Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,521
113
People in CC who have no bible school training distort the scriptures daily.

I really cannot give you even one example of bible college student on CC who is distorting scripture. So I don't agree with your premise at all.

The turning away from sound doctrine most often comes from people with NO bible school training.
The height of hypocrisy. Only at seminary can you be exposed to apostacy as truth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
S

Scribe

Guest
And today people who have Bible school training promote false doctrines and apostatize daily. All the well-know apostates are theologians and professors in seminaries (or bishops and archbishops). And every fundamentalist Bible school has been compromised over the last few years. Check it out for yourself.

Since the 19th century it is the Christian seminaries (primarily in Germany) which became the centers for attacks on the Bible, the Gospel, and Bible doctrine. Dean John W. Burgon (and others) in England exposed this in the 19th century, and showed how German skeptics had influenced British theologians. Others in the USA exposed unbelief, skepticism, and apostasy in the early 20th century, when the battle between the Fundamentalists and the Liberals rocked Christianity. In the end the Fundamentalists had to leave the liberal seminaries.

But again during the 20th century there was a decline in almost all the Bible colleges and seminaries in the States. This has all been documented in the battle for biblical inerrancy in several books. Which brings us back to the fact that A SEMINARY EDUCATION IS NO GUARANTEE OF FAITHFULNESS to the Word of God. Quite the opposite. Many believing young Christians have had their faith shattered by attending bible schools and seminaries. And in any event Christ did not authorize the substitution of sound Bible teaching with meaningless academic degrees.
When I talk about Bible college or just good text books used in Bible colleges I am always talking about reading those that believe that bible is the inspired word of God infallible and inerrant in the original autographs. I think we all agree that we should pay no attention to liberal seminaries and those that do not believe the bible is inspired.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,521
113
When I talk about Bible college or just good text books used in Bible colleges I am always talking about reading those that believe that bible is the inspired word of God infallible and inerrant in the original autographs. I think we all agree that we should pay no attention to liberal seminaries and those that do not believe the bible is inspired.
The problem arises when you fail to verify the authors of the textbooks. Many do not ascribe to the standard you pretend to support.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
S

Scribe

Guest
The problem arises when you fail to verify the authors of the textbooks. Many do not ascribe to the standard you pretend to support.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
That is their right. I am not going to argue about the benefits of reading books. Each person can figure it out on their own.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,846
9,819
113
The problem arises when you fail to verify the authors of the textbooks. Many do not ascribe to the standard you pretend to support.
Is the slander intentional, or does it just well up from what's in your heart without you realizing it?
 

mustaphadrink

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2013
1,447
245
63
I’m yes I think scripture should interpret scripture , so before making your judgement there , consider what I’m saying
“But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭14:10-14‬ ‭


Again brother , I would attend a church with a female pastor because I have faith that tells me a woman isn’t less or different in Christ . Where as you , if you were to listen to her you would in your mind be doubting everything she said .

so you are correct we should let scripture teach us about the gospel . And learn about faith and how what you know is your standard and others have the standard of their faith .

this again is why I would have no issue what so ever listening to a female pastor , teacher or prophet

“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3:27-29‬ ‭KJV‬‬

faith tells me God doesn’t care about male or female , I don’t either . Regardless that Paul said he himself didn’t allow women’s to teach or speak in church.

you should consider this understanding about faith and how it applies to the individual

“. For one believeth that he may eat all things:

another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith:

for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭14:1-2, 23‬ ‭KJV‬‬

in other words my faith doesn’t tell
Me women are any different than myself , and I have no doubt if I listen to a female pastor or speaker in a church . It’s the message I’d care about .

but if you went to the same church you begin at doubt and it’s not going to benefit you to hear her , because you would obviously already have her convicted of a transgressor.

learning from those scriptures is important concepts like jidgement and faith in Romans 14 are important understandings from the gospel

it’s about your faith for you , my faith for
Me , thier faith for them . I myself am not held to your standard of belief but to mine same with you and everyone else nominee is held to
My standard of faith but to theirs
You have made a lot of assumptions which are not tenable. Up to Romans 14 v 10 the verses have no reference to women in leadership so they are irrelevant.

