Female Deacons

[Larry Smart]

Since the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message (BFM) the convention added to paragraph VI that "the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture." I can only speculate as to why the convention needed to make this addition. I feel that now is the time to add the office of deacons is limited to men as qualified by Scripture. I base this on 1Timothy 3:10-12.

The reason I bring this up is because one of our local SBC church has female deacons and I feel this is wrong. I am curious how other Baptist men and women feel about this and would be interested in any Scripture canceling out what we know from the above verses.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

Since the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message (BFM) the convention added to paragraph VI that "the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture." I can only speculate as to why the convention needed to make this addition. I feel that now is the time to add the office of deacons is limited to men as qualified by Scripture. I base this on 1Timothy 3:10-12.

The reason I bring this up is because one of our local SBC church has female deacons and I feel this is wrong. I am curious how other Baptist men and women feel about this and would be interested in any Scripture canceling out what we know from the above verses.

It's a good time to enforce it because, regardless of what scripture maintains, the feminist-minded just flat out ignore or dismiss such and justify them with specious reasoning.
I've always found it troublesome that a women, knowing what the Bible maintains, still reaches for the pulpit.

 

[Poor Beggar]

My thoughts:
They can be in leadership roles. Romans 16:1-2
They cannot teach over the assembly. 1 Tim 2:13-14, 1 Cor. 14:40
Why can they be in leadership? It allows them to be equal in worth. Gen. 2:23
Many of today's church scandals would probably be avoided if women oversaw women and men oversaw men. Women would also get more realistic advice. Titus 2:4
Chloe was the spiritual leader of her home and Paul trusted her as a reliable source. 1 Cor. 1:11
Lydia and nympha were both the heads of their households and would have taught when Paul and Silas weren't present. Acts 16:14-15, col. 4:15
If there had been a male teacher living in the home I believe Paul would be greeted him.
Priscilla was an icon and taught a man outside the congregation. Acts 18:18,26
Paul greets many women providing instrumental roles in the early church. Romans 16:1-16
However, women can not be pastors. 1 Tim. 2:9-12
This keeps with the divine order of accountability. Ephesians 5:21-33
Men have been assigned the role of ultimate headship. 1 Cor. 11:3
Women may not have been pastors, but they have words of instruction in the church. 1 Cor. 14:26. Thus is similar to miriam, deborah, and hulda in the OT and anna in the NT. The four daughters of philip prophesied as well. They simply didn't teach in an official capacity over the assembly.
The church is used to teach truth to the world through its example. Eph. 3:10

 

[Poor Beggar]

Also, we spiritualize 2 John 1, but I've never seen a real good reason offered. That verse really suggests a woman in s leadership role.

 

[Larry Smart]

Also, we spiritualize 2 John 1, but I've never seen a real good reason offered. That verse really suggests a woman in s leadership role.

Thank you both for your input. Poor Begger, am I correct that you see the female servants equal to the position of deacon? I also think women can serve as leaders in the church when it comes to teaching women and children

 

[Bluelion]

here we go again. Let me ask you a question, if you believe women can not hold authority over men in church then why do you say its ok in the world though? Are there two sets of standards one we live by in church and one in the world? Are we not to conduct our self the same way in the world as we would in church? So why do you say ok women can lead just not in church over men but any where else over a man is ok. Do not see how hypocritical that is?

 

[HondaMan]

So why do you say ok women can lead just not in church over men but any where else over a man is ok. Do not see how hypocritical that is?

Paul said women cannot preach in the church, but they can serve in other ways. Wanna be upset at someone? Be upset at Paul. He wrote those letters. Better yet, he was influenced by God.

