A woman as a Pastor? Does it make it right if there is a need for pastors?

[JackH]

Not a fair question at all, if that's what he wants. Judgement of that kind belongs only to Christ. Any of us can judge whether or not someone is being obedient to the word - we are told to do that. But to say someone needs to repent is to infer we have knowledge of them that only Christ has.

If she is the main preacher at church she is in disobedience to the word of God.

I've only heard the one sermon when a woman had anything I wanted to hear from the pulpit.

If someone is disobedient to the word of God, then they need to repent.

If a woman is engaged in an adulterous relationship, then she needs to repent and turn away away from that behavior.

Do you or anyone else disagree?

If a woman is the main preacher at a church then, according to you, she is disobedient to the Word of God.

What is the difference between her and a woman engaging in an adulterous relationship?

What do you tell a woman, for example, who just graduated from a Christian college with an advanced degree who wants to enter the ministry?

Do you tell her she can't be a senior pastor but she can be a youth pastor? Or do you tell her that she can be an associate pastor as long as she is only "shepherding" other women or children?

Do you tell her she can preach and teach all she wants, but she can't apply what she preached and taught to real life situations? Which would be the role of a pastor. For example, she could teach on what the word of God says on divorce, but could not counsel a divorced woman who was contemplating remarriage?

God is not the author of confusion.

Confusion turns people away from God.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Hey, you are the one who jumped on me about not getting back to you within two hours.

You made the statement that "There was not a female pastor in any first-century church."

You prove it. Prove that it is an absolute certainly that statement is correct.

As I knew was the case, you can't prove a New Testament first-century female pastor, and I don't have to prove a negative. YOU LOSE! Thanks for playing.

 

[phil112]

If someone is disobedient to the word of God, then they need to repent.

If a woman is engaged in an adulterous relationship, then she needs to repent and turn away away from that behavior.

Do you or anyone else disagree?

............................

For someone of your advanced age you sure are immature in the word.
Sinners need to repent. People in disobedience to God need to reconcile themselves to God with that. Not up to me to decide the penalty, only point out the error.
If someone is unable to be baptized, if someone never participates in a foot washing, if someone never participates in communion, they are in disobedience to the word.
Are they going to hell if they don't repent? I rather doubt it, but if they are able they should be doing those things.
Is it a sin for a woman to preach? Never seen it in my bible. Is it wrong? Yes.

You need to quit flapping your jaws so much, give your real age so people like me stop seeing you as a liar, and listen. Maybe you could learn something.

 

[phil112]

I can respect this answer Phil. But can I ask you what you mean by saying that a woman is never to rebuke a brother ? Is it acceptable for a wife to question and/or correct her husband on a biblical matter, for example ? Just looking for clarification of your context and meaning of the word rebuke ?

My friend, if you're in this discussion you should already know my answer. It is vital to the subject at hand.

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

 

[JackH]

Sinners need to repent. People in disobedience to God need to reconcile themselves to God with that. Not up to me to decide the penalty, only point out the error.
If someone is unable to be baptized, if someone never participates in a foot washing, if someone never participates in communion, they are in disobedience to the word.
Are they going to hell if they don't repent? I rather doubt it, but if they are able they should be doing those things.
Is it a sin for a woman to preach? Never seen it in my bible. Is it wrong? Yes.

So you make a distinction between sin and disobedience to God?

Do you have any biblical evidence for doing so?

 

[JackH]

As I knew was the case, you can't prove a New Testament first-century female pastor, and I don't have to prove a negative. YOU LOSE! Thanks for playing.

Hey, you challenged me to reply to your post.

And then you jumped on me for not replying to you within 2 hours.

And this is all you got?

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Hey, you challenged me to reply to your post.

And replying with nonsense isn't a reply at all, now is it?

And then you jumped on me for not replying to you within 2 hours.

You had the time to reply to Marc so many times in those two hours, also with nonsense, to the point I'd a whipped your butt if I was him. But that's just me.

And this is all you got?

You have nothing, so that's all I need. I will give you this, though. You answered my question without actually saying the words. You're a "stuff stirrer." That's kind of a waste of time and effort, isn't it?

 

[JackH]

Harsh? These are quotes. I have done nothing more than to collect these "quotes" over a period of about 15 years as the abuse of women is one of my pet peeves. I quit collecting them because I thought I had enough to make a point. Had I continued the list would probably be twice as long.

If you are one to quote the "Church Fathers" even old John Chrysostom admitted that Junia was a women. And he was basically anti female as you see from the quotes above.

In commenting on Romans 16:7, John Chrysostom (347-407) states:

"Greet Andronicus and Junia...who are outstanding among the apostles: To be an apostle is something great! But to be outstanding among the apostles - just think what a wonderful song of praise that is! They were outstanding on the basis of their works and virtuous actions. Indeed, how great the wisdom of this woman must have been that she was even deemed worthy of the title of apostle."


​

The abuse of women is one of my pet peeves too.

I agree with you about Junia.

Why should we not think that Priscilla at the very least was at least the equal of her husband Aquila with respect to "shepherding" new believers in the early church?

And here is a name I don't recall being discussed before - Tabitha aka Dorcas.

Do you have any particular take on her and her role in the early church?

 

[VioletReigns]

Seriously, if anyone, man or woman, would even consider heeding any of the legalistic advice on this thread rather than accepting Jesus' grace, you are living a life of bondage.

This is a thread, folks. It's the internet, full of conflicting ideas and multiple levels of confusion. It is not the Voice of God. Seriously, do you see peace here? Do you read liberty? Do you see JESUS being lifted up here?

C'mon, shake yourself from the dust and throw off the shroud of death. Renew your mind in truth and stop letting vain men direct your thoughts. Arise and shine. Your light has come. It's JESUS!

 

[JackH]

I'd a whipped your butt if I was him. But that's just me.

What, did you just see the movie Fifty Shades of Grey?

Personally, I'll pass on that one, but I am enthused about seeing Killing Jesus. It's based on Bill O'Reilly's book and will be televised next month I think.

Me thinks some of this rhetoric discriminating against women participating in the ministry is killing Jesus. And I don't mean that He is laughing.

But let me ask you this:

In your lengthy post you begged me to respond to, you said a woman could not be a senior pastor.

Right?

Your lengthy post you begged me to respond to led me then to think that you believe that a woman could be an associate pastor or a youth pastor.

Is that right?

 

[VioletReigns]

Where is Jesus in this thread? All I see is a mishmash of religious points of view. I don’t see Jesus here – I see the internet!

What I’m mostly hearing here are men who have exchanged one outward show for another. Whereas the fornicator may have stopped fornicating, or the drunkard cleaned up his act. That is, they had escaped the “defilements of the world”. So what is it that you are actually preaching now? That your outward show of “obedience” puts you in authority in the church? Just because you have escaped one form of fleshly defilement in exchange for another? (self-righteousness) And that because you are a male that puts you up on a higher rung of righteousness? Are you insane?!?

How else do such men speak out arrogant words of vanity by which they entice others by sensuality, unless their escape has been defined by the flesh? It really makes no difference how much they have claimed how they were saved by Jesus, does it? Haven’t we seen many of these same kind of turn-from-sin preachers fall back into the very sin they have been preaching against, until the moment they are found out? Self-righteousness, hate, bitterness, wrath, jealousy, contention, lust, greed, faithlessness... are they truly able to cast these stones at others?

Notice how Peter used those two proverbs to describe such men: a dog returning to its own vomit and a pig that gets washed returning to the mud. This says much about the change of the ones Peter wrote about. The message is clear, for these false preachers merely got cleaned up, as pigs that get washed or dogs that become domesticated. Either will eventually return to its former preferences. Never lose the image of a clean pig running back to the mud or a housebroken dog gobbling up its own puke. And then remember how those born of God are instead referred to as sheep or lambs, which are merely animals who follow a Shepherd.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

What, did you just see the movie Fifty Shades of Grey?

Not even at gunpoint.

Personally, I'll pass on that one, but I am enthused about seeing Killing Jesus. It's based on Bill O'Reilly's book and will be televised next month I think.

