Is it Wrong for Women to Preach in Church?

[S.O.J.I.A.]

1 Corinthians 7:25-27 NKJV "Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy. I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress—that it is good for a man to remain as he is: Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife."

which if you look at verse 10 of the same chapter as an example, we understand this as paul saying I have no quotes of instruction from Jesus on this subject. going on to verse 12 you see the same thing in that Paul rules on a circumstance Jesus himself did not speak on directly.

this would not be an example of Paul stepping outside his apostolic authority and giving a non-binding command or ruling.

 

[woobadooba]

which if you look at verse 10 of the same chapter as an example, we understand this as paul saying I have no quotes of instruction from Jesus on this subject. going on to verse 12 you see the same thing in that Paul rules on a circumstance Jesus himself did not speak on directly.

this would not be an example of Paul stepping outside his apostolic authority and giving a non-binding command or ruling.

You have ignored the fact that Paul clearly gave a personal belief based on the distress of the times. You are not willing to admit that you could be wrong.

 

[Vicomte13]

Be careful. Although it may be true that some of what Paul wrote had cultural ties, it's important to get at the root of why he said what he said before concluding it ought to be rejected because it doesn't sound right today. Even during his time people were taking his writings out of context (see 2 Peter 3:16). People do the same today.

I did not say that. I said that Paul has to be rejected on these points because Jesus himself did the opposite, and Jesus is God, but Paul is not. Jesus' own personal example trumps Paul.

Likewise, Jesus trumps the Council of Jerusalem - all of the Apostles together. He said that NOTHING a man eats makes him unclean - and thereby made all foods clean (a point that was re-emphasized to Peter three times directly by God from the sky). But at the Council of Jerusalem, the Apostles assembled wrote to the Christian Church that things like blood sausage or the staples of the Masai (cow blood) and the Mongol (horse blood) are not to be eaten.

Jesus trumps. It is not, and was not, sinful to eat blood. NOTHING means nothing - it does not mean Nothing, except blood. The Apostles sought to impose a rule on Christianity that is contrary to what Jesus ordained. Therefore, what the Apostles said, written right there in the Bible, is null and void. Men cannot override God. Period.

The Father said to follow Jesus. And Jesus said to follow him, and to keep his commandments. Jesus taught St. Photini and used her teaching to bring the Samaritans to him - so Jesus used a woman to teach men. He did the same thing at the Resurrection. Note well that Eve broke the original law, but at at the Crucifixion it was the men who ran away and denied Jesus - the women were at the foot of the cross with him to the end, and Jesus revealed the truth to the women, who taught the men that the resurrection had happened - and the men still lacked faith and did not believe. Jesus taught men through women. Therefore, that is part of the model and doing that is following him. Rejecting that because Paul disagreed is the wrong thing to do. Paul has no authority to override Jesus, and no authority to replace God's example with his own.

Similarly, when Jesus made ALL food clean, that mean blood sausage and Mongol blood porridge also, and the Apostles - acting understandably because they were all Jews and abhorred the very idea of eating blood - lacked the authority to override Jesus commandment and re-establish a prohibition on blood. Their rule, in Acts, from the Council at Jerusalem, is to be understood as a mere time, place and manner restriction, and not a law of God. It's actually contrary to the law of God, and was made because of (Jewish) human weakness regarding a tradition.

If that's really a law of God, just because men who were not Jesus overruled Jesus on it, then the English, Germans, Caribbean people, Masai and Mongols are all abominable before God because they eat blood-based staples in their diets.

It's really simple: the Father said to follow JESUS, and JEsus said to follow HIM and keep HIS commandments.

Jesus had long hair.
Jesus taught men through women. Jesus made all foods clean. That should be the end of the analysis.
The only reason it isn't is because some people have a tradition of turning the Bible into a God-maker, such that words of Paul or the Apostles that contradict what Jesus say or did are placed on the scale against Jesus and Jesus himself is overridden, sometimes, in favor of an opinion of Paul or the Apostles, or the Church.

To do this is inane.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Well - and no disrespect - maybe you haven't had God speaking to you in that way.

