“Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.”
“Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children and live a life of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.” Eph.4:15-16,5:1-2

Mark,
Quoting Grudem himself in the RBMW Appendix:
“In fact, the most common word for ruler, the one that literally meant ruler, was archon. It is not at all surprising that in contexts where the Hebrew word for head meant ruler, it was frequently translated by archon.”
Why do you want to place authority in these passages? It goes against Jesus’ teaching about being servants to one another rather than seeking authority over one another.
“But it is not this way with you, but the one who is the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like the servant.” (Luke 22:26)
“He called the twelve and said to them, “If anyone wants to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.” (Mark 9:35)
The two conditions of true greatness are humility and service – not authority and service.
In fact, Jesus words, no matter which gospel account one reads, are never telling any believer to take authority of any kind over another believer – just the opposite – He warns against it.

“…do some proper research before making silly comments.”

It saddens me when a discussion degenerates to that level.

Mark,
Several weeks back in this discussion you were asked to define and demonstrate how a husband uses this “authority” that you say ‘kephale’ means and as yet you have not. It seemed that you generally described it as something that could not be used over your wife against her will, which never really met a normal definition of authority. Unless perhaps you meant it as “power to influence or command thought, or behavior.” That was as close a definiton I could find to fit what you kept describing, but it hardly puts the husband in a place over his wife.

“Kephale does have authority…cased closed…do some proper research before making silly comments.”

Mark,
Have I ever characterized anything you’ve said as “silly”? I am really sorry that you have chosen to say that to me.

I have done a lot of research on the meaning of kephale and know that it is not an iron clad case for the meaning to be ‘authority’.

Mark,
It says in 1Cor.11:5 that women were praying and prophesying.
Why would the cultural head covering have been a controversy at all if these women were at home in private individual prayer and prophesying to themselves?
Do you think Paul allowed praying and prophesying in ch. 11 and then changed his mind by ch.14?

Mark,
So, as long as you can say that the meanings of those words we’ve been discussing in those particular verses comes anywhere close to the overall male hierarchy view that you ‘read’ the Scriptures with, then that’s good enough for you. Right?
I can’t help but wonder, do you ever wake up in the middle of the night asking, “I wonder if Jesus really said, ‘It is finished’?”

“I’m glad we agree on the inerrancy of the word. I’m glad you also see that to read the ‘red letters’ as literally Jesus exact words is not necessary. Thus you can see why i don’t necessarily have to see Eve’s words as the ‘exact’ words that she spoke. Both Moses and the gospel writers are recording history after the events. It is still under the inspiration of the Spirit and the word is still authoritative and inerrant. God inspired these words that are recorded to be His revealed word, and i hope you can see that i am no means a liberal for seeing it this way- i have a very strong view of scripture.”

Mark,
You seem to be very willing to give plenty of leeway to Moses and other writers in the Bible except Paul.
If as you say, “God inspired these words that are recorded to be His revealed word” then to turn around and say they are not exactly the words He inspired is antithesis.
But, perhaps, I am beginning to see now why it seems of no consequence to you that Paul would use the word ‘authenteo’ in 1 Tim2:12 instead of the more common ‘exousiazo’ or why he would use ‘kephale’ instead of ‘archon’ in Ephesians. Am I beginning to understand your stance?

Mark wrote:”BUt i would also add for myself, the specific culture of the writer. The time when the document was written. The other cultural backdrops- for example with Moses, what is similar/dissimilar with other Ancient Near Eastern sources. All these types of things also help us determine the purpose for writing, the intended audience etc.”

Mark,
Why wouldn’t your above comment also apply to 1Tim.2?

“8 I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing. I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.”

These were situations with new Christians with plenty yet to learn – obvious by the fact that Paul addresses the men who were dealing with anger issues and doubts and women who weren’t dressing decently. Because of educational restrictions placed on women in that culture they would have much catching up to do.

Are you saying that you do not believe that the prohibition to teach there is related to the very next sentence – “a woman should learn in quietness and full submission”?
A person can not teach what they have not first learned.

Do you believe that vs.15 teaches that women are saved through bearing children?

Mark,
“3Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7A man ought not to cover his head,[b] since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.”

