Rubel Shelly - A Woman's Place - Church AssemblyRubel Shelly from Woodmont Hills seems to give women the right to speak in tongues, sing and prophesy as long as we "observe the etiquette of your time and place." Why is Paul forced to recant just to meet the needs of churches flying apart at the approach of the final Jubilee? All emphasis this writer's. To understand the of female roles you may want to read Rubel Shelly's repudiation of the none use of instrumental music in worship. This, of course, is the step required before the use of musical worship teams could be presumed to have mediating power between God and the worshiper.
See Dwight Robbers at Skillman Church of Christ and why Women must Keep Silent in Church to Learn: that also includes males but women are always behind the violation of SILENCE which points directly to music and the hypocritic arts and crafts called sorcery.
While Dr. Shelly proposes to preach only a "core gospel" he not only repudiates any presumed authority for not using instruments, he goes further and demands that they are the gift of God. At the same time, he declares on the side of A Capella for the "plenary" sessions of the church but allows them for other "non-worship" religious rituals.
However, at the Restoration Forum at Abilene Christian University (ACU), Dr. Shelly had already established a foundation hostile to the purely A Capella view by repudiating those who resist full fellowship with instrumental groups.
Next, he will equate inequality in the Church informed by the Bible with racism in the South. We might inform all that slavery was not defeated by anti-slavery warriors but religious warriors incited to mass slaughter by self-proclaimed "Clergy." Click for some of the evidence.
He discusses the roles of women in public worship. Because you cannot quote without losing some of the context you may click here to read the whole article. To see some "preventatives" for Mike Cope's keynoter at Jubilee 98 Click Here.
I don't believe that I ever saw a discourse on women's role in the church which did not try to soften you up with guilt body blows below the belt. Rubel's comments are in the small type.
First: Shelly will equate our understanding of what Paul said about women's (and uninspired men) role in the church which was patterned (paradigmed) as that "taught in all of the churches." The pattern fits the Mind of Christ (Holy Spirit) or it has no teaching value at all:
Rubel Shelly: "In my lifetime, for example, the church in the United States has been forced by its surrounding culture to face the issue of racism. My children cannot identify with the world in which I grew up -- segregated schools, people of color confined to the back seats of public transportation vehicles, public water fountains and toilets prohibited to African-Americans. As a matter of fact, I cannot identify with the world in which I grew up. Its realities are so foreign to my present convictions that I could easily think it was centuries ago and worlds away!
"Now there is a clear example of how culture forced the church to face up to its own moral and spiritual failure.
"Racism was entrenched within the church and was exposed as a moral evil only when the culture around us was challenged by some of its most oppressed members.
It is probably racism to THINK that black people WANT to attend a white church: they told me so. People are still racists: to Shelly and tribe the low class includes the ANTI-instrument churches of Christ against which he invents many RACA words.
There is very little in the Bible about racism, but it was the PREACHERS as "doctors of the law" who take away the key to knowledge for their own sense of security. The Church of Christ by direct commandment is a School of the Word: Jesus commanded that we teach and observe what He commanded. That includes the Prophets and Apostles. The PATTERN was to Rest, Read and Rehearse which is not sing and make melody with women clergy. Therefore, Rubel Shelly is defending his own role as what Paul called a "Corrupter of the Word" or selling learning at retail.
He denies the laity to read, interpret and speak the Word. However, he assumes that role and insists that HE forces the "audience" to carry out the exact pattern at the Ziggurats or Towers of Babylon including Jerusalem. Both the Sabbath as WORSHIP instead of REST and the Tithe originated in Babylon to which God senteenced Israel because of musical idolatry. Therefore, it is absolutely certain that daughter churches follow the Mother Church, rule over the flock and subject the audience into SERFDOM. Now, Rubel Shelly wants the women (because deacons are hard to control) to become Field Bosses with a white horse and a horse whip.
Promoters of feminist theology love to compare the clear Biblical teaching about silence to racism or fire bombing restaurants or mugging ladies wearing furs. However, the Bible has no such performing roles other than the elders commanded to teach that which has been taught as synagogue or school of the Bible: church has no other functions.Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city
them that preach him,
being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
That practice continued for the godly tribes while the Jacob-cursed and God-abandoned Levites used instruments to perform SORCERY or to make the lambs dumb before the slaughter: in all sacrificial systems they were called PARASITES.
Jesus exampled the Synagogue as A School of the Word (only) which quarantined the godly people from the mega-church or Temple-State.
Paul ALWAYS silences the hypocritic roles of self-speaking, singing, playing or actin so that the Word can be PREACHED by being READ for comfort and doctrine.
The Historic Church of Church followed the REGULATIVE PRINCIPLE (the LOGOS) and never changed.
Paul affirmed that he taught what the Spirit Jesus guided him to teach; he did not sermonize, sing, clap, dance or play instruments.
Rubel Shelly is NOT defining the School of Christ but a Daughter Liturgical Institute to which the Kingdom does not come says Jesus.
