So, there was a huge debate about this not long ago, and of course I just now find something which much more accurately and eloquently describes women's role in the Bible.

My old pastor, Mark Martin, out of Calvary Chapel Phoenix, just did a sermon on it.

This details women, and their roles. It seemed like a lot of you were interested in the Christian point of view on a woman's role.

This won't be painful, I promise. Mark is not only entertaining, but extremely analytical in his study of the word, which will appeal to some of you.

We can continue to debate the points once you have listened.

~ http://www.graceupongrace.org/listendownload.cfm (down at the bottom...Woman's Role In The Church)

As I said in my arguments, WOMEN ARE NOT INFERIOR TO MEN.

If nothing else, let me know what you guys think.

Everything you really need to know about the role of women in the church is in the Malleus Maleficarum.

If you are not familiar with it, you have no business talking about the topic.

Nah, their role in Christianity is to give blowjobs and get fucked.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35:

"...women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says, If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."

The role of women have evolved, as has the Christian World.

Your pastor seems like a good communicator. He is, after all, trying to win friends and influence people. I bet he gets mucho support from his female brethren.

Where is snoopy?????????????????????? Chops hooker into 4 pieces and whacks it. angelrapist.

would you fuck an angel?

^ Shut up, Foolio

That poor man's speech changes nothing on the facts that the all the religious texts that stemmed from the Jewish religion depict women as inferior shits. It also changes nothing about the fact that in all religious societies over the world, women are inferior shits.

quote:Originally posted by Snoopy:

It also changes nothing about the fact that in all religious societies over the world, women are inferior shits.

If thats so...then why would paul say to greet her as a SAINT!?!? There are many other examples...but thats just one.

Romans 16

Personal Greetings

1I commend to you our SISTER Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea. 2I ask you to receive her in the Lord IN A WAY WORTHY OF THE SAINTS.

quote:Originally posted by Darwinist:

1 Corinthians 14:34-35:

"...women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says, If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."

The meaning of that verse was quite literally "lost in translation".

quote:Originally posted by Snoopy:

That poor man's speech changes nothing on the facts that the all the religious texts that stemmed from the Jewish religion depict women as inferior shits. It also changes nothing about the fact that in all religious societies over the world, women are inferior shits.

Actually, Judaism views women as holier than men.

"A man must love his wife at least as much as himself but honor her more than himself" (Yevamot 62b, Sanhedrin 76b)

"According to traditional Judaism, women are endowed with a greater degree of "binah" (intuition, understanding, intelligence) than men. It has been said that the matriarchs (Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah) were superior to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) in prophesy. Women did not participate in the idolatry regarding the Golden Calf. See Rosh Chodesh below. Some traditional sources suggest that women are closer to G-d's ideal than men."

(from Jewfaq.org)

I believe these two quotes reveal that clearly enough.

Also if this is true how do you explain Matriachal socities, like the Navajo?

And the Catholic faith has the greatest respect for Mary above all other humans, how does that fit in to your point?

[This message has been edited by JewDude (edited 08-18-2005).]

You miss the point, and as all religious subhumans, you're only able to read a book so it fits your blind views. Respecting Mary is a symbol for respecting the mother. The overloading majority of religious men does tend to respect their mother, but other women are often viewed as garbage. Of course, if the mother is having a good time around town, she brings shame to the family and must be stoned to death, by all means. Of course, we are beyond such primitive acts, but the fucking lot of you are thinking it, and wanting it. It's your ultimate failure, your lack of being able to hold on to a woman. If a woman fucks behind your back, that doesn't make her a whore, it just means your dumb ass can't hack it.

All in all, religious people are anti-female because they either have microscopic dicks, or they just can't nut altogether.

Ive always known Snoopy to be the sharpest tool in the shed, but when it comes to matters of religion, he is possibly on of the dullest.

Its rather hard to debate on religion when you have none, Snoopy.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:



Its rather hard to debate on religion when you have none, Snoopy.

Stupidest quote so far.

quote:Originally posted by Snoopy:

You miss the point, and as all religious subhumans, you're only able to read a book so it fits your blind views.

