1 Timothy 2:15

[matthew4:4]

One more thing I just found. Please read this and tell me what you think when you have the time. I understand your busy so dont worry about it. Women as pastors?

P.S.- Feel free to send me any websites or other sources

Edited July 11, 2007 by matthew4:4

[firehill]

matthew 4:4, can I ask you a question?

Why does Paul use the plural 'women' in v.10 but then singular 'a woman' in v.11? Why did he change from plural to singular? Was not the grammar of the bible inspired too?

[matthew4:4]

matthew 4:4, can I ask you a question?

Why does Paul use the plural 'women' in v.10 but then singular 'a woman' in v.11? Why did he change from plural to singular? Was not the grammar of the bible inspired too?

Take a look at verse 1 of chapter 3. "This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work." Now, I ask you is this talking about a particular man, a group of men, or all men? It's not a grammatical error. It's just a form of speaking he uses. Look imagine I am the president of a children's funding organization and I am giving a speech and during a part of the speech I say something like: We know that many children of this country are starving. Therefore I say to you, I will not allow a child to go hungry. In my new plan...etc. No grammatical error in that. I think thats fairly easily resolved and not one of the issues here. Also take a look at that link for some good points on the subject and let me say one thing to all since this is a very controversial topic lets view it like the site says, lets not make this man vs woman like many do in this debate. Like I've stated in my previous posts I believe woman can do just as much as men can but this is not the issue here. It's spiritual authority and what the Bible has to say about. God bless

P.S.- Oh, lol, and yes its all inspired, it is absolutly perfect!

Edited July 12, 2007 by matthew4:4

[firehill]

Take a look at verse 1 of chapter 3. "This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work." Now, I ask you is this talking about a particular man, a group of men, or all men? It's not a grammatical error. It's just a form of speaking he uses.

The Greek word that is used and translated 'a man' in the version of the bible that you are quoting from is a generic term for 'anyone' which is inspired. Therefore the original inspired word means 'anyone', not 'a man'. Paul didn't make a mistake when he said, 'If ANYONE' desires' through inspiration of the spirit.

Look imagine I am the president of a children's funding organization and I am giving a speech and during a part of the speech I say something like: We know that many children of this country are starving. Therefore I say to you, I will not allow a child to go hungry.

The problem with the analogy you give is that Paul, in v.11 is NOT speaking about the same subject that he is in v.10. In verse 10 he's instructing women on their attire. In vv.11-15 is he speaking to the issue of their attire? Yes, Paul's instructions of the two different subjects that he is talking about in both verse are inspired.

[OopsMartin]

One more thing I just found. Please read this and tell me what you think when you have the time. I understand your busy so dont worry about it. Women as pastors?

P.S.- Feel free to send me any websites or other sources

Not a particularly enlightening or well studied response in Got Questions!

[OopsMartin]

P.S.- I had an idea about the Priscilla thing. It may not have neccesarily been correct for her to teach Apollos but due to the circumstances and time it was probably not really paid much attention to. Also, it hadnt been taught yet that women shouldnt teach men so maybe they hadnt really known. Obviously there were many things in the old testament that were ok until corrected in the new testament so this could be something of the same manner. Plus this is the only example we can pull were a woman was teaching a man. Just a thought. LOL.

Do you think that any of the things that were OK in the OT were things instigated by God? IOW do you think that God would cause, inspire, encourage His people in the OT to do something that in the NT has now been declared as sin?

[matthew4:4]

Take a look at verse 1 of chapter 3. "This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work." Now, I ask you is this talking about a particular man, a group of men, or all men? It's not a grammatical error. It's just a form of speaking he uses.

The Greek word that is used and translated 'a man' in the version of the bible that you are quoting from is a generic term for 'anyone' which is inspired. Therefore the original inspired word means 'anyone', not 'a man'. Paul didn't make a mistake when he said, 'If ANYONE' desires' through inspiration of the spirit.

Look imagine I am the president of a children's funding organization and I am giving a speech and during a part of the speech I say something like: We know that many children of this country are starving. Therefore I say to you, I will not allow a child to go hungry.

