|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/25/2007 1:48:47 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davelinde
Can you explain how you differentiate (senior) pastor from elder and where you get the definitions?
I guess I could imagine a role called "associate pastor" that was neither an elder (or a pastor) but more of a deacon or minister of some sort. It could be a valid, useful role and it could be modeled after things the often referenced NT women did, and hence, open to both genders.
My definitions:
Elder - someone who sets the direction and priorities of the church, and handles issues of discipline within the church i.e. basically the governing authority of the church.
Pastor - someone who teaches and shepherds the church body.
I don't think that the traditional role of a "senior" pastor is easily separated from the role of elder, nor do I believe that it should be. However, I could very easily see an associate pastor fulfilling the role of pastor without needing to fill the role of an elder. That being said I have seen churches where none of the pastors serve as elders, and although it is not a governing style I would choose, it is possible.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/25/2007 2:17:00 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davelinde
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
Just a side note: Many churches, that believe that women cannot teach or have authority over men in the church, often allow these same women to teach and have authority of the the Jr. High and High school boys. However, in Paul's day, a boy was considered a man on his 13th birthday (after his Bar Mitzvah). So if Paul had really intended that women should never teach or have authority over men, he certainly would never have permitted women to teach Jr. High or High school boys (whom Paul would have considered men); if this was truly prohibited by Paul, why would it be ok now for women to teach this group of "men" in churches that believe that it was Paul intention to restrict women from teaching men?
I'll go out on a limb here and say that I am OK with a cultural definition separating children from men. When can they marry? When are they expected to earn a living? When do they cease to be children instructed by mothers and others acting as their mother? I also think it's better for young boys to be taught by men, I'm just not willing to be dogmatic about it. In the last two churches I've served with men DID teach the pre-teen and teens btw.
In the first century, while it was common for girl's to marry very young, boys did not. Nor was it typical that a young man (i.e. boy) was able to earn a living on his own, and in the first century, mothers were prohibited from teaching or instructing any of their children about religion, and had only a limited role of instructing their younger boys. I guess my point is I think it is important that we give equal consideration to each cultural argument, not just the ones that support our own position; however, I also think that it is important to realize that a better understanding of the culture doesn't ever out weigh every other consideration in interpreting the biblical text (the grammer and vocabulary still are very important). The difficulty I have egalitarian interpretations is that often they give too much weight to cultural issues or suppositions about cultural issues, and not enough weight to the grammar and vocabulary of the text itself. However, I think it is important to realize people on every side of this issue have to make some suppositions and cultural arguments, the question is which ones do we make and how good is the evidence for the suppositions we have accepted i.e. we always need to know when we our "out on a limb."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/25/2007 2:57:03 PM
|
|
|
davelinde
Posts: 361
Joined: 5/5/2006
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
However, I think it is important to realize people on every side of this issue have to make some suppositions and cultural arguments, the question is which ones do we make and how good is the evidence for the suppositions we have accepted i.e. we always need to know when we our "out on a limb."
If you have an idea of any direct Biblical instruction as to when a young man stops being a child and begins to be an adult I'd consider it and apply it here. I'm not sure there is anything, so I'm willing to be flexible. In my personal view young men transition from childhood to adulthood between the ages of 12 to 18 or so. Still there are "old" 12 y/o's and "young" 18 y/o's.
For this idea I would accept the same limitations I put on any other "cultural" argument. It is not an unchangeable truth! It might be so for one culture, then it could change again, then change again, then change again! Maturity and gender are different things.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2007 3:09:15 PM
|
|
|
Lycea
Posts: 205
Joined: 6/18/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: bzirk
Has anyone on this thread been led to be a teacher of men in the church or have spiritual authority over men in the church. Please note that I'm not talking about men who are not believers or in secular settings. If so, would you describe the circumstances? Those are sincere questions, and no, I'm not looking to rake you. I am honestly asking about your experience.
Ok, this is from WAY back, but I am just joining the discussion.
I am 28, married with two children, Senior Pastor of our local church and an Evangelical Quaker. We have been recognizing God's call and gifting of women for Pastoral leadership since the late 1600's, and that had nothing to do with feminism. Some of the earliest written and published material on this topic were produced by early Quakers.
I am not a feminist. I believe and preach the Truth of God's Word from the Bible. I am submissive to my husband. I love my children and care for them. I also happen to believe that God has called me to, equipped me for, and placed me in this position of ministry.
