Women are Not to Teach or Usurp Authority...

[Silverhair]

I do not think Kai sees women as less than men when it comes to the gospel message.

The Word of God sees women as different from men when it comes to pastoring and preaching to the congregation of an assembled church.

For men to be the only gender qualified to be pastors does not mean women are inferior to men. It is a matter of proper roles.

For some reason, God wants pastors to be male, not female. Scholars have linked this preference to Eve being deceived by the serpent and women being the weaker gender.

As I stated previously, sitting under the preaching of a female pastor was uncomfortable for me. My spirit was troubled by it.

I will not condemn Beth Moore, Ann Graham Lotz, or other female preachers. But I will not attend or join any church where a woman is pastor. I attended a church briefly where lesbian deacons sometimes preached from the pulpit. It was a “reformed”, woke, “federated” Presbyterian / United Church of Christ church.

I understand your position I just trust God to put the right people, male or female, in the various offices where they can best serve the kingdom. Be that washing dishes being an elder, deacon or even pastor.

I would not attend a church pastored by a man or woman that held to liberal views. If they do not preach the word of God then it is not a church for me.

 

[Silverhair]

@Silverhair, I hope you can at least agree that Paula White is someone who is not qualified to be a pastor/elder, and I don't say that just because she's a woman.

I really do not know anything about her so cannot pass judgement.

What I will say is that I would not attend any church whether pastored by a man or woman that did not preach the word of God.

I find to many "christians" are willing to accept the liberal views being spread as they want to be loving and not offend anyone.

What I also find is that to many male pastors are willing to look the other way when they know there is sin in the church. They want to cover it up lest it make their church look bad.

 

[Kai]

You see that in scripture whereas I see that women can fill any position that God chooses to put them in.

That's where we disagree. My view is informed by Scripture, and yours is apparently informed by what our culture has accepted as the norm.

One thing you have to consider is that when Phoebe carried that letter to Rome she would most likely have read it out and instructed the church as to what Paul meant by what he had written.

That is just an assumption. All Scripture reveals to us is that she delivered the letter to the Romans and doesn't tell us what happened after the fact.

 

[Silverhair]

That's where we disagree. My view is informed by Scripture, and yours is apparently informed by what our culture has accepted as the norm.

We can both claim our positions are informed by scripture.

That is just an assumption. All Scripture reveals to us is that she delivered the letter to the Romans and doesn't tell us what happened after the fact.

I agree it is an assumption but it is a logical one. When you consider how Paul's letter has been misunderstood by both bible scholars and lay people then it is a reasonable conclusion to see Phoebe teaching and correcting any misunderstandings that may have come up in the Roman church. She would have been the only source of firsthand information, do you think those in Rome would not have questioned her on it?

 

[Kai]

When you consider how Paul's letter has been misunderstood by both bible scholars and lay people then it is a reasonable conclusion to see Phoebe teaching and correcting any misunderstandings that may have come up in the Roman church.

She also could have passed it along to the appropriate church authorities so they could teach their people directly. That's another logical explanation.

 

[Silverhair]

She also could have passed it along to the appropriate church authorities so they could teach their people directly. That's another logical explanation.

Although highly improbable.

The pastor would not have firsthand knowledge would they? They would not have heard it from Paul who could explain any questions that came up. She would have that knowledge.

I know you really do not want to accept this but when a missionary comes back do they tell the pastor who then passes the information on or do they present the information so it is coming from the person that has been there?

@Kai just accept the fact that neither you nor I are the final arbiter of who stands in that pulpit, God is.

He will put the person that He knows will accomplish whatever His plan for that situation is.

 

[Kai]

Although highly improbable.

The pastor would not have firsthand knowledge would they? They would not have heard it from Paul who could explain any questions that came up. She would have that knowledge.

He would have firsthand knowledge if he immediately read the letter upon arrival. Furthermore, is the Holy Spirit not capable of clearly communicating what He intends to reveal to the saints?

I can see how there might be confusion in some churches today where the pastor does not teach the whole counsel of God and refrains from preaching on controversial subjects. But churches in Paul's day weren't concerned about being politically correct.

So it's not as improbable as you think; in fact, I think for those reasons it's more probable that it happened the way that I'm suggesting.

 

[Silverhair]

He would have firsthand knowledge if he immediately read the letter upon arrival. Furthermore, is the Holy Spirit not capable of clearly communicating what He intends to reveal to the saints?

I can see how there might be confusion in some churches today where the pastor does not teach the whole counsel of God and refrains from preaching on controversial subjects. But churches in Paul's day weren't concerned about being politically correct.

So it's not as improbable as you think; in fact, I think for those reasons it's more probable that it happened the way that I'm suggesting.

Yes we have seen how well the pastors we have now have dealt with that letter.

The Holy Spirit can communicate but they have to be willing to accept what He is sending.

But why do what you require when God already has someone with first hand knowledge?

You continue to ignore the obvious.

 

[Kai]

But why do what you require when God already has someone with first hand knowledge?

Because Christ's sheep hear His voice in Scripture.

Why require that someone learn from the messenger rather than directly from the message itself?

 

[Ben1445]

I find to many "christians" are willing to accept the liberal views being spread as they want to be loving and not offend anyone.

I find women pastors to be one of those liberal views.

 

[Silverhair]

Because Christ's sheep hear His voice in Scripture.

Why require that someone learn from the messenger rather than directly from the message itself?

