"Paul here gives some reasons for why he teaches on women not teaching or exerciseing authority over a man. Have these reasons changed, did the woman being deceived, falling into transgression stop being a reality after that culture passed?"

Excuse me, but exactly WHEN did men stop being deceived and falling into sin in the body of Christ brother?  I have seen more men ruin the pulpit than women... 

This comment takes your side past the realm of reality and into fantasy... Men are sinless?  Give me a break.

I see now the heart of your theology... it is contrived from a male dominance idea, and probably stems from insecurity issues brought on by some sort of thing the mother did wrong in raising them.  UGH...  

Actually I see the issue of man ruling over women as part of the curse as a result of sin.
Weeds and biting insects were also part of the curse.

It's not what God originally intended.
Do we let weeds grow unchecked?
Do we not attempt to eliminate pesky insects?

Just contemplating...

I have been thinking today about this subject and this is what I felt like sharing with you all.

This is the last Age, the last covenant God is going to make with sinful mankind.  As we have all been discussing it seems overwhelmingly so that Christ is coming back very soon.  One thing we need to remember is that God never changes.  He may change the way He goes about bringing something to pass but His character never changes.

He inspired the NT writings and nowhere does He say that we will need to update them for Him.   Times and people change but not God. What He hated in the OT is what He hates in NT times and what He loved in the OT He still loves now.   You can depend on His promises. I think that's one of the great things about God, don't you?

The inerrancy of the Bible is something we Christians have always taken pride in. We knew that through translations a word here or there may have been misinterpreted but it wasn't something big enough to change the original meanings of Scripture. Now we have people fussing not only over a word or two but complete books, some have questioned and called them strawmen. What is it coming to when we can't trust God to give us a Bible that is holy and true!

It may not matter to some of you that some of the newer versions have changed that Mary was a virgin to a young woman but it matters to me.  The free sex going on today and people living together without ever marrying is nothing new and they probably don't care or even notice the change.

We are living in a very educated and evil generation.  It doesn't matter what people have done to advance themselves or how their cultures have changed over time, not to God any way.  What He told Paul, Peter, James and John, etc., to write is good until He returns to end the world that now exists.  It has been doomed since the beginning. Mankind can try to make it better but God has already told us, it will wax worse and worse.

 For I am the LORD, I change not Mal. 3:6

I believe only qualified men can be overseers.  They are responsible for the flock, and are to emulate the leadership of the ultimate qualified male leader of the church, Jesus Christ, by servant leadership.

The overseers are to put the needs of the flock above their own, just as Jesus Christ put the needs of the church above His own.  In the same way, husbands are to put the needs of their wives first.

Some disagree with the authoritarian leadership of men in the church, and rightly so.  However, scripture is clear, that the responsibility of being an overseer rests with qualified males.

I'll get back to Jason's comments...but in reading through the thread to this point there seems to be a certain perception that is coming through, but maybe it's just the way I'm reading...


Do men have "authority" over women?  Or, is it that women are to not have "authority" over men?

I thinks theres been some halfast logic in play over this issue, and not just on this thread.  I Tim. 2:12-14 appears to be the polar opposite "trump card" (to use Gary's referent as he did about Gal. 3:26-29 earlier in this thread) that is used to "put women in their place", so to speak.  From my reading and experience in the Lord, NO Believer is to "usurp" or "have authority" over any other Believer, male or female.  This backward reasoning also seems to be much of the basis of what is fobbed off as "male headship in the family", ie. "the guy's in charge".

Also, the word "authority" may not be clearly defined in this discussion.  Normally, when I see "authority" being discussed in this setting the equivalent Greek word that comes to mind is "excousia"--command style, top-down hierarchy--the kind that Jason is well used to from his experience in the Marines.  That kind of "authority" is the exact kind that Jesus said "not so" to. 

So, to reiterate; "Do men have "authority" over women?  Or, is it that women are to not have "authority" over men?"  Or, is there actually a third path, *cough*, I mean, The Jesus Path?


V