RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Church



Message

oopsmartin -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/20/2005 11:26:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ginosko

Cynthia,

Not in this particular thread, but someone, in a different thread, pretty much said, “women are to be silent in the church, period.”

Don't count me as part of that group, please. We still need a choir![:D]


LOL who is "we" anyway, the men? After all if women are truly absolutely silent in the assemblies (I've been in those churches), then it's all about the men. Women are just observing the gatherings of us men "doing church".



oopsmartin -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/20/2005 11:33:48 PM)

I have a challenge for you who believe women cannot teach in the assemblies. Eliminate the 1 Timothy 2:11-15 passages. And then how will you "prove" that women cannot teach in the church meetings and assume no ministries of authority.



Ginosko -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/20/2005 11:38:23 PM)

Martin and any other interested,

I had stated previously, "Christ's submission to the Father is the divine model for us to understand the realation between the Father and The Son"

Martin objected to this assertion, saying, "Actually no. Christ’s submission to the Father is to show us the degree of sacrifice that Christ gave for the purpose of our salvation."

I would humbly suggest that for all who doubt the truth of my assertion to examine the Gospel of John very carefully. The broader context of this gospel shows the dependence of the Son upon the Father- the very same Son who is co-existent and equal to the Father. Do we not see the Jesus pictured there as one who utterly trusts, depends, obeys and loves the Father? Of course! Jesus depends on the Father for His power (Jn 5:19). Jesus depends on the Father for His knowledge (Jn 8:16). Jesus depends on the Father for His message (Jn 7:16), for His authority (Jn 17:2), for His love (Jn 10:17) and for His union and communion with the Father (Jn 8:29). Jesus was sent by the Father. This certainly communicates submission as well as does the very word SON. Jesus carried out His mission which was given to him by the Father. In all of this there is a model for we who are Christ's followers. Jesus voluntarily, joyfully, wnd willingly submitted to His Father. That is the model by which the man is expected to submit to Jesus and the model by which the women is expected to submit to the man- all to the glory of the Father.



cynthia -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/20/2005 11:57:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ginosko

Hey Cynthia,

I know this is off topic and I recognize you are in charge[;)] and you can slap my hand for it, but what is this "score" thingy on the left side of each post?

I am happy to say that I am not in charge. [:D] Fritz is watching our every move. [sm=icon_smile_super.gif]



kg77 -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/20/2005 11:57:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: oopsmartin

I have a challenge for you who believe women cannot teach in the assemblies. Eliminate the 1 Timothy 2:11-15 passages. And then how will you "prove" that women cannot teach in the church meetings and assume no ministries of authority.


I am not convinced on this issue one way or the other... but isn’t there more than one passage that basically says the same thing as in 1 Timothy?

For example:

1 Corinthians 14:34 - 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.

I could be wrong, but I thought there were maybe a couple more passages that are similar.



joint heir -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/20/2005 11:58:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ginosko

Martin and any other interested,

I had stated previously, "Christ's submission to the Father is the divine model for us to understand the realation between the Father and The Son"

Martin objected to this assertion, saying, "Actually no. Christ’s submission to the Father is to show us the degree of sacrifice that Christ gave for the purpose of our salvation."

I would humbly suggest that for all who doubt the truth of my assertion to examine the Gospel of John very carefully. The broader context of this gospel shows the dependence of the Son upon the Father- the very same Son who is co-existent and equal to the Father. Do we not see the Jesus pictured there as one who utterly trusts, depends, obeys and loves the Father? Of course! Jesus depends on the Father for His power (Jn 5:19). Jesus depends on the Father for His knowledge (Jn 8:16). Jesus depends on the Father for His message (Jn 7:16), for His authority (Jn 17:2), for His love (Jn 10:17) and for His union and communion with the Father (Jn 8:29). Jesus was sent by the Father. This certainly communicates submission as well as does the very word SON. Jesus carried out His mission which was given to him by the Father. In all of this there is a model for we who are Christ's followers. Jesus voluntarily, joyfully, wnd willingly submitted to His Father. That is the model by which the man is expected to submit to Jesus and the model by which the women is expected to submit to the man- all to the glory of the Father.



What are you specifically trying to say...

That women should submit to all men?

That Christ is eternally submitted to God the Father?

That men do not have to submit to humans ...just to Christ?

That women should submit to men instead of Christ?

could you clarify?



