For those who believe in women pastors...

[InquisitorKind]

-edited for poor scholarship

Why do you think it's ok?

And how do you explain your views in light of:

NASB

1 Timothy 2:

11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.
12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.
13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.
14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

I have yet to come to a decision about this...

Any input would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
~Matt

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

This is an issue that I have been struggleing with for years. I have tried to justify allowing Women pators.

As an American in the 21st century, I want the word of God to be parrallel to my culture.

As a Christian who takes the word of God to be inspired, I find it more and more difficult to accept that the word of God allows for that.

I too would like to here well reasoned arguments from both sides.

[JCA]

First, Christ didn't exaclty say these words.. the words are someone elses, and are explaining how they see it.

From what I have studied, this is more of a cultural thing of the time.. but lets look at the verses in the KJV:

1 Tim 2
7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
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.

This person, the author, is relating to what they believe is right in the context of how teaching should be done.. However, looking at the actual text, you can see that this person says *I*, and not that Christ says..

It does not particularly state here that women CAN'T teach, only that they should LEARN in silence and subjection.. and that HE doesn't let them have authority over men.

Another thing to think about is the culture at the time. Not many people where schooled, and least of all the women. They where second class citizens, and most of the time only a few steps above slaves. Not many men would listen to a woman trying to "teach" them anything back then.

Even in Strongs, and in other Church documents, there is mention of female "Deaconesses".. and in fact, Christ was ministered to by females, and they carried His messages for Him.

I think it may come to a level of teaching that maybe women aren't supposed to be involved in.. maybe above the station of Deaconess is not available..

I too would like to hear more opinions on such a topic..

:)

Love and Peace

JCA

[dizzle]

Personally, I do not believe that women should be the Head Pastor at a Church.... where exactly the line is drawn I have more difficulty with.

[Jaltus]

Can opposed post at all? If so, I have a lot to say about JCA's post, otherwise I'll just watch.

[JCA]

Maybe I should clarify a little more..

In a way, I'm like Dee Dee on this.. I'm not sure of what 'level' it should be governed at.. However, I do not believe that the Holy Spirit does not work through women, and so would have to believe that they too are touched by God and also have a portion of 'truth' given them:

Romans 12
4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:
5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.
6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;
7 Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;
8 Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness.

This also says to me that maybe we are defining the position wrongly.. maybe we are taking the "Women can't teach" text out of context in the respect that although they may not be able to teach NEW revelations to Men, they may well be allowed to help reinforce, Bible/Scripture study etc. on a level seemingly above Man..

Once again, it's a touchy subject, because society and our understanding of God has actually come a long way from having women as second class citizens..

Also, this whole thing ties into a lot of things.. IF the command is rigid, and Women cannot teach, period.. then if Creationism gets into Schools, there better not be any Female teachers trying to explain it.. and you better define what teaching is in the respect of Scripture, because even discussing it on here could be considerd teaching..

AND :) What is the punishment for a woman 'teacher'? And If I learn something from a female who is quoting and 'teaching' scripture, has she done wrong?

Wow.. like that didn't muddy the water more :)

But, I'm interested in what Jaltus has to say, so if someone doesn't want him answering here, then let me know, and I'll ask him seperately :)

Love and Peace

JCA

[yxboom]

Jaltus:
Can opposed post at all? If so, I have a lot to say about JCA's post, otherwise I'll just watch. A thread with an invite in the other forums would work. :)

[InquisitorKind]

Jaltus:
Can opposed post at all? If so, I have a lot to say about JCA's post, otherwise I'll just watch.

::has mega powertrip:: ;)

j/k

Actually, I since I'm not looking for debate on this thread, I would ask that the opposed not post.

With that being said, I will be starting another thread looking at the other view, without interruptions as well.

Later, if no one beats me to the punch, I'll start another thread (on another part of the forum) and let people go at it, inserting my comments as needed.

Hope you don't mind too terribly, but if you have something that you're just itching to say, send me a PM. Or wait until I ask about the otherside.

Thanks very much!
~Matt

[InquisitorKind]

I'll get back to this thread later...I have suddenly become quite ill...

I retract what I said above and let Jaltus, and any others, post what they will in response to JCA...

:eww: :(

...later...

~Matt

[Jin-Roh]

It does not particularly state here that women CAN'T teach, only that they should LEARN in silence and subjection.. and that HE doesn't let them have authority over men.

Another thing to think about is the culture at the time. Not many people where schooled, and least of all the women. They where second class citizens, and most of the time only a few steps above slaves. Not many men would listen to a woman trying to "teach" them anything back then.


