The Women Who Ought to Remain Silent in the Assemblies of God

[talitha]

However, if a woman is unmarried, she may indeed speak in the assemblies of God, because she is not under submission to need to be quiet.

I have learned that when I come to nonsensical conclusions like this one about doctrine, there is something that I am missing or misunderstanding. This is totally loony. When I married at 33, I didn't suddenly lose my God-given gifting to teach, nor did God bar me from teaching. Tan ridiculoso! I have actually gained much more in wisdom after marriage than I had before. Much more. Both in experiential wisdom and in spiritual wisdom. And I KNOW that God has not instructed me to keep it to myself. That would not be like Him.

In 1 Corinthians 11, just three chapters before the passage you quoted, Paul gives instructions for women praying and prophesying in the church. Same Greek word as he used in chapter 14. However, for me it is not clear that Paul is actually speaking in either instance. I think that in this book Paul is responding to questions and concerns that were conveyed to him by the people in the Corinthian church. If I keep reading from verses 34-35 into verse 36, it appears that Paul is responding to the idea of wives keeping silent in verse 36 when he says (maybe to the domineering husband(s)) "What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?" Just an alternative reading. We need to keep in mind as we read Paul's epistles that (with the possible exception of Ephesians) they were written strictly as instructions for the churches addressed, and the over-arching theme of Paul's writings was FREEDOM FROM THE LAW, because Judaizers were going to these churches after he left them, preaching that the people must obey Jewish law.

 

[squirrel123]

I see no one had yet explained how it is that people (mostly men), who know that women shouldn't teach, got to know God's will better than God himself, who keeps calling women to do just that... Are you saying that God makes mistakes? That He somehow accidentally calls the wrong people sometimes? Or does He call these women as some sort of diabolical test - as in "let's see which of these two opposing commands they obey"?

 

[Denadii]

There are a few scriptures that instruct certain women to keep silent in the assemblies of God, here is the first verse,


And here is the second verse,


Now, the Greek word for woman is "gyne", which could mean a woman or more specifically a wife. The usage of the word to mean a wife can be seen in this verse,


Now, all women are not wives, since any woman that is unmarried is therefore not a wife, she is a "single woman", as we call it today's day. And if you look closely at the I Corinthians 14:35, you will notice that these women being instructed to "ask their own husbands" are women that are married, because a married woman has a husband. The same applies to the 1 Timothy passage where it says "women will be saved through childbearing", only a woman who is married to a husband will child-bear. Therefore, these passages of women to keep quiet, are not referring to all women, it is referring to wives specifically. Wives are the women that are to keep quiet in the assemblies of God, not all women, or rather, not single women. Why? Because it is the wife's husband that should assume the authority between them two, which is why the passage in 1 Timothy says, "assume authority over a man". This verse isn't saying that women shouldn't be teachers over men, it is talking about wives having authority over their man, their husband, and should thus not teach, because it is her husband the one that should teach, and not his wife.

When a woman becomes married, she comes under submission to her husband,


When a woman comes under the submission of marriage, it is then that she must be quiet. However, if a woman is unmarried, she may indeed speak in the assemblies of God, because she is not under submission to need to be quiet. Even so, marriage will indeed become a former thing, as it is said here,


So does it not stand to reason that if all people that are resurrected will all as be as angels one and the same, not being of the gender of a man or a woman, that indeed God has given just as equal ability for an unmarried woman to teach just as a man? This is why we are encouraged to not marry, because marriage will soon become a former thing, and there will be no distinction between a man or a women in the resurrection, and here is where Paul encourages all who are unmarried or widowed to remain single,


In "to be as myself", Paul was referring to him being unmarried. And even in this verse we also see the same thing concerning marriage,


A man comes to "touch" a woman when he marries a woman. This also coincides with this saying of Jesus,


Now, men and women are not commanded to not marry, but instead, encouraged to not marry, as it is better to remain single to give full devotion and service to the Lord. Yet if a woman does indeed marry and becomes a wife, she must then come under submission and keep quiet in the assemblies of God and not teach.

May God open your understanding. You may also view this study on my blog at http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2016/01/20/the-women-who-ought-to-remain-silent-in-the-assemblies-of-god/ .

This belief about women keeping silent overflows into the beliefs of women should not preach or be ministers, and its unscriptural.

In 1 Cor. 14:34 the Apostle Paul’s letter states: “…the women should keep silent in the assemblies. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.” There are several major problems with this statement.

First, nowhere does the Jewish Law forbid women to speak in public gatherings. Paul, being a well-educated Jew, certainly would have known this. In fact, there was a law on the books that did forbid women to speak, vote and exercise authority over men by holding public office. It was not a Jewish, but a Roman law. These words would sound far more credible if someone else, other than the Jewish Apostle Paul, had written them.


Second, on numerous occasions throughout his travels and letters, the Apostle Paul affirmed the ministry of women (Rom 16:3-4; 1 Cor. 16:19; cf. Acts 16:11-40; 18:26). The centrality of the Shemah – the Oneness of Israel’s God, informed Paul’s theology when he wrote that in Christ-following assemblies there was no place for segregation or discrimination:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28)

In 1 Corinthians 11:5, he wrote that a woman’s head must be covered while she is engaged in speaking in tongues or prophesying in a public assembly. The question was not, therefore, if a woman could speak and teach, but how it should be done in a way that would be right before God, angels and the people of Corinth.

