Lin

“How can “she” (any woman) be saved…if “they” (all women) remain in faith….??? Not only has Neopatriarch completely failed to prove his case that Eve is to be taken as a generic representative for women but he has failed to show how a woman’s salvation depends on what all women do? Please explain Mr. Neopatriarch how this is possible? Also please explain how the salvation of a man (represented by Adam) would be dependent on what all men do? It just doesn’t work. ”

I had to pull this out because I feared many might miss it in the post. this is exactly what he is proposing..that salvation of this ‘woman’ is dependent on what all women do. That is how preposterous their argument is and when you show the same for Adam, it crumbles. Does God have a different way of salvation for women?

Once again, works salvation rears its ugly head in their interpretations and I have more problem with that than I do with their need to elevate themselves above women.

“No one yet has been able to explain to me why Paul would forbid women from teaching God’s word to only men when according to this interpretation, men would be the ones who would be capable of correcting women’s errors. Yet we allow these same women to teach other women and children. Wouldn’t it be far safer to let women teach in the presence of men instead of just in the presence of the easily deceived women and children?”

Excellent, Excellent point! I have always wondered why the Patrirarches left their wives in charge of teaching the kids.

Actually, this is a ploy of Satans to make sure that many men refuse to listen to anything of the Word from women. It has the potential to effectively shut up over half of all followers of Christ being used of God when it comes to lost males. It hampers the Body of Christ and produces demi-gods in many instances who are elevating themselves instead of Jesus Christ.

Kostenberger wrote:

“How can women under Timothy’s charge (and in churches everywhere) avoid repeating the same mistake? By “childbearing,” that is, by adhering to their God-ordained calling, including a focus on marriage, family, and the home. 1 Timothy 2:15 thus turns out to be Paul’s prescription for women as a lesson learned from the scenario of the Fall described in the preceding verse.”

This teaching really scares me for the Body of Christ. Not just because of the limits it puts on women. But because it is NOT biblical at all and contradicts other passages in the NT. That is why I think these folks are false teachers. I think this teaching is much more serious than just limiting women.

1. How could women be ‘safe’ from Eve’s mistakes by putting themselves in specific roles under men who are more likely to sin on PURPOSE? Wouldn’t that negate their leadership qualities? Just like they teach that women are easily decieved,men then, would be more prone to sin on purpose leading the women,who is easily deceived,into more sin. That could be the only logical outcome of such teaching.

2. Paul presents a different picture in Corinthians about it being better not to marry so one can serve the Lord better and not be pulled by the needs of family. So, Mr. Kostenberger disagrees with Paul and thinks women are safe’ from Eve’s mistakes when stay in their ‘role’. If this is Pauls prescription for women in Ephesus, why not the women in Corinth, too? Makes no sense.

3. Gee, nevermind that ‘Childbearing’ is a noun in this passage.

They are making this a salvic/sanctification issue. In effect, they are teaching works salvation. I wish more folks could see it for what it is. It also makes me really question the value of seminary education and all the fancy letters behind names.

I have not finished the entire post but this just sticks out at me and I had to add to it. (Banging head against the wall)

Cheryl, Thanks for breaking this down into a filter. It is much easier to understand the full meaning and the previous teaching of the ‘body and members’ is not lost. It becomes obvious that Paul does not contradict himself in chapter 14. Since we cannot find the ‘law’ in scripture, it is obvious he is quoting.

This passage has more to teach us than just the woman question. What are we doing in churches that have one guy preaching to us every week? Where others are not using or even desiring gifts to be used to edify the Body. We are sorely lacking in this respect in most churches. Most members of the Body are mere spectators!

“The Genius of Orthodoxy: Eldresses”

It would be great to read this. Is it posted anywhere?

“Are women sinning if they “go into all the world and preach the gospel to every nation” as so many missionaries have done?”

A very hard comp is Elisabeth Elliott. This has always confused me as she stayed in the jungle and taught men. Yes, illiterate men, but men all the same. She also kept her first husband’s name when she remarried.

It is strange to me how so many folks do not see the contradictions in the comp camp.

“:He said that there is no peace unless there is both justice and righteousness. He said that righteousness without justice cannot bring peace and neither can justice without righteousness.”

I see this so clearly now because of a dear friend who showed me the parallels between the behavior of Israel of the OT and our churches today. It is truly astonishing to read the OT and see how much Christendom is repeating the exact same mistakes as Israel.

“I want to say that I’ve always believed that most of those who believe that men are to be the spiritual leaders and also teachers of other men based on their perspective of Adam and Eve and Paul’s writings aren’t deceived in their beliefs. ”

I thnk some are based on this being what they were taught from early childhood. BUT, you have given the exact same arguement I have used when folks promote Calvin as a great theologian. Where did this great theologian find baptizing babies, sacraments and the state church in the NT scripture? He was not deceived. He was part of a ‘system’ in a leadership capacity and liked his position. He made his ‘doctrine’ fit his ‘position’.

