Women Are Not To Teach From The Pulpit or In Church Media.

Truth7t7

Well-known member
Are you aware that much of the New testament is best understood by learning where it connects to the Old testament.
Your posts seem to indicate that you are not aware of the need to include the OT in your understanding of doctrine.
Are you aware that the scripture below is self explanatory, and only those opposed to its simple and clear teaching desire to divert from its admonitions

"It Is A Shame For Women To Speak In The Church"

1 Corinthians 14:34-35KJV
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.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
Your wrong cjab all you need is A hug and i just gave to you. Know that your lack of love and faith si why you cna't go farther. I pray for you pray and pray for you that you don' hold grudges with women and dont' close doors on them. You remind of John from narrow way. God bless ya.
Cjab isn't wrong, no grudges against women as you falsely claim

Women are to keep silent in the Church, let alone being a Bishop or Deacon in leadership

It appears that you oppose the very clear teachings of God's inspired scripture below "Why"?

"It Is A Shame For Women To Speak In The Church"

1 Corinthians 14:34-35KJV
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.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
Remember one thing people Paul is an apostle he is not God. He wrote the letters but Jesus has authority, Jesus with his apostle and his followers which mary his mother and the other mary and other women were part of his ministry. Jesus told his followers to tell of his gospel and the good news. Women were present there and recieve those words aswell to say about the gospel !

By no means Paul what he said surpasses Jesus you got that ! Jesus is God and Paul is not A prophet. Another follower of Jesus has authrotiy and he said to his followers to tell the gospel. We have elders and women apostles one named Junia by Paul too. Women not being pastors liek elders of A church can go to the pulpit in church from other denominations I mean and preach and give sermones that has been done we see now in modern days. They can do that as long as they are not pastors I don't agree with pastors only men are priest in the mosaic law said G-d. Women can be queens, prophets (who are higher than priest ) and street prechers they can be those things and are doing those things.

The mosaic law doens't allow women to be witness in the courts, be judges, be queens, ( even one queen got it becuase of the death of A family ), be priests, be soldiers and other positions in the mosaic law. But theys till do the will of God and his plan in the stories of the bible.
The words written by Paul are "God" inspired, you continued fight against God's clear instruction below is in defince of God's words not Paul's

2 Timothy 3:16-17KJV
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

"It Is A Shame For Women To Speak In The Church"

1 Corinthians 14:34-35KJV
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.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
 

Arikel88

Active member
What you say truth7t7 doesn't change A thing it proves

2 Timothy 3:16-17KJV
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

One thing buddy Jesus was God and he said !

John 13:34
34A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you also must love one another.

i'm gonna ask you one thing because you dodge me like cjab does and who do you follow Jesus or Paul ? who Jesus is God and gave new commandment and showed Jesus has athority and Paul who follows Jesus ? and he obeys the pastor ? Paul recieve scripture from God who is Jesus and Jesus were prophets recieve scripture from God was amde for Jesus coming. Paul can't say women can't preach niether can say women to stay silent because he isn't authority to change what Jesus established before him and niether i'm I or you or anyone change what it is written ! Paul writtes things according to worship Jesus and follow him and no way does he take the mantle of leadership.

Your wrong in how all this is dedicated to worshipping the lord and you close doors truth7t7 so women can do their part and thier doing thier part whether you like it or not ! young man !

whatever remorse or bad thing women has done to you let it go. Becuase just like Cjab your hate women-talk on how you look at women just so they don't preach the word proves you close door and Jesus let you open doors so you can help people get to heaven -_-. insensible proves you do not know everything.
 

Stephen

Active member
I agree that Roman law would not be the reference, but surely there is a specific OT law silencing women. Though noone seems to know what Paul is referencing

I think Roman law is what is being referred to. There is no OT law.

I also think that Paul didn't write this verse, but was a scribal insertion (see my previous posts) referencing the roman law. This has been demonstrated by tracing manuscript history to identify when it was introduced.
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
I think Roman law is what is being referred to. There is no OT law.

I also think that Paul didn't write this verse, but was a scribal insertion (see my previous posts) referencing the roman law. This has been demonstrated by tracing manuscript history to identify when it was introduced.
Thanks Stephen. I have no idea of the veracity of what you are saying, though I am fairly certain when NT writers speak of the Law, they mean the Jewish law. Roman law would have no bearing on a realtionship with God.

