Analytical:

True, 1 Tim 2 11-12 can be extended to other areas but it's primarily talking about a woman and a man in the sense of a wife's submission to her husband, hence the Adam and Eve example and reference to child-bearing.

Or another way of looking at it, could be that it talking about the relationship order between male & female, with the reference to Adam & Eve being made to stress that said order was instituted at creation?

God bless

The simple truth is God made us all equal, God made a woman to support the man. The man is the head of the house. Fine no one is disapproving that, since God made us all equal, i don't see any reason why God can call a man to preach and not call a woman.

The truth about life is that there are so many things to believe, it's the choices you make as regards life that makes you who you are.

@Analytical,

I'd like you to refresh your memory about the points made so far in my inputs:

(a) both men and women are to preach the Gospel

(b) both men and women can teach - in the settings recommended in the Word

(c) there are no distinctions between the sexes as far as salvation is concerned

(d) there is definitely a distinction made between the sexes in service

(e) all things are to be done by both sexes in the contexts revealed in the Word.

Now, if you suppose that all things are just about done with no regard for context, I offer that you're missing the gist of Scripture. Here:

Rom. 12:4 - "For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office."

I Cor. 14:31 - "For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted."

I Cor. 14:34 - "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law."

I Cor. 14:37 - "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord."

"Calling and anointing" is a cliche people always use today without a clue as to the sphere of their operations. That someone has an anointing from the Spirit does not automatically qualify that person for just about any role - even though most people want to be "speakers" and take center stage. There is clearly a difference made in the various kinds of speaking roles - as in prophesying, teaching, exhorting, speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues. Not all are the same; and especially so, the Word shows us that a woman is not to be a teacher in the setting of the Church.

Let's apply a bit of common sense here. If the case in I Tim. 2:12 was simply about a home setting, what's the rational behind the thought that a woman ought not to teach her husband (according to YLT), but as long as she has "the anointing" then she can teach in the church??

If we take the time to consider the contexts of the use of the gifts, we cannot fail to see that each has their different roles and offices to apply themselvs to - whether men or women. And we are on safe grounds only when we go by what we understand contextually from Scripture, and not what tradition has led many to believe.

Cheers.

@ topic

I don't think discrimination of sex is in the bible, a woman is as equal as a man. Though the man as lots of responsibilities more than the woman, that doesn't mean he has much authority over her. Our generation as made it easier for everyone to live independently, no one is no one's slave anymore. We have brains like other humans.

The phenomenon behind the topic now is like saying the man's brain is more advanced than that of the woman's thereby not having the responsibility to preach the gospel which I find totally absurd.

The gospel can be preached by any sex, the issue of abonimation has being renewed by Jesus Christ. Atleast, in the day of pentecost when the holy spirit came down from heaven, it met with both men and women in the house and all spoke in tougues.

The issue of women not preaching is simply erroneous. Please let this be corrected.

Women are very much allowed to preach, it ain't a taboo.

ope_emi:

@ topic

I don't think discrimination of sex is in the bible, a woman is as equal as a man. Though the man as lots of responsibilities more than the woman, that doesn't mean he has much authority over her. Our generation as made it easier for everyone to live independently, no one is no one's slave anymore. We have brains like other humans.

The phenomenon behind the topic now is like saying the man's brain is more advanced than that of the woman's thereby not having the responsibility to preach the gospel which I find totally absurd.

The gospel can be preached by any sex, the issue of abonimation has being renewed by Jesus Christ. Atleast, in the day of pentecost when the holy spirit came down from heaven, it met with both men and women in the house and all spoke in tougues.

The issue of women not preaching is simply erroneous. Please let this be corrected.

Women are very much allowed to preach, it ain't a taboo.

ope mi I disagree with you, woman was created from a rib of the man. The man has authority over the woman and we are by no means equal. God created us as a companion for him.

However, the balance was set under the new covenant where men are encouraged to love their wives as themselves, and not to mistreat them. We should never consider ourselves equal with men.

But concerning the gifts, preaching and teaching, I believe there is no separation of sexes as to who can perform these.
There are female preachers everywhere, and also women who teach the word in a very plain clear manner, transforming the lives of many women worldwide.

@trini_girl,

Good points you made to ope_emi's, and the sympathy of his entry is only based on feelings rather than on Scripture.

However, I'd like to offer the following:

1. Men and Women Are Equal
As far as creation is concerned, we are all created equal. A man is not "more created" than a woman (if you get my drift), for they belong to the same class - humans. A woman is equal to the man as long as she's not of another class of existence, such as animals. The Bible says, "Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord" (1 Cor. 11:11). That tells me they're on the same grounds of creation; neither of them is a higher species than the other. "Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us (i.e., both men and women) in the womb?" (Job 31:15).

2. Men and Women Share Equal Grace
Though equal in creation, we are all also equal in salvation. Paul tells us that, "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. . . There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:26 & 28). The apostle Peter also says women are as much "heirs together of the grace of life" with the men (I Pet. 3:7).

3. Men and Women Have Different Roles and Responsibilities
From creation to salvation, God's arrangement in the divine economy shows that men and women, though equal in more than one way, yet have differing roles and responsibilities. In creation, women were blessed to be the "helpmeet" of men (Gen. 2:18); in salvation, they still play significant roles in men's lives. However, in God's order for service, God's Word is clear as to the roles of each person, and we have pointed these out severally:

   (a) I Tim. 2:10-12           (b) I Cor. 14:34-35          (c) Tit. 2:3-5

Those who are persuaded otherwise should help us take a look at these scriptures; and instead of sharing their feelings from nowhere, help us interpret those verses.

shahan:

@trini_girl,

Good points you made to ope_emi's, and the sympathy of his entry is only based on feelings rather than on Scripture.

