Bible Study Women preachers

[Merry Menagerie]

Very interesting perspective! Never heard this one before. Thanks for that free.

 

[von]

Wow, I sure am learning that people believe so many different things. Can you just show me one woman that was a pastor in the Bible? Please show me that. You would think that if it were okay then there would be at least one. Jesus didn't even pick a woman to be one of the 12.
Can I ask a serious question. Where do people get all of this information? I believe that if I was stuck on a desert island and only had a Bible I could find my way to God. Do you see what all of these people who have written these commentaries have done to the people? These books are just a mans opinion, but the Bible is the actual Word of God.

 

[Free]

Can you just show me one woman that was a pastor in the Bible? Please show me that. You would think that if it were okay then there would be at least one.

Can you show me just one man who is called a pastor in the Bible?

Where do people get all of this information?

History.

These books are just a mans opinion, but the Bible is the actual Word of God.

Some of which was written to specific people at a specific point in time. One cannot just take any Scripture and haphazardly make blanket statements about what that Scripture is saying. A very important point in biblical interpretation is to try and get to the meaning that the author intended.

 

[Solo]

Now teaching. The women were used to having the divine revelation and spiritual authority over men. Paul simply won't let women teach until they submit themselves to learning the Faith in silence. This is not a general statement that women can't ever teach, Paul is simply speaking to a very specific situation to put the women in their rightful place, as equals with men, and then they can teach.

To further support this view, 1 Tim. 2:15 is a very odd verse that really doesn't fit any other view. Women will be kept safe in childbearing by turning to Christ, not Artemis. Faith in Christ, not costly gifts for Artemis.

That is the most logical and reasonable explanation of that passage. It fits everything right down to verse 15.

Perhaps you could explain the submissiveness that a woman must exhibit according to the scripture that Paul wrote, and explain why Paul referred to the order of creation, and his intent behind showing that woman was deceived, not man. The authority and responsibility placed on the heads, and on those in submission is directly related to this scripture. Man is responsible to Jesus Christ the head of the Church, Wives are responsible to their husbands, Children are responsible to their parents, Employees are responsible to their employers, Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the Church, Wives are to respect their husbands. This scripture in Timothy is no different then any of Paul's teachings on roles and submission of individuals in society.

11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 1 Timothy 2:11-14

 

[von]

The Bible speaks about pastors, does it specifically name them no. But no where can you show scripture of a woman preaching but you can find plenty of men preaching. He used an ass in the old testament why not a woman? There are not woman angels. Why not, I wonder?
I never take a specific scripture and use it haphazardly, but preachers do it all the time. Pull one scripture out of context and make a whole sermon out of it. You must be a dispensationalist, I believe the Word of God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Right on, Solo, you hit the nail on the head.

 

[AHIMSA]

Doesn't Debra lead the Israelittes in the book of Judges?

The problem is the Bible was written in a male dominated society, of course that would be reflected in the scriptures. Yet again, there are times when the Bible exceeds the social constraints of its time:

"In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free"

There is nothing wrong with a woman taking a position of authority, this is the 21st century, not 1094...get over it.

 

[Free]

The Bible speaks about pastors, does it specifically name them no. But no where can you show scripture of a woman preaching but you can find plenty of men preaching.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Which men preaching does the Bible mention apart from Jesus and the Apostles?

He used an ass in the old testament why not a woman?

Because Balaam wasn't riding on a woman.

There are not woman angels. Why not, I wonder?

What you mean is that when angels manifest in the physical, they sometimes appear as men, according to the Bible. However, not all manifestations of angels are identified as men, they simply are angels.

I never take a specific scripture and use it haphazardly, but preachers do it all the time. Pull one scripture out of context and make a whole sermon out of it.

Wow, you must know a lot about the Bible and biblical interpretation. How many years of formal theological study have you had?

You must be a dispensationalist, I believe the Word of God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

I don't know if I'm a dispensationalist, but I also believe that the "Word of God is the same yesterday, today, and forever." However, I also recognize the fact that the writers meant what they wrote and not what we want to think they wrote.

 

[lovely]

I think that women are fulfilling the curse...

Genesis 3:16 (in part)
"Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."

