You have more than one portion of scripture that shows that the primary vocal and leadership roles in the corporate gathering of the Church are deligated to men. And if we ordain a women into that postion we have rejected the scriptures and God’s authority.

The delgation by God of these postions is not based on inherent ability. There are many portions of scripture where women are shown to have performed equally as men. But the context of both 1 Corinthians and 1 Tmothy are clear that the offices and leadership positions are to be given to men.

It is also clear in Acts that outside of the official meeting of the local Church that it was ok for women to teach. Look at Pricillia and Aquilla where they take equall teaching credit to disciples even the Apostle Paul.

This is not a cultural thing but a submission to the authority of God and that transcends culture.

I found the NETBible translation (note 21 from Jerry Brown) to be fascinating. NO pastor of an organized denomination (i.e., Presbyterian, Methodist, etc.) can be truly considered “independent”, as they are called by a board or the bishop. Depending on the denomination, even bishops are elected, so are not independent (though many act like it).

I used to be quite feminist and thought that my role was as a human being, and wasn’t at all limited by my sex, especially by God who is “no respecter of persons” (and all those other one-line phrases preachers seem to pull from various locations of holy writ to ascribe as all-encompassing attributes of God.)

However, I have learned that the roles of men and women are very different, while their worth remains the same. It is the place of honor for the woman, who is the glory of man (she identifies herself to the man,) to be submissive. In this way, she honors both man, through her respect (something all men naturally crave,) as well as God, by following the order He initiated and perpetuated since the beginning.
Also, to reiterate a point mentioned in the original post, the natures of men and women create for them differing roles. Even the naturalists argue that the role of men and women has always been different to fit their natural differences. Women are more inclined to the maternal role of nurturing, while men are suited for guarding, defending, and leading. The latter sounds more like someone I would want to shepherd my sheep. Tending to them is seemingly ineffective if they are being attacked and slaughtered…

Not that women are incapable etc. but it is how God has designed things.

Absolutely women have a place in the Church, even teaching (other women) in the church. However, this role does not include exercising authority over men.

Jesus taught women who were clearly competent, and tutored, if you will, these women. They “sat at the feet of Jesus” which was their way of saying “were discipled by the Rabbi.” These women were educated and would participate in discussions in the temples… There are numerous other examples of women having educational roles in the church. Phillip had four daughters who prophesied, publically proclaiming the Word of God. Priscilla (who is always identified with her husband) and many, many more who were instructional members in the Church.

The women Paul was talking to were ill-informed and teaching false doctrine, correct? (Perhaps the same “breed” who were causing so chaos in the services in other churches?) Of course Paul would want them to be silenced! Ask your husbands at home, ladies, and don’t be disruptive in church.

On another note, in a response quote earlier (April) someone mentioned that he was led to the Lord by a woman pastor, and calling this wrong was “denying the Spirit.”
I disagree. All throughout the Bible God has used people who are blatantly disobeying Scripture to influence His own. Just because He uses situations for His glory doesn’t mean that the situations glorify Him in the typical manner of thinking.

Since I tend to be a little long-winded I will post my actual opinion in a following entry.

I think it’s great that so many are doing their research and understanding what to believe and why to believe it. This discipleship, sadly, is so lacking in today’s modern American church!

Thanks and God bless all!

http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Women_Service_Church.htm

I have given some of the sources you mention a quick once-over, and I think what I can see is best summed up by a sentence from Suzanne’s Bookshelf, where she states “It indicates that there is a strong thirst for a justification for restricting women’s roles.” This strikes me as quite backwards. I think, based on historical background, that the sentence is more accurate when it is stated “It indicates that there is a strong thirst for a justification for expanding women’s roles.” This makes it easier for me to see why so much word-wrangling is being done. Essentially, we have a Biblical statement (1 Timothy 2:12) that is backed up by another (1 Corinthians 14:34) that a group of people don’t like, so an awful lot is being done to try to justify that position. I don’t think that church history or the Bible is working for that position terribly well. I know there are times when I don’t like what the Bible says about something, but what is called for in that situation is obedience, not attempts to justify an alternative position. The word-wrangling over 1 Timothy 2:12 seems to be such an attempt. Rather than advance an agenda, I choose to let the weight of history and Scripture guide my understanding of this.

I probably shouldn’t have narrowed my comments to the meaning of authentein, but should have said that the meaning of the verse and its application today in the church is a hot issue. My bad.

Read chapters 2 & 3 of WOMEN IN THE CHURCH (Second Edition – Kostenberger and Schreiner). Then read P.B. Payne’s essay on the verse:

http://www.linguistsoftware.com/Payne2008NTS-oude1Tim2_12.pdf

Then read what Dr. Ann Nyland says in her notes on this verse in THE SOURCE NEW TESTAMENT. Then go to

powerscourt.blogspot.com (aka Suzanne’s Bookshelf)

and do a search for the 12/14/08 article on “request re authentein” and read Suzanne’s other blogposts on the passage.

Then go to the complegalitarian.wordpress.com blog and read some of the posts on 1 Timothy and the comments.

Ben Witherington III and Scot McKnight and Craig Keener and Gordon Fee are egalitarians. So was F.F. Bruce.

And a translators note from the NET:
“According to BDAG 150 s.v. αὐθεντέω this Greek verb means “to assume a stance of independent authority, give orders to, dictate to” (cf. JB “tell a man what to do”).”

I’m not feeling “hot issue” here. Paul is be pretty clear here. Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 14:34 seems to back this up. So, while I am not sure it ever precludes all teaching in all settings by a woman, I definitely can’t go the other way and open the door completely. That would seem to fly in the face of teaching that has been pretty consistent since apostolic times, with few exceptions.