THE FIRST BLAST TO AWAKE WOMEN DEGENERATE

[Ethan1942]

"To promote a woman to bear rule, superiority, dominion, or empire above any realm, nation, or city, is repugnant to nature; contumely to God, a thing most contrarious to his revealed will and approved ordinance; and finally, it is the subversion of good order, of all equity and justice.

In proof of this proposition, I will not be so curious as to gather whatsoever may amplify, set forth, or embellish the same; but I am purposed, even as I have spoken my conscience in most plain and few words, so to stand content with a simple proof of every member, bringing in for my witness God's ordinance in nature, his plain will revealed in his word, and by the minds of such as be most ancient amongst godly writers." page 6, TheFirstBlastOfTheTrumpetAgainstTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen
https://archive.org/details/TheFirs...tTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen/page/n5/mode/2up

Those are the words of: "John Knox, (born c. 1514, near Haddington, East Lothian, Scot.—died Nov. 24, 1572, Edinburgh), Scottish clergyman, leader of the Scottish Reformation and founder of Scottish Presbyterianism. Probably trained for the priesthood at the University of St. Andrews, he was ordained in 1540. He joined a group of Protestants who fortified St. Andrews Castle, but they were captured by French Catholics and carried away into slavery in 1547. Released through English intervention in 1549, he spent four years preaching in England, where he influenced developments in the Church of England. With the accession of the Catholic Mary I, he fled to the Continent. He served as pastor at Frankfurt am Main and Geneva until his return to Scotland in 1559. In England, Elizabeth I made common cause with the Scottish Presbyterians, lest the French gain control of Scotland to support its Catholic monarch, Mary, Queen of Scots. Knox survived conflicts with Mary and spent the rest of his life in setting up the Presbyterian church." Encyclopedia Britannica

I watched the ceremony in honor of Queen Elizabeth in St. Giles Cathedral yesterday and it brought to mind it was the church where John Knox was minister. I imagine Knox was rolling over in his tomb about the church, which now ordains woman to the pulpit, marries same-sex couples, and ordains openly professed homosexuals to the pulpit as well. The 41-page booklet by John Knox about women in the rule should be read by every Bible-believing Christian. It is amazing how those in the MAGA movement claim to be strict constructionist about the US Constitution, but feel at liberty to deny and disobey the commands of God in his word as they treat it as changeable by cultures. The arguments against Knox in the 16th century are similar to the religious feminist's arguments of today.

Lest I be misunderstood, I will be voting for Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis for president in 2024 and a straight Republican ticket in the coming midterm election as well, excepting any woman even if endorsed by Donald Trump.

"TheFirstBlastOfTheTrumpetAgainstTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen" by Knox convinces me that is where we are heading. Watching Steve Bannon's War Room it seems half of his guests are women and it will become worse for sure unless God revives us, his people, and brings us back to his word.

 

[Dino246]

Clearly, Knox was a hypocrite as well as a misogynist, whatever he was besides.

To hypocrisy, he was fine with the support of the English queen where it suited his interests, despite writing against any female in a leadership role.

There is ongoing debate about the proper role of females in the Church, but that is not the subject of this thread. Gender neither qualifies for nor disqualifies from "secular" leadership. There are many women who lead well, just as there are many men who lead well. There are many women who lead poorly, just as there are many men who lead poorly. Scripture does not exclude women from leadership in the political realm; anyone who thinks that they should be excluded should examine their reasons carefully. I suspect at the root there is simple, unwarranted, ugly prejudice.

 

[Cameron143]

"To promote a woman to bear rule, superiority, dominion, or empire above any realm, nation, or city, is repugnant to nature; contumely to God, a thing most contrarious to his revealed will and approved ordinance; and finally, it is the subversion of good order, of all equity and justice.

