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

[Reine]

You're preaching to the choir. My wife went on a trip. I ended up with 6 pairs of black and navy socks...

Hmmm... sounds pretty tough :/ .... Maybe she'll help you straighten 'em out when she gets back home if you tell her she has to submit ....lol, sorry I'm just trying to stay on topic.

 

[Jethro]

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.

Read the Bible and accept it!
No this is a total misrepresentation of Scripture. Paul nowhere tells men to submit to women, and nowhere does he recognise women leadership in the church. If you have not read, Paul clearly said in 1 Timothy 2:11-12, "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission (to the men). I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." (NIV)

Could Paul be any clearer on this subject.

 

[gnostic]

Do I really or would I really care what Paul say?

I thought what Jesus taught is more essential to Christianity than anything that Paul taught. Don't like Paul, and never like his perspective about the church.

 

[Jethro]

Do I really or would I really care what Paul say?

I thought what Jesus taught is more essential to Christianity than anything that Paul taught. Don't like Paul, and never like his perspective about the church.

The whole Bible has been inspired by God, unlike the gnostic heretical gospels. For Paul said all Scripture is God-breathed (literally breathed into the minds of the apostles by the Holy Spirit) (2 Tim. 3:16). Furthermore, Paul gave a warning to the Corinthian church in 2 Cor. 13:2-3, "I already gave you a warning when I was with you the second time. I now repeat it while absent: On my return I will not spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others, 3 since you are demanding proof that Christ is speaking through me. He is not weak in dealing with you, but is powerful among you." Moreover, Peter said about Paul's writings, "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction" (2 Pet. 3:15-16) (NIV).

Therefore, Christians obey the words of Jesus, Peter, Paul, James and John, equally.

 

[Me Myself]

The whole Bible has been inspired by God

According to people.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Do I really or would I really care what Paul say?

I thought what Jesus taught is more essential to Christianity than anything that Paul taught. Don't like Paul, and never like his perspective about the church.

I would agree that Jesus' teachings take primacy... However I would never say Paul's contribution was worthless. The problem is we do not have a universally accepted list of the works he genuinely wrote. Many of the writings ascribed to him, were clearly not his work and are contradictory.

I find that Paul's contribution in spreading Christianity to the world is unsurpassed.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The whole Bible has been inspired by God, unlike the gnostic heretical gospels.

What nonsense.

People not God, selected the Books to be found in the various Bibles. If this choice was indeed inspired by God, those choices would be the same. They are not.

The Gnostic Scripture is not Heretical to all Christians.
It is people who define what is heretical or heterodox. Each church compiles it own list.
When Christianity became Romanised, Gnosticism was one of those that lost out to the new orthodoxy. Gnosticism remained as valid an expression of Christianity as it had been from the start.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Therefore, Christians obey the words of Jesus, Peter, Paul, James and John, equally.

You may do so... All Christians clearly do not ... nor is it possible to "Obey" or believe the many contradictions.
Like it or not, Churches are selective as to their teaching. This thread contains prime examples of the differences.
The difficulty becomes extreme, when some Christians believe that every thing in the Bible to be the infallible "Word of God"

 

[gnostic]

I would agree that Jesus' teachings take primacy... However I would never say Paul's contribution was worthless. The problem is we do not have a universally accepted list of the works he genuinely wrote. Many of the writings ascribed to him, were clearly not his work and are contradictory.

I find that Paul's contribution in spreading Christianity to the world is unsurpassed.

Therefore, Christians obey the words of Jesus, Peter, Paul, James and John, equally.

Be that as it may. I remember a number of teachings, including parables, from Jesus, from the gospels. I couldn't give you a word-for-word of what is taught, but I do remember the message or context of his teachings.

On the other hand, I remember very little of what Paul taught. For me, his letters weren't very "memorable". They are actually boring. They lack imagination. I can't see how he was at all inspired.

The few things, I do remember:

His warning of false prophet. Bah.

He started the whole Original Sin thingy. Bah. (Blaming woman for the world's problem, again)

Something about 3 heavens. Bah.

Paul was certainly more learned than Peter and the other disciples. However, he was no different from the man before his conversion. To me, Paul is misogynist prig.

The Church that followed, was more in Paul's image than that of Jesus'.

 

[waitasec]

The whole Bible has been inspired by God, unlike the gnostic heretical gospels. For Paul said all Scripture is God-breathed (literally breathed into the minds of the apostles by the Holy Spirit) (2 Tim. 3:16). Furthermore, Paul gave a warning to the Corinthian church in 2 Cor. 13:2-3, "I already gave you a warning when I was with you the second time. I now repeat it while absent: On my return I will not spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others, 3 since you are demanding proof that Christ is speaking through me. He is not weak in dealing with you, but is powerful among you." Moreover, Peter said about Paul's writings, "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction" (2 Pet. 3:15-16) (NIV).

