Cheryl Schatz
2009-12-06
Under #6 Question I asked something completely different than you answered. It looks like you got #6 mixed up with #7. So we will fix that up in the next comment field. Regarding your “answer” to a question here is what you said:
It is no surprise that if one dismisses the passages restricting the roles of women in the church, then of course there is nothing to stop them. However i think the texts are pretty clear and do give ‘witness’ to women not teaching. (now i think my numbers are muddled up…hope you can follow)
Who is dismissing the passages that seem to restrict women from teaching or even speaking in the assembly? No one here is dismissing them. We are taking the inspired words and the inspired grammar and taking the full context to understand the passages. Once one takes the context and the grammar, then the importance of my questions are understood.
However I find you very befuddling. You say that the hard passages on women are “clear” yet you have refused to answer many of the questions that would show how your “clear” understanding distorts the texts themselves. You also say that it is not a sin for women to teach even in the church and now you are once again that there is a “witness” of the texts to women not teaching. So what is it going to be? Are women allowed to teach or not? If they can teach in the church, how many times can they teach before it becomes a sin? Please do answer because your appeal to the text is “unclear”.