A Woman of Chayil: Far Above Rubies by Jane Carole Anderson

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The authors of the original Greek or Hebrew texts were all male. Next will be the LGBT community and Muslims wanting a place on the bible translation committee. These are all part of a liberal and populist agenda like we see on TV i.e. there must be one asian, one black, one hispanic, one muslim, and one LGBT person in every thing otherwise it is considered not "fair" or "equality".

This is bait.

[UntoHim]

Evangelical,
When the next widely accepted translation of the Judaeo-Christian scriptures by a committee of LGBT or Muslim folks comes out, I'll be sure to let you do the first review, OK big guy?

In the meantime, I will thank you in advance to not post any more racist or insensitive things on our forum. I'm not sure what the sex, nationality or race was of the translators of Revelation 7:9, but here goes anyway: "a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages". This is they way things are going to end for eternity....better get used to it now.

I haven't had my first cup of coffee yet, so don't hold me to any of this.....

First to question God: Adam - Male
First to murder: Cain - Male
First to get drunk: Noah - Male
First to commit sexual sin: Sodom and Gomorrah - Males
First to murder to take another person's spouse: David - Male
(shall I go on?)
--------------------------------------------------------
First to suffer consequence of the Fall: Eve - A Woman
First recorded heroes to save the Jewish people: Women (gave birth before Egyptians could kill Hebrew babies)
First recorded single hero to save the Jewish people: Esther - A Woman
First to the empty tomb of Jesus: Mary - A Woman
First ex-Local Churcher to write a book helping former members: Jane Anderson - A Woman
-

[OBW]

Unto,

I expect that Noah is only the first recorded person to be drunk. I suspect that fermenting was not new at that point in history. Just no reason to record the results of the consumption of too much of the fruit of the vine.

But not really relevant to anything anyway.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Evangelical,
When the next widely accepted translation of the Judaeo-Christian scriptures by a committee of LGBT or Muslim folks comes out, I'll be sure to let you do the first review, OK big guy?

In the meantime, I will thank you in advance to not post any more racist or insensitive things on our forum. I'm not sure what the sex, nationality or race was of the translators of Revelation 7:9, but here goes anyway: "a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages". This is they way things are going to end for eternity....better get used to it now.

I haven't had my first cup of coffee yet, so don't hold me to any of this.....

First to question God: Adam - Male
First to murder: Cain - Male
First to get drunk: Noah - Male
First to commit sexual sin: Sodom and Gomorrah - Males
First to murder to take another person's spouse: David - Male
(shall I go on?)
--------------------------------------------------------
First to suffer consequence of the Fall: Eve - A Woman
First recorded heroes to save the Jewish people: Women (gave birth before Egyptians could kill Hebrew babies)
First recorded single hero to save the Jewish people: Esther - A Woman
First to the empty tomb of Jesus: Mary - A Woman
First ex-Local Churcher to write a book helping former members: Jane Anderson - A Woman
-

There is nothing racist about my post. It is the ones who say "the bible has no women translators, so we must find some" who are the ones who see the divisions. To me this idea of women translators of the bible is coming from the liberal and populist agenda, not the bible itself (which is written by men, including God Himself who is a man). It seems you subscribe to this agenda yourself. In fact, if people truly believed in what the bible says about no male or female in Christ we would not be discussing about this male or female translator nonsense.

Romans 12:2 Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

...Straw-man's are part and parcel of this sort of discussion - grow up and get over it. I'm not asking for respect...

Just a reminder, in his own words, that "Evangelical" is not interested in a serious discussion of any topic. His penchant for derailing, baiting, strawman arguments and inflammatory rhetoric is his MO since he believes such is "part and parcel of this sort of discussion...". Anyone who disagrees with him needs to "grow up and get over it". Respect is not important to him so he feels under no obligation to show respect to other forum members.

Include now deflecting from the request/s of the Moderator to dial it down.

Nell

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Nell

Just a reminder, in his own words, that "Evangelical" is not interested in a serious discussion of any topic. His penchant for derailing, bait, strawman arguments and inflammatory rhetoric is his MO since he believes such is "part and parcel of this sort of discussion...". Anyone who disagrees with him needs to "grow up and get over it". Respect is not important to him so he feels under no obligation to show respect to other forum members.

Include now deflecting from the request/s of the Moderator to dial it down.

Nell

What I'm trying to "dial down" is what you said about certain bible translations of certain passages being lemons. I don't care if a person is pushing a feminist, LGBT or multi-faith agenda, as soon as the bible translation is called into question it makes me wonder.

In regards to your quote of my post, what I said was in response to what you said about my posts being crap after I questioned why you weren't used theological resources?

Your response was essentially, "if you want respect, you have to give some, I can't take anything you say seriously, most of what you say is crap".

So we can see that my point about respect not being important, is in the context of why aren't you using theological resources? You or I don't need respect to do a Google Search and find out the facts for ourselves.

But on this topic I think you calling certain passages of the bible "lemon translations" is a bit of a stretch. There is a line between writing a book to help former members of the local church and support women, and claiming the bible translations are wrong. To me it's just one piece of the larger pie that seeks to undo history and rewrite everything to suite populist ideals.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

Just a reminder, in his own words, that "Evangelical" is not interested in a serious discussion of any topic. His penchant for derailing, baiting, strawman arguments and inflammatory rhetoric is his MO since he believes such is "part and parcel of this sort of discussion...". Anyone who disagrees with him needs to "grow up and get over it". Respect is not important to him so he feels under no obligation to show respect to other forum members.

Include now deflecting from the request/s of the Moderator to dial it down.

Nell

Evangelical provides very detailed and thoughtful responses, well researched, scriptural based, and patiently clarifies himself. The forum is lucky to have him.

It does not matter whether women or any other demographic group were involved in translating the bible. If there is an objection to the translation of a verse, resources are readily available to present a case.

Yet, there are many translations of the Bible into different languages and the translators are not all white male. Julia Smith translated the Bible from original languages into English. It is too broad of a brush to categorically dismiss verses mentioning women and submission as "lemons" That is not say that every verse is bias free, on the contrary some may be, so, I think visiting the original languages and manuscripts is a good approach and if Jane Anderson has a point of view then let's see it. I'm willing to hear her out on one or more of these "lemon"verses. 1 Timothy 2 is very instructive providing an explanation as to why (v14).

Drake

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

In fact, if people truly believed in what the bible says about no male or female in Christ we would not be discussing about this male or female.

Hmmm, well maybe. But also one might question that, if there is no male and female, then why aren't there more females in certain roles?

So it can cut both ways.

The Bible certainly sends the message that generally speaking men are to take the lead and women are to follow. But the extreme subjugation of women we see in ancient times was, I believe, just that--an extreme.

Neither Jew nor Gentile, neither male nor female. This doesn't mean there are no differences between these groups, it has nothing to do with their abilities or roles. What it's talking about is their standing before God.

The OT, even some aspects of the Jewish ordinances and culture, was meant to reflect a fallen, Genesis 3 situation. But in Christ many things changed and were brought closer to God's original intent. Gentiles and Jews have completely equal status in the NT, there is no difference before God. Male and female, too, except for the reality of their originally intended roles--that the man was to lead and the woman was to be a "helper."

The extreme second-class status of women we see in the OT was not God's original intent--but neither was a situation where, except for physical aspects, the two are interchangeable. God intended man and women to come back to his original design--that through their cooperation in assuming somewhat different responsibilities God is glorified. If we were all the same things would run more smoothly, but God would get less glory--there is no need for cooperation in that case. So it is with the male-female differences.

But what is the extent of the expectation and limitation on each gender? Because I have see the Lord's blessing on teaching ministries of many women, I have to believe Paul's seeming restriction of women from teaching was situational to the culture of the time. However, I still believe that regarding lines of authority in the Church God prefers men to lead and women to follow (of course, most men follow too!).

That's my take on that subject.


But in general, simply because someone thinks it would be beneficial for women to have a larger role in the intellectual tasks of Biblical analysis does not necessarily mean he or she is motivated by appealing to "populism" or are being "conformed to the age."

