End Time Army of Women Preachers Psalms 68:11

[rdp]

Even when she's teaching him from the all-authoritative word of God ? Respectfully, this just makes absolutely no sense whatsoever - & is a clear intrusion into the biblical witness.



In this way, a woman could speak in the church without undermining her husband's authority. I do believe you are right that a woman should not expound, teach, or in any way take authority over a man in a setting of believers gathering together. However, she is free to speak, pray, prophesy, worship, sing, teach other women/children, and testify to edify the church.




You still have not directly answered the contradiction of Paul's teaching of a woman remaining silent, and yet, still being able to pray/prophesy in the church. If you are silent, no language can come forth, right? This interpretation contradicts itself. You still have not said how exactly this can be.

How can you be silent, without language, and yet still be able to prophesy? You didn't answer this, and will not. There is no answer for this (with your interpretation) unless you expect a woman to use sign language when she is prophesying, instead of speaking out loud. But you have said that women in your church are free to speak/pray/sing/prophesy/testify, yet you have not said how they can do those things, and remain silent.


LOL - Sigh...Yes, I have explained this to you over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over & over...ad nauseum infinitum X 2 . For about the 10th time now (this gets soooo old), each passage means precisely what it says in its distinct context....simple.

As I've already asked you (& you "ignored"), please explain how NT believers must both "Bear one another's burdens" (Gal. 6.2) & yet "every man shall bear his own burden" (Gal. 6.5)?? Using your logic, we must segregate these passages since "both cannot be true" - or, in your words "You still have not directly answered the (supposed) 'contradiction of Paul's teaching'" .



Why? Because, there is no answer to that. Was Paul contradicting himself in these passages? No. I don't believe he was. He was addressing two different situations. It is obvious that a woman can't remain SILENT in the church, and be used in the gifts of the spirit within a body of believers.


Ummm, this is precisely what I've been trying to tell you for almost 50 pp. now ?? This is just plain weird. Your "conundrum" is self-authenticated (as well as fabricated) & nowhere near as earth-shattering as you apparently think it is.



So the interpretation of the word silent becomes the center of attention here. What exactly did Paul mean by a woman keeping silent?


Well, let's try it again . He meant that women were to keep silent in matters of either evaluation of prophecies or "preaching" as evidenced by the fact that the Greek verb translated "speak" is defined as to "talk or preach" & is translated as "preach" no less than 6 times in the KJV. I've pointed this out enough times that I could almost pass-out. Your response? "You're not answering me" ??



(My opinion) Paul was using this passage to teach women to be silent if men/husbands were teaching/preaching, and not to interrupt or use silly language to interrupt what he/they were saying, and not to undermine their authority. He was speaking to the women to not, in any way, undermine their husbands or other men in the church setting.


Well this is certainly true, but it's not all that the passage affirms. As I've stated before, whatever interpretation you may arrive at, do you honestly believe anyone would read the following passages & - just allowing the biblical data to stand on ts own merits without any outside assistance - conclude that God approves of "women-preachers" in the church?


34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.


11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.


C'mon now, be honest with these Scriptures.



I have said before, that you are right in that there is no place in the NT where we see a woman standing before a group of men, and teaching the men from the scriptures. That is not there, and you are right, it can't be found. Paul never allowed for a woman to have a position of authority over men.


This is my whole point & I sincerely appreciate your honesty here.


However, if a woman is sharing the gospel to those who are hungry, alongside her husband, with his support, and working together as a team, much as Priscilla and Aquila, this is not out of order. We see many, many women who were helpers in the NT, who never sought their own authority, but still were valuable workers/preachers/evangelists.


Oh, I completely agree! Certainly women can & do make invaluable observations & insights in winning the lost. But, as you've pointed out, it's not at all within the context of the gathering together of men & women in the church - it's in the context of winning the lost.


Again, no saved woman has any business teaching an unsaved sinner man a Bible study - when there are plenty of men who can (& should) do the job. The more excellent model is for women to win women & men to win men to the Lord. Hence, no violation of the created-order or impropriety takes place .



Thus it remains, that a woman would remain silent when her husband, or other man was speaking, and not seek to interrupt, or undermine their words. However, in the right time, place, and setting, a woman would be free to exercise the gifts of the spirit, keeping all things decent and in order, as Paul taught.


Sure, I completely agree with this. I think we're more closer than we are apart in agreement on this issue (& I really don't even understand our differences now?).



This is simply my understanding, RDP... and I guess yours is different. Regardless though we may never agree... doesn't matter. I know that you have put many hours into studying Greek and Hebrew, that is obvious. But I don't believe the Lord expects every believer to have a complete grasp of Hebrew/Greek to understand the simplicity of the words we have written in the Bible.


First, though I've accumulated a lot of learning over the years in the area of Greek (not so much in Hebrew), I still have much to learn - but learning I am!


Second, I completely agree that we can stand firmly on the numerous excellent translations available today, which is the very reason I believe what I do! Indeed, in my studies of Greek, I've amazed at how accurate most reputable English translations are (i.e., Formal Equivalences). To me it is very simple & straight-forward & I honestly cannot believe any one truly thinks God approves of "women-preachers" in the NT church assembly.


New International Version
I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.


I pray that we can continue this discussion in a kind way, and keep slurs, insults, and demeaning talk out of the way. This would be pleasing to the Lord, I believe.


Well, I agree about the congeniality of discussions, but, in all sincerity I think we've pretty-much exhausted the topic & see no use in continuing much further. I think the point has been well demonstrated that many are just stubbornly refusing to see what the Bible clearly states about the issue of supposed "women-preachers" in the church assembly.


Besides, my wife & I are taking a few days off to relax & I probably will not be looking on much after tomorrow night (I fully expect this to fuel the fire of many). I will say that I appreciate your spirit in this last post (well some of it ). God Bless.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

And, to continue this discussion, I would like to ask why Paul did not detail qualifications for those in the five-fold ministry? If you could, provide the complete list of NT scriptures that detail qualifications for the five-fold ministry... which would be apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers.

Ephesians 4:11-13
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

We are quite aware of the detailed list of of qualifications given for: bishops, deacons, and elders. Those positions being quite obviously positions of authority in church government, and most will agree that it would have to be a man fulfilling those roles.

However, to my knowledge, there are no list of qualifications given by Paul for those in the five-fold ministry, like those given for bishop/elder/deacon.


As you've pointed out, Deacons are not a part of the 5-fold ministry indicating that, while certainly important, they're not in the "preaching" ministry in a strict-sense as with the 5-fold ministry (though it seems to be a proving ground for future potential). Interestingly, even those functioning in this position are to be men:


8 Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. 9 They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. 11 Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. 12 Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well.


Further, Phillip is specifically called an Evangelist (& he preached & baptized; e.g., Acts 8) - Yet, specifically where can we find a woman identified as the same in the Bible:_________? it doesn't exist...Why not? Scripture has no problem identifying Evangelists - which, again, are always identified as men & never women.



I believe this is why: (my opinion) Church government is meant for the shoulders of men to handle.


Yes, but Sis. Alvear has told us that Phoebe was a "ruler" - even of Paul ?!?



However, in edifying the church through the gifts of the spirit, and the five-fold ministry, which is also for edification of the church body, then there are no qualifications listed, except that if the Lord has called, and given you this ministry/talent/gift, that you are to use it for the edifying of the body.

Therefore, the five-fold ministry could include women, because there are no qualifications listed by Paul, and it remains an open door, so to speak. (Of course, all have their opinions on this.)


Anyone in the 5-fold ministry should certainly be able to teach (else they're not qualified to be in the 5-fold ministry) - which is clearly forbidden of women in the church assembly by Paul over & over.


So, yes M'aam, I would strongly "disagree" with this statement inasmuch as women are NEVER identified in the 5-fold ministry in the Bible (Junia was NOT an "Apostle" & this has been demonstrated already on this thread) - yet we can specifically pin-point where a man is identified in each ministry. Case-closed for me & my fellowship.



Therefore, if you know the Lord has called you, like Sis. Alvear has testified of her calling, then you would be in disobedience to the spirit of Christ to not follow. If the Lord opens the doors, and makes a way, and there is fruit from the labor, then who are we to judge this? Let each one be fully persuaded in his own mind, and not cast stones at those upon whom have produced great fruit in the spirit because they have answered the call from Jesus on their life.


I cannot violate the Scriptures - & neither should any one else calling themselves "Christians."

1 Cor. 12:26-31
26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

Paul was not talking here about church government (although he mentioned it as a part of the church members) but he was addressing edification of the church body through ministry, and he included part of the five-fold ministry, as well as other gifts/ministries all lumped together in the same passage.


But specifically where can we locate a woman being identified as "first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers":___________? And, notice that after he references the official set-in office of the ministry he continues on with "after that," which is translated from a Greek adverb ( ἔπειτα) meaning "afterwards; properly, only then (emphasizing what precedes is a necessary precursor) - http://biblehub.com/greek/1899.htm.


This Greek term denotes a moving on to a secondary-subservient topic only after giving the ministry the position of primacy in the church - which, again, we never see women identified as in the church (& even strictly forbidden). Further, Paul goes on to mention "helps," which of course a woman is certainly free to partake of (& is perfectly suited for IMO). So, of course women have an active place in the church - that "place" is not "preaching-teaching" to men however (& when they do so they are out of their God-given "place" - as is the pastor who allows it).



This would seem to correlate that the five-fold ministry, gifts of the spirit, and other ministries, are not part of church government, but are for the edification of the body, of which any believer man/woman could be used to edify the church.

Bishops/elders/deacons would fall under the category of church government, and the qualifications listed by Paul seem to be very clear that men would occupy these positions.

No so sure I would put deacons in the category of church government, as they seem to be more in the generic "servant" category by both biblical example, as well as actual lexical data. We first see the word "deacon" used this way (as a servant contra "preacher") in the book of Acts.

“And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, 'It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables” (Acts 6:2). The juxtapositioning of the two issues of "preaching the word of God" in contrast to "serving tables" well demonstrates that the one is not the other.

Here's 2 excellent academic articles on this issue for your consideration: http://bible-truth.org/deacon.html & http://www.gotquestions.org/deacons-church.html.


God Bless.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

Psalms 68:11

Psalms 68:11 Who Proclaimed the Word?

Perhaps many will remember the great chorus from handel’s messiah based on this psalm. The loud acclamation rings out: “The Lord gave the Word! Great was the company of the preachers.” What may not be so obvious is that this is a hard saying for those who believe all of the Scripture restricts women from preaching. Two major issues have been associated with this text: (1) What was the owed that was announced? And (2) Were the announcers women?
The first problem is the less difficult one. “The word” (‘omer) in this context hardly means mere news of the victory that had just been won. It is a divine word, either a promise (Ps 77:8) or a command with accompanying divine power (Hab 3:9), or else it is the word of God that is likened elsewhere to mighty thunder or a trumpet blast (Ps 68:33, Is 30:30; Zech 9:14).
The older commentators found in this word a reference to gospel preaching, probably because they linked this text directly with Isaiah 40:9. That meaning fits well the Isaiah context, but no direct reference to preaching the good news or gospel appears in this context.
It would be too reductionistic, however to limit this word, as many unfortunately do, to a watchword in war. Now it is true that women were leader of the songs of victory, and the feminine gender is used for announcers. It will be remembered that when Israel defeated Pharaoh, Deborah and Barak overthrew Sisera, Jephthah routed the Ammonites and David beat Goliath, the women went forth with a song of victory.
But a song of victory from God does not appear to cover all that this psalm talk about. It is used of the word of promise as well, and this is what opens this text up for a larger sphere of reference. Therefore, everything included in that word of promise was being communicated to a great host who would announce that word.
As mentioned before, the announcers of the good news (ham bass rot) appear to be women, for the Hebrew participle is in the feminine plural form. God placed his word in the mouths of his announcers; the word of promise and power in the face of a hostile world. As such, this word is very close to that of Isaiah 40:9 and especially Joel 2:28-29. These heralders comprised a great host of individuals. Surely this foreshadows what God would do at Pentecost and what he has since done all over the world through the great missionary force, which has included so many women.
Yes this was copied and pasted)

Just got in from the eye doctor really had a better report than last time...thanks for those that have prayed...

Good grief - you've got to be kidding me at this point - again ???


Have you not read how many times I've demonstrated that the context of Psalm 68 has absolutely nothing to do with women "preaching to men" from the Scriptures, but rather simply proclaiming God's vindication of His people ?


This has gotten' sooooo silly - but, what else can you do when you're attempting to defend the indefensible ?? As usual, you're merely swatting at shadows.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

and no I am not putting women preachers beside Paul in doing what he was called to do I am only saying he had women with him ministering the word...No greater missionary ever lived other that Paul...If I have come across that way I did not mean it like that....not at all....sorry ...sometimes our writings sound so different that what we would express personally. If I sounded in any way that I think some woman or man for that matter was greater than Paul I am sorry I did not mean it that way at all. I repeat: I think women worked right along with Paul but I do not think they were greater than him or even over him for that matter...


No Sis. Alvear, women did not "minister the word of God right alongside Paul" - no more than they were beheaded, beaten, stranded in the deep, shipwrecked, etc. "right alongside" Paul. You have not - nor can you provide any biblical text which specifically demonstrates this (I've already demonstrated your error in appealing to Rom. 16 & Philippians 4.3).


If you will read what I personally have written you will read that I have always said, :I never heard the Lord call me to preach, He called me to be a missionary...." Whatever that may mean to you....I have never been ordained and do not plan to be....God's calling is enough for me...I am no threat to anyone. I grew up under Brother and Sister AO Holmes and mother Holmes is still alive today...a queen of women preachers...I deeply love her...Went to church under Brother and Sister Bryan Taylor and came to the mission field in 1968 with both the Holmes blessings and the Taylor's blessings...

There is no such thing as "women-preachers" in the Bible in the sense of women expounding the Word of God to men in the church. Anyone can place any label on someone else, but that does not validate the designation from the Scriptures.


