Woman should not teach or assume authority over men (applies to secular????)

[tucksma]

It's the same way you listen to your pastor now. You are quiet while he speaks. You learn in silence. In an informal setting it is fine to ask questions, and it's fine to disagree, but while being taught, learn in silence.

Honestly that's just a respect thing though. I would say that to both a man or women, that when being taught be quiet and listen. Its purely respect to the teacher.

 

[Sophia]

I think the Word is pretty clear.
Women are supposed to be meek.
Not weak, but meek. Meek means having strength under control. Like a tame horse: it is powerful, much stronger than it's jockey, but obedient.

If a woman is asserting her authority over a man, her age or older, then she is over-stepping her role.

I don't care what other women think, I know that this works, because I know what I want out of a man.
I don't want a wimp, so I don't treat men like wimps. I resent women who treat men like wimps, because they are ruining my chances at getting a decent guy.

 

[Misty77]

The point he was trying to get at was that this verse isn't support for authority. This verse is saying what you must be before coming to christ which is nothing, for everyone is equal when coming to him. That doesn't have anything with authority.

Also I am not condemning barak at all, merely saying he slipped up, and Deborah took over. I by no means was condemning him, but in that specific situation, he wasn't "up to par" which made it so a women was aloud to take over.

Pasturing is included in authority which is why I keep bringing it up. Also I do understand what you are saying about our pastors getting it from there pastor and so on but Paul didn't get it from a Pastor, he got it from God. What my point was that you are saying men have no authority over women, but 1 Tim 2 is devoted to it. So to say that that whole book doesn't apply to us, would mean it shouldn't even be in the bible because it doesn't pertain to anyone other than these people. Clearly it was in the bible, so clearly it applies to us. There is no understanding to gain from 1 tim 2 if the point isn't to us. In fact if the bible teaches that men do have no authority over women as you say, then what Paul did was go against the bible in this letter.

Nothing in the Bible says that he messed up or failed to be up to par. The only inference is that he said he would only go to battle if Deborah would go with him. She was the judge, so it was appropriate. He was showing her honor. Modern men have decided that Barak was in error, or somewhat less of a man, not God.

In I Timothy 5:14, Paul tells the women to rule (KJV mistranslates to "guide") the home. The word there is oikodespoteo which means to be master (head) or ruler of a house. It's where we get our word "despot." That is actual a much stronger word than is used in I Timothy 3:4 for bishops to rule their home. That word is proistemi which is one who is in charge in a providing or care-taking role.

I have not said that there is no basis for male leadership in the home, just that it is not to the extent that you interpret it. Men as a gender are not rulers of women as a gender. If you notice, the instructions are not emphasizing who is to keep whom under control (danger!!), but they specify how we are to each yield our selfish desires to fulfill God's will in our lives. Women are to yield their will, and men are to yield their lives (Eph. 5:22-33). That is how it is supposed to work.

 

[Sophia]

Nothing in the Bible says that he messed up or failed to be up to par. The only inference is that he said he would only go to battle if Deborah would go with him. She was the judge, so it was appropriate. He was showing her honor. Modern men have decided that Barak was in error, or somewhat less of a man, not God.

In I Timothy 5:14, Paul tells the women to rule (KJV mistranslates to "guide") the home. The word there is oikodespoteo which means to be master (head) or ruler of a house. It's where we get our word "despot." That is actual a much stronger word than is used in I Timothy 3:4 for bishops to rule their home. That word is proistemi which is one who is in charge in a providing or care-taking role.

I have not said that there is no basis for male leadership in the home, just that it is not to the extent that you interpret it. Men as a gender are not rulers of women as a gender. If you notice, the instructions are not emphasizing who is to keep whom under control (danger!!), but they specify how we are to each yield our selfish desires to fulfill God's will in our lives. Women are to yield their will, and men are to yield their lives (Eph. 5:22-33). That is how it is supposed to work.

full disagreement.

if you want to run stuff, it's just going to cause you more trouble down the line.
Biblical wisdom says submit. Why rebel against that wisdom?

 

[Misty77]

I think the Word is pretty clear.
Women are supposed to be meek.
Not weak, but meek. Meek mean having strength under control. Like a tame horse: it is powerful, much stronger than it's jockey, but obedient.

If a woman is asserting her authority over a man, her age or older, then she is over-stepping her role.

I don't care what other women think, I know that this works, because I know what I want out of a man.
I don't want a wimp, so I don't treat men like wimps. I resent women who treat men like wimps, because they are ruining my chances at getting a decent guy.

A woman being bold in her faith doesn't emasculate men. One gender is not elevated at the expense of another. We are joint-heirs and co-laborers for Christ. We can be confident without being condescending.

