Yeah, yeah I know it’s an atheist forum, but I’ve learned more about the bible here than I ever did in church 
. I’m just curious about the arguments for and against women preaching. The bible clearly states nooooooo women even speaking in church. You’re even suppose to keep your trap shut if you have a question and save it until you can ask your husband. I think that’s in the new testament so there’s none of the excuse that you’re allowed to ignore stuff in the old testament. It really doesn’t seem open to interpretation so I’m wondering how it’s justified. I’ve never seen the reasoning used for allowing women to preach. I’m glad that so many denominations don’t allow women preachers, I think it’ll make a huge difference in religion becoming less relevant. A lot of women alive now don’t remember when you weren’t allowed to do something because of your gender. Not to mention that ruling out half the human race isn’t a good idea when your membership is shrinking in the first place
That’s actually Saint Paul’s misogyny I think, it’s not in the Gospels as far as I know.
Many denominations allow female pastors, even bishops. The church of England/ Episcopalians allows female priests and bishops. They are also very accepting of gays .
Perhaps the hold out is the Catholic church. The Abrahamic faiths are all patriarchal. It’s surprising that women are allowed any serious role rather than not being allowed any. Imo, this will change in the Catholic church, along with allowing clergy to marry. If it does not change, the catholic church will not survive this century, imo.
The link below is what Paul said about Women
Reform Judaism allows female rabbis.
In Islam, female imams are permitted , with a female only congregation.
I think we can blame it all on that Feclae tramp who wandered the countryside with Paul and was completely wiped from the New Testament or perhaps Lilith, the second Eve, or even God’s wife Asherah, that fucked it all up for women. Anyway, at some point, way back when, a long, long, time ago, in a country far, far, away, some women, did something so disturbing as to have all subsequent women wiped from the pages of history forever.
1 Timothy 2:12
I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
Why? As far as I understand it Asherath was YHWH’s wife in prehistory before there was an Israel or Judaism. At the time he was a war god, she the major goddess of the Canaanite pantheon. Some scholars have claimed that Asherath may have been worshipped by Israelites as late as the third century bce
She seems to appear later, in Jewish apocrypha, as Lilith, Adam’s first wife. Apparently she would not obey Adam, so he went whining to YHWH “That woman you gave me----” YHWH turned red headed Lilith into a demon. It is said that a Jewish folk superstition that red heads are bad luck had its genesis in Lilith.
It’s a fascinating area, given the bloody minded misogyny of the Abrahamic religions.
(((((((((((((((((((((((((9)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Despite warnings from the Lord, many Israelite leaders worshiped Asherah. Several of Solomon’s wives drew the king from the true God to “Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians” (1 Kings 11:5)—most likely the same as Asherah. Queen Jezebel also worshiped Asherah and supported 400 Asherah prophets (1 Kings 18:19).
Another reference I recall: 1 Corinthians 14: 34-35: (RSV version) As in all churches of the saints, the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
A bad apologetic excuse given to me back in the 1990s was that Paul was addressing women who had prostituted themselves (unbeknownst to their husbands I guess.) The apologist, a minister, didn’t mention about any of them being married. And I only realize now that is says ‘asking husbands later.’ Hmm. I’ll just chalk it up as another nonsensical apologetic thrown at me.
Lilith - “Adam’s Second Wife.” I was wrong, I thought the second wife came first. Lilith was first, the wife with no skin was second, and then Eve. The first one was made with clear skin and And Adam was so repulsed by her, having watched her being made by God, that he would not go near her. We have no idea what happened to her. Lilith was God’s second fuck up attempt at providing Adam with a wife.
The Alphabet of Ben Sira Midrash identifies a
third wife, created after Lilith deserted Adam, but before Eve. This
unnamed wife was purportedly made in the same way as Adam, from the
“dust of the earth”, but the sight of her being created proved too
much for Adam to take and he refused to go near her. It is also said
that she was created from nothing at all, and that God created into
being a skeleton, then organs, and then flesh. The Midrash tells that
Adam saw her as “full of blood and secretions,” suggesting that he
witnessed her creation and was horrified at seeing a body from the
inside out. Ben Sira does not record this wife’s fate. She was never
named, and it assumed that she was allowed to leave the Garden a
perpetual virgin, or was ultimately destroyed by God in favor of Eve,
who was created when Adam was asleep and oblivious. It should be noted
here, that both Lilith and the Second Wife are free from any curse of
the Tree of Knowledge, as they left long before the event occurred."
This just demonstrates that God is a real fuck up and does not understand women any better than the averabe man. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!