When we read Paul’s letters we need to keep in mind that 1 Corinthians was not the beginning of this correspondence. Paul wrote at least one letter to the Corinthians prior to this (1 Cor. 5:9) and the Corinthian leadership had also written to him (1 Cor. 7:1). It is therefore highly probable that the statement in 1 Cor. 14:34-35 is a quotation from a letter that the Corinthian male leadership had addressed to Paul. It was their proposal on how to bring order into the disruptive practice of some women in the congregation as they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Paul, however, disagreed.


If this text is viewed as a quotation, then the challenge in 1 Cor. 14:36 that Paul brings to the male leadership makes perfect sense:

“Was it from you (masculine) that the word of God first went forth?! Or has it come to you (masculine) only?!”

The all-male leadership of the Corinthian congregation was not to forbid (women) to speak in tongues and themselves were to be encouraged to prophecy just as the women among them already were doing:

“Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues. But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.” (1 Cor. 14:39-40)

Paul’s solution, therefore, was not to exclude half of the congregation from exercising the gifts of the Spirit, but rather to make sure that it was done in a respectful, proper and orderly fashion.

Was Paul right about women? Absolutely! His Corinthian opponents were not.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I see no one had yet explained how it is that people (mostly men), who know that women shouldn't teach, got to know God's will better than God himself, who keeps calling women to do just that... Are you saying that God makes mistakes? That He somehow accidentally calls the wrong people sometimes? Or does He call these women as some sort of diabolical test - as in "let's see which of these two opposing commands they obey"?

Believe it or not, you're closer than you think ! (accidentally , of course)

 

[Imagican]

I have learned that when I come to nonsensical conclusions like this one about doctrine, there is something that I am missing or misunderstanding. This is totally loony. When I married at 33, I didn't suddenly lose my God-given gifting to teach, nor did God bar me from teaching. Tan ridiculoso! I have actually gained much more in wisdom after marriage than I had before. Much more. Both in experiential wisdom and in spiritual wisdom. And I KNOW that God has not instructed me to keep it to myself. That would not be like Him.

In 1 Corinthians 11, just three chapters before the passage you quoted, Paul gives instructions for women praying and prophesying in the church. Same Greek word as he used in chapter 14. However, for me it is not clear that Paul is actually speaking in either instance. I think that in this book Paul is responding to questions and concerns that were conveyed to him by the people in the Corinthian church. If I keep reading from verses 34-35 into verse 36, it appears that Paul is responding to the idea of wives keeping silent in verse 36 when he says (maybe to the domineering husband(s)) "What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?" Just an alternative reading. We need to keep in mind as we read Paul's epistles that (with the possible exception of Ephesians) they were written strictly as instructions for the churches addressed, and the over-arching theme of Paul's writings was FREEDOM FROM THE LAW, because Judaizers were going to these churches after he left them, preaching that the people must obey Jewish law.

Allow me to offer some insight into this MISunderstanding.

The words offered to the Corinthians was NOT only to them. What applies to one member of the 'Church' applies to all. While all 'gifts' are not 'equal' or the same, whatever teachings that are 'good' for one Christian are 'good' for ALL Christians. In other words, doctrine that is good is GOOD FOR ALL.

If one does what they are suppose to DO when reading and interpreting scripture, it becomes perfectly CLEAR that each chapter written by Paul is SPECIFIC. Not 'left up' to personal interpretation. He begins each chapter with a THEME and the entire chapter pertains to THAT particular THEME. He does write RANDOMLY as some presume.

The chapters in question are about SPECIFIC things. The one that speaks of women remaining 'silent' in the 'church' are pertaining to the THEME of the Chapter. The 'specific' thing he is speaking of. In this case, it is 'tongues'. Read the chapter yourself with the UNDERSTANDING that the entire chapter is about ONE THING: tongues.

So what Paul is offering is that women were NOT to speak in tongues IN THE CHURCH. In the 'gathering'. For we KNOW that women were not expected to REMAIN silent in the 'church' so far as singing, praising etc........ That concept is ludicrous.

But what Paul is addressing in this entire chapter is the PROPER use of tongues. Obviously a 'problem' taking place in the 'church at Corinth.

For: "tongues are for a SIGN, not to them that BELIEVE, but to them that BELIEVE NOT.

Now what purpose would a woman have to be speaking 'tongues' IN THE CHURCH unless the 'church' was FULL of 'non believers'? For it would be useless 'tongues' unless the 'church' was full of 'non-believers' if tongues are: 'for a sign' to them that 'believe NOT'.

And the Bible DOES specifically deny women teaching MEN. Other women and children are not denied. But women ARE denied teaching MEN. And it doesn't instruct us to accept what we LIKE and deny what we don't. It simply offers instructions to those WILLING to accept. Nothing offered in the Bible forces us to FOLLOW the truth. Each of us is given the ABILITY to overcome the 'flesh'. And it is the FLESH that rebels against the 'Spirit'.

Hope this helps.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Oh shut about all the women thing you candy people. Must take a break from cf... smh

 

[Denadii]

This 'women keep shut up in church' is just so unscriptural! I really wish people would get the Word instead of churchy doctrine.
In 1 Cor. 14:34 the Apostle Paul’s letter states: “…the women should keep silent in the assemblies. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.” There are several major problems with this statement.

