Michael Horton came up with calling those kinds of songs with that designation at least 30 years ago.LOL........"Jesus is my Boy Friend!!!"
-
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!
The Feminization of Christianity
- Thread starter Earth Wind and Fire
- Start date
- Status
There is a radio show I listen to that refers to much of modern "preaching" strip mining the Bible for a list of self help ideas. I listened to a "sermon" the other day on "prayer" where the pastor never even opened up the Bible, but was talking all about the feelings that "should" be there. Talk about beating men and less emotional women over the head with making feelings the end all and be all of spirituality. This same "pastor" during the "gospel presentation" literally redefined sin to being "far from God" again focusing on the emotions He in the one and only half reference to the Bible said "For we all are far from God and the wages of being far from God is being even farther from God" No mention of the cross, or resurrection of Jesus. Just that God wants to have a relationship with you and he is desperate for you. desperate should never be ascribed to God as He doesn't need us, we don't complete him, or whatever other romantic way we can bring God down. I can't respect a god presented in that fashion and I know my husband couldn't either.
We have dumbed down the word and raised mystic feelings above it so I don't blame men one bit for wanting none of it. Nor do I blame guys for being sick of being told their less spiritual than their emotional counterparts. I'm tired of it as a women. I would rather deal in truth, than emotions that change with the wind, and in fact we are to lead our emotions now allow are emotions to lead us. As long as church allow emotions to be the leader we will continue to see churches go more and more off the deep end, and become less and less relevant and effective communicators of the God's Word.
In Paul's situation and due to the problems he experienced in Asia Minor and Greece, Paul made this decision. We don't see God making this a universal requirement. If it was, why did Paul greet Phoebe as a deaconness at the end of Romans? Clearly she had a leadership role in the church at Rome.
First of all Deconness does not equal Pastor. They are 2 different roles.
Second of all Paul points to the Creation order as the reason for male leadership. Creation order would lend itself to a universal requirement.
Certainly one argument, but Phoebe would have had a role to both men and women.
Phillips daughters would have been preaching to both men and women in their role as prophets in the church.
Yes serving both men a women. Decon literally means table server. As I said Decon and Pastor are 2 different roles with 2 different qualification.
Acts is descriptive, not conscriptive like Paul's Epistles.
Also you did not deal with the fact that Paul points to creation as the reason why men are to be in authority.
Women have no business being Pastors as that is a clear violation of God's order.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Okay. The pastor is the shepherd. He doesn't have to be the preacher or the teacher or the counselor in the church. He can administrate and delegate those duties based upon the gifts God gives to the church. I have listened to some outstanding teachers and preachers who are women. They have blessed me with their deep attention to God's word.
If you feel the need to have pastor be a very specific role, I see no evidence in scripture that the pastor has to stand in the pulpit and preach. In fact, the pastor may be a horrible preacher.
Who said anything about standing behind a pulpit.
If you want to separate out Pastors from Overseeres from Elders (although 1 Peter would disagree with separating elder from Shephard) that's your prerogative. You will still be left with the fact that every role that talks about teaching the church is reserved for men.
Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full[a]respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap. 1 Tim 3:1-7
5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, 6 namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion. 7 For the overseer must be above reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain, 8 but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict
Titus 1:5-9
To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder and a witness of Christ’s sufferings who also will share in the glory to be revealed: 2 Be shepherds of God’s flockthat is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; 3 not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. 4 And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.
1 Peter 5:1-4
Here we have Peter tying being a Shepherd to being an Elder which as we see from Titus is a man's role.
We only see women teaching other women as authority is given to men to teach the church.
Any women that teaches men in a church setting shows they are willing to ignore clear Scripture, not a deep attention to it.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
The U.S. church as a whole
The masculine is used this is true. Yet, you cannot deny that women had preaching and teaching roles in the early church. The woman in Proverbs 31 is very gifted and honored.
To make the verses on elders and deacons universally for men goes against Phoebe being a deacon. Looking at the Bible as a whole, we should consider that Paul's instructions are based upon the circumstances of the moment, not as a law to be strictly adhered to.
If you are going to be strict and legalistic about the issue, then only men can be missionaries and evangelists. Women who come to faith in areas where men have not cannot be leaders as soon as one man comes to faith. To do so would shut down most mission agencies around the world.
My consideration is that being legalistic in leadership functions is a castration of the spreading of the gospel.