3 wives!
My wife’s cousin is a rabbi. She’s in one of the reformed sects of Judaism–she certainly wouldn’t be one in one of the more orthodox sects. In her synagogue men and women sit together. In orthodox services men and women are strictly segregated.
Of course not. Impossible, what with him having been invented by men (not women) and all
When I was a Christian I was once kicked out of a bible study when I simply pointed out that the NT and Paul, in particular, didn’t allow women to teach or usurp authority over a male. I went and saw that pastor and challenged him over the issue, he didn’t want to discuss the matter ( they allowed women to preach at this church). I am embarrassed it took me so long to see what a bigoted, sexist, homophobic piece of trash both I and the bible were at that time.
A bit harsh. I refer to myself at around 16 as “'an insufferable little prig”. Imo. one need only be embarrassed by youthful prejudices and general fuckwittery if one is never able to move on.
I saw and see the Tanakh as the mythology of Judaism. The putative ‘New Testament’ is the mythology of a minor sect of followers of “The Way” who became ‘Christians’
St. Paul put women and married couples in charge of some of his churches. I don’t know why church leaders have a problem with the concept.
the women in bible study wanted to know how they could get their husbands to go to church so that they could tell them what was said. Women sat at the back of the churches. To ask questions during mass, they would have to be screaming from the back.
MEN EXPLAIN APOSTLESHIP TO ME
The first sentence of John Paul II’s 1994 Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is a bald faced lie. It states that ordination has been reserved for men alone since the beginning. Romans 16 has long list of people, including women listed as apostles, deacons, and coworkers. The secular authorities agree. Pliny the Younger could find only women deacons to question about this puzzling new religion. My translation is from 1978. Apparently, he never read the Bible.
The whole point of the document is the necessity of being in the apostolic succession to be a priest.
Do you know who WASN’T a Disciple of Jesus OR in the apostolic succession? – Saint Paul.
He was converted on the road to Damascus. He was going to Damascus to persecute Christians and to try to wipe them out. He preaches before even meeting with the Apostles. At one point, he takes Peter to task.
Apostles differ from Disciples in that Apostles are sent out with a message. Let’s look at some of the other Apostles in the Bible
The Samaritan Woman at the Well. – St. John in his Gospel gives a long account of her apostleship BEFORE the resurrection. The Disciples were only baptizing and Jesus himself was not baptizing.
The story starts with Jesus sending the Disciples off to town while he sits at the well in the heat of the day and waits for her. She comes by herself. Fetching water was a communal activity done in the early morning out of the heat. The rest of her town had ostracized her.
Jesus then speaks to her, totally shocking her.
Father tells the story of being on El-Al when one of the ‘devout’ Jewish men reached into the over head bin to prepare to pray. He knocked his case right onto the head of the priest’s mother. Father’s mother was hurt that he didn’t even apologize. Father explained. – He couldn’t. His religion forbids him from speaking to a woman. Even (or especially?) to apologize.
Also remember that Samaritans were considered half breeds and blasphemers by the Jews. They were part of the pre Babylonian split of Israel that no longer worshipped solely at the Temple. They had their own facilities and didn’t pay into the Temple fund. The Jews considered them enemies. (The only Good Samaritan would have been a dead Samaritan.) Jesus had to pass through Samaria on his way from Galilee to Jerusalem.
The woman could not have been more surprised if her bucket had started talking to her. Jesus then proceeds to tell her of her life history. Unlike Peter who took years, she IMMEDIATELY, starts to believe Jesus could be the Messiah. She runs off to her village to tell them of the Good News and convinces many. By the way, SHE WAS DIVORCED 5 TIMES. (So Christ and the early Church WELCOMED the divorced.)
The Acts of the Apostles.
Women are listed as part of the Company in verses 1-4. The Apostles draw lots between 2 other men who had been present with them since the beginning to take the place of Judas. So the construct of only 12 special disciples was artificial. The group is listed as being about 120 brothers.
A Mathias, who was not mentioned previously, is listed as a Disciple
Joseph/Barsabbas/Justus and Joseph/Barnabas are listed
5-14 includes both men and women.
Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, Nicolaus of Antioch.
They convert the Samarians. (It would actually have been easier to convert the Samaritans as they weren’t under the thumb of the Temple hierarchy.)
Tabitha, a seamstress, is explicitly listed as a new Christian. Finally – women as considered important enough to list.
8-3 has Saul harassing women – Why? Jewish men don’t speak to women. He would have no reason to harass them, IF THEY HAD NOT BEEN PROCLAIMING THE GOSPEL.!