No one is suggesting that women are less or dfferent. I keep on saying this but it seems to fall on deaf ears. Anyone, a woman, a man, a single person, a married person, even a child is only effective if they are doing what God has ordained in scripture. Not what a denominatioon says or they say.

I have no idea what being unclean has got to do with a woman teaching.

And you should consider this understanding about faith that it doesn't sidestep what scripture teaches.

it is an assumtion on your part that I have already convicted her of a transgressor whatever that means.

And learning from scripture that teaches us about leadership in the church which there are plenty of is essential if we are to grasp what is being taught.

As for " and everyone else nominee is held to My standard of faith but to theirs" is complete double dutch.
 

mustaphadrink

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2013
1,447
245
63
First you say the church assembled in homes, then you say a teaching in a home is not an assembly.

"Church" is the body of Christ regardless of where it meets.

Jesus said where two or more are gathered in His Name... ;)
I do not disagree with you at all. The difference I see here the teaching given was not in one of their fellowship times when anyone and everyone was in attendance. it was just the three of them. That is what makes a difference.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,521
113
That is their right. I am not going to argue about the benefits of reading books. Each person can figure it out on their own.
The problem is not reading books it is reading books by authors who are unbelievers. The problem is not about attending seminary it's about attending seminary where unbelieving professors are teaching the students.

We cannot expect unbelievers to teach the truth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
S

Scribe

Guest
Acts 18:26 does not show a woman teaching a man. it shows a man and a woman (husband and wife) explaining things to him in their home, not in the assembly.

Acts 2: 16-128. Nothing there about a women teaching men so it is crystal clear.

it does not say no male or female in Christ. It says no male or female in the Spirit and refers to salvation not leadership in the church. I wish people would do a bit of research and homework before making ridiculous claims.

And I don't read anywhere in scripture that the truth is a matter of conscience. What I do read is that the Holy |Spirit will lead you into all truth so the fact that so much speculation is passed off as truth it must mean that people are ignoring the Holy Spirit and putting their spin on things. No wonder the church is up the creek without a paddle.
"Putting a spin on things" is the issue.

11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Many will "put a spin on things" when they say Paul was meaning that a woman cannot teach in the pulpit. It is impossible for Paul to mean that since pulpits had not been invented and it would not have entered the mind of Paul, nor the mind of his readers. Therefore cultural context of the time in which it was written (a rule of hermeneutics) rules out "pulpit" interpretation and we must find another solution rather than "putting this spin" on it. We must concede that he did not mean pulpit or we are not being honest.

Reading 1 Peter 3 we have an example where something similar is said about "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection."

1 Pet 3
1Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 2While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. 3Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 4But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. 5For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement

Comparing this with 1 Tim 2 it is impossible for the thinking reader to not notice the striking similarity in content and subject matter and it to dismiss the comparison is difficult for the honest truth seeker. It screams out for attention. Like big flashing lights 1 Peter 3:3 and 1 Tim 2:9 Scream "WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME SUBJECT"

1 Tim 2
9In 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; 10But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

When trying to determine what Paul meant when he wrote 1 Tim 2 concerning women being silent I find it most edifying to others who I discuss it with that ask them to first take a moment and read 1 Peter 3: 1-6 a few times, get them to tell me what that means to them, then Read 1 Tim 2:9-15 and when they do it this exercise it is not uncommon for them to react with an "Oh... I see" before we have even discussed it any further.

I think that he defines the meaning of this Greek word "hēsychia" the NIV says "quietness" The Interlinear says "quietness" the NAS says "A woman must quietly receive instructions:" The literal meaning of the Greek word is the objective, and I think many have exited the highway of the goal of authorial intent when they contend for the literal meaning of the English word silent.

