patrick_fore — 2014-07-24T20:05:58-04:00 — #1
It is a possibility that in the next few years we might see a women president.
Women have demonstrated throughout the history of this planet that they are just as qualified to lead and present information than their male counterparts.
Can someone please explain to me why in some modern, mainline denominations that women are prohibited from pastoring and preaching?
If you don't believe me that women can preach a sermon or lead a church please visit this link.
ryan_nelson — 2014-07-24T20:36:17-04:00 — #2
This is a really interesting study of the biggest passage used to oppose women becoming pastors:
david_paul — 2014-07-24T20:47:00-04:00 — #3
I don't think it is a question of capability. It is a question of role. People who live in this country these days recoil and cringe at the idea of having Providentially-assigned roles. We want to choose our own paths. We want to exercise our freedom to do as we wish. Guess what? Nothing is stopping you. Of course, that doesn't mean that YHWH is playing along with that charade. He will judge according to His will.
paolo_russo — 2014-07-25T04:12:25-04:00 — #4
I see a general confusion (me first) about the idea of submitting, headship, teaching and preaching.
Do you know the issue about Junia, the first woman Apostle? Check mark goodacre podcast/blog.
I guess that spending some time in study the greek word under Titus, Timothy, Ephesians that point at the issue of Women with a good dictionary, can enlighten us in a profitable discussion
patrick_fore — 2014-07-25T13:20:26-04:00 — #5
If it's not about capability, what is it about?
I guess it's convenient that men get roles of leadership, power and teaching and women are stuck changing diapers and making cookies for the hard working men.
People have been using that religious language to oppress women for centuries.
kpk — 2014-07-29T14:29:20-04:00 — #7
I don't mind women "teachers" but I can't imagine a woman as a pastor. It's just odd to shepherd a flock with men in it.
All pastors are teachers, not all teachers are pastors.
scott_cody — 2014-07-29T17:58:18-04:00 — #8
I appreciate this discussion. In my heart, I'd love for women and men to be able to serve in the same roles in the modern church. And in many ways we have and are moving toward finding more prominent positions for women in our churches. However I do struggle with the words of Paul and the clear patriarchal emphasis of Scripture. While I DO NOT believe Paul meant that women should be totally silent in church gatherings, I do believe that Paul was limiting their teaching role in venues when men and women were present. The two big questions are "why?" and "it is applicable for us?" There's a lot of discussion about these two questions. Maybe it was because of a particular issue they faced in Ephesus, but Paul gives similar instructions to the Corinthians. Maybe it was a cultural thing and in our culture, a more egalitarian view would equally be God honoring. But Paul does reference the creation order and there seems to be an ongoing theme of male spiritual leadership throughout Scripture. Exceptions do crop up (i.e. Deborah, Priiscillia, Phoebe and Junia (?). The Kingdom does seem to welcome them all. However even in the light of those examples, there is a running theme of male leadership, male shepherds, male evangelists and teachers. Even though my heart longs to open the gates wide, my struggle with Scripture limits my willingness when it comes to accepting women as pastors and teachers.
patrick_fore — 2014-07-29T19:13:38-04:00 — #9
Why is it odd? Would you work for a company with a women as a CEO? Could a women be your supervisor? It's odd cause it's not normal. Just because it's not the norm, doesn't mean it's wrong.
patrick_fore — 2014-07-29T19:20:16-04:00 — #10
Of course it's a cultural thing. And of course Paul would view it this way. The Paul had a 1st century eastern worldview. There are many cultural taboos back then that we view as common today. (Women wearing pants, jewelry, not covering their heads)
Logic doesn't have to take a back seat to a particular view of history and a theological bias. If we let women lead men in the military, in politics, in our jobs then it seems absolutely ridicules for them not to be able to Shepard a church.
Perhaps its pride and intellectual dishonesty that keeps women out of that leadership role?
scott_cody — 2014-07-29T20:48:30-04:00 — #11
Thanks for your reply to my extended comments and I appreciate your confidence. The Bible was certainly written within culture and as such, certain commands and examples may be applied literally for that ancient culture while in a different way in our modern culture. The struggle I have is what criteria do we use to determine what teachings are cultural and which ones are timeless.
I don't think we should send logic to the backseat nor do I think we should always give it the steering wheel. God's logic is not always my logic and I must both trust and test my "logical" conclusions.
While I'm sure there have been many who keep women out of leadership roles because of pride or dishonesty, I hope that I am one that struggles with the text and first and foremost commits myself to obeying its timeless truths while shifting when cultural applications warrant it.
So how do you determine whether a Biblical teaching or example is cultural or timeless?
Does Paul's reference to Adam and Eve give any "timeless" credibility to male leadership?
Is is possible that women can fulfill certain leadership roles in secular aspects of life while not in spiritual aspects?
patrick_fore — 2014-07-30T13:03:19-04:00 — #12
Honestly man, I don't think it's as theologically strong as you think. Sometimes when we want something to be true, we view scripture through a certain lens.
The creation story illustrates God making female and male in God’s own image. God placed them in the garden to work in harmonious partnership.
Old Testament prophets call for justice, speak out against inequities, and stand with the oppressed.
Jesus himself had women as friends, disciples and witnesses,. He challenged the conventional beliefs of his day that women were inferior and men were superior.
Deborah served as a judge over Israel (Judges 4 – 5) and Esther delivered her people from extermination (Esther).
Women like Philip’s daughters (Acts 21:9), Priscilla (Rom. 16:5), Euodia and Synteche (Phil. 4:3), Phoebe (Rom. 16:1), deaconesses (1 Tim. 3:11), and Junia, who is referred to as “prominent among the apostles” (Rom. 16:7)
Paul called the people of God to create a world where the gifts of both women and men are celebrated and used, where "there is neither male nor female, but all are one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28).
