Role of Women

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by CubeX, Jan 11, 2004.

  1. CubeX

    CubeX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is by far the most controversial topic other than calvinism and arminism (please don't even start anything about this. no one wins! [​IMG] ) But, the question is, what is a woman's role in the church? It seems to me that it's all backwards. Here's what I mean:

    Everyone is talking about how a woman should stop doing this and that (job leadership, military, church leadership) because they're not supposed to do anything like that! But they miss the point! The point is that a man should take such good care of his wife that she doesn't have to do anything!(Yes, I'm a guy, and I'm sure I'll regret that...one day! LOL! :D )

    Anyways, I don't know if any of you have been reading Paul's letters lately, but how about when he straight-up tells one church that the words he was saying(it was only for 2 paragraphs I believe) were not God's, but his. It didn't apply to this topic, but it is usefull for reference. But when it comes to most passages like this, he usually says: "I want..." I believe he wanted to make himself VERY clear.

    What I believe he was doing was upholding the Jewish and actually nearly ALL cultural laws of that day! It was a man's world then. It does NOT mean that those passages can't be usefull today though! Here's an example for this:

    Paul talked about slaves and masters in the several passages. Now, there's none of that today, but it is still very applicable if we change it around to employers and employees!

    But, here's where I give the flip-side of the story!

    There's a reason for all of that being said. It was said to uphold the family. If a husband and wife saw themselves as the heads of their house, then they would destroy their homes! You can't have to masters, that's wha tJesus said!(I know He was talking about this, but it applies!) This goes for ANY position though. Job, home, church, etc.; they all have to have a non-competitive head so that the establishment does NOT fall!

    So, after pointing out both sides, the question is: What are you trying to say!

    What I'm trying to say is:
    1) A man should take care of his wife. She's his trophy!
    2) A woman CAN preach and can be called to lead! (Check out Judges!)
    3) With God as the head of every home, church, job, nation; there would be no competition within the family. To prove this, men, look at #1!

    I'll get back to ALL of you with passages for EVERYTHING later on either tonight or tommorrow.

    Thanks for all comments!
    And remember! If you keep the first commandment! You keep them all! (Think about it!)

    -CubeX
     
  2. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pretty progressive CubeX!

    I'd say the regarding women LEADING churches the NT is pretty clear (if not specific) that that's IDEALLY a male job. In his description of the pastoral qualities Paul did not say women could be pastors - if he had intended this he would have likely said something in favor of it since that would have been very progressive indeed! The fact that he did not mention it means he probably did not consider it an issue.

    But...

    What about a woman (a Christian) shipwrecked on an island of male heathen. If she wins them all for Jesus who would be the leader of their "church"? SHE would - at least temporarily!
     
  3. CubeX

    CubeX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    I tried to edit the first post, BUT I had already timed out; but I just wanted to also point out 3 things:
    1) This is not a post that supports feminism. That's the same thing as sexism except from a women's point of view!
    2) This is intended to address isues inside the church AS well as outside the church.
    3) This is just to let you all know that when I post, I tend to sway back and forth between sides to point out both the possitives and negatives or each side! It helps everyone! (I think! - Oh yeah, and to lighten moods, I tend to always post things like this! :D )

    Anyways, I'll be studying tonight and I'll collect some passages for both sides the best I can. It's hard for me because I always link everything together and it takes a while!

    Thanks,
    -CubeX

    (Also, I do believe that this is different from the other post titled similarly!)
     
  4. Preacher Ron

    Preacher Ron
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    What you said in the above quote wont hold water, when it comes to a woman preaching!

    I Timothy 3:2
    A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,

    Notice: the word husband! It's hard to be a husband,of one wife if your a woman.

    Sorry! but like it or not that's what the very word of God says.

    Preacher Ron
     
  5. Debby in Philly

    Debby in Philly
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Like CubeX said, it was a man's world back then. The whole sentence is calling for seeing to it that a bishop be blameless, and that one way to prove that is if he (in a man's world it would just happen to be HE) only had one wife, instead of several, as was acceptable back then in some cultures. I think that today, saying that a church leader of either gender should not be commiting adultery would cover the meaning here.
     
  6. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's a good point Debby!

    But...

    I would say that Paul still seems to envision MALE church leadership - because if he had intended women to be pastors he would have no doubt had to defend that view and this would have mentioned it! Still that's just my take.

    As for the silence thing - well that pertains to being properly behaved in worship and does NOT preclude women "speaking" PROPERLY in worship (announcement, prayer request, song leading etc.)
     
  7. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    What you said in the above quote wont hold water, when it comes to a woman preaching!

    I Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,

    Notice: the word husband! It's hard to be a husband,of one wife if your a woman. Sorry! but like it or not that's what the very word of God says.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Ron, you've taken the verse completely out of context. Not your fault, though, this is probably one of the most misapplied scriptures in the Bible. Paul was writing to Macedonia. Maceconia was one of a few places where polygamy was practiced (it had fallen out of favor elsewhere in the Roman empire). Paul was directly addressing the issue of polygamy here. He did not write this verse to address the issue of gender. He also did not write this verse to imply that every person who is a bishop must be married either. Paul himself was a church leader (the word translated "bishop" means, one who leads) and was single.
     
  8. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0

    I do think that Paul preferred male church leadership, but he did not ban women from women as leaders in the church. Similarly, Paul says outright that he preferrs to be single, and even says "it is better to be like I am". But that doesn't equate to Paul requiring men to be single, if ya know what I mean.
    Yes, that topic is currently being discussed in another thread. I likewise posted a detailed response to the verses that appear to cal for "silence".