But Paul defines his intended meaning of the word in the context of his sentence also (another rule of hermeneutics), "1 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. " The context of the sentence describes and attitude of submission and a receptive spirit therefore the quietness part would be that of not arguing rather than that of her location when she is doing it. There is nothing in these statements that identify the location (assembly or otherwise) and therefore saying that Paul is talking about the assembly is an assumption that cannot be supported by the words or the sentence structure itself. Insisting that he meant assembly is putting a "spin on it"

Paul also defines his meaning of the word "Teach" within the sentence when he says "or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." If we continue with the definition of quietness as not arguing with her husband (which is also supported by the context of the entire surrounding verses and our comparison with 1 Pet 3:1-6) we are on much safer ground hermeneutically to define "Teach" as in "correcting her Husband" instead of submitting to his authority, which is quiet a different matter than a female preaching the bible from the pulpit isn't it?

And location is not mentioned so adding "in the assembly" or "behind the pulpit" are both radical insertions into the text that do more than put a spin on it; they are violent attempts to wrest away authorial intent and establish a pharisaical rule concerning women in the assembly that was never even and OT concept. (see Deborah, and Huldah for examples)

As to whether a woman has the gifts to preach and teach that question can only be answered the same way it would be answered in evaluating a man's gifts to preach or teach. You would have to listen to them.
If the woman is preaching and teaching better than most men you have heard, and especially with more skill at expository preaching of the scriptures producing educated saints as a result and if her preaching and teaching is empowered by the Holy Spirit so that people are listening with rapt attention and experience illumination and transformation by the word of God as a result. and if she is doing it better than any man in that church I would give her the pulpit and not let some erroneous interpretation that missed the mark of what Paul was saying cause those people to miss what God wanted to preach or teach through that woman. And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,521
113
"Putting a spin on things" is the issue.

As to whether a woman has the gifts to preach and teach that question can only be answered the same way it would be answered in evaluating a man's gifts to preach or teach. You would have to listen to them.
If the woman is preaching and teaching better than most men you have heard, and especially with more skill at expository preaching of the scriptures producing educated saints as a result and if her preaching and teaching is empowered by the Holy Spirit so that people are listening with rapt attention and experience illumination and transformation by the word of God as a result. and if she is doing it better than any man in that church I would give her the pulpit and not let some erroneous interpretation that missed the mark of what Paul was saying cause those people to miss what God wanted to preach or teach through that woman. And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.
This is subjective criteria not biblically based criteria. You are guilty of putting your spin on the subject not making a biblical evaluation of the matter. It may seem right but it does not end well.

Eve's leadership led mankind to where it is today.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,846
9,819
113
This is subjective criteria not biblically based criteria. You are guilty of putting your spin on the subject not making a biblical evaluation of the matter. It may seem right but it does not end well.
Do you think that your interpretation is "biblical" when you ignore relevant context?

Eve's leadership led mankind to where it is today.
Typical sexist blather. Adam sinned. Deal with that biblical reality!
 

mustaphadrink

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2013
1,447
245
63
"Putting a spin on things" is the issue.

11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Many will "put a spin on things" when they say Paul was meaning that a woman cannot teach in the pulpit. It is impossible for Paul to mean that since pulpits had not been invented and it would not have entered the mind of Paul, nor the mind of his readers. Therefore cultural context of the time in which it was written (a rule of hermeneutics) rules out "pulpit" interpretation and we must find another solution rather than "putting this spin" on it. We must concede that he did not mean pulpit or we are not being honest.

Reading 1 Peter 3 we have an example where something similar is said about "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection."

1 Pet 3
1Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 2While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. 3Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 4But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. 5For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement

Comparing this with 1 Tim 2 it is impossible for the thinking reader to not notice the striking similarity in content and subject matter and it to dismiss the comparison is difficult for the honest truth seeker. It screams out for attention. Like big flashing lights 1 Peter 3:3 and 1 Tim 2:9 Scream "WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME SUBJECT"

1 Tim 2
9In 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; 10But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 11Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

When trying to determine what Paul meant when he wrote 1 Tim 2 concerning women being silent I find it most edifying to others who I discuss it with that ask them to first take a moment and read 1 Peter 3: 1-6 a few times, get them to tell me what that means to them, then Read 1 Tim 2:9-15 and when they do it this exercise it is not uncommon for them to react with an "Oh... I see" before we have even discussed it any further.