First, nowhere does the Jewish Law forbid women to speak in public gatherings. Paul, being a well-educated Jew, certainly would have known this. In fact, there was a law on the books that did forbid women to speak, vote and exercise authority over men by holding public office. It was not a Jewish, but a Roman law. These words would sound far more credible if someone else, other than the Jewish Apostle Paul, had written them.

Second, on numerous occasions throughout his travels and letters, the Apostle Paul affirmed the ministry of women (Rom 16:3-4; 1 Cor. 16:19; cf. Acts 16:11-40; 18:26). The centrality of the Shemah – the Oneness of Israel’s God, informed Paul’s theology when he wrote that in Christ-following assemblies there was no place for segregation or discrimination:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28)

In 1 Corinthians 11:5, he wrote that a woman’s head must be covered while she is engaged in speaking in tongues or prophesying in a public assembly. The question was not, therefore, if a woman could speak and teach, but how it should be done in a way that would be right before God, angels and the people of Corinth.

When we read Paul’s letters we need to keep in mind that 1 Corinthians was not the beginning of this correspondence. Paul wrote at least one letter to the Corinthians prior to this (1 Cor. 5:9) and the Corinthian leadership had also written to him (1 Cor. 7:1). It is therefore highly probable that the statement in 1 Cor. 14:34-35 is a quotation from a letter that the Corinthian male leadership had addressed to Paul. It was their proposal on how to bring order into the disruptive practice of some women in the congregation as they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Paul, however, disagreed.

If this text is viewed as a quotation, then the challenge in 1 Cor. 14:36 that Paul brings to the male leadership makes perfect sense:

“Was it from you (masculine) that the word of God first went forth?! Or has it come to you (masculine) only?!”

The all-male leadership of the Corinthian congregation was not to forbid (women) to speak in tongues and themselves were to be encouraged to prophecy just as the women among them already were doing:

“Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues. But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.” (1 Cor. 14:39-40)

Paul’s solution, therefore, was not to exclude half of the congregation from exercising the gifts of the Spirit, but rather to make sure that it was done in a respectful, proper and orderly fashion.

Was Paul right about women? Absolutely! His Corinthian opponents were not.

Oops! I already posted this....I must feel it's important hey?

 

[Imagican]

So, were the words of the letter written to the Corinthians NOT authentic? And if one attempts to garner that understanding, (that the Bible cannot be relied upon for 'truth'), then that allows one to 'make up' whatever they CHOOSE to believe. To become their OWN religion and their OWN God.

If Paul's words ARE authentic, exactly what do they MEAN. For they are pretty clear so far as the words themselves.

But let me offer this: Most 'women' don't accept what the Bible offers concerning the event of the 'garden' either. Unwilling to be submissive to their husbands. They don't LIKE the words and therefore rebel against them because of their OWN lusts and desires that won't allow them to follow as instructed.

And it's not JUST a 'woman issue'. MOST of us rebel against those that 'things we are instructed' that get in the way of our lusts and desires.

But I will offer this: It is ONLY when we are willing and able to ACCEPT what they Bible offers and FOLLOW that instruction can we TRULY consider ourselves FOLLOWERS. Following bits and pieces according to our own desires does not produce a TRUE follower.

And the Bible informs us that if we DON'T, then God is not IN US.

Question: Do you suppose that there are people out there that would LIKE to think of themselves as followers and would LIKE others to perceive them as followers yet their hearts are 'far, far from God'?

The Bible informs us that the 'clay' doesn't have the capacity to determine it's TRUE shape. That only the potter can make that determination. For the clay on it's own is JUST CLAY without FORM.

Isn't this analogy offered to show us that we are incapable of determining our own path so far as righteousness is concerned? That in order to BE a true follower, we MUST follow. Not 'just the things that we WANT to follow'. But even those things we don't LIKE to follow.

So attempting to ignore of alter the truth doesn't 'change it' except in one's own perception. But what's worse than one altering the truth to suit themselves is convincing others to follow the same folly.

Paul's words OBVIOUSLY had meaning or they wouldn't be there. Since no one is live today that was there at the time, it is impossible to 'say' with certainty what the 'law' was. OBVIOUSLY there was some sort of law about women remaining 'silent' or Paul wouldn't have written those words. So it's not a matter of IF, it's a matter of WHAT they mean. The words are clear even if their meaning isn't.

I have offered what I believe they mean. The entire chapter where these words are found at the 'end' is a chapter devoted to 'tongues'. NO reason to believe that the words pertaining to women at the end of the chapter aren't in regards to 'tongues'. Paul did not randomly veer from the theme of the chapter into something totally separate from the theme.

He is obviously referring to women remaining silent in the 'gathering' as it pertains to 'speaking in tongues'. And as far as anyone KNOWS, there was 'oral tradition' that forbade women from speaking on tongues IN THE GATHERING and this is the 'law' Paul was referring to.

You know folks, if we try to understand the Bible from modern perspective we will end up really confused.

It was only about a hundred years ago that women gained the 'right to vote' in AMERICA. Previous to that, they had NO SUCH RIGHT.

