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!
Obviously, things are not the same in other places... including the New Testament.Originally posted by Me2:
Well Clearly Deacons are husbands...
where I Come from...There male.
Sorry. I pulled that quote online from Bible Gateway and didn't get the verses around it. I added the bracketed word "deacon" to help clarify the context. The meaning is the same.Originally posted by Artimaeus:
BabtistBeliever
"Women [deacons] must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips,
but temperate, faithful in all things." (1 Timothy 3:11 NASB)
If you are going to quote someone, please, quote them accurately. The NASB says: "Women must likewise be dignified..."There is a superscript 1 indicating a note before the word Women. The note says, "I.e. either deacons' wives or deaconesses." You gave the impression that it said, "deacons"
I see no distinction. The "office" of deacon is not an authoritative one in scripture, but a serving one.Originally posted by Artimaeus:
Rom 16:1 She is a deaconess of the church not a Deacon of the church. There is no office of Deaconess.
How is it taken out of context?Now the bad news, Rom 16:1 no more 'proves" it than most verses taken out of context.
Not at all. I've already discussed 1 Tim 3, and where it says "Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife", it uses the *masculine* form, "diakonoi". Thus, the argument that women can't be deacons because they can't be a husband goes away, because the verse is specifically talking about males. I have changed no gender, I have simply pointed it out.You want to modify (change the gender of) an entire passage (I Tim 3) directly dealing with the subjust at hand and insist on taking a single verse back to the original, which is not even taling about the subject and say this proves your point
I'm not saying all servants are deacons, but I *am* saying all "deacons" are servants (at least in scripture) - that is what "deacon" ("diakon-") means. 1 Tim 2:12 is about authority, not servitude, so it doesn't even apply to the subject of deacons.Originally posted by John Miller:
BrianT, are you saying that all servants are
deacons?
What about 1 Timothy 2:12?
So a woman can be a deacon but not have authority over a man, that is not a deacon?
Yeah, female disciples, but not female Disciples! (I'm really trying to follow this thread).Originally posted by Johnv:
I always wondered too, why if so many today claim that women are to be in authoritative roles over men didn't Jesus appoint female apostles.
But Jesus DID have female disciples. Mary Magdelene, for one.
Ew!Originally posted by post-it:
I know some deacons who wouldn't wash anybody's feet much less their own.![]()
That's a good point. A woman washed his feet, and he afterwards washed the feet of his closest friends.Originally posted by post-it:
I would think that if Jesus would allow a woman the job of washing his feet, he would allow women the job of Deacon.
Every single person (I think) who has said women can be deacons has said that the role of a deacon in NT times did not include teaching or ruling over anyone. Those were the roles of pastors or elders. Deacons took care of the sick, delivered goods to the needy, served tables at church dinners, etc. All roles, BTW, that in even the most conservative Baptist churches are mostly filled by women, I would guess. They do the job of a deacon, but just don't get to be called one.I am very curious as to why there are some men who are posting in this thread who have no problem with women being deacons. Why would you not encourage a woman to follow Titus 2:3-5? Why would you want a woman to rule over you and teach you?