I think the same way about comp/pat teachers/preachers. Their ‘position’ fits their doctrine. They won’t give that up anytime soon. As a matter of fact, as diligent scholarship refutes and questions their views, they are getting bolder and they resort to attacking the messenger as ‘liberal’ or feminist and even as ‘rebellious’ and in sin.

Paula, I hate to watch sports but I do fast cars. Years ago I even did some racing a few times on a motor speedway. I am very fond of war movies and movies with political themes.

All: If you have not read The Gospel of Ruth by Carolyn Custis James, you need to. Ruth was a bold, gutsy woman who broke all the rules of that time and look what happened through her doing that: The line of Messiah.

“Thank you Cheryl, especially for indulging the sidebar. I always feel like we are just not quite in the right post to really get into this, so I will say no more. I know we are all saying 95% the same thing. I suspect the other 5% are just sore spots for each of us that get our dander up. I know that is the case for me – that any inkling toward a “sameness” philosophy gets me in a lather (and I know you aren’t saying that Paula, but that is what I “hear”). ”

I am so glad you said this here. I think your last line is very important. I hear this all the time about ‘sameness’ and blurring of the lines of gender and how scary it all is.

I have another view which I ask you to respectfully consider. But first, let’s look at gender differences from categories:

Physical/Biological
Major differences by design!

Emotional, Intellectual, Spiritual
What are the differences? And are they nature or nurture.

One of the problems I have with those who are scared we are blurring the lines or arguing sameness (biologically-NEVER!) is that they are attempting to put me in a box. A pink box of frilly bows. I could never relate to the ‘women’ chapters in comp books. I could relate to the men chapters, though. For that, I was considered, rebellious and a feminist. I would rather debate theology than talk about recipes. I would rather learn how to fix a car than learn to cook. I would rather play golf with the guys than go have my nails done. I despise shopping.

So by focusing on ‘differences’ outside of those that are biological, we can do great damage to each other.

I will give you another example of the damage this can do. Years back I worked on several projects with Love Won Out. These are former homosexuals who speak out on being delivered. The story lines were very similar. Many of the men when young boys were artistically endowed. But that did not fit the paradigm for them from their familes, r their church. They were put in the ‘masculine box’ and became easy prey for those that ‘understood’ them better. It took them years to figure all this out and leave that horrible lifestyle only by the Grace of the Lord. (The women had similar stories)

On a humorous note, I doubt that Dobson had my thoughts in mind when he started Love Won Out. But I saw this gender box theme in their tesitmony’s even though they did not intend that.

We can do great damage with gender differences that go beyond the biological. It serves to demean talents and block the exercising of spiritual gifts.

There is so much more in Genesis to ‘mine’ that has been traditionally ignored. Thank you so much for your work on this. Because of you, I have gone back and studied Genesis in depth over the last few years and am amazed at what I believed about it without doing the hard work of testing every teaching.

Driscoll and others have dveloped a ‘female’ Christianity and a ‘male’ Christianity. They are trying to so hard to remake Jesus into some kind of macho commando. (i.e., his redneck Jesus teachings, etc)

This would mean that women cannot be Christlike as He is a male and they do not share the characteristics that Mark teaches. Perhaps this feeds into ESS and what they are teaching there to get around this problem.

In any event, I see very clearly that they are setting up two very distinct forms of Christianity that are pink and blue. It really is insidious.

“But where is the documentation?”

Cheryl asked you to provide the documentation from scripture:

It is a violation of the rules of any grammar as I have already shown. It would be such a simple exercise to prove me wrong by bringing up a second witness.

“The reason Paul switches to the generic singular form is because he intends to connect his proscription in verse 12 to his argument from the creation order in verses 13-14 where the singulars ‘Adam’ and ‘Eve’ are used as representatives of all men and women. In verse 14, ‘the woman’ refers back to Eve and stands the representative of all women.”

This makes no sense from another point of view. Why would being deceived be a more important prohibition from teaching than sinning willfully and on purpose like Adam?

Are you saying that God prefers and trusts those that sin willfully and purposely?

“… Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are…” (1 Cor 7:25-26, NIV). Since he is addressing a specific issue, limited to a certain place and time, and since no general command of the Lord Jesus exists to address, Paul, by the wisdom of the Lord granted him by the Spirit of Christ ” (i.e., “the mercy of the Lord” to which he refers), he gives an hoc rule that suits this issue and its attending circumstances.”

Frank, I was just reading this last night and thinking the same thing about this whole passage.

gengwell, I have had so many seminary trained people tell me that saved in that verse means that she will be ‘restored’ if she stays in her role as wife and mother and not trying to teach men.

As if she was saved but would not be unless she did not stay in her proper role. Some also claim it is more about sanctification than salvation.

BTW: I think these conversations are an excellent teaching tool

What are the reasons 1 Corin 14 could not be used as a second witness against women teaching men? Just curious.

