Women Can't Preach

[FaithGraceGirl]

How hard is it for people to understand? If they completely disregard this scripture then what's stoping them from doing the same to the whole Bible?

(33b.) As in all the worshipping assemblies of the saints,

(34.) let the women keep silent in your worshipping assemblies; for it is not turned over to [or allowed] them to speak; on the contrary, let them go on subordinating themselves, as also the law says. (1 Corinthians 14:33b-38 ).

 

[Cactus Jack]

I refuse to attend a church where a woman is preaching. It is not their place.

 

[cubanito]

A woman may preach to other women. She may "preach" in the sense of evangelizing or lecturing. What she may not do is: 1- hold an authoritative position over a man in Church, 2- officially teach in Church and 3- dispute openly if she has a husband or Father to do it for her.

Now, in the Bible Priscilla TOGETHER WITH Aquila her husband, helped correct Apollos in Acts 18:24. I know a very intellectually gifted lady at Church who are married to a man that, while Godly, because of age is somewhat slow in intellect. With their husband by her side, she accomplishes much good. It is because she is visibly subordinate to him that she can then be effective.

If a woman speaker is brought to speak to some issue, not during the worship, not as the sermon, but as some sort of in addition detached program, sure. She is not holding an authoritative position, it is not part of the formal worship.

JR

JR

 

[tturt]

What about the perspective that that Scripture was written to one church where the women were talking out loud during the services?

Of course women should learn in quietness - it's hard to learn when you're talking.

 

[If Not For Grace]

At age 17 she knows more than Joyce Meyer, I'm impressed...

 

[cubanito]

What about the perspective that that Scripture was written to one church where the women were talking out loud during the services?

Of course women should learn in quietness - it's hard to learn when you're talking.

1- Qualifications for Elders and Deacons are stated flatly as "Husband of one wife." While we may quibble as to whether this was to exclude polygamists (which was legal then, and still in much of the world), or divorced, it is eminently clear it excludes women. Homosexual marriage is a novel invention of the 21st century.

2- In addition, the reason given is not that there was disruption, but that "Adam was created first" and that "Eve was deceived and so fell into sin" as opposed to Adam who rebelled openly (God had only commanded Adam to not eat from the tree, There is no record of God commanding Eve before the fall to do other than "Be fruitful and multiply" which she clearly obeyed. This is why JC had to be born of a virgin. It was Adam, not Eve, through whom sin entered the world.

3- Lastly we have the historical record. Anytime women have been allowed to preach, the entire denomination is already messed up. It happens AFTER they give up Biblical inerrancy, and active unrepentant homosexual acceptance, abortion and all the other "accomodations" follow. We also have the fact that no Godly woman in the entire Bible EVER leads. Deborah did not lead, she judged. From the NASB:

Judges 4:4 Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time. 5 She used to sit under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim; and the sons of Israel came up to her for judgment. 6 Now she sent and summoned Barak the son of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali, and said to him, “Behold, the Lord, the God of Israel, has commanded, ‘Go and march to Mount Tabor, and take with you ten thousand men from the sons of Naphtali and from the sons of Zebulun. 7 I will draw out to you Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his [d]many troops to the river Kishon, and I will give him into your hand.’” 8 Then Barak said to her, “If you will go with me, then I will go; but if you will not go with me, I will not go.” 9 She said, “I will surely go with you; nevertheless, the honor shall not be yours on the journey that you are about to take, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hands of a woman.” Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh. 10 Barak called Zebulun and Naphtali together to Kedesh, and ten thousand men went up [e]with him; Deborah also went up with him.

Note that again: "the Lord, the God of Israel, has commanded," not I Deborah. She was a prophetess, which role IS Biblical for women. A prophet might be a leader, such as Moses, but more often they advice leaders, like Samuel did Saul, Nathan David and so on.

This is one of the reason I hate the NIV. Deborah JUDGED, she did not lead. Because Barak refused to lead alone, she followed him. Even so, her being a judge was not ideal. This was a chotic time where the recurring phrase "every man did what was right in his own eyes" shows that.

