Are women allowed to Preach?

[garee]

Are you saying God has allowed women to be pastors over a local church but they are not an elder? Is this anti-female? Women cannot be elders?

Genesis 3 and Ephesians 5:22-23 God is the head of Christ. Christ is the head of the husband. The husband is the head of his wife.

The Father and Son just like male and female represent one creation. Not two

As the father submits to the Son (the father and I are one) vice versa.... the same apllies with the pastor and wife or deacon and wives minisitry the work of two. Woman does not need men to teach them just as men do not need men . That is the work of the father and Son the working together in perfect harmony as the infallible teacher in whom we seek the approval of

Sometimes its the one unseen wife that does most of the work . Again it their mutual gift as a ministry His or hers. that can mulitply with faithful children not accused of riot or unruly

1Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober,of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Here's a series of articles on 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 derived from work some guy did in seminary.

To sum it up: the primary arguments presented by those who are convinced that Paul did not write 1 Cor 14.34-35:

• It does not fit very well into the surrounding context.
• It contradicts Paul’s teaching about women elsewhere.
• It has Paul referring to “the law” as a basis for Christian behavior.
• The “displacement” of verses in the Western text indicates that they are a later addition to the text.

Taken together, these arguments certainly do seem to weigh against the authenticity of these verses. They have not, however, gone without challenge.

Links

• On the authenticity (or not) of 1 Corinthians 14.34-35: Introduction
• On the authenticity (or not) of 1 Corinthians 14.34-35: Assessing motives
• On the authenticity (or not) of 1 Corinthians 14.34-35: Arguments against authenticity
• On the authenticity (or not) of 1 Corinthians 14.34-35: responses to claims of inauthenticity
• On the authenticity (or not) of 1 Corinthians 14.34-35: A solution in Codex Fuldensis?
• On the authenticity (or not) of 1 Corinthians 14.34-35: Philip Payne and Curt Niccum on Fuldensis and Vaticanus

 

[loyaldisciple]

What you believe God's word is teaching you is your opinion as a private interpretation..Like fingerprints evey man has one. There is one infalible teacher as our giude and comforter. In that way we are intsrtcted to call no man teacher of earth.Men unlike Christ a differnt kind of teaching ministry, we do need any human to teach us

The fact of the matter is God is not served by human lips or hands. Why you would desire to make it about male dna?


It is God who makes one different giving them gifts that are not of themselves.

WRONG. Following and believing in God's very clear word is not expressing any opinion, it is expressing true faith. It is any viewpoint that disagrees with God and His clear word that is an opinion. And God certainly is served by human lips when they pronounce His truth just as He has spoken it and just as it is written. God does not leave everything simply up to mankind's interpretation. Many things in the Bible He has spoken clearly and decisively and require no interpretation whatsoever. It is those people taking those words and twisting them in order to fit their own agenda that are developing wrong opinions and purposely standing in defiance of His word.

 

[tourist]

The Father and Son just like male and female represent one creation. Not two

As the father submits to the Son (the father and I are one) vice versa.... the same apllies with the pastor and wife or deacon and wives minisitry the work of two. Woman does not need men to teach them just as men do not need men . That is the work of the father and Son the working together in perfect harmony as the infallible teacher in whom we seek the approval of

Sometimes its the one unseen wife that does most of the work . Again it their mutual gift as a ministry His or hers. that can mulitply with faithful children not accused of riot or unruly

1Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober,of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

I believe that it is the Son who submits to the Father. The Father is certainly not going to submit to the Son, that's not how that relationship works.

 

[lightbearer]

From a link in the above link > MS. 88 as Evidence for a Text Without 1 Cor 14.34–5 (this is a pdf)

Besides that Clement had some other issues.

According to Clement, though Christ's goodness operated in the creation of the world, the Son himself was immutable, self-sufficient, and incapable of suffering. According to his interpretation, such are the characteristic qualities of the divine essence. Though the Logos is most closely one with the Father, whose powers he resumes in himself, to Clement both the Son and the Spirit are "first-born powers and first created"; they form the highest stages in the scale of intelligent being, and Clement distinguishes the Son-Logos from the Logos who is immutably immanent in God. Because of this Photius would later charge that he "degraded the Son to the rank of a creature." Separate from the world as the principle of creation, the Logos is yet in it as its guiding principle. Thus a natural life is a life according to the will of the Logos. Clement has also been accused of Docetism in his teachings on the Incarnation. According to him, the body of Christ was not subject to human needs. See the following passage from Stromateis which clearly denies Christ's full humanity:

In regard to the Savior, however, it were ridiculous to suppose that the body demanded, as a body, the necessary aids for its maintenance. For He ate, note for the sake of the body, which had its continuance from a holy power, but lest those in His company might happen to think otherwise of Him, just as aftewards some did certainily supposed that He had appeared as a mere phantasm. He was in general dispassionate; and no movement of feeling penetrated Him, whether pleasure or pain.
https://orthodoxwiki.org/Clement_of_Alexandria

 

[lightbearer]

The pastor determines if they are stable enough to enter.

Show me that in Scripture.