I think that this is what we do, we want to prove we are equal by abandoning our distinct, created, role. I know that for many years, because of the false teachings I grew up with (feminism), that I turned my back on what God designed me to be, and the ministry that He gave me, as a daughter, a sister, and on to wife, and mother. I am equal, but I do not have to try and rule over a man to prove it, I am equal in the eyes of Christ...He died for me, the wretched creature I am. The false teachings of this world say that a woman is a doormat if she doesn't stand against the male dominated world. Well, I know that this is wrong...it takes more strength, God given, to obey Him and submit. The reason we have so much divorce is because we have stepped away from God's model...Christ loving the church, and the church submitting to Christ...the church is not submitting because we want to modernize Scripture to fit what we think is right. I do not want to fall into that trap again. I do not want to lean on my own understanding, but in all my ways acknowledge God, and He will direct my path. I pray that I can die to myself, and the rights I feel I am entitled to, and Trust God by obeying and being conformed to the image of Christ. That is worth any price, and I know it will be more fulfilling to my soul than my one thought up conterfeit based on the false doctrines of this World.

I believe that women can minister. I believe that God has used women to minister to men, but they are not to have authority over men, especially in Spiritual matters within the church. I believe that women should honor their role, and function within it, and God will bless it greatly, because it is His best design. He can use women pastors, and He will, but that does not mean it it His best, and that He will not raise up others who will try to restore the Bible's model, as He gives them grace to do so. These women, because of false teachings being embraced by our church...that has a adopted a "Self-help" mentality...have been allowed, and forced, to step up. They have no covering. The men stopped leading, and the women stepped in. It is time for the women to step down and allow God's best to be our model once again. Titus 2 speaks of what older women should be teaching younger women.

Titus 2:3-5
"3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed".

Women are to do these things so that the Word of God is not blasphemed. How could women not doing these things blaspheme the Word of God? Notice...be sober, love husbands, children, discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to own husbands...when they are not, the picture of what Christ has done for His church is distorted, and people are led away from the Truth of the Word.

I will not repeat the other Scriptures that have already been cited, but I think that it is stretching to say that women should be pastors...Shepherdess is not what Christ is. The head of the woman is the man, and I do not want to make excuses to skirt God on the matter. I have been hardheaded in the past, and I do not want to be now. I would gladly give up every right I have as a woman to serve God better, if that is what it takes. Some persecuted believers in Christ already do...men and women alike.

Philippians 3:7-8
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. 8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

The Lord bless you all.

 

[von]

Free- Isn't it enough that the people in the Bible who preached were Jesus and the apostles? How about the men that the apostles appointed. You made the point plain yourself. Jesus and the apostles preached. Mary, Rahab, Priscilla, all of the other women did not. Point made.
Do you have formal theological training. I didn't know that the Holy Spirit only reveals His word to people with formal training. I learned something new today. I guess I better find a theologian because maybe I have misunderstood the whole plan of salvation.
AHIMSA - Yes, Deborah did lead the Israelites. However, she did not preach. I never said that woman can't be used of God, I just don't agree with them preaching in the church, only to other women or children.

 

[Solo]

I think that women are fulfilling the curse...

Genesis 3:16 (in part)
"Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."

I think that this is what we do, we want to prove we are equal by abandoning our distinct, created, role. I know that for many years, because of the false teachings I grew up with (feminism), that I turned my back on what God designed me to be, and the ministry that He gave me, as a daughter, a sister, and on to wife, and mother. I am equal, but I do not have to try and rule over a man to prove it, I am equal in the eyes of Christ...He died for me, the wretched creature I am. The false teachings of this world say that a woman is a doormat if she doesn't stand against the male dominated world. Well, I know that this is wrong...it takes more strength, God given, to obey Him and submit. The reason we have so much divorce is because we have stepped away from God's model...Christ loving the church, and the church submitting to Christ...the church is not submitting because we want to modernize Scripture to fit what we think is right. I do not want to fall into that trap again. I do not want to lean on my own understanding, but in all my ways acknowledge God, and He will direct my path. I pray that I can die to myself, and the rights I feel I am entitled to, and Trust God by obeying and being conformed to the image of Christ. That is worth any price, and I know it will be more fulfilling to my soul than my one thought up conterfeit based on the false doctrines of this World.