“First of all, neither in the OT or in the NT, is there a clear distinction made between prophecy or teaching in terms of “forthtelling” or “proclaiming” God’s revealed word. ”

True and where Grudem, et. al. also get in trouble is when someone points out how the Puritans defined prophecy. They tend to ignore that uncomfortable position even though they are quite willing to quote the Puritans on many other issues. Of course, the Puritans were not concerned about women prophesying so they did not need to twist the meaning. :o)

I am a bit surprised Doug has not asked him about authenteo. :o) But then, there is so much in this passage which is misunderstood.

Very good point about the grammar not being used any where else in scripture. To date, no one has brought you another example?

“In fact, I refuse to allow you to discuss anything else until you answer this. And when you realize there isn’t a shred of scripture to back up this assertion and opinion of yours, then I’ll go on to the rest of your claims.”

I agree, Paula. If one cannot get Genesis right without reading into it what is NOT there, then why bother with anything else.

Chris is ignoring Gen 1. They usually do.

Cheryl, What about the argument that Priscilla was teaching under her husband’s authority. AFter all, he was there while she was teaching Apollos.

Cheryl, I recommend you move this discussion to the latest thread. for some reason, chris wants it buried. I can guess why but I think this needs to be more widely read. After all, it WAS on topic of your latest post: What Paul was teaching.

“Also note that when authorities disagree, it is fallacious to appeal to them. You only quoted those that agree with your interpretation regarding whether “a woman” can be understood generically in this passage. And when such a switch is made in the middle of a sentence, such a view stretches credulity, no matter who it is that’s doing the stretching.”

I agree, Paula. I was waiting for quotes from Grudem to make their appearance. The problem is that these ‘guys’ are not well read because they are only presented with one side and not any of the hard questions asked of their favorite ‘scholars’ who write papers and put them on sites that allow no comments. They just ignore other scholars who bring out hard questions. I completely shut down when Calvin is quoted. After all, he was so brilliant a theologian, he was in a ‘state church’ baptizing babies. Wonder where he saw that in scripture? And lets not forget Grudem’s book that teaches that God is subordinate to us when He ‘ezer’ us in an attempt to affirm that ezer means subordinate. That is how far they are willing to go to hang on to their fleshly desires of power and control over others.

Is “chris’ serious that he/she wants you to prove what is not there? Why doesn’t he just show us the OT scriptures that say women cannot teach men? It would save us all a lot of time. But that is not the point, is it?

Thanks guys. That helps a lot. I find that whole area fascinating.

How does that relate to biblical commands? Do we see each one with more than one witness?

I need to understand the whole concept of 2-3 witnesses better. Any thoughts on where to start?

Frank, you have described what I was taught by my mother and the church in the SBC about the Priesthood of believer. Sadly, those days are over.

” I understand what Cheryl and Paula are saying but it is naive to believe that such a utopian commune can exist in a fallen world. ”

I can relate to your frustration because I have been there. Seeing what I have seen I had to come to the place to ask what does a real Christian look like and what would a true Body of Christ look like?

I have come to the conclusion that few of us have seen a real Body of Christ operating. I know I will get rocks thrown at me for that. The problem is that we really do believe that a human has to be in charge. We bring our worldly thinking into the Body. We have been trained that way (even in church) to follow men instead of Christ.

What if the Body was made up of the truly regenerate who only sought after the Holy Spirit? Seeking unity ONLY in truth? Seeking true gifts with which to edify the Body. Everyone making others more important than themselves as scrpture teaches. What would that look like?

We tend to think this is unrealistic. A ‘utopi’ as you call it. I say this is exactly what the Body is to be. And when the church was first being built, God sent a strong message with Ananias and Sapphira that the Bride was to be pure. And then the Epistles give us examples of that not happening. That does not mean we throw in the towel. We have plenty of warnings in Revelation of this.

I have had so many pastors on blogs talking about Paul commanding this or that to prove he was a ‘ruler’. Funny how I read him begging, persuading, exhorting, encouraging, etc. Standing for truth. His power was truth. His authority was truth. Not him.

There are ‘elders’ in my life who are not official elders. But they ARE elders according to scripture. One is even a woman. These are folks who live out Matthew 5. Their fruit is obvious and they do not need a title conferred upon them by mere men. They do not have authority over me. They ‘stand before me’ as examples of Christ. As Image Bearers.

I agree with Paula on this one. One of the things I saw up close and personal in many situations was a ‘leader’ who over time came to expect to be followed. This is what happens when you use terms like ‘leader’ instead of servant. Servant is what is used in scripture.

Another problem is that folks do not understand that all authority between believers is Jesus Christ. Not another human. We are not to be like the world. But we are. There is a great danger that we do not grow past whoever is the leader. We see that happen all through history except for a few brave souls like Luther and even those who went against Zwingili and Calvin hiding in caves for the doctrine of believers baptism and a church of true believers…not a state church.

I think it is instructive that most Epistles are written to the church and not the ‘elders’ of each church. If this hierarchical structure were as many teach it, then why would Paul dare allow the entire Body to be involved in carrying out the instructions in his letters? He would have written to the elders to handle it.

“Well, I do love rules (my nickname when we play games is “RULE BOY”).”

I need you to play UNO with my daughter. She makes up rules as we go along. Same with Battleship.