 2, he transitions saying, "Now i praise you because you remember me in everything, and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them up to you." What are the "traditions" Paul speaks of here?
Greek word, "paradosis" meaning: "of the body of precepts, esp. ritual, which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence"... (Strong's via Blue Letter Bible)
The body of precepts, especially ritual. Given the context of the next 4 Chapters, most scholars understandably recognize the "paradosis" as the rituals that were to be observed during the assemblies.
Let me do a little exercise here that will help illuminate this context:
"Now I praise you because you remember me in everything, and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. (Insert instruction here) But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better, but for the worse."
The one instruction isn't completely out of place... it's not something that Paul says... "Oh, let me get back to that, but before I forget I need to mention..." No. The instruction is clearly a part of what Paul is addressing, and what he is addressing is how the Corinthians were holding firmly to the traditions he delivered to them. That they were doing so... yes. But, that they were being rather chaotic and undisciplined about it all, that's what he's addressing and he continues to address the issues for the next 4 Chapters.
Carlos said: The context before the 1 Cor 11 instructions about coverings is a private home.
I disagree for several reasons here. One, whereas verse one may very well continue the context of Chapter 10, Paul makes a clear transition in verse 2 as I've already shown above.
Two, because prophesy is, very specifically, a gift for the edification of the church.
Carlos said:
Head coverings are to be understood as general instructions to Christians in the church. Not as instructions for how they ought to be in an assembly of the church but in general as to how they ought to be overall.
I heartily disagree... one cannot even get this from a simple reading of the text. The headcovering instruction is directed only at women who are praying and prophesying...it isn't a directive to all women nor is it "how they ought to be overall" as if women need to wear headcoverings at all times. It is for women who are praying and prophesying (in the context of church assemblies) in order to show that they are doing so under the authority of the men. I don't believe anyone in the Church fully understands Paul's reference to the angels here, but the context strongly implies that it is because the angels are also beings in submission, not because they are always around.
Carlos: "If women can speak while praying or prophecying in an assembly of the church as long as they wear a head covering and if Paul said that they cannot then we have an irreconcilable contradiction in our Bibles."
No, there really isn't an irreconcilable difference here. It's just that, while you are correct that the context changed, it didn't change in the way that you are describing. The context change is that Paul moved from giving women a directive to wear a head covering as a symbol of authority whilst praying and prophesying to referring to a specific issue of women being disruptive. This is why Paul states for the women to hold their peace and wait until they get home to ask questions.
Carlos: "To definitively say that women can speak with a head covering means we must assume that Paul could not have possibly said for them to be silent (unless we admit to a real contradiction)."
Unless "silent" is being misinterpreted. It's been gone over and over how the word here isn't a command to never speak but rather to hold one's peace.
Carlos: We do not interpret the clear by the unclear but rather the unclear by the clear.
Meaning that if the context is clear regarding when women are to be silent then the context of 1 Cor 11 instructions about head coverings (assuming the inference there is valid about being allowed to speak with a head covering) must be some other context in view of the lack of context in those instructions.
Frankly, it really isn't "unclear" at all... not if one drops the preconceived notion that women are to never speak in the assemblies. Looking at it with no such notion and it's quite clear that Paul's giving two very different instructions to women, covering to very different issues. One is that they need to show submission to proper authority when praying and prophesying, the other is to address the issue of women speaking out of turn, that they need to hold their peace and not disrupt the assembly.
And, with all this, I've gotten to repeating myself, a clear sign that it's probably best to move on. I've appreciated this thread and especially Woodlandapple's and AirDancer's contributions regarding the Greek. No Christian should ever shy away from learning more about the languages our translations are based on. I'm a firm believer in the inerrancy of the Scriptures...but I also know that we, as fallen humans, do make mistakes in our interpretations of the Scriptures... the more we can learn from those gifted as pastors and teachers among us, the better we all are.
The instruction to the Corinthians isn't the only place we find the precept. Consider 2nd Thessalonians, chapter 3.
Take note that the word translated "quietness" is defined opposite of being "busybodies". This word, 'quietness' is the same "silence" that was used in other places, including where it is found used in 1 Timothy directed toward women (this time) and translated "silence", "But I suffer not a woman to teach , nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."
Are we to believe that the unemployed are to be silent? Or are we to understand that neither they, nor any other, should be allowed to "walk in a disorderly fashion" ?
Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.
For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing. And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count [him] not as an enemy, but admonish [him] as a brother. Now the Lord of peace himself give you peace always by all means. The Lord [be] with you all. - (2Th 3:6-16 KJV)
For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing. And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count [him] not as an enemy, but admonish [him] as a brother. Now the Lord of peace himself give you peace always by all means. The Lord [be] with you all. - (2Th 3:6-16 KJV)
Are we to believe that the unemployed are to be silent? Or are we to understand that neither they, nor any other, should be allowed to "walk in a disorderly fashion" ?
Justice
Member
I quess I missed Carlos' adequate reply to the "elect Lady".
