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.

Diakonos

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2019
1,381
434
83
31
Anacortes, WA
Ok, then please make sense of it in context. Since you know, tell me, Do you believe there is a relationship between vs 12 and vs 13-14?
If no, then tell me why Paul connected them with "for".
If yes, then tell me why vs 12 is followed by vs 13-14.


(not in reference to this conversation...just tell me what your understanding of these verses in context. This is all I have been wanting from you the whole time. Teach me the meaning of these verses as if I had no idea what they meant)
I have done all this already, in my previous post.
Which post exactly? I just re-read our conversations. I see that you don't believe there is a causal connection between the verses. But I do not see your explanation of what the passage means. Can you tell me your exegesis of the passage in the Biblical context? The biblical context means using Adam and Eve in your exegesis, just as Paul did. Hence, the "for", which you really cannot avoid.
Without that context, it doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense....to you. Does it have to make sense for you to accept it?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,797
113
Which post exactly? I just re-read our conversations.
943.

I see that you don't believe there is a causal connection between the verses.
That is not what I said. What I did say is, "There is no causal connection between prior creation and authority". Adam's creation prior to Eve's does not necessarily confer authority over her, and it certainly does not confer authority of all males over all females or preclude female authority over males. The two concepts are unrelated. I related them on the basis of the cultural situation, where Paul is not making a theological argument for female submission, but rather, upending a false teaching about Adam and Eve.

But I do not see your explanation of what the passage means. Can you tell me your exegesis of the passage in the Biblical context? The biblical context means using Adam and Eve in your exegesis, just as Paul did. Hence, the "for", which you really cannot avoid.
Answered above.

It doesn't make sense....to you. Does it have to make sense for you to accept it?
In a word, yes.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
They also told Jesus he was wrong for healing on the sabbath. Because it was against God's word. They thought they had the word of God on the subject.

Like .. You can't preach... your a woman... and your usurping authority over a man when you preach. .. Pharisees. They think they have the word of God but they don't.
You cannot pastor a church because you are divorced. God put you in that situation for your own good.

Your slander of Jesus is an unequal comparison conceived to make a falsehood look like truth.

The Pharisees taught the sabbath wholly without compassion and Jesus did no wrong in healing on the sabbath.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Diakonos

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2019
1,381
434
83
31
Anacortes, WA
Paul is not making a theological argument for female submission, but rather, upending a false teaching about Adam and Eve.
What false argument was Paul referring to? And who was making this false argument?
Are you saying that if you don't understand something in the Bible, then you don't accept it?
here is an example:
"Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials". That is a command. If that didn't make sense to you, does that mean you don't accept it?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,797
113
What false argument was Paul referring to? And who was making this false argument?
Not a false argument but a false teaching, part of the mystery religions, that Eve was formed before Adam, and was free of any wrongdoing with regard to the forbidden fruit.

Are you saying that if you don't understand something in the Bible, then you don't accept it?
here is an example:
"Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials". That is a command. If that didn't make sense to you, does that mean you don't accept it?
It's an admonition, not a command... and it does make sense to me.

There is a vast difference between me not understanding something (yet) and it not making sense.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
You cannot pastor a church because you are divorced. God put you in that situation for your own good.

Your slander of Jesus is an unequal comparison conceived to make a falsehood look like truth.

The Pharisees taught the sabbath wholly without compassion and Jesus did no wrong in healing on the sabbath.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
I have been very patient with you but I will put you on my ignore list now and will stop engaging with you as it is obvious that you're getting provoked to the point of sinning.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
it's a real fireball this topic, wonder why they don't ban it on here.
Discussing the scriptures involved should never be banned. It is like discussing the scriptures about the gift of tongues. The same people who get so angry when their interpretation on tongues is questioned are also hostile toward those who don't accept their interpretation about women preachers. It's not the discussion of scriptures that should be banned but only those who don't remain civil and resort to abusive rhetoric.

But the ignore feature does help.
 

Diakonos

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2019
1,381
434
83
31
Anacortes, WA
a false teaching, part of the mystery religions, that Eve was formed before Adam
What's your source for this "Eve created before Adam" heresy being prominent among 1st century Jews Paul was writing to?
It's an admonition, not a command
How do you know that?

There is a vast difference between me not understanding something (yet) and it not making sense.
Fine, I will word it another way:
If you didn't understand James' command to count trials as joy, does that mean you won't accept it until you understand why he said that?
 
T

TheIndianGirl

Guest
yes, I know the bride is the church. I used the term "bride" because I was referencing the marriage of the Lamb. "Bride" seemed like a more appropriate term for the topic because I was referring to the parallels between our future marriage to Christ...and the current marriage(s) between a man and a woman. As I have already said, the divine marriage pattern of authority and leadership is consistently applied to the family structure and the church's structure throughout the Bible.
The relationship between husband and wife is supposed to reflect the relationship between Christ and Church, in that sense I see the parallel. How this relationship applies to an individual church's structure is that Christ leads the Church, which I don't believe is related to the internal church structure. The pastor is not head/leader of the the local church, Christ is. Many pastors even make that clear. How do you find that the relationship between Christ and Church applies to the internal structure of the Church?
 

