# What does it mean to "forsake the assembling of ourselves together"?



## Jonathan95 (Feb 19, 2020)

Hebrews 10:25

Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

My question is, what exactly constitutes the breaking of this command?

I was recently admonished due to my job requiring me to get up earlier in the morning hence, needing to sleep earlier and rendering me unable to attend Bible study throughout the week since it does not start until 7pm which is late for me.

Is not going to Bible study breaking this command? The verse does not speak to frequency of gatherings so I'm not sure why it is a problem when I make sure to always attend service on the Lord's Day. Am I missing something?

Does every gathering of believers fall under this text and this command?


----------



## jw (Feb 19, 2020)

It may not include the doctrines and commandments of men. The LORD's Day -under the New Testament administration of the Covenant of Grace - is the God-ordained appointment for the gathering of His people corporately, wherein they are to spend the whole day in worship (secrete, private, and corporate), godly conference, and/or acts of mercy and necessity. Mid week prayer meetings, Bible study, _etc_. do not fall under this rubric, and the LORD Jesus Christ, as King of His church, has not required this at their hands to require you to frequent such things that are not commanded by Him, _especially_ in lieu of your duties that are commanded by Him for the other 6 days of the week.

Does your church, or whoever admonished you, keep the sabbath day holy, eschewing all unnecessary work (or putting others to unnecessary work) on the LORD's Day? I know not, but I have seen an hypocrisy (charitably put, perhaps unwittingly) amongst those who do not believe in the perpetuity of the 4th Commandment (insofar as prohibit work and recreation on the sabbath day), that they are willing to lay a yoke on people that the LORD Himself has never put on them. Requiring attendance to "services" outside of the LORD's Day, which may not properly be called worship _services_, since not commanded by God. It is great to have mid week gatherings, praying as a congregation, _etc_., but to have some _requirement_ for people to be there is an overstepping of authority, and something for which men will give account in their shepherding of the sheep.

Reactions: Like 10 | Amen 1


----------



## timfost (Feb 19, 2020)

I cannot make mid-week study due to my work. I choose to work Wednesday evenings, not because I don't want to attend study but because it provides a steady source of helpful income for my family. This is _consistent with the creation mandate to work_ which is also codified in the 4C. I would not apply the same argument if this work was Sunday work, since the same 4C tells me to be otherwise occupied with worship. 

If we apply the 4C to other days of the week in a way that binds the consciences of believers, we've added to God's law.

Mid-week studies are wonderful, but not mandatory. Sunday worship is wonderful _and mandatory_, unless there is a providential hindrance.

Reactions: Like 9


----------



## Jonathan95 (Feb 19, 2020)

Joshua said:


> It may not include the doctrines and commandments of men. The LORD's Day -under the New Testament administration of the Covenant of Grace - is the God-ordained appointment for the gathering of His people corporately, wherein they are to spend the whole day in worship (secrete, private, and corporate), godly conference, and/or acts of mercy and necessity. Mid week prayer meetings, Bible study, _etc_. do not fall under this rubric, and the LORD Jesus Christ, as King of His church, has not required this at their hands to require you to frequent such things that are not commanded by Him, _especially_ in lieu of your duties that are commanded by Him for the other 6 days of the week.
> 
> Does your church, or whoever admonished you, keep the sabbath day holy, eschewing all unnecessary work (or putting others to unnecessary work) on the LORD's Day? I know not, but I have seen an hypocrisy (charitably put, perhaps unwittingly) amongst those who do not believe in the perpetuity of the 4th Commandment (insofar as prohibit work and recreation on the sabbath day), that they are willing to lay a yoke on people that the LORD Himself has never put on them. Requiring attendance to "services" outside of the LORD's Day, which may not be properly be called worship _services_, since not commanded by God. It is great to have mid week gatherings, praying as a congregation, _etc_., but to have some _requirement_ for people to be there is an overstepping of authority, and something for which men will give account in their shepherding of the sheep.