If a man is drunk and puking all over, then he should not be allowed to attend the service. If a man is freaking out on heroin, he should not be allowed to attend the service.

Depends on how they present themselves.If they are at the end of their rope seeking GOD in dispair the sermon and or worship service might very well be for them to guide them even closer to the FATHER,

It is the pastor to make these decisions in order to reasonably protect the rest of his flock.

Show me that in Scripture

C'mon people you can attack my stance here all that you wish, but you know there are times when a person should not be allowed to enter the church.

The post you responded to went through that.

Originally Posted by lightbearer

Repent and believe is the only prerequisite. And that my friend is between GOD and the believer.

So unless one is not living a repentant life;still wearing their sin on their shirt so that all would see. Who is to judge this stability to which you speak?

JESUS; Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. 1Pet 2:24

 

[garee]

WRONG. Following and believing in God's very clear word is not expressing any opinion, it is expressing true faith.

I would think we should let God be the true ONE and everyman a liar.

It is expressing your opinion as your private bias, called a private interpretation of His true faith, our new faith . Its not you that others are to seek the approval of as if the commandment study to show our selves approved of God came from your own lips.

We should search as to how we can hear God and not man

It is any viewpoint that disagrees with God and His clear word that is an opinion. And God certainly is served by human lips when they pronounce His truth just as He has spoken it and just as it is written

.

Yes,Just as it is written not according to our interpretation of what we think he our one infallible teacher is teaches us. God moves us ,not us move Him

The God that made the world and all things therein, he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;neither is he served by men's hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;Act 17:24

Do we need and man or woman to teach us? If so…Then he must be served by the lips of a Ass also as that unclean animal which was used as a unbeliever to show he is not served by human lips, hands.

And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee.And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay. Num 22:28

Even the Son of man when call good teacher, gave the glory to one un seen Father (neither male nor female) .as if God was a man like us to begin with

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Scribe B used two dots (called a distigme) in the left margin of Codex Vaticanus to identify 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 as added text (see image below).



Is 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Authentic? No.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

.
Fascinating article > 1 Corinthians 14.34-35. I think I'm going to be commenting a lot on this one.

That a text bearing a striking similarity to 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is found in the writings of Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, strengthens the likelihood of an early interpolation.[31]

"The woman, says the law, is in all things inferior to the man. Let her accordingly be submissive, not for her humiliation, but that she may be directed, for the authority has been given by God to the man"​

 

[hornetguy]

1COR 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

1COR 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

1COR 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

1COR 14:40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

"DECENTLY AND IN ORDER" certainly IS about who gets to attend. How do you expect things to be done in orderly fashion when you allow disorderly people to attend ? You refuse to apply logic to your argument. And it is common sense that dictates the pastor must make these decisions as he is the one God has placed in charge of the gathering.

And you are the king of eisigesis. If you are willing to read YOUR will into that scripture, you can make it "say" whatever you want it to say. You could make it say that men have to sit on one side of the auditorium, and women on the other. You could justify a scripted service, that has to follow the same pattern every time you assemble.

You can make most scriptures say whatever you want, if you have no honesty about understanding the context of what has been said.... what the intent is.

I even predicted what you would use as your "proof text".... because I have your number, slick. As does just about everybody else involved in this thread.

It's sad, actually.

And, anyone that would lie about his age in his profile should not be trusted with scriptural discussion. Dishonesty is just that, dishonesty.

 

[loyaldisciple]

I would think we should let God be the true ONE and everyman a liar.

It is expressing your opinion as your private bias, called a private interpretation of His true faith, our new faith . Its not you that others are to seek the approval of as if the commandment study to show our selves approved of God came from your own lips.

We should search as to how we can hear God and not man

.

Yes,Just as it is written not according to our interpretation of what we think he our one infallible teacher is teaches us. God moves us ,not us move Him

The God that made the world and all things therein, he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;neither is heserved by men's hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;Act 17:24

Do we need and man or woman to teach us? If so…Then he must be served by the lips of a Ass also as that unclean animal which was used as a unbeliever to show he is not served by human lips, hands.

And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee.And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay. Num 22:28

Even the Son of man when call good teacher, gave the glory to one un seen Father (neither male nor female) .as if God was a man like us to begin with

Sorry to inform you that every man is a sinner but every man is not a liar. Only those who mispronounce scripture or attempt to twist it into something it is not are the liars.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

.
Fascinating article > 1 Corinthians 14.34-35. I think I'm going to be commenting a lot on this one.

From the above article. Tertullian (145-220 AD), too, had a problem with the mention of the law in 1 Corinthians 14:34 as justification for silencing women in the church.

Although Tertullian believed women ought to be silenced in the church, he did not know what to make of the reference to the Law.