When there is not a person willing to do as God says, others get drafted. It was Adam's place to contest with the serpent, but he stood back passively, waiting to see if his wife would die. When JC is asked to quiet those welcoming Him to Jerusalem, JC states that if there were no people to praise His entrance, the very rocks would come alive to do it.

Deborah is an example of something very frequent today. Men escape their responsibilities at home and Church into football or whatever. A void is created. Sometimes women are pulled into that void, but as Deborah illustrates, it is NOT the ideal situation. It becomes an occasion to mock men for their cowardice and passivity, and their honor is taken away.

If a woman is leading and preaching to men in the Church, for sure something is very wrong. It may be the woman's fault, but more often it is the men at fault. In either case, it is not right.

 

[Ezra915]

Well stated, Cubanito. I was going to jump in on this, but you hit all the points!

 

[iamauthentic]

this is an encouraging thread. so much biblical sound doctrine being spread. i pray it stays this way.

 

[DeaconDean]

I will only add this tid-bit.

Yes, women cannot be the spiritual leaders (bishops/elders/pastors) of a church.

But, that does not mean a woman cannot evangelize.

There is an incident in John 4 where Jesus used a woman at a well to evangelize a whole town. And a Gentile woman at that!

"Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?" -Jn. 4:29 (KJV)

Just food for thought.

I will now gracefully bow out.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[WOFFED]

Our desire is to become one with Yeshua as our worldy tent (whether female or male)
becomes less relevant as we tabernacle with Yeshua.​

Luke 17:21 (CJB)
nor will people be able to say, ‘Look! Here it is!’ or, ‘Over there!’ Because, you see, the Kingdom of God is among you.”

Gospel of Thomas verse 113 (Lambdim translation)
His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?"
<Jesus said,> "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is'. Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it."

1 Corinthains 12:13 (CJB)
For it was by one Spirit that we were all immersed into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, slaves or free; and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

Galations 3:28 (CJB)
there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor freeman, neither male nor female; for in union with the Messiah Yeshua, you are all one.

Gospel of Thomas, verse 22 (Lambdin translation)
Jesus said to them, "When you make two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and female one and the same, so that the male not me male nor the female female; and when you fashion eyes in the place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in place of a foot, and a likeness in place of a likeness; then will you enter the kingdom."

 

[cubanito]

Gospel of Thomas is pseudoepigraphy written long after Thomas was dead and does not belong next to Scripture.

JR

 

[cubanito]

I will only add this tid-bit.

Yes, women cannot be the spiritual leaders (bishops/elders/pastors) of a church.

But, that does not mean a woman cannot evangelize.

There is an incident in John 4 where Jesus used a woman at a well to evangelize a whole town. And a Gentile woman at that!

"Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?" -Jn. 4:29 (KJV)

Just food for thought.

I will now gracefully bow out.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Well said and mostly correct (she was Samaritan, not fully Gentile). There is a balance here, and we are not Muslims. Still, I would caution against a man PRIVATELY evangelizing a woman or vice versa. Such intense emotional situations can easily lead to sexual temptation. Our Lord was incapable of sin, and He spoke to her in a public area.

Notice that the Scriptures command for women to be taught, which was radical at that time. Women are in no way inferior to men before Christ, as JC is in no way inferior to the Father. Yet there is an order, even in the Trinity, and women are to be in subjection to men in this world if for no other reason than God says so.

Women were the last to desert JC at the cross, except for John. He appeared first to women. There is no demeaning of women here. There is, however, a proper order to follow. Women are not to usurp the authority that God set up. I am here not suggesting by any means that a woman must remain in a physically abusive relationship.

JR

JR

 

[a Truster]

I will only add this tid-bit.

Yes, women cannot be the spiritual leaders (bishops/elders/pastors) of a church.

But, that does not mean a woman cannot evangelize.

There is an incident in John 4 where Jesus used a woman at a well to evangelize a whole town. And a Gentile woman at that!

"Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?" -Jn. 4:29 (KJV)

Just food for thought.

