On the rest of the thread, though, I have a question.

Romans 16:13
Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too.

Romans 16:12-14/ Romans 16

Though I understand the passages on women/teaching, this has always been something that has struck out to me. For when I consider the role of mothers with their sons, I cannot help but think about it is never a matter of serving—which in itself can be considered another form of teaching since it’s teaching a principle by demonstration even when words are absent (if the passage of teaching being forbidden for women is to be taken in the ABSOLUTE sense of the word)………but I also remember how mothers have had times where they speak into the lives of their sons and check them with authority, whether in admonishment or rebuke in saying things like “Boy, have you lost your mind? Stop that foolishness”. That said, I cannot help but wonder what the relationship was like between Paul. Does anyone else have any thoughts/

Moreover, if I Corinthians 11 and I Timothy 2 is not just “cultural”, I still wrestle with the thought of where to draw the line. tHe church at Rome was instructed not only to greet one another, but explicitly—“with a holy kiss.” You find This command not only once, but 5 times in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:26 and 1 Peter 5:14.)…..& if you’ve ever been to Europe, they seem to have no problem expressing it in what seems to be a most GODLY WAY.

Some will even say ‘Well, that was simply cultural” yet in the passages dealing with not permitting a woman to teach a man, they’ll swear that any “cultural” are invalid but still argue on the basis of Scripture (I Timothy 2 & various others), The same goes for those who are for women in the pulpit and who yet ignore this passage also or other passages in Scripture…….& the repeated emphasis/ease which Paul commanded it may say something about whether the mentality against it is ofen based on PERSONAL BIAS/DISLIKE and double standards than Scripture. Why is it less of something to harp on than female ministers?

Righter sees you are making up for lost time-good to see you back in the swing of dissertation writing! lol

How you been?

The early church understood the prophecy in Joel 2:28-30 as being fulfilled. The fulfilment of this prophecy and the language of 1 Corinthians 14, implies that prophesying is available to all, which is consistent with what is described elsewhere in the New Testament (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:4-5, 1 Thessalonians 5:19-22, 2 Thessalonians 2:2, Romans 12:6).

On Ephesians 2:20, This verse states that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. The Greek construction indicates that these are two distinct groups: apostles and other prophets. This implies that the church was in fact partly built on the foundation of the non-apostolic prophets. Therefore, affirming that non-apostolic prophets were error-prone results in an untenable position.

However, this does not mean that ALL PROPHETS ARE FOUNDATIONAL. The prophets at Corinth and Thessalonica as well as other local churches founded by Paul were second generation Christians and were not witnesses to Christ’s resurrection. Non-foundational prophets were those who proclaimed truth that had already been revealed, or proclaimed prophesies of a private and personal nature, regarding practice rather than new revelation.

One could also add that the foundational prophets discussed in Ephesians 2:20 were not necessarily those in the Book of Acts, but those in the OT PRIMARILY. I’m reminded of how everything in the OT and during Jesus’s time THAT BUILT UP THE FAITH OF BELIEVERS was also built upon the prophets PRECEDDING HIM:

Matthew 5:17

[ The Fulfillment of the Law ] “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Matthew 7:12
So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Matthew 11:13
For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John.

Matthew 22:40
All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

Luke 16:16
[ Additional Teachings ] “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.

Apart from those prophets in paticular, who was it primarily that founded the doctrine of those in the NT Church? Was it not APOSTLES PRIMARILY WHO’S WORD WAS ABOVE QUESTION? Surely, if it was all those who were prophets, then the INSTRUCTIONS IN I CORINTHIANS 14 would be invalid with having to have a prophets words WEIGHED.

As my friend Sam said on the issue (from HEAT/LIGHT), “the Apostles recognized the authority of their own teachings and writings as the very words of God. Paul commands the church in Thessalonica to receive his words “…not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thessalonians 2:13), and points out, as was the case with denying the words of the Old Testament prophets, that anyone who disregards his words “disregards not man but God” (1 Thessalonians 4:8). Others are punished for disregarding the message of the Apostles; “If anyone refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed.” (2 Thessalonians 3:14)

Also, in 2 Peter 3:15-16, Peter equates Paul’s letters with “the other Scriptures.” Further, Acts 5:3-4 & 21, implies that lying to an Apostle is equivalent to lying to the Holy Spirit, and thus God himself!

The New Testament is made up of the writings of the Apostles (or of those under their authority) because it is THEY, not the New Testament prophets, who are the authoritative messengers of God during that time. And since to be in the office of New Testament Apostles you had to have personally experienced the living or physically resurrected Jesus, that office (in the New Testament sense of being an authoritative messenger of Jesus) is now closed, thus no one can any longer speak the very words of God to his people, except in that they are rightfully dividing His written word (the teachings of the Prophets and Apostles) in the Scriptures.”

http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue74b.htm (from others dealing with the argument that Paul seemingly disobeyed the prophecy from Agabus and that he still came out good, therefore meaning that prophecy is NOT authorative but testable and unless it confirms with the inner witness of the believer, it’s not to be taken seriously—-and that sometimes, people’s perception of the prophetic can be off)

Also, from another Reformed CHarismatic on the issue—very balanced, IMHO.

http://mymiscellanies.blogspot.com/2006/10/gospel-driven-prophecy-understanding.html

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.brace/prophets.htm