Good for Baptist Women; SBC Still Not Listening

Woman can preachers and those keeping women from pursuing their call are wrong.

 

If you are referring to the position of Elder please provide Biblical support that backs it up?

Thanks!

 

Well, you beat me to it!

 

A.T. Pierson preaching on Hebrews 13:7 at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, 1892:

"This text, whatever may be its other value, is mainly of importance, because it indicates three tests of a genuine, God-sent leader. In the first place he speaks the word of God, in the second place his faith is fixed on a personal Saviour; and, in the third place, his life conforms to the Word of God and to the faith in Christ, and ends in a glorious immortality. Wherever we find those three indications meeting in any man or woman, we may recognize the heaven-sent leader, and it is at our peril if we do not follow such leadership."

Wikipedia:

 

Junia was the name of women in that time. There is no record of a man ever being named Junia. As women were almost totally ignored in that day and time it is obvious she was quite something for Paul to even mention her. You should be proud of her instead of trying to belittle her role ... as men have done through the centuries.

I suggest you read the book, The Lost Apostle: Searching for the Truth About Junia by Rena Pederson.

 

jaigner,

I am quoting from your initial post, but I am responding to your line of argument throughout this thread. The majority of your arguments collapse in that they are not good analogies. Civil rights and slavery are a poor example because these things are clearly contrary to Scripture and nowhere in the New Testament will one find instructions to enslave others. To say that the march of social justice will help us to see that we are similarly misinterpreting Scripture here is laughable. The text of Scripture clearly qualifies men alone for the office of Elder.

While the direct qualification passages are clear, one could argue that this is a social distinctive. I do not believe this argument holds as the early church did many things that threw them at odds with both Jewish and pagan culture. I just can't see why Paul would draw a line here saying, "While I know that God is all for women in the ministry, I better not write such a socially-upsetting fact in my letter." Paul didn't show such cowardice elsewhere. Why would he settle on this point?

The passage that really gets past any argument over social distinctives is found in I Corinthians. Paul says that woman are not to be in authority over men. Now, you already attempted to "culturalize" this by speaking about women covering their heads (clearly a cultural distinctive). Yet Paul did not disallow women to be in authority because of culture; he clearly attributes this position to the order of creation. Why? What does this say to Paul? It says that God instilled in creation an order that He expects to be followed...an order that is not social, but God-ordained. Again, Paul bases this argument not on Corinthian morals or culture, but on the clear pattern he saw in Genesis, while under the inspiration of the Spirit.

 

When some do not have an argument then they make extreme and unfounded comparisons to raise the level of emotion. It is a debate tactic rather than a discussion.

 

So Paul was wrong when He said in 1 Timothy 2:12 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.

To be a Pastor she would need to teach men. He also said in 1 Timothy 3: 2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
Reiterated it to Titus in chapter 1 of that scripture. Two qualification a woman cannot meet she cannot be one on woman man and if she is married she shouldn't rulerth his own house, excuse let me reinterpret that verse shw doesn't ruleth well her own house and she will be a one woman, woman no we have yet another reason she shouldn't be a pastor.

 

remember "pinko?"

I can remember when debating Christians came to a draw, one quoting one proof text to prove a point and the other quoting a different one to disprove it would end the debate with one calling the other pinko.

Meaning communist.

We don't do that today--we accuse them of being liberal.

Conservative, fundamentalist, liberal, whatever are just labels.

If the liberal is right, they are still right even if labelled liberal.

Same goes for the fundamentalist.

Why can't we debate from scripture instead of name calling?

Why do we drop the l bomb or the even worse "well obviously you don't believe the Bible?"

Believers CAN understand the Bible differently, and we may not know who's understanding is correct until eternity.

They will know we are Christians by our love, not our debating skills or lack of them.

 

NODAK...

I like your post. :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

...Bob

 

As do I! Great post.

 

Sorry, I just don't buy that at all. You sound like those people who want to throw out the Constitution because it "doesn't really apply to us today". God doesn't need to re-write Scripture so it "fits" our attitudes about it. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God............... There's an old saying............ "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it." That will tell you where I stand.
There are too many "politically correct" Christians , IMHO. I'm amazed and somewhat shocked by this whole thread, to be truthful.

 

AMEN!!!!!

I basically said the same in another thread and was reminded that we weren't talking about FLOWERS, as if it's ok to be unkind and call names depending on the topic being discussed. Even had one poster here go so far as to say if I couldn't "handle it" (meaning their unkindness) I shouldn't participate!

Personally, I don't believe we women are to be ordained pastors or teach/usurp authority over the men in church. But calling people "liberals" and telling them they don't believe the Bible (meaning our interpretation of the Bible) is not going to win them to our way of thinking. It simply attacks the person instead of the position.

Seems some of us have "the truth" but not the LOVE that should accomodate that truth.

 

So how does this fit the first century church and not us?

1 Timothy 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Where do you get get that "Christianity has long discriminated against women"?
Because women were not allowed to preach?
They have been SS teachers, there are womans organizations like the WMU and others, woman have been allowed to accomplish many things witihin the church but, they were not allowed to be pastors, is that what you consider discriminated against? Woman have also and are normally VBS directors in the 60's and 70's the VBS was in daytime and mostly women taguht and many children were added to the church because the efforts of the women.

 

Yes, amen! I need to quote Salty in a message, only by permission, of course!

 

I disagree with this completely. Christianity does not discriminate. If anything the Bible shows us how important women are! :jesus: Jesus first revealed himself to women! There are tons of examples of how we are told to treat women. That being said, the Bible clearly lays out the roles men and women are to have.

Many people have asked for scriptural support for the view of women being allowed to be elders. None has been provided. That speaks for itself.

I do agree name calling is not appropriate. We are all here for fellowship.