In proof of this proposition, I will not be so curious as to gather whatsoever may amplify, set forth, or embellish the same; but I am purposed, even as I have spoken my conscience in most plain and few words, so to stand content with a simple proof of every member, bringing in for my witness God's ordinance in nature, his plain will revealed in his word, and by the minds of such as be most ancient amongst godly writers." page 6, TheFirstBlastOfTheTrumpetAgainstTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen
https://archive.org/details/TheFirs...tTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen/page/n5/mode/2up

Those are the words of: "John Knox, (born c. 1514, near Haddington, East Lothian, Scot.—died Nov. 24, 1572, Edinburgh), Scottish clergyman, leader of the Scottish Reformation and founder of Scottish Presbyterianism. Probably trained for the priesthood at the University of St. Andrews, he was ordained in 1540. He joined a group of Protestants who fortified St. Andrews Castle, but they were captured by French Catholics and carried away into slavery in 1547. Released through English intervention in 1549, he spent four years preaching in England, where he influenced developments in the Church of England. With the accession of the Catholic Mary I, he fled to the Continent. He served as pastor at Frankfurt am Main and Geneva until his return to Scotland in 1559. In England, Elizabeth I made common cause with the Scottish Presbyterians, lest the French gain control of Scotland to support its Catholic monarch, Mary, Queen of Scots. Knox survived conflicts with Mary and spent the rest of his life in setting up the Presbyterian church." Encyclopedia Britannica

I watched the ceremony in honor of Queen Elizabeth in St. Giles Cathedral yesterday and it brought to mind it was the church where John Knox was minister. I imagine Knox was rolling over in his tomb about the church, which now ordains woman to the pulpit, marries same-sex couples, and ordains openly professed homosexuals to the pulpit as well. The 41-page booklet by John Knox about women in the rule should be read by every Bible-believing Christian. It is amazing how those in the MAGA movement claim to be strict constructionist about the US Constitution, but feel at liberty to deny and disobey the commands of God in his word as they treat it as changeable by cultures. The arguments against Knox in the 16th century are similar to the religious feminist's arguments of today.

Lest I be misunderstood, I will be voting for Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis for president in 2024 and a straight Republican ticket in the coming midterm election as well, excepting any woman even if endorsed by Donald Trump.

"TheFirstBlastOfTheTrumpetAgainstTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen" by Knox convinces me that is where we are heading. Watching Steve Bannon's War Room it seems half of his guests are women and it will become worse for sure unless God revives us, his people, and brings us back to his word.

I wonder how Knox felt about Deborah.

 

[Mem]

When I read the title
THE FIRST BLAST TO AWAKE WOMEN DEGENERATE
I got the idea that the topic might have something to do with a profound flatulence, and I see that I wasn't far(t) off

 

[Ethan1942]

I wonder how Knox felt about Deborah.

If you read his tract you can see what he thought about Deborah, and how that does not include political rule or as a basis for selecting a leader. His writing brings out many things I'd never heard or seen pointed out before. The tract is archived online so I can't do a copy/paste but you can read his instructions on that starting page 26 lower right column and he covers more than Deborah.

https://archive.org/details/TheFirs...TheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen/page/n25/mode/2up

Someone mentioned hypocrisy, and the major hypocrisy I see is in the churches of today as they go on and on about abortion, which is not specifically addressed in the Scriptures, but ignore the direct commands of God about the role of women and the relationship with men. It is impossible to be an honest Bible-believer and support women in any leadership role in family, church or nation. We hear the churches so upset about family values being corrupted and the major corruption is in the loss of headship by the man in the home to start with at the first. John Knox answers the ideas of today's religious humanists that teach man's opposition to God's law.

I am convinced that with the state of the USA's churches today, elections will mean nothing. I do not see God continuing to bless a nation that so blatantly defies his laws, especially those as basic as family structure and man/woman relationships. John Knox also addresses the situation where the man is in pubic office, but his wife is directing his decisions.

 

[Cameron143]

If you read his tract you can see what he thought about Deborah, and how that does not include political rule or as a basis for selecting a leader. His writing brings out many things I'd never heard or seen pointed out before. The tract is archived online so I can't do a copy/paste but you can read his instructions on that starting page 26 lower right column and he covers more than Deborah.

https://archive.org/details/TheFirs...TheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen/page/n25/mode/2up

Someone mentioned hypocrisy, and the major hypocrisy I see is in the churches of today as they go on and on about abortion, which is not specifically addressed in the Scriptures, but ignore the direct commands of God about the role of women and the relationship with men. It is impossible to be an honest Bible-believer and support women in any leadership role in family, church or nation. We hear the churches so upset about family values being corrupted and the major corruption is in the loss of headship by the man in the home to start with at the first. John Knox answers the ideas of today's religious humanists that teach man's opposition to God's law.