Ginosko -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 12:04:42 AM)

Martin,

According to the Scriptures, Paul bases his prohibition of a woman teaching or having authority over a man upon the order of creation. It all goes back to the garden of Eden. God made Adam first. Woman was made for the man. Man was not made for the woman. God made the woman the helpmate of the man. The woman was made from the man, that is the very first woman was made from the first man. The woman was brought to the man. God did not present Adam to Eve but rather God made Eve a present to Adam. Eve was named by the man. Now before you all get yer jammies in a bunch these thought s were paraphrased from an explanation provided by a woman- Elizabeth Elliot. So the question is, what is the significance of Adam naming Eve? In the Old Testament whenever someone named something it meant that the responsibility and authority of the one naming for the one named. Man's naming of the woman demonstrates his resposibility and authority. So one need not limit his investigation to I tim 2:11-15 to see the role of man's headship of the woman or the responsibility for leaadership in the church. It is all over the Scriptures. I Cor 11:3, for example, teaches that the male is the head of the woman. There's a great deal of theology that stems from this teaching.



Ginosko -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 12:10:24 AM)

Joint heir,

I'd be pleased to attempt to clarify. Women should be submissive to their husbands- not to all men. Yes, the Bible teaches that the Son is eternally submissive to the Father. And, yes, all men are to submit to the authority and headship of Christ.



Ezra -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 12:23:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: oopsmartin

I have a challenge for you who believe women cannot teach in the assemblies. Eliminate the 1 Timothy 2:11-15 passages. And then how will you "prove" that women cannot teach in the church meetings and assume no ministries of authority.


Martin:

That's hardly a challenge. The real challenge is, if it were to be proven that this is so from other Scriptures, would you and your fellow-contentious Christians obey the Word? So here are just a few Scriptures independent of the one quoted by you above:

1. ELDERS ARE TO TAKE OVERSIGHT OVER THE ASSEMBLY
"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls... Remember them which have the rule over you, WHO HAVE SPOKEN UNTO YOU THE WORD OF GOD, whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation [manner of life]" (Heb. 13:17,7).

Here Paul clearly links the preaching and teaching of the Word of God with those who have "the rule" or oversight of the assembly. This is authority in the assembly, and women are forbidden to usurp authority or take authority unlawfully.

2. ELDERS "FEED" THE FLOCK OF GOD (THE ASSEMBLY)
"The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ... FEED THE FLOCK OF GOD which is among you, TAKING THE OVERSIGHT THEREOF..." (1 Pet.5:1,2).

Here again Peter clearly links the preaching and teaching of God's Word to those who are "to take the oversight" of the assembly. As Christ commanded Peter to feed His lambs an His sheep, so now Peter, "also an elder" exhorts his fellow elders. Feeding includes preaching, teaching, warning, and encouraging/exhorting, as well as rebuke and reproof.

3. ELDERS ARE SPECIFICALLY MATURE GIFTED MALES CAPABLE OF TAKING OVERSIGHT

"If A MAN [note well, not "If a man or woman"] desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work... A bishop [episkopos = one who takes oversight] must be blameless, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE... APT TO TEACH.... ONE THAT RULETH WELL HIS OWN HOUSE..." (1 Tim.3:1-7)

Note carefully that Paul addresses the men here and shows why only the man would qualify to be an elder. Since women are to be in subjection to their own husbands, it follows that ruling the house is ruled out for women, therefore ruling the assembly is impossible, since the first is the condition for the second.

By connecting the three points noted above, there can be absolutely no doubt that God has ruled out the ministry of pastor/elder/bishop for women. In fact the ministry of deacon is also ruled out, since the only difference between the elder and the deacon is the gift of teaching or feeding the flock (public ministry of the Word).

There are just two offices in the local assembly -- elder and deacon -- and both are clearly given to men (see Acts 6:1-7).



oopsmartin -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 2:44:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kg77

quote:

ORIGINAL: oopsmartin

I have a challenge for you who believe women cannot teach in the assemblies. Eliminate the 1 Timothy 2:11-15 passages. And then how will you "prove" that women cannot teach in the church meetings and assume no ministries of authority.


I am not convinced on this issue one way or the other... but isn’t there more than one passage that basically says the same thing as in 1 Timothy?

For example:

1 Corinthians 14:34 - 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.

I could be wrong, but I thought there were maybe a couple more passages that are similar.


1 Cor. 14 is about disturbing the meeting with questions. Nothing to do with speaking as in preaching, teaching, etc.



oopsmartin -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 3:00:16 AM)

quote:

you and your fellow-contentious Christians


tsk tsk. Unnecessary!


