This issue is tough because its so connected to the times we live in and allowing women to preach perfectly aligns with a modern secular position. If we lived say 100 years ago, this position of women not preaching was not much of an issue. Its too difficult to remove our modern secular western upbringing with this issue. I have no idea if a woman should preach. I do see in the bible that everybody has different responsibilities mandated by God, I think that I have to be the head of my household, that im responsible for loving my family as Christ loves the Church is a huge load on my shoulders and I dont necessarily want that burden or think that I can live up to that, does anyone care that Paul has stipulations for men as well? No, of course not, because having empathy for men is not popular in our modern secular culture. So how do we separate all of our indoctrinated upbringing by a non biblical fallen world? If an issue aligns with the world does that make it automatically false? Its a tough issue, all I know is that when I first read Paul saying women should not teach, they should be silent, my first reaction was of shock and disgust, but thats because of our modern culture in my opinion not because certain people not being allowed to do certain things is a negative in of itself. Im not sure if its right or wrong, its a very messy, complicated issue, full of ego and pride on both sides. Thank you and God Bless
I understand what you are saying. I think about how Peter told Timothy, that some of Paul's teachings are hard to understand. With that being said, I consider Corinthians to be the hardest of Paul's letters to read, and understand. I don't agree with most people on what they think he's saying in 1 Cor. 14. Because of verse 36. He says, "What?". It sounds like he can't believe what he's hearing. Paul is writing to them because of the things he's heard they are doing in the Church. In other chapters, he first says what he heard they were doing, and then he would correct them, and tells them how things should be done. Here in 14, it's difficult to separate when he's saying how it should be done, how they are doing it, and is saying that, they don't let women speak in Church. His comment about the Law? That should be a hint to people. "It's not permitted for them to speak, commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the Law? When did Paul ever mix Law and Grace together. That's the problem Paul had with Peter. That's why he says, What? came the Word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? Wasn't it given to women, too? I think that's what this verse is saying. Everybody can speak, decently, and in order. He is describing how they have been arguing over things, and they should be doing it in an orderly fashion, and not wild, and chaotic. They are arguing over who is a prophet, and who isn't., for one thing. . v. 32) And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 37) If any man think himself to a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38) But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. 39) covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. Let all things be done decently, and in order, he says in v.40. In all of chapter 14, he bounces back and forth a little. It is a difficult section to read, lol. But, that's what I think Paul is saying. Be blessed!!!
I think that is too burdensome, which is why I dont think a man shouldnt bare all that on his shoulder. w/e could be shared should be shared. You say you dont find issue with women speaking in church. If she has to stay silent, she cant verbally praise God in church . If she has to stay silent in church who will run the kids ministry, you have to be verbal to leads kids ministry.
In 1 Timothy 2:12 Paul famously says "I do not permit a woman to teach..." In Galatians 3:28 Pauls erases sexual distinctions by saying "...there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Lastly, in 1 Corinthians 7:12 Paul says "Now to the rest I say (I, not the Lord)..." I wish to make two points: First, which epistle did Paul write first: 1 Timothy, Galatians, or 1 Corinthians? What is their order? Does the chronological order of the epistles hint at any modification of a social trend involving women - either from Paul's perspective or, say, the evolution of Greek religious customs in the First Century? Second, if Paul's opinion in 1 Timothy is precisely that - his opinion - might it be possible he began distinguishing his opinion from what God expressly commands by adding (I, not the Lord) to his letters?
In Galatians Paul is talking about salvation and we are all one in Christ. Paul does not erase sexual distinctions by this verse. He is saying one group does not have any advantage over the other group when it comes to salvation. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” We all have equal value but different roles.
@@HC-dn1do ... Exactly. The argument that Paul "erases sexual distinctions" fails (utterly) to recognize that he is not adressing roles, but rather access to salvation. He is addressing the fact that there are no racial, societal, or gender restrictions when coming to Jesus. If Paul WERE addressing roles, then he is clearly contradicting himself when he writes to the church in Ephesus (years after this letter to Galatia), where he argues for continued role distictions between men and women.
(I, not the Lord). When Paul says that it means that when Jesus came in the flesh on this Earth Jesus didn’t give a specific command for the issue Paul was speaking about. But whatever Paul wrote down as Scripture is to be followed. So many fall for people who say that it was Paul’s opinion when we can look at Scripture to see that what Paul wrote was inspired by The Holy Spirit. Paul states clearly in other places, including the same letter in which this phrase is found, that the words he is writing are inspired by God. Later in the same book, he states very clearly: “If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. ” Paul also told his disciple, Timothy that “All Scripture is God-breathed…” This would include Paul’s words. Even Peter alludes to Paul’s writings and refers to them as God inspired scripture. So why did Paul use the phrase “I, not the Lord?” Simply because he was explaining something that had not already been covered by “the Lord” (Jesus) while He was on earth. In this section of scripture Paul provides us with a beautiful example of how important it was for the Apostles to preserve and not to alter the words of Jesus. In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul’s words can be classified into three different categories: (1) Paul’s opinion, (2) Paul’s command, and (3) Jesus’ command. Let’s take a minute to look at each of these separately: Paul’s Opinion (v. 1-9, 25-38, 40) Since Paul is “a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God,”4 his opinion is to be taken very seriously. He says in 1 Corinthians 7:25 that he “gives [his] judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy.” This means that his opinion is not necessarily obligatory, but rather a very good idea. It would not be a stretch to say that one would be foolish not to take the advice of such a wise man. That being said, it is important to understand that much of what Paul said that falls under the “Paul’s opinion” category, is based on “the present crisis,” or from our point of view “the past crisis.” That crisis was the persecution of Christians. By this time James (son of Zebedee) and Stephen had already been martyred for the faith, soon to be followed by Paul, Peter, and James (the brother of Jesus). Because of this Paul felt it would be better for those who were single when they became Christians to stay single if they are able to. This way, if a brother is martyred, he won’t leave behind a mourning widow or orphan.. Paul’s Command (v. 12-24, 39) As an Apostle, Paul was vested with Apostolic authority. This meant that his commands were obligatory for the church, and therefore obligatory for us today. When Paul addresses the married men and women in the Corinthian church saying “’I, not the Lord’ issue the following command…” his command is to be followed. It is under this heading that Paul addresses the question of what a disciple should do with a non-believing spouse. He says very clearly that divorce is not an option for the disciple. He goes on to say that the unbelieving spouse may be convinced to become a disciple as a result of the example set by his/her spouse. Jesus’ Command (v. 10-11) The real reason Paul says “I, not the Lord” is to distinguish from when he previously said “Not I, but the Lord.” When the Corinthian church wrote to Paul and asked him a question that Jesus had already directly addressed, he simply repeated for them what Jesus had already said. By doing this he shows how precious he regarded the words of Jesus because he refused to merge his commands with Jesus’ commands. The relevant command of Jesus to which Paul refers to is found in Matthew 19:9 when Jesus says, “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Such a command carries with it the implication that “divorce” for anything other than sexual immorality is simply not recognized by God. In the case where Person A divorces Person B and marries Person C simply because Person A doesn’t love Person B any more, according to Jesus, the relationship between Person A and Person C is simply an extramarital affair; something condemned by God in the Seventh Commandment7. This of course applies to people who profess themselves to be Christians. Paul says in his command that this rule does not apply in the case of an unbelievingspouse insisting on divorcing his/her believing spouse8. So to make a long story short (too late): When Paul said “I, not the Lord” and “Not I, but the Lord” he is simply distinguishing between a command that originated with him and a command that originated with Jesus, both of which are obligatory. -Brian Colon””
Seem to remember on school, so long ago now, that text is about a woman authority vs a man’s. In Godly things. Not everything, necessarily. But if there is a man who can witness to the congregation, it is preferable. And that probably stems all the way back to the garden, where the serpent is able to deceive Eve. Combined with those spirits that so women and took them as wives and created Nephilim which enticed the Creator to destroy most everything. Adam did decide to sin knowing. He did it because he did not to live without her. A man acted incorrectly because his vision can be blurred by the woman. He is acknowledging a man’s shortcoming. Trying to make the “church “ strong against spiritual creatures. Which would no doubt attack the church.
