Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

[OrphanedRepublican]

I am sure that YOU believe that those Scriptures in some way mean that women are called to priests. But als....that simply is a real overreach my friend. That is the process of READING INTO the Scriptures what we want them to say.

I think you are referring to 1 Corinthians 11:7...........
" For a man should not have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of the man.

A common understanding of that Scripture has been that, compared with woman, man is a more direct reflection of God and man has a more direct relationship with God. Moreover, it has been understood that these factors are displayed in the supposed superiority and authority of man in contrast to the inferior and subordinate status of woman.

Writing about 250 years ago, John Gill said:

“. . . man was first originally and immediately the image and glory of God, the woman only secondarily and mediately through man. The man is more perfectly and conspicuously the image and glory of God, on account of his more extensive dominion and authority."

In Genesis 1, there is nothing at all to indicate that women, intrinsically, have a lower status or less authority than men. In Gen. 1:26-28, men and women have the exact same status as God’s image-bearers, and they have the exact same authority and purpose. Men and women are to share the rule of God’s creation.

I do not believe that women are permitted to be priests. That is absolutely not the case nor I have said that. Further, there is such a disconnect between your replies to what I'm actually saying that there is no fruitful exchange here.

 

[mustaphadrink]

I have not been arguing for titles or positions but against those who say women may not lead up any work and must stay quiet.

Women on the mission fields have established works and assemblies where no previous work was ever done ... this makes them leaders.

A total disconnect to what I have said.

 

[mustaphadrink]

And if everyone would go back to the very first post in this thread.......what you just posted is exactly what I SAID 132 pages ago!!!!

You said...........
"If a MAN is blameless and the HUSBAND of one WIFE, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination........"

That is the exact word that GOD SAID in 1 Timothy 3:1-2.

So then the debate is not about MAN or WOMAN as a Pastor..... but instead is ....
"WHY DO THOSE WHO WANT WOMEN TO BE PASTORS REJECT THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD"?????

So are you saying others are not allowed to add to what you said or confirm what you said even if God gave them the words to write?

 

[Evmur]

As a Christion Evmur.....I do not bet on anything.

Actually....I do not care what you believe about me my friend. What I post here is exactly what I have seen and experienced whther you like it or not.

REPENT = CHANGE DIRECTION! The lost man was doomed and destined for hell. He was convicted of his sin by the Holy Spirit and accepted Christ and that action cause him to change direction FROM hell to heaven which is REPENTING.

Holiness comes by the grace of God and has nothing to do with good teaching. GOOD TEACHING meaning that the tongues spoken today by the AOG is not Biblical. Is that where you want to go with this conversation?????

You are basing holiness and salvation on GOOD TEACHING??????

My dear friend......you have a lot to learn don't you????

You believe in HOLINESS! “Holiness” in our tradition does not mean “Holy-Roller Pentecostalism.”. Although the Pentecostal Movement (begun in 1901) is an offshoot of the Holiness Movement, its emphasis on speaking in tongues never figured in John Wesley’s teaching nor in the birth of the Oriental Missionary Society.


Wesley’s perfection meant a perfection in love. Wesley taught that becoming a Christian launched a person on a process growth in Christian love, empowered by God’s grace, but also to be pursued with vigor by the believer. “This process of sanctification…culminates in an experience of ‘pure love’ as one progresses to the place where love becomes devoid of self-interest…It is important, however, to note that this perfection was not static but dynamic, always improvable…

“Although Wesley talks about an instantaneous experience called ‘entire santification’ subsequent to (conversion), his major emphasis was the continous process of going on to perfection” .

Evmur, instead of the time you use to post such things on the internet, take the time to read the book.............
(R. G. Tuttle Jr., “John Wesley” in
Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Walter Elwell, ed., [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984]).

No I am not basing holiness upon good teaching but upon the gift of grace. Wesley was an unholy man until one morning at Aldersgate St he felt his heart strangely warmed. He had tried everything to make himself holy but had to admit that he was as a man in chains preaching to men in chains.

I base the outworking of this holiness upon good teaching or spiritual knowledge. So much unholiness in the church is down to bad teaching.

To say perfection requires improvement is a contradiction in terms, we know about Wesley's supposed perfection, you as a good old Southern Baptist boy should not be believing that.

 

[Evmur]

No I am not basing holiness upon good teaching but upon the gift of grace. Wesley was an unholy man until one morning at Aldersgate St he felt his heart strangely warmed. He had tried everything to make himself holy but had to admit that he was as a man in chains preaching to men in chains.

