₦airaland Forum

If network dey fast, I don't see why I can't finish 10gb in 1 day.

achorladey:
Simple question for you

Do your Bible specify all gender roles for men and women?

A. Yes

B. No

C. A and B

D. Thread carefully

Unlike you that shy away from direct questions thrown at you. I will answer this.

Scriptures contain everything needed for life and godliness which is shown in 2 Peter 1:3-4. It says, " His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires."
This verse highlights that believers have all they need to live a life that pleases God and to experience His promises because of God's omnipotence and the knowledge of Jesus Christ and that includes gender roles amongst others , so going by that, your answer is A.

achorladey:
Stop using all gender roles when you know your Bible didn't state all gender roles
Do you get it now?

My guy, it's clearly you either don't know the bible or you don't know what you're saying.

Tallesty1:
Ordinarily, this may appear like universal ban but the Corinthian church was known for disorder during worship services. Corinth, being a bustling, diverse, and morally chaotic city, often struggled with maintaining structure in public gatherings. It's on record that their services had become noisy and unruly with everyone speaking at once, making it difficult to teach or worship effectively ( 1 Corinthians 14:26–33)

It is within this specific context of disruption that Paul addressed the issue of women who, at the time, have not received as much formal teaching and speaking out during worship. His instruction was about restoring order, not silencing women universally. In fact, earlier in the same letter, Paul acknowledges that women both pray and prophesy in public worship:




This emperical evidence that women were allowed and even expected to participate vocally in worship under appropriate spiritual authority and order.

Therefore, Paul was not contradicting himself but offering specific corrective guidance for a specific situation. To interpret the “silent” passage as a universal prohibition on women preaching or teaching would be to ignore the broader scriptural witness and the immediate literary and historical context.

If you argue that Paul’s instruction for women to remain silent in church as seen in 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 was limited only to the Corinthian congregation and not intended as a universal command, then that raises a serious inconsistency. Why, then, were only women told to be silent? Were men completely innocent of causing any disruptions in the church? Was it only the women who were creating disorder, while the men were always orderly and quiet? That’s highly unlikely, especially considering human nature and the general pattern of behavior observed across both genders as well as the context of the text. If Paul’s concern was simply about maintaining order, he would have addressed both men and women equally if both were equally responsible. But he singles out women not out of prejudice or cultural sensitivity but because he is reinforcing a principle that goes beyond Corinth and touches the structure God ordained for church leadership and teaching.

To further reinforce this, consider 1 Timothy 2:11–14, where Paul instructs, "Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence." He doesn't appeal to cultural norms of the time or some isolated church issue, his reason is theological and rooted in creation itself: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived fell into transgression.” In other words, this instruction is not based on temporary customs or first-century Greco-Roman culture, but on the created order established by God from the beginning. Paul is making a universal, doctrinal point, not giving context-specific advice.
This makes it clear that the office of elder or pastor is reserved exclusively for qualified men. This isn’t about personal opinion or modern preferences, it’s about obedience to the clear teaching of Scripture. Eldership involves authoritative teaching and spiritual oversight of the congregation, both of which 1 Timothy 2 says a woman is not to exercise over men. Those who support the idea of female pastors must wrestle not just with a handful of verses, but with the entire biblical framework for spiritual leadership in the Church (and home as well). The Pastoral Epistles which includes 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus outline specific qualifications for elders and overseers, and in every instance, those qualifications assume a male leader (“the husband of one wife,” “manages his household well,” etc.).

Churches that place women in pastoral roles, no matter how well-intentioned, stand in open contradiction to these commands. This isn’t about demeaning women or diminishing their worth. On the contrary, women are vital to the life of the church and serve in many necessary and meaningful roles. But the authoritative office of pastor or elder is not one of them and this is not because women are inferior, but because God, in His wisdom, designed it that way. To reject this structure is not to challenge a tradition, it is to defy the authority of Scripture and God Himself.