1Co 14:34 - Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. Tools Unchecked Copy Box1Co 14:35 - And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. Tools Unchecked Copy Box1Co 14:36 - What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? Tools Unchecked Copy Box1Co 14:37 - If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Paul was telling the "men", "you are not all that", lol. You are not the only ones that are born again. Holy Spirit doesn't only speak to you. Paul didn't like Law being mixed in with Grace. Ordinances, Laws, rules, and rituals, was not Paul's way of doing Church, praise God!!! He just wanted things to be done decently, and in order, Hallelujah!!!
Maybe, just maybe the Holy Spirit inspired what Paul wrote. Why is it when we come across a scripture that does not endorse what we want, does the issue become, “well it’s Paul’s opinion”, rather than denying to myself and coming under the authority of scripture?
Michael Heiser here demonstrates the dangers of approaching the Scriptures like a technician handling a technical manual. You are just about guaranteed to get it wrong.
Yet another issue that Heiser got dead wrong. He claims the text is ambiguous. That implies the Holy Spirit who inspired the text did not speak clearly through Paul. Christians have always held to the perspicuity of Scripture, that Scripture is clear in what it teaches. The key to understanding the passage is that teaching is linked to exercising authority. The created order is that man was created first and woman came from man. The man is the head of the woman and not the other way around. It's not godly for a woman to seek to rule over a man. There's no women Pastors/Elders and this is crystal clear and not ambiguous at all.
I'm going to preach; blow it out the men's ear. Tired of the debate. Proud woman preacher, proud woman pastor. I find consistently the men who are opposed to women preachers have authority issues. if Huldah can speak with the authority of "Thus saith the Lord" then so can any woman whom God calls." Women can speak and teach/prophesy, call it whatever you want to call it. There are alternative interpretations to those verses in I Timothy and I Corinthians and I stand by it. This issue will never be settled. My church has been ordaining women since 1810, and I'm fiercely proud of them for having the gumption to do it. And they were anything but compromising and secular, so let me head that accusation off at the pass.
So what if your daughter said the Lord spoke to me directly and said that I meant to do this would you have a different opinion still? Or would you be open to the fact that maybe this was actually a call but given by God after all he did have Mary Magdalene as a witness of him who also taught and instructed people. I have a 10 c to believe because the Bible is labeled with brilliant men and women but they were flawed human beings and they were a lot of them were captive to their the laws of old of Moses early Jewish beliefs, and Paul was also citizen of Rome which has very strict laws against women in every aspect so part of me still believes that there was a part of them that was still ingrained with their upbringing and original beliefs you never really forget your childhood teachings and religion is involved because it's so personal to everyone. I know that Paul and Barnabas had their disagreements about a totally different topic but they were allowed to be human and not agree with each other and still spread the same message. So for me it is an important topic because what are we telling our young women today who are leaving their Christian upbringing behind them just based off of this small text that could have just been something for that time or a belief that he had personally that came from him growing up as a roman citizen. I'm sorry but we read the old sayings of Solomon when he fell for a time and lost favor, where he temporarily deemed life as worthless and not and not having a meaning to it at all we know that that did not come from Christ. Solomon as we know repented but he still had his own beliefs there's still allowed to make mistakes so part of us has to admit that in the Bible there might actually be mistakes I'm sorry that's the truth it's not all
Heiser is ignoring two points . First ; Genesis 2:23-24. Adam’s vow to his wife “23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” Eve ate of the fruit forcing Adam to also eat of the fruit to fulfill his Vow. Also we know that as the head of the family Adam warned Eve not to eat of the fruit also offering an extra layer of protection by saying “ Don’t even touch it, least ye die”! Certainly Adam was not a willing participant.
Paul did NOT write the Pastorals anyway and it is easily seen it was written much later after Paul died. Only 25% of British new testament evangelicals at the conference on Pauline Authorship believe Paul wrote 1 Timothy (23%) , 2 Timothy (26%), Titus (25%) them. Plus they were written late 1st century CE or 2nd century CE so why would it apply to a modern times almost 2000 years later?
