Did Priscilla “Teach

[HRoberson]

Gee whiz....sorry for the long post.

A "meeting" of any group requires (usually - but I'm gonna waffle later) at least three things:

a. Some agreed to and generally routine purpose - to play golf, to make a decision, to worship, and...
b. Some number appropriate to represent the group - a quorum for example, and
c. Some structure, again usually routine

Before anybody asks, I don't have Scripture for these; it seems to have been my universal experience on at least two continents and in various settings (religious, military, corporate, and yes, family). Any number of you may have had different experiences. Fine.

Since we apparently want to try and get this down to a fine difference (we are after all on a coC board), let's suggest this:

A "meeting of the church" is no different than a meeting of any other organization. A small Sunday evening assembly is a meeting of the church because it is routine and structured, with expected results. There is no "quorum" per se in this meeting because we all believe that "where one or two are gathered together....", except that somebody has to show up. The same holds true for Sunday morning. In these cases, the fact that it is routine (time and purpose) creates the "meeting." If we want to know how many small groups have to show up to have a "meeting," the answer is "one," assuming we've advertised the meeting.

However, this only holds if by a "meeting" we mean something routinely done by the "church." A meeting of small groups to play putt-putt is not a "meeting" of the church in the terms we are (OK, I am) using it.

So, to answer the question "what does it take to have a meeting of the church," it is this: a regular or announced general meeting for some religious and/or corporate purpose. By corporate I mean "having to do with the body as a whole." So, a meeting to vote on a new pastor may well be a "meeting" of the church, but a meeting of the fly fishing ministry would not be.

That answer deals with "corporate" meetings. I am well aware that we worship all the time and that prayer meetings of one or two Christians enjoy the company of our God. However, for the purposes of this thread (as I understand it), those do not qualify as "meetings" of the church any more than Tony Blair's lunch constitutes a meeting of the government.

And so, if we intend to argue over whether Pricilla taking Apollos aside and teaching him authorizes Pricilla to preach next Sunday, it clearly does not. The two settings are completely different and (at least to my and apparently Paul's mind) are "guided" by different considerations.

OK. Somebody's gonna ask "So HR, how do you know that the 1st century folk made the same distinctions that we do?" The answer simply is: I don't specifically. What I do know is that their assemblies apparently had some structure, were routine, and were designed to accomplish various but specific purposes. As such, Paul apparently had some "rules" for their occurence that applied to them specifically. Was it not Paul who said something like: "if they have a question, let them ask their husbands at home." Apparently, there were and could yet be different allowances based on where we find ourselves and with whom.

So, to answer my earlier question in a different way: Scripture says so. If it is intended to be a public assembly of the church, it is. If it isn't, it isn't.

Now a caveat: These comments are limited to addressing the term "meeting" of the church and is not intended to imply that we cannot worship singly while surfing. We can, but we are not therefore a "meeting" of the church. OK, another caveat: this response is limited to whether or not Pricilla's teaching Apollos provided de facto authorization (assuming she needed it) to preach in the "assembly."

I know this answer may not satisfy those of you who need BCV and/or specific guidelines for details, but that's about all you're gonna get from me. I don't see this as a critical issue, nor do I particularly care if Pricilla did preach the next Sunday. It is clear to me that Pricilla and Aquilla did not take Apollos aside during a worship or "meeting" period of the church. Therefore, this instance cannot directly be related to a "worship" service and cannot be used (directly) to support women preaching in an "assembly."

One more observation. Logic works within a system of states of being, and is bounded by the rules of that system. The meeting of a Baptist church in Loredo is an assembly. It is not however, the Baptist church of Texas even if it is in Texas and Baptist. We can make this discussion silly if we'd like, but I don't know to what productive end that would be.

