Why Can't Men Believe what the Scriptures Say?

[Floatingaxe]

It's only one person's view.

[Kabowd]

It's only one person's view.

Yeah, God's.

[apothanein kerdos]

Greek-English Lexicon, H.G. Liddell and Robert Scott. Revised by Henry Stuart Jones, 1968.

Kephale

11. 1 of things, extremity

a. In botany

b. In anatomy

c. Generally, top, brim of vessel ... capital of a column

d. In plural, source of a river, Herodotus 4.91 (but singular, mouth); generally, source, origin, orphic fragments 21a; starting point (examples: the head of time; the head of a month).2

Thank you for posting that, because it shows how you don't know how Greek functions. kephal only works as a source of something when used in plural form. In Ephesians 5, it's singular (kephale). This leaves it with the possible interpretations:

1) A master (authority)

2) Chief (authority)

3) Cornerstone (authority)

You just shot yourself in the foot firehill.

Really?

It is based on thousands of Greek writings roughly between 100BC to about AD 600 and notice it doesn't at all include any of the 'authority', 'final authority', 'rank' 'superior rank', 'leader' meanings.

Because Lidell and Scott rely on Classical Greek and not specifically Koine Greek. Get a Koine lexicon, such as Thayer's. Or, you could take a Greek class. This was in my vocab early on in learning Koine Greek - it always meant a master or a chief. Are you going to suggest that I learned Greek incorrectly because a primarily Classical dictionary didn't have that definition?

Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that kephal only means source in the plural form in both Classical and Koine Greek. In Koine, however, it means an authority in every instance.

I would say that Apothenien Kerdos pretty much torpedoed Firehill's use of kephale.

Well there are other ways to get around the verse other than resorting to a Classical Greek lexicon (that is limited in its use of Koine). I've seen it done, and it can be done in a valid way. In other words, someone can remove kephal from the authority context in this verse and still have a valid interpretation (though not correct in my opinion). No one here, however, has done that.

[Guest shiloh357]

It's only one person's view.

Not hardly. It is the product of understanding how languages work and having some hermeneutic integrity. It is not a "view," it is simply the truth. Some things are true, simply because they are true. So far, you don't possess the skill or knowledge to demonstrate any error in what AK has presented, and absent of that, you don't appear to have much anything substantive to offer to the debate.

[HAZARD]

Correct The Lord is the lord over the household, all mankind. The steward, faithful and wise servant is placed/appointed over the household, with limited authority, always refering to God as the ultimate authority, till Christ's return.

Correct; God is the supreme power and authority, and even women teachers and preachers, and prophets realise this.

What is being totally forgotten and missunderstood in this debate regarding women teachers and preachers chosen by God is this:

Being a teacher or preacher does not give the teacher or preacher any authority over any one be they male, man, or female, woman! be the teacher a man, male or a female, woman! unless they are a Divine being as Jesus Christ Himself is, or as God the Father is.

If the preacher/teacher is female, and also if she is a married woman running a houshold, she will love, respect and obey her husband as he will love and respect her. He will love, guide, protect and praise her name and thank God for her for ever more! She may know much more than her husband in many fields including doctrinal matters, as my wife does knowledge wise over me, but the woman, wife, teacher, and even my more knowlegable than me, wife, will not, and does not userp her husbands, her students authority. Being a human being teacher does not automaticly give the teacher authority over men? If I am wrong, I would like to read the Scriptures where God/Jesus states; "It is written that anyone I send to teach, male or female, will have absolute authority over those being taught, no matter if the student is male or female."

God sends who He will, and many are women, as Scripture shows in another thread on this board, which some men cannot come to grips with. To teach, preach, as is recorded in Scripture, DOES NOT MAKE THEM IN ANY WAY, IN AUTHORITY OVER MEN! God does not say they are in authority does He? GOD, through the apostles say women are not to be in authority, and neither do they want to be. If any woman can enlighten me or any other male, on any doctrinal matter I at least will greatly apreciate it. That does not make the woman teaching me something I do not know my superior, neither does it place her in authority over me, and If she was willing to help me she would not want to help me just so she can be my authority figure? If women can, and many truly can, believe it or not, teach men willing to listen, of the things of God, through the Holy Spirit, what is so wrong with that, especially if God personally has empowered them to do this?

Haz.

[Floatingaxe]

It's only one person's view.

Not hardly. It is the product of understanding how languages work and having some hermeneutic integrity. It is not a "view," it is simply the truth. Some things are true, simply because they are true. So far, you don't possess the skill or knowledge to demonstrate any error in what AK has presented, and absent of that, you don't appear to have much anything substantive to offer to the debate.

You have no authority to speak to me in that way, shiloh. You know nothing of what knowledge or skill I possess. Does tearing down someone increase your ego? Check that with the Lord.

I am allowed, as a member of Worthy to state what I WILL. You have no right to speak to me personally and be judgmental of a sister in Christ.

