Women should not be allowed to preach in church

[Depleted]

A brilliant man is not described in the Bible as being a flexible man ... He is a man described as one who follows the exact laws of God ... The Bible clearly states women are NOT to preach in church ... In fact, the Bible clearly states women are to be silent in church and to never exercise ANY authority over a man ... God has set man to be the ruler ... There are beautiful and Godly women and then there are the feminists that pretend to be Godly ... In the United States there are many more of the latter as opposed to the former ... Now Angela, you are free to jump all over these truths just as you have attacked many other truths ... I doubt you can resist ...

Joefizz, this is as clear an example of nothing-but-eisgesing as it gets.
1. The Bible never says anyone, apart from Jesus, followed the exact laws of God.
2. It does describe a brilliant man, but nothing about flexibility. All about wisdom comes from fear/reverence for the Lord.
3. The Bible doesn't even talk about "in church." It does talk about authority over men.
4. It does talk about women being silent, but it is particular on when we are to be silent. (And this thread certainly teaches when some men should be silent too. My own personal brand of eisegesis there. lol)
5. It most certainly does say woman have authority over men. It's particular an authority as teaching. (Titus 2 again.)
6. It never says God set men as rulers.
7. He's so busy patting himself on the back for his brilliant eisegesis, he doesn't even notice Angela isn't American, yet blames her for that and being a feminist with equal (lack of) authority.
8. And then blahblahblah opinion out the yin and the yang to prop up the personalized teachings that have absolutely nothing to do with what the Bible says.

Great example on why eisegesis is dumb!

 

[Icetech]

I think the only thing debatable at this point is whether you have the mind of God on ANYTHING that you could share with us or if all you have is dead letter.

[FONT=&quot]For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Romans 11:34

Give specific examples and i will be more than happy to clarify my words and if they disagree with what the Bibles states in plain English then I will repent and admit my error on this thread.

[/FONT]

 

[Depleted]

Wrong Angela ... When Paul wrote "a woman" it is clear that he meant "all women" ... If he was only speaking about one woman then he would have named her or said "this woman" or "that woman" ... Also, later scripture states that a woman is to have NO authority over a man ... It is extremely clear that these references were to "all women" as no single woman was ever named in these verses ... Now you can twist the verses any which way you like to satisfy your own desire, but it is very clear the verses are referring to "all women" ... Yes, even the feminists are included ... I know that is very hard for you to accept, but it is the truth ... You wanted people to take the time to read your post, so I read it ... And it is nonsense ... You know exactly what God has said, you just don't wish to go by it ...

Likewise, You know exactly what God has said, you just don't wish to go by it. Loud and clear from your last post. No need for repeat examples.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Romans 11:34

Give specific examples and i will be more than happy to clarify my words and if they disagree with what the Bibles states in plain English then I will repent and admit my error on this thread.

Um...no, i'm not going to help you continue like this.
We're sick to death of arguments over dead letter.
We want the mind of God on all matters, not futile arguments.

 

[Dino246]

I do not deny it. Those quoted verses must be understood in their correct context which is part of the discussion.

This is rich... you insist on these verses being taken in their plain out-of-context meaning, and now you argue that they must be understood in their correct context? Which is it?

The correct context of 1 Timothy 2 includes the cultural and religious context. Do you deny this?

The correct context of 1 Corinthians 14 includes the alleged "law" that "so sayeth" yet there is no law to that effect in the OT. Your claim that it refers to Genesis 3 is laughable at best.

 

[joefizz]

Joefizz, this is as clear an example of nothing-but-eisgesing as it gets.
1. The Bible never says anyone, apart from Jesus, followed the exact laws of God.
2. It does describe a brilliant man, but nothing about flexibility. All about wisdom comes from fear/reverence for the Lord.
3. The Bible doesn't even talk about "in church." It does talk about authority over men.
4. It does talk about women being silent, but it is particular on when we are to be silent. (And this thread certainly teaches when some men should be silent too. My own personal brand of eisegesis there. lol)
5. It most certainly does say woman have authority over men. It's particular an authority as teaching. (Titus 2 again.)
6. It never says God set men as rulers.
7. He's so busy patting himself on the back for his brilliant eisegesis, he doesn't even notice Angela isn't American, yet blames her for that and being a feminist with equal (lack of) authority.
8. And then blahblahblah opinion out the yin and the yang to prop up the personalized teachings that have absolutely nothing to do with what the Bible says.

Great example on why eisegesis is dumb!

Ok I'm beginning to understand better it seems similar to a "rant" while stating such words as "clearly" or the like,insisting that the bible is rather "plain" which of course is not always the case I have heard more than I care to withstand of such things.

 

[Depleted]

Paul says that he doesn't permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man but he doesn't say that God doesn't permit. It is obvious that Paul is offering his own spiritual perception and what he offered must be taken as his own personal opinion. That does not mean that what he says should not be considered, only that what he says is not necessarily spiritually conclusive and therefore binding by God.

1 Timothy 2:12

And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.​

Actually, if it's in the Bible, it was inspired by God, so it is what God said, not just what Paul said.

That said, it does help to understand who Paul was talking to. Corinthians! And Timothy, the guy who went back to the Greek churches. These people were a mess. They had grown up in the Greek culture, and had worshiped a whole bunch of Greek gods before the Lord chose them. Imagine starting a church in a Sharia Law country. Even after the people are saved, there is a whole bunch of stuff they grew up doing, and haven't yet always figured out it is a bad idea.

And then there are stuff we just naturally do without thinking, that probably isn't such a good idea when we're gathered together to worship. For instance, I am woman, thus I like to talk. Had I not been taught to shut up during service, I really would turn to hubby and start asking him questions when I didn't understand what the preacher meant in his sermon. That's my nature. I just had to be told not to act on my nature somewhere along the way.