I think that he defines the meaning of this Greek word "hēsychia" the NIV says "quietness" The Interlinear says "quietness" the NAS says "A woman must quietly receive instructions:" The literal meaning of the Greek word is the objective, and I think many have exited the highway of the goal of authorial intent when they contend for the literal meaning of the English word silent.

But Paul defines his intended meaning of the word in the context of his sentence also (another rule of hermeneutics), "1 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. " The context of the sentence describes and attitude of submission and a receptive spirit therefore the quietness part would be that of not arguing rather than that of her location when she is doing it. There is nothing in these statements that identify the location (assembly or otherwise) and therefore saying that Paul is talking about the assembly is an assumption that cannot be supported by the words or the sentence structure itself. Insisting that he meant assembly is putting a "spin on it"

Paul also defines his meaning of the word "Teach" within the sentence when he says "or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." If we continue with the definition of quietness as not arguing with her husband (which is also supported by the context of the entire surrounding verses and our comparison with 1 Pet 3:1-6) we are on much safer ground hermeneutically to define "Teach" as in "correcting her Husband" instead of submitting to his authority, which is quiet a different matter than a female preaching the bible from the pulpit isn't it?

And location is not mentioned so adding "in the assembly" or "behind the pulpit" are both radical insertions into the text that do more than put a spin on it; they are violent attempts to wrest away authorial intent and establish a pharisaical rule concerning women in the assembly that was never even and OT concept. (see Deborah, and Huldah for examples)

As to whether a woman has the gifts to preach and teach that question can only be answered the same way it would be answered in evaluating a man's gifts to preach or teach. You would have to listen to them.
If the woman is preaching and teaching better than most men you have heard, and especially with more skill at expository preaching of the scriptures producing educated saints as a result and if her preaching and teaching is empowered by the Holy Spirit so that people are listening with rapt attention and experience illumination and transformation by the word of God as a result. and if she is doing it better than any man in that church I would give her the pulpit and not let some erroneous interpretation that missed the mark of what Paul was saying cause those people to miss what God wanted to preach or teach through that woman. And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.
Your assesment is very subjective and does not have a place for what the scripture teaches. All over the world there are a lot of things done in the church that are good or very good but they do not fulfil the teaching of scripture. Without that you have nothing. Having an annointing and the life of the spirit in the words spoken is all that matters. You get those when you are following the teaching of scripture.
 

Major

Active member
Dec 12, 2020
885
181
43
your better then me, and agree all the way, mostly self tough. serving God the best I can. thank you for encouragement. Praise the one God.
I am not better than anyone my friend. Some people are more educated than others but in the eyes of God we are all standing on leval ground!
 

Major

Active member
Dec 12, 2020
885
181
43
Are you sure it’s not that you are not looking at the rest of the scriptures ? Why would Paul teach one church one thing and then teach Timothy his successor that if it’s north about the subject it’s about ?

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:11-15‬ ‭KJV‬‬

it seems there’s a point there to
Me but , a secret I’ve learned is Paul’s letters are not a continuance of a story but thy ye are repetitive teachings to the church and won’t change later regardless of the historical time we’re in

the issue for me that I’m sure scripture will reconcile , what Paul’s saying is an element of the law of sin and death , so in this particular matter he’s speaking as of the women’s sin hasn’t been removed .

observe

“Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”


Why do you suppose he’s speaking this way of women ? And yet also teaches this

“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3:27-28‬ ‭

that’s like it was before they sinned at all , but Paul’s teaching in the other place that women are subject to men and are still being accused of eves transgression

I’m not at all wanting to argue or meaning to sound argumentative infeel
Like what I am trying to say isn’t wuote coming out right .

can you offer some thoughts on that ? Why is Paul teaching those two seemingly contradictory points ?
IMO.....Paul was telling the church that God wanted it to operate as the family with the Man (Husband) being help as the responsible party.

He did that because it was Eve ( WIFE) who was deceived 1st!
 

Major

Active member
Dec 12, 2020
885
181
43
SOOOOOO I have to explain . In this thread I have been thinking one way , and some others made some interesting points , I decided to consider and pray and do some studying about it and now , I have to reconsider my position .


As I’ve said many times in hear to learn and discussion helps . So I think scripture here really
Makes me pause in my prior belief

“Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

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.

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. What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

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.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭14:29-37‬ ‭KJV‬‬

this is extremely difficult for me to accept and believe but it’s plainly there so I have to not necessarily change as of this moment but seriously pause and find the order here

because

And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit;

and they shall prophesy:”

‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:17-18‬ ‭


Is Paul’s bias from the Jewish law showing through like peters did ? And is Paul conflicted because he tells us we are no longer under the law , that the curse of the law was removed , that in Christ there is no distinction beteeen Jew , gentile , male female ?

I had looked at a different passage where Paul said many no her thkngs about this but began with “ i do not permit women to speak , but very clearly Paul is Making the statement “ these things are the commandment of the lord for the churches “

so I now am hoping to reconcile things because both ideas are there and Paul is making a clear judgement speaking for the lord to the church . I would now have doubts about hearing women speakers inside the church gathering

but still very hard thing to accept in my mind , can’t deny things so clearly stated even though it means I need to re think my own position

God bless and thanks to everyone for letting me participate in the conversation actually learned something to really pray about and look more into .
Several things are at play.

One thing is that the women of Paul's day were not educated. They were not allowed to go to the temple to learn. In fact it has been said that the men in that day considered a mule more than they did a woman.

Another thing is that in the church of that day, women would ask their husbands questions across the isles and that caused a lot of confusion so Paul was saying..."You women be silent in church and then ask your questions when you get home".

Paul also said in 1 Corth 14:34......"Women are are to speak in church". However, the whole 14th chapter's CONTEXT is speaking in tongues and then in verse 34......."Women are not to speak in church". Many Bible scholars take that to mean that women were being told NOT to speak IN TONGUES in church.

Personally......I do not know and I only posted this to have the conversation. Which ever the reason, the Scriptures IMO are clear and they say that it is a MAN who is to be the pastor of the church.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,846
9,819
113
Several things are at play.

One thing is that the women of Paul's day were not educated. They were not allowed to go to the temple to learn. In fact it has been said that the men in that day considered a mule more than they did a woman.

Another thing is that in the church of that day, women would ask their husbands questions across the isles and that caused a lot of confusion so Paul was saying..."You women be silent in church and then ask your questions when you get home".

Paul also said in 1 Corth 14:34......"Women are are to speak in church". However, the whole 14th chapter's CONTEXT is speaking in tongues and then in verse 34......."Women are not to speak in church". Many Bible scholars take that to mean that women were being told NOT to speak IN TONGUES in church.

Personally......I do not know and I only posted this to have the conversation. Which ever the reason, the Scriptures IMO are clear and they say that it is a MAN who is to be the pastor of the church.
Because, after all, the word, “pastor” clearly and plainly appears in all of the passages that restrict women, right? Wrong. Not even once. The concept isn’t there either.
 

Funkus

Active member
May 20, 2020
157
48
28
i think Jesus advocated for women to play spiritual roles. The woman at the well who went on to testify to her village, Mary who proclaimed his resurrection to the male disciples is remarkable. Even in the old testament God often chose women to do important spiritual roles (Huldah). There are just too many examples to mention. The verses quoted here all relate to the later organisation of the church and how they saw fit to arrange it for their time not for all time. I've seen some very bad male preachers too
Anyway the bigger thing i recon is women getting broken by society and in need of a lot of healing more important than who is doing preaching work
 
S

Scribe

Guest
i think Jesus advocated for women to play spiritual roles. The woman at the well who went on to testify to her village, Mary who proclaimed his resurrection to the male disciples is remarkable. Even in the old testament God often chose women to do important spiritual roles (Huldah). There are just too many examples to mention. The verses quoted here all relate to the later organisation of the church and how they saw fit to arrange it for their time not for all time. I've seen some very bad male preachers too
Anyway the bigger thing i recon is women getting broken by society and in need of a lot of healing more important than who is doing preaching work
I think you get it.
God is pleased to see women and men filled with the Holy Spirit and prophesying and expounding on the Word of God empowered by the Spirit. "I would that all God's people were prophets and that he would pour out His Spirit on them all"

