Woman senior pastor

[Reynolds]

Modalism is not a model or analogy, it's a heretical view of the Trinity. It states there is only 1 Person in the Trinity.

Did I not say it was a heresy?

 

[Reynolds]

If so, then that term would NOT show us females were either pastor/elder!

What?

 

[Yeshua1]

What?

that term would be for a deacon, and not used for either elder/pastor....

 

[Yeshua1]

Did I not say it was a heresy?

Too bad that many see it is OK< hyst see the flock of TJ jakes!

 

[Reynolds]

Too bad that many see it is OK< hyst see the flock of TJ jakes!

Its a good thing I don't follow T D Jake's. I could not tell you one thing he believes.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Been quite busy traveling today. Looks like the thread will be shut down before I can respond to much.

Ordered Ellis's book. Got it yesterday. Haven't started reading. I don't agree with his position, but want to be aware of what his apologetic is.

I will be quite interested to hear your take on it. If nothing else, you may be able to vouch for the others that he is not simply trying to appeal to popular culture. It was a counter-cultural position to take in his Baptist world.

I don't agree and wasn't convinced, but it was intriguing to see someone actually defend the position they practiced. This is kind of how I feel about what you've said about Earle Ellis's book.

I appreciate your open-mindedness and your willingness to look at the position with a willingness to learn something new. Even if it doesn't change your mind, I think it will be interesting for you.

I've read a lot of arguments for women in vocational ministry over the years and very few of them had any traction with me. When I read Ellis' book, all that changed.

FYI, he's coming from a Reformed tradition, and his theology tends to deal with covenants more than most I have read.

I am especially interested to hear what you think of his four principles for interpretation and if you see any flaws there. (I am willing to have my mind changed.)

 

[Baptist Believer]

I am sure his argument which you reference revolves around the "biased translation" of diakanos.

Actually it doesn't. It touches on it - obviously, it has to mention all of the notable women in the early church recorded in scripture - but that is definitely NOT what the argument "revolves around."

So your assumptions are incorrect.

Again.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I have, and he basically just trues to assert that now we have no real distinctions/roles difference between male and females!

I sincerely doubt you have read it carefully, since that would be the most superficial reading of that chapter that I could imagine.

He forcefully argues against the popular models of egalitarianism - which is what you claim he positively asserts.

DId you REALLY read it?

 

[Squire Robertsson]

This thread is closed.

Six Hour Warning

This thread will be closed sometime after 5 PM Pacific.