Heb. 13:17, 7 has nothing to do with who can be an elder or who can teach, preach, etc. Your thinking it does is because you are bouncing off of your interpretation of 1 tim.2

1 Pet. 5:1-2 has nothing to do with who can “feed the flock”. Again you are bouncing off your presumption of 1 Tim.2

Your point 3 is the only one you can try to use. However, if it did mean what you think (and it doesn’t) , that still does not say that women cannot preach, teach, or exercise authority in the church. Elder is only one ministry among many. And elders are not the only ministries that involve teaching, preaching and exercising authority. Apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, (even deacons), those with gifts of healing, miracles and administrations teach and preach and exercise authority in the church.

quote:

There are just two offices in the local assembly -- elder and deacon -- and both are clearly given to men (see Acts 6:1-7).


No there are not just two offices. And even though you may believe that there were never women deacons, history tells otherwise. Plus, there is Phoebe in Scripture. You will note that Acts simply records the choosing of the first deacons, it doesn not give any presumption that future deacons will only be males.



groovymovieman -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 6:45:03 AM)

Women's role in the church?
To let Jesus live in them and through them. For Jesus to be manifest through their individual personalities and giftings. Basically, no different than the role of a man in the church. Do women carry a different Jesus then men do? If not, what's even the issue?
Niether Jew nor Greek, male nor female in Christ, remember?



bygraceiamsaved -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 7:31:48 AM)

quote:

Eliminate the 1 Timothy 2:11-15 passages. And then how will you "prove" that women cannot teach in the church meetings and assume no ministries of authority.


MMMMM this says a lot. The fact is Martin that it is in scripture. We are not to take away, but I guess we can't force anyone not to ignore......



bygraceiamsaved -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 7:34:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cynthia

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ginosko

Hey Cynthia,

I know this is off topic and I recognize you are in charge[;)] and you can slap my hand for it, but what is this "score" thingy on the left side of each post?

I am happy to say that I am not in charge. [:D] Fritz is watching our every move. [sm=icon_smile_super.gif]


LOL Cynthia, now you don't have to keep changing your moderator/poster hat.



JoToP -> Response to Oopsmartin's "challenge" (4/21/2005 9:00:20 AM)

quote:

I have a challenge for you who believe women cannot teach in the assemblies. Eliminate the 1 Timothy 2:11-15 passages. And then how will you "prove" that women cannot teach in the church meetings and assume no ministries of authority.



I get this picture of some ante-diluvian Oopsmartin arguing with Noah. Noah has been preaching that God is going to destroy the world because of its corruption. The ante-diluvian heckler says, “The only Scripture you’ve got to prove that nonsense is Genesis 6:13 and that is in oral tradition form, so your argument falls flat. God is not angry and will not destroy the whole world. Take away Genesis 6:13 and you don’t have a case and you’re wasting your time building that boat thingy.

Problem is, Oops, it doesn’t matter if God says it once or a million times, God’s Word is binding upon us.

But the truth is, if we don’t have 1 Timothy 2:11-15, women are still to remian silent in the church and are not to exercise authority over men. Not only do we have corroborating Scripture, but we have that Scripture rooted in the Law. It is an inextricable doctrine of Scripture.

Ginosko,

Your answer to Oopsmartin on the submission of Christ was perfectly on target and Oopsmartin’s response was weak and impositional as usual. The submission of Christ to the Father is explicit doctrine, Oops:

Here’ just one example:

John 4:34 (ESV)
Jesus said to them, "My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to accomplish his work.


But, then, if we didn’t have that passage for this doctrine we could use this one:

John 5:19 (ESV)
So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.


And if we didn’t have that one we could use this one:

John 5:30 (ESV)
"I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.


And if we didn’t have that one we could use this one:

John 12:49-50 (ESV)
For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak. [50] And I know that his commandment is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has told me."


Etc., etc., etc.



bygraceiamsaved -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 9:21:33 AM)

quote:

Heb. 13:17, 7 has nothing to do with who can be an elder or who can teach, preach, etc. Your thinking it does is because you are bouncing off of your interpretation of 1 tim.2


Heb 13:7 Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith.
Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
Heb 13:9 Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them.

Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.
Heb 13:18 Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear conscience, desiring to act honorably in all things.
Heb 13:19 I urge you the more earnestly to do this in order that I may be restored to you the sooner.

Pe 5:1 So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed:
1Pe 5:2 shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly;
1Pe 5:3 not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock.
1Pe 5:4 And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.
1Pe 5:5 Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble."
1Pe 5:6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you,

Matches 1 Timothy 2 and 3.