So, if you believe that ‘head’ in vs.3 means ‘authority’ then, to be consistant, you must also say that a woman needs her head covered and a man never should.

“11 In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. 13Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.”

And you don’t believe that vs.11-16 have any bearing on vs.3-10??

Are you saying that you don’t think they have any connection or commentary on verses 3-10?

Mark,

I take it that you do not think these two verses have anything in common?
“3Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.”
“12For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.” (1Cor.11)

“When you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, for…One remains hungry, another gets drunk. Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in?…”
Obviously, the Corinthians had many problems most of us never encounter.

Cheryl,

221 🙂 Of course, otherwise how could we ever really be certain of anything in God’s Word.

“i have already said that i don’t think the prophecying here should be considered the same as teaching. In fact the bible separates them as different spiritual gifts, and no my church doesn’t perform like that. We don’t have people prophecying and speaking in toungues because no one is gifted that way, but still the Corinthians did, and Paul is describing orderly worship conduct for the assembly when gathered together.”
BUt i would also add for myself, the specific culture of the writer. The time when the document was written. The other cultural backdrops- for example with Moses, what is similar/dissimilar with other Ancient Near Eastern sources. All these types of things also help us determine the purpose for writing, the intended audience etc.”
Mark,
In light of your comments, I find it difficult to understand that you still insist that 1 Cor. 14 is a prohibition on women speaking in “formal church” today.
“And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.” 1Cor.11:5-6
It says in vs.5 that women were praying and prophesying.

Would the cultural head covering have been a controversy at all if these women were at home in private individual prayer and prophesying to themselves?
Do you think Paul allowed praying and prophesying in ch. 11 and then changed his mind by ch.14?

“The issue remains that i have shown that these 2 texts are addressing a formal type setting, and no one has been able to show otherwise from these texts.”

Mark,
Even if they were a formal setting, we already established that it was directed at a specific group (the Corinthians) that had a different set of criteria and different set of problems than a church congregation today.
I’m sure you are not suggesting that women should still cover their heads and several should speak in tongues and some should interpret. Right?

“No, she misquoted God by introducing the words “and you must not touch it”.

Isn’t saying that God said something He did not say a lie?

“again no that is not what i am suggesting, but it was what was happening at the ‘formal’ church in Corinth at that time, because their church had those gifts.
Are you denying that the context i’m providing is NOT addressing the gathered body?”

Mark,
Yes, I agree, it is a gathering of the Body.
So, then only some parts of what Paul tells the Corinthian church is for us, since we don’t meet the same gifts criteria?
Then, how do we determine which parts are for us?

“Interestingly about the Phillipian Jailer, Paul went back to his house aswell and baptised him and his household aswell. Was this church aswell? Was there then 2 churches within the space of a few days in Phillipi? One at Lydia’s and one at the Jailers?”

Mark,
I thought we had established many comments back that the Believers are the church. Not buildings with certain numbers of parishoners in them. Didn’t we? 🙂

Perhaps they remained separate congregations or perhaps Lydia’s and the Jailer’s households met together, we do not know, I agree.

But, what would keep either group from being the Church whether God had them remain separate or joined? Either way, it’s the people who are the Church.

“1 Corinthians 14:26. Paul addresses when they ‘come together’. He rattles off hymn singing, word of instruction, revelation, toungues- “All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.”

Mark,
So, are you saying that you understand this passage to mean that ALL these things he lists must be done each time during the gathering of believers in order for it to be a “formal church”?

“1. Where does it say in Acts 17 that they held church there with ‘possible others’?”
“How can these things be strengthening for the church if only a few people are there? It is ridiculous to see this any other way.”

Mark,
I’m not seeing where I mentioned Acts17…but the ‘possible others’ I was thinking of were the Philippian jailer and his household ch.16.

So, how do we determine when we have enough believers together to have “formal church”? Do you have a specific number in mind?

If only a handful of people are gathered, don’t they need to be strengthened?
Can you give one verse that specifies the number of believers that is necessary?

There were no church buildings in Ephesus. Houses for Christian worship did not begin to be built until two hundred years after the days of Paul. No Christian church building was known until about 340 AD. Paul stayed with Lydia in her house. He and the rest of the new believers held ‘church’ in her home and possibly others, but no synogogue or church building is known to have existed there at that time. How can that not be ‘formal’ church? – they had no other choice. There was no St. Georges Presbyterian Church there, no First Baptist, no cathedral of any sort.