I believe that women can minister. I believe that God has used women to minister to men, but they are not to have authority over men, especially in Spiritual matters within the church. I believe that women should honor their role, and function within it, and God will bless it greatly, because it is His best design. He can use women pastors, and He will, but that does not mean it it His best, and that He will not raise up others who will try to restore the Bible's model, as He gives them grace to do so. These women, because of false teachings being embraced by our church...that has a adopted a "Self-help" mentality...have been allowed, and forced, to step up. They have no covering. The men stopped leading, and the women stepped in. It is time for the women to step down and allow God's best to be our model once again. Titus 2 speaks of what older women should be teaching younger women.

Titus 2:3-5
"3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed".

Women are to do these things so that the Word of God is not blasphemed. How could women not doing these things blaspheme the Word of God? Notice...be sober, love husbands, children, discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to own husbands...when they are not, the picture of what Christ has done for His church is distorted, and people are led away from the Truth of the Word.

I will not repeat the other Scriptures that have already been cited, but I think that it is stretching to say that women should be pastors...Shepherdess is not what Christ is. The head of the woman is the man, and I do not want to make excuses to skirt God on the matter. I have been hardheaded in the past, and I do not want to be now. I would gladly give up every right I have as a woman to serve God better, if that is what it takes. Some persecuted believers in Christ already do...men and women alike.

Philippians 3:7-8
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. 8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

The Lord bless you all.

Lovely,
Beautiful post. Thank you for such great input.
God bless you and yours,
Colorado raised,
Solo

 

[asb4God]

Some Thoughts

Can you just show me one woman that was a pastor in the Bible? Please show me that. You would think that if it were okay then there would be at least one. Jesus didn't even pick a woman to be one of the 12.

Possibility #1: Romans 16:7 "Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was."

Junias is almost assuredly a woman. And if we are to understand "oustanding among the apostles" to mean that they are both apostles, an interpretation which many accept, then it looks like Junias was considered an apostle. Translation issues: ("oustanding among the apostles") - en tois apostolois - could be either "among the apostles" or "well-known to the apostles." I vote for the former.

Possibility #2: Romans 16:3 "Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus. 4 They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them. 5 Greet also the church that meets at their house."

Elsewhere, as is the custom, Paul identifies married couples by naming the husband first. In only one istance out of 7 does Paul name Aquila first. So, 6 of 7 times Priscilla is mentioned first. Why? It is highly likely that the house church Paul addresses is led by Priscilla and not Aquila.

SUBMIT

Consider a famous passage (Ephesians 5:18-23) - follow my rough translation here:

18 "Do not (imperative/command) get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled (imperative/command) with the Spirit. 19 Speak(ing/participle) to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing(ing/participle) and make(ing/participle) music in your heart to the Lord, 20 always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 21 Submit(ing/participle) to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 Wives, submit ("submit" not present in the Greek) to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.

So, "submitting ... one to another ..." is just the last participle in a string of participles which purpose is to describe what it looks like to carry out the previous imperative/command: "be filled with the Spirit." Submitting to each other is the key in Scripture.

HEAD

Consider v. 23 above: Head = kephale in Greek. It is used literally in Classical and Koine Greek to mean the physical head of a man or beast and FAR more often metaphorically to mean "source" or "origin" of a thing, as in "head" of a race of people (the first one) or "head"waters and the like and rarely (once I believe I found) in which it might mean metaphorically "authority," though I disagree with Grudem as to his translation of the sentence in which this is found.

The husband is the head (source or authority?) of the wife as Christ is the (source or authority?) of the Church, his body of which he is the Savior.

I would rather expect to see Paul say that if Christ is the authority of the Church, he might have said "of which he is the LORD," but instead he seems to draw our attention to the fact that Christ is our Savior, that is the SOURCE of our salvation. Therefore, it is more likely that Paul expects husbands to be the source of something to the wife, rather than her leader.

AUTHORITY

Consider the idea of authority. 1 Timothy 2:12 "I do not permit (present continous - "I am not permitting") a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."

