Women should keep silent in the assembly?

[Saint Frankenstein]

That's quite true. The church of the new testament had deaconesses and apostles. Is it Priscilla who taught alongside Paul?

Yes: Priscilla and Aquila

 

[wellwisher]

The male brain is wired more front to back and the female brain is wired more from side to side. The wiring, side to side, allows women, on the average, to have more use of both her left and right hemispheres of the brain. This makes women both analytical; left brain and intuitive/emotional; right brain.

Sometimes the balance between the hemispheres can swing left or right or happen at the same time. She may go from clear headed; left brain, to emotional, right brain, based on hormonal changes. Or both sides may play together, to form a composite of logic and feeling, that men are not always sure how to deal with.

This side to side wiring is also connected to the audio parts of the brain in each of the two hemispheres; words and symbols of language. Women want and need to talk and communicate to exercise this wiring. Often this is about gossip, since gossip is about human emotions and reasonable cause and affect solutions, which is consistent with their brain wiring.

The male brain is more front to back; frontal lobe and visual cortex. Men, on the average, tend to have less wiring side to side. They often consciously use one preferred side of the brain, such a left for reasoning skills, with the other side more unconscious; repressed emotions due to less conscious control.

When a male gets mad, this is often processed unconsciously. The female has more control over the right hemisphere, so she can get mad more willfully and use it to game the system; nag. This is why this is treated different. There is a difference between premeditated and compulsive.

Men tend to relay more on visual cues than they do on audio cues, due to the wiring front to back. Back before cell phones and GPS, if men and women were driving together and appeared to be lost, the women would want to stop and ask directions; verbal confirmation for good data and a renewed calm feeling. The male would try to use his spatial vision to figure it out; front to back. He would be less conscious of the danger since this emotion is from his more unconscious right brain side.

These differences is why men and women would teach religion differently. A woman could be too strict or too lax based on her choice of ambient feeling; nag or indulge. If you try to make everyone feel good, you will need to get rid of anything that bothers anyone. The male is less about the ambiance of feeling and about his visual attempt to find a way express the lessons, often without a map.

 

[wellwisher]

Yes: Priscilla and Aquila

This was based on a type of husband and wife dynamics; work partners. Paul would lead through his visions without a map, and his work wife would complement him. Priscilla and Aquila could extend his range, through their lateral brain wiring, while allowing his visions to lead. From above this combined wiring forms the sign of the cross.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That was never the case.....its like an automobile...it has only one set of instruments...one steering wheel, one set of brakes and one accelerator. In the family, God has appointed the husband as the designated driver, and he is in the main one in the driver's seat. That doesn't mean that others in his vehicle are prisoners, or have no input.....the passenger seat is occupied by one who can act as a navigator. The man is obligated as family head to care for his wife and family the way Christ cared for his disciples...with love and patience and understanding. Males and females have a different approach to things and if everyone stays in their designated role, each will appreciate the importance of the other's role......each are needed as it creates a perfect balance.

Men are not superior or more qualified, although some men view that role as dictatorial.....it was never meant to be that way. Both roles are equally valued and if things go belly up over a poor decision made by the male....the buck stops with him.

I enjoy how you take the driver's seat on these issues.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

That covers the car then .....it doesn't cover the Christian family arrangement however. But it is true that some men are inadequate for the role of head of the household because of personal weaknesses. A wise woman will not take that role away from him (thereby emasculating him and robbing him of confidence in himself continually) but will help him to reason on things so as to make decisions for the good of the whole family, thereby building his confidence in his ability to carry his responsibilities. Nothing wrong with that.

The same is true of the household for us. I'm better at finances, he's better at day to day planning. He certainly doesn't feel emasculated by taking jobs we both agree he's good at. If anything was going to destroy his confidence, it would be setting up expectation that because his dangly bits lay a certain way, he needs to succeed at a job that neither brings him joy nor is part of his talent set.
The problem isn't with him being a house husband, the problem is with cultural norms demeaning the role.

 

[Stevicus]

The male brain is wired more front to back and the female brain is wired more from side to side. The wiring, side to side, allows women, on the average, to have more use of both her left and right hemispheres of the brain. This makes women both analytical; left brain and intuitive/emotional; right brain.

