The place for women in the church, continued...

[abcgrad94]

We have to remember that what we call leadership is still more servanthood. Neither our pastor nor deacons, nor any committee chairman can do anything unless the congregations gives them permission.

Sometimes, those church jobs which are more visible are considered leadership positions. 'Taint necessarily so. In the final analysis, it is still service, not bossing.

Excellent reminder, brother!

 

[freeatlast]

Many years ago, when our church was without a pastor, as moderator I appointed a committee to draft by-laws for the church. One of the women I wanted to appoint declined, saying she did not believe women should serve in leadership positions.

I pointed out a couple of things. One, this was an act of service to the congregation, not leadership. Two, because she was wise, and committed to the work of the church, this was a way of her using her gifts and talents.
Three, there was no glory at stake. She and her colleagues were going to work quite hard. She was not leading the congregation, she was serving it.

She changed her mind and agreed to serve.

We have to remember that what we call leadership is still more servanthood. Neither our pastor nor deacons, nor any committee chairman can do anything unless the congregations gives them permission.

Sometimes, those church jobs which are more visible are considered leadership positions. 'Taint necessarily so. In the final analysis, it is still service, not bossing.

Many women are wise. Even more so then many men, but that is not the qualification for exercising authority and drafting by-laws is a place of authority. It may not be the final vote, but it does hold a place of authority over men. Just because you stood against God's word by calling something other then it was does not justify the act. And just because you were able to convince her to go along is not virtue. Calling a thorn by any other name does not keep it from being a thorn. And rebellion is still rebellion.

 

[freeatlast]

Excellent reminder, brother!

Here is a better reminder;
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

 

[Tom Butler]

Many women are wise. Even more so then many men, but that is not the qualification for exercising authority and drafting by-laws is a place of authority. It may not be the final vote, but it does hold a place of authority over men. Just because you stood against God's word by calling something other then it was does not justify the act. And just because you were able to convince her to go along is not virtue. Calling a thorn by any other name does not keep it from being a thorn. And rebellion is still rebellion.

Sorry to disagree, but drafting by-laws is not a place of authority. The church gave her an assignment. She did not impose her will on anyone, did not over-ride the vote of anyone else on the committee. She had one vote. She not make any decision of authority over any man. She, along with the by-laws committee members, studied the issue, and joined the others in making a recommendation to the congregation.

The church had elected me moderator. I appointed her to the committee. The congregation approved. At no point did she usurp authority. She acted under the authority of the congregation. The congregation was not under her authority, nor was anybody else.

As a matter of fact, every woman who serves in any capacity serves the congregation.

 

[jaigner]

Now that is without a doubt what the church is about today! :tear:

I'm sorry. That just wasn't very specific. To what are you referring?

 

[freeatlast]

Sorry to disagree, but drafting by-laws is not a place of authority. The church gave her an assignment. She did not impose her will on anyone, did not over-ride the vote of anyone else on the committee. She had one vote. She not make any decision of authority over any man. She, along with the by-laws committee members, studied the issue, and joined the others in making a recommendation to the congregation.

The church had elected me moderator. I appointed her to the committee. The congregation approved. At no point did she usurp authority. She acted under the authority of the congregation. The congregation was not under her authority, nor was anybody else.

As a matter of fact, every woman who serves in any capacity serves the congregation.

It is not about posing will. It is not about spouting orders. it is about being in a position that offers leading. Just because you call somethig it is not does not change the truth. Your rebellion is evident.

 

[Peggy]

Waa waaa waaa - boy I hate to hear mean whining about authority.

Is a woman a pastor? An elder? Those are positions of authority.

Anything else is fair game in my opinion because women do have a lot to offer the church if you let them.

 

[tinytim]

Freeatlast, Just curious.. how many women are you a leader of?

Are you a pastor, deacon, or what office do you hold in church?

And if you were around when Philip's daughters were prophesying, what would you have said?

OR if you were around when Deborah was a judge, would you have told her she was against God?

You seem to think that anyone that disagrees with your assessment and opinion of that particular passage is automatically against God.

I disagree with you, and I am not against God. I have just seen God use many women in leadership roles inside our church, inside our association (YES, we even have a woman moderator for our association!!!).. and inside our denomination. (uh oh, have I mentioned that a woman is the president of the West Virginia Baptist Convention every fourth yr?) It is very evident that God uses women to lead. We witness this by the fruit that is being brought forth for the glory of God.

Paul was addressing a problem within that particular setting. The overall principle is that women were uneducated, and in that society were property of the man. As such, if they were to teach, it would have been a problem.

