quote:

ORIGINAL: joint heir

The wedge was driven between the sexes at the Fall....surely as christian men and women who are filled with the Holy Spirit who are diligent students of the word of God we are working to actually remove that wedge ...to walk in the Spirit and not the flesh

Why we as christians are in disagreement one can not say....but what we can say is that we are much closer in our views and united together against the enemy....whose position on this topic is far from any being explained on this thread....

quote:

I think that is why God set up things the way he did, it was not as a result of the fall but was put in place before the fall.

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

quote:

ORIGINAL: bygraceiamsaved

I agree, but then tell us how you reconcile both sets of verses using your defintion of setting aside which Martin said nothing of setting aside interpretation but setting aside the scripture itself. I would also ask how one could interpret 1 Timothy 2 and 3 wrongly, it's pretty clear and to the point.

Several other possible interpretations for 1 Timothy 2 have been written. The most likely interpretation is that Paul was answering a concern of Timothy's regarding a specific situation involving a woman or women who were teaching false doctrine. Paul is instructing Timothy to encourage them to learn. The reference to the creation order may have been because of the nature of the false doctrine being taught.

Another possible interpretation is that Paul is repeating a line from Timothy's initial letter to Paul in verses 2:12-15 which would make those verses the question that Paul is responding to in chapter 3. Paul opens the answer by stating "Here's a trustworthy saying", which would be opposed to the possibly "not trustworthy saying" that women can't teach men or have authority. Chapter 3 then goes on to outline the qualifications for "ANYONE" who want to be a bishop, overseer or deacon. Paul especially points out some specific qualifications for women when he says in verse 11 " Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things."

When an "apparent" clear reading of scripture seems to be out of sink with the rest of scripture it's okay to say "I don't know why he wrote it that way." Then you dig deeper for other possible interpretations. Then you compare all of those possibilities with the rest of scripture. What you don't do is write doctrine based on one passage that seems to contradict other scripture especially other scripture written by the same author. Paul commends women in leadership in other places. And, more telling, is the fact that Paul includes specific qualifications for women in outlining the qualifications for anyone who wants to be an overseer in the very next chapter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

quote:

I think that is why God set up things the way he did, it was not as a result of the fall but was put in place before the fall.

What was set in place before the fall?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ginosko

Eve was created for Adam. She was to be his helper.

quote:

It is ordained by God that men be the head of their homes

quote:

The woman was happy in her estate to joyfully and willingly accept the spiritual headship and godly leadership of her husband.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bygraceiamsaved

The system of Man being the head and Woman the helper.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bygraceiamsaved

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

quote:

ORIGINAL: bygraceiamsaved

I agree, but then tell us how you reconcile both sets of verses using your defintion of setting aside which Martin said nothing of setting aside interpretation but setting aside the scripture itself. I would also ask how one could interpret 1 Timothy 2 and 3 wrongly, it's pretty clear and to the point.

Several other possible interpretations for 1 Timothy 2 have been written. The most likely interpretation is that Paul was answering a concern of Timothy's regarding a specific situation involving a woman or women who were teaching false doctrine. Paul is instructing Timothy to encourage them to learn. The reference to the creation order may have been because of the nature of the false doctrine being taught.

Another possible interpretation is that Paul is repeating a line from Timothy's initial letter to Paul in verses 2:12-15 which would make those verses the question that Paul is responding to in chapter 3. Paul opens the answer by stating "Here's a trustworthy saying", which would be opposed to the possibly "not trustworthy saying" that women can't teach men or have authority. Chapter 3 then goes on to outline the qualifications for "ANYONE" who want to be a bishop, overseer or deacon. Paul especially points out some specific qualifications for women when he says in verse 11 " Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things."

When an "apparent" clear reading of scripture seems to be out of sink with the rest of scripture it's okay to say "I don't know why he wrote it that way." Then you dig deeper for other possible interpretations. Then you compare all of those possibilities with the rest of scripture. What you don't do is write doctrine based on one passage that seems to contradict other scripture especially other scripture written by the same author. Paul commends women in leadership in other places. And, more telling, is the fact that Paul includes specific qualifications for women in outlining the qualifications for anyone who wants to be an overseer in the very next chapter.

Look at the exact wording here Laura, he is not speaking of women who want to be bishops etc. He says specifically and the bishop and overseer's wives are to be this way as well. If the spouse does these things it makes it difficult for the bishop, overseer to be a testimony as it hurts it as well and it is difficult to conduct a ministry without the support of a Godly wife who does the things Paul mentions. Then the bishop, overseer would have to deal with this as well as his ministry.

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

It may not be unthinkable but scripture never says that God called Deborah to be the Judge of Israel because there weren't any decent men. That is speculation based on a bias against women being in authority over men. I would think that God would have made it quite clear if that was his reasoning.

God certainly breaks with the norm. He never breaks his own laws. Therefore, God cannot have a law or rule prohibiting women being in authority over men.

quote:

21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place.

22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.

23The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man."