Did you know everyone hates you? You want to know why, because you add nothing to debate, you only detract by starting some immature flame war with people no matter what you are talking about. You should be demoded for good. Ironically those books would be OUR books and thus our interpretations would be the way they were intended to be read.

quote: Respecting Mary is a symbol for respecting the mother. The overloading majority of religious men does tend to respect their mother, but other women are often viewed as garbage. /[quote]

Evidence would be nice. You are making a blind statement with no attempt to back said statement. I believe that is a major fallacy.

[quote] Of course, if the mother is having a good time around town, she brings shame to the family and must be stoned to death, by all means. Of course, we are beyond such primitive acts, but the fucking lot of you are thinking it, and wanting it.

Have you ever looked at the penalties prescribed for men in such things? Maybe you should.

And I am impressed by your sudden psychic abilities, it seems as though you can now read the minds of all of us “religious sub-humans”. Don’t make such idiotic suggestions. You know nothing of what I think and how I feel, and please don’t act like you do.

quote: It's your ultimate failure, your lack of being able to hold on to a woman. If a woman fucks behind your back, that doesn't make her a whore, it just means your dumb ass can't hack it.

It makes her an adulterer. Male adulterers are punished harshly as well.

quote: All in all, religious people are anti-female because they either have microscopic dicks, or they just can't nut altogether.



Well I think that I am more than well enough equipped, “the staff of Judah which shall never depart from between their feet”, remember?

You have no clue what you are talking about do you, which is not surprising knowing your “style of debate”, which is of course the patented “lying-asshole” style.

quote:Originally posted by SurahAhriman:

Stupidest quote so far.

How so? Only because Snoopy who has no religion cannot possibly appreciate it enough to understand the intricities as far as one who follows said religion?

I'm not religious, and it allows me to criticize every religion with no bias. Anything that you write, is tainted because you believe your religion is right, which is ignorant considering the number of religions. I don't think religious people ever question their faith to the extent that I would, which explains why i'm not religious.

When I look at the holy books, they all seem to put women in a lesser view then men, but not a lesser value. This is the impression that I got and it can't be wrong or I wouldn't have gotten it. When you read the book, you see what you want to see, which was what those books were designed to do. I'm sure the reason for a lesser view of women has to do with those books being written thousands of years ago, where we don't live. Most of the ideals and beliefs aren't even applicable in todays modern world.

It's seems to me the only reason that religious woman even care, is to try and prove that their not going against the bible.

quote:Did you know everyone hates you? You want to know why, because you add nothing to debate, you only detract by starting some immature flame war with people no matter what you are talking about.

Did you know all of humanity hates you? You want to know why? Because you're a Jew.

Nigga fo' sho.

quote:Originally posted by JewDude:



It makes her an adulterer. Male adulterers are punished harshly as well.

I'd like to see a verse on that. Female adulterers were stoned to death, while professional whores were left alone. Isn't that weird? Maybe because the mob that does the stoning were frequent clients.

This discussion shouldn't be discussed with the tongue, it should be discussed with the gun. Why should we be sympathetic towards those who sympathize with the savages of history whose purpose it was to stand in the way of human progress for their own private gain?

I don't have a problem with religion. Religion could be a nice thing. The Romans had a nice religion. It didn't stand in the progress of their society. But when I see these Jews and Muslims, I can only see one solution to their existence. Extermination. Extermination with extreme prejudice. Extermination doesn't necessarily mean killing. Assimilate the ones you can into progressive society. The ones you cannot, cut them, bleed them, incinerate them, bomb them, shoot them, rape them, destroy them until they return to the dust they so gladly worship.

quote:Originally posted by Snoopy:

Extermination with extreme prejudice.

Oh dear.

quote:"A man must love his wife at least as much as himself but honor her more than himself" (Yevamot 62b, Sanhedrin 76b)

I would've thought that would go the other way round too. (A woman should love her husband...)

Oh yeah, the point I originally wanted to make is that Jesus' and Paul's teachings which are by todays standards sometimes viewed as mysoginist. They subverted the patriarchal culture.

quote:Originally posted by Christop:

Oh yeah, the point I originally wanted to make is that Jesus' and Paul's teachings which are by todays standards sometimes viewed as mysoginist. They subverted the patriarchal culture.

They did? Last time I checked patriarchy was doing fine.

And don't throw Jesus and Paul in the same bucket. Jesus said man and woman shall be one flesh, Paul said woman shall submit to man. The latter is misogynist, the first no.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

How so? Only because Snoopy who has no religion cannot possibly appreciate it enough to understand the intricities as far as one who follows said religion?