This is what generally bugs and bothers me about Evangelical's analysis. He throws out these snarky accusations with no conclusive evidence of their appropriateness. He sees the possibility of a conclusion and then goes from it being possible to being true, not because the evidence is conclusive, but because it fits his mindset. He comes across as a person so convinced he's right that he is above considering he might be wrong.

[Evangelical]

There are no female authors of the Bible likely because of this verse:

1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;

If a female authored any book of the Bible then it would be equivalent to teaching authority over a man. In addition, culturally speaking, a female author of the bible would have been a hindrance to the gospel in ancient times.

There are two books (one biblical, one not but used in Catholicism) named after females - Esther and Judith. These were not written by females but by men.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Hmmm, well maybe. But also one might question that, if there is no male and female, then why aren't there more females in certain roles? So it can cut both ways.

Because of what the bible says about female teachers, I would discount any notion of their ministries being blessed by God, on the same basis that I would discount any LGBT, muslim, or buddhist ministry as being "blessed by God". Our assessments of "God's blessing" is flawed when it is based upon external matters such as frequency of answered prayers, outward blessings, church growth, or financial blessing. These same metrics may be used by any ministry even non-Christian one, to conclude it is "under God's blessing". I am sure the hundreds of Muslims that attend the Mosque every week feel blessed by God. If we think like that then we are being like Job's friends.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Because of what the bible says about female teachers, I would discount any notion of their ministries being blessed by God, on the same basis that I would discount any LGBT, muslim, or buddhist ministry as being "blessed by God". Our assessments of "God's blessing" is flawed when it is based upon external matters such as frequency of answered prayers, outward blessings, church growth, or financial blessing. These same metrics may be used by any ministry even non-Christian one, to conclude it is "under God's blessing". I am sure the hundreds of Muslims that attend the Mosque every week feel blessed by God. If we think like that then we are being like Job's friends.

Likewise with such external metrics as one church one city, having copyrights to some God-ordained church name, accepting the so-called minister of the age, claims to be the only true testimony, etc.

[Nell]

The notion that the Bible was penned by "all males" does not take into account, for example, that there is widespread discussion that the book of Hebrews was written by Priscilla (wife of Acquila). The author of Hebrews is not identified in the book itself so to state out of hand that the author of all books in the Bible are "male" is intellectually dishonest and belies the possibility that a woman penned Hebrews and perhaps other books as well. Such statements should be qualified as being "your opinion" and not authoritative.

Drake has remarked: "...if Jane Anderson has a point of view then let's see it. I'm willing to hear her out on one or more of these "lemon" verses."

Uh...Jane wrote a book. The best way to hear her out is to spend $2.99 and download the Kindle version. I will soon, hopefully, be able to post a Readers Digest condensed version of a few major points, but this takes time. It's a good read. You might actually enjoy it.

https://www.amazon.com/Books-Jane-Ca...ole%20Anderson

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Because of what the bible says about female teachers, I would discount any notion of their ministries being blessed by God, on the same basis that I would discount any LGBT, muslim, or buddhist ministry as being "blessed by God". Our assessments of "God's blessing" is flawed when it is based upon external matters such as frequency of answered prayers, outward blessings, church growth, or financial blessing. These same metrics may be used by any ministry even non-Christian one, to conclude it is "under God's blessing". I am sure the hundreds of Muslims that attend the Mosque every week feel blessed by God. If we think like that then we are being like Job's friends.

Well, the fact of the matter is Jesus said "by their fruit you will know them." And I have no doubt of the good fruit of many of these ministries. There is also the witness in my spirit of the anointing of the Spirit on many of these ministries.

Paul also said women should keep silent in churches. But even Nee and Lee realized an extreme interpretation of this did not add up and allowed female speaking. As for teaching and having authority over a man, I believe Paul was talking about the kind of teaching he knew, pre-written-NT, where he and the other apostles taught with the equivalent authority we now reserve only to the Bible. Women did not take part in that. But interpreting the Bible and teaching from it is not the same thing. Just because a women teaches doesn't mean she holds authority in the way Paul meant. We are free to listen as the Spirit leads. The Spirit and the Bible are our final authority now. In Paul's day it was the Spirit and the Apostles. They had a kind of authority that is now reserved to the Bible. (And, no, Lee didn't have it.)