1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The place of women in the Church

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by stilllearning, Sep 23, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RAdam

    RAdam New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,100
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly. If there is a power vacuum, you cannot blame a woman for leading, you blame the men for not doing what God commanded.
     
  2. jaigner

    jaigner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is very strange. Speaking out and causing trouble is not an issue of gender. Men have done the same thing.

    Women were required by Paul to learn from their husbands because women were not educated. Today, thankfully, women can be educated just as men (not at SWBTS, but at many fine evangelical schools), are not claimed as property, are not viewed as inferior. Women have as much to add to the discussion on Christian life as men do, perhaps more at times, seeing how the accounts of Church history that we have are from almost exclusively male points of view. Women bring a fresh voice into the conversation.

    Furthermore, most of the couples I have known who claim to believe in male headship have functioned practically as an egalitarian couple. Those where the man regularly asserted obvious attempts of headship were generally weaker marriage relationships. There is fluidity here and, by the grace of God, men and women are called to build Christ's Kingdom.

    I was raised to dogmatically argue for male headship, but it wasn't the practical example I had. At one point, in grad school I had to come to the point where I realized my attachment to the complementarian point of view was out of my own personal insecurity and preference, but that I couldn't get there from the text.
     
  3. Alcott

    Alcott Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    9,404
    Likes Received:
    353
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Paul evidently "forgot to erase" one or more of the things he wrote on this general topic. What do you think it was, or they were??
     
  4. RAdam

    RAdam New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,100
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is awefully strange that the context of these verses say that women were required to learn of their husbands, be silent, not usurp authority, and be in submission because of God's command to the woman at the fall rather than because of lack of education, or because of a particular issue in the church, or because of cultural considerations. Yet, despite the clear language of the context, people would rather insert their own reasons. Moreover, people would go against the language of scripture and claim that men taking a leadership role weakens a marriage. What weakens a marriage is couples not following Paul's instructions.

    The lesson with marriage is women are to submit to the husband like the church submits to Christ, while the husband is to love the wife like Christ loves His church. I ask again, does Christ submit to His church?
     
  5. Jerome

    Jerome Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    9,788
    Likes Received:
    698
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I Cor. 16:19
    Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.
     
  6. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2

    Thank you RAdam, for answering the question, of my OP.
     
  7. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ann, only one problem to your theory here... there were no church buildings.. .all the churches at this time were home churches... so yes, they taught in the church.
     
  8. jaigner

    jaigner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is an issue of interpretation, not of "inserting" ones own reasons. Many, many evangelicals have, like me, arrived at this position after much thought, prayer and study.
     
  9. annsni

    annsni Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,914
    Likes Received:
    706
    Acts 18:24-26 "Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately."

    I don't see them doing this at church.
     
  10. John Toppass

    John Toppass Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,080
    Likes Received:
    8
    Twist and massage the scripture till it says what you want it too.

    Phoebe was not a deaconess she was a servant. All deacons are servants but not all servants are deacons.
    The scriptures say that the office of deacon is that of a male. While some think women should be able to be deacons or deaconess's, this is not scriptural.

    I guess if a church does not want to follow scripture, then the church can do anything it wants. That would make it a church that does not follow the word of God.
     
  11. jaigner

    jaigner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    According to you.

    But there are a lot of Christ-following evangelicals who want to be faithful to the Bible who believe differently.
     
  12. Peggy

    Peggy New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have a perfectly fine head, thank you. His name is Jesus and I follow him.

    I'm nearly 50 years old. I don't need my father to be the "head" over me. And I am unmarried.

    --------------------------------------------------
    Yes because some men believe they are inherently superior to women. I disagree.

    hahahaha! Are you a Hyles-Anderson College grad, perchance?
    My head is firmly attached to my body.

    The most devout people I personally know are widows in the church. Who is head over them? Why Jesus Christ, of course. They are completely devoted to his headship and rule over their lives.
     
  13. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    2
    I trust that all here understand that that, in business as well as marriage, a co-equal partnership is a recipe for gridlock and conflict.

    If any of you have business partners, then you know that if each partner has equal decision-making authority, that won't work. Someone has to have the final word, or nothing will ever get done. The same with marriage.

    It's a question of each partner's role. It is not a question of boss/employee or boss/underling. And I guarantee you that if I demand to make all the decisions without listening to my wife, she will have a fool for a husband.

    In the final analysis, the key is not if the wife submits to her husband. The key is that both be submitted to the Lord. If one is not, then the submission thing won't work very well.

    As I was writing, I remembered that the OP was about the role of women in the church, not in the home. So forget what I wrote above.
     
    #73 Tom Butler, Sep 25, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2010
  14. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    18,441
    Likes Received:
    259
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Their house probably was the church. House churches were the norm of the day in the very early church. So they were teaching both in their home and in the church ... and in reality it doesn't matter, teaching is teaching is teaching.
     
    #74 Crabtownboy, Sep 25, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2010
  15. John Toppass

    John Toppass Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,080
    Likes Received:
    8
    No, according to scripture. Try reading it, everything else is subordinate even what you and I think or want to happen.
     
  16. Jerome

    Jerome Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    9,788
    Likes Received:
    698
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You mean like reading "silence" and "not permitted to speak" in Scripture, and then undertaking a paragraph-long, convoluted explanation to reinterpret Paul's words, claiming what he really meant to write was that they can speak at church, they just can't serve as a church officer?

    Is that what you mean by twisting and massaging Scripture?
     
  17. annsni

    annsni Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,914
    Likes Received:
    706
    Just because their church met in their home doesn't mean that their home was "church". "Church" would be the assembly. Where do we see that they took Apollos home to the assembly?
     
  18. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    18,441
    Likes Received:
    259
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I do not believe you meant that sentence as it comes across on the cool screen.

    That is one of the best statements playing both sides against the middle I have ever seen. Any politician would be pleased to be able to make such a two sided statement.

    I mean really it is saying, "The church is the church, but the church isn't the church or are you saying the church met but there was no church.

    I believe you have touched on one of the weaknesses of English with this one.



    Hmmmmmmmm, this is rather like saying since the Sunday School class is not the whole assembly, they though the class is in the church it isn't in the church.

    Unfortunately in English the word 'church' can mean the entire body or members and it can also mean the building. I am not a Greek scholar. Perhaps Greek is better here and there are two words for "church" one definitely meaning the believers and the other the building.
     
  19. Jerome

    Jerome Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    9,788
    Likes Received:
    698
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So now there's church and "church".

    Annsni, when your church had a woman bring the Sunday morning message, was she silent or "silent"?
     
  20. annsni

    annsni Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,914
    Likes Received:
    706
    The Bible clearly tells us that Aquilla and Priscilla brought Apollos into their home. My husband and I also will bring people into the church building to meet with them for teaching and counseling. Guess what? While they are in the church building, that is not the church assembly. Is the prohibition against speaking in the church meaning the church building or the assembly? THAT is the difference.

    Let's say we have our new church plant meeting in my house. We then have someone over for dinner on Monday night. Are they in the church? Nope. They are in our home. Just because the church meets in our house doesn't mean that my home is the church. Understand?

    You mean when Anne Graham spoke? I fully disagreed with that.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...