cheryl

Don,

In the case of Noah, giving it to “everyone” was 8 people. I don’t think we need to worry that God didn’t speak to the pagans on the blood issue. The fact is that God repeated the law. It was a law that was for all of Israel. This of course came after it was given to every person on the earth (all 8 of them). And the best thing….it was repeated.

So, my question still stands. Is there a universal law that God has given that isn’t repeated? Let’s take the law against lying, stealing, adultery, etc, etc. All of these sins are prohibited and they are all very clear in scripture so that we are not confused about how to stay away from sin. God has no problem in repeating himself and sometimes he does it over and over again. He wants us to “get it” because he wants us to stay away from sin.

So if there is a “law” that stops godly women from teaching doctrine to men, why isn’t this law placed into any list of sin? Why isn’t there a punishment given for this sin? Why was there no example of a woman charged with this universal sin? No other universal law is like this. No other universal law is left without a second witness. The question that I would like all of us to consider, is why not? Does God care less for women that he could not give a second witness to only women? Or is it possible that there is no such universal “law” that forbids godly women from teaching correct biblical doctrine to men?

Paula: Thanks for the questions!

“The man†who has become like us keys in on the one whom God said would be tempted to eat from the tree of life. God is specifically talking about the man here, but because the woman also ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, obviously she too would have been like God in knowing good and evil. However, she wasn’t the problem one. Adam was the one who sinned with knowledge and by his own choice without his being deceived. He was the one in rebellion and was charged with bringing sin into the world. Although we can assume that Adam and Eve were both knowing good and evil because Eve also ate the fruit, we cannot assume from scripture that God also kicked out Eve from the garden. God tells us only that Adam was kicked out of the garden. Unfortunately the TNIV takes the literal Hebrew and puts their interpretation into the text. Instead of saying “the man†as most translations render this verse, they assume God means both Adam and Eve because we do know that both of them left the garden. The assumption is that God kicked them both out of the garden but the text doesn’t say that. A much better answer is the prophecy that God gives to Eve that she would desire her husband and obviously her desiring him would cause her to want to be with him. It is also understandable that his sinful rule over her would not have allowed her to stay in the garden. He wasn’t leaving alone!

So to summarize, the Hebrew for Genesis 3:22 is not plural but is accurately translated as “the man†and God’s mentioning Adam becoming like him in knowing good and evil cannot be used to say that the woman did not also know good and evil. The emphasis on this verse is the rebellious man.

Hey there Molly by Golly 🙂

I am not sure what pamphlet was sent with the DVD as I am not involved with the shipping. I do know that our ministry stands firmly for testing everything and holding fast to that which is good. If any emerging type of church holds firmly to the foundational doctrines of scripture and holds to scripture as God-breathed, then we can fellowship with a clear conscience with these brothers and sisters in Christ. The only thing that could be of concern is that “doing church†is not relegated to a seeker centered service where the gospel is not clearly preached because it might offend the non-Christian. Although we are to be seeker sensitive, the church is the place where we grow in our knowledge of God and our place to serve our Lord and each other. If it becomes too focused on the felt needs of the non-Christian and stops growing and equipping the Christian, we need to be concerned. Our son right now is in a seeker centered church. He has been diligently working on the Pastor and the Elders trying to convince them to preach the word of God in a clear way for the edification of the whole church. He has been told that the full gospel will be understood eventually by the non-Christian but for the time being they choose to not offend by preaching about sin and righteousness and a coming judgment and the blood atonement. In fact they are so against his preaching the full gospel to the lost that they have forbidden him to teach in the church for fear that he will teach the gospel to the unbeliever. He is also not allowed to play in the church band or even teach the children. It is so sad that the seeker centered movement is so unwilling to preach the word that they are more willing to cater to the felt need of unbelievers than the truth of scripture.