So what about this submission thing? The wife toward her husband. And sometimes that is going to be about teaching. She should not try to teach her husband something he does not agree with. She should not try to correct him. She should not try to usurp authority over him and teach something that he has told her not to teach. He is there to help her. She can be wrong sometimes. Something was going on at Ephesus that made Paul say this as instructions to Timothy for the church there. Maybe there were some women who were swept up by the false teachers and trying to repeat their teachings and their husbands needed to ask them not to and they were being told to listen to their husbands and allow his authority to be there scriptural reason for stop teaching these things even if they still thought they were true.

There are real life examples where the wife of the pastor is at odds with her husband and needs to submit and let him be the lead pastor and not try to be the lead pastor herself just because she is his wife. Sometimes a wife who does teach can attempt to take on more authority than has been given to her by others.
 

Funkus

Active member
May 20, 2020
157
48
28
Thanks Scribe i'm quite primitive/still learning and make a lot of mistakes
i actually reflected on this and in the end i think maybe God likes some people to resist change and be very strictly legalistic even if it's going too far. why? because they try and stop things going completely wild and out of control which is too far the other way. somewhere in the middle is that right balance. so he uses both types of people maybe is my hunch and they sort of need each other. problem comes when one group thinks they're completely right and the other completely wrong, hey a bit like relationships. the man sure has to be strong
 

Pilgrimshope

Well-known member
Sep 2, 2020
1,513
487
83
IMO.....Paul was telling the church that God wanted it to operate as the family with the Man (Husband) being help as the responsible party.

He did that because it was Eve ( WIFE) who was deceived 1st!
“the Man (Husband) being held as the responsible party.”

I think that he’s speaking from the curse and not the blessing

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1:27-28‬ ‭

That’s before transgression then this happens which is Paul’s argument for why women are subject to men

“And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:4-7‬ ‭KJV‬‬

then this is the result of sin

“And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:12-13, 16-17‬ ‭

I tend to see the serpent , the woman and the man being held responsible for their parts in the transgression . Which I believe reflects God who holds each person to account only for what they have done themselves. Male or female is my own belief

I think that Paul’s point is regarding ministry specifically , Eve essentially became the first false prophet . Echoing the lie that was opposed to Gods true word .


If you see how it was before they sinned and after a person is baptized and sin is remitted I think you see the difference in women being subject to
Men as a punishment for their transgression from the beginning , part of the curse for sin

but the gospel is about our sins being forgiven and remitted , the sins as scarlet being made white as snow , so I think once a person is in Christ it’s about the blessing , and no longer the curse for sin

“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:

for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3:26-29‬ ‭

I think when oaul
Specifically includes gender indifference in this statement where he makes elsewhere also , we have to consider the beginning before man became sinners and received the curse in genesis three which included death , expulsion from Eden , no more access to the tree of life , women’s increased pains of childbearing , women’s subjegation to men , men’s responsibility of labor and toil to equal women’s labor and birthing pains

not to mention the serpent at all . Just regarding male and female in Christ it sounds like this

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion...
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1:27-28‬ ‭

that’s what Paul is saying also is my point it’s different in Christ likenbefore sin there’s no separation of Jew and gentile like after , no authoritative order of male and female like afterwards because Adam and Eve were children of God they were both subject to his authority there was no need for intercession or Mediation he spoke with them not by priesthood but in relationship

“ For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:

for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

I think Paul’s point is referring ministry specifically his point being ot went wrong when Eve was deceived and then spread the deception to Adam , so therefore Paul’s argument is “ let the woman remain silent in church and learn in submission at home from her husband “

I think we would have to say that women can’t receive the Holy Ghost , or be chosen by God in order to think subjection is still about flesh and blood or gender or race .


I don’t think that’s true I believe God is looking past the flesh and at the individual person at the soul
And heart of us how we treat others not gender and race and ritual observations but brotherly love in faith

I think each individual is gong to be held to account only for their own deeds in Christ and not others whether male or
Female

but marriage also changes things . From that of singles