Jeremy

Sorry all. I really don’t have time to debate this. I have given exegesis, Kristen, please re-read my posts. I was not disingenuous in stating that if there was a good argument from the egals I would convert. I honestly haven’t heard a good argument yet, and it seems you’ve given me your best. Craig, if you let the text speak for itself, it does show the comp side explicitly. Egals have to do a socio-cultural switch to side-step what the text actually says. If I felt that any of you were open to the comp side, I’d continue to debate, but I really feel like I’d be wasting my time….not that it isn’t important to debate such things because it sharpens our Bible study methodology and knowledge of Scripture…I just don’t have the time right now. Sorry. If you truly want answers to the questions you’ve posted and would be open to listening to it, I will try and find some time. God bless you all in your journey and thanks for sharing your side.

Kristen,
I appreciate the time you took to reply. I don’t agree with the arguments, but I feel like it might be pointless to go around on this. The parallel of women in ministry to black slavery and the divine right of kings is unfair. My complementarian view is based on exegesis not eisegesis. It seems the egalitarian view is really trying to justify something they believe in and want to see changed. There is a lot of reading into Scripture and sloppy word study to argue the egalitarian position. Complementarians are not denying women the right to use their gifts. There are plenty of places to use one’s gifts. The pulpit is one small forum that not even most men get to use. I return to an earlier question I posed, why do women desire the pulpit so much? Maybe it has to do with Genesis 3:16? Anyhow, I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I’m not going to persuade any of you, and I haven’t been convinced by any of your arguments. I do appreciate that you are trying to be faithful to God’s Word; I just think you’re starting from a faulty premise.

I think I inadvertently addressed Lydia’s main issues in that last post.

Kristen (continued),
I just think that’s a weak argument that in a letter that mentions Phoebe, not addressed to her, Paul would tell her the guidelines to exercising her influence. Women were permitted to be deacons, and that was influential, but they were not allowed to teach men. Phoebe would have known this; Paul didn’t need to mention it in a letter to the Romans.

As far as Galatians 3:28, Paul nowhere removes social structure that are in place. In Ephesians he does not release slaves from their duty; they are to obey their masters. So when Paul gives slaves the freedom of Galatians 3:28, he must not be talking about social roles. They are fellow heirs in salvation, but they are still slaves. Women are fellow heirs in salvation, but they are still women.

Kristen,
I guess I’ll address your concerns first…you have a lot, so hopefully I’ll get them all. First, creation order is used as an analogy, not a reason, in 2 Cor 11:3. Second, in 1 Cor 11, the form is possibly not applicable today of head coverings, but the principle of submission to one’s husband still is. The problem in Corinth was not so much with the covering, but with the attitude.

‘Gar’ is used plenty of times for ‘because’. Even in the favorite verse of egalitarians, Galatians 3:28, it is used this way. I can give you plenty of examples if you need.

The word “authentein” is only used this one time in the NT, but there are more words for authority than just ‘exousia’ used in the NT. Context defines words. Women are forbidden in this verse to teach or to exercise authority, and are commanded to be silent and in submission. All these words leads one to believe that the word authority here is simply that. How would you explain that they can’t teach men?

I don’t see your point with the “I do not permit”. Is it that this is Paul’s opinion rather than a rule? Paul gives commands in the first person often. For example, in 1 Corinthians 10:20, he says, “but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons.” It still sounds like God’s word. Paul makes it clear when he gives commands that he has no word of from the Lord to give (1 Corinth. 7).

Paul doesn’t just give these commands for women to a couple churches. In 1 Corinthians 14:33-34, he writes, “as in all the churches of the saints. The women are to keep silent in the churches” So it is all the churches that practice these things.

I have to go. I’ll write more later.

Craig,
I’ve looked on the site and haven’t seen a good explanation of any of these verses.

Mara,
My view is based on an honest interpretation of Scripture, not on gender bias. I’ve done my homework and read the egalitarian arguments. I just don’t see any good evidence.

You write: “If, instead, women had been the gate keepers of the origianal Greek and Hebrew and were the ones who decided which verses were more important and to be lifted up and which verses were to be ignored or swept away, our understanding of the Bible and gender would be very different.”
Are you saying we should ignore or sweep away certain Scripture? I believe all Scripture is inspired by God and none should be swept away. I assume you mean that certain texts do not apply today because they were responding to socio-cultural aspects of the time, namely that women were uneducated or that it was a male-dominated society. Unfortunately, to hold that position ignores the reasons Paul gives for not allowing women to teach or exercise authority over men in 1 Timothy 2. These reasons are the creation order and Eve’s deception. These reasons are not cultural or temporal, but eternal. Therefore, his command is eternal. No?

I’m respectfully looking for answers based on accurate Bible exegesis, not appeals to gender bias.

Cheryl,
It seems your whole argument is based on a faulty application of 1 Peter 4:10,11. This does not say that the gifts must be used in the public arena of the church service or in a pastoral role. Even the Word Biblical Commentary you cite states this:
“While Kelly (180) limits the speaking Peter has in mind to “routine
functions like teaching and preaching” (in distinction from “ecstatic
utterances”), there is no proof of this in the text. The term could
embrace all that Paul includes under “prophecy” (Rom
12:6), “teaching” (Rom 12:7), and “exhortation” (Rom 12:8), as well
as “wisdom” and “knowledge” (1 Cor 12:8)”
1 Peter is not limited to the public service or to preaching.
On a side note, I’m not sure why women desire the pulpit so much. I asked my Bible class today who were the top 3 most influential people in their lives. The pastor was never one of them. Most people forget the sermon the next day. People who have the most impact are those who are living out the Word daily and discipling others. Women are allowed to use their gifts for that high calling. There are many places other than the pulpit to use our gifts.
Also, you cite 1 Corinthians 14 a lot to say that both genders are given these gifts that are meant to be used in the public setting. However, in the same chapter Paul tells women to be silent in the churches (v. 34). I know you are familiar with this, so how do you expalin that this does not limit women who God gifts? Even if it is temporally based on the state of the church or the status of women at that time, Paul is still limiting women at that time from using the gifts of speaking that God gives them. And how do you explain 1 Timothy 2:12 that limits women from teaching and exercising authority over a man?
I’d love to hear your view on this. I am a complemenatarian because I don’t see any other way to understand God’s Word on this issue. It would be easier to be an egalitarian, but I would not feel that I was accurately handling Scripture. If I could see a true way of interpreting these passages that favored the egalitarian position, I would gladly shift sides.

