Re: Mame
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:Mame wrote:Of course this woman can go and join another faith, and should, if she doesn't like the rules of this one... that sort of goes without saying, doesn't it?
Isn't that why there are so many churches/sects/faiths out there?
What I was referring to was not about religion at all - it was about control and power. This is possibly the wrong forum for that discussion.
Mame, I disagree that this is not the proper forum. After all, organized religion is all about "control and power."
BBB
I must disagree with you on that BBB. Sure, some denominations and some churches may be like that. Not all. I cannot understand why people lump everything that they do not like or understand into one huge pot. Perhaps some are so used to seeing such things in their own or other churches that they thing all are alike. Not so.
I am also not used to individual congregations running things as they see fit. I am more and more convinced that I made the right choice when I joined my church. I can go into any of our churches anywhere in the world and expect to find exactly the same thing.
What I do not find is the judgemental and sometimes insane rhetoric that I so often read about.
I agree that women should be free to teach within the church. I do not, however, agree with women holding Ministerial office.
ebrown_p made some very good points in his, IMO, excellent post.
As far as Setana's post goes, I will post the following:
That there were females in the early Christian church who corresponded to those known among the Jews in some measure as endowed with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, cannot be doubted. What was their precise office, and what was the nature of the public services in which they were engaged, is not however known. That they prayed is clear; and that they publicly expounded the will of God is apparent also. As the presumption is, however, that they were inspired, their example is no warrant now for females to take part in the public services of worship, unless they also give evidence that they are under the influence of inspiration, and the more especially as the apostle Paul has expressly forbidden their becoming public teachers; 1 Tim. 2:12. If it is now pled, from this example, that women should speak and pray in public, yet it should be just so far only as this example goes, and it should be only when they have the qualifications that the early "prophetesses" had in the Christian church. If there are any such; if any are directly inspired by God, there then will be an evident propriety that they should publicly proclaim the will, and not till then. It may be further observed, however, that the fact that Paul here mentions the custom of women praying or speaking publicly in the church, does not prove that it was right or proper. His immediate object now was not to consider whether the practice was itself right, but to condemn the manner of its performance as a violation of all the proper rules of modesty and of subordination. On another occasion, in this very epistle, he fully condemns the practice in any form, and enjoins silence on the female members of the church in public
