Methodist and women pastors

[rbell]

Its not just the UMC, the SBC is dealing with this also.

This article is from the SBC. It seems to say that the SBC is opposed to senior pastors being women but doesnt object to female clergywomen as associate pastors, ect.

http://www.sbclife.net/Articles/2000/10/sla5.asp

A quote from this article:

Reporters often turn to a 1997 article by Sarah Frances Anders in which she referred to 1,225 confirmed SBC clergywomen. "Of these at least eighty-five are pastors," Anders reported in her article for Baptist Women in Ministry's FOLIO magazine.

A former Louisiana College professor, Anders centered her research on the progress made by women in religious leadership, particularly noting their ordination. The revision to the SBC doctrinal statement does not address ordination, but it clearly affirms the leadership of women in a variety of non-pastoral roles.


Until God removes large sections of the Bible, including the book of 1 Tim, I will not attend any church that ordains a woman in any position.

AJ

I see a huge distinction between having a woman serving as senior pastor and having a woman serving in other ministry positions.

 

[thegospelgeek]

OK - Some points:

Miriam and Huldah were prophets. Yes, prophets can be women. We see that in 1 Corinthians 11, women can prophesy. There's no argument on that. But that's not a pastor.

Deborah was a judge. She led an army. That's a civil position - not a spiritual one. Yes, she was also a prophet but that does not mean that she was a shepherd over a local flock.

Dorcas served others, as we all are called to do. Philip's daughters were prophets - as I've shown is Biblical.

Euodia and Syntyche helped to spread the Gospel as we all are called to do.

Priscilla and her husband taught Apollos together - in private.

Phoebe was a "diakonos" which means servant. There is no evidence anywhere that she had any authority or teaching position over men.

......

I'm sorry, but the AOG is in great error in this interpretation of Scripture.

Ann makes a very correct assesment of the AoG document. It also want's to place experiance in it's churches on equal footing with Scipture.

AiC, you say that you must consider all scripture and I agrre. You use the verse about there being no male nor female as an argument that all are the same. I say this is in regard to salvation, you say it covers all things.

Let's assume you are correct and I am in error.

If there are no male nor females, then why does Paul continue to give us the reason for his statement that the women should not usurp authority in 1Tim. Notice he does not say "because the women of Ephusus are misbehaving" as the AoG document implies.

Does the instruction of the women at Ephusus to dress modestly only apply to those women? If not then where does Paul change who he is instructiong.?

In the next chapter Paul instructs that the Bishop must have demonstrated the ability to rule his houshold, including the children, well. God's word make it clear that the husband is the head of the family Eph 5:22. He says that if a man can not rule his houshold how can he rule the church?(1 Tim 3:5) Following this principle, how can a woman rule the church without ruling her houshold well. But God's word says that she is not the head of her houshold. Thus she can not be the overseer of the a Church.

If you can show me with scripture where my logic fails, I'll be the first to admit it.

 

[Alive in Christ]

trustitl,

"Truth is not determined by our experience. This is very dangerous and is the source of much deception."

I know. Thats why I dont do that. It is the scriptures that determine truth, not our feelings or experience. I have said that all along.

It is from the scriptures that I have come to this conclusion.


:godisgood:

 

[Alive in Christ]

Steaver,

"Christians "prayerfully" come to conclusions about many topics. You can practice whatever you will. We all have to prayerfully and rightly divided the word of truth. In the end, the fire will judge our doctrines and we will all then be truly in one accord. "

I agree completly. I have not come to any conclusions because I prayerfully "had a feeling", or prayfully had some "warm and fuzzies".

I have prayerfully considered the whole of the scriptures, not just 1 or 2 proof texts, and prayerfully come to this conclusion.

"I have studied this issue of women pastors and find (in my prayerfull considerations) that the AoG paper does not rightly divide the word of truth."

And thats perfectly fine. "Let each one be fully convinced in His own mind".

"The Refiner's fire will judge my position and how I have taught others. I can only press towards humbleness and submisiveness when studying and coming to my conclusions. May the fire then refine any misguided ways."

I agree completely. :thumbs:


:godisgood:

 

[trustitl]

I know. Thats why I dont do that. It is the scriptures that determine truth, not our feelings or experience. I have said that all along.

It is from the scriptures that I have come to this conclusion.

Curious to know what parts of scripture that made you conclude that the following passage do not mean what they say?

I Cor. 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

I Tim 2:11 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.


Please explain why you choose to put these very clear words behind other verses that are not addressing the issues of women, authority, teaching, and submission.

