Question, do you support women as elders? By the way, that Genesis passage seems to indicate that there was a belief among at least some Jews that God is both male and female.
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!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Female Officers in the Early Church
- Thread starter T. E. Smith
- Start date
I support any woman who is called of God for the purpose of His ministry where He wants to place them for His purpose. I use to be a licensed Evangelist through a church I use to attend for God's purpose for me in going into State Prisons and jails to teach the word of God to the male and female inmates. I do not support anyone, male or female who are not called of God to hold such positions in the church.
Rev 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen
Even though "kings" is a masculine term, this is the ultimate destination He desires for all of His people. The Lord often uses both male and female terms to refer to both sexes. Women are to live in the "hidden man of the heart" (1 Peter 3:4). Both men and women in the church are referred to as "the bride of Christ." God has both a masculine and feminine nature. The mother heart of Jesus was evident as he prayed over Jerusalem.
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matthew 23:37).
Submission is considered to be a feminine trait. However, Jesus submitted to the cross under the direction of the Father. If we walk in the Spirit, we too will possess both the masculine aggressiveness and feminine submissiveness of God.
Both submissiveness and aggressiveness are God-given strengths. Yet, both can be perverted, so that we become submissive and aggressive in the wrong ways, with the wrong attitudes. Because these qualities are so misused and misunderstood by the world, they have become distasteful and despised. If aggression is frowned upon, submission is viewed in an even more negative light in western culture. We equate submission with weakness and lack of spirit. Nothing could be further from the truth. There was never a human being more submitted to God than Jesus Christ-- yet never was there one as completely resistant to the system of the world! It took extraordinary submissiveness and aggression for Jesus to overcome the world. For the Christian, whether we are male or female, He is our model. We are to possess His qualities and use them according to the needs around us.
Even though "kings" is a masculine term, this is the ultimate destination He desires for all of His people. The Lord often uses both male and female terms to refer to both sexes. Women are to live in the "hidden man of the heart" (1 Peter 3:4). Both men and women in the church are referred to as "the bride of Christ." God has both a masculine and feminine nature. The mother heart of Jesus was evident as he prayed over Jerusalem.
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matthew 23:37).
Submission is considered to be a feminine trait. However, Jesus submitted to the cross under the direction of the Father. If we walk in the Spirit, we too will possess both the masculine aggressiveness and feminine submissiveness of God.
Both submissiveness and aggressiveness are God-given strengths. Yet, both can be perverted, so that we become submissive and aggressive in the wrong ways, with the wrong attitudes. Because these qualities are so misused and misunderstood by the world, they have become distasteful and despised. If aggression is frowned upon, submission is viewed in an even more negative light in western culture. We equate submission with weakness and lack of spirit. Nothing could be further from the truth. There was never a human being more submitted to God than Jesus Christ-- yet never was there one as completely resistant to the system of the world! It took extraordinary submissiveness and aggression for Jesus to overcome the world. For the Christian, whether we are male or female, He is our model. We are to possess His qualities and use them according to the needs around us.
OK, let's be fare about this as maybe it was not you that I tried to discuss this with.
1Cor 14:34 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.
1Cor 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
What is your understanding of what Paul said?
Many scholars see those verses as a later addition to the text, and so they were not written by Paul. I side with these scholars, and I do not consider v. 34-35 authentic.
The concept of the man being head of the marriage as Christ is head of church it was missed.
The words submission by by Christ to the the Father is a role model for men to submit and even die for their family .
Civilians often miss the idea of a leader can lead and do so under authority given from above
I am a ssg,I was installed under the command authority given by the company commander who listened to my platoon sgt,platoon leader and 1sg.
I was charged to train ,guide my squad and account for their actions .I had sgts under me .these I delegated tasks to and they worked under me and I under the platoon sgt,ldr.and us all under the company commander and 1sg.
In all that there was subordinate and superiors relationships .you always were in both places and acted depending upon who you dealt with ,even the company commander had that as he couldn't have a company without the battalion commander .
The words submission by by Christ to the the Father is a role model for men to submit and even die for their family .
Civilians often miss the idea of a leader can lead and do so under authority given from above
I am a ssg,I was installed under the command authority given by the company commander who listened to my platoon sgt,platoon leader and 1sg.
I was charged to train ,guide my squad and account for their actions .I had sgts under me .these I delegated tasks to and they worked under me and I under the platoon sgt,ldr.and us all under the company commander and 1sg.
In all that there was subordinate and superiors relationships .you always were in both places and acted depending upon who you dealt with ,even the company commander had that as he couldn't have a company without the battalion commander .
Who are these scholars you speak of as they are only carnal people without Godly knowledge? You only side with these scholars as you to have no Godly knowledge. Anyone can read the Bible and even quote from it, as even Satan can quote from it. but if they do not understand what they are quoting then it's just empty words to them.
What are you going on about? Your lack of knowledge on this subject is clear because many Christian scholars (egalitarian ones) view the verses as inauthentic. You should watch out before you use that language, if you don't know who you're actually taking about and calling names.
So you are of the majority rules just because a bunch of non-believers say the Bible is fallible. I will give you a heads up as the Bible never was socially acceptable.
Latin root word for religion is bondage, which is different then that of Gods pure religion of James 1:27, but that of following tradition and the doctrine of a mans church, not Gods true Church. The Latin root word is religare as re is a prefix that means return and ligare means to bind. Religion tells you what you can and cannot do and becomes socially acceptable by mans interpretations, traditions and doctrines. Religion is what nailed Christ to the cross because the Bible is not socially acceptable to society, if it were then Christ would have died in vain. God is not about mans religion, nor does he recognize religion. God is about a personal relationship with you and His son Jesus Christ.
John 1:1 in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 the same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 all things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:4 in him was life; and the life was the light of men.
John 1:5 and the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
John 1:2 the same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 all things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:4 in him was life; and the life was the light of men.
John 1:5 and the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Again, I asked for their names of those you say are egalitarian ones. It should not be that hard to list their names. Never called anyone a derogatory name.
Is 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 a Marginal Comment or a Quotation? A Response to Kirk MacGregor - CBE International
Introducing Kirk MacGregor’s article, Priscilla Papers editor Jeff Miller affirms “a central purpose of academic journals—to foster scholarly discussion and thereby move toward the truth of important and difficult matters.”1 First Corinthians 14 contains the only passage in the Bible that at...
www.cbeinternational.org
A gloss is basically a brief notation in a text, typically interlinear or marginal, not originally written by the author. If you ever jot notes in the margins of your bible, that is a "gloss." All Bible scholars now recognize that glosses were incorporated into some manuscripts.
BTW, CBE International and its publication Priscilla Papers is the gold standard in Christian egalitarianism. And yes you did call them a derogatory name, you called them "carnal people without godly knowledge."
Well at least you gave me one name and telling someone that only have a carnal knowledge is not calling them a name. I read part of that article as I am not going to read the whole thing as I don't need to. No Spiritual discernment in what he wrote.Conclusion:Is 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 a Marginal Comment or a Quotation? A Response to Kirk MacGregor - CBE International
Introducing Kirk MacGregor’s article, Priscilla Papers editor Jeff Miller affirms “a central purpose of academic journals—to foster scholarly discussion and thereby move toward the truth of important and difficult matters.”1 First Corinthians 14 contains the only passage in the Bible that at...
A gloss is basically a brief notation in a text, typically interlinear or marginal, not originally written by the author. If you ever jot notes in the margins of your bible, that is a "gloss." All Bible scholars now recognize that glosses were incorporated into some manuscripts.
BTW, CBE International and its publication Priscilla Papers is the gold standard in Christian egalitarianism. And yes you did call them a derogatory name, you called them "carnal people without godly knowledge."
1Cor 14:34 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.
Have you ever questioned why Paul made this statement?
1 Corinthians 14 is all about prophecy, tongues and orderly worship in the church. Paul was giving a call to order in the Corinthian church as the women were disorganized during the service with their endless chatter asking questions.
In this chapter Paul is giving instruction on how to give prophecy and use tongues in an orderly fashion. Paul was not telling women that they were not allowed to teach men, but to keep quite in the church with there disruptive chatter and questions that interrupted the service. They were told to hold their questions until they got home and ask their husband. They were never told they could not teach men.
If God did not approve of women leading or instructing men then why was one third of Israel's first leadership team Female? God said to the prophet Micah "I sent Moses to lead you, also Aaron and Miriam, Micah 6:4.
Why was Deborah the chief prophet and judge over Israel for four decades? Why was Huldah the most accurate prophet in Israel and why did God use her to instruct the king? Why did Anna prophesy at the Temple and Priscilla instruct Apollos? Why was Chloe a house church leader, Phoebe a deacon and and Junia (yes a woman) an apostle.
Let's take this back to the very beginning of God creating male and female as much of the Bible is written as being masculine language.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Notice in vs. 27 in the use of the word "him" as referring to both male and female. We also read this again in Genesis 5:1-2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. God created Adam, a name that refers to mankind or humanity in Hebrew, in two genders as male and female. The singular masculine is used to refer collectively to both male and female genders.
Throughout the Bible we see such verses like 1 Timothy 3:1-2 as being masculine language as we read "husband of one wife". This phrase is gender inclusive rather than gender exclusive because the masculine language is often used to incorporate women in scripture just like Genesis 1:26-27 and 5:1-2. It's the same with using the word "brethren" as it refers to both male and female from the first page of scripture to the last page of scripture.
There is an even stronger connection between the masculine singular and gender exclusivity in 1Timothy 3:1-16 and Titus 1:5-16. Regarding the office of Pastor means that women are not prohibited from serving as Pastor if God calls them. The Holy Spirit gives the gifts He pleases as we read in 1 Corinthians 12 meaning that no woman is barred from any Spiritual gift or office because of her gender. Nowhere in scripture does it say women can not be Pastors or Evangelist.
no not today not tomorrow or any other day.. you said i would not like the results you jumped where you shouldn't i have not been back in here very long. for the longest it would not load and would go to a stupid readers digest page.. if you want know my take on women being silent in the Church..i covered that in another post. have a good day
What I meant by results and should have made that clear is that we would probably end up arguing the word instead of discussing it. I would like to hear your understanding of 1 Corinthians 14:34 as I would hope we could discuss this as mature adults.
Fine, continue in your exclusionary confusions. You know you did not say they have carnal knowledge - you said carnal people.
Yes I have heard that explanation before, but it seems to me far better to posit that Paul never said it and that the words were added late by bigoted scribes. The author explains why the passage is separate.
I agree that whoever wrote 1 Timothy was probably not excluding the office to men only, and that the term "husband of one wife" was not actually intended to be gender- specific. But it's too bad he used that language, because it causes a lot of confusion among some people.
And that is.....
So a woman can be the husband of one wife if it is not gender specific?
It is very good that he used that language as it made it clear what he was talking about and it helps that it is backed up in Timothy.
Sounds like you want the scriptures to say what you want them to say
Who are you agreeing with? And that is pure supposition.
That is not an exclusionary confusion. That is the word of God, which you do not seem to like.