Sometimes the balance between the hemispheres can swing left or right or happen at the same time. She may go from clear headed; left brain, to emotional, right brain, based on hormonal changes. Or both sides may play together, to form a composite of logic and feeling, that men are not always sure how to deal with.

This side to side wiring is also connected to the audio parts of the brain in each of the two hemispheres; words and symbols of language. Women want and need to talk and communicate to exercise this wiring. Often this is about gossip, since gossip is about human emotions and reasonable cause and affect solutions, which is consistent with their brain wiring.

The male brain is more front to back; frontal lobe and visual cortex. Men, on the average, tend to have less wiring side to side. They often consciously use one preferred side of the brain, such a left for reasoning skills, with the other side more unconscious; repressed emotions due to less conscious control.

When a male gets mad, this is often processed unconsciously. The female has more control over the right hemisphere, so she can get mad more willfully and use it to game the system; nag. This is why this is treated different. There is a difference between premeditated and compulsive.

Men tend to relay more on visual cues than they do on audio cues, due to the wiring front to back. Back before cell phones and GPS, if men and women were driving together and appeared to be lost, the women would want to stop and ask directions; verbal confirmation for good data and a renewed calm feeling. The male would try to use his spatial vision to figure it out; front to back. He would be less conscious of the danger since this emotion is from his more unconscious right brain side.

These differences is why men and women would teach religion differently. A woman could be too strict or too lax based on her choice of ambient feeling; nag or indulge. If you try to make everyone feel good, you will need to get rid of anything that bothers anyone. The male is less about the ambiance of feeling and about his visual attempt to find a way express the lessons, often without a map.

About men not asking for directions, my grandfather was the exact opposite of that stereotype. He would stop and ask for directions all the time. Although one thing I didn't know until many years later is that he couldn't read maps. On the other hand, I love maps and prefer to use them as opposed to verbal directions, which I can sometimes get confused due the imprecisions of spoken language. Also, there are some situations where I may not want people to know that I'm lost, so I won't ask for directions. But I've usually been pretty good at finding my way around places. (Although it's different in stores, since I can never find anything in stores.)

Regarding the difference between male and female brains, I found this article on the subject: Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women [Infographic] | Northwestern Medicine

So men have bigger brains, but women have more gray matter.

But these are just tendencies; it doesn't account for each and every individual. There will always be those who don't follow those tendencies, and they have rights too. That's how I would look at it.

 

[Brian2]

And slaves were uneducated too, and men can interrupt rudely as well, but none of that seemed to be enough reason to silence menn.

Saying women should ask their husbands at home is unbelievably condescending. We are not children to be patronized.

In the epistles it is often difficult to know the full context and the circumstances that are being addressed.
Paul seems to be wanting to create some order in the gatherings when the people meet. It seems that there could have been a problem in that area with women for some reason.
This site might give some clues as to the possible reasons.
What to Say When Someone Says Women Should Be Silent in Church

 

[ADigitalArtist]

About men not asking for directions, my grandfather was the exact opposite of that stereotype. He would stop and ask for directions all the time. Although one thing I didn't know until many years later is that he couldn't read maps. On the other hand, I love maps and prefer to use them as opposed to verbal directions, which I can sometimes get confused due the imprecisions of spoken language. Also, there are some situations where I may not want people to know that I'm lost, so I won't ask for directions. But I've usually been pretty good at finding my way around places. (Although it's different in stores, since I can never find anything in stores.)

Regarding the difference between male and female brains, I found this article on the subject: Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women [Infographic] | Northwestern Medicine

So men have bigger brains, but women have more gray matter.

But these are just tendencies; it doesn't account for each and every individual. There will always be those who don't follow those tendencies, and they have rights too. That's how I would look at it.

Even these pink and blue brain style teachings are being questioned right now due to findings in developmental psychology. Even less difference is found in children's brains with evidence that the malleability exists before parenting starts. What kind of toys and tools you're given as a child exercises parts of your brain that then become your adult 'wiring.' Meaning things we take as innate gender properties may not be.

What Science Really Says About the Differences Between Boys and Girls

Because of this a lot of different parenting styles have come into fruition which don't treat boys and girls differently, and it's led to some pretty spectacular results. Like better emotional processing and interpersonal skills on both sides.
Megan on TikTok

 

[Fallen Prophet]

And men are meant to be fathers. There is no substitute for the influence of a father in the lives of his children. In many marriages, the fathers are the primary raisers of the children, and it works out just fine.