Diakonos

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2019
1,381
434
83
31
Anacortes, WA
The relationship between husband and wife is supposed to reflect the relationship between Christ and Church, in that sense I see the parallel. How this relationship applies to an individual church's structure is that Christ leads the Church, which I don't believe is related to the internal church structure. The pastor is not head/leader of the the local church, Christ is. Many pastors even make that clear. How do you find that the relationship between Christ and Church applies to the internal structure of the Church?
Absolutely, Christ is the head of the body. The "senior pastor" technically isn't even a biblical office. So I don't have an opinion about that. Elders (the teachers and leaders of the church), however, are always described as male; they are referred to as "man", "he", "him" and "husband". If you can find a verse in the Bible that even hints at the idea of a woman elder, please tell me so that I can repent. I just simply don't see any evidence at all for the possibility of a female elder ever existing in the entire Bible...and certainly not an affirmation of the idea. If you or anyone can find this evidence, then we would have a reason to entertain the thought. People who argue for women eldership are fighting against a very obvious Biblical affirmation: Men and women are not the same. If we were the same, we wouldn't be having conversations like this. But Satan wants us to be jealous of (or abuse) the uniqueness of the other sex. God wants us all to follow His wonderful, complementary design and trust that He knows what he is doing. But if you chose to dig into the subject, paying attention to the obvious, natural conclusions the Bible expresses, you will see so much wisdom and beauty in God's design of male and female.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,797
113
What's your source for this "Eve created before Adam" heresy being prominent among 1st century Jews Paul was writing to?
I said nothing about it being a prominent heresy among first-century Jews to whom Paul was writing. Where did you get all that?

Paul was not writing to first-century Jews; he was writing to Timothy, a half-Jewish Christian leading the church in Ephesus (a pagan city, not a Jewish city), advising him on how to deal with specific concerns he was facing.

How do you know that?
Commands come with punishments for violation. There is no specific punishment for not counting trials as joy.

Fine, I will word it another way:
If you didn't understand James' command to count trials as joy, does that mean you won't accept it until you understand why he said that?
That's a leading question; I don't accept that James' statement is a command. As for the gist of your question, you are missing the point. As I said before, there is a difference between not understanding, and nonsense. I don't understand Mandarin or tensor calculus (never having studied either) but I don't believe either is nonsense. You want me to accept nonsense. It ain't gonna happen.
 

Reformed1689

Active member
Jun 1, 2018
151
56
28
It is just that simple. Jesus came to save men only.

John 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

Matt 11:27
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth
any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.


MANKIND
Literally. What does the above word mean?
Does it exclude women?
Is it THAT simple?

All men are created equal.
Are only men created equal?

Your rules....
Hermeneutics are not needed.
Context is not needed.
Exegesis is not needed.

The only thing needed is the ability to READ!
Your post is a false equivocation fallacy.
 

Diakonos

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2019
1,381
434
83
31
Anacortes, WA
I said nothing about it being a prominent heresy among first-century Jews to whom Paul was writing. Where did you get all that?

Paul was not writing to first-century Jews; he was writing to Timothy, a half-Jewish Christian leading the church in Ephesus (a pagan city, not a Jewish city), advising him on how to deal with specific concerns he was facing.
My mistake. I forgot that Timothy was pastoring at Ephesus.
What is your source for this "Eve created before Adam" heresy being prominent in 1st century Ephesus? (I want to be on the same page as you).
Commands come with punishments for violation.
I don't accept that James' statement is a command.
Do you know what the "imperative tense" means in a Greek phrase like this? When a Biblical writer uses the imperative tense this way, it indicates that this is required of us, entailing necessity, and expectation to fulfill.
So as I was saying,


Here are some examples of this usage of the imperative tense:

1615056134771.png
1615056146796.png 1615056148703.png 1615056149837.png
1615056528189.png

2nd person imperatives are always commands.

As I was saying, If you didn't understand James' command to count trials as joy, does that mean you won't accept it until you understand why he said that?

Similarly, Paul used the imperative tense in his statement about not letting women teach. Although our English translations don't reflect that, they can be hard to miss without careful inspection. It is, indeed, required of us to follow his example from his tone to Timothy. Additionally, In another place, he tells us to imitate him.
 

Attachments

Major

Active member
Dec 12, 2020
885
183
43
I have been very patient with you but I will put you on my ignore list now and will stop engaging with you as it is obvious that you're getting provoked to the point of sinning.
Would YOU PLEASE do that for me as well?????.....PLEASE?
 

Major

Active member
Dec 12, 2020
885
183
43
Discussing the scriptures involved should never be banned. It is like discussing the scriptures about the gift of tongues. The same people who get so angry when their interpretation on tongues is questioned are also hostile toward those who don't accept their interpretation about women preachers. It's not the discussion of scriptures that should be banned but only those who don't remain civil and resort to abusive rhetoric.

But the ignore feature does help.
Dicussing the Scriptures is always the thing to do.

However......the way some "Christians" discuss anything, gives rise to the condemnation of the world on Christians who talk and behave as is evidenced here in front of our eyes.

Actually, I would say that when reading some of the posts here, some would not have any proof that this was in fact a Christian web site at all.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
Would YOU PLEASE do that for me as well?????.....PLEASE?
Just look at what happened to Stephen in Acts 7. Verse 54 says they gnashed on him with their teeth. The high and holy ones accuse others of sin because they cannot tolerate the truth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger