Check out some similar questions!

jlisenbe · Jun 28, 2018, 08:14 AM

Your problem was in not having any scripture to back up whatever your point was, so you had to resort to personal attacks. My contention, of course, was that when leaders are named, they were typically men. That is not an argument from silence. Very sorry you can't see that, but yeah, we've talked it to death.

Wondergirl · Jun 28, 2018, 03:01 PM

My contention, of course, was that when leaders are named, they were typically men.

That was because God worked with the culture that had been established. God didn't dictate the rules of engagement. He had given mankind free will to establish their own governments and policies and systems.

jlisenbe · Jun 28, 2018, 06:32 PM

My contention, of course, was that when leaders are named, they were typically men.

I said that simply to demonstrate that I am not making an argument from silence.

Your observation, with all due respect, is only speculation. It is not stated anywhere in the Bible. When Israel occupied the Promised Land, it would seem to have been an ideal opportunity to change culture. That, in fact, happened in a variety of ways, but not in the area of leadership. It is more logical to me to simply understand that God ordered the culture, not the other way around. If a person wants to walk in accordance with our current culture, then I get that, but it does not change the teachings of Scripture.

Wondergirl · Jun 28, 2018, 06:59 PM

If a person wants to walk in accordance with our current culture, then I get that, but it does not change the teachings of Scripture

So if Christian women become pastors, teachers, even SS superintendents, that would be against God's will?

jlisenbe · Jun 29, 2018, 02:47 AM

I think that would be too strong of a statement. I would be content to simply say that God's pattern of leadership, both in the Old Testament and New Testament, was to use men. Were there exceptions to that? Yes, so I would have to conclude there could be exceptions now as well, but they were infrequent and the pattern was quite clear. I honestly don't see how anyone could read the Bible and come to any different conclusion. But when you say, "That was because God worked with the culture that had been established," I don't see how anyone could know that. The Bible, so far as I know, does not indicate that. In fact, your reference to the prevailing culture just strikes me as curious. God always worked to transform cultures, not adjust to them. The NT church was counter-cultural in a striking manner, and yet the leadership even there came, primarily, from men.

Athos · Jul 1, 2018, 04:19 AM

I probably shouldn't butt in here, but you know who rushes in where wise men fear to tread.

It seems to me that a book, or collection of books, that covers about a thousand years and is written by many authors containing almost one million words and is from God himself, should have mentioned/approved the idea of women in leadership/preaching roles. Apparently, he didn't (except as noted). So what does that mean?

As for me, following the discussion, and (I think) understanding both sides, it seems the issue is how one interprets the Bible. Has God said everything there is to be said once and for all re salvation? Or, as we grow and evolve, has God left room for the species to widen its understanding on the path to salvation – not changing what has already been written in the Bible but deepening it?

I think where we get hung up is when one side declares the other side to be invalid.

Btw, I wonder if the original poster got his answer?

jlisenbe · Jul 1, 2018, 07:38 AM

Btw, I wonder if the original poster got his answer?

Ha! I imagine he got more than he bargained for.

dwashbur · Jul 2, 2018, 06:51 AM

"Has God said everything there is to be said once and for all re salvation? Or, as we grow and evolve, has God left room for the species to widen its understanding on the path to salvation – not changing what has already been written in the Bible but deepening it?"

Concerning salvation, yes he has. Concerning other stuff related to day-to-day life in the 21st century, not so much.

Athos · Jul 2, 2018, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Concerning salvation, yes he has. Concerning other stuff related to day-to-day life in the 21st century, not so much.

Thanks for replying.

I understand your answer to be yes - that a woman can be a Sunday School Superintendent according to the Bible. What I didn't understand was the second part of your answer - "Concerning other stuff related to day-to-day life in the 21st century, not so much".

jlisenbe · Jul 2, 2018, 12:45 PM

My question would remain, "How do you know that? How do you know that salvation is a settled issue, but other issues related to the 21st century are not settled?" The Bible, so far as I know, has not said that.

The question, I think, is always a simple one. Either the Bible will tell us how to live, or we will tell the Bible how we will live. Now does the Bible mention the internet, or cars, or buses and trains? No, so there are areas where it is silent, and therefore we have to work out God's will on them. But it speaks in great measure about morality, marriage, children, the sanctity of human life, and yes, leadership in the church, as well as many other areas.

Athos, you have asked a great question. I'm glad dwashbur answered you. Honestly, this whole thread has grown tense and tedious to me. We have talked it to death with very little agreement, and I regret that. Questions are asked but not answered, and that is also regrettable.

talaniman · Jul 2, 2018, 01:09 PM

Man is an imperfect creature, even when speaking for GOD. Ancient man more so as his knowledge was well limited by the time. For sure though each man (Or woman to be PC) can make his own choice in accordance to his own faith, and live in that choice.

Happy journey, may you find your answers.

jlisenbe · Jul 2, 2018, 01:20 PM

It's either true or it's not. If it's true, then we should follow it. If not, then we should discard it.

talaniman · Jul 2, 2018, 01:45 PM

Faith is about believing not knowing. Even knowing has no absolutes.

jlisenbe · Jul 2, 2018, 04:37 PM

If knowing has no absolutes, then you cannot know absolutely that knowing has no absolutes. It's a self contradictory statement.

Now if we want to say that we can never know everything, then we are in agreement.

Wondergirl · Jul 2, 2018, 05:38 PM

It's either true or it's not.

And truth is determined how?

jlisenbe · Jul 2, 2018, 07:12 PM

And truth is determined how?

That's the whole point. Jesus in John 17:17 stated, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." The Word of God is the summation of truth. It is the measuring rod, the standard by which truth is determined, and the foundation upon which all truth is built.

Wondergirl · Jul 2, 2018, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

That's the whole point. Jesus in John 17:17 stated, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."

Thus, anything that's in the Bible is true and is to be taken literally.

jlisenbe · Jul 2, 2018, 07:42 PM

The Bible, like all literature, contains idioms, metaphors, hyperbole, and analogies, and there would therefore be sections not to be taken literally. Jesus, for instance, when He describes Himself as the door to the sheepfold, does not intend for us to literally see Him as a door. When we are described as sheep, we are not to be thought of literally as sheep. But as a general rule, with some commonsense exceptions, the Bible is to be taken literally.

Is the Bible true? Yes.

dwashbur · Jul 3, 2018, 07:11 AM

Athos,
What I mean is, the Bible gives everything a person needs to know to be reconciled to the God of the Bible and become part of His/Her/Its intimate family.

It can't tell us anything about Sunday School because that's a 19th century invention that has morphed over the decades into something that doesn't remotely resemble its beginnings. The Bible says nothing about such things, so we have to do the best we can figuring it out.

That's what I meant by day-do-day life in the 21st century, not so much. It tells us plenty about what our attitudes are supposed to be, but it doesn't deal with specific behaviors or hierarchical structures such as the church at large has developed across the centuries. Some things, it leaves us to figure out for ourselves.

talaniman · Jul 3, 2018, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

The Bible, like all literature, contains idioms, metaphors, hyperbole, and analogies, and there would therefore be sections not to be taken literally. Jesus, for instance, when He describes Himself as the door to the sheepfold, does not intend for us to literally see Him as a door. When we are described as sheep, we are not to be thought of literally as sheep. But as a general rule, with some commonsense exceptions, the Bible is to be taken literally.

Is the Bible true? Yes.

As best as humans can make it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Bible

It has passed through many hands over time.