But are they stepping outside of the authority that God has in place? Do they disrupt the church service or do they come to you before/after/during the week? Do they bring suggestions about any other subject ever since they DO have minds? Have you explained your thinking and asked for their help in committing to praying for your vision for the church? Have you thought about the fact that a woman's program is separate from the men and does not include them? I don't quite understand your concern here.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Your View On Women As Pastors
- Thread starter Baptist4life
- Start date
- Status
But are they stepping outside of the authority that God has in place? Do they disrupt the church service or do they come to you before/after/during the week? Do they bring suggestions about any other subject ever since they DO have minds? Have you explained your thinking and asked for their help in committing to praying for your vision for the church? Have you thought about the fact that a woman's program is separate from the men and does not include them? I don't quite understand your concern here.
Some did and others did not. Some persisted even after I explained the situation. Conferences outside of the local church do not address particular situations and often the prime example is presented as how things ought to be done. Every church, community is different with its own set of problems. That is where I believe that a one size fits all does not work and we must be unified in seeking God in His word and prayer.
Some of their ideas were absolutely fantastic.
Some wanted their way and others supported me but I still had to deal with the issue in a way that did not belittle the men. I would have had no problem if the men were healthy and had been strong leaders. However it was touchy and I wanted to train the men to be strong leaders without a word and just take them with me to do ministry hoping that eventually they would lead. They did eventually lead and it worked out well but it was tough for awhile. Whenever a lady spoke about wanting a women's ministry I had to deal with the issue. At the time the men were not leading the church or their home. So something needed to be done and I felt it was most important for the men to learn t lead. I did see evidence of the men not leading their homes and the women complaining about their husbands even to their face. So I did not want to embarrass them or put them down but help them to be strong and bold. It did require the women to be patient and learn to support the men. The end results were great but in the middle of it I had to watch what I said. The men became strong leaders and their wives began to learn to support their husbands and live like godly wives.
But I don't understand why a woman's ministry would have been a problem - especially if led by a strong, Godly woman. I could see that sort of group being perfect for a weekly time to get together to pray for the church, our husbands and their leadership, our families and our community. Why could they not have a ministry - and why would their ministry have undermined the men? I guess I'm just not seeing the connection there.
If the men do nothing and the women do everything then that becomes a problem. I think many pastors will tell you that if it were not for the women then little would get done. Why? My wife and I came from a church that had strong male leadership and we were shocked when I started pastoring to see how few men led and were content to let the women do everything except have the title of deacon. That is where the problem lies.
I believe that if the men are leaders then most ministries are stronger for it, but when the men let the women do everything then the men get lazier and the women complain while they do everything. I think sometimes the women need to step back and encourage the men to lead by letting go and letting the men take charge. When I have spoken to women about this they often feel as though everything will fall apart if they let go.
Hefty charge to make against God...
I guess your women's ministry model is different than ours. Our women's ministry is for women and they don't interfere or get involved in the other ministries of the church. We have a ladies' Bible class weekly which is all women except my husband who goes in to lead worship in the beginning then leaves, and the pastor (along with his wife) who lead the study. Then we have some support ministries for women (weight loss, recovery and the wives of men in recovery). Other than that, women might be involved in other ministries but it's not the "women's ministry" that does it but individuals.
Maybe that's where my confusion comes in.
It's what the Bible says. Are you accusing the Bible of being chauvinistic?
The Bible also says to cut off your arm, pluck out your eye - yet for some reason there are not nearly as many one armed one eyed folks occupying our churches as you think there should be. It is not the Bible that is chauvinistic, it is the folks using the Bible that are. God is the ultimate "womens-libber", don't put on him your narrow fundamentalist views of the role of women.
There are verses in scripture (many of them mentioned here) that can be interpreted to demonstrate a preference for men in certain positions of leadership, but there are no verses that qualify as an outright ban on women in leadership. Hence, while we can debate the practical wisdom of woman in leadership, we cannot say that it is scripturally forbidden outright.
1 Timothy 2: 9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
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 believe 1Tim2's context has sufficiently been discussed, at least once. I could bring it up again, but I think we'd be going in circles, which I don't believe woudl be fruitful. Rather, we should leave it at understanding that there is disagreement in this thread as to the whether 1Tim2 warrants a specific contextual admonition, or a general admonition across the board. I'm okay with agreeing to disagree.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, if you want to read Scripture out of context, that's up to you.
I'll give the "very short" version: Paul was combating the heresy of gnosticism here. Gnosticism was being spread by women, and being adopted by the men from the women. Paul is using the Eve reference to demonstrate that the deception of gnosticism was spreading in the same manner that Eve's deception spread to Adam.
If it were simply a matter of women not being allowed to teach, Paul would have said "For Adam was first formed, then Eve". But he says "For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression".
If any of you fell for the attempt to cast aspersions on my quotation from A. T. Pierson's sermon on Hebrews 13:7:
"By around 1890, Pierson's views on women and ministry had grown radical for Presbyterians of the day. He began defending the right of women to preach, and by the middle of the decade, The Missionary Review carried a favorable article on women as pastors."
"By the mid-1890s, Arthur Pierson was not only the father of a missionary wife in Japan, but one of his unmarried daughters was a home missionary in Vermont where she acted as pastor and conducted church services among the poor."
"In Bible notes from the 1890s, Pierson stated that the entire question of woman's role needed to be "reconstructed."
Occupy until I Come: A.T. Pierson and the Evangelization of the World
here is what his biography confirms:
"By around 1890, Pierson's views on women and ministry had grown radical for Presbyterians of the day. He began defending the right of women to preach, and by the middle of the decade, The Missionary Review carried a favorable article on women as pastors."
"By the mid-1890s, Arthur Pierson was not only the father of a missionary wife in Japan, but one of his unmarried daughters was a home missionary in Vermont where she acted as pastor and conducted church services among the poor."
"In Bible notes from the 1890s, Pierson stated that the entire question of woman's role needed to be "reconstructed."
Occupy until I Come: A.T. Pierson and the Evangelization of the World
I can honestly say I have not heard that viewpoint before. I still think Paul was referring to the order of creation first and foremost, and Eve being the "weaker vessel" that was deceived.
I do not see a women's ministry as being apart from the church but a pert of the church. If the men are not leading the church and their homes then I see a problem. I believe the men should be the primary leaders. If they are not then no amount of any other ministry will make up for that. If the men lead the church then balance is possible. Men who lead, train and attract other men. If male visitors find weak male leadership then they will either leave of stay and make a difference.
If you have string female leadership and discipleship but poor male leadership and discipleship then you have a weak church and weak leadership in the home. I do not see where weak male leadership encourages submissiveness in women.
Too many churches accept the idea of weak men and strong women instead of training the men to be strong leaders. I take the position that strong male leadership also encourages strong female leadership and makes for a bold strong church working in unity and harmony instead of it being lopsided and a church full of strong females and weak males.
Regardless of one's view of these verses, the creeping in of gnosticism was a HUGE issue for the early church.
- Status