Women's pastors?

[Bluelion]

Yeah you know what there were slaves for thousands of years, slaves today, and Paul said Slave obey your masters. Are you now going to argue slavery is biblical like they did in the South of America?

 

[tulipbee]

Yeah you know what there were slaves for thousands of years, slaves today, and Paul said Slave obey your masters. Are you now going to argue slavery is biblical like they did in the South of America?

Paul said serve two masters at the same time?

 

[abacabb3]

as far as I know an Apostle is the highest it goes, if that is not an elder what is?


edit wait correction Son and daughter of God is as high as it goes

An APostle is someone who saw the resurrected Christ (1 Cor 9:1). It just does not address the issue whether someone is a governing authority. There were Apostles that were elders. For example, Peter refers to himself as "a fellow elder." Yet, in Acts 15 Elders and Apostles are referred as two separate peoples. So, this means not every APostle was an elder.

Being an APostle is an honor, but not one still bestowed today and with it does not necessarily come governing authority. 500 people witnessed the resurrected Christ, but not all 500 went on to govern churches.

 

[abacabb3]

Paul said serve two masters at the same time?

Yes. We are to honor the king, but give to God what is God's. You are taking "Serving God and mammon" out of context.

 

[tulipbee]

If a person is "among the trees", does that make them a tree?

Makes 'em water that feeds the trees.

 

[Bluelion]

Paul said serve two masters at the same time?

No he didn't I can explain what Paul was saying. He was saying don't resist evil but do good to all who do evil. That is how you conquer evil and turn souls to Christ.

Eph 6
5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. 6 Try to please them all the time, not just when they are watching you. As slaves of Christ, do the will of God with all your heart. 7 Work with enthusiasm, as though you were working for the Lord rather than for people. 8 Remember that the Lord will reward each one of us for the good we do, whether we are slaves or free.

9 Masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Don’t threaten them; remember, you both have the same Master in heaven, and he has no favorites.

 

[Bluelion]

Yes. We are to honor the king, but give to God what is God's. You are taking "Serving God and mammon" out of context.

For you can not serve two masters either you will love one and hate the other or you will serve one and not the other, man can not serve both money and God.

 

[Bluelion]

An APostle is someone who saw the resurrected Christ (1 Cor 9:1). It just does not address the issue whether someone is a governing authority. There were Apostles that were elders. For example, Peter refers to himself as "a fellow elder." Yet, in Acts 15 Elders and Apostles are referred as two separate peoples. So, this means not every APostle was an elder.

Being an APostle is an honor, but not one still bestowed today and with it does not necessarily come governing authority. 500 people witnessed the resurrected Christ, but not all 500 went on to govern churches.

first are apostles,
second are prophets,
third are teachers,
then those who do miracles,
those who have the gift of healing,
those who can help others,
those who have the gift of leadership,
those who speak in unknown languages.

 

[abacabb3]

Yes...and where in that does it say APostles are by necessity elders?

(BTW I quoted 1 Cor 12:28-29 first in this thread )

 

[abacabb3]

For you can not serve two masters either you will love one and hate the other or you will serve one and not the other, man can not serve both money and God.

Yes, but we cannot use this verse as justification as to why we don't need to honor our parents, because that would be serving two masters...

 

[Bluelion]

Yes...and where in that does it say APostles are by necessity elders?

(BTW I quoted 1 Cor 12:28-29 first in this thread )

elders is not list at all in Paul's description of the church, why is that? Maybe it is because elders is a Jewish term that come straight out of the synagogues and temple and carried over to the Christian church, which later became what the Catholic church is today. In Baptist you could say a pastor is an elder of the church because churches are independent and it does not go higher than him except for the board. So tell me which elders are we speaking of and what church, what is a modern elder?

 

[Bluelion]

Yes, but we cannot use this verse as justification as to why we don't need to honor our parents, because that would be serving two masters...

the fact you said that shows you lack understanding.

 

[abacabb3]

the fact you said that shows you lack understanding.

What are you even talking about? Maybe you need sleep.

 

[Metal Minister]

Originally Posted by Metal Minister

Metal,

I've been down that road more times than I care to remember.

Junia and Romans 16:7

This verse reads: “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me” (ESV). The NIV translates as: “Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.” These two different translations show some of the dimensions of the difficulties in translating this verse.

Literally, the Greek reads (English translation): “Greet Andronicus and Junia/the kinsmen of me and fellow-captives of me who are notable among/in/by the apostles who also before me have been in Christ.”

The controversy surrounds the gender of Junia, relating to the phrase, “among the apostles.” If Junia is feminine and she is among the apostles, this makes her a female apostle.

This is a brief examination of these 3 points.

a. The gender of Junia.

