Women starting churches?

My opinion:
In the context of the Scripture where the female restriction is given it is always under the umbrella of "not usurping the male authority".

Under the Law both prophetesses Huldah and Deborah's husbands were named showing they were under the authority of a male.
IMO, if the pastor and/or deacons agree that a gifted woman may teach a mixed audience then the Scriptures have not been violated.

AOBTW, if you want to take 1 Timothy 2:12 in its strictest and most narrow way then women cannot vote in a church business meeting, they cannot ask questions in sunday school, they cannot teach other women or children in Sunday School or Children's Church.

My opinion of course.

HankD

 

Hank D-

You can take it as strict as you like.

The issue is definately one of New Testament Polity, so if we are going to discuss the issue then we have to stick to the New Testament.

As I have stated already, the question is really a mute point because not only can a woman operating as a maverick not biblically assume the authority to start a church.... neither can a man.

She can teach The Word of God, and she can do anyting she wants to in her home. The question is ... can she start a church? Technically no -

Only a church has the authority to do that, because how else would you be able to administer the ordinances?

 

Dear Voice,

Concerning your comment as to only a Church can start another church.

Actually only Jesus can do that...

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The disagreements occur when we start discussing the "local" Church versus the "invisible" Church especialy (underline especially) among Baptists.

My own view is that both are taught.
The "church" Jesus speaks of in Matthew 16:18 is the "invisible" Church known only to God and is comprised of all born-again believers.
This is the Church which will continue on through eternity (so shall we ever be with the Lord) purified of pretenders and hypocrites.

Local Churches are imperfect in that they may have unsaved mingled in among the redeemed (wheat and tares) awaiting the Return of the Lord.

Can a woman start a local Church is not a valid question since many already have.
The question is SHOULD women be allowed to start local churches.
Well I believe that the Scripture allows it in the sense that whenever 2 or 3 or gathered in His name there He is. It doesn't require a male minion as in Judaism. This situation would be an extension of the "invisible" Church or the identifiable local Church in the area.

Now, as to an identifiable Local Church to perpetuate the preaching of the Word, believer's water baptism and the Lord's Table?
No, it is not the norm of the Scripture.
However (and the reason I used Huldah and Deborah as examples from the OT) when men are unwilling, or unworthy to the Lord's work, then the way the Lord may work in this present age may be similar to the way He worked with Huldah and Deborah... Use women to shame the men into getting the lead out.

HankD

[ September 03, 2002, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

It takes a church to start a church.

Simple answer... can't be done biblically.</font>[/QUOTE]Please explain what you mean when you said,
"It takes a church to start a church."

 

Without going into great length, I'll say this.
Of the nearly 115 times that the word church is used in the New Testament, in almost every instance it is used in reference to a local church.

Personally I do not believe that there is such a thing taught in the Bible as the Mystical / Invisible church.

This leads me to say this... Jesus gave the authority to administer the ordinances (Baptism and Lord's Supper to the first church). And so the first church passed this authority on to other churches. Consequently, a church cannot Biblically adminster the ordinances, if they also have not received this authority from another church.

Therefore, No ordinances = No church.

The idea of people baptising themselves, and baptizing anyone/anywhere/anyhow is very close to heresy in my book.

This is not to say that a group of believers could not obtain this priveledge from an already established church. This happens quite often in Baptist circles, moreso than many realize.

In regard to the lady who started this thread, that would be the route I would recommend for her. Establish a group, pray for God to send them some leadership, and then seek out a church to organize them.

[ September 03, 2002, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: A voice crying in the wilderness ]

 

Hank -

The exceptional never supercedes the standards.

Again, the rule for discussing New Testament polity must be discussed from New Testament scriptures.

God is a God of order, and His churches are established in an orderly fashion.

 

Yes, Voice, I know, but have you never appealed to the OT for anything?

The question is not "can" women start churches but "should" they?

I knew an elderly single woman missionary (a widow) whom the Lord led to Haiti where He started a Local Baptist Church through her.
She appointed men nationals to leadership and left.

Other churches founded by women have not done so well , Mary Baker Eddy... Ellen White.

The instance where a woman is involved in the leadership of a church in the NT is in the Revelation of Jesus Christ, her name is Jezebel.

So, my answer again is ... No they shouldn't but if the men fall down?, what do you think?
Are you ready to go to Haiti?

HankD

[ September 04, 2002, 09:52 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

The old Baptist belief about foreign mission fields where danger was all about.....
"Here am I, Lord; send her....." but never in the pulpit at home.

May He reign in our hearts and minds as He reigns over the universe.

