KeralaBrethren.net
New User? Register Today!
Registered Users, LOGIN
What we believe (Eng) What we believe (Mal) About Us Contact Us
Forums Home General Forum Youth Forum Sisters Forum Archives (2005-2007) Archives (2001-2004)
Listing of Brides Listing of Grooms
Assemblies in Kerala Evangelists in India Instituitions in India
Christian Albums Christian Songs
Audio Sermons Bible Wallpapers Brethren Links KB History (Eng) KB History (Mal)

K E R A L A  B R E T H R E N
General Forum (2005 - 2007)

Forums Home ::
This Message Forum is to discuss spiritual topics only. Please avoid personal or assembly matters.
Let us use this facility for our spiritual enrichment and for bringing glory to our Lord almighty.
Webmasters reserve the right to delete any topic or posting partly or completely from this forum.
View Topics ::

Go to bottom of the page

# 01373 :  Brethren have become so legalistic
Brethren believers have become some of the most legalistic in the world. Here are some examples:

1) Restrictions on Women: Our restrictions are much worse than they once were. Women are not allowed to speak (not only just teach) during meetings. Women are not even allowed to pick hymns or give testimonies in some churches. During our previous generations, we had mighty women of God who prayed during meetings and were very active. Now we think that is Pentecostal and we discourage the spiritual growth of our sisters.

2. Strict worship patterns: We say that we are against the traditional worship of traditional churches. But we have the same traditions and patterns now. We go through rituals just like other sects of Christianity but refuse to accept them as rituals.

3. We have become a denomination. Marriages are discouraged between brethren and non-brethren people. We have our conferences, cathedrals, general conventions, seminaries, funds and other institutions. K.V. Simon would be shocked to see these if he was alive today. Because we have become a denomination, we have no relations and no concern for the rest of the Christian world. As a result, we do not have the influence over others outside as we once did.

4) We lack good leadership within our assemblies. Christian leadership is seen as positions of power rather than ministry. We have very few full time evangelists in local churches and the practice is discouraged. This has definitely impacted negatively our churches. In the last century, each local church had a full time evangelist supported by the local church. We need to come back to this pattern.

We need to come back to some of the truths and build the walls that are broken. Brethren assemblies and believers need a revival. We need a vision for the lost again!!

Post by : witness2007  View Profile    since : 10 Sep 2007


Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 10 Sep 2007 10:41:02 AM Close
'witness2007,'

I am not a Brethren. Your observations are interesting and tell me that these Brethren are really committed to follow the Word of God, becasue they fear God.

On item#1 of yours: You have witnessed that these Brethren are following 1 Corinthians 14:34-40, which is written, without any delay, after Apostle Paul corrected the misuse of tongues at Corinth. You have witnesses that these Brethren are following the Lord's command. It is not legalism.

On item #2 of yours: You have witnesses that these Brethren are following the Word of God as we read in Colossians 2:8. They are not following the human traditions, rituals of man, etc. as you do (You used "we" in your writings). They just follow the Word of God, because they fear God.

On item#3 of your: Mr. K.V. Simon is not alive. There is no meaning in scaring people with refering to it. Where do you have your cathedrals (You used the expression "we")? I don't know about any of the Brethren seminaries. Individuals may have some, not the Brethren as a group. If they do, please enlighten me with specific information.

On your #4: What do you mean by leadership? The Brethren have elders in their local gatherings. The elders are the leaders, according to the Bible. Each local gathering is independent, but not mutually exclussive. Your item #4 tells me that you want to establish an unscriptural leadership, similar to a Boshop or a Pope.

From these four items I conclude that you are lost among the false teachings that prevail among the Christendom as propagated by false teachers. You must learn from the Bible. If you need any help, please ask Dr. Johnson C. Philp. He will be a good mentor to point you to the submission that is needed from your part to the Word of God.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : witness2007   View Profile   Since : 10 Sep 2007 11:06:11 AM Close
Bro Koshy:
It is interesting that you are not a "Brethren" but you defend the current status of these assemblies. I am well aware of the linguistic classifications between the "brethren" and the "Brethren". Unfortunately, even the "brethren" have become like a denomination in India. To clarify your concerns.

1. What does the misuse of tongues have to deal with the role of women? There is no question that today's brethren assemblies discourage the exercise of gifts by women in assemblies compared to a century ago. This is partially due to the influence of brethren assemblies from the West as opposed to the local church movements in Kerala prior to their affiliation with brethren assemblies from England.

