• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Are women inferior to men?

2 know him

Newbie
Dec 9, 2011
482
106
✟7,513.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I had previously stated you appear to not understand both Jesus and Paul that well. Paul built on Jesus practices and teaching. Poor exegesis of Paul misses that point.

John
NZ

I studied Paul very very closely and intently for many many years. I understand many things about Paul's writings that most people haven't even begun the grasp.
It is not easily or lightly that I came to except that Paul contradicted the teachings of Jesus, it took me 1 year after first having been presented with some information that I could not deny as being true, but I couldn't accept because of Paul's writings to realize that Paul was wrong and the author of the other information was right.

Again, I have laid out a foundation of where Paul contradicted Jesus in the thread: Paul the heretic. You can do a search for it I'm sure you'll find it and maybe you'll be willing to take up challenge of showing how Paul's teachings did not contradict Jesus in the questions that I posed there.
 
Upvote 0

Brokenhill

Praise God, i'm satisifed.
Jul 26, 2015
253
71
34
Arizona
✟34,363.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I may have chosen to answer your post in general rather than address a specific Scripture; that does not mean I wilfully ignored it.
I repeat my statement that Scripture does not command that all women be homemakers, and it's certainly true that not all women have children to care for. So if a woman goes to work and the man takes the role of homemaker, they are not disobeying the word of God.

At the end of the day though, this is your life. If you feel you have to go out to work, even though you'd rather not; that's up to you.
Way back when, you ignored the passages regarding the qualifications for elders/deacons--the part about them being husbands only.

The bible teaches us in many ways, not just be direct command. Much of what we learn and ought to do is by example. We are to imitate Jesus, godly men, and good things. John 13:15, 1 Corinthians 11:1, Hebrews 13:7.
Jesus taught in parables, and we see the Apostles reasoning together about their meaning in Matthew 16:5-12. Jesus told them they had a wrong conclusion, but He did not give them the answer--they had to figure it out for themselves.

Titus 2:3-5 says older women are to be "workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the WORD OF GOD will not be DISHONORED."
1 Timothy 5:14 encourages young widows to "get married, bear children" keep house...".
I don't see anywhere in the NT where married men are to be keep the home.
Also, in Genesis 3:17, Adam's curse was to toil in farming for producing food. Eve's curse was pain in child-bearing, and in 1 Tim. 2:15 women "will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith...".

We see a picture, for MARRIED COUPLES, that the man's primary responsibility is to work/provide for his family and love his wife. The woman is to raise children (if she can/has them) and take care of her husband and the home.
But I would not say that that is the woman's exclusive responsibility...Proverbs 31:13-31 shows a women who works with her hands as well, and is involved in business...but that she's also taking care fo her household and her husband can trust her. So if we look at that from the NT perspective, we can see that the primary role of the women is to take care of the family, but she may also work. But the man's primary role is working and being the spiritual leader.

Just wanted to clarify that I agree that married women CAN work.
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
31,437
10,308
NW England
✟1,346,087.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Way back when, you ignored the passages regarding the qualifications for elders/deacons--the part about them being husbands only.

I didn't ignore them, I chose to answer another point/Scripture first intending to return to them later, and I forgot.
Ignoring implies deliberate intent - that was not the case, and you have no idea of my thoughts and intentions anyhow.

To answer that now; a) Scripture says they should be the husband of one wife - ONE, rather than several as some people had. Overseers need to set an example. b) If overseers/deacons/Ministers have to be a husband, they have to be married - someone want to tell the pope and catholic clergy they are disobeying Scripture? c) These verses also say that overseers should be able to manage their children, so they have to have kids and have to be able to control them. Any Minister married to a barren wife or who has unruly teenagers had better resign from the Ministry pretty quickly. d) This passage also says that these people should not like money or get drunk, not be argumentative etc etc. Presumably then, anyone with any of the above qualities or characteristics should not be a Minister? Maybe that is the case in some churches in which case, I applaud their consistency. But it seems clear to me that many people overlook these later verses. They read the verse which says that a deacon should be the husband of one wife and say "Scripture says a Minister should have a wife; a woman can't have a wife so this verse proves that a woman can't be a minister."
It doesn't prove it at all, and if you are going to apply one of the qualities in that passage to clergy, you have to apply them all. So like I say, get rid of anyone who is unmarried, childless etc.