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

Ginosko

While you wax eloquently you still did not answer the question. What scriptural roles does God give to the genders?

quote:

It is equally salient that God created Adam first and then Eve. Eve was created for Adam. She was to be his helper.

She was created to be his "helpmeet". That is not the same as a "helper".

quote:

God intended that Adam be the federal head of the entire human race.

Scripture please.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

Together Adam and Eve were the head of the entire human race.

quote:

You will recall that when Eve was deceived by Satan, God came to Adam. God was in essence holding Adam accountable for Eve's sin.

They were BOTH accountable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk

I agree with the rendering of helper. It is a very strong word, and in almost all instances it was used in the OT, it was help from God. So it's a strong word, and that tells me that women were never to be denigrated as less than men as has so often happened. The fall has soemthing to do with that. But there is something that did establish headship before the fall.

quote:

21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place.

22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.

23The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man."

Maybe I'm stupid, but it seems that right from the beginning Adam was taking the lead. He even named her. Not God but Adam made the name, and it's a derivative of his name. He also speaks his recognition that she is part of him. This very strongly implies an independence of woman on man. It also is obvious that he is the one in the lead. Not her.

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

quote:

I think that is why God set up things the way he did, it was not as a result of the fall but was put in place before the fall.

What was set in place before the fall?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bygraceiamsaved

quote:

ORIGINAL: joint heir

The wedge was driven between the sexes at the Fall....surely as christian men and women who are filled with the Holy Spirit who are diligent students of the word of God we are working to actually remove that wedge ...to walk in the Spirit and not the flesh

Why we as christians are in disagreement one can not say....but what we can say is that we are much closer in our views and united together against the enemy....whose position on this topic is far from any being explained on this thread....

I think that is why God set up things the way he did, it was not as a result of the fall but was put in place before the fall.


Regardless of whether or not one can prove headship/domination (definitions vary) before or after the Fall ...we can all agree that there was a wedge driven at the Fall....this is where the battle of the sexes began

My point was only that the wedge is not being driven now between us as christians as previously contended...but that we have to remember that we are all closer in positions on this issue than farther apart....we all want the right thing here...

by discussing this we are trying to bring male/female relationships into what we each believe is right and peaceful....no one is trying to do the devil's work....it was in response to a post on the last page....

this thread is just flying though...and it is hard to keep everything straight

_____________________________

**************************
Love thy neighbor preemptively
**************************

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk

I agree with the rendering of helper. It is a very strong word, and in almost all instances it was used in the OT, it was help from God. So it's a strong word, and that tells me that women were never to be denigrated as less than men as has so often happened. The fall has soemthing to do with that. But there is something that did establish headship before the fall.

quote:

21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place.

22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.

23The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man."

Maybe I'm stupid, but it seems that right from the beginning Adam was taking the lead. He even named her. Not God but Adam made the name, and it's a derivative of his name. He also speaks his recognition that she is part of him. This very strongly implies an independence of woman on man. It also is obvious that he is the one in the lead. Not her.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sadiebelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

It may not be unthinkable but scripture never says that God called Deborah to be the Judge of Israel because there weren't any decent men. That is speculation based on a bias against women being in authority over men. I would think that God would have made it quite clear if that was his reasoning.

God certainly breaks with the norm. He never breaks his own laws. Therefore, God cannot have a law or rule prohibiting women being in authority over men.

Deborah couldn't do anything as far as carrying out God's orders without Barak. He was her hands. That means God puts limitations on how far a woman can go in her "authority". She couldn't lead an army into battle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sadiebelle

[Edited by Admin for off-topic remark.]

quote:

ORIGINAL: joint heir

quote:

ORIGINAL: sadiebelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: laura_bre

It may not be unthinkable but scripture never says that God called Deborah to be the Judge of Israel because there weren't any decent men. That is speculation based on a bias against women being in authority over men. I would think that God would have made it quite clear if that was his reasoning.

God certainly breaks with the norm. He never breaks his own laws. Therefore, God cannot have a law or rule prohibiting women being in authority over men.

Deborah couldn't do anything as far as carrying out God's orders without Barak. He was her hands. That means God puts limitations on how far a woman can go in her "authority". She couldn't lead an army into battle.

the point is that she had authority....everyone has limits to their authority...male or female...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ginosko

Coheir,

Your argument is one commony espoused by egalitarians. It is one that lacks foundation, however. If you will recall God first instructed Adam to seek his "helpmeet" among the animals but none suitable was found there. None was fit for Adam. So, God made Eve FROM man. Okay, so Adam has now got someone who is fit for him, one who shares his human nature, and one who is also made in the image of God. They're of equal value and worth before God. But we see that it was Adam who was given a helper this in the sense that Eve was to be a loyal and suitable assistant in tending the affairs of the garden. Shem was not intended to be a rival but a partner. Remember, it was Eve who was created for Adam- not Adam for Eve. In this there is no offense. Adam is the head, Eve is the assistant. Submission to headship does not suggest or mean inequality. That's a concept with which egalitarians struggle.