Women Pastors

I don't think she should have been teaching the adult SS class if it had men in it.

No women pastors either, or women with leadership roles over men in the church.

Here are a couple of links I posted on another thread recently:
Good article critiquing and responding to Biblical arguments for women pastors today (egalitarian views) by Ron Rhodes:
http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0136a.html

Site for Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (Complementarian view)
www.cbmw.org

 

I was simply responding to the crass opinion of someone calling me wrong without any documentation. Those kind of things are easy to say but clearly reveal the lack of study by the person who says them.

 

gb,

I'm the one asking your for documentation/ support and you then accuse me of not having supporting documentation and being uneducated and crass. What are you smoking?! And yes, my opinions are crass, but how about you dealing with the initial questions asking for proof for some of your statements that I am supposed to take as fact...because they came from you I guess, rather then puffing (get it puffing...smoking, that's funny without even trying) yourself up and creating the image that you are some expert about things you yourself are unable to backup.

 

Let's calm down fellas. We are supposed to be discussing an issue, not attacking each other.

 

"Wives, love your husbands...." I guess men don't have to love their wives then.

"Peace on earth, good will towards men." No peace for women.

"He among you who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." I guess women can cast stones whether they're with sin or not.

"Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother..." But a woman doesn't have to leave her parents?

 

Johnv, are you being serious about the above post? I laughed for awhile before I thought you were serious.

 

I read a book by Jeanette Oke. About a woman Deaconess. She preached, but didn't pastor. This book was set in the turn of the Century. It was very intresting how she build a church on her own in a community. It's called The Calling of Emily Evans.

while I don't think that a woman should preform weddings, bury, or so on... I don't see anything wrong with a woman giving a lesson where a male preacher is lacking. Afterall , Isn't the point to get the Word out?

Err ... Should I hide now 0.o?

 

The point is to be biblical....God has a perfect plan,we need to follow what scripture teaches,not what works for the moment.

Who said Janette Oak books were the guideline for doing things biblical? Obviously she just telling a story,or she was way off base on what is right and wrong.

The Bible clearly speaks on this subject...women can not teach or preach to men. Men are to be the leaders of the church. They are to be the teachers of the Word. Like I said before,women can teach women and children.
Scripture does not allow for women to be preachers. Period. We can not change what the Word says. Nor can we ignore it. His purposes and plans will prevail. Some may not obey it,but it will always be Truth.

 

What we see in the churches of today is not what was being taught in the apostolic churches. The scriptures are very clear as to the offices in the church. There are too many watered down churches today who wish to justify their position of (aposty) I do not think the godly woman of her houshold objects to the husband as being -What the term "husband" means. What we are seeing in too many churches today is lack of spirituality.. We see very little of Repent and Be Baptised.. What we really hear is "Situation ethics". Well, I have spouted off enough- ASk the Lord to have Mercy upon us and thank him for his unconditional love and abounding Grace. Dewey Maggard

 

gb93433----SBC "Theology" hasn't changed---as you have mentioned earlier---for me, my theology is the same as the late, greats---RG Lee, WA Criswell, Homer G. Lindsey, Jr----Our theology hasn't changed since our "Grassroots" start!

True---the SBC was started over the Slavery issue----but about 10 years ago as I recall---at the Annual Convention meeting in New Orleans---the SBC voted on a motion to issue a "Blanket" act of repentance toward the whole African-American culture---asking forgiveness for its role played in the War Between the States. I was part of the vote that passed in the affirmative---Yes, we will ask forgiveness----now----according to the word from the Word thats what we were commanded to do---but you know what???? Just as we were commanded to ask forgivenss----the African-American culture is also commanded to give forgiveness! And if they refuse to forgive---they are just as guilty in that---as we were in the roll played that helped spark that great war!

Unfortuneately---the Law of the Harvest is manifest---the SBC is still reaping what its sown over 135 years ago!

Blackbird

 

"Wives, love your husbands...." I guess men don't have to love their wives then.

"Peace on earth, good will towards men." No peace for women.

"He among you who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." I guess women can cast stones whether they're with sin or not.

"Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother..." But a woman doesn't have to leave her parents? </font>[/QUOTE]Johnv, what are you doing here? Are you mocking God's word? What's up?

 

Women can "preach" in some contexts. They can preach to/teach/help train other women and are biblically commanded to do so to an extent.