The Greek form, Jounian (from Junias), depending on the Greek accent given to it, could be either masculine or feminine. So the person could be a man, Junianus, or a woman, Junia. “Interpreters from the thirteenth to the middle of the twentieth century generally favored the masculine identification, but it appears that commentators before the thirteenth century were unanimous in favor of the feminine identification; and scholars have recently again inclined decisively to this same view. And for probably good reason.... The Latin ‘Junia’ was a very common name. Probably, then, ‘Junia’ was the wife of Andronicus (note the other husband and wife pairs in this list, Prisca and Aquila [v. 3] and [probably], Philologus and Julia [v. 15]”.[1]

b. Is Junia a female apostle

The phrase “esteemed/notable by the apostles” is a possible Greek construction as in the ESV.[2] But it is more natural to translate as “esteemed/notable among the apostles,” as with the NIV.
Why is it more natural? See this footnote.[3]

Andronicus and Junia were possibly a husband and wife team of apostles.[4]

c. Junia is therefore a female apostle.

This means that Junia was a female apostle, not one of the Twelve, but one of the ministry gifts of Christ to the church (See Eph. 4:11) – an apostle who was a woman.

Notes
[1] Douglas G. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (The New International Commentary on the New Testament). Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996, pp. 921-922.
[2] This is using the preposition, ev, in its instrumental sense.
[3] With a plural object [apostles], ev often means ‘among’; and if Paul had wanted to say that Andronicus and Junia were esteemed ‘by’ the apostles, we would have expected him to use a simple dative [case] or [the preposition] hupo with the genitive [case]. The word epistemoi (‘splendid,’ ‘prominent,’ ‘outstanding’; only here in the NT in this sense [cf. also Matt. 27:16]) also favors this rendering” (Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, p. 923, n. 39,).
[4] Gordon Fee says that that Rom. 16:7 refers to “probably Andronicus and his wife [Junia]” (I Corinthians, 1987, Eerdmans, p. 729, n. 80).

I'm not holding my breath waiting for positive feedback from those supporting a traditionalist interpretation.

Regards,
Oz

So again, it appears there is a "controversy" only when one wants to look at verses like 1 Timothy 2, etc, in a way as to ignore it's prohibition on women in church authority. Otherwise, it's just fine to leave it as is. All we have is speculation.
Now, let us, for the sake of argument, say Junia was a female apostle. This does not mean she had authority in the church. Remember, Paul mentions her in conjunction with her husband, denoting her submission to him. If we look at the verses in the light of a woman who is submitting to her husband, then nothing changes. We have a woman, either as an apostle, or an apostle, who had a gift of ministry. Missionaries have the gift of ministry. Comforters of the sick and those who've recently lost loved ones, is a ministry in the church. Teaching children and other women, is a ministry in the church. Deacons (or deaconesses) have the ministry of helping within the church, yet hold no authority.
Now this all ignores that in Jewish culture at this time, women were always listed under their husbands in greetings, but that's a little beside the point right now. So you see, you've jumped to a conclusion not supported by the facts at hand. You assume that because she might be a female apostle, she somehow had authority in the church. However, now we must start ignoring the plain words of other scriptures, and must now start trying to twist them to fit the hermeneutic you've just invented, based on a current sociopolitical view.

 

[abacabb3]

So you see, you've jumped to a conclusion not supported by the facts at hand. You assume that because she might be a female apostle, she somehow had authority in the church. However, now we must start ignoring the plain words of other scriptures, and must now start trying to twist them to fit the hermeneutic you've just invented, based on a current sociopolitical view.

 

[tulipbee]

Yes...and where in that does it say APostles are by necessity elders?

(BTW I quoted 1 Cor 12:28-29 first in this thread )

This reminds me over the trouble of apostolic successions.
Written in my heart, I discovered the three people get together and votes whom to lead. Then the new leader leads the other two and plants a church.

My pastor was ordained by his or her pastor don't work for me. Successions could been broken. A new church plant can be started with just 3 elders, man or female.

Catholicism can turn into protestantism and still be the church.

 

[abacabb3]

I think we are getting besides the point, my understanding is that the right way to do things is to be given the right hand of fellowship and ordained an elder. Just a random guy and his Bible should start a Church.

 

[tulipbee]

I think we are getting besides the point, my understanding is that the right way to do things is to be given the right hand of fellowship and ordained an elder. Just a random guy and his Bible should start a Church.

And with a broken apostlic succession, what would be the right way?

Who can ordain?

 

[abacabb3]

And with a broken apostlic succession, what would be the right way?

Who can ordain?

That's a tough question, and I don't have a perfect answer to it. My best understanding is that if someone known the Gospel and there is legitimately no one he can turn to to be ordained to preach it, then he may go and preach it. This is not normative and very rare.

 

[twin1954]

Originally Posted by twin1954

This is an inflammatory statement. You are flaming me.

This biographical piece, ‘Founders William & Catherine Booth’, refutes your view. Since William and Catherine Booth were not Calvinists, does that make their views heretical?

I’m not a Calvinist. Does that make my views heretical? Do I not worship the God of the Bible because my theological conclusion is not that of your Calvinism?

Are you telling all those who are not Calvinists, including all the non-Calvinists on CF, that they are not worshipping the God of the Bible and are thus heretics?


This also is flaming others and me. When will you quit doing this?

Oz

First, you may draw whatever conclusions you wish for you will anyway. Second, I think someone needs to grow a little skin. It seems a little thin. Third, have I become your enemy because I speak the truth? What does that say about both of us?