Women Preachers...The truth!

[trophy33]

Paul is speaking under the culture of that period which is Patriarchal.

Because those teachings if taken literally would contradict many teachings/examples in other parts of scriptures.

Read 1 Corinthians 9:19-23.

.

No, nothing of it is cultural or temporal.

Adam was still created first, Eve was still the one deceived, women are still weaker and it still applies that a woman was created for a man, not vice versa.

So, nothing cultural about it.

 

[mnphysicist]

One of the things I find fascinating is that many preachers who advocate male only preachers will have in their personal libraries a number of textbooks from female theologians... Its an interesting conflict, they may preach against women preaching, yet in their own study, they seek out the wisdom of women authors.

Nate and Tim's podcast digs pretty deep on the whole headship thing where they suggest the complementarians have gotten Paul's words 180 degrees out of sync with what he truly was getting at. (its nearly 40 minutes, but they do have a transcript)

 

[timewerx]

Well, if he teaches it but he & we can't act on it. Then what's the point in teaching it?

There are many teachings written in the Bible that we don't do anymore. Many of them in the Old Testament.

We still need to read them in the Bible for a reason. For historical studies for example. It reflects the culture of the period.

 

[timewerx]

Nate and Tim's podcast digs pretty deep on the whole headship thing where they suggest the complementarians have gotten Paul's words 180 degrees out of sync with what he truly was getting at. (its nearly 40 minutes, but they do have a transcript)

Apostle Paul is a hard man to understand

Even St. Peter Himself acknowledged this. It pays to look much closer and much more carefully when dealing with Paul's teachings.

Because if you interpret all of Paul's teachings plainly or literally, you'll find some of them contradicts each other. Some will even contradict teachings by other authors in the Bible.

Thus, it can't be that all of them should be literally or plainly interpreted. Many of his teachings actually don't apply to us. Same thing why many Old Testament teachings don't apply to us too.

And many of Paul's teachings must be regarded by the overall context of all of Paul's teachings plus the teachings of other saints. For example, the topic of grace and faith.

 

[Strong in Him]

Bible gives several reasons for this, for example:

1) The creation order:
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
1Tm 2:11

Animals were created before humans; does that mean they have authority over us?

2) Because women are easier to be deceived:
And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
1Tm 2:14

That's not an argument for women not being able to teach; that's an argument for women being allowed to learn. 1 Timothy 2:11 - "a woman should learn ...".
There are women in Scripture who received, proclaimed and taught God's word - Deborah, Huldah, the woman at the well, Mary Magdalene etc. God called, chose and allowed them to do this.

3) Woman was created for man, not man for woman, its her purpose:
"Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for the sake of man."
1Cor 11:9

a) There are many women who are single and not only survive without a man but serve God.
b) This doesn't say that women can't teach or lead.

4) Women are weaker (so they need leadership and protection of men)
1Pet 3:7

As I said before, many women live, survive and serve perfectly well on their own, without the protection, or help, of men.

 

[timewerx]

I've seen many on this topic get pulled...

It looks like you proved me wrong!

 

[trophy33]

Animals were created before humans; does that mean they have authority over us?

This is something you must discuss with the apostle Paul, not with me. This is the reason he gave.

That's not an argument for women not being able to teach; that's an argument for women being allowed to learn. 1 Timothy 2:11 - "a woman should learn ...".

Read the verse again and at least the whole sentence, then you will see you got it wrong.

There are women in Scripture who received, proclaimed and taught God's word - Deborah, Huldah, the woman at the well, Mary Magdalene etc. God called, chose and allowed them to do this.

There are always some exceptions, like a talking donkey teaching the prophet.
But when we are talking about the common order, then we do not build it on exceptions, but on theological rules and reasons.

As I said before, many women live, survive and serve perfectly well on their own, without the protection, or help, of men.

Actually, its because men built a society that makes this possible. When a woman can go buying to a supermarket and get a job in a company, of course she can now physically survive, being single. That does not mean she is not weaker, she needs this kind of protection (from a state, from police, from army, from laws, from an employer etc) for her survival and protection.

 

[timewerx]

That does not mean she is not weaker, she needs this kind of protection (from a state, from police, from army, from laws, from an employer etc) for her survival and protection.

Women also work in these agencies

So not only men but women also protects us and women as well.

 

[Strong in Him]

This is something you must discuss with the apostle Paul, not with me. This is the reason he gave.

No, it isn't; it's your interpretation of what he wrote.
The question is still valid; if you are saying that the order of creation determines authority, what of those things that were created before us - which in fact is everything?

Read the verse again and at least the whole sentence, then you will see you got it wrong.

If you read all the verses in context, what I said makes sense.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
Paul allows women to learn and argues that they should - in a culture where this was not allowed - by they need to learn in silence.
12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
That doesn't say that no woman anywhere can teach, ever - Paul knew that Priscilla taught Apollos. It just re-emphasises the previous verse; a woman must be quiet while she is learning and not assume (some versions say "usurp", which means to grab violently) authority.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
This doesn't say that women can't teach because they were created second.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Adam became a sinner too - Paul says that sin came into the world through Adam, Romans 5:12-21. Adam was not deceived, which is not a sin anyway; he was deliberately disobedient. He had heard God's command for himself, straight from God, Genesis 2:16-17, and still did it. Eve had not been created at that point, Genesis 2:21, and we are not told that she was given the command by God himself. That being the case, she would have heard about it from Adam - yet when the serpent asked her what God had said, she got it wrong, Genesis 3:3. She added something that God had not said.
This suggests that she hadn't heard, or wasn't listening, when Adam told her God's command; maybe she was trying to talk to him, or someone else, someone at the time. That sounds like speculation, but it fits very well with what Paul says in Timothy - "women should be allowed to learn so that they are not deceived, but they should learn in silence."
Note that the serpent did not say to Adam "DID God say .....?" Adam knew perfectly well what God had commanded; if someone knows something for a fact it is much harder, if not impossible, to trick, or deceive, them.
15 But women will be saved through childbearing – if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
What does that mean? Childbirth does not save women; Jesus does. That would imply that women who don't have children aren't saved - and any women who DOES have children but does not continue in faith, love and holiness, won't be saved either.

There are always some exceptions, like a talking donkey teaching the prophet.
But when we are talking about the common order, then we do not build it on exceptions, but on rules.

If anyone knows what "God's order" should be, it is God.
Yet the fact is that he calls women to proclaim the Gospel and speak for him - and always has done.

Actually, its because men built a society that makes this possible.

Men built society? Where do you get that idea from?
There are, and have been, thousands of inspirational women in leadership.

 

[timewerx]

Note, Adam's name means "To Create"

Eve's name is "To Live"

Eve's name is more in-tune with Christ's mission - "To bring life..."

Neither is subject to another.

 

[timewerx]

The most Gender Equal nation in the world is also one of the best countries to live in - eliminated poverty, extremely low crime rate, and eliminated prostitution! See Iceland!

The most Patriarchal countries on the other hand are the worst in everything. Rampant poverty, rampant corruption, dysfunctional government, very high crime rates, high rates of failed justice, high cases of human rights abuse... Note, not all of these countries are Islamic, many are Orthodox Christians.

Coincidence?

Is this proof that man in charge is better?

 

[section9+1]

So God blesses countries that disregard his word. God inspires teachings that are meant to be ignored. God says one thing but means the opposite. Nations that do not consider God's plan or his will are actually the better nations. The nations that we need to be more like. God is evil, nuts, or a bad practical joker. So that is what we are dealing with when we open the bible. Makes you wonder why open it at all.

 

[trophy33]

Women also work in these agencies

So not only men but women also protects us and women as well.

Yes, the current relatively new political system in some countries allows that.

 

[nolidad]

We have women leaders, disciples, and preachers in the Bible. Financially succesful and independent ones too! Add Proverbs 31 to that - an example of a person with great leadership qualities!

So why did Apostle Paul said otherwise, is he contradicting scriptures?? Of course NOT! Misinterpreted? YES!