I could say the same thing to you - maybe you haven't either, even if you think you have.

Jesus had long hair.

You feel feel to disregard the instructions of the apostles if they do not make sense to you... yet you hold it as an article of faith, with no evidence from Scripture whatsoever, that Jesus had long hair...

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

What do you believe Paul meant when he said, "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence" (1 Tim. 2:12)?

In saying, "I do not permit," was Paul sharing a personal opinion/belief? Was it a command of God? Did it have anything to do with the culture of the time? What did he mean by "authority"?

First, the Greek word gune can refer to either woman or wife. Context in this passage strongly leans towards wife (Adam and Eve, etc.) A wife taking spiritual authority over her husband would be a problem. Whether a single or widowed woman could hold a place of authority is less clear.

Second, the phrase 'take authority' is far stronger in the Greek, speaking of seizing authority or usurping another's authority. It is doubtful that delegated authority (such as a church group inviting a female speaker to guest preach) or rightful authority (such as the authority a woman may have in her career) would fall under this category.

More here:

What does it mean that a woman should not teach or take authority over a man?

 

[Vicomte13]

You feel feel to disregard the instructions of the apostles if they do not make sense to you... yet you hold it as an article of faith, with no evidence from Scripture whatsoever, that Jesus had long hair...

No. I am right to disregard the opinions of the Apostles when they contradict Jesus, as they do in the specific instances I cited. Jesus is God. The Apostles are not God. God trumps. Always. Obviously. No brainer.

And it's not a matter of faith. It's a matter of eyesight. We have Jesus' burial shroud. It has a miraculous image of his dead body on it. He had long hair and a long beard.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

You have ignored the fact that Paul clearly gave a personal belief based on the distress of the times. You are not willing to admit that you could be wrong.

he operated within his apostolic authority, being lead by the Spirit of God, in making a prudent judgement on a matter("...as one whom the LORD in His mercy has made trustworthy").

I don't see how this supports your point?

 

[Halbhh]

Of course Eve sinned! She knew the law, and broke it because she wanted to. Adam stumbled along stupidly afterwards because she asked him to (by giving him the fruit). Eve was the first sinner, not Adam.

:=) yup.

I mean Adams sin is equal to hers. Just as wrong.

 

[Go Braves]

I know some Baptists think so, our Baptist church doesn't think that. I think anybody who's got the gift to preach, is called to it by God, well they ought to. Lady or man. It's a shame to squander gifts.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

No. I am right to disregard the opinions of the Apostles when they contradict Jesus, as they do in the specific instances I cited. Jesus is God. The Apostles are not God. God trumps. Always. Obviously. No brainer.

You think you know more about the teachings of Jesus that the apostles who Jesus personally picked to lead the church.

And it's not a matter of faith. It's a matter of eyesight. We have Jesus' burial shroud. It has a miraculous image of his dead body on it. He had long hair and a long beard.

That itself is an article of faith not supported by Scripture, or even Roman Catholic teaching. But I suppose the legend of the shroud feels right to you, and that's what matters...

First, the Greek word gune can refer to either woman or wife. Context in this passage strongly leans towards wife (Adam and Eve, etc.)

25 widely used translations here, and every single one translates it as "woman" not "wife".

 

[Friend-of-Jesus]

God said to women, "you are not to preach".

 

[woobadooba]

I don't see how this supports your point?

I feel that trying to explain it to you won't do any good as you don't appear to be open to the possibility of being wrong. I'm moving on.

 

[Vicomte13]

You think you know more about the teachings of Jesus that the apostles who Jesus personally picked to lead the church.

That itself is an article of faith not supported by Scripture, or even Roman Catholic teaching. But I suppose the legend of the shroud feels right to you, and that's what matters...

I note that the Church later made blood sausage fine to eat, so that the authority vested in the Church by Jesus eventually came to the correct answer for later times. Similarly, I note that the same authority does not prevent women from teaching, merely from being priests (at present).