Yes that is what we do now but when Phoebe carried the letter to Rome they would have had the chance to learn from someone that had firsthand knowledge of what the author meant.

As we know from the varied views people have of scripture that just having the message in writing does not guarantee that all will understand it the same way.

You have a view that I do not hold but we both look to scripture for support of our positions.

 

[Silverhair]

I find women pastors to be one of those liberal views.

I trust God to use whom He wants where He wants when He wants to accomplish His plan.

 

[Kai]

Yes that is what we do now but when Phoebe carried the letter to Rome they would have had the chance to learn from someone that had firsthand knowledge of what the author meant.

Why couldn’t Paul write down exactly what he meant? Isn’t Scripture the objective standard that we’re supposed to look at when we want to verify that what we’re being taught is true?

 

[Ben1445]

I trust God to use whom He wants where He wants when He wants to accomplish His plan.

You mean like Adam’s disobedience in the garden?
You mean like Israel’s disobedience in the wilderness?
You mean like Uzzah’s disobedience in saving the ark of the covenant?
You mean like the OT false prophets?

Jer. 23:16-22
Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD. They say still unto them that despise me, The LORD hath said, Ye shall have peace; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, No evil shall come upon you. For who hath stood in the counsel of the LORD, and hath perceived and heard his word? who hath marked his word, and heard it? Behold, a whirlwind of the LORD is gone forth in fury, even a grievous whirlwind: it shall fall grievously upon the head of the wicked. The anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have performed the thoughts of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly. I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings

Here are preachers that God did not send. You would have trusted them also.

 

[Silverhair]

Why couldn’t Paul write down exactly what he meant? Isn’t Scripture the objective standard that we’re supposed to look at when we want to verify that what we’re being taught is true?

Yes it is and as I have said a number of times I trust God to use whom He chooses to accomplish His plan. It seems you do not.

Paul did write down what he wanted and we see that even today people argue over what he meant.

So when those in Rome had Phoebe who had firsthand knowledge as she was with Paul had questions then she could answers.

 

[Silverhair]

You mean like Adam’s disobedience in the garden?
You mean like Israel’s disobedience in the wilderness?
You mean like Uzzah’s disobedience in saving the ark of the covenant?
You mean like the OT false prophets?

Jer. 23:16-22
Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD. They say still unto them that despise me, The LORD hath said, Ye shall have peace; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, No evil shall come upon you. For who hath stood in the counsel of the LORD, and hath perceived and heard his word? who hath marked his word, and heard it? Behold, a whirlwind of the LORD is gone forth in fury, even a grievous whirlwind: it shall fall grievously upon the head of the wicked. The anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have performed the thoughts of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly. I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings

Just like a pagan King, Cyrus
Just like a reluctant messenger, Jonah
Just like the religious leaders who crucified Christ Jesus
Just like the rabbi that was breathing fire against the Christians, Saul/Paul
Just like all the men and women that God has used through the years to move His plan ahead.

God can and has used both those that hate Him and love Him to move His plan along.

God even used the examples you posted or do you think He was surprised by them?

 

[Ben1445]

Just like a pagan King, Cyrus
Just like a reluctant messenger, Jonah
Just like the religious leaders who crucified Christ Jesus
Just like the rabbi that was breathing fire against the Christians, Saul/Paul
Just like all the men and women that God has used through the years to move His plan ahead.

God can and has used both those that hate Him and love Him to move His plan along.

God even used the examples you posted or do you think He was surprised by them?

You think God was pleased with them?

No.
God condemned the prophets that He had not called.

 

[Silverhair]

You think God was pleased with them?

No.
God condemned the prophets that He had not called.

You are focused on one thing but why do you not look at what I posted?

God does not have to be happy with the individuals to use them.

Was He happy with Jonah or Paul or what about the religious leaders that crucified Jesus?

 

[Kai]

Yes it is and as I have said a number of times I trust God to use whom He chooses to accomplish His plan. It seems you do not.

I trust that God will use whomever He chooses to fulfill His plan. However, the Bible serves as our guide in identifying those He has called into ministry and those who might be false teachers.

 

[Foxmeister]

I think there is some confusion regarding Phoebe's role in the church. Here are some variations of Romans 16:1-2.

"I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: 2 That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succorer of many, and of myself also." KJV

"I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church in Cenchrea, 2 that you may receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and assist her in whatever business she has need of you; for indeed she has been a helper of many and of myself also" NKJV

"I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae. 2 I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been the benefactor of many people, including me." NIV

I placed those words in bold for a purpose, as they identify Phoebe's role in the church. In the KJV and NKJV she is a servant of the church. Is a servant a leader in the church? No. In the NIV version her role is a deacon. What is the biblical role of a deacon? Someone who serves and handles logistics and administration for the church. In either case a servant or deacon is a leader. In the KJV we see she had been a succorer, a person who offers help, relief, or comfort to someone in times of need, distress, or difficulty. In NKJV she was a helper, who relieves burdens from others. In the NIV she had been a benefactor, someone or something that gives money, help, or resources to a person, organization, or cause, usually without expecting anything in return.

She was not a leader in the church. She was a woman Paul sent to deliver a letter. Paul was highly educated and spoke more than one language. He was articulate, therefor I doubt his letter needed Phoebe to tell anyone what Paul meant by what he wrote. She was a servant delivering a letter and Paul instructed those he sent the letter to to treat her with kindness as she was a believer.

Take the scripture literally for what it says she was. You know what they say about assuming.