This is simple. The text is clear. People also try to find ways around homosexuality by playing national treasure with the text. There are a lot of things we don’t want to submit to in the text, but the truth is that the word is perfect and we are the problem.
this is only is an issue with modern women, modern churches, and modern men yielding to western culture. Heiser was wrong on this one. This what Paul says, in 1 Cor 14:37 - "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.".............two verses earlier Paul writes, "And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home..". yeah
Every woman doesn’t have a husband.. Every woman who may be married doesn’t always have a husband who is saved. Not every woman has the ability to have children..
The only authority a women has is her own man and children and to teacher other women and children. To otherwise is to be out of order. Just imagine my wife does not like the way her best friends husband dresses so she starts to instruct him on a better way he should dress. She is out of order, and this is what Paul is addressing. Plus all pagan religions had female priestess and leader. Not so in God's house.
And yet, with your example of the clothes, you have men telling other men’s wives how they should or should not dress and that’s ok? Are we going to ignore all the spiritual gifts women in a church have because they can’t lead men ever? Churches use that to say women can’t lead anything-even projects, constructions, etc not having to do with scripture. This needs clarification and honestly it offends me Heiser didn’t see a “reason to care” about this issue.
There are 66 Books in our Protestant Bibles. How many of them were written by women? Of the 12 apostles that Jesus chose, how many of them were women? No ambiguity in this and certainly not because of someone's personal opinion. I wish Dr. Heiser, whom I DO highly respect by the way, would have brought this aspect into his discussion. Maybe in his 'previous' discussion/debate it was brought up and he dismissed it as important or relevant...I don't know. For me, the issue is adhering (or not) to God's ORDER for the male/female realm. That, to me, is worth caring about.
Did Jesus choose the disciples. Yes the 12 were all men. Also there are other passages against women being pastors. Stick with what you learned previously from the bible. Nowhere was a woman ordained a pastor also look at the qualifications for pastors. He must be a husband to one wife. It doesn't say she must be the wife of one husband
The Judges were pastors/shepherds. So, Deborah. In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’ -excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
All 12 were men because its fulfillment of the abrahamic promise. It has nothing to do with leadership in the church. We are all literally called the bride of Christ , so we are called to submit
mary, martha and mary magdeline, were disciples' of Jesus. In those times women were not really allowed to go off with a group of men and travel. Him not having many female disciple means nothing. " husband of one wife ,.He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full. " A man legit did not become a bishop because him and his wife couldnt have kid's, depsite being a great teacher he refused to become one. God gives us common sense.
Michael is more than qualified to teach. Just because you're triggered, doesn't mean the speaker is false. The man has been asked his views to a question.
Paul did NOT write the Pastorals anyway and it is easily seen it was written much later after Paul died. Only 25% of British new testament evangelicals at the conference on Pauline Authorship believe Paul wrote 1 Timothy (23%) , 2 Timothy (26%), Titus (25%) them. Plus they were written late 1st century CE or 2nd century CE so why would it apply to a modern times almost 2000 years later?
Please like and subscribe and click the bell icon to get new video updates
The humble yet spiritual genius of the late great Dr. Michael S. Heiser!
He is fair and reasonable.
Secular, Feminist liberals are foaming at mouth loving this message.
I miss Dr Heiser. His honest, deeply knowledgeable approach is inspiring to me.