The bible teaches us in many ways, not just be direct command. Much of what we learn and ought to do is by example. We are to imitate Jesus, godly men, and good things.

Jesus set us an example and showed us how to live as his followers and as salt and light in the world; that doesn't include instruction about marriage, children and domestic arrangements. He wasn't married.

Jesus taught in parables, and we see the Apostles reasoning together about their meaning in Matthew 16:5-12. Jesus told them they had a wrong conclusion, but He did not give them the answer--they had to figure it out for themselves.

Yes, and none of those addressed the matter of marriage and home life. The disciples, who were the wage earners as fishermen and tax collectors, left their families and paid jobs to follow Jesus; what does that say?

Titus 2:3-5 says older women are to be "workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the WORD OF GOD will not be DISHONORED."

1) it says older women; what about the younger ones? 2) Going out to work does not dishonour the word of God. 3) women had no rights at that time and in that society and could do nothing except stay at home and create, and care for, the family. Where does it say it has to be women who do this today?

1 Timothy 5:14 encourages young widows to "get married, bear children" keep house...".

Young widows.
Like I say, women had no rights then, so if a woman lost her husband, she had no income or means of support. Paul says nothing about asking if marriage is God's will for them - and in 1 Corinthians 7 he wished that everyone would remain unmarried so they could serve the Lord better - neither does he say anything about love or marrying for love. He just encourages women who have lost their husband to go and find another one!

I don't see anywhere in the NT where married men are to be keep the home.

Because it was written in a male dominated society; that's not what men did then.
Today, there are occasions where men are out of work and/or their wives have better paid jobs. In such cases the couple may well decide that it makes more sense for the man to be at home while his wife worked. Such a situation could not happen in Bible times; women could not learn and did not have highly paid jobs. So there is no Scripture which addresses the issue. It's a bit like looking in the Bible for advice about whether to buy an ipad/iphone, or what kind of car to buy. These things weren't even dreamed of in Bible times, so it's not surprising that there is no teaching at all on the subject.

Also, in Genesis 3:17, Adam's curse was to toil in farming for producing food. Eve's curse was pain in child-bearing, and in 1 Tim. 2:15 women "will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith...".

So what does that mean for us today?
Not all men are farmers or manual workers. Not all women have pain in childbirth, or at least, they may have varying amounts of pain. It certainly isn't the case that women are saved only if they have children - we are saved by Jesus, not childbirth.

We see a picture, for MARRIED COUPLES, that the man's primary responsibility is to work/provide for his family and love his wife. The woman is to raise children (if she can/has them) and take care of her husband and the home.

That's how it was then, and how it may be, mostly, today; certainly the bit about women bearing the children. It doesn't mean that God has commanded that men should have paid jobs and not stay at home. Some men do both and have paid jobs as nannies, carers or midwives - doing jobs that were always, traditionally, seen as "women's work", yet being paid for them. Scripture does not forbid, or address, this issue either.

So if we look at that from the NT perspective, we can see that the primary role of the women is to take care of the family, but she may also work. But the man's primary role is working and being the spiritual leader.

Like I said, the NT domestic arrangements were not necessarily as they are today.
 
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,003
84
New Zealand
✟119,551.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
I don't know what 'most people' really consists of. But I can offer that when words are offered 'clearly' and their meaning 'just as clearly', and then someone says I don't 'see it that way' because I can find other translations of certain words in Greek, they are 'NOT' accepting it as offered and merely interpreting it differently. They are 'altering' what exists to suit themselves.

I smile when I see statements like that. So, you don't know Greek. Therefore you rely on generations of scholars who have given us Scripture in our own language. But with no knowledge of that scholarship you can make judgement calls!!!! Nonsense.


Now, if that one line were all we were offered, there may be some that could say, "Well, it doesn't REALLY say that". But when we compare all the other lines Paul offered concerning the 'place' of women in the 'church', it is pretty clear that the 'authority' in the 'church' was to be held by MEN. If a woman is commanded to be 'silent' in the 'church', how does one propose that a woman can be a 'church leader' and remain 'silent'?