Again your trying to use decon a separate role to invalidate Paul's clear teaching on authority (elders and shepherds) in the church. ( It's funny you separate roles when it suits you and than blend then when it suits you)
As far as Pr. 31 goes I'm not arguing that women can't work outside the home. Not to mention the church did not exist in the Old Testament. (Jesus said I WILL build my church).
Obviously they took on teaching roles which is why Paul and Peter have clear instructions on who could and who could not have authority in the Church. There were also people in the early church who commited major sins yet I don't see you pointing to then to get rid of a "legalistic" standard. This is why we don't point to descriptive parts of the Bible as conscriptive for people today. (hence why no one seriously argues for polygamy on the basis of Solomon having close to a thousand wives and concubines).
Again Women can teach women, and the issue is having authority in the Church. Every mission trip and evangelistic outreach I have ever been on has always had a mix of man and women and men talk to men and women talk to women. It's really not that complicated.
And once again you ignore that Paul points to creation order invalidating the idea that the command was only for one church.
Scripture is clear on this issue and no amount of emotionally charged (oh irony I love it) anecdotes or strawmens will sway me from what Paul, and Peter under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit make clear.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Paul isn't creating a law when he lays out the modus operandi of how he sets up group dynamics in a local church. If you wish to be stringent, then you must also denounce all congregational rule churches and all churches who use church councils rather than elders. To do so would be to condemn the majority of churches around the world as breaking God's prescriptions for the structure of a local church. Do you require such specifics of all churches?
It does not bother me if a church holds to a strict adherence of Paul's words. It bothers me more when people use it only for male doninance and then ignore the other prescriptions Paul gives for the church. As long as you require elder rule with no congregational voting and men only speaking in church, that is fine.
And your scripture for this idea is where? Pointing to creation order seems pretty clear to me to be descriptive.
Ok.
Ok
Well I am a protestant for a reason.
If they want me to consider them Biblical church's.
Well that is good
And who is doing that? I reject the modern feminist idea that separate roles for the genders is about domination. It's about the Biblical standard. My husband in no way dominates me by being my head any more than having a male Pastor dominates me. That is emotionally charged language trying to confused the issue.
And who is arguing for ignoring clear teaching of Scripture.
Context is key. Pulling a single verse out of its context as feminist like doing with 1 Cor 14:34 does just as much injustice to the Bible as those who ignore clear teaching.
Let's actually look at the passage in question.
1 Cor 14:26-40
26What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. 27If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. 28But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. 29Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said.30If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. 31For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged,32and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. 33For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.
As in all the churches of the saints,34the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. 35If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
36Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached? 37If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. 38If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. 39So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.40But all things should be done decently and in order.
Paul makes it clear that the kind of speaking is jumping in to ask question. That's why he says let her ask at home. This entire passage coming off the section on Spiritual Gifts and things being done in order in the Church. As any teacher can tell you if you allow kids to ask any question that comes to mind when it comes to mind the class will desend into chaos which is what is being avoided. To rip verse 34 from even the verses directly after it creates a contradiction in Paul's writings (1 Cor 11:5 although even this verse makes it clear that women are under the authority of men) that is easily resolved when you look at the entire context.
Well I will leave you now to this thread as my fever is now up above 102 and my thinking is getting foggy. I will respond once I'm over this sickness.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
I hope you feel better soon.
Who is Michael Horton?
He is the moderator for the White Horse Inn. Google it. It's a podcast and resource website.
Is he reformed......IE a Reformed Baptist?
Sister, you are precious in the Lord's sight! We need more like you to guide the brethren & sisteren to deep study in the Word.
Get rest & lots of fluids.....I will pray for your speedy recovery.
I strongly suggest you (and everyone else for that matter)
to go pick up copies of the following, and then decide for
yourself what you expect from your church (or any church)
that respects and honors manhood.
(Original cover)
I'm sick of all the emphasis on the love and compassion of
Christ, especially in view of these dangerous times we live
in, plus the overwhelming disrespect Christians have to
endure because of some nitwit preacher keeps telling them
"..it's all for the good..." and somehow this is supposed to
make us feel better.
The problem with mainstream Christianity is all passivity
is considered "godliness". After all "Jesus wept" and "He
opened not His mouth..."
The world gets to set the rules on how well they receive the
message of the Gospel. And we acquiesce. We want to be
loved by everyone, and careful not to offend anyone, if we
expect to win them to the kingdom.
The world will settle for anything in the Bible as long as it's
palatable to unsaved people.
Real men in Christ (the masculine ones) tend to be polite and
respectful, especially church and secular authority, but they
also know when to kick rear-ends, and take names!
I'm also tired of all the portraits of Jesus hung in church
foyers all of the country, displaying Him as some sort of
bearded lady! These paintings make Him appear to be
wearing blush, eyeliner and His white robe has a plunging
neckline.
Another painting I find offensive is where He is out with
His disciples on the water when a storm brews, and Peter
(we all know the story) steps out of the boat, begins to sink,
and cry's "Lord, help me!" What this painting shows is Jesus
taking Peter by one hand as if to dance the samba, and not to
effect a rescue!
What about all the times Jesus Himself stood up to the
religious leaders in the community and called them out?
He called them snakes, sons of snakes, vipers, and
other assorted colorful names, telling them they were
fit for hell. You know how many modern day Scribe's,
Pharisee's and hypocrites you have in your church, or
somewhere else in your community. We don't dare
call them out. That would be so "disrespectful.....".
One of these day's, real men in Christ are going to have to
call out some of these so-called "Christian leaders" in the
Christian version of the OK Corral......
to go pick up copies of the following, and then decide for
yourself what you expect from your church (or any church)
that respects and honors manhood.
I'm sick of all the emphasis on the love and compassion of
Christ, especially in view of these dangerous times we live
in, plus the overwhelming disrespect Christians have to
endure because of some nitwit preacher keeps telling them
"..it's all for the good..." and somehow this is supposed to
make us feel better.
The problem with mainstream Christianity is all passivity
is considered "godliness". After all "Jesus wept" and "He
opened not His mouth..."
The world gets to set the rules on how well they receive the
message of the Gospel. And we acquiesce. We want to be
loved by everyone, and careful not to offend anyone, if we
expect to win them to the kingdom.
The world will settle for anything in the Bible as long as it's
palatable to unsaved people.
Real men in Christ (the masculine ones) tend to be polite and
respectful, especially church and secular authority, but they
also know when to kick rear-ends, and take names!
I'm also tired of all the portraits of Jesus hung in church
foyers all of the country, displaying Him as some sort of
bearded lady! These paintings make Him appear to be
wearing blush, eyeliner and His white robe has a plunging
neckline.
Another painting I find offensive is where He is out with
His disciples on the water when a storm brews, and Peter
(we all know the story) steps out of the boat, begins to sink,
and cry's "Lord, help me!" What this painting shows is Jesus
taking Peter by one hand as if to dance the samba, and not to
effect a rescue!
What about all the times Jesus Himself stood up to the
religious leaders in the community and called them out?
He called them snakes, sons of snakes, vipers, and
other assorted colorful names, telling them they were
fit for hell. You know how many modern day Scribe's,
Pharisee's and hypocrites you have in your church, or
somewhere else in your community. We don't dare
call them out. That would be so "disrespectful.....".
One of these day's, real men in Christ are going to have to
call out some of these so-called "Christian leaders" in the
Christian version of the OK Corral......
Last edited:
I expect discipleship, fellowship, discipline & love (as in loving the Father & loving your neighbor as yourself). Sure, cantatas & fellowship lunches are nice but really unnecessary.
In the Old School /Primitive Baptist churches there is a very complete gathering of everyone including Men, Women & children all assembling in one area to hear the word from one man (one well studied in scripture--usually the Pastor or Elder(s)---All Studied Men) who will preach the word. Parents are expected to work with the children later on so they completely understand the Message & if the parents do not understand the message and/or have questions then they go back to the Elders for clarification.
That's my preferred style of church--everyone walks away knowing more than they did before (and the parents helped the kids learn scripture). It is an enriching experience (not a social "How you doing" gathering place).
In the Old School /Primitive Baptist churches there is a very complete gathering of everyone including Men, Women & children all assembling in one area to hear the word from one man (one well studied in scripture--usually the Pastor or Elder(s)---All Studied Men) who will preach the word. Parents are expected to work with the children later on so they completely understand the Message & if the parents do not understand the message and/or have questions then they go back to the Elders for clarification.
That's my preferred style of church--everyone walks away knowing more than they did before (and the parents helped the kids learn scripture). It is an enriching experience (not a social "How you doing" gathering place).
- Status