Women in politics/leadership roles

[I Am Blessed 24]

Women are not to usurp authority over men IN THE CHURCH!

usurp: to seize and hold illegally and by force

I handle the finances in my family. I did not "usurp" this task illegally or by force. My husband gave it to me.

When a woman wins an election, she is not "usurping" authority, she was given that authority by the voters. (both men and women)

Women are to be in submission to their OWN husbands...not to every man who walks the face of the earth.

If it's OK with hubby, I'm OK with God!

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by Gina L:
1. Their victory under Deborah was miraculous.

2. Maybe you're not familiar with it? Go read.

(hey, I wasn't familiar with hardly anything except hte story of Joseph and Daniel and Noah until two years ago, and that was only what I remembered from Sunday School stories!)

3. I'm not arguing with you either, just asking you to show a good reason why you aren't agreeing with what I said.
Gina

1. I know it was miraculous.

2. Yes, I remember it well.

3. The judgment was upon the men, not Deborah or the nation in general. Especially in that day and time, it would have been a rebuke against them. It demonstrated just how far off that particular group strayed from God's order.

My comment that a victory is not necessarily a sign of blessing was based on the whole of biblical history.

Sometimes, God used pagan nations to bring about his will. That doesn't mean that they enjoyed his favor. They were just accomplishing a purpose.

 

[Jailminister]

Well I guess I said something controversal. It is biblical, but I guess controversal, also.
Bro Bob queried:

Okay. I'm a slow learner. Is MY WIFE (the doctor) sinning here? She is
discreet
chaste
good keeper of the home
obedient to her husband

(1) Where exactly does Scripture say she should not be in leadership?

(2) Where exactly is her active role IN ADDITION to this against God's Word?

(3) Where exactly does the Prov 31 woman fit in? She made merchandise, had a whole staff working for her, etc etc

When you can show me SCRIPTURES instead of sucking ideas out of the latest issue of Sword of the Lord, let me know.

It is not keeper of the home, it is keeper at home. Much difference.

1)In 1 Corinthians 11 It gives the headship qualification. The woman only head is the man. She is head of nothing. Now you can let her do leadership as her husband, but it will be YOU who will have to answer to God for disobedience.

2)It is hard to be at home and on a job also. When you put or let your wife go out of the household and work, then you are placing her under someone elses headship. Do you really want that violation of the scriptures?

3)In Proverbs, she was working at home and under her husbands headship. That was her primary responsibilty. Example, My grandmother never work on a public job, but she did sewing at home to help out with the family budget. This does not violate the scriptures, because it does not take her away from home or place her under anothers headship.

PS. I don't read the Sword of the Lord. I have seen it before, but I just don't read it.

I am blessed, Here is the exact scripture:
1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. It does not say IN CHURCH only.

Gina said

Jailminister, I don't understand. How does God set the precedent with Deborah and then it isn't supposed to be followed? Nowhere in the bible have I seen him say "this is an exception to what I expect of women", or anything that would imply such.
Did God's laws for women and their role in life change in the bible? When? Where?

Deborah was a sign from God on the condemnation of how weak the man had become. Does that mean that Deborah was wicked? No. Somebody had to lead and NO MAN WOULD. God gave her to us as an example of how wicked and weak men could be if they don't obey God. Let me say that a godly woman, by being what God says she should be, actually control the world. When she teaches, AT HOME, her children the ways of the Lord she is able to do more than she could in leadership position.

These things must seem foreign to a lot of people here on the forum. To me and my family it is just following God's word. The main thing is that it works. PROOF IN THE PUDDING

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by Jailminister:
The main thing is that it works. PROOF IN THE PUDDING

So, pragmatism rules the day. Great philosophy.

Btw, you missed the boat entirely about the keeper at home deal. I will have to address it later. Thanks.

 

[Gina B]

I agree with most of what Jailminister says (at this time anyhow) I just have a problem with how God used some women in the bible and there being any proof that it was only because men refused to. I have heard people SAY that's why it was done, but I haven't had anyone show me where it says or implies that, apart from when a woman killed Sisera.
Gina

 

[Jailminister]

Gina, you must look at the whole bible and see how God design the different roles of men and women. God used the heathen many times to correct or punish His people. That does not mean that He put His blessings on the heathen.

Gunther said

So, pragmatism rules the day. Great philosophy

I had already showed you the biblical reasoning and I was declaring that it works. Mock it if you like, but the PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Jailminister:

Here is the exact scripture:
1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. It does not say IN CHURCH only.