Fiscus105:
You are one of "very very few" people that I have met either online or offline, who not only understand Bible, but have deep knowledge, how to interpret any book correctly, devoid of biases or primordial sentiments.

Meanwhile, in other to buttress your submissions,.....the same Paul admonishing congregants in Cenchrea, (in the book of Roman 16:1-2), by telling them to give Phoebe (female) all necessary supports they could give, for her to be successful in her ministerial role, as new head of church in Cenchrea.

Where in the text does it say that Phoebe is the new head of the church?

achorladey:
Remove the all. Things that are not clearly defined is what you will call all laid out.

I don't get what you mean? Are you saying that the scriptures doesn't have biblical gender roles laid out in them?
Because the scriptures that I know of have them clearly defined, if yours don't have them laid out then I'm afraid that what you're talking about has absolutely nothing to do with the Christian Religion.

PstBiola:
There is perhaps no more hotly debated issue in the church today than that of women serving as pastors. As a result, it is important to not see this issue as men versus women. There are women who believe women should not serve as pastors and that the Bible places restrictions on the ministry of women, and there are men who believe women can serve as pastors and that there are no restrictions on women in ministry. This is not a matter of chauvinism or discrimination. It is an issue of biblical interpretation.

The Word of God proclaims, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:11–12). In the church, God assigns different roles to men and women. This is a result of the way mankind was created and the way in which sin entered the world (1 Timothy 2:13–14). God, through the apostle Paul, restricts women from serving in roles of teaching and/or having spiritual authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors over men, since pastoring definitely includes preaching, teaching publicly, and exercising spiritual authority.

There are many objections to this view of women in pastoral ministry. A common one is that Paul restricts women from teaching because in the first century, women were typically uneducated. However, 1 Timothy 2:11–14 nowhere mentions educational status. If education were a qualification for ministry, then the majority of Jesus’ disciples would not have been qualified. A second common objection is that Paul only restricted the women of Ephesus from teaching men (1 Timothy was written to Timothy, the pastor of the church in Ephesus). Ephesus was known for its temple to Artemis, and women were the authorities in that branch of paganism—therefore, the theory goes, Paul was only reacting against the female-led customs of the Ephesian idolaters, and the church needed to be different. However, the book of 1 Timothy nowhere mentions Artemis, nor does Paul mention the standard practice of Artemis worshipers as a reason for the restrictions in 1 Timothy 2:11–12.

A third objection is that Paul is only referring to husbands and wives, not men and women in general. The Greek words for “woman” and “man” in 1 Timothy 2 could refer to husbands and wives; however, the basic meaning of the words is broader than that. Further, the same Greek words are used in verses 8–10. Are only husbands to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger and disputing (verse ? Are only wives to dress modestly, have good deeds, and worship God (verses 9–10)? Of course not. Verses 8–10 clearly refer to all men and women, not just husbands and wives. There is nothing in the context that would indicate a narrowing to husbands and wives in verses 11–14.

Yet another objection to this interpretation of women in pastoral ministry references women in positions of leadership in the Bible, specifically Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah in the Old Testament. It is true that these women were chosen by God for special service to Him and that they stand as models of faith, courage, and, yes, leadership. However, the authority of women in the Old Testament is not relevant to the issue of pastors in the church. The New Testament Epistles present a new paradigm for God’s people—the church, the body of Christ—and that paradigm involves an authority structure unique to the church, not for the nation of Israel or any other Old Testament entity.

Similar arguments are made using Priscilla and Phoebe in the New Testament. In Acts 18, Priscilla and Aquila are presented as faithful ministers for Christ. In verse 18, Priscilla’s name is mentioned first, suggesting to some that she was more prominent in ministry than her husband. (The detail of whose name comes first is probably inconsequential, because in verses 2 and 26 the order is reversed from that of verse 18.) Did Priscilla and her husband teach the gospel of Jesus Christ to Apollos? Yes, in their home they “explained to him the way of God more adequately” (Acts 18:26). Does the Bible ever say that Priscilla pastored a church or taught publicly or became the spiritual leader of a congregation of saints? No. As far as we know, Priscilla was not involved in ministry activity in contradiction to 1 Timothy 2:11–14.