It's just a buddy of mine. I get where he's coming from. He just wants to be sure that this doesn't lead to me isolating myself. Still, to say that by not attending I'm breaking a biblical command seems far-fetched.



timfost said:


> I cannot make mid-week study due to my work. I choose to work Wednesday evenings, not because I don't want to attend study but because it provides a steady source of helpful income for my family. This is _consistent with the creation mandate to work_ which is also codified in the 4C. I would not apply the same argument if this work was Sunday work, since the same 4C tells me to be otherwise occupied with worship.
> 
> If we apply the 4C to other days of the week in a way that binds the consciences of believers, we've added to God's law.
> 
> Mid-week studies are wonderful, but not mandatory. Sunday worship is wonderful _and mandatory_, unless there is a providential hindrance.




I completely agree. Thank you. I shouldn't be made to feel guilty when I have done nothing wrong. We shouldn't impose the 4C on any other day.

My church isn't confessional so I don't believe they think much about the Sabbath or the RPW or things of that nature. I've considered going to a confessional church but I've already become a member at this church and I dont know if it's okay to leave because of this kind of stuff or not..


----------



## J.EdwardNewhill (Feb 19, 2020)

My church requires that every member regularly attend on Sundays AND attend a weekly small group when they are in session. However, they provide so many different days and times for the small group that it is accomadating for almost any schedule. I don't think not being able to attend a Bible study mid-week even remotely qualifies abs forsaking the gathering

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 20, 2020)

This is an area where churches regularly alienate their members:

1. I had an ailing acquaintance that had been sick for months and got a church discipline letter of admonishment in the mail even though they had never received an elder's visit to check on their condition. 

2. I've seen "Not forsaking the assembly" used for encouraging Wednesday night service attendance when most of the congregation eats out on Sundays. 

3. I have a friend who visited another church on Sunday to hear from a traveling missionary and ended up in a 2 hour elder's meeting answering questions about it. 

Many times this passage is used as a hammer to beat people into compliance with church policies.

Reactions: Like 6 | Praying 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

My understanding of the verse is that it has a particular reference to Sabbath services. However, if a church's session has appointed a mid week prayer meeting for the congregation I think it is incumbent upon members of the congregation to attend that meeting unless they have a good reason not to (work or family commitments). I think it is clear that the church met throughout the week in the time of the Apostles and not only on the Sabbath.

As for bible studies I would not see that is a necessary thing for members to attend. But I'm sceptical of how Bible studies are usually conducted by the church today anyway.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> As for bible studies I would not see that is a necessary thing for members to attend. But I'm sceptical of how Bible studies are usually conducted by the church today anyway.


You mean the going around a circle and "what does this passage mean to you?"

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> You mean the going around a circle and "what does this passage mean to you?"



Certainly that. Having Bible studies lead by men other than elders or the minister would be another concern. Women's Bible studies.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> Certainly that. Having Bible studies lead by men other than elders or the minister would be another concern. Women's Bible studies.


Well now you are getting into matters of denominational polity not scriptural mandate.


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> Well now you are getting into matters of denominational polity not scriptural mandate.



I'm not sure how. The things which I have listed, as far as I can see, are prohibited by Scripture. The only permissable form of Bible Study that I can see is one lead by either the minister or elders.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## timfost (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> You mean the going around a circle and "what does this passage mean to you?"



The existential Bible study...

Reactions: Like 1 | Praying 1


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> I'm not sure how. The things which I have listed, as far as I can see, are prohibited by Scripture. The only permissable form of Bible Study that I can see is one lead by either the minister or elders.


I don't see that in Scripture or in the Confessions. The Confessions only place that restriction on the sacraments.


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> I don't see that in Scripture or in the Confessions. The Confessions only place that restriction on the sacraments.



The Bible says that women are to be silent in the church and not to usurp the authority of men. The only teaching authority given in Scripture is to elders and ministers.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> The Bible says that women are to be silent in the church and not to usurp the authority of men.


A women's Bible study is not a worship service. So that does not apply. Scripture does allow older women to train younger women.

