Women in the pastorate and pulpit...

When the Word of God is read, God spells out how he wants the church to be officed or ran. He knows why He wants it that way and for anyone to change this because of how the world sees things now, would be placing the world's view above God's will. That would not be from God, so that means it would have to be from one who is against God Word.

13 No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."
Luke 16:13 (NKJV)

 

One aspect of this discussion that needs consideration is the difference between reading the Bible as God's words, ipsissima verba, and reading it as the words of those led by Him. If it is the latter, then that allows us to listen to the nuances of their perceptions, particularly when, as in Paul's case, he sometimes identifies things as his own opinion or practice rather than as direct revelation. So when Paul says that it is his practice not to allow women leadership in the churches, he is giving us his best judgment but is not assuming that he has the last word on the matter.

Then there is the problem of the pastoral epistles -- their authorship, their provenance, and how they reflect an emerging situation in the early church's polity. Can they be considered as pertinent for all time, or were they a response to the needs of the churches in that time and place?

This kind of question is important to reflect on, rather than simply saying, "It's in the Bible." Who wrote it, and why, and toward what effect?

 

While I think you are correct about Debra, that doesn't mean that every woman who thinks she's called to preach is God calling her because of an indictment against men. It can be explained just as easily by the woman who subscribes to the same liberal beliefs that Crabtownboy does. Once you do that, the door to women preachers is wide open. You even have a handy excuse to avoid what the Bible teaches by pointing out the story of Debra to justify yourself. BTW, I'm not saying you're doing this.

 

And Ann, have you noticed that those churches which have such practices also get a lot of other things wrong, too?

 

Debra was judge not a priest (OT)/pastor (NT). God called men and women to be judges just as He did to be prophets but do not confuse the positions as being one and the same.

God never called a women to fill in where the priests of God had fallen away and was leading the Nation of God's people into sin. Nor will you find, in scripture, where God called a woman to the pastorate where men fall short, weren't enough or whatever.

 

But what Paul wrote was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit; it is direct revelation. In the case of what I think you refer to (I Cor 7.12), Paul is saying that what he writes is not something Jesus has said, but nevertheless, we cannot regard this as Paul's mere opinion.

But don't take my word for it:

"Here [Paul] can cite no word of the earthly Jesus but relies directly on
his own sense of how God is guiding or inspiring him (cf. vv. 25, 40)"
(Craig Blomberg, "The NIV Application Commentary: 1 Corinthians," p. 135).

In a footnote, Blomberg references "most commentators," such as Peter
Richardson ("'I Say, Not the Lord': Personal Opinion, Apostolic Authority,
and the Development of Early Christian Halakah," TynB 31 [1980]: 65-86.
Blomberg adds that "attempts to distinguish levels of the authority of the
two kinds of statements fail."


In the Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament edition, David K. Lowery writes on 1 Corinthians and says this (p. 518): "Jesus, in the course of His ministry, never had addressed this issue (cf. vv. 10, 25).
But Paul, with no less authority (cf. v. 25) did. . . . Paul affirmed that
the same principle should operate in a believer-unbeliever marriage as in a
marriage of two Christians: as a rule, no divorce."


Adam Clarke's Commentary on this passage has the following:

"[But to the rest speak I, not the Lord] As if he had said: For what I have
already spoken I have the testimony of the Lord by Moses, and of my own Lord and Master, Christ; but for the directions which I am now about to give there is no written testimony, and I deliver them now for the first time. These words do not intimate that the apostle was not now under the influences of the divine Spirit; but, that there was nothing in the sacred writings which bore directly on this point."

 

If you are speaking of leadership in 'general' (such as bible studies, visiting, ect..) I see nothing wrong here though there might need to be some thought regarding where, and as to what it is doing but for the most part no problem.

With regard to teaching 'in the church'.. that would depends on how one understands the scriptures on teaching in relation to a/the currently assembled body.
For me, I see the issue of "not to teach a man" as speaking more in relation to both the Pastorial aspects of his office, being that of preaching and teaching the assembled body as one group. It could also refer to that of another person teaching the group as a whole and thus can be understood in context as the person who did this being only male.

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

Annsni...

The question is, is it REALLY specifically forbidden in the scriptures? Do the scriptures REALLY teach that women are to be perpetually in a subservient, "under the man all the time", "stay in your place", "keep quiet" role in the church? Or is that just the interpretation favored by SOME men in Gods church...but of course not all men?

 

First, Yes - it is REALLY specifically forbidden in the scriptures that is abundantly clear. And Yes women, just like men, have a God ordained position and place with regard to certain things and it has not changed since God set it up.

No one has said anything of the sort (what I bolded) so the commonly claimed (though never said) argument you gave is a false one.