Acts 24:12 And they neither found me in the temple
disputing with any man, neither raising up the people,
neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:
poieō , A. make, produce, first of something material, as manufactures, works of art,
4. after Hom., of Poets, compose, write, p. dithurambon, epea, Hdt.1.23, 4.14; “p. theogoniēn Hellēsi” Id.2.53; p. Phaidran, Saturous, Ar.Th.153, 157; p. kōmōdian, tragōdian, etc., Pl.Smp.223d; “palinōdian” Isoc.10.64, Pl.Phdr.243b, etc.; “poiēmata” Id.Phd.60d: abs., write poetry, write as a poet, “orthōs p.” Hdt.3.38; “en toisi epesi p.” Id.4.16, cf. Pl.Ion534b: folld. by a quotation, “epoēsas pote . .” Ar.Th.193; “eis tina” Pl.Phd.61b; “peri theōn” Id.R.383a, etc.
3. of sacrifices, festivals, etc., celebrate, “p. hira” Hdt.9.19, cf. 2.49 (Act. and Pass.);
p. sabbata observe the Sabbath, LXXEx.31.16;
also of political assemblies, “p. ekklēsian”
Turba ,“festaque confusā resonabat regia turbā,” id. ib. 12, 214
“turbae carmina, sermonem collect a large crowd
Racism is a human trait and is not transferable to Christ's Body. Those whom were racist were racist. However, they were universally tainted with racism by "preacher" under the thumb of plantation owners. Methodist, Baptists, Presbyterians and Catholics divided over the civil war: churches of Christ did not.
No man, living or dead, ever had the slightest hint in their mercinary little minds that the Bible in any place claimed or hinted that "Ham's" curse was being a black African and that this gave them authority to make them into "tractors." That was purely made up like Shelly makes up a new translation for Paul's words about performance-worship. Notice how easy this becomes:
- At his next halt, where only Boers lived, Hilary received his harshest view of the Reverend Keer: 'Arrogant, stupid man. Kept saying he loved the Xhosa and the Hottentots, but every action he took damaged them.'
- 'In what way?'
- 'Made them dissatisfied with their lot.'
- 'What is their lot?'
- 'At school in England, did they teach you the Book of Joshua?"
- 'I've read it.'
- 'But have you taken it to heart? (He then continued his discussion until Reverent Keer translated Joshua for the new Missionary:
- 'You shall not marry with the daughters of Canaan...You shall keep yourself apart...You shall destroy their cities...You shall hang their kings from trees...You shall block up their graves with stones, even to this day...You shall take the land, and occupy it and make it fruitful...One man of you shall chase one thousand of them...You shall keep yourself apart...And they shall be your hewers of wood and the drawers of water...And all this you shall do in the name of the Lord, for He has commanded it.'
- Closing the big book reverently and placing his hands upon it, he stared directly into Hilary's eyes and said, 'That is the word of the Lord. It is His Bible which instructs us.'
- There is another part of the Bible,' Hilary said quietly, leaning his thin shoulders forward to engage the debate.
- James A. Michener, The Covenant, p. 309
Second: he will reject the almost-universally understood and absolutely non-sexist exclusion of the effeminate-principle (male or female) of prophesying (excstatic speaking, singing with instruments to induce charismatic "speaking in tongues") as a way to pretend a revelation from God.
Then, he will equate this grossly-misunderstood principle to sexism which the force had to beat out of us:
Rubel Shelly: "Have we learned anything from that experience? Can we humbly confess that we may have been blind on other matters? Surely God takes no pleasure in closed minds and stubborn wills!
"An issue this generation is being forced by culture to face is sexism in a variety of forms. Women have been denied equal pay for equal work in the job market, and that is being challenged. Women have been treated unfairly in job opportunities and career advancement in many settings, and that is changing. Women have historically been subject to sexual harassment in public and violence in private, and those things will never be the same again in our culture.
Now, dear brother, not only are you implicated in the "principle" of sexual harassment, now your interpretation of that old Paul may implicate you in the principle of violence against women. Scripture does not define a ROLE for the assembly (school of Christ) nor does it authorize a DOLE. Rubel Shelly is in trouble if he claims to be an authoratative teacher and does NOT accept the EQUAL PAY that Paul uses to MARK those Huper or Super apostles.There are only two functions in the church defined over and over
A senior mal preaches by reading the Word.
The rest of the people are silent because a disciple is a student and not an actor in a religious drama.
The very nature of the female brings on all religious ceremonialism.
Why does the silence apply to women and clearly gender-confused males in the literature? F. LaGard Smith said that ifyou stopped women from speaking in tongues then speaking in tongues would cease. The literature notes that males left to themselves would never set up a ritual of singing, clapping, playing instruments and other non-reverent behavior:
"Philodemus considered it paradoxical that music should be regarded as veneration of the gods while musicians were paid for performing this so-called veneration. Again, Philodemus held as self deceptive the view that music mediated religious ecstasy. He saw the entire condition induced by the noise of cymbals and tambourines as a disturbance of the spirit.
He found it significant that, on the whole, only women and effeminate men fell into this folly.
Accordingly, nothing of value could be attributed to music; it was no more than a slave of the sensation of pleasure, which satisfied much in the same way that food and drink did.