1 Timothy 2 is speaking of instructions on worship while chapter 3 is speaking of overseers and deacons.

Martin: Do you have scripture that specifically speaks to women in places of authority in the church? So far I have seen none from anyone including you in the other camp.



bygraceiamsaved -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 9:37:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joint heir

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ginosko

Martin and any other interested,

I had stated previously, "Christ's submission to the Father is the divine model for us to understand the realation between the Father and The Son"

Martin objected to this assertion, saying, "Actually no. Christ’s submission to the Father is to show us the degree of sacrifice that Christ gave for the purpose of our salvation."

I would humbly suggest that for all who doubt the truth of my assertion to examine the Gospel of John very carefully. The broader context of this gospel shows the dependence of the Son upon the Father- the very same Son who is co-existent and equal to the Father. Do we not see the Jesus pictured there as one who utterly trusts, depends, obeys and loves the Father? Of course! Jesus depends on the Father for His power (Jn 5:19). Jesus depends on the Father for His knowledge (Jn 8:16). Jesus depends on the Father for His message (Jn 7:16), for His authority (Jn 17:2), for His love (Jn 10:17) and for His union and communion with the Father (Jn 8:29). Jesus was sent by the Father. This certainly communicates submission as well as does the very word SON. Jesus carried out His mission which was given to him by the Father. In all of this there is a model for we who are Christ's followers. Jesus voluntarily, joyfully, wnd willingly submitted to His Father. That is the model by which the man is expected to submit to Jesus and the model by which the women is expected to submit to the man- all to the glory of the Father.



What are you specifically trying to say...

That women should submit to all men?

That Christ is eternally submitted to God the Father?

That men do not have to submit to humans ...just to Christ?

That women should submit to men instead of Christ?

could you clarify?


I thought this was clear. When we submit to the leadership of our church leaders and our husbands we are submitting to Christ.

"Wives submit unto you husbands as unto the Lord."

Jesus said in his prayer to let the cup pass from him "Not my will but thine be done."

1Th 5:12 We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you,
1Th 5:13 and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves.



i_believe -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 9:59:49 AM)

quote:

I had stated previously, "Christ's submission to the Father is the divine model for us to understand the realation between the Father and The Son" ...


Amen Ginosko!

It is NOT about what one could or could not do based on their knowledge or gifts. It is about about submitting to those in authority over you as God has commanded in scripture. Moses was not the greatest choice to lead if you looked at his lack of confidence and fear but God called him for His glory not our understanding.

God does not choose those who we think are best qualified for His work. He has given us the outline of how to be the church and how to behave in the assembly. It is not about better it is about obedience. Different roles does not imply inferior.

1Co 1:25-29 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. (26) For you see your calling, brothers, that not many are wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, and not many noble; (27) but God chose the foolish things of the world that he might put to shame those who are wise. God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put to shame the things that are strong; (28) and God chose the lowly things of the world, and the things that are despised, and the things that are not, that he might bring to nothing the things that are: (29) that no flesh should boast before God.



JoToP -> Moving on... (4/21/2005 10:08:04 AM)

Submission is simply a relinquishing of one's will for that of another. It has no impact on intrinsic value whatsoever as BygraceIamsaved's quote of Christ's pronouncement of the Father's will being done instead of his own illustrates.

I think the egalitarian case that authority/submission impacts equality has been buried 6 feet under. Now we can move on to other things, like maybe what exactly does Paul mean in 1 Timothy 2? The Oops Side has held on assiduously to the view that it is a particular case. But the epistle is general and pastoral in nature with no particular church in mind. How then does one extract a particular case from the passage? The very chapter is universal in nature, 1 Tim. 2:1-4 (ESV)
First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, [2] for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. [3] This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, [4] who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

And leading directly into the verses in question:

1 Tim. 2:8 (ESV)
I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling;


The very setting of the chapter is in perfect agreement with the nature of the letter, general, pastoral and catholic.



Fritzpw_Admin -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 10:34:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ezra

The real challenge is, if it were to be proven that this is so from other Scriptures, would you and your fellow-contentious Christians obey the Word?

Ezra,

That was unnecessary. If you wish to continue to engage in this topic you'll need to stop that.

Please do not respond to my warning within the Community.

Please email community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.

Please do not send me PMs regarding this warning.



bygraceiamsaved -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 11:20:38 AM)

Everything that Jesus taught and did blew away everything used by both men and women to belittle each other. But where does Jesus ever say or do anything that tears down or criticizes the order of creation in which men bear a primary responsibility to lead, protect and sustain? I see nowhere in scripture where Christ did this. I see nowhere where Jesus opposed the loving headship of husbands or the limitation of the office of eldership to Godly men. Jesus must have favored eldership of only men in the church. He never spoke against it and again chose 12 men for his apostles.