I preach on Sunday mornings, but I do not lead our men's and teen boys Sunday School class. I officiate at weddings and funerals, but my husband is integral in premarital counseling and ministering to men who are mourning. He also meets with the teen guys and men for other fellowship activities, and I meet with the teen girls and women for fellowship activities. We are in ministry together. I just happen to be the one that God has gifted and called to preach, so in the 21st century church that means I am the one with the title. I do not consider my ministry to be greater or more important because of that.
Elders in our church are chosen based upon spiritual gifting and discernment. There are no restrictions based on gender. I am not the head of the Elder's board. I attend meetings as a de facto member.
In reading other posts on this thread, by no means all of them, it seems that most people are entering here with a chip on their shoulder and a desire to beat down the opposition. I would say the best thing to do with this issue is to pray, trust God to lead both you and those who disagree with you. Is it more important to maintain unity in the body through the bond of peace or to be right? Being right feels good, and it certainly makes us feel more secure in our position if we really knock out our opponent, but is that what God's will is for his family?
As a female pastor, if you don't come to my church because I am a woman, that is fine with me. But if there are those who agree that what I am preaching and teaching is from God's word, and is advancing them in their faith and walk with God, why protest?
There are some who think that women just wake up one morning and think, "I'm bored, I know I will go into the preaching ministry." Most women I know who are in ministry approached it with fear and trembling. If you are not a woman called to preach, you cannot possibly understand how difficult it is to step out in faith and obedience to God's call in spite of those who would attack you on a very personal level.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2007 3:43:26 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1115
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: offline
|
It is unfortunate that one must bring in personal experiences into this discussion. I say unfortunate because in my experiences, trying to argue with women pastors about this topic quickly gets turned into her saying that I/we are attacking her personally for her views, even when we only give bible verses showing that women pastorship is wrong. The last part of lycea's post is evidence of this.
quote:
If you are not a woman called to preach, you cannot possibly understand how difficult it is to step out in faith and obedience to God's call in spite of those who would attack you on a very personal level.
This is equal to saying that since I am a man, I can not possibly understand her calling, therefore I have no right to ever say she is wrong. And those who do say she is wrong, are personally attacking her. How can one have a proper discussion with such a statement already given?
I truly would be concerned that I would be reported for a TOS violation if I were to say that I believe that God does NOT call any woman to be pastor, and any woman who believes that He has called her is wrong. Well, now that I said it I guess we will see how it goes.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2007 4:45:43 PM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
Welcome to the asylum!
Thanks for putting your perspectives out there. The pastor of the church we went to before we moved to Colorado told me once that when she felt she was being called to be a pastor, she cried for three days straight.
Regards,
BT
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2007 5:07:22 PM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stephanos
It is unfortunate that one must bring in personal experiences into this discussion. I say unfortunate because in my experiences, trying to argue with women pastors about this topic quickly gets turned into her saying that I/we are attacking her personally for her views, even when we only give bible verses showing that women pastorship is wrong. The last part of lycea's post is evidence of this.
quote:
If you are not a woman called to preach, you cannot possibly understand how difficult it is to step out in faith and obedience to God's call in spite of those who would attack you on a very personal level.
This is equal to saying that since I am a man, I can not possibly understand her calling, therefore I have no right to ever say she is wrong. And those who do say she is wrong, are personally attacking her. How can one have a proper discussion with such a statement already given?
I truly would be concerned that I would be reported for a TOS violation if I were to say that I believe that God does NOT call any woman to be pastor, and any woman who believes that He has called her is wrong. Well, now that I said it I guess we will see how it goes.
In all fairness, she's answering someone else's request for some information on the circumstances of her calling.
I also think we're getting reprimanded a bit for a debate that could be handled with greater charity. I for one know that at one point I had said something you found annoying. Her points there are fair.
As far as not understanding what it's like to feel called to leadership as a female, go back and read some of the posts on this thread and then imagine walking into that crowd as a female pastor. It just can't be very comfortable.
I also understand that noone likes to be told that they just can't understand. I for one think I can, but it's awfully hard to convince someone else who has had their toes stepped on that I do.
There's a time to debate theology, and then there's a time to be charitable and listen to a sister.
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2007 8:45:46 PM
|
|
|
Lycea
Posts: 205
Joined: 6/18/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Stephanos,
I did not say you could not disagree with my position. You can give as many Bible references as you like about women in ministry and whether or not it is valid for us to serve in certain church leadership positions. I don't mind the discussion, even if you come right out and say you think I am wrong.
