Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??
- Thread starter Major
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S
When I talk about Bible college or just good text books used in Bible colleges I am always talking about reading those that believe that bible is the inspired word of God infallible and inerrant in the original autographs. I think we all agree that we should pay no attention to liberal seminaries and those that do not believe the bible is inspired.
-
2
- Show all
You have made a lot of assumptions which are not tenable. Up to Romans 14 v 10 the verses have no reference to women in leadership so they are irrelevant.
No one is suggesting that women are less or dfferent. I keep on saying this but it seems to fall on deaf ears. Anyone, a woman, a man, a single person, a married person, even a child is only effective if they are doing what God has ordained in scripture. Not what a denominatioon says or they say.
I have no idea what being unclean has got to do with a woman teaching.
And you should consider this understanding about faith that it doesn't sidestep what scripture teaches.
it is an assumtion on your part that I have already convicted her of a transgressor whatever that means.
And learning from scripture that teaches us about leadership in the church which there are plenty of is essential if we are to grasp what is being taught.
As for " and everyone else nominee is held to My standard of faith but to theirs" is complete double dutch.
No one is suggesting that women are less or dfferent. I keep on saying this but it seems to fall on deaf ears. Anyone, a woman, a man, a single person, a married person, even a child is only effective if they are doing what God has ordained in scripture. Not what a denominatioon says or they say.
I have no idea what being unclean has got to do with a woman teaching.
And you should consider this understanding about faith that it doesn't sidestep what scripture teaches.
it is an assumtion on your part that I have already convicted her of a transgressor whatever that means.
And learning from scripture that teaches us about leadership in the church which there are plenty of is essential if we are to grasp what is being taught.
As for " and everyone else nominee is held to My standard of faith but to theirs" is complete double dutch.
First you say the church assembled in homes, then you say a teaching in a home is not an assembly.
"Church" is the body of Christ regardless of where it meets.
Jesus said where two or more are gathered in His Name...
"Church" is the body of Christ regardless of where it meets.
Jesus said where two or more are gathered in His Name...
The problem is not reading books it is reading books by authors who are unbelievers. The problem is not about attending seminary it's about attending seminary where unbelieving professors are teaching the students.
We cannot expect unbelievers to teach the truth.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
We cannot expect unbelievers to teach the truth.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
-
1
- Show all
S
"Putting a spin on things" is the issue.
11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Many will "put a spin on things" when they say Paul was meaning that a woman cannot teach in the pulpit. It is impossible for Paul to mean that since pulpits had not been invented and it would not have entered the mind of Paul, nor the mind of his readers. Therefore cultural context of the time in which it was written (a rule of hermeneutics) rules out "pulpit" interpretation and we must find another solution rather than "putting this spin" on it. We must concede that he did not mean pulpit or we are not being honest.
Reading 1 Peter 3 we have an example where something similar is said about "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection."
1 Pet 3
1Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 2While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. 3Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 4But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. 5For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement
Comparing this with 1 Tim 2 it is impossible for the thinking reader to not notice the striking similarity in content and subject matter and it to dismiss the comparison is difficult for the honest truth seeker. It screams out for attention. Like big flashing lights 1 Peter 3:3 and 1 Tim 2:9 Scream "WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME SUBJECT"
1 Tim 2
9In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 10But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
When trying to determine what Paul meant when he wrote 1 Tim 2 concerning women being silent I find it most edifying to others who I discuss it with that ask them to first take a moment and read 1 Peter 3: 1-6 a few times, get them to tell me what that means to them, then Read 1 Tim 2:9-15 and when they do it this exercise it is not uncommon for them to react with an "Oh... I see" before we have even discussed it any further.
I think that he defines the meaning of this Greek word "hēsychia" the NIV says "quietness" The Interlinear says "quietness" the NAS says "A woman must quietly receive instructions:" The literal meaning of the Greek word is the objective, and I think many have exited the highway of the goal of authorial intent when they contend for the literal meaning of the English word silent.
But Paul defines his intended meaning of the word in the context of his sentence also (another rule of hermeneutics), "1 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. " The context of the sentence describes and attitude of submission and a receptive spirit therefore the quietness part would be that of not arguing rather than that of her location when she is doing it. There is nothing in these statements that identify the location (assembly or otherwise) and therefore saying that Paul is talking about the assembly is an assumption that cannot be supported by the words or the sentence structure itself. Insisting that he meant assembly is putting a "spin on it"
Paul also defines his meaning of the word "Teach" within the sentence when he says "or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." If we continue with the definition of quietness as not arguing with her husband (which is also supported by the context of the entire surrounding verses and our comparison with 1 Pet 3:1-6) we are on much safer ground hermeneutically to define "Teach" as in "correcting her Husband" instead of submitting to his authority, which is quiet a different matter than a female preaching the bible from the pulpit isn't it?