 

[Poor Beggar]

Thank you both for your input. Poor Begger, am I correct that you see the female servants equal to the position of deacon? I also think women can serve as leaders in the church when it comes to teaching women and children

Yeah, the word for deacon (can't remember it right now) simply means servant, so it's a leader who is a trusted servant. Most of the stuff I read way back about the early church seemed to suggest that women deacons oversaw women and children and men oversaw men. Only the head teacher oversaw the whole church and was male--someone we would refer to as a pastor. This also seems to reflect what I see in the NT writings. What I don't find in the writings is sidelining women into "easy" sub-management type roles and assigning men with all the "important" tasks, which is what sort of happens in a lot of churches.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

Thank you both for your input. Poor Begger, am I correct that you see the female servants equal to the position of deacon? I also think women can serve as leaders in the church when it comes to teaching women and children

Women teaching women and children is a common thing. I attended a very traditional Baptist church and the women sung, had exclusive Bible studies among each other, and pertained to the children.
But when it comes to the main sanctuary, it is only men at the pulpit. Because everyone knows what the Bible, or more specifically Paul, teaches.

Speaking of Paul, it seems like drastic changes in churches are often due in trivializing or dismissing what Paul states. I've noticed this a whole lot with many things, treated almost like he's a second rate apostle as they take the others by every word.

 

[Larry Smart]

here we go again. Let me ask you a question, if you believe women can not hold authority over men in church then why do you say its ok in the world though? Are there two sets of standards one we live by in church and one in the world? Are we not to conduct our self the same way in the world as we would in church? So why do you say ok women can lead just not in church over men but any where else over a man is ok. Do not see how hypocritical that is?

Hello Bluelion - I'm not good at apologetics, but just trying to learn. It sounds as if I brought up a subject that has already been hammered out. If that is the case, I apologize. Not being as versed as I should be, I will try answering your questions.
The reason I believe it's not okay to have women deacons, but okay for female leaders in the world is because the church covers spiritual issues and the world can covers worldly issues. There are different standards based on spiritually vs. worldly. Yes, we are to conduct ourselves as Christians in the world. I do not see this as hypocritical at all. I see it as scriptural. Again, I'm not seeking debates, but just information as that posted by Poor Beggar. I don't agree with all the things that he posted. But, that is how he views them and I appreciate his post. Thank you for your response and have a blessed day!

 

[Albion]

Yeah, the word for deacon (can't remember it right now) simply means servant, so it's a leader who is a trusted servant. Most of the stuff I read way back about the early church seemed to suggest that women deacons oversaw women and children and men oversaw men. Only the head teacher oversaw the whole church and was male--someone we would refer to as a pastor. This also seems to reflect what I see in the NT writings. What I don't find in the writings is sidelining women into "easy" sub-management type roles and assigning men with all the "important" tasks, which is what sort of happens in a lot of churches.

FWIW, Church history shows that male deacons and female "deaconesses" (the usual term) had quite different responsibilities, even though the root word just means (as noted already) a "servant."

Male Deacons are considered to be clergy in the older Christian churches, but many of these churches do also have Deaconesses. The latter are never considered to be clergy or to have been ordained. The administrative structure is different in Baptist churches, but the point here is about the historic role of each of these...and it's not the case that they ever were considered to be the same or even very similar, despite the term (diaconos).

 

[Poor Beggar]

Women teaching women and children is a common thing. I attended a very traditional Baptist church and the women sung, had exclusive Bible studies among each other, and pertained to the children.
But when it comes to the main sanctuary, it is only men at the pulpit. Because everyone knows what the Bible, or more specifically Paul, teaches.

Speaking of Paul, it seems like drastic changes in churches are often due in trivializing or dismissing what Paul states. I've noticed this a whole lot with many things, treated almost like he's a second rate apostle as they take the others by every word.

Yep. Peter warned us that Paul's teachings are very deep. How easily people can accept his teachings is a sign of their spiritual maturity in my opinion.

 

[Goodbook]

In my baptist church women can be elders if they are its usually along with their husbands.

The men teach the men and the women teach the women. This is how it ought to be. Not that women cant teach men and men cant teach women...we do learn together. But we cant be authoritative over each other in certain aspects of gender simply cos we not alike.

For example a man cannot teach a woman how to be feminine. They just cannot! Like wise a woman cannot teach a man how to be a man, as we mostly learn by example. Hope this makes sense.