"Similar opinions may be found in the writings of Philo. On one occasion he spoke of the Jewish "Feast of Fasting," used by the Greeks for the Day of Atonement:"
"Now, many a man from the false religions, which are not ashamed of criticising what is noble, will ask: how can there be a feast without carousing and overeating, without the pleasant company of hosts and guests, without quantities of unmixed wine, without richly set tables and highly stacked provisions of everything that pertains to a banquet, without pageantry and jokes,
bantering and merry-making to the accompaniment of flutes and citharas, the sound of drums and cymbals and other effeminate and frivolous music of every king,
enkindling unbridled lusts with the help of the sense of hearing. For in and through the same [pleasures] those persons openly seek their joy, for what true joy is their they do not know.
Sigao Hush, keep still, keep secret. There is no absolute command for silence.
The REASON for the ritual-prone women and and effeminate are to be silent is in order to LEARN!
Eido 1. see, perceive, behold, 3. see mentally, to see in the mind's eye, to examine, investigate,
Everyone but the READER was to keep SINENCE in order to UNDERSTAND which is the function of CHURCH.
But ye have not so learned Christ; Eph 4:20
But that isn't the way Christ taught you! Eph 4:20LIV
If so be that ye have heard him,
and have been taught by him,
as the truth is in Jesus: Eph 4:2S
Plato would equate the replacement of effeminate male dramatic actors, singers, instrumentalists and dancers with real women as sexual harassment. Why are some so anxious to put women on display with all of the looks and arts of the purely secular world? Is it to use the women to attract the male seekers just as they did at the gas fissure at Delphi? God knew the natural response, Paul knew the natural response and every male reaching puberty knows why women were excluded from stand up (silence also means sedantary) or speak-out roles during that short interval which had no modern "performance worship" component: not even by males who have been structured to attract both male and female.
Third, we are ready for our sillygism:
Major premise: "We" were once racist and misused the Bible to defend it.
Minor premise: Sexism in the "cotton fields" is the same as racism because we misuse the Bible to defend it.
Conclusion: This challanges us to retink our traditions because they are probably based on the misuse of the Bible.
Rubel Shelly: "Some of the overtones of the cultural pressures related to sexism are challenging the church to rethink its traditional posture about women. May a woman's voice never be heard in an assembly? May females never teach classes in which there are adult males? Must they defer to men as the directors of church ministries -- including women's ministries? Must they be forbidden to pray aloud if their husbands or sons are within earshot?
"Culture is raising these questions. Christians must make informed responses to them. The Word of God must ultimately sit in judgment on culture, not vice versa. Just what is a "woman's place" in God's scheme of things?
Shelly then sets up "roles" which must be opened to women because they have been forced open for performance men. This is another syllogism:
Major premise: We men have Biblical authority for our roles in performance worship: and Fanny Crosby may even replace Paul's letters.
Minor premise: Women are just as equal as men.
Conclusion: Therefore, women should also be performing ministers.
But Shelly's major premise replaces Scripture with usurped nests which evangelists (ministers) have wriggled into the green, green grass of home so that the "threshing oxen" which eats while it threshes has become a "nester" and takes on role of "father" of the family and too often (in history and the newspapers) husband of the bride of the family. This explains why it is so easy to open the doors to other unauthorized and anthetical roles.
Of course, this began when the minister became master and began to build his pyramid ministry system with "job openings" for a host of his tribe to replace the "mutual ministry" clearly demanded if you are going to be a family. There simply is no professional role to be filled in a "family" because "bubba ain't just right in the head." This is a gross insult to the "members" of the family now "set down on the back pews" by the force Shelly speaks of.
The rest of Shelly's article takes as a given Christ's approval of the self-composition of hymns to replace the Biblical text or Words of Christ or Spirit as Paul demanded in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, performance sermonizing in the established church which always tokenizes the Word of God-Incarnate, performance-perfunctory prayers for the audience to replace the "closet" Jesus demanded, ritual "giving as an act of worship" in clear violation of Paul's revelation in 1 Corinthians 8 and 9, a Catholic-like ritual for the "Lord's fellowship meal," and even "sounding the trumpets" to announce the Musical Worship Team which must "perform the worship for you" because in ancient paganism and in Israel under the Law of Punishment "God is too dangerous for you to handle" thereby totally repudiating Jesus' firing of clergy-performers with their "burden-lading of the congregation like pack animals," and a host of "programs" or "ministeries" to keep everyone so busy that they don't know that the "fed, clothed, housed, and transported" evangelist is supposed to "go, preach" and that many churches have become so "program-logged" that they are incredibly sinking ships.
The charge is that those who trust the Word are Bible Worshipers. In fact, the question is asked and answered to affirm that self-composed humns and sermons are the idols.
It is this writer's opinion, and early experience in the deep cotton fields of the South, that the usually-itinerant preachers in the cotton belt defended racism because the "Massa" kept the slaves and also kept the preacher.
It was the preacher who bent to the cultural pressures and found so-called Biblical authority to make the field boss happy. I can still hear "ole Black Ham" ringing from the pulpit -- usually unpaid but the vocational preacher (like Paul and all priests of that time) still needed to spread the gospel of superiority. Is it possible that by the use of words like decadent, deleterious and decrying the rural songs in the book with no urban songs, is a subtle form of religious racism? Why else would Jubilee 99, the Zoe Group and others try to suck all of the "field hands" into Nashville to teach them how to sing, play, dance, raise holy hands and perform drama?
