Women Pastors? Help me.
- Thread starter DevonS
- Start date
-
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.
Agreed... but what He "wrote" (actually, 'breathed') was in Greek, not English. Most English translations don't accurately translate the Greek in the relevant passages, as has been amply demonstrated in this thread.
Since you agree "absolutely" with John146, could you please tell me where the Bible "clearly states" that pastors should be men? John146 won't respond except with diversions.
Since you agree "absolutely" with John146, could you please tell me where the Bible "clearly states" that pastors should be men? John146 won't respond except with diversions.
It almost seems foolish to quote the same scripture again, since this thread is simply going in circles and nobody is being taught and nobody is being lifted up from it, but I will show it once again. I'm absolutely certain that it will make zero difference at all!!
[h=1]Titus 1:6-9English Standard Version (ESV)[/h] [SUP]6 [/SUP]if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife,[SUP][a][/SUP] and his children are believers[SUP][b][/SUP] and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. [SUP]7 [/SUP]For an overseer,[SUP][c][/SUP] as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, [SUP]8 [/SUP]but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. [SUP]9 [/SUP]He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound[SUP][d][/SUP] doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
other scriptures that are absolutely clear about women leading men during the assembly are below (again)
[h=1]1 Timothy 2:11-15English Standard Version (ESV)[/h] [SUP]11 [/SUP]Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. [SUP]12 [/SUP]I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. [SUP]13 [/SUP]For Adam was formed first, then Eve; [SUP]14 [/SUP]and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. [SUP]15 [/SUP]Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
[h=1]1 Corinthians 14:34English Standard Version (ESV)[/h] [SUP]34 [/SUP]the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
I personally would prefer that women were permitted to preach and lead, because I realize that they are every bit as intelligent as men, however I cannot let my human thinking and very limited wisdom overtake what God has said. The way I see it is why gamble? if the Bible says not to do something in clear black and white, then I am not willing to gamble and say that it don't mean what it says and carry on with whatever I want to do or think is best. I simply wish to submit and obey, and not try and figure out how to make it say what appeals to me personally. If you prefer to disregard what those verses say, then that's fine, but I won't.
[h=1]Titus 1:6-9English Standard Version (ESV)[/h] [SUP]6 [/SUP]if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife,[SUP][a][/SUP] and his children are believers[SUP][b][/SUP] and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. [SUP]7 [/SUP]For an overseer,[SUP][c][/SUP] as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, [SUP]8 [/SUP]but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. [SUP]9 [/SUP]He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound[SUP][d][/SUP] doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
other scriptures that are absolutely clear about women leading men during the assembly are below (again)
[h=1]1 Timothy 2:11-15English Standard Version (ESV)[/h] [SUP]11 [/SUP]Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. [SUP]12 [/SUP]I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. [SUP]13 [/SUP]For Adam was formed first, then Eve; [SUP]14 [/SUP]and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. [SUP]15 [/SUP]Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
[h=1]1 Corinthians 14:34English Standard Version (ESV)[/h] [SUP]34 [/SUP]the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
I personally would prefer that women were permitted to preach and lead, because I realize that they are every bit as intelligent as men, however I cannot let my human thinking and very limited wisdom overtake what God has said. The way I see it is why gamble? if the Bible says not to do something in clear black and white, then I am not willing to gamble and say that it don't mean what it says and carry on with whatever I want to do or think is best. I simply wish to submit and obey, and not try and figure out how to make it say what appeals to me personally. If you prefer to disregard what those verses say, then that's fine, but I won't.
Your first Scripture is not saying anything against women being teachers. How many men in the Bible had more than one wife? Solomon was considered the wisest of all yet he had seven hundred wives and hundreds of concubines besides. He was a king. Your second Scripture addresses married couples. Why does this keep getting ignored? Other Scriptures given on this subject also clearly address married couples only, telling women to ask their questions of their husbands after the meeting. Your third Scripture seeks to put women back under the law. Again, this has been ignored time and time again. After everything Paul said AGAINST being put back under the law, you are going to say this is relevant to Christian women, that they must be put under the law? Do you have yourself under the law? Where is this law in Scripture? It has yet to have been produced. Where can we find it?
Y
Years ago in my study of the Bible I got really caught up in reading Paul's writings so much so that I read them more than our Saviour Christ Jesus' words. Now I realise that I need to put Jesus and His word above all, as He focuses on the inward more than the outward, and He is the sinless Christ Who died for the remission of our sins.
