Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Biblical era culture, abd Understanding | 1 Tim 2:12 | justme | 161265 | ||
Hello Doc: I think it is interesting that "devon" asked the inital question, and no resonse has been made by that person. Oh well. But just to add some more thought to the issue of Scripture and Transculture, I have a serious question. If we follow your interpretation of how culture should cross the culture of time and years, than why not use the customs of the time of Jesus, ore even if you like go the the culture of Paul while in Rome? Much of the time period of Paul and Jesus had dietatary laws and personal, male and female cleansing regarding husband wife and their private love life. Then there was the womens laws regarding the birth of a male or female child etc. My point is there was an itermixing of religious laws and the ones of governing authorities. We live in a time when women have gained a rightful position in many areas, and some areas have gone beyond what is considered by some, to be barbaric, by killing their own child while in the womb. The numbers of baby killings is in the multi-millions just in the United States! The group I feel that has been so reluctant to even consider the possibility of the effect of past culture, on the role women have in the church, are those who fail to see the influence the culture of those who penned Scripture, while under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. Yes, I agree there is a "slippery slope" in attempting to understand what is cultural and what is to be "for believers in all time,". I do not want to appear to be unorthodox or liberal, but I personally have no desire to greet my brothers and sisters in Christ with a holy kiss. I have used some very simple illustrations, but it does get more complecated as we fully study the Scripture from the view point of, what did it mean to those it was written? What was the history of the time it was written, and how do I apply this to me today? These questions are something we must do to totally understand Scripture. Now there are many passages this would not apply, as the issue is totally clear with no added understanding will change a thing. I am sure what I have said is redundant, but none the less worth while to recall every once and a while. Blessings to you. justme |
||||||
2 | Biblical era culture, abd Understanding | 1 Tim 2:12 | DocTrinsograce | 161286 | ||
Dear Justme, You speak of women as having attained a "rightful position in many areas." Right by whose standards? Men have abdicated their proper leadership roles as holy, righteous, loving, providing examples. Either you embrace the clear command of Scripture or you discard it. Picking and choosing, based on our own sense of right, is taking God's place. You wrote, "The group I feel that has been so reluctant to even consider the possibility of the effect of past culture, on the role women have in the church, are those who fail to see the influence the culture of those who penned Scripture, while under the leadership of the Holy Spirit." The Antiochian School of Thought has always advocated that Scripture must always be interpreted in the full historical and grammatical context. That tradition stretches down to us from Augustine and the Reformers. It is embraced by most confessional churches today. The groups where you see the ordination of women are those that embrace the Alexandrian School of Thought, which does not consider the historical and grammatical context as paramount for interpretation. Instead, they use something other than Scripture on which to base authority. Liberal theology has long rejected (over 100 years) the historico-grammatical approach to Biblical interpretation. Consequently, your statement is non sequitur. The groups most likely to utilize women in positions of authority in the church are also least likely to use sound exegetical methods. The "simple illustrations" you use do not bear consideration. None of them are accompanied by the kind of detailed explanation like to that of the prohibition to women in leadership. If we were in the Middle-East, we might still "greet one another with a holy kiss." These do have very specific historical contexts. However, we can clearly see that we are to approach one another with affection. Making an effort to coerce Paul into saying something else, is far, far worse than failing to take the cultural context into account! This does not help your argument at all. Cultural considerations can add color to our understanding of the Scripture. However, they should never dictate our understanding of the Scripture. Please see my posts on sound exegetical methods. They explain the Antiochian School's approach. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Biblical era culture, abd Understanding | 1 Tim 2:12 | justme | 161419 | ||
Doc: The issue I have with some of what you say, is there is no attempt to seek a meeting of the minds. I respect your views, but it comes accross that you are right, and the final authority. I had hoped for a kinder dialogue. You are correct that culture should not dictate our understanding of Scripture. However without understanding the culture in the time of the writtings of Scripture, we are left to assume that the culture was inspired, which it was not. My "arguement" is not an arguement it is a observation. I have witnessed the missapplication of Scripture to put a heavy burden on fellow believers, by well meaning teachers. By taking cultural settings in the Bible and applied them to believers today. That was and is my point. I am puzzled how we have some of the most skilled Doctors, Seminary Proffessors, Missionaries, and the list goes on, who are women, and yet some churches would have such people sit quietly in the church, with no use for their wisdom. I am not advocating headship over a male, simply the recognization of equality in spiritual gifts, and abilities. I offer my response in kindness, respect, and a dialogue in Christian Love. I would consider myself as the person that James speaks about as being asked to give up his seat for a more wealthy person. The word picture I am attempting to paint is, You have asked me to get out of the furthest back roe "knowledge seat" and you expect your widsom to take the final word. Is nothing correct but your view? To this I would say that fokes dont care how much you know; until people how much you care. I think I have been put down, and my intention was not to challenge but to dialogue. Blessings. justme |
||||||
4 | Biblical era culture, abd Understanding | 1 Tim 2:12 | devon | 161422 | ||
justme this is devon and I agree with you totally for sometimes we are caught up on what each letter of the Word says that when the Spirit of God speaks rhema to our spirit we can't receive it because we have become so dogmatic in our approach to scripture that we over look that the bible teaches it is Spirit who leads us to all truth. I'm just focused on help belivers mature in the gifts that God has given them and not to become stagnent in their spiritual growth. P.S. please respond asap | ||||||
5 | Biblical era culture, abd Understanding | 1 Tim 2:12 | Wild Olive Shoot | 161426 | ||
Just a question if I may? I thought rhema never contradicted logos. Isn't that what is happening here with the scriptural support being giving. I'm only asking because I'm curious and would like to understand a little better. If rhema doesn’t reconcile with logos, is it really rhema? WOS |
||||||
6 | Biblical era culture, abd Understanding | 1 Tim 2:12 | devon | 161430 | ||
Dear freind the word logos is GREEK and refers to Jesus as being the Word of God with in turn is the scipture. Now dealing with rhema it does not contridict the logos but it is the Spirit of God applying and giving understanding to what is already written. Now according to this scipture you quoted I still belive that Paul was not stopping women from operating in their calling or using thier spiritual giftedness but that under the proper authority which is man to function in their full compacity. This belive this is important because many men I being one have hindered many women from their calling. Let me further clarify I understand that God has created us equally in that because I'm a man God hears me better but that we were given different roles. This not to diminish or reject the role as mother,wife, helpmeet which are all important. But to the dismay of some God has gifted many women with the ability to teach and as the call of prophetess just nust not pastor in which they would have to take authority over a man. Remember that after Jesus rose from the dead accorinding to Matthew 28 and 1- 10 it was Mary Magdelene he told to tell his disciples he had risen which in other words is the Gospel. please respond | ||||||
7 | Biblical era culture, abd Understanding | 1 Tim 2:12 | BradK | 161434 | ||
Hi Devon, I'm not sure I want to engage in this seemingly endless debate...? However, with that said I don't think that the fact that Mary Magdalene was the one to first tell the disciples substantiates that women are called to preach! Where in scripture is the role of prophetess given? Cretainly there is a God-given order for all things- particularly church offices. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||