    Click Here to view the "Role of women in the church" thread.
     
  9. CubeX

    CubeX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, I do believe that Paul preferred that a man be a preacher; but part of that was because in that day, a man HAD to be in charge! A woman being in charge was not a common thing. Also, just a thought, but how would the non-Christians of that day respond to such a feat? Also, I believe that Pual reinforced that a man be in charge because of his growing up with the law. He understood its sensitivity to the Jewish areas and even ouside of those.

    But another thought is that in Acts, we see God proclaiming that that everything was clean in the vision of the clothe unfolding the food and Peter rejecting it b/c it was "unclean" by the law. But God said that EVERYTHING was clean that he had made and everyone had the right to the Kingdom of God; and also, I know that this will be controversial, that everyone has an equal chance of opportunities. Please consider this WISELY before responding.

    I have more, but I will wait until the appropriate time to surface it.

    Thanks for discussing both sides of the topic,
    -CubeX
     
  10. Preacher Ron

    Preacher Ron
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    First of all, it did not matter what Paul preferred, He wrote what the Holy Spirit told him to write.

    Also the Bible says that God is the same yesterday, today and for ever more!

    Any way you look at it, back then and even now husband, means Man! not woman.

    Preacher Ron.
     
  11. CubeX

    CubeX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    But what about the times that he said that the command wasn't from God but from himself. It's just like looking at not participating in the lotery b/c the Bible says NOT to gamble. There's no direct quote that says "Don't participate in a lottery"; but, when applied, you see that the parts of the lottery that are similar to those of gambling. You make the connection, interpret wisely (I know that there will be a comment, but I will say that YES there are clear ways to interpret Scripture. It's taught in Seminary.), and then apply it correctly.

    The fact is, you need to look at the questions of: Why did he say that? What was going on in that time of history? What was the basis of that culture? and many more.

    But again I ask, what about the times Paul straight forwardly tells the readers that he is the one giving the command. Why? Because there wasn't one DIRECTLY, but God made others still apply.

    It's just like what Jesus said: If you lust after a woman, you have commited adultry with her in your heart.

    There are many examples in Matthew.

    Thanks for your responses! :D
    -CubeX
     
  12. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a little tricky here! Paul does not give a prohibition against women being pastors - that much is clear. But his statement of "husband of one wife" is pretty masculine! I think the clue here is that nothing else is said! If he were condoning female pastors he would likely have said so - because no one would likely have ASSUMED HE WAS! Thus his silence gives an argument against the female pastor. But there is NO PROHIBITION!

    Consider this...

    A woman shipwrecked on an island of heathens. She wins them all for Christ. Now who is the leader of their worship community? SHE IS! Maybe not ideal, maybe not permanently. Paul is approaching this practically. But I think it's clear he envisions the pastoral role as IDEALLY male.
     
  13. CubeX

    CubeX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Charles Meadows, I believe you hold the best answer. Paul did not say women could not be preachers. But he probably knew the importance of a man's leadership b/c God did create us as the stronger sex. Paul said that.

    I believe that saying that men were preferably the right ones for the job, but not that a woman could not be called.

    -CubeX

    (Oh yeah, and a thought, what if a beautiful woman was preaching a sermon? A man wouldn't pay any attention to the words. What a thought, huh? I believe I'm understanding the passage's "why" question now!)
     
  14. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0

    Nope, Paul wrote what the Holy Spirit INSPIRED him to write. The Bible was written by inspiration, not dictation. Big difference.

    So is the context. But we often disregard the context, which is just as dangerous as disregarding the text. Context plus text equals the message (logos).


    Any way you look at it, the Bible does not forbid women preachers.
     
  15. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's crazy. A good analogy, but crazy [​IMG] . Do women not listen to the message because the preacher is a hottie? Maybe if you're in high school [​IMG]
     
  16. CubeX

    CubeX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, no, no... :D heheh. I meant that males are more distracted by women than women are by males! It is a fact. I'm sure you agree that the temptation doesn't change. Even for ministers. I've personally had one leave because of cheating on his wife with another woman. And all the reported youth ministers reported for molestation. It is the fact that men are more distracted than women when it comes to this area. This was a basic example that does not apply to every male; but for a very good number, yes. But I will state that it DOES NOT apply to everyone instead of a "may, because of the truth. The only reason I've stumbled upon that as a reason was because of my studying of phycology in Apologetics class.

    -CubeX
     
  17. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whew! :D I'm sure it's possible that Paul took that into consideration when voicing his preference for males in the pulpit. Still, it's apparant that Paul wouldn't have considered it a significant enough reason to ban women from teh pulpit, since he did not do so.
     
  18. CubeX

    CubeX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree!

    -CubeX
     
  19. Emily

    Emily
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    0
    The word of faith cult-like church that I belonged to for a LONG time had a beautiful woman as one of their Pastors..

    She was a GREAT preacher.. She could hold your attention like no other in that church... too bad she was preaching false doctrines..

    but I guess my point was that most men did not seem distracted with her beauty.. My husband used to love to hear her preach.. She dressed very modestly, and looked pretty every time she preached, but not "hot", so to speak.. I think she looks like Princess Jasmine..

    I dont agree with women being Pastors.. it just doesnt feel right to me.. even though I have seen some women preach the pants off men!
     
  20. Jesus is Lord

    Jesus is Lord
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which Church was it?
     

Share This Page

Loading...