Not it's not that 'clear' at all. Your view has two underlying assumptions. a) That head means authority over. But it's use in Biblical times was wider than that. Even in English today we use head with a non authoritarian meaning - headwaters of a river. headings of a book for example. The first word of the bible "in the beginning' uses the Hebrew word 'rosh' (head). That is a source meaning. not authority over. b) Jesus subverted 'authority over'. Matt 20:25-26 Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you ...NIV

Adam was created first FOR God, Eve was created after 'from Adam/for Adam'. These are not 'my words'. They are straight out of the Bible. Now how does one suppose that women and men are 'equal' according to God's word? There is absolutely no mention of a relationship between God and Eve. The relationship that Eve was created 'for' was Adam.

I have previously commented on this. True to style you ha ve never exegeted any rebuttal.

And then just 'look' at the significant leadership of God's 'chosen people'. There was "NEVER" a 'Queen' of Israel so far as the dominant 'ruler'. Never a woman 'High Priest' in the Temple. Not a 'single' female apostle. Was that due to men choosing that path or is it merely the order of the 'creation' of God? The bible indicates in everything it offers that it is simply the 'order' of the 'creation of God'. And we cannot change that 'order' in 'truth'. We can certainly ignore God's instructions and 'do' whatever we 'choose'. But we cannot follow in 'truth' if the truth is that God is the creator and created the order concerning men and women.

God worked within history and the cultural norms of those times. Slavery and polygamy were also practised without Divine sanction. What about genocide, naked prophets and having to marry a prostitute? Its OK to do those today because in 'in the Bible'? In the NT all ancient cultural norms were to be replaced - rank,status, ethnic origin, gender. We can pretty clearly see women having leading roles in the NT church.

It is utterly irrelevant to me what men 'say' if what they 'say' does not conform to the Word of God. And anyone that insists that God is incapable of preserving His Word as far as I'm concerned, is referring to a 'different God' than the one I profess to know and place my faith in.

That's true, but many of us don't see you as having the only 'right view'.

So interpretation is one thing, but altering what is offered in order to come to a different interpretation is a completely different concept. And that is what I have witnessed here more than mere interpretation. For like I said, if something is offered perfectly clearly, there isn't a whole lot of room for a 'different' interpretation. Jesus is the Son of God. That doesn't leave a whole lot of room or even NEED for different interpretations.

Blessings,

MEC

You interpret.We all do. That is not altering. You and I both have English as our native language. But the word 'gas' means different things to both of us. You have no monopoly on understanding Scripture, and little sound basis for dogmatically denouncing anyone who disagrees with your rather uninformed, but sincerely held opinions.

John
NZ
 
  • Like
Reactions: Judy02
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,003
84
New Zealand
✟119,551.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Titus 2:3-5 says older women are to be "workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the WORD OF GOD will not be DISHONORED."
1 Timothy 5:14 encourages young widows to "get married, bear children" keep house...".
I don't see anywhere in the NT where married men are to be keep the home.
Also, in Genesis 3:17, Adam's curse was to toil in farming for producing food. Eve's curse was pain in child-bearing, and in 1 Tim. 2:15 women "will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith...".

Yes but this was within the context of some women going around undermining sound teaching. Paul asks for a contrast between godly women and misinformed ones upsetting others. Nothing at all to do with some 'divine order'.

We see a picture, for MARRIED COUPLES, that the man's primary responsibility is to work/provide for his family and love his wife. The woman is to raise children (if she can/has them) and take care of her husband and the home.
But I would not say that that is the woman's exclusive responsibility...Proverbs 31:13-31 shows a women who works with her hands as well, and is involved in business...but that she's also taking care fo her household and her husband can trust her. So if we look at that from the NT perspective, we can see that the primary role of the women is to take care of the family, but she may also work. But the man's primary role is working and being the spiritual leader.

Until the industrial revolution and movement to cities homes were providers not consumers of goods and services. All family members were involved, including children. There were no nuclear families until quite modern times. That model lacks historical perspective. None of Paul's teaching had a modern family in view as that was not the pattern at the time.

Just wanted to clarify that I agree that married women CAN work.

Of course they can. We see that in the NT.

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
31,437
10,308
NW England
✟1,346,087.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You interpret.We all do. That is not altering. You and I both have English as our native language. But the word 'gas' means different things to both of us. You have no monopoly on understanding Scripture,

If that's addressed to me, I never said that I do.

and little sound basis for dogmatically denouncing anyone who disagrees with your rather uninformed, but sincerely held opinions.