I am convinced that with the state of the USA's churches today, elections will mean nothing. I do not see God continuing to bless a nation that so blatantly defies his laws, especially those as basic as family structure and man/woman relationships. John Knox also addresses the situation where the man is in pubic office, but his wife is directing his decisions.

So it is your opinion that men, not God, chose Deborah as a judge?

 

[Ethan1942]

So it is your opinion that men, not God, chose Deborah as a judge?

God chose Deborah, but nowhere are we told to choose a woman as elder, leader, official, Pastor, Deacon, etc. We are to mind our own business as to what or who God chooses and we are to follow what he has commanded us.

"The secret things belong unto Jehovah our God; but the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deut 29:29, ASV)

We can guess at why God put Deborah in as judge, but we cannot know for he has not told us.

 

[Ethan1942]

The church can choose to obey God, or follow the dictates of the modern humanists!

"And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him." (Gen 2:18, ASV)

"For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man: for neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man:" (1Cor 11:8-9, ASV)

"Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." (Gen 3:16, ASV)

"But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness. For Adam was first formed, then Eve; and Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression:" (1Tim 2:12-14, ASV)

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (1Cor 11:3, ASV)

"In like manner, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, even if any obey not the word, they may without the word be gained by the behavior of their wives; beholding your chaste behavior coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning of braiding the hair, and of wearing jewels of gold, or of putting on apparel; but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner aforetime the holy women also, who hoped in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands: as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose children ye now are, if ye do well, and are not put in fear by any terror." (1Pet 3:1-6, ASV)

"let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law." (1Cor 14:34, ASV)

"Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach;" (1Tim 3:1-2, ASV)

"Let deacons be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well." (1Tim 3:12, ASV)

"Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will continue stedfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the word. And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus a proselyte of Antioch;" (Acts 6:3-5, ASV)

"If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able to endure, and all this people also shall go to their place in peace. So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law, and did all that he had said. And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens." (Exod 18:23-25, ASV)

"And Jehovah said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tent of meeting, that they may stand there with thee." (Num 11:16, ASV)

"So I took the heads of your tribes, wise men, and known, and made them heads over you, captains of thousands, and captains of hundreds, and captains of fifties, and captains of tens, and officers, according to your tribes." (Deut 1:15, ASV)

"As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they that lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. Jehovah standeth up to contend, and standeth to judge the peoples." (Isa 3:12-13, ASV)

Read John Knox discussing these matters and you'll recognize the silly twisting the religious humanists use to avoid the direct words of God's word. https://archive.org/details/TheFirs...TheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen/page/n25/mode/2up

 

[Cameron143]

God chose Deborah, but nowhere are we told to choose a woman as elder, leader, official, Pastor, Deacon, etc. We are to mind our own business as to what or who God chooses and we are to follow what he has commanded us.

"The secret things belong unto Jehovah our God; but the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deut 29:29, ASV)

We can guess at why God put Deborah in as judge, but we cannot know for he has not told us.

Could God choose to place a woman in a place of authority today?

 

[Lanolin]

with regard to Queen Elizabeth, she was not chosen by anyone. She inherited the throne as firstborn daughter of a King. She had no brothers, only sister Margaret. She was IT

Now if Edward VII hadnt chosen to abdicate it may have all been different ...but his wife, the american Wallis Simpson, would not have been Queen anyway because she married the King but that didnt mean that SHE was going to be Queen, she was only his wife. She was not born to the throne.

so anyway, lets maybe blame the Americans with their strange ideas of succession ...or Edward VII for giving up the throne for HER. The crown passed to Edwards brother, George who was not prepared to be King, and he died young and thats how Elizabeth got to be Queen.

 

[Ethan1942]

Could God choose to place a woman in a place of authority today?

Cameron, I do believe God has chosen to place many women in office today. Reading Isaiah chapter 3 with the description of God's judgment upon Israel, I see women in the rule as part of the evidence that the USA and church institutions are under judgment also. So much there is similar to how the USA finds itself today. My situation voting with gender as a factor was something I have struggled with because what if I'm given the choice between a leftist Democrat and a female whose claims are inline with MAGA, and it seems that the GOP needs a majority in House and Senate to stop the fast slide into Communism? I have that situation as it developed in my locale.