If there are any intricities to be found they would be self evident.

quote:Originally posted by elfstone:

They did? Last time I checked patriarchy was doing fine.

And don't throw Jesus and Paul in the same bucket. Jesus said man and woman shall be one flesh, Paul said woman shall submit to man. The latter is misogynist, the first no.

I wasn't throwing Jesus and Paul in the same bucket.

Paul's writings subvert the presumptions of the dominant Greco-Roman culture in that he actually addresses the women of the churches, whereas other texts of that era simply told the men how their wives should behave.

*pours petrol on flames*

hmm someone just remind me where in all the gospels jesus spoke to a woman in a nice, lovng, respectful of her humanity or kind way?

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

How so? Only because Snoopy who has no religion cannot possibly appreciate it enough to understand the intricities as far as one who follows said religion?

That's pretty narrow minded as well.

I'm an atheist, but I have respect for all religions, as well as the followers of those religions.

I think it's great that Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. have that sort of thing in their lives. Religions preach a lot of love, respect, morals, values, life lessons, honor, etc.

Quite frankly, our world today needs that sort of thing. Regardless of which religion is teaching these positive things.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

*pours petrol on flames*

hmm someone just remind me where in all the gospels jesus spoke to a woman in a nice, lovng, respectful of her humanity or kind way?

Beautiful point. But because the Good Book contradicts itself as a rule, you have to expect several lines of scripture to spew forth that depicts womanhood in some kind of exalting light.

I am eagerly awaiting for Digital Savior to explain this Jesus/Paul analogy with more clarity. As it relates to (and also contradicts) most scripture - Which one of them is more of a misogynist? Don't they both kind of support the subordination of women towards men?

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

*pours petrol on flames*

hmm someone just remind me where in all the gospels jesus spoke to a woman in a nice, lovng, respectful of her humanity or kind way?



behold your mother, behold your son

quote:Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:

behold your mother, behold your son

lol

yes i'm sure that her continuing financial security was uppermost on mary's mind while her firstborn was having his extermities perforated by nails.!!

no 'mom i love you and don't cry, be strong cos god is gonna raise me up'

but just 'palm her off' onto one of his friends..

with a son that callous...

why? so did he fuxx0r mm? taht would mean that wat paul said was true.

quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:

Everything you really need to know about the role of women in the church is in the Malleus Maleficarum.

If you are not familiar with it, you have no business talking about the topic.

HAHA

quote:Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:

behold your mother, behold your son

You could not find a worse example? I thought of 3 before coming to this one where someone could say that Jesus denies his own mother.

1. Mary Magdalene

2. The adulterer he saved from stoning

3. The samaritan woman at the well.

quote:Originally posted by elfstone:

You could not find a worse example? I thought of 3 before coming to this one where someone could say that Jesus denies his own mother.

1. Mary Magdalene

2. The adulterer he saved from stoning

3. The samaritan woman at the well.



you really need to work on your bible reading.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:



you really need to work on your bible reading.

Maybe...I don't recall anything that would make me wrong and I have no New Testament nearby. Maybe someone will post scripture as usual?

Paging: Threadstarter

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

The meaning of that verse was quite literally "lost in translation".

The word homosexual wasn't added to the bible until 1949. There is no word in hebrew that means homosexual. Sodomite doesn't even mean homosexual. If you're going to be a literalist, as I think you are, you might as well try to defend this verse.

Digital Savior:

Three of the last pastors we have had have been female and they've been damn good too. It's quite ironic that you listen to a man to tell you what your rights are as a christian woman. But that's just me. I'm guessing that you believe women shouldn't be pastors. So here's my question to you: Do you believe that female pastors can be equal to there male counterparts or do you believe that all female pastors are inferior?

[This message has been edited by Atomical (edited 08-24-2005).]

quote:Do you believe that female pastors can be equal to there male counterparts or do you believe that all female pastors are inferior?

a brief study of the early church shows that there were women leaders in the Ur-church, that they were probably better than their male counterparts.

infact even i as a rabid opponent of today's female clergy freely admit that they often do a better job of pastrol care than their male colleagues.

ability isn't the point here, but rather what god has commanded.

quote:Originally posted by elfstone:

Maybe...I don't recall anything that would make me wrong and I have no New Testament nearby. Maybe someone will post scripture as usual?



i am not Digital Saviour. and there are countless online NT's.