And location is not mentioned so adding "in the assembly" or "behind the pulpit" are both radical insertions into the text that do more than put a spin on it; they are violent attempts to wrest away authorial intent and establish a pharisaical rule concerning women in the assembly that was never even and OT concept. (see Deborah, and Huldah for examples)
As to whether a woman has the gifts to preach and teach that question can only be answered the same way it would be answered in evaluating a man's gifts to preach or teach. You would have to listen to them.
If the woman is preaching and teaching better than most men you have heard, and especially with more skill at expository preaching of the scriptures producing educated saints as a result and if her preaching and teaching is empowered by the Holy Spirit so that people are listening with rapt attention and experience illumination and transformation by the word of God as a result. and if she is doing it better than any man in that church I would give her the pulpit and not let some erroneous interpretation that missed the mark of what Paul was saying cause those people to miss what God wanted to preach or teach through that woman. And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.
11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Many will "put a spin on things" when they say Paul was meaning that a woman cannot teach in the pulpit. It is impossible for Paul to mean that since pulpits had not been invented and it would not have entered the mind of Paul, nor the mind of his readers. Therefore cultural context of the time in which it was written (a rule of hermeneutics) rules out "pulpit" interpretation and we must find another solution rather than "putting this spin" on it. We must concede that he did not mean pulpit or we are not being honest.
Reading 1 Peter 3 we have an example where something similar is said about "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection."
1 Pet 3
1Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 2While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. 3Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 4But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. 5For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement
Comparing this with 1 Tim 2 it is impossible for the thinking reader to not notice the striking similarity in content and subject matter and it to dismiss the comparison is difficult for the honest truth seeker. It screams out for attention. Like big flashing lights 1 Peter 3:3 and 1 Tim 2:9 Scream "WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME SUBJECT"
1 Tim 2
9In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 10But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
When trying to determine what Paul meant when he wrote 1 Tim 2 concerning women being silent I find it most edifying to others who I discuss it with that ask them to first take a moment and read 1 Peter 3: 1-6 a few times, get them to tell me what that means to them, then Read 1 Tim 2:9-15 and when they do it this exercise it is not uncommon for them to react with an "Oh... I see" before we have even discussed it any further.
I think that he defines the meaning of this Greek word "hēsychia" the NIV says "quietness" The Interlinear says "quietness" the NAS says "A woman must quietly receive instructions:" The literal meaning of the Greek word is the objective, and I think many have exited the highway of the goal of authorial intent when they contend for the literal meaning of the English word silent.
But Paul defines his intended meaning of the word in the context of his sentence also (another rule of hermeneutics), "1 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. " The context of the sentence describes and attitude of submission and a receptive spirit therefore the quietness part would be that of not arguing rather than that of her location when she is doing it. There is nothing in these statements that identify the location (assembly or otherwise) and therefore saying that Paul is talking about the assembly is an assumption that cannot be supported by the words or the sentence structure itself. Insisting that he meant assembly is putting a "spin on it"
Paul also defines his meaning of the word "Teach" within the sentence when he says "or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." If we continue with the definition of quietness as not arguing with her husband (which is also supported by the context of the entire surrounding verses and our comparison with 1 Pet 3:1-6) we are on much safer ground hermeneutically to define "Teach" as in "correcting her Husband" instead of submitting to his authority, which is quiet a different matter than a female preaching the bible from the pulpit isn't it?
And location is not mentioned so adding "in the assembly" or "behind the pulpit" are both radical insertions into the text that do more than put a spin on it; they are violent attempts to wrest away authorial intent and establish a pharisaical rule concerning women in the assembly that was never even and OT concept. (see Deborah, and Huldah for examples)
As to whether a woman has the gifts to preach and teach that question can only be answered the same way it would be answered in evaluating a man's gifts to preach or teach. You would have to listen to them.
If the woman is preaching and teaching better than most men you have heard, and especially with more skill at expository preaching of the scriptures producing educated saints as a result and if her preaching and teaching is empowered by the Holy Spirit so that people are listening with rapt attention and experience illumination and transformation by the word of God as a result. and if she is doing it better than any man in that church I would give her the pulpit and not let some erroneous interpretation that missed the mark of what Paul was saying cause those people to miss what God wanted to preach or teach through that woman. And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.
Your assesment is very subjective and does not have a place for what the scripture teaches. All over the world there are a lot of things done in the church that are good or very good but they do not fulfil the teaching of scripture. Without that you have nothing. Having an annointing and the life of the spirit in the words spoken is all that matters. You get those when you are following the teaching of scripture.
Several things are at play.
One thing is that the women of Paul's day were not educated. They were not allowed to go to the temple to learn. In fact it has been said that the men in that day considered a mule more than they did a woman.