All of God's children are able to change - to adapt to circumstances given them - but that is irrelevant to the ideal situation.

Men and women were designed in particular ways - physically, spiritually, mentally, emotionally - to fulfill particular roles.

Women were designed - ideally - to be the primary "raisers of the children" in more ways than one.

The fact that people can adapt to less-than-ideal situations does not change that.

A family or situation not fitting the mold does not mean there is anything wrong with the mold or the family.

That's just mortality.

Men are better at protecting because they have superior upper body strength in case of a fight.

That is an incredibly simplistic viewpoint. Man's instinct and drive to protect - to provide for and instruct - goes far beyond them simply being stronger.

But women can be dang good fighters too... some of them better than most men.

Irrelevant and not the ideal situation.

The ideal would be a man being present to fight on behalf of the woman and children.

However - any fighting a woman can learn to help the man would be awesome.

On the other hand, there is nothing inherent in maleness that gives a man greater spiritual insight than a woman.

Maleness?

We are speaking of spiritual things - you can put away the college professors and bumper stickers - this ain't a political rally.

Officiating a worship service or holding the Priesthood has nothing to do with "maleness" or any "greater spiritual insight".

If anything - Man's need to receive the Priesthood in order to fulfill their spiritual roles may showcase a lack of "spiritual insight" on their part.

They aren't born with everything they need to fulfill their role - like the ideal woman. They need a constant partnership with God.

God's organization for the Universe and His Church is similar to His intended organization for the family of Mankind.

God gives to Man. Man gives to Woman. Woman gives to children - then the cycle continues.

It is not about superiority or spiritual insight - but about establishing a hierarchy of responsibility.

For example - even though it was Eve who first decided to partake of the Fruit and convinced Adam to partake - it was Adam who bore the responsibility of that action and the blame.

He was Eve's husband and Priesthood holder. This is an inalienable thing.

Just like how only women can conceive - only men can officiate.

Thus it is nonsense to say it is his job to spiritually protect her.

It is the order of Heaven.

The husband inherits the bulk of the responsibility for his family. His salvation literally depends on it.

Therefore - an instinct was installed in Man to protect his family - both physically and spiritually.

That's the ideal anyway.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

But you are ignoring the question of why. Surely God must have a reason.

I would have to be as smart as God to understand his reason. I do not claim to be that smart. Perhaps you do?

 

[epronovost]

I would have to be as smart as God to understand his reason. I do not claim to be that smart. Perhaps you do?

Why do you assume that your God is intelligent in the first place?

 

[halbhh]

For what reason would a woman not have the same right as a man to speak in a religious assembly? Other than sheer sexism of course. I'm not speaking of women chatting and gossiping. No one should be rude--men cannot do this either. I'm speaking of the contribution to the learning and worship.

The most well known religious prohibition is from 1 Corinthians 14:34 "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak," and 1 Timothy 2:11-12 "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet."

Be aware, of course, that this sort of thing doesn't just exist in Christianity, but other religions as well. Thus, I hope we get responses from multiple religions.

In Orthodox Judaism, for example, the tradition is not to have women rabbis. Now it is controversial there because some women are pushing the envelope and gaining semikha (ordination). That causes a lot of anxiety and hard feelings among those who are opposed. For example, I was reading just the other day about a woman who taught in a Jewish school in the UK. When she received her ordination, she was let go from her job.

BTW, this post is not meant to be a slam of any religion or sect. I think that all of them have made a lot of progress compared to how things were in the past.

Anyhow, this post was inspired by visiting a website outlining the beliefs of Messianic Israelism (I was hoping to better understand one of the writers in this forum). So while some may try to claim that this is a thing of the past, trust me, in some groups it is still very much alive.

Okay, let the discussion begin.

Paul wrote letters to various churches, and in each letter, there are specific instructions to that individual church, to help it deal with a problem in that church in that city.

A theme that Paul repeats over and over, in many of these letters, is that Christians should sacrifice their own freedoms when needed for the sake of the "weak" so that the weak not be lost.