 

[Marcia]

OK - Some points:

Miriam and Huldah were prophets. Yes, prophets can be women. We see that in 1 Corinthians 11, women can prophesy. There's no argument on that. But that's not a pastor.

Deborah was a judge. She led an army. That's a civil position - not a spiritual one. Yes, she was also a prophet but that does not mean that she was a shepherd over a local flock.

Dorcas served others, as we all are called to do. Philip's daughters were prophets - as I've shown is Biblical.

Euodia and Syntyche helped to spread the Gospel as we all are called to do.

Priscilla and her husband taught Apollos together - in private.

Phoebe was a "diakonos" which means servant. There is no evidence anywhere that she had any authority or teaching position over men.

With all of these examples, we see that women play an important role in God's kingdom. However, there are boundaries to the role they play. But in reading the rest of the paper, it all falls apart because of their premise that because women served and prophesied, we must then interpret all of the rest of the clear instructions for women not to teach or have authority over men, or that pastors are to be the husband of one wife must not say what it's seeming to say. That's not proper study of Scripture. Since not one of the women in the Bible save for Deborah have any authority over men or are shown to be teaching men apart from Priscilla teaching with her husband one single man in private, we cannot come to the conclusion that God wants women to be in authority over men. It's just not there.

I'm sorry, but the AOG is in great error in this interpretation of Scripture.

Very good post, Annsni! :thumbs:

 

[Marcia]

* And Junia was an apostle. That would pretty much include being in authority.


* Priscilla was always mentioned 1st because it was common to mention the leader of a group or partnership 1st. Aquilla, her husband, assisted her in the ministry.

There is debate as to whether the word is Junia or Junias.

Also, if it is Junia, she could have been an apostle, that is, "one sent out," but this does not mean she had the office of apostle.

This passages could also be saying that these people were esteemed among the apostles (my pastor brought this point out in a message not long ago).

Here's some interesting info from the NET Bible on this.

Or “Junias.”
sn The feminine name Junia, though common in Latin, is quite rare in Greek (apparently only three instances of it occur in Greek literature outside Rom 16:7, according to the data in the TLG [D. Moo, Romans [NICNT], 922]). The masculine Junias (as a contraction for Junianas), however, is rarer still: Only one instance of the masculine name is known in extant Greek literature (Epiphanius mentions Junias in his Index discipulorum 125). Further, since there are apparently other husband-wife teams mentioned in this salutation (Prisca and Aquila [v. 3], Philologus and Julia [v. 15]), it might be natural to think of Junia as a feminine name. (This ought not be pressed too far, however, for in v. 12 all three individuals are women [though the first two are linked together], and in vv. 9-11 all the individuals are men.) In Greek only a difference of accent distinguishes between Junias (male) and Junia (female). If it refers to a woman, it is possible (1) that she had the gift of apostleship (not the office), or (2) that she was not an apostle but along with Andronicus was esteemed by (or among) the apostles. As well, the term “prominent” probably means “well known,” suggesting that Andronicus and Junia(s) were well known to the apostles (see note on the phrase “well known” which follows).

As for Prisicilla, she is only mentioned with her husband and she has no authority over men in the church as a pastor does.

 

[Amy.G]

What reason is there to think Junia was a woman?

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

Were men and women imprisoned together? I don't see any evidence of women apostles.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Trustitl,

You asked how I...and obviously others such as the Assemblies of God folks...deal with these scriptures.....

"I Cor. 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

I Tim 2:11 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."

Considering all of the other scriptures that make abundantly clear that women have a right to speak, prophesy, minister, preach, teach, be the leader of a ministry, and hold the office of apostle (having authority of course),.....then it is completely reasonable to assume that these were *specific* situations, with *specific* problems, involving *specific women* who were obviously causing big problems.


:godisgood:

 

[Jerome]

Yes, Christian women were imprisoned too, as Paul well knew

Acts 8:3.
As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.

 

[trustitl]

Trustitl,
You asked how I...and obviously others such as the Assemblies of God folks...deal with these scriptures.....

Considering all of the other scriptures that make abundantly clear that women have a right to speak, prophesy, minister, preach, teach, be the leader of a ministry, and hold the office of apostle (having authority of course),.....then it is completely reasonable to assume that these were *specific* situations, with *specific* problems, involving *specific women* who were obviously causing big problems.

Thank you for clarifying that your positions are based on the assumption that these scripture are limited to specific situations.

You seem to have your bases covered, but have you considered

1. Timothy was not limited to a specific location and that Paul does not tell Timothy these are limited to specific situations?

2. Paul does not address the situation using individual names, something Paul does frequently in other books as well as here (Hymenaeus and Alexander in 1:20)

3. Paul uses creation as the basis for his teaching.

4. Paul actually tells Timothy that he is giving him information that will help him knowhow thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. (3:15) This would have been the place for him to explain this was for this situation.