In the GOP primary for Congressman, there was a female endorsed by Trump and a male who had values and stands on issues that were MAGA. Actually, the female was another of those incidents where you end up scratching your head about why on earth Trump endorsed her! The woman is crazy, a true nut-case, but God chose to have her win the primary. In November I will not vote for her, but I'll not vote for the Democrat either. I will pass over that selection on the ballot rather than vote for the lesser of two evils. If she wins it is of God and his will that is secret to me. I am obligated to vote according to how I understand the Scriptures and not pry into the wisdom of God.

In regards to the late Queen Elizabeth II, I've considered the Monarchy as tradition, symbolism and much as a figure head. I've admired the dignity, poise and high standards of the Queen's public personna. My DNA is 90% the UK, so I feel a bit of common humanity there so I do watch and keep up with the happenings in the Royal Family. Sadly her dedication to the Monarchy made a mess of her family situation and that is deplorable, but the Queen is there because God willed it.

"Then came Jeremiah from Topheth, whither Jehovah had sent him to prophesy; and he stood in the court of Jehovah's house, and said to all the people: Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel, Behold, I will bring upon this city and upon all its towns all the evil that I have pronounced against it; because they have made their neck stiff, that they may not hear my words." (Jer 19:14-15, ASV)

I confess, I've struggled against being stiff-necked, and not being able to live up to the commands of our Lord Jesus Christ, even to the point I must battle depression. I so often have to reread with tears rolling down my cheeks, the comfort passages.

Even the great Apostle Paul wrote:
"Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that for which also I was laid hold on by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself yet to have laid hold: but one thing I do, forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before. I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded: and if in anything ye are otherwise minded, this also shall God reveal unto you: only, whereunto we have attained, by that same rule let us walk." (Phil 3:12-16, ASV)

King David was not perfect so he was able to write:
The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy. He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever. He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us. Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him. For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust. (Ps 103:8-14, KJV)

 

[Cameron143]

Cameron, I do believe God has chosen to place many women in office today. Reading Isaiah chapter 3 with the description of God's judgment upon Israel, I see women in the rule as part of the evidence that the USA and church institutions are under judgment also. So much there is similar to how the USA finds itself today. My situation voting with gender as a factor was something I have struggled with because what if I'm given the choice between a leftist Democrat and a female whose claims are inline with MAGA, and it seems that the GOP needs a majority in House and Senate to stop the fast slide into Communism? I have that situation as it developed in my locale.

In the GOP primary for Congressman, there was a female endorsed by Trump and a male who had values and stands on issues that were MAGA. Actually, the female was another of those incidents where you end up scratching your head about why on earth Trump endorsed her! The woman is crazy, a true nut-case, but God chose to have her win the primary. In November I will not vote for her, but I'll not vote for the Democrat either. I will pass over that selection on the ballot rather than vote for the lesser of two evils. If she wins it is of God and his will that is secret to me. I am obligated to vote according to how I understand the Scriptures and not pry into the wisdom of God.

In regards to the late Queen Elizabeth II, I've considered the Monarchy as tradition, symbolism and much as a figure head. I've admired the dignity, poise and high standards of the Queen's public personna. My DNA is 90% the UK, so I feel a bit of common humanity there so I do watch and keep up with the happenings in the Royal Family. Sadly her dedication to the Monarchy made a mess of her family situation and that is deplorable, but the Queen is there because God willed it.

"Then came Jeremiah from Topheth, whither Jehovah had sent him to prophesy; and he stood in the court of Jehovah's house, and said to all the people: Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel, Behold, I will bring upon this city and upon all its towns all the evil that I have pronounced against it; because they have made their neck stiff, that they may not hear my words." (Jer 19:14-15, ASV)

I confess, I've struggled against being stiff-necked, and not being able to live up to the commands of our Lord Jesus Christ, even to the point I must battle depression. I so often have to reread with tears rolling down my cheeks, the comfort passages.

