What are you saying? Is the Old testament not as true as the new?

I suppose that is why "GOD" restricted the role of priests to males from the tribe of Levi in the OLD LAW? Women cannot teach men---1 Tim 2:11-12. They can "help" in the instruction of men (Acts 18:26), but this verse is clear they can not be "the teacher", or the one presenting the message. Women are to teach other women--Titus 2:3-5. It is true that the early church did have "prophetesses" (Acts 2:17), it does not conclude "who" they taught, by looking at other passages, we must conclude that they taught other women, if not there would be contradictory passages---all written by the same spirit? As Philip's daughter spoke God's word (Acts 21:9), it does not say that she taught any man. Thus, those looking for an excuse for allowing women preachers must "conclude" by words "omitted" from the scriptures and must also make other clear passages of scripture written by the same Holy Spirit of God (2 Tim 3:16) contradict each other...I think not. Thus the only way for any Lady to lead any formal church service is to make part of God's word a lie. And if one part of it is no good, why should we believe any of it?

There is no record of "ANY WOMEN" teaching or preaching God's word to men in the New Testament. We have women helping in the church. Dorcas aided the poor by making coats for them---Acts 9:36-39. Phoebe--Romans 16:1-2, is called a "servant" of the church, but this does not state that she taught men or preached in formal church gatherings were men were present. The saints were told to "assist" her, but this does prove that held authority over any man. The same Greek word which is translated (assist), again is translated in 2 Tim 4:17 indicating that "Jesus Christ" was "assisting" Paul, does this conclude that Paul held authority over Jesus or that Paul taught Him anything?

Euodia and Syntycha---Phil 4:2-3, these women had struggled in the cause of the Gospel and are called Paul's fellow workers. Again, nothing indicates teaching or preaching. Being a fellow worker does not imply authority. If so, why do we not have the same authority as God, as we are called fellow workers of God? ---1 Cor 3:9

In the offices of the church both elders and deacons are described as duties for the male--- 1 Tim 3:2, 8. Women in the role of leadership in the formal church would violate God's order that He as set for the world--- 1 Cor 11:3-4, "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoreth his head."

Sometimes people do go overboard and claim that Women are to remain entirely silent in the church--( 1 Cor 14:35-36). This was not the intent, as clearly demonstrated by the command for the whole church to sing together---Eph 5:19, Col 3:16. There is biblical precedent as the women sang in the choirs in the Old Testament, even though they were not allowed to lead worship--Ezra 2:65. Society indeed has tried to change the "bounds" that God has set, but we must stand with the truth or fall with the lie. Ralph

I do not quote the old test all the time.

No I am not saying that at all. Its just that you have to understand what the old test pertains to, especialy old test Jewish law.

Exactly.

Those passages in Leviticus describe laws for the Jewish people which are designed to encourage hygiene and good health.

Hence the rule against eating shellfish, which even today could be contaminated, or wearing fabrics which could cause skin rashes in a hot dusty climate.

And hence the clear mandate against homosexuality for the obvious health reasons.

The birth death and resurrection of Jesus ended the Old Covenant and created the New Covenant with God. However, many of the Old Testament rules still made a lot of sense for people living in those conditions at that time.

The immorality of homosexuality was reiterated by Paul in the book of Romans and elsewhere.

This isn't the homosexuality thread, Gary.

Yes dear

And for you Ralph, here is an example of what I meant about women and the early church.

Paul's letters also offer some important glimpses into the inner workings of ancient Christian churches. These groups did not own church buildings but met in homes, no doubt due in part to the fact that Christianity was not legal in the Roman world of its day and in part because of the enormous expense to such fledgling societies. Such homes were a domain in which women played key roles. It is not surprising then to see women taking leadership roles in house churches. Paul tells of women who were the leaders of such house churches (Apphia in Philemon 2; Prisca in I Corinthians 16:19). This practice is confirmed by other texts that also mention women who headed churches in their homes, such as Lydia of Thyatira (Acts 16:15) and Nympha of Laodicea (Colossians 4:15). Women held offices and played significant roles in group worship. Paul, for example, greets a deacon named Phoebe (Romans 16:1) and assumes that women are praying and prophesying during worship (I Corinthians 11). As prophets, women's roles would have included not only ecstatic public speech, but preaching, teaching, leading prayer, and perhaps even performing the eucharist meal. (A later first century work, called the Didache, assumes that this duty fell regularly to Christian prophets.)

1.) The church within their house, does not conclude that they "TAUGHT, PREACHED, OR HELD AUTHORITY, because they used their house as a meeting place---1 Cor. 16:19, "The Churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute (send greetings) with the church that is in their house."

2.) Yes 1 Corinthians chapter 11 certainly concludes that women were doing very much what you said, it does not "assume" any thing, thus this is why the entire letter directed to the people of Corinth was one of "CHASTISEMENT" from Paul, in directing these "former pagan" converts in the proper methodology of worship in the HOUSE OF GOD. Thus the very first few verses in Chapter 11 are telling these people "....keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you." 1Cor 11:1. "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (vs.2). It goes on in the next several verses explaining just how the people were to conduct themselves in a formal worship service. (Vs's. 4-15), and then Paul declares that he has heard there were divisions among them, concerning the proper way to partake of the Lord's Supper or in rememberance of Him(Christ) and there are other "HERESIES" among them (Vs. 19). It is strange that you can draw a conclusion that women are "authorized" in openly praying and leading men in prayer and the apostle Paul, the one that is being directly inspired by God concludes that what they are doing could be considered "HERESIES"...very strange indeed.

And you also conclude that a woman is to be considered a "DEACON" by reading Romans 16:1, "I command onto you Phoebe our SISTER, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:" "....receive her in the Lord, "as" becometh saints, and assist her. (Vs. 2). Yet we clearly can read what the qualifications are for one becoming a deacon or elder in the church, "Let the deacons be the HUSBANDS OF ONE WIFE, ruling, their children and their own houses well." ( 1 Tim 3:12). "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee; If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children children not accused of riot or unruly ( Titus 1:5-6).

I notice in All of your conclusions you must use words such as, PERHAPS. ASSUME. etc. I would conclude that it indeed would be ALL THE MUCH SURPRISING TO SEE WOMEN take leadership roles in the church. Whoever, you parroted this information from, certainly did not do their Biblical research. For every one of the assumptions, and suggestions, and conclusions DIRECTLY CONTRADICT other very clear passages where no "assumptions" are needed. We must always remember, what we are told in teaching the scriptures, "If any MAN speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; If any man minister (preach, teach etc) let him do it as of the ability which God giveth....." (1 Peter 4:11). Now it is clear that the word 'Oracle' means, SCRIPTURES. Thus we are told not to assume anything which is NOT WRITTEN in the scriptures. Even in the Old Teaching we are directly told as such, "The secret things belong unto the Lord our God; but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do ALL THE WORDS OF THE LAW." (Deut. 29:29). For indeed how do we know just what is in the mind of God, less the Spirit of God reveals it to us, "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God." ( 1 Cor 2:11). And it was that same Spirit of God that revealed to us the verses just presented....and they in no way were assumptions, speculations, suggestions of PERHAPS......THEY WERE TRUTH. (John 17:17), "Sanctify them though thy truth; they WORD is TRUTH." Ralph

Perhaps you should actually read Isaiah 33:1.56 .