women deacons

Chipsgirl
I did not say a youth leader should act on logic and emotion that statement went with deacons. I said the a woman should not be in youth leader because they are unable to cater to the needs of a young man entering adulthood. I believe a man should be the youth leader and women should be there under the man to teach the young woman. A leader is usualy best to be a man in the church because in general a man can hold up against the stress better than a woman because the emotion does not come first, but i do not disagree that there should be women within but not as the head.

 

What type of person or how should a person (man or woman depending on what you believe) be and act when they are deacons and youth leaders? I know of the Tim. verses, are there others? Would the qualifications be the same or similar?

Rachel

 

[/QUOTE]how do you reconcile Romans 16:1 and the fact that Pheobe was a deaconess, who was also the deliverer of the letter to the Roman church in which the responsibility of explaining Paul's intent to the reader(men included) was included, with the fact that Paul also told the Corinthian Church in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 "34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church."? So should they not do anything in church? Teach children? Keep quiet? Deliver letters? Be servants of the church?

The answers are not nearly as concise as you have emphatically claimed. [/QB][/QUOTE]


I'm not the one this was addressed, but I'll join in the discussion.

Actually, the answer is pretty concise. God told us that women are not to be deacons. Deacons are to be the husband of but one wife. That kinda precludes women, wouldn't you say?

Romans 16:1 speaks of Phebe as a servant. I expect that if God wanted us to think of her as something else, he would have had Paul use a word other than servant. Since we are told that women are not to be in the position of deacon, it follows logically that Phebe wasn't being referred to as a deacon.

Your questions about what women can do in the church are particularly telling. What I'm hearing you say is that the idea of teaching children and being a servant is beneath you, that you're unwilling to stoop to serving in that way. What I'm hearing you say is that if you're not a deacon, you can't have a ministry in the church. Is this what you're saying? Are you saying that your talents, and the talents of other women, aren't served unless they are in the position of deacon?

The ability of a woman to do the job of deacon isn't being questioned. The answer is very concise and it's very clear.

Chris

 

Paul uses the same word in 1 Timothy 3 when describing deacons as he did in Romans 16:1 when describing Pheobe, diakonos. If you believe that every word in the Bible is inerrant and the word of God, then you cannot simply dismiss the fact that this word is used to describe a woman. God told Timothy through Paul, who was in Ephesus at the time(I believe), that he should not have women deacons in his church, Paul told the Corinthians through Paul that women should have no role in the church whatsoever(That is the questions I posed above, you greatly misinterpreted my meanings), yet God had Paul send a woman, whom God through Paul describes as a deacon to the church at Rome. To narrow it down here are three greatly different roles of women in church
>Women are to not be deacons(1 Tim)
>Women are to do nothing in church(1 Cor)
>Women are shown as deacons(Romans 16)
This is all I am pointing out, the guidelines given above are to 3 distinctly different churches in 3 different phases of existence, and it is very reasonable to assume that God gave them three distinctly different guidelines on this issue.
As to the whole "if women can't be a deacon they can't be anything" comment. That was in no way my meaning. I was trying to illustrate the above and I was not clear in questions. 1 Cor does say "women are to remain silent" while obviously Romans 16:1 is on the other end of the spectrum, and 1Tim looks to me to be somewhere in between. The individual church must discern from God what He wants of them in there current growth stage and location.
For the record I don't believe there are many(if any in the USA) cases where women need to remain completely silent in a church. Corinth was having some major issues with temple prostitutes and such coming into the church and women were being a great distraction in that area, but that's for another post.

 

Diane,

I agree that women should only minister to other women or girls, but I would like to see Scriptural support for "boys under 12" and "the husband and wife team".

--Jeff

 

I give 12 as an arbitrary number using Jesus as an example with his trip to the temple. Puberty is a better standard but children are reaching puberty at a younger age.

As for the husband and wife team, I refer to the wife being under the authority at church of her husband. Having a husband and wife involved with the youth is to prevent the appearance of evil or temptation. Our senior pastor will not counsel a woman without his secretary present nor will he meet with the secretary with his door closed without another adult in the room.

 

The passage about deacons gives instructions for 'and their women.' Some interpret this to refer to the women deacons. Some interpret it to refer to deacon's wives, since 'women' can mean 'wives' depending on context.

We need to keep in mind that many Baptist churches have a non-historical view of the term 'deacon.' In a lot of Baptist churches a 'deacon' is someone who sits on a board and makes decisions for the church. Throughout most of history, the root of the role of deacon has been seen to be the Seven who fed the widows in Acts, and the role of a deacon is the administrate giving to the poor and charitable tasks of that nature.

In the Bible, we see that elders were the pastoral types who met together and made decisions. The elders correspond most closely to the pastor and the deacons in a Baptist church, rolled into one role, but functioning as a group, not as a one-man pastorate.