What I was referencing were personal attacks that I have received and others that I know have received for following what we believe is God's will and plan for our lives. Some of those attacks have been so filled with hatred and violence it might surprise you. I was once told by a Bible professor that men beat their wives because they kept "yammering until the man had no choice." (In a conversation about male/female roles in Genesis 3.) Another time an OT reference was used in class to defend the view that God places a higher value on men than women.
So often, in discussions about men and women and roles, it turns into a kind of who's better/smarter/closer to God war. Should this discussion in this setting be about stomping others into the ground, or should it be a place to find out what others believe and their basis for that belief?
I don't care if people disagree with me or each other as long as it is done with respect and in view of our relationship as brothers and sisters in Christ.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2007 11:18:00 PM
|
|
|
Stephanos
Posts: 1115
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in KC MO
Status: offline
|
Lycea,
In the situations that you mention, I agree. They were crude idiots who went too far. There is a good reason why I consider myself complementarian. That is while I do not believe that women are called by God to be pastors, they are called to serve God in many ways. Paul speaks on the different parts of the body, and how each one while different to another, benefits the whole. To use his analogy in terms of women, I do not believe that women can be eyes or are ever called to be eyes. However they are called to be ears, and fingers, and noses, and hair, and dozens if not hundreds of other different parts. Some of those parts, I believe, men can not serve as.
I truly am sorry that some have taken (what I believe to be) the biblical position of men-only pastorship to such an extreme. I just hope you know that not all of us are like that. Some, like myself, hold a very high respect of women and their ability to serve God.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/1/2007 12:42:36 PM
|
|
|
Lycea
Posts: 205
Joined: 6/18/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Thanks for your word there!
Like I said before I am a long ways from having read all of the 4859 posts on this thread, so I am not sure all of the points that have been covered. i do agree with recent posts that point out the difficulties in balancing cultural issues with a good hermenuetic. It is always hard not to read our own cultural issues into the text, and that goes for both sides of the debate.
I also want to affirm the discussion on the previous page about maintaining Christian unity, even when we disagree on issues like gender roles. I personally have been in churches in three different denominations, each with their own view of gender roles. Evangelical Quaker is where I was raised, traditionally we have had fairly good hermenuetics behind our stance on this issue. Evangelical Methodist, where we were told that it would be ok for a woman to preach if there was not a man available (still have not found the biblical basis for that view). Southern Baptist in the year that women were prohibited from pastoral leadership. I had no problem fellowshipping with others of different viewpoints, but I was bothered by the seeming man-made approach to finding the middle ground. And interestingly enough, I first felt called to preach while sitting in a Southern Baptist church service, while attending a Southern Baptist University. (Talk about uncomfortable.)
I absolutely respect the intent of keeping to the Biblical message in those churches that take a men-only stance on leadership roles. I just happen to disagre with the methods of reaching that conclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/1/2007 4:05:07 PM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lycea
And interestingly enough, I first felt called to preach while sitting in a Southern Baptist church service, while attending a Southern Baptist University. (Talk about uncomfortable.)
Someday I would love to hear that story.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/1/2007 7:25:34 PM
|
|
|
davelinde
Posts: 361
Joined: 5/5/2006
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lycea
I absolutely respect the intent of keeping to the Biblical message in those churches that take a men-only stance on leadership roles. I just happen to disagre with the methods of reaching that conclusion.
So how do you interpret the scriptures that seem to set up gender roles in the leadership of churches and families? Wrong then and wrong now? Right then but wrong now? Meant for a very narrow application and sadly misunderstood by many? Are there roles with gender, or is that all made up?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/1/2007 9:58:47 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1767
Status: offline
|
quote:
I absolutely respect the intent of keeping to the Biblical message in those churches that take a men-only stance on leadership roles. I just happen to disagre with the methods of reaching that conclusion.
This certainly sounds like double-talk. If the "men-only stance on leadership roles" is Biblical, then it is Divinely revealed. And if it is Divinely revealed, you have decided to disagree with God, not men. And that is a very serious matter.
There are no "methods of reaching that conclusion". Scripture is actually quite plain in this regard, and it does not take a Ph. D. to decipher that teaching. Christians have believed and practiced for two millenia that only men may have spiritual authority and leadership in the home and in the church.
