Women forced to keep silence in Church

[DeighAnn]

19 minutes ago, Paul James said:

i think the guiding principle is that most of the Old Testament is written for us rather than directly to us.

Isn't there more end time prophecy written in the old than in the new?  

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Wasn't this Paul saying He and not God?

[Paul James]

By the way, because I am the OP, I can change the topic.  I'm actually enjoying the twists and turns of the different responses and I would encourage to keep it going.   If something comes to mind that might seem off-topic, don't worry.  Say it.  You won't get any strife from me.

Now, textual criticism.   I believe that the only ones who are threatened by textual criticism are the ones who believe that the KJV is the breathed-on version and that every word in it is literally dictated by the Holy Spirit.   When someone using textual criticism brings up that some verses were doctored at some time in the history of the church, as I said in my OP concerning women in the church, then some who have the faith in their beloved KJV feel that their faith is under attack.

I think that this is because they are bound to the literature of the Bible instead of involving the anointing of the Holy Spirit to clarify some aspects of the Scripture to enable the reader to pick the meat from the bones.  Bible Hub shows most English versions of the Bible and it is good to compare the wording among them to get a good appreciation of what the passage is actually saying.   

I have a friend who has a PhD in classical literature, and she is fluent in classical Greek and Latin, and I remember a Bible study in which she frustrated the minister conducting it because she regularly corrected him from her reading of the Greek text!   It made a very amusing and memorable Bible study.

[Paul James]

14 minutes ago, DeighAnn said:

Isn't there more end time prophecy written in the old than in the new?  

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Wasn't this Paul saying He and not God?

I looked up the whole passage and I don't see that it was just him saying it and not God.  But then, I don't think he knew that his instructions were going to be put on an equal basis to Old Testament Scripture.   He was just giving his views to Timothy to encourage him to ensure that the churches under Timothy were being run decently and in order.   It was decided later, probably in the second century that Paul's letters be elevated to Holy Scripture.

 

[DeighAnn]

29 minutes ago, Paul James said:

I looked up the whole passage and I don't see that it was just him saying it and not God.  But then, I don't think he knew that his instructions were going to be put on an equal basis to Old Testament Scripture.   He was just giving his views to Timothy to encourage him to ensure that the churches under Timothy were being run decently and in order.   It was decided later, probably in the second century that Paul's letters be elevated to Holy Scripture.

 

Ok.  Did that change something?  Let me be clear. I want to say that in a better way but it's not coming to be so please know I am just being honest.  SO,  I don't care what the bible went through to get to the one I have now. How ever God worked it with whomever He worked it to put in or take out or even let the kenites change (knowing the wisdom and the knowledge I received from Him would alert me to them when He wanted me to see them), so that I read and believe it is the PERFECT WORD OF GOD.  God knew exactly what would be in it and when.  Going from that fact, any problem I run into is MINE. 

AND truly, I know almost absolutely nothing about where its been or what it's been through and I don't think I have much less of an understanding of Gods Plan.  BUT I did kinda read through what you wrote and I liked it.  I totally do believe the 'scribes' not of the tribe of Levi were there for that very reason.  So thank you for putting that out.  I appreciate it.  

[Paul James]

21 minutes ago, DeighAnn said:

Ok.  Did that change something?  Let me be clear. I want to say that in a better way but it's not coming to be so please know I am just being honest.  SO,  I don't care what the bible went through to get to the one I have now. How ever God worked it with whomever He worked it to put in or take out or even let the kenites change (knowing the wisdom and the knowledge I received from Him would alert me to them when He wanted me to see them), so that I read and believe it is the PERFECT WORD OF GOD.  God knew exactly what would be in it and when.  Going from that fact, any problem I run into is MINE. 

AND truly, I know almost absolutely nothing about where its been or what it's been through and I don't think I have much less of an understanding of Gods Plan.  BUT I did kinda read through what you wrote and I liked it.  I totally do believe the 'scribes' not of the tribe of Levi were there for that very reason.  So thank you for putting that out.  I appreciate it.  

Did you catch up with the link to the M.A. thesis about order in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35?   If not I can put it back in.  It is about 160 pages so it is a good read and gives lots of food for thought.   The author did remark about the Timothy reference but I forgot what he said.   I think he implied that it was an insertion into the text of a later manuscript and may not have appeared in the original instructions that Paul gave Timothy.   Of course, that can't be proved because we no longer have access to the originals for comparison.   

Maybe if the originals were preserved to this day, they may have been idolised as holy icons, something which the Lord would not have approved.  Therefore it is my view that He allowed the originals to perish or be lost for that reason.

Here is the link:

http://www.personal-communication.org.nz/Bringing_Order_to_1_Cor_14_34_35 (1).pdf

 

 

Edited February 6, 2021 by Paul James

[Willa]

1 hour ago, Paul James said:

read that John Lake became disillusioned with the doctors of his time after studying toward a medical degree.   I think that disillusionment coloured his teaching about seeking medical assistance.   

You might check out wikipedia's article:  John G. Lake.  Granted, it is written by an unbeliever.  The following is just a partial clip.

Lake was born in St. Marys, Ontario, Canada and moved to Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan with his family in 1886.^[4] He was born into a large family of 16 siblings (eight of whom died young).^[5] He graduated from high school in St Mary's shortly before the move to Michigan, and claimed to have been ordained into the Methodist ministry at the age of twenty-one.^[4] However, his seminary attendance has never been confirmed ^[6]:53 and census records cannot confirm even ten years' education.^[7] Lake, then, may have had no formal theological training.

Lake moved to a suburb of Chicago, Harvey, in 1890, where he worked as a roofer and construction worker before returning to his hometown in 1896. According to Lake, he became an industrious businessman and started two newspapers, the Harvey Citizen in Harvey, Illinois and the Soo Times in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan,^[4] before beginning a successful career in real estate, and later, becoming a millionaire in life insurance dealings. Historian Barry Morton found no evidence that Lake ever owned the two newspapers, citing sources which indicate the Harvey Citizen was founded by the Harvey township,^[8] and the Soo Times was started by George A. Ferris and owned by Ferris & Scott Publishers.^{[1]:103[9]:394[10]} Morton further alleges that Lake exaggerated his business career, and that "clear evidence" shows Lake instead worked as a small-scale contractor, roofer and "house-flipper".^[1]:103 In the 1900 Census, Lake's occupation is listed as "carpenter".^[7] In February 1893, Lake married Jennie Stevens of Newberry, Michigan, and the two had six children and adopted another before her death in 1908. During the 1890s Lake and many members of his family began appearing regularly in Dowie's services, where they were invariably healed and allegedly brought back from death's door. In 1898 Lake opened a small chapter of Dowie's Christian Catholic Church in Sault Ste Marie and held meetings in the attic of his parents' home. In 1901 he relocated his family to Zion, Illinois, where he worked in the theocratic town's construction department.

After massive retrenchments affected ever-bankrupt Zion City,^[11] Lake found new employment around 1905. He later claimed that he maintained relationships with many of the leading figures of his day including railroad tycoon James Jerome Hill, Cecil Rhodes, Mahatma Gandhi, Arthur Conan Doyle, and others.^[12][13] When he began his preaching career he claimed to have walked away from a $50,000 year salary (around $1.25 million in 2007 US dollars^[14]), as well as his seat on the Chicago Board of Trade. Lake's biographer, Burpeau, reported no evidence outside of Lake's own assertions that Lake was connected to these wealthy financiers and industrialists.^[6] According to Morton, contemporary records show Lake never left Zion City at the time Lake was said to be making his name in Chicago; he instead worked in nearby Waukegan as an "ordinary, small-town insurance salesman". Lake does not appear in contemporary newspapers until 1907 where he gave an account of his experience of speaking in tongues.^[1

[Waggles]

Matthew 4:4  But he answered, “It is written, “‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

So are the scriptures we read as The New Testament the word of God or not? 

Are they trustworthy and reliable?

It would seem according to Paul James no, they are not as our NT is fraught with additions by unknown church scribes and false doctrines. 

So then what is true in scripture?

[Frits]

2 hours ago, Paul James said:

Maybe if the originals were preserved to this day, they may have been idolised as holy icons, something which the Lord would not have approved.  Therefore it is my view that He allowed the originals to perish or be lost for that reason.

Due to the omission of punctuation marks ('....'), it is not immediately clear that v34 is an insertion into the text of Jewish orgin!  When we put it back it says this:

'Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.'

It comes from the Talmud!
Paul in his answer had to demolish this stronghold made by Jewish figures, to protect the church members!
Paul learned fully equality between man and woman.

[Paul James]

29 minutes ago, Frits said:

Due to the omission of punctuation marks ('....'), it is not immediately clear that v34 is an insertion into the text of Jewish orgin!  When we put it back it says this:

'Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.'

It comes from the Talmud!
Paul in his answer had to demolish this stronghold made by Jewish figures, to protect the church members!
Paul learned fully equality between man and woman.

This thesis gives an excellent analysis of the reference:

http://www.personal-communication.org.nz/AUA_THESIS_PAPER.pdf

 

[Justin Adams]

39 minutes ago, Frits said:

It comes from the Talmud!

The Talmud is unreliable. There is also not a single actual law forbidding women thus. Paul/Saul would have known this, so that is why scribal 'error' is suggested. Additionally, you must know that there was no single Judaic 'religion' in that era. There were several sect variations and each had their own texts.

If you follow peer review scholarship, you will see that ancient text scholars like Dr. Heiser can tell when text has been 'modified'. Mostly this is for clarity and fixing mistakes. However, the NT was really a time of upheaval and tremendous change, so it is not surprising that (like the KJV transcribers) there are a number of 'interesting' and didactic variations and even omissions.