Evangelical feminists refuse to accept the Bible's plain words which forbid teaching of men by women, and are unable to adequately explain why Jesus himself did not appoint any women as apostles before his crucifixion, or after his resurrection.

Do these women have a point?
Is it fair to conclude the Bible "SEEMS" to be sexest?
and does the Bible allow women to teach men?

1 Timothy 2:5-18 (11 verses)

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

1 Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

1 Timothy 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

1 Timothy 2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

1 Timothy 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

1 Timothy 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

1 Timothy 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

1 Timothy 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

1 Timothy 2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
________________________________________________
1 Corinthians 14:33-35 (3 verses)

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

1 Corinthians 14:34 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.

1 Corinthians 14:35 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.
_________________________________________________
Practice of Jesus Confirms No Women Apostles

When reminded that even Jesus appointed no women apostles, feminists assert that Jesus was concerned that if he had done so, people would discount his message, that accepting women as apostles would be a cultural change for Evangelical people to accept, and that they would have turned away from Jesus and his message.
That's preposterous, given the fact that Jesus' activities and teaching were already so revolutionary; who would worry about the women helping Jesus?
Furthermore, Jesus as the son of an omnipotent God had the power to do whatever he wanted, and that included making anyone accept as truth anything he wanted them to believe; if Jesus had appointed women as apostles, he would have found a way to make a woman apostle acceptable to the people to whom he preached.

Jesus...was a revolutionary in his age own with regard to the role of women in worship...[but he] confirmed the Old Testament patriarchy by not appointing a woman as an apostle, though women followed him, ministered to him, and were his close friends. It is nonsense to argue that the counter-cultural Jesus appointed only male apostles because he was culturally conditioned.
Is it not plausible to think that had if he intended to empower women to have equality with men in leadership he would have called a woman to be an apostle, either before or after the resurrection?

Personaly I dont care who teaches what, to whom, for I have no faith in the Bible, thats not to say I dont believe in a God of sorts.
I am all for equal rights, so dont beat me just yet.
However I am curious as to the opinion of the general public in regard to women and the Bibles possible sexest teachings.

Cheers
RazZ

Many of those verses need to be taken IN context as to the situation that was being addressed at the time they were said. Paul made clear it was wholely acceptable for a woman to chose not to marry (or remarry) but to dedicate her life solely to Gods service.
But as for the practicality of a woman being an apostle or evangelist...Women are the bearers and nurturers of life. I do not view that as a submissive role socially but as an honor that my gender was chosen by God to be entrusted with the care and well being of our most preciouse gift. Service is a highly regarded position by God, and the upbringing of our children is very much the entrustment of our future as a whole.
Everyone can not be playing the same role, it takes all of us, and I am very satisfied that the duty I have been given is very important and very honorable. I think Jesus very much held women and their place in life in very high regard by the depiction of the role Mary and Mary M. played in His life, not to mention the Samaritan woman, the adultress, and the fact that it was the women that loved and cared for Him with such passion that He first revealed Himself to after the reserection.
An apostles work is very important, but if I as a mother bring my children up in the right way...the apostles job is much smaller.

The bible is a product of its times. It was written in an age where women were accorded considerably less status than they are today. It was also written by men. Is it so surprising that it is sexist in some respects, then?

It's only sexist to people who crave total control. The Bible gives a balanced relationship between men and women as each have roles none of which are more important than the others.

Ben

Kalvin and I agree on this one. It is the old "the grass is greener on the other side" theory. I realize that I have an equal right to follow my heart and do what I feel I can do my best at and contribute the most with. Many feminists however aren't fighting with such pure intentions. It has often become a matter of just wanting what someone else has to say we can have it if we want to. If I as just one player in the big picture am off doing someone elses role because I don't WANT to do mine, or I think theirs is better, who is gonna do mine? We are all filling a place that is very necesary and needed.
We have to consider social and cultural restraints. They exist and we must coincide as best we can with them. This is NOT a perfect world unfortunatly and we must live in it such as it is as best we can.
If due to social and cultural stigma, my being a woman made my teaching or testimony less accepted to a person...I have to ask myself should I:
1. Get bent all out of shape about the injustice of it and force my opinion and no longer care if they have gotten the message or answers they needed...or
2. Step back and not let my freedom and confidence keep them from the truth.
Paul said not to let our own freedoms cause another who was in doubt to stumble. If my being a woman causes doubt then by all means let a man councle the person...the important thing is that person and their needs not my ego.
There is plenty of work I can effectivly do to contribute...and that is what really matters. If I do what I can and let others do what they can then we have done what needs to be done.