Those, like Tolbert Fanning, preached against slavery and escaped a Tennessee town just ahead of what might have been a lynch mob headed by the elders. They will still git you if you don't use the only true inspired KJV, 1611 edition, the version Jesus used.
I muse profoundly! Is it vaguely possible that the cultural pressure of the big city with a domineering musical and entertainment industry feeding the coffers of the "church plant" and obscene preacher's pay might be causing some to try to scratch their fingers bloody trying to justify what really really need to do to stay alive? Will tomorrow's children curse us for our racism against Christ and His Word and small, rural worship services with no "pyramid of programs"? Well, son, you know that I had to go along with ole Massa! The plantation owners are still white!
Rubel Shelly: "The interpretive and practical rub comes when we move out of the area of the church's primary works of compassion, charity, and service
to standing up and/or speaking out in a church's plenary assembly or in Bible classes where adult males are present. The two critical texts that can be cited in connection with this issue are both from Paul.
Jesus Direct command about compassion, charity and service.
Paul taught that the church is to make known the wisdom of God. Because Jesus didn't build a church (Circe) but an ekklesia (synagogue) as a SCHOOL OF THE BIBLE the "church" has the duty, under Word or Spirit filled elders, to "teach that which has been taught" and "refute those who oppose it." The MINISTRY SYSTEM is the curse imposed when the elders fired God and demanded a human king so that they could worship like the nations.
I still believe that the individual's responsibility is compassion, charity and service while the church's (read "preadher") job was to "take the gospel to the world which had not heard it." The Pastor-Teacher (Elder's) role is to equip the local saints for the ministry of (1) being able to teach sound truth and (2) refute error to (3) keep the navigator's of winds of change out at sea rather than in safe harbor.
When presumptuous males stand up and speak out in a performance role the little children including females say, "I want some of that!" Why? Because superstition puts the preacher in the role of priests, able to forgive sins, overlook errors, give us attention which validates our whole lives and, heavens forbid, force us into being "unhappy campers" if we sass "God's annointed one."
In short, women do not seek to imitate Christ or Paul but the preacher. If Christ really showed up at Jubilee 99 (He will be in some way) and we found ourselves waving our hands, gliding across the stage, singing our own revelation with enervating harmony or telling stale jokes we would gag and then collapse in shame.
But, they have sold their birth right by wanting to be like a human model -- idol if you will.
Now, you can permit women to stand up, speak out, and preside over in every role but that of the preacher's and the elder's (gotta protect those!), or the preacher can sit down as Jesus usually did in the synagogue and read the inspired Word. Perhaps you praying for me or leading me in prayer is not an "act of worship" with legal penalties if you don't do closing song and closing prayer in the right order. What arrogance to presume to worship for me or lead me into the presence of God or provide a platform upon which God can land!
Perhaps if the church was a local, family-like group of its own community you could meet in houses, no one needs to stand up or preside over and we won't get upset if a woman stands up to pass the bread to the next chair. There will be no seeker audience and no urge to perform. There will be no pyramidal "offices" with $100 grand or more for the top of the tower, and the women won't aspire to get some of that too.
Doesn't everyone lust to have a CD?
Rubel Shelly: "Taken at face value and without qualification, this text likely requires more than anyone is willing to demand. Let me explain.
"The verb translated "remain silent" is an imperative form of the word sigao. Sigao means "a. say nothing, keep silent ... b. stop speaking, become silent ... c. hold one's tongue, keep some. (a) secret" (Bauer, Gingrich, and Danker, Greek-English Lexicon, 2nd ed., p. 749). Its corresponding noun (sige) means "silence, quiet in the sense of the absence of all noise, whether made by speaking or by anything else" (Bauer, Lexicon, pp. 749-750).
This word means that in whatever situation was in view by Paul in this text, females were not allowed to open their mouths. They couldn't make a sound. They had to wait until the service was over even to ask a question about what had happened.
"I repeat: Taken at face value and without qualification, this text likely requires more than anyone is willing to demand.
If this verse governs the conduct of Christian women in church assemblies, then females can't confess their faith in Christ publicly
or sing praise to the Lord! Furthermore, if this is a prohibition of all speaking by women in all Christian assemblies, Paul has contradicted his own instruction earlier in the same epistle (11:5). Is there an obvious qualification to this requirement of absolute silence?
WE DO NOT INTERPRET THE BIBLE BASED ON OUR PRACTICES. There was no praise singing or speaking in the church.
Paul and Peter use two Greek words to refute Shelly. When Paul said that the women should remain silent in the collective assembly, sigao means to keep silence or hold your peace. No, dear brother, Paul allowed women to breathe and sing! Esuchia means "desistance from bustle or language." It means to "keep one's seat, be sedentary" or be "undisturbing."
Women were never the revealers of the word. A prophetess is the wife of a prophet or a pagan soothsayer with flying hair, singing, dancing and playing instruments. There were "prophesiers" outside of the Corinthian assembly (11:5) but not after 11:17 which begins to discuss "when you come together." Silence can be understood by its application to uninspired men:
But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. 1 Corinthians 14:28
Paul does not discuss a feminine prophet or musician in Corinth! He makes a flat demand that:
- Let your women keep silence in the churches (popular meetings): for
- it is not permitted unto them to speak;
- but they are commanded to be under obedience,
- as also saith the law. 1 Corinthians 14:34
Why is that? It is because there are no stand up, speak up, musical prophesying roles in the church for either male or female. The women held those offices in their old paganism. Those jobs are gone, gone, gone: call no man father: woe for taking away the keys to knowledge!
