• Welcome to Talk Jesus

    A true bible based, Jesus centered online community. Join over 13,000 members today

    Register Log In

Woman..

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:15)

Member
Life's worth is too often defined by achievements, beauty and wealth.

Although we claim that mankind's perception of slavery, women, rules, and love have changed and become more liberal and more accepting. Are we still in chains? In its core, has life become any better for the soul?

Did women's freedom to work and compete with men actually make her grow weary?

Do working women secretly delight in their hearts to be loving housewives than to work long hours behind glass cabins?

Why do we talk about independence so much? Was it wrong for our grandmothers to be dependent on their husbands?

We want our daughters to be educated but have we failed to educate them on being a woman?

Is independence in a woman causing families to split? Although that can't be the sole reason, can we say it might be one of the reasons?

Maybe submission and dependence were not looked at as losing a woman's self-worth earlier. Today we might dislike the verse "Wives submit to your husband". Brides do not want to say it or maybe they do not fully comprehend it.

Could it possible that submission could lead to winning and dependence is freedom?

While modern life promised to be fulfilling, are women still lacking self-worth and joy that makes her beautiful?

To shun God's values and morals is to lose life's meaning. My modern views doubt God's principles but soul longs and thirst for his word.
Maybe you disagree with a lot of what is written or maybe you also ponder these very questions.

I will leave you with this quote by Elisabeth Elliot.

“To me, a lady is not frilly, flouncy, flippant, frivolous and fluff-brained, but she is gentle, she is gracious, she is godly and she is giving. You and I have the gift of femininity... the more womanly we are, the more manly men will be and the more God is glorified. Be women, be only women, be real women in obedience to God.”


- Leah Patience
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Loyal
Hi Leah Patience -- your comments / insights are wonderful / thought-provoking. Being a Godly woman should be our goal. Growing in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ should be our goal. God created women for a reason. To be a help meet for the men. He also knows that lots of women will be single and on their own -- how much do we depend on God for His leadership / support.

God created family -- satan has been in the picture to try to destroy that which God created. And we play right into satan's hands -- God has provided the cure-all for that. Do we accept that or reject it. It's our eternal life at stake.

Thanks for sharing.
 
Member
I would wonder how ethical is it, how moral, to confine women to a lesser place due to their gender? America is the land of the free and the home of the brave. It took a great deal of patience and effort to make women equal in freedom and liberty to men. Should we then renounce that personally because we imagine God prefers women to be less than as free as a man? Even a sinning male?
By one man, not woman, sin entered the world.

I thank God for the women that pushed the boundaries that contained their level of freedom in America due to their sex. They fought, no doubt some died, so that I may have the right to vote, to work, to inherit, to leave the house without my husbands permission, to prosecute my husband should he rape me.

I think of those sacrifices and gains and I think if God did not inspire women to step over the line that they were taught to believe contained their level of liberty and freedom according to standards often imparted due to Biblical nuances, where would I be today? Barefoot, pregnant, a serf in a marriage? Unable to fend for myself, earn a living without a man able to by law call me his property, and unable to inherit from my relatives because I am female.

Good news in Saudi Arabia not that long ago. Women are finally able to drive! And should they be seen behind the wheel of a car they won't be pulled over and decapitated.
Progress! Thank God.
 
Loyal
I guess we don't appreciate what we Do have in this country. Unfortunately there Are those who use Our freedoms to work Against us. We should be praying for them.
 
Active
I would wonder how ethical is it, how moral, to confine women to a lesser place due to their gender? America is the land of the free and the home of the brave. It took a great deal of patience and effort to make women equal in freedom and liberty to men. Should we then renounce that personally because we imagine God prefers women to be less than as free as a man? Even a sinning male?
By one man, not woman, sin entered the world.
I would have thought Uber, that your salvation would be more important to you than your position in the world. It seems however, that your equality with men is more important. 1 Corinthians 14:33-38 As in all the congregatios of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to enquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritualy gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored. When it says that it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church, there is, I believe, a proviso; The Spirit can speak through whom he wishes, so if a woman is moved by the Spirit, he can speak through her. The reason any of us come to Jesus; is salvation, without which we have no access to heaven. I believe obedience is a small price to pay, don't you?
 
Member
I would have thought Uber, that your salvation would be more important to you than your position in the world. It seems however, that your equality with men is more important. 1 Corinthians 14:33-38 As in all the congregatios of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to enquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritualy gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored. When it says that it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church, there is, I believe, a proviso; The Spirit can speak through whom he wishes, so if a woman is moved by the Spirit, he can speak through her. The reason any of us come to Jesus; is salvation, without which we have no access to heaven. I believe obedience is a small price to pay, don't you?
You are one who is quick to judge my relationship with the Father. I have no patience for someone who attempts to imply one is not a Christian because their understanding of scripture does not comport with the understanding of their judge /accuser.

I'll make two points and then we may conclude our exchange. Women are called by God to preach. The idea that women are to remain silent in the church is a misunderstanding of Paul's teaching, and when taken as women are to remain mute in the house of our Father, is no better an edict that that which is appointed Muslim women in their mosques. When the truth is, Paul was teaching women are not to openly seek clarity concerning something being taught in the church. That's why the verses following the one taken so far out of context is ignored. Because it makes clear what Paul was saying. The woman is to wait until she may inquire of her husband or what we today call pastor, for further understanding.
There are women apostles in the scriptures and there are women pastors today.

Lastly, the reality is, I acknowledge the truth of God and his word. That there is no division among the faithful. There is no male nor female. We are all one in Christ. Galatians 3:28.
 
Active
You are one who is quick to judge my relationship with the Father. I have no patience for someone who attempts to imply one is not a Christian because their understanding of scripture does not comport with the understanding of their judge /accuser.