Imagine how women were treated two thousand years ago. They were basically 'property'. Men, who made the laws made many that kept women in a 'certain PLACE' in society. And those that followed the Bible in the making of their laws most certainly USED the Bible to make many laws pertaining to women.

If we try to equate the 'woman of today' of that two thousand years ago, we are placing ourselves in a position to come to nothing but "FALSE" conclusions on matters spoken of in the Bible pertaining to women.

It's not a matter of what someone LIKES, it's a matter of FACT. If you can't 'get over' the facts, you will NEVER understand what it is that we have been offered in 'truth'. May as well write your own Bible.

Life has NEVER been 'fair'. Nothing IN life is MEANT to be 'fair'. I don't believe that there is a human being that exists that could actually determine fairness if they spent their entire lives trying.

So it's not an issue of fair or equal or 'the same'. It's a matter of TRUTH as offered by God to those that would be FOLLOWERS of that truth.

Once you start BELIEVING that things are suppose to be FAIR, you will then shut out any possibility of understanding what God has offered in instruction. God has NEVER instructed us that His truth is about 'fairness', 'equality', or any such 'human created' concepts. What He HAS offered is HIS WILL in a manner that we can understand regardless of our concepts of 'fairness'.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Denadii]

So, were the words of the letter written to the Corinthians NOT authentic? And if one attempts to garner that understanding, (that the Bible cannot be relied upon for 'truth'), then that allows one to 'make up' whatever they CHOOSE to believe. To become their OWN religion and their OWN God.

If Paul's words ARE authentic, exactly what do they MEAN. For they are pretty clear so far as the words themselves.

But let me offer this: Most 'women' don't accept what the Bible offers concerning the event of the 'garden' either. Unwilling to be submissive to their husbands. They don't LIKE the words and therefore rebel against them because of their OWN lusts and desires that won't allow them to follow as instructed.

And it's not JUST a 'woman issue'. MOST of us rebel against those that 'things we are instructed' that get in the way of our lusts and desires.

But I will offer this: It is ONLY when we are willing and able to ACCEPT what they Bible offers and FOLLOW that instruction can we TRULY consider ourselves FOLLOWERS. Following bits and pieces according to our own desires does not produce a TRUE follower.

And the Bible informs us that if we DON'T, then God is not IN US.

Question: Do you suppose that there are people out there that would LIKE to think of themselves as followers and would LIKE others to perceive them as followers yet their hearts are 'far, far from God'?

The Bible informs us that the 'clay' doesn't have the capacity to determine it's TRUE shape. That only the potter can make that determination. For the clay on it's own is JUST CLAY without FORM.

Isn't this analogy offered to show us that we are incapable of determining our own path so far as righteousness is concerned? That in order to BE a true follower, we MUST follow. Not 'just the things that we WANT to follow'. But even those things we don't LIKE to follow.

So attempting to ignore of alter the truth doesn't 'change it' except in one's own perception. But what's worse than one altering the truth to suit themselves is convincing others to follow the same folly.

Paul's words OBVIOUSLY had meaning or they wouldn't be there. Since no one is live today that was there at the time, it is impossible to 'say' with certainty what the 'law' was. OBVIOUSLY there was some sort of law about women remaining 'silent' or Paul wouldn't have written those words. So it's not a matter of IF, it's a matter of WHAT they mean. The words are clear even if their meaning isn't.

I have offered what I believe they mean. The entire chapter where these words are found at the 'end' is a chapter devoted to 'tongues'. NO reason to believe that the words pertaining to women at the end of the chapter aren't in regards to 'tongues'. Paul did not randomly veer from the theme of the chapter into something totally separate from the theme.

He is obviously referring to women remaining silent in the 'gathering' as it pertains to 'speaking in tongues'. And as far as anyone KNOWS, there was 'oral tradition' that forbade women from speaking on tongues IN THE GATHERING and this is the 'law' Paul was referring to.

You know folks, if we try to understand the Bible from modern perspective we will end up really confused.

It was only about a hundred years ago that women gained the 'right to vote' in AMERICA. Previous to that, they had NO SUCH RIGHT.

Imagine how women were treated two thousand years ago. They were basically 'property'. Men, who made the laws made many that kept women in a 'certain PLACE' in society. And those that followed the Bible in the making of their laws most certainly USED the Bible to make many laws pertaining to women.

If we try to equate the 'woman of today' of that two thousand years ago, we are placing ourselves in a position to come to nothing but "FALSE" conclusions on matters spoken of in the Bible pertaining to women.

It's not a matter of what someone LIKES, it's a matter of FACT. If you can't 'get over' the facts, you will NEVER understand what it is that we have been offered in 'truth'. May as well write your own Bible.

Life has NEVER been 'fair'. Nothing IN life is MEANT to be 'fair'. I don't believe that there is a human being that exists that could actually determine fairness if they spent their entire lives trying.

So it's not an issue of fair or equal or 'the same'. It's a matter of TRUTH as offered by God to those that would be FOLLOWERS of that truth.

Once you start BELIEVING that things are suppose to be FAIR, you will then shut out any possibility of understanding what God has offered in instruction. God has NEVER instructed us that His truth is about 'fairness', 'equality', or any such 'human created' concepts. What He HAS offered is HIS WILL in a manner that we can understand regardless of our concepts of 'fairness'.