I see a much bigger problem in today's time... It is one that doesn't depend on Gender.
It is this...

UNeducated preachers and teachers in the church that have never learned how to use proper hermeneutics, and they try to stand and teach "truths" that are actually their opinions of what they believe. They try to force 1st century culture onto a 21st century church. Or worse yet, they think their southern USA culture is the norm for all of Christianity. Many are well meaning, but are ignorant to the fact that God is a God of diversity, and there are many great congregations, that Love the Lord, and are glorifying Him around the world. And yes, some even have women pastors, teachers, etc. I have set under some, and I have to say, they are much smarter than people who come on here with their uneducated opinions.

I start Seminary this month for a M.Div. and I am happy to say that I will be having women teaching some classes... They are qualified, and educated in this society, (unlike the 1st century)... And I expect to gain from their knowledge of ministry.

Now, I expect your response to be how ungodly I am... but in reality... you have no right to judge a brother in Christ. I am good with God!.... HE is proud of me. And frankly, I don't care what a person such as you says about me... I only want to please Him.

 

[thebuzzard]

Hmmmmm. I do not see the statements of Paul about this (2 Tim 2:12 etc.) pertaining to things outside the church gathering. And this was to assure that the leadership of the actual local church was handled by men (spiritually qualified men).

2 Tim 2:12 states that Paul did not want women to "usurp authority" over the man (leadership of the church)

The word they translated "usurp" is authenteo which carries some interesting meaning. It was typically used to convey:
1. one who acts on his own authority, autocratic
2. an absolute master
3. to govern, exercise dominion over one

It sure seems that Paul is telling the church to not have a woman seize control over it and the male leadership. That the leadership should be men.

It also seems to indicate that the male leadership would be free to have a woman participate as long as she is not "authenteo" excercising dominion over the male leadership.

I believe this is all direction for leadership issues.

 

[Tom Butler]

It is not about posing will. It is not about spouting orders. it is about being in a position that offers leading. Just because you call somethig it is not does not change the truth. Your rebellion is evident.

I am curious how others contributing to this thread see it. Am I in rebellion?
Is a woman's service on a committee usurping or exercising authority?

The church I serve is quite conservative, inerrantist, Bible-believing. As far as I can tell, not a single member of our church disagrees with my position.

Is my church in rebellion?

 

[tinytim]

NO.. you are not.. Tom...
For instance when I was called here to pastor almost 5 yrs ago, the pulpit committee had 3 women, and 3 men on it.

I think it is very wise to include women in committees because they bring a different perspective than men.. They even bring a special intuition about things that men may miss.

Just because Freeatlast is misinterpreting this scripture, don't change what you know God is telling you to do...

I mean, afterall, this is just an internet message board, and anyone that is smart enough to use a computer can voice their opinion...

Listen to God.... not some false teaching about what God says.

Freeatlast is in rebellion against God as he is judging you simply because you disagree with is uneducated opinion!

 

[The Archangel]

I disagree with you, and I am not against God. I have just seen God use many women in leadership roles inside our church, inside our association (YES, we even have a woman moderator for our association!!!).. and inside our denomination. (uh oh, have I mentioned that a woman is the president of the West Virginia Baptist Convention every fourth yr?) It is very evident that God uses women to lead. We witness this by the fruit that is being brought forth for the glory of God.

This is not something to be proud of (note: I'm not necessarily talking about the women having leadership roles in your particular convention). What I am saying, though, is that you are displaying an attitude of superiority when it comes to gender that is not based on scripture, but on pragmatism.

Does God use women? Certainly. And, I'm thankful that he does. However, to say that God uses women to lead (presumably, as you are discussing, in a church setting) is an oxymoron, according to scripture. Either God is wrong in 1 Timothy 2 or these women are leading in contradiction to God's clear command. Any church that has a woman pastor is a church in disorder, scripturally speaking.

Paul was addressing a problem within that particular setting. The overall principle is that women were uneducated, and in that society were property of the man. As such, if they were to teach, it would have been a problem.

Again, you completely miss the point that Paul is making in 1 Timothy 2.

11 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.
​

Of course, as it is plain to see, Paul is making his statement related to Creation, not to any cultural phenomena, as you are suggesting. There is absolutely no mention of education or property or anything. Paul states "I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man...For Adam was formed first..." Notice the for (γαρ, in Greek) is the reason he is saying what he is saying.

Paul appeals to creation. Your presuppositions are showing and this is causing you to misinterpret the text.