Bible Gateway (http://www.biblegateway.com) has a lot of translations, et cetera.

This is what first came to mind...



"Luke 7:45-47 (Young's Literal Translation)

Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

Public Domain

45a kiss to me thou didst not give, but this woman, from what [time] I came in, did not cease kissing my feet;

46with oil my head thou didst not anoint, but this woman with ointment did anoint my feet;

47therefore I say to thee, her many sins have been forgiven, because she did love much; but to whom little is forgiven, little he doth love.'

"

I think that shows high regard...as high as one might see for an individual...he used her to reproach them for their own judgments about her and what she was doing.

Jesus regarded God above all. But, did he have high regard for all people? He did have compassion and love for all people, I think, but he treated some with what appears to be contempt. Maybe not for the person, per se...but for those things that others hold in high regard, but in God's eye mean nothing...those things that people often put above God...

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:



i am not Digital Saviour. and there are countless online NT's.

I said "someone", not you...

And that's a bit more trouble than I care to waste on totse, sorry http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" (1 Timothy 2:11-14)

What does this mean? This means women should not be allowed to teach, as they are easily deceived. My initial thought is that this is wrong, but it is in the bible, and the author was inspired by GOD. Who am I to challenge these teachings?

Anyway, as Digital is a woman, her holy book forbids her to teach to us. She should take the Bible's advice, it would save her a lot of embarrassment.

Dangit...I am sorry that I started this and then have been absent.

I will start replies immediately.

JSax, you apparently didn't listen to the sermon posted in the thread starter. Pastor Mark deals with this verse in Timothy, and others. He teaches on why this was not intended as a verse to SILENCE women. It coincides with Paul's teachings to the church of Corinth regarding women in the church. It would be in your best interest to both listen to this sermon, and study the cross references in a reliable translation of the Bible, before trying to quote from it as if you are some sort of authority on this subject.

Women are not to teach MEN in an organized setting. A woman is permitted to teach a man, outside of church or Bible study. Basically, it is never to be seen as a woman having spiritual authority over a man, to avoid embarassment (men's prides are very fragile, you know *lol*).

However, women ARE allowed to teach the Bible. To each other women and to children in an organized setting such as church or sunday school, as well as outside of these organized settings.

I repeat, women are allowed to teach men outside of an organized setting...just not as head of a church. See Joyce Meyers. She is a very good teacher, but she teaches over men on a pulpit. She is a "pastor" of men, and this is forbidden. She is breaking this commandment. Her ministry suffers as a result. If she simply led women, this would not be an issue.

You can take as many random verses you want and manipulate them to serve your position, but that doesn't make your interpretation correct.

Since Totse is not an organized setting, I am permitted to teach on the Bible as I see fit. I am also witnessing. That is very different than "teaching", since most people here are not believers. I am not trumping their spiritual authority over me as a woman, because as far as God is concerned, they don't have any spiritual authority yet, since they aren't believers.

Just so everyone else knows, JSax has decided to pit himself against me, breaking from a previous alliance we formed based on particular interests regarding Totse staff. He has no other objective than to try and demean me at this point, citing that I WILL be "pwned".

Please keep this in mind when reading his newfound interest in haughty retorts, as he had no problem inquiring about and gleaning from my Biblical knowledge regarding Solomon's temple and other historical proofs that the Bible is accurate in AIM not more than a month ago (in a respectful manner, no less !).

He now has an agenda, and it is NOT to seek out the truth (he could just ask me, and not post hateful attacks). It is to try and make a fool of me...try hard as he may. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

EDIT: My wording made it seem like I was accusing JSax of lying, when that wasn't at all the point. The intention of that statement was to show his motive to strike at me, and not to seek truth or "proof".

[This message has been edited by Digital_Savior (edited 08-24-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

Just so everyone else knows, JSax has decided to pit himself against me, breaking from a previous alliance we formed based on particular interests regarding Totse staff. He has no other objective than to try and demean me at this point, citing that I WILL be "pwned".

First of all, I never really formed any "alliances." I've agreed with things you have said about the totse administration, and I have disagreed with some things you have said. Just because I was willing to listen to you doesn't mean that I had an alliance with you to overthrow the evil totse admins.