2. There are many things that have become rituals in our assembly worship meetings. We said that we left the rituals of episcopal churches. But we have established our own over the many years but we say that they are based on the scripture.

3. While we may not call them cathedrals, many churches in Kerala are looking to build impressive church buildings. We have many "bible schools", funds, conferences, other para church organizations.

4. By leadership, i am talking about local churches. How did you derive that I want a pope? I am talking about local church leadership and the local church's responsibility to support full time evangelists.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 10 Sep 2007 11:55:57 PM Close
Dear "witness2007"

Sorry if I am interfering in your reply to Br.George.

The replies to item 1-1st :Corinthians 14
34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church

1 Timothy-2
11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. 12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.

Item-2: Breaking of bread and wine are as per the scriptures on the first day of the week, started by 1st century saints, but I have to agree with you on one regard with the increase of prosperity , that the gathering on the first day of week has become like a ritual as other denomination making themselves present only on sunday , just having a pinch of the bread which passes by and sipping the wine without any preparation abd just for a formality, this is because due to no proper conviction.

3- During the last century when brethren assemblies started in India, history states that the 1st Lords day (breaking of bread and wine) was done under a tree,God blessed the generations gave us wealth, health and Job, hence to build a good place and a better place for saints to gather and praise our Heavenly Father is not bad. But as I mentioned in other post in my early days while praising and breaking of bread, literally we used to fall prostrate at his feet, but know sitting in chair or by standing , through word we fall prostrate at his feet , the reason we cannot bend our knees, as satan has made it stiff.

Contd/-
Samuel

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 12:26:45 AM Close
Contd/-

4- "I am talking about local church leadership and the local church's responsibility to support full time evangelists. "

Where do you see in the scriptures the churches have full time evangelist, who is an evangelist-a person who takes the responsibilty of the sharing the Good news about salvation to pass on the message that Jesus Christ is the only Savior and achieving souls unto his Kingodm, especially at public gatherings or in broadcasts, by personal conversation, by leaflets/tracts, or voluntarly going to unreached places. The scripture says souls are added a church is planted , elders are given the responsibility of further spiritual enrichment of the gathering by the holy spirit, In the scriptures , pne of the greatest evangelist was Apostle Paul, his work was to spread the Good news, he planted churches and went on moving , and again coming and exhorting them. And a speciality for a full time evangelist, he should earn for his livelihood by working , and Apostle is an example , he worked with his hands for his livelihood.

2nd Thessalonians 3
6 But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he[a] received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow us, for we were not disorderly among you; 8 nor did we eat anyone’s bread free of charge, but worked with labor and toil night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, 9 not because we do not have authority, but to make ourselves an example of how you should follow us.
10 For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. 11 For we hear that there are some who walk among you in a disorderly manner, not working at all, but are busybodies.

But some evangelist have taken evangelism as thier profession and assemblies & fund employ them, forgetting that God has employed them.

Yours in Christ
Samuel.V.J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kbr   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 2:27:36 AM Close
Dear Brethren,

I agree with the replies of George P Koshy and Samuel on doctrines, but we cannot deny the fact that many assemblies in India have the problems as mentioned by witness2007, in his points 2,3& 4.

I mean many assemblies - we cannot generalise it.

"We need to come back to some of the truths and build the walls that are broken. Brethren assemblies and believers need a revival. We need a vision for the lost again!!"

I appreciate his intention.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 2:45:16 AM Close
Dear "kbr"

Please read once again once what I have written for 2,3,4- I didnt go against but the facts but why we are like that we have to examine ourselves.

Yours in Christ
Samuel.V.J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kbr   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 2:53:37 AM Close
Yes, br. Samuel,

I read your posts, I missed to appreciate it.

regards

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 7:15:16 AM Close
Dear 'witness2007,'

The verses I referred to earlier follow immediately after the correcting of the misuse of speaking in tongues at Corinth. It is clearly stated that the women to be silent in the assembly is a command from the Lord. It was not a command from the Apostle. Your original posting #1 indictes that you want to allow women to speak, not be silent, in the assembly. The assembly is the body of Christ and no man (a member of the body) has the authority to change the command from the Head to the body. The problem with the Pentecostals and Charismatics is that they want to disobey that command from the Lord that the Holy Spirit placed soon after the correction of the misuse of speaking in tongue. Those who want to continue that error that was corrected in 1 Corinthians 14 also want to over-rule the Lord and allow the women to speak. Ignoring the scriptures to establish a preferred teaching is not the mark of obeying God.

