quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi


If you want your position to have a fair hearing, you need to be fair in your presentation. Simply stating that "It's the most unjust fallacy of scripture there is." doesn't help. Tone in down, and give more details about why you believe that these passages have been misinterpreted, and be ready to backup your assertions with objective and verifiable facts. Don't simply state that "the words are translated incorrectly in the English.", but give concrete examples of these "mistranslations", and the basis for your opinion that these passages have been mistranslated into English.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SD456

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi


If you want your position to have a fair hearing, you need to be fair in your presentation. Simply stating that "It's the most unjust fallacy of scripture there is." doesn't help. Tone in down, and give more details about why you believe that these passages have been misinterpreted, and be ready to backup your assertions with objective and verifiable facts. Don't simply state that "the words are translated incorrectly in the English.", but give concrete examples of these "mistranslations", and the basis for your opinion that these passages have been mistranslated into English.

I already did about 10 pages ago when I was in the discussion. Since then the same words and verses have been discussed again and again. I don't think I need to repeat myself and everyone else.... The word 'authentein' is one of those mistranslated words where the entire idea of women not being allowed to be over men comes from.

But I think I shall just keep hovering and reading. It's too tiring to go over things again and again.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: SD456

quote:

ORIGINAL: cobblestone

Thank you, I'll try to find the posts. But for me the fact remains that Paul's reference is rabinical and not biblical. Of man not God. That's in direct reference to silence of women. No matter how one interprets the passage what is being considered isn't biblical. Period. Anything else is interpretating Torah.


edit: I can hear it! But Paul's words are biblical! Paul states it's rabinical by adding the words "as the law says" Clearly it's not old testement law he was refering to.
Misdeeds, mistrust, unequality, suppression of the Spirit,
Why is rabinical law being held onto?
Is it because then women would have a say in interpretation? Becuase when they have no voice that's what happens. No women are allowed to interpret scripture according to church tradition. That's quenching the Spirit.

It's the most unjust falacy of scripture there is. If it were not so this would no longer be an issue.

Yes, I've always found it sad that it is men who have interpreted the scriptures, and have always leaned against women being empowered by the Holy Spirit in any difinitive way, and I fully believe that is not biblical. Nor is it the heart of God.

These past pages have been very good. There is much research that people have made on the topic. IMO the words are translated incorrectly in the english.

I have seen some good arguments for an Egalitarian position including many on this thread, but this is not one of them.

When you question someone's interpretation and motives simply because they are "men" you have added nothing helpful to this discussion. The reality is that being a "man" really has nothing to do with why most in the church have come to the conclusions that they have. There are many examples of woman who in their studies have concluded that the "traditional" interpretation of these passages is the correct one, and there are many men who have studied these same passages and believe that an Egalitarian position is the correct one. (and many that hold a position somewhere in the middle). The book "women in ministry: four views" has examples of both.

If you want your position to have a fair hearing, you need to be fair in your presentation. Simply stating that "It's the most unjust fallacy of scripture there is." doesn't help. Tone in down, and give more details about why you believe that these passages have been misinterpreted, and be ready to backup your assertions with objective and verifiable facts. Don't simply state that "the words are translated incorrectly in the English.", but give concrete examples of these "mistranslations", and the basis for your opinion that these passages have been mistranslated into English.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cobblestone

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: SD456

quote:

ORIGINAL: cobblestone

Thank you, I'll try to find the posts. But for me the fact remains that Paul's reference is rabinical and not biblical. Of man not God. That's in direct reference to silence of women. No matter how one interprets the passage what is being considered isn't biblical. Period. Anything else is interpretating Torah.


edit: I can hear it! But Paul's words are biblical! Paul states it's rabinical by adding the words "as the law says" Clearly it's not old testement law he was refering to.
Misdeeds, mistrust, unequality, suppression of the Spirit,
Why is rabinical law being held onto?
Is it because then women would have a say in interpretation? Becuase when they have no voice that's what happens. No women are allowed to interpret scripture according to church tradition. That's quenching the Spirit.

It's the most unjust falacy of scripture there is. If it were not so this would no longer be an issue.

Yes, I've always found it sad that it is men who have interpreted the scriptures, and have always leaned against women being empowered by the Holy Spirit in any difinitive way, and I fully believe that is not biblical. Nor is it the heart of God.

These past pages have been very good. There is much research that people have made on the topic. IMO the words are translated incorrectly in the english.

I have seen some good arguments for an Egalitarian position including many on this thread, but this is not one of them.

When you question someone's interpretation and motives simply because they are "men" you have added nothing helpful to this discussion. The reality is that being a "man" really has nothing to do with why most in the church have come to the conclusions that they have. There are many examples of woman who in their studies have concluded that the "traditional" interpretation of these passages is the correct one, and there are many men who have studied these same passages and believe that an Egalitarian position is the correct one. (and many that hold a position somewhere in the middle). The book "women in ministry: four views" has examples of both.

If you want your position to have a fair hearing, you need to be fair in your presentation. Simply stating that "It's the most unjust fallacy of scripture there is." doesn't help. Tone in down, and give more details about why you believe that these passages have been misinterpreted, and be ready to backup your assertions with objective and verifiable facts. Don't simply state that "the words are translated incorrectly in the English.", but give concrete examples of these "mistranslations", and the basis for your opinion that these passages have been mistranslated into English.

If you think that following rabinical teachings for the last 2000 yrs of Christianity is justifyable then there's nothing I can say to you. I'll leave it at that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SonInMe1

quote:

The Prophetess Deborah

was not a spiritual leader, i.e. pastor, bishop, deacon and only aquired her position because no man would step up to the plate. She was a Judge who made decisions and judgements before there were kings for Isreal.

quote:

have you actually studied the evidence for and against as you have quoted above or are you accepting someone else's word concerning this matter of women regarding teaching?

I read the bible...and those who accept feminine spiritual leadership are the ones who pervert scripture to fit their cultural norms.

There is absolutely no spiritual women leaders, over men, or teaching men in the bible. There IS scripture against such practices so...what is the problem?

There have been many wonderful ladies in the bible doing great things in the Lord. This is nothing against women..at all. Its in recognistion of how God made them, and how God made men.

One last comment....I.....am not ignorant.

quote:

so please could you provide Scriptural evidence for what you quoted above highlighted in blue please as this is quite a profound statement to make and I would like to weigh it up in a balanced way using Scripture.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ezra

quote:

so please could you provide Scriptural evidence for what you quoted above highlighted in blue please as this is quite a profound statement to make and I would like to weigh it up in a balanced way using Scripture.

Why do people continue to ask for "the Scriptural evidence" when that has already been provided not once but many times in this thread?

There is ample evidence in Scripture to support what is stated and highlighted in blue. Take the time to go through the entire thread if you are indeed sincere about weighing the evidence.

The naysayers can never find the Scriptural evidence to support women being in spiritual authority, therefore they simply deny that the Bible says what it says, and that what is stated is not for one generation but for all generations beginning with Adam.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ezra

quote:



...... There is ample evidence in Scripture to support what is stated and highlighted in blue. Take the time to go through the entire thread if you are indeed sincere about weighing the evidence.

The naysayers can never find the Scriptural evidence to support women being in spiritual authority, therefore they simply deny that the Bible says what it says, and that what is stated is not for one generation but for all generations beginning with Adam.

Ezra - I will indeed take some time to go through some of this thread at least as it is so long and would take days if not weeks to get through in it's entirety!

Whilst respectfully you believe there is evidence in Scripture and within the threads on this subject onsite to support what is stated and highlighted in blue as per quote in the above post (#4939), I trust the Scripture I have studied and which I believe with conviction to support the individual roles of women in the church. The link provided below is a good link because what it reiterates is explained by interpreting Scripture with Scripture and this is very evident when you prayerfully consider the information contained (as per the link below).

