Quote:
Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord
You know, I know you guys take this serious, and of course, I know the issue is a serious one.
But really... doesn't anyone see that what we are really on is a battle of personal interpretation over a couple of scriptures where culture, translation, and interpretation surely plays a huge role in its concept?
Can't you guys accept that some understand the passages differently than you? You surely don't have a "thou shalt" or "thou shalt not" in clear verbiage, instead having only proof for your concept using translations that might have one word in the definition that speaks to your case.
So... anyway, my point in all this is just to say.... it's become comical. That's all.
|
If this was accurate it would be one thing. Precedent has to factor in somewhere, such as no OT female priest, no female Apostles (upon whose teaching he would build the church) chosen by The Lord, no qualifications for female bishops and deacons. Besides the fact no logical explanation has been offered for
1 Tim 2:11-12, the only one offered so far has been this is referencing a husband and wife. Which apparently only single women could then teach, or it would require the married woman to be silent in the very place Paul in
1 Cor 14 tells her to ask.
It may be comical in that we are insistent on these very transparent passages, but we are insistent, because some are insistently trying to misrepresent them.