Thanks for allowing me into this blog space.
1. Not every gift is supposed to be used publicly in church. The 1 Peter passage you site does not say that all gifts should be used publicly. If I am gifted by God to run well, does that mean I should run publicly in church? Women might have gifts to speak well and understand God’s Word, and these gifts can be used to edify the body of Christ, but not in the public arena of a church service where authority is assumed. It is not withholding anyone’s gift from being used to serve the body, just in certain arenas. This is prohibited by Scripture in 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Timothy 2-3, and elsewhere.
2. I read the article from CARM where you quote the author, and you do misuse his idea of gift. In that same article he clearly states, “it is not possible for a woman to possess every spiritual gift that a man possesses. A woman cannot be a father. Furthermore, the spiritual gift of being an elder/pastor is something only the male is called to per divine revelation.” So they do not believe a woman can have the spiritual gift of being a pastor…he was only saying that women are gifted (i.e. talented).

Your article creates a strawman of the complimentarian side and then uses that strawman to set up a false dilemna, namely that women don’t use the gifts for the common good or they do use their gifts for the common good and are damned either way. Your argument is based on a quote by CARM that there are some gifted women. But you seem to misunderstand what they are saying. Just because a woman is gifted in the ability to preach does not mean that is the same kind of gifting of the Holy Spirit meant to be used to preach. Their are gifted orators, that doesn’t mean they speak publicly in the church.

I did not see the last edited section. Sorry for the confusion

Thanks much

JEremy

I was hoping you took this post down from your site, as I have confirmed it was not written by Matt Slick.

I do not mind an intelligent debate on this subject, but please change the author to my name, “Jeremy” as it is my commentary on this page.

Grace,
Jeremy
http://innovationapologetics.blogspot.com/

Also, I have not guest posted Matt Slick at all. Just quoted many of his articles for backgrounds more on other issues like mormonism.

I would find it beneficial for you to take that off since they are not all Matt Slick’s arguments, they are also John Piper’s. The quietness vs. Silence is also directly from Piper’s research on the topic. My blog is aimed at taking research and applying it to a conclusion with sufficient evidence.

I can try to prove to you as much as possible that this blog is my own, as it is backed up by many of my followers. I am a member of Campus Crusade for Christ at my university, and I know any other apologist would have better commentary then myself, as I am new at doing this kinda thing lol

Just don’t give credit to others for compiling these arguments or give credit to Matt for an argument that is anothers. That is all

Since my authorship is not coming up, I am not aware of how to change that. I can put my name under each of my blogs, if that is the case. I have already provided a new post explaining it is my site.

As for Matt Slick, you seem to have a grudge against him because of your time on air with him. One thing I would like you to know, he is not the only good apologist that has this viewpoint. This is why I will begin by using many apologist’s and theologians as sources for my commentary on Women in ministry.

It looks like the reason women seem to “dislike” 1 Tim 2:12 is because we want equality. Even I believe women are great teachers, some are great leaders and etc. The thing is, we can’t let something scriptural become only something that is now emotional.

It is not that God belittles women, or that he doesn’t think they could be capable of leading, he just didn’t make man and woman as equal as we would like to believe. He made man with the intent to be a leader in a relationship with a woman and he made man to be a leader in the church. It has nothing to do with God not liking x and y chromosomes the same.

I am not looking to trash anyone, I would like to debate Cheryl. I would like to see how she uses scripture to prove her side of this case, so I can see where she believes my side is wrong.

I am not also trying to cause a scene. Also I have a question. As I have listened to Matt Slick, the only time he doesn’t allow others back on his show is when they are disrespectful to him. I hope you were not, as that is not a good image we are showing to others.

I am not assuming, just curious. Also, I am editing my post for further clarification on the topics I chose that will be beneficial to understanding my point more clearly. So before you refute it, check back in a day or two to see my edited version.

Grace,
Jeremy

How does someone even change that author, and how does Google make the author be contrary to what I have listed as ME as the author on my page?

Check out my page and you will see my picture. I have used Matt Slick’s name, email, site, etc to let others know of contacting or calling him since he is a great apologist, but other than that my blog should have my authorship, other than quoting other apologists and sharing their work with others.

Check out my site again, and research it before you make accusations that were directed by google. Thanks

I did not know you had a debate with him, which I would love to listen to.. I only saw the first comment you posted.

I only used Matt Slick for sources, as well as John Piper, and a Bible Dictionary.

I would still like to talk about the topic with you more in depth tho

Since it was MY post you were referring to, do not give credit to someone by the email of carmradio@ymail.com… i only quoted this author on my page, so I don’t need him to get mad at me for thinking I said my post was from him.

Also if you want to debate me on the topic – email me at quiet4no1@gmail.com. Unless you are not up for it, but from what I can see that you wrote above, you didn’t really refute it… you just kinda pointed out a mistake a made in clarifying a topic.

If you want to see Matt Slicks page from carmradio@ymail.com – here is a link:

Women in Ministry

I believe he has more credentials and experience than I or you =)