Anne Graham Lotz Preaching to Evagelists

To not allow a gifted and spirit-filled woman of God to preach is to waste a God-given talent. This world is largely going to Hell and I for one think it's much more important to reach the lost than it is to be legalistic.

 

Actually, there is no interpretation involved. Paul just comes out and says it...</font>[/QUOTE]Paul also recommended that women have their head covered when they prophesy in the church meetings (that's not keeping silent) and identified women as fellow ministers in the gospel.

Some of us try to look at everything that Paul said about women and realize that the passages in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy that talk about "women" keeping silent in the churches is referring to the wives of the men who are speaking -- instead of challenging them in public at church, they are to talk about possible differences of interpretation between them at home so as not to violate the accepted social structures of the day.

I recommend you read E. Earle Ellis' work on the subject, especially the book "Pauline Theology:Ministry and Society", for a very conservative and scriptural look at the issues. Ellis demonstrates fairly clearly from the writings of Paul that women are not barred from the preaching and teaching ministries of the church, nor necessarily the pastorship of the church.

Of course most people here are going to dismiss his presentation of the scriptures without bothering to check it out...

For what it's worth, Ellis is a world-renowned scholar on Paul and he is extremely conservative with the texts (in fact, he is often criticized for it in more moderate/liberal circles).

Personally, I've been on both sides of the issue, so I know the arguments. I came to my current position that there are very few restrictions on women in ministry (none if you are single) about a decade ago when I decided to have an open mind and study the matter again.

 

In Your studies,Baptist Believer,when you were so opened minded...what scriptures convinced you that women can preach and/or pastor a church? Can you please identify those scriptures for me...I do have an open mind to scripture. Where does Paul say that elders can or should be women and where does it say if a woman is gifted in that area she should be over the men?

Thanks so much for your precious open minded time,
Molly

 

ColoradoFB, I disagree with most of your arguments, but I can somewhat see where you are coming from anyway! However, you just about shot your credibility to pieces with the preceding statement.

Let's paraphrase your statement a bit:

" This is so sad, especially coming from a woman. Replace "women" with "cars" and "men" with "boats", and see how it sounds . . ."!!

Most ridiculous, huh?

But the "logic" is the same! You have no more basis to make your "changes" than I did as far as the point being made.

If you insist on making it a racial thing, at least stick to whatever the bible says re: race; not some arbitrary modification.

 

Narrowway said:

Narrow is the way but society keeps widening the road without the proper permit.

That God given talent should be directed toward (teaching) women and girls, according to scripture and only women who have met very distinct criteria should be allowed to lead. Have you ever really looked at the criteria for the widows our churches are to help? MOST or many older women would quickly be disallowed.

This world is largely going to hell because even Christian's have waivered, turned away from God's word and made up rules that are politically correct. I stand firm on God's word and God's word says women are not to preach or teach men.

Ann Graham Lotz might make some remarks or push her newest book at some SBE meeting but should NOT preach or teach to mixed company according to scripture.

Diane Tavegia

 

Dear Diane,
UNLESS in a completely secular way or on the Baptist Board?

Karen

 

ColoradoFB, I disagree with most of your arguments, but I can somewhat see where you are coming from anyway! However, you just about shot your credibility to pieces with the preceding statement.

Let's paraphrase your statement a bit:

" This is so sad, especially coming from a woman. Replace "women" with "cars" and "men" with "boats", and see how it sounds . . ."!!

Most ridiculous, huh?

But the "logic" is the same! You have no more basis to make your "changes" than I did as far as the point being made.

</font>[/QUOTE]Wrong, Just...

Cars & boats are not attributes of humans. Cars have not discriminated against boats. Race and gender are human attributes. However, I will not follow you down the path of derailing the topic again. The moderator has made it clear that this is to stay on topic!

 

Hmmm… Sounds like I came across in a very condescending manner. I posted my message in response to Major B’s assertion that Paul had clearly stated that women were not to preach or serve as pastors. I wanted him to open his mind again to making another investigation of the issue.

