Does the Bible Permit Women to Lead, Teach, Preach or Speak?

[Rakhel]

Judaism is not like Christianity at all in fact you will find many opinions by Jews about women but in my Jewish home there is not submission by me and there is a marriage of equality.

same in this Jewish home.

 

[Pegg]

Paul didn't write Hebrews.

Also, Paul recognized women leadership in the church as well. So by what you're saying, men should also be submissive to women.

there is evidence that paul was the writer of hebrews. however, the issue of 'subjection' is very clear in the scriptures

1Cor 11:3 But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God

if Paul thought men should be submissive to women, then he would not have written this 'headship' arrangement.

 

[Pegg]

A man worthy of respect would not expect to be submitted to imo.
Marriage is an equal partnership imo.

i didnt think this thread was specifically about marriage, but in any case it still stands. The bible is pretty clear that the man should be the head of the family and i agree with that.

it doesnt mean the man and woman are not equal partners, they certainly are and i agree with that. But in relation to God, it is the man who is held accountable for his family and that is why he is given the role of the 'head' of the family. The final decisions must rest with him because he will be the one who will be held accountable. See the account in Genesis...what got Adam into trouble in the first place? He could have turned the situation around if he had of made his own decision:

Genesis 3:17 And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account

 

[e.r.m.]

i didnt think this thread was specifically about marriage, but in any case it still stands. The bible is pretty clear that the man should be the head of the family and i agree with that.

it doesnt mean the man and woman are not equal partners, they certainly are and i agree with that. But in relation to God, it is the man who is held accountable for his family and that is why he is given the role of the 'head' of the family. The final decisions must rest with him because he will be the one who will be held accountable. See the account in Genesis...what got Adam into trouble in the first place? He could have turned the situation around if he had of made his own decision:

Genesis 3:17 And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account

Very good point Pegg. I'm also with you on the post about 'headship'.

 

[fallingblood]

there is evidence that paul was the writer of hebrews. however, the issue of 'subjection' is very clear in the scriptures

1Cor 11:3 But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God

if Paul thought men should be submissive to women, then he would not have written this 'headship' arrangement.

Continue on a few verses after the one what you left off at. Because you just did a great shame to what Paul was saying by not actually taking him in context. The verse you quoted is only a tiny portion of that discourse.

And no, Paul didn't write Hebrews. Scholars agree on that. And Paul also had no problem with women being the heads of churches. So by the verse you quoted (if we assume Paul is the author) he is stating that men have to submit to women. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Me Myself]

Yes, the bible is pretty straightforward on this.

im sure if you knew a man who was worthy of respect, you'd find it easy to submit to him

I agree completely, that´s why I submit to my girlfriend and also ask her to submit to me.

We also rebel sometimes, and it is perfectly cool. Submitting and being dominant can be a very nice way to play the game of romance.

That said, I am sure most women would like a guy who both knows when to be dominant and when to submit to their wishes.

There oughta be balance, and it is important to remember that this balance changes with each person and each relationship.

So if you find someone you respect it should be nice to submit to him/her, but I would say that if the respect goes both ways the contrary interaction should be open for contemplation too.

 

[Jethro]

And one way to know that you've found a man worthy of your respect is that he would not want you to do so.

That must mean you are not willing to submit to God, or the Torah. For God is the One who inspired Paul to give this command to Christian women. Furthermore, Peter gave the example of woman submission by the life of Sarah, who willingly and lovingly submitted to Abraham. :yes:

 

[Jethro]

I'm not so sure about that. If we assume that everything that was written in the name of Paul was from Paul, then he contradicts himself. If we remove those pieces that don't seem to be from Paul, then we have Paul supporting the role of women leadership in the church.

Where did Paul contradict himself and where did he support women leadership?

 

[fallingblood]

Where did Paul contradict himself and where did he support women leadership?

Romans 16:1, 16:3, and 16:7.
1 Corinthians 1:11, 16:3


All of those verses show that Paul supported women leadership, and held women leaders in high regards.

Personally, I don't think he ever actual condemned women leadership though.

 

[Jethro]

there is evidence that paul was the writer of hebrews. however, the issue of 'subjection' is very clear in the scriptures

1Cor 11:3 But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God

if Paul thought men should be submissive to women, then he would not have written this 'headship' arrangement.

Also, when Paul told Christian wives to submit to their husbands, he would have also told the men to submit to their wives, if women didn't have to submit to their husbands as the head of the home.