I would like to point out that I do not wish to force my convictions on anyone - I would always say "pray and ask the Holy Spirit to guide you" - He is the best teacher at the end of the day and this is vitally important:

Link to Women's roles in the Church


At the end of the day - whether we have a gift of teaching or not; or whether we agree on all matters of doctrine or not - it is love (agape) that matters most and this is what should be evident in our posts and respect towards one another concerning all those who confess to love and serve the Lord Jesus.

Bless
Little_1

< Message edited by Little_1 -- 4/20/2008 1:33:06 AM >

_____________________________

"Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer." ROMANS 12:12
Testimony

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

...... I would also encourage you to spend a little time looking through this thread, as you will quickly discover that the answer is not near so black and white as Ezra has implied.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beck34

I never meant to stir up all of this. I didn't want people to hurt one another. I just wanted to know if I heard God's voice or not. Please remember the humility of Christ and his command to "Love thy neighbor."
It is one of His greatest commandments, and our opinions should not be shoved down peoples throats! They should be stated in a loving way, with humility and respect for the other person's feelings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lycea

It is true, classifying the entire male gender as trying to keep women down is wrong. I think we also have to allow that for many years, Augustinian thought along with the teachings of Aquinas were more heavily influential in determining the value of women than scripture. With the majority of the scholarship throughout the ages being in the male domain, we also have to allow the question, "if women were allowed to study, would things have been different?" Not that we will ever get an answer, but the question is valid. And if women were in charge, would we not also see some reverse-sexism? It just seems to flow from human nature to exalt that which is like me, and put down that which is different.
As for "authentein" it is difficult to come to a hard and fast conclusion as to the word's intended meaning because of the scarcity of use in external manuscripts and the complete lack of other use within the scripture. Because Paul chose this word, he must have meant to convey something very specific. If not, he had other words to choose from that indicated just plain ordinary authority. I am not expert enough to offer opinion on what it means, I will leave that to linguists, but the fact that there is disagreement on the topic regardless of gender says to me that we need to keep digging into the issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beck34

It just strikes me as totally amazing how one little idea can stir up so many opinions.

quote:

When you question someone's interpretation and motives simply because they are "men" you have added nothing helpful to this discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SD456

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lycea

It is true, classifying the entire male gender as trying to keep women down is wrong. I think we also have to allow that for many years, Augustinian thought along with the teachings of Aquinas were more heavily influential in determining the value of women than scripture. With the majority of the scholarship throughout the ages being in the male domain, we also have to allow the question, "if women were allowed to study, would things have been different?" Not that we will ever get an answer, but the question is valid. And if women were in charge, would we not also see some reverse-sexism? It just seems to flow from human nature to exalt that which is like me, and put down that which is different.
As for "authentein" it is difficult to come to a hard and fast conclusion as to the word's intended meaning because of the scarcity of use in external manuscripts and the complete lack of other use within the scripture. Because Paul chose this word, he must have meant to convey something very specific. If not, he had other words to choose from that indicated just plain ordinary authority. I am not expert enough to offer opinion on what it means, I will leave that to linguists, but the fact that there is disagreement on the topic regardless of gender says to me that we need to keep digging into the issue.

I never classified the 'entire' male gender as being wrong. I made a simple statement. The few men (very few compared to all the zillions of men out there in the world) who translated scriptures were men who would have been very much influenced by their times and culture (as we all are). You just can't get around that. I believe that their translations would have definately weighed on the side of women kept under men's thumb. There is no way they would have tried to show 'authentein' in it's true translation or in a true light or perhaps they wouldn't have even understood it in it's true tranlsation because there conclusion is already colored.

quote:


"authentien' is found in very few manuscripts outside the bible even, but the ones that it is in during those times shows that at the period of time the scriptures were written, 'authentein' had the meaning of being: violent, harshly dominating, and had a much, much stronger meaning than simply 'can't have authority over'.

quote:


In fact, used with the correct meaning it would also hold true with men not being able to harshly dominate women and men would also not be able to have 'authentien' over women.