A famous example of this is that Paul writes he would even give up eating meat (for the rest of his life) if needed, for the sake of a weak brother or sister --

"9Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10For if someone with a weak conscience sees you, with all your knowledge, eating in an idol’s temple, won’t that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols? 11So this weak brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12When you sin against them in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall."

Even when the thing that would cause the "weak" to fall is perfectly innocent:

8But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.

1 Corinthians 8 NIV
(and also another very clear example chapter is Romans chapter 14)

So: even though the freedom we gain allows us to do new things, we are to give up any such freedom -- perfectly OK things that are harmless -- if that freedom would cause another believer that is weak in faith to become lost.

The instruction to a city where apparently women were disrupting the services was for them to be quiet during the service, in that particular church. While it's 100% ok and fine for a woman to speak up and lead songs, preach and more... == totally fine and good == it is still the case that in a situation where it would cause a "weak" man to be lost, they need to at least temporarily sacrifice some of their perfectly good freedoms for the sake of that weak person.

There are additional examples, if you need more....

This is a good topic and I am glad you raised it....



This all goes back to the concept of headship. If you go back to Eden, the role of husband and father was “complimented” by the role of wife and mother. Each had clearly defined roles with no need for one to encroach on the other’s role in the family arrangement. It’s like any good company, it has its President or CEO and a Vice President who supports the one whose job it is to run the company smoothly. Each person knows their job description, and is happy to do what they are instructed to do by their boss. Ambition is usually created by pride, so ambitions can lead to conflict if one is not qualified for the other person's job, even though they may be capable.

So if someone within that company tries to usurp the role of someone superior in rank, (or with better qualification) we experience ill feeling.....and if it is done with jealousy or malice, the trouble is magnified.

God designed families to be run by one CEO, and with the support of his Vice President, each family was to be run like a successful company, with happy employees who know their job and do it well. No one could complain that they were undervalued or underpaid...the rewards were priceless.


Seeing women usurp the role of men in Christendom is not surprising. The Apostle Paul also said....
1 Corinthians 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.“

So even Jesus has a head over him.

With that arrangement in mind, women did not have a teaching role in the congregation, but they were teachers of others outside of it and had a large part in the preaching activity. This follows that when congregations met for Bible study, song and prayer, which dominated their gatherings, women were to know their place. Those who want to go outside of what is written in the scriptures assume that God’s rules only apply to ancient times, and now that women have gained equality, they should be able to compete with men in all fields including positions in the congregation of God’s worshippers. That is a false judgment. God’s rules never go out of fashion, they apply universally so that peace and order is maintained. It was so from the beginning.

It doesn’t mean that women must remain silent altogether, but they are not assigned teaching roles in the congregations. This is not a position of power, but one of responsibility. God holds men accountable for what they teach and how they handle themselves in the congregation and in their personal lives. Elders were those with spiritual qualifications, but not from doing a theological course at some seminary or Bible college.....their qualifications were spiritual and actively demonstrated. (1 Timothy 3:1-12)


No human is free to rewrite God’s rules, but to humbly accept the assignment given with no jealousy or animosity....it just creates divisions and contentions.


Jehovah’s Witnesses stick to what the Bible teaches and humility prevents any woman from reaching out for something that does not belong to her....look where it got Eve....

We understand that God put these things in place for a reason, and we respect his arrangement.

Yes, that's another, separate question: the best natural order inside a family, for harmony.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

And why should she? She is NOT a child, to be patronized. There is no good reason she should not have the identical opportunities to ask questions that a man has.

The purpose of the meeting is Not the time to ask questions aka ' interrupt the meeting '.
The time for questions is ' after ' the meeting.
First, a woman to ask her husband, and then if need be they ask the spiritually older men in the congregation.
It has nothing to do with being treated as a child, just as in the accepted headship school system that a teacher is over the student, the principal over the teacher, and the super over the principal.

 

[epronovost]

The purpose of the meeting is Not the time to ask questions aka ' interrupt the meeting '.
The time for questions is ' after ' the meeting.
First, a woman to ask her husband, and then if need be they ask the spiritually older men in the congregation.
It has nothing to do with being treated as a child, just as in the accepted headship school system that a teacher is over the student, the principal over the teacher, and the super over the principal.

There is no specific mention on the nature of the meetings, which could very well be cérémonial or pastoral (aka teaching). It also clearly mentions that women are never to be teacher or hold any authority over men. In other words, a more vulgar way of putting would be quiet and listen and if you don't understand something wait for the end of lectures and ask your husband to explain you that; you are not fit to entertain discussion or debate on those subject. It's infantilising to such a point, that you youself, made an infantilising reference comparing women, in that context, to children in school to defend it.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

There is no specific mention on the nature of the meetings, which could very well be cérémonial or pastoral (aka teaching). It also clearly mentions that women are never to be teacher or hold any authority over men. In other words, a more vulgar way of putting would be quiet and listen and if you don't understand something wait for the end of lectures and ask your husband to explain you that; you are not fit to entertain discussion or debate on those subject. It's infantilising to such a point, that you youself, made an infantilising reference comparing women, in that context, to children in school to defend it.

The Bible describes only men as being charged with congregation oversight - Titus 1:5-6; 1 Timothy 3:1-2; James 3:1
It's the order of creation, Adam first shows God's purpose in oversight (oversight as Adam was to care for Eve)- 1 Timothy 2:12-13.
Not women clergy inside the congregation, but outside Jesus sent out both men and women (male and female) who can have the same active ministry share in carrying out what Jesus instructed all to do at Matthew 24:14.
Women even serve as examples to the angels as per 1 Corinthians 11:8-10.

Please note too that a man's authority is limited. The man is in subjection to Christ and to act accordingly as per 1 Corinthians 11:3.
Even the congregation itself is to be in subjection to one another in displaying humble behavior as per Ephesians 5:21-30

 

[robocop (actually)]

That is not true at all. As a woman, I am still bound by all the commandments that are not specific to men, which is way way more than what you listed.

For one thing, in the traditional Orthodox home, the woman makes sure the home is kosher and shomer shabbat. That requires her to observe all sorts of laws. Are you getting the idea?

It is however true that the Orthodox tend to divide men and women over prayers requirements verses keeping the home.

Thank you for correcting me. I think I got my idea from jewfaq.org.

 

[epronovost]

The Bible describes only men as being charged with congregation oversight - Titus 1:5-6; 1 Timothy 3:1-2; James 3:1
It's the order of creation, Adam first shows God's purpose in oversight (oversight as Adam was to care for Eve)- 1 Timothy 2:12-13.
Not women clergy inside the congregation, but outside Jesus sent out both men and women (male and female) who can have the same active ministry share in carrying out what Jesus instructed all to do at Matthew 24:14.
Women even serve as examples to the angels as per 1 Corinthians 11:8-10.

Please note too that a man's authority is limited. The man is in subjection to Christ and to act accordingly as per 1 Corinthians 11:3.
Even the congregation itself is to be in subjection to one another in displaying humble behavior as per Ephesians 5:21-30

That doesn't make it any less unequal or infantilising towards women and frankly idiotic as it robs Christian congregation of the leadership qualities of its female members as well as their brilliance as teachers and scholars. Nice of you to detail the specific nature of the sexism and stupidity, but that doesn't make it less stupid and sexist.

 

[1213]

Read this 10x. Let it sink in -- the woman was only deceived but the man was willfully rebellious. Who does this verse REALLY put second?

By what the Bible tells, the reason why man did it seems to have been that he wanted to please the woman. Woman did it apparently because she wanted to become like God. I think the one who wants to please is better leader than the one who seeks high position, because that person is thinking others and not just oneself.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

That doesn't make it any less unequal or infantilising towards women and frankly idiotic as it robs Christian congregation of the leadership qualities of its female members as well as their brilliance as teachers and scholars. Nice of you to detail the specific nature of the sexism and stupidity, but that doesn't make it less stupid and sexist.

Again, we are speaking about -> Not to be interrupting at the meeting.
True, woman are Not elders, but women can express without interrupting.
Both men and women can see women's brilliance as teachers (scholarly). ALL are God's fellow workers- 1 Cor.3:9
Women are to be teachers, just Not take the lead in the congregation meetings - Titus 2:3 B
Just as Eve was Not Adam's head. Even Christ has a Head over him - 1 Corinthians 3:23 Christ belongs to God.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

........It's infantilising to such a point, that you youself, made an infantilising reference comparing women, in that context, to children in school to defend it.

Sorry I was Not more clear (post # 193) because a college teacher would still be considered as being over an adult student.