Good call on the education thing. Only men where educated back then. That's probably also really important when it a Christian might have to have the practical know how of how to debate a greek philosopher in argopeous[sp?] or something. I woman would have no idea how to do that because of the culture.

I don't know how far one can extend the whole women thing in the NT. The NT, in my view, supports a lot of things for women in the context of the culture. I've seen some great female preachers, but the pattern in the Bible is normally woman helps man (not making women inferior) not the other way around.

I mean, I know my pastor really appreicates his wife. So I'm pretty sure she plays a bigger role in helping the ministry then most of us suspect.

[smilax]

JCA:
First, Christ didn't exaclty say these words.. the words are someone elses, and are explaining how they see it.But as an apostle, Paul's words had the same weight behind them as Christ's own. A similar instance of this is found in the seventh chapter of I Corinthians.Another thing to think about is the culture at the time. Not many people where schooled, and least of all the women. They where second class citizens, and most of the time only a few steps above slaves. Not many men would listen to a woman trying to "teach" them anything back then.And Jewish fishermen would be preferred because...? As for the appeal to culture, the text itself shows that Paul is arguing from creation order. This has nothing to do with cultural values whatsoever but is rather grounded on the historical basis of the events in Eden.Even in Strongs, and in other Church documents, there is mention of female "Deaconesses".. and in fact, Christ was ministered to by females, and they carried His messages for Him.A deacon, of course, was one that set tables. And no one restricted women from ministering or bringing messages. The context of I Timothy is a formal ecclesial setting.However, I do not believe that the Holy Spirit does not work through women, and so would have to believe that they too are touched by God and also have a portion of 'truth' given them:No one denies this. But in unity, there is diversity. Galatians iii, 28 is often cited to prove that there is supposed to be total functional equality. A Jew does not worship as a Gentile did. They have different roles in the body. And precisely as Romans xii, 4 states, not all parts have the same office; particularly, women are not to have offices of teaching.This also says to me that maybe we are defining the position wrongly.. maybe we are taking the "Women can't teach" text out of context in the respect that although they may not be able to teach NEW revelations to Men, they may well be allowed to help reinforce, Bible/Scripture study etc. on a level seemingly above Man.. Again, speaking of literary context, right after I Timothy ii, 11-15 comes a passage on the qualifications of a bishop, namely one in a position of authority who taught (as opposed to deacons.) Reinforce? Absolutely. Priscilla helped Aquila teach Apollos. But when "authority" (whatever that means) is an issue, it becomes normative for the women to remain silent.Once again, it's a touchy subject, because society and our understanding of God has actually come a long way from having women as second class citizens..Of course, we would say that women were never second-class in God's eyes.Also, this whole thing ties into a lot of things.. IF the command is rigid, and Women cannot teach, period.. then if Creationism gets into Schools, there better not be any Female teachers trying to explain it.. and you better define what teaching is in the respect of Scripture, because even discussing it on here could be considerd teaching..I stand by the definition of teaching with respect to a formal gathering where authority (standing up and preaching a sermon, for instance) is an issue.AND :) What is the punishment for a woman 'teacher'? And If I learn something from a female who is quoting and 'teaching' scripture, has she done wrong?God can use the vilest acts for good, but those who did those actions will still be punished for their sins.

The point is not to relegate women to a lower position. Besides, the greatest in the kingdom of heaven will not be those who stand in the spotlight; it is the humble, the meek, the broken, and the contrite that Christ wants. With this in mind, we ought to heed to warning of James iii, 1, that those who teach will be held to a greater standard of accountability.

I Corinthians xii, 22: "Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary."

[JCA]

smilax:
But as an apostle, Paul's words had the same weight behind them as Christ's own. A similar instance of this is found in the seventh chapter of I Corinthians.

Are you saying that everything Paul said is to be taken that it came from Christs lips? Even when he says *I*? So in other words, Christ didn't just teach these people then, He programmed them not to have any of their own thoughts or say anything He didn't say.. and yet, I can't find where Christ said some of the things Paul says..

Plus as the verese says, 11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. Okay.. pretty straight forward.. then it goes on to say 'But I...

Why is this saying "but I".. why a "but" and why the "I"? Why not have it as plain as the line before it?

And Jewish fishermen would be preferred because...? As for the appeal to culture, the text itself shows that Paul is arguing from creation order. This has nothing to do with cultural values whatsoever but is rather grounded on the historical basis of the events in Eden.
Yes, he is blaming woman for the fall of man, and saying that is a reason to deny them teaching. Once again, in context with BOTH religious history AND the culture of the time was being reacted to. To believe that NONE of the verses in the Bible are put into context because of the prevailing society seems a little obsurd.