Therefore, Christians obey the words of Jesus, Peter, Paul, James and John, equally.

circular logic...

 

[Reine]

I agree with many of you here on a combination of what you are all saying. Paul's teachings were not completely without merit... but they were 'Paul’s' teachings. Often Paul even said he was merely giving his opinion, and it wasn't from the Lord. Also there were arguments and inconsistencies in the bible showing that someone had a different opinion. The bible does not say it is the infallible word of God. It speaks of the writings that the Jewish people followed as inspired, as we are still inspired today. You have to see that these writers of their encounters with God were subjective of the culture and times they lived in, and they wrote their experiences with that also leading them. God did not erase their minds and experiences. All experiences are a subjective journey of discovery to the one who experiences them, but more important than these discoveries is learning that whatever information that we glean personally is not for proving our point of view right or wrong, but using it as a tool to have a heightened awareness of ourselves, our spiritual mind, and to contribute to loving others

 

[Jethro]

I agree with many of you here on a combination of what you are all saying. Paul's teachings were not completely without merit... but they were 'Paul’s' teachings. Often Paul even said he was merely giving his opinion, and it wasn't from the Lord. Also there were arguments and inconsistencies in the bible showing that someone had a different opinion. The bible does not say it is the infallible word of God. It speaks of the writings that the Jewish people followed as inspired, as we are still inspired today. You have to see that these writers of their encounters with God were subjective of the culture and times they lived in, and they wrote their experiences with that also leading them. God did not erase their minds and experiences. All experiences are a subjective journey of discovery to the one who experiences them, but more important than these discoveries is learning that whatever information that we glean personally is not for proving our point of view right or wrong, but using it as a tool to have a heightened awareness of ourselves, our spiritual mind, and to contribute to loving others

My sister, you are very mistaken about Paul's writings. For Paul made it very clear to Timothy that all Scripture (including his writings) was inspired of God, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" 2 Tim. 3:16).
Also, Peter supported Paul's writings in 2 Peter 3:15-16, "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."
Furthermore, he only ever stated once that what he was writing had not been prophetically given to him personally by the Lord (1 Cor. 7:12). However, this did not mean that it had not been inspired. For all Biblical authors were either directly or prophetically told what to write i.e. thus says the Lord, or by direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit as in the case of the majority of Paul, Peter's writings.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

My sister, you are very mistaken about Paul's writings. For Paul made it very clear to Timothy that all Scripture (including his writings) was inspired of God, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" 2 Tim. 3:16).

Why on earth would you assume that Paul considered his own writings to be scripture?

Actually, I probably shouldn't even say Paul, since the scholarly consensus seems to be that Paul didn't write 2 Timothy:

2 Timothy

 

[not nom]

all Scripture (including his writings)

what makes you think that? he didn't say "all scripture (including my writings)".

 

[sojourner]

My sister, you are very mistaken about Paul's writings. For Paul made it very clear to Timothy that all Scripture (including his writings) was inspired of God, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" 2 Tim. 3:16).
Also, Peter supported Paul's writings in 2 Peter 3:15-16, "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."
Furthermore, he only ever stated once that what he was writing had not been prophetically given to him personally by the Lord (1 Cor. 7:12). However, this did not mean that it had not been inspired. For all Biblical authors were either directly or prophetically told what to write i.e. thus says the Lord, or by direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit as in the case of the majority of Paul, Peter's writings.

Paul didn't consider his letters as scripture. They were simply letters.

 

[Jethro]

Why on earth would you assume that Paul considered his own writings to be scripture?

Actually, I probably shouldn't even say Paul, since the scholarly consensus seems to be that Paul didn't write 2 Timothy:

2 Timothy

Paul clearly wrote in 1 Corinthians 11:23, "For I received from the Lord what I also passed onto you..."

Paul also wrote in 2 Cor. 13:2, "I already gave you a warning when I was with you the second time. I now repeat it while absent: On my return I will not spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others, 3 since you are demanding proof that Christ is speaking through me."

And as I quoted earlier, Peter testified that Paul's writings are Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16, "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."

Can Peter be any clearer?

 

[Me Myself]

The way I see it Paul could very well be one of the false prophets Jesus warned about.

He distorts a really good amount of Jesus´s message.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Paul clearly wrote in 1 Corinthians 11:23, "For I received from the Lord what I also passed onto you..."

And so you're saying that God only communicates through scripture?

So much for prayer, apparently.

Can Peter be any clearer?

Is Peter Paul?

 

[Me Myself]

And so you're saying that God only communicates through scripture?

So much for prayer, apparently.

The trick is to write after you pray

 

[Jethro]

The way I see it Paul could very well be one of the false prophets Jesus warned about.

He distorts a really good amount of Jesus´s message.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Give evidence of your supposed claims.