I base the outworking of this holiness upon good teaching or spiritual knowledge. So much unholiness in the church is down to bad teaching.

To say perfection requires improvement is a contradiction in terms, we know about Wesley's supposed perfection, you as a good old Southern Baptist boy should not be believing that.

did you see that? he felt his heart strangely warm and he believed that Christ had indeed borne his sins away ... that's it, that will do anybody. Charles Spurgeon simply looked. The preacher cried "Look unto Me all the world I am the Saviour and there is no other" and Spurgeon looked.

... you've been reading too much Finney

 

[BarneyplusBarneyBuckets]

It is not my intention to cause an argument or division among the faithful with that question just discussion in a Christian and civil manner.

I have always simply posted the Word of God as it is written. I post this question in order to properly attempt to teach the Word of God....PEROID!

1 Timothy 3:1-2.........
"This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach".

According to the written Word of God, a Pastor can only be a "Male/Man".

Now, before anyone argues that point or disagree with me, remember that the "One" who said..."In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" also was the "One" who said......
"if a "MAN" desire the office of a bishop".

The old Major did not have anything whatsoever to do with what Jesus Christ placed into the Word of God. The old Major just reads it and accepts it as it is written so your disagreements will be with Christ and not me!!!!

Now the question must be WHY would God do that?

1 Timothy 2:13-14 .....
"For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

It’s important to understand that Paul does not prohibit women from teaching in all contexts (Titus 2:3; Acts 18:25-26), only from teaching the Bible to men in the church.

Notice that Paul prohibits women from doing two distinct things.

1.
Women may not teach the Bible to men in the church.
2.
Women may not exercise authority over men in the church.

Teaching and exercising authority in the church are the two primary responsibilities of elders, pastors, or bishops. Thus, women are not to hold the office of pastor, but neither are they to perform these particular functions of a pastor over men in the church.

Again, for the inquisitive minds the question is still...WHY is that the case.

I will give you what I think is the reason behinds God's direction.

1.
The creation order is the first reason Paul gives for prohibiting women from teaching or exercising authority in the church.
Paul doesn’t ground his command in cultural considerations or a particular problem with the women in the Ephesian church. Rather, he grounds his command in creation. He says that the reason women are not to teach or exercise authority over men in the church is that....
“Adam was formed first, then Eve”. Paul means that God established Adam as the head and authority of his wife, Eve. God designed men to lead.

2.
The nature of women is the second reason Paul gives for prohibiting them from teaching or exercising authority in the church.
Paul says, “Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (1 Tim 2:14). Paul is saying something about the natural constitution of men and women, that men as a class are naturally more fitted to teach and have authority in the church, but women are not.
Dr. Wayne Grudem says, “This is by far the most common viewpoint in the history of the interpretation of this passage” (Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth 70).

Women used to be Pastors, in order for them to be banned they must have been in the role to begin with or there would be no need to ban them. Furthermore, it was a Roman Emperor who banned women to strengthen his rule and quell the uprising against him. There are ancient paintings that have been found to show females in high roles in the church. Jesus loved everyone and relevant to the time he was pretty much a feminist. Women were key to spreading God's message as men would not have been able to mix with women to do so. 'I commend to you our sister phoebe, a deacon of the church of Cenchreae, so that you may welcome her in the Lord as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and myself as well' Romans 16:1-2

 

[Funkus]

before there were pastors there was pasta and women were involved in making it, only when the pasta get's converted in the pastor did the question arise, can women be pastors?

 

[Major]

Women used to be Pastors, in order for them to be banned they must have been in the role to begin with or there would be no need to ban them. Furthermore, it was a Roman Emperor who banned women to strengthen his rule and quell the uprising against him. There are ancient paintings that have been found to show females in high roles in the church. Jesus loved everyone and relevant to the time he was pretty much a feminist. Women were key to spreading God's message as men would not have been able to mix with women to do so. 'I commend to you our sister phoebe, a deacon of the church of Cenchreae, so that you may welcome her in the Lord as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and myself as well' Romans 16:1-2

Would you please post those Scriptures which tell us about women Pastors in the 1st church?????

"HIGH ROLES" does not mean Ordained Pastors!

Romans 16:1 that you used to support your idea of women as deacons says that The NIV and NRSV call Phoebe a “deacon”.

However, the NASB and ESV, KJV AMO, HOLMAN, NKJV all stick with “servant.” The Greek word is diakonos, which can be used for a range of meanings including “servant,” “messenger,” or “deacon.”