Yup. Easter week, on NatGeo (which is kind of like the Playboy Channel showing "Passion of the Christ" IMO).

Me thinks some of this rhetoric discriminating against women participating in the ministry is killing Jesus. And I don't mean that He is laughing.

Disallowing women from any ministry other than teaching other women and doing the preschool thing in church on Sunday is, I'm sure, not making Him happy.

But let me ask you this:

In your lengthy post you begged me to respond to, you said a woman could not be a senior pastor.

Right?

Your lengthy post you begged me to respond to led me then to think that you believe that a woman could be an associate pastor or a youth pastor.

Is that right?

The latter statement I made in black-and-white, yes. I base that, as I stated in that post (which I think is #120 on this thread -- long time ago, ancient history for threads like this -- on 1 Timothy 2:11, 12, which I believe is best read just as it is written, not trying to read a limiting social context into it, nor a cultural bias that I'm positive Paul did not have. The structure of the passage makes the reason why women cannot be pastors perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with “for,” giving the “cause” of Paul’s statement in verses 11, 12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men?

1 Timothy 2, NASB
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. ]/indent

The order of creation has universal application in the family and in the church, as detailed in Ephesians 5:22-33.

But I also read this:

1 Corinthians 11
4 Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head.
5 But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.
6 For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.
​

Many women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching, evangelism, and helps. Much of the ministry of the local church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted from public praying or prophesying, only from having spiritual teaching authority over men. The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit described in Galatians 5:22, 23, and to proclaim the gospel to the lost.

The authority of husbands and pastors over women who serve is detailed metaphorically throughout 1 Corinthians 11 in the description of the "head covering." Christ is the head of the church, and husbands are the heads of their wives. Whatever authority is given through Christ and the husband is perfectly granted to the wife who wants to serve.​

​

​

 

[Jasher]

The negative attitude toward women has been mostly established in the Church of our day by two passages from the writings of Paul. Here is the first - I will comment further on the second as time allows...

1 Cor. 14:34-38 (KJV)
[34] …Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. [35] And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. [36] What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? [37] If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. [38] But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

After reading on the subject I think that in both cases he was addressing local errors in the Church; and he was not making a general statement for all time for all of the Churches.

The one thing that has to be considered is the writings of St. Paul are often answers to problems or questions that he has been presented with either by letter or by a visitor from that Church. So we are only hearing one side of a conversation. So when he is answering a question we have to deduce from his answer what the question or statement that he is responding to was. Most letters were lost to history. And so that is what we have to do with this passage. 1 Corinthians 14:36-38 is his response to an important situation, which was detrimental to the Corinthian Church. So what problem is he addressing in our text? What is he reacting to?

After writing on boards like this for 20 years it is interesting how many times that this issue of women keeps coming up again and again; and of course the problem that spiritually savvy Christians have with these passages is the manifested spirit of St. Paul and his kindness and respect for women is in direct conflict with this stated text. And so we struggle with our apologetics in order to reconcile the two. Of course to those who are more legalistic about this problematic text – they have no problem.

It is unfortunate that the Koine Greek does not have quotation marks. If it did I don't think a lot of us would be struggling with this passage like we do. For the sake of this post allow me to add quotation marks to the appropriate text of this passage.

1Corinthians 14:34-37 (KJV) [34] ...“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.” [35] “And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”

In vs. 34 & 35 St. Paul is quoting the words of someone in the Church probably a "Judiazer," someone from the Circumcision Party, who opposed Paul at every turn - who in judging from the text - considered himself a prophet in that local body.

Moreover, I Corinthians 14:34,35, if taken totally literally, cannot refer to the Old Testament Scriptures when speaking of the Law for there is not one trace from Genesis to Malachi of any such prohibition of women to literally keep silent in the church nor is there a single word in the whole "law of Moses" dealing with the subject. Therefore the words, "it is not permitted" and "as also saith the Law" must refer to some rule outside of Scripture. There was no other but the Oral Law of the Jews appealed to by the Judaizers in the church in their efforts, at that time, to bring Christianity back within the confines of Judaism.