In Romans 16:1, Phoebe is called a “deacon” (or “servant”) in the church and is highly commended by Paul. But, as with Priscilla, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that Phoebe was a pastor or a teacher of men in the church. “Able to teach” is given as a qualification for elders, but not for deacons (1 Timothy 3:1–13; Titus 1:6–9).

The structure of 1 Timothy 2:11–14 makes the reason why women cannot be pastors perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with “for,” giving the “cause” of Paul’s statement in verses 11–12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men? Because “Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived” (verses 13–14). God created Adam first and then created Eve to be a “helper” for Adam. The order of creation has universal application in the family (Ephesians 5:22–33) and in the church.

The fact that Eve was deceived is also given as a reason for women not serving as pastors or having spiritual authority over men (1 Timothy 2:14). This does not mean that women are gullible or that they are all more easily deceived than men. If all women are more easily deceived, why would they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? The text simply says that women are not to teach men or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. God has chosen to give men the primary teaching authority in the church.

Many women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching, evangelism, and helping/serving. Much of the ministry of the local church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted from public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only from having spiritual teaching authority over men. The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12). Women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23), and to proclaim the gospel to the lost (Matthew 28:18–20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).

God has ordained that only men are to serve in positions of spiritual teaching authority in the church. This does not imply men are better teachers or that women are inferior or less intelligent. It is simply the way God designed the church to function. Men are to set the example in spiritual leadership—in their lives and through their words. Women are also to set an example in their lives, but in a different way (1 Peter 3:1-6). Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3–5). The Bible also does not restrict women from teaching children. The only activity women are restricted from is teaching or having spiritual authority over men. This bars women from serving as pastors to men. This does not make women less important, by any means; rather, it gives them a ministry focus more in agreement with God’s design.

Even though I agree with this but bro take am easy with the complete copy and paste syndrome without quoting the source.

achorladey:
Research and opinion of others on the topic is not the criteria the spirit of God used to do his purpose regarding men and women.

Of course, this I agree with it. The scripture is all laid out with biblical gender roles and if I should ask you regarding this topic, what is your stance on this because you came in to my mention with an attacking mentality without stating your own stance.

achorladey:
Oga spare us with your research. The Bible is not written based on research. Your Bible tells you men spoke through the inspiration of the Holy spirit. How the Holy Spirit works is not restricted to research.

Read to understand. By research, I meant the opinion of those concerning this topic and their argument of why women should be allowed to be pastors.

judewrites:
This topic is very sensitive and as a result many Christians have different varying opinions on it .

However, in describing ministry gifts, Paul never designated the office of pastor solely to a man. So are the other ministry offices.

Think about it carefully.

There’s nothing particularly sensitive about this topic. I’ve previously researched it, examining various perspectives through the lens of Scripture.

The role of elder or pastor, as this topic addresses, is clearly reserved for men according to biblical teaching.

Churches that assign this office to women are in serious error and are acting in disobedience to the authority of God’s Word. The pastoral role is not intended for women, as seen in passages from 1 Corinthians 14 , 1 Timothy 2, and Titus 1, books often referred to as the pastoral epistles.

The introduction of female pastors into the Church is largely a result of modern egalitarian views and secular movements like the push for women's empowerment, which have gradually influenced Christian practice. Historically, up until around the 19th century, the concept of a female pastor was virtually unheard of in the Church.

judewrites:
1 Corinthians 14 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
²⁹ Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
³⁰ If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
³¹ For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
³² And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
³³ For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
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.
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.
³⁶ What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
³⁷ If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

I just did a research....