However, Phoebe is also described as a diakonos of “the church at Cenchreae.” While I acknowledge that this view is not unanimous among scholars and commentators, I think that the addition of the phrase “of the church at Cenchreae” makes it probable that Phoebe served in some official capacity but to claim her as an ORDAINED DEACON is to make a reach which just is not there.

 

[Major]

No I am not basing holiness upon good teaching but upon the gift of grace. Wesley was an unholy man until one morning at Aldersgate St he felt his heart strangely warmed. He had tried everything to make himself holy but had to admit that he was as a man in chains preaching to men in chains.

I base the outworking of this holiness upon good teaching or spiritual knowledge. So much unholiness in the church is down to bad teaching.

To say perfection requires improvement is a contradiction in terms, we know about Wesley's supposed perfection, you as a good old Southern Baptist boy should not be believing that.

WRONG.

Wesley DID NOT believe or teach sinless perfection. IF you had read the book I suggested to you, you would not have posted your comment here as you just did..

Wesley taught that Sanctifying grace is the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit that changes us so that our lives are increasingly conformed to the mind of Christ. John Wesley called this lifelong process sanctification or becoming "perfected in love."

Wesley took seriously Jesus's invitation to 'be ye therefore perfect as your Father which is in heaven is perfect' (Matt 5:48).
By 'perfection,' Wesley did not mean moral flawlessness or sinlessness. He meant perfection in the sense of maturity."

Wesley believed we could become perfect in love in this life. If Jesus invites us to seek perfection, perfect love is possible. He didn't mean we would be free from mistakes, temptation or failure.

For Wesley, growing as a Christian is all about being filled with love, which happens by the grace of God.

 

[Major]

So are you saying others are not allowed to add to what you said or confirm what you said even if God gave them the words to write?

No, that is not what I said. I was only saying that I agreed and it was what I had already said as well!

We are in agreement and I did not in any way mean for you to take it as you could not build on previous posts.

My apologies for any misunderstanding.

 

[Major]

I do not believe that women are permitted to be priests. That is absolutely not the case nor I have said that. Further, there is such a disconnect between your replies to what I'm actually saying that there is no fruitful exchange here.

They why not try to post in everyday common down to earth English?

I am not smart enough to be called a "disconnector"......what ever that is!

 

[Major]

did you see that? he felt his heart strangely warm and he believed that Christ had indeed borne his sins away ... that's it, that will do anybody. Charles Spurgeon simply looked. The preacher cried "Look unto Me all the world I am the Saviour and there is no other" and Spurgeon looked.

... you've been reading too much Finney

So you are saying that it was at the moment His "heart was warmed" that he got saved......or that he realized that God had forgiven him.
Isn't that saying the same thing????

Isn't that the basis of the AOG theology........"Signs and Wonders" = Faith??????

Scripture says in Romans 19:17 that.........
"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God"!

 

[mustaphadrink]

No, that is not what I said. I was only saying that I agreed and it was what I had already said as well!

We are in agreement and I did not in any way mean for you to take it as you could not build on previous posts.

My apologies for any misunderstanding.

Thankyou.

 

[mustaphadrink]

before there were pastors there was pasta and women were involved in making it, only when the pasta get's converted in the pastor did the question arise, can women be pastors?

If the pasta get converted in the pastor does that mean it is pastarised.

 

[Truth7t7]

I do not believe that women are permitted to be priests. That is absolutely not the case nor I have said that. Further, there is such a disconnect between your replies to what I'm actually saying that there is no fruitful exchange here.

I'm donating a basket, to help the exchage be a little more fruitful

 

[Evmur]

So you are saying that it was at the moment His "heart was warmed" that he got saved......or that he realized that God had forgiven him.
Isn't that saying the same thing????

Isn't that the basis of the AOG theology........"Signs and Wonders" = Faith??????

Scripture says in Romans 19:17 that.........
"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God"!

Not only saved but sanctified ... but we have to learn to walk the saved and sanctified life ... that depends on good understanding of doctrine.

 

[Major]

Not only saved but sanctified ... but we have to learn to walk the saved and sanctified life ... that depends on good understanding of doctrine.

I am just a little perplexed that you as an AOG person who insists on speaking in tongues would fall back on understanding Bible doctrine, that is another thread.

Again....I am always blessed to help you. You are in fact correct, as far as you went, however there are 3 kinds of "Sanctification".

#1.
While we are positionally sanctified because we are SET APART and made " free from every sin” by the blood of Christ, which is what we see in Acts 13:39..........
"And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.”