I'll make two points and then we may conclude our exchange. Women are called by God to preach. The idea that women are to remain silent in the church is a misunderstanding of Paul's teaching, and when taken as women are to remain mute in the house of our Father, is no better an edict that that which is appointed Muslim women in their mosques. When the truth is, Paul was teaching women are not to openly seek clarity concerning something being taught in the church. That's why the verses following the one taken so far out of context is ignored. Because it makes clear what Paul was saying. The woman is to wait until she may inquire of her husband or what we today call pastor, for further understanding.
There are women apostles in the scriptures and there are women pastors today.

Lastly, the reality is, I acknowledge the truth of God and his word. That there is no division among the faithful. There is no male nor female. We are all one in Christ. Galatians 3:28.
How you see scripture is your right Uber, This site is here for debate and because of that we often disagree. I find it suprising that a Christian person can ignore a scripture where our apostle punctuates it by pointing out that (a) it's the law, (b) It's the Lords command, and (c) anyone who ignores it will be ignored. If you wish to disagree with your apostle and the Lord, that is your perogative. Good luck.
 
Member
I see where they were in ministry. One was a judge. I don't see where any was an apostle.
I think if we reflect on the meaning of the word apostle we see that they were so.

Acts 18: 24 Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent and cultured man, and well versed in the [Hebrew] Scriptures. 25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and being spiritually impassioned, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things about Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John; 26 and he began to speak boldly and fearlessly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained more accurately to him the way of God [and the full story of the life of Christ].

Romans 16:7 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
7 Greet Andronicus and Junia,[a] my relatives[b] who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

Footnotes:
  1. Romans 16:7 Or Junias; other ancient authorities read Julia
  2. Romans 16:7 Or compatriots

Romans 16 Amplified Bible (AMP)
Greetings and Love Expressed

16:1 Now I introduce and commend to you our sister [a]Phoebe, a deaconess (servant) of the church at [b]Cenchrea, 2 that you may receive her in the Lord [with love and hospitality], as [c]God’s people ought to receive one another. And that you may help her in whatever matter she may require assistance from you, for she has been a helper of many, including myself. 3 Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, 4 who risked their own necks [endangering their very lives] for my life. To them not only do I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles.
 
Member
How you see scripture is your right Uber, This site is here for debate and because of that we often disagree. I find it suprising that a Christian person can ignore a scripture where our apostle punctuates it by pointing out that (a) it's the law, (b) It's the Lords command, and (c) anyone who ignores it will be ignored. If you wish to disagree with your apostle and the Lord, that is your prerogative. Good luck.
Romans 6:14 For sin will no longer be a master over you, since you are not under Law [as slaves], but under [unmerited] grace [as recipients of God’s favor and mercy].
 
Loyal
Deacons / deaconesses are not the same as apostles -- look at Act 1:21 -- Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 - beginning from the baptism of John to that day when he was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrections. vs 25 "to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression, fell, etc. "

Maybe we should stick with the Scriptural definition Of.
 
Member
Deacons / deaconesses are not the same as apostles -- look at Act 1:21 -- Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 - beginning from the baptism of John to that day when he was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrections. vs 25 "to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression, fell, etc. "

Maybe we should stick with the Scriptural definition Of.
Even if we look to those described as Deaconess in scripture it remains evident that those women are not silent in the church. And delivered the Gospel and served the church as women.
Deaconess is derived from the Greek, diakonos. Usage: a waiter, servant; then of any one who performs any service, an administrator.

And there remains Paul's reference to the woman named Junia, the Apostle.
 
Loyal
@Uber Squirrel -- Look at 1 Timothy 3:11 "Likewise, their wives (wives of deacons) must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well."

The Romans 16:7 -- it Could mean that they were among the apostles Or that they were in the midst Of the apostles.
 
Active
@Uber Squirrel -- Look at 1 Timothy 3:11 "Likewise, their wives (wives of deacons) must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well."

The Romans 16:7 -- it Could mean that they were among the apostles Or that they were in the midst Of the apostles.
i agree sue among them not as one x
 
Loyal
I was reading luke this morning and it clearly says Jesus appointed the 12 apostles.

Luke 6:13-16
And when day came, he called his disciples and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.


to me other then Paul the apostles start and end here
 
Loyal
I was reading luke this morning and it clearly says Jesus appointed the 12 apostles.

Luke 6:13-16
And when day came, he called his disciples and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.


to me other then Paul the apostles start and end here
I would have to disagree with you. Jesus did not name Paul as an apostle, of the 12, and mathias was chosen by lot to replace judas. And yet 1 Cor 1:1 says "Paul, called as an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother," and acts 4:36 "Now Joseph, a Levite of Cyprian birth, who was also called Barnabas by the apostles (which translated means Son of Encouragement)," and yet in acts 9:27 "But Barnabas took hold of him and brought him to the apostles and described to them how he had seen the Lord on the road, and that He had talked to him, and how at Damascus he had spoken out boldly in the name of Jesus. ", although it could be 2 different barnabas's. In acts 15 both paul and barnabas went to Jerusalem to the apostles (because they werent?).

Then there is romans 16 which tell of others.... my point being, there were the Big apostles, being the twelve, and then the small ones, that are called apostles but no record of them being apointed by Christ while He was on earth. So it seems people CAN be an apostle without being in the flesh and appointed by Jesus in person. Unless of course you want to throw out parts of scripture that dont seem to follow along, which I doubt you would do.
 
Loyal
I suspect that there are some self-appointed apostles and others in 'ministeries' on TV that are not especially Biblically sound. We need to be cautious as to how we 'handle' Scripture. :)
 
Top