Women leading Churches

No a woman should not have a leadership role in the assembly, although a woman can be a prophetess.

Phoebe was a deaconess...

Rom16:1

Ridiculous legalism. I would never join a church that did not permit female clergy and would strongly discourage others from the same. It's just institutionalized sexism.

If we understand that Paul takes great pains to say "I suffer not" then we understand that this is an issue of his own personal preference. (See his discourse in I Corinthians 7, where he says things like "I say, not God," and vice versa).

I think the decision belongs to the local church. As a member of a Southern Baptist Church, we have no women clergy. Personally, though, I would not mind a woman pastor.

No you shouldn't have a woman in a position of "authority" over men. The Bible speaks only of spiritual authority of course.

A woman can't be a deacon.
A woman can't be a pastor.

A woman can lead other women in Bible studies.
A woman can be a speaker at womens groups.
A woman can give testimony infront of the church.

Texas_Lynn you couldn't be further from the truth. It's not legalism, it's the Word of God. Either believe it or don't but whatever you do don't disregard portions of it to suit yourself.

You think a woman can be a pastor? Well you're wrong. Read Titus for the requirements of a local church. The leader is to be "the husband of one wife". Clearly a position that can be held only by a man.

Ben - Phebe in Romans 16:1-2 was not a Deaconess. I don't know where you get that from. Here's the text...

Romans 16:1-2 "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also."

So what is she? She's a sister and one who provides "succour" which is comfort. A sister and a comforter, she was probably an hospitable woman who fed them and provided comfort to them. Paul asks them to recieve her as a sister and to help her get settled that's all. She was not a deaconess. There is no such thing in the Bible.

Romans 16:1 of the Revised Standard version calls Phebe (Phoebe) a deaconess.

Not that I agree with it, but that is probably where Ben Johnson got it from.

Originally posted by BT
Texas_Lynn you couldn't be further from the truth. It's not legalism, it's the Word of God. Either believe it or don't but whatever you do don't disregard portions of it to suit yourself.

Click to expand...

NOT DISREGARDING, MERELY considering the cultural context, as you certainly should.

As recently as the 19th Century, scientific theory in vogue was that girls should not be educated because it was believed that use of the brain for knowledge would limit its use for child nurturance.  we now know that was a theory not based on fact. 

Paul could not have conceived of our society where women work side by side with men other than husbands or fathers, control their own destiny, and are not conceived of as property.  Therefore  while we honor him as a builder of the church we are under no obligation to follow his discredited social theories.

 

Wow Lynn that's..spooky. I believe that a woman has every right that a man has and equal if not greater intelligence dependant on the individual.

As for scientific theory I agree that it was wrong. But lets leave Science and God seperate for this post at least.

But if you want to discredit anything that he writes you might as well hang up your Bible because in essence what you're saying is that it is not perfect. That it is not the Word of God. If you don't believe that the Bible is the "inspired" word of God. That it was penned by humans but written by God. Then I guess the debate ends there. I certainly understand the difference in cultural traditions such as when Paul says to "Greet each other with an holy kiss" this is not say an American tradition. But you clearly miss the point. Which is, God says (not Paul), what is to be the make up of the local church (Read Titus). This section has nothing to do with Pauls opinions which many of the other letters have portions of.

I don't really know what to say... if you don't believe the Bible then I guess that ends it. I'll pray for you.

Oh sorry I have one other point.. Here's what you said... (sorry I'm new and haven't figured out how to paste quotes yet )

"Paul could not have conceived of our society where women work side by side with men other than husbands or fathers, control their own destiny, and are not conceived of as property. "

I think you're dead wrong there. If you read Ephesians 5 you'll see that Paul had a good understanding of the relationships between men and women. Husbands and wives specifically here.

Ephesians 5:24
"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;"
Ephesians 5:28
"So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself."

Women don't sound like property to me. Would God teach us to love our "coats" or "dog" or "house" or "axe" etc. as our selves, verily as our own bodies? Show me that in scripture please.

Oh and how about Peter? He lived in the same social age as Paul... Let us see what he has to say.

1 Peter 3:1
"Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;"

Here we see that the wife could be the person to lead ("win") a husband to salvation!!! Didn't you say that they couldn't percieve of a woman working side by side with men?? Here they claim the greatest work imaginable can be done by a woman!!

You see Lynn, what the problem is, is that men have not followed the Bible!! If only they had!! If only we all had! The Bible is the PERFECT word of God!! It tells us how to live a holy and just life. The Bible shows a great deal of respect and regard for women. For whatever reason God has said that they can not be leaders over men in the Church. I don't know why (besides what is written). I'll make you a deal... when we get to heaven, you and I will ask him. Ok sister?

Hey Waterwizard,

Yes you are probably correct. It's unfortunate that these corrupt texts are out there to lead people into error.

Sometime in the near future I'll start a thread about the corrupt texts and the only true text. Hopefully it will bring some people back to the complete and unchanged Word of God. The King James Version.

my church has a male lead reverend and a female pastor who speaks every other week or so and also leads bible study for both men and women. i think women have as much place in any role as men, and saying differently is just sexist. paul did not live in the society or anticipate it.

Ben - Phebe in Romans 16:1-2 was not a Deaconess. I don't know where you get that from. Here's the text...

Romans 16:1-2 "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also."

So what is she? She's a sister and one who provides "succour" which is comfort. A sister and a comforter, she was probably an hospitable woman who fed them and provided comfort to them. Paul asks them to recieve her as a sister and to help her get settled that's all. She was not a deaconess. There is no such thing in the Bible.

Click to expand...

It's also footnoted so in the NASV, Waterwizard.

BT, since it was originally written in Greek, let's look at the Greek and see what it says:

Rom16:1: "diakonos"---"DEACON" in Philip1:1, 1Tim3:8 & 3:12.

It also means "MINISTER", in Matt20:6, Mk10:43, Rom13:4 15:8, 1Cor3:5, 2Cor3:6, 6:4, 11:15, 11:23; Gal2:17, Eph3:7, 6:21, Col1:7, 1:23, 1:25, 4:7; 1Thess3:2 4:6.

It has been translated, "servant", in: Matt22:13, 23:11, Mk9:35, Jn2:5 & 2:9, 12:26.

In Rom16:1 (and 16:27), contextually it is identical to the usage of "deaconess"...

Originally posted by BT
if you don't believe the Bible then I guess that ends it. I'll pray for you.

Click to expand...

I believe the Bible is the basis of our faith but I do not believe in legalism. 

If your position is correct, then there is no place