Featured TV Star Turned Baptist Minister

Michael wrenn- Rather than toss around terms like subjugation of women, religious bigotry, and male chauvinists ; why not just go to a church you agree with?

Some of us don't agree with the concept of a woman pastor because we see it as being unbiblical. Too bad you can't put your bitterness and sarcasm aside and respect that.

 

I can understand this point and, to a certain degree, I understand it. There are many doctrines I disagree with that I would be largely silent about. It's okay to disagree and, who knows, maybe they're the ones that are correct.

This one is different. We're talking about an intentional, misguided attempt to silence 50% of the Church because of a couple of tiny portions of Scripture that Paul gave to a specific 1st-century context. And these misguided beliefs have spawned countless numbers of abuse, physical and emotional. It's time to give it up.

 

ONLY time that will be able to happen is IF the Lord decides to go back on His word commanding us NOT to ordain women in pastorate positions, nor in Elders spots!

Guess the answer will be "never!"

 

Fortunately for everyone here, I have studied and now speak JesusChaser's language. Allow me to translate.

Amazingly enough, he used the quotation marks correctly.

Unfortunately, this is complete crap. Many evangelical scholars have quite easily refuted this base argument.

Read a book. Or a journal or something.

 

It so happens that I don't interpret scripture through a Pharisaical lens. Based on experience, reason, and very early tradition (the Celtic Church), I also read scripture and infer from it that Jesus accepts women on an equal basis for any kind of service in the church, including that of pastor. Jesus first appeared to women after the Resurrection, and He commissioned them to go and teach men the fact. Also, I believe this based on the true, original NT meaning of headship: http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/i-believe-male-headship.

People who don't believe in women pastors interpret scripture selectively. They take literally anything that seems to support their subjugation of women but ignore, or interpret differently, other passages.

I like this statement from the Nazarene Manual:

"The purpose of Christ’s redemptive work is to set God’s
creation free from the curse of the Fall. Those who are “in
Christ” are new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17). In this re-
demptive community, no human being is to be regarded as
inferior on the basis of social status, race, or gender (Gala-
tians 3:26-28).
Acknowledging the apparent paradox created by Paul’s in-
struction to Timothy (1 Timothy 2:11-12) and to the church
in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:33-34), we believe interpreting
these passages as limiting the role of women in ministry
presents serious conflicts with specific passages of scripture
that commend female participation in spiritual leadership
roles (Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-18; 21:8-9; Romans 16:1, 3, 7;
Philippians 4:2-3), and violates the spirit and practice of the
Wesleyan-holiness tradition. Finally, it is incompatible with
the character of God presented throughout Scripture, espe-
cially as revealed in the person of Jesus Christ."

There are many fine articles on women's ordination on the CBE website: http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/ordination-women

 

He has a bride...us...and oh, He was just a little bit unique, being God and all :BangHead:

 

Completely ignorant argument. Based on your understanding, we can throw out all of the requirements outlined in Scripture since they offend and discriminate against a broad group of people

Husband of one wife is NOT debatable no matter how many liberal baptists here say it is.

 

It certainly is different. It is a sin against God to exclude women this way.

And I get accused of sarcasm and bitterness? Well, add righteous anger to that. As you said, women are being subjected to abuse by those who would deny them the chance to fulfill God's calling. I know many Godly women who heard that call and are following it, bringing souls into the kingdom and providing comfort and many blessings to those whom they are serving. God continues to call women to pastoral ministry and bless their ministry even while others would deny them that place based on a false interpretation of scripture, imagining that they know the mind and will of God on the matter.

I'm glad God is in charge and not these people who treat women as second-class Christians.

 

Saying so doesn't make you a liberal. This is not a liberal viewpoint.

Of course, the passage was speaking to a world in which there was horrible discrimination against women. It didn't need to say "or wife of one husband" because that wouldn't have made any sense in that context.

We can definitely interpret it that way today.

 

You are creating a context and a tension that does not exist. The whole of Scripture is the context in regards to the roles of man and women. Men are to lead, women to submit to leadership. A man being under a woman's leadership is contrary to the whole of Scripture, making your hermeneutic faulty.

 

where inthe Bible did the Lord or one of His Apostles have women in either elder or a pastoral position within the local church setting though?

Lets be blunt, this is JUST "Biblical femenism" trying to creep into church through the ole" paul was JUST "accomodating cultural norms of the time!"

 

There are millions of evangelicals that disagree with you, including some of the best minds in Christian scholarship.

 

Completely ignorant statement. Head covering for women is not debatable, according to how you interpret scripture. Bet your women don't follow it; bet your church doesn't make them.

This is not a liberal-conservative issue. People like you always resort to that to try to discredit those who disagree with you. The first supporters of women's ordination among Protestants were conservative holiness people and denominations, and that remains true to this day.

 

Corrected version:

This may be the first correct thing you've ever said, though it takes a linguist to be able to decipher it. Biblical feminism is creeping into the Church, and since it's biblical, that's a good thing.

Let's face it, you have no standing in this argument, and you are going against the best scholarship evangelicals have to offer.

 

Not true; your hermeneutic is faulty. If scripture is not interpreted in context, errors follow.

http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/i-believe-male-headship

 

...and? Are we to blindly follow others or follow what God's word says?

 

I have interpreted it in context of the whole of Scripture, something your hermeneutic wants to disregard.