If you want proof texts, I don’t have much to give you because the development of sound doctrine involves much more than finding a verse here or a verse there that bolsters a bias you may already have.

Here’s just one clue for you. In 1 Corinthians, Paul recommends that women cover their heads when they prophesy in the church meetings. Moving past the head-covering issue, you’ll notice that women are speaking in the meetings of the church. This goes counter to the popular translations/interpretations that Paul demands that women “be silent in the churches”. Since I believe that Paul is consistent in his teaching, I need to look at all of Paul’s teaching on women, the church, submission and authority, marriage, and study the texts carefully in their original languages.

You’ll figure this part out when you understand the answers to the previous issues about “women” being silent in the churches. In short, the word that is often translated as “women” in those passages, should be translated “wives” according to the context of Paul’s teaching. Instead of Paul teaching that women should not speak in church, Paul is teaching that women should not contradict their husbands in the public church meetings but rather talk to them about their differences at home instead of dragging personal issues into the public church meetings.

That’s the short version.

Unfortunately, that’s pretty much all I am going to say about the issue because:

1.) This thread is not directly about this issue and I’m not going to drag it off topic (especially since Dr. Bob has had some trouble with this one).
2.) I have an enormously busy week at work and I will have very little time to discuss the issue further.
3.) I have already given a reference to the theologian who has done much more work in this area than I (E. Earle Ellis) and you can follow it up with him. (He teaches at Southwestern Seminary and is a member of a Southern Baptist church by the way.)

Glad to give it. I hope the seemingly caustic tone of your appreciation will not carry over to your study of the issue.

 

After 30 years of studying the Bible and teaching it, I actually looked very hard to find what you think is there, for personal reasons. However, it isn't there. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh? You’ve already checked out what Ellis has written? What did you think about his affirmation of submissive roles?

That’s complete nonsense!

Apparently you have no clue regarding my views or the position I’m advocating. Time to do your homework instead of assuming the worst of those who may have a different interpretation than yours.

We’ve already done this. That’s why I want you to open your mind again to reassess the situation and read Ellis’ work on the subject.

As I mentioned in my previous post to Molly, I’m way too busy this week to continue a conversation on this subject. If you actually want to study the issue again, I strongly recommend Ellis to you as a very sound and conservative interpreter of scripture. He makes a very strong case based on the totality of Paul’s writings and deals with the allegedly “clear” passages about women directly and extensively.

If you aren’t willing to study up on the subject, there’s little I can do to change your mind.

 

I'm Sorry if my tone came across in a condescending way,I was really just trying to be funny about it...I just can not figure out how anyone can read Paul's letters and see how to conduct oneself in a local church and read anything different than what it says...I was confused by your open mindedness,when it seems to me,you are only open minded to allowing scripture to mean whatever you would like for it to mean. Instead of taking things into the context of how and why it was given to us.

The topic is women preaching. I believe that a women preaching is then teaching her husband in the context of the local church,so that would violate your interpretation also.

I've heard and been under some wondeful women teachers,but I respected the fact that they taught women and did not try to override thier husbands or other men placed in leadership. It is all about following scripture and balance.

Molly

 

No problem here.

I get myself in trouble all the time for trying to be funny in print. It is often very difficult to “hear” the tone of voice when people post.

Sure, I understand that. I have been in your shoes. But sometimes the things that seem to be plain are not as simple as they appear.

Yup, I understand that too. I didn’t come to my current position on women in vocational ministry until I took Paul’s writings in complete context (that is, reading everything he had to say about the subject previous mentioned – including submission, authority, women speaking and not speaking in church, unity and diversity, etc.) before I focused on the generally accepted “proof” texts that seem to say that all women are to remain silent in the churches.

Not really, but I haven’t given you enough information for you to make that distinction regarding my interpretation. Again, I urge you to see if you can find some of Earle Ellis’ writings on women in the New Testament to get a better perspective on the subject.

