pinklight

Thank you Cheryl for your response. 🙂

I’ve heard a gender hierarchalist say that Mary had no choice in being Jesus’ mother. Strange things said never end… How could anyone come to such a conclusion?

Gheees that last post had so many errors in it. I left of the word ‘eat’ twice and ‘tree’ once. Sorry! lol

[quote]All of God’s prohibitions have a second witness.

That’s True Even in the Garden! Eve (The Woman) stated the prohibition on the Tree of Knowledge Of Good & Evil! Adam’s first witness is God himself telling him and the second witness you can say is Eve. She stated it and adam was right there/next to her to hear it! Plus Paul backs up the fall/account in Romans & Tim. and in Cor.’s! Also have the Holy Spirit as a witness too, who is bringing this all to Pauls mind! Great Job[/quote]

Exactly. Eve’s testimony was a wittness to God’s command! And also in chp 1 where God tells them both what they could (which is after he created Adam telling Adam what he could and couldn’t eat) God’s prohibition is encompassed in what they could otherwise God was contrdicting himself now in 1:29 telling Adam that he could every tree. The forbidden must of had no seed!

Cheryl ,said:

‘Now as to 1 Timothy 2:12, if we are going to take this passage the complementarian way, I think the restriction would have to be for inside and outside the church not because of the “everywhere” but because of the reason given as something to do with creation. If they interpret this as the order of creation so that the man gets to teach because the first one gets to have special privileges that the second one doesn’t have, then one cannot restrict this to the church because the order of creation has nothing to do with worship but the nature of the creation. Although I believe this interpretation is very wrong for several reasons, if we took it this way as the complementarians do, we could not limit the restrictions to church.’

Way to go! I never thought of that! Thanks!

Don said:

‘On “saved thru childbearing” this wording misses a crucial “the” in the Greek. It is really “saved thru the childbearing”. As such I believe it is refering to the most special child ever born, namely Jesus. However, it is using terminology of Ephesus, where they had the “goddess” Artemis workshipped in a 5 story building and one of the things they asked for was to be “saved in childbearing” which was very dangerous back then.

So I think Paul is using terms familiar to Ephesians, but giving them a Biblical meaning.’

Thanks for that Don! I’ve been over at the carm discussion boards in the thread that Matt posted for a second time to Cheryl and in it I mentioned the cult of Artemis and a relation to 2:15 of one of it’s beliefs that women would be saved through chiblbirth by her.

voiceofsanity said,

‘It is hard to believe that you can’t see that you are clearly starting with your desired conclusion (i.e. that women should teach in church and be able to become pastors and elders) and twisting scripture to support your preconceived belief. Matt is right and you are wrong. The fact that he has 2000 years of theological scholarship to back him up puts the burden of proof on you. You have not met that burden and I hope you will repent of your errant beliefs.’

I hear this ‘2000 years’ argument thrown around quite a bit which btw doesn’t prove a thing. The fact that a belief has been held for any x amount of years does not make it Truth. God does not establish his Truth in such a way.

The foundational problems I see with the interpretations of ‘complementarian’ flavor are all the contradictions with other scriptures and all the inconsistencies with regard to what is claimed to be a so-called ‘plain reading’ of this 1 Tim 2 passage. The very plain and simple reading of the Greek grammar of the text under discussion actualy speaks about 1 woman and not all.

How do I edit what I’ve posted?

Cheryl said:
‘Guys,

As you listen to the audio from last night’s debate remember one thing…I asked to share why I believed that “a woman” was a particular woman and not “all women” and Matt refused to allow me to share this. He called me a heretic without even hearing my argument to the end. I asked Matt to tell me what it was in the passage that made him believe that Paul was restricting all women from teaching men and Matt went outside the passage to do this. Friends, this means that there is NOTHING in 1 Timothy chapters 1, 2, or 3 that would make us believe that Paul is stopping the teaching of every godly Christian woman since Matt was unable to bring even one argument to the table from the passage we were talking about. Think about this!’

Yes, thank you! That’s what I noticed yesterday and was going to post on last night but did not…!

Cheryl said:
‘I have asked complementarians everywhere to give a defense of their belief that “a woman” is every Christian woman by asking them to then tell me who the “she” is from 1 Timothy 2:15 and who are the “they”. I have yet to have a single one of them able to give me a coherent answer. They just don’t know. And apparently Matt doesn’t know either because he stopped me from discussing verse 15. Is that confidence that he has the truth or is he running away from something that he has no answer to? Maybe we will never know because he will not dare to have back on his radio show. He simply cannot afford to talk about verse 15.’

I had a patriarchalist tell me that ‘she’ in verse 15 is Eve who represents all women (so ‘she’ really means singular ‘woman’) and then the following plural ‘they’ means all women. As much as I tried to understand any logic of such a conclusion, none was available and so I hardly had a response since I was so taken aback that such an argument would even be put forth.

Justa berean, hi! I can recognize my berean folk. *wink…* Here’s the link: http://carmpodcasting.blogspot.com/

Hi, everyone!
I appreciate all the positive comments on here and there’s alot to absorb. Thank you everyone!

I just read some comments over at the carmpodcasting blogspot about someone saying that they did not hear anything yet from Cheryl that supports women to be ‘elders/pastors.’

I hear often comments made that confuse a ‘pastor’ with an ‘elder’ as they are not only two different words in Greek but also pastor is a gift, whereas an elder/overseer is not. I would like to continue to see discussions or articles over this mix up because it certainly is a huge point.

All gifts are given to ANY no matter thier gender. The question then is not even if a woman can be a pastor! What I’ve found is that usualy with most comps the issue is not that women can’t have any or all the gifts, but rather that they cannot function with them with authority over men. I realize that a heirarchal view has reaped a mix up between the two positions but I just have to point out then that what it comes down to is that this debate (in regards to 1 Tim 3) is really not even about the gift of pastor (!) but rather it is about a man or woman being able to aspire to ‘overseer’.

Isn’t there a link here somewhere at this site to an excellent article that spoke to this issue?