Unregistered

Lee contradicts himself in his teaching on women. He seems to indicate that a man in Christ has left the life of the natural man, who cannot please God, and entered the realm of the spiritual man, who can and does please God. But a woman is not afforded the same basis? Women are criticized for natural attributes, but as I see it, the same criticism of the natural man is true of the natural woman. Since there is no male or female IN CHRIST, then, when a woman becomes spiritual by being reborn spiritually, she is the same as a reborn man. Both man and woman should be assessed the same way. It is futile to keep harping on the sins of a woman who is still in the natural, because the focus should be on the spiritual, not the natural. I am a born again woman. I contend for the right to be as spiritual as a man, as able to learn directly from God, His Word and His Spirit, as a man. It is God Who teaches us all our roles in Him, whether as godly men or godly women. But nevertheless we all need no man teach us, for we all have the anointing. To represent that man learns directly from God but that woman needs a third entity -- a man -- to teach her, is NOT SCRIPTURAL. Paul could not have meant that. Surely he was speaking only in the context of speaking out of order in meetings, and somehow that was a problem in that particular early setting. Paul in other places, speaks very highly of certain women ministers.