Biblical Baptist

[Abel]

[Bruce Gourley]

[Abel]

[Bruce Gourley]

[Abel]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Bruce Gourley]

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: And Hal, let me add my congratulations of that 65th milestone.

[Abel]

[Haruo]

[Bruce Gourley]

[Abel]

No, what I have done is exactly what I said. I take the verse in its full context. Look at the portion of scripture in I Timothy you are referring to, but let's look at it in full context:

1 Timothy 2:9-10 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Paul was emphasizing the uselessness of putting on the dog (as we say down here). He was referring to the importance of modest apparel. He was also stressing the fact that it is not the outward beauty that is important, but doing well. Good works done for Christ makes a woman more beautiful than all the gold and pearls she can wear.

However, he then describes a woman’s limitations lest they believe their good works should involve roles assigned to men: 1 Timothy 2:11-12 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

He then explains the reason for a woman’s restriction in the ministry:1 Timothy 2:13-15 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Eve showed poor judgment by being deceived. As a result, she is forbidden from holding office over a man. Personally, I believe Adam showed worse judgment by knowingly eating the fruit, but I don’t see things from God’s perspective.

Now, please tell me how I have sliced and diced these verses to square with my personal opinion. Where have I misused these verses?

[Bruce Gourley]

[Abel]

That was not Paul's command. Again, read the portion in context. He was speaking of dressing modestly. They were not to be drawing attention to themselves. Had Paul simply said “Women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array.” period, that would have been your clear command. Then that should be what we go by. But that is not all he said. That is not what he meant. Do not omit V.10. It is a continuation of v.9. He said rather, they should adorn themselves with good works if they claimed to be Godly women. Now, if we took this verse by the letter, we’d have naked women running around in churches. Paul was explaining it is better to be adorned with good works rather than the jewelry and fancy clothes.

However, when we come to verses 11&12, there is no contrast made to anything else. He says women are not to teach or exercise authority over a man. Period. No comparison, no analogy, no metaphor, just a simple restriction.

[Bruce Gourley]

[Abel]

I am through with you Bruce. Your unchristian attitude towards me has been distasteful from your opening post. I do not appreciate it. Instead of proper Bible discussion, you resort to cheap ad hominem insults. You claim the Bible contains errors and contradictions, yet you have the gall to say I am a Bible-abuser.

When I PM’d you and asked for you to show respect, I should have known the type of person you really were when you told me the only reason I was in your “digital living room” was by your permission and if I couldn’t handle the heat I should go play somewhere else. Not one time have you displayed Christian charity towards me.

I refuse to lower myself to you tactics. Hopefully others here will see your true colours. Go ahead and claim your victory. I’m sure you are proud of yourself for offending a Christian brother, if indeed you are a Christian. I am shaking the dust of BL off my feet.

[Haruo]

[Neil Heath]

[Bruce Gourley]

Indeed, we all see through a glass darkly. And there is no shame in admitting so.

[Ed Pettibone]

[KeithE]

Abel, if you are still reading consider being a non-judgmental fundamentalist who is not quick to judge other Christian's thought patterns. Stick to your beliefs and argue back but let others have their beliefs w/o cries of judgment as to the Christian-ness (if there is such a word) of those that see the Bible in a different light than you do (as if your have the right to judge). I can and do respect such non-judgmental fundamentalists.

[Gene Scarborough]

Abel reminds me of the folks at Corinth who were all torn up with speaking in tongues and battling one another over it.

He ends his classic directions with these words: "So abide these three: faith, hope, and love----but the greatest of these is love."

Let's hope he learns about the definition of Agape = "unfailing good will."

[Dave Roberts]

[Hal Eaton]

Abel has adopted the time-honored rule which guarantees you can win (at least by tedium) every argument:

Ask your opponent to define his terms. (Then define them for him . . .)

[Tim Bonney]