Paul ALWAYS uses the normal word for "authority," which is exousia, until he comes to this verse, in which he uses a very interesting term - authentein, which literally means to murder or metaphorically to "usurp authority." Why not just "authority" but to "usurp authority" in such a violent way as to draw the reader's mind to murder? Someone upthread explained it correctly that the Ephesian provenance of this Epistle and the presence of the Temple of Artemis has everything to do with what was happening in the Ephesian church.

Let that suffice to get things going here.

Blessings all,
Scott 8-)

 

[asb4God]

One More Thing

"Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."

There is a difference between "description" and "prescription."

The above verse is simpy describing what the fractured nature of the male/female relationship will be. A woman will desire relationship with her husband, but he will "rule over" her. Her desires are normal, but his response is abnormal. God is not telling the woman that the man should "rule over" her, simply that he will.

This is especially clear in light of Genesis 1:26 "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Who rules over whom? BOTH rule over God's creation. In what order? No order. Equally. This is God's 'original intent,' as it were.

This verse is a sad commentary on what was previously a unified relationship of co-rulership.

Btw, don't get me started on the "curse" as you won't find that word (arur) in any but two places in the Fall passages - as God does to the ground and to the serpent. It is not used of Eve at all. There is no curse on Eve such that she must be ruled over.

Scott 8-)

 

[Solo]

Re: Some Thoughts

Can you just show me one woman that was a pastor in the Bible? Please show me that. You would think that if it were okay then there would be at least one. Jesus didn't even pick a woman to be one of the 12.

Possibility #1: Romans 16:7 "Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was."

Junias is almost assuredly a woman. And if we are to understand "oustanding among the apostles" to mean that they are both apostles, an interpretation which many accept, then it looks like Junias was considered an apostle. Translation issues: ("oustanding among the apostles") - en tois apostolois - could be either "among the apostles" or "well-known to the apostles." I vote for the former.

Possibility #2: Romans 16:3 "Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus. 4 They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them. 5 Greet also the church that meets at their house."

Elsewhere, as is the custom, Paul identifies married couples by naming the husband first. In only one istance out of 7 does Paul name Aquila first. So, 6 of 7 times Priscilla is mentioned first. Why? It is highly likely that the house church Paul addresses is led by Priscilla and not Aquila.

SUBMIT

Consider a famous passage (Ephesians 5:18-23) - follow my rough translation here:

18 "Do not (imperative/command) get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled (imperative/command) with the Spirit. 19 Speak(ing/participle) to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing(ing/participle) and make(ing/participle) music in your heart to the Lord, 20 always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 21 Submit(ing/participle) to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 Wives, submit ("submit" not present in the Greek) to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.

So, "submitting ... one to another ..." is just the last participle in a string of participles which purpose is to describe what it looks like to carry out the previous imperative/command: "be filled with the Spirit." Submitting to each other is the key in Scripture.

HEAD

Consider v. 23 above: Head = kephale in Greek. It is used literally in Classical and Koine Greek to mean the physical head of a man or beast and FAR more often metaphorically to mean "source" or "origin" of a thing, as in "head" of a race of people (the first one) or "head"waters and the like and rarely (once I believe I found) in which it might mean metaphorically "authority," though I disagree with Grudem as to his translation of the sentence in which this is found.

The husband is the head (source or authority?) of the wife as Christ is the (source or authority?) of the Church, his body of which he is the Savior.

I would rather expect to see Paul say that if Christ is the authority of the Church, he might have said "of which he is the LORD," but instead he seems to draw our attention to the fact that Christ is our Savior, that is the SOURCE of our salvation. Therefore, it is more likely that Paul expects husbands to be the source of something to the wife, rather than her leader.

AUTHORITY

Consider the idea of authority. 1 Timothy 2:12 "I do not permit (present continous - "I am not permitting") a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."

Paul ALWAYS uses the normal word for "authority," which is exousia, until he comes to this verse, in which he uses a very interesting term - authentein, which literally means to murder or metaphorically to "usurp authority." Why not just "authority" but to "usurp authority" in such a violent way as to draw the reader's mind to murder? Someone upthread explained it correctly that the Ephesian provenance of this Epistle and the presence of the Temple of Artemis has everything to do with what was happening in the Ephesian church.

Let that suffice to get things going here.

