Women Pastors?

[nolidad]

In the particular instances I'm thinking of - Phoebe, a deacon, and Junia, an apostle - the words were not gendered. Junia was included in an instance of the masculine plural (which is used for mixed groups), and Phoebe was described with exactly the same term as a male deacon. In the context they were used - an epistle sent by a church leader, to a church community, commending other church leaders - it seems beyond clear to me that their context demands that we read them with a church-specific meaning.

As for the claim that Greek was not prone to idiomatic usage; I find that strange and completely contradicted by the evidence.

Well if Paul hadn't said deacons must be the aner of one gyne- I would have no problem with Phoebe being a deaconess (office holder) But because he did I see phoebe as one who served teh church at Cenchrae with great zeal.

Junia was not an apostle.
1. there is no record of her being ordained as an apostle.
2. there is no record of her having a ministry of note anywhere.
3. No writings from her.
4. According to the "egalitarian hermeneutic" she is a noted or well renowned apostle! but nothing survives of her supposed apostleship?????? Curious indeed.
5. No record of her being with Jesus throughout his ministry.
6. No record of her taking the place of another apostle as the apostles said was the reason why Matthias was elevated as shown in Acts 1
7. So modern "scholars" elevate her to a famous apostle with no record of her ministry, no record of making her an apostle, no record of another reason to elevate one to apostleship and a very twisted translation of:

Romans 16:7
Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

There is no linguistic justification to translate that as a noted apostle instead of one who had a good reputation among the apostles.

8. Also what about poor Andronicus? will no one speak for him? Where are th e seven things I mentioned about Junia!

The fact that these are the only mention of them in the fist century and no surviving record of there supposed apostleships survive when he have of the others should raise a red flag to all who want to translate it with the more modern "egalitarian" method.

 

[Philip_B]

I do not consider Paul to be ignorant, or loose when writing under teh INspiration of the Holy spirit.

I am not sure how much Greek you have, however most scholars I have read suggest that Paul shows in some of his writing a great deal of excitement rather than measured thought. I not not convinced that Paul believed he was writing under the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he was just writing, and in the case of much of the material presented here, he was writing to a person, friend and colleague, not to the whole community.

but He (Paul) didn't and see no need for us to feel teh need to edit gods Word.

I don't believe that the Christian understanding of the writing of Scripture was a notion of God dictating to a scribe. Such an understanding is expressed in Islam in relation to the Koran, however I don't believe it is how we have, or should, understand our scriptures in the same way.

 

[Paidiske]

Junia was not an apostle.
1. there is no record of her being ordained as an apostle.
2. there is no record of her having a ministry of note anywhere.
3. No writings from her.
4. According to the "egalitarian hermeneutic" she is a noted or well renowned apostle! but nothing survives of her supposed apostleship?????? Curious indeed.
5. No record of her being with Jesus throughout his ministry.
6. No record of her taking the place of another apostle as the apostles said was the reason why Matthias was elevated as shown in Acts 1
7. So modern "scholars" elevate her to a famous apostle with no record of her ministry, no record of making her an apostle, no record of another reason to elevate one to apostleship and a very twisted translation of:

Romans 16:7
Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

There is no linguistic justification to translate that as a noted apostle instead of one who had a good reputation among the apostles.

8. Also what about poor Andronicus? will no one speak for him? Where are th e seven things I mentioned about Junia!

The fact that these are the only mention of them in the fist century and no surviving record of there supposed apostleships survive when he have of the others should raise a red flag to all who want to translate it with the more modern "egalitarian" method.

Well, this is not quite accurate. The Orthodox have an unbroken tradition of recognising Andronicus and Junia (both) as apostles, as having been among the 70 Christ sent out in Luke 10:1. So there is a living record which has been preserved, even if it is often forgotten in the west.

 

[Gregorikos]

Who anointed Him as one fo the foremost authorities on Greek? I agree He has quite an impressive biography, but I trust Spiros Zodhiates- not only a native greek speaker but holds a master in koine greek.

