Female Pastors & Bible Teachers

[SnowyMacie]

2. Human rights don't exist. You only have as many rights as the people in power over you give you.

This is scary. As a libertarian, I almost had a heart attack just reading that.

QFT

as a human I allmost had a heart attack just reading this

as thinking people we should believe in human rights
but as Christians we should definatly believe in human rights
people are made in the image of God, does not that in and of itself deserve some respect?

QFT

 

[MacFall]

As someone who knows authoritarian views inevitably extend beyond controlling women I was not surprised.

This. Misogeny is usually a symptom of a more general misanthropy, in which people are considered to be objects to be categorized, manipulated and controlled.

 

[Rhamiel]

This. Misogeny is usually a symptom of a more general misanthropy, in which people are considered to be objects to be categorized, manipulated and controlled.

this seems rather silly
well never mind
what you said seems correct
but it seems to be a non sequitar for this conversation

 

[redblue22]

Christian leaders do not seem to be doing much of anything as far as leading. These great "leaders" give a 20 minute speech once a week. I think women are quite capable of handling such a task.

 

[MacFall]

Christian leaders do not seem to be doing much of anything as far as leading. These great "leaders" give a 20 minute speech once a week. I think women are quite capable of handling such a task.

But the opposing position seems to be that it has nothing to do with ability. They're just not allowed. Because they were "designed differently" (even though that different design clearly has no actual meaningful effect, as implied by the premise, in which they have the ability).

Penises lead vaginas! Jesus said so. (Except no wait he didn't.)

 

[redblue22]

thank you, yes, I've been following that line of discussion. I am adding something different. The focus of my comment is not about ability, though I did make that statement about women being capable.

Instead, I am saying there is nothing that Christian men are doing that should be called leadership. A man is not a leader just because he gives a lecture. And since lecturing does not make one a leader, there is no reason to ban a woman from doing this rather easy simple task.

 

[SnowyMacie]

Because they were "designed differently" (even though that different design clearly has no actual meaningful effect, as implied by the premise, in which they have the ability).
(Except no wait he didn't.)

Not only that, it's not scientific. There are only psychological differences between men and women, and are as follows...

Men: a bit more aggressive, more sexual

Women: Tend to be more extroverted, nurturing, and trusting

Cognitive wise: men are only super slightly better at math while women are super slightly at verbal skills.

Really, even those differences are very small except for the aggressiveness.

 

[Rhamiel]

Jesus did not choose any women to be Apostles
I find it interesting that so many people accept moden inovations insted of the orthodox faith handed down from the begining of the christianity

 

[Johnnz]

Our fundamental paradigm is the story of creation. There is no mention of role, male leadership or female subordination there. Both were given the mandate to be stewards of the earth, both together best reflect the image of God, both become 'one flesh'.

The consequence of the Fall, 'he will rule over you' clearly indicates a change for the worst, something that was not part of God's original designs for His beloved humanity. The salvation Jesus offers is the beginning of creation's restoration of what was lost in Eden, and much more in Christ. This is why Paul wrote that gender is no longer a basis for discrimination and division within God's family. This is our template. The apparently 'restrictive' verses, if taken without some relevant situational/cultural factors being addressed and therefore as absolutes, would introduce a radical contradiction into God's designs for us.

John
NZ

 

[Johnnz]

Jesus did not choose any women to be Apostles
I find it interesting that so many people accept moden inovations insted of the orthodox faith handed down from the begining of the christianity

Except that Junias was an apostle, and, contrary to custom in NT times, Jesus allowed women to join Him as trainee disciples. And when Paul mentions women as well as men as fellow workers we can reasonably assume they had positions of some note within the new community.

John
NZ

 

[redblue22]

why is it a turn for the worst? one could say that it was a good move for living in the world they were now to exist in. clothing was not a turn for the worst, but was to be expected since they were no longer living in paradise.

 

[MacFall]

Jesus did not choose any women to be Apostles
I find it interesting that so many people accept moden inovations insted of the orthodox faith handed down from the begining of the christianity

You're reading massively into the fact that Jesus chose men as Apostles. Actually it only makes sense that he would choose men, because of the incredibly sexist culture in which they lived. Male Apostles got persecuted enough without having violent sexism to deal with as well.

The orthodoxy you follow took a good few centuries to develop. I don't trust the traditions of man when they add to or contradict the very words of Christ, none of which contain the idea that women should not or cannot lead men. And even if that's what Paul meant (and I don't think it was), Paul was not Christ, and did not have the authority to add to the laws of God. What happened after Paul was that a bunch of powerful men who were pants-wettingly scared of losing their privilege through the liberating force of the true gospel read things into the Bible that excused their pursuit of power. Sexism was only one example of that.

