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.
-
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.
I'm sure that this is true and that an unmarried man, or even married man is to submit to Christ and His word as well. Why do you believe that there is a distinction between how a woman submits to the Lord verses how a man submits to the Lord.
Seems to me, based on my understanding of scripture, that what is true for the man must also be true for the woman as God makes no distinction between male and female, rich or poor, slave or free according to the writing of Paul.
If it were allowed by God for a woman to preach and be placed in other positons of leadership and authority but left up to man to decide to allow these things, would you be in favor of a woman being allowed to preach or placed in a position of leadership or authority.
I ask all the men this same question. If allowed by God but left up to you to decide what would be your decision. Allow or refuse to allow.
I would allow.
Seems to me, based on my understanding of scripture, that what is true for the man must also be true for the woman as God makes no distinction between male and female, rich or poor, slave or free according to the writing of Paul.
If it were allowed by God for a woman to preach and be placed in other positons of leadership and authority but left up to man to decide to allow these things, would you be in favor of a woman being allowed to preach or placed in a position of leadership or authority.
I ask all the men this same question. If allowed by God but left up to you to decide what would be your decision. Allow or refuse to allow.
I would allow.
Spiritually in Christ, there is no distinction made, but here on earth, the Lord has given us order and distinctions are made. If what you are trying to state is true, then what's wrong with gay marriage?
There are certainly husbands and wives in the churches here on earth. There are certainly males and females in the churches here on earth.
If God's word has allowed it? Absolutely! Are we not to submit authority to God's word? It's not a degrading of women issue. It's an obedience issue.
There are certainly husbands and wives in the churches here on earth. There are certainly males and females in the churches here on earth.
If God's word has allowed it? Absolutely! Are we not to submit authority to God's word? It's not a degrading of women issue. It's an obedience issue.
There is a dispute among scholars if 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 are even authentic. It appears that those verses appear after verse 40 in about half of the western manuscripts. That arrangement really makes verses 29-33 flow better together with verses 36-40. The reason some think that those verses are not Paul's is because they appear in two different places, which suggests to them that they were written in the margin and added later.
link > The Textual Problem of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35
link > The Textual Problem of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35
Scripture, even the KJV, does not say anywhere that a woman may not be a pastor.
Scripture, even the KJV, does not say anywhere that a woman may not preach in the church/assembly.
The conflation of terms only causes confusion and unnecessary disagreement.
The Greek term "episkopos" (tr. "bishop" or "elder") is not the same word as "poimen" (shepherd/pastor). "Preach" is another word again (Which I don't know offhand).
If all "anti-females-as-preachers" people would carefully avoid conflation in their statements, we might get somewhere.
And, once again, John146, Genesis 3 DOES NOT SAY "the woman is subject unto the husband". You accuse other translations of corrupting the word... sheesh! It says that God said to the woman "... but he shall rule over you." It's a statement of consequence, not a command to be in subjection! Look at the context and tell me you believe God commanded that women "must" suffer in childbirth, or that men "must" sweat from the face when producing food, and "must" eat their food in sorrow? I certainly hope not.
Scripture, even the KJV, does not say anywhere that a woman may not preach in the church/assembly.
The conflation of terms only causes confusion and unnecessary disagreement.
The Greek term "episkopos" (tr. "bishop" or "elder") is not the same word as "poimen" (shepherd/pastor). "Preach" is another word again (Which I don't know offhand).
If all "anti-females-as-preachers" people would carefully avoid conflation in their statements, we might get somewhere.
And, once again, John146, Genesis 3 DOES NOT SAY "the woman is subject unto the husband". You accuse other translations of corrupting the word... sheesh! It says that God said to the woman "... but he shall rule over you." It's a statement of consequence, not a command to be in subjection! Look at the context and tell me you believe God commanded that women "must" suffer in childbirth, or that men "must" sweat from the face when producing food, and "must" eat their food in sorrow? I certainly hope not.
7
that would be interesting
even without it, on the copy/pastes I did, the remark is made by the author that Paul was telling more than women to clam up
there were all those noisy and out of order people abusing tongues
there are many sounding gongs in churches and in this forum from time to time too
as it is, ripping that section our of context and wielding it like a club does no service to anyone
even without it, on the copy/pastes I did, the remark is made by the author that Paul was telling more than women to clam up
there were all those noisy and out of order people abusing tongues
there are many sounding gongs in churches and in this forum from time to time too
as it is, ripping that section our of context and wielding it like a club does no service to anyone
that would be interesting
even without it, on the copy/pastes I did, the remark is made by the author that Paul was telling more than women to clam up
there were all those noisy and out of order people abusing tongues
there are many sounding gongs in churches and in this forum from time to time too
as it is, ripping that section our of context and wielding it like a club does no service to anyone
even without it, on the copy/pastes I did, the remark is made by the author that Paul was telling more than women to clam up
there were all those noisy and out of order people abusing tongues
there are many sounding gongs in churches and in this forum from time to time too
as it is, ripping that section our of context and wielding it like a club does no service to anyone
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.
L
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.
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.
L
You are free to possess whatever opinion you like, Ms. Depleted. For me to be trained poorly in the word, then you must be saying the Bible is wrong because it is those very words I have been referring to and following all along. At the very same time you accuse someone else of "judging", you are proving yourself to be the one doing the real judging.