I will now gracefully bow out.

God Bless

Till all are one.

If you read on to verse 42 you'll find that they said to the woman, '' Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Messiah, the saviour of the world''.

Blessings, H.

 

[If Not For Grace]

Just finish the passage the OP quoted

v16

16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

 

[BluesLamb]

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

It's important to distinguish that Paul meant there was no male nor female under a specific circumstance, and church leadership does not qualify along with many other aspects of daily life. Households, work, etc.

 

[a Truster]

That verse from Galatians is used in relation to salvation and that is all. It simply means that in justification and repentance all are equal who are under grace. It does not mean all are equal in any other way.

 

[Faith.Man]

What about the perspective that that Scripture was written to one church where the women were talking out loud during the services?

Of course women should learn in quietness - it's hard to learn when you're talking.

I agree with you. That is the proper interpretation. I would add that there is an over abundance of bad male teaching in the "church" today.

 

[Faith.Man]

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

It's important to distinguish that Paul meant there was no male nor female under a specific circumstance, and church leadership does not qualify along with many other aspects of daily life. Households, work, etc.

I believe Barnes' Notes on the Bible agrees with you. I quote it below:

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

There is neither Jew nor Greek - All are on a level; all are saved in the same way; all are entitled to the same privileges. There is no favoritism on account of birth, beauty, or blood. All confess that they are sinners; all are saved by the merits of the same Saviour; all are admitted to the same privileges as children of God. The word "Greek" here is used to denote the Gentiles generally; since the whole world was divided by the Jews into "Jews and Greeks" - the Greeks being the foreign nation best known to them. The Syriac renders it here "Aramean," using the word to denote the Gentiles generally. The meaning is, that whatever was the birth, or rank, or nation, or color, or complexion, all under the gospel were on a level. They were admitted to the same privileges, and endowed with the same hopes of eternal life. This does not mean that all the civil distinctions among people are to be disregarded.

It does not mean that no respect is to be shown to those in office, or to people in elevated rank. It does not mean that all are on a level in regard to talents, comforts, or wealth; but it means only that all people are on a level "in regard to religion." This is the sole point under discussion; and the interpretation should be limited to this. It is not a fact that people are on a level in all things, nor is it a fact that the gospel designs to break down all the distinctions of society. Paul means to teach that no man has any preference or advantage in the kingdom of God because he is a rich man, or because he is of elevated rank; no one is under any disadvantage because he is poor, or because he is ignorant, or a slave. All at the foot of the cross are sinners; all at the communion table are saved by the same grace; all who enter into heaven, will enter clothed in the same robes of salvation, and arranged, not as princes and nobles, and rich men and poor men, in separate orders and ranks, but mingling together as redeemed by the same blood, and arranged in ranks according to their eminence in holiness; compare my notes at Isaiah 56:8.

There is neither bond nor free - The condition of a free man does not give him any special claims or advantages in regard to religion; and the condition of a slave does not exclude him from the hope of heaven, or from being regarded as a child of God, on the same terms, and entitled to the same privileges as his master. In regard to religion, they are on the same level. They are alike sinners, and are alike saved by grace. They sit down at the same communion table; and they look forward to the same heaven. Christianity does not admit the one to favor because he is free, or exclude the other because he is a slave. Nor, when they are admitted to favor, does it give the one a right to lord it over the other, or to feel that he is of any more value in the eye of the Redeemer, or any nearer to his heart. The essential idea is, that they are on a level, and that they are admitted to the favor of God without respect to their external condition in society. I do not see any evidence in this passage that the Christian religion designed to abolish slavery, any more than I do in the following phrase, "there is neither male nor female," that it was intended to abolish the distinction of the sexes; nor do I see in this passage any evidence that there should not be proper respect shown by the servant to his master, though both of them are Christians, any more than there is in the following phrase, that suitable respect should not be shown in the contact with the sexes; compare 1 Timothy 6:1-5. But the proof is explicit, that masters and slaves may alike become Christians on the same terms, and are, in regard to their religious privileges and hopes, on a level. No special favor is shown to the one, in the matter of salvation, because he is free, nor is the other excluded because he is a slave. And from this it follows:

(1) That they should sit down to the same communion table. There should be no invidious and odious distinctions there.