I should note that I vowed to "pwn" you after you told me I was incapable of debating, not simply because I wish to discredit you for political reasons. I have every intention of doing this, mainly with the Noah's Ark thread.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

Please keep this in mind when reading his newfound interest in haughty retorts, as he had no problem inquiring about and gleaning from my Biblical knowledge regarding Solomon's temple and other historical proofs that the Bible is accurate in AIM not more than a month ago (in a respectful manner, no less !).

I was trying to convince you Solomon didn't exist. I tell you what, I'll make a thread on it in about 5 hours or so to reiterate my point.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

He now has an agenda, and it is NOT to present the truth. It is to try and make a fool of me...try hard as he may. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

NEVER accuse me of not trying to present the truth. That is tantamount to calling me a liar, which I am not. I believe you owe me a public apology, at the very least.

Edit: Take any other personal attacks against me into B&M.

Edit 2: Ok, Digital clarified her previous statement. She was not accusing me of being a liar. I can live with her statements. Again, any other attacks should be taken into BM.



[This message has been edited by jsaxton14 (edited 08-24-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Snoopy:

That poor man's speech changes nothing on the facts that the all the religious texts that stemmed from the Jewish religion depict women as inferior shits. It also changes nothing about the fact that in all religious societies over the world, women are inferior shits.

Oh ? What texts would those be, Snoopy ? Can you name them, and provide the specific verses that contain this supposed bigotry ?

Also, the Bible doesn't instruct us to follow the Jewish religious culture. It teaches us to follow God.

As a matter of fact, Jesus came along and beat down the residing Jewish religious faction, using his own law (as God) that he gave to them, which they manipulated in the first place.

But you wouldn't know this, since you lack any relevant, concrete knowledge of the Bible.

I have very clearly, on several occasions, given the scripture which supports the fact that women are NOT inferior to men.

It doesn't really matter what MAN'S opinion of woman is. God created women, just as He created men, and the guidelines for spiritual and positional authority are outlined concisely within the scriptures...and NOWHERE does God state that woman is inferior to man. His opinion nullifies man's opinion.

You hate Christians, not women. You hate Christian women that can school you on the Bible, too.

Friends shouldn't let friends be bigots. Doesn't anyone love you enough to try and curb your hatred ?

I still like your cat, though, and you can't stop me. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

ahhh digi is back http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)! and doing her solid best to lose all use of her hands before she hits 25.

anyway for ONCE we agree so i'll sit back and watch the fun.

*pours coffee and kicks back to watch DS kick some heathern arse*

quote:Originally posted by BaKeD_gOoDs:

I'm not religious, and it allows me to criticize every religion with no bias.

Is that so ?

You are not religious for what reasons ?

Those reasons create a bias.

quote:Originally posted by elfstone:

They did? Last time I checked patriarchy was doing fine.

And don't throw Jesus and Paul in the same bucket. Jesus said man and woman shall be one flesh, Paul said woman shall submit to man. The latter is misogynist, the first no.

Uhhh...the fact that you can't see the blatant contradistinction between those two scriptures just illustrates why you don't understand Christianity (an observation, not an insult).

Man and woman become one flesh when they are MARRIED. Not just walking around together, pickin' apples on a sunny day.

The covenant of marriage joins them in a union of souls. They become one minded, which means neither one or the other can reside in thought or action without the other, in theory. Not many people can actually accomplish this, but this is how God designed marriage.

This has nothing to do with a woman's POSITIONAL authority in the household. Marriage is a symbolism of God's relationship to the Church; God as husband, and Church as "bride". God is always the spiritual head of the church, though the church resides in union with Him.

See it now ?

*huggles Jack*

I am 26, approaching 27 in January. So, let's say my hands will reach utter obliteration by...30. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

And what is this "for ONCE" crap ? We agree on a lot. Just so happens it is never related to religion. *LMAO*

If you agree with me, you could HELP. Don't just post when you have a counter-argument for me, you old coot.

http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Atomical:

The word homosexual wasn't added to the bible until 1949. There is no word in hebrew that means homosexual. Sodomite doesn't even mean homosexual. If you're going to be a literalist, as I think you are, you might as well try to defend this verse.

Are you talking about the Septuagint again ?

