A Double Standard in Christianity?

smh

you cite without reference

source source source

this is such fun

I notice you are not married

perhaps you want to lord it over the women in this forum since you do not have your own female to trod on?

you cannot address any verses that show you are wrong and so you get angry

calm down. throwing the word liar around is not going to get you in the good graces of anyone here

oh I know you don't care. at least that's what you say.....

LIE!
LIE!
So stop lying about me and I will stop pointing out your lies.

1) Priscilla had Aquila as a covering in the teaching of Apollos;

and,

2) Of course women can hold positions in the church. It is forbidden to them to teach or usurp authority over a man;

and,

3) Philip's daughters prophesied...it does not say that they prophesied in a church setting. There is a certain protocol for womwn praying or prophesying in church....they must have a symbol of authority on their head....and teaching is completely off-limits; unless it is the teaching primarily of other women. Exception: if a woman has a man as her covering who can correct her in the case that she is deceived, she may in fact preside over men and teach them Because it is really the man who is her covering who is presiding over the meeting; she is merely giving the message, but the man in charge over her is in control and can make sure that no false doctrine is being preached. In such a case the woman is not usurping authority.

1Ti 2:11, Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
1Ti 2:12, But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
1Ti 2:13, For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
1Ti 2:14, And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Ideally, the woman is not to teach at all but to learn in silence with all subjection.

But Paul, in 1 Corinthians 11 and 14, allows for the fact that certain people will be ignorant and thus gives protocols for those who would also be belligerent and rebellious so that they would insist that they have a woman pastor.

Personally, I would not sit underneath a woman pastor unless there were a male pastor over her making sure that she didn't lead the congregation astray.

And for the most part, I wouldn't sit underneath a woman pastor at all.

May the Lord abundantly bless you and receive you as a son.

You were appealing to people's negative emotions about Kim Jong Un, hoping that they would apply those emotions to my doctrine.

we are trying to help you. you cannot ignore the fact women were not silent in church and did teach. you might find you get along better with women if you see that women are not excluded. perhaps then you would not get so upset and call people liars when they try to point this out to you

following is all in the NT, the early church as it is commonly called. this is in the Bible, no one is making it up. I guess you either believe what is written or you deny what is plainly written. it's your choice.


Paul greets Phoebe in Romans 16 as a deacon of the church and Junia, whom Paul addresses as prominent among the Apostles

Priscilla is acknowledged as a teacher along with her husband, Aquila in Acts 18. 26 in fact, Priscilla corrected Paul...and Paul took it

The four daughters of Philip are spoken of as exercising the gift of prophecy in the same verse, Acts 18

In Acts 18:26, Priscilla is acknowledged as a teacher, along with her husband Aquila

the four daughters of Philip in Acts 21:9, exercised the gift of prophecy or inspired speech. and they were not married

this is all in the New Testament, so all excuses or opinions stating that women should always be silent are obviously missing something

How does you lying about me help me?

How does the concept that a woman can teach or usurp authority over a man, help him in the slightest?

All of this has been addressed.

following is all in the NT, the early church as it is commonly called. this is in the Bible, no one is making it up. I guess you either believe what is written or you deny what is plainly written. it's your choice.


Paul greets Phoebe in Romans 16 as a deacon of the church and Junia, whom Paul addresses as prominent among the Apostles

Priscilla is acknowledged as a teacher along with her husband, Aquila in Acts 18. 26 in fact, Priscilla corrected Paul...and Paul took it

The four daughters of Philip are spoken of as exercising the gift of prophecy in the same verse, Acts 18

In Acts 18:26, Priscilla is acknowledged as a teacher, along with her husband Aquila

the four daughters of Philip in Acts 21:9, exercised the gift of prophecy or inspired speech. and they were not married

this is all in the New Testament, so all excuses or opinions stating that women should always be silent are obviously missing something

And yet all 27 Books of the NT are written by men. All of the Apostles were men. Hmm

that doesn't tell you anything?

it should

men wrote those things about women

hello? wakey wakey

men approved of those women and wrote about them

under the guidance of the Holy Spirit

I'll leave you now to digest that since it didn't occur to you

None of which allows a woman to teach or have authority over a man. Paul wrote more Books in the Bible than anyone. I'll believe him.

1 Timothy 2:12-15 (NKJV)
12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.

It is nevertheless a proclamation based on holy scripture.

Abd, didn't I tell you that you would have a disparaging comment?

No JBF,

I have never in all my years as a Christian heard a fellow Christian say they believe in an Authoritarian idealogy in regards to women--ever. There are men and churches that ARE Authoritarian--sometimes subtlety, sometime it's right there in there doctrine--those are nearly always some kind of cult.

Authoritarian: favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom.

It is a matter of semantics, I think.

The fact that the ground was cursed meant suffering for Adam; that is all I'm saying.

Deny that that is a curse if you want; I'm not inclined to arguer over such peripheral issues.

However, I don't agree with you.

Believe what you want to on the matter. It's no skin off my back. Just know that I do not agree with you here.

Nope.

Another "non-sequitur"?

"wolf, wolf!"

That is no proclamation, other than your own. Can you not see it is a strange thing to say about yourself? And how would you saying that about yourself have any baring on the discussion? Are we supposed to simply take the word of a stranger on a chat forum?

"When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or prove true, that is a word which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."--Deuternomy 18:22

I was looking for that commentary but did not see it posted. What post is the link in?

The point of having Christ's imputed righteousness is that it is a righteousness not your own. Not of "self".