Women Pastors

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Wrenn:
What I don't agree with is fundamentalist presuppositions.

"In Christ there is neither male nor female."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you stretch this to refer to anything outside of soteriology?

 

What is this about us not being able to cut our hair?! It's just supposed to drag the ground all of the time? And we're just supposed to sit around the house all of the time cooking and cleaning, what about those of us who don't or can't have children?

Please explain!!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A prophet/prophetess was not simply a "foreteller", as you maintain, but also a "forthteller", or a preacher.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is true, but speaking the truth out of Holy Spirit empowered wisdom is not the same as having the role and title of Pastor. The fundamental issue isn't about worth or ability it is about authority. God established a chain-of-command for the sake of order. Using the logic that all are equal in authority in Christ would imply that we should allow children to pastor too. Of course not! Children are under their parents' authority and none of us would even think of placing ourselves under the spiritual authority of a child. Women have been placed under men in the chain-of-command. That's just the way it is and is no reflection of a person's position before God.

If God didn't intend women to have some role of speaking the truth He wouldn't have given women the gift of prophecy. But that's an entirely different issue from the position of Pastor. Some churches have women who are called "women's pastor" and, depending on how it is used, I don't see anything wrong with that either because she's not teaching or having authority over men.

Since the issue is about authority I believe as long as a woman is under her parental/marital authority (as applicable - this may not apply to some women who are unmarried adults) and under the authority of her church leadership, she can fulfill whatever role her church allows -- because she is under her God-given authority.

There are reasons for the structure of authority that God established. Just because the Bible says that women are not to be in positions of teaching authority over men does not make them less valuable. There is still a wealth of opportunity open for women in the church to use the gifts God has given them, even the gift of prophecy -- speaking the truth out of Holy Spirit empowered wisdom -- without holding a position of authority over men. And that doesn't even mean that a woman can never have anything to say that is applicable to men. It's about authority, not worth or value. For example, our Sunday School classes are more informal and class participation is encouraged and welcome. In this setting, women are just as welcome as the men are to share insights, etc. with the class. I believe this is completely acceptable because 1) it has been established as an acceptable practice by the authority of this church and 2) it is not a situation where the women have any authority over the men in the class.

In Scripture, women have also been given specific instruction and authority to teach other women. IMO, this is just as honorable, and certainly as needful, a ministry as the pastorate of the church. There is a need for women who are just as well trained, knowledgeable and capable as any male pastor so that they are able to minister to women -- who comprise half of the adult population of the church! I'm sorry, but there are just some things a man is never going to understand! This is a vitally important role for women in the church.

-- Danette

 

Equal in value, different in function!

 

Amen! And Amen!

 

By the way, I'm the head of my household. What I say goes and....
Oh no, got to go here she comes!!!

 

To the question concerning hair...

It isn't a shame to cut a woman's hair, but it's a shame to look like a man when you do. A woman's hair is supposed to be a natural covering for her, so why cut it? For a man, he isn't supposed to have these coverings when praying, etc., so why have it long?

Something I've debated with others about is whether short hair on women and long hair on men is a sin or not. The Bible says it is "a shame", not a sin. What is the untranslated form of this word? Unless proven wrong, I say it isn't a sin but something that generally displeases God, such as divorce. It isn't a sin but it still displeases God that we do it.

 

Regarding Women Pastors:

Ge 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply,

One of the "Principles" of God is that it requires a "Male and Female" to produce "Children".

The "physical application" of this "principle" is a "carbon copy" of God's "Spiritual plan", as is all other "physical systems" of this world.

God's marriage to Israel, Jesus's marriage to the church, is God's "Spiritual plan" to produce "Children of God", which Adam and Eve failed to do.

A "man and man", or "woman and woman" can not produce children, in either the "Spiritual" or "physical" realm, or a "mixture" of the two, one physical, one spiritual.

Since the Church is the "Bride of Christ", it must be "mated" with a "male" to produce children. Of course Jesus is the "Spiritual Mate", but a "physical" mate must be present, this would be the "Pastor".

A woman Pastor and woman Church can not produce children of God any more than two physical women.

"ALL" the "nature systems" of this world are "carbon copies" of God's "spiritual plan", until you learn this, you'll never understand the Bible.

Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,

even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

 

The day a woman gets up in our pulpit to give a sermon is the day I leave and go home and watch sports.

