Is prohibiting female church leadership (over men) legalistic?

[~Zao~]

Zoii said: ↑
Its threads like this that show that Christianity is not for women.

Do you think you would have a better position in Islam or orthodox Judaism?

It’s replies like this that makes it unpalatable for women to associate with male-mindedness-god-worshippers. Better off seeking Him elsewhere.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Zoii said: ↑
Its threads like this that show that Christianity is not for women.

It’s replies like this that makes it unpalatable for women to associate with male-mindedness-god-worshippers. Better off seeking Him elsewhere.

I guess it depends on whether they want to worship God as He is, or worship something made in the image they desire. Either way, a topic for another thread.

 

[SkyWriting]

This is very important to note. When Paul gives his rationale for why women shouldn't be in authority over men spiritually, he doesn't offer cultural reasons but scriptural ones.

That's where Paul fails.

"Treating others the same as you would wish to be treated" is entirely subjective.
So following God's law is entirely subjective. Paul missed that. Perhaps because he never saw Jesus in action.

 

[~Zao~]

If you take the position that Paul's words are inerrant scripture, then you must accept all of them. IF you believe that women should not be put in charge of men, then you also believe that all people from the island of Crete are nasty, brutish people. Do you believe this?

Because Paul says quite clearly that Cretans are nasty and brutish. Therefore, you must condemn all Cretans today, just as Paul did 2000 years ago. Does this seem reasonable?

My point is this ... Bible interpretation is a detailed study itself. Theologians know this. There are well defined principles for Bible interpretation. It is wise to learn them, and to follow them.

If I believed that all women should be under the least of all men, like ya’ll seem to believe, there is nothing to prove that true.

 

[SkyWriting]

I also published my post regarding "clergy", I believe women can have leadership in the Church as part of the laity.

As long as you rape church women the same as you want to be raped yourself, then your good.

Luke 6:31
And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

Proverbs 3:27
Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to do it.

John 15:13
Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.
(wife even)

 

[SkyWriting]

God indeed set up the pattern of male headship, and it is not being a bigot, but just the way he ordained it to be!

So you think God disobeyed scripture then?
That's' an odd stand to take.

Matthew 7:12
Luke 6:31
Philippians 2:3-8
Matthew 5:5
Psalm 37:11

 

[~Zao~]

I guess it depends on whether they want to worship God as He is, or worship something made in the image they desire. Either way, a topic for another thread.

I read my bible taking from it what is spiritual substance and leaving the rest of the letters where they belong, in the shadows of truth.

 

[SkyWriting]

The higher criticism /critical "scholars" who saw 3 Isaiah's, 4 writers of Genesis etc!
Christians should still trust the conservative views in regards to who wrote the books of the Bible!

That would be just like trusting the Pharisees.

Matthew 23:23
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.

 

[aiki]

It's nice to talk about universal moral laws, but aside from don't murder (Genesis 9), I don't think "universal moral laws" are given in scripture until they're given to the Israelites, and mixed in with the "laws of separation and ceremony". Also, the covenant of circumcision was given as an "everlasting covenant" to Abraham, and until reading the New Testament, I wouldn't have thought a law could get anymore universal than an "everlasting covenant", so we need to be careful when describing laws as moral, or ceremonial, or universal. I think we both get this, anyway.

Well, Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It was at the Fall when universal moral laws were first imparted to the human race which happened long before God's covenant with Israel was established. Also, "everlasting" is not the same as "universal." "Everlasting" means "unending" or "eternally enduring" and "universal" means "applicable to all" or "true of all people or things in the world or a particular group." As you say, let's be careful about these terms and not use them as though they are synonymous. Anyway, one may recognize a moral law God intends should be universal by its being given as a command or prohibition in both the Old and New Testament. The condemnation and prohibition of homosexuality is a good example.

I love your faith! But (I think) your argument neglects to consider 1 Samuel 21:6, when David took the consecrated bread which it was lawful only for the priests to eat.

How so? Do we ever see women priests in the OT? No. Save for Deborah, do we ever see women prophets in the OT? No. She was, by the singular nature of her situation as a female prophetess, a very rare exception rather than the rule. Do we ever see a woman set up by God as Queen over Israel? No. While some laws might have been violable in the OT in certain circumstances, not all of them were.

There were female prophets. Or at least, female prophetesses. Deborah is an example. No female priests, agreed.

Well, their absence - or almost total absence - in these roles supports/sets a very clear precedent for Paul's prohibitions of women in places of spiritual authority over men.

Why do you think this? The wife in Proverbs 31:10-31 probably did all she did whilst pregnant and nursing twins!

Your unfounded speculation aside, the woman described in the chapter was not barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. And she is set up as model for women in the OT.

Bleh. Good exercise, proper nutrition, positive attitude... Using simple things such as these, most of the inconveniences you refer to can be avoided or the detrimental impacts minimised.

Says the never-to-be-pregnant man.

That's your opinion.