Do you think our fellow believers in the underground Church of China, and places like it, are never really having “formal church”?

“First of all Paul differentiates. The teahcing restrictions are in the context fo a formal church so that is how i read it. Also the teaching that is presented at home, in studies etc ar not IDENTICAL to that presented in a church. Bible studies are about discussions not 1 person presenting the passage in an expository fashion. Again you are confusing everything in an attept to prove a point, but the reality is, the bible has differentiated such things.”

Mark,
I really, really would appreciate it if you would quote the exact phrases, words or verses in the chapters that show the context to be “a ‘formal’ church.” That would clarify our misunderstanding.

And again, do you believe there is a minimum limit on the number of persons constituting “a formal church” gathering? If so, what is that number?

“Paul’s words in Ephesians are awesome. But they have been too easily twisted too long for me to see them as foundational as the words of Jesus Himself. Paul’s words are building blocks to the house of faith and marriage more than they are the foundation. But too many try to make his words the foundation to the exclusion of the word of Christ.”
Mara,
Couldn’t agree more! I think it is very telling that none of these discussions center around the words of Jesus. If what we think Paul meant does not line up with what Jesus said and did – then perhaps one should take a second look. Jesus didn’t rebuke the woman at the well for telling her whole city about Him and made Mary Magdalene the first preacher of the Gospel.

Mark,
I wonder if perhaps our perceptions on this differ because many of us (commentors) are in the US and Canada dealing with teachers, ministers and denominations that you may not deal with much in Australia.

gengwall,
My understanding of 1 Peter 3 would be that it coincides with the admonitions not to be a stumbling block and the usual ways, like dressing to impress, are not to be the emphasis, but your godly attitude is.

“What better way to prove that God’s ways are not our ways than to have the uneducated (not the cream of the rabbinical crop) take the Good News to the Jews and the most educated rabbinical cream of the crop (tutored by Gamaliel) take the Good News to the Gentiles? :o) ”

“Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.” ICor.1:26-31

“By suggesting that women endure such things so that her submission will bring him to repentance, makes her responsble for his salvation.”

Yeah Lin – and it just goes hand in hand with men being the spiritual ‘head’ – kind of short circuits the Holy Spirit. Like He needs our assistance to change hearts.

The NT churches certainly did not view ordination as we do. The Great Commission is the only apostolic succession ordained by Christ, and it applies universally to all believers. In the early Church , when they recognized that a person possessed certain gifts necessary for a needed work, the congregation affirmed and “set apart” that person for the task by the laying on of hands. (Acts 13:1-3)

No seminary, no tests, no interviews – the person was already using their gift. Timothy is instructed to “not lay hands on anyone hastily.” In other words, be sure the person has the gift first.

“The fact is, both texts are in the context of believers gathering together in a ‘formal’ way, what is appropriate and what is not!”
Mark,
Do believe there is a certain minimum limit on the number of believers that constitutes a ‘formal’ Church gathering? If so, where do we find that verse? Or do you believe the rabbinical law’s 10 man minimum still applies?

Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority, except that authority over wives which has been given to husbands, in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Therefore go inside the synogogues and cathedrals at 10:30 a.m. on Sunday morning and make disciples of all those who show up for formal services, baptizing them in the baptismal font at the front of the sanctuary building, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and pastors then preach a sermon to them telling how to obey everything I have commanded you. Matthew 28:18-20 TRV (The Rant Version) 🙁

Mark,
“On the sabbath day we went outside the gate by the river, where we supposed there was a place of prayer; and we sat down and spoke to the women who had gathered there. A certain woman named Lydia, a worshiper of God, was listening to us; she was from the city of Thyatira and a dealer in purple cloth. The Lord opened her heart to listen eagerly to what was said by Paul. When she and her household were baptized, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come and stay at my home.” And she prevailed upon us. (Acts, chapter 16:13-15)

What is not ‘formal’ Church about this?
What is not ‘formal’ about Paul speaking the Truth, people believing the Word, and a baptism?
“Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”