Keep Reading Dr Thiel...

 In a recent posting on COGWRITER, "Are Women to Give Sermons?",  Bob Thiel says...

"Let me make a few points.

First, while Tina Engelbart is entitled to her opinion about what she thinks the Greek means, the reality is that there is no record of Christian women preaching in either the New Testament nor in early Christian writings. While it is possible that the apostate Simon Magus may have had a female preach, and maybe some of the other apostates did, people who understood koine Greek at the time apparently did not feel that the Apostle Paul was allowing women to preach.

Second, UCG is correct that women should not be preaching. This is confirmed by the following passage that is in the Bible (hence, even allowing for a different translation of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, this is not something only to be derived from the Talmud as Tina Engelbart indicates):

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. (1 Timothy 2:11-12).

It is also a historically accurate position as the early COG did not have women preaching in services."

https://www.cogwriter.com/news/doctrine/are-women-to-give-sermons/

I would suggest that Dr Thiel keep reading to fully understand Paul's reasons for his opinions. And that this is just Paul's opinion.

Let me make a few points as well...

I Timothy 2:  

11 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.... KEEP READING BOB 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

First of all, Paul says it is his rule. He does not permit it. It's his opinion and he has nothing from his hallucinatory Jesus to quote about the issue. Neither would he find anything in the Gospels which came long after his death. 

Secondly, His opinion is based on the mythic story of Adam and Eve as to how men were first created and then women, (from the rib no less) of the first man Adam. The story is not literally true. 

Paul makes Adam being created first a significant pecking order issue as to the differences between a man's authority and a woman's.   The story of Adam and Eve is simply that, a story. You cannot take a myth, no matter what the context,  to make up literally true rules.  

The purpose of the story was to establish the fault of women for just about everything since time began and debunking goddess worship in the nations around Israel. The story is to promote Patriarchy in the form of Priests, Temples and Animal sacrifices as the way of Israel. The way of Matriarchy, as in the pagan nations worshipping fertility. agricultural phenomenon and the goddess was not going to be the way of Israel. This is the mentality of the Bronze and Iron Age and not the Computer and Space Age. 

Thirdly, Paul makes the point that in his view and in the tale, Adam was not deceived. He was a total non-player, even in the story.  The story actually reminds us that Adam was right there with Eve, but this is conveniently overlooked by Paul to make his opinion on the matter more valid and credible.   

In reality, Adam evidently had a problem speaking up.  At best, Adam was not in charge of the situation in the least. At worst, he was deceived equally "and did eat." They are both "transgressors" in this and equally.  Paul downplays that reality so he can make his point and defend his position that woman are not to speak in church or sermonize. Paul had a personal problem with women in his life I suspect. 

Genesis 3:6 "When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes, and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom, she took the fruit and ate it. She also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it."

Paul graciously lets women off the hook of being at fault for everything by allowing them to be "saved" by having babies. He did not evidently find it to be helpful or encouraging to quote the actual verse outlining this process of salvation by baby bearing.

Genesis 3:16 16To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

How close women almost came to having painless and pleasurable childbirth! Thanks a lot Eve!

How convenient and ludicrous. In the story, Eve or no woman had yet given birth to another human, so it was evidently a convenient time to tell women that it would be painful and this is part of her punishment. I would like to suggest that had this story never been told, childbirth would probably still be painful but the reason would be simply because this kind of experience for a woman is painful.

It's kind of like the Jesuits showing up at an Indian village and announcing that if they did not turn over their land, they would make the Sun or the moon go dark. Knowing the timing of solar and lunar eclipses no doubt helped them along in this trickery. I would have loved to seen a knowledgeable tribe member tell them, "Ok, do it right now and we will, but if you fail, we'll burn you at the stake." "Yeah no...we gotta go"

Like Paul, Bob, that is merely your opinion, and have failed to tell the whole story.

So Women of the Church, If you would like to hear an hour and half of what Bob admits "might be a little controversial" and give the impression he's not quite sure himself about the topic, you will enjoy what your true "role" is.

Bob makes the poetic point that women "were not taken from the head of man to be over him nor from the feet to be trampled underfoot" as the nice quote goes, but from the rib as his equal, etc. The real reason women come from the rib of man is that men have lots of ribs and losing one is more because there are lots of them and won't be missed. Women weren't taken from fingers as one might need all ten along the way. Fingers are more significant than one of 24 ribs. So are men more than women.

When teaching anatomy in massage schools, I'd get to the anatomy of the rib cage and how breathing works and say "First of all we have 24 ribs...." Then I would wait. It was always a female student. Up goes the hand. "But men have one less right?" I'd say no but I understand where you get that from. They'd get upset because in church they were told the tale. My answer was that if I cut off your finger, your children would still have ten fingers at birth. And just counting modern-day man's ribs pretty much took care of the question. One said she was telling her dad what I said and I told her to have him call me if he'd like. (The "call me, let's reason together" is ever with me.) Dad must have chickened out. I admit I should not have said: "...and have him explain Santa to you too." It just slipped out.

"Enjoy..."

Living Church of God: Reeling Over the Sheldon Monson Fiasco and Loosing Members, LCG Creates "Study Topics" On Masks

The boys in Charlotte are scrambling to keep their members in line and that necessary money stream coming in. It seems that the Sheldon Monson fiasco is having a huge impact upon LCG as members flock to Monson and his webcast.   Many in LCG are now switching feast sites in order to attend Monson's site.

The mask fiasco that Weston created has now led LCG to draw up 3 "study guides" for the few remaining faithful to examine as they try to recover from the "present distress" the church is now going through.

We have seen a lot of COG's do a lot of stupid things over the years, but this one makes LCG look absolutely ridiculous.

It's like watching a high school girl get all pissy when her boyfriend dumps her for someone better.

The longer COG's exist the more immature they act.

Church Administration
Online Study Resources for Brethren

During this difficult period of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Church is faced with the challenge of making decisions about services and our weekly and Festival practices. As always, Church leadership looks to the inspiration of Jesus Christ and the laws and statutes of God to guide these decisions, not to mention a “multitude of counsel,” which has included the Council of Elders, Feast of Tabernacles Site Coordinators, and numerous field ministers. And the Church Headquarters leadership frequently revisits these decisions, looking for opportunities to move past this “present distress” and back to the normal services we all love.

As we move through this unprecedented time together, we want to make all brethren aware of study resources that may be helpful in light of the issues the Church is facing today.

The following study guides are available on the lcg.org website, by clicking on the “Bible Study” link:

1. Study Topic: Singing, Masks, Livestreaming, and Faith, by Mr. Wallace Smith:
https://www.lcg.org/bible-studies/study-topic-singing-masks-livestreaming-and-f faith 

2. Study Topic: Does Psalm 81 contain a commandment for singing?, by Mr. Dexter Wakefield:
https://www.lcg.org/bible-studies/study-topic-does-psalm-81-contain-commandment-singing 

3. Study Topic: Masks and Singing—Is one forbidden at Sabbath Services while the other is commanded?, by Mr. Peter Nathan:
https://www.lcg.org/bible-studies/study-topic-masks-and-singing-one-forbidden-sabbath-services-while-other-commanded

Adult Non-Sabbath School: If the Time Comes for YOU to Walk Away from Your Church...For your own sake-Do it.

Actually leaving your Church of Choice Church of God is difficult no matter what you actually feel inside. And, in reality, only you know exactly how you feel though even admitting that to yourself can take a long time.  

When it comes to church and belief, we stay far longer than than when first we suspected or admitted, "This no longer serves me." We are programed to stay put. There are consequences real and imagined to  stepping out on one's own. The Church has scriptural ammunition to shoot at you with.  Leaving the group feels unnatural and in the past, to do so would threaten one's very survival in the real world alone.  To even use the "Me" word, feels awkward, selfish and against all programing of "We" and "Us" the church provided you with over the years. 

It was never "I am not divided. All one person ME".   It is always "WE" and we sing those hymns, in part, to keep the program running and tuned weekly. 

(Note: Church of God hymns weren't exactly designed to make us feel good about ourselves or confident that it was ok to do so.  Even growing up Dutch Reformed were programed to "Trust and Obey. For there's NO OTHER WAY, to be happy in Jesus, but to Trust and Obey"  Disturbing to say the least. )

Church was never designed to accommodate unbelief of its views.  It is not designed to even recognize views of itself that might be less than true.  It's certainly not designed for you to  point them out. It is not designed for you to think about your own authenticity and feelings. It is not designed for the critical thinker nor the one given to introspection as to what seems right and what does not. Your church is designed to make you feel guilty and badly for hearing what you hear, seeing what you see and feeling how you feel about it all. 

We learn to ignore the craziness we might hear from a pastor or the self appointed and remember, Ignore-ance is not just what we don't know, it's what we won't know.  

"If your head tells you one thing and your stomach something else, your head is most likely lying to you."  

The price for recognizing and finally admitting to yourself outwardly what you have known inwardly for a time is very high.  It is not, might be high.  It IS high and  few there be that actually go there. 

To many, if not most, going along to get along is the safer and less costly path. I know of those in the COG's who find this the best they are willing to do. I did it myself for a time. You'd not be alone in that either. 

Going along to get along might have it's short term value as you think through how you REALLY feel about the drama, burden, beliefs and politic of your church and its leadership. But it is only of short term value. If it becomes "just how I am" and be untrue to what you really feel, it will gnaw until you go numb to it all. 

It will feel like your feet are stuck in the mud and you can't really move, but, most of you can, as long as staying put is ok with you. That will feel good enough.  That will be "OK",  and you can hold the fear of change and self awareness at bay, maybe for just a little longer or maybe for the rest of your life.  And if you do decide to actually move and get your feet out of the mud, as you see and feel it, you may have to step out of your expensive shoes and leave them behind in the mud. 

 You have invested so much. To walk away from what no longer inspires or serves you seems the ultimate defeat. We feel dis-illusioned like that's a bad thing. Who wants illusions? Well some do of course because it's easier and safer. But this is about you not them.  What will everyone think of me?  Will I retain my friends?   Can I handle being alone in it all?

That's a decision only those stuck, and they know they are stuck, can make.  Knowing when to hold them and when to fold them becomes the issue and one only the player can make. 

A bit of encouragement here on the process of letting go, the price of doing so and learning not to care,  when struggling with walking away from that which no longer serves you and you finally know it.