There are Biblical examples which I have already listed earlier in the thread regarding ordained female leadership.

In the workplace (the primary goal of this thread), there are many times that women are in authority over men. And it is entirely appropriate.

 

[Sophia]

A woman being bold in her faith doesn't emasculate men. One gender is not elevated at the expense of another. We are joint-heirs and co-laborers for Christ. We can be confident without being condescending.

There are Biblical examples which I have already listed earlier in the thread regarding ordained female leadership.

In the workplace (the primary goal of this thread), there are many times that women are in authority over men. And it is entirely appropriate.

i have been struggling with this for 6 years. I am confident that women in the workforce is at least 50% of why divorce rates are where they are at.

I know what we've been told. I think we've been lied to about what equality is.

Being submissive, like I said before, is not weakness or inequality.
If you think being meek is less valuable, then Christ was without value.

being joint heirs doesn't mean having the same role today.
there will be neither male nor female in heaven, but for today, we must follow our place in life, in the role we've been given, with the gifts we've been given.

 

[Misty77]

full disagreement.

if you want to run stuff, it's just going to cause you more trouble down the line.
Biblical wisdom says submit. Why rebel against that wisdom?

You are welcome to disagree. But it would help for discussion if you gave specific reasons for your disagreement or counterarguments for why my points were wrong.

I never said that I wanted to run anything, and I even talked about submission at the end of the post. I use the word "yield" because "submit" can be misinterpreted as "subjugation." I find it easier to use terms that both sides of the discussion can agree on.

 

[Misty77]

i have been struggling with this for 6 years. I am confident that women in the workforce is at least 50% of why divorce rates are where they are at.

I know what we've been told. I think we've been lied to about what equality is.

Being submissive, like I said before, is not weakness or inequality.
If you think being meek is less valuable, then Christ was without value.

I have no disagreements with meekness.

Lydia, the valorous woman, Ruth, Priscilla, and Phoebe are women in the Bible who worked. And with it being an agrarian society, the SAHMs worked very hard just to provided dinner, make clothing, and fetch water. SAHM today does not mean what it did then.

 

[Sophia]

i misunderstood what you were saying. I think we agree.

 

[tucksma]

Nothing in the Bible says that he messed up or failed to be up to par. The only inference is that he said he would only go to battle if Deborah would go with him. She was the judge, so it was appropriate. He was showing her honor. Modern men have decided that Barak was in error, or somewhat less of a man, not God.

In I Timothy 5:14, Paul tells the women to rule (KJV mistranslates to "guide") the home. The word there is oikodespoteo which means to be master (head) or ruler of a house. It's where we get our word "despot." That is actual a much stronger word than is used in I Timothy 3:4 for bishops to rule their home. That word is proistemi which is one who is in charge in a providing or care-taking role.

I have not said that there is no basis for male leadership in the home, just that it is not to the extent that you interpret it. Men as a gender are not rulers of women as a gender. If you notice, the instructions are not emphasizing who is to keep whom under control (danger!!), but they specify how we are to each yield our selfish desires to fulfill God's will in our lives. Women are to yield their will, and men are to yield their lives (Eph. 5:22-33). That is how it is supposed to work.

The evidence for him messing up is him saying he wouldn't go if she didn't. That's not what he should of done, rather go to war no matter what because that is what God wanted him to do. In that aspect you can say he slipped up. It'd be different if he said "I'd like you to go with me" but he didn't he wouldn't have done his job if she didn't go. In that aspect, there is evidence.

With 1 Tim 5: 14 I would like to say a few things.
1. that word is used once in scripture so it is hard to tell the meaning.
2. One definition is to manage the house, not to head it so it's hard to say which goes here or just how strong it is considering it comes up once.
3. Women can guide the house while being in subjection. I am not saying that the man gets to think on his own, control his wife, and all that. I am saying that a man has authority so in the end he makes the decision. In making the decisions he must talk to his wife, and take her words into high consideration (thus the wife is guiding the home). Basically the man makes the decision and the wife keeps the man in check, making sure his decision making is Godly focused. Not once have I said women are to be controlled. Also your view of equal seems to be impaired. This is an equal relationship! They are equal to Christ, and, if done right, leads to a very beautiful relationship. Equal does not mean equal opportunity rather equal in the eyes of God, which both genders are.

 

[Misty77]

The evidence for him messing up is him saying he wouldn't go if she didn't. That's not what he should of done, rather go to war no matter what because that is what God wanted him to do. In that aspect you can say he slipped up. It'd be different if he said "I'd like you to go with me" but he didn't he wouldn't have done his job if she didn't go. In that aspect, there is evidence.