Blessings all,
Scott 8-)

You still haven't shown where a woman was a pastor in the Bible.

 

[asb4God]

Ok

"Pastor" is a spiritual gift. You won't find male "pastors" either. You will simply find those called to exercise their spiritual gift - something Paul makes clear everywhere is not based upon gender.

The pastor is one of those who serve in certain roles or functions, and is often interchangeable with bishop or elder.

An elder according to a Complementarian must be the "husband of one wife," and therefore, better not be an unmarried man, if pressed to its literal meaning, right?

Instead, the "Pastoral Epistles" are written (a) in a patriarchal culture to a (b) specific cultural milieu in which women were the usual spiritual medium. This must be understood when viewing these passages.

Scott 8-)

 

[Solo]

Re: Ok

"Pastor" is a spiritual gift. You won't find male "pastors" either. You will simply find those called to exercise their spiritual gift - something Paul makes clear everywhere is not based upon gender.

The pastor is one of those who serve in certain roles or functions, and is often interchangeable with bishop or elder.

An elder according to a Complementarian must be the "husband of one wife," and therefore, better not be an unmarried man, if pressed to its literal meaning, right?

Instead, the "Pastoral Epistles" are written (a) in a patriarchal culture to a (b) specific cultural milieu in which women were the usual spiritual medium. This must be understood when viewing these passages.

Scott 8-)

You have a pretty liberal understanding of scripture, and you can subvert the role of submission if you like, but the truth of the matter is that each person whether male or female is subjugated under the authorities that God deems necessary, no matter what they feel like in their flesh. There are many more scriptures that you need to subvert to accomodate your belief, but your welcome to choose the path you feel is right whether it is or not.

 

[asb4God]

Yeah

You have a pretty liberal understanding of scripture,

I thought you might take this tack eventually.

I am a Conservative Evangelical. Over half of the Conservative Evangelical scholars in the world today agree with my view of this issue - or shall I say I agree with them? :wink:

Or would you like argue that the following have a "liberal understanding of Scripture": F.F. Bruce (deceased), N.T. Wright, Gordon Fee, Craig Keener, John Kohlenberger, Stanley Grenz and Roger Nicole liberal? If so, you would be one of very few humans to take such a drastic step. In fact, liberal scholars would disagree with you. We all agree that homesexuality is wrong in all cases, btw.

and you can subvert the role of submission if you like

What I'd like to do is translate and interpret Scripture based upon what it tells me. There is no "role of submission," only a principle of submission, which is real, but likely means something different than you understand it to mean.

but the truth of the matter is that each person whether male or female is subjugated under the authorities that God deems necessary, no matter what they feel like in their flesh.

True. There is submission. But submission must be understood in light of Scripture, not in light of whatever contemporary cultural meaning we attach to it.

There are many more scriptures that you need to subvert to accomodate your belief, but your welcome to choose the path you feel is right whether it is or not.

I will deal with all of Scripture faithfully. I don't need to subvert anything to learn what it says. I only need to interpret it and make my decisions.

Scott 8-)

 

[Solo]

Re: Yeah

You have a pretty liberal understanding of scripture,

I thought you might take this tack eventually.

I am a Conservative Evangelical. Over half of the Conservative Evangelical scholars in the world today agree with my view of this issue - or shall I say I agree with them? :wink:

Or would you like argue that the following have a "liberal understanding of Scripture": F.F. Bruce (deceased), N.T. Wright, Gordon Fee, Craig Keener, John Kohlenberger, Stanley Grenz and Roger Nicole liberal? If so, you would be one of very few humans to take such a drastic step. In fact, liberal scholars would disagree with you. We all agree that homesexuality is wrong in all cases, btw.

[quote:5f81a]and you can subvert the role of submission if you like

What I'd like to do is translate and interpret Scripture based upon what it tells me. There is no "role of submission," only a principle of submission, which is real, but likely means something different than you understand it to mean.

but the truth of the matter is that each person whether male or female is subjugated under the authorities that God deems necessary, no matter what they feel like in their flesh.

True. There is submission. But submission must be understood in light of Scripture, not in light of whatever contemporary cultural meaning we attach to it.