The problem with the analogy you give is that Paul, in v.11 is NOT speaking about the same subject that he is in v.10. In verse 10 he's instructing women on their attire. In vv.11-15 is he speaking to the issue of their attire? Yes, Paul's instructions of the two different subjects that he is talking about in both verse are inspired.

ok, I understand your first point. If it is generic and means everyone then you're right. Nothing to say there but as far as your second point, it doesnt matter that Paul is not speaking about the same subject. He is going through a list of different things for men and women and there is nowhere there where he puts a change into the writing in order to siginify that he is going to switch to writing about a different group of subjects. You are trying so hard to make those two words into something that its not. You understand that its much harder to believe in it through that type of perspective than the way I'm looking at it. You have to stretch it to be able to make it seem that way. I don't have to stretch or play with any of it. It speaks for itself. God bless. Your brother in Christ, matthew

[matthew4:4]

P.S.- I had an idea about the Priscilla thing. It may not have neccesarily been correct for her to teach Apollos but due to the circumstances and time it was probably not really paid much attention to. Also, it hadnt been taught yet that women shouldnt teach men so maybe they hadnt really known. Obviously there were many things in the old testament that were ok until corrected in the new testament so this could be something of the same manner. Plus this is the only example we can pull were a woman was teaching a man. Just a thought. LOL.

Do you think that any of the things that were OK in the OT were things instigated by God? IOW do you think that God would cause, inspire, encourage His people in the OT to do something that in the NT has now been declared as sin?

Listen, I've look over Gotquestions.org and read a few different questions and answers they have and I don't know how you could make that type of statement. It is a good site that has tons of answers to tons of questions. Read a few of them and you will see that they are very logical answers and always contain atleast two or three if not more verses to back up what they are saying. Atleast read a bit more on the site before judging it so fast and please show where you seem to find error.

You want an example of something allowed in the old t which was later changed. How about divorce? It was allowed during that time that people could divorce their wives provided the gave a certificate. Later on Jesus sets the rule in place that a man can only separate from a woman through the death of that woman or if she commits adultery. Another important thing to look at with the story of Priscilla teaching is that it was her and her husband teaching. She did not teach a man alone. Read what the website said for more info and again please tell me what is wrong with what they had wrote in response to that particular question. Your brother in Christ, matthew

[firehill]

ok, I understand your first point. If it is generic and means everyone then you're right. Nothing to say there but as far as your second point, it doesnt matter that Paul is not speaking about the same subject. He is going through a list of different things for men and women

Where it matters thus far in our conversation is here, at Paul's grammar usage. He said, 'a woman' not 'women.'

and there is nowhere there where he puts a change into the writing in order to siginify that he is going to switch to writing about a different group of subjects. You are trying so hard to make those two words into something that its not. You understand that its much harder to believe in it through that type of perspective than the way I'm looking at it. You have to stretch it to be able to make it seem that way. I don't have to stretch or play with any of it. It speaks for itself. God bless. Your brother in Christ, matthew

I don't understand your Point. Could you please explain it again. In vv.11-15 Paul is stopping 'a woman' from false teaching. In chp 3, Paul is talking about bishops and deacons. So there is a Subject change.

[OopsMartin]

Listen, I've look over Gotquestions.org and read a few different questions and answers they have and I don't know how you could make that type of statement. It is a good site that has tons of answers to tons of questions. Read a few of them and you will see that they are very logical answers and always contain atleast two or three if not more verses to back up what they are saying. Atleast read a bit more on the site before judging it so fast and please show where you seem to find error.

You misunderstood me. I wasn't making that comment regarding the whole site, only about the particular article you mentioned. I agree that in general they are a good site. That article is simply not impressive.

You want an example of something allowed in the old t which was later changed. How about divorce? It was allowed during that time that people could divorce their wives provided the gave a certificate.

Doesn't fit. Divorce was never a good thing that God encouraged. Christ just tightened up the restrictions. You need to show Scripture in the OT where women were outlined restrictions on teaching and leading men.

Another important thing to look at with the story of Priscilla teaching is that it was her and her husband teaching. She did not teach a man alone.

You are adding to Pauls words. He didn't say that he didn't now permit a woman to teach or exercise authority