8:26-40 has the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch. The Holy Spirit orders Phillip to chase down his carriage where he is reading Isaiah. He had been coming back from offering sacrifice at the Temple. No he wasn’t. A castrated man would NOT have been allowed into the inner courtyard with the ‘real’ men. He would have been separated out at the immersion baths and sent to join the women. (They didn’t want any of them thar deviants in the Temple.) This would have been the closest to transgender that the medical ‘science’ of the day could accomplish.
What is his reaction to the message? When told that he can be accepted as an EQUAL member of the church, he Is so thrilled, he orders the carriage stopped at the first water he sees and Phillip IMMEDIATELY baptizes him. I wonder if Phillip also told him that God ordered him to chase him down and convert him.
So the Church has ALWAYS had a strong message of the acceptance of the LGBT community from the beginning. I have no idea how the vatican or the evangelical ‘christians’ come up with anything different.
Being in charge of the treasury, he would immediately have taken this message back to Ethiopia and related it to his Queen. I’m sure she wasn’t happy about being excluded from the Temple either and probably also joined immediately.
Chapter 10 has the Holy Spirit descending on the Roman household of Cornelias before they are baptized by Peter and without him laying hands on him. Even then, GOD chooses; not the pope.
Chapter 13:15 – The Jews stirred up the influential women against the Christians. Why would they do this? Jewish men don’t talk to women. – This would acknowledge that early Christianity was a WOMAN’S movement. Think of Christ’s message of love and honor to the poor and downtrodden and those who serve. The poorest and least powerful are WOMEN. They would have been flocking to Christ’s message in droves. The men would have been invested in the power structure of the Temple and would not have left it.
It was the same in the Dust Bowl during the Great Depression. Those who left and went west to California were the poorest – those who had NOTHING to lose. The land owners stayed. Women were not considered full members in Judaism. They are in most sects of Christianity. (At least pre Benne Dick)
Chapter 16: Timothy’s Jewish mother is listed as a believer.
Chapter 16:14 Lydia and the other women of Phillipi convert. Paul converts HER household and leaves her in charge of the church. (Single mother?)
Philippi was also where the slave girl possessed by the demon prophesized. The authorities don’t care about their preaching until the demon is expelled and they lose their cash flow. The Bible states she is happy with her new state and probably immediately began spreading the word.
Paul converts his Roman jailer and his household.
Chapter 17 – More conversions of Jews, Greeks, and numerous prosperous women.
17: 8 Beroea – Many Jews and influential Greek women and men. – Women listed first ~ the converts were mostly women or stressing the importance of the women converts in the early church?
En d of chapter 17 in Athens lists 1 man 1 woman and others.
Church in Corinth - he converts a husband and wife team and takes them to Ephesus and sets them up in charge of the church. They are joined by the orator Apollos.
Paul baptizes 12 more men at Ephesus. The silversmiths who made miniature statues of Artimas objected to the new religion because they did not want to be out of a job.
Chapter 21:5 Wives and children included in the assembly.
The Roman Governor Felix and his Jewish wife listen to Paul preach.
King Agrippa and his wife Bernice listen to Paul. They all get together to try to figure out what to tell the Emperor what Paul is being accused of.
Paul’s letter to the Romans
Chapter 16 has Phoebe listed as a deaconess of Cenchreae.
We hear from Prisca and Aquila again as the church meets in THEIR house.
Rest of list of Chapter 16
Beloved Epaenetus
Mary – who has worked hard for you.
Andronicus and Junias – they are outstanding apostles and they were in Christ even before I was. (Paul and the early church acknowledge women apostles.)
Ampliatus, Urbnanus, Apelles, household or Aristobulus, Herodion, the household of Narcissus, Tryphaena and Tryphosa – who have worked hard for the Load (Husband and wife team? Brother & sister?), Persis, Rufus and his mother, Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patobas, Hermas (feminine?) and brothers with them. Philologus and Julia, Neraus and his sister, Olympas
Paul’s letter to Corinthians
1:27 – Single out the weak to shame the strong.
9-5 has married apostles
Chapter 11 – women’s head coverings – judge for yourselves based on societal norms.
Men shouldn’t wear long hair – This doesn’t make a great deal of sense as Samson and other early Hebrew holy men took oaths to never cut their hair. The pagan culture seems to be creeping in here.