Another thing is that in the church of that day, women would ask their husbands questions across the isles and that caused a lot of confusion so Paul was saying..."You women be silent in church and then ask your questions when you get home".
Paul also said in 1 Corth 14:34......"Women are are to speak in church". However, the whole 14th chapter's CONTEXT is speaking in tongues and then in verse 34......."Women are not to speak in church". Many Bible scholars take that to mean that women were being told NOT to speak IN TONGUES in church.
Personally......I do not know and I only posted this to have the conversation. Which ever the reason, the Scriptures IMO are clear and they say that it is a MAN who is to be the pastor of the church.
One thing is that the women of Paul's day were not educated. They were not allowed to go to the temple to learn. In fact it has been said that the men in that day considered a mule more than they did a woman.
Another thing is that in the church of that day, women would ask their husbands questions across the isles and that caused a lot of confusion so Paul was saying..."You women be silent in church and then ask your questions when you get home".
Paul also said in 1 Corth 14:34......"Women are are to speak in church". However, the whole 14th chapter's CONTEXT is speaking in tongues and then in verse 34......."Women are not to speak in church". Many Bible scholars take that to mean that women were being told NOT to speak IN TONGUES in church.
Personally......I do not know and I only posted this to have the conversation. Which ever the reason, the Scriptures IMO are clear and they say that it is a MAN who is to be the pastor of the church.
-
2
- Show all
i think Jesus advocated for women to play spiritual roles. The woman at the well who went on to testify to her village, Mary who proclaimed his resurrection to the male disciples is remarkable. Even in the old testament God often chose women to do important spiritual roles (Huldah). There are just too many examples to mention. The verses quoted here all relate to the later organisation of the church and how they saw fit to arrange it for their time not for all time. I've seen some very bad male preachers too
Anyway the bigger thing i recon is women getting broken by society and in need of a lot of healing more important than who is doing preaching work
Anyway the bigger thing i recon is women getting broken by society and in need of a lot of healing more important than who is doing preaching work
S
I think you get it.
God is pleased to see women and men filled with the Holy Spirit and prophesying and expounding on the Word of God empowered by the Spirit. "I would that all God's people were prophets and that he would pour out His Spirit on them all"
So what about this submission thing? The wife toward her husband. And sometimes that is going to be about teaching. She should not try to teach her husband something he does not agree with. She should not try to correct him. She should not try to usurp authority over him and teach something that he has told her not to teach. He is there to help her. She can be wrong sometimes. Something was going on at Ephesus that made Paul say this as instructions to Timothy for the church there. Maybe there were some women who were swept up by the false teachers and trying to repeat their teachings and their husbands needed to ask them not to and they were being told to listen to their husbands and allow his authority to be there scriptural reason for stop teaching these things even if they still thought they were true.
There are real life examples where the wife of the pastor is at odds with her husband and needs to submit and let him be the lead pastor and not try to be the lead pastor herself just because she is his wife. Sometimes a wife who does teach can attempt to take on more authority than has been given to her by others.
God is pleased to see women and men filled with the Holy Spirit and prophesying and expounding on the Word of God empowered by the Spirit. "I would that all God's people were prophets and that he would pour out His Spirit on them all"
So what about this submission thing? The wife toward her husband. And sometimes that is going to be about teaching. She should not try to teach her husband something he does not agree with. She should not try to correct him. She should not try to usurp authority over him and teach something that he has told her not to teach. He is there to help her. She can be wrong sometimes. Something was going on at Ephesus that made Paul say this as instructions to Timothy for the church there. Maybe there were some women who were swept up by the false teachers and trying to repeat their teachings and their husbands needed to ask them not to and they were being told to listen to their husbands and allow his authority to be there scriptural reason for stop teaching these things even if they still thought they were true.
There are real life examples where the wife of the pastor is at odds with her husband and needs to submit and let him be the lead pastor and not try to be the lead pastor herself just because she is his wife. Sometimes a wife who does teach can attempt to take on more authority than has been given to her by others.
Thanks Scribe i'm quite primitive/still learning and make a lot of mistakes
i actually reflected on this and in the end i think maybe God likes some people to resist change and be very strictly legalistic even if it's going too far. why? because they try and stop things going completely wild and out of control which is too far the other way. somewhere in the middle is that right balance. so he uses both types of people maybe is my hunch and they sort of need each other. problem comes when one group thinks they're completely right and the other completely wrong, hey a bit like relationships. the man sure has to be strong
i actually reflected on this and in the end i think maybe God likes some people to resist change and be very strictly legalistic even if it's going too far. why? because they try and stop things going completely wild and out of control which is too far the other way. somewhere in the middle is that right balance. so he uses both types of people maybe is my hunch and they sort of need each other. problem comes when one group thinks they're completely right and the other completely wrong, hey a bit like relationships. the man sure has to be strong
-
1
- Show all
“the Man (Husband) being held as the responsible party.”