Even the great Apostle Paul wrote:
"Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that for which also I was laid hold on by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself yet to have laid hold: but one thing I do, forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before. I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded: and if in anything ye are otherwise minded, this also shall God reveal unto you: only, whereunto we have attained, by that same rule let us walk." (Phil 3:12-16, ASV)

King David was not perfect so he was able to write:
The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy. He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever. He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us. Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him. For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust. (Ps 103:8-14, KJV)

I appreciate your explanation and sincerity and humility in your post. Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions.

 

[Dino246]

The church can choose to obey God, or follow the dictates of the modern humanists!

"And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him." (Gen 2:18, ASV)

This thread warrants a thorough response, but I will begin with this:

The words translated "help meet" are ezer kenegdo. These words are used of God Himself in other passages. As such, they do not indicate anything of subservience or incapability for leadership. Rather, they indicate full equality and correspondence to the man.

 

[Dude653]

That's a lot of words to say
"I'm a misogynist"

 

[ZNP]

I have come to the conclusion that those who think the Bible was written by misogynists are idiots.

Both Jesus and Paul strongly encouraged all that could remain single to do so. There is no pressure from the Bible writers to get married. Yet, at the very least 80% of the ministry in the church is for those who are married. You have children's meetings, counseling for those who are struggling in their marriage, counseling for those who are about to get married, and a single's ministry which is generally composed mostly of singles who want to get married.

In any church it seems two thirds of the members are women, and many will be single mothers.

So then when Paul says:

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;

He is talking about one family out of a congregation that might be 100 families or more. The Pastor's wife in every church I have ever met with was a very important person in that congregation. She would minister to the women and the children as her husband would speak to the congregation. Since the majority of a healthy congregation is composed of women and children the pastor's wife had a very significant and important position. Paul was saying you needed all three. You needed a man who could be an example to the men and let them see the church is not just a woman's club, and you need the wife who could be an example to the women, and you needed a successful family that could be an example to all those who are struggling with dysfunctional and broken families.

However, I have also seen congregations with women pastors and even openly lesbian pastors. I have not done a survey of all of them, so in my very limited viewing of a couple of congregations like this they seemed very sick. The only men I saw were elderly, and accompanying their wives to the church. The congregations appeared much closer to 90% women, and I never felt the life and peace to return a second time.

1Timothy 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Look at this, the Bishop "must" be blameless, the husband of one wife. But here it is "Let the deacons be the husband of one wife". This is not a "must". You can have a deacon who is not married. So if you had a congregation of 500 Paul is only requiring the Pastor to be married. The church is a hospital and the biggest need (though not the only need) is for broken, damaged and dysfunctional marriages to have a good example set in front of them. Now anyone who cannot see that as the primary need is in my mind an idiot.

Then of course you come to the point that men are, as a rule, bigger and stronger. I am reminded of the video of the girl on the NYC subway, this young man sits next to her, grabs her by the hair, and appears to all that he is going to drag this girl off to his lair like cavemen or some nature video of apes. At that moment it seems she must have really wondered where have all the men gone who will defend me?

 

[Dude653]

I have come to the conclusion that those who think the Bible was written by misogynists are idiots.

Both Jesus and Paul strongly encouraged all that could remain single to do so. There is no pressure from the Bible writers to get married. Yet, at the very least 80% of the ministry in the church is for those who are married. You have children's meetings, counseling for those who are struggling in their marriage, counseling for those who are about to get married, and a single's ministry which is generally composed mostly of singles who want to get married.

In any church it seems two thirds of the members are women, and many will be single mothers.

So then when Paul says:

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;

He is talking about one family out of a congregation that might be 100 families or more. The Pastor's wife in every church I have ever met with was a very important person in that congregation. She would minister to the women and the children as her husband would speak to the congregation. Since the majority of a healthy congregation is composed of women and children the pastor's wife had a very significant and important position. Paul was saying you needed all three. You needed a man who could be an example to the men and let them see the church is not just a woman's club, and you need the wife who could be an example to the women, and you needed a successful family that could be an example to all those who are struggling with dysfunctional and broken families.

