1 Mabel,

Hi Mabel, and thanks for joining in the discussion. Your post ended up in my spam box for some reason. I think it was due to a typo in your email address. Anyway it has been rescued and posted in the order that the comments came in.

Your questions are very appropriate. After all if a woman is in “sin” for teaching a man then if she risked teaching the Bible on the radio, or writing about the Bible in a book or even blogging as I am doing here, and there is anyway that a man might read her teaching then that would make her in sin for making her teaching available where a man might be tempted to read or listen. If we follow this teaching to its logical conclusion then we would be severely restricting women’s effectiveness to even reach out to women in a public manner.

It appears to me that there are more questions than answers and perhaps a whole ball of yarn to unravel that these men hadn’t considered.

Thanks for posting your questions! I would also recommend that you post them on Mike’s blog too on our last debate post http://rolecalling.blogspot.com/2009/09/building-bridges-schatz-and-seaver.html Mike to approve each comment so he won’t be able to say that he didn’t see the questions. 🙂