Amen. That’s what I am trying to do, and I’m sure you are trying to do the same. We just have a difference in interpretation.

Thanks for your kind words Molly!

 

I am a very serious person,so when(which is not very often) I try to be funny,it usually is not! And when I am just playing on someone else's choice words,I may be mistaken for attacking someone!And,I am not doing that either! I agree...on the internet,lots can be misinterpreted...kinda like when studying the Bible! One thing I learned a while back,there is only one interpretation(the author's actual meaning when writing),but there are many applications.

Thanks for understanding and not taking offense! I sure did not mean it that way!

Molly

 

Baptist Believer, I've never heard of Earl Ellis but I'd like to say that I try to avoid author's (unless it's someone giving direct quotes in context with links...). For as many author's as you can find who believe Paul did NOT mean women were not to preach or teach men, someone else can come up with author's who feel the other way.

I have to yield to the Holy Spirit and how He speaks to me through scripture. I read that it is wrong for women to preach or teach men. So, for ME it is wrong. If my interpretation is wrong... then the Lord will deal with me about it. If I'm right and yet was swayed.... and influenced other's based on an author's words, then woe is me.

Does that make sense?

To Karen.... I have no problem with Ann Graham Lotz addressing a group that includes men unless she is teaching or preaching. We have women make announcements and women who will give recognition to a women's class that has done some exceptional church ministry. We've also had wives of missionaries stand and tell us about her part of their mission. However, that is NOT Biblical teaching or preaching! Our mission reports are usually done on Sunday night and the husband will follow up with a sermon or our own pastor will preach. And I do NOT think of BaptistBoard.com as a church! I hope no one uses this board in place of a local church!

Hope you're all having a Great Day in Jesus!

Daniel 12:3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

Diane

 

But don’t you think it is important to recognize that other people might have relevant things to say about an issue because they have studied it carefully over the course of many years? I’m certainly happy my surgeon went to medical school, practiced his skills and developed his gifts for more than 20 years before he cut me open back in March. Because of his experience, he was able to modify his surgical plans when they found out my gall bladder condition was much worse than they suspected without having to take the radical (and routine step for my situation) of opening me up completely and turning a relatively minor surgery into a major surgery. Instead, he found the balance between them and I am better off as a result. If a novice surgeon had been working on me I would only now be returning to normal instead of fully recovering in six weeks.

Don’t you think it is possible that the Spirit may speak through other people, including Earle Ellis? If you automatically reject the perspectives of other people out of hand, you may be rejected someone through whom the Spirit is attempting to speak.

It makes sense but I strongly disagree with your method. If you are wrong and refuse to consider other points of view out of fear that the Spirit cannot keep you holding to what is true, then you are likely rejecting some teaching that the Spirit would like you to receive. If you believe the Spirit will guide you into all truth (as the Bible teaches), then you shouldn’t be afraid to hear other perspectives.

And just in case you missed it, Earle Ellis is highly regarded by Southern Baptists, is a member of a Southern Baptist church and teaches at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth.

I appreciate the sincere tone of your reply!

 

I must confess that I am surprised at this coming from you, BB. You are really taking this verse for something it most definitely is not. Jesus wasn't telling YOU or ME that the Holy Spirit would come and guide US into all truth in that passage you are quoting...taken in the context of that dialogue he was clearly talking to the apostles. In fact, the Spirit did guide them into "all truth" and this truth is incorporated into the New Testament, which is "the prophetic word confirmed" and NOT of "any private interpretation." (2 Peter chapter 1).

 

You make a good point. If A woman has been blessed by the Holy Spirit with the gift of preaching, then by all means, she should preach to anyone who will listen. It's funny how all are told by Jesus to proclaim the Gospel, but then WE get in the way and we tell people HOW they're supposed to preach the Gospel.

If someone told US how to preach the Gospel, we'd be telling them to pound sand.