The Baptist role of 'pastor' is not exactly scriptural, and neither is the role of 'deacon.' We need to understand these terms in their New Testament context.

A deacon does not necessarily have to have responsibility that involves exercising authority over others or teaching men.

We also need to realize that 'deacon' in Greek is a broad term that could refer to any servant, including apostles.

 

IMO the problem here is that a clear statement does not need to be "interpreted".

 

IMO the problem here is that a clear statement does not need to be "interpreted". </font>[/QUOTE]****snipped my own irritated comment...pray before posting*****

 

That depends on what the job really 'is'. Our church is seeking a Children's Minister that would be a pastoral type job with the gentleman being over all our children's activities, leaders, etc. In our case, it would have to be a man.

We have women in charge of our volunteers for extended session and a young married couple in charge of our children's church. That church only allows children through second grade to attend. The rest are in service with their parents.

 

Our pastor's wife is in charge of the Children's Ministry in our church. Her assistant is a woman.

Our youth minister is a married man. Our church would not hire a single man to be the youth minister.

My grandson's youth minister is a woman.

I think it is up to the individual churches and their requirements.

I know of several churches that have ministers for senior adults and these ministers are women.

In our Southern Baptist Church, women pray, sing, read scriptures, lead music. We do not have a woman pastor or women deacons.

 

So Jesus and Paul would have never been considered?

 

I don't know that I have a problem with women leading male teens, but I think it would be better if a man did it. Men tend to underestimate their influence.

 

So Jesus and Paul would have never been considered? </font>[/QUOTE]I didn't say that I agreed and perhaps the church had other reasons for not hiring the young man.

 

No one should challenge a woman's ability to lead or their capability to do many jobs equal to men. However, we are not talking about secular activities, we are talking about the Church. God gave particular roles to men and to women, for the harmony and edification of the church body. Unfortunately, many men and women have determined that improvements in God's blueprint is necessary. This is true both in our families, as well as the offices of the church.

The roles of men and women are different, but that does not make either subservient and that is the undertone that is weaving throughout this thread. It is all about a perception, or a general assumption, that women must not be "as good" as men because God does not call them to preach, or because the Apostles did not instruct the disciples in Jerusalem to "look ye out among you seven SISTERS, of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business."

I am not certain why Jesus' gender was ordained to be male for surely God's plan for the human family could have been orchestrated and fulfilled equally well regardless of the gender our Savior chose in eternity to assume when he was born. However, He was born . . . a man. Adam was created first . . . a man. The twelve chosen to be apostles were . . . men; the first deacons were . . . men. Now, if anyone wants to challenge God for practicing discrimination, feel free to do so, but the pattern, the example we are to follow, is there for a reason. Men need to step up to their roles in the church and as the heads of their families, and women need to support them in those roles. God will bless our homes and our churches if we will simply follow the pattern He has left for us to emulate.

 

Paul uses the same word in 1 Timothy 3 when describing deacons as he did in Romans 16:1 when describing Pheobe, diakonos. If you believe that every word in the Bible is inerrant and the word of God, then you cannot simply dismiss the fact that this word is used to describe a woman. God told Timothy through Paul, who was in Ephesus at the time(I believe), that he should not have women deacons in his church, Paul told the Corinthians through Paul that women should have no role in the church whatsoever(That is the questions I posed above, you greatly misinterpreted my meanings), yet God had Paul send a woman, whom God through Paul describes as a deacon to the church at Rome. To narrow it down here are three greatly different roles of women in church
&gt;Women are to not be deacons(1 Tim)
&gt;Women are to do nothing in church(1 Cor)
&gt;Women are shown as deacons(Romans 16)
This is all I am pointing out, the guidelines given above are to 3 distinctly different churches in 3 different phases of existence, and it is very reasonable to assume that God gave them three distinctly different guidelines on this issue. </font>[/QUOTE]I agree with that, but we also have to take into account what God said about the qualifications for being a deacon, which is primarily where I was going. If I'm not mistaken, deacon has the same meaning as servant, and certainly men and women should be servants. However, we're also talking about a specific church "office" (for lack of a better word), and it seems to me that Scripture makes a clear distinction when addressing a particular office and when talking about Christian attitudes and behaviors in general.

I was looking to clarify whether what I was hearing was what you meant. Thank you for clarifying. I'm glad I was wrong.

Chris

 

Picking and choosing which verses you will agree with and which you will ignore is not only wrong it is harmful to the ministry. I agree that women should not be pastors but there is very clear Biblical precedent for women to be deacons. Is that to say that all churches are to have women deacons? Absolutely not (my own church doesn't), as I have stated over and over again, the guidelines were very clearly different for the different churches in Paul's ministry. Anyway I'm beating my head against the wall.