However, I have also seen congregations with women pastors and even openly lesbian pastors. I have not done a survey of all of them, so in my very limited viewing of a couple of congregations like this they seemed very sick. The only men I saw were elderly, and accompanying their wives to the church. The congregations appeared much closer to 90% women, and I never felt the life and peace to return a second time.

1Timothy 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Look at this, the Bishop "must" be blameless, the husband of one wife. But here it is "Let the deacons be the husband of one wife". This is not a "must". You can have a deacon who is not married. So if you had a congregation of 500 Paul is only requiring the Pastor to be married. The church is a hospital and the biggest need (though not the only need) is for broken, damaged and dysfunctional marriages to have a good example set in front of them. Now anyone who cannot see that as the primary need is in my mind an idiot.

Then of course you come to the point that men are, as a rule, bigger and stronger. I am reminded of the video of the girl on the NYC subway, this young man sits next to her, grabs her by the hair, and appears to all that he is going to drag this girl off to his lair like cavemen or some nature video of apes. At that moment it seems she must have really wondered where have all the men gone who will defend me?

Well first of all the Bible doesn't say anywhere that a woman can't hold a political office.
People just take the opinion of one guy, the apostle Paul who never met Jesus and use it to support their misogynistic views

 

[Dude653]

Also we have this thing called the Constitution which says that legislation is not allowed to specifically favor any one religion.
Our forefathers were wise enough to know that hey theocratic government is how you get countries like Saudi Arabia who make women walk around wearing trash bags

 

[ZNP]

Well first of all the Bible doesn't say anywhere that a woman can't hold a political office.
People just take the opinion of one guy, the apostle Paul who never met Jesus and use it to support their misogynistic views

I agree with you that Paul's word concerning a Bishop does not apply to anyone else. It doesn't even apply to deacons in the church. With the Bishop Paul said "must" but with the deacons he said "let".

We have jobs that we require the person to be a man or woman so think of the hypocrisy that they can't see that same need in the church. Also, why do they keep thinking that Paul is requiring the Bishop to be a man when what he is really requiring is that you pick both a man and a woman.

 

[Dude653]

Think a lot of Christians are following "Paulinaty" . Last time I checked, Paul isn't God, as I mentioned earlier, never actually met Jesus
He also contradicts himself when he says in Galatians that there's no male or female in the body of Christ
And the whole thing about a woman can't teach a man is just absurd. Especially if she has college degrees and things like theology biblical history etc. Why can't she teach me something if she's more educated than me?

 

[ZNP]

Think a lot of Christians are following "Paulinaty" . Last time I checked, Paul isn't God, as I mentioned earlier, never actually met Jesus
He also contradicts himself when he says in Galatians that there's no male or female in the body of Christ
And the whole thing about a woman can't teach a man is just absurd. Especially if she has college degrees and things like theology biblical history etc. Why can't she teach me something if she's more educated than me?

The context of this verse is Paul telling the church to pray for kings and all in authority. He then proceeds to point out that he was ordained as a preacher and teacher, so he also was a person in authority.

Finally:
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

He is not prohibiting the woman from learning, but it must be done in subjection. This is what destroyed the US education system, the kids do not learn in all subjection. You go to China, a country with a history that is ten times that of the US and they understand first and foremost you must make sure the students are in subjection.

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Every single thing in this chapter is about being in subjection, and not usurping authority.

What would be the point of "learning in silence with all subjection" if once you have learned you weren't also to teach?

Paul did not contradict himself when he said there as no male or female in the church. In the church we have Jesus, the Lord, the head, the male in this relationship and rest of us are to be in subjection to him with our heads covered (1Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.)
. If the woman is teaching and her head is covered she is not usurping authority. If you are under the headship of the Lord and speaking "in Christ" then you are in the male in this relationship.

How many people both men and women speak their own opinions, their head is not covered, their speaking is simply confusion, opinions, self righteousness, judgemental of others, etc.

1Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

The teaching on this has been from idiots who don't read the word and have their own agenda. Paul said clearly women can learn (unlike other religions which wouldn't allow women into the schools) and they can pray i n the church and they can prophesy in the church. Anyone who says Paul taught differently is a liar. That said they are to learn in silence in all subjection. As a teacher in the US Public school system all of the disturbances and outbursts and speaking are a major drag on the class moving forward.