Results 61 - 80 of 118
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: jesusfreak508@aol.com Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58779 | ||
Tim Moran Could you please read posts #58776 and #58348. I would really like your thoughts. Especially on the research I'm trying to do for my Sunday School class. Thanks, Melanie |
||||||
62 | succorer neutral gender | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58810 | ||
Paul was writing to Timothy about a church he himself had established and apparently he was writing this letter nearer to the end of his life. If that was how he intended those words, why didn't he make that policy when he established that church? Why instead did he make that policy when there were problems in the local society, and inside the church body with gnosticism, where these solutions would serve? As for creation, that is a reference to what happens when the teacher is lead by the student. One, Woman shouldn't have been the one leading the debate with the devil. Man was "formed" first, meaning not just created, but also the one to whom God gave the instructions, the teachings. Woman was his pupil, yet he was there with her, and he heard her replies of incomplete knowledge of the Word and he did not step in. Not to correct her, not to chase off the devil. He let her incomplete knowledge of the Word deceive her, then he the teacher, just went along with the student. She got herself killed with incomplete knowledge of the Word. While her teacher "was there with her". As for Catholic practices--- so far all my research indicates that it was they who shut the door to women in ministry and teaching positions. Beginning with the Council of Laodicea in 352 AD they began a systematic ceasing of such practices by forbidding existing women roles one by one. Beginning in 352 AD where they wrote, "One ought not to establish in the church the women called overseers." If I follow your logic, they weren't overriding the Bible, they would have been restoring it to what the Apostles intended. I'm afraid you have offered me nothing convincing or convicting. I will have to continue to pray about and research this. As Paul advises in 1Cor14, praying in the spirit and praying in the mind. I am sure you are sincere in your convictions, and I respect your opinion, but I think your logic and your arguments are flawed. I would appreciate your opinion on 1Jer 31:33,34 though. Do you feel this prophecy was fulfilled with Jesus? And how would it work into the doctrine of 'the elect'. I have been reading about that here on this forum and I'm very confused. Thank you Melanie |
||||||
63 | succorer neutral gender | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58834 | ||
No. Well maybe. I agree with you. I was just looking for someone in agreement with me for prayer and I wanted some more supporting Scriptures. Thank you! | ||||||
64 | succorer neutral gender | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58836 | ||
The Lord said to him, "Who has made man's mouth? Or who makes him mute or deaf, or seeing or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?" Exodus 4:11 So I'm not going to worry about just not hearing you. |
||||||
65 | succorer neutral gender | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58848 | ||
Oh. For a minute there I thought I hit rewind, but I get it now. We're exchanging non-Biblical quotes. Sorry. That last Biblical quote of mine was out of order then. Okay. Here's one for you. "Meaning must be determined in terms of use and convention along with also some definite ontological tie to the world. Without the combination, utterances could not be accurately defined between what is a reflection of what is going on in the world and what is a reflection of what is going on in the mind.... ....When God spoke through the human author He intended that the words used in the Biblical text were meant to communicate something about the entire reality which surrounds us. When approaching the Bible, a reader must comprehend the extra-linguistic referents so he can be reasonably certain that his understanding of God's message is correct." I'm not reasonably certain that either of us have the message correct, but I am reasonably certain you don't use this method. Still want to play? Melanie |
||||||
66 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58850 | ||
Find this law in the Pentateuch. I've tried and can't even find any reference to it. I do find reference to the prophetess Miriam, Moses sister who sang praises to the Lord with him leading the Israelites in worship in Exodus. I also find reference in Numbers 37 to the daughters of Zelophehad approaching and SPEAKING before the whole congregation demanding they not be cut out of their father's inheritance---and God sided with them. But to this point directly, if The Pentateuch is not the law referred to in this NT verse, then we go to local law which is a custom, which rather cuts the meat out of your stated argument on this issue in other posts. |
||||||
67 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58853 | ||