This is not my doctrine, as 'kbr' inferred. I have no doctrine. I only write what I found in the scriptures.

Your initial posting does not tell us about local assemblies, but it deals in general with a group of Christians, the Brethren. If you are with a group of Christians who has rituals, then it is your duty to point this out to them and not to publisize in a world-wide-web-forum. This Forum or any other Forum has no right to correct any assembly.

You wrote, "We have many 'bible schools.'" Are these schools run by the assemblies or by individuals? If they are by individuals, how are they that of the Brethren (a general designation of a group of people)?

An impressive building is not a cathedral. A cathedral is an important church building that relates to or containing a bishop's throne. By implication, when you wrote about a cathedral and justify that term, you also admit that there is leadership; a very effective one, a bishop.

When you write about Brethren leadership, it is not about leadership in a local assembly.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kbr   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 7:21:20 AM Close
<<I have no doctrine>> Yes, I understand now that you have no doctrines.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : witness2007   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 9:11:37 AM Close
Whether you want to call the assembly ministers "elders" or "bishops" or "pastors", there is definite support in the scriptures for hard working laborers in an assembly to be supported by the assembly that benefits from their preaching and teaching, especially when it is their primary focus (as opposed to an afterthought for some elders these days holding demanding secular professions).


1 Timothy 5:17-18 Let the elders who perform the duties of their office well be considered doubly worthy of honor, especially those who labor faithfully in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain, and again, the laborer is worthy of his hire."


1 Cor 9:3-15 Consider this: What soldier at any time serves at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat any of the fruit of it? Who tends a flock and does not partake of the milk of the flock? . . . If we have sown [the seed of] spiritual good among you, is it too much if we reap from your material benefits? . . . Do you not know that those men who are employed in the services of the temple get their food from the temple? And that those who tend the altar share with the altar in the offerings brought? [Deuteronomy 18:1.]

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : witness2007   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 9:15:24 AM Close
Also, we see that during the initial stage of the assemblies in Kerala, nearly all assemblies had at least one brother who was fully devoted to teaching and ministering in a local assembly. These brothers often received support from foreign missionaries and churches were blessed by their ministry. Today, we have elders who have come back from the Gulf and other secular jobs for retirement and have no real spiritual calling and our churches are stagnant when it comes to good teaching and evangelism and encouragement of young people etc.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 9:15:28 AM Close
Dear Br.George in Christ,

I have a differnce of opinion in this sentence
<<The assembly is the body of Christ and no MAN (a member of the body) has the authority to change the command from the Head to the body. >>

Why have you chosen the word specifically MAN , is not woman a member of the body of Christ, all believers those who have been redeemed by our savior are the body of the Christ irrespective of thier sex.

I would rather prefer no one has the authority to change the command.

Yours in Christ
Samuel.V.J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 9:25:01 AM Close
Dear "witness2007"

"Also, we see that during the initial stage of the assemblies in Kerala, nearly all assemblies had at least one brother who was fully devoted to teaching and ministering in a local assembly. These brothers often received support from foreign missionaries and churches were blessed by their ministry. Today, we have elders who have come back from the Gulf and other secular jobs for retirement and have no real spiritual calling and our churches are stagnant when it comes to good teaching and evangelism and encouragement of young people etc."


Very much wrong concept , you are looking from one angle only, about elders nowadays I have mentioned in many post. What type of support are mentioning foriegn missionaries , foriegn missionaries came to india to spread the Gospel , and they lived like one of us, the early pioneer were brethren who learned the word of God, in its true way, a group of beleivers had the same understanding guided by the Holy Spirit, had proper conviction and calling, lived a life pleasing to God,left everything for Gods Glory, hence they had the courage and guts to lead the flock in a proper way.


Yours in Christ
Samuel.V.J


Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 11 Sep 2007 9:32:29 AM Close
Dear brother Samuel V.J.,

I was also in the process of posting while you made yours.

