House Church Talk - Re: There can not be male and female6

[David Anderson]

Mike, aka SameSpecies, wrote:

>I appreciate your thoughts here Kevin.  I would also appreciate it, if
>before we move on; you would go back and answer my questions, in the post I
>sent yesterday.  I feel we would be doing the ones standing by, with the
>task of discerning, a disservice, if my questions of you concerning
>translation were not answered, before we move on.  I understand that one of
>the concerns is whether surrounding context and the rest of scripture will
>support my translation.

Email isn't always the best medium. I see it as another modern form of 
letter writing. I believe the apostles would have used it, but who knows? 

I think this has been a good dialogue on the women's silence issue - 
conditional silence, that is, imo. Others who come along later can just 
go back, read, and work from there. The archives of House Church Talk  are created 
automatically, unlike in the olden days. So, let's just patiently work 
our way through until every objection is considered and every opinion 
weighed. Then, when this comes up again, we can spare ourselves of all 
the tediousness. I am still interested in several other threads and have 
yet to get started on the women's thing yet.

Be open-minded and prayerful. Just post once a day so that your opponent 
doesn't feel overwhelmed.

>Kevin, I know allot of brothers have some great sounding explanations for
>what these scriptures must be "really" saying.

Mike, in a separate message I would like to explore the passages of Paul, 
upon which most everyone agrees that face-value isn't what he, the 
writer, "really" meant. Be thinking of examples, yourselves. I would like 
to make a list of these.

Blessings to all, secured by Jesus,

       David Anderson