Women Pastors for women?

Here again, the word "pastor" is being applied with the modern understanding of a titled role, not a first-century understanding which is likely more of a ministry specialty.

I mentioned earlier (not sure if this thread or another) that I suspect the modern concept of "counselor" is closest to the biblical gifting of "pastor". I may be incorrect in this, but counseling is certainly one area where modern pastors are called to minister - and not all "pastors" are gifted in counseling. Personal experience testifies only too loudly of this.

Women are not less than men just made for a different purpose. They I created to be helpmates and companions to their husbands and mothers to children, not to be the Masters of men or a 'backup' plan. In Western Civilization we are taught to think if you aren't in charge you are a failure or less than a leader. Women are equipped to help, not to lead. God made it that way and he made it that way and ordered such BEFORE the fall of mankind.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Aramaean, neither Servant nor Free person, neither male nor female, for all of you are one in Yeshua The Messiah.

I would say your brother is not attending a church grounded in the scriptures.

What's with all this "submission" talk concerning churches or pastors?
We aren't to submit to a church or pastor either one can be "accepted" as genuine or "discredited" .
Aside from marital relations we ought to "submit" to God and his word not a pastor or church because essentially both are to be under "God's authority".

the main difference is counselors see a limited number of clients a a time.

This scripture you quote is out of context. Paul reaffirmed the support role of women on the church, not their leadership we are programmed to accept today. Jesus could have eliminated the marital Covenant and even said directly that women were now to be equal leaders in the church with men. Instead Jesus did nothing but reaffirm the marital Covenant and he never appointed women to leadership positions. He also personally chose 12 men not 12 women to be the foundation of the church.

First, you're assumption that all women must be born to marry and have children is an affront to women who never get married nor ever have children.

Second, why are you hung up on one of God's orders, but not the other ones? (1 Thes. 5 comes to mind.)

Third, you assume we are "Western Civilization." We're not. At least, we're not supposed to be if we come to this site. We're Christians, so have a higher standard.

Fourth, how does Titus 2:3-5 work with your plan? Indeed, we were made for more than "helpmates and companions to their husbands and mothers to children."

What's the name of your spirit again? You're quick to name women's spirits. What's yours?

As you wish.
I am a Christian. Not a Pauline.

MARY MAGDiLINE don't forget her. Who was the person so annoited that Jesus trusted to deliver the message that he had returned. She stood by the toumb and waited while the others hid like cowards. And the RCC calls her a whore.

Do that study on pastors. It will answer your questions.

He's "Original" I'll give him that lol.

Yes. When history proves it is the RCC that holds that position to this day.

Did Jesus ever explain why He was appointing only men to be among the initial 12? No. That's just what He did. Did He ever state categorically that women could not be leaders? No, nor did any NT writer. It appears that you have built your ecclesiology on what happened, rather than on what was taught should happen. Attributing meaning and purpose to narrative, where it is not supplied by the author, is called "eisegesis". While it might "preach well", it doesn't necessarily make for sound doctrine.

It is logically invalid to take the example of twelve male apostles as doctrinal while rejecting as irrelevant the examples of females in the roles of deacon (Phoebe), apostle (Junia), teacher (Prisca), et cetera.

Agreed, but "pastors" counsel a limited number of individuals at a time too. Otherwise it's called "preaching" because there is little to no dialogue during a sermon.

Alrighty then I suppose I should grab a man passing by, marry him quick and
start popping out babies (although I suspect thats too late for me).

I’m just glad I can trust in God’s plan and purpose for my life and don’t have to
rely on your opinion. Otherwise all women would be bare foot and tied to
the kitchen sink with 20 kids pulling at their apron strings.

Seriously, you honestly think God created women just to be baby making machines!
Your not Amish are you?

You assume much. I'm not exalting Western Civilization one bit. Titus 2 I absolutely agree with, because it indicates women who are promoting other women to be good wives. Sure I should have mentioned not all women are called to bear children, they are consecrated to God alone. This is where we get the idea of nuns. Paul tells us essentially to marry God alone if possible. Since sexual sin is prolific even in the church today we probably won't see much if that in this age. In any case Titus 2 shows us a a woman who is not a church authority, but an encourager and a counselor. I think that's great! In any case, I'm not under any demonic control, to answer your other question. In fact Satan is never going to counsel people to unapologetically and unashamedly follow the word of God just as it is written. Satan does on the other hand, specialize in changing one or more words of God's counsel in order to subsequently destroy the central theme. The strongest evidence that we have today that women are not supposed to be in Authority in the church is the very fact that very few women even within the church will even be properly submissive to their own husbands much less to God himself. It is far easier to deal with a person you can reach out and touch and understand as a fellow human then it is to try to understand God who is far far greater than we are. In essence from what I have seen that until women in the church stop their power struggle and assumption that not having a leadership position equates to not being of any value we will continue to see the equivalent power struggles and the home. The Lord has shown me that this power struggle stems from Fear within women. They fear that they are not heard or valued. They fear that they are not taken seriously. But far worse they fear that not achieving some position of power and authority over men in this life makes them somehow a drone or a person of questionable value and significance. When in fact the opposite is true because many great men have presented their testimony regarding their success and said they could not have done it without their wives. Can this age we see a much greater push from women to seize all the assets and power that their husband has in a community for their own selfish desires rather than to be the Proverbs 31 Woman Who is preoccupied with bringing honor to her husband and his family name, not becoming a husband herself. A decent man uses Authority as a tool to achieve a task, where is most women in our society see Authority is an Accolade or affirmation of their value.

Spoken like a true rebellious woman! Your contempt for his intent is glaringly obvious. It is amazing to me how many time that I have taught or Council that women should do as God has modeled for them to do among the great women of God such as Sarah and Rebecca that their first response has something to do with being barefoot and pregnant. Proverbs 31 indicates a woman who is much more than barefoot and pregnant but nonetheless she is not in charge of her husband or any aspect of the worship of God. As I said in my latest comment prior to this one essentially, it is amazing to me how the one thing that women refuse to try in the church today is simply to do what God has clearly told them to do.

Actually, as a woman in a society that was patriarchal women were much likely to be able to slip under the radar in public then the clearly wanted men who were Avid and open christ-followers. I love how people are always trying to elevate Mary Magdalene into Apostles position even though there is absolutely no indication that got ever commissioned her to do so or that she ever discharged that calling. We can pretend that she did go forth as an apostle and that an evil patriarchal society simply never recorded her Ministry but that would be quite foolish since ancient historians regularly recorded the conduct of both men and women including Cleopatra and many Roman and Greek women of significance.

Where is your statistical support for the bolded statement? Why are you pointing to the sinfulness of some to denigrate the whole? Are there not many rebellious, unsubmitted, and sinful men in leadership positions in the church? Are they not adequate reason not to allow men in positions of authority? Your reasoning is unbalanced.

This has absolutely nothing to do with a power struggle, primarily because men don't have the power either; Christ does.

Godly women (in fact, all women) have nothing to fear from godly men who are submitted fully to Christ. When you find some men like that, let all the women know so they may follow them.

You are making your argument on the basis of alleged personal revelation. That has no bearing on a discussion of scriptural principles. Plus, I believe you're off-base by a wide margin, and you're generalizing positively from examples when it suits your position, and negatively when it doesn't. That's inconsistent.

Where is your statistical support for the bolded statement?

Sound arguments about the role of women in the Church are not made from subjective generalities about women in the wider society.

More unsound reasoning, sadly. You're employing a wealth of logical fallacies.