Chapter 14:34-35 No woman should speak in assembly – which doesn’t make sense as he was calling them apostles and deacons previously. Father says the deaconesses just helped with the clothing during baptisms. This also doesn’t make sense as Pliny the Younger was asking the deaconesses about their religion. When was the last time you asked a wardrobe mistress questions on theology? Pliny the Younger seemed to only be able to find women to question or was Christianity seen as primarily led by women or did the men bail?
The synagogs were setup with the women in a balcony in the back so they could duck out with screaming infants. For them to speak in assembly, they would have had to be screaming from the back of the building. The rest of the ladies at Bible study wanted to know how to get their husbands to come to Mass so that they could tell them what was going on. The men would have also been the ones allowed to go to school to study scripture at this point.
This chapter is all about keeping order during services.
Chapter 15-4 has further inaccuracies. It has Christ appearing first to Peter. He appeared to Mary Magdalene first.
So these two vatican documents are full of inaccuracies and can both by summarized as
I is male – therefore I is holy.
According to Father, priests were not encouraged to read the Bible until Pope Pius the XII around World War II. That makes no sense;. Represent Christ and blow off everything he said. It is blatantly obvious the no one in the vatican has ever bothered to read the Bible.
These documents are the prime evidence that the vatican is a billion dollar international organization totally dedicated to worshipping their dicks. They look at Jesus and see nothing other than the great penis in the sky. Benne dick’s response to the pedophile crisis spotlight’s their practice of offering our children in sacrifice to their dicks.
If they had bothered to read the Bible, they would have realized that NOTHING infuriates God more than offering children in sacrifice to false gods.
The Father
You shall be to me a kingdom of priests, a holy nation. That is what you must tell the Israelites. Ex. 19:6
The Son:
On the other hand, it would be better for anyone who leads astray one of these little ones who believe in me, to be drowned by a millstone around his neck, in the depths of the sea. Mat. 18:6 & Luke 17:2
The king will answer them: ‘I assure you, as often as you did it for one of my least brothers, you did it for me.’ Mat. 25:40
First Pope
You too are living stones, built as an edifice of spirit into a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. … You, however, are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people he claims for his own to proclaim the glorious work” of the One who called you from darkness into his marvelous life. Peter 2:5-9
The New Testament ‘misogynist’
There does not exist among you Jew or Greek, slave or freeman, male or female. All are one in Christ Jesus. Furthermore, if you belong to Christ you are descendants of Abraham, which means you inherit all that was promised. Gal: 3:28-29
The “church” meant the Catholic church until the protestant reformation.
Then as now, female priest are not permitted.
Coming form the patriarchal religion of Judaism, Christianity has been misogynistic since the very beginning. It remains so today as a world religion, as does Judaism and Islam
Until the twentieth century. Mary Magdalene was seen as a prostitute even though there is no biblical justification for such a judgement. I’ve read that was Peter’s doing, because he was jealous of Mary Magdalene and her relationship with Jesus. I consider that unlikely what with Jesus probably being a mythical figure and all.
I accept the scripture you have cited . All I can say is “so what?” I’m interested in the actual behaviour of the church towards women, not what it should have been
From your previous posts I’ve seen no evidence that you have the power to perform miracles. That means you lack the power to transform an apple into an orange. IE make something of Christianity which it clearly not and has never been.
Of course, for me this is only of academic interest. You put the horse before the cart yet again. So far, you have yet to demonstrate your god actually exists. Or moving on from there, that Jesus was an historical figure.
At school we referred to flights of fancy such as yours here as “bumpf” (bum fluff)
That I attack your personal superstitions does not mean I’m attacking you as a person. 
1The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife,2 sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach.—[1 Timothy 3:1-2
Jesus on divorce
I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery. Mat 19:19
Mat 5:32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate. Mark 10:9
Seeing as the sect which Yeshua ha Notzri may have founded was almost certainly Jewish, most certainly. Divorce has always been allowed in Judaism, and in Islam***.
With Paul having pretty much abolished the ritual aspects of Judaism, the church had to invent new ones of its own. This was necessary to establish auctoritas (power) and dignitas (dignity)
The the basis of church power can be summarized by the seven sacraments, still in use by Catholics today.*** A quick glance will show that the church simply usurped some existing social customs, as well as inventing a few, such as the mass, penance, confirmation, holy orders and last rites.