OK, another observation. Whether a small group meeting is an assembly of the church for the purposes of determining roles, depends on the larger group. It may well be that a congregation would not want women leading the discussion or praying during a small group meeting. Some congregations make a distinction between small group and "corporate" assemblies. I do in fact. Our congregation will likely not have a female preacher in the near future because, quite frankly, to do so would cause more turmoil than it would be worth. Therefore, if we are to have rules for "assemblies," we don't let women "preach," but we do allow them to do pretty much anything in a small group setting. We have determined that that is the best course for us at this point in history. We make an arbitrary decision that activities outside the building (and to some extent, not during a "regular" assembly time) are not guided by the same rules. The reasons for that distinction may appear illogical unless we add in the fact that congregational peace and unity are important considerations in addition to whether any setting should be considered "special" per se. Can others observe that we aren't being consistent in specfic areas? Yes. So what?

What constitutes a "meeting" is not a numbers game. It is a purpose and setting game.

Over to you guys...

HR

[DCR]

Good post, HR.  Thanks for sharing the thoughts you have put into this.

One point I take away from your post is that we define these things the way we do out of practicality and the best interest of the group we are a part of.

[boringoldguy]

This problem arises from a fundamental problem of ecclesiology in our movement.

So I'll ask this question -  is the Church anything more than the sum total of its members?

Yes.  The church is the body and bride of Christ.

Agreed.    So the question becomes -  how do we distinguish between a group of individual believers who happen to be in the same physical location and a church?

I'd argue that the passage we're discussing,  while not explicitly answering the question - certainly and incontrovertibly affirms that there is a difference.     We're told that Priscilla and Aquila took Apollos "aside."   "Aside" from what?     The only reasonable answer is "aside" from the assembly.    So its clear that they weren't in an assembly, because they were "aside."

Btw, DCR,  certain posters on this board would answer my earlier question differently than you did.

[DCR]

This problem arises from a fundamental problem of ecclesiology in our movement.

So I'll ask this question -  is the Church anything more than the sum total of its members?

Yes.  The church is the body and bride of Christ.

Agreed.    So the question becomes -  how do we distinguish between a group of individual believers who happen to be in the same physical location and a church?

If they are members of the body of Christ with Christ as their head, then they are the church.  I would also point out, though, that the existence of the church is not limited to when she's assembled.  When I am not physically present with other members, I don't cease to be a member of the church at that point.  If a toe is away from the hand, the toe doesn't stop being a toe or stop being a member of the body.

I'd argue that the passage we're discussing,  while not explicitly answering the question - certainly and incontrovertibly affirms that there is a difference.     We're told that Priscilla and Aquila took Apollos "aside."   "Aside" from what?     The only reasonable answer is "aside" from the assembly.    So its clear that they weren't in an assembly, because they were "aside."

Side note:  it should be pointed out that this "assembly" that they pulled Apollos aside from was at a synagogue.  How many of them were actually believers, we're not really told.  And, Apollos only knew John's baptism before Aquila and Priscilla pulled him aside.  Is it accurate to equate this particular "assembly" with the "church"?  And, is it accurate to consider this "assembly" an "assembly" in the sense that we're talking about (an assembly of the church)?

[James Rondon]

Sometimes, I take someone to the side so as to not embarass them. Other times, it is so that we can have a discussion, and a dialogue perhaps, without others getting involved, or because the matter is not meant for others to hear. And still other times, it's a matter of wanting to be heard, when there might be noise or discussion that would make it difficult (I had a bible study with a few men at a McDonalds yesterday. A group of kids came in, and it started getting loud, and I asked the men I was studying with if we could go out in the parking lot to finish up our discussion and pray).

[coffeesucker]

And certainly, the Lord was with you in your study, right James?

Brethren, I think you're straining gnats and swallowing camels over this "what constitutes an assembly issue" - Jesus is with us whenever and wherever we are, sometimes even when we don't want Him to be there! Meaning, He still knows our heart and is with us in Spirit even when we are being sinful.
And if it's in a parking lot at McDonalds, in the car on the way to vacation with your family, or in a church building during an assembly, Jesus is there. The presence of God is there. Arguing about definitions really gets us nowhere.