I think that he’s speaking from the curse and not the blessing
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”
Genesis 1:27-28
That’s before transgression then this happens which is Paul’s argument for why women are subject to men
“And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.”
Genesis 3:4-7 KJV
then this is the result of sin
“And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;”
Genesis 3:12-13, 16-17
I tend to see the serpent , the woman and the man being held responsible for their parts in the transgression . Which I believe reflects God who holds each person to account only for what they have done themselves. Male or female is my own belief
I think that Paul’s point is regarding ministry specifically , Eve essentially became the first false prophet . Echoing the lie that was opposed to Gods true word .
If you see how it was before they sinned and after a person is baptized and sin is remitted I think you see the difference in women being subject to
Men as a punishment for their transgression from the beginning , part of the curse for sin
but the gospel is about our sins being forgiven and remitted , the sins as scarlet being made white as snow , so I think once a person is in Christ it’s about the blessing , and no longer the curse for sin
“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Galatians 3:26-29
I think when oaul
Specifically includes gender indifference in this statement where he makes elsewhere also , we have to consider the beginning before man became sinners and received the curse in genesis three which included death , expulsion from Eden , no more access to the tree of life , women’s increased pains of childbearing , women’s subjegation to men , men’s responsibility of labor and toil to equal women’s labor and birthing pains
not to mention the serpent at all . Just regarding male and female in Christ it sounds like this
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion...
Genesis 1:27-28
that’s what Paul is saying also is my point it’s different in Christ likenbefore sin there’s no separation of Jew and gentile like after , no authoritative order of male and female like afterwards because Adam and Eve were children of God they were both subject to his authority there was no need for intercession or Mediation he spoke with them not by priesthood but in relationship
“ For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
I think Paul’s point is referring ministry specifically his point being ot went wrong when Eve was deceived and then spread the deception to Adam , so therefore Paul’s argument is “ let the woman remain silent in church and learn in submission at home from her husband “
I think we would have to say that women can’t receive the Holy Ghost , or be chosen by God in order to think subjection is still about flesh and blood or gender or race .
I don’t think that’s true I believe God is looking past the flesh and at the individual person at the soul
And heart of us how we treat others not gender and race and ritual observations but brotherly love in faith
I think each individual is gong to be held to account only for their own deeds in Christ and not others whether male or
Female
but marriage also changes things . From that of singles
I think that he’s speaking from the curse and not the blessing
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”
Genesis 1:27-28
That’s before transgression then this happens which is Paul’s argument for why women are subject to men
“And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.”
Genesis 3:4-7 KJV
then this is the result of sin
“And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;”
Genesis 3:12-13, 16-17
I tend to see the serpent , the woman and the man being held responsible for their parts in the transgression . Which I believe reflects God who holds each person to account only for what they have done themselves. Male or female is my own belief
I think that Paul’s point is regarding ministry specifically , Eve essentially became the first false prophet . Echoing the lie that was opposed to Gods true word .
If you see how it was before they sinned and after a person is baptized and sin is remitted I think you see the difference in women being subject to
Men as a punishment for their transgression from the beginning , part of the curse for sin
but the gospel is about our sins being forgiven and remitted , the sins as scarlet being made white as snow , so I think once a person is in Christ it’s about the blessing , and no longer the curse for sin
“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Galatians 3:26-29
I think when oaul
Specifically includes gender indifference in this statement where he makes elsewhere also , we have to consider the beginning before man became sinners and received the curse in genesis three which included death , expulsion from Eden , no more access to the tree of life , women’s increased pains of childbearing , women’s subjegation to men , men’s responsibility of labor and toil to equal women’s labor and birthing pains
not to mention the serpent at all . Just regarding male and female in Christ it sounds like this
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion...
Genesis 1:27-28
that’s what Paul is saying also is my point it’s different in Christ likenbefore sin there’s no separation of Jew and gentile like after , no authoritative order of male and female like afterwards because Adam and Eve were children of God they were both subject to his authority there was no need for intercession or Mediation he spoke with them not by priesthood but in relationship
“ For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
I think Paul’s point is referring ministry specifically his point being ot went wrong when Eve was deceived and then spread the deception to Adam , so therefore Paul’s argument is “ let the woman remain silent in church and learn in submission at home from her husband “
I think we would have to say that women can’t receive the Holy Ghost , or be chosen by God in order to think subjection is still about flesh and blood or gender or race .
I don’t think that’s true I believe God is looking past the flesh and at the individual person at the soul
And heart of us how we treat others not gender and race and ritual observations but brotherly love in faith
I think each individual is gong to be held to account only for their own deeds in Christ and not others whether male or
Female
but marriage also changes things . From that of singles