Women & Apologetics

[Freedom63]

Another doctrine that becomes confusing due to culture. During Paul's time women weren't allowed to be formally educated as men, most learned at home under the husband or another tutor. Most cultures still viewed women as property of the father or husband and most christians followed these traditions. A women had little legal rights, couldn't divorce, etc...

In Corinth former pagan women were coming into church and probably mixing pagan babbling rituals with christianity. Paul gave clear rules that a woman couldn't lead a church, for one...it was illegal and against tradition.
Women certainly worked in other areas, but always under the authority of a man.

We can't hold biblical advice given to one culture would remain the same for changing cultures, today women aren't property, educated and can take care of themselves without men.

This is a wonderfully straightforward breakdown of the issue. It really does seem like common sense when all the factors are considered. I really do not understand why so many churches continue to struggle with this issue.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Armistead14,

In Corinth former pagan women were coming into church and probably mixing pagan babbling rituals with christianity. Paul gave clear rules that a woman couldn't lead a church, for one...it was illegal and against tradition....

We can't hold biblical advice given to one culture would remain the same for changing cultures, today women aren't property, educated and can take care of themselves without men.

Err, not quite, whilst there is some reality in what you say, that is using culture as though it is God’s revelation.
The issue is not clear as to how the church should be ordered. Some hold to 1 Timothy where the instruction is clear, women should not be in leadership over men, and some point out that women were in sorts of leadership in Romans 14. Titus 1 and 2 are also interesting, possibly indicating women should teach children at least. Furthermore all the apostles Jesus chose were men, and Jesus wasn’t subject to the cultural or religious constraints
No the churches need to decide. For me, I suggest apostles should preferably be men, but whilst I am in favour of women in leadership it is clearly from scripture a matter of interpretation and I respect both views absolutely.

 

[Bubblies]

Armistead14,
Furthermore all the apostles Jesus chose were men, and Jesus wasn’t subject to the cultural or religious constraints

Why do you think Jesus wasn't subject to the cultural constraints?

 

[Armistead14]

Armistead14,
Err, not quite, whilst there is some reality in what you say, that is using culture as though it is God’s revelation.
The issue is not clear as to how the church should be ordered. Some hold to 1 Timothy where the instruction is clear, women should not be in leadership over men, and some point out that women were in sorts of leadership in Romans 14. Titus 1 and 2 are also interesting, possibly indicating women should teach children at least. Furthermore all the apostles Jesus chose were men, and Jesus wasn’t subject to the cultural or religious constraints
No the churches need to decide. For me, I suggest apostles should preferably be men, but whilst I am in favour of women in leadership it is clearly from scripture a matter of interpretation and I respect both views absolutely.

I think Christ would work within that culture and pick men because picking women would've gone against how the culture needed to function back then. Christ worked within the system of that day, it's laws and customs, I would suspect today he would have no problem with women.

Had Christ broken this jewish law I think all the focus would've been on that. Christ didn't come at that time to totally break down a working culture, but laid the foundation for it's systemic changes as history evolved.

 

[bythegraceofgodgoi]

God designed men and women differently. Men and women have different specialties. Homosapien males are genetically designed by the creator to be better leaders. This is not an insult to women, nor does it imply that we women are inferior. Are men inferior to women because they are usually not better nurturers that women? Of course not. Being different is an objective fact that is beyond the subjective realm of the dualistic concepts of superior or inferior. The word equal means "having exactly the same properties; the state of being identical". If this is the case, men are women are indeed not equal, as they have different strong suits and weaknesses.

 

[Ave Maria]

Is it wrong for a woman to teach an apologetics class at church?

I don't believe that this would be wrong. Catholic women teach Catechism class to children all the time so why not an apologetics class?

 

[Sageroots]

I would like to note that a woman teaching an apologetics class does not put her in authority over men. I would also like to note that if the whole "women not being in authority over men" thing is meant to say that they can't teach men, or lead we may be in trouble. All men are not better leaders that all women and the callings that God puts on lives are not gender specific. If she's got the call, let her do it.

 

[lovemygod316]

For instance, if you look at the story of Deborah, it is clear that one reason that God brings Deborah onto the scene to take up that role as a judge and a prophetess, is because Barak is failing to live up to his responsibilities. So, to rebuke Israel, God raises up Deborah to basically say, "Barak, get off your butt and do your work, man. You're called by God and you're falling down on the job. If you fall down on the job, then I'll just raise someone up that normally is not called to be in this role." So she's the exception that proves the rule in that regard.

We sure could use a "Deborah" today, because today's "Barak" seems to be just as falling down on his job.