[Guest shiloh357]

It's only one person's view.

Not hardly. It is the product of understanding how languages work and having some hermeneutic integrity. It is not a "view," it is simply the truth. Some things are true, simply because they are true. So far, you don't possess the skill or knowledge to demonstrate any error in what AK has presented, and absent of that, you don't appear to have much anything substantive to offer to the debate.

You have no authority to speak to me in that way, shiloh. You know nothing of what knowledge or skill I possess. Does tearing down someone increase your ego? Check that with the Lord.

I am allowed, as a member of Worthy to state what I WILL. You have no right to speak to me personally and be judgmental of a sister in Christ.

I am only stating the obvious. Obviously, if you had the skill to refute the information I or AK have already provided to firehill, you would have done so. As I said, absent of any substantive refutation, you really don't have anything offer to the debate. My authority to say that comes from your participation on this thread. If you have other evidence that is inconsistent with the hermeneutic information I or AK have provided, then post it for review.

You may not like attention drawn to your lack of meaningful, substantive offerings in this debate, but I have said nothing that is not based upon observable fact.

[apothanein kerdos]

It's only one person's view.

Not hardly. It is the product of understanding how languages work and having some hermeneutic integrity. It is not a "view," it is simply the truth. Some things are true, simply because they are true. So far, you don't possess the skill or knowledge to demonstrate any error in what AK has presented, and absent of that, you don't appear to have much anything substantive to offer to the debate.

You have no authority to speak to me in that way, shiloh. You know nothing of what knowledge or skill I possess. Does tearing down someone increase your ego? Check that with the Lord.

I am allowed, as a member of Worthy to state what I WILL. You have no right to speak to me personally and be judgmental of a sister in Christ.

I am only stating the obvious. Obviously, if you had the skill to refute the information I or AK have already provided to firehill, you would have done so. As I said, absent of any substantive refutation, you really don't have anything offer to the debate. My authority to say that comes from your participation on this thread. If you have other evidence that is inconsistent with the hermeneutic information I or AK have provided, then post it for review.

You may not like attention drawn to your lack of meaningful, substantive offerings in this debate, but I have said nothing that is not based upon observable fact.

[EricH]

This is the second thead over which we are getting multiple reports. I am closing it for now

[Ovedya]

Correct The Lord is the lord over the household, all mankind. The steward, faithful and wise servant is placed/appointed over the household, with limited authority, always refering to God as the ultimate authority, till Christ's return.

Correct; God is the supreme power and authority, and even women teachers and preachers, and prophets realise this.

What is being totally forgotten and missunderstood in this debate regarding women teachers and preachers chosen by God is this:

Being a teacher or preacher does not give the teacher or preacher any authority over any one be they male, man, or female, woman! be the teacher a man, male or a female, woman! unless they are a Divine being as Jesus Christ Himself is, or as God the Father is.

If the preacher/teacher is female, and also if she is a married woman running a houshold, she will love, respect and obey her husband as he will love and respect her. He will love, guide, protect and praise her name and thank God for her for ever more! She may know much more than her husband in many fields including doctrinal matters, as my wife does knowledge wise over me, but the woman, wife, teacher, and even my more knowlegable than me, wife, will not, and does not userp her husbands, her students authority. Being a human being teacher does not automaticly give the teacher authority over men? If I am wrong, I would like to read the Scriptures where God/Jesus states; "It is written that anyone I send to teach, male or female, will have absolute authority over those being taught, no matter if the student is male or female."

God sends who He will, and many are women, as Scripture shows in another thread on this board, which some men cannot come to grips with. To teach, preach, as is recorded in Scripture, DOES NOT MAKE THEM IN ANY WAY, IN AUTHORITY OVER MEN! God does not say they are in authority does He? GOD, through the apostles say women are not to be in authority, and neither do they want to be. If any woman can enlighten me or any other male, on any doctrinal matter I at least will greatly apreciate it. That does not make the woman teaching me something I do not know my superior, neither does it place her in authority over me, and If she was willing to help me she would not want to help me just so she can be my authority figure? If women can, and many truly can, believe it or not, teach men willing to listen, of the things of God, through the Holy Spirit, what is so wrong with that, especially if God personally has empowered them to do this?

Haz.

That is untrue in the context of the meetings of the church. How many times have you heard the expression, "My pastor says this," or, "My pastor preached this sermon which really taught me this and that"?

The Greek word for "teach" is "Didaskos." It's the root of our English word "didactic," which means "to teach, to deliver instruction." In any culture, in any time, at any place, when a person is given a forum in which to teach others as students, he is doing so as an authority on the subject. Especially in these forums the student gives complete authority to the speaker to deliver to them that knowledge which they lacking.

God does not at any time contradict His Holy Word. The Scriptures are clear that women are not permitted to teach or to have authority over men. If any woman feels that it is her "gift to teach," then she is not wise herself in the Word of God, and I seriously question the validity of her calling.