REmember that Paul also taught to take heed of the laws of the ruling authorities which at that time were the Romans, the Saducees, and the Pharisees - All extremely Patriarchal.......

Sooooo...... When Paul taught that women should not preach, should not lead, submit to husbands, on whose authority he's referring to????

Hint:
The Romans, The Sadducees, and the Pharisees.....Are they your authority??? They still are if you follow their patriarchal ways!

Bible gives several reasons for this, for example:

1) The creation order:
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
1Tm 2:11

2) Because women are easier to be deceived:
And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
1Tm 2:14

3) Woman was created for man, not man for woman, its her purpose:
"Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for the sake of man."
1Cor 11:9

4) Women are weaker (so they need leadership and protection of men)
1Pet 3:7

Well Myst, you and I have finally agreed on an issue!

 

[nolidad]

Obviously, Paul did not assimilate into the culture through actions but in his teachings.



He never said it...

But why would he tell about 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 if he never practiced it?

.

Your serious error is you are looking at the two different topics and trying to equalize them.

In 1 Cor. 9 Paul shows he is not being literal because of his use of the Word as many times- so he identifies with people in order to present the gospel in hopes of saving. This is a verse concerning soteriology.

While the role of Women in the church is not a comparative lesson but instruction about order in the church!

As Myst pointed out, Paul does not defend his teaching by citing patriarchy or society, but the very Word of God! He did not cite Rome or the Pharisees or Sadducee.

Now you need to put your thinking cap on for a minute. Paul was the apostle to the Gentile Church. Hand picked by god to bring the gospel to we gentiles. God used him to write over half the NT. Don't you think if Gods wishes were what you wrote, He would have inspired Paul to do that, instead of waiting for 2 millenia???????????

Also in 1 Cor. 11 Paul cites creation for women to have authority on their head. Hew also does not refer to govt. or Jewish teaching- but says it is the teaching of all the churches!

 

[trophy33]

No, it isn't; it's your interpretation of what he wrote.
The question is still valid; if you are saying that the order of creation determines authority, what of those things that were created before us - which in fact is everything?

Paul said that, not me:
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

There is no point for you to continue deny it. Why does it apply only to humans (for example older brother is in authority over younger ones, parents over children etc.) is a different issue.

If you read all the verses in context, what I said makes sense.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
Paul allows women to learn and argues that they should - in a culture where this was not allowed - by they need to learn in silence.
12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
That doesn't say that no woman anywhere can teach, ever - Paul knew that Priscilla taught Apollos. It just re-emphasises the previous verse; a woman must be quiet while she is learning and not assume (some versions say "usurp", which means to grab violently) authority.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
This doesn't say that women can't teach because they were created second.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Adam became a sinner too - Paul says that sin came into the world through Adam, Romans 5:12-21. Adam was not deceived, which is not a sin anyway; he was deliberately disobedient. He had heard God's command for himself, straight from God, Genesis 2:16-17, and still did it. Eve had not been created at that point, Genesis 2:21, and we are not told that she was given the command by God himself. That being the case, she would have heard about it from Adam - yet when the serpent asked her what God had said, she got it wrong, Genesis 3:3. She added something that God had not said.
This suggests that she hadn't heard, or wasn't listening, when Adam told her God's command; maybe she was trying to talk to him, or someone else, someone at the time. That sounds like speculation, but it fits very well with what Paul says in Timothy - "women should be allowed to learn so that they are not deceived, but they should learn in silence."
Note that the serpent did not say to Adam "DID God say .....?" Adam knew perfectly well what God had commanded; if someone knows something for a fact it is much harder, if not impossible, to trick, or deceive, them.
15 But women will be saved through childbearing – if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
What does that mean? Childbirth does not save women; Jesus does. That would imply that women who don't have children aren't saved - and any women who DOES have children but does not continue in faith, love and holiness, won't be saved either.

The point is, that women should not have authority over men and must be quiet because Adam was created first. Thats all.

If anyone knows what "God's order" should be, it is God.

And apostles.

Yet the fact is that he calls women to proclaim the Gospel and speak for him - and always has done.

Even a donkey once did it.