I am obedient to the Bible in church and in my home. Even when it is VERY difficult. I have learned that even when I've had to nearly chew my tongue off to submit, the joy the Spirit fills me with makes it ever worth it. But this is a study forum and neither my pastor, my husband, nor my father is present. I come to this forum to learn. I am eager for the posts of such as you and the others who come to me with reason, research, inspiration, and/or a teaching spirit/heart. Perhaps if I explain it this way. I believe the Bible is the literal Word of God. I am Woman. And I have already gotten killed once because I was armed with incomplete, sloppy teachings of God's Word. I have been redeemed, but my Redeemer has told me to learn/study His Word to protect myself and those I love from further attacks by the old foe. He did not say memorize it. He said learn it. Study it. Know it. I take that very seriously. I was just in my room telling my husband I needed to pray about this guy Kalos. I was asking him to join me in prayer, because as I told him, I feel like my cat when our rottweiler comes in the house. And my cat feels like the dog is a danger to her. And she's right. I don't think Kalos is the devil or anything like that, but I do believe he is a sloppy teacher. Rather like the biology teachers at university who refuse to have creationism discussed in their classes because you must accept their "proven" curriculum to get the grade. And as I've said, I do see sloppy teachers as a very definite danger to me in this forum. If you will pray about this too, that I learn not to be affected by anything he says or the manner of his delivery, then we will have three in agreement.... Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. As woman I've already been led down the garden path once, this time I'm double-checking and triple-checking my sources. Now my husband wants the computer so being the good Proverbs wife he adores...gotta go! God bless, Melanie |
||||||
68 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58855 | ||
Thank you. That is a very good point. I had not thought of that. Isn't there also a scripture somewhere that says something about the number of witnesses? I think I read it somewhere in a teaching about why/when Jesus presented Himself and His Father as two witnesses. Oh, really good point. But you can bet there will be those who point to Timothy as the second case. I'll have to think about that, too. Melanie |
||||||
69 | succorer neutral gender | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58858 | ||
I think your logic is flawed because the Spirit keeps bringing me back to this sticky point. As it happens I happen to be a dutiful submissive wife and I do speak through my husband and ask my questions through my husband at church because the Spirit quite sternly brought me to this passage after a debate with my pastor in a Wednesday night study class he was leading. And in our church nobody expects or desires the women not to speak or question for themselves! But our pastor is young and is newly ordained and sometimes my questions would make him feel inadequate to answer them. They weren't harsh or argumentative, but they would just be a point he hadn't considered or studied. The man works a full time job to support his family and he pastors full time. He simply doesn't have the time to study that I do. When he does study a scripture or an issue though, the man is a lion. So don't picture him as an ineffectual or ignorant overseer. He's bright, articulate, and Godly. FILLED with the Spirit when he is preaching. Since he began our little church membership has doubled, so don't get the wrong idea about him. In any event, after that night the Spirit pulled me out of my normal schedule of reading and brought me to the 1Cor verse. It nearly broke my heart. But I obeied. Even though it's not the custom in our church as I said. And having obeied in Faith, the Spirit imparted to me the Wisdom that it had directed me to this Scripture for my pastor. Not as a slap against me. Though I did get some indications that I was also supposed to take some lesson in learning to accept rebuke. So I hope you see that I do not approach the Scripture based on what I do or do not want to believe. But having accepted the rebuke, and having obeied the Scripture, and gotten my heart right with it, and having left it behind....the Spirit has now brought me back to it. With the mind that your interpretation of it is not correct, or not entirely correct, or something. I don't have any set in stone conclusions yet because the lesson is on-going, but I do know that those who come at me with dogmatic, 'just memorize the book' persuasions and demands, are a trial to my right frame of mind. I have to pray doubly hard because I don't know if I'm digging in my heels because the Spirit wants me to or if it is just in reaction to religious spirits getting in my face! Hm. And I hadn't thought of your reference to the divorce. Interesting. And I know you are going to think I am being argumentative but what about Hosea? |
||||||
70 | "women keep silent in the churches" | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58859 | ||
Scribe, Prayon, and Cyclist-- Where have you guys been the last couple of days?!! Melanie |
||||||
71 | "women keep silent in the churches" | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58861 | ||
Ed, I have had indications in my research, which I admit is less than a week on-going, that it was a law in Corinth that women had to take a secondary, or subordinate place to men. And not just their husbands. I haven't followed it up completely because everything keeps referring me to Roman law and I'm not ready to leave Corinth and Ephesus yet. But since I've yet to find any such law from Moses, this would almost have to be talking about civil law, wouldn't it? But in any event, I agree that the usage of it by Paul though probably spoke to not upstaging their husbands (or their pastor), but I think his reference to the law might have been something like, 'and if they don't like it, remind them it is the law, too'. Melanie |