So ultimately you have taken exception to what the Holy Spirit has revealed in God's Word, and now you wish to cover that with such double talk.
It won't suffice to state "I respect that, but I will continue to refuse to accept it". That is actually disrespect for the truth.
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/2/2007 6:53:44 PM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
I do have one curiousity. I wasn't aware of the Quakers had such a long history of using women in this way. I would be curious how they reached the position they did way back then. Any good resources you could point me to?
BT
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 1:03:44 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bterpstra
I do have one curiousity. I wasn't aware of the Quakers had such a long history of using women in this way. I would be curious how they reached the position they did way back then. Any good resources you could point me to?
BT
The book "Discovering Biblical Equality: complementarity without hierarchy." has a couple of chapters on the history of women in ministry covering the 18-20 centuries; and it does cover some of the quaker history. The book is a good resource, but very biased towards an egalitarian position; in the introduction to this book the editors actually state that they "see no middle ground on this question". I appreciate the research that has gone in to this book, and the footnotes they have provided, but I really wish they had taken a more balanced approach to their scholarship.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 5:31:50 AM
|
|
|
Marksman
Posts: 271
Joined: 6/7/2007
From: Drouin, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
Elders in our church are chosen based upon spiritual gifting and discernment. There are no restrictions based on gender. I am not the head of the Elder's board. I attend meetings as a de facto member.
There are such as being the husband of one wife. Can you tell men how a woman can be a husband of one wife?
_____________________________
God Bless America
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 10:18:18 AM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Marksman
quote:
Elders in our church are chosen based upon spiritual gifting and discernment. There are no restrictions based on gender. I am not the head of the Elder's board. I attend meetings as a de facto member.
There are such as being the husband of one wife. Can you tell men how a woman can be a husband of one wife?
Post 4768 explains one line of logic used - and people can (and do) agree or disagree with it. The more complementarian your view, the more likely you will disagree this. Read literally in the absence of any other context (a bad idea) , elders should be married men.
Basically- and here we have agreement within most circles, complentarian or otherwise - Paul can't be 100% stuck on the literal husband of one wife (i.e. married men only) since that would rule himself out as an elder and since Paul elsewhere thought being single better for the kingdom than to be married, the requirement to be married probably wasn't the primary idea here. So in order to keep the passage consistent internally, you have to wonder what else is going on there.
The idea being that "husband of one wife" isn't translated entirely right there. There's an emphatic sense to the word "one" that should more accurately be translated as "only one" or "but one". Then the meaning of the passages shifts emphasis away from a required male-ness to an injunction against polygamy. The wording focused on the man then becomes normal when addressed to husbands, since polyandry (more than one husband) wasn't even on the table in that culture. The injuction against polygamy had to be addressed to men and to men only. It would be logical to write it that way, even if he held a more egalitarian view.
I think there are other arguments used, but this is the one that I'm aware of. I have no idea (yet) what led the Quakers this direction that long ago. Lycea or Benelchi probably have a better idea than I do on that.
< Message edited by bterpstra -- 12/3/2007 6:27:23 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 10:25:35 AM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
Benelchi-
Thanks for the reference. My book budget is about tapped out, but probably have room for one more. Question for you - have you read Wm. Webb's book "Slaves, Women and Homosexuals."
Would love to get a a complementarian's take on his work some time. Primary purpose of the book is coming up with a structure to facilitate determinig which portions of a passage are cross-cultural/not time bound versus those that which address specific local issues, and how to assess what the underlying principle at stake really is. Uses the women's issue as a test case. Falls into the egalitarian camp, but allows that a complementarian reading is possible. Only part way through at the moment.
BT
< Message edited by bterpstra -- 12/3/2007 6:20:33 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 12:34:09 PM
|
|
|
Lycea
Posts: 205
Joined: 6/18/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Really old Quaker publications on the issue of gender in the church are:
"The Woman Learning in Silence" (1656) by George Fox.
"Womens Speaking Justified, Proved, and Allowed of by the Scriptures" (1666) by Margaret Fell. you can get to a digital version of this one at:
Womens Speaking Justified
As to another question above:
quote:
So how do you interpret the scriptures that seem to set up gender roles in the leadership of churches and families? Wrong then and wrong now? Right then but wrong now? Meant for a very narrow application and sadly misunderstood by many? Are there roles with gender, or is that all made up?
