Your View on Women as Deacons

[canadyjd]

Also, I Timothy 3:11 gives instructions on how a deacon's wife should live. If this office were open to both men and women, why would this verse say "wives" [as opposed to "their spouses" or something similar to that]?

No, I Tim. 3:11 does not give instructions for a deacon's wife. The greek word translated "their wives", doesn't mean "their wives".

The word "their" is not in the text. The word translated "wives" should be translated "women".

So, right in the middle of qualifications for deacons, Paul tells us what kind of women can serve as deacons. It doesn't make sense any other way.

I had a Greek prof. in Seminary who understood the word meant "women" and not "their wives". Although I admired him, I disagreed with his conclusion that the "women" mentioned in 3:11 was referring to the women on the widow's list that is mentioned later in the book. The context doesn't support that conclusion.

For me, this was a case where I discovered scripture taught something different from what I had been taught in church.

Instead of following the traditions of the church, I have changed my mind and now follow what scripture says.

peace to youraying:

 

[Dr. Bob]

Here are some more thoughts --

Phoebe was not a "deaconness". She was a deacon.

If just describing her as a servant (root of the word deacon) they would have used the feminine gender.

But instead God used the word for the OFFICE, official function, of a Deacon.

The synagogue, on which 99% of our church form and function are based, had both male and female "deacons" (sh'mash in Hebrew) who took care of the mundane needs of worship - got out scrolls, read, oil in lamps, seating, cleaning, etc.

Elders ministered the Word and prayer and serving SPECIAL needs (Acts 6 is talking about ELDERS, not Deacons)

 

[jaigner]

Doesn't I Timothy 3:12 ("Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife....") kind of limit that office to men?

No.

Paul was speaking to a people for whom the possibility of women in a leadership role wasn't even a possibility. We have to remember that this was a letter to a specific group of people at a specific time. That's why we must interpret in light of these things.

 

[gb93433]

Doesn't I Timothy 3:12 ("Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife....") kind of limit that office to men?

No.

Paul was speaking to a people for whom the possibility of women in a leadership role wasn't even a possibility. We have to remember that this was a letter to a specific group of people at a specific time. That's why we must interpret in light of these things.

1 Timothy 3:8-11, 8 Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not double-tongued, or addicted to much wine or fond of sordid gain, 9 but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 These men must also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons if they are beyond reproach. 11 Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things.

There are records of women being deaconesses in the early church as early as around the early second century.

 

[annsni]

Doesn't I Timothy 3:12 ("Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife....") kind of limit that office to men?

No.

Paul was speaking to a people for whom the possibility of women in a leadership role wasn't even a possibility. We have to remember that this was a letter to a specific group of people at a specific time. That's why we must interpret in light of these things.

Yet Paul points back to creation for his reasoning - not just a particular place and time.

 

[annsni]

Doesn't I Timothy 3:12 ("Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife....") kind of limit that office to men?

No.

Paul was speaking to a people for whom the possibility of women in a leadership role wasn't even a possibility. We have to remember that this was a letter to a specific group of people at a specific time. That's why we must interpret in light of these things.

Jaigner - You are not Baptist and thus are not allowed to be posting in the Baptist only section. Please do not post here anymore. I've reported your posts to the moderators.

 

[John Toppass]

While I have seen lots of women who were and are fantastic servants in the church. There are also lots of men who do not qualify to hold the office of deacon, who are fantastic servants. We as Christians should all be looking for ways to serve just as we all should have ministries.

When Paul used the word "diakonos" to describe Phoebe, to say she held the office of deacon would contradict what has been written elsewhere, by Paul, in the scripture. When we remember that "All deacons are servants but not all servants are deacons" then Paul used the word diakonos to describe Phoebe as a servant. Now there is not any contradiction because Phoebe was a servant not a deacon or deaconess.

It does not matter who did what and when they did it, if it goes against scripture or causes scripture to contradict itself, then it was wrong then too.

God, for whatever reason, knows why He has set the rules for offices in the church the way He did. God is not trying to punish anyone by these qualifications, He is making sure that someone does not hold a office in His church where by their previous or present actions, they can not defend the beliefs or teachings of His church. God sees the BIG PICTURE, we don't. Seems we just try to change things to match what we call fair or what makes us feel good from our limited point of view.

I had to change my mind years ago when I actually read the scripture but I also have to remember that I nor anyone else, male or female, on this earth do not see the BIG PICTURE like God does. God is sovereign and knows exactly at all times what is going on. God is also very pleased when we turn it over to Him and trust His Will.

 

[jaigner]

Jaigner - You are not Baptist and thus are not allowed to be posting in the Baptist only section. Please do not post here anymore. I've reported your posts to the moderators.[/QUOTE]

Whoa....wow, such harshness. I'll have you know I was raised Baptist, came to Christ because of a Baptist church, currently serve a Baptist church in an interim capacity, and have a graduate theology degree from a fine evangelical institution. Just because I no longer claim Baptist as an identity doesn't take the Baptist out of me.

I also have not said anything heretical or false that warrants reporting.

Thank you for your kind attention.

 

[matt wade]

Whoa....wow, such harshness. I'll have you know I was raised Baptist, came to Christ because of a Baptist church, currently serve a Baptist church in an interim capacity, and have a graduate theology degree from a fine evangelical institution. Just because I no longer claim Baptist as an identity doesn't take the Baptist out of me.

I also have not said anything heretical or false that warrants reporting.

Thank you for your kind attention.

It's not harshness. It's a forum rule. As a Christian you should follow the rules unless they go against God. This particular rule does not cause you to be against God, so you should follow it. It's really that simple.