If 2 John is being referred to as the bride of Christ why wasn't 1 John and 3 John addressed in the same manner? You don't have all the answers. So if your wife ask you about the "elect Lady" who she is or what does it mean, you can't tell her? I give you props for saying "I do not know" because no man or woman has all the answers and if they say they do --- run because a person with a huge God like ego is not good for anyone.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jethro--Nor do I have any problem with your post # 166. I was in town at the local Walmart this morning and met one of our elders and his wife. She gave me some encouragement. Of course I did not rebuke her but accepted it graciously and thanked her. It has been my experience that some who have no scriptural foundation resort to redicule and sarcasm in the absence of solid Bible answers. In this thread we speak only of the assembly. No one as yet has been able to show where Paul did not teach the same thing in every church, and he taught the silence of the woman in the worship assembly.
I have no doubt Carlos will supply ample response to Handy's reply to his post.
I have no doubt Carlos will supply ample response to Handy's reply to his post.
Church / Assembly is not the building it is the people most of us agree on that.
Asking again...your opinions
What is an assembly? church
Must the assembly/church you speak be in a designated building ?
Is it an assembly/church at a members house for Bible study?
Is it an assembly/church at the river for a baptism.
Do we not assemble for the potluck?
When we assemble we are to assemble in His name correct?
Do we not assemble our selves at the grave site..
G1577
From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.
G1537
A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): - after, among, X are, at betwixt (-yond), by (the means of), exceedingly, (+ abundantly above), for (-th), from (among, forth, up), + grudgingly, + heartily, X heavenly, X hereby, + very highly, in, . . . ly, (because, by reason) of, off (from), on, out among (from, of), over, since, X thenceforth, through, X unto, X vehemently, with (-out). Often used in composition, with the same general import; often of completion
Repeated again
2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Amplified Bible (AMP)
6[It is He] Who has qualified us [making us to be fit and worthy and sufficient] as ministers and dispensers of a new covenant [of salvation through Christ], not [ministers] of the letter (of legally written code) but of the Spirit; for the code [of the Law] kills, but the [Holy] Spirit makes alive.
Asking again...your opinions
What is an assembly? church
Must the assembly/church you speak be in a designated building ?
Is it an assembly/church at a members house for Bible study?
Is it an assembly/church at the river for a baptism.
Do we not assemble for the potluck?
When we assemble we are to assemble in His name correct?
Do we not assemble our selves at the grave site..
G1577
From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.
G1537
A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): - after, among, X are, at betwixt (-yond), by (the means of), exceedingly, (+ abundantly above), for (-th), from (among, forth, up), + grudgingly, + heartily, X heavenly, X hereby, + very highly, in, . . . ly, (because, by reason) of, off (from), on, out among (from, of), over, since, X thenceforth, through, X unto, X vehemently, with (-out). Often used in composition, with the same general import; often of completion
Repeated again
2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Amplified Bible (AMP)
6[It is He] Who has qualified us [making us to be fit and worthy and sufficient] as ministers and dispensers of a new covenant [of salvation through Christ], not [ministers] of the letter (of legally written code) but of the Spirit; for the code [of the Law] kills, but the [Holy] Spirit makes alive.
Jasher, regarding your post # 139:
I believe in the inspiration of the Bible. I believe in verbal inspiration. I believe Paul was an apostle of Jesus and therefore inspired in what he wrote. When he wrote in I Cor.14:34 "--as also saith the law" I believe he wrote by inspiration. I will take what he says over what any man says or writes. My question to you is this: Do you believe he was inspired? Do you believe he spoke truth or error?
I believe in the inspiration of the Bible. I believe in verbal inspiration. I believe Paul was an apostle of Jesus and therefore inspired in what he wrote. When he wrote in I Cor.14:34 "--as also saith the law" I believe he wrote by inspiration. I will take what he says over what any man says or writes. My question to you is this: Do you believe he was inspired? Do you believe he spoke truth or error?
I've asked this before and now I'm asking it again:
Do you have a problem with women disrupting services in your church, or do you just have a problem with women in general?
Sorry for not responding earlier Stormcrow.
I have no problem whatsoever with women speaking up in a church assembly if God allows it and if that is what you meant.
I would indeed have a problem with either a woman OR a man disrupting an assembly in a way God does not allow.
Asking whether I have a problem with women in general because I believe the Scriptures when it says that women should be silent in a church assembly is like asking if one has a problem with having a husband because one believes the bible to say that it is better to stay single if one can.
Not even worth an answer in that regard.
My belief that women should remain silent in a church assembly has absolutely not one thing to do with anything other than that it says they should.
I personally could care less if a woman gets up and speaks. In my natural self I would just as soon that all women spoke up and even led an assembly so that I could sit in the back and do nothing or say nothing. I prefer solitude and being unnoticed. I prefer doing nothing, again in my natural self, than taking on the responsibility for acting as a man ought to act in the presence of God and the Body.
But I have been called as a Christian to follow the Lord according to whatever understanding the Spirit gives me from the Word about what His will is. I do not determine what His will is based on what I feel naturally comfortable with, what I like or do not like, what my culture says is valid or not, or anything else.
I determine what His will is based first and foremost on biblical principals and commands.
In the present case it says women should be silent in a church assembly. Whatever my natural inclinations to the contrary I believe what it says and encourage everyone I can to follow what it says to do.
For His greater honor and glory in the Body that He might be glorified.
Much of Western church practice is not even close to what the Lord intends the Body to be.
I believe the Lord wants to change that.
Carlos
Not sure what you are asking Justice.
I mean in my understanding it does involve speaking out words to encourage, comfort, and exhort others. Is that a how answer that you were looking for?
May I ask why you say that you are supposed to ask me this? I mean did someone tell you to ask me this?
Carlos