I used the term 'man' not to indicate male, but as a generic use of that term to indicate the human race. In Greek there is a word, ANTHROPOS, which includes both male and female, but is usually translated as 'man.' There is another Greek word, ANER, which is also traslated as 'man.' ANER deals with the male and it is used when dealing with husbands, at many places in the New Testament. I used 'man' in my posting as you quoted to include both the male and female.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : joyboy   View Profile   Since : 12 Sep 2007 9:57:50 PM Close
I'm going to address witness2007's points one by one.

1. I agree with most of the posters above quoting 1 Cor 14

2. I agree with witness2007 on this one. In the kerala brethren assemblies, if one strays from the 3 songs, 3 prayers, then verbal thoughts pattern then he is ostracized. Holy spirit led, also means holy spirit led order.

3. unfortunately, we have become a denomination. But also, I do think it's wise to marry within the brethren for a brethren young person. I know of too many marriages over the brethren/pentecostal or brethren/marthomite lines that cause problems in family debates over different issues. It's a practical thing. however, practicality does not mean it shoudld be prohibited. Personally, I think it is wise.

4. We can't generalize here. Sure we have those who seek leadership for power, while others are genuine. What we have to stop is the accusations of such within our groups, and pray for our leaders.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : joyboy   View Profile   Since : 12 Sep 2007 9:59:19 PM Close
Bro. koshy, you say you are not brethren, yet you attend the exclusive brethren. Please stop distinguishing between "B"rethren and "b"rethren.

It is disingenuous. Yes, we are not a denomination, but it is a convenient term to refer to the set of beliefs and practices that most of us share, even exclusives and non exclusives.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : witness2007   View Profile   Since : 14 Sep 2007 9:06:42 AM Close
I agree that there are some whose primary aim is money or power in all areas of Christian leadership, not just among the brethren people.

But that does not mean that a local churches do not have the responsibility to support financially men that labor there. Whether they are called elders, pastors, evangelists or bishops, if a church is benefiting from the teaching of such men, than the church should take care of some of their financial needs. That is what the Word says.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : witness2007   View Profile   Since : 14 Sep 2007 10:56:50 AM Close
Many have misread 1 Timothy 2. When it talks about a woman not having authority to teach, it is in the context of the husband-wife relationship. Notice that the reference is to "woman" and not "all women." The analogy to Adam and Eve makes this even more clear. The husband is to be the one teaching the scriptures both at home and in the assembly. The husband is the spiritual head of the household. The verse does not mean that all women should exercise absolute silence in the assembly.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : moses2006   View Profile   Since : 14 Sep 2007 1:17:11 PM Close
'witness2007'

Should we also take v9 - "that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing," ONLY in the context of a husband-wife relationship, as you suggested for v11 and 12?!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 14 Sep 2007 2:00:01 PM Close
Dear 'joyboy,'

You wrote, "Bro. koshy, you say you are not brethren, yet you attend the exclusive brethren." --- You are wrong. I never was or am in the fellowship with any exclussives, even exclussive brethren, unless that is the relationship that Christ offered. Then it was to an exclussive group and they were all his disciples.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : joyboy   View Profile   Since : 14 Sep 2007 2:54:50 PM Close
bro koshy

I understand that you are affiliated with a group of believers, who are loosely referred to as the exclusive brethren. now, are you being deliberately coy, and refusing to identify yourself with a name, or are you saying that you really don't fellowship at such an assembly?

If it's the latter, I do apologize.

Regardless of what we personally believe, humans like to label. I was merely referring to the man-made label.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : witness2007   View Profile   Since : 14 Sep 2007 3:19:23 PM Close
joyboy wrote: "Should we also take v9 ONLY in the context of a husband-wife relationship, as you suggested for v11 and 12?"
Obviously that refers to all women. But the verse "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man" refers to the husband-wife relationship. We cannot establish doctrines based on the KJV or any English version. There are some that have studied these verses in the original language that have come to this conclusion.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : joyboy   View Profile   Since : 14 Sep 2007 6:02:01 PM Close
witness: that wasn't me. that was moses.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 15 Sep 2007 2:16:33 AM Close
Dear "witness2007"

Why do you skip the verses from 1 corinthians 14,
34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

And a detail of it why women should be silent is detailed in 1 timothy-2, because sin came to the world through women, many a times the decision and exhortation given by women lead to wrong leading.There is a order for the body of the Christ, Christ the head of the church, Husband the head of wife, so a decorum goes on, wo why the confusion, yes this era , women are working shoulder to shoulder, earning and sharing , but it doesnt mean that the order of the scriptures to be changed.

