Women forced to keep silence in Church

[Waggles]

Acts 21:8  On the next day we departed and came to Caesarea, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him. 
9  He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied. 

[Beppybuva]

So can I keep reading my Joyce Meyers books?  Or no? ?

[Willa]

44 minutes ago, Paul James said:

There is an opinion that the reference in 1 Timothy prohibiting women from teaching, could have been an insertion by a misogynistic Latin church editor to make it appear that the insertion was actually written by Paul.

This is the type of criticism that I would object to.  It is supposition to suit someones opinion but apparently has no facts to support it.  For the most part the word of God should be taken at face value and not twisted by what could have happened.  When I was young I did those things and paid the consequences.  I am either in submission to God and His word or I am not.  

[Willa]

18 minutes ago, Beppybuva said:

So can I keep reading my Joyce Meyers books?  Or no? ?

You are free to read what you want, but I don't read her stuff.  There are others that are more accurate and reliable.  Kay Arthur may be a better choice.  My favorite is Corrie Ten Boom.  

[Paul James]

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

I'll respond to your posts, not to someone's thesis.  If you want to condense the salient points and post them as your own, then I'll respond to that.

Do you have any answer to the points I've made?

You'll have to sit down and read through the thesis like I did.

[Paul James]

1 hour ago, Beppybuva said:

So can I keep reading my Joyce Meyers books?  Or no? ?

Of course, false teachers and not limited to men.

[Paul James]

1 hour ago, Willa said:

This is the type of criticism that I would object to.  It is supposition to suit someones opinion but apparently has no facts to support it.  For the most part the word of God should be taken at face value and not twisted by what could have happened.  When I was young I did those things and paid the consequences.  I am either in submission to God and His word or I am not.  

The problem is that it is a historical fact that some of Greek Manuscripts were edited and redacted to suit the preference of the commentators in the Second Century.   So, we have to approach the Scripture prayerfully, seeking the leading of the Holy Spirit in how it should be interpreted.   This is important when we read a passage of Scripture and something about it doesn't seem to fit right.   Seeing that 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 doesn't seem to fit the context has made some Bible scholars look more deeply into the text, and compared different Greek manuscripts.  What they found was that the two verses would have fitted better in a different place which made them clearer.

A serious Bible scholar would have instantly been alerted to the contradiction between 1 Corinthians 11 where Paul supported prophecy from females, and 1 Corinthians 14 where he appears to prohibit females from speaking in church.  The scholar would know that the Holy Spirit never contradicts Himself, so, one reference is from the Holy Spirit and the other doesn't, and so further investigation is required to sort out the contradiction.

There are 25,000 Greek manuscripts.  Some have been edited and others haven't.  That's where scholarship comes in.  This is why there are scholars trained in Koine Greek, so they can study the manuscripts and spot the redactions.  The method is called Redaction Criticism, which seeks to establish what is the most authentic text of the New Testament Scriptures.

Some ultra-fundamentalists dislike academic scholarship because they have the mistaken notion that it is used to water down God's Word.   Although some liberal academics do this, the best Bible scholars are honest and professional in the way they approach the Scriptures and they do their best not to be influenced by any theological bias.

I think that those who take a simplistic literal approach to the KJV, which many fundamentalist Evangelical and Pentecostals do, they put themselves in danger of being deceived by accepting the redactions in the Greek manuscripts that contributed to that version.

As they have compared the different manuscripts, the Greek scholars have found that there are manuscripts where the wording makes better sense and shows a greater support for female ministry.    It is interesting that the manuscripts that don't have punctuation in them are the later ones and those who support the Latin Scriptures that form the basis of RCC theology.  This lack of punctuation, and the division of the Scriptures into chapter and verse, which also is a later addition, causing the breaking up of passages, thereby giving a different reading of the passage than what it is with correct punctuation and the chapter and verse division taken out.

One glaring example of insertion is Romans 8:1: "There is therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus."  This is the reading shown in many manuscripts.   But other manuscripts that support the KJV read: "There is therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit."   It is commonly thought that the words "who walk not after the flesh, etc". were inserted by an editor to suit works-based RCC theology.   The former reading without the insertion is more consistent with Pauline theology.

Edited February 5, 2021 by Paul James

[Waggles]

1 hour ago, Paul James said:

Although some liberal academics do this, the best Bible scholars are honest and professional in the way they approach the Scriptures and they do their best not to be influenced by any theological bias.