true. he was wrong on this one though
This issue is tough because its so connected to the times we live in and allowing women to preach perfectly aligns with a modern secular position. If we lived say 100 years ago, this position of women not preaching was not much of an issue. Its too difficult to remove our modern secular western upbringing with this issue. I have no idea if a woman should preach. I do see in the bible that everybody has different responsibilities mandated by God, I think that I have to be the head of my household, that im responsible for loving my family as Christ loves the Church is a huge load on my shoulders and I dont necessarily want that burden or think that I can live up to that, does anyone care that Paul has stipulations for men as well? No, of course not, because having empathy for men is not popular in our modern secular culture. So how do we separate all of our indoctrinated upbringing by a non biblical fallen world? If an issue aligns with the world does that make it automatically false? Its a tough issue, all I know is that when I first read Paul saying women should not teach, they should be silent, my first reaction was of shock and disgust, but thats because of our modern culture in my opinion not because certain people not being allowed to do certain things is a negative in of itself. Im not sure if its right or wrong, its a very messy, complicated issue, full of ego and pride on both sides. Thank you and God Bless
Your cux
I understand what you are saying. I think about how Peter told Timothy, that some of Paul's teachings are hard to understand. With that being said, I consider Corinthians to be the hardest of Paul's letters to read, and understand. I don't agree with most people on what they think he's saying in 1 Cor. 14. Because of verse 36.
He says, "What?". It sounds like he can't believe what he's hearing. Paul is writing to them because of the things he's heard they are doing in the Church. In other chapters, he first says what he heard they were doing, and then he would correct them, and tells them how things should be done. Here in 14, it's difficult to separate when he's saying how it should be done, how they are doing it, and is saying that, they don't let women speak in Church. His comment about the Law? That should be a hint to people. "It's not permitted for them to speak, commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the Law? When did Paul ever mix Law and Grace together. That's the problem Paul had with Peter.
That's why he says, What? came the Word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? Wasn't it given to women, too? I think that's what this verse is saying. Everybody can speak, decently, and in order. He is describing how they have been arguing over things, and they should be doing it in an orderly fashion, and not wild, and chaotic. They are arguing over who is a prophet, and who isn't., for one thing.
. v. 32) And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 37) If any man think himself to a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38) But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. 39) covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. Let all things be done decently, and in order, he says in v.40. In all of chapter 14, he bounces back and forth a little. It is a difficult section to read, lol. But, that's what I think Paul is saying. Be blessed!!!
I think that is too burdensome, which is why I dont think a man shouldnt bare all that on his shoulder. w/e could be shared should be shared. You say you dont find issue with women speaking in church. If she has to stay silent, she cant verbally praise God in church . If she has to stay silent in church who will run the kids ministry, you have to be verbal to leads kids ministry.
Easy way to make this issue matter a whole lot more: be a woman, or deeply love a woman whom this issue affects.
That is a terrible point lmao
In 1 Timothy 2:12 Paul famously says "I do not permit a woman to teach..." In Galatians 3:28 Pauls erases sexual distinctions by saying "...there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Lastly, in 1 Corinthians 7:12 Paul says "Now to the rest I say (I, not the Lord)..." I wish to make two points: First, which epistle did Paul write first: 1 Timothy, Galatians, or 1 Corinthians? What is their order? Does the chronological order of the epistles hint at any modification of a social trend involving women - either from Paul's perspective or, say, the evolution of Greek religious customs in the First Century? Second, if Paul's opinion in 1 Timothy is precisely that - his opinion - might it be possible he began distinguishing his opinion from what God expressly commands by adding (I, not the Lord) to his letters?
Good points.
In Galatians Paul is talking about salvation and we are all one in Christ. Paul does not erase sexual distinctions by this verse. He is saying one group does not have any advantage over the other group when it comes to salvation. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” We all have equal value but different roles.
@@HC-dn1do ... Exactly. The argument that Paul "erases sexual distinctions" fails (utterly) to recognize that he is not adressing roles, but rather access to salvation. He is addressing the fact that there are no racial, societal, or gender restrictions when coming to Jesus. If Paul WERE addressing roles, then he is clearly contradicting himself when he writes to the church in Ephesus (years after this letter to Galatia), where he argues for continued role distictions between men and women.
(I, not the Lord). When Paul says that it means that when Jesus came in the flesh on this Earth Jesus didn’t give a specific command for the issue Paul was speaking about. But whatever Paul wrote down as Scripture is to be followed. So many fall for people who say that it was Paul’s opinion when we can look at Scripture to see that what Paul wrote was inspired by The Holy Spirit.
Paul states clearly in other places, including the same letter in which this phrase is found, that the words he is writing are inspired by God. Later in the same book, he states very clearly: “If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. ” Paul also told his disciple, Timothy that “All Scripture is God-breathed…” This would include Paul’s words. Even Peter alludes to Paul’s writings and refers to them as God inspired scripture.
So why did Paul use the phrase “I, not the Lord?” Simply because he was explaining something that had not already been covered by “the Lord” (Jesus) while He was on earth. In this section of scripture Paul provides us with a beautiful example of how important it was for the Apostles to preserve and not to alter the words of Jesus.
In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul’s words can be classified into three different categories: (1) Paul’s opinion, (2) Paul’s command, and (3) Jesus’ command. Let’s take a minute to look at each of these separately:
Paul’s Opinion (v. 1-9, 25-38, 40)
Since Paul is “a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God,”4 his opinion is to be taken very seriously. He says in 1 Corinthians 7:25 that he “gives [his] judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy.” This means that his opinion is not necessarily obligatory, but rather a very good idea. It would not be a stretch to say that one would be foolish not to take the advice of such a wise man.
That being said, it is important to understand that much of what Paul said that falls under the “Paul’s opinion” category, is based on “the present crisis,” or from our point of view “the past crisis.” That crisis was the persecution of Christians. By this time James (son of Zebedee) and Stephen had already been martyred for the faith, soon to be followed by Paul, Peter, and James (the brother of Jesus). Because of this Paul felt it would be better for those who were single when they became Christians to stay single if they are able to. This way, if a brother is martyred, he won’t leave behind a mourning widow or orphan..
Paul’s Command (v. 12-24, 39)
As an Apostle, Paul was vested with Apostolic authority. This meant that his commands were obligatory for the church, and therefore obligatory for us today. When Paul addresses the married men and women in the Corinthian church saying “’I, not the Lord’ issue the following command…” his command is to be followed. It is under this heading that Paul addresses the question of what a disciple should do with a non-believing spouse. He says very clearly that divorce is not an option for the disciple. He goes on to say that the unbelieving spouse may be convinced to become a disciple as a result of the example set by his/her spouse.
Jesus’ Command (v. 10-11)
The real reason Paul says “I, not the Lord” is to distinguish from when he previously said “Not I, but the Lord.” When the Corinthian church wrote to Paul and asked him a question that Jesus had already directly addressed, he simply repeated for them what Jesus had already said. By doing this he shows how precious he regarded the words of Jesus because he refused to merge his commands with Jesus’ commands.
The relevant command of Jesus to which Paul refers to is found in Matthew 19:9 when Jesus says, “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Such a command carries with it the implication that “divorce” for anything other than sexual immorality is simply not recognized by God. In the case where Person A divorces Person B and marries Person C simply because Person A doesn’t love Person B any more, according to Jesus, the relationship between Person A and Person C is simply an extramarital affair; something condemned by God in the Seventh Commandment7. This of course applies to people who profess themselves to be Christians. Paul says in his command that this rule does not apply in the case of an unbelievingspouse insisting on divorcing his/her believing spouse8.
So to make a long story short (too late): When Paul said “I, not the Lord” and “Not I, but the Lord” he is simply distinguishing between a command that originated with him and a command that originated with Jesus, both of which are obligatory.
-Brian Colon””
Seem to remember on school, so long ago now, that text is about a woman authority vs a man’s. In Godly things. Not everything, necessarily. But if there is a man who can witness to the congregation, it is preferable. And that probably stems all the way back to the garden, where the serpent is able to deceive Eve. Combined with those spirits that so women and took them as wives and created Nephilim which enticed the Creator to destroy most everything.
Adam did decide to sin knowing. He did it because he did not to live without her. A man acted incorrectly because his vision can be blurred by the woman.
He is acknowledging a man’s shortcoming. Trying to make the “church “ strong against spiritual creatures. Which would no doubt attack the church.
1Co 14:34 - Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
Tools
Unchecked Copy Box1Co 14:35 - And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Tools
Unchecked Copy Box1Co 14:36 - What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
Tools
Unchecked Copy Box1Co 14:37 - If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Paul was telling the "men", "you are not all that", lol. You are not the only ones that are born again. Holy Spirit doesn't only speak to you. Paul didn't like Law being mixed in with Grace. Ordinances, Laws, rules, and rituals, was not Paul's way of doing Church, praise God!!! He just wanted things to be done decently, and in order, Hallelujah!!!