Siga� [Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon]
I. to be silent or still, to keep silence, Hdt., attic; siga, hush! be still! Hom.:--Pass., ti sesig�tai domos; why is the house hushed? Eur.
II. trans. to hold silent, to keep secret, Hdt., Aesch., etc.:--Pass. to be kept silent or secret, Lat. taceri, Hdt., Eur., etc.; esig�th� si�p� silence was kept, Eur.
I. silence, Soph., Eur., etc.; si�p�n poiein Xen.; �n s. there was a hush or calm, Soph.
2. the habit of silence, Dem.
II. dat. si�p�i as adv., in silence, Hom., attic
Sign of Destruction with Loud Sounds
Olethros Destruction, death, destruction of property (tithes and offerings), in the ekklesia
Rubel Shelly: or sing praise to the Lord! Furthermore, if this is a prohibition of all speaking by women in all Christian assemblies, Paul has contradicted his own instruction earlier in the same epistle (11:5). Is there an obvious qualification to this requirement of absolute silence?
Nor, we might add, can RHETORS declaim:
Similar Definition to silence:
aposi�p-a� , maintain silence, Isoc.12.215, Plb.30.19.9, etc.; cease speaking and be silent, metaxu leg�n a. Plu.Alc.10 ; as a rhetorical figure (cf. sq.), Demetr.Eloc.44,253.
II. trans., keep secret, onoma Luc.Pseudol.21 ; leave unsaid, Id.Pisc.29; leave unnoticed, POxy. 237 vii 24 (ii A.D.)
Rhetorician: II. After the Greek manner, an orator; but with contempt, a rhetorician, speechifier, etc.: stultitia rhetoris Attica, Nep. Epam. 6, 3 ; cf. with � 1.
Is Shelly correct? Is she permitted to stand up and peak in tongues and then sit down and have a male interpret for her? No. Paul said: "It is not permitted them to speak." Rubel 'exegetes" by saying that this would not allow her to sing. Well, perhaps that is a better understanding than that Paul was mistaken and she was permitted to speak. Paul does not remotely discuss "singing" in the modern context which he would probably equate to "speaking in tongues" or making warfare among the brethren and sistern. Silence is not absolute for men or women.
Sigao (g4601) see-gah'-o; from 4602; to keep silent (trans. or intrans.): - keep close (secret, silence), hold peace.
This is not understood from a "first century dictionaries" of a first century Bible which only "scholars" have (along with their first century bibles), but from its use elsewhere:
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, Ro.16:25
And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace. Luke 20:26
Remember, that Paul gives stand up, speak out roles to men who are inspired and can be validated by another inspired person. This, by the way, was just Paul's ironic way of saying: "You ain't inspired so don't pretend that cut-and-paste sermons are 'gospel sermons.'"
If the people could not take hold of the inspired word in the Corinthian church then both men and women needed to hold their peace or be silent. The alternative given to Timothy was to "give thyself to reading and explaining the inspired record."
No preacher and no elder has the authority to permit a woman to do what God has forbidden in the assembly. Permitted does not mean "shared authority" but:
Epitrepo (g2010) ep-ee-trep'-o; from 1909 and the base of 5157; to turn over (transfer), i.e. allow: - give leave (liberty, license), let, permit, suffer
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. Matthew 19:8
Therefore, the NOT means that Paul did not turn over, transfer, give leave, or permit a woman to speak over the men in public assembly. And he made it the violation of God's commandment for a preacher or elder or Musical Worship Facilitator to give her this authority to speak and preach with a tune when you will not allow her to make public proclamation without a tune. Don't you see how crazy this is?
The word speak is from the Greek:
Laleo (g2980) lal-eh'-o; a prol. form of an otherwise obsol. verb; to talk, i.e. utter words: - preach, say, speak (after), talk, tell, utter.
Rather than solving the Holy Spirit's and Paul's problem by permitting women to speak to give her the authority to breath, perhaps it would be more spiritually-minded to close down "inspired" songs from Fanny Crosby and the Musical Worship Team and speak the word one to another as Paul in Ephesians and Colossians demands.
Because Paul prohibited the women to speak in the assembly and speaking in tongues is speaking, doesn't Paul demand that women should not (never did as recorded) speak in tongues?
THOUGH I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 1 Corinthians 13:1
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 1Co.14:2
Speaking that which has not been revealed and available in Scripture or being divinely inspired is defacto speaking in tongues.
Hupotasso (g5293) hoop-ot-as'-so; from 5259 and 5021; to subordinate; reflex. to obey: - be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto.