Ryan: The thought of the woman ruling the husband is not that she did so necessarily before the fall, but that her innate desire after the fall will be one of wanting to rule the man. This is how many commentaries define the word “desireâ€. They see her desire as being a bad thing, not as something good. My article was to dispute that. In fact, my article was in defense of God’s prophecy. God is the one who said that the woman would desire the man. Women understand what this means. In fact, I believe that it is God’s grace that allows this. As one who laid in the delivery room in excruciating pain as I gave birth to each child, at that moment in time the thought of ever allowing him near me again so that this pain would happen to me again was repugnant. Yet after the birth of my child, those thoughts were gone. The same thing happens when women are dominated and controlled and at times treated as if they are children and not mature adults, yet the women still keep coming back to the men that they love. There is something in a woman that keeps her love for him no matter what. Any other meaning for “desire†in this passage would fail to prove out as a fact in this world.

Molly: Your comments were well said. Women understand our ability to take abuse and mistreatment and keep coming back for what we hope will eventually be emotional love shown in the way we need to receive it. It is so rewarding for me to see so many men refusing to continue the tradition of male domination and who are now coming alongside women and treating them with respect and who have a willingness to hear what women have to say and to teach them. In the past if men would have been more willing to listen to women, they would not have so easily attributed to God a prophecy about women’s desire to rule men. That is a false prophecy that God did not originate. Instead God prophesied about women’s future and their ability to love the man despite being treated as a creature to be ruled over. Oh that God would allow the time to come quickly when every member of the body of Christ will be treated with dignity and respect and honored for their gifts and placement in the body no matter what their gender happens to be.

Thank you for your question. In 1 Corinthians 14:36 Paul is referring to a letter from the Corinthians that he has been answering throughout 1 Corinthians. Verses 34 and 35 of chapter 14 are a quote from that letter. Immediately after the quote, Paul addresses the letter writers who are trying to force their legalistic restrictions onto the women in the congregation. Since the letter is commanding a restriction onto only women, it is unlikely that the letter writers would have included women and it is also unlikely that it came from every man in the congregation. Paul has already discussed women speaking in the church through prayer and prophecy in chapter eleven. Since women apparently had freedom to speak in the church by praying and prophesying, it certainly wasn’t the entire congregation who were restricting the women. The Judaizers were the ones who were trying to bring Jewish traditions into Christianity and they had already infiltrated the Galatian church. These Judaizers would also have insisted that the congregation follow the Jewish way of restricting women from learning and from speaking in the congregation.

The American Standard Versions renders verse 36: What? was it from you that the word of God went forth? or came it unto you alone?

Here the question is on whether there is a restriction on who can have the word of God come to them (question of learning) and who the word of God came through (question of who can prophesy God’s words). Paul is amazed that they are trying to take control of God’s words by restricting who can learn and who can speak forth in the congregation. Verse 37 is now written to anyone in the congregation. Paul says that if anyone thinks himself as a prophet, or as a spiritual person, then that one must recognize that Paul’s command to allow all to have the freedom to prophesy (verse 31) is a command of the Lord.  God’s commands through Paul directly contradict the prohibition in verses 34 and 35.

So in answer to your question, it would not be likely that the letter written to Paul came from both men and women since the letter was commanding restrictions on women’s participation in the church.

Martin,

I do not have a full list of the churches/denominations that ordain women but below are links to a couple of denominations that are good examples of those who hold to the inerrancy of scripture and are not off into doctrinal error.

The first two links below are for the Christian Reformed Church. The first link is regarding their beliefs and the second their position on women.

http://www.crcna.org/pages/beliefs.cfm

http://www.crcna.org/pages/positions_women_office.cfm

These next two links are for the Evangelical Covenant Church with the first link below their affirmations regarding the word of God, etc and the next link their position on women in ministry.

http://www.covchurch.org/affirmations

http://www.covchurch.org/ministry/departmental-ministries/women-in-ministry

I think that these two denominations are good examples of churches that hold tightly to God’s word. There are also many others including my own denomination. I hope that helps you out in your forum discussion. Once again, thanks for the kind remarks!

Cheryl