 

[ajg1959]

I was thinking about this thread while I was trying to go to sleep last night and it occured to me that we are debating the issue of women being pastors in the AOG church. Why?

Most AOG dont even recognise us baptists as fellow believers because we dont speak in tongues. They teach that tongues is the evidence of salvation and that if you dont speak in tongues then you are not saved.

Some of them teach that the Holy Spirit doesnt dwell in a believer until they recieve the "baptism of the Holy Spirit", and the initial evidence of recieving the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues.


Either way, us Baptists are considered to be lost and/or without the Holy Spirit because we dont speak in tongues.

They also believe that salvation can be lost and that a person may need to get re-saved many times or risk going to hell.


When a church teaches such apostasy about the true gospel of salvation, then why would we give any credibility to their other doctrines and beliefs?

AJ

 

[trustitl]

I was thinking about this thread while I was trying to go to sleep last night and it occured to me that we are debating the issue of women being pastors in the AOG church. Why?

Most AOG dont even recognise us baptists as fellow believers because we dont speak in tongues. They teach that tongues is the evidence of salvation and that if you dont speak in tongues then you are not saved.

Some of them teach that the Holy Spirit doesnt dwell in a believer until they recieve the "baptism of the Holy Spirit", and the initial evidence of recieving the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues.

Either way, us Baptists are considered to be lost and/or without the Holy Spirit because we dont speak in tongues.

When a church teaches such apostasy about the true gospel of salvation, then why would we give any credibility to their other doctrines and beliefs?

AJ

I agree wholeheartedly. Although I do not fit into the baptist camp, I see my differences with them as being somewhat trivial compared to issues such as these. I think the reason the charismatics are so appealing is because they are very zealous and display physical attributes that can be seen with the eyes such as "gifts" of the spirit and "worship" related activities.

I think the baptists and others such as myself need to ask ourselves why people are not finding us appealing. No doubt carnally minded individuals will be drawn to such things, but I think many true seekers are not seeing in the rest of us as having something to offer.

May we all be Spirit filled in the proper sense so God is proclaimed in our lives. Specifically, may all of us be treating our wives with such love, honor, and respect that those outside my have nothing to say about us. Also, may the women be joy filled as they fulfill their roles in the kingdom of God.

 

[annsni]

I was thinking about this thread while I was trying to go to sleep last night and it occured to me that we are debating the issue of women being pastors in the AOG church. Why?

Most AOG dont even recognise us baptists as fellow believers because we dont speak in tongues. They teach that tongues is the evidence of salvation and that if you dont speak in tongues then you are not saved.

Some of them teach that the Holy Spirit doesnt dwell in a believer until they recieve the "baptism of the Holy Spirit", and the initial evidence of recieving the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues.


Either way, us Baptists are considered to be lost and/or without the Holy Spirit because we dont speak in tongues.

They also believe that salvation can be lost and that a person may need to get re-saved many times or risk going to hell.


When a church teaches such apostasy about the true gospel of salvation, then why would we give any credibility to their other doctrines and beliefs?

AJ

That's the point I was trying to make back in the beginning AJ.

 

[ajg1959]

That's the point I was trying to make back in the beginning AJ.

Sorry Ann, I didnt mean to steal your idea. I should have read all of the posts more closely.

But hey, my pastor says that some of his best sermons come from someone else's ideas, I think mostly his wife.....:smilewinkgrin:

AJ

 

[padredurand]

I spent 13 years as a United Methodist pastor (92-05). If I though for one moment that this drive for women pastors had anything to do with proclaiming the Gospel; I may take a second look. In my experience - I do not know what it is like in other Annual Conferences - the northeast is far removed from what Wesley intended.

In the 1950s there were a handful that followed the "God is dead" mess and the denomination said nothing. In the 1960s, I believe the denomination was overrun by radicals. Many were not looking for their place in the work of ministry but for a forum to advance their ideology. Many spent their college years in protest against Vietnam, ecology, government and what ever the cause of the week may be. They went to seminary- not to become trained practitioners of the Faith- but to continue their radical protests and ideas. The Gospel was replaced by The Cause.