However, I'd like to offer the following:

1. Men and Women Are Equal
As far as creation is concerned, we are all created equal. A man is not "more created" than a woman (if you get my drift), for they belong to the same class - humans. A woman is equal to the man as long as she's not of another class of existence, such as animals. The Bible says, "Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord" (1 Cor. 11:11). That tells me they're on the same grounds of creation; neither of them is a higher species than the other. "Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us (i.e., both men and women) in the womb?" (Job 31:15).

2. Men and Women Share Equal Grace
Though equal in creation, we are all also equal in salvation. Paul tells us that, "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. . . There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:26 & 28). The apostle Peter also says women are as much "heirs together of the grace of life" with the men (I Pet. 3:7).

3. Men and Women Have Different Roles and Responsibilities
From creation to salvation, God's arrangement in the divine economy shows that men and women, though equal in more than one way, yet have differing roles and responsibilities. In creation, women were blessed to be the "helpmeet" of men (Gen. 2:18); in salvation, they still play significant roles in men's lives. However, in God's order for service, God's Word is clear as to the roles of each person, and we have pointed these out severally:

   (a) I Tim. 2:10-12           (b) I Cor. 14:34-35          (c) Tit. 2:3-5

Those who are persuaded otherwise should help us take a look at these scriptures; and instead of sharing their feelings from nowhere, help us interpret those verses.

Very enlightening take!

I have struggled between the definition of "equality" between the sexes for fear of being labelled a feminist.

But your distinctions between creation and roles have nipped it in the bud.

I am always careful not to give the impression that I am a man's "equal", there are things that men are simply designed for that women are not! (Like changing light bulbs) 

In male dominated environments like the workplace I have found women excelling and surpassing men and with good reason. In the churches however, you find more men in positions of leadership, with women in supporting roles.

*** thinking ***

I'm still not sure if I agree with your stance on women and teaching.  But the seperation of roles vs equality in creation and salvation is definitely refreshing.

Thanks

trini_girl:

I'm still not sure if I agree with your stance on women and teaching. But the seperation of roles vs equality in creation and salvation is definitely refreshing.

Thanks

Sister trini_girl,

That is the whole point. God has specific areas of influence, roles and responsibility in mind to maximise the complimentary nature of the two genders.

A creational point is that men should talk a position of leadership and wield the authority and responsibility that comes with it. That is not to say that women are less capable, talented or gifted, it's merely adhering to divine order.

All things being equal, in a full church setting, women are not to take on the teaching role or assume authority over men. The scriptural narrative is very clear. Starting from the home (Gods basic building block, not the church as many presume), to the church which is essentially a supersized family.

So for example. You have ten families. Each headed by a husband, with a wife in dutiful (and biblical) submission, and say a couple of kids. When they come together as a church, does it make sense to now give authority to a women over the men? No, it is inconsistent. it's why women cannot be elders. It's as clear as spring water. Yes, there are important roles for women. It's sad that people think that mothering and nurturing the future, are somehow lesser roles than teaching the word or assuming a titular office.

Women for the most part (confirmed scientifically and anecdotally) have better language/speech skills than men, that is not a reason for usurping God's divine order. It's important that we learn to obey and appreciate scriptural dynamics in relationships. So for example the marriage order shouldn't change if the woman is better paid, better connected, has a better pedigree, is famous etc etc.

I'll stop now 'because I know you detest lengthy posts, but i hope we are moving towards shared understanding!

God bless

trini_girl:

I am always careful not to give the impression that I am a man's "equal", there are things that men are simply designed for that women are not! (Like changing light bulbs)

Lol. . . we're all learning. Many blesses. _{you always manage to be a good crack!}

Got this from another site:

1 Timothy 2 : 11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

Should a woman be allowed to be a deacon(ess) or an elder in a church?
I would say that it goes against scripture to allow deaconesses or women elders (pastors). While many women out there could clearly teach me a thing or two about God and scripture, that would go against the model of federal headship. Man is the head of the family…


1 Corinthians 11: 3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. Ephesians 5 22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Why would a woman be allowed to, say, lead a children’s ministry, but not be an administrative pastor of a church?
The key to whether women can teach a children’s ministry is in that they are not teaching men but rather children. These children should still be getting spiritual instruction from their fathers and mothers but are not ready to study on their own. A woman is capable of giving instruction but must submit to God’s authority and instructions.


Titus 2: 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, 4 so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored

Would you let a woman be a guest speaker and give a sermon?
This is more difficult because a woman could be a very valuable guest speaker, but is that acceptable. I guess it depends on the context of the situation; is it topical or is it preaching? Does that even matter? I would be uncomfortable to have a woman as a guest speaker or giving a sermon during the service but a separate arena may be preferable - a special “class” or speaking opportunity for example. I have to admit that this is a very slippery slope.


1 Corinthians 14 :34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

This section follows discussion about speaking in tongues and prophesy and so it may be limited to that concept but I suspect that it may be addressing the issue at Corinth where women may not have been turning to their husbands for spiritual leadership. They may have been trying to circumvent their roles and seeking instruction from other men (not elders) or were even trying to teach other men. I may have tried to cover too many ideas for one post but I hope it makes sense. I’ll respond to any clarifications you have or to expand on these ideas if needed. When posting arguments for or against, please quote scripture. You can find online bible translations at Bible Gateway. Please understand that I have the utmost respect for Godly women and have no doubt they are very capable of teaching/preaching in the church. It’s just that I understand the scriptures to be God-breathed and true in their entirety. I also understand the scriptures to say that women are not to teach or preach in the church. It never says can’t or incapable of teaching. Finally, what does this mean in regards to evangelism? Are women not to evangelize? Are they not to share the gospel? I don’t think this is the case. Maybe the instructions from God only applied to the church environment. This may allow for outside studies, books, seminars, children’s ministry, etc.