No matter what anyone says the scriptures are plain on the matter and anything that deviates from it is a gross misinterpretation of the Word of God... Brother Glen

 

Okey dokey, Mike...

 

Have read thru these posts and I have to say no one has answered Micheal's original question

Michael: "I wonder do you also follow the other restrictions that Paul gave. Do you make your women shut up when they enter the church doors? Do you require that they wear a head covering? Do you forbid them to cut their hair?"

Which provides further proof that fundamentalists are not guided primarily by an unbiased instruction of the Bible but by their traditions. Their tradition says no women preacher but syas nothing about women being silent in church (which would logically imply no singing, no talking, no SS teaching - where would we be if we didn't have women SS teachers).

I also note that Fundamentalists are literalists when they want to be and interpret figuratively when they want to - whatever matches their preconceived views. Paul Achtemeier points this out effectively in the excellent book "The Inspiration of Scripture".

Michael keep up the challenging questions - maybe someone is listening and thinking.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Michael: "I wonder do you also follow the other restrictions that Paul gave. Do you make your women shut up when they enter the church doors? Do you require that they wear a head covering? Do you forbid them to cut their hair?"

Which provides further proof that fundamentalists are not guided primarily by an unbiased instruction of the Bible but by their traditions. Their tradition says no women preacher but syas nothing about women being silent in church (which would logically imply no singing, no talking, no SS teaching - where would we be if we didn't have women SS teachers).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Keith, if you had read thru the posts, you would have seen the third and forth posts, explaining what Paul was refering to when he told the women to keep silent in the church.

I suppose it's ok with you if we have homosexual preachers in our church or drunkerds preaching, seeing how by your view we no longer need the Bible?

 

I'm really sad that you misunderstand us that much, Michael.

 

Michael,

What is your agenda on this board, Michael? You complain about the treatment you get, and then turn right around and wage your personal, private war against your fundamentalist brothers! You generally don't debate the issues. All you do is take cheap shots. I have tried to back away from criticizing you, but now this! I won't stand by and take it. You are divisive among the bretheren!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Joey M:



Keith, if you had read thru the posts, you would have seen the third and forth posts, explaining what Paul was refering to when he told the women to keep silent in the church.


I suppose it's ok with you if we have homosexual preachers in our church or drunkerds preaching, seeing how by your view we no longer need the Bible?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rereading the 3rd post, I see that Joey M used non-literal interpretation and allows women to utter some syllables inside a church as long as it is not teaching or usurping authority over a man. It says nothing about preaching, so I'd say women can preach! It says nothing about being a pastor (head or assistant). So great! Women can be pastors!. I'm glad you have such a liberating view through non-literal interpreattion. But it does say women should not teach. Oh no, they cannot be Sunday School teachers. And they better not be a head of a committee with any men on it. That would be unbiblical.

How this verse gets translated to mean no women head pastors, or no ordination for women, I'll never understand. I take that back I do understand, it comes from TRADITION not unbiased reading of Scripture.

You say that I think we no longer need the Bible. I'd say you only need your TRADITION since it seems to drive your interpretations.

 

There's a difference between truth and unsubstantiated criticism. Searching for truth is what we're about here. Unsubstantiated criticism is not welcome! Why don't we all stick to stating our beliefs, support them by scripture, try to understand the other point of view, and seek discernment by the Holy Spirit? Might that be a Christ-like way for iron to sharpen iron?

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> 1 Tim. 2:12-15 "12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now if that is man's tradition and not Bible to you, then you've got a different Bible than I do.
A woman can teach Sunday School as long as it is boys under 13 and girls. She cannot teach men, nor can she preach, nor can she be a deacon, nor can she hold any office in the church that puts her in authority over the man.
Now there are alot of things that a woman can do to glorify God and be a help in the church. And a woman can preach, as far as witnessing testifiying , things of that nature. I'm just a Sunday School teacher and not a pastor yet when I teach I preach the word. A woman can preach the word, just not in the same sense that a pastor undershepards the church.
If you want a woman pastor, then that's fine check your Bibles in at the door, pick up your own angenda a sit down and listen to her. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
And Mike, your cheap shots do nothing for me. I'd rather be called a fundementalist than a yellow bellied liberalist that makes up their own doctrine, because they are afraid to offend anyone.
chew on that a while. I still love ya in the Lord and will pray that God open your eyes.

God speed.