I see a much bigger problem in today's time... It is one that doesn't depend on Gender.
It is this...

Uneducated preachers and teachers in the church that have never learned how to use proper hermeneutics, and they try to stand and teach "truths" that are actually their opinions of what they believe. They try to force 1st century culture onto a 21st century church. Or worse yet, they think their southern USA culture is the norm for all of Christianity. Many are well meaning, but are ignorant to the fact that God is a God of diversity, and there are many great congregations, that Love the Lord, and are glorifying Him around the world. And yes, some even have women pastors, teachers, etc. I have set under some, and I have to say, they are much smarter than people who come on here with their uneducated opinions.

I think it is almost hilarious what you are saying here. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so egregious an error.

You presume to lecture on hermeneutics when it is clear that you cannot apply a proper hermeneutic to 1 Timothy 2.

You presume to lecture on culture when Paul never appeals to culture.

You presume to lecture us and call us "uneducated" because we disagree with your position? Give us a break. As you yourself state later, you have not even begun to study for your M.Div. Many of us already have ours and are, therefore, decidedly not uneducated.

There may be gifted women teachers--and thank God for them. But, they are not to be pastors. Period.

I start Seminary this month for a M.Div. and I am happy to say that I will be having women teaching some classes... They are qualified, and educated in this society, (unlike the 1st century)... And I expect to gain from their knowledge of ministry.

Where is this seminary located? Is it a Baptist seminary? Is it in Richmond, VA perhaps?

Now, I expect your response to be how ungodly I am... but in reality... you have no right to judge a brother in Christ. I am good with God!.... HE is proud of me. And frankly, I don't care what a person such as you says about me... I only want to please Him.

See...this is disturbing. You are already positioning yourself as a martyr and a pariah if we should happen to disagree with you. You are saying, in effect, that to disagree with you is ipso-facto to judge you and to persecute you.

The truth of the matter is this: A Christian has every right to judge a brother (or sister). In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul asks the rhetorical question: Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? The implied answer is "Yes."

Judging someone to be in error (as you are) and working to correct that error (as some of us are trying to do) is the most loving thing a brother or sister can do.

And, by the way, if you truly wanted to please God you would commit yourself to His word in all matters--even when that means going against the prevailing culture of the world, as uncomfortable as that may be.

A word to the wise, should be sufficient.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

It is not about posing will. It is not about spouting orders. it is about being in a position that offers leading. Just because you call somethig it is not does not change the truth. Your rebellion is evident.

The problem here is that you are not understanding what Paul is saying in 1 Timothy 2. He is clearly talking about a position of teaching authority (ie. a pastor or elder), not any so-called leadership position.

It is not rebellion to have women work in a church or to give opinions. As I wrote to another poster, even if a woman is working in a committee, the church still has to approve the recommendation. So it is not that the women are "leading" because the Congregation is not under their authority; the congregation is under its own authority (as demonstrated in the congregational form of church government).

Women may serve in the church. The thing they may not do is occupy the role or office of pastor or elder. That is clear in Paul's letter to Timothy.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[freeatlast]

I am curious how others contributing to this thread see it. Am I in rebellion?
Is a woman's service on a committee usurping or exercising authority?

The church I serve is quite conservative, inerrantist, Bible-believing. As far as I can tell, not a single member of our church disagrees with my position.

Is my church in rebellion?

Tom,
A woman certainly can be on a committee as long as she is not the chair of that committee if men are on it, or is on one that has been given authority to make a final decision on a matter or even on one that is setting church by-laws or polity. Keeo in minde that the passage in Tim also says to be silent. The idea is that the men are the ones who are to do all leading and policy making which is leading. As to you being in rebellion the answer would be yes if you promoted or encouraged a woman to violate God's command in 1Tim.
You mentioned this;
"The church I serve is quite conservative, inerrantist, Bible-believing. As far as I can tell, not a single member of our church disagrees with my position."

I am not trying to be smart here, but I would really be surprised that it is true. Most Baptist churches claim the same thing and it simply is not true. The church I attend makes the same claim, and is conservative based on other churches, but when placed against the bible it is moderate to liberal in action. So words/clasims today mean very little since we are in postmodernism and I am convince full blown into the falling away. The Laodicean Church thought they were conservative, but they were actually luke warm (putrid). Yes you might be conservative in relation to other churches, but in comparison to the bible I seriously doubt it. However if I am wrong I would love to visit because if true it would be a blessed welcome to what I am seeing today.