The Jewish Oral Law did teach the silencing of women. The Talmud also taught that it was "a shame for a woman to let her voice be heard among men". However, the Oral Law of the Jews is not Scripture. Again, the reference to the "law" is, of itself, sufficient to show that the Apostle who labored so earnestly to free the Christian Church from the very shadow of Judaism was not expressing his own conviction in the language attributed to him. Paul never appealed to the "law" for the guidance of the Church of Christ, but, on the contrary, declared that believers were dead to the law by the body of Christ" (Romans 7:4) that they might serve in newness of spirit and not the oldness of the letter (v.6).)

Now lets look at St. Paul's response to this quotation. I have used the old KJV because it uses the word “What” in its translation as do several other versions. This should be read in a mocking angry sarcastic tone of voice.

[36] What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? [37] If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

“What” is an expression of outrage at the preceding quote. He follows with a denouncement of the comments of the Judiazer. He didn't dwell on the problem probably because he only wanted to correct the situation and not to destroy or run off the individual.

So in summary the text of 34 and 35 was not composed by St. Paul, but was only quoted by him in making a correction to the words of this Judiazer. Actually, the exact opposite of the text was intended in this passage of Scripture. Paul was a very sarcastic fellow and I'm sure that if he knew that his letters would eventually become scripture He would have been more carful in expressing himself as he did.

 

[MarcR]

If someone is disobedient to the word of God, then they need to repent.

If a woman is engaged in an adulterous relationship, then she needs to repent and turn away away from that behavior.

Do you or anyone else disagree?

If a woman is the main preacher at a church then, according to you, she is disobedient to the Word of God.

What is the difference between her and a woman engaging in an adulterous relationship?

What do you tell a woman, for example, who just graduated from a Christian college with an advanced degree who wants to enter the ministry?

Do you tell her she can't be a senior pastor but she can be a youth pastor? Or do you tell her that she can be an associate pastor as long as she is only "shepherding" other women or children?

Do you tell her she can preach and teach all she wants, but she can't apply what she preached and taught to real life situations? Which would be the role of a pastor. For example, she could teach on what the word of God says on divorce, but could not counsel a divorced woman who was contemplating remarriage?

God is not the author of confusion.

Confusion turns people away from God.

What is the difference between her and a woman engaging in an adulterous relationship?

The difference is that everyone here agrees that adultery is wrong.
we are debating whether women preaching is wrong. we should be allowed to discuss the issue without being called to judgement that is not ours to make

 

[Agricola]

I can not see Jesus saying women can not preach, if it was such a big issue Jesus would be saying stuff about it. Instead Jesus liberated women and used women in a way which was rebellious against the law and the culture of the day.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

The negative attitude toward women has been mostly established in the Church of our day by two passages from the writings of Paul. Here is the first - I will comment further on the second as time allows...

...After reading on the subject I think that in both cases he was addressing local errors in the Church; and he was not making a general statement for all time for all of the Churches.

As I said in the post just before yours, that is not the case. Otherwise Paul would not have made the argument that Adam was created before Eve, and while Adam sinned, Eve was deceived. That's not a "local error" argument but an argument for all time. And as I further pointed out, women are not excluded from and office or authority except that of senior pastor, as 1 Corinthians 11 is an entire chapter detailing "head covering" which is a metaphorical discussion of women taking authority from men -- pastor or husband -- in order to be able to serve other offices of the church.

 

[VioletReigns]

Matthew 7:2 - For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.

Be careful people... I'm seeing holes in your theories. Read through this thread and see if any of you have professed something other than Jesus Christ.

The truth is, if you are building your whole religious belief system on outward appearances, you are still in the world. That kingdom will topple in adversity because it's built on sinking sand, it's based on man and not on Jesus Christ.

 

[MarcR]

Harsh? These are quotes. I have done nothing more than to collect these "quotes" over a period of about 15 years as the abuse of women is one of my pet peeves. I quit collecting them because I thought I had enough to make a point. Had I continued the list would probably be twice as long.