There are many more scriptures that you need to subvert to accomodate your belief, but your welcome to choose the path you feel is right whether it is or not.

I will deal with all of Scripture faithfully. I don't need to subvert anything to learn what it says. I only need to interpret it and make my decisions.

Scott 8-)[/quote:5f81a]
For a conservative evangelical you sure have a liberal understanding of the roles of women and men in relationship to the head of the Church, Jesus Christ.

Scripture is clear on submission; however, the world places undue negative connotations on submission. The Bible teaches us to be transformed by the renewing of our minds away from the world, not to be conformed to the world. I suspect that the position of submission that many with a liberal take on it would line up better with the world definition of submission as opposed to the truth of the order of things, especially for the purpose of protection within the authority given each of us.

Your dealing of the scripture in your previous post was subjective from your viewpoint, and was not within the realm of taking the entire scripture in accord. Your opinion was released as you selected one of two choices that was submitted, and the submission was lacking the entire word of God in this area. Perhaps rightly dividing the Word of truth is important in this case as well.

Your statement, "But submission must be understood in light of Scripture, not in light of whatever contemporary cultural meaning we attach to it." is true. I would suggest that the world sees submission as a negative attribute and God sees it as a positive. Men and woman that are submissive in their roles as God has given them is such a blessing to see within a world of pride and disobedience.

 

[asb4God]

Or...

For a conservative evangelical you sure have a liberal understanding of the roles of women and men in relationship to the head of the Church, Jesus Christ.

I rather think you have an inaccurate understanding of the term "liberal." Either that or to you it is a flaming arrow you shoot when you disagree with another's interpretation of Scripture because you think by it you win some argument. In fact, even "liberals" do not view the Conservative Evangelical view as a "liberal" understanding of Scripture, but rather "liberals" come to their conclusions in an entirely different way.

You also do not understand the biblical (or classical or koine) understanding of the word "head." You look around and see that 'this guy is the "head" of that corporation' and 'that gal is the "head" of the scrapbooking club," but the use of head in Scripture is almost always metaphorical and there is more evidence for it meaning "source" or "origin" than "authority over" in all of the ancient world, not only this passage. That is objectivity, not subjectivity.

Scripture is clear on submission; however, the world places undue negative connotations on submission. The Bible teaches us to be transformed by the renewing of our minds away from the world, not to be conformed to the world. I suspect that the position of submission that many with a liberal take on it would line up better with the world definition of submission as opposed to the truth of the order of things, especially for the purpose of protection within the authority given each of us.

Yes, Scripture is clear on submission, but in the passages in question, I am not taking the world's definition of submission. I am taking a biblical definition based upon my own translation and interpretation of the languages, from the Hebrew to the Greek traveling right on through the Septuagint. Conservative Evangelicals scholars - in fact, more than less - agree with this interpretation and nobody believes they have a "liberal understanding of Scripture."

Your dealing of the scripture in your previous post was subjective from your viewpoint, and was not within the realm of taking the entire scripture in accord. Your opinion was released as you selected one of two choices that was submitted, and the submission was lacking the entire word of God in this area. Perhaps rightly dividing the Word of truth is important in this case as well.

Actually, it was objective. One cannot get more objective than to go to the languages, understand the passage in its historical-grammatical context and interpret it. That is the height of objective. In fact, although I didn't share every relevant Scripture - as that would take too much space and time - I have dealt with ALL of the relevant passages on these issues and dealt with the issue "systematically" in my studies, including many written papers. I have come to my conclusions in this manner, not by taking a few verses here and there out of context.

Your statement, "But submission must be understood in light of Scripture, not in light of whatever contemporary cultural meaning we attach to it." is true. I would suggest that the world sees submission as a negative attribute and God sees it as a positive. Men and woman that are submissive in their roles as God has given them is such a blessing to see within a world of pride and disobedience.

Agreed. But I would also argue that your view of submission, if even taken from the Ephesians passage is wrong because the word "submit" does not exist in verse 22. The context of that passage isn't even submission; it is being "filled with the spirit." To make this passage about submission is just not to understand why Paul even placed this passage here.

Scott 8-)

 

[Solo]

Re: Or...

For a conservative evangelical you sure have a liberal understanding of the roles of women and men in relationship to the head of the Church, Jesus Christ.