Blessings,

MEC

If you back up a chapter to a chapter and a half and read from there, you would find that Paul was answering questions from the church...He was speaking in 'responsa' Sometimes he would repeat the question, and other times he simply read the statement....

So you ask "Was the scripture not authentic. If you read it with more context.....not just these two verses...... Ok For context ...start with Paul himself....He was a zealot before he got saved. He knew the scriptures. He knew that there is not law in the Talmud or the Penetuch against women teaching or ministering....That being the case, why would he say it was in the law? What happened there was...Paul repeated the statement a 'pastor' made. Then he answered it. "What?! Did the Word of God come to you? Or Are these only your words, your opinion?
One CANNOT build a doctrine on one or two verses! That's what has happened here...I'm not jumping on you of course, because I heard this rot forty five years ago when I got saved. And it is tripe! Totally against the Word.

 

[Strong in Him]

.

 

[Imagican]

I see no one had yet explained how it is that people (mostly men), who know that women shouldn't teach, got to know God's will better than God himself, who keeps calling women to do just that... Are you saying that God makes mistakes? That He somehow accidentally calls the wrong people sometimes? Or does He call these women as some sort of diabolical test - as in "let's see which of these two opposing commands they obey"?

And how are you capable of PROVING what you have stated? How can you PROVE that a single woman has EVER been called 'by God' to teach MEN?

God doesn't make mistakes, PEOPLE do.

I can assure you that many that BELIEVE that they are 'called by God'...............are not.

It's quite possible that at different stages of his ministry, Jim Jones BELIEVED he was 'called by God'. And that's just ONE extreme example.

The Bible says that a Bishop, (leader of a church), MUST BE 'married, with children, not a drunkard, etc.........', But how many pastors insist they were 'called by God' but do not meet the criteria ORDERED by God?

So 'saying' that one is 'called by God' does not MAKE them 'called by God'. Those are 'just words'. And the tongues of men,(mankind which would include women as well), are FULL OF LIES.

So what I would NEED in order to accept your statement would be PROOF. And if what you propose contradicts the Bible, I don't believe you could prove it to me.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Denadii]

So, were the words of the letter written to the Corinthians NOT authentic? And if one attempts to garner that understanding, (that the Bible cannot be relied upon for 'truth'), then that allows one to 'make up' whatever they CHOOSE to believe. To become their OWN religion and their OWN God.

If Paul's words ARE authentic, exactly what do they MEAN. For they are pretty clear so far as the words themselves.

But let me offer this: Most 'women' don't accept what the Bible offers concerning the event of the 'garden' either. Unwilling to be submissive to their husbands. They don't LIKE the words and therefore rebel against them because of their OWN lusts and desires that won't allow them to follow as instructed.

And it's not JUST a 'woman issue'. MOST of us rebel against those that 'things we are instructed' that get in the way of our lusts and desires.

But I will offer this: It is ONLY when we are willing and able to ACCEPT what they Bible offers and FOLLOW that instruction can we TRULY consider ourselves FOLLOWERS. Following bits and pieces according to our own desires does not produce a TRUE follower.

And the Bible informs us that if we DON'T, then God is not IN US.

Question: Do you suppose that there are people out there that would LIKE to think of themselves as followers and would LIKE others to perceive them as followers yet their hearts are 'far, far from God'?

The Bible informs us that the 'clay' doesn't have the capacity to determine it's TRUE shape. That only the potter can make that determination. For the clay on it's own is JUST CLAY without FORM.

Isn't this analogy offered to show us that we are incapable of determining our own path so far as righteousness is concerned? That in order to BE a true follower, we MUST follow. Not 'just the things that we WANT to follow'. But even those things we don't LIKE to follow.

So attempting to ignore of alter the truth doesn't 'change it' except in one's own perception. But what's worse than one altering the truth to suit themselves is convincing others to follow the same folly.

Paul's words OBVIOUSLY had meaning or they wouldn't be there. Since no one is live today that was there at the time, it is impossible to 'say' with certainty what the 'law' was. OBVIOUSLY there was some sort of law about women remaining 'silent' or Paul wouldn't have written those words. So it's not a matter of IF, it's a matter of WHAT they mean. The words are clear even if their meaning isn't.

I have offered what I believe they mean. The entire chapter where these words are found at the 'end' is a chapter devoted to 'tongues'. NO reason to believe that the words pertaining to women at the end of the chapter aren't in regards to 'tongues'. Paul did not randomly veer from the theme of the chapter into something totally separate from the theme.

He is obviously referring to women remaining silent in the 'gathering' as it pertains to 'speaking in tongues'. And as far as anyone KNOWS, there was 'oral tradition' that forbade women from speaking on tongues IN THE GATHERING and this is the 'law' Paul was referring to.

You know folks, if we try to understand the Bible from modern perspective we will end up really confused.

It was only about a hundred years ago that women gained the 'right to vote' in AMERICA. Previous to that, they had NO SUCH RIGHT.

Imagine how women were treated two thousand years ago. They were basically 'property'. Men, who made the laws made many that kept women in a 'certain PLACE' in society. And those that followed the Bible in the making of their laws most certainly USED the Bible to make many laws pertaining to women.

If we try to equate the 'woman of today' of that two thousand years ago, we are placing ourselves in a position to come to nothing but "FALSE" conclusions on matters spoken of in the Bible pertaining to women.

