Quote:In reference to akhan Rob's post concerning Junias in Romans 16:7 (or Youniya in the Peshitta text), Chrysostom exclaims in his Homilies...y
I provided the link to this earlier when the usual two or three 'proof texts' like Deborah, etc. were referenced. But, apparently nobody read it or they wouldn't be trying to use examples like this.
=====================================================================================
In 1 Tim 2:11-15 Shaul / Paul says the ban on female pastors is based on original sin, not the customs of society.
Elohim cursed Chewa / Eve with several things;
* pain in childbirth and
* submission to her husband.
Do modern women still have to submit? Why not ask if modern women still experience pain in childbirth? They are both curses stemming from the same sin. What it says about the woman's role is not based on the customs of the day, but the customs of the day were based on Elohim's curse in Genesis 3.
There's very few places in the Word where I can think of Elohim explaining WHY He says "Thou shalt not ____________". One is why women aren't allowed to preach. Another is idolatry, "For I YHWH, your Elohim, am a jealous Elohim". Now many people will try to continually re-interpret the scriptures and say the ban was because of this or that that was happening in Ephesus at the time, but Paul clearly gives the context and clearly gives the reason for his statement and clearly says it's because of what happened in the garden of Eden, not what happened in Ephesus.
Women are allowed to prophecy - the scriptures make that clear. Someone might be able to make an argument that 1 Tim 2 is dealing with the office and maybe women can still speak when they've been asked to. But for a woman to hold the office of Senior Pastor, or decide who does and doesn't speak, etc., would certainly be a violation of what the New Testament is telling us here.
Women can prophecy because this is not a leadership position. A prophet is someone who opens their mouth and speaks an oracle from God. This can be done in a submissive way (and in fact requires a lot of submission to the Spirit). Paul speaks in 1 Cor 14:26-32 that the prophets should speak only when they are permitted. 1 Cor 14:26-32 clearly puts prophets in submission to the direction of those men who are in charge of the order of any worship.
Now invariably when this comes up people will say...
1. Aren't women allowed to be prophets? Isn't that the same thing? Clearly not. That's like saying the scriptures must be in conflict, and let's pay more attention to the verses we like than the verses we don't like. There's no conflict here - only a refusal to reconcile the whole word.
2. Cite role of various women and argue that these examples supercede clear teachings on Doctrine.
Miriam is often mentioned, but Elohim struck Miriam with leprousy when she tried to proclaim that her position was on par with that of Mosh?? / Moses. Some people haven't learned the lesson of this passage and still try to claim she had the same leadership position as Mosh??. The scriptures record Miriam leading the women in song (Exodus/Shemot 15:20), but never record her leading the men in song, let alone teaching. Her ministry was to the women of Israel. This does not violate the ban on women "having authority over a man". The scriptures do not ban women teaching or leading women or children, only adult men.
Deborah is frequently mentioned too, but a close look shows that this too, is an example of how Elohim did not give Deborah the same reward a man might have gotten in her position.
When Deborah was a judge, the scriptures say Israel "did evil in the eyes of the Lord" (Judges 4:1). Allowing a woman to become Judge was probably one of those evils it was talking about. (Maybe not the source of all of Israel's evil, but one manifestation of the fact that they had forgotten Elohim's way of doing things.) In Isaiah 3:12 Elohim calls calls it a "disaster" (verse 11) that "women rule over them" (verse 12). In Hebrews 11:32, when Elohim honors the men of the ages who acted on faith, Barak is honored, but not Deborah.
Phoebe is mentioned in Romans 16 as a "servant" (diakonoV=)yn#m#). Some have tried to say this word refers to a leader in the church, but it simply means "servant" and it's used in places like Matt 22:13 and John 2:5 to refer to people who are clearly servants, but not leaders among an assembly. However, there has been a tradition supporting female "deacons/servants", but not in a ministry to men. In the Apostolic Teaching and Constitution (1st-2nd century AD), it was said that
* women were forbidden to teach (Book III, part VI),
* and forbidden to baptize/immerse (Book III, part IX)
* but allowed, and even preferred, for immersing/baptizing women as recorded in:
*
o "Ordain also a deaconess who is faithful and holy, for the ministrations towards women. For sometimes he cannot send a deacon, who is a man, to the women, on account of unbelievers. Thou shalt therefore send a woman, a deaconess, on account of the imaginations of the bad. For we stand in need of a woman, a deaconess, for many necessities; and first in the baptism of women" (Apostolic Teaching and Constitution, Book III, part XV, Sec II, CCEL)
So scriptural approval of a woman as a "deaconness" does not necessarily authorize women for leadership role in the general congregation of both men and women, but servant roles ministering to women, particularly in areas where a male minster might compromise the modesty of women.
Some people have even gone so far as to make up lies to say the Scriptures have examples supporting women in ministry. Some have claimed that there was a female apostle/shaliach named "Junia" mentioned in Romans 16:7.
* In the Greek Romans 16:7, the name mentioned in the Textus Receptus is "Junian", which is NOT a feminine name. "Junian" can be either masculine or feminine, and those who say the ONLY correct translation of it is in the feminine are spreading a complete lie in order to establish a conflict in scriptures so they can ignore the verses they don't like. There is not one Greek manuscript that contains a feminine version of this name. Those who say there are manuscripts with a feminine version of this name are promoting a lie. Of course, some men do have feminine names, like Jonah / Yonah / ("hnwy" in Hebrew, "h)nwy" and "Nnwy" in TY and Peshitta), but the name "Junian" is not feminine. So if a male prophet like Jonah (whom the scriptures call the "son" of Amittai) can have a grammatically feminine name like "Jonah", then a grammatically neutral name like "Junian" should not give rise to "proof" that this person was a woman. We cannot go around saying that the Scriptures are in error. We have to accept it as authoritative cannon and do what it says whether we like it or not. We cannot argue with Scripture, we cannot change it. Elohim will hold us accountable if we do.
* In the Aramaic Romans 16:7, the name appears as ")ynwy". No background is given on this person, thus we are left wondering whether this name should be treated as Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Coptic, Armenian, Latin, Sanskrit or something else. We cannot really draw any conclusions as to whether this is a man or a woman.
Not one of the disciples Y'shua picked was a woman. Elohim excluded women from ministry in the Levitical priesthood and the DNA marker to indicate Levitcal ministry is passed from father to son.
If it says women are not to teach [men], who are we to argue with that? We have to follow what Elohim says, not what men (or women) say.
One argument used to support women in positions of authority that Gal 3:28 says we are "neither male nor female". That, of course, is a failure to examine the real context of the verse in question. Let's look at both the verse and it's context. Galatians 3:27-29 says...
for all of you who were immersed (baptized) into Messiah have clothed yourselves with Messiah. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free,male nor female, for you are all one in Messiah Y'shua. If you belong to Messiah, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Clearly, this is talking about the context of salvation. In the even greater context, Shaul / Paul was talking about the role of the Torah and gentiles verses Jews. Thus, the idea of their being "neither Jew nor Gentile" is more central to the theme of Galatians chapter 3 than "slave nor free" or "male nor female".
So yes, the context of this verse is well established, even if some people want to make it sound like it means something different than the context it is presented in. That's where balancing all of scripture comes into play. In a nutshell, the scriptures support the idea of women...
1.. Acting as a prophetess (many verses)
2.. Being a servant (Romans 16)
3.. Leading other women in song (Ex 15:20)
----------------------
They clearly ban women...
1.. From teaching men in general, at least in a way that involves authority
2.. From have having a position of authority over men
-------------------------
And leave open the question of whether woman can...
1.. Teach women
2.. Teach children
3.. Have a position of authority over women and/or male children
4.. Lead men in song
5.. Change diapers in the nursery
6.. Drive automobiles, create clay sculptures, etc, etc, etc.
...though I dare say most people would have no problem with women engaging in most of these "unanswered" issues.
Women are allowed to be servants, which means they are elligible to recieve the greatest reward possible. (Matt 23:11, Mark 9:35). Preaching does not necessarily contain the greatest reward (though from a human point of view, some people hold it in the greatest esteem). If women try to do something they're not called to do, they will spend a lot of time doing something that will get in the way of being able to receive the greatest reward Elohim had in store for them.
Also, Jewish tradition has a long resistance to women in leadership. Thus we have Jewish Oral Tradition, Gentile Church Oral Tradition, Written scripture, and scriptural examples all speaking against the idea of women in leadership and no scriptural support to the contrary. Who are you going to follow...men/women or Elohim's Word? Personally, I'm not going to argue with the scriptures by agreeing with those who set themselves on edge against the Holy Writ.
=========================================================================
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="
tupid: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/withstupid.gif" alt="