So in fact I think that the Church WAS vested with that authority, but that it was the teaching authority of the Church - which was the Apostles in the time of Paul and the 12, but is the Bishops and Pope today - which set the rule originally, then updated it. In other words, Paul had the authority then, and the Apostles had it then, because they were put over the Church. They are dead, and their successors have the authority now, because they are put over the Church. The authority itself reposes the Church through the Holy Spirit.

Now, this is quite different from the way you look at it. You look at it as all contained in that book, in which case, with regards to your first comment, I am at least as qualified as you are to read a First Century document and interpret it, and in that document what Jesus said, and Jesus' authority is crystal clear in that.

Either way I look at it, the Apostles rules on blood, and Paul's rules on hair and women teaching are not valid. Either they WERE valid, because of the authority of the Holy Spirit Jesus sent into the Church allowed them to modify the law he gave to address the situations of that time - and the same authority has since modified Paul's and the Apostle's decisions back to those that Jesus originally said and did. In which case we get where we are. Or else they were not valid in the first place, because the Apostles were not given the authority to override and replace the commandments of God, in which case long hair and blood sausage never were a problem.

As far as the Shroud goes, it is neither a matter of faith or legend, but of solid forensic science, and yes, solid science does matter.

 

[Friend-of-Jesus]

I know some Baptists think so, our Baptist church doesn't think that. I think anybody who's got the gift to preach, is called to it by God, well they ought to. Lady or man. It's a shame to squander gifts.

Baptist or artist or balloonist, doesn't matter. Only word of God matters. Only it is true. No woman should preach, God said. He is the boss of the universe. We're little nothings on the little speck of earth in the endless Universe of His. Who are we to argue with Him?

 

[RDKirk]

God said to women, "you are not to preach".

C'mon, you can't quote God and not provide chapter and verse.

And because you've claimed to be directly quoting God, we must insist that the chapter and verse you provide be a direct "thus saith the Lord" quote.

Or was that a Poe's Law example?

 

[woobadooba]

First, the Greek word gune can refer to either woman or wife. Context in this passage strongly leans towards wife (Adam and Eve, etc.) A wife taking spiritual authority over her husband would be a problem. Whether a single or widowed woman could hold a place of authority is less clear.

Second, the phrase 'take authority' is far stronger in the Greek, speaking of seizing authority or usurping another's authority. It is doubtful that delegated authority (such as a church group inviting a female speaker to guest preach) or rightful authority (such as the authority a woman may have in her career) would fall under this category.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I think your perspective on this is worthy of consideration.

 

[Vicomte13]

No woman should preach, God said. He is the boss of the universe.

He never said that. Not ever. Paul said that. Paul is not God. Jesus used women to preach. YHWH used women to preach. God has used women to preach since the time of Paul.

God sent women to preach. Often.

 

[RDKirk]

He never said that. Not ever. Paul said that. Paul is not God. Jesus used women to preach. YHWH used women to preach. God has used women to preach since the time of Paul.

God sent women to preach. Often.

Actually, Paul didn't say "No woman should preach," either.

But I'm thinking Friend-of-Jesus may have tossed a "Poe" at us.

 

[Vicomte13]

Actually, Paul didn't say "No woman should preach," either.

But I'm thinking Friend-of-Jesus may have tossed a "Poe" at us.

What's a "Poe"? Edgar Allen? Ravens flying about squawking "Nevermore! Nevermore! Nevermore!"?
Hearts pounding away under the floorboards (ew...)? People bricked into the walls?

 

[pescador]

Baptist or artist or balloonist, doesn't matter. Only word of God matters. Only it is true. No woman should preach, God said. He is the boss of the universe. We're little nothings on the little speck of earth in the endless Universe of His. Who are we to argue with Him?

This seems a little bit confusing!

Only word of God matters? Not God himself, not Jesus, not the Holy Spirit, not the bride of Christ?

Where did God say that no woman should preach? Paul wrote that he personally did not permit a woman to speak in church, not God, because of the social mores of the day (2000 years ago).

We're not little nothings on the little speck of earth! We are born again into the body of Christ and are God's adopted children.

Finally, who is arguing with God??