||||||
72 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58915 | ||
So again, my original question. Who determines the line between what is the logical explanation and what is rewriting it? And if I am praying constantly as I study, praying specifically in fact that I be led not into what I want it to mean but what the Lord intended it to mean, are you saying that I can be lead wrong? Melanie |
||||||
73 | "women keep silent in the churches" | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58919 | ||
It is hard to disagree with someone in whom I share so much agreement, and even with exceptions, I am not disagreeing, merely trying to clarify. So-- two points: What law is he referring to, and if it's not Moses delivered, and is Corinth/Roman law, if we are supposed to disregard time/place/circumstances why mention it at all? Second point, v40 of same chapter, "But all things should be done with regard to decency and propriety and in an orderly fashion." Having asked this, though, I do not in any way wish to be implying that I think any Scripture was meant for only the time in which it was written. Even if Paul was referring to local law, I would say that he was reminding them that Jesus also commanded we respect and obey our local authorities and government. Looking forward to your thoughts, Melanie |
||||||
74 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58926 | ||
That's my whole point. My wrestling with this was finished. I had cried over it, questioned it, 'it's not fair!', etc., etc., then had made peace with it because my Walk has already taught me God is just never wrong. I had settled myself into obedience. As I said in another post, even though no one in my church expects such a thing. I felt the peace of it in my spirit, so I know I was doing as the God willed. Yet I did not get dogmatic. In discussion with the youth and women, I would simply testify to my experience with this verse, and my sure knowledge that this was how God expected me to behave in our study sessions with our pastor. The peace within me over it was my "proof". You would think it was settled. Except it does not sit well with me as a blanket order to all women in all churches in all situations as starkly as it translates in our English language Bible. I would say within context it literally means that a woman has no right, and is dead wrong, to speak out in church, or to my mind in any public situation, in such a way as to indicate shortcomings with or disrespect to or lack of submission to her husband, or to her pastor. But Kalos and others, do not share that view. They see it as a direct order for women to simply be silent in church. Always. No exception. That is the point that does not sit as settled with me. You are a blessing by the way. With every post I send up a little prayer thanking God for putting you in a place where I can draw upon your wisdom. Melanie |
||||||
75 | "women keep silent in the churches" | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58930 | ||
But that law says a woman will be ruled by her desires for her husband. And that is just truth. It happens whether we like it or not; even for the feminist who staunchly maintains no man is going to rule over her. It doesn't say he will rule over her. It says she will be ruled by her own love/desire/craving -- for him. Now Jesus did say wives submit to your husbands, but in the context of that verse I can't find any interpretation that would lead me to believe I should accept a secondary or subordinate place. I am to submit to him, but he has to be willing to die for me....I've always felt that pretty much put me up on a pedastal. And I take a lesson in the right attitude for it from Jesus washing His disciples feet. He was serving them, in a role that they saw as that of a subordinate, but it wasn't subordinate at all, was it? Did that make sense? This forum is really teaching me or at least trying to teach me how to articulate my thoughts. It's not as easy as I had always thought. I really appreciate you taking this time for me. Melanie |
||||||
76 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58939 | ||
I just thought of another one to add to places she should not do it -- not just in public, but also, not in front of her children. And I was just reading another post in this thread written by Kalos on Wed 11/14 in response to userdoe220 and now I have NO IDEA where he stands on this. In his posts directed to me, it would seem he is arguing exactly the opposite of what he is saying in this older post. But thank you, Melanie |
||||||
77 | "women keep silent in the churches" | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58945 | ||