When Paul admonished women not to speak in church, he wasn't speaking against women ordained as pastors. What he was speaking against was the disorderly manner some high status women in the Corinthians church who taught and preached in their services.

Paul wanted these women to correctly submit to church authority in the Corinthian church before handling church leadership.

Paul wasn't referring to women pastoring a church.

The New testament was in Greek, so there are bound to some misinterpreting in English.

Go and re-do that research. I'm 100 percent certain that you got your research from Egalitarian sources which are not but pure lies.

I no get power for long write, make I just summarize am with this - A Proverbs 31 woman / Woman like Sarah of whom the Bible told Christian ladies to be like.

I disagree with the Catholic doctrine in so many areas but to this I say 100 percent agreed.

IyaTola:
Yes! Get their review on this channel on WhatsApp https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaH6zEJFHWpuQ1zwxt1Q

Hello. This link is no longer valid.
Wanted to know more about this.

GanagiBitrus:
That's entirely your opinion & you are entitled to it. Unfortunately your opinion does not supercede the rules.

Or can you provide the part of UEFA rule that supports your opinion?

I know football rules and I also see situations such as these where rules do not follow which is why I said everything rests on the final decision of the referee on the pitch.

GanagiBitrus:
Most of you argue out of ignorance.
Google is your friend.
You can't be more knowledgeable than the referee & the VAR officials.

Oga that wasn't a straight red card offence in any way, if not most if not all foul inside box go be straight red.
I agree that it's a foul inside the box but definitely not a straight red. But I guess it all comes down to the final decision of the referee.

My brother, who English help? Besides I can always teach and correct her English.
As long as she's ready to learn and upgrade, this is not even a problem at all.

How much is 1 pi in Naira because I have 164 to be moved to available balance and might want to sell some of it.

Na B.
I know say I correct, so whey my money?

Jonathan:
No!

Have you seen 1 Corinthians 11:4?
Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head.
— 1 Corinthians 11:4

Legitorscamrevi:
This is toooo much
Split this task into 2

Haba

Na so Job requirements Dem be. Just search for vacancies for Job roles with requirements in all these Job website and you will be bewildered.

Abeg O.P. I get skills in Data Entry, Canva for graphics and CapCut for video editing. If you need my services in these areas make I know because I no nothing on Sales and Marketing o.

Omoawoke:
Spits!

What a shame to the men

Na so we see am o. Men has been weakened and effeminate since the last century

Wordson:
Interesting match! Good pressure from Atletico.

I'll like to know how this will end

You'd be disappointed in the end.

hopexter:
Marrying of 17 years old girls is only allowed in Muslim country. In western world you’ll go to jail. A 17 years is not even allowed to drive in Nigeria according to the law, you’re seemed as a minor at 17.

In some western world it's mostly set to 16 (with parental consent) though.

hopexter:
Why didn’t you say this when Reno was accused of the same thing? This is the thing with you people. You wanted him to be accused without him retaliating isn’t it?

Again, I don't know when all these happened. I personally do not have a problem if someone marries a 17-year-old girl. I'm just asking a genuine question of which I don't think you have an answer to maybe due to your personal vendetta against Peter Obi.

hopexter:
It is, cos he was accused of marrying an underage.

Sleekfingers:
Marrying an underage person na offense.....but most Nigerians thinks it is normal......that's how they get into trouble in some countries

Ok, so now that it is shown that he married her when she was 17, will they now lock him up? Not just him but many others who married their wives at 17 and lock them up also?
Note that in other countries set their minimum age requirements to 16 years with parental consent, so let's just forget about other countries and stick to Nigeria.