With 1 Tim 5: 14 I would like to say a few things.
1. that word is used once in scripture so it is hard to tell the meaning.
2. One definition is to manage the house, not to head it so it's hard to say which goes here or just how strong it is considering it comes up once.
3. Women can guide the house while being in subjection. I am not saying that the man gets to think on his own, control his wife, and all that. I am saying that a man has authority so in the end he makes the decision. In making the decisions he must talk to his wife, and take her words into high consideration (thus the wife is guiding the home). Basically the man makes the decision and the wife keeps the man in check, making sure his decision making is Godly focused. Not once have I said women are to be controlled. Also your view of equal seems to be impaired. This is an equal relationship! They are equal to Christ, and, if done right, leads to a very beautiful relationship. Equal does not mean equal opportunity rather equal in the eyes of God, which both genders are.

I think our area of disagreement may largely be in semantics. =)

 

[AmberGardner]

Wisdom HERSELF preaches and has female apostles.

Proverbs 1:20 Out in the open wisdom calls aloud, she raises her voice in the public square; 21 on top of the wall she cries out, at the city gate she makes her speech:

Proverbs 9:3 She has sent out her young women to call from the highest places in the town,
4 “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!” To him who lacks sense she says, 5 "Come, eat of my food And drink of the wine I have mixed. 6 "Forsake your folly and live, And proceed in the way of understanding."

Ever heard of Sheerah? She built cities. Important cities.

1 Chronicles 7:24 His daughter was Sheerah, who built Lower and Upper Beth Horon as well as Uzzen Sheerah.



However, a wife is to obey her husband as unto Christ.

Ephesians 5:24 As the church submits to Christ, so you wives should submit to your husbands in everything.

 

[Victoria72]

To all the women who are contributing to this blog: Why? Why are you contributing to it? Some of the verses that religious leaders use to place a stranglehold on women can be found in Timothy and Titus. Furthermore, some of the NT books have interpolations. Who wrote these 14 books? Paul supposedly wrote them. Now please do some research and google: did Paul really write all of the 14 NT books attributed to him? Read a few articles and make sure they are either neutral (Wikipedia) or from a Christian source. You will be surprised that it is questionable that he wrote them all; especially the ones that oppress women! Why argue with the men or even the women that accept this oppression? It's not worth it. Jesus said: Matthew 10:5-15......"These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans, But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as you go, preach, saying, Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper in your money belts, nor bag for your journey, nor two tunics, nor sandals, nor staffs; for a worker is worthy of his food. "Now, whatever city or town you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and stay there till you go out. And when you go into a household, greet it. If the household is worthy, let your peace come upon it. But if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. And whoever will not receive you nor that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet". Notice how Jesus said "to the house of Israel" which I interpret as the Jewish people. If you compare that to today's standards, it is our own fellow Christians. Again, this is how I interpret it.

I'm done arguing with fellow Christians that have no problem oppressing me because I'm a woman. I asked to have my profile deleted from this site but for some mysterious reason, my profile has yet to be deleted. Therefore, until someone deletes my profile (more than likely, I will get banned first). I'm going to continue to defend women because that is what Jesus did. I would rather listen to Jesus than a bunch of modern day Pharisees AND I'm going to find a site that embraces ALL PEOPLE'S opinions.

 

[tucksma]

Victoria we haven't once said women should be oppressed. We are reading the bible and showing that the bible teaches that men have authority over women, not in that they can whip them around, but that the men (mainly in the church and in the family) make the final decision. This is shown in example throughout the whole bible, not just Paul's letter's. Paul is the only one to say it bluntly. Women have a giant pull on what the "final decision" will be, if the man respects her like the bible says he is to do. Also preaching and pasturing are different. One leads a church, one can be done to anyone. We aren't attacking women. Also we are looking at your opinion but in the end either you are right, I am right, or neither of us are. Because we have posing views we can't both be right. To embrace every view as truth is unbiblical.

 

[phil112]

I would rather listen to Jesus than a bunch of modern day Pharisees AND I'm going to find a site that embraces ALL PEOPLE'S opinions.

Paul listened to Jesus. That is who taught him what to say. Only modern day bible "scholars" want to believe Paul didn't write those books. Why? Because Paul was told by Jesus to pass the word along that walking in the flesh is no way to please God. And walking in the flesh is exactly what you and others that dismiss Paul's teachings want to do.

catholic: 1. Of broad or liberal scope; comprehensive
2. Including or concerning all humankind; universal
Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

I know Christ and others here would prefer you remain a christian, but if you must follow the world, then go.

 

[GreenNnice]

Originally Posted by GreenNnice

Prophesying is not 'preaching,' or, 'teaching,' at least, that's what those against women being called by God to pastor or teach in a church would tell you, cjord.