As far as teaching authority, what passage are you pointing to for that?


----------



## earl40 (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> I'm not sure how. The things which I have listed, as far as I can see, are prohibited by Scripture. The only permissable form of Bible Study that I can see is one lead by either the minister or elders.



I'll go one up on you.  The teaching is to be done by Teaching elders or in other words Pastors, and not Ruling elders.


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

earl40 said:


> I'll go one up on you.  The teaching is to be done by Teaching elders or in other words Pastors, and not Ruling elders.


Scripture?

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> A women's Bible study is not a worship service. So that does not apply. Scripture does allow older women to train younger women.
> 
> As far as teaching authority, what passage are you pointing to for that?



I don't see that Paul's command for women to be silent in the church is restricted to the worship service. They are not to teach and they are not to usurp authority. 1 Corinthians 14:34, 35: " 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."

The idea that Paul meant this only for the worship service but would have been happy with women teaching the church in other contexts has no basis in Scripture and is clearly in opposition to all he says on this matter. As regards the older women teaching the younger women, what is it, exactly, that the aged women are to teach the younger women? Titus 2:4: "That they [the aged women] may teach the young women *to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children*." Not doctrine, not theology, not holding Bible studies exegeting Scripture but how to be chaste women, good wives and mothers. This does not require women's bible studies lead by women reading sentimental claptrap spewed out by the publishing houses as an easy money maker. The idea that a church would allow women to go off on their own and start teaching each other doctrine is absurd and this has been amply illsutrated by the reality of women's bible studies and conferences.

As for teaching authority, Paul is quite clear: 1 Timothy 2:12: "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." Who is given authority to teach in the church? 1 Timothy 3:1: "If a *man* desire the office of a bishop..." It is men who are to rule and teach in the church.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## chuckd (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> The Bible says that women are to be silent in the church and not to usurp the authority of men. The only teaching authority given in Scripture is to elders and ministers.


I can teach my children the Scriptures and so can my wife, even though our son is male. I can teach my coworkers, friends, and family. I have weekly discussions from an older man in my church and he teaches me a great deal, not an elder. I learn a lot from many on this site, many of whom are not elders. You are not an elder (according to your signature), yet you are making a case for what the Scriptures teach on this subject.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

chuckd said:


> I can teach my children the Scriptures and so can my wife, even though our son is male. I can teach my coworkers, friends, and family. I have weekly discussions from an older man in my church and he teaches me a great deal, not an elder.



Scripture tells parents- fathers and mothers- to nurture their children in the faith and for children to heed the teachings of their parents. That's completely different and not relevant to what I've been saying. As to your friends and coworkers: are you holding a bible study in your work? If so and I were your elder I'd tell you to stop. If you want to evangelise your coworkers and give them the reason for the hope which is within you I would say: go for it, we have Scriptural precept for that.

But, by the by, ideally it is better for the father to teach the whole family. That is the Biblical model.

Anyway I think we have rather veered off topic.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> This does not require women's bible studies lead by women reading sentimental claptrap spewed out by the publishing houses as an easy money maker.


Which is not what I am discussing.


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> If so and I were your elder I'd tell you to stop.


Why?


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> Why?



Because laymen are not sanctioned by Scripture to lead Bible studies. They don't have the authority. Scripture places the authority to *teach* the doctrines of the faith in men who meet certain qualifications and who are called and recognised by the church.

And as I write this the thought occurs to me that perhaps you are an office bearer lol. However, even if you are, I would say a workplace Bible study- even lead by an ordained elder- is rather irregular. Teaching should take place within the church. It is part of discipling.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> Because laymen are not sanctioned by Scripture to lead Bible studies. They don't have the authority. Scripture places the authority to *teach* the doctrines of the faith to men who meet certain qualifications and who are called and recognised by the church.


Again, where is the Scripture for that mandate?


alexandermsmith said:


> And as I write this the thought occurs to me that perhaps you are an office bearer lol. However, even if you are, I would say a workplace Bible study- even lead by an ordained elder- is rather irregular. Teaching should take place within the church. It is part of discipling.