If you want to know more, here is an even more convincing and lengthy argument:

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/eccl/women.htm

It concludes that:

The woman is forbidden from preaching, or authoritatively proclaiming the truth of the Word of God, to men in a local assembly of believers. Today, this authoritative proclamation of the Word of God would include any form of pastoral ministry or the holding of any ordained office. The reasons for this divine injunction stem from God's prescribed order in creation, in the family and in the local church.

@Donzman,

Many thanks for that piece - much enjoyed.

I'm wondering if the author was not a bit stringent about the part of women administrator

Donzman:

Why would a woman be allowed to, say, lead a children’s ministry, but not be an administrative pastor of a church?
The key to whether women can teach a children’s ministry is in that they are not teaching men but rather children.

I think that is quite simplistic. Men can also teach children as well; and in many cases children ministries have grown stronger with both male and female children-ministers.

A woman can be an administrative pastor of a church. It doesn't mean she has to be the teacher. But i trust she can actually handle administrative issues, sometimes better than the men do.

Scripture for that? Easy:

1 Cor. 12:28 - "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues."

I believe women make excellent administrators (helps and governments); and the other gifts - healing, miracles, tongues, etc. - are to be exercised by women as well (see I Cor. 14:39-40). The only specification not alloted women is teaching - and for that we need to look at other texts like I Tim. 2:12. As regarding the other gifts, I don't find any specifications elsewhere addressing women to not engage in such in church setting.

Good piece all the same.

Cheers.

Trini girl,
I honestly think you are a bunch of conflicting and confused character trying real hard to use anger to scare people away from replying to your post and believe me it will not work.

From what i see of you, your actions betray your statements and like theY say , action speak louder than words. What ever happens to feminine virtues? come to think of it, I think i am beginning to see reason why they say women should not speak in the church because using you as a case study, if you become a pastor, God forbid, you definitely will not allow any man to counter idea with you becouse you have a mind set that is fixed. it is either i agree with you or i am talking rubbish not so?

If what you said earlier in the post about women been our supporter and companion is correct don't you think you should start by showing us some respect? i like you but your hot blood is biggining to worry me, i do sincerely hope you will be okay.

Just cool down please?

I am biggining to have double mind about a woman having authority in the church because what i see in Holy Trini girl is some thing i never thought of.

Still me

shahan:

Good points you made to ope_emi's, and the sympathy of his entry is only based on feelings rather than on Scripture.

I can see you quite understand where my stance is, and I couldn't have explained better. I wouldn't say I based my explaination on only feelings but also scriptural, just that I didn't quote the Bible. Keep up with the good work. 

Bless you, ope_emi.

osegwu:

Trini girl,
I honestly think you are a bunch of conflicting and confused character trying real hard to use anger to scare people away from replying to your post and believe me it will not work.

From what i see of you, your actions betray your statements and like theY say , action speak louder than words. What ever happens to feminine virtues? come to think of it, I think i am beginning to see reason why they say women should not speak in the church because using you as a case study, if you become a pastor, God forbid, you definitely will not allow any man to counter idea with you becouse you have a mind set that is fixed. it is either i agree with you or i am talking rubbish not so?

If what you said earlier in the post about women been our supporter and companion is correct don't you think you should start by showing us some respect? i like you but your hot blood is biggining to worry me, i do sincerely hope you will be okay.

Just cool down please?

I am biggining to have double mind about a woman having authority in the church because what i see in Holy Trini girl is some thing i never thought of.

Still me

Hi Osegwu,

Haba, more "personal" criticism.  Your criticism is welcome.  However, I assure you that I am by no means conflicted or confused about what I believe.

Also, I had no idea people were "scared" of responding to my posts.   I have not gotten that impression in the least.

I also don't think it's fair, as I'm sure you will agree, to use my personality quirks (if you can call it that) as an indication or justification for women not being in positions of authority in the church.  

Perhaps I myself am not ready, but I'm sure there are many capable, scripture quoting women who have mastered the art of seething inwardly while politely giving a response with a smile, while their blood pressure hits the roof. Look at Shahan for example, she seems to be a well learned theologian.

Respect has to be earned, plain and simple.  Just because you're a man, doesn't mean you're a man, if you catch what I mean.  I have met young boys with a more mature character than 40 year old men.

For expressing my opinion I have been accused of all sorts of erroneous things.  I think I've handled it quite well. In fact, I truly found it amusing how ignorant people can be. The fact is, once you don't conform to what other people believe on this forum when it comes to christianity, you automatically become a feminist tool of the anti-christ, and people offer you many "prayers".

I do not conform.  I do not need or want to "impress" anyone here by being a "sweet" woman.  I do not need to be liked by the men here. I aint lookin for a husband. I do not have to be agreeable and I sure as hell do not have to respect anyone who disrespects me. If people cannot realize this is only one side of me then too bad.

Maybe it's a Trini-African thing, but black women here express themselves without fear. RAH!  

It seems that the problem is I should not express my opinion about people's post by using words like "rubbish" and "nonsense".  But others have expressed that about my posts and I didn't consider it an insult. In fact, I found it funny.  People are just too sensitive, and need to grow up! This is just a place to exchange ideas for heaven sake, it's not real life!