I absolutely believe that there are scriptural directives that apply to gender roles in the home. Those are repeated in several Pauline epistles and are not contradictory in nature to either themselves or other scriptures. What I do object to is a blanket carry-over that takes husband/wife roles and applies them to every man and woman.
This is especially difficult in the Greek as to whether the author is referring to men/women or husbands/wives, because there are not terms used solely for husbands/wives that are not used elsewhere to mean men/women. That puts a burden on the interpretor to determine from context which translation should be made.
I believe that in many cases what ought to be translated within the parameters of marriage, family, and home is instead translated more broadly to include the church, and sometimes beyond that into every male/female relationship. That kind of blanket application does contradict many scriptures, and I would say is inconsistent with a true pursuit of a systematic theology.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 12:46:01 PM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1904
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
Interesting that a book about justifying women preachers would be written by a woman... 
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center - Latest post - John 3:16 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 1:04:16 PM
|
|
|
Lycea
Posts: 205
Joined: 6/18/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
The other writing is also in favor of women, don't be mislead by the title, it is the beginning scripture that Fox dealt with.
The link to his writing is:
The woman learning in silence Just follow the link, and click on "starts at."
And if you note, his was written first. (Hers was complementary to his.) Both are great respecters of the scripture.
BTW my husband says in response to ccoppenbarger, "That is like saying a book against slavery is invalid because it was written by a slave."
(Not my words.  )
< Message edited by Lycea -- 12/3/2007 1:10:38 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 1:31:06 PM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
Thanks for the reference. No matter what your point of view is, it's always fun to trace and idea down through time.
BT
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 2:12:59 PM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1904
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lycea
The other writing is also in favor of women, don't be mislead by the title, it is the beginning scripture that Fox dealt with.
The link to his writing is:
The woman learning in silence Just follow the link, and click on "starts at."
And if you note, his was written first. (Hers was complementary to his.) Both are great respecters of the scripture.
BTW my husband says in response to ccoppenbarger, "That is like saying a book against slavery is invalid because it was written by a slave."
(Not my words. )
Actually, it would probably be a "a book for slavery would be invalid if written by a slave."
Regardless, the apostle Paul said that he did not allow women to teach men. Why were none of the 12, women?
A pastor of a church is a teacher. An elder is to be the husband of one wife, not the wife of one husband.
A deacon is likewise.
There is no scriptural support for a woman to be the head of a body of believers, or even to be a major leader in the church. She can be a leader of women, but not of men.
No matter how far back the Quakers may go with this women leading the church business, it's simply not scriptural.
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center - Latest post - John 3:16 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 2:28:24 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2829
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
Actually, it would probably be a "a book for slavery would be invalid if written by a slave."
Where is the logic in that??? Do you really believe that "a book advocating slavery would be valid, if it were not written by a slave?"
quote:
Regardless, the apostle Paul said that he did not allow women to teach men. Why were none of the 12, women?
A pastor of a church is a teacher. An elder is to be the husband of one wife, not the wife of one husband.
A deacon is likewise.
There is no scriptural support for a woman to be the head of a body of believers, or even to be a major leader in the church. She can be a leader of women, but not of men.
No matter how far back the Quakers may go with this women leading the church business, it's simply not scriptural.
As many have pointed out, the issue is not quite as black and white as you have attempted to make it. Most biblical scholars who accept a traditional view of male church leadership, still acknowledge the textual difficulties which you have simply chosen to ignore.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men/Women roles in the church - One Stop Thread - 12/3/2007 2:32:55 PM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1904
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
Actually, it would probably be a "a book for slavery would be invalid if written by a slave."
Where is the logic in that??? Do you really believe that "a book advocating slavery would be valid, if it were not written by a slave?"
Not what I meant...
quote:
quote:
Regardless, the apostle Paul said that he did not allow women to teach men. Why were none of the 12, women?
A pastor of a church is a teacher. An elder is to be the husband of one wife, not the wife of one husband.
A deacon is likewise.
There is no scriptural support for a woman to be the head of a body of believers, or even to be a major leader in the church. She can be a leader of women, but not of men.
No matter how far back the Quakers may go with this women leading the church business, it's simply not scriptural.
As many have pointed out, the issue is not quite as black and white as you have attempted to make it. Most biblical scholars who accept a traditional view of male church leadership, still acknowledge the textual difficulties which you have simply chosen to ignore.
Seems to me to be pretty black and white according to scripture. I see no textual problems. There's only textual problems if you want them to be.
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center - Latest post - John 3:16 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