The male does not have the power to force the woman to be obedient or under tha authority of himself. Rather, the faithful, Biblically-literate woman will exercise her own authority to forego her old pagan prophesying or speaking in tongues. This word is understood by how it is used: submission is submission to the law Paul speaks of:
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. Romans 8:7
For they, being ignorant of Gods righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. Romans 10:3
And Paul understood that what was happening in Corinth proved that they were still carnal and therefore, Paul's message can easily be perverted to our own destruction:
AND I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 1 Corinthians 3:1
Paul would love it if everyone could have a miraculous gift of speech. Then, they could go out into all the world and preach without ever studying. One person would speak their inspired message and the rest would sit down and listen. Pavarotti might say: "I wish that you could all sing opera" but he is not remotely suggesting or giving us the authority to try.
However, the uncovered prophesying outside of the assembly and speaking in tongues in the assembly in Corinth was practiced by many. This was defacto proof that they were repeating their old pagan ecstatic speech usually induced by wine or music and, as usual, would be seen as mad or insane.
Therefore, none of the Corinthians had the power to reveal or Paul would not have written and visited them.
Rubel Shelly: Furthermore, if this is a prohibition of all speaking by women in all Christian assemblies, Paul has contradicted his own instruction earlier in the same epistle (11:5). Is there an obvious qualification to this requirement of absolute silence?
No. 1 Corinthians 11:5 does not give women permission to "prophesy in church" as long as they wore the veil. We will see in another fragment that 11:5 is
outside the assembly and
chapter 14 is during the collective assembly. To understand this Click Here.
The almost-universal view until the Neo-Pentecostals infected churches of Christ, was that women did not reveal inspiration with or without tongues in the first century.
There is no hint that any man ever spoke in tongues outside of the touch or presence of an Apostle. Even Philip who performed the "signs following" baptism could not cause people to speak in tongues. Of course, this was a sign gift poured out by Christ the Spirit but they never happened unless within the Apostle's arm-reach. This was to show that the gift belonged to those whom Christ had chosen to authenticate His Words.
There is no hint that any woman any place ever spoke in tongues unless it was in the unauthorized sense in Corinth. Remember that in chapter 12 said that not all had the gift of tongues. Therefore, if they were all doing something it was their old pagan form of madness or insanity.
A fundamental rule of biblical interpretation has to do with context. Every statement of Scripture must be read within its setting and not yanked out to serve as a free-standing pronouncement. The larger environment of Paul's strict demand for silence was his discussion of assemblies in which supernatural gifts such as tongues and prophecy were supplied by the Holy Spirit. The immediate context of his statement is the authoritative review and interpretation of the songs, tongues, and prophecies that have been offered in a particular assembly of that type. "Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said" (11:29).
The issue for the sisters in those assemblies, then, was not confessing Christ or singing -- or even, in these Spirit-driven services, praying aloud or prophesying -- but presiding over these services and/or authoritative pronouncements about things that had transpired during them. You will shortly see the reason for his emphasis on presiding, making authoritative judgments, and being decision-makers for the collective body.
If this is indeed the right interpretation of the "qualification" to Paul's demand for non-participation by the Christian women at Corinth, then his statement in chapter 14 is perfectly consistent with what he had already written in chapter 11. What should a man or woman do with a revelation, tongue, song, prophecy, or prayer given to him or her by the Holy Spirit? Share it! Observe the etiquette of your time and place in doing so, which at Corinth in the first century required women to wear veils to symbolize their submission to male headship and leadership in the church (11:7-10). Then, when the time came for the church's leaders to make an authoritative evaluation of anything that had been offered by either males or females in those services, the male leadership -- whose position of authority was acknowledged by the symbolism of the veil -- was to make a judgment with the women keeping strict silence as that verdict was delivered. Thus the women at Corinth were permitted to exercise their supernatural gifts but were required to defer to the church's male leadership for an assessment of its import on the future life of the group.
"Rubel Shelly: "The issue for the sisters in those assemblies, then, was not confessing Christ or singing -- or even, in these Spirit-driven services, praying aloud or prophesying -
"but presiding over these services and/or authoritative pronouncements about things that had transpired during them. You will shortly see the reason for his emphasis on presiding, making authoritative judgments, and being decision-makers for the collective body.
Phoebe stuff I forbid
I don't remember that "preside over" statement. However, Rubel is heading in the direction of saying that women are now "equal" enough to do about anything in stand up-speak out roles. However, she is still not "equal enough" to decide whether, using Paul's words, she is a revealer of direct inspiration or just insane. This may put her on the same level as men who must also be audited by another inspired man.
Paul did not give either preachers or elders the right to interpret a supernatural revelation, which we are sure never existed in Corinth if we understand Paul's use of irony.
You have to just close your eyes and make such statements and hope that no one notices. And many will not because Paul's message was "you are so wise" which meant that "fools loved to be fooled."
If Corinth is the authority for stand up - speak out roles for women in the contemporary church then this seems to give authority for revelation through God-given talent (Spiritual gifts) if the cultural norms are observed?
If the sisters now do not have the authority to speak by way of revelation then it is difficult to see how authority is transmitted for non-inspired speaking when Paul - from all appearances - seems to prohibit it.
The new exegesis is that Paul really did not say "I permit not" or "the women should remain silent" but said just the opposite. However, after having stood up and spoken out the women must sit down, shut up and allow the males (however unqualified?) to judge whether she is inspired or charismatic (insane).
Rubel Shelly: "Shelly: "If this is indeed the right interpretation of the "qualification" to Paul's demand for non-participation by the Christian women at Corinth, then his statement in chapter 14 is perfectly consistent with what he had already written in chapter 11.