Further, I don't even waste time to respond or reason with certain individuals, especially after I read their posts and realize their childish mentality and ignorance.

If you have been reading my posts, you would realize that I am NOT an antagonist or an attention seeker.  I am normally very quiet, friendly and open to new ideas.

If possible, please try and make this the last time speculation or advic about my personality comes up in a thread, since this is the last time I will be responding to same,  and more importantly since it is not directly related to the topic at hand.  Let me remain a mystery please, abeg. It is enough. In fact, I think I will disappear for a while.  
*** Did someone say good riddance?? *** LOL!!!

Thank youuuuu!

Hope I didn't scare you      

I believe a woman should be able to preach, or teach. The biblical weight of evidence supports it.

Bobbyaf:

I believe a woman should be able to preach, or teach. The biblical weight of evidence supports it.

Which bible are you reading?. . . I tell you Jamaicans, stop smoking weed.

Which bible are you reading?. . . I tell you Jamaicans, stop smoking weed.

The very same one you need to read more widely, or fail to understand, 

Please read: Acts 2:17, 18 which says: 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: 18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

Again this leads us back to stop smoking weed.

How you do not see the difference between someone prophesying and preaching to a church?

Of course we will all prophesy that Jesus is Lord but many parts of the bible makes it clear what the role of women should be in the church, you can refer to my previous posts. It is in no means demeaning to be asked not to preach, there is no guarantee that the preacher will get in heaven before the congregation, heaven is the primary goal after all.

Morning All,

Most of the more nuanced submissions have acknowledged that there are gender differences in roles, spheres of influence and areas of responsibility.

Can women prophesy, preach, teach or take authority?
The answer appears to be yes to all, but with exceptions.

Women are not permitted to take authority over mature Christian men in a full church setting. Over children, over adolescents and over other women, yes. But not in church in the presence of mature adult males men. To do so is to usurp authority and rebel against divine order.

Vast learning, eloquence, charisma, family background, or ability of any kind is not cause to rebel against divinely instituted order. Will all self-titled females whose position gives them (an unscriptural) authority over men please desist forthwith. You have been warned!!![/color][color=#990000]

Folks, I went off for the weekend.  Now I'm back.

@Ishmael

Yes, but Christ later decided to change his mind. It was much later after his resurrection that he gave Apostle Paul that instruction that women should keep their mouth silent in churches.

To suggest Christ later changed his mind on a commandment he gave his disciples (male and female) later would be stretching it too far!  Watch it, brother.  He is the same yesterday, today and forever Heb. 13 vs 8.

@Shahan

I'm not advocating feminism, neither am I saying women should not be submissive to their own husbands and defer to them in authority.  The scripture is clear.  But that is as far as authority goes.  All women cannot submit to all men.  I can't find any scripture that supports that.  Rather, everyone, male and female, should submit to higher authority (Heb 13:17).

(d) there is definitely a distinction made between the sexes in service

Please support yourself with the relevant scriptures that show gender distinctions in service.

Rom. 12:4 - "For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office."

I agree wholeheartedly, but not in a gender sense.  Notice it says all members.  Simply put, we don't all have the same office.  Some are pastors, others prophets, some evangelists etc.  This is talking about disctinction in office and not in gender.

I Cor. 14:34 - "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law."

I Cor. 14:37 - "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord."

Please refer to my earlier posts on this.  It's addressing the problems and issues in the context having in mind the nature of the Corinthian church.  If the women keep silence in church, then by implication, they should not even prophesy or sing in church.

There is clearly a difference made in the various kinds of speaking roles - as in prophesying, teaching, exhorting, speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues. Not all are the same; and especially so, the Word shows us that a woman is not to be a teacher in the setting of the Church.

Agreed, the gifts (or speaking roles as you call it) are not the same.  I did not infer that.  There are clear differences between them, but I have not seen where the Holy Spirit says He cannot distribute to women as He wills.

Let's apply a bit of common sense here. If the case in I Tim. 2:12 was simply about a home setting, what's the rational behind the thought that a woman ought not to teach her husband (according to YLT), but as long as she has "the anointing" then she can teach in the church??

Don't let us misinterpret scriptures.  This verse adressed the usurping of authority.  Don't take one and leave the other.  The final decision making rests with the husband as the head and a wife should submit to that headship.  However, not that the man should lord it over, nor the woman usurp that authority.  Both are equally condemned in scriptures.

I'm not reasoning based on tradition or feelings but on what the word says.  If you ask my own opinion that's a separate issue.  Let's leave the work of the Holy Spirit to Him to do.  He distributes as He wills.  Or are you saying He doesn't give women gifts as teachers?

@trini-girl

ope mi I disagree with you, woman was created from a rib of the man.  The man has authority over the woman and we are by no means equal.  God created us as a companion for him.

I guess you meant the husband has authority over his own wife.

@Analytical,

Glad to have you back. Hope your weekend was smashing!

Analytical:

Please support yourself with the relevant scriptures that show gender distinctions in service.

In one of my previous entries, I outlined the equality of men and women in both creation and salvation; but offered with texts to the point that this equality is not carried over into service.

For the Scripture to even mention that a woman ought not to teach (I Tim. 2:12) establishes this distinction in gender as far as service is concerned.

I also offered that it is irrational that the Bible would forbid women teaching their husbands at home while permitting them to teach other husbands present in church! The YLT got it wrong, and you can get a good Greek lexicon to show you why.

