Can Women Pastor ?

[rdp]

Gotta' run for the night, look in tommorrow.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Jeffrey, you reveal your bias via your quick agreement w/ Prax w/out serious examination.

He's not explaining the text of I Tim. 2:12-15 at all...other than "synagogues," which are NOT even hinted at in these verse???? And you jump up & down saying "well done"??????????????????????????????

Sheesh, is this all it takes to explain away Scripture for you??

Bias?

"well done" -- I thought he did a great job at do a line-by-line break-down on the text. Bias? lol

Synogogues are not mentioned. True. But clearly you didn't read Prax's post then. He never made that comment. He did say that many of these Christians were Jews, and one's that just a year earlier religiously and faithfully assembled in synagogue. That those traditions would cease in one year is unthinkable.

So calm down and address his points.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

You've made things up before, that's why.

The "Golden Rule of Interpretation" has other names, depending on the field of Hermeneutics you study (yes, there are many)! It's an approach not skipped by other fields to (those who suggest first learning authorial intent for example).

The plain, literal meaning works great. Read on in your instruction manual for passages that seem "obscure" or that are "controversial." To give you a heads up, the "Golden Rule" is used to discern whether the passage is figurative or not! That's the case with the passages you are presenting. We know Paul is not waxing poetic.

The "plain" and "literal" is defined by the context of what Paul's addressing, by Paul's time and day, by the situation unique to the churches -- these all help inform us what the "plain and literal" mean.

Your Golden Rule is an instrument for determining literary genre, not overall interpretation. Try again.

Oh brother, just refuse to acknowledge your ignorance eh' Jeffrey!?

Don't have much time: How can one "determine" interpretation w/out 1st determining the genre???????????? Sheesh, 'round & 'round it goes...............

Besides, you're the one asserting that I've "made things up"....but I forgot that you're the only authority that you accept, or those who agree w/ you!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Well, actually, by "consistency" I hope you don't mean if the gender means one thing in one passage it means the same thing in all passages? Please tell me you don't mean that.

And all of this by me simply making an observation made by scholars for years. The term for "Elders" is ALWAYS in the masculine, NEVER in the feminine! Trivialize it all day long, it's still a grammatical fact, which would work fine if it was in your favor......but it's not! Sorry Charlie, come again!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Bias?

"well done" -- I thought he did a great job at do a line-by-line break-down on the text. Bias? lol

Synogogues are not mentioned. True. But clearly you didn't read Prax's post then. He never made that comment. He did say that many of these Christians were Jews, and one's that just a year earlier religiously and faithfully assembled in synagogue. That those traditions would cease in one year is unthinkable.

So calm down and address his points.

Ughhhh, I just did address them. He's making unsupported assertions outside of the text. And you applaud him for it???????? Unreal. Is this what they taught you in your "hermeneutics" courses????

[rdp]

gotta' go, look in tommorrow.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Oh brother, just refuse to acknowledge your ignorance eh' Jeffrey!?

Don't have much time: How can one "determine" interpretation w/out 1st determining the genre???????????? Sheesh, 'round & 'round it goes...............

Besides, you're the one asserting that I've "made things up"....but I forgot that you're the only authority that you accept, or those who agree w/ you!

Not the expert, but I was trying to enlighten you. And there you go changing the subject. No one has question what literary genre Timothy or Corinthians is. Have they? If so, please enlighten me. And then please tell me why you are mentioning this GOLDEN apple to us all. Thank you kindly.

(Do you realize all your posts are signed off with "gotta go, see you tomorrow" only to see 20 more posts?)

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

And all of this by me simply making an observation made by scholars for years. The term for "Elders" is ALWAYS in the masculine, NEVER in the feminine! Trivialize it all day long, it's still a grammatical fact, which would work fine if it was in your favor......but it's not! Sorry Charlie, come again!

Yes, but you aren't LISTENING to a single point anyone makes on this thread. It's like an auto pilot on the other side. Because a word has a gender, does not mean it directly implies exclusivity to a particular gender. That's doesn't consider generic masculines in the Koine Greek.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Ughhhh, I just did address them. He's making unsupported assertions outside of the text. And you applaud him for it???????? Unreal. Is this what they taught you in your "hermeneutics" courses????

What are his "unsupported" assertions?

[Jeffrey]

BTW, I'm really not biased. I'm just particular against puffed up arguments. I am undecided on this subject. I know, weird place to be. I definitely believe a woman can preach, it's teaching men that is the problem (which implies pastoring). However, I enjoy hearing the evidence... and evidence that's painstakingly prepared.