Taken, you just refuse to read the Bible even if it would help.

And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him,
And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils,
And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance.
(Luke 8:1-3, KJV).

See how the Bible points out that there were MANY OTHER women with Jesus.
You'd know that if you'd read the Bible.

Tony when in the HELL did I say there were NOT other women, I listed a few as an example. You are with out a doubt the most contrary and contradicting person I have EVER come across. So what is your ACTUALL gripe with my POINT as opposed to my not listing the entire KJV as a reference and back up to my post?
Do you even READ what I write? What did the number of women have to do with what I said, listing more would have made my point stronger but we have some space and time limitations here in this world and forum. So what exactly is your gripe?

*Originally posted by Taken
Tony when in the HELL did I say there were NOT other women, I listed a few as an example. You are with out a doubt the most contrary and contradicting person I have EVER come across. So what is your ACTUALL gripe with my POINT as opposed to my not listing the entire KJV as a reference and back up to my post?
Do you even READ what I write? What did the number of women have to do with what I said, listing more would have made my point stronger but we have some space and time limitations here in this world and forum. So what exactly is your gripe? *

Oh, did I misread your post?

Maybe I just didn't want to take any chances agreeing with you, as per the quotation in the other thread.
Besides, I was answering your last post, not the one before it.

Tony I do not ask you to ever agree with me, but regardless of wether you agree or disagree atleast read before you comment. The jist of my post, that i thought was rather clear, is that feminist saying the Bible is sexist is way off course.
Jesus' attitude towards the women near Him and their portrayal in the Bible is not one of them being "less' than anyone, but of them, due to social and cultural distinctions at the time, as well as a different God given role and ability, in a different service than that of men. Not a LESS IMPORTANT service but a different one, and one we should be honored to have and happy to serve in.
I then further elaborated that the important thing is that the work be done, not that my ego be served. Therefor if I need to step aside due to someone viewing a female as less apt, then I should do so, regardless of the falicy of that idea.

I just do not see where the controversy lies.

*Originally posted by Taken
Tony I do not ask you to ever agree with me, but regardless of wether you agree or disagree atleast read before you comment.*

Then, why don't you extend the same courtesy to me?

*The jist of my post, that i thought was rather clear, is that feminist saying the Bible is sexist is way off course.*

I guess it just wasn't that clear.

*Not a LESS IMPORTANT service but a different one, and one we should be honored to have and happy to serve in.*

I don't know about that "less important" thing.

When Adam was created, the universe became bad.

And the LORD God said, It is not good...
(Genesis 2:18, KJV).

After Eve was created, the universe became very good.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good....
(Genesis 1:31, KJV).

*Therefor if I need to step aside due to someone viewing a female as less apt, then I should do so, regardless of the falicy of that idea.*

Crap.
If you need to stop preaching the gospel, then you should do so?
That does bring up a point, namely, who HAS been telling you to stop preaching the gospel?

*I just do not see where the controversy lies. *

I know.
It lies between Christians and antichristians.

Tony Tony Tony Tony...I never said I would STOP spreading the Gospel...I said if someone of lesser faith had less confidence in me because of their upbringing and culture, then I would gladly step aside and let a fellow Christian of the Male persuasion talk with them and not make it an ego thing. What is more important, me being right or them getting closer to God?
Lety them get to God...and He can straighten out any errors in their thinking....that is His work not mine.

Paul said "I have become all things to all people that a few might be saved"