Jesus always spoke clearly against the very things that needed to be changed, yet I find nowhere where he chastises nor changes this.

Jesus did purge leadership of pride and exalting of oneself and that he honored women greatly as persons worthy of the highest respect of God, but he did not change what Paul is speaking of in the several passages we have looked at.

Of course women should not be excluded from ministry. There are many ministries open to men and women, the issue is whether any of the women serving with Paul fulfilled roles that would be inconsistent with a limitation of the ledership to men. From what I read in scripture, no they did not.

Paul said that Euodia and Syntyche "contended at my side in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers"(Phil. 4:2-3) There is honor given for their ministry but no grounds for saying that the nature of their ministry went against the limitations that are in 1 Timothy 2:12.

If that were the case and it could be said that they did in fact go against 1 Timothy 2:12 then Paul would have siad that the "deacons" mentioned in Phil. 1:1 with the "overseers" were fellow workers while he was there. But he doesn't.



bygraceiamsaved -> RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread (4/21/2005 11:24:58 AM)

Phoebe is praised as a "servant or "deacon" as has been already mentioned " who has been a great help" to many people, including me"(Romans 6:102) Help does not mean leader. It's hard to imagine that Paul would mean that by that Phoebe became his leader. First of all if Paul would have changed his mind concerning what he had written or was going to write in 1 Timothy, Thess. and a number of other passages, he would have said so as it would have been pretty significant and he would not ever go opposite of what he had told the churches in these same passages.



joint heir -> RE: Moving on... (4/21/2005 11:27:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JoToP

Submission is simply a relinquishing of one's will for that of another. It has no impact on intrinsic value whatsoever as BygraceIamsaved's quote of Christ's pronouncement of the Father's will being done instead of his own illustrates.

I think the egalitarian case that authority/submission impacts equality has been buried 6 feet under.


If anyone was arguing that having to submit to authority makes one unequal...then you have a point, but not one person has ever argued that there are none in authority and that people should not submit because it somehow impacts equality. It is pretty easy to win an argument in which no one is offering any disagreement...

The discussion is not about whether or not authority/submission exist or is proper...but instead what is that nature of that authority and who is given that authority and is there a group of people never allowed to have certain types of authority...

there has been sufficient scriptural evidence offered that puts the case of an existing class of people forbidden from certain levels of authority in serious doubt....which is why Martin offered the challenge ( not to ignore a part of scripture...but instead to set aside the common understanding of 1 Timothy to determine if it is actually this verse that is being misrepresented ...and by removing this error seeing if the whole house of card doctrine would fall

I would think that the question that I posed in the 1st page of this thread...asking people to define authority is still appropriate to the conversation....What is this authority we are talking about?

and since most agreed on page 1 that women will prophesy and did prophesy ...How is it possible that they can do this without authority?...How exactly does one speak the words of God and revelation from God without authority? and then what does this mean concerning the common understanding of 1 Timothy?

I think that this is the direction that the conversation needs to go....



bygraceiamsaved -> RE: Moving on... (4/21/2005 11:37:13 AM)

quote:

there has been sufficient scriptural evidence offered that puts the case of an existing class of people forbidden from certain levels of authority in serious doubt....which is why Martin offered the challenge ( not to ignore a part of scripture...but instead to set aside the common understanding of 1 Timothy to determine if it is actually this verse that is being misrepresented ...and by removing this error seeing if the whole house of card doctrine would fall


The proper solution however is not to "set it aside" but to fit other scripture that has been given with it so that both scriptures fit neatly. The Bible and that includes 1 Timothy never contradicts itself. Ever and setting something aside is not the Biblical way to interpret.



joint heir -> RE: Moving on... (4/21/2005 11:48:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bygraceiamsaved

quote:

there has been sufficient scriptural evidence offered that puts the case of an existing class of people forbidden from certain levels of authority in serious doubt....which is why Martin offered the challenge ( not to ignore a part of scripture...but instead to set aside the common understanding of 1 Timothy to determine if it is actually this verse that is being misrepresented ...and by removing this error seeing if the whole house of card doctrine would fall


The proper solution however is not to "set it aside" but to fit other scripture that has been given with it so that both scriptures fit neatly. The Bible and that includes 1 Timothy never contradicts itself. Ever and setting something aside is not the Biblical way to interpret.


setting aside a verse and setting aside an interpretation to test its validity are two separate things

....the first being wrong the second being often neccessary and constructive....it keep us from taking one verse and creating a doctrine of error around it...



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI