Those who have some familiarity with the Bible know that women are once admonished to sort of keep their questions to themselves and return home and ask (nag?) their husbands theological questions. I have been a conservative American Christian since about 1994, and a "regular attender" since many years prior to that so I'd formed some opinions on that passage as well as others regarding women.
Its easy to use the cultural standards argument to dismiss just about anything the Bible says, meaning if it was just a reference to what comprised the norm in those days it certainly isn't meant to be germane now. This notion has, on the back of the good horse Evangelical Fem ridden the new testament from start to finish. Of couse she simply jumped over the OT, not worth a trot through as it were. For example head coverings and adornments; have a look at the church today and its easy to see we don't embrace long hair necessarily and clearly not head coverings as anything more tha historical tradition. For the record I tend to agree with that take on those rather aesthetic things.
My bookend on the other end of the spectrum was always that I did not support women be ordained, and I was solidly behind the Ephesians and other Biblically ordered marriage (with of course all the PC disclaimers about not saying men must lord over women and dominate blah blah blah....that I must say that is also a symptom of the progress of evangelical feminism).
But this idea of keeping quiet was in the middle, and I tended to question if it had practical value outside of maybe a selfish male desire for a time of quiet away from having to perform the mental gymnastics of trying to follow his wife's meanderings (and I dearly love my wife' meanderings...sometimes they tire me)
After MRA type discussion dies down at another site I started posting at a Christian marriage forum. I didn't so much try to sell overall misandry as a condition in the world, so much as take it to the marriage and divorce issue. Its been nearly I year now, and I have concluded with zero doubt that this idea of keeping the women silent in church was very well founded. Women readers before you breath fire, there are indeed women quite capable of linear discourse, and men not at all capable. But at the very base, and in general, level, the circular defense women there were able to offer no fault divorce and the overall meme in thier lives that men are vile is ubiquitous. Whats worse it coexists with zero difficult right next to a mutually excluding concept, and they can even state two mutually exclusive beliefs in one sentence, and then "prove" it with some utterly unrelated remark. Its maddening. They are "pro-family" but no fault divorce MUST be available fot the women, BUT, the overwhelming filing majority of women means nothing more then men are REALLY realiably bad, AND YET we are all equal sinners.....wow....it wears me out to get my feeble mind around that statement. Imagine in some Bible study groups how these kind of templates for discourse could leave men perplexed and indeed not wanting to bother. Imaginbe men trying and again to convince that this is hogwash, that agree or disagree is fine but dont do both. Sheesh.
Finally, I posted this elsewhere but will close my little vent here with the results of the seminary student (men and women) survey that a tarveling lecturer found.
One group he asked to list the "worst sins" 5 or so....and they dutifully listed them...man and woman
The next group in a different location (unaware of the first survey) he asked everyone to list the sins a man was predisposed to and likewise for the woman.....men and women answered both for men and women.
The mens tendencies were listed by men and women overwhelmingly coincident with the top worst sins from the previous groups answers.
The number one sin that the women wrote about women.....low self esteem!

I keep repeating that last because it is telling of something way beyond the petty, and how one may use it if arguing with one woman. Its a societal marker (another....did we need another?) of how somehow the relative status of men and women, which at any given point for each could be describes as it relates to the other, but which is not a zero sum game and can move independently, has successfully been sold as a balance scale....good for men = bad for women and the converse.
BS!

Well, I spent time in an Evangelical (Pentecostal) congregation, and the issue was never discussed. That is, women had complete freedom of behaviour in and out of church.

By contemporary standards I guess I'm a misogynist. I don't believe that women as a group have the same interest in "big" ideas as men, they tend to focus on the personal/particular. Women will enjoy stories about Mary or Martha or Ruth, but discussions about theology usually bore them.

And of course we all have to deal with the modern orthodoxy of moral relativism/gender equality.

No 2. Terrible hairstyle

No 3. Visible Panty Line

No 4. Cell phone battery uncharged

No 5. Wearing the same dress three times.

The number one sin that the women wrote about women.....low self esteem!


And we all know who is to blame for that....

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. [Genesis 1]

We're in this together. We're supposed to work together, support each other, love each other. Self-love & egotism are not spiritual attitudes, they are the way of the world, the way of error and pain and negativity.

Agreed BT we are supposed to work with our women.

I just wish so may people wouldn't ignore that and still act like individuals after marriage.

Yes I'm familiar with the passage in Corinthians that talks about women being silent in church. The reasons given: women were questioning their leaders, asking if these leaders were really inspired/instructed by God and questioning their authority to speak on God's behalf.

This must have been more than a little bit annoying to those who did not want their authority questioned. More annoying still if they could not present answers that were satisfying to those asking the questions. How much easier, it is, really, to just say that God wants them to be quiet. Problem solved. How advantageous.

I admire those who ask questions. I think it's a sign of an intelligent mind. Why should we accept everything we're told without question? And I imagine it's easier for men to accept things the way they were back then (without question), since God seemed to (according to man) hold authority over women. Why would anyone but women want to question that?

While I agree with the idea that authority should be questioned, as in scrutinized for legitimacy and integrity, not just blindly questioned for the sake of being antagonistic, you are misrepresenting scripture. Agree or disagree with what it says, but at least don't misrepsent the source you are citing.

1 Corinthians 14: 33-35
"For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Let 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.
And 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."

Adam, as a son of God, who was a part of the original creation, could NOT be deceived, however, Eve as a "By-product" of the original created could be, and was deceived.


God forbids the woman to handle the word of God !!!


William Marrion Branham, God`s vindicated prophet for today.......
CHURCH AGE BOOK.
Let us go back to the beginning. In the original physical creation as we know it today, God made everything in pairs, male and female.


There were two chickens--rooster and hen. There were two cattle, the cow and the bull. And right down the line.


But when it came to man, there was only one. They were not a pair. Adam had been made in the image of God. He was a son of God.

As a son of God he could not be tempted and fall. That would be impossible.


So God took a byproduct of man to cause the fall.

Woman never stepped fresh from the hand of God as a true product of God.


She was produced from man.






Robert.

Good topic .
This has been a huge concern for me as well.


For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own desires shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

This is going on in many churches today.

.

First, when this letter was written (mid 1st C) there was hardly any Christian authority, or orthodoxy. The churches, such as they were, were small and unorganized.

Second, Paul expected the end of the world at any time. He was not writing advice for an institution which would survive two thousand years.

Third, Paul was a Jew of his times, when women had little input into religious matters. Matters of belief and behaviour that were not covered under Jewish practice had to be improvised.

Fourth, religion by nature is conservative and authoritarian. Submission to church or temple leaders was and is the norm.

Fifth, authority by nature is neither good nor bad. It is a set of opinions and beliefs found useful by others who came before us. Rebellion for its own sake is childish.

Sixth, questions are fine if they informed by an understanding of the subject, otherwise they are tiresome.

Every denomination is outside of the perfect will of God and teaches it`s own ideas, to a greater or lesser degree.......
Matthew 15:9.
But IN VAIN they do worship me, (Not atheists then) teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Cain worshipped in vain, millions worship in vain today.

Revelation 17:1.
And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the GREAT WHORE that sitteth upon many waters.

The “Great Whore” = the Roman Catholic organisation.

Revelation 13:14.
Because of the signs he was given power to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them t