Is prohibiting female church leadership (over men) legalistic?

[~Zao~]

Obviously the Roman Catholic Church is not following scripture. They actually were married until 1139. So a bit late in the game.
Blessings

Do you think that “sin” has been a determining factor of homosexual leaders? Or do you agree that is a fundamental attribution error?

 

[bekkilyn]

I understand. I have no problem with women serving the Lord and scripture does not teach against it. However, when I read the qualifications for an Elder , Pastor , Bishop, it clearly states a man for this position. I am not sure how to change what is written in Timothy to reflect both men and women.
Blessings

Paul is not making a gender statement in this passage, but addressing the behavioral requirements of a Christian leader with respect to the men who needed to hear his message. The women who were kept secluded at home and under the domination of men were not typically the people running around having sex with prostitutes and also youths of the same gender while neglecting their husbands at home. Paul did address women in other parts of scripture, such as dressing modestly and not wearing strands of gold in their hair, etc. and thus addressing a problem more specific to women as he did not want Christian women being mistaken for the professional prostitutes who dressed in that manner. Paul's overall message concerning Christian behavior is that both men and women should stand apart and be distinguished from the world around them in a positive and Godly way. When we turn these verses into statements about gender roles and who should have which jobs at home and in the workplace, we are missing the entire point of Paul's message.

 

[~Zao~]

Paul is not making a gender statement in this passage, but addressing the behavioral requirements of a Christian leader with respect to the men who needed to hear his message. The women who were kept secluded at home and under the domination of men were not typically the people running around having sex with prostitutes and also youths of the same gender while neglecting their husbands at home. Paul did address women in other parts of scripture, such as dressing modestly and not wearing strands of gold in their hair, etc. and thus addressing a problem more specific to women as he did not want Christian women being mistaken for the professional prostitutes who dressed in that manner. Paul's overall message concerning Christian behavior is that both men and women should stand apart and be distinguished from the world around them in a positive and Godly way. When we turn these verses into statements about gender roles and who should have which jobs at home and in the workplace, we are missing the entire point of Paul's message.

Also there is the example of the woman at the well that Christ claimed had 5 husbands. It wasn’t just men. Yet people read so much into what isn’t said instead of what is. Spiritual adultery is the main point.

 

[SkyWriting]

God ordaining that men only can be authorized to be the pastor or elders is NOT discriminating, for does he not have the capability to do this as He deems fit?
And the Bible is not old letters, but the living and active and authoritative word of God to us today!

So not obsolete then?

Hebrews 8:13
In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

 

[SkyWriting]

I can't entertain this argument, as it nullifies the scripture. "All scripture is God-breathed." If you're going to use this argument, my view is that you might as well abolish the entire New Testament.

Paul invented the word "God-breathed" as it is never written in any other document. Paul didn't write all of the NT. Not even half. He never met Jesus. If Paul didn't treat women the same as he would want to be treated, then everything he taught is suspect and open for examination.

 

[trophy33]

Why would anyone be representing Mary? We are all to be ambassadors of *Christ*.

It was just an example that genders have some specific roles. As you cannot be a mother, so also women are not meant to be a head of men.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Paul is not making a gender statement in this passage,

Paul is addressing only men.

" This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."
1 Timothy 3

 

[Sparagmos]

And just to lighten things up a bit — I'm not sure about the original writer of this (it comes from an archived website), but while we're at it, here are...

TEN REASONS

ACCORDING TO THE NATURAL ORDER OF THE WORLD, SOCIAL CUSTOM, AND THEOLOGY

WHY MEN SHOULD NOT BE ORDAINED​

1. The male physical build indicates that men are more suited to tasks such as picking turnips or de-horning cattle. It would be "unnatural" for them to do other forms of work. How can we argue with nature?

2. For men who have children, their duties as ministers might detract from their responsibilities as parents. Instead of teaching their children important life skills like how to make a wiener-roasting stick, they would be off at some committee meeting or preparing a sermon. Thus these unfortunate children of ordained men would almost certainly receive less attention from their male parent.

3. According to the Genesis account, men were created before women, presumably as a prototype. It is thus obvious that men represent an experiment, rather than the crowning achievement of creation.

4. Men are overly prone to violence. They are responsible for the vast majority of crime in our country, especially violent crime. Thus they would be poor role models, as well as being dangerously unstable in positions of leadership.

5. In the New Testament account, the person who betrayed Jesus was a man. His lack of faith and ensuing punishment stands as a symbol of the subordinate position that all men should take. It is expected that even ordained men would be unable to withstand the natural male tendency to buckle under pressure.

6. Jesus didn't ordain men. He didn't ordain any women either, but two wrongs don't make a right.

7. Men are simply too emotional to be ordained. Their conduct at football matches, in the army, at political conventions and especially at Promise Keepers Rallies amply demonstrates this tendency.

8. Many men are simply too handsome to lead public worship. They could prove to be a distraction to the women in the congregation!

9. To be an ordained pastor is to nurture and strengthen a whole congregation. But these are not traditional male roles. Throughout the history of Christianity, women have been considered to be not only more skilled than men at nurturing, but also more fervently attracted to it. If men try to fit into this nurturing role, our young people might grow up with severe gender role confusion.

10. If the Church is the Bride of Christ, then it goes without saying that all ordained leaders should be female. It just makes theological sense!

And BINGO. That’s genius.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Do you think that “sin” has been a determining factor of homosexual leaders? Or do you agree that is a fundamental attribution error?