I rather think you have an inaccurate understanding of the term "liberal." Either that or to you it is a flaming arrow you shoot when you disagree with another's interpretation of Scripture because you think by it you win some argument. In fact, even "liberals" do not view the Conservative Evangelical view as a "liberal" understanding of Scripture, but rather "liberals" come to their conclusions in an entirely different way.

Liberal is a non-orthodox understanding of scripture and meaning of same. Your perception of submission is therefore liberal.

You also do not understand the biblical (or classical or koine) understanding of the word "head." You look around and see that 'this guy is the "head" of that corporation' and 'that gal is the "head" of the scrapbooking club," but the use of head in Scripture is almost always metaphorical and there is more evidence for it meaning "source" or "origin" than "authority over" in all of the ancient world, not only this passage. That is objectivity, not subjectivity.

I understand Koine Greek just fine. Your understanding of the Greek word kefalhv transliterated Kephale used metaphorically in the scripture of 1 Corinthians 11:3 is translated meaning authority. Jesus is the authority over the man, man is the authority over the woman, God the Father is the authority over Jesus. The metaphorical meaning of the Greek word kefalhv is

2. metaph. anything supreme, chief, prominent
a. of persons, master lord: of a husband in relation to his wife
b. of Christ: the Lord of the husband and of the Church
c. of things: the corner stone


But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 1 Corinthians 11:3

Scripture is clear on submission; however, the world places undue negative connotations on submission. The Bible teaches us to be transformed by the renewing of our minds away from the world, not to be conformed to the world. I suspect that the position of submission that many with a liberal take on it would line up better with the world definition of submission as opposed to the truth of the order of things, especially for the purpose of protection within the authority given each of us.

Yes, Scripture is clear on submission, but in the passages in question, I am not taking the world's definition of submission. I am taking a biblical definition based upon my own translation and interpretation of the languages, from the Hebrew to the Greek traveling right on through the Septuagint. Conservative Evangelicals scholars - in fact, more than less - agree with this interpretation and nobody believes they have a "liberal understanding of Scripture."

Your understanding does not hold true throughout the entire scriptures from Genesis to Revelation as it relates to the roles of Jesus, man, woman, children, slaves, masters, etc. Submission is an important part of a Christian's life, but not if it is misunderstood from a cultural or special interpretation that subverts it's use.

Your dealing of the scripture in your previous post was subjective from your viewpoint, and was not within the realm of taking the entire scripture in accord. Your opinion was released as you selected one of two choices that was submitted, and the submission was lacking the entire word of God in this area. Perhaps rightly dividing the Word of truth is important in this case as well.

Actually, it was objective. One cannot get more objective than to go to the languages, understand the passage in its historical-grammatical context and interpret it. That is the height of objective. In fact, although I didn't share every relevant Scripture - as that would take too much space and time - I have dealt with ALL of the relevant passages on these issues and dealt with the issue "systematically" in my studies, including many written papers. I have come to my conclusions in this manner, not by taking a few verses here and there out of context.

Then you should post your entire study on the subject, instead of posting a seemingly inaccurate accounting of the topic.

Your statement, "But submission must be understood in light of Scripture, not in light of whatever contemporary cultural meaning we attach to it." is true. I would suggest that the world sees submission as a negative attribute and God sees it as a positive. Men and woman that are submissive in their roles as God has given them is such a blessing to see within a world of pride and disobedience.

Agreed. But I would also argue that your view of submission, if even taken from the Ephesians passage is wrong because the word "submit" does not exist in verse 22. The context of that passage isn't even submission; it is being "filled with the spirit." To make this passage about submission is just not to understand why Paul even placed this passage here.
Scott 8-)

The word submit is not in the verse of scripture of 1 Corinthians 11:3 but with the meaning of Jesus as the head, then all under him should submit whether the word is there or not. What do you think? To claim that God was not revealing truth in the words that Paul wrote as to the roles of authority within the body of Christ is to misunderstand the roles entirely.

 

[von]

Lovely- I really did not read your post until now. I think you summed it up and so much more graciously than I ever could. As you can tell I am not a very gracious person. Any how, it was very nice and very well written. Thanks for your imput.