Scripture?

I've asked for Scripture several times on the matter of who is allowed to teach, you keep saying officers only but, unless I missed it, have yet to provide proof of that from Scripture.


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> Which is not what I am discussing.



It is one of the things I mentioned and to which you responded by saying Scripture doesn't prohibit that. So I responded by arguing why it does.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> It is one of the things I mentioned and to which you responded by saying Scripture doesn't prohibit that. So I responded by arguing why it does.


No, you immediately went to these things you buy at the book store. And no, that is not what I was suggesting by women's Bible study. You assumed that.


----------



## alexandermsmith (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> Again, where is the Scripture for that mandate?
> 
> Scripture?
> 
> I've asked for Scripture several times on the matter of who is allowed to teach, you keep saying officers only but, unless I missed it, have yet to provide proof of that from Scripture.



I have given you Scripture: I have given you Scripture prohibiting women from teaching in any circumstance and Paul's reference to those who want to hold a position of the bishop, or elder. I have assumed that we are in agreement about ordained office. Maybe we're not but I have no intention of getting into a debate about that. The issue we have been discussing is whether _women_ have the right to teach and I have shown that Paul makes it abundantly clear that he rejects the very notion of women teaching within the church and that example of the aged women is not teaching in the sense of teaching doctrine, which again is what we are talking about. Rather it is teaching how to be a chaste and godly woman which, again, does not have a bearing on the matter we are discussing which was Bible studies. If we need women's bible studies for aged women to teach younger women how to be godly ladies (which is so not what women's bible studies are about as far as I can tell from the literature and conferences) then I guess for 1900 years there was an epic fail in this department as I can't imagine there was ever one women's bible study in a serious, evangelical church until the 20th century. I would hazard the guess that bible studies as we understand them today didn't exist until very recently.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## chuckd (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> Because laymen are not sanctioned by Scripture to lead Bible studies. They don't have the authority. Scripture places the authority to *teach* the doctrines of the faith in men who meet certain qualifications and who are called and recognised by the church.
> 
> And as I write this the thought occurs to me that perhaps you are an office bearer lol. However, even if you are, I would say a workplace Bible study- even lead by an ordained elder- is rather irregular. Teaching should take place within the church. It is part of discipling.


Are you an elder?


----------



## timfost (Feb 20, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> As regards the older women teaching the younger women, what is it, exactly, that the aged women are to teach the younger women? Titus 2:4: "That they [the aged women] may teach the young women *to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children*." Not doctrine, not theology, not holding Bible studies exegeting Scripture but how to be chaste women, good wives and mothers. This does not require women's bible studies lead by women reading sentimental claptrap spewed out by the publishing houses as an easy money maker.



We should be careful here. Can one teach about loving husbands and children without doctrine? _Practical theology_ _is theology_. The theology that women teach is not an office, so it will necessarily look different than the instruction of an elected officer in church. Can women get together to discuss theology? If not, then it seems that they also cannot teach other women to love unless we insist on severing the relationship between biblical love and theology. I hope you are _not_ willing to do this.



alexandermsmith said:


> As for teaching authority, Paul is quite clear: 1 Timothy 2:12: "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." Who is given authority to teach in the church? 1 Timothy 3:1: "If a *man* desire the office of a bishop..." It is men who are to rule and teach in the church.



I do think that often times bible studies are good opportunities for non-ordained men to teach. If it is necessary for an elder to be able to teach (1 Tim. 3:2, 2 Tim. 2:2, 24), the congregation must witness this ability _before _electing to that office. To be clear, I'm not advocating non-officers to lead a formal worship service, but if non-officers are never allowed to publically teach, it is impossible to know if a man is qualified for elder in the first place.

_________________________

Perhaps it may be wise to start another thread on this subject as it is not very related to the OP...

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1


----------



## earl40 (Feb 20, 2020)

David Taylor said:


> Scripture?



Exactly, show me where a RE teaches in scripture...PS. there are none.