 

[Me Myself]

Genesis 3:17 And to Adam he said: “Because you listened to your wife’s voice and took to eating from the tree concerning which I gave you this command, ‘You must not eat from it,’ cursed is the ground on your account

Actualy, he punishes both according to their misdeeds:

Soil becomes cursed because it is man and not woman that will work in it.

God punished everyone there, if man was the only rsponsable only man would have been punished.

Besides, if one is to take bible literaly in this, then why wouldn´t onetake literaly when it condones slavery in the OT and the NT ?

 

[fallingblood]

That must mean you are not willing to submit to God, or the Torah. For God is the One who inspired Paul to give this command to Christian women. Furthermore, Peter gave the example of woman submission by the life of Sarah, who willingly and lovingly submitted to Abraham. :yes:

Or he is a Jew, that doesn't accept the NT as scripture. That is probably a better bet. The NT does not apply to him.

 

[Pegg]

Yes, the bible is pretty straightforward on this.



I agree completely, that´s why I submit to my girlfriend and also ask her to submit to me.

We also rebel sometimes, and it is perfectly cool. Submitting and being dominant can be a very nice way to play the game of romance.

That said, I am sure most women would like a guy who both knows when to be dominant and when to submit to their wishes.

There oughta be balance, and it is important to remember that this balance changes with each person and each relationship.

So if you find someone you respect it should be nice to submit to him/her, but I would say that if the respect goes both ways the contrary interaction should be open for contemplation too.

I dont see how being a 'head' has anything to do with domination?

Christ is the head of the church, but is he domineering? Not at all. He was a man of great love and compassion. People were happy to submit themselves to his lead because as a leader he was inspiring and gentle...he certainly want domineering.

 

[Me Myself]

I dont see how being a 'head' has anything to do with domination?

Christ is the head of the church, but is he domineering? Not at all. He was a man of great love and compassion. People were happy to submit themselves to his lead because as a leader he was inspiring and gentle...he certainly want domineering.

I have no problem with the word, you may replace "dominate" with "giving guidance" or "saying how things should be". It was jsut away of saying it, hopefully you´ll see my point beyond semantic.

 

[Pegg]

Also, when Paul told Christian wives to submit to their husbands, he would have also told the men to submit to their wives, if women didn't have to submit to their husbands as the head of the home.

yes I agree

Pauls words are actually quite endearing for he likens the subjection of the wife to her husband like the subjection of the congregation to Christ.
Ephesians 5:21 Be in subjection to one another in fear of Christ. 22 Let wives be in subjection to their husbands as to the Lord, 23 because a husband is head of his wife as the Christ also is head of the congregation, he being a savior of [this] body. 24 In fact, as the congregation is in subjection to the Christ, so let wives also be to their husbands in everything.

no christian would refuse to submit to Christ...thats why we are christians, because we have submitted. And if husbands are 'christlike' then their wives will enjoy submitting to his authority...Pauls next words bear this out:

25 Husbands, continue loving YOUR wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and delivered up himself for it,

 

[sojourner]

Paul also said, "...there is no more male or female...for all are one in Christ Jesus."

 

[e.r.m.]

im sure if you knew a man who was worthy of respect, you'd find it easy to submit to him

There are wives who demand submission from their husbands, and that is disgusting and unacceptable.

 

[OnPower]

how come it's just paul who says that? isn't that kinda.... odd? I was under the impression that nobody should speak in church. it's either shut up and listen, or sing wether it is a disgrace for someone to speak in church depends entirely on what they say. who claims differently is stupid. so if you want to insist god says that, go ahead.. I for one don't buy it.

"feminism has caused many professing Christian women to become rough, loud and arrogant, the very opposite of how God wants Christian women to be"

orly? has it not also cut down on marital rape and domestic abuse? and what about the professing christian men who are quite clearly full of it? did maleism cause this? and what do you suggest to do about it -- that is, if you're even aware of the problem?

paul was teaching the Laws

I 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.


"as also saith the law" :yes:

 

[OnPower]

Don't know why everyone forget Deborah.

that was a good try


if we read the account, God could not find anyone else to take the role of authority

They were all busy worshipping false gods

Do you need me to post this for you ?

:run:

 

[OnPower]

No, he picked a tired and old topic, that the fundies base upon 1) one passage from Paul and 2) the practices of the Catholic Church, neither of which is especially tenable when discussing "What God wants."

you can choose to ignore the laws as you please

Do you realize that all law will be restored in the kingdom?