But we also know that we still committ sins which is what is recorded in1 John 1:10..........
"If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. "

That’s why the Bible also refers to sanctification as a practical experience of our separation unto God.

#2.
Then there is what is called Progressive sanctification. It has in view the setting apart of believers for the purpose for which they are sent into the world: John 17:18-19 confirms that fact..............
“As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified” .

That Jesus set Himself apart for God’s purpose is both the basis and the condition of our being set apart and that is recorded in John 10:36...........
"Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

We are sanctified and sent because Jesus was. Our Lord’s sanctification is the pattern of and power for our own. The sending and the sanctifying are inseparable. On this account we are called “saints” or “sanctified ones.

#3.
There is a third sense in which the word sanctification is used in Scripture—a “complete” or “ultimate” sanctification.

This is the same as glorification. Paul prays in 1 Thess. 5:23.........
“May the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ”.

Paul also speaks of Christ as “the hope of glory” in Colossians 1:27.........
"To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory".

That then links the glorious appearing of Christ to our personal glorification. Colossians 3:4 verifies that Doctrinal teaching.......
“When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory” .

This glorified state will be our ultimate separation from sin, a total sanctification in every regard.
1 John 3:2 says...........
“We know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is”.

 

[Major]

Thankyou.

God bless you my brother!

I never intend to make enemies!

 

[Evmur]

I am just a little perplexed that you as an AOG person who insists on speaking in tongues would fall back on understanding Bible doctrine, that is another thread.

Again....I am always blessed to help you. You are in fact correct, as far as you went, however there are 3 kinds of "Sanctification".

#1.
While we are positionally sanctified because we are SET APART and made " free from every sin” by the blood of Christ, which is what we see in Acts 13:39..........
"And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.”

But we also know that we still committ sins which is what is recorded in1 John 1:10..........
"If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. "

That’s why the Bible also refers to sanctification as a practical experience of our separation unto God.

#2.
Then there is what is called Progressive sanctification. It has in view the setting apart of believers for the purpose for which they are sent into the world: John 17:18-19 confirms that fact..............
“As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified” .

That Jesus set Himself apart for God’s purpose is both the basis and the condition of our being set apart and that is recorded in John 10:36...........
"Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

We are sanctified and sent because Jesus was. Our Lord’s sanctification is the pattern of and power for our own. The sending and the sanctifying are inseparable. On this account we are called “saints” or “sanctified ones.

#3.
There is a third sense in which the word sanctification is used in Scripture—a “complete” or “ultimate” sanctification.

This is the same as glorification. Paul prays in 1 Thess. 5:23.........
“May the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ”.

Paul also speaks of Christ as “the hope of glory” in Colossians 1:27.........
"To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory".

That then links the glorious appearing of Christ to our personal glorification. Colossians 3:4 verifies that Doctrinal teaching.......
“When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory” .

This glorified state will be our ultimate separation from sin, a total sanctification in every regard.
1 John 3:2 says...........
“We know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is”.

You are a Mormon, so you also believe in speaking in tongues but as you say that is another topic. Paul asks "do all speak in tongues?" so obviously all did not, although Paul would that they all did.

Some teaching hinders personal development and holiness, preaching the law or a mixture of law and grace will hinder holiness. Teaching the gospel as law as they do when they insist that women must stay silent is wrong.

 

[Major]

You are a Mormon, so you also believe in speaking in tongues but as you say that is another topic. Paul asks "do all speak in tongues?" so obviously all did not, although Paul would that they all did.

Some teaching hinders personal development and holiness, preaching the law or a mixture of law and grace will hinder holiness. Teaching the gospel as law as they do when they insist that women must stay silent is wrong.

"I AM A MORMOM"??????

Just so you will know.....I have produced several "CULT" teaching papers on the Mormon religion for the Florida Baptist Convention defining exactly why they are NOT CHRISTIANS in any way.

Where in the world are you coming from???? I am thinking that you have had too much coffee to drink!!

I have told you and YOU know and have posted that I am a Southern Baptist!!!!

NO......I do not believe in speaking in tongues. I think maybe you have had too much coffee! Speaking in tongues ended when the "perfect Came" just as is recorded in 1 Corth. 13. What is seen in todays Pentecostal and Charismatic church's is all faked!

As far as women being silent......"I NEVER SAID THAT"!!!!!

I have said and say again just for you that GOD SAID that it was MEN who were to be Pastors and Deacons.