Psh. I was going to roll over you on this subject in Politics, but I lost my whole post. It was about 18 paragraphs long, refutes Mr. Jordan, AND your flawed logic on this subject. I am still too pissed and too sad to try and redo it. *wails*

I went through ever point you just touched upon...*sighs* I will do it again. *grumbles*

Just give me some time, ok ?

quote:

Digital Savior:

Three of the last pastors we have had have been female and they've been damn good too. It's quite ironic that you listen to a man to tell you what your rights are as a christian woman. But that's just me. I'm guessing that you believe women shouldn't be pastors. So here's my question to you: Do you believe that female pastors can be equal to there male counterparts or do you believe that all female pastors are inferior?

First, does it not strike alarm in your heart that you have been through THREE ?!

Second, I never said women can't teach. They cannot hold a positional or spiritual role of authority over men, AS DETAILED SPECIFICALLY IN THE BIBLE, as they would be required to as a pastor of a church.

Some of the most effective speakers I have heard on the subject of God have been women...so long as they reserve it to women in an organizational role, they aren't doing anything wrong.

As soon as they stand on a pulpit before MEN and teach, they are assuming a positional and spiritual authoritative role over them...that would be like the CHURCH teaching God (please see my explanation in a previous post about the analogy of God and the church).

By the way, is it lost on you that just because YOUR church does something, it doesn't make it right ?

The Bible is THE final authority on all matters, and if your church is in direct contradiction to the Word, it is not right.

I listen to a MALE pastor, because that is how God designed the church to function.

There is no sexism in that. I do not feel threatened by it, either...and neither should you.

In case you hadn't noticed, I am not a doormat with a beaten-wife-syndrome complex. I speak my mind...loudly. It is not as if I am cowering in the corner, waiting for my pastor to chastise me for being inferior to him.

My pastor doesn't TELL me what my rights are as a Christian woman, God does (consequently, this is precisely where my pastor gets his information from...oh, the horrors !).

I read my Bible, with diligence and fortitude. I study it, too. That means I check several sources and translations, and cross reference and verify between the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. I don't need too much guidance on my role in the church. The Bible is CLEAR.

To answer your question, women are not to be pastors, or deacons. This is specifically outlined in 1 Timothy 2:11-14, and again by Paul in Corinthians.

The structure of 1 Timothy 2:11-14 makes the "reason" perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with "for" and gives the "cause" of what Paul stated in verses 11-12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men ? Because - "Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived." That is the reason.

This leads some to believe that women should not teach because they are more easily deceived. That concept is debatable...but if women are more easily deceived, why should they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? That is not what the text says. Women are not to teach or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. As a result, God has given men the primary teaching authority in the church.

Women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching and helps. Much of the ministry of the church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted to public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only to having spiritual teaching authority over men.

The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians chapter 12). Women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), and to proclaim the Gospel to the lost (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).

PROCLAIM THE GOSPEL TO THE LOST !! (for everyone else that thinks I oughtn't to be talking about the Bible on Totse)

I hope this answers your question, Atomical.

[This message has been edited by Digital_Savior (edited 08-24-2005).]

quote:

First, does it not strike alarm in your heart that you have been through THREE ?!



I'm not sure how your church works, but ours rotates pastors. Let me give you an example. A church is unhappy with a pastor of theirs. This could be do to performance or any number of other issues. Whatever the reason the limited hierarchy of the methodist church moves them. Personally I think that switching pastors causes the church to go into a rebirth and find itself again. It brings members that haven't attended back to the church to experience the new pastor.



quote:

Second, I never said women can't teach. They cannot hold a positional or spiritual role of authority over men, AS DETAILED SPECIFICALLY IN THE BIBLE, as they would be required to as a pastor of a church.



I'm surprised you subscribe to patriarchy. I thought that was a Catholic thing. Our church has one pastor that serves two congregations. She is openly accessible and I don't have to go to a youth pastor or assistant pastor. What purpose does patriarchy serve in 2005? I say this because you want to create status and patriarchy by only allowing men to become pastors. I would say that before Jesus came women weren't treated equally. But when Jesus came he treated everyone equally. What does that tell you about the "new covenant "of the New Testament?

quote:

Some of the most effective speakers I have heard on the subject of God have been women...so long as they reserve it to women in an organizational role, they aren't doing anything wrong (. As soon as they stand on a pulpit before MEN and teach, they are assuming a positional and spiritual authoritative role over them...that would be like the CHURCH teaching God (please see my explanation in a previous post about the analogy of God and the church).



quote:

By the way, is it lost on you that just because YOUR church does something, it doesn't make it right ?