I dont understand your questions.

 

[Kerensa]

Paul invented the word "God-breathed" as it is never written in any other document. Paul didn't write all of the NT. Not even half. He never met Jesus. If Paul didn't treat women the same as he would want to be treated, then everything he taught is suspect and open for examination.

The majority of the statements in the NT about women keeping silence or being submissive to their husbands (e.g. Eph. 5:22, Col. 3:18 and 1 Tim. 2:11-15) are from letters that are most likely not by Paul but pseudonymously attributed to him by later followers. The same goes for "God-breathed" in 2 Tim. 3:16, for that matter.

1 Cor. 14:34-35 is in a letter that definitely is by Paul, but those two verses, if you look at their context, are an interjection that doesn't quite seem to fit with the whole passage about orderly worship. It's possible that they weren't in the original letter and were interpolated in later copies by an editor. (Apparently in some manuscripts they appear later in the chapter, after verse 40.) If you remove verses 34-35, the verses before and after them fit together quite neatly.

The thing is, throughout Paul's letters and the Book of Acts, there are many references to women heading house churches and taking other leadership roles. And Paul makes many statements praising and admiring them, so how could he have been against them?

Paul had many great qualities and did more than any other one person to advance the spread of Christianity in the Gentile world, but he wasn't and isn't the only authority on what Christian doctrine should be and how followers of Christ (male or female) should behave. I'm pretty sure Paul, when he was writing letters to the various churches he'd helped to establish, trying to sort out their specific questions and problems, wasn't thinking that every word he wrote would one day be considered Holy Scripture and an infallible guide for all Christians everywhere. And as SkyWriting says, Paul never met Jesus in person. We don't have ANY statements recorded from Jesus himself as to women submitting to men or not teaching men or not taking leadership roles, etc.

As for women submitting to men or being inferior to men, that's not the original model that God created. Gen. 1:26-27 makes clear that both male and female are created in the image and likeness of God and given dominion over all the earth. Inequality and submission only come into it with the curse on Adam and Eve. Christ removes the curse completely. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:28 — which, by the way, is a letter that scholars consider to be definitely by Paul!!)

 

[Dave-W]

This has nothing to do with local law. Your answer should be consistent with what scripture teaches.

He was being facetious.

 

[Dave-W]

Whatever. Aquila was the teacher of Appolos. Guess that means nothing.

Did you mean Pricilla?

 

[Dave-W]

There is no requirement for a man to be married

How can you be a husband but not married?

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

6. Jesus didn't ordain men. He didn't ordain any women either, but two wrongs don't make a right.

Funny, but I didn't like this one (number 6 above). Maybe you should rephrase so it's not ambiguous (i.e. so it couldn't be interpreted as accusing Jesus of wrong).

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Paul invented the word "God-breathed" as it is never written in any other document. Paul didn't write all of the NT. Not even half. He never met Jesus. If Paul didn't treat women the same as he would want to be treated, then everything he taught is suspect and open for examination.

Paul did meet Jesus - remember at Damascus?

Your argument is outside the scope of this thread. I'm asking for scriptural reasons women should be permitted to have certain leadership roles over men, such as pastor or teacher. While the scriptures might be wrong or false is an argument, it needs another thread. (Obviously, as a Christian, I hold all scripture to be inspired by God. If I held only the OT to be true, I'd be a Jew rather than a Christian).

The majority of the statements in the NT about women keeping silence or being submissive to their husbands (e.g. Eph. 5:22, Col. 3:18 and 1 Tim. 2:11-15) are from letters that are most likely not by Paul but pseudonymously attributed to him by later followers. The same goes for "God-breathed" in 2 Tim. 3:16, for that matter.

Same response for this argument. I'm asking for scriptural reasons women should be permitted to have certain leadership roles over men, such as pastor or teacher. While the scriptures might be wrong or false is an argument, it needs another thread.

 

[trophy33]

Paul is addressing only men.

" This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."
1 Timothy 3

Its just a specific translation choice, there is "anyone" in Greek.

 

[trophy33]

How can you be a husband but not married?

By having a husbandry?

 

[Dave-W]

Paul is addressing only men.

" This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."
1 Timothy 3

In almost every language into the mid 20th century, male gender was used to address both male and female.

 

[Kerensa]

Funny, but I didn't like this one (number 6 above). Maybe you should rephrase so it's not ambiguous (i.e. so it couldn't be interpreted as accusing Jesus of wrong).

Funny, but I thought it was hilarious (and I didn't write it, by the way — as I said, the source is obscure, but I provided a link to the site where I found it).

If you read it as it's meant to be read — as a witty but rather sharp satire — it's not accusing Jesus of wrong at all. What it's doing (all the way through the "Ten Reasons", actually) is taking all the traditional arguments as to why women should not be ordained and turning each one of them on their head, to show the exact same kinds of arguments — with similar backing from scripture and the "natural order of the world" — could just as easily be used against men being ordained.

One of those traditional arguments is "Jesus didn't ordain any women." But the fact is, he didn't ordain any men either. So the argument works equally well both ways. That's the point of the "two wrongs don't make a right" comment — if it's "wrong" for people of one gender to be ordained because Jesus didn't do so, it must be equally "wrong" for the other gender to be ordained, since Jesus didn't do so either. That's all.

 

[Dave-W]

By having a husbandry?

Where is the wife in that?

Husband of one wife.

While i believe wife of one husband fits the given pattern, being unmarried does not.