It's not a matter of what someone LIKES, it's a matter of FACT. If you can't 'get over' the facts, you will NEVER understand what it is that we have been offered in 'truth'. May as well write your own Bible.

Life has NEVER been 'fair'. Nothing IN life is MEANT to be 'fair'. I don't believe that there is a human being that exists that could actually determine fairness if they spent their entire lives trying.

So it's not an issue of fair or equal or 'the same'. It's a matter of TRUTH as offered by God to those that would be FOLLOWERS of that truth.

Once you start BELIEVING that things are suppose to be FAIR, you will then shut out any possibility of understanding what God has offered in instruction. God has NEVER instructed us that His truth is about 'fairness', 'equality', or any such 'human created' concepts. What He HAS offered is HIS WILL in a manner that we can understand regardless of our concepts of 'fairness'.

Blessings,

MEC

Well written and partly right....Except for where you're wrong

 

[Strong in Him]

And how are you capable of PROVING what you have stated? How can you PROVE that a single woman has EVER been called 'by God' to teach MEN?

How can you PROVE that they haven't?
How can you PROVE that when a woman says to her vicar/Minister/Bishop, "I think God may be calling me to do this?", the clergy, and others, pray, interview her, test her calling, pray again and then ordain her - that they have ALL got it wrong?

God doesn't make mistakes, PEOPLE do.

Precisely.
God doesn't make mistakes - and there are hundreds of ordained women, leading churches, serving God, helping others to find faith, teaching the faith etc etc.

I can assure you that many that BELIEVE that they are 'called by God'...............are not.

You can't assure us of anything of the kind. You haven't heard the women's testimonies or been in the room when clergy have discussed, debated and prayed about the whole subject.

It's quite possible that at different stages of his ministry, Jim Jones BELIEVED he was 'called by God'. And that's just ONE extreme example.

And when people look at the "fruit", it's quite clear that he wasn't.
Yet Christians with female ministers are being taught, encouraged in their faith and hearing the Gospel preached. So what does that tell you?

The Bible says that a Bishop, (leader of a church), MUST BE 'married, with children, not a drunkard, etc.........', But how many pastors insist they were 'called by God' but do not meet the criteria ORDERED by God?

If that's how you want to interpret it; yes, they must.
Any male presenting for ordination, therefore, MUST be married and fertile. If not, never mind how wonderful their calling, faith and experience; if they can't have kids, they're out. Any male presenting for ordination MUST not have a temper, be able to control his children, not love money etc etc.
Funny how you see men pointing to this passage as "proof" that women can't be ordained, but never men. Funny how no one ever says "he's definitely called by God, has faith, charity, knowledge etc but he's proud and ambitious so we're not having him."

So 'saying' that one is 'called by God' does not MAKE them 'called by God'.

No; but what grounds do you have for saying that ALL the female priests who are serving now, and have been over the years, were ALL lying/deluded?

So what I would NEED in order to accept your statement would be PROOF. And if what you propose contradicts the Bible, I don't believe you could prove it to me.

With respect, no one has to prove it to YOU. If you strongly disagree with women being ordained; go to a church where they are not allowed to test, and follow, this calling.

Women are being called by God to serve him in this way.
They are going to the church, and clergy, to have their calling tested.
Most of them do go ahead, are trained and subsequently ordained. The church recognises the calling, and authority, that God has given.
It IS happening, and has been for a number of years; it's a fact whether you accept it or not.

 

[Denadii]

And how are you capable of PROVING what you have stated? How can you PROVE that a single woman has EVER been called 'by God' to teach MEN?

God doesn't make mistakes, PEOPLE do.

I can assure you that many that BELIEVE that they are 'called by God'...............are not.

It's quite possible that at different stages of his ministry, Jim Jones BELIEVED he was 'called by God'. And that's just ONE extreme example.

The Bible says that a Bishop, (leader of a church), MUST BE 'married, with children, not a drunkard, etc.........', But how many pastors insist they were 'called by God' but do not meet the criteria ORDERED by God?

So 'saying' that one is 'called by God' does not MAKE them 'called by God'. Those are 'just words'. And the tongues of men,(mankind which would include women as well), are FULL OF LIES.

So what I would NEED in order to accept your statement would be PROOF. And if what you propose contradicts the Bible, I don't believe you could prove it to me.

Blessings,

MEC

You want proof the bible permits women to preach and minister? Read the bible properly..Stop taking a single verse or a single paragraph and get the proper context. And stop believing silly churchy doctrines.

 

[Blade]

cgaviria praise GOD.. He does not think like man Praise GOD for all the women prophets teachers preachers on and on. In HIS Body..not yours not mine.

I hear things sometimes about marriage. But.. does that man love her like Christ loves the Church? And does He judge you does He condemn you, does he force you, control you, make you think say do ANYTHING? And..sorry just HOW do you want to treat this wife?

There are always some that want to have power over and control. And this can be men or women over the man. The proof is in this thread "submission". As you read its just one sided. But God never gave her to you to CONTROL or to your slave or "submission". If one loved her.. those thoughts one would never have.

This just gets silly. Well Paul also talked to people that had SLAVES! Shall we get some? How it was THEN is NOT how it is NOW.

