SBC, Mohler, and Women in Service

  • 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.

JohnDB

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2021
7,768
3,423
113
OK....
So unless you hid under a rock or was out of pocket from News Services....

The SBC under Albert Mohler's directions(theologian at a Seminary) wanted to include a bit about Women not being able to be leadership or teaching co-ed classes of adults.

Now they claim that this is based upon scriptures and that this is the definition of conservative evangelical doctrines. They recently, a few years ago, tossed out some member churches due to liberal theology, sowing disharmony, and not financially supporting any missions at all. (Kinda the core purposes of the SBC)

First, the SBC is a convention...all members are individually definable by location and church name....but collectively that definitely is not true. Because, by definition, SBC members are undefinable. Literally that's how SBC states that collectively our membership is undefinable by theologies or doctrines or much of anything other than our faith in Jesus.

So this woman thing?
I go "Huh???"

Since when does the convention think they can tell us anything about who we hire/employ or don't? They certainly never have so much as sent out a "Do not hire list" yet....even when the pastors are convicted pedophiles...
So there's that basic foundational principle that's being broken.

We are a convention....we, at free will, collect and convene because we agree...AKA: convention. The president has ONE job....he bangs the gavel to call the meeting to order next year. That's it....that is the extent of the power of the SBC President.

So...
Women in Leadership?
It happens that God will install a woman leader when men are so childish in their faith that they need a wet-nurse. God raises up and provides a woman as a sign that the men need to grow up. Now the woman isn't sinning by being a leader. She is just the leader because she is leading....doing the job. No different from Mary at Jesus's tomb...she was first to see resurrected Jesus because she was still busy working.. (while the men were still hiding and holding a meeting to discuss what to do about their crucified leader).

And....this past Sunday....
Our Senior Pastor is preaching a series on Romans....
And I looked ahead to Phoebe....
Who in some translations is a deaconess....whatever you might think of that position.....
She was sent by Paul to the men of Rome to explain what Paul meant in his letter to the Romans......Just like my Pastor did and Has been doing for the congregation every Sunday.
 
And a Word about Albert Moehler...

The man is usually a genius. Extremely brilliant on scriptures and theological positions....VERY carefully carving out a VERY narrow path.....

I have a LOT of respect for him.

But I do not agree with him on this subject.

I do not know WHY he is getting this subject wrong....especially when he has been a clear voice of reason and scriptural sanity for so long.

I don't know if it's a genuine honest mistake or if it's deliberate. Dunno.
But that is Baptists. We agree on so much....just one small disagreement....
 
I was under the impression that individual Baptist churches were autonomous? Surely, who they hire as Pastors is nobody's business but that local church.
This decision just highlights their patriarchal views about women.
 
  • Love
Reactions: JohnDB
I recognize the truth when I hear it, without regard of it comes from in the same way that I treat untruths. I'll either accept or dismiss anyone's opinion accordingly. It was said of Jesus, "Isn't this the son of Joseph...?" (the obvious answer being, "Yes, it is, so..."). That strikes me as a similar spirit of someone that'd say, "Isn't this a woman...?"
You'd think a woman's flesh is impenetrable, absolutely unreachable. She's beyond any dignity of God's attention other than her service to the flesh of men. Or does this actually implicate the flesh of men is that impenetrable that truth must be delivered to them by other men in order for them to receive it in 'respect'?

I'd rather not think about it all too much, and now I realize why... 🤨
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suze and JohnDB
If there is that in the nature of women that makes them suitable to be a help meet, it may also make them more vulnerable to deception. However, given the sorry state of churches today would any more error even be noticed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnDB
If there is that in the nature of women that makes them suitable to be a help meet, it may also make them more vulnerable to deception. However, given the sorry state of churches today would any more error even be noticed?
Accusing women of being, 'more vulnerable to deception' is a very demeaning statement. Very misogynist at the least and very unchristian. Men are just as equally susceptible to deception as women.
 
Accusing women of being, 'more vulnerable to deception' is a very demeaning statement. Very misogynist at the least and very unchristian. Men are just as equally susceptible to deception as women.
Oh they are quoting that verse from Paul about "Women should remain silent in church and to ask their husbands if they have questions at home"
Some dont want women to even ask questions in Small Group....:eek:

However....George Leile versus Adoniram Judson....we dont want to face this reality between the two that God was/is telling the USA.

Judson has gotten/stolen the glory of being the first American Missionary....George Leile really was the first missionary. Their success rates tell the tale too....the efforts put into this...the story is so exquisitely American its insane and wry and ironic that it must be God telling the tale....and that we need to pay attention and listen to what God is trying to tell us collectively. To miss this story is to try and ignore God. But worse things have been done by religious groups.
 
If there is that in the nature of women that makes them suitable to be a help meet, it may also make them more vulnerable to deception. However, given the sorry state of churches today would any more error even be noticed?
I would suggest you do some research on the meaning and usage of the Hebrew words translated as “help meet”. :)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: JohnDB
I would suggest you do some research on the meaning and usage of the Hebrew words translated as “help meet”. :)
I think his speed, spell checker, and fat fingers got the best of him....