Reactions: Sad 4


----------



## earl40 (Feb 20, 2020)

earl40 said:


> Exactly, show me where a RE teaches in scripture...PS. there are none.



Tim don't be sad to have ones mind renewed by scripture.


----------



## Jonathan95 (Feb 20, 2020)

Hello there


earl40 said:


> Exactly, show me where a RE teaches in scripture...PS. there are none.





earl40 said:


> Exactly, show me where a RE teaches in scripture...PS. there are none.





chuckd said:


> Are you an elder?




Yes, please start a new topic. This now has almost nothing to do with my original post, thank you.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## timfost (Feb 20, 2020)

I'm starting to wonder if perhaps another thread should be started on this subject?


earl40 said:


> Exactly, show me where a RE teaches in scripture...PS. there are none.



Earl,

I'm not sure if you've even thought through what you were saying. 1 Tim. 3:2, 2 Tim. 2:2, 24 all say that an elder is to be able to teach. Are we talking about grammar and arithmetic? Of course, it is the word of God!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## David Taylor (Feb 20, 2020)

earl40 said:


> Exactly, show me where a RE teaches in scripture...PS. there are none.


Of course you would have to show where there is a distinction in Scripture between ruling elder and teaching elder.


----------



## earl40 (Feb 20, 2020)

timfost said:


> I'm starting to wonder if perhaps another thread should be started on this subject?
> 
> 
> Earl,
> ...



There are threads on this already and I wish to not derail this thread anymore. I will leave with just one , or two words. "Ruling"elder..."Teaching"elder.


----------



## Eoghan (Feb 28, 2020)

Should one attend all services on a Sunday? As a young Christian I found myself attending two services on a Sunday, leading a Crusader class Sunday afternoon, Youth fellowship Sunday evening, 420 Club Tuesday night, mid-week Bible study Wednesday and Christian Union at lunchtime mid-week. (Yes I am a Baptist)

I have rationalised that and feel duty bound to attend a (singular) Sunday service but all else is subservient to my conscience, family and mental health


----------



## Eoghan (Feb 28, 2020)

Oh I forgot the prayer meetings before Church services!


----------



## Edward (Feb 28, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> The things which I have listed, as far as I can see, are prohibited by Scripture. The only permissable form of Bible Study that I can see is one lead by either the minister or elders.



Does your Bible have Titus 2 in it? Or do you contend that such lessons would not be Biblical?

_The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; T*hat they may teach the young women to be sober,* to love their husbands, to love their children, *To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.*_


----------



## Edward (Feb 28, 2020)

Eoghan said:


> As a young Christian I found myself attending two services on a Sunday,



Piker. A couple of weeks ago I was in 3 services on Sunday morning. Need to up that game. (I did bail before the third sermon - I have a limit of one time through for a sermon).


----------



## Wretched Man (Feb 29, 2020)

earl40 said:


> There are threads on this already and I wish to not derail this thread anymore. I will leave with just one , or two words. "Ruling"elder..."Teaching"elder.


I would be interested in seeing the other threads related to this - or seeing a new thread started. Can you provide links? I’m certainly opposed to women teaching in the church. From there, I become heavily conflicted on what is appropriate. I’ve always struggled to handle the “4 daughters of Philip prophesizing”, “Priscilla teaching Apollos”, or the “prophetess Anna”...


----------



## earl40 (Feb 29, 2020)

Wretched Man said:


> I would be interested in seeing the other threads related to this - or seeing a new thread started. Can you provide links? I’m certainly opposed to women teaching in the church. From there, I become heavily conflicted on what is appropriate. I’ve always struggled to handle the “4 daughters of Philip prophesizing”, “Priscilla teaching Apollos”, or the “prophetess Anna”...