If you question.. read 1st Cor 13. We follow ALL the word, not pick what we want to follow Now if one forces, makes another do this kind of thing. You will always have problems in your marriage. For it will not be based on love. Again.. one word. Christ. Look how He treats the Chruch. And YOU as the bride.. are YOU fully in "submission" to Him? Do you do all that you expect from that woman, do the same for Christ?

So we wont do this for Him but we expect we sometimes demand another treat us as if we are there god? let her be her. If she knows Christ.. HE is her lord not you. Or.. some day you will answer to her DAD

 

[Denadii]

I have learned that when I come to nonsensical conclusions like this one about doctrine, there is something that I am missing or misunderstanding. This is totally loony. When I married at 33, I didn't suddenly lose my God-given gifting to teach, nor did God bar me from teaching. Tan ridiculoso! I have actually gained much more in wisdom after marriage than I had before. Much more. Both in experiential wisdom and in spiritual wisdom. And I KNOW that God has not instructed me to keep it to myself. That would not be like Him.

In 1 Corinthians 11, just three chapters before the passage you quoted, Paul gives instructions for women praying and prophesying in the church. Same Greek word as he used in chapter 14. However, for me it is not clear that Paul is actually speaking in either instance. I think that in this book Paul is responding to questions and concerns that were conveyed to him by the people in the Corinthian church. If I keep reading from verses 34-35 into verse 36, it appears that Paul is responding to the idea of wives keeping silent in verse 36 when he says (maybe to the domineering husband(s)) "What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?" Just an alternative reading. We need to keep in mind as we read Paul's epistles that (with the possible exception of Ephesians) they were written strictly as instructions for the churches addressed, and the over-arching theme of Paul's writings was FREEDOM FROM THE LAW, because Judaizers were going to these churches after he left them, preaching that the people must obey Jewish law.

If a person were to read from 1 Corinthians 12 through 1 Corinthians 15 while awake, they should see the context of the verse...Talitha is quite right...Paul was repeating a thing spoken by another preacher, then he answered it...In fact the entire context here, is that Paul is answering questions..Some questions he notes that somebody asked it, and others, he simply repeated the question/ statement...I too wish Paul was more clear on this one... as in "Pastor Bonehead here said women should keep silent in the services as the law says." It would have been simpler for some modern people to understand....First...There is nowhere in the law that says women should keep shut up...That was a Roman law, not Gods law, or rabbinical law. Second...If modern Christians would stop trying to read the Word intellectually and in context they would then have the Holy Spirit teaching them instead of shutting Him up along with the Women.

 

[Imagican]

How can you PROVE that they haven't?
How can you PROVE that when a woman says to her vicar/Minister/Bishop, "I think God may be calling me to do this?", the clergy, and others, pray, interview her, test her calling, pray again and then ordain her - that they have ALL got it wrong?



Precisely.
God doesn't make mistakes - and there are hundreds of ordained women, leading churches, serving God, helping others to find faith, teaching the faith etc etc.



You can't assure us of anything of the kind. You haven't heard the women's testimonies or been in the room when clergy have discussed, debated and prayed about the whole subject.



And when people look at the "fruit", it's quite clear that he wasn't.
Yet Christians with female ministers are being taught, encouraged in their faith and hearing the Gospel preached. So what does that tell you?



If that's how you want to interpret it; yes, they must.
Any male presenting for ordination, therefore, MUST be married and fertile. If not, never mind how wonderful their calling, faith and experience; if they can't have kids, they're out. Any male presenting for ordination MUST not have a temper, be able to control his children, not love money etc etc.
Funny how you see men pointing to this passage as "proof" that women can't be ordained, but never men. Funny how no one ever says "he's definitely called by God, has faith, charity, knowledge etc but he's proud and ambitious so we're not having him."



No; but what grounds do you have for saying that ALL the female priests who are serving now, and have been over the years, were ALL lying/deluded?



With respect, no one has to prove it to YOU. If you strongly disagree with women being ordained; go to a church where they are not allowed to test, and follow, this calling.

Women are being called by God to serve him in this way.
They are going to the church, and clergy, to have their calling tested.
Most of them do go ahead, are trained and subsequently ordained. The church recognises the calling, and authority, that God has given.
It IS happening, and has been for a number of years; it's a fact whether you accept it or not.

you are the one making the 'assumption' so the burden of PROOF would be yours.

But I will offer this: If someone says they are 'called by God' yet their behavior or understanding does not conform to the Word of God, that would be a pretty GOOD indication that they are not being 'truthful'.

And I'll offer this: there are MORE than 'one God'. There is only one TRUE God, the Creator of this universe and Father of Jesus Christ. But whatever one worships AS God is their 'god'.

So when someone says that they were 'called by God', they may indeed be sincere in their statement even if the 'god' that they worship ISN'T the One True God.

Those that worship Satan worship him AS GOD.

I am making no distinct accusations, just pointing out possibilities.

But I will say that it is pretty obvious that 'the god' that was worshiped by Jim Jones was NOT the 'same God' that I worship. And it should have been obvious by his TEACHINGS to any and all that KNOW the One True God.

The problem is that many do NOT 'know' their God. They are mere followers of the teachings of men which puts them in a position to be led in just about ANY direction regardless of the 'truth'.

How about this for an example: Any and EVERYONE that actually KNOWS the TRUE Christ KNOWS that His message is one of LOVE and FORGIVENESS.

So, if a 'church' or 'person' teaches some OTHER message like persecution or dealing out punishment to those that do not follow as THEY DO, it's pretty obvious that they are following a DIFFERENT Christ.

In other words, if my 'church' would torture of murder those that don't follow US, then we aren't really following The Son of God.

If one's 'church' doesn't teach forgiveness, then it is not following the teachings of Christ. If one is not following the teachings of Christ, then how are they going to be truthful when they claim to be 'followers'?

So the burden of PROOF is on the claimant not the receiver of their words.

But I take this a step further personally. I DO do the homework to determine whether the words of others are the TRUTH as they pertain to the Bible. I simply compare what they offer to what we are offered in the Bible. If their words do not conform then it's pretty obvious that they are not the 'truth' that we are offered in order to KNOW.

God hasn't left us ignorant. Only those that 'choose' ignorance are left in the dark. He doesn't expect us to GUESS, he offers us the ability to KNOW.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

This belief about women keeping silent overflows into the beliefs of women should not preach or be ministers, and its unscriptural.

I do not agree. You have simply chosen to alter scripture to suit your agenda or ignore scripture that contradicts what you offer.

In 1 Cor. 14:34 the Apostle Paul’s letter states: “…the women should keep silent in the assemblies. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.” There are several major problems with this statement.

The only problems that exists are interpretation. If you understand what he is saying, there are not problems unless it is a matter of lusts or will.

First, nowhere does the Jewish Law forbid women to speak in public gatherings. Paul, being a well-educated Jew, certainly would have known this. In fact, there was a law on the books that did forbid women to speak, vote and exercise authority over men by holding public office. It was not a Jewish, but a Roman law. These words would sound far more credible if someone else, other than the Jewish Apostle Paul, had written them.

Since neither you nor I lived in their society two thousand years ago, neither of us can make any DEFINITE statements about things that may not have been recorded in detail.


Second, on numerous occasions throughout his travels and letters, the Apostle Paul affirmed the ministry of women (Rom 16:3-4; 1 Cor. 16:19; cf. Acts 16:11-40; 18:26). The centrality of the Shemah – the Oneness of Israel’s God, informed Paul’s theology when he wrote that in Christ-following assemblies there was no place for segregation or discrimination:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28)

Nice try. These words aren't about 'ministry', they are about SALVATION. The manner in which you try to misrepresent them show to what extent you will go to to promote YOUR agenda that has nothing to do with scripture as you present it.

In 1 Corinthians 11:5, he wrote that a woman’s head must be covered while she is engaged in speaking in tongues or prophesying in a public assembly. The question was not, therefore, if a woman could speak and teach, but how it should be done in a way that would be right before God, angels and the people of Corinth.

No, all indications are that they heads were to be covered if they simply JOINED in the 'gathering'.

Paul is SPECIFIC in that women are NOT to place themselves in a position to even BELIEVE they are able to teach MEN.

When we read Paul’s letters we need to keep in mind that 1 Corinthians was not the beginning of this correspondence. Paul wrote at least one letter to the Corinthians prior to this (1 Cor. 5:9) and the Corinthian leadership had also written to him (1 Cor. 7:1). It is therefore highly probable that the statement in 1 Cor. 14:34-35 is a quotation from a letter that the Corinthian male leadership had addressed to Paul. It was their proposal on how to bring order into the disruptive practice of some women in the congregation as they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Paul, however, disagreed.

Paul didn't mention 'some women', he spoke of women PERIOD. You continually 'make up' what you want words to mean with any evidence of the excuses you use to do it. Everything in this previous paragraph is UTTER speculation without any EVIDENCE to back it up.


If this text is viewed as a quotation, then the challenge in 1 Cor. 14:36 that Paul brings to the male leadership makes perfect sense:

“Was it from you (masculine) that the word of God first went forth?! Or has it come to you (masculine) only?!”

The all-male leadership of the Corinthian congregation was not to forbid (women) to speak in tongues and themselves were to be encouraged to prophecy just as the women among them already were doing:

“Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues. But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.” (1 Cor. 14:39-40)

No mention of women being given permission to even SPEAK in the 'gathering', certainly no evidence of permission being given to prophecy or speak in tongues in the 'gathering'.

Paul’s solution, therefore, was not to exclude half of the congregation from exercising the gifts of the Spirit, but rather to make sure that it was done in a respectful, proper and orderly fashion.

Yet if women are to remain SILENT in the 'church', that IS the order.

Was Paul right about women? Absolutely! His Corinthian opponents were not.

Yet you alter or ignore his words. Choosing to 'change' their meaning 'at will' to support YOUR agenda. You have shown clearly that his words on the subject have little if ANY true meaning to you,

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Goatee]

God gave us the scriptures, and most of the scriptures have existed many thousands of years even before the catholic church came into existence. So I do indeed thank God for his word, not the catholic church, who has even been known to burn scriptures in the past on the basis that they did not want anyone reading the scriptures themselves.

Jesus brought into life His church. That church is the universal 'Catholic' church. The one that put together the Holy Bible we have today.

Looks like you have a chip on your shoulder regarding the Catholic church my friend.

 

[Goatee]

Also, woman, as far as i am concerned, are equal to men.

One has to remember that in the times that Paul wrote women were treated a lot differently to how they are now!