What should a man or woman do with a revelation, tongue, song, prophecy, or prayer given to him or her by the Holy Spirit? Share it! Observe the etiquette (traditions) of your time and place in doing so,
which at Corinth in the first century required women to wear veils to symbolize their submission to male head ship and leadership in the church (11:7-10)."
The veil as a symbol of submission to the church's leaders was a convention at Corinth; it was never a universal rule for female Christians in all cultures.
Anyone, whether male or female, who was given a revelation from the Holy Spirit at Corinth or at any other place was authorized by the very same Spirit to communicate it to others; so long as these supernatural gifts of revelation were in evidence, it was Spirit-origin that was at stake and not the gender of the recipient.
The authority to preside over a church's meetings and to render decisions about its affairs was vested in its male leaders at Corinth; it was in these leader-authority roles that women were to defer to their Christian brothers and "remain silent in the churches."
The record is clear that no authentic speaking in tongues could occur when the disciple of the last Christ-ordained Apostle died and the canon was complete. This was all within the first century. If there is any revelation of the facts of Scripture after the first century then we would like to have a copy. If women can now prophesy by speaking in tongues then, as Pat Boone admitted, we must have a restoration of apostles. Some in churches of Christ have deluded themselves into believing that they are "Christ representatives" or apostles "in this church." Or some even have God as their book agent!
The conclusion from this statement about the etiquette of the first century being with the veil seems to fairly imply that speaking in tongues did not cease as long as the cultural etiquette was observed. Now, Rubel goes from wishy to washy by saying that egalitarianism means that "some of us are more equal than others." This, along with other fragments, may show that permitting women a stand up role but still under the control of men (Plato) is really a way to insult women by permitting them to move into performance roles common to prostitution and the theater. There, women participated but men cross-dressed and made up with dramatic coaching made sure that the women didn't get "too equal." Click here to see the whole drama unfold.
"Slaves provided 'dinner-theater' entertainment for the guests while they served: singing, playing musical instruments, reciting verse, dancing, acrobatics, and playing farce. Serving boys (Oh, yes they did.) or girls dispensed the wine and offered sexually attractive appearances. While slaves were accepted as part of the banquet's course and (sometimes)
admired for their entertainment,
they were simultaneously segregated from the real camaraderie of the meal.
In a sense, they were performing puppets, subject to derision, degradation, abuse and punishment. See Full Details
"Did you see Sally's dress? A bit short wasn't it?" On the Web, a Musical Worship Team discussion group: "Old Paula's voice is beginning to croak. She has lost her talent. But how do you girls suggest that we get rid of her?" "Weelllee! Perhaps she can pretend to sing and I will fill in."
Then, when the time came for the church's leaders to make an authoritative evaluation of anything that had been offered by either males or females in those services, the male leadership -- whose position of authority was acknowledged by the symbolism of the veil -- was to make a judgment with the women keeping strict silence as that verdict was delivered. Thus the women at Corinth were permitted to exercise their supernatural gifts but were required to defer to the church's male leadership for an assessment of its import on the future life of the group.
Let's expand that a bit: Because there are no inspired prophets in today's church that eliminates anyone capable of judging whether the women are prophets or mad.
Rubel Shelly: "Shelly: Then, when the time came for the church's leaders to make an authoritative evaluation of anything that had been offered by either males or females in those services, the male leadership -- whose position of authority was acknowledged by the symbolism of the veil -- was to make a judgment with the women keeping strict silence as that verdict was delivered.
"Thus the women at Corinth were permitted to exercise their supernatural gifts but were required to defer to the church's male leadership for an assessment of its import on the future life of the group.
But: If both men and women were judged on the same basis then why did the Holy Spirit confuse Paul and the rest of us by putting in all of that feminist stuff? Well, Robert Schuler, harshly judging the Southern Baptists, says that Paul wasn't qualified to speak about how we use women because Paul wasn't married! So take that.
The veil was more than a symbol: it told the males, "hands off." Unveiled prophesying was singing, dancing, drama and playing musical instruments was to "facilitate" the move on god and attract customers after the worship affair was over.
No, dear brother, this is not what the sexists males in Corinth were saying: This is what Paul said because he said it to all of the churches through other letters and Peter backs him up.
Paul warned against unveiled prophesying in 11:5 which was continuing pagan practices "out of which the new believers had just come." In chapter ten, Paul warned them not to continue pagan worship. He used the example of Mount Sinai where they "rose up to play." This was singing, dancing and playing musical instruments in a dramatic performance. This was pagan "prophesying" which pretended to get a message from the demons. Paul recognized that the tongues in Corinth came out of their own head or mind.
Rubel says that women can speak or sing but she must observe modern "etiquette," speak or sing in tongues (Bruner, in The Holy Spirit calls most singing "low level glossalalia"). Then, after violating 1Cor 14:34, she must then become silent to allow the male leaders to decide whether she was inspired or insane.