Yes, I know all about your beginnings in Brazil - That's all I will say .

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

and almost half a century later and still blessed by their oversight in my life...

Yes M'aam, well, I know a woman who gave numerous pastors fits (including me) until she finally found one who let her "preach" in the church assembly....guess what? Now this pastor is the best thing since sliced bread to her & she gives him no trouble!


Hmmmm, who-da'-thunk-it ?


Just sayin'......

[rdp]

Originally Posted by ILG

I used to preach back in the day. Thought I would chime in for a moment.



Notice that this says "the man" not "the men" and talks about Adam and Eve. I believe this is talking about a woman not nagging her husband.


Well, I've already posted enough syntactical data, exegesis, quotes by professional linguists, etc. that I see no need to continue. As with most issues, people will simply believe what they want to believe - despite the crystal clear biblical evidence to the contrary.


Dr. Daniel Wallace:Gune and aner are words which mean 'adult female' and 'adult male' in their unmarked meanings. Only if there are sufficient contextual clues that husband and wife are in view do the words mean 'wife' and 'husband.'...The definite article or 'idios' (one's own) or a possessive pronoun is required to show that husband and wife are in the text. None of these things occur in 1 Tim 2. (RDP: which is precisely why hardly any reputable translation adopts the "husband-wife" rendering) The article occurs in 1 Cor 11, but only because it is syntactically required by the construction. Both passages are clearly talking about the Christian community in worship, which would of course involve single adults and married couples. Take a look at other passages that are clearly speaking about husband and wife--e.g., Eph 5, 1 Peter 3--and you'll see that they use these signals to note that husband and wife are in view.



Here's the actual Greek text itself, along with precise morphology: http://biblehub.com/text/1_timothy/2-12.htm


Here's the actual translation (taken from the ultra-literal NASB):


11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression....14 I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you before long; 15 but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church.


I Timothy 2.12; NLT: I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly.


Renown grammarian-exegete, Dr. Douglas Moo's direct comments to me regarding the plural rendering of the NLT in I Timothy 2.12: "I think that you are basically on the right track. One certainly cannot insist on continual action in a present infinitive, for instance; and, of course the NLT rendering of the plurals is irrelevant to what is going on in the Greek."


No, the passage is not at all discussing the home-order, but rather church-order as clearly stated in I Timothy 3.14-15 (wherein Paul clearly affirms his stated purpose in writing the epistle to Timothy).



Seeing as this seems to be a direct contradiction against women prophesying and the Bible allows women to prophesy to men elsewhere in the Bible, it only makes sense that this must be speaking of something other than women prophesying and is likely connected to the cultural context of women and men being separated and possibly women being unable to hear what was going on.

Since women were used powerfully by God in prophesying to Kings about going to war (Huldah) and in judging the people of God and leading them (Deborah) and the Bible specifically states that sons and daughters shall prophesy, those who don't want women to speak in the church at all find themselves wrestling with scripture in my opinion. They also allow women to testify and sing and other things, but say they draw the line at preaching or pastoring. Since God saw fit for a woman to lead Israel altogether (Deborah), I think in certain circumstances it can be good and fine for a woman to lead the whole camp. There is a terrible and nasty spirit that makes all women into Jezebels and flaming feminists for simply wanting to be used of God. Shame.

Anyway, there's my two cents, for what it's worth.

Of course women can be used of God, but not in "preaching-teaching" men in the church from the Scriptures (I failed to see any biblical example of this in your post ). Women (as well as the pastor) are out of their place when they do this & in direct defiance to crystal-clear God-breathed Scripture.


But, just as I predicted, this has simply been a rehash of the same ol' errors - which I predict will simply continue to be copy-pasted & then stubbornly taught to others. And, those who do so will have to give an account of their wresting of Scripture in the Day of Judgement .


Carry on gals - very busy for the next week.

[Roxanne Murphy]

Originally Posted by n david

There you go again. And here you claimed a while back to not be using that word as an insult.

It wasn't an insult, I was acknowledging a fellow Pharisee. The apostle Paul did so, calling the Pharisees who sat on councils to question and judge him "men and brethren". I just stated it in today's English.

[Sister Alvear]

No scripture in the Bible says a woman cannot preach...if my friend wants to say that women cannot teach men then women cannot lead songs...or anything that might teach...she had better not even make a sound....

It would be better to really know what the Bible says and what it means...In no sitting can a woman be subject to all men and in no sitting that I have ever been in a woman has not tought something in someway...

[Sister Alvear]

A song leader or song leaders generally set the pace for the whole service...and never put a woman on an insturment...because she might play lead music...lol....

[Sister Alvear]

The truth of the matter is a woman should not rule her husband...that is what the original says...