(2) they should be regarded alike as Christian brethren in the house of God, and should be addressed and treated accordingly.

(3) the slave should excite the interest, and receive the watchful care of the pastor, as well as his master. Indeed, he may need it more; and from his ignorance, and the fewness of his opportunities, it may be proper that special attention should be bestowed on him.
​

In regard to this doctrine of Christianity, that there is neither "bond nor free" among those who are saved, or that all are on a level in regard to salvation, we may remark further:

(1) That it is unique to Christianity. All other systems of religion and philosophy make different ranks, and endeavor to promote the distinctions of caste among people. They teach that certain people are the favorites of heaven, in virtue of their birth or their rank in life, or that they have special facilities for salvation. Thus, in India the Brahmin is regarded as, by his birth, the favorite of heaven, and all others are supposed to be of a degraded rank. The great effort of people, in their systems of religion and philosophy, has been to show that there are favored ranks and classes, and to make permanent distinctions on account of birth and blood. Christianity regards all people as made of one blood to dwell on all the face of the earth (see the note at Acts 17:26), and esteems them all to be equal in the matter of salvation; and whatever notions of equality prevail in the world are to be traced to the influence of the Christian religion.

(2) if people are regarded as equal before God, and as entitled to the same privileges of salvation; if there is in the great work of redemption "neither bond nor free," and those who are in the Church are on a level, then such a view will induce a master to treat his slave with kindness, when that relation exists. The master who has any right feelings, will regard his servant as a Christian brother, redeemed by the same blood as himself, and destined to the same heaven. He will esteem him not as "a chattel" or "a thing," or as a piece "of property," but he will regard him as an immortal being, destined with himself to the same heaven, and about to sit down with him in the realms of glory. How can he treat such a brother with unkindness or severity? How can he rise from the same communion table with him, and give way to violent feelings against him, and regard him and treat him as if he were a brute? And Christianity, by the same principle that "the slave is a brother in the Lord," will do more to mitigate the horrors of slavery, than all the enactments that people can make, and all the other views and doctrines which can be made to prevail in society; see Plm 1:16.

(3) this doctrine would lead to universal emancipation. All are on a level before God. In the kingdom of Jesus there is neither bond nor free. One is as much an object of favor as another. With this feeling, how can a Christian hold his fellow Christian in bondage? How can he regard as "a chattel" or "a thing," one who, like himself, is an heir of glory? How can he sell him on whom the blood of Jesus has been sprinkled? Let him feel that his slave is his equal in the sight of God; that with himself he is an heir of glory; that together they are soon to stand on Mount Zion above; that the slave is an immortal being, and has been redeemed by the blood of Calvary, and how can he hold such a being in bondage, and how can he transfer him from place to place and from hand to hand for gold? If all masters and all slaves were to become Christians, slavery would at once cease; and the prevalence of the single principle before us would put an end to all the ways in which man oppresses his fellow-man. Accordingly, it is well known that in about three centuries the influence of Christianity banished slavery from the Roman empire.
​

There is neither male nor female - Neither the male nor the female have any special advantages for salvation. There are no favors shown on account of sex. Both sexes are, in this respect, on a level. This does not mean, of course, that the sexes are to be regarded as in all respects equal; nor can it mean that the two sexes may not have special duties and privileges in other respects. It does not prove that one of the sexes may not perform important offices in the church, which would not be proper for the other. It does not prove that the duties of the ministry are to be performed by the female sex, nor that the various duties of domestic life, nor the various offices of society, should be performed without any reference to the distinction of sex. The interpretation should be confined to the matter under consideration; and the passage proves only that in regard to salvation they are on a level.