Makunahatata:
Are you stupid?..
Your thoughts and ideas are yours alone and must operate within the boundaries of law..I am sure if you're abroad,you won't be saying this nonsense, people like you even automatically assume laws that are not in existence, just to satisfy your white masters, but you feel this is Nigeria, you can do any how..your mentality will land you in kirikiri... continue sleeping with teens

I hope your ignorant self knows that "in the abroad," as you mentioned, includes some countries and states where the minimum age for marriage is set at 16 (with parental consent). Your comments reek of ignorance and false accusations, so this will be the last time I respond to you on this issue. Since you cannot engage in a civilized discussion like an educated person, there's no point in continuing this conversation.

And besides, no one isn't talking about how one's thoughts and ideas are yours alone and must operate within the boundaries of law. Because this can mean differently depending on the context and such laws can change at any given time.

Makunahatata:
blablabla.....Mr paedo, child molester,sex predator, so far consent age recognized by the Nigerian law remains 18, you have no point, you just blabbing nonsense, a 17 years old remains a child...you need to educate yourself more, illiterate!😹

It’s a waste of my time arguing with someone unintelligent. If Nigeria changes the law tomorrow to make the legal age 16, you would also change your mind and suddenly claim that 17 is an adult. You don’t even have your own thoughts and ideas, you’re so fixated on one side that you refuse to consider other perspectives, think critically, and form your own conclusions after evaluating all sides. This kind of rigid thinking makes it easy for you to change your stance whenever laws change, without any real understanding of the issue.

But for someone like you, who likely finds it too much effort to engage their mind, trying to educate you is simply a waste of time. Instead of blindly following whatever the law dictates, you should develop the ability to think independently. Just because something is legal or illegal doesn’t automatically make it right or wrong. Country Laws are created by people, and they change over time based on societal trends, not necessarily moral truths. If you can’t grasp this simple fact, then you’re just a puppet to whatever rules are set before you via one means or the other, without any real understanding of ethics or logic.

Makunahatata:
is a 17 years old now officially considered an adult in Nigeria? ...are u ok?

I think relevant authorities should take note of your account, u dey part of the paedophiles sleeping with underage kids for your area.

It clearly shows how ignorant you are. You have no idea what "paedophile" actually means. You think that just because Nigeria sets the minimum legal age for court marriage at 18, marrying someone who is 17 automatically makes you a paedophile. By that logic, you might as well argue that your forefathers were paedophiles too.

Check the dictionary definition of "paedophile" and ask yourself whether a 17-year-old falls within the specified age range. A paedophile is someone attracted to prepubescent children, not someone involved with a biologically mature individual who happens to be under an arbitrary legal age. The law does not define morality, and different countries, cultures and historical periods have had varying age norms for marriage.

And before you resort to making personal attacks on someone over the internet, let me make it clear, I have no interest in sleeping around with women. Instead of throwing baseless accusations, educate yourself on the meaning of words before using them.

Makunahatata:
if na hausa now..una go dey foam fr mouth

Justshez:
It is not, however, why do you hypocrites shout when a Muslim man marries a 17-year-old?

tamdun:
It's not a bad thing since he's not a Muslim

seguntijan:
If to say na hausa man you go pick issue with it na

None of you guys answered the question and this wasn't even about Mr. Peter Obi. It's obvious you all have personal vendetta against the man, hence rushing to comment. And FYI, I have no problem with any one marrying a 17 year old as long as the families agrees with it.

Ok... So how is this an offence or a bad thing?

I don't have problems if the Bride's father told me all these before marriage, it's his terms and conditions in marrying his beloved daughter, so it's left for me to sign it (of which I wouldn't even dare to request for a pen not to talk of signing it). But if it's during or after the marriage he is saying this one, I go tell am say, E don pass, you don already hand am over to me, and as the Head and authority in this new family, it's based on what I want her to do for us and not want you're expecting her to do for us.

Besides, mutual roles is about expectations and not just emotional feelings, those feelings gradually dwindle (but may not eventually die out) but the expectations would always be required of you. Either as a man or woman, if you're not ready to fulfill you own roles that is expected of you in marriage, abeg, just wait and work on yourself before entering the marriage covenant.