Note, this is not the Paul telling US what WE should do, this is the Paul telling an individual what HE prefers. This is important, because here's he's writing a private letter to Timothy, a sole individual (he's not writing to a public gathering), about administrative affairs of the early church. These are not matters of God's commands to people, but Paul giving administrative advice to Timothy. This is not an edict of women being doctrinally forbidden from certain practices that men are given. If that were the case, then Paul would be telling us that women are not saved through faith alone (v15: "But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety"), and we know that is not the case.

[ September 12, 2003, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

[I Am Blessed 24]

Good post John!

Paul is giving his personal witness and Charge to Timothy. He is also telling Timothy what HIS preferences are about the place of women IN THE CHURCH...not at home.

BTW, I can be a 'keeper at home' without being in my home 24/7. When I go to the grocery store, my home is in order and I am being a 'keeper at home' even though I'm not there. It is no different with a job.

It would be wonderful if all the women who WANTED to stay home all the time COULD. Sometimes, that is just not feasible. I, for one, refuse to be made to feel guilty or unGodly or "out of submission" because of it.

 

[Johnv]

You bet! You can be a Sunday School teacher, and I would happily put my kids in your class. You could be a police officer, and I would respect the badge you wear. You could run for school board, and I'd probably vote for you. You could run for president, and... well... you get the idea.

BTW - It should be noted that HOW a woman is keeper at home is between the husband and wife, not by someone who is not in the marriage reading the letters of Paul.

 

[Jailminister]

JohnV said:

Note, this is not the Paul telling US what WE should do, this is the Paul telling an individual what HE prefers. This is important, because here's he's writing a private letter to Timothy, a sole individual (he's not writing to a public gathering), about administrative affairs of the early church. These are not matters of God's commands to people, but Paul giving administrative advice to Timothy. This is not an edict of women being doctrinally forbidden from certain practices that men are given. If that were the case, then Paul would be telling us that women are not saved through faith alone (v15: "But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety"), and we know that is not the case.

This is such an outlandish post that I hardly know where to start. Let me ask you first and this is important, what other scriptures do you believe is not inspired? Which other scriptures are irrelevant?
This scripture is very relevent in yesterday and today. Women have left the home and gone out on a job with another head over them. Accept what you want to accept, but it does not make it right. You may respect a woman who is a police officer and that is your business. I respect the badge, but I pity the woman. She has left her place, the home, and has placed her self out of the will of God. What a pity.
Also apparently you do not understand the woman being saved thru childbirth scripture, because it has nothing to do with Salvation. Please study that a little closer.

 

[Jailminister]

JohnV said:

Note, this is not the Paul telling US what WE should do, this is the Paul telling an individual what HE prefers. This is important, because here's he's writing a private letter to Timothy, a sole individual (he's not writing to a public gathering), about administrative affairs of the early church. These are not matters of God's commands to people, but Paul giving administrative advice to Timothy. This is not an edict of women being doctrinally forbidden from certain practices that men are given. If that were the case, then Paul would be telling us that women are not saved through faith alone (v15: "But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety"), and we know that is not the case.

This is such an outlandish post that I hardly know where to start. Let me ask you first and this is important, what other scriptures do you believe is not inspired? Which other scriptures are irrelevant?
This scripture is very relevent in yesterday and today. Women have left the home and gone out on a job with another head over them. Accept what you want to accept, but it does not make it right. You may respect a woman who is a police officer and that is your business. I respect the badge, but I pity the woman. She has left her place, the home, and has placed her self out of the will of God. What a pity.
Also apparently you do not understand the woman being saved thru childbirth scripture, because it has nothing to do with Salvation. Please study that a little closer.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Jailminister:
... Let me ask you first and this is important, what other scriptures do you believe is not inspired? Which other scriptures are irrelevant? This scripture is very relevent in yesterday and today.

I never said Paul's letter to Timothy wasn't inspired. I never said it wasn't relevant. I said it was a PRIVATE letter written to ONE person. It's clear that you are coompletely taking Paul's letter to Timothy out of context.

Also apparently you do not understand the woman being saved thru childbirth scripture, because it has nothing to do with Salvation. Please study that a little closer.

Uhhh, if you made an effort to actually read my post, you'll see that's exactly what I said.

[A female police officer] has left her place, the home, and has placed her self out of the will of God. What a pity.

Interesting that you can make such a determination simply by knowing the officer's gender. Interesting more is that you use a book of the Bible which you so clearly do not understand.

 

[Jailminister]

JohnV said

I never said Paul's letter to Timothy wasn't inspired. I never said it wasn't relevant. I said it was a PRIVATE letter written to ONE person. It's clear that you are completely taking Paul's letter to Timothy out of context.

