House Church Talk - speaking

[Bruce Woodford]

Hi Tim,

In response to my e , you wrote:"Its obvious that you will be able to find 
justfication for your position and continue in what you want to believe. In 
My Opinion, I Cor 11:5 Paul has already assumed the right of women to pray 
or prophecy publicly (11:1-16); here he probably is emphasizing the right of 
women to judge prophecy, something restricted to the male leadership of the 
church. As well, women (or men for that matter) shouldn't be disrupting 
meetings with questions or chatter . I see coverings in that it was an issue 
of hair, long for women short for men. A cultural issue. This will not 
change anyones mindset if you cannot change. I feel the real issue is 
insecure men afraid of what their wives might say about them in the 
meetings, revealing who they really are. Isn't it just old fashioned 
CONTROL? Its so much easier to control by the flesh then to submit to one 
another. As C.S. Lewis said. "Who needs a head if you can walk in 
agreement." In my opinion, if you cant walk in agreement, you cannot lead, 
you can only control by being a dictator."

Dear brother, I think you should know that my wife takes a vocal part in 
house church gatherings and I encourage her to do so! You see, it is NOT a 
control issue as you suspect!  I believe scripture is quite clear that women 
are scripturally free to conduct themselves in a house church gathering just 
as they are free to have conversations in any other setting (in which 
conversation is appropriate) with or without men present. On this list, I 
have actively and repeatedly advocated the scriptural nature of our sisters' 
vocal participation in all house church gatherings and I have repeatedly 
cited scriptures where first century Christian women did just that! THE ONLY 
CONTEXT IN WHICH WOMEN ARE TO BE SILENT (i.e. not to speak) IS IN A WHOLE 
CHURCH GATHERING OF A CITY. I have also cited a number of actual whole 
church gatherings in the book of Acts where all the speakers were males and 
no mention is made of any vocal participation of women. Such a gathering is 
a unique situation in that it is the only context where scripture also 
requires:
(1) that speakers speak one at a time,
(2) that if tongues speakers speak, it is to be by two or at the most three,
(3) that no one is to speak in tongues if there is no interpretter,
(4) that 2 or three prophets may speak and other prophets are to judge,
(5) that a prophet who is speaking is to hold his peace if something is 
revealed to another prophet who is sitting by,

As to the asking of questions:  very good questions and edifying answers are 
often spoken by godly women in house church gatherings!  But city wide whole 
church gatherings are not a suitable place for "question and answer 
sessions" or for conversations!  I Cor.14:35 does not deal with the issue of 
DISRUPTION caused by women asking questions in a whole church meeting, it 
deals with the fact that women are to be silent and not to speak in such a 
gathering!

Re. the covering question of I Cor.11, it cannot be a "cultural issue" for 
Paul's instructions to Christian men ran totally counter to his very own 
Jewish culture in which men always covered their heads to pray or 
prophesy!!!  Nor can the covering that a woman is to have on her head (when 
she prays or prophesies) and which a man is not to have on his head (when he 
prays or prophesies) be THEIR HAIR!  All you need to do to see how 
ridiculous such a position is is to insert into the text the phrase "hair 
on" in place of "covered" and  "hair off" in place of "uncovered"!!!

Finally, relative to the subject of headship, I won't comment on your C.S. 
Lewis quote as I do not know the context in which he was speaking. But from 
what scripture says about headship, the reason for it is NOT because parties 
are not able to walk in agreement! God the Father and Christ have always 
walked in agreement and perfect unity, but God is the head of Christ (I 
Cor.11:3),  Christ submitted himself to the Father's will (Matt.26:39,42)and 
does nothing but what He sees the Father do! (John 5:19,20)  So when God, 
Himself reveals that God is the head of Christ, Christ is the head of the 
man and man is the head of the woman, I would find it difficult to argue 
with God and say that "a head is unnecessary if you can walk in agreement"!

This sort of philosophy reminds me of the feminist slogan popularized many 
years ago, " A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle!"   Such a 
philosophy comes from people who do not know Christ and the God of the 
Bible! I Cor 11:7-12 makes very clear that both men and women are dependent 
on and complementary to each other!

Godly headship has nothing at all to do with dictatorial control!

Your brother in Christ,
Bruce

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE*