Women Pastors

I agree, Kellisa. I was only trying to make the point that he would probably not gain a hearing among Bible scholars. BTW, Jesus was God, so there is no comparison as you say.

Daniel

 

Was Phoebe a deacon or a clergy member?
Anyway, I don't think Paul should be our ultimate guide for deciding who is a member of the clergy. I think Jesus should be. And Jesus never gave anything to a man (be it healing, forgiveness, or bread) that he didn't give to a woman.
If Paul were here he could join my church. And since its a Baptist church he would have no more vote in deciding who could pastor my church than I could. He would not have anymore say so than any other member because we are are equal in God's eyes.
Bottom line: Paul's letters may be in a collection of inspired works that point us to salvation in Jesus Christ, but Paul is not God and he doesn't get to decide who pastors my church. Hopefully, the members of my church will always decide that under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and in accordance with the teachings of Jesus Christ.

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: David Cooke, Jr. ]

 

I agree with David. Jesus is the criterion by which we judge everything - including other Scripture.

Daniel

P.S. In all fairness, I should say that Thomas has far more education than I, and he apparently knows a heck of a lot more Greek than I judging from his posts.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by paynedaniel:
[QB]I agree with David. Jesus is the criterion by which we judge everything - including other Scripture.
QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why? What makes Jesus this "criterion"? I've asked this question before and I don't believe I've gotten an answer.

 

"Why? What makes Jesus this "criterion"? I've asked this question before and I don't believe I've gotten an answer"

I agree and how do you read Jesus words in the Bible and determine which ones you will accept and which ones you think are incorrectly written. What is your determining factor?

 

What makes Jesus the criterion? He is God. He is the criterion by definition. Everything centers around him. How can a Christian ask a question about the prominence of Christ?

Daniel

 

What makes Jesus this criterion? You have got to be joking! HE is the Word made flesh. To hold any part of the Bible above Him is idolatry. Jesus saved me, not the Bible, which merely pointed me toward Him. When you start placing words which are supposed to lead us to Jesus above Jesus himself, you need to ask yourself who or what it is you are worshipping. We call ourselves Christians, not Biblians, for a reason.

 

I just simply want to know how he decides which verses from Jesus he accepts and which ones he excludes. I'm not trying to put the Bible above Christ.

 

Maybe I'm just to old but I don't understand.
The bible is the inspired and inerrant word of God. The OT and NT are His Word. He gave us the bible. You can say the bible is Christ's mind on earth.
So if the bible teaches a doctrine, I think I'm to follow it.

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: Bob Alkire ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kellisa:
I just simply want to know how he decides which verses from Jesus he accepts and which ones he excludes. I'm not trying to put the Bible above Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can affirm women in ministry without excluding a single word of Jesus.

Joshua

 

David & Daniel (nice biblical names ), charging people with worshipping the Bible instead of Jesus makes for a frightening accusation, but in fact you are skating around the question and the point. This has been put to you several times, in several ways, by several people. I think it's time to come up to the lick log and deal with it instead of charging people with worshipping the Bible. What is your objective basis for understanding the Bible? What is your objective basis for understanding what Jesus would do, or what He said? I believe in the leadership by Jesus through the Holy Spirit as much as anyone and probably more (or at least in a different way) than many on this Board. BUT, the fact is anyone can run around saying Jesus told me this and the Spirit led me do this, and if there is no objective way to judge this, then anything anyone says Jesus taught them or led them to do must be assumed to be right. D. A. Carson illustrated this with an incident which he relates in his book [I}Showing the Spirit[/I], a commentary on I Cor. 12-14. A preacher told Carson that he believed a particular way because God had shown or told him. Carson countered by saying that God had shown him something that was completely opposite. The first preacher, nonplused, said that both must be right since that was what God had shown them!

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

Would the fact that Jesus chose ALL male apostles carry any weight with any of you who say that Jesus is the criterion??

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by rlvaughn:
Would the fact that Jesus chose ALL male apostles carry any weight with any of you who say that Jesus is the criterion??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope, especially not with Mary sitting at Jesus' feet in the position of a disciple.