That is something else I am wondering (not as in 'wondering' per se but as in awe of) about with the Bible. So many people with so many different ideas of how to interpret this verse or that, yet they still get to the same central idea or meaning of the verse. I look and v16 in Gen 3 and see the same words you do and I read them much like (as an example) 'you add the yeast to the dough and set it aside, and it will rise'-- the dough will rise BECAUSE I have added yeast and set it aside. 'I will desire and crave my husband, and he will over me'--I will be ruled by my husband BECAUSE I desire and crave him. Yet we both reached the same point: somebody has to have the final say, and God has determined that it's the husband (or the father--or in our day of single parents, the mother). I heard John Davidson on TV years ago say that his wife was adored, cherished, put up on a pedastal, the Queen of his life--but she could never be King. I laughed at that time and wondered if he realized he was being completely Biblical. This is just such an awesome book. Look how it tells us to fellowship with other Christians. If I didn't obey that I wouldn't have ever thought about your point that Jesus never had to order the wives to love their husbands. You give me much to pray about and consider, and all of it valuable. Thank you very much. Melanie |
||||||
78 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58955 | ||
I think Kalos, and John MacArthur (I'll have to look him up and do some reading), need to come to my little church or one like it where the women GREATLY outnumber the men, and those here are on average pretty old and for reasons of other demands on their time or more often just the ill health of themselves or their wives, they simply cannot, or will not, accept a leadership role. My husband is constantly held up in prayer at our church simply as an example of what we need, young men, young husbands and fathers. And even though he loves the Lord and his faith is growing by leaps and bounds all the time, still getting him to take off early on Wednesdays for Wednesday night services or to take off a whole Saturday to help clean up the church grounds or do some building or repairs, etc., is like pulling teeth. I'm not saying that in judgement of him because it is something we have publically discussed amongst our church and everyone understands his reasoning, especially since our pastor often finds himself in the same situation and as a result is in a constant state of trying to balance work-pastoring-church services-and-his family. If the women were not allowed, no, if the women were not expected to teach and hold positions of some authority within our church, it is our church that would suffer. We work it out in that we are all lead by our pastor, and as such under his authority even in our leadership or teaching positions. But this is also true of the men in leadership and teaching positions. And personally, I even when teaching the youth and the women, invariably discuss (and pray) what I am going to teach with my husband because I believe the Bible tells me to do this, but also because I truly value his insight and opinions. And it's never happened, but I don't think I would teach something if he disagreed with me. I know that I have disagreed personally with one thing that my pastor wanted me to teach to the youth, in response to something they brought up out of left field, and I had the Scripture to back up my thoughts on it, but he also had Scripture, and he was my pastor, so I taught the way he felt lead that it should be taught. In fact I went back to it with them and we had a great lesson on why my teaching MUST be lead and subordinate to his teaching and authority. I wish Kalos would understand that there is a difference between challenging the Word of God and challenging how he lives/interprets/uses the Word of God. Wasn't it Paul who also said that he should come to where I am? Thoughtfully, Melanie |
||||||
79 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58957 | ||
Bashing Paul....there you go again. Everytime I try to get into your head and find my way to your way, you just say something so completely untrue, out of place and judgemental that I just have to throw my hands in the air. You were considering me, then BAM! I give up....No. I don't. Because you know what? Maybe it's YOU that is supposed to be learning something here. Sincerely, she |
||||||
80 | Hi JesusFreak | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58967 | ||
Ed--you did misunderstand. This is so beautiful. God is so good. Now the Holy Spirit is truly a great teacher! Because you did understand, even as you misunderstood. You misunderstood that she was asking him, Kalos. What did he, Kalos, think of the problems this caused for rape victims. His response said he didn't/doesn't think of them; too bad for them; they're just out of luck unless someone saw them being raped; don't put it on me, put it on God. But you understood what Deb was asking him even when he didn't. You thought of the problems this Law causes for the rape victims, and you answered the question. I agree with you that forensics supplies the second and third and fourth or fifth, etc., witness. You answered as he should have, or could have, as someone trying to teach or enlighten. But her point was that HE didn't answer with any thought to what it does to rape victims. But how could she respond to you without telling him what she was trying to get him to see for himself. You got lead into the trap of his accusation; that she was questioning the Word of God. Which she never did. I think I'm going to call this the Kalos Effect. And do you know what the real beauty of this is? I could be wrong too! Love, Melanie |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Next > Last [6] >> |