The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum The Bible

1) Those who adopt the "cultural boundness" idea beyond what should be obvious (intentionally vague ) have opened the door to all kinds of errors to various degrees. For example, there are few who would relegate Paul's instructions concerning the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11 to a bygone era, i.e., bound to the 1st century early Church. But, in the same passage where Paul is addressing matters of biblical worship, he brings up the matter of headcovering for both men and women. It is interesting, at least to me, that the same people who would never dream of imposing "cultural boundness" to the Lord's Supper have no problem dismissing Paul's instructions on headcoverings as being restricted to a Greek cultural practice of the first century. The more extremists would include the explicit teachings in the Bible against homosexuality as passé.

2) On the matter of women office bearers, the Bible doesn't allow one to adopt such a view. However, there is a big difference between embracing this pernicious error vs. rejecting the divine inspiration, infallibility and Inerrancy of the Bible as a whole. It is a dangerous position to take as it often reveals a much more serious and latent problem as to one's overall view of Scripture itself which allows them to circumvent the clear teaching concerning the qualifications for the offices of Elder and Deacon. Fortunately, some don't digress any further than that. But many do follow down that road and begin casting off other doctrines which are non-confessional/biblical. If nothing else, when I come across someone who holds to women in office the proverbial "red flag" is immediately hoisted and I become suspicious of that person and thus begin to read/listen to what this person has to say everywhere else with a critical eye/ear.