Joshua

 

Just what I figgered.

 

Me either - for the same reason. Alright, I have addressed this before, but here's for those who haven't heard. It is the task of textual criticism to find the real (historical) Jesus and the Jesus of faith (the Jesus enshrouded in human doctrine). It's not as easy as accepting all the Bible blindly, but it is more honest. It has to be done because two or more pictures of who Jesus was and what his mission was are presented in the NT

Daniel

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: paynedaniel ]

 

My objective basis for understanding the bible, etc.? Not a question that can be answered in a few short sentences. But a few points I'll mention. The Central question of Christianity is from Jesus "Who do you say that I am? ".
I could give an objective answer based on a reading and re-reading of the Gospels as well as the scant historical record of our Lord. But the real answer to the question is ultimately personal and subjective: whether or not Jesus is the Lord of my life and is my personal Lord and savior. Although what Paul wrote did wonderful things to advance the church and Christ's kingdom, he was ultimately a man like me, a sinner. By the way, Paul's faith was not based on some wrote adherence to the old testament bible. If that were the case, he would have died a jew. Paul was a Christian not b/c he believed the bible was the inerrent word of God. He was a Christian b/c he had a personal relationship with Christ, and Jesus spoke to him. He didn't look at letters someone else wrote to decide what was right or who could serve in what church. He decided as best he could in light of what he knew and what I'm sure he prayerfully considered (in that he would have made a good Baptist).
But I am not bound by Paul. I am under Christ. My conscience may lead me to different conclusions than Paul sometimes. But for important things, like who is my savior and who is my perfect model for life, I am sure Paul and I would agree that Jesus is the answer. By the way, I have the benefit of four Gospels to read. I don't think Paul did. And even though he and Peter (a friend of Jesus, to say the least)got to talk, they didn't always agree on what Jesus would do, either. Kinda reminds us of Baptists today, huh?

 

David & Payne,
How do you know Christ is God? How do you know He deserves preeminence? And spare me the usual liberal default smoke-screen about Bibliolatry. We've already covered that in an earlier thread.

 

I posted the above before coming to the end of the thread. Let me now interact accordingly.

Daniel,
You still aren't answering the fundamental question: why whould you look at the Bible at all for textual criticism's sake about Jesus? What is your basis for knowledge? What is your basis for the basis? You're a bright guy and seem to know where this is going


David wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I could give an objective answer based on a reading and re-reading of the Gospels as well as the scant historical record of our Lord. But the real answer to the question is ultimately personal and subjective: whether or not Jesus is the Lord of my life and is my personal Lord and savior. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What difference does Christ make if it's ultimately personal and subjective? A muslim can make subjective claims, as can the athiest, pantheist, etc.

Your answers about Paul's view of Scripture make me wonder if you've ever read his writings at all (Cf Rom 15:4; 2 Tim 3:14-17).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Although what Paul wrote did wonderful things to advance the church and Christ's kingdom, he was ultimately a man like me, a sinner. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You claim you are a sinner and so is Paul. Yet you seem to claim his writings are not completely reliable while your own conscience and reasonings are. This is pretty illogical. You debase another humans's ability to discern the spiritual but exalt your own.
By the way, how do you know you are a sinner? How do you know Paul was?

Speaking of Paul, you wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> He was a Christian b/c he had a personal relationship with Christ, and Jesus spoke to him. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you know this?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>But I am not bound by Paul. I am under Christ. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would it be disloyal to Christ to be submissive to Paul's writings? Because Paul was a sinner? Yet you say you are bound to your own conscience. What makes your conscience so much more reliable than Paul's writings? How do you know?

 

Textual criticism helps us find out what Jesus actually said and did and what his followers claim he said and did. Sometimes the two conclusions are very different, and sometimes they are very similar. If the conclusions are similar, then we can be fairly sure that the words and deeds of Christ in that passage are authentic. The only thing we can be absolutely certain about, though, is the Christ who lives within us as perfect revelation.

Daniel Payne