Again, if that's addressed to me, I'm not trying to denounce anyone. If anyone sincerely believes the Bible says that women should be silent in church and not be preachers or Ministers, that's what they believe. If they believe they have to apply that teaching today, then that's what they have to do, and go to a church which also practices that.

I believe they are wrong. Scripture and my own experience tells me that God does use, and call, women today. But I'm not going to tell anyone they should go against what they believe God is saying.

I also believe that this is not a matter pertaining to salvation and ultimately doesn't matter.
 
Upvote 0

Church2u2

Active Member
Aug 9, 2016
121
48
48
Georgia
✟23,003.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Hi..Well what about those abusive tyrants out there destroying their family? It'd sure be hard to be "submissive" to that.Eve was crafted from Adam's rib..but formed by God.The same as every other creature. Why was she created? Because Adam needed companionship. What was her function? To be his helper.A wife has the devine right to help her husband wherever he needs it.It would be calling God a liar to say otherwise.Woman was created for man.It wasn't the other way around. Deborah was a judge but she was also a prophetess which made her a "mouth piece" of God..meaning He instructed her what to tell the people. Plus she was a wife but for whatever reason God chose her instead of her husband to be a "helper" and spiritual guide for the people. Judges 4.I never really understood why Paul silenced women because as far as I've read Jesus never silenced them and the only man with authority over a woman is her husband. So she doesn't have to submit to any random dude. If God thought a woman was good enough to do it then why not Paul?? Ultimately Judges 4 just showed me that God can use whatever He has created to labor for Him.It showed me that nothing can stop God.
 
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,003
84
New Zealand
✟119,551.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
1 Corinthians 14

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Earlier Paul had stated:
1 Cor 14:1 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.NIV
1 Cor 14:26 26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. NIV

Are you aware that in the various manuscripts that verse appears in different places? The most reasonable explanation was that it is an early gloss, but not written by Paul. That avoids Paul contradicting himself. Earlier he had written:

1 Cor 14:1 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. NIV
1 Cor 14:26 26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. NIV
Note that brothers refers to the whole church not just the men.

If women must be silent then those verses don't make sense. We know women were prophets in the church.


Note that brothers refers to the whole church not just the men.
Everyone includes women being oral too.

Thus your interpretation makes Paul contradict himself. Also nowhere in the OT law are women silenced. Paul, a Jewish scholar made a big mistake?


39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

Now let's see.......................which part of this do you need 'interpreted' to you John. Which part or parts don't you understand? Just ask and I'll see if I can interpret it for you.

None. What don't you understand? On one hand you have a contradiction as noted above. But also brethren = the entire church. Paul's letter would be read to the whole congregation. Few were literate. None there would understand brethren to mean 'only the men'.

Blessings,

MEC

My responses.

John
NZ
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Church2u2

Active Member
Aug 9, 2016
121
48
48
Georgia
✟23,003.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Properly understood Paul didn't silence women. In fact he referred to them as having significant ministry and leadership roles within the new community.

John
NZ
Hi everyone I'm a newbie. I enjoy discussing scripture. This topic particularly interests me. Here is something that I've found in Philippians 4:3 I intreat thee also, true yoke-fellow, help those women which labored with me in the gospel,with Clement also ,and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.) So women did work alongside Paul in the gospel. He named quite a few in the beginning of this chapter. But what really caught my eye was when Paul asked that those women were helped.Well it didn't say exactly in what role these women labored. The point is that Paul didn't seem to have a problem with working in the gospel alongside women and thought enough of them to ensure that they were helped. Then there were Tryphena and Tryphosa who Paul also said were laboring in the Lord ( Romans 16:12) It seems to me that these women were doing a lot more than baking bread.Scripture said they laboured in the Lord.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,941
11,096
okie
✟222,536.00
Faith
Anabaptist
....I came here to talk about the Lord and hopefully learn something from someone else.Thanks.
Cool ! That's Refreshing and Encouraging!
(Like Malachi ? --- a good conversation that Yahweh has a scribe in heaven make a permanent record of)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Church2u2
Upvote 0

Church2u2

Active Member
Aug 9, 2016
121
48
48
Georgia
✟23,003.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Church2u2:

You mean you didn't join this site for
PAUL-BASHING, TRINITY-BASHING, or WOMEN-BASHING??!!??