One sex is not to be regarded as the special favorite of heaven, and the other to be excluded. Christianity thus elevates the female sex to an equality with the male, on the most important of all interests; and it has in this way made most important changes in the world wherever it has prevailed. Everywhere but in connection with the Christian religion, woman has been degraded. She has been kept in ignorance. She has been treated as an inferior in all respects. She has been doomed to unpitied drudgery, and ignorance, and toil. So she was among the ancient Greeks and Romans; so she is among the savages of America; so she is in China, and India, and in the islands of the sea; so she is regarded in the Koran, and in all Muslim countries. It is Christianity alone which has elevated her; and nowhere on earth does man regard the mother of his children as an intelligent companion and friend, except where the influence of the Christian religion has been felt. At the communion table, at the foot of the cross, and in the hopes of heaven, she is on a level with man; and this fact diffuses a mild, and purifying, and elevating influence over all the relations of life. Woman has been raised from deep degradation by the influence of Christianity; and, let me add, she has everywhere acknowledged the debt of gratitude, and devoted herself, as under a deep sense of obligation, to lessening the burdens of humanity, and to the work of elevating the degraded, instructing the ignorant, and comforting the afflicted, all over the world. Never has a debt been better repaid, or the advantages of elevating one portion of the race been more apparent. For ye are all one in Christ Jesus - You are all equally accepted through the Lord Jesus Christ; or you are all on the same level, and entitled to the same privileges in your Christian profession. Bond and free, male and female, Jew and Greek, are admitted to equal privileges, and are equally acceptable before God. And the church of God, no matter what may be the complexion, the country, the habits, or the rank of its members, is one. Every man, on whom is the image and the blood of Christ, is a brother to every other one who bears that image, and should be treated accordingly. What an influence would be excited in the breaking up of the distinctions of rank and caste among people; what an effect in abolishing the prejudice on account of color and country, if this were universally believed and felt!

 

[motherprayer]

I always find it interesting when Deborah is brought up in defense of women preachers.

Judges 4:9 NKJV So she said, "I will surely go with you; nevertheless there will be no glory for you in the journey you are taking, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman." Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh.

She basically rebuked him for his weakness here, and made it clear that it wasn't God's true desire to have a woman lead.

 

[Faith.Man]

I always find it interesting when Deborah is brought up in defense of women preachers.

Judges 4:9 NKJV So she said, "I will surely go with you; nevertheless there will be no glory for you in the journey you are taking, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman." Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh.

She basically rebuked him for his weakness here, and made it clear that it wasn't God's true desire to have a woman lead.

Judges 4:9

And she said, I will surely go with thee,
She made no hesitation about it, but agreed at once to go with him for his encouragement; perceiving some degree of weakness in him, and yet an hearty and sincere inclination to engage in the work proposed, and that this might be no hinderance, she readily assents to it: adding,


notwithstanding the journey thou takest;
the way or course he steered, the methods he took in insisting on it that she should go with him:

shall not be for thine honour;
as a general of an army, who is commonly solicitous to have the whole glory of an action:

for the Lord shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman;
meaning either herself, for she being judge of Israel, and going along with him, would have the glory of the victory ascribed to her, as usually is to the principal person in the army; and so it would be said in future time, that the Lord delivered Sisera and his army, not into the hand of Barak, but into the hand of Deborah, whereby he would not have all the honour which otherwise he would have, if she went not with him; or else Jael, Heber's wife, is meant, into whose hands Sisera did fall, and by whom he was slain; but this seems to have no connection with Deborah's going or not going with him, it did not depend upon that one way or another; unless it can be thought that thus it was ordered in Providence as a rebuke of his diffidence and weakness,that because he would not go without a woman, Sisera should fall not into his hands, but into the hands of a woman; and if so, this is a clear instance of Deborah's having a spirit of prophecy, and of a prediction of a future contingent event:
and Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh;
that is, they went together from the palm tree between Ramah and Bethel in Mount Ephraim, to Kedesh in Mount Naphtali, in order to raise the ten thousand men that were to fight with Sisera.

From John Gills Commentary on the Whole Bible. In any event, it is Old Testament and we are not bound by its laws, all 600+ of them.