"When enjoining on women silence in the church, that they speak not for the mere sake of learning (although that even they have the right of prophesying, he has already shown when he covers the woman that prophesies with a veil), he goes to the law for his sanction that woman should be under obedience. Now this law, let me say once for all, he ought to have made no other acquaintance with, than to destroy it."[11]​

By the fourth century, the Law no longer posed a problem, for the inferiority of the woman and the sole guilt of Eve had changed the meaning of Genesis 3:16 from a consequence of sin to a commandment of God. Chrysostom combined 1 Corinthians 14:34 with Genesis 3:16 without discussion and maintained that women should be silent in the Church because “the woman is in some sort a weaker being and easily carried away and light minded.”[12]

 

[loyaldisciple]

And you are the king of eisigesis. If you are willing to read YOUR will into that scripture, you can make it "say" whatever you want it to say. You could make it say that men have to sit on one side of the auditorium, and women on the other. You could justify a scripted service, that has to follow the same pattern every time you assemble.

You can make most scriptures say whatever you want, if you have no honesty about understanding the context of what has been said.... what the intent is.

I even predicted what you would use as your "proof text".... because I have your number, slick. As does just about everybody else involved in this thread.

It's sad, actually.

And, anyone that would lie about his age in his profile should not be trusted with scriptural discussion. Dishonesty is just that, dishonesty.

You didn't predict anything. What you did was to request that a certain scripture not be used to prove you wrong because you knew it already did prove you wrong and I didn't allow you to get by with that tactic. It is extremely obvious that things cannot be accomplished "decently and in order" when disorderly people are allowed to be involved. The verse above proves beyond any doubt that God does not intend for disorderly people to attend any church service. You have put forth your opinion that "everyone" should be allowed to attend and God's own word has proven you to be wrong. You even knew the actual scripture proved you wrong and still you were mistaken enough to post your ungodly opinion. I haven't pretended to be the king of anything. It is God and His word that are KING and it is God and His word that has proven you to be wrong beyond any shadow of a doubt.

And furthermore what makes you accuse me of lying about my age.

 

[Mel85]

Sorry to inform you that every man is a sinner but every man is not a liar.

Stop, and think about what you just typed.... lol.

 

[Locutus]

Should Lloyd's acquaintance be forgot?

For the sake of Lloyd's ang-xine

 

[loyaldisciple]

Stop, and think about what you just typed.... lol.

There is nothing wrong with what I typed.

 

[Depleted]

Who does an unmarried woman submit to? In today's world a woman does not have to submit to anyone in the strict sense that Paul stated. He said that he does not permit a woman to preach, he did not say that God does not permit it. Seems that what he was stating was based on his own personal understanding of scripture. What Paul was inspired to write in scripture was truthfully stated but not all of it was necessarily a statement of scriptural truth.

I disagree. Every woman should submit to someone. There's a reason for that -- we really are the weaker vessel. Not that we can't hold the same amount of content, but that we break easier. And we could use someone who loves us like Christ loves the church, even if that's not a husband. Fathers are the best choice, but if Dad isn't a believer, it rather ruins the purpose of submitting, (considering submitting has to do in the direction of the Lord.) It could be a pastor, an uncle, an older brother, any man the woman trusts.

It helps us from going half cocked and serves a protection -- a mantle or shield.

 

[Depleted]

An additional piece of evidence, at least for me, is that verse 34 says that the law says that women should be in subjection to men. Nowhere does the law of Moses say that, and I don't know of any instance where Paul called anything other than the law of Moses, the law. There may be, but I don't know about it.

Are you suggesting the law doesn't say the father or husband is the final decision maker? You might want to study the law. It's a lot different from what is commonly taught as the Law.

 

[Depleted]

I'm starting to wonder if someone with a disposition like loyaldisciple's added verses 34-35 to the bible.

Actually the men and women were divided in the synagogue. I can see the women shouting over to their husband to try and explain what was just taught. Think how disruptive that would be. And that whole section in 1 Cor. if about order during meetings.

 

[Depleted]

You continue to believe that I choose to follow scripture simply because it meets my own thinking or my own agenda. This is where you make your big mistake in judging my thoughts. I don't cherry pick the Bible believing in any scriptures because they suit my own agenda nor my own worldly opinions. I believe in the word of the Bible PERIOD. If you choose to believe anything other than that, then you have fallen away from the truth. I have not "proven" as you say, my thoughts or biases towards anything. What I have proven is my desire to follow the word as spoken. It really doesn't matter what you believe my motives might be. God knows that I trust Him very much and that I do not sit around second guessing nor questioning His word. When I see that He has told me something, I believe it.

I listen to my "teacher" all of the time. In fact, I have read the Bible before and recently decided to read it again from beginning to end. What I don't listen to is this world, this society nor anyone who tends to agree with it. You are free to judge me as you wish and you are free to claim I am judging others. However, when I provide actual scripture it is not I that is judging anything. It is God delivering those words "through me" in order to teach or help someone with something.

So much for listen. I "continue to believe about you?" How do you know what I continue to believe about you since this is the first time I asked you anything -- ever?

You're so busy defending yourself, you don't have time to listen.

Nope. Definitely not a man I will bother listening to as a teacher. Forming opinions and attacks even before reading what was said. It's you who are bad at judging.

And you with delusion of grandeur thinking God gave "through" you alone all wisdom and knowledge. Doesn't rightly look like he gave you even a little wisdom or knowledge.