Gosh... Are ya SURE?

Welcome.
Hi..I guess I'm taking your response as a bit of perhaps "friendly " sarcasm. And I'm glad to be here.Thanks.
 
Upvote 0

Brokenhill

Praise God, i'm satisifed.
Jul 26, 2015
253
71
34
Arizona
✟34,363.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I didn't ignore them, I chose to answer another point/Scripture first intending to return to them later, and I forgot.
Ignoring implies deliberate intent - that was not the case, and you have no idea of my thoughts and intentions anyhow.

To answer that now; a) Scripture says they should be the husband of one wife - ONE, rather than several as some people had. Overseers need to set an example. b) If overseers/deacons/Ministers have to be a husband, they have to be married - someone want to tell the pope and catholic clergy they are disobeying Scripture? c) These verses also say that overseers should be able to manage their children, so they have to have kids and have to be able to control them. Any Minister married to a barren wife or who has unruly teenagers had better resign from the Ministry pretty quickly. d) This passage also says that these people should not like money or get drunk, not be argumentative etc etc. Presumably then, anyone with any of the above qualities or characteristics should not be a Minister? Maybe that is the case in some churches in which case, I applaud their consistency. But it seems clear to me that many people overlook these later verses. They read the verse which says that a deacon should be the husband of one wife and say "Scripture says a Minister should have a wife; a woman can't have a wife so this verse proves that a woman can't be a minister."
It doesn't prove it at all, and if you are going to apply one of the qualities in that passage to clergy, you have to apply them all. So like I say, get rid of anyone who is unmarried, childless etc.
I do apply all those qualifications to all deacons/elders. If they break any one of the qualifications, they are not fit for their job.

If I go to a restaurant and a waitress comes up to me and asks "what would you like to eat?", and I say "1 double cheese-burger with mushrooms and swiss cheese", the waitress (if she's doing her job) will bring me exactly what I ordered without asking "so not american cheese? and not a triple burger right? and you didn't want 17 burgers right?". My point is that she doesn't need to know what I DONT want, she just needs to know what I WANT. Likewise, imagine us asking God: "what do you want in a deacon/elder?" -- His answer inherently excludes anything He didn't ask for. HE ASKED FOR A HUSBAND, NOT A WIFE--therefore all deacons and elders must ONLY BE MEN. There is no discussion on this, no offense (seriously), but this is simple language analysis which can be comprehended by a 5th grader.
God asked for a man with children, who is hospitable, etc. etc...if a man does not fit EVERY SINGLE requirement, he cannot serve as that office!

In order for my wife to work at the hospital as a respiratory therapist, there are certain age, experience, and testing/certification requirements. If she does not fulfill ALL requirements, she can not legally work at the hospital.

Jesus set us an example and showed us how to live as his followers and as salt and light in the world; that doesn't include instruction about marriage, children and domestic arrangements. He wasn't married.
He taught on marriage in Mat. 19. But regardless, God has given us examples throughout the OT and NT or proper marriaged.

Yes, and none of those addressed the matter of marriage and home life. The disciples, who were the wage earners as fishermen and tax collectors, left their families and paid jobs to follow Jesus; what does that say?
The point was that just because it's not commanded directly, doesn't mean it's not necessary. We can reason with scripture that is given to us and make inferential conclusions.
That doesn't excuse deacons/elders from having wives/families. Sometimes there are 2 good/right things to be doing, but one must choose the greater of the responsibilities. Also, Paul states in 1 Cor. 9:5 that they may take along a wife during their ministries, and therefor they can also receive of the monetary blessings provided by the church to the preacher.

1) it says older women; what about the younger ones? 2) Going out to work does not dishonour the word of God. 3) women had no rights at that time and in that society and could do nothing except stay at home and create, and care for, the family. Where does it say it has to be women who do this today?
The older are to be an example, so that that the younger ones follow suit.
The problem is when women put their work ahead of their family. For example, daycare should not be raising the children--the mother should be the primary raiser along with the father when he's available.
It doesn't have to say that it "has" to be a certain way, to be a certain way. Or at the very least an ideal.