Examining the broader context, why should women be permitted to speak in tongues when it was like "noise and clang" and spoke directly to soothsaying and warfare (13:1), was an "unsure bugle" was speaking to God when God was trying to speak (14:2), was just "speaking into the air" (14:9) which speaks of pagan worship-perhaps Juno and, no women ever revealed doctrine (14:6). Speaking in tongues was a sign that unbelievers were taking control (14:21 and Isa 28). Speaking French in an English-speaking church would make the speaker a barbarian (14:11) and would insult the congregation. Paul utterly belittled speaking in tongues when one word with understanding was worth 2,000 words in tongues-!! Speaking in tongues as opposed to speaking an unlearned language was considered madness (14:23).
Rubel Shelly: "The Bible is not against women ministering, using their God-given talents, standing up and speaking,
administering church programs, singing (congregationally, small groups, or solo),
reading Scripture, sharing information about church projects,
testifying, teaching sub-groups of the church's membership (whether female, male, or mixed), writing articles or poems that will be used by males,
or otherwise participating fully in the life of local churches. A church's failure to encourage the development of female talent and work robs it of countless blessings.
That same failure results in buried talents that return no dividend to the owner who entrusted them to the church through its female membership.
While Paul defined spiritual gifts in chapter twelve, there is no evidence that any Corinthian had any spiritual gift. They couldn't settle the smallest dispute and Paul had to write letters to teach them the most basic doctrine. If Pavarotti comes into our congregation and says: "I see that you are all singing opera" this would not be a compliment because he would, like Paul, say: "But you don't all have talent, do you?"
Rubel Shelly: "The Bible is not against women ministering, using their God-given talents, standing up and speaking, administering church programs, singing (congregationally, small groups, or solo), reading Scripture, sharing information about church projects, testifying, teaching sub-groups of the church's membership (whether female, male, or mixed)
God cannot use performance talent. If a woman has a God-given talent then it is a Spiritual Gift. Rather than being the natural, without-respect-of-persons, this would mean that God specifically singled her out and gave her a gift of standing up in public and singing. Are her words inspired? It is generally accepted that songsters are "inspired" and this has always been the ancient belief.
If they are inspired then they should be written down and shared. If they are just God's already-revealed words then why can't the fattest, ugliest, least-talented vessel of clay (an old mud pie) speak the words to make sure that God isn't being aided? Wasn't that to be the case with Messiah and with Paul? "Talent" denies the power of God! Someone has called it the idolatry of talent and so it is.
But, Paul said of the males:
Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. 1Co 14:29
A prophetess (female pagan soothsayer in that culture) is not a prophet (male.)
No singing in parts, waving hands, praising the Lords, hand clapping, skirts flapping, eyes-winking here. Someone speaks one at a time, two at most in one session. The other judges in the form of dialog. No choirs to repudiate God's power and the Spirit's commands. No instruments which would be like the gong and clang of the witch's familiar spirit or the warriors cymbals. Nothing to prevent the others from hearing and saying, Amen.
What the Bible does prohibit is female elders-presbyters; women are not to be the decision-making authorities for the church. Neither are they to direct the congregation's plenary assemblies during its sessions of prayer and teaching of the Word. These two leadership roles appear to be specifically assigned to males.
Rubel Shelly: "Aside from a single office and two activities in public worship, only culture, tradition, and (perhaps) prejudice deny females the chance to use their gifts in the life of the church.
Although some argue for the setting aside of even these three biblical limitations on women, my fear is that secular pressure is nudging them away from biblical norms. At the very least, I would observe this: Even those who argue that Scripture permits women elders or assembly leaders cannot claim that Scripture requires these roles of women as it clearly does of men.
People use the same method of interpretation for female elders as Rubel uses for speaking in tongues or prophesying. I cannot think of any authority which demands what Rubel has already "permitted." Those like Willow Creek which Woodmont Hills belongs to demands that you subscribe and joyfully submit to women elders.
Paul knew, and God and the Law knew, that women cannot rise, stand over and be conspicuous without exercising her active verb Authenteo which, we are told, involved her sexual authority.
Therefore, for that tiny interval for taking the Lord's Supper and hearing the Word read and explained for edification and prayer, women were excluded both from speaking "roles" and stand-up roles. So were males "put on the program to get 'em to come to church." To read the details of what God said Click Here
Scripture was delivered by God as Spirit and Life (Jn 6:63). Paul told the elders to deliver the Word to others as it had been delivered unto them. When we begin to tokenize, preachify, versify, dramatize or put the Word to music you can be sure that false prophets are at work. They "take away the key to knowledge" given freely by God (Isa 55) and sell you sick lambs. They take your "gold certificates" and give you change in Confederate currency.
But then Paul said in his bitter irony: "fools love to be fooled." And so shall it ever be. Our goal is not to decide what you should do in your worship assembly. Our goal is to understand the Scripture and why it is perverted to the destruction of the church.
Rubel warns that the church may be on a slippery slope and he seems to be "hanging onto" a few restrictions. One gets the clear "vibe" that he may be driven by "them that hath the purse" pushing for more full pews. However, you cannot abandon any part of Scripture without having the burden of the Law fall upon your shoulders. And there is no more pathetic sign of ceremonial legalism in the Bible and in paganism than the thrashing around in charismatic musical worship performed for the congregation in the urgent hope of bringing the worshiper into the presence of God.
Counter added 5.07.05 9:24p 4380 3.3.09 10000 9.23.13 11533