Strangely enough, I don't believe a woman should be a pastor because of the "authority over men" issue. I've got absolutely no problems with trying to persuade you into my beliefs, but I draw the line over having authority over you. I just don't. And because of that, I don't think I should ever be a pastor. I just don't think I have authority over men my age or older men.

And, being a woman, I get hit a lot with men thinking they have authority over me, simply because "Me. Man. You. Woman" Neanderthal mind-melding that takes place within the church. So, I just won't do it because I know how stupid it is when men try it on me.

Angela and I disagree with this. But, even so, I don't like it when someone says Paul wasn't inspired in that one little place. Yes he was. He was talking to a group who needed to know God's way over cultural tradition, but it says something from God to all of us, because we're all stuck in cultural traditions. And we need to know when to hang that up in lieu of what God really did say.

 

[joefizz]

For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Romans 11:34

Give specific examples and i will be more than happy to clarify my words and if they disagree with what the Bibles states in plain English then I will repent and admit my error on this thread.

I get so tired of that word regarding God's word the bible,"plain" it's almost as if people think God/Jesus was so simple minded instead of wise.

 

[Icetech]

This is rich... you insist on these verses being taken in their plain out-of-context meaning

So says you! Present your evidence for this.

The correct context of 1 Timothy 2 includes the cultural and religious context. Do you deny this?

If you are referring to anything beyond or outside of what is written in the Bible then the answer is yes and I deny it whole heartily.

 

[Icetech]

I get so tired of that word regarding God's word the bible,"plain" it's almost as if people think God/Jesus was so simple minded instead of wise.

Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
2 Corinthians 3:12

In other words I am not interested all that much in the Greek as people much smarter than myself in several translations used the word "authority" in 1 Timothy 2:12.

 

[Depleted]

I don't have to. A quick check in a concordance proves that "teach" and "authority" are acceptable translations of 1 Timothy 2:12. I do not care what Angela53510 copies and pastes off of the internet. None of that has any "authority" over what the Bible says but it is the Bible that has all of the "authority." Who is Angela that I should listen to her?

διδασκω didasko {did-as'-ko} a prolonged (causative) form of a primary verb dao (to learn); TDNT - 2:135,161; v AV - teach 93, taught + 2258 4; 97 1) to teach 1a) to hold discourse with others in order to instruct them, deliver didactic discourses 1b) to be a teacher 1c) to discharge the office of a teacher, conduct one's self as a teacher 2) to teach one 2a) to impart instruction 2b) instill doctrine into one 2c) the thing taught or enjoined 2d) to explain or expound a thing 2f) to teach one something


αυθεντεω authenteo {ow-then-teh'-o} from a compound of 846 and an obsolete hentes (a worker);; v AV - usurp authority over 1; 1 1) one who with his own hands kills another or himself 2) one who acts on his own authority, autocratic 3) an absolute master 4) to govern, exercise dominion over one

Stongs

Yeah. No. Really doesn't work. (And, again, I don't think women should be pastors over men, so you can't be blaming me on the whole feminist nonsense, yet again.) Strong's did an amazing job in his concordance. BUT Strong's Concordance is specifically linked to the KJV, so his sources were the same sources the scholars who wrote the KJV had at that time. And those sources were very limited, considering it was the 16th century when they were checking out the sources. (17th century by the time the book was published.) Sort of like saying, Jerome was right to use the word "penance" (in Latin) instead of "repent," because he got that from the current issue of Translators Are Us.

It was the right translation for that time period, but the world has grown, earlier MSS have been found, translators can see the earliest MSS and translate from them, instead of translating from Bibles written 20 years before the concordance he's making.

What you're reading is a concordance that belongs with the small length and width of what was known in England in the late 1500s and early 1600s, and one specifically geared to the national Bible of the time.

If you're going to argue with Angela, just because you want to prove you can do a quicky google, you're going to have to try harder than that. You're going to have to learn the purpose of the concordance you're learning from.

 

[Icetech]

Um...no, i'm not going to help you continue like this.
We're sick to death of arguments over dead letter.
We want the mind of God on all matters, not futile arguments.

Futile arguments are mine and your words. What does the Bible say as your last several posts have been devoid of true wisdom which comes from the Bible.

 

[Depleted]

Really?


The 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] book of the Bible is Levitcus, did you forget that!



Pi is actually 3.141..... and not 3.145.......

These are recent posts by Angela so I probably could compile a massive list of mistakes since she is approaching 10000 posts. The point is people make simple honest mistakes so it is very disingenuous of her to use as a tool to attack ones competency.

A child having a hissy fit when told not to eat candy before dinner.

 

[Icetech]

A child having a hissy fit when told not to eat candy before dinner.

Go back and read Angela's posts in those threads and you will see a real hissy fit.

 

[joefizz]

Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
2 Corinthians 3:12

In other words I am not interested all that much in the Greek as people much smarter than myself in several translations used the word "authority" in 1 Timothy 2:12.

Well that was totally weird,I didn't post anything about Greek yet you presume that's what I was talking about,you clarify something to others by doing so.

 

[joefizz]

So says you! Present your evidence for this.



If you are referring to anything beyond or outside of what is written in the Bible then the answer is yes and I deny it whole heartily.

Ohhhhhhhh I see, you are one of those type people,"Bible only" no including culture,religious beliefs,or considering time periods.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Well Joe, you just gotta laugh sometimes.

 

[blue_ladybug]

You seriously need to stop disrespecting Angela....

Go back and read Angela's posts in those threads and you will see a real hissy fit.

 

[joefizz]

Well Joe, you just gotta laugh sometimes.

 

[tourist]

I'm 62. I can't pole pit at my age, even if I knew what that meant.

Whatever that event is sounds strenuous.