And yes, in the eyes of the society at the time, a Fisherman was considered above a woman.. your point?

A deacon, of course, was one that set tables. And no one restricted women from ministering or bringing messages. The context of I Timothy is a formal ecclesial setting.
And your reasoning for that is? Whre does the word "teach" only mean in a formal setting? Did Christ only "teach" in temples etc.? That is an assumption of Man.. even a Church is just an "assembly" of people.. And in church terms, a Deaconess or a Deacon, is someone who does more than just sets a table.. and carries messages..

No one denies this. But in unity, there is diversity. Galatians iii, 28 is often cited to prove that there is supposed to be total functional equality. A Jew does not worship as a Gentile did. They have different roles in the body. And precisely as Romans xii, 4 states, not all parts have the same office; particularly, women are not to have offices of teaching.
Where does it state that "prticularly" in Romans 12:4-8 that women can't teach?

Again, speaking of literary context, right after I Timothy ii, 11-15 comes a passage on the qualifications of a bishop, namely one in a position of authority who taught (as opposed to deacons.)
So the rank of Deacon is just to set tables and usher people? Interesting..

Church Servers - The Deacon

Church-Servers, the Deacon The name deacon in own sense designates a third rank of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. On initial assignment the deacons were servers at the meal of the Lord, i.e. at the fulfillment of the liturgy. They were also ministers of the word of God. The present circle of their liturgical actions is determined in an exact sense by the primary head of the establishment. They serve at the administration of Holy Communion for the bishops and presbyters, but do not perform sacraments, except for baptism as a last resort, according to the image fulfilled by his laity. They uplift prayers as assistants and read the Gospel.

From: http://www.holy-trinity.org/liturgics/bulgakov-deacon.html

Seems to me that Deacons/Deaconesses are allowed to 'minister the word of God'.. maybe it's a denominational thing...

Reinforce? Absolutely. Priscilla helped Aquila teach Apollos. But when "authority" (whatever that means) is an issue, it becomes normative for the women to remain silent.Of course, we would say that women were never second-class in God's eyes.
Can't say I disagree there :) It's always been a man issue.

I stand by the definition of teaching with respect to a formal gathering where authority (standing up and preaching a sermon, for instance) is an issue. God can use the vilest acts for good, but those who did those actions will still be punished for their sins.

The point is not to relegate women to a lower position. Besides, the greatest in the kingdom of heaven will not be those who stand in the spotlight; it is the humble, the meek, the broken, and the contrite that Christ wants. With this in mind, we ought to heed to warning of James iii, 1, that those who teach will be held to a greater standard of accountability.
And I can repsect you for standing by your beliefs :)

However, it doesn't appear that women not being teachers is an actual command.. so what sin are you suggesting is being committed? And how is that to be taken inthe context of Christs commandments? If you look in my sig, it mentions that ALL commands are to be looked at through the eyes of the command "Love thy neighbor.."

Well, in my eyes, if my neighbor has some more truth about God than I have, I don't particularly care if that person is male or female, I will allow myself to be taught.. now.. is the sin now mine, or the woman techers? Shouldn't I also then have a responsibility to move away and ignore ANY woman who tries to "teach" me? I don't particulalrly believe that "teaching" is restricted to formal gathering. Teaching takes place whereever the Holy SPirit decides, not Man.

I Corinthians xii, 22: "Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary.

I also believe that there should be no relegation of a woman to a lower position.. but I thought you just had?!?! After all, they are good for setting tables, right? ;)

And Smilax.. it's just an opinion.. I seek God wherever I can, gleam what I can from those that express and show the Fruits of the Spirit, and I'll be frank and tell you that I see more women doing that today than men... We obviously move in different circles :D

Love and Peace

JCA

[geebob]

Another thing to think about is the culture at the time. Not many people where schooled, and least of all the women. They where second class citizens, and most of the time only a few steps above slaves. Not many men would listen to a woman trying to "teach" them anything back then.

the one problem with this, I seem to recall that slaves could have authority over their masters.

I've heard that in the persecuted church, leadership is often not determined by education but how much one has suffered for christ. So would the persecuted church have women pastors who've suffered much? I bet it would be rare but it wouldn't surprise me to find examples.

[InquisitorKind]

-edited to add: I'm feeling much better.

Holey-Moley, that's a lot of information to sift through!

Ok, it isn't that much, but I'll be going through...I'll ask questions later if I need.

In the meantime, please feel free to continue to support your views in rebuttals, more remarks, etc...

I'm enjoying this thread!

Thanks for your participation,
~Matt