Short and to the point which is irrefutable.

https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/the-office-of-ruling-elder.14841/


----------



## Steve Curtis (Feb 29, 2020)

earl40 said:


> irrefutable


Hardly... 
Many have refuted it. You and Rev Winzer may challenge the refutation, but just because you (or he, or others) say it doesn't make it necessarily so.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## TheInquirer (Feb 29, 2020)

Going back to the OP, I have been troubled when pastors have tried to make mid-week Bible studies mandatory. In one case, the pastor didn't seem too troubled by congregants missing church on Sunday. I saw no biblical justification for this type of thinking.

When the authority of Scripture is not withheld, all kinds of man-made rules fill the vacuum. I would only be comfortable applying this passage to the Sunday gathering. 

Its actually this kind of thing in the church that led me to study the Sabbath in more detail even though I have not been a part of Sabbath-keeping churches. I am no expert on this topic but I do see this command in Hebrews rooted in the Sabbath concept.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Mar 2, 2020)

Edward said:


> Does your Bible have Titus 2 in it? Or do you contend that such lessons would not be Biblical?
> 
> _The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; T*hat they may teach the young women to be sober,* to love their husbands, to love their children, *To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.*_



I have already addressed this passage in this discussion.


----------



## Edward (Mar 2, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> I have already addressed this passage in this discussion.


No, you haven't. You interacted with a small portion out of context.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Mar 2, 2020)

Not to continue to 'derail the post', I believe this is an important facet that should be addressed.



alexandermsmith said:


> Scripture tells parents- fathers and mothers- to nurture their children in the faith and for children to heed the teachings of their parents. That's completely different and not relevant to what I've been saying.



6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: 7 And thou shalt teach (8150) them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

_The Holy Bible: King James Version_, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Dt 6:5–7.

*8150*. שָׁנַן *shanan* (1041d); a prim. root; _to whet, sharpen_:—pierced(1), sharp(4), sharpen(2), sharpened(1), *teach them diligently*(1).

Robert L. Thomas, _New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries : Updated Edition_ (Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998).

It would seem as if scripture makes a _subtle_ distinction between an official (T)eaching and the (t)eaching that parents and (for example), 'the older women'. *This becomes somewhat of a sticky whicket in most circles as it seems to be used in an illicit fashion, becomes a confusing term, melded together wrongly.



> As to your friends and coworkers: are you holding a bible study in your work? If so and I were your elder I'd tell you to stop. If you want to evangelise your coworkers and give them the reason for the hope which is within you I would say: go for it, we have Scriptural precept for that.



The above is as well a confused term; whether or not one see 'evangelization' as an active office (some do), the bible uses it is the context of an office. Hence, to use the term like it is used above, with its history in the scripture, is to use it erroneously, in my opinion. Better to clarify how one is using it and why so as to not cause more confusion on the confusing subject. Semantics?


----------



## alexandermsmith (Mar 2, 2020)

Edward said:


> No, you haven't. You interacted with a small portion out of context.



If my memory serves me correctly this isn't the first time you have come into a discussion late and demanded I repeat myself just for you, and I'm sure it won't be the last, but anyway here is my answer. Here I addressed the exact portion you quoted in your post. If you don't agree with my interpretation then offer your own. If you are unable to offer your own then remain silent. But this tactic of accusing me of not addressing the issue is nothing more than that: it is a tactic to divert and distract. By saying I have not addressed this portion of Scripture, rather than saying you disagree with my interpretation, is to suggest I have been unable to offer an interpretation of it, or to discount what I have said as irrelevant. It is a sneaky tool of debate.



alexandermsmith said:


> I don't see that Paul's command for women to be silent in the church is restricted to the worship service. They are not to teach and they are not to usurp authority. 1 Corinthians 14:34, 35: " 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."
> 
> The idea that Paul meant this only for the worship service but would have been happy with women teaching the church in other contexts has no basis in Scripture and is clearly in opposition to all he says on this matter. As regards the older women teaching the younger women, what is it, exactly, that the aged women are to teach the younger women? Titus 2:4: "That they [the aged women] may teach the young women *to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children*." Not doctrine, not theology, not holding Bible studies exegeting Scripture but how to be chaste women, good wives and mothers. This does not require women's bible studies lead by women reading sentimental claptrap spewed out by the publishing houses as an easy money maker. The idea that a church would allow women to go off on their own and start teaching each other doctrine is absurd and this has been amply illsutrated by the reality of women's bible studies and conferences.
> 
> As for teaching authority, Paul is quite clear: 1 Timothy 2:12: "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." Who is given authority to teach in the church? 1 Timothy 3:1: "If a *man* desire the office of a bishop..." It is men who are to rule and teach in the church.