Imo, it’s no accident that there are seven sacraments. Next to three, seven is one of the most ancient sacred numbers
*** Even today, some Islamic countries still practice the Triple Talaq .
Perhaps disabuse yourself gentle reader of any notion that Islam is a religion anything other than deeply misogynistic. (just like Judaism and Christianity)
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha… Who in the hell let this dweeb go this far down the rabbit hole? Ha ha ha h aha ha …
Someone needs to drag him back to reality. We are so far out on the tree of lunacy and imagination that the topic has reached Harry Potter level.
HEY! “The Author.” What evidence do you have for the existence of your god thing. Before we go all over the planet with one silly argument after another. Where is this god thing you speak of?
I was just asked to prove Gods existence and did, follow me and learn.
He is your God but okay; are you of scientific inclination? That is to say do you understand the difference between REALITY and DELUSION?
Under even your definition we have the following reality in evidence and demonstrated on earth everyday.
Merriam Webster: Definition of sterile
free from living organisms and especially pathogenic microorganisms
Tell me how your scientist got life on a sterile Earth how your scientist got and eternal unsterile earth in a totally sterile Universe?
Then pool all your friends,relatives, Doctors, even scientist themselves and ask them If the International Space Station has been sterile on its outside for 21 years, after continuous contamination by sterile uniforms of Astronauts. and space instantly sterilizes them every time they leave the Space Station. How delusional must humanity be to claim Earth was ever formed sterile! Indeed had earth really formed sterile, it would still be sterile in 2022, as this Universe is sterile and sterile producing.
disprove that, and yes you can use all the scientist on Earth … I’ll be waiting, to lead you to God when your ready.
Psst … Earth was created! God bids you and all welcome.
Inane assertion. Demonstrate I have a god. I can’t wait.
It does not matter. Demonstrate the existence of your god thing. The one you are sure I have. What my leanings are have nothing to do with any actual evidence you might be able to provide.
I have given you no definition of anything. Nor have I made any assertion. I askd for evidence of your god thing. Are you going to provide it or just ramble on about nothing at all.
No one knows for sure. Not me not you. We do have some very good clues. But we are not talking about how life on earth began. I have asked you for Evidence for the Existence of your god thing. You can not possibly know more about how life started than the greatest minds on the planet. Where is your Nobel Prize. Or are you just making dipshit assertions. Where is the evidence for your god?
Who in the fuck would make such an eronious assertion? Have you not heard of Uri-Miller? They are the most iconic. Recently, Richard Wolfenden, PhD, and Charles Carter, PhD – have shed new light on the transition from building blocks into life some 4 billion years ago. WE KNOW FOR A FACT: The building blocks of life can come from (what you are referencing as a steril universe). These are only two of a dozen supporting studies. We also know that Amino Acids (The building blocks of life) are found on asteroids throughout the universe. " Scientists have known that CI chondrite asteroids contain amino acids including glycine and alanine since 2001 when an analysis of a meteorite known as Ivuna, which landed in Tanzania 1938, revealed their presence."
NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH EVIDENCE FOR YOUR GOD. When are you going to stop flapping your gums and produce something called evidence?
Not true at all. There may have been a point when the earth was more star-like than it is today. To date we know of nothing that can live in the extreme temperatures of a star, but we can not necessarily rule it out. Strange things have been found all over the planet. (Life in vocanoes at the bottom of the ocean. Life in the nuclear waste of reactors. Life under miles of ice where no sunlight has shown for eons.) Weird shit happens and life seems to find a way.
None of this evidence for your God thing. All you have asserte is “Life exists therefore God.” If that is the measure of your ability to reason, you are in way over your head on this site.
Don’t you have anything better? Do you have any actual evidence for the existence of your god. Life exists, that is a fact. Now demonstrate your god exists.
wrongo, you immediately result to opinion. I haven’t given you an opinion I have given you physical evidence. If your going to respond do so with Physical evidence not the same old opinions of scientists, opinions I might add that aren’t even your own opinion. Let us understand I have no qualms with you living life in delusion, I just need you to know, comprehend and accept that you “choose to live a lie” and that HELL, is your final end.
Next time you go to a doctor ask if LIFE ever forms on sterile surfaces. Then ask, could it form on a sterile surface that never loses its sterility? see if his answer doesn’t draw you back to me and what I have given you this day. An opportunity to be saved
I give you all Scientist, by all means just try to disprove Earth wasn’t created, and good luck. Remember the only reason The International Space Station has an unsterile environment is because WE CREATED IT! How naive must one be to fail to recognize in a sterile Universe unsterile cannot exist. ever.
I expect proof not delusion, opinion, and beliefs. mine is the evidence you must now disprove it, with equal physical evidences instead of a litany of scientist false opinions, who have lied to you your whole life.