"Preach" can also be synonomous with what we term as witnessing or sharing the gospel. I am not aware of any gender restrictions on this type of activity.


John, Please tell me you aren't serious.

You know that you must abuse the scriptures you listed to draw the conclusions you pose.

And surely, you must know that there is no abuse whatsoever of the scripture that says literally "one woman man" in saying that it means pastors must be men. The literal translation is actually more devastating to the idea of female pastors than "husband of one wife" since it specifically identifies the "man".

 

I'm not forbidden from posting here.

I don't appreciate the false accusation. I guess you don't want to address my point?

My point is that we interpret the Bible to use "men" as "all" when it suits us, and "men" to refer to "men" when it suits us as well. To be specific, no, I don't think it's clearcut to say that "husband of one wife" excludes women from the pulpit. I think it's a possible interpretation, but not clearcut. Where is the scriptural support that husbands are required to love their wives if scripture says "wives, love your husbands"? Simply saying "oh, he must be mocking scripture" is not a valid arguement, especially since I don't intend to mock scripture in any way.

 

John, this little thing called "context" helps us to determine when "men" refers to "males" and when it refers to everyone.

 

My point is that we interpret the Bible to use "men" as "all" when it suits us, and "men" to refer to "men" when it suits us as well.</font>[/QUOTE] No. We interpret based on the context and known language rules. It is clear that "men" can generically be used for "mankind" whereas "woman" is very specific. The text about pastoral qualifications uses both thus making the gender requirement very specific.

Then you are simply denying that the scripture says what it says under normal language rules.

I don't believe that the command for a husband to love his wife carries an implicit commnand for the woman to love her husband in that particular passage. However it can be shown as a principle with other scripture.

But you could very well argue that women are not biblically commanded to love their husbands as specifically as husbands are commanded to love their wives. Wives are commanded to honor and obey.

Her task to obey is in general on the same level of difficulty as man's task to sacrificially love her more than himself.

I didn't say that... I said you were wrong.

 

Yes, I agree. The "husband of one wife" verse was not contextually intended to exclude women from teh pulpit.

Needless to say, we disagree on that. Fair enough. However, you should refrain from beilitlling posters just because you disagree with them.

Oops, I didn't mean you per se. My bad!!

 

I AM A NEW MEMBER OF BAPTIST BOARD AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THE LORD DREW ME TO THIS FORUM BECAUSE I AM HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME TRYING TO FIT IN AT THE BAPTIST CHURCH I AM GOING TO HERE IN ILLINOIS AND THEY HAVE THE SAME BELIEF THAT WOMEN SHOULD NOT BE PASTORS. WHEN IT SAYS THAT WOMEN SHOULD NOT HAVE AUTHORITY OVER MEN TO ME THAT SAYS IN THE RELATIONSHIP AT THE HOME. GOD CALLED US ALL TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO EVERYONE. MY MOTHER WHO IS A METHODIST HAS BEEN AN ORDAINED MINISTER FOR ALMOST 3 YRS. AND HAS TAKEN A FULL TIME JOB AS PASTOR OF A METHODIST CHURCH IN ILLINOIS. WE ARE ALL EQUAL IN GOD'S EYES AND THAT'S HOW IT SHOULD BE IN OUR EYES ALSO. WE ARE ALL CALLED TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN OUR LIFE TO MINISTER SOMEHOW TO UNBELIEVERS DRAWING THEM TUR LORD AND SAVIOR.MY MOTHER WAS CALLED TO BE A MINISTER FOR A CHURCH AND SHE HAS OBEYED GOD'S CALLING AND I AM VERY PROUD OF HER.

 

Being called to different areas of ministry is not equal. Just look at the population. None are equal. Every person is gifted differently.

It is God who determines the giftedness. Therefore it is God who calls to different areas of ministry.

 

If you all would just read the Bible, you would see that God used man to lead his people, not women, but with that said, a man is not capable of leading effectively without a faithful woman beside him.

Johnv, I suggest you read through the KJB and record each time God uses men and women and see what roles they were put in, it may surprise you to see that the Bible is clearcut on this issue.

 

I've read it, as well as the Greek and Hebrew source texts. I've formed my opinion from these. I know you disagree with my conclusion. Fair enough. That doesn't make you more educated on the subject than I.