Men built society? Where do you get that idea from?

History.

There are, and have been, thousands of inspirational women in leadership.

I can hardly think of 5, but it does not matter. Thats not the topic.

 

[Servant of Yeshua]

Should wives also submit to their Husbands??

That's another million dollar question! The answer to this one goes back to the book of Genesis!

The answer is NO, not anymore....Jesus came to take away our burden which originated from Genesis, due to Man's sin.

I have been married for over 27 years. Both people in the marriage should inquire of the Lord for wisdom in all things. I am not sure why a woman would WANT marry a man that she did not trust enough to submit to. Submit is not a bad word and I doubt many of us are good at doing it 100% of the time. At a job, you submit to your manager. If he or she is a good manager, they will listen to your suggestions and will often agree with you. In a marriage, It is a huge responsibility to be the man and have that God given responsibility to be the spiritual leader of the family. When I see families where the woman is obviously the leader in all ways, they are not functioning well at all. And it is honestly sad for everyone. Submitting does not at all mean that you are a doormat. It means that you are given him the respect as having the final say to situations that really could go either way when there is no right or wrong way. I have been blessed by those times that I thought I knew what was best, but allowed my husband to take the lead. And God blessed me for it. Jesus came, not to BE served, but to serve. And so should we. When you have a servant's heart...you WILL be blessed. I know it doesn't make any sense to us because man's ways are not God's ways. If the husband is being the loving and wise leader that he is meant to be, he will love and cherish his wife and be willing to die for her. She will know that in her heart and respect and love him tremendously. ( it is important in a marriage to make sure you are not speaking out of pride and self righteousness, but out of true love)

 

[Eloy Craft]

Genesis 2:23
Then the man said, “This at last is( long time waiting) bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh;(her bone is his bone) this one shall be called Woman, for out of Man this one was taken.

It's the natural order of the primary human society. Deep down in the psyche and deep in our past we are hunter gatherers. we still find fulfillment in a glorious time in our past. What fulfilled human life then is what everyone wants.

 

[TechyinAZ]

However, if you are giving him authority to lead, then you are automatically giving her inferior status as a subordinate to his leadership. It's not simply two different roles here; it is assigning him to be her superior. There is no implication in the Genesis account that they are to have two different roles. They are to share the same roles together. God did not come up with a whole different set of roles once Eve was created.

Personally, I don't even read this part of the creation account as having anything to do with roles, but more as God creating us all, animals and humans alike, for relationships...for community. We are social creatures and it is not good for us to live our lives alone, and this would be true regardless of whether we marry or remain single. For example, Paul remained single all of his life, but he still didn't go about his ministry alone but helped others, his brothers and sisters in Christ, as they helped him.

I guess this is where we disagree. Because God clearly made man the leader in the household, but this doesn't automatically mean the woman is any less valuable. She is equal to the man, but this doesn't mean she needs to be just as great of a leader as the man is. Because she wasn't designed for that.

Sure, men and women can share the same roles together, but the priority of roles is different. For example, both man and woman can work to support their family, but God calls the man to be the main producer for the family. For example.

But it isn't in a slave or military hierarchy type of way. The man still need to listen to his wife because it is biblical and he still needs to server her, just as she serves him and it is beautiful that way. It's just we can't throw all the texts about Godly manhood and womanhood and biblical design out the window.

Now of course there are exceptions, like if a husband cannot get a job and only the wife can. That is an obvious exception.

 

[TechyinAZ]

One of the things I find fascinating is that many preachers who advocate male only preachers will have in their personal libraries a number of textbooks from female theologians... Its an interesting conflict, they may preach against women preaching, yet in their own study, they seek out the wisdom of women authors.

Nate and Tim's podcast digs pretty deep on the whole headship thing where they suggest the complementarians have gotten Paul's words 180 degrees out of sync with what he truly was getting at. (its nearly 40 minutes, but they do have a transcript)

I think women theologians are ok in most areas, due to Acts where Pricilla was teaching Apollos about Christianity. But it is clear in 1st Timothy 2 that women are not to be Pastors. That is plainly clear.