BTW...."help-mate" is a Hebrew word....and used extensively about God helping us in areas where we are weak and incapable.

As in the "God who helps me".....

As in our female help/mates...

And originally a wealthy man who had plural wives was claiming to be weak and needing a lot of help....kinda funny in a lot of ways....BUT when you are a leader....an absolute must.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dino246
I think his speed, spell checker, and fat fingers got the best of him....

BTW...."help-mate" is a Hebrew word....and used extensively about God helping us in areas where we are weak and incapable.

As in the "God who helps me".....

As in our female help/mates...

And originally a wealthy man who had plural wives was claiming to be weak and needing a lot of help....kinda funny in a lot of ways....BUT when you are a leader....an absolute must.
It’s from the KJV…

“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2‬:‭18‬ ‭KJV‬‬
 
  • Haha
Reactions: JohnDB
Isn't it ironic that God delivered Sisera into the hands of a woman, whom he had grossly mischaracterized.
Still examining the facets of that irony, the conjuctive waw is written as a pictograph of a tent peg, and the conjunctive waw is translated "And."
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnDB
In Timothy Paul clearly wrote it as his own beliefs. He didn't say anything about the viewpoint of God but that he doesn't accept it. And that is good.
He also wrote some Speaking in Tongues is Angel Language which we know is not what people were doing as the Holy Spirit led them in the Bible.
In fact, there's several places Paul uses hyperbole that we understand to not take literally.
If that's how Paul views it then God Bless him but in that context it's not an Inspired Directive from God Himself.
It's more like how the Synagogue is operated which in Corinthians he almost describes the New Church and Format similar to the Yiddish Synagogue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnDB
.
In fact, there's several places Paul uses hyperbole that we understand to not take literally
Yes....
The castration in Galatians is obvious hyperbole....kinda
It's frustration mixed with hyperbole.

Like the "husband of one wife".

Wealthy Roman men looked down their noses in disgust at Jews for polygamy....

However Wealthy Roman/Greek men universally had consorts they supported. And it wasn't exactly a secret. Including from their wives.
But since they weren't married....they had a bit of a hypocrisy issue. Paul referred to these women in a sarcastic fashion as wives as he did not want the Early Church in Ephesus to be controlled by wealthy elitist men.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lrs68
Accusing women of being, 'more vulnerable to deception' is a very demeaning statement. Very misogynist at the least and very unchristian. Men are just as equally susceptible to deception as women.
You can call it many things, but I'd argue unChristian is not one of them.

1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
 
Yes....
The castration in Galatians is obvious hyperbole....kinda
It's frustration mixed with hyperbole.

Like the "husband of one wife".

Wealthy Roman men looked down their noses in disgust at Jews for polygamy....

However Wealthy Roman/Greek men universally had consorts they supported. And it wasn't exactly a secret. Including from their wives.
But since they weren't married....they had a bit of a hypocrisy issue. Paul referred to these women in a sarcastic fashion as wives as he did not want the Early Church in Ephesus to be controlled by wealthy elitist men.
Well Said!
 
You can call it many things, but I'd argue unChristian is not one of them.

1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
I wouldn't say "unchristian" either.

Because then it becomes a VERY slippery slope of creating a universal hermeneutic of flat reading upon everyone. No art, no science....just flat reading.
And that's the point where the wheels came off the wagon.

What Paul, in his misogynistic world, said versus did are two completely different things.
Because we see Phoebe in Romans....charged with doing exactly as my pastor is doing while in this series on the Book of Romans. Not one thing even remotely a bit different.

But...what the most likely reason is, outside of Paul's explanation, is that they are not spiritual children needing a wetnurse.

In times past God has risen up women to be spiritual leaders when the men have abjectly failed to spiritually lead and now know nothing whatsoever about God.
MANY instances of this in scriptures from women as a Judge, a prophetess, and even the Samaritan Woman at the well was used to kick off Jesus's Samaritan Campaign.

Now the Roman religious world was not completely misogynistic. There were many female priestess and leadership for the Old Hellenustic gods. Most were prostitutes of some sort. A very select few were just there for beauty and purity. (Dianna worship)

Paul was definitely looking to differentiate Christianity from all the other religions of the World....especially with their exclusivity from all other religions.

But since Paul was their direct spiritual "father" and was not like Samuel's mentor Eli in the slightest....who had not led the people properly in a long time. The inclusion of women into the leadership would have been insulting and disastrous. The disaster stemming from the lack of respect most wives usually had for their husbands. Their "questions" were likely little more than backhanded insults of some form. (Remember the consorts....yeah).

Men should lead....
But that doesn't mean men are always capable. But that doesn't give women license to usurp men's authority either. If women are rising due to putting men down or falsely accusing them....that's a huge red flag of being a Jezebel.

There's a REASON why there is not a registry of those women who have falsely accused men of sexual assault. And that reason is not a good one.