----------



## alexandermsmith (Mar 2, 2020)

Scott Bushey said:


> Not to continue to 'derail the post', I believe this is an important facet that should be addressed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thank you for this. It is a very important distinction which, as you suggest, is at the root of the confusion in this area. As if to prohibit women from teaching in the church is to quite literally silence them at all times so as to not even be able to offer private counsel or their own opinion on theological matters. 



Scott Bushey said:


> The above is as well a confused term; whether or not one see 'evangelization' as an active office (some do), the bible uses it is the context of an office. Hence, to use the term like it is used above, with its history in the scripture, is to use it erroneously, in my opinion. Better to clarify how one is using it and why so as to not cause more confusion on the confusing subject. Semantics?



I was using evangelise in the informal sense. I recognise, of course, that there is in the church the formal position of Evangelist (or Home Missionary as was often the case over here in Scotland and a recognised position still used in my own denomination). If you think my use of the term evangelise causes too much confusion I'm happy to another word or term you think more appropriate. What I was trying to get at was that all Christians are commanded to be able to explain the hope they have withen them when asked/challenged. And all Christians are at liberty to distribute Christian literature (preferably produced by trustworthy sources) and all Christians are at liberty to engage in theological discussions (though it may not always be wise to do so). I would place a formal Bible study- which by its nature touches upon elements of authority and teaching which I believe to be regulated by Scripture- in a separate category.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Scott Bushey (Mar 2, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> that all Christians are commanded to be able to explain the hope they have withen them when asked/challenged.



They are. Agreed. Sadly, this is on the foot-heels of an error (as it relates
to the previously mentioned distinction).



alexandermsmith said:


> I would place a formal Bible study- which by its nature touches upon elements of authority and teaching which I believe to be regulated by Scripture- in a separate category.



I guess this would boil down to definitions. Many would only attach the word, 'Formal' to those studies that are specifically _sent, _of the local church_. In other words, if one wasn't actually sent by their local church, should they never pursue having any biblical studies with people who are seeking truth and are not members of any local church body? 'Giving witness to the hope that is in us', would be (t)eaching; one would be hard pressed to simply make the statement, 'the hope that is within us', without actually (t)eaching what that means, no? After all, we are speaking of people that have no idea what this statement means. It may be completely new to them.

_


----------



## Edward (Mar 2, 2020)

alexandermsmith said:


> If my memory serves me correctly this isn't the first time you have come into a discussion late and demanded I repeat myself just for you, and I'm sure it won't be the last, but anyway here is my answer. Here I addressed the exact portion you quoted in your post.



A:


alexandermsmith said:


> Titus 2:4: "That they [the aged women] may teach the young women *to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children*." Not doctrine, not theology, not holding Bible studies exegeting Scripture but how to be chaste women, good wives and mothers.



B:


Edward said:


> The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; T*hat they may teach the young women to be sober,* to love their husbands, to love their children, *To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.*



A =/= B

Now, if you can point me to a post up thread where you discussed how blasphemy has nothing to do with the Bible, I'll revise my argument.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Mar 2, 2020)

Hebrews is very Christocentric, but the aim of the book is to encourage Christians to persevere, specifically to encourage them not to *renounce* their faith in Jesus and go back to a former faith/life.

Within that context the word the author uses in 10:25 means to “leave behind”, “desert” or “abandon” or to “separate connection with someone.” In other words, don’t leave the church! 

I recoil whenever I see this passage used to imply that someone is violating it if they don’t come to every activity or service or gathering at a church.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------