As for being in pulpit. Its generally considered that in formal church settings the men speak. Not that women cant get up and speak, but we only do so if invited. This is to preserve order in the church and also cos males have the protective role. Which adam failed to do when he listened to Eve.

 

[Poor Beggar]

In my baptist church women can be elders if they are its usually along with their husbands.

The men teach the men and the women teach the women. This is how it ought to be. Not that women cant teach men and men cant teach women...we do learn together. But we cant be authoritative over each other in certain aspects of gender simply cos we not alike.

For example a man cannot teach a woman how to be feminine. They just cannot! Like wise a woman can it each a man how to be a man, as we mostly learn by example. Hope this makes sense.

As for being in pulpit. Its generally considered that in formal church settings the men speak. Not that women cant get up and speak, but we only do so if invited. This is to preserve order in the church and also cos males have the protective role. Which adam failed to do when he listened to Eve.

I agree with this. Where's your church?

 

[Goodbook]

Its in new zealand, so I supoose the sbc rules and guidelines dont apply here. We generally follow the Bible and Gods leading on all matters.

 

[classicalhero]

The passage in Romans where we are told that Phoebe was a servant is also used in chapter 13 to describe the government. I highly doubt tha paul would be saying that the government is doing the work we should be doing.

 

[Poor Beggar]

The passage in Romans where we are told that Phoebe was a servant is also used in chapter 13 to describe the government. I highly doubt tha paul would be saying that the government is doing the work we should be doing.

But it's used to describe the government serving. In chapter 16 it describes Phebe serving. So Phebe is a servant, which is a deacon. The context shows she's not just any servant. She's important and being commended by Paul. People are told to help her. That's a deaconness.

 

[Poor Beggar]

The passage in Romans where we are told that Phoebe was a servant is also used in chapter 13 to describe the government. I highly doubt tha paul would be saying that the government is doing the work we should be doing.

i.e., each passage has its own obvious context.

 

[Bluelion]

Paul said women cannot preach in the church, but they can serve in other ways. Wanna be upset at someone? Be upset at Paul. He wrote those letters. Better yet, he was influenced by God.

that's not what Paul said and if your going to quote someone to make a point how about posting chapter verse and the quote. The fact is it is hypocritical and God is not a hypocrite.

 

[Bluelion]

Hello Bluelion - I'm not good at apologetics, but just trying to learn. It sounds as if I brought up a subject that has already been hammered out. If that is the case, I apologize. Not being as versed as I should be, I will try answering your questions.
The reason I believe it's not okay to have women deacons, but okay for female leaders in the world is because the church covers spiritual issues and the world can covers worldly issues. There are different standards based on spiritually vs. worldly. Yes, we are to conduct ourselves as Christians in the world. I do not see this as hypocritical at all. I see it as scriptural. Again, I'm not seeking debates, but just information as that posted by Poor Beggar. I don't agree with all the things that he posted. But, that is how he views them and I appreciate his post. Thank you for your response and have a blessed day!

Yeah this topic has spark very heated debates its not you, but you will see by the end of the thread what I mean.

Let me ask you is it ok to go out in the world and steal, or commit adultery, or take God's name in vain? why not? you just said there are spiritual things and worldly. If we are children of God we are to follow God not just in church but in the world. So it would be a sin for a Christian woman to lead a man in the world sense she can not do so in church. If your reasoning is woman was deceived but a man not then she can not be a trusted leader any where with men. It's a double standard. Must people quote Paul but what Paul said he did not allow women to usurp authority over men. The world usurp means to act on ones self interest. So what Paul was saying he did not let women minister simply so they could be important in the church for there own reasons. For that matter he did not let men either.

Now I do believe the Man is the head of the family as the bible states. There certainly are roles with in the family father, mother, children is the order. but if God appoints a woman who are to tell her no, such as he did with Deborah. Deborah was more than a pastor she was a judge appointed by God and yes she did lead men. So you see God does appoint women. The fact you can not even see a double standard with your stance shows a problem, how can we move past that point when you don't see the flaws in your argument?