Because only women pastors exist in my church.

quote:

The Bible is THE final authority on all matters, and if your church is in direct contradiction to the Word, it is not right.



John 1:12: All people, men and women, have the opportunity to become children of God - presumably without regard to gender, race, sexual orientation, nationality, etc.

bullet Acts 2:1-21: At the time of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit was described as entering both men and women. In Verse 17, Peter recites a saying of the prophet Joel that talks about sons and daughters; Verse 18 talks about men and women.

bullet Acts 9:36: Paul refers to a woman (Tabitha in Aramaic, Dorcas in Greek, Gazelle in English) as a Christian disciple.

bullet Acts 18:24-26 describes how a married couple, Priscilla and Aquila, both acted in the role of pastor to a man from Alexandria, called Apollos. Various translations of the Bible imply that they taught him in the synagogue (Amplified Bible, King James Version, Rheims, New American Standard, New American, New Revised Standard) However, the New International Version have an unusual translation of this passage. The NIV states that the teaching occurred in Priscilla's and Aquila's home.

bullet Acts 21:9: Four young women are referred to as prophetesses.

bullet Romans 16:1: Paul refers to Phoebe as a minister (diakonos) of the church at Cenchrea. Some translations say deaconess; others try to downgrade her position by mistranslating it as "servant" or "helper".

bullet Romans 16:3: Paul refers to Priscilla as another of his "fellow workers in Christ Jesus" (NIV) Other translations refer to her as a "co-worker". But other translations attempt to downgrade her status by calling her a "helper". The original Greek word is "synergoi", which literally means "fellow worker" or "colleague." 4

bullet Romans 16:7: Paul refers to a male apostle, Andronicus and a female apostle, Lunia, as "outstanding among the apostles" (NIV) The Amplified Bible translates this passage as "They are men held in high esteem among the apostles." The Revised Standard Version shows it as "they are men of note among the apostles." The reference to them both being men does not appear in the original Greek text. The word "men" was simply inserted by the translators, apparently because the translators' minds recoiled from the concept of a female apostle. Many translations, including the Amplified Bible, Rheims New Testament, New American Standard Bible, and the New International Version simply picked the letter "s" out of thin air. They converted the original "Junia" (a woman's name) into "Junias" (a man's name) in order to warp St. Paul's original writing by erasing all mention of a female apostle. Junia was first converted into a man only in the "13th century, when Aegidius of Rome (1245-1316 CE) referred to both Andronicus and Junia as "honorable men." 5

bullet 1 Corinthians 1:11: Chloe is mentioned as the owner of a house where Christian meetings were held. There is some ambiguity as to whether the women actually led the house churches. Similar passages mention, with the same ambiguity:

bullet The mother of Mark in Acts 12:12, and

bullet Lydia in Acts 16:14-5, and 40, and

bullet Nympha in (Col 4:15).

bullet 1 Corinthians 12:4-7: This discusses gifts that the Holy Spirit gives to all believers, both men and women. The New International Version obscures this message; in Verse 6 is translated "all men", whereas other translations use the terms "all", "all persons", "in everyone", and "in all."

bullet 1 Corinthians 16:3: Paul refers to a married couple: Priscilla and Aquila as his fellow workers in Christ Jesus.

bullet 2 Corinthians 5:17: "Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation..." (NIV). Again "anyone" appears to mean both men and women.

bullet Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (NIV) This is perhaps the most famous passage in the New Testament that assigns equal status to individuals of both genders (and all races, nationalities and slave status).

bullet Philippians 4:2: Paul refers to two women, Euodia and Syntyche, as his coworkers who were active evangelists, spreading the gospel.

bullet Philemon 2: Paul writes his letter to "Apphia, our sister" and two men as the three leaders of a house church.

bullet 1 Peter 4:10-11: This passages discusses all believers serving others with whatever gifts the Holy Spirit has given them, "faithfully administering God's grace in its various forms." (NIV) Presumably this would mean that some women are given the gift of being an effective pastor, and should be permitted to exercise that gift.

What kind of christian hates women and discloses their friends AIDS status for use as an argument.

quote:

I listen to a MALE pastor, because that is how God designed the church to function.

There is no sexism in that. I do not feel threatened by it, either...and neither should you.