Jim

 

In these times there has been somewhat of a big falling away from the faith by Christians across the world. And, in the absence of men willing to lead the church of Christ, God will most definitely raise up women in their stead. Until we get ourselves back in line with God's plan and get back on track spiritually, with men in the leadership roles within the church, there are going to be good and godly women leading the church.

 

Our mission representatives are now recruiting from the the elderly and retired because of the shortage of young people.

HankD

 

For those who are suggesting that we act contrary to the Word of God based upon a quote "shortage of men" may I remind you that we serve a God of complete and total sovereign control of all things.

What you suggest is what is destroying our churches today, it's what is known as pragmatism.

God in no way is failing to get His plans and purposes accomplished, we should never seek to help Him out by acting contrary to His revealed methods of doing things.

What we need to do is act in faith and trust in His sovereignty.

[ September 06, 2002, 05:54 AM: Message edited by: A voice crying in the wilderness ]

 

On the contrary, I haven't suggested anything but have made observations both of the Scripture and the condition of professing Christendom and our sovereign God's response to those observed events.

There is a responsiblility of man and a call to action within the all-encompassing sphere of the sovereignty of God.

Many (and I'm not singling you out) are hiding behind "God's sovereignty" as a convenient place to shirk that responsibility.

HankD

[ September 06, 2002, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Amen to that brother!

But does God expect anyone to act responsibly for something if their actions are contrary to The Order given to us in His Word.

Think of it in this manner, God doesn't hold us responsible for anything He will not hold us accountable for one day.

Could God hold someone accountable for failing to act outside the parameters of His Word?

[ September 08, 2002, 06:49 AM: Message edited by: A voice crying in the wilderness ]

 

That's part of the overall problem, knowing those parameters.

First and foremost, He does what He wants, when He wants and He doesn't consult with us first.
We all know that.

If He wants to use a donkey (Balaam) or a woman (sorry, ladies, no offense meant )to speak His Word He just does it, examples Huldah and Deborah.

What He does with women missionaries concerning the deeds done in the body who bring and teach the Word of God to men, I honestly don't know (but I suspect it will go well for them and not so well for the men who wouldn't).
We'll just have to wait and see.

But let me agree again, it's not His norm, but it happens. If we look at the Scripture, not many (even those who claim they do) keep the letter of the princple involved (IMO).

1 Corinthians 14
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

OK lets take this literally...
It doesn't say anything as to the content of the subject of the speaking (teaching, praying) or the identity of the object of the speaking (man. woman or child). It just says for them to keep silent.
So, Any time a woman prays aloud in church or gives a testimony in a praise meeting or teaches children in sunday school or children's church or teaches other women in the local church then this scripture is violated. True?
Why or why not?
If true, are the men ready to teach the little ones and run the children's church?

What I am saying (perhaps) is that we indeed violate this Scripture but, (for the sake of the discussion) I'd rather have the women take up the slack than shut down the sunday school for lack of willing men.

BTW, yes, I teach - an adult sunday school class.
But, Yes, I have offered to teach the little ones or any who have a need.

HankD

[ September 08, 2002, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Br. Hank, I believe that your heart is definately in the right place.

As for 1 Corinthians 14, we have to examine that passage in it's context. Chapters 11-14 Paul is reproving the church for their disorder in their worship services.

I think the context would dictate that we apply the women in silence passage only to the public worship services. Something that the ladies in our church gladly uphold.

They clearly can teach the younger ladies and children.

I'm all for women being involved with a great deal of service to our Lord.

But The End Never Justifies The Means.

God can and does use people outside THE BOX so to speak, but this is never something we should advocate nor seek to promote.

I still do not believe that we should ever encourage a woman to act contrary to God's Word. Regardless of how the situation may appear in our eyes, we must trust that God will accomplish His will according to His Word.

[ September 08, 2002, 10:07 PM: Message edited by: A voice crying in the wilderness ]

 

1 Corinthians 11

5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.

Paul taught that a woman who is preaching ("prophesies") should have heard head covered in the church.

 

Dear voice and believer,

I agree. We need to look at the over all context of a passage of Scripture to re-capture the original intent of the book.

1 Corinthians has an underlying premise:

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it,
neither yet now are ye able.

The epistle is milk and not meat, written to the carnal. Babes in Christ.

Their former religion had a great deal to do with what Paul wrote to them. The natural Law of God had been overthrown by the "mystery cults" of the Greek hellenists "thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee" had been reversed. Even their gods had been feminized, Diana of the Ephesians, etc. Priestesses held authority over the devotees, halucinogenic drugs and promiscuity were an acceptable way of life with them.

Paul had to return them to the natural order of God before the Law of Liberty and true holiness could be taught.

Something definitely had gone wrong at Corinth.
There was no spiritual growth.
The tares had been sown and had hindered the growth of the wheat.

HankD

[ September 09, 2002, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]