The fact is scripture, not man, makes it abundantly clear that women shall not be pastors nor that they are (in a corporate worship setting) to teach men. You never find in scripture a female pastor just as you would never find a female priest both of whom declare(d), expound(ed), and teach/taught the Word of God to His assembly/Church.

 

Your church is not alone. Most congregations are 60% women. I know mine is and if I could my men's ministry doing half of what the WMU does we would be growing like crazy.

But I would like to hear what others think of my first post.

 

You should also notice the words and attitude of Debera towards Barak. This alone dismisses her as some sort of example for women pastors. She informs Barak that the glory will not belong to him but to a woman. She was speaking as though something were wrong with that picture....not like it was exceptable or the norm.

 

Is being a teacher and the principle the same thing? They are both leaders.
Or what about being a supervisor vs a manager?

The disinction is made in 1. the forum that it is conducted, and 2. the authority that mandated for to and for that position.

A Sunday school teacher does not have the same authority the pastor nor does the music minister. They have a limited authority within their own spheres of ministry but it is distinctly different than that of the pastor.

Secondly, as I stated, we can at the very least clearly distinquish the cases like when the body of Christ/Church is assembled together as a whole. The passage in which Paul speaks of not allowing a woman teach nor to usurup.. is in this case specifically dealing with the assembled body (like what we call Church service).

The other aspects are where some diverge on the women teaching issue. Though they can not be preachers before the assembled congregation they can (as some see it) be allowed to teach smaller groups because this is not the assembled body of believers.

Now this gets confusing to those who do not understand what the Church the is biblically and not what some have distorted it to become. It is not 'where two or three gather together' but is a called together group who becomes one entity of saved/believers who have purposed together to fulfill as one body the Commissioning of Christ. And this body has leader which the pastor(s)/elder(s) as well some other aspects that scripture lays down. So in other words a bible study is not a church nor is the gathering of christians for a concert.

First of all, Beth Moore's ministry is biblical as she primarily deals with women but also teaches to anyone 'outside' a church gathering. However this was answered in what I gave as Beth M. is not teaching men in what we call a church setting.

Joyce Myer's is a pastor and a word of faith false teacher so she is not even comparable.

Yes, some for the better and some lead into false teachings depending on which one you choose to discuss. However, as I stated (regarding Beth M.) She does not stand before a Church body and teach and thus there is nothing wrong with what she is doing. However Joyce M. DOES stand before churches a pastor and also before them as a congregation teaching them as they are assembled together as the body of Christ.

But yes, we are to declare something is wrong when scripture speaks against it. We do not allow nor keep silent when there are people 'seemingly' being helped by a pastors ministry but is also openly sleeping around with the women and the men of that group. We should never assume God is condoning something that He states is wrong just because there are many people there. I remember a pastor once said a wise bit of truth which was :

"Just because a church is growing does not mean that God is involved." (that part I remember clearly - the rest is a sort of paraphrase of what he said explaining it) To assume such is to throw out scripture and depend on our own understanding, emotions, and worldly views. We must always compare what is going on and being taught to the Word of God. If it passes the scriptural test - it is of God for He is declaring Himself through the Word by our lives and ministries. If it does not then it is not of God.

You wonder, if it's wrong why are so many peoples lives affected by them? First I'm just wondering why you will trump scripture for experience. Experiences do not dictate scripture but scripture dicates our experiences that we might know what is of God and what is not.

Second, only one of the two are biblcally ministering according to scripture the other stands in direct opposition to a great many biblical truths

 

Wow! Much shorter and more specific than mine
Well done!

 

God appears to have made some statements after the incident in the garden. Certain things were said of all the players. Satan, Adam, and Eve. And to Eve it was said of Adam........

Gen 3:16 .............and he shall rule over thee.

Now, what was said to Satan, enmity and bruising, still applies to this day. What was said to Adam, work and toil and sweat and thistles all apply to this day. I would have to assume that what he said to Eve...... you follow?

Just as the Adam was proclaimed guilty and the consequence of his sin passed to all mankind...... the consequence of Eve's actions were passed to all women.

1 Tim 2:12-14 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

And in scripture..... it is clearly pointed out and back to Eve's transgression as being the reason that she was not to teach, nor usurp......., but to be in silence. Will you argue that what was said to Satan about enmity between him and the woman is outdated and to be revised. Is what he said to Adam no longer valid...... So why do we decide to remove from scripture the consequences of Eve's actions.

My point is that when a woman teaches or usurps authority over the man, and is not in silence, she has gone against what God has decreed, ordained, and set in order.

 

Wow! they keep popping up!!!!!! A triple..... I must really be opinionated......

 

Double post!