OK, that is the first language expert you have cited in support of your theory that μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα in 1 Timothy 3:2 and 12 must be taken literally and it limits the pastorate to men only. But what did he say? Where's the quote?

Also Arnold Fruchtenbaum. He also holds a masters in Biblical greek, but no longer read teh NT in English.

OK, now Arnold Fruchtenbaum. What did he say? Where's the quote?

 

[nolidad]

OK, that is the first language expert you have cited in support of your theory that μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα in 1 Timothy 3:2 and 12 must be taken literally and it limits the pastorate to men only. But what did he say? Where's the quote?



OK, now Arnold Fruchtenbaum. What did he say? Where's the quote?

For Zodhiates, it is His Greek/English NT Study Bible.

for Fruchtenbaum it is his manuscript on teh Pastoral epistles.

But I wish to get back to your "scholar" Dr. Mounce and his article there is not literal (paraphrased)

He is being somewhat deceptive in this. Yes it is true that American english has a "semantic range" of meanings. but that is only because American English has devolved into a very colloquial language that is heavily laced with colloquialisms, euphemisms, and idioms. This is true of only very few other languages. Koine Greek is a very structured language and the ancients employed few idioms- as your lack of showing how the idioms developed to justify aner and gyne as being gender non-specific.

Also transliterating Greek to English if a false analogy he uses for "non-literalism" Why? Because the construct of Greek is different than the construct of English, but to translate from one to the other has inviolate rules of grammar to follow. So our English JOhn 3:16 follows correctly and grammatically the Greek John 3:16. One simply has to know the rules!

As for words? they all have very definite meanings. DOG--- You most likely pictured some sort of canine! But we use dog in other ways in English--- hot dog (but that has a literal meaning to you) in the dog house (that also has a literal meaning to you) my dogs are tired (that has a literal meaning to you if you know that euphemism) In English, context determines which type of dog we are thinking of.

Greek is not so wide ranging. take diakonos. a greek dictionary gives it four basic meanings- all mean servant but context determines which kind of servant is in mind, whether a simple server, a govt. official, a church officer etc. They all are there to serve but in differing capacities.


Greek verbs are much different. There are a possible 580 verb endings, which makes a one word translation-kind of okay, butr can fail to capture the full intent of the verb.

That is why I love the Amplified, for it will use more english words to convey the varied verb meanings based on its ending. but the Best is the 10 Volume greek/english NT or Zodhiates Greek/English NT study bible. They help you parse the verbs. It still has the same basic meaning but gives the voice, tense, mood, person and number which can nuance the meaning- not alter it as you seek to do with aner and gyne.

I knew there was something fishy about Mounces article but could not put my finger on it till the middle of the night when I was awaken and realized what it was.

We may not be able to translate Greek to English in our colloquial forms- that is near impossible without knowing the definitions of the colloquialisms like it is "raining cats and dogs," but we can translate it is raining heavily from the greek to the English in a non-colloquila way and do no harm to the intent and content of teh original.

Sorry but your "scholar" in reality does not support your case. If he did- you would not be sure of anything I just wrote for you would have to determine the "semantic range" of every verb and noun instead of accepting themat their normal, customary, usual, face value definition, unless context demands you to think differently. So why do you treat the bible differently in this passage?

 

[nolidad]

I am not sure how much Greek you have, however most scholars I have read suggest that Paul shows in some of his writing a great deal of excitement rather than measured thought. I not not convinced that Paul believed he was writing under the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he was just writing, and in the case of much of the material presented here, he was writing to a person, friend and colleague, not to the whole community.

Without knowing the man that is a purely subjective opinion, and it belies Paul as a member of teh Sanhedrin and apostle. Paul was highly intelligent. And even if his writings are passionate, that in no way precludes they were not well thought out.

But most importantly- If you believe the Pauline writings are indeed part of the NT, then you know Paul was merely the instrument used by God to insure the teachings would make it to the churches. YOu are subtly accessing god HImself of being careless with whom He chose to pen the rules for teh church implying Paul was more emotional than rational in his writings.

I don't believe that the Christian understanding of the writing of Scripture was a notion of God dictating to a scribe. Such an understanding is expressed in Islam in relation to the Koran, however I don't believe it is how we have, or should, understand our scriptures in the same way.

Well I am not sure how you define that term, but I do believe this:

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Peter 1:19-21
King James Version

19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.


And I do believe god knew far in advance who He would use to write the NT, which letters were to be included in the NT, and inspired them to write. They had the freedom of language (to a degree) and expression (to a degree) but make no mistake, they wrote what god intended to be taught through those whom He chose.

 

[nolidad]

Well, this is not quite accurate. The Orthodox have an unbroken tradition of recognising Andronicus and Junia (both) as apostles, as having been among the 70 Christ sent out in Luke 10:1. So there is a living record which has been preserved, even if it is often forgotten in the west.

Well if it is unbroken can you cite extant witnesses writing as such? But once again this is also subtly deceptive. You say they have a record of tehm being apostles- but no record of their being elevated to discipleship.

What evidence do they rely on to show theset wo were ordained by the other apostles. What methodology other than acts 1 caused them to ordain them

what witnesses do they cite to say they were among the 70? it is not enough to just say so in this court of public opinion, where you and I are presenting arguments for our positions.

 

[Philip_B]

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἐλεγμόν, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ,

Everything written is God breathed and profitable for instruction, for conviction. and for training in righteousness.​

Clearly there is no intent on the part of Paul to speak of the Canon of the New Testament which at that stage had not been conceived, and perhaps is more properly understood as a reference to the LXX, which is most probably what he understood as scripture.

 

[Gregorikos]

For Zodhiates, it is His Greek/English NT Study Bible.

for Fruchtenbaum it is his manuscript on teh Pastoral epistles.

You haven't told us anything here. What did they say?

 

[nolidad]

πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἐλεγμόν, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ,

Everything written is God breathed and profitable for instruction, for conviction. and for training in righteousness.​

Clearly there is no intent on the part of Paul to speak of the Canon of the New Testament which at that stage had not been conceived, and perhaps is more properly understood as a reference to the LXX, which is most probably what he understood as scripture.

Conceived by man- but known by God. It matters not what Paul knew or didn't. God did and He inspired the writers in the letters that were to become part of Sacred Scripture! Unless of course you do not believe the New Testament is Sacred Scripture, but just maybe really really really good writing?

When Moses was writing- He didn't know He was writing under the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit and writing Sacred SCripture. but He was! Same with all the other OT writers. I don't think they got an E-mail saying that god wad going to breath on them or in them to make sure what was written next would be error free! They just wrote and god insured it was error free.

Same with the NT. God insured that of all the writings available- only those He guided the council to pick to be the NT were especially breathed by Him!

God is not cavalier not does He put a blindfold on and toss darts at a list of books.

 

[nolidad]

You haven't told us anything here. What did they say?

A Bishop and deacon must be a husband of one wife! Or a one woman man, not some gender neutral just be faithful!

Neither one even hint that this verse is an idiom to simply mean faithfulness.

They both recognize bishops and deacons to be exclusively men.

For Zodhiates, I find nothing downloadable.

For Dr. Fruchtenbaum:

this is $3.00 and is MP 3
The Role of Men and Women in the Local Church - MP3

This is a free PDF download:
http://www.arielcontent.org/dcs/pdf/mbs106m.pdf

Here he even talks about deaconesses!

But also there is a big discourse on the contentious 1 Cor. passages as well.

But another reason why women cannot be deacons.

Timothy 3:12
Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

A qualification of a deacon is that he RULES his house well!

If a woman can hold the office of a deacon, that even contradicts what you say about this verse:

1 Tim. 2:
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

If a woman is to hold the office of a deacon she must rule (proestemai) superintend or guard over)
that places her in authority over her husband which even you agreed is a no no!

 

[nolidad]

You haven't told us anything here. What did they say?

A Bishop and deacon must be a husband of one wife! Or a one woman man, not some gender neutral just be faithful!

Neither one even hint that this verse is an idiom to simply mean faithfulness.

They both recognize bishops and deacons to be exclusively men.

For Zodhiates, I find nothing downloadable.

For Dr. Fruchtenbaum:

this is $3.00 and is MP 3
The Role of Men and Women in the Local Church - MP3

This is a free PDF download:
http://www.arielcontent.org/dcs/pdf/mbs106m.pdf

Here he even talks about deaconesses!

But also there is a big discourse on the contentious 1 Cor. passages as well.

But another reason why women cannot be deacons.

Timothy 3:12
Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

A qualification of a deacon is that he RULES his house well!

If a woman can hold the office of a deacon, that even contradicts what you say about this verse:

1 Tim. 2:
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

If a woman is to hold the office of a deacon she must rule (proestemai) superintend or guard over)
that places her in authority over her husband which even you agreed is a no no!

 

[nolidad]

That's an interesting take. I assume then you think having a woman as a pastor is a sin. But at what point does our accidental sin.... sin committed unknowingly and in good faith...... at what point does that become apostasy? Is that true of all sin, or only the alleged sin of having a woman as pastor?

I think you're wrong, by the way, but I'd love to see where your logic leads you.

Well let me ask you this:

If god says you are allowed to A-Y only and you choose to do Z are you being obedient or disobedient to God?

Is disobedience to God a sin or not ?

 

[Believer000]

Should women be pastors?
I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; instead, she is to remain quiet.
1 timothy 2:12

No. I think women should teach children and other women in the Church. In terms of leadership of the flock itself that should naturally fall into the hands of the men. This is supported by Scripture. Why would a woman even want that kind of responsibility?. You're more accountable to God as a leader of His Church. I imagine it's stressful.

 

[Paidiske]

Yes it is true that American english has a "semantic range" of meanings. but that is only because American English has devolved into a very colloquial language that is heavily laced with colloquialisms, euphemisms, and idioms. This is true of only very few other languages. Koine Greek is a very structured language and the ancients employed few idioms- as your lack of showing how the idioms developed to justify aner and gyne as being gender non-specific.

I have studied quite a few languages (to different degrees) over the years. French, Japanese, Koine Greek; it is not at all true that English has an unusual level of colloquialism, euphemism and idiom. In my experience these are universal features of language. And in Koine Greek, which was not classical Greek but the later lingua franca Greek of the street, simplified and with many loanwords from other languages/cultures, it was certainly true.

Well if it is unbroken can you cite extant witnesses writing as such? But once again this is also subtly deceptive. You say they have a record of tehm being apostles- but no record of their being elevated to discipleship.

What evidence do they rely on to show theset wo were ordained by the other apostles. What methodology other than acts 1 caused them to ordain them

what witnesses do they cite to say they were among the 70? it is not enough to just say so in this court of public opinion, where you and I are presenting arguments for our positions.

I tell you what, why don't you go and ask that in the Orthodox forum? I have pointed out to you that the idea of Junia as an apostle is not a modern invention, but an ancient understanding of the early church. What you do with that is up to you.

Why would a woman even want that kind of responsibility?. You're more accountable to God as a leader of His Church. I imagine it's stressful.

Let's see... I have four churches under my care, we're less than two weeks out from Christmas, I have two funerals to take in the next week, we're navigating our way out of Covid lockdown and figuring out how to sustain our worship and community life while complying with ever-changing regulations, there's other stuff I can't really post about, and today's supposed to be my day off but I'm working because I just have too much to get done. Yep, it's stressful.