As for Priscilla teaching Apollos, I am convinced she did. And her husband Aquila did too. They were a teaching team! Can women teach men? Most certainly - Christian and non-Christian.

Great discussion. I'm enjoying reading the comments and look forward to more. God's Peace!
-g-

[WileyClarkson]

[As for Priscilla teaching Apollos, I am convinced she did. And her husband Aquila did too. They were a teaching team! Can women teach men? Most certainly - Christian and non-Christian.
/quote]

   

[DCR]

Brethren, I think you're straining gnats and swallowing camels over this "what constitutes an assembly issue"

It's possible that the point of my questioning has been misunderstood.  It's not my intention to strain gnats.  Actually, just the opposite... I'm questioning gnat-straining.  What I'm doing is posing a challenge to those who have a strict understanding of what an "assembly" is, which may be a view that the early church didn't necessarily have.  There are some that say,

"X is an assembly, but Y isn't. "
"X is a worship service, but Y isn't. "
"We can do X in the 'assembly' but not Y." 
"But, we can do Y at such and such place and in such and such situation because we do not consider that an assembly or a worship service." 

That's the kind of arbirtrary gnat-straining that I'm trying to challenge some critical thinking on here.

[HRoberson]

One point I take away from your post is that we define these things the way we do out of practicality and the best interest of the group we are a part of.

Yes. And while I may not agree that such behavior is Scripture-demanded per se, other considerations may modify the way we behave. I believe (as I've said in a number of posts) that the unity and peace of the congregation is usually more important than whether we've got the "right" answer on each specific question.

HR

[OkiMar]

coffee,
I appreciate your comments, but I disagree.  The issue is important because of its implications.  Certainly, God is with us; that's not the point.  I contend that 2-3 members of a larger congregation do not necessarily constitute THE congregation whenever and wherever they meet.  Roles for men and women are different depending on the setting.  God has given us guidance in regards to women for corporate worship of the assembly or congregation.  If 2-3 members of a larger congregation are considered to be THE congregation in all instances, then the same guidance regarding roles would apply.  I do not believe this to be the case. 

Thanx

[Dennis]

coffee,
I appreciate your comments, but I disagree.  The issue is important because of its implications.  Certainly, God is with us; that's not the point.  I contend that 2-3 members of a larger congregation do not necessarily constitute THE congregation whenever and wherever they meet.  Roles for men and women are different depending on the setting.  God has given us guidance in regards to women for corporate worship of the assembly or congregation.  If 2-3 members of a larger congregation are considered to be THE congregation in all instances, then the same guidance regarding roles would apply.  I do not believe this to be the case. 

Thanx

On what do you base your position?  I am assuming I know, but it is hard to engage in a meaningful discussion without specifics.

[WileyClarkson]

I contend that 2-3 members of a larger congregation do not necessarily constitute THE congregation whenever and wherever they meet.

If those several members meet for the purpose of study, singing praise, prayer, and the Lord's Supper, it doesn't matter if it is two or 20 or 200.  This is what occurred in homes during the first 150 years of the church.  There were no church buildings that we think of as being where the church gathers on apecific day of the week.  The church Jerusalem in the first several years met daily "to break bread," which was a common meal that included the LS and had teaching around the table, prayer around the table, and singing around the table.

At the time of Priscilla and Aquilla, the house church was the only type of "church" known.  Since a house church could consist of two or three christians, then what Priscilla and Aquilla did may well have included the other elements of "worship."  We don't know that for sure because it is not stated.  The fact that in Corinth women prophets were included with male prophets and the women led prayer in the assembly just as the men did and were considered in order of importance in the church as right under the apostles, is all to often disregarded totally by males in control of the modern church.  Since prophecy in the NT church was a form of teaching that was judged in accuracy by the other prophets present, there is a very important message in these two statements by Paul.  Women were allowed to teach and speak in the corporate assembly of the church and they most definitly taught in public and private situations.

[OkiMar]

coffee,
I appreciate your comments, but I disagree.  The issue is important because of its implications.  Certainly, God is with us; that's not the point.  I contend that 2-3 members of a larger congregation do not necessarily constitute THE congregation whenever and wherever they meet.  Roles for men and women are different depending on the setting.  God has given us guidance in regards to women for corporate worship of the assembly or congregation.  If 2-3 members of a larger congregation are considered to be THE congregation in all instances, then the same guidance regarding roles would apply.  I do not believe this to be the case. 

Thanx

On what do you base your position?  I am assuming I know, but it is hard to engage in a meaningful discussion without specifics.

Dennis,
I don't understand what specifics you want.  I thought I was specific...2-3 members of a larger congregation are not THE congregation.  Sorry.

[OkiMar]

If those several members meet for the purpose of study, singing praise, prayer, and the Lord's Supper, it doesn't matter if it is two or 20 or 200.  This is what occurred in homes during the first 150 years of the church.  There were no church buildings that we think of as being where the church gathers on apecific day of the week.

Concur, but this is a different topic.  We are talking about Priscilla and Aquila pulling Apollos aside and teaching him.  Others appear to be arguing the point that this was tantamount to a corporate worship service. 

The fact that in Corinth women prophets were included with male prophets and the women led prayer in the assembly just as the men did and were considered in order of importance in the church as right under the apostles, is all to often disregarded totally by males in control of the modern church.  Since prophecy in the NT church was a form of teaching that was judged in accuracy by the other prophets present, there is a very important message in these two statements by Paul.  Women were allowed to teach and speak in the corporate assembly of the church and they most definitly taught in public and private situations.

Wholly disagree, but again off topic.

[Dennis]

coffee,
I appreciate your comments, but I disagree.  The issue is important because of its implications.  Certainly, God is with us; that's not the point.  I contend that 2-3 members of a larger congregation do not necessarily constitute THE congregation whenever and wherever they meet.  Roles for men and women are different depending on the setting.  God has given us guidance in regards to women for corporate worship of the assembly or congregation.  If 2-3 members of a larger congregation are considered to be THE congregation in all instances, then the same guidance regarding roles would apply.  I do not believe this to be the case. 

Thanx

On what do you base your position?  I am assuming I know, but it is hard to engage in a meaningful discussion without specifics.

Dennis,
I don't understand what specifics you want.  I thought I was specific...2-3 members of a larger congregation are not THE congregation.  Sorry.

Are you saying this is just your opinion or your theory? 

[OkiMar]

Dennis,
I'm sure you are getting at something, but I just don't know what it is.  Are you saying that 2-3 members of a larger congregation are THE congregation?  Is there a significant difference between my opinion and my theory?  Not sure why that matters?  What specifics about the 2-3 members are you referring to?  I think I am missing something.

[DCR]

Dennis,
I'm sure you are getting at something, but I just don't know what it is.  Are you saying that 2-3 members of a larger congregation are THE congregation?  Is there a significant difference between my opinion and my theory?  Not sure why that matters?  What specifics about the 2-3 members are you referring to?  I think I am missing something.

What I don't understand is what difference it makes?  If 2-3 members of the congregation are away on a Sunday morning and they meet together (assemble together) to pray, sing hymns, and partake of the Lord's Supper, do different rules apply for the "official" assembly of THE congregation that don't apply to the assembly of the 2-3?  Can the 2-3 do anything, in that scenario, that can't be done in the official assembly of the congregation?

[OkiMar]

Dennis,
I'm sure you are getting at something, but I just don't know what it is.  Are you saying that 2-3 members of a larger congregation are THE congregation?  Is there a significant difference between my opinion and my theory?  Not sure why that matters?  What specifics about the 2-3 members are you referring to?  I think I am missing something.

What I don't understand is what difference it makes?  If 2-3 members of the congregation are away on a Sunday morning and they meet together (assemble together) to pray, sing hymns, and partake of the Lord's Supper, do different rules apply for the "official" assembly of THE congregation that don't apply to the assembly of the 2-3?  Can the 2-3 do anything, in that scenario, that can't be done in the official assembly of the congregation?

DCR,
In the example you provide, I do not see a difference.
Thanks.

[Dennis]

Dennis,
I'm sure you are getting at something, but I just don't know what it is.  Are you saying that 2-3 members of a larger congregation are THE congregation?  Is there a significant difference between my opinion and my theory?  Not sure why that matters?  What specifics about the 2-3 members are you referring to?  I think I am missing something.

I am asking you to prove your case.  Scripture Oki, scripture.  If you think its's already there, point to the post that says it.  I am really not trying to be contentious, but I have seen a lot of theory in this thread and precious little authority. 

Please show:

1.  Support for you position that there are meetings, and THE meeting.

2.  Support for your position that it makes a difference, that is that there are different rules that apply to THE meeting compared the meetings.

3.  Support for the proposition that we only function as the church while we are in THE meeting.  [I acknowledge you haven't actually said this, but it seems necessarily implied by you argument that different rules apply to different meetings].

[OkiMar]

Dennis,
Thanks.  Sorry for the confusion.  I thought this was pretty clear, but apparently not. 

Did the gathering of Priscilla, Aquila, and Apollos constitute a corporate assembly?  No, it did not.  Priscilla and Aquila took Apollos aside and taught him (this has already been sufficiently stated in other posts).  There is not one shred of scriptural evidence that this meeting was an example of a corporate worship assembly.  You ask for scripture that doesn't exist.  The onus is on you to prove that this meeting was a corporate worship assembly.  I don't think it can be successfully proven.  The text, however, does indicate that this matter was discussed in private. 

Does it make a difference?  Yes!  Private discussions are not equivalent to the corporate worship assembly.  Are there situations where 2-3 people come together to worship via singing, prayer, partaking in the Lord's Supper, etc just as a corporate worship assembly?  Of course, but this is not one of those occasions.  The text does not remotely support such a conclusion.  Additionally, there are limitations on the roles of women in the corporate worship assembly (I Cor 14 and I Tim 2).  On the other hand, women are expected to spread the Gospel as per the Great Commission.

[Dennis]

Oki thank you for you response and your willingness to discuss the matter without invective or unnecessary hyperbole.  I hope I am doing the same.

You say I ask for scripture that does not exist and that the onus is on me to prove you wrong.  How is saying that I am asking for scripture that does not exist not an admission that you cannot support your position? As to shifting the burden of proof to me, we are discussing your assertion that the "corporate worship" is somehow different than other meetings of the saints.  Typically in these on-line discussions, I don't like to argue about "burden of Proof" because we are simply discussing things and there really are no formal rules of debate.  However, to the extent there are rules, I should think the burden rests with the person who made the assertion.  In this case, that is you.

You cite two chapters as supporting you position that the rules are different in "the corporate worship assembly" as compared to other meetings or occasions.  I assume that the following are the relevant passages from the cited chapters [if not, let me know]:

1 Cor 14

As in all the churches of the saints, 34women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says. 35If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached?

1 Tim 2

11Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. 12I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.

I do not see anything in either of these passages that says the rules change when a meeting becomes a "corporate worship assembly."  The passage in 1 Timothy makes no reference to location, occasion or other circumstances at all.  The passage in 1 Corinthinas says "in the churches" or "in church."  That is precisely why I said your position necessarily requires you to infer that the saints cease to function as "the church" outside of the "corporate worship assembly."  I am curious whether you agree with that proposition, and if you do not, how you can agree that the church can still be a church outside of the "corporate worship assembly" and yet take the position that different rules apply in different situations based on these passages.

Again, thank you for your response and discussion.

[phoebe]

Interesting discussion.

What I perceive as the problem with this question of "What is an assembly?" is that we are trying to put a modern-day definition (a legalistic one, at that) of a verb on a noun. It is not "assembly", it is "assembling". It is the gathering together of the people, not the people themselves.

As long as we continue to put a noun definition on a verb, we'll continue to struggle with this. It is out of place in this discussion on the Priscilla-teaching issue.

[memmy]

So basically we are assembling here online as well.

Sure hope none who believe it is wrong for a woman to teach a man, doesn't learn anything from any of us po' women folk here.   

Blessings, Memmy 

[OkiMar]

Dennis,
The fact that P & A took him aside is one of the keys to the passage.  Nothing in the text indicates that this was anything more than a discussion and correction.  If there is something more, I am not aware of it, and you haven't really tried to prove it.  God expects women to teach and spread the Gospel; however, he has limited womens' roles in the work and worship of the Church. 

S/F

[OkiMar]

Sure hope none who believe it is wrong for a woman to teach a man, doesn't learn anything from any of us po' women folk here.

Memmy,
No disrespect intended, but you don't appear to do anything more than snipe from the sidelines.  I have learned numerous things from many, many gracious Christian women.  Your comment above, however, is laden with insecurities, and that is a shame.  I'm sure I could learn something from you if you would step up to the plate and add something of substance rather than just trying to get your post count up. 

S/F

[coffeesucker]

Chill out OkiMar - have another cup of coffee.
No need to be so rude.
-g-

[OkiMar]

Can't right now; getting ready to go to sleep for the night.  I don't think I was being rude.  Straightforward? Yes.  But my intention was not to be rude. 

[Dennis]

Dennis,
The fact that P & A took him aside is one of the keys to the passage.  Nothing in the text indicates that this was anything more than a discussion and correction.  If there is something more, I am not aware of it, and you haven't really tried to prove it.  God expects women to teach and spread the Gospel; however, he has limited womens' roles in the work and worship of the Church. 

S/F

Oki,

I recognize that the passage about Priscilla and Apollos started this thread, but my real question is trying to get to the bottom of the authority upon which you base your contention that there is THE assemby where rules are different from other get togethers and meetings of Christians.  You don't seem to be addressing my questions.  I am simply trying to find the basis for your contention that the rules change when we are out of the "corporate worship assembly."  You cited to passages as support for your position.  I have quoted those passages and made some comments with a specific question about them.  What is your response?

I am not trying to prove anything.  We are discussing YOUR assertion.  I am interested to see if you can back it up.

[OkiMar]

Dennis,
Sorry for the delay.  Yes, there is guidance regarding local congregations and the way in which they congregate.  We have been provided guidance regarding elders, deacons, various acts of worship, roles, etc.  You are no doubt familiar with all this.  P, A, and A can hardly be considered a gathering of the Saints with the intent of holding a worship service.  If they had, then the guidance referred to above would apply. 

The passage in 1 Timothy makes no reference to location, occasion or other circumstances at all.

I disagree.  1Tim 3:15  "But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."  The entire context has a view towards the worship assembly.

[Dennis]

OKI,

Don't worry about the delay, I assume your schedule is somewhat, shall we say, interesting.

I am not questioning  the fact that scripture discusses both local congregations and the body universal as the "Church." Rather, I am questioning your assertion that different rules apply in different meetings of the saints even within the local congregation.  Let's stick to that question for the time being. 

If I understand you correctly, by citing to 1 Tim 3:15 [and assuming that 3:15 defines the context of 1 Tim 2 which you cited earlier] then because (1) this verse says this is how you ought to behave in Church and (2) you are tying this to the worship assembly, you are necessarily saying that we ONLY function as the Church in the worship assembly.  If that is what you are saying, then I must ask for your authority. 

If that is not what you are saying, then I must ask again for the basis for the assertion of different rules for different meetings.

[OkiMar]

OKI,

Don't worry about the delay, I assume your schedule is somewhat, shall we say, interesting.

I am not questioning  the fact that scripture discusses both local congregations and the body universal as the "Church." Rather, I am questioning your assertion that different rules apply in different meetings of the saints even within the local congregation.  Let's stick to that question for the time being. 

If I understand you correctly, by citing to 1 Tim 3:15 [and assuming that 3:15 defines the context of 1 Tim 2 which you cited earlier] then because (1) this verse says this is how you ought to behave in Church and (2) you are tying this to the worship assembly, you are necessarily saying that we ONLY function as the Church in the worship assembly.  If that is what you are saying, then I must ask for your authority. 

If that is not what you are saying, then I must ask again for the basis for the assertion of different rules for different meetings.

Dennis,
No, I am not saying that at all.  The scriptures have provided guidance for how we worship in the assembly.  The scriptures have not been as specific when it comes to personal evangelism (i.e. P&A).  Women are expected to teach (Great Commission, Timothy's mother, Priscilla, etc), but they have been limited in role when the congregation meets for worship.  Hope this helps.
Thanks.

[Dennis]

Oki, thanks for the response.

Above you said:

Additionally, there are limitations on the roles of women in the corporate worship assembly (I Cor 14 and I Tim 2).  On the other hand, women are expected to spread the Gospel as per the Great Commission.

As I have pointed out, the 1 Cor 14 passage says women are to keep silent "in the churches."  The 1 Tim 2 passage doesn't really say unless, as you contend, 1 Tim 3:15 provides the context.  For the present, I have no problem with that since it would be consistent with the 1 Cor 14 passage.  3:15 says Paul is instructing Timothy how to "behave in the household of God which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth." Neither of these passages say anything about a "corporate worship assembly" unless you contend that references to the "Church" or the "household of God are synonymous with the "corporate worship assembly."  If that is the case then, as I said above, you are necessarily saying that we are NOT the Church [or at least not "in" the Church] outside the corporate worship assembly.  [Alternatively, different rules would not apply outside the "corporate worship assembly"] 

Since you have already denied contending the Church ceases to function with the closing prayer, you must come up with some other authority for different rules applying in different meetings.  Do you have any?

[OkiMar]

Dennis,
I apologize.  This was flying right over my head because I thought it was undestood.  The authority that you are referring to, specifically the authority for Priscilla to teach in an evangelistic setting as opposed to preaching in a worship service, is derived from her example as recorded by Luke. 

S/F

[Dennis]

Dennis,
I apologize.  This was flying right over my head because I thought it was undestood.  The authority that you are referring to, specifically the authority for Priscilla to teach in an evangelistic setting as opposed to preaching in a worship service, is derived from her example as recorded by Luke. 

S/F

Oki, I appreciate the discussion, but you keep answering questions that I have not raised.

I have NEVER questioned whether it was appropriate for Priscilla to teach.  The question I have asked several times now is your authority for saying that different rules apply to the "corporate worship assembly" and other meetings of the saints.  This whole discussion started when you said that it was OK for Priscilla to teach because it was not a corporate worship assembly and different rules apply to corporate worship assemblies. At one point you referred to 1 Cor 14 and 1 Tim 2.  After a bit of discussion, you admitted that you did not agree with what I believe to be the necessary implication of using those passages to support your position, namely that the church only functions as the church in the corporate worship assembly. Thus we are, as I see it, back to you having no authority to support your proposition.

I ask again, what is your basis for contending that different rules apply for different meetings of the saints.  Lets focus on that one question and see where it leads the conversation.  If you want to rely on the two passages and accept what I see as the inherent weakness of that position or explain why you think I am wrong to conclude what I have, that's OK just say so.

[OkiMar]

Oki, I appreciate the discussion, but you keep answering questions that I have not raised.

I have NEVER questioned whether it was appropriate for Priscilla to teach.  The question I have asked several times now is your authority for saying that different rules apply to the "corporate worship assembly" and other meetings of the saints.

Dennis,
Again, this is exactly what I am answering.  The authority for different rules lies in the inspired approved, example of Priscilla teaching Apollos.