Young widows.
Like I say, women had no rights then, so if a woman lost her husband, she had no income or means of support. Paul says nothing about asking if marriage is God's will for them - and in 1 Corinthians 7 he wished that everyone would remain unmarried so they could serve the Lord better - neither does he say anything about love or marrying for love. He just encourages women who have lost their husband to go and find another one!
Right, 1 Cor. 7 is a very important passage to balance this idea...but it's suggesting to the ones who cannot live outside of sin to get married and keep house. But you're right, it's not required that they get married...but if they do, they need to put their family as their primary "job".

Because it was written in a male dominated society; that's not what men did then.
Today, there are occasions where men are out of work and/or their wives have better paid jobs. In such cases the couple may well decide that it makes more sense for the man to be at home while his wife worked. Such a situation could not happen in Bible times; women could not learn and did not have highly paid jobs. So there is no Scripture which addresses the issue. It's a bit like looking in the Bible for advice about whether to buy an ipad/iphone, or what kind of car to buy. These things weren't even dreamed of in Bible times, so it's not surprising that there is no teaching at all on the subject.
As I mentioned, Proverbs 31 proves that women some women were regarded as being intellectual, crafty, and capable of a certain level of independence and generating income/goods for the family.

One's immediate society should never influence how apply scripture. God's commands/examples go above and beyond whatever society's norms are.
If society directed the church today, then it would be perfectly acceptable to to wear bikinis to worship services. It's everyday attire in the summer time in places like Tucson around college campuses.
American culture has crept much too far into the various churches--and not just with modesty or marital roles, with how money is spent, and what kind of distractions are provided that draw our focus away from God. But that's all a different discussion.

So what does that mean for us today?
Not all men are farmers or manual workers. Not all women have pain in childbirth, or at least, they may have varying amounts of pain. It certainly isn't the case that women are saved only if they have children - we are saved by Jesus, not childbirth.
Of course we are saved by Jesus, but since that verse uses strong language, it might be a little important to consider.
We're still the same creation as Adam and Eve. God created society, men have manipulated it for the worse. The principal or idea we can extract is that as men we should be diligent hard workers to provide for our family. That is the burden given to us because of the curse. That's our pain, whereas the women have pain in child bearing. You don't have to be a manual laborer to be in toil.

That's how it was then, and how it may be, mostly, today; certainly the bit about women bearing the children. It doesn't mean that God has commanded that men should have paid jobs and not stay at home. Some men do both and have paid jobs as nannies, carers or midwives - doing jobs that were always, traditionally, seen as "women's work", yet being paid for them. Scripture does not forbid, or address, this issue either.
The creation story is often referenced throughout scripture to discuss eternal principals. In Mat. 19, Jesus condemns the Jews because they were divorcing their wives for any ol' reason...He says "Moses gave you a certificate of divorce ...but from the beginning, this was not so". What He's saying is that IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR TEMPORARY SOCIETY ALLOWS, God's definition of marriage still stands.
When you downplay the importance of creation order, and even the curse to follow...you can easily end up completely opposing God. People (in the church) use political correctness and the changing face of "human rights" to get away with sin...such as homosexual marriages. It's a shame.

Like I said, the NT domestic arrangements were not necessarily as they are today.
That doesn't make it right. That doesn't mean that it isn't God's ideal to have it a different way.
The problem is we're all lazy and we think we're entitled to certain things because of our society. God says in Luke 17 that we are to do what is right, and still consider ourselves "unworthy slaves".
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
"Moses gave you a certificate of divorce ...but from the beginning, this was not so". What He's saying is that IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR TEMPORARY SOCIETY ALLOWS, God's definition of marriage still stands.

Or He's explaining that back in the Garden, God created perfect partners. Nice.
But being that there are flaming swords keeping us out, we are not there.

Romans 13:1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which is from God. The authorities that exist have been appointed by God.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
therefore all deacons and elders must ONLY BE MEN.

Do not make rules unto women, lest you wish women to make rules unto you.
All gender based rules are nullified.

For this is the essence of the Law and the prophets.
13
Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the
way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.

The narrow gate is how you treat people equally. Verse 12.....verse 13.
In the early manuscripts, there are no numbers.
 
Upvote 0