So why would I want that? I didn't want it. I was content to work a secular job and volunteer some of my skills to the church in my spare time. But God called me. That is the only thing that would make me consider this, that would enable me to persevere in it, or that would motivate me to so passionately defend it.

 

[bekkilyn]

No. I think women should teach children and other women in the Church. In terms of leadership of the flock itself that should naturally fall into the hands of the men. This is supported by Scripture. Why would a woman even want that kind of responsibility?. You're more accountable to God as a leader of His Church. I imagine it's stressful.

It's not about wanting or not wanting to, but about obeying God's call. Have you ever experienced a call from God and attempted to go to Tarshish instead of Ninevah?

 

[Paidiske]

It's not about wanting or not wanting to, but about obeying God's call. Have you ever experienced a call from God and attempted to go to Tarshish instead of Ninevah?

That reminds me, back when I was first discerning my vocation, and about to go to an interview panel, I was talking to a nun about it all. And she said to me that she thought I was very brave to offer for ordination. And I looked at her like she was crazy and said, "It's not brave, sister. I've thought long and hard about how big the fish in the other direction is!"

 

[bekkilyn]

That reminds me, back when I was first discerning my vocation, and about to go to an interview panel, I was talking to a nun about it all. And she said to me that she thought I was very brave to offer for ordination. And I looked at her like she was crazy and said, "It's not brave, sister. I've thought long and hard about how big the fish in the other direction is!"

And it gets kind of tiring battling that big fish for 20+ years!

 

[Believer000]

I have studied quite a few languages (to different degrees) over the years. French, Japanese, Koine Greek; it is not at all true that English has an unusual level of colloquialism, euphemism and idiom. In my experience these are universal features of language. And in Koine Greek, which was not classical Greek but the later lingua franca Greek of the street, simplified and with many loanwords from other languages/cultures, it was certainly true.



I tell you what, why don't you go and ask that in the Orthodox forum? I have pointed out to you that the idea of Junia as an apostle is not a modern invention, but an ancient understanding of the early church. What you do with that is up to you.



Let's see... I have four churches under my care, we're less than two weeks out from Christmas, I have two funerals to take in the next week, we're navigating our way out of Covid lockdown and figuring out how to sustain our worship and community life while complying with ever-changing regulations, there's other stuff I can't really post about, and today's supposed to be my day off but I'm working because I just have too much to get done. Yep, it's stressful.

So why would I want that? I didn't want it. I was content to work a secular job and volunteer some of my skills to the church in my spare time. But God called me. That is the only thing that would make me consider this, that would enable me to persevere in it, or that would motivate me to so passionately defend it.

Wow, all the best to you!. If God calls anyone to lead who is to challenge Him?.

 

[Gregorikos]

A Bishop and deacon must be a husband of one wife! Or a one woman man, not some gender neutral just be faithful!

Neither one even hint that this verse is an idiom to simply mean faithfulness.

I have 3 highly reputable, conservative Bible scholars that flat out say it's an idiom for marital faithfulness, plus the most highly respected strictly Biblical lexicon in the world which says the same.

You have two guys who don't say anything to the contrary.

For Dr. Fruchtenbaum:

this is $3.00 and is MP 3
The Role of Men and Women in the Local Church - MP3

This is a free PDF download:
http://www.arielcontent.org/dcs/pdf/mbs106m.pdf

This is an internet discussion forum. I'm not going to download your guy's $3 MP3 to help you prove your point. That woudn't help anybody but the guy that gets my 3 bucks.

The free PDF download is 47 pages. I didn't see anything that contradicted the idiomatic nature of μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα. I did see that your guy believes it's a command of the Lord that all married women should wear a hat or veil to church.

Assuming you're married, does your wife wear head coverings to church? Is that what you believe as well?

He also advocates for total silence for women in the church meetings. Is that what you advocate as well?