 

[Rhamiel]

Except that Junias was an apostle, and, contrary to custom in NT times, Jesus allowed women to join Him as trainee disciples. And when Paul mentions women as well as men as fellow workers we can reasonably assume they had positions of some note within the new community.

John
NZ

it is not clear if Junias was an apostle or just a very well respected christian woman
the 12 Apostles were all men, even when Jesus had followers like Mary Magdaleen and other women He could have choosen

 

[SOLDIER ❤]

I believe it is possible for a woman to be a pastor and a teacher only and only when there is no capable male to handle this position.

Also this is for those who are within the faith I mean it might seem crude and rude and all for some people to read this, but...The bible speaks of the man as being the head so he is the leader, but the bible also mentions the female as something special of value that is so precious and fine that must be delicate so...yeah your the head, but you must handle me with care. So it's not to say that ladies are shunned or to be completely stepped on, but we must realize that just as Jesus is the head of our lives he has made the man the head so we must follow, but the man must also love us with care. What this have to do with the thread? ummm. Sorry it just shifted that way in my response sowwy. hehe.

 

[Johnnz]

it is not clear if Junias was an apostle or just a very well respected christian woman
the 12 Apostles were all men, even when Jesus had followers like Mary Magdaleen and other women He could have choosen

Nor is it clear that she was more than just a respected woman. Looking at the NT church women obviously played significant roles within the new community of believers, which would be consistent with Jesus' anti-cultural practice of including women in his troupe.

Jesus chose the apostles under the old covenant. The NT church is established under a new and better covenant, that signals the return to Edenic creation, where we see only equality. Whereas the 12 had special significance we cannot overlook the much larger group Jesus commissioned to preach and cast out demons, which happened under the old covenant as a signal that many things were about to change.

John
NZ

 

[Rhamiel]

You're reading massively into the fact that Jesus chose men as Apostles. Actually it only makes sense that he would choose men, because of the incredibly sexist culture in which they lived. Male Apostles got persecuted enough without having violent sexism to deal with as well.

The orthodoxy you follow took a good few centuries to develop. I don't trust the traditions of man when they add to or contradict the very words of Christ, none of which contain the idea that women should not or cannot lead men. And even if that's what Paul meant (and I don't think it was), Paul was not Christ, and did not have the authority to add to the laws of God. What happened after Paul was that a bunch of powerful men who were pants-wettingly scared of losing their privilege through the liberating force of the true gospel read things into the Bible that excused their pursuit of power. Sexism was only one example of that.

Jesus did not bow to the culture of the time
1 of the 12 apostles did not die for the faith, John, he was exiled to an island...
yeah being all men really helped them
and Jesus said that the servant is not greater then the master, He knew that they would be persecuted

all this talk of men being scared of women in authority
is everything just a power play to you?
do you not think that the Holy Spirit leads christians?

 

[MacFall]

Jesus chose the apostles under the old covenant. The NT church is established under a new and better covenant, that signals the return to Edenic creation, where we see only equality.

Now that's a good point that I don't see made often.

Man ruling over woman was a prediction of the results of sin; not an establishment of divine order. So Christ comes to renew the world of sin... yet he endorses the rule of men over woman? That stinks of fallacy.

 

[MacFall]

Jesus did not bow to the culture of the time
1 of the 12 apostles did not die for the faith, John, he was exiled to an island...
yeah being all men really helped them
and Jesus said that the servant is not greater then the master, He knew that they would be persecuted

And their persecution may have been prematurely fatal if they had been women who dared to rise above their culturally-mandated servility.

My point is, Jesus never said that women shouldn't lead. You're reading that into scripture, or otherwise following the lead of someone else who did, who followed the lead of someone else who did, back through centuries of "tradition". And I severely question the motives of the people who founded that tradition.

all this talk of men being scared of women in authority

You mean like what we're seeing in this thread right now by people (specifically, men) who are saying that it isn't right for men to be lead by women?

is everything just a power play to you?

No, but it's a pretty good bet that for those who seek power, that their actions are power plays. Libido dominandi is just as strong and all-consuming as any other lust. And there can be no doubt that many of the people who shaped the structure of the church a few centuries in were privileged by power.

 

[Rhamiel]

MacFall

You mean like what we're seeing in this thread right now by people (specifically, men) who are saying that it isn't right for men to be lead by women?

it is not just men who think this, go to the first page of this thread, many of the people who think this way are women