And I guess thats what does it for me. For me, the Holy Spirit doesn't "dispense" gifts based upon gender. For centuries it's been convenient for men to use the Bible as a tool to oppress women. I'm not saying you are intentionally doing the same, I just think it's been drilled into Christians apart of certain doctrinal affiliations that women are to serve and men are to lead. Even though if we look at history, being a man doesn't qualify you lead. We all can point to hundreds of men that are, were terrible Christian leaders that did significant damage.
ryan_nelson — 2014-07-30T13:28:46-04:00 — #13
I'd really encourage you to check out this post: http://juniaproject.com/defusing-1-timothy-212-bomb/
Patrick too. Paul refers to the order of creation to address a specific rumor being spread by a specific woman spreading a specific false teaching (that Eve was created first). 1 Timothy 2:12 deviates from the rest of the passage by using the singular woman, whereas the rest of the passage uses women. That post does a pretty good job of breaking it down with the original language, and is definitely worth bringing into the conversation.
josh — 2014-07-30T14:43:44-04:00 — #14
What is wrong with changing diapers and cooking food for your family? Are those not honorable duties? You make it sound like being a stay-at-home mother/homemaker is a lowly role.
freddie_jr_kinsler — 2014-07-30T15:42:31-04:00 — #15
God Calls men to Preach over a Church. He will call men to Preach at a Men's prision. He will use a Women to teach at a Woman's prision, not a man because of what could be said. That said we see Women in the Bible used in many other Roles. One a goverenis. We never see a female Preaching in any manner, note the angels in the Bible are never Female. That said does not imply women not to hold office like President of the USA.
ian_mundy — 2014-07-30T16:11:20-04:00 — #16
I think the main problem with this is not that these are not noble or honorable duties, but the tendency to paint the picture that those duties are all that women are good for. I definitely agree that they are a worthy calling, and one that neither gender should feel ashamed for taking the responsibility of, but it is dangerous when we began to assert (even unknowingly) that the identity of an entire gender is wrapped up in these things. Just as much as it is degrading to ourselves and others to solely place identity in anything other than Christ.
freddie_jr_kinsler — 2014-07-30T17:34:09-04:00 — #17
Tim. 3:14-15 Rom.16 and of (Phoebe) servant of the Church which is at Cenchrea. Up on using the Greek word diakone, he Paul does not mention her as an official deacon or part of the deacon group at that church.He does go on to say "in a manner worthy of the saints". 1Tim. 2:12 this is stated not out of culture but doctrine. 1Tim.2:13-14 . It is not politically correct in today's world, but I will bow to scriptures.
patrick_fore — 2014-08-01T10:20:53-04:00 — #18
Missed the point here. I would never say that those roles were not honorable. What I am saying, it doesn't come with the same pay grade and leadership influence.
patrick_fore — 2014-08-01T10:27:54-04:00 — #19
Your assumption that women never preached in the bible is false. Though there are others, Mary Magdalene is perhaps the biggest example. She was with Jesus during his death through resurrection and was the first one to announce that he was risen. Augustine called her an apostle to the apostles. She was there in the beginning of the Christian movement. To say she never preached is comical.
david_paul — 2014-08-01T11:36:54-04:00 — #20
To overemphasize what she did is also comical. You still can't, and maybe never will, comprehend the sheer fact that YHWH has DESIGNED this world so that certain things have certain roles. You are, as I said in the other "women's role" thread, so locked-in to a physical sense of the world that you seem incapable of recognizing the prophetic sense of the way things are. The male/female dichotomy ISN'T about men and women, as surprising as that may seem to you. It is about YHWH as the male leader and Israel as the female support who lifts up her husband. As a result of lifting up the husband, she is lavished upon as though she is a princess. This is precisely why Sarah called Abraham "lord" (1 Pet. 3:6; Gen. 18:12) and her new name was "princess". This physical set of historical circumstances has ZERO reason aside from the prophetic picture it presents of the role YHWH has established for Himself and Israel.
So here's the deal...someone has to be the woman in this prophetic role-play and someone has to be the man. Obviously, those who are women were chosen to play the role of the support and the men are the leaders. You don't have to like it, you just have to accept it as inevitable fact...unless you want to piss YHWH off and reap the whirlwind. You can, of course...He set before you a choice. Deut. 30:19
But here's a bit of a twist...since YHWH is really the male in this picture, all men are required to play BOTH ROLES, because the men of Israel are nevertheless part of the bride-wife. But guess what again...women are also called upon to be the leaders over their children, and so they have place to play the leader also. There is also the role of prophetess, but that will apply to precious few. These things are designed in such a way that we all have practice playing all the roles...BUT, and this is a big "but"...we must play all the roles ACCORDING TO the roles we are physically given.
In the end, one of the core reasons for these things (apart from the prophetic picturing that is in play), is the most fundamental thing of all--obedience. He's God, and we're not. He says "jump" and we say "how high?" He designs and we submit to the Designer as part of the design. That's just the way it is, dude. You can cry about it, piss and moan about it, cast aspersions, and try to belittle those who disagree with you, but in the end, you are bucking the Designer, and I would never want to be you.
rev_karen_taylor — 2014-08-01T14:05:20-04:00 — #21
I co-pastor a church with another lady and we are doing beautifully. People are growing spiritually and we are growing in numbers. If you will remember Jesus spoke to woman who were overseeing a church. There is no male or female in Christ. Sorry fellows.
next page →