Analytical:

I agree wholeheartedly, but not in a gender sense. Notice it says all members. Simply put, we don't all have the same office. Some are pastors, others prophets, some evangelists etc. This is talking about disctinction in office and not in gender.

If you remain on that one verse and interpret it privately on its own, slanted inferences will fill this page, because that would be in open violation of the principles of interpreting Scripture (see II Pet. 1:20).

That the Bible teaches that we don't all have the same office should make us dilligently gather our conclusions as to each person's role from other verses to the point. And when you see both I Cor. 14 and I Tim. 2 in their full picture, then Rom. 12:4 fits in context.

Analytical:

Please refer to my earlier posts on this. It's addressing the problems and issues in the context having in mind the nature of the Corinthian church.

That may well be, but its application is universal.

Analytical:

If the women keep silence in church, then by implication, they should not even prophesy or sing in church.

That's the conclusion many people draw when they fail to see the context of "speak" in I Cor. 14:34.

It does not at all mean they should be mute; rather, it offers the understanding that a woman ought not to take a leading role as a speaker who addresses the church, such as a teacher would. The same sense is given in Acts 14:12 where Paul was called "the chief speaker" as he addressed the crowd.

That this verse applies universally at all times in every church is underscored by two important lines in verses 34 and 35:

". . .but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law"

". . . for it is a shame for women to speak in the church".

Notice the second line: it did not say it was a shame for "your women" (i.e., the Corinthian women, as if there was any adverbs or qualifier) to speak in the church; but rather, as it stands without any qualifier and makes it a universal application by simply using "women" in general terms: "it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

We definitely cannot go round this and limit it only to the situation at Corinth - that would be disregarding the fact of what the law says in the first place.

Analytical:

Agreed, the gifts (or speaking roles as you call it) are not the same. I did not infer that. There are clear differences between them, but I have not seen where the Holy Spirit says He cannot distribute to women as He wills.

The Holy Spirit does not confuse His distribution even among women.

Analytical:

Don't let us misinterpret scriptures. This verse adressed the usurping of authority. Don't take one and leave the other. The final decision making rests with the husband as the head and a wife should submit to that headship. However, not that the man should lord it over, nor the woman usurp that authority. Both are equally condemned in scriptures.

I've explained before that YLT doesn't help on that verse. Besides, why would it make sense that what was forbidden in the home setting becomes applicable in the church setting? If it seems to be condemning it in the home, how does it applaud it in the church?

Analytical:

I'm not reasoning based on tradition or feelings but on what the word says. If you ask my own opinion that's a separate issue. Let's leave the work of the Holy Spirit to Him to do. He distributes as He wills. Or are you saying He doesn't give women gifts as teachers?

I've offered from Tit. 2:3-5 an example of the sphere in which women are encouraged to teach. That does not make the setting as broad as to abrogate the other texts under review. To go beyond that into the sphere of the church at large is an abuse of authority that no Spirit-led woman can defend.

Women play excellent roles in the home and church, as well as in society. However, when it comes to the sphere of the church, God has laid down roles for each one.

Analytical:

I'm not advocating feminism, neither am I saying women should not be submissive to their own husbands and defer to them in authority. The scripture is clear. But that is as far as authority goes. All women cannot submit to all men. I can't find any scripture that supports that. Rather, everyone, male and female, should submit to higher authority (Heb 13:17).

The logical extension of such thinking, is that a woman can be a submissive wife at home, but then take authority over her husband in church. Sorry, thats warped.

To avoid just that we now have the hypocritical wife as "co-pastor " arrangement. Whereby to avoid a woman taking authority over her own husband she is made a pastor. Over other men, but not over her own husband. Again, plain convoluted.

No, women do not submit to all men, only to their own husbands. In a church setting they submit to the male eldership like everyone else (including their husbands). The exception to this being if her husband (whatever his position in church) instructs otherwise. Eldership authority does not supercede spousal authority.

And mature adult men do not submit to any women, only the male eldership.

I have said it severally before, home first then church.

God bless

Thanks Shahan I had a wonderful weekend and you?

Now to further this discussion, Shahan, TV01 and all, let's consider the following, like the Berean Christians did so that we can edify ourselves and hold on to the truth.  

1 Tim 2 vs 12 (KJV, since YLT seems to be contentious!!)

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Shahan requested for a Greek lexicon.  The words translated woman and man are (from Strong's Greek-Hebrew Dictionary):

Gunee- meaning wife or woman; e.g. translated wife in I Cor. 7:3 and 27

Andros-meaning husband or man; e.g. translated husband in Luke 2:36

Please confirm if there is anything contrary.  The usage of both words in this chapter points more to that of a wife and husband as the basic use.  Moreso, if you follow with the next verses 13-15, refering to Adam and Eve, and then childbearing.  Please note, it is a wife that is associated with childbearing, not just every woman.

The words suffer not or not allowing are

ouk- meaning not
epitrepoo - meaning I am allowing

In essense, the words 'I am not allowing' is a present indicative tense that means he is not presently allowing.

But you may ask why?  That brings us again to the context in which this instruction was passed.  Remember that Timothy was the pastor of the church at Ephesus, to whom Paul wrote this book -1 Tim 1 vs 3.  He put Timothy in charge to properly instruct the young church at Ephesus against myths and false doctrines, where Paul was almost killed by preaching against their goddess.