The Jews who were in Berea were commended for having "readiness of mind" and they "searched the Scriptures daily" to see whether the things that Paul said were true. In the past I advocated women having long hair with their heads covered and other outward things Paul teaches. I realise now that it is not wise to focus on the outward appearance and that those who do so often oppress others such as disabled people; Aboriginal people; elderly people. I now read Paul's word's and I match them to the Scriptures making sure that whatever he says is true. Of the Synagogue in Berea were mentioned "honourable women" who were commended for their belief in Christ Jesus through the study of the Scriptures. Now I have disfigured arms from an autoimmune disease and realise that asking women (who often become older and less able, or who struggle with disability to wear a head covering) is not merciful and nurturing to the inward spirit of the hearer. I spent more time telling Churches and women that they need to follow having long hair and head coverings than I spent telling other women to: Love the LORD their God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength; and to love their neighbours' as themselves.
"The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with the men of this generation, and condemn them: for she came from the utmost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here." Luke 11:31 (KJV)
The Jews who were in Berea were commended for having "readiness of mind" and they "searched the Scriptures daily" to see whether the things that Paul said were true. In the past I advocated women having long hair with their heads covered and other outward things Paul teaches. I realise now that it is not wise to focus on the outward appearance and that those who do so often oppress others such as disabled people; Aboriginal people; elderly people. I now read Paul's word's and I match them to the Scriptures making sure that whatever he says is true. Of the Synagogue in Berea were mentioned "honourable women" who were commended for their belief in Christ Jesus through the study of the Scriptures. Now I have disfigured arms from an autoimmune disease and realise that asking women (who often become older and less able, or who struggle with disability to wear a head covering) is not merciful and nurturing to the inward spirit of the hearer. I spent more time telling Churches and women that they need to follow having long hair and head coverings than I spent telling other women to: Love the LORD their God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength; and to love their neighbours' as themselves.
"The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with the men of this generation, and condemn them: for she came from the utmost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here." Luke 11:31 (KJV)
Last edited by a moderator:
S
Very few churches have a single leader as a pastor these days as there are always checks and balances within most denominations whether they be Congregationalist style or Presbytery style. Paul definitely taught that there needs to be leadership in a church. He himself was the leader of all the Gentiles and he acknowledged that several times.
Greek word for pastor is off of Shepherd and there is only one Shepherd for flock or if it's a very large flock there may be a number of shepherds but there was always one head Shepherd. The hierarchy that Paul teaches about in Timothy also supports God's plan that there be an ultimate level of accountability in any relationship whether it be a family one or a church one.
There is much more president and the Bible for leadership than there is for no leadership and much more precedent for having a single leader then a group of leaders.
Greek word for pastor is off of Shepherd and there is only one Shepherd for flock or if it's a very large flock there may be a number of shepherds but there was always one head Shepherd. The hierarchy that Paul teaches about in Timothy also supports God's plan that there be an ultimate level of accountability in any relationship whether it be a family one or a church one.
There is much more president and the Bible for leadership than there is for no leadership and much more precedent for having a single leader then a group of leaders.
the first scripture is listing the qualifications of the churches human leaders (elders). It is not biblical for a woman to be an elder of the church (or a Deacon).
1 tim 2:11 and 1 cor 14:34 both speak very plainly, and it don't matter to me even if it was addressing only married couples, the fact is that it very simply says that women should be silent and not have authority over men in the assembly.
It makes absolutely no difference to me how a person might seek to nullify any of these scriptures, in the end everyone must stand alone, I choose to read what it says and take what it says very seriously.
I'm out, ive said what I think needs to be said, on to something else. Have a blessed day everyone!!
1 tim 2:11 and 1 cor 14:34 both speak very plainly, and it don't matter to me even if it was addressing only married couples, the fact is that it very simply says that women should be silent and not have authority over men in the assembly.
It makes absolutely no difference to me how a person might seek to nullify any of these scriptures, in the end everyone must stand alone, I choose to read what it says and take what it says very seriously.
I'm out, ive said what I think needs to be said, on to something else. Have a blessed day everyone!!
Y
There was a point where Sarah asked Abraham to send away his other wife and child. This disturbed Abraham but God asked him to heed Sarah's voice in this matter. Sarah is an example to women of obedience to her husband Abraham, yet on this occasion Abraham was to submit to her request.
There are exceptions to many matters when we read the Scriptures. The Old Testament is a foreshadow of Christ and much can be learned through mediation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Additionally, one could take this one verse out of context to say that women are only saved through child bearing. This when we know that God says in Isaiah 54:1: "Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD." And lastly that women as men, are saved through Christ Jesus. Giving birth to and raising children is honourable, yet a woman is saved through the death and Resurrection of Christ Jesus.
There are exceptions to many matters when we read the Scriptures. The Old Testament is a foreshadow of Christ and much can be learned through mediation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Additionally, one could take this one verse out of context to say that women are only saved through child bearing. This when we know that God says in Isaiah 54:1: "Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD." And lastly that women as men, are saved through Christ Jesus. Giving birth to and raising children is honourable, yet a woman is saved through the death and Resurrection of Christ Jesus.
Last edited by a moderator:
there are definite jobs for both parties, what we need to do is be ready for whatever the
Holy Spirit requires of us to do or to say, for after our total commitment to Jesus, we
are His ready and willing servants...for the both of us, we'll do anything, and be as
thankful as we can for the privilege...
Holy Spirit requires of us to do or to say, for after our total commitment to Jesus, we
are His ready and willing servants...for the both of us, we'll do anything, and be as
thankful as we can for the privilege...
I don't see "pastor" anywhere in the verses you quoted. I don't see "leader" or "lead" either. Care to try again?
The truth which John146 refuses to acknowledge (and which I invite you to acknowledge) is that there is no "clear statement" that only men can be "pastors". There is only interpretation and interpolation (eisegesis) which leads to that conclusion.
Yes, I'm being picky about words, but it's directed at John146, not at you, because elsewhere he has been extremely picky about exact words. His belief is that the KJV is the exact words God wanted in English, so I called him on his use of "pastor" where the KJV has "bishop"... they aren't the same in English or Greek.
The truth which John146 refuses to acknowledge (and which I invite you to acknowledge) is that there is no "clear statement" that only men can be "pastors". There is only interpretation and interpolation (eisegesis) which leads to that conclusion.
Yes, I'm being picky about words, but it's directed at John146, not at you, because elsewhere he has been extremely picky about exact words. His belief is that the KJV is the exact words God wanted in English, so I called him on his use of "pastor" where the KJV has "bishop"... they aren't the same in English or Greek.
Y
The honourable women mentioned in Acts 13:50 and Acts 17:12 may have been godly women of some authority. The word translated as honourable "(eusxḗmōn) is used in Koine Greek of a person who properly uses influence, especially by serving in a high (respected) position" (Strong's Concordance).
We are back to the beginning... again.
The cross brings equality to all. The carnal mind has trouble accepting this.
It is found eighteen times in the Gospels. Fourteen of those times it is translated minister. Most of these are clearly what we would consider ministry in the acts and teaching of Jesus. Four times, when the context is clearly what we would term a hired-servant type, it is actually translated servant.
My point is very clear. When the male translators dealt with Phoebe, they had a choice. Do we make Phoebe a servant, thus in line with our views where women should be in church? We surely cannot make her a deacon. That's too much authority. And we surely cannot make her a minister. That would leave too much room. Why, she might have been an elder, a prophetess, a pastor, or an apostle. No way! Make her a servant!
Now, we all should be servants. But when Paul wanted to denote servanthood as a holy characteristic of Christian life, he usually used the word doulos, the Greek word for bondslave. He understood that servanthood meant death to self and sacrifice for others. But when describing the function of another, he did not use this word. But the translators did. That's the fifteenth century translators hired by King James--not the first century apostle chosen by God.
Now, the translators did a marvelous job on 99% of the Scriptures. But on some male-female issues, their choice of words was colored by their gender. Maybe not intentionally, but certainly in effect.
For instance, in Ephesians 6:21, Tychicus is referred to by Paul as a beloved brother and faithful minister. Same word, different sex, different translation.
Look at Colossians 1:7. Epaphras, our dear sundoulous (fellow servant), is a faithful diakonos (translated minister) of Christ. Why not Phoebe? Then Paul refers to himself as a diakonos in Col. 1:23, 1:25, and Eph. 3:7 and follows in Eph. 3:8 that because he was made a diakonos, he can preach! If Paul, why not Phoebe!???
Eph. 3:7-8... of which I became a minister [diakonos] according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. To me who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ.
Sound doctrine must come from an overview of all the scriptures on a subject. Then the seemingly hard to understand into the context of the whole, not the other way around. What we have done with teaching on women in ministry is the other way around. We have ignored the practice of women being used in ministry and concentrated on a few Scriptures that may have missed out on the translation boat when the translators took their voyage.
It is true that the word diakonos is primarily used to describe a person who would minister in what we would term the ministry of helps. And Phoebe may have ministered to the church in this fashion. But the word has a fuller meaning, including the one mentioned above in which Paul received grace to preach from his grace to minister (diakonos).
Look at some other Scriptures where diakonos or a derivative of that word is translated ministry:
The cross brings equality to all. The carnal mind has trouble accepting this.
I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church in Cenchrea, that you may receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and assist her in whatever business she has need of you; for indeed she has been a helper of many and of myself also. Romans 16:1-2
The word servant is the word diakonos, from which we get our word deacon. Strong's Concordance states that the general understanding of the meaning of this word was a Christian pastor or teacher. It can mean minister, servant, or deacon. Paul used it or a derivative of the word thirty-four times. Six times it clearly refers to the office of a deacon. Twenty-seven times it is translated minister. Only once, when Paul uses the word, is it translated servant--in describing Phoebe. Note that the translation was not Paul's, but men hundreds and hundreds of years later deciding to change the word from the original Greek to mean something else in relation to Phoebe. One could assume they were misogynists. Men have sought to control women forever, it seems. Keep them pushed down, marginalized, minimized, of lesser value than men; it hasn't been much more than a hundred years since women's suffrage won the legal status for women of being considered persons under the laws of the land in North America. Jesus did not treat women that way, and when you get right down to it, neither did Paul. That does not stop men to this very day treating women as inferior to themselves, and citing Scripture to justify their position when clearly women have been in positions of authority and used by God throughout history to TEACH and also to have authority over men.
It is found eighteen times in the Gospels. Fourteen of those times it is translated minister. Most of these are clearly what we would consider ministry in the acts and teaching of Jesus. Four times, when the context is clearly what we would term a hired-servant type, it is actually translated servant.
My point is very clear. When the male translators dealt with Phoebe, they had a choice. Do we make Phoebe a servant, thus in line with our views where women should be in church? We surely cannot make her a deacon. That's too much authority. And we surely cannot make her a minister. That would leave too much room. Why, she might have been an elder, a prophetess, a pastor, or an apostle. No way! Make her a servant!
Now, we all should be servants. But when Paul wanted to denote servanthood as a holy characteristic of Christian life, he usually used the word doulos, the Greek word for bondslave. He understood that servanthood meant death to self and sacrifice for others. But when describing the function of another, he did not use this word. But the translators did. That's the fifteenth century translators hired by King James--not the first century apostle chosen by God.
Now, the translators did a marvelous job on 99% of the Scriptures. But on some male-female issues, their choice of words was colored by their gender. Maybe not intentionally, but certainly in effect.
For instance, in Ephesians 6:21, Tychicus is referred to by Paul as a beloved brother and faithful minister. Same word, different sex, different translation.
Look at Colossians 1:7. Epaphras, our dear sundoulous (fellow servant), is a faithful diakonos (translated minister) of Christ. Why not Phoebe? Then Paul refers to himself as a diakonos in Col. 1:23, 1:25, and Eph. 3:7 and follows in Eph. 3:8 that because he was made a diakonos, he can preach! If Paul, why not Phoebe!???
Eph. 3:7-8... of which I became a minister [diakonos] according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. To me who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ.
Sound doctrine must come from an overview of all the scriptures on a subject. Then the seemingly hard to understand into the context of the whole, not the other way around. What we have done with teaching on women in ministry is the other way around. We have ignored the practice of women being used in ministry and concentrated on a few Scriptures that may have missed out on the translation boat when the translators took their voyage.
It is true that the word diakonos is primarily used to describe a person who would minister in what we would term the ministry of helps. And Phoebe may have ministered to the church in this fashion. But the word has a fuller meaning, including the one mentioned above in which Paul received grace to preach from his grace to minister (diakonos).
Look at some other Scriptures where diakonos or a derivative of that word is translated ministry:
- The ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5)
- The ministry of the spirit (2 Cor. 3:7)
- The ministry of righteousness (2 Cor. 3:7)
- Addicted to the ministry of the saints (1 Cor. 16:15)
- Able ministers of the new covenant (2 Cor. 3:6)
- Civil authorities as ministers (Rom. 13:4)
- Paul is a minister, Tychicus is a minister, Epaphras is a minister, and Timothy is a minister. Why not Phoebe? Only one reason. She was a woman. Who made her less? Not God. Not Jesus. Not Paul. Only man and his pride that has perpetuated womenless ministry. Priscilla and Phoebe show us about Paul, by David Fees
Instead of counting the words in Bible and throwing Strong's definitions and own modern opinions, its good to look at the eastern orthodox church that has the tradition going back to the apotles' days and the early church, used always the Greek language in its service and in their Bible and have much more to say about the word diakonos.
Holy Orders
If you dont like old Greek churches, you can look at the protestant apologetics page:
https://carm.org/there-were-deaconesses-so-there-can-be-female-elders-and-pastors