 

[jaigner]

It's not harshness. It's a forum rule. As a Christian you should follow the rules unless they go against God. This particular rule does not cause you to be against God, so you should follow it. It's really that simple.

Thanks for your concern, Matt. I already addressed the issue.

I also don't think the Biblical texts on governing authorities really apply in this situation...online forums were not popular in 1st century Rome.

I also respectfully request you to refrain from personal attacks and judgment.

Blessings.

 

[Revmitchell]

Thanks for your concern, Matt. I already addressed the issue.

I also don't think the Biblical texts on governing authorities really apply in this situation...online forums were not popular in 1st century Rome.

I also respectfully request you to refrain from personal attacks and judgment.

Blessings.

And just what was said that you perceived as a personal attack?

 

[annsni]

Jaigner - You are not Baptist and thus are not allowed to be posting in the Baptist only section. Please do not post here anymore. I've reported your posts to the moderators.

Whoa....wow, such harshness. I'll have you know I was raised Baptist, came to Christ because of a Baptist church, currently serve a Baptist church in an interim capacity, and have a graduate theology degree from a fine evangelical institution. Just because I no longer claim Baptist as an identity doesn't take the Baptist out of me.

I also have not said anything heretical or false that warrants reporting.

Thank you for your kind attention.

However, you do not identify yourself as a Baptist so you are not. You identify yourself as being Methodist which means you disregard the rules of the board. If you are Baptist, then say so - do not be ashamed.

 

[saturneptune]

To answer the question of the thread, my view on women deacons is that it is up to the local church.

 

[Jerome]

you do not identify yourself as a Baptist so you are not.

If you are Baptist, then say so - do not be ashamed.

Good sentiments. Of course, they don't apply when we are naming our new church, do they?:laugh:

 

[John Toppass]

wow did this thread get hijacked

 

[annsni]

Good sentiments. Of course, they don't apply when we are naming our new church, do they?:laugh:

We won't be hiding that we are Baptist in beliefs, will we? We're certainly not calling it Island Methodist Church!

 

[matt wade]

Thanks for your concern, Matt. I already addressed the issue.

I also don't think the Biblical texts on governing authorities really apply in this situation...online forums were not popular in 1st century Rome.

I also respectfully request you to refrain from personal attacks and judgment.

Blessings.

If you think that was a personal attack, you haven't been around here too much. I'm trying to figure out who you are. I'm guessing some type of returning poster (that was previously banned), or a current poster setting up a new persona. Whatever it is, it will come out in the wash. One thing is for sure, you sure are stuck on this women as deacons/pastors issue. Someone must have really upset you when they said you or your wife (not sure if you are male or female) couldn't be a deacon or a pastor.

I also see you've changed your church affiliation. Did you walk down the aisle at a Baptist Church this morning and ask for membership?

 

[jaigner]

Good sentiments. Of course, they don't apply when we are naming our new church, do they?:laugh:

Nice, man. LOL

 

[jaigner]

If you think that was a personal attack, you haven't been around here too much. I'm trying to figure out who you are. I'm guessing some type of returning poster (that was previously banned), or a current poster setting up a new persona. Whatever it is, it will come out in the wash. One thing is for sure, you sure are stuck on this women as deacons/pastors issue. Someone must have really upset you when they said you or your wife (not sure if you are male or female) couldn't be a deacon or a pastor.

I also see you've changed your church affiliation. Did you walk down the aisle at a Baptist Church this morning and ask for membership?

Actually, Matt, I don't have so much of an agenda. Besides working in some churches of various denominations, my membership, since I came to faith as a child, has been in a Baptist church. I currently hold an interim position in a Baptist church.

Regarding the issue of women in leadership, I haven't personally been affected in the manner you've mentioned, but I have gotten to the point when it grieves me very deeply that some people refuse to, removing as much of their previous bias and information as possible, examine Scripture in its historical and literary context and really grapple with many issues, especially this one.

If one does struggle with it and comes to a different conclusion than I, that is the direction they feel the Spirit leading and I cannot discount or discredit this. On the other hand, if people just read the surface of Scripture without informed exegesis and hermeneutic and then claim that God has spoken and the issue is not open for discussion, that is very dangerous and disturbing.

I pray that all will be open to their beliefs being refined and moved by the Spirit as necessary. Mainly, I wish all would hold truth with an open hand and rely on the Spirit instead of their own understanding.

Finally, this is just an issue I myself have grappled with deeply over the past few years. After studying under many committed Christians who hold the Bible in high esteem and come down on both sides of the gender issue, I am under the persuasion that women are to be allowed to hold church office as men do.

Blessings.

Oh, and I was playing the invitation today, so no, I didn't walk the aisle.

 

[saturneptune]

I also don't think the Biblical texts on governing authorities really apply in this situation...online forums were not popular in 1st century Rome.

I also respectfully request you to refrain from personal attacks and judgment.

Blessings.

No one gave you a personal attack or judged you. You are either Baptist or not. You either take the Bible for what it says in plain English or not. You either follow the rules of the forum or not. These are all simple principles that do not require a convention of top notch theologeans to figure out.

Earning advanced degrees does not require you to throw out common sense. There is no need to be vague. Statements like "I used to be a member of this group, but work for that group, and now associate with the other group" is just a bunch of mumbo jumbo. Are you Baptist or not? I am, and quite grateful to be one. Most Christians, believe it or not, have not studied Greek, Hebrew, and the culture of the day in order to make the meaning they read in English mean something other than what it says. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" means exactly what it says. I never thought about the possibility that Moses was drinking too much wine when he wrote it, or that the culture he was in gave that phrase a special, secret meaning.

If you are Baptist, then realize this is a debate forum. There is a difference between debate and a personal attack. You have not experienced a personal attack here.