If you are one to quote the "Church Fathers" even old John Chrysostom admitted that Junia was a women. And he was basically anti female as you see from the quotes above.

In commenting on Romans 16:7, John Chrysostom (347-407) states:

"Greet Andronicus and Junia...who are outstanding among the apostles: To be an apostle is something great! But to be outstanding among the apostles - just think what a wonderful song of praise that is! They were outstanding on the basis of their works and virtuous actions. Indeed, how great the wisdom of this woman must have been that she was even deemed worthy of the title of apostle."


​

Imo the word apostle, which means one who is sent, is used in two very different ways.

1) The 12 plus Paul.
2) any missionary.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Imo the word apostle, which means one who is sent, is used in two very different ways.

1) The 12 plus Paul.
2) any missionary.

The problem with this is that Mathias was named among the original 12 to replace Judas before Paul became an apostle.

Second, the bible speaks of more apostles then just the original 12, as Luke 10:1 shows the Lord appointed 70 more. And other scriptures name other apostles, as Timothy was an apostle as well.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

In an ancient first, second, and third century Roman world men outnumbered women... except in the Christian church where women greatly outnumbered men.

This occurred in part because Christians did not "discard" female infants and Christian women did not have a substantial mortality rate from abortions done in a world without antibiotics or even a practical working knowledge of germs.

Also, it occurred because despite the persecution levied against Christians women were more likely than men to convert to Christianity.

There are various reasons for this with one being that the Christian worldview imparted higher value to women which contrasted with the status of the average woman of non-noble birth under ancient Roman paganism (nobility; however, was an entirely different matter). You see, ancient Greco-Roman paganism taught that the gods had played a trick on man by creating woman of inferior material, etc... See: http://ncbible.org/resources/fword01.pdf

Without getting too wordy, it was in the assemblies which were primarily composed of women that false doctrines, myths, and other speculative ideas (in addition to gossip) were entering (1 Tim 1:3-4). Upon reading 1 Timothy, for example, one becomes immediately aware that the integrity of the Christian faith is at stake in some (not all or most) of these assemblies. Paul's concern in response is to maintain and guard the truth of the Christian faith (1 Tim 1:19; 2:4–7; 3:14–16; 4:1–3, 6–7, 16;6:1–5, 12).

Some of these women had wandered into vain debates and were attempting to act as teachers without understanding and discernment (1 Tim 1:6–7). There is throughout a concern for maintaining and guarding the truth of the faith (1 Tim 1:19; 2:4–7; 3:14–16; 4:1–3, 6–7, 16;6:1–5, 12).

We do not know the identity of the false teachers or the full content of their teaching. From the instructions given, we can conclude that the false teaching led to a disregard for proper decorum and practices in the church (1 Tim 2:8–15) as well as to a rejection of the institution of marriage (1 Tim 4:3).

In light of this last aspect of the heretical teaching, it is noteworthy that particular attention is directed to young widows (in 1 Tim 5:9–15), who are urged to marry, have children and manage their homes (1 Tim 5:14). When these normal, socially prescribed roles and functions are neglected or rejected, these women are prone to "gossiping" and being "busybodies, saying things they ought not to" (1 Tim 5:13).

On the basis of this data, at least two reconstructions of the situation in Timothy’s congregation at Ephesus are possible: (1) the women in the church at Ephesus were the primary advocates and promoters of the heretical teachings which were upsetting accepted patterns of congregational and home life; (2) the women in the church had been particularly influenced by the heretical teachers. Such a situation in the Ephesian church is addressed in 2 Timothy 3:6–9, where women, the special targets of those "who oppose the truth" (2 Tim 3:8), become "unable to acknowledge the truth" (2 Tim 3:7).

In either case, Paul’s restrictive word in 1 Timothy 2:11–12 must be understood within a context where false teaching is at issue. The general prohibition against all those who "teach false doctrines" (1 Tim 1:3) is now focused specifically on the women who have fallen prey to such false teaching or who are involved in its promulgation.

This does not extrapolate to women being barred from correctly and properly teaching God's Word or holding ministry positions in a godly manner within the context the entire NT provides.