Where can I find the original of this?
No woman should preach, there’s good GODLY reason for that. Anyone who says otherwise, they’ve let emotion dictate and not God. Thanks for this video.
It was a letter to a particular church with a particular question. Phoebe?
Maybe, just maybe the Holy Spirit inspired what Paul wrote.
Why is it when we come across a scripture that does not endorse what we want, does the issue become, “well it’s Paul’s opinion”, rather than denying to myself and coming under the authority of scripture?
Paul also says. Who did the word of God originate? Man or woman? Be careful. Satan even caused eve to doubt the word of God
Michael Heiser here demonstrates the dangers of approaching the Scriptures like a technician handling a technical manual. You are just about guaranteed to get it wrong.
NAH. He's handling it in a way that many preachers and people who just wing it with feeling could do a lot of good learning.
yes
IT SEEMED TO MATTER TO PAUL
LIKE EVERY WORD IN HERE MATTERS
WOW
JUST SAYIN
Yet another issue that Heiser got dead wrong. He claims the text is ambiguous. That implies the Holy Spirit who inspired the text did not speak clearly through Paul. Christians have always held to the perspicuity of Scripture, that Scripture is clear in what it teaches. The key to understanding the passage is that teaching is linked to exercising authority. The created order is that man was created first and woman came from man. The man is the head of the woman and not the other way around. It's not godly for a woman to seek to rule over a man. There's no women Pastors/Elders and this is crystal clear and not ambiguous at all.
I'm going to preach; blow it out the men's ear. Tired of the debate. Proud woman preacher, proud woman pastor. I find consistently the men who are opposed to women preachers have authority issues. if Huldah can speak with the authority of "Thus saith the Lord" then so can any woman whom God calls." Women can speak and teach/prophesy, call it whatever you want to call it. There are alternative interpretations to those verses in I Timothy and I Corinthians and I stand by it. This issue will never be settled. My church has been ordaining women since 1810, and I'm fiercely proud of them for having the gumption to do it. And they were anything but compromising and secular, so let me head that accusation off at the pass.
What? He skipped verse 15! That's the weird here. That's all we care about, the really weird part!
So what if your daughter said the Lord spoke to me directly and said that I meant to do this would you have a different opinion still? Or would you be open to the fact that maybe this was actually a call but given by God after all he did have Mary Magdalene as a witness of him who also taught and instructed people. I have a 10 c to believe because the Bible is labeled with brilliant men and women but they were flawed human beings and they were a lot of them were captive to their the laws of old of Moses early Jewish beliefs, and Paul was also citizen of Rome which has very strict laws against women in every aspect so part of me still believes that there was a part of them that was still ingrained with their upbringing and original beliefs you never really forget your childhood teachings and religion is involved because it's so personal to everyone. I know that Paul and Barnabas had their disagreements about a totally different topic but they were allowed to be human and not agree with each other and still spread the same message. So for me it is an important topic because what are we telling our young women today who are leaving their Christian upbringing behind them just based off of this small text that could have just been something for that time or a belief that he had personally that came from him growing up as a roman citizen. I'm sorry but we read the old sayings of Solomon when he fell for a time and lost favor, where he temporarily deemed life as worthless and not and not having a meaning to it at all we know that that did not come from Christ. Solomon as we know repented but he still had his own beliefs there's still allowed to make mistakes so part of us has to admit that in the Bible there might actually be mistakes I'm sorry that's the truth it's not all
Heiser is ignoring two points .
First ; Genesis 2:23-24. Adam’s vow to his wife
“23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”
Eve ate of the fruit forcing Adam to also eat of the fruit to fulfill his Vow.
Also we know that as the head of the family Adam warned Eve not to eat of the fruit also offering an extra layer of protection by saying “ Don’t even touch it, least ye die”!
Certainly Adam was not a willing participant.
Paul did NOT write the Pastorals anyway and it is easily seen it was written much later after Paul died. Only 25% of British new testament evangelicals at the conference on Pauline Authorship believe Paul wrote 1 Timothy (23%) , 2 Timothy (26%), Titus (25%) them. Plus they were written late 1st century CE or 2nd century CE so why would it apply to a modern times almost 2000 years later?
Paul and the early church are clear on this matter. NO FEMALE PRIESTS, PREACHERS, PASTORS, ETC.
SHOUTING DOES NOT MAKE YOU CORRECT.
This is simple. The text is clear. People also try to find ways around homosexuality by playing national treasure with the text. There are a lot of things we don’t want to submit to in the text, but the truth is that the word is perfect and we are the problem.
this is only is an issue with modern women, modern churches, and modern men yielding to western culture. Heiser was wrong on this one. This what Paul says, in 1 Cor 14:37 - "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.".............two verses earlier Paul writes, "And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home..". yeah
Every woman doesn’t have a husband.. Every woman who may be married doesn’t always have a husband who is saved. Not every woman has the ability to have children..
The only authority a women has is her own man and children and to teacher other women and children. To otherwise is to be out of order. Just imagine my wife does not like the way her best friends husband dresses so she starts to instruct him on a better way he should dress. She is out of order, and this is what Paul is addressing. Plus all pagan religions had female priestess and leader. Not so in God's house.
And yet, with your example of the clothes, you have men telling other men’s wives how they should or should not dress and that’s ok? Are we going to ignore all the spiritual gifts women in a church have because they can’t lead men ever? Churches use that to say women can’t lead anything-even projects, constructions, etc not having to do with scripture. This needs clarification and honestly it offends me Heiser didn’t see a “reason to care” about this issue.
Very well spoken, I totally agree.
There are 66 Books in our Protestant Bibles. How many of them were written by women? Of the 12 apostles that Jesus chose, how many of them were women? No ambiguity in this and certainly not because of someone's personal opinion. I wish Dr. Heiser, whom I DO highly respect by the way, would have brought this aspect into his discussion. Maybe in his 'previous' discussion/debate it was brought up and he dismissed it as important or relevant...I don't know. For me, the issue is adhering (or not) to God's ORDER for the male/female realm. That, to me, is worth caring about.
Did Jesus choose the disciples. Yes the 12 were all men. Also there are other passages against women being pastors. Stick with what you learned previously from the bible. Nowhere was a woman ordained a pastor also look at the qualifications for pastors. He must be a husband to one wife. It doesn't say she must be the wife of one husband
The Judges were pastors/shepherds. So, Deborah.
In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’
-excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
All 12 were men because its fulfillment of the abrahamic promise. It has nothing to do with leadership in the church. We are all literally called the bride of Christ , so we are called to submit
mary, martha and mary magdeline, were disciples' of Jesus. In those times women were not really allowed to go off with a group of men and travel. Him not having many female disciple means nothing. " husband of one wife ,.He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full. " A man legit did not become a bishop because him and his wife couldnt have kid's, depsite being a great teacher he refused to become one. God gives us common sense.
@@8784-l3b Samson was also a judge. Could you please show us anywhere Samson played the 'pastor' role?
Did Paul go around and find any means to glory in himself or take a place of authority?
No no no. Everything this guy says is false.
Yes he does 1Cor 7:25. Read more (because there is more) before you comment.
Paul tries to establish his authority many times in most of his writings.
What an embarrassment of a man to his daughter
This guy has no right teaching anything smh
Michael is more than qualified to teach. Just because you're triggered, doesn't mean the speaker is false. The man has been asked his views to a question.
You don’t know who Dr Heiser is huh?
Says who? Michael Heiser was a heavyweighter when it comes to understanding scripture.
Paul did NOT write the Pastorals anyway and it is easily seen it was written much later after Paul died. Only 25% of British new testament evangelicals at the conference on Pauline Authorship believe Paul wrote 1 Timothy (23%) , 2 Timothy (26%), Titus (25%) them. Plus they were written late 1st century CE or 2nd century CE so why would it apply to a modern times almost 2000 years later?