It doesn't matter what The Cause is at the moment because it changes as fast as the blowing wind. This week it may be gay rights, next week the environment and "our mother earth', then off to Africa and feminism. Several years ago a series of "Reimagining conferences" were held. They worshiped Sophia- wisdom from the OT as the missing female expression of the Godhead. You can read more about these conferences here

This has nothing to do with women proclaiming the Gospel nor whether God has a claim on their lives. It is women demanding to be recognized because they are women with loud voices and momentum. I spent my 13 years in the UMC cleaning up messes left behind woman pastors. All of them were divorced and went into the pastorate following the break up of their marriage. One would not sing Amazing Grace because she refused to say the phrase "saved a wretch like me". One openly confessed to being religious but wonder aloud "saved from what?" Another could organize a roast beef supper or rummage sale like nobody's business but would go months at a time without publicly reading from or preaching from a Bible. They all had an agenda and the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was not it. They received their credentials from institutions equally agenda driven without any regard for personal testimony or integrity.

Again, this has nothing to do with a woman's role in the church. I am convinced that this is a thinly veiled work of the adversary to tear the Lord's church apart from the inside.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.
2 Timothy 4:3-4​

The time has come......

 

[Alive in Christ]

ajg....

"Most AOG dont even recognise us baptists as fellow believers because we dont speak in tongues. They teach that tongues is the evidence of salvation and that if you dont speak in tongues then you are not saved.

Some of them teach that the Holy Spirit doesnt dwell in a believer until they recieve the "baptism of the Holy Spirit", and the initial evidence of recieving the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues.


Either way, us Baptists are considered to be lost and/or without the Holy Spirit because we dont speak in tongues."

I'm not an AOG person, so I have to keep going back to their "beliefs" section of their web-site to find out their stance on things.

I did that regarding your comments and it appears you are mistaken.

For some reason this one...as opposed to the one on women in leadership...is not in PDF format, so I can copy and paste.....


(bolding mine)

"The New Testament testifies to a spiritual unity that both already is and yet is to be pursued. Paul exhorts us to be “diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph. 4:3, NASB). Despite denominational labels or distinctives, all true believers in Christ are one in Him. Yet unity must be cultivated and promoted within the Church at large and within local congregations.

"While we may disagree with the interpretation of Scripture by other Christian groups on a variety of issues, we must heed Paul’s advice that we are not “to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls” (Rom. 14:4, NKJV).

http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/sptlissues_church_at_large.cfm


:godisgood:

 

[trustitl]

I am including a link from the official Assemblies of God website to their position paper on women in positions of leadership. Keep in mind, the Assemblies of God are anything but liberal. They are as evangelical and conservative as can be.

This position paper makes it abundantly clear...from the scriptures alone that women in leadership is approved of by Almighty God, and that the few scriptures some use to exclude them are not being interpreted properly, taking into consideration the "whole" scriptural view on the topic.

As I read the position paper of the AOG I see that they take scriptures that could be taken two ways and take the option that supports them every time. They get a foundation and interpret the two most easily understood scriptures in the NT on the issue through these verses.

To me that is backwards but it is understandable when I see that they first establish the role women have played in the history of this denomination. They appear to be justifying themselves through scripture rather than basing themselves upon it.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Trustitl...

"To me that is backwards but it is understandable when I see that they first establish the role women have played in the history of this denomination. They appear to be justifying themselves through scripture rather than basing themselves upon it."

I understand what you are saying, and well intentioned folks will sometimes do that.

We cant discern the hearts of the AOG folks, and I dont know that much about them. I just know that for my almost 30 years as an evangelical christian I have generally noticed that most evangelicals have a favorable impression of them, even though they might not agree with them.

I have never heard the AOG lumped together with the extreme Word of Faithers, the snake handlers, and other really extreme pentecostal groups.

The AOG has always seemed to have a pretty good "approval rating" in the Baptist churches where I have fellowshipped, including my current one.

My conviction is to give them the benefit of the doubt, and assume that in the past they came to the conclusion, from the scriptures, that women could indeed be in positions of leadership 1st, and then put it into practice.


:godisgood:

 

[thegospelgeek]

Trustitl...



I understand what you are saying, and well intentioned folks will sometimes do that.

We cant discern the hearts of the AOG folks, and I dont know that much about them. I just know that for my almost 30 years as an evangelical christian I have generally noticed that most evangelicals have a favorable impression of them, even though they might not agree with them.

I have never heard the AOG lumped together with the extreme Word of Faithers, the snake handlers, and other really extreme pentecostal groups.

The AOG has always seemed to have a pretty good "approval rating" in the Baptist churches where I have fellowshipped, including my current one.

My conviction is to give them the benefit of the doubt, and assume that in the past they came to the conclusion, from the scriptures, that women could indeed be in positions of leadership 1st, and then put it into practice.


:godisgood:

I have good friends who are AoG, and they have a good witness and I believe they are born again. I also feel they are wrong when it come to women pastors.