Also, are you suggesting that Roman law would have an injunction against women speaking?
 

cjab

Well-known member
You say that silence is equated with submission, but you don't show the specific verses that teach that. Why not?
Consider that a husband and wife are to submit to one another. Does that indicate they are to be silent while submitting?
Of course. It means, in the context, don't answer back.

answer back

phrasal verb of answer

  1. respond cheekily or disrespectfully to someone, especially when being criticized or told to do something
 

Stephen

Active member
Thanks Stephen. I have no idea of the veracity of what you are saying, though I am fairly certain when NT writers speak of the Law, they mean the Jewish law. Roman law would have no bearing on a realtionship with God.

Their relationship with the local law was important in the book of 1st Corinthians. For example, wives wearing headcoverings was a roman law, Men not wearing headcoverings in religious worship was also important relative to the cultureal meaning. The brother sleeping with his father's wife was in violation of roman law, and the membership of the ecclesia was in violation of roman law for not reporting it.

Paul was very muich concerned with Christians not causing trouble.

Also, are you suggesting that Roman law would have an injunction against women speaking?

Yes.

See Adam Clarke's commentary on 1 Tim 2:12


Verse 12. Nor to usurp authority] A woman should attempt nothing, either in public or private, that belongs to man as his peculiar function. This was prohibited by the Roman laws: In multis juris nostri articulis deterior est conditio foeminarum quam masculorun,; l. 9, PAP. LIB. 31, QUAEST. Foeminoe ab omnibus officiis civilibus vel publicis remotae sunt; et ideo nec judicis esse possunt, nec magistratum gerere, nec postulare, nec pro alio invenire, nec procuratores existere; l. 2, de Reg. Juris. ULP. LIB. i. AD SAB.-Vid. POTH. Pand. Justin., vol. i. p. 13.​
"In our laws the condition of women is, in many respects, worse than that of men. Women are precluded from all public offices; therefore they cannot be judges, nor execute the function of magistrates; they cannot sue, plead, nor act in any case, as proxies. They were under many other disabilities, which may be seen in different places of the Pandects.​
But to be in silence.] It was lawful for men in public assemblies to ask questions, or even interrupt the speaker when there was any matter in his speech which they did not understand; but this liberty was not granted to women. See the note on 1 Corinthians 14:34; 1 Corinthians 14:35.​


As to whether the verses are a scribal insertion, here is a place to begin your research. Go where you wish from there.

https://hermeneutics.stackexchange....orinthians-1433-35-an-interpolation/1158#1158
 

cjab

Well-known member
Their relationship with the local law was important in the book of 1st Corinthians. For example, wives wearing headcoverings was a roman law, Men not wearing headcoverings in religious worship was also important relative to the cultureal meaning. The brother sleeping with his father's wife was in violation of roman law, and the membership of the ecclesia was in violation of roman law for not reporting it.

Paul was very muich concerned with Christians not causing trouble.



Yes.

See Adam Clarke's commentary on 1 Tim 2:12


Verse 12. Nor to usurp authority] A woman should attempt nothing, either in public or private, that belongs to man as his peculiar function. This was prohibited by the Roman laws: In multis juris nostri articulis deterior est conditio foeminarum quam masculorun,; l. 9, PAP. LIB. 31, QUAEST. Foeminoe ab omnibus officiis civilibus vel publicis remotae sunt; et ideo nec judicis esse possunt, nec magistratum gerere, nec postulare, nec pro alio invenire, nec procuratores existere; l. 2, de Reg. Juris. ULP. LIB. i. AD SAB.-Vid. POTH. Pand. Justin., vol. i. p. 13.​
"In our laws the condition of women is, in many respects, worse than that of men. Women are precluded from all public offices; therefore they cannot be judges, nor execute the function of magistrates; they cannot sue, plead, nor act in any case, as proxies. They were under many other disabilities, which may be seen in different places of the Pandects.​
But to be in silence.] It was lawful for men in public assemblies to ask questions, or even interrupt the speaker when there was any matter in his speech which they did not understand; but this liberty was not granted to women. See the note on 1 Corinthians 14:34; 1 Corinthians 14:35.​


As to whether the verses are a scribal insertion, here is a place to begin your research. Go where you wish from there.

https://hermeneutics.stackexchange....orinthians-1433-35-an-interpolation/1158#1158
BS - Rome recognized Judaism as a legal religion, allowing Jews to worship freely. Christianity was merely an extension to Judaism.
 