First of all I did not take it out of context. No need to make false accusations like that trying to defend yourself. Secondly, if it was just for Timothy, then God would not have placed in the bible for us. 2Tim 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

Uhhh, if you made an effort to actually read my post, you'll see that's exactly what I said.

Your implication in the original post was that if you took what Paul said seriously then you would have to assume that women can only be saved(Salvation) in childbearing. My reponse was that it had nothing to do with Salvation.

Interesting that you can make such a determination simply by knowing the officer's gender. Interesting more is that you use a book of the Bible which you so clearly do not understand.

Oh excuse me, I guess wisdom will die when you die. I understand it quite clearly. You just refuse to understand. By the way gender has a lot to do with it. God made the women as a "helpmeet" not vice versa.

 

[Gina B]

Trick question. What if a woman is politically active from within the home?

Petitioning people online, writing letters, etc., increasing public awareness of issues and helping people understand how our government works and/or offering advice to those in or involved with such things?
Gina

 

[Jailminister]

Gina, I don't think that is a trick question. I think it is relevant. Women are not stupid. God gave women a great ability to teach her children and guide her house. My wife and I talk about who we are going to vote for and she is very intelligent on the issues. As long as she can do those things at home and under her husbands headship, then I see no problem with it.

 

[Gina B]

Thanks JM. Every once in a while you suprise me with an unexpected answer like that!

Gina

 

[Jimmy C]

Jailminister

by your "logic" Deborah was outside the will of God when she became a Judge and ruled - that is had authority over ALL the men of Isreal.

Please explain how these writings are not inspired!

I see no indication that it was because men would not lead that Deborah - a Prophetess no less was Judging Isreal. I'll bet she even spoke in the Temple. And to top it off she was married, looks like she was usurping her husband.

There is nothing in these verses to indicate that Deborah was anywhere but right in the middle of the Lord's will.

But you women should be silent and have no authority crowd simply ignore that God can and does use women however he wants to, yesterday and toady.

Judges 4

4 Now Deborah, a prophetess, F44 the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time. 5 She used to sit F45 under the palm R75 tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim; and the sons of Israel came up to her for judgment. 6 Now she sent and summoned Barak R76 the son of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali, and said to him, "Behold, the LORD, the God of Israel, has commanded, 'Go and march to Mount Tabor, and take with you ten thousand men from the sons of Naphtali and from the sons of Zebulun. 7 'I will draw out to you Sisera, the commander of Jabin's army, with his chariots and his many F46 {troops} to the river Kishon, and I R77 will give him into your hand.' " 8 Then Barak said to her, "If you will go with me, then I will go; but if you will not go with me, I will not go." 9 She said, "I will surely go with you; nevertheless, the honor shall not be yours on the journey that you are about to take, for R78 the LORD will sell Sisera into the hands of a woman." Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh.

 

[Jailminister]

Jimmy C said:

by your "logic" Deborah was outside the will of God when she became a Judge and ruled - that is had authority over ALL the men of Isreal.

Please explain how these writings are not inspired!

I see no indication that it was because men would not lead that Deborah - a Prophetess no less was Judging Isreal. I'll bet she even spoke in the Temple. And to top it off she was married, looks like she was usurping her husband.

There is nothing in these verses to indicate that Deborah was anywhere but right in the middle of the Lord's will.

But you women should be silent and have no authority crowd simply ignore that God can and does use women however he wants to, yesterday and toady.

I believe that Deborah was in God's will as a judgment of how wicked and weak the men had become. God allowed it and actually blessed it. That does not mean that that is how God intended it to be. From the beginning the female was to be a helpmeet. She had no headship of her own. You must look at the whole bible for what it says instead of just 1 passage.
You assumed she spoke in the Temple, but I see no evidence of that.
God can, has and will use women as he wills, but he will not violate his commands if we are doing right ourselves.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Jailminister:
My wife and I talk about who we are going to vote for and she is very intelligent on the issues.

Just curious. Do you plan on instructing your wife whom to vote for?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by I Am Blessed 16:
Women are not to usurp authority over men IN THE CHURCH!

usurp: to seize and hold illegally and by force

I handle the finances in my family. I did not "usurp" this task illegally or by force. My husband gave it to me.

When a woman wins an election, she is not "usurping" authority, she was given that authority by the voters. (both men and women)

Women are to be in submission to their OWN husbands...not to every man who walks the face of the earth.

If it's OK with hubby, I'm OK with God!

Amen, Sister I Am Blessed 16 -- Preach it!