The people of Ephesus were neck-deep in the Artemis worship of the goddess Diana. Women were very prominent in the Artemis religion, Diana being their female goddess of fertility and birth.  Part of the issues at stake in Ephesus was female superiority, dominance and insurbordination, all stemming from pagan worship of Diana, including the false doctines, part of which is that Diana is the one that delivers from childbearing.  This was the background at Ephesus.  And this explains why he was not allowing such myths to be carried into the church.
Not that Paul was commanding women everywhere not to speak!  

There are enough examples of women in the New Testament church (I don't want to go into those in the Old Testament) even commended by Paul himself.  Or was he contradicting himself?  These were women that taught and preached in the church, contrary to what you wrote.  Here is a list of them

Priscilla- She taught and pastored.  She appeared to be more prominent than her husband.  More often, she was mentioned first. See Acts 18:2,18,26; 1 Cor. 16:19; and Romans 16:3.  This should also answer TV01 in:

To avoid just that we now have the hypocritical wife as "co-pastor " arrangement. Whereby to avoid a woman taking authority over her own husband she is made a pastor. Over other men, but not over her own husband. Again, plain convoluted

Priscilla and her husband Aquila co-pastored a church in their house!  She even taught Apollos!!  Note that there were churches in houses, comprising both men and women, in the early church.

Phoebe- was a deacon-  greek 'diakonon' translated minister or servant. See Romans 16:1.  She ministered.

Junia- was an outstanding Apostle, even with Paul's high standard!  That should jostle you. Roman 16:7.  She was an Apostle of the church, in Christ even before Paul, according to Paul's testimony.  Now tell me what does apostle do?

Nympha- pastored a church in her house in Laodicea. She was the only leader mentioned by name there.  See Col. 4:15.

There were more in the early church, but these should suffice.  Yes, they were not as many as the men, but they were teaching as leaders all the same.  The same Paul commended all these.  How could he have done that if he meant they should not teach in church when they were all teaching, some alongside him in his missions?

Bless y'all.

NB:  Some scholars actually dispute the gender of Junia, the Apostle, for obvious reasons.  However, from studies, it's more likely a woman, Junia being a common feminine name of the 1st century, mentioned with Andronicus, likely to be her husband or brother.

There is evidence to support both sides, unfortunately. At least the way I see it, I would greatly appreciate help.
Note: Mark 15: 41, if we are using the word Minister.

@Analytical, just a couple of corrections, I think:


Nymphia was male (Col. 4¹⁵): Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house.

Priscilla: note that there is no mention (with her in dominance) wherein she and Aquila taught an apostle. In 18 ²⁶, she is mentioned secondarily. Same goes for Cor 16 ¹⁹. Romans 16: 3, is also disputable, as he calls them "helpers".

Phoebe: he (paul) commends her as a servant of the church, not as a Minister, a point I'm not willing to allow unless if you provide a link to a respected source (not just a random website naming her as a deacon, please). Romans 16 ² says she has been a succourer of many, and of Paul also, that does not make her a minister. If anything, it more helps the case that the woman fits more into the role of a comforter.

Junia: regardless of

Analytical:
NB:  Some scholars actually dispute the gender of Junia, the Apostle, for obvious reasons.  However, from studies, it's more likely a woman, Junia being a common feminine name of the 1st century, mentioned with Andronicus, likely to be her husband or brother.

the point still remains that he calls Andronicus and Junia his kinsmen.

If anything, consider Romans 16: 15, more in keeping with your argument.

For all of that, though, this argument is very interesting. I think it would settle my doubts if someone found a quote by Jesus himself, though, because as someone said before (I'm not inclined to find the quote), Paul at times speaks as a man, working to build unity in the church.

@mihai,

Very many thanks for pointing out those lines about Nymphia, Priscilla, Phoebe, and Junia. My rejoinder to Analytical's was delayed due to technicla hitches at my end. But we are all learning, and I loved his well-articulated arguments, though.

@Ananlytical,

Good points, well articulated. . . but here are a few things that I may not agree with you on:

Analytical:

1 Tim 2 vs 12 (KJV, since YLT seems to be contentious!!)

Shahan requested for a Greek lexicon. The words translated woman and man are (from Strong's Greek-Hebrew Dictionary):

Gunee- meaning wife or woman; e.g. translated wife in I Cor. 7:3 and 27

Please confirm if there is anything contrary.

S[/b]trong's, [b]T[/b]hayer's [b]G[/b]reek [b]D[/b]efinitions, and [b]K[/b]ing [b]J[/b]ames [b]C[/b]oncordance all interpret Gunee as a woman in that verse. Thayer says as occuring in there, it refers to a woman of any age; whether a virgin, or married, or a widow.

Why is it unbalanced to interpret Gunee as [b]wife in I Tim. 2:12? In the first place, verse 10 uses the same generic word which in most Bibles is translated simply as woman or women. Even YLT uses the words "woman/women" in both verses 10 & 12:

". . but--which becometh women professing godly piety--through good works. . and a woman I do not suffer to teach, nor to rule a husband, but to be in quietness."

Again, it is the same word used in John 19:26. Let us follow your rule of reasoning and substitute wife in place of woman: "When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, 'Wife, behold thy son!' " You do not suppose for one moment that Jesus would have referred to His mother as "wife" , would you?? The verse simply reads:

"When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman [gune], behold thy son!"

Now, you see why YLT uses woman in I Tim. 2:12 instead of wife - because the translators knew it does not make any sense if they used wife there.

Analytical:

Andros-meaning husband or man; e.g. translated husband in Luke 2:36

The same word is used in John 1:30 - "This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me".