Prophesying does not teach a woman anything. Prophesying, or, a woman telling a man of things to come in life does not make her have authority over a man.

cjordan: That's a good question, but, truthfully, that's not an argument to me, it's arguing something that's, really, with too much gray area.

If you read you will see I put preach the Word slso....And who said im trying to argue.... You never argue about the Word just tell it and keep moving...now whoever is mad that a woman can be a pastor and can teach and can preach then take it up with God...I know the truth.... Its funny how people say they have the Holy Spirit and know God yet he hasnt revealed to the a woman of God....And to get something across I know that a woman can be a pastor, teacher, evangelist, prophet, and apostle. ... Here is proof....Question: Who are the people of God? Answer: Many are called, but few are chosen. The ones chosen to do a work in the 5 fold ministry are people of God. Everybody else was called into the body of Christ....So tell me if many are called and few are chosen, the ones who dont believe women can be leaders are saying that thoses few called are only men? Not so because then you call God a liar....He said whosoever will let him come...And if you must know sir if a man is a bishop and a woman is a prophet she is over him due to her calling...A bishop was never called in the 5 fold ministry....Hopefully these non believers will seek to get closer to God....Is anything too hard for God?

You are preaching to the choir, I agree, if you have a problem with women teaching and preaching to men today, take it up with God. I'm CERTAIN that men ARE to be in authority over women the majority of the time in a church setting, but, NOT always. God's ways are not our ways and His thoughts are higher than our thoughts.

When there is a woman who is pastoring a church, then, see what fruit that church is producing, and, if it is doing good things through HER leadership, then, that's God's call on her life, as i see it. Why do we have to prune the tree, that's God's job, not ours. Quit judging sisters in Christ who've been called to pastor, for a myriad of reasons, of which we don't know, like no men is willing to stand up and be that kind of speaker or she is with experiences in missionary field, etc. that God wants to use in that 'great' role of pastor.

But, as a rule, it's not perfect for a woman to pastor a church, or, teach, even, but, can they, sure, they can, the Lord leads us all individually in life. I understand that man willfully disobeying what they knew was right, a.k.a. Adam in the garden of Eden taking the fruit from Eve, but, the ability to be deceived, well, that carries with it MUCH more ramifications of evil, at least, Paul said so, relating that Eve 'transgressed,' not Adam, in the garden.

 

[homwardbound]

One in Christ.........And to be one in Christ what must we be? Christ is no longer on earth is He? So that means He is a spirit doesn't it? When we are told to walk in the spirit and not the flesh, it doesn't mean literally. You can't do that literally . It is physically impossible for a man to be a spirit while alive in a fleshly body.
We are exhorted to have the mind of Christ. Why? Because we can't be like Him physically until we are translated.
There is no gender in heaven, in the spirit world. There most certainly is in the fleshly world. For you to apply that verse to those of us that are physically walking in the flesh is a distortion of scripture.
How ridiculous it applying that scripture to us now? How many pregnant men have you seen lately.

As long as we live on this planet there will be man and woman.

As long as one does not reckon themselves dead to the flesh through the death of Christ at the cross, there is no life.
since you do not believe you are dead to sinful flesh by Christ here and now, you will still be controlled by your flesh and still sin as you still do

Romans 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the
Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

consider self dead to law flesh and be freed to walk as Christ walked in the Spirit of God
Philippians 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.

If you believe you are dead as it states in romans 6:1-11 by baptism (Holy Ghost) if then are dead to sin and alive to God in the Spirit of God period
"it is what it is"

 

[homwardbound]

Perhaps I shall apologize to the German people for my past support of the Anne Frank House Museum in Amsterdam...

I am of German descent on you have not offended me

 

[tucksma]

As long as one does not reckon themselves dead to the flesh through the death of Christ at the cross, there is no life.
since you do not believe you are dead to sinful flesh by Christ here and now, you will still be controlled by your flesh and still sin as you still do

Romans 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the
Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

consider self dead to law flesh and be freed to walk as Christ walked in the Spirit of God
Philippians 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.

If you believe you are dead as it states in romans 6:1-11 by baptism (Holy Ghost) if then are dead to sin and alive to God in the Spirit of God period
"it is what it is"

"all things through christ" doesn't literally mean ALL things. If it did then I can sin through Christ who strengtheneth me. The all there just means anything that is for God, and God has an order of men and women.

 

[homwardbound]

It should be translated as "WIFE" and "HUSBAND", not woman and man.

It should read:

1 Timothy 2:11 A WIFE should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a WIFE to teach or to assume authority over her HUSBAND; she must be quiet.


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...1332747373047.46138.1661930167&type=3&theater

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...1332747373047.46138.1661930167&type=3&theater

And he must treat her the same as God treats him, seeing through Son as Forgiven, so the Husband will not force the wife ever as God has not forced anyone to believe.