From 'Vayikra Rabba' !!

[Craig]

In a court of law, can the first and second witness be the same person?

Indeed, yes in the court of Y'shua on the Day of Judgement. Just as Moshe is all that Jews were told they needed to believe to believe Y'shua. Do you reject selections from Shemot and Debarim as 'one witness' because they were both written by Moshe? No! Because, they aren't truly written by Moshe, but by Elohim. Thus, the refusal to treat different books by Paul the same way is treating them as less than the infallible Word.

"Overturning the last 6,000 years"? You must be joking. You still have not addressed my first response. Let's stick to Tanakh. Tell me, how could Deborah be a judge in Israel? Also, tell me about Huldah the prophetess.

Like I said, I provided a link that completely refuted those examples and pretty much every other example that has ever been used as a "proof".

Speaking of 'In the the Kingdom", I recall Yeshua's words that we are like angels and there is no marriage.

He certainly wasn't talking about the Kingdom now (or we all should be celibate (Genesis 11:7-9, I Timothy 4:1-5)), or the even the Millennial Kingdom, but rather the period after the thousand year reign.

As for the "it is really ironic that these things are being debated in the "Nazarene/Messianic Judaism Forum" comment, can you show me one historical instance where the historical "Nazarene Jews" accepted Paul (or one of his letters) as an authority, let alone a "NT" canon?

Yes, I can. I'll dig up the references in a followup.

Also, since you seem to reject Paul, and thus by default (Luke and Acts) and the Peshitta canon. If your theology is similar to the Evyoni Paqid, you are in an even weaker position regarding female ordination than someone who accepts all of them. Because, then you like him, must accept and obey Oral Torah, and Orthodox Jews have always held to the very same things Paul advocates, sometimes even separating the seating in congregations with a dividing wall.

I've shown two separate witnesses from Tanakh showing women as authorities over men. You quote two Pauline passages (which you call the word of Elohim), call them your 'two witnesses', and deny looking to Tanakh for precedent. I guess it is ironic, isn't it?

Sorry, Rob, I slam dunked you "two separate witnesses from Tanakh." It isn't my fault you were too apathetic to go to the trouble of reading the link I provided.

Shlama, Craig