You see that if you try substituting "husband" where the word "man" appears in the above verse, it doesn't make sense; even though they are the same Greek words. The point to understand is that the Greek expression is a generic word for "man", and the word "husband" is to be understood where it is connected in context with their Greek equivalent "wife/wives". This is not the case in I Tim. 2:12, and that is where YLT got it wrong to have used husband instead of the generic man. It is the same word in Greek that appears in both verses 10 and 12.

Analytical:

The usage of both words in this chapter points more to that of a wife and husband as the basic use.

Check again; I just pointed out the difference above - they're not the basic use.

Analytical:

Moreso, if you follow with the next verses 13-15, refering to Adam and Eve, and then childbearing. Please note, it is a wife that is associated with childbearing, not just every woman.

Lol, how you push that idea is not substantiated even in Scripture. A woman doesn't have to be a wife before she can bear children.

Analytical:

In essense, the words 'I am not allowing' is a present indicative tense that means he is not presently allowing.

There are loads of tenses in that construct that show a finality is meant.

Analytical:

But you may ask why? That brings us again to the context in which this instruction was passed. Remember that Timothy was the pastor of the church at Ephesus, to whom Paul wrote this book -1 Tim 1 vs 3. He put Timothy in charge to properly instruct the young church at Ephesus against myths and false doctrines, where Paul was almost killed by preaching against their goddess.

Every culture presents the same dangers, and there was not a place where the apostles ministered where they didn't face these dangers. Now, if you agree that the epistle recognizes Timothy as a pastor of the church at Ephesus, how do you defend the idea that Paul was instructing him on issues about the home?

Analytical:

The people of Ephesus were neck-deep in the Artemis worship of the goddess Diana. Women were very prominent in the Artemis religion, Diana being their female goddess of fertility and birth. Part of the issues at stake in Ephesus was female superiority, dominance and insurbordination, all stemming from pagan worship of Diana, including the false doctines, part of which is that Diana is the one that delivers from childbearing. This was the background at Ephesus. And this explains why he was not allowing such myths to be carried into the church.

That is a weak premise - men also were found in the various cults in Ephesus. There was no place where the apostle used that as an excuse to ask men to refrain from teaching in church.

Analytical:

Not that Paul was commanding women everywhere not to speak!

We already dealt with that. The sense is universal.

Analytical:

There are enough examples of women in the New Testament church (I don't want to go into those in the Old Testament) even commended by Paul himself. Or was he contradicting himself? These were women that taught and preached in the church, contrary to what you wrote. Here is a list of them

You missed the context, and I'll deal with them momentarily.

Analytical:

Priscilla- She taught and pastored. She appeared to be more prominent than her husband. More often, she was mentioned first. See Acts 18:2,18,26; 1 Cor. 16:19; and Romans 16:3.

I've checked up those texts and found that your assumptions were not correct. Priscilla was not more prominent than her husband, and was not more often mentioned first - check again. Second, none of the texts say that she taught or pastored in a church setting; and the only verse that might have been remotely in semblance of the idea to many people is Acts 18:26:

"And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly."

This does not suggest that the couple took him into church; rather, they invited him to their home and expounded the way of God more perfectly to him. Surely, the couple had a church in their house (I Cor. 16:19), but the case of Acts 18:26 didn't suggest that it was a church setting that Apollos was being discipled.

Analytical:

Priscilla and her husband Aquila co-pastored a church in their house! She even taught Apollos!! Note that there were churches in houses, comprising both men and women, in the early church.

As above.

Analytical:

Phoebe- was a deacon- greek 'diakonon' translated minister or servant. See Romans 16:1. She ministered.
Junia- was an outstanding Apostle, even with Paul's high standard! That should jostle you. Roman 16:7. She was an Apostle of the church, in Christ even before Paul, according to Paul's testimony. Now tell me what does apostle do?
Nympha- pastored a church in her house in Laodicea. She was the only leader mentioned by name there. See Col. 4:15.

mihai has hlped us on that, I think.

Analytical:

There were more in the early church, but these should suffice. Yes, they were not as many as the men, but they were teaching as leaders all the same.

You haven't been able to establish how they were teaching as leaders in the church as the men were, especially in light of the texts that seem to discourage the practice.

Analytical:

The same Paul commended all these. How could he have done that if he meant they should not teach in church when they were all teaching?

Nope, they were not all teaching. The texts didn't say so, and maybe they sounded like they did to you. In light of clear verses to the contrary, I'm not convinced that women were set as teachers in the church.

Cheers.

Folks, well done and thanks for the compliment. I see this discussion not as argument but as study. I am also learning. In fact, it has made me to consider a lot this past few days, but the evidences cannot just be wished away. I hope you are learning too so that we can all be thoroughly furnished.

@mihai

Nympha was a woman. It's a feminine name, just like Junia. The same argument against Junia is being used against Nympha, depending on the rendition of the Greek words and where the accent is placed. Four Bible translations, (The New American Standard, The New American Standard Update, The New International Version, and the Revised Standard Version ) all called her a woman. Check the references. Also the word translated 'his' in KJV was translated 'her' in the others.

Priscilla in the references was mentioned first more than her husband. Please check them. I did say, she seems to be more prominent than her husband.

Phoebe was a deacon. The word translated servant is 'diakonon' which means minister. Check Strong's Greek Dictionary to confirm. The same word was used by Paul to severally refer to himself as a minister in I Cor. 3:5. and Ephesians 3:7.

I will be back. I'm actually in a hurry.

@Analytical,

Thanks for adding to our understanding and helping us to see your perspective.