Not true - how can those who are not filled with the Holy Spirit - the author of the holy scriptures - have any credence in understanding the scriptures in truth and God given wisdom.?

Look at the theological fiasco created by Bible scholars with their so-called 'redaction criticism' on Mark 16:15-20.

Pure theological bias. Scholars devoid of the Holy Spirit casting aspersions upon the truth of scripture. Claiming that these verses were added long after by someone or other, and that they are not applicable. Oh how convenient for cessationists and worldly scholars. 

Sorry, but as I am able to pray in the Spirit when reading and meditating on the word of God I rely on God given insight pertaining to doctrine. 

James 1:5  If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.

1Co 1:20  Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

1Co 12:8  For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit,

[Paul James]

1 hour ago, Waggles said:

Not true - how can those who are not filled with the Holy Spirit - the author of the holy scriptures - have any credence in understanding the scriptures in truth and God given wisdom.?

Look at the theological fiasco created by Bible scholars with their so-called 'redaction criticism' on Mark 16:15-20.

Pure theological bias. Scholars devoid of the Holy Spirit casting aspersions upon the truth of scripture. Claiming that these verses were added long after by someone or other, and that they are not applicable. Oh how convenient for cessationists and worldly scholars. 

Sorry, but as I am able to pray in the Spirit when reading and meditating on the word of God I rely on God given insight pertaining to doctrine. 

James 1:5  If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.

1Co 1:20  Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

1Co 12:8  For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit,

I don't go along with the anti-academic that some religious groups practice.

It all depends on the motive and objective of those who do academic study of the Scriptures.   It is quite true that liberal and Cessationist scholars are adapting the Scriptures to suit their particular theology.  If their motive is biased, then they cannot present an honest exegesis and hermenetical analysis of Scripture.

But a Christian academic who seeks to give an unbiased analysis of Scripture to support or refute a particular premise, then I include that within the umbrella of rightly dividing the Word of God.   For example, Frank Morrison decided to write a negative analysis of the resurrection of Christ in order to present evidence to prove it never happened.  Halfway through his research he realised that the evidence supporting the resurrection was irrefutable.  His book, "Who Moved The Stone" finished up being the best work on the clear evidence that Jesus really did rise from the dead on the third day.   He doesn't merely say that Jesus rose from the dead because "the Holy Sprit told me so".  He went through the available evidence in a very exacting and comprehensive manner to show that Jesus not only rose from the dead, but that the Jewish and Roman authorities had no doubt about it either.  But the Jewish and Roman authorities covered it up by bribing the tomb guards and spreading the story that the disciples had stolen the body, while the Apostles proclaimed and witnessed to the resurrection as a true historical fact.

But the anti-academic attitude of the early Pentecostals opened the door for all sorts of heretical teaching and practice to invade the movement, the worst being the "oneness" doctrine which denies the trinity, which caused a major division in the Pentecostal movement.   It is the lack of academic analysis that allows kundalini, prosperity doctrine and other false prophecy and teaching to go unchallenged.

To my knowledge, Gordon Fee is the only Pentecostal academic who has used his training and skill to write very sound doctrinal commentaries on several books of the Bible.

[Starise]

I'm curious @Paul James what has led you to this study? Are you involved in some sort of situation right now? 

I give little to no credit to anything the RCC has done. Saying they made female references to male references does not surprise me.

I looks to me as if some have tried VERY HARD to explain what apparently the rest of us have all missed. Even after lots of cross referenced study.

The Bible clearly indicates we had women in different ministries. No argument there.

Women have a place the same as men. I don't see the possibility we can ignore this in the Bible. We can't "explain away" all of those references. 

I believe God gives us all a ministry of some kind. No ministry is above another. They are merely in different places doing different things.

Let's look at the head leadership position in the local church. There's a lot more to it than standing behind a pulpit a few times a week and giving a message. Probably not an ideal position for a woman with children or even a single woman. Not to mention I am pretty sure it isn't Biblical. If you could prove it IS Biblical I still would not attend a church with a female pastor, mainly because I don't think they possess the varied set of skills necessary to lead a congregation. Yes they would be good a few things at the expense of others. I think you need a man for that job. Men are the leaders of their families and I think we need to hear from other men who are seeking spiritual leadership of both themselves and their families. Ministering to mom only won't cut it. Most churches have both men's and women's ministries.The women are not left out of any healthy church.