I listen to whoever speaks God's word because God accepts all people.



quote:

To answer your question, women are not to be pastors, or deacons. This is specifically outlined in 1 Timothy 2:11-14, and again by Paul in Corinthians.



I don't believe in your ridiculous church patriarchy. Get a life.

quote:

The structure of [b]1 Timothy 2:11-14 makes the "reason" perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with "for" and gives the "cause" of what Paul stated in verses 11-12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men ? Because - "Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived." That is the reason.



Too bad they didn't exist. It's all symbolism.

quote:

This leads some to believe that women should not teach because they are more easily deceived. That concept is debatable...but if women are more easily deceived, why should they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? That is not what the text says. Women are not to teach or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. As a result, God has given men the primary teaching authority in the church.



Why is it debatable that women are easily deceived? You're living in the sixties when the average woman stayed at home. Maybe women are easily deceived because it is they who are the down trodden. Only recently has there been some attempt to give women equal pay for equal work and other benefits that men have enjoyed for centuries. It's a bit discouraging that I'm having to explain this to a woman.

quote:

Women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching and helps. Much of the ministry of the church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted to public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only to having spiritual teaching authority over men.



Women excel in the same things as men. That's why a woman runs Xerox. You're trying to perpetuate a stereotype that doesn't exist anymore.

quote: But when Jesus came he treated everyone equally.

questionable.

very, very questionable.



[This message has been edited by jackketch (edited 08-25-2005).]

What is questionable is fundamentalism. I have friends who go to a Baptist church where they kicked out a woman who was found to be living with a man out of wedlock. Jesus died for our sins so fundamentalists can pick and choose who can come to church. It doesn't make sense to me.

I had exposure at a young age to a deepwoods fundamentalist Pentacostal church. Unbelievable, the regard in which they hold their women.

quote:Originally posted by Atomical:

What is questionable is fundamentalism. I have friends who go to a Baptist church where they kicked out a woman who was found to be living with a man out of wedlock. Jesus died for our sins so fundamentalists can pick and choose who can come to church. It doesn't make sense to me.

can't disagree with you there.but to be fair, the question of female clergy isn't really a fundamentlist thing. only fairly recently has mainstream christianity changed it's thinking on this (with certain notable exceptions like the Methodists).

the problem all 'liberal' christians face is that the NT is very clear on the question. and whatever worthy theological arguements the pro female clergy lobby come up with , they still find themselves in the unenviable position of either contradicting a commandment of god or declaring large chunks of scripture to be in some way invalid.

jackketch: the problem all 'liberal' christians face is that the NT is very clear on the question. and whatever worthy theological arguements the pro female clergy lobby come up with , they still find themselves in the unenviable position of either contradicting a commandment of god or declaring large chunks of scripture to be in some way invalid.

No, it'll just be making up an excuse. Just like all their other excuses for breaking various rules in the Bible. For example, there's a very obvious rule in the New Testament that says women are supposed to wear hats in church or they'll be punished by having their heads shaven, but I don't see any churches following that. Except with nuns, and maybe the Amish.

Oh, and don't bother to tell me why women don't have to wear head coverings in church. I already know it's an excuse.

I'm just curious, but does anyone know about the Jewish part of this sort of thing?

What is their policy regarding women and their role? Has that changed?

fundamentalism sucks. Church tends to be boring and singing.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

can't disagree with you there.but to be fair, the question of female clergy isn't really a fundamentlist thing. only fairly recently has mainstream christianity changed it's thinking on this (with certain notable exceptions like the Methodists).

the problem all 'liberal' christians face is that the NT is very clear on the question. and whatever worthy theological arguements the pro female clergy lobby come up with , they still find themselves in the unenviable position of either contradicting a commandment of god or declaring large chunks of scripture to be in some way invalid.



Of some of the 'gnostic writings, are the stipulations the same...or...was that not even an issue????

quote:Originally posted by outcast:



Of some of the 'gnostic writings, are the stipulations the same...or...was that not even an issue????

most of the socalled 'gnostic' writings are very pro women.

and the Gopsel Of Thomas perhaps gives us a better snapshot of womens role in the Ur-church than the gospels do.

as jesus said ....i will make her a living spirit...

Then...maybe...one should not base such ideas solely on the books that were selected and should, at least, consider the social influences at the time of compilation and familiarize themselves with other texts as well.