Analytical:

Nympha was a woman. It's a feminine name, just like Junia. The same argument against Junia is being used against Nympha, depending on the rendition of the Greek words and where the accent is placed. Four Bible translations, (The New American Standard, The New American Standard Update, The New International Version, and the Revised Standard Version ) all called her a woman. Check the references. Also the word translated 'his' in KJV was translated 'her' in the others.

It's going to take a very indepth analysis to elucidate why the KJV and other kindred translations used the masculine pronoun instead of the feminine. First, the pronoun used there is a perculiar one that could be used for either sexes (him or her) or the neuter (it). It is the persuasion of many translators that the context and background seems to support the masculine pronoun than the feminine. Even YLT uses "his" instead of her, to lend credence that Nymphas was well known to be a male.

Notice I used Nympha[b]s[/b] (not Nympha, which is feminine); however, as above, more of the scholarly translators believe it to be masculine, since the feminine will need an accent to make it so; and early Greek did not use accentuations.

Thirdly, the versions you offered are very helpful indeed in many instances. However, I'm not one to often use the NIV (New International Version) for indepth study. Now this may cause an uproar, but until one comes to the understanding that the NIV is a version and not a translation, it would be difficult to see the point.

Take for instance the NIV rendering of John 9:35 - was Jesus referring to Himself as "Son of Man" or "Son of God"? The NIV says Son of Man; other translations use "Son of God". If you were treating that subject, what would be your persuasion from the point of reference of careful study?

That may be an off topic here, but it's just an example of why I may not class as one to use the NIV and other listed versions in yours as tools for indepth study. Nonetheless, please don't take my views as standard - they are just mine - and I may be wrong!

Analytical:

Priscilla in the references was mentioned first more than her husband. Please check them. I did say, she seems to be more prominent than her husband.

Here:

Acts 18:2,18,26
²And finding a certain Jew by name ^aAquila, of Pontus by race, having recently come from Italy with his wife ^bPriscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome, he came to them. . .
¹⁸And having remained many days more, having taken leave of the brothers, Paul sailed to Syria, having shaved his head in Cenchrea, for he had a vow. And ^bPriscilla and ^aAquila were with him. . .
²⁶this one also began to speak boldly in the synagogue, and ^aAquilas and ^bPriscilla having heard of him, took him to them , and did more exactly expound to him the way of God. . ._{YLT, KJV, LITV}

1 Cor. 16:19
Salute you do the assemblies of Asia; salute you much in the Lord do ^aAquilas and ^bPriscilla, with the assembly in their house. . ._{YLT, KJV, LITV}

Romans 16:3
Greet ^bPriscilla and ^aAquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus.

Total number of verses quoted = 5
Total number of times Aquila mentioned before Priscilla = 3
Total number of times Priscilla mentioned before Aquila = 2

Analytical:

Phoebe was a deacon. The word translated servant is 'diakonon' which means minister. Check Strong's Greek Dictionary to confirm. The same word was used by Paul to severally refer to himself as a minister in I Cor. 3:5. and Ephesians 3:7

I wouldn't be that simplistic. The occurence of the word does not suggest that all deacons, ministers, or elders were teachers. Check this:

I Tim. 5:17 - "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine."

There are some who are not to be teachers of doctrine, which I assume is in context with what we have been trying to set forth.

Cheers.

OK. I'm back.

Continuing from where I stopped:

1 Cor 3:5 (KJV)

Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?

Ephe 1:7

Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

The word translated minister here is the same word used for Phoebe in Rom 16:1- The word 'diakonon'.  Strong's Greek Dictionary reference for 'diakonon' gives it's meaning as

'specially, a Christian teacher and pastor (technically, a deacon or deaconess) -- deacon, minister, servant.'.

I repeat, Phoebe ministered or taught like the others called deacons like Stephen etc.

the point still remains that he calls Andronicus and Junia his kinsmen.

The greek word translated 'kinsmen' also translates as relative, tribesmen etc.  Just like manking doesn't refer to man only.

@Shahan

I flow with your reasoning, but why won't the rendition of those words be husband and wife under the context they were used, seeing the words were used interchangeably for them?

Lol, how you push that idea is not substantiated even in Scripture. A woman doesn't have to be a wife before she can bear children.

If a woman bears a children and she is not a wife, then the child is a bastard.  The scripture does not recommend that and certainly Paul wouldn't have supported what the scripture calls sin.

Every culture presents the same dangers, and there was not a place where the apostles ministered where they didn't face these dangers. Now, if you agree that the epistle recognizes Timothy as a pastor of the church at Ephesus, how do you defend the idea that Paul was instructing him on issues about the home?

There are many instructions passed to Timothy and Titus, both Bishops actually because they oversee a group of churches, that touched on home issues, because homes and individuals make a church and not a building.

Weighty arguments guys. I 'm ust say a lot of effort is going on here I'm sure a lot of people are being educated and edified.

I hesitate to assume in all cases that words translated minister always signify office. I believe the import of that word is usually to signify service, not function or title. When Paul was acting in his capacity as an Apostle, he was always quick to say so.

Whilst I don't think it's far off to call Timothy & Titus bishops, I believe the capacity they were acting in was more akin to the apostolic. Remember, they were effectively establishing the church. When the men (I stress men here), whom they were instructed to equip were in place and a certain degree of all round maturity existed in the body, then the church could function according to the blueprint. Which I simply see as this, Male elders (who may or may not teach, as gifting, maturity or experience allowed) shepherding the flock. But so's not to overly digress, there's an ongoing thread "Church Structure & Sole Authority Pastors" discussing that.

As for the NIV+ version, lets just say it's way down on my list as well.

I really appreciate the excellent work so far.

God bless