Those who argue on 1st Corinthians 14 for the so called other tongues , why this verse not bieng higlighted, so we have scriptures for granted and interpreting as we want, which shouldnt be.


Yours in Christ
Samuel.V.J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 17 Sep 2007 7:44:48 AM Close
Dear 'joyboy,'

What you nwrote about me is not correct. Your information is wrong.

You are not giving information about you, but are trying to make me to give information about me. This is against what you have agreed to, as stated in the Forum's plocy. I give information that are relevant about me as I choose. I also ask for others about their name. it is for the purpose to communicate with them as a brother or a sister. If they don't rust me, that is where I stop. I have given you enough information about me and it is more than you ever gave about yourself.

On 12 Sep 2007 your wrote, "Bro. koshy, you say you are not brethren..." Did I write this? Please help me to find this statement. Where did I do this? I never should wrtie such a statement as you claim that I wrote. It is my Lord who called me a "brethren." When He said this, He was referring to His disciples, They were a special group of people who where with Him. In that sense they were exclussives too and Mary knew that. She was one of them. She went straight to them. But she was not a Brethren, with a "label" before or after. She and they were "brethren" with a relationship and not a "label." You should tell me where I wrote what you claim about my denial, so I could correct that error. If not, you are willfully misleading others with falsification of my statements.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : joyboy   View Profile   Since : 17 Sep 2007 8:49:19 AM Close
Bro. Koshy, as I wrote above: if i am wrong I apologize. So, let me apologize for the exclusives comments.

I do find, though, your distinctions between "being a 'B'rethren" and "being brethren" rather disingenuous, and supercilious. Why don't you just say that you are opposed to man made names? The fact that you are here discussing truths, and the fact that the majority of your posts defend assembly principles affiliate you with the group known as "the Brethren", regardless of what you call yourself.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : rtdaniel   View Profile   Since : 12 Oct 2007 10:28:47 AM Close
Dear Mr.Samuel VJ,
I can understand what you are trying to prove. In genaral there are valuable poients in what you are trying to say. But you need to go deep in the Word of God and understand the teaching. Without doubt the "brethren" needs to come back to the "Word". But before you can make any changes you yourself should know what you are talking about. Your understanding about the work and possition of an evangalist in the Assembly and his support are no baised on the Scripture rather than formed out of your biased openion about them.
May God help you.
R.T. Daniel
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : paulsmathew   View Profile   Since : 13 Dec 2007 11:04:02 PM Close
the first post by witness is indeed something to ponder upon..
" But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonoureth her head: for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven"
this verse from 1st corint 11:5 is a verse against women praying or prophesying with her head uncovered but it also seems to suggest that there were in the time of apostle paul women who prayed and prophesied but the condemnation here was not on them doing so but dong so in a manner which is unworthy that is with their head uncovered..
therefore to say that women should not peak in assembly is something on which we should really think and ask God's leadin rather than makin it a general rule..
in that case they should not join in singing when we sing hymns be it worship meetings or any other meetings but we do allow that.. so why be selective in following the God's word. we must be able to follow the God's word fully isn't if women are meant to be silent..
what i'm coming to is brothers is that we need to understand the backgrounds and situations for which they were written. rather than making sweeping statements in our own understanding.
hope and pray that the Holy Spirit keeps us open to hear His word afresh rather being dogmatic in what have held on for long.. rest issues in later posts.
God bless you all especially you mr. witness for bringing out these issues,,
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 14 Dec 2007 7:00:49 AM Close
Dear Paul S. Mathew,

You wrote, "therefore to say that women should not peak in assembly is something on which we should really think and ask God's leadin rather than makin it a general rule.."

Could you explain 1 Corinthians 14:34-40? there we read about the Lord's command.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : sambudhanoor   View Profile   Since : 17 Dec 2007 6:18:18 AM Close
Dear ejnnej

You can see some writing on “Statement of Faith” in Brethren India Discussion General Forum:
http://www.brethren.in/forum_new/forum_topics.asp?FID=1

Statement of Faith:
http://www.brethren.in/forum_new/forum_posts.asp?TID=1

there are 3 pages.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 17 Dec 2007 6:54:17 AM Close
Dear 'ejnnej,'

The statement of faith should be, "The Word of God, the Scripture (the Bible), is the final authoruty for the faith and conduct of a believer."

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : paulsmathew   View Profile   Since : 21 Dec 2007 1:00:42 AM Close
dear bro george koshy
Here the apostle, 1. Enjoins silence on their women in public assemblies, and to such a degree that they must not ask questions for their own information in the church, but ask their husbands at home. They are to learn in silence with all subjection; but, says the apostle, I suffer them not to teach, 1Ti_2:11, 1Ti_2:12. There is indeed an intimation (1Co_11:5) as if the women sometimes did pray and prophecy in their assemblies, which the apostle, in that passage, does not simply condemn, but the manner of performance, that is, praying or prophesying with the head uncovered, which, in that age and country, was throwing off the distinction of sexes, and setting themselves on a level with the men. But here he seems to forbid all public performances of theirs. They are not permitted to speak (1Co_14:34) in the church, neither in praying nor prophesying. The connection seems plainly to include the latter, in the limited sense in which it is taken in this chapter, namely, for preaching, or interpreting scripture by inspiration. And, indeed, for a woman to prophesy in this sense were to teach, which does not so well befit her state of subjection. A teacher of others has in that respect a superiority over them, which is not allowed the woman over the man, nor must she therefore be allowed to teach in a congregation: I suffer them not to teach. But praying, and uttering hymns inspired, were not teaching. And seeing there were women who had spiritual gifts of this sort in that age of the church (see Act_22:9), and might be under this impulse in the assembly, must they altogether suppress it? Or why should they have this gift, if it must never be publicly exercised? For these reasons, some think that these general prohibitions are only to be understood in common cases; but that upon extraordinary occasions, when women were under a divine afflatus, and known to be so, they might have liberty of speech
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : paulsmathew   View Profile   Since : 21 Dec 2007 1:04:06 AM Close
reply to bro george koshy contd.
hey were not ordinarily to teach, nor so much as to debate and ask questions in the church, but learn in silence there; and, if difficulties occurred, ask their own husbands at home. Note, As it is the woman's duty to learn in subjection, it is the man's duty to keep up his superiority, by being able to instruct her; if it be her duty to ask her husband at home, it is his concern and duty to endeavour at lest to be able to answer her enquiries; if it be a shame for her to speak in the church, where she should be silent, it is a shame for him to be silent when he should speak, and not be able to give an answer, when she asks him at home. 2. We have here the reason of this injunction: It is God's law and commandment that they should be under obedience (1Co_14:34); they are placed in subordination to the man, and it is a shame for them to do any thing that looks like an affectation of changing ranks, which speaking in public seemed to imply, at least in that age, and among that people, as would public teaching much more: so that the apostle concludes it was a shame for women to speak in the church, in the assembly. Shame is the mind's uneasy reflection on having done an indecent thing. And what more indecent than for a woman to quit her rank, renounce the subordination of her sex, or do what in common account had such aspect and appearance? Note, Our spirit and conduct should be suitable to our rank. The natural distinctions God has made, we should observe. Those he has placed in subjection to others should not set themselves on a level, nor affect or assume superiority. The woman was made subject to the man, and she should keep her station and be content with it. For this reason women must be silent in the churches, not set up for teachers; for this is setting up for superiority over the man.
what im saying at the end is that yes women do not have authority to teach in an assembly but yes when it comes to worship to singing why should they be stopped and told that the scripture does
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : paulsmathew   View Profile   Since : 21 Dec 2007 1:31:28 AM Close
alow them to do so ?
moreover as a believer we are all seen as equal in the sight of God . so for a sinner to worship His or her GOd how can we lay restraint it be it man woman slave or rich(Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
even in revelation we see repeatedly great multitude worshipping the Lord almighty.. there's no restriction there to worship be it male or female
so when we say silence in the asembly that dos not give us the whole and sole license to supres all maner of speaking of the women believers but is restricted to
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : paulsmathew   View Profile   Since : 21 Dec 2007 1:36:45 AM Close
certain things as can be seen as teaching and excercising authority in the assenbl in the presence of male believers..
all this talk brother is only with a desire brother to follow the Word in its entirety and not deduce anything of human or denominational interpretation .
so brother thanks for being patient enough to rad thru this..
May God bless you
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page



Go to top of the page

All times are GMT -5 Hours
Forums Home ::
© 2017 Sansnet.com



HOME