Last edited:

Truth7t7

Well-known member
What you say truth7t7 doesn't change A thing it proves

2 Timothy 3:16-17KJV
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

One thing buddy Jesus was God and he said !

John 13:34
34A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you also must love one another.

i'm gonna ask you one thing because you dodge me like cjab does and who do you follow Jesus or Paul ? who Jesus is God and gave new commandment and showed Jesus has athority and Paul who follows Jesus ? and he obeys the pastor ? Paul recieve scripture from God who is Jesus and Jesus were prophets recieve scripture from God was amde for Jesus coming. Paul can't say women can't preach niether can say women to stay silent because he isn't authority to change what Jesus established before him and niether i'm I or you or anyone change what it is written ! Paul writtes things according to worship Jesus and follow him and no way does he take the mantle of leadership.

Your wrong in how all this is dedicated to worshipping the lord and you close doors truth7t7 so women can do their part and thier doing thier part whether you like it or not ! young man !

whatever remorse or bad thing women has done to you let it go. Becuase just like Cjab your hate women-talk on how you look at women just so they don't preach the word proves you close door and Jesus let you open doors so you can help people get to heaven -_-. insensible proves you do not know everything.
Read "God's" words again

Kick your feet, roll on the floor, shout and scream to the top of your voice, it's not going to change God's words below

"It Is A Shame For Women To Speak In The Church"

1 Corinthians 14:34-35KJV
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.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
 

Stephen

Active member
Rome recognized Judaism as a legal religion, allowing Jews to worship freely. Christianity was merely an extension to Judaism.

At the time 1st Corinthians was written that wasn't the case. Paul was wanting to go to Rome to make that argument before Caesar to turn Christianity into a licit (as opposed to illicit) religion.

One of the more interesting hypothesis out there is that the books of Luke and Acts were the court filings for Paul's legal arguement, which is why Acts ends before the trial.
 

cjab

Well-known member
At the time 1st Corinthians was written that wasn't the case. Paul was wanting to go to Rome to make that argument before Caesar to turn Christianity into a licit (as opposed to illicit) religion.

One of the more interesting hypothesis out there is that the books of Luke and Acts were the court filings for Paul's legal arguement, which is why Acts ends before the trial.
The First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, probably written about 53–54 ce at Ephesus, Asia Minor, deals with problems that arose in the early years after Paul's initial missionary visit (c. 50–51) to Corinth and his establishment there of a Christian community.

Paul didn't go to Rome until AD58.

Again - more baseless facts.
 

Arikel88

Active member
Read what "Jesus" said ! and his words aren't going to change ! you can hold yourself unto 2 verses but if jesus says otherwise it's over :O.

Paul said that based of tradition of hebrew rabbias who negated women and by tradition put women in part of synagogue to keep silence. Paul wrote that but still the bible has other verses which I found that psalms, prophets, jesus and God said about preaching the word.

Because women were loud singing in temples in the temple of Solomon truth7t7 and daughters and sons of priest sang in temples. your incrrect everything was made for Jesus to arrive and he complets his prophecy. And Truth7t7 show more verse because your clinching in 2 verse against women and your only using it only against women ? it's not about helping it's about negating women thier part to preach ? Women can preach but not as pastors. And the Jesus came to speak the gospel and paul is ordered by Jesus to do so are you ? you keep dodging me the question truth7t7 do you follow Jesus or Paul ? then tell someone to slap you in the head to remember your in christianity this is worship to Jesus not paul yor mistaken if you can hold 2 verses against the whole bible about women singing in temples becuase a temple is A church becuase their are more verses.

Your just using 2 verses to just prevent women from preaching God doesn't want that truth7t7 God doesn't want that he wants you to love women and worship him with them ! Truly Truth7t7 you don't know what your doing young man.

I reccomend you to find more verses because paul words vs Jesus words ? Paul follows Jesus this and other things prophets are not above Jesus for he is God and Paul is Rabbia who kept tradition what Jesus(God) wrote in mosaic law which also adresses Jews remember truth7t7 the 10 commandments and 613 mitzvah are adressed for the tribes of Israel. You and I are gentiles we have to be in A process to be part of those tribes only because of what Jesus says we are children of God ! The noahide law is apllied to us by law Judaism and you. And Jesus said by 2 commandments keepeth the law love God and your neighbor ! So one question for you do you keep all 613 comamndments and 10 comamndments ?
 

Stephen

Active member
The First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, probably written about 53–54 ce at Ephesus, Asia Minor, deals with problems that arose in the early years after Paul's initial missionary visit (c. 50–51) to Corinth and his establishment there of a Christian community.

Paul didn't go to Rome until AD58.

Hmmmmmm . . . . that is exactly what I said.

Christianity wasn't yet a licit religion in Roman eyes when 1 Corinthians was penned. That is why Paul manipulated events to appear before Caesar at the end of Acts. Read Paul's arguments before Pilate and Herod, they are all about demonstrating that Christianity is an extension of Judaism.
 

cjab

Well-known member
Hmmmmmm . . . . that is exactly what I said.

Christianity wasn't yet a licit religion in Roman eyes when 1 Corinthians was penned. That is why Paul manipulated events to appear before Caesar at the end of Acts. Read Paul's arguments before Pilate and Herod, they are all about demonstrating that Christianity is an extension of Judaism.
Back then Christianity was no different from Judaism, in the eyes of the apostles: it was the same religion. If you can't understand that, you go back to first principles.

Judaism only diverged from Christianity irreversibly after the destruction of the temple.
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
At the time 1st Corinthians was written that wasn't the case. Paul was wanting to go to Rome to make that argument before Caesar to turn Christianity into a licit (as opposed to illicit) religion.

One of the more interesting hypothesis out there is that the books of Luke and Acts were the court filings for Paul's legal arguement, which is why Acts ends before the trial.
Luke is written to a Christian named Theophilus so that he can know the truth of what he has been taught and hs believed.There is no indication of any other purpose, like a court case.
It is interesting that people invent possible scenarios and then others take them up and proote them.
 

Stephen

Active member
Back then Christianity was no different from Judaism, in the eyes of the apostles: it was the same religion. If you can't understand that, you go back to first principles.

Judaism only diverged from Christianity irreversibly after the destruction of the temple.

Apologies for the inadvertent 'like". My mouse has gone nuts.

Yes, according to the apostles it was the same. But according to Rome (which is what we are discussing) it was a new religion, and one that didn't have standing in the empire.
 

Stephen

Active member
Luke is written to a Christian named Theophilus so that he can know the truth of what he has been taught and hs believed.There is no indication of any other purpose, like a court case.
It is interesting that people invent possible scenarios and then others take them up and proote them.

If Theophilus (i.e. "God lover") has been taught it and believed it, then what's the point of a written record. And why does Acts end right before the trial? Acts is a court drama where all of the facts are established, but the book is ended before the climactic trial and judgment.

At any rate, regardless of whether it was a court filing or not, the last several chapters are Paul manipulating the situation in order to argue his case before Caesar that Christianity is an extension of Judaism. Acts does not record the judgment.
 

cjab

Well-known member
Apologies for the inadvertent 'like". My mouse has gone nuts.

Yes, according to the apostles it was the same. But according to Rome (which is what we are discussing) it was a new religion, and one that didn't have standing in the empire.
No apology is needed. It was God himself who caused it to happen, even though you dislike me intensely.

Rome didn't have any means of distinguishing Christianity from Judaism as it was the same God, the same law, and the same spirit. Jesus was of course a Jew. Moreover there were many Christians in Jerusalem. At the most it was just a variant of Judaism. It wasn't anything Rome could care about. It was only much later that Rome saw Christianity as a threat. You really are making a lot of things up. The only reason Paul went to Rome was to escape the Jews.
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
If Theophilus (i.e. "God lover") has been taught it and believed it, then what's the point of a written record. And why does Acts end right before the trial? Acts is a court drama where all of the facts are established, but the book is ended before the climactic trial and judgment.

At any rate, regardless of whether it was a court filing or not, the last several chapters are Paul manipulating the situation in order to argue his case before Caesar that Christianity is an extension of Judaism. Acts does not record the judgment.
ok
 
Top