It's not merely my opinion that the description of women you've adopted is/was commonly used to describe an oppressive state of affairs.

 

[~Zao~]

[QUOTE="aiki, post: 73482064, member: 178791”]...
Your unfounded speculation aside, the woman described in the chapter was not barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. And she is set up as model for women in the OT.
...

The model left nothing for the men to do but sit at the gate and collect praise. Who do you believe will collect the rewards? God being given the glory and all....

 

[SkyWriting]

I see no definitive proof. It’s all relative.

"Proof" is entirely relative. There is no scientific or historical "proof" of anything.
Only in Math.

 

[SkyWriting]

The condemnation and prohibition of homosexuality is a good example.

...of violating God's primary laws
Matthew 7:12
Luke 6:31
Romans 15:2

 

[Sam91]

Well, Adam and Eve did eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It was at the Fall when universal moral laws were first imparted to the human race which happened long before God's covenant with Israel was established. Also, "everlasting" is not the same as "universal." "Everlasting" means "unending" or "eternally enduring" and "universal" means "applicable to all" or "true of all people or things in the world or a particular group." As you say, let's be careful about these terms and not use them as though they are synonymous. Anyway, one may recognize a moral law God intends should be universal by its being given as a command or prohibition in both the Old and New Testament. The condemnation and prohibition of homosexuality is a good example.



How so? Do we ever see women priests in the OT? No. Save for Deborah, do we ever see women prophets in the OT? No. She was, by the singular nature of her situation as a female prophetess, a very rare exception rather than the rule. Do we ever see a woman set up by God as Queen over Israel? No. While some laws might have been violable in the OT in certain circumstances, not all of them were.



Well, their absence - or almost total absence - in these roles supports/sets a very clear precedent for Paul's prohibitions of women in places of spiritual authority over men.



Your unfounded speculation aside, the woman described in the chapter was not barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. And she is set up as model for women in the OT.



Says the never-to-be-pregnant man.



It's not merely my opinion that the description of women you've adopted is/was commonly used to describe an oppressive state of affairs.

There were 3 female prophets.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Zoii said: ↑
Its threads like this that show that Christianity is not for women.

It’s replies like this that makes it unpalatable for women to associate with male-mindedness-god-worshippers. Better off seeking Him elsewhere.

I would examine my own faith

 

[ToBeLoved]

"Proof" is entirely relative. There is no scientific or historical "proof" of anything.
Only in Math.

I don’t think that’s true. Maybe I should say data.

I think Pew Internet does a lot of studies that are reliable on religion

 

[~Zao~]

I would examine my own faith

I don’t believe in watering down scripture nor telling others to dummy down to appear as others would have you. But young people, especially females, don’t need either to be accepted into Christianity if it’s read in the spiritual sense it was meant to be. Nor do they need to be told, especially young males, that they represent God and women the church. Not true. God is the representative of God and all represent the subordinate.

 

[ToBeLoved]

That's where Paul fails.

"Treating others the same as you would wish to be treated" is entirely subjective.
So following God's law is entirely subjective. Paul missed that. Perhaps because he never saw Jesus in action.

I don’t think Paul fails at all.

If God’s commands are good and in the Christians best interest, than it is loving to give and treat other with love.

We can give people what they want, but often what we want is not what is best for us or others.

If you read the Old Testament you will see many times the people did not understand the purpose behind Gods commands and they often applied their own human reasoning to their own deterement

 

[ToBeLoved]

If I believed that all women should be under the least of all men, like ya’ll seem to believe, there is nothing to prove that true.

1 Corinthians 5:13
But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I don’t believe in watering down scripture nor telling others to dummy down to appear as others would have you. But young people, especially females, don’t need either to be accepted into Christianity if it’s read in the spiritual sense it was meant to be. Nor do they need to be told, especially young males, that they represent God and women the church. Not true. God is the representative of God and all represent the subordinate.

It’s of course meant to be in a spiritual sense, but it is also to mean that even God has a certain hierarchy.

I think we choose our mates poorly.

 

[SkyWriting]

I don’t think Paul fails at all.If God’s commands are good and in the Christians best interest, than it is loving to give and treat other with love.We can give people what they want, but often what we want is not what is best for us or others.If you read the Old Testament you will see many times the people did not understand the purpose behind Gods commands and they often applied their own human reasoning to their own detriment.

So you can't even find scripture to to make your point then? Sex or gender discrimination or imagined "roles" Paul promoted are not biblical. People often dispute my research with human reasoned arguments and have no scriptural backing.

Luke 6:31
And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

James 2:8
If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well.

Mark 12:31
The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Romans 15:2
Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to build him up.

Galatians 5:14
For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Matthew 7:12
“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Proverbs 3:29
Do not plan evil against your neighbor, who dwells trustingly beside you.

Luke 10:27
And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.”

Romans 13:10
Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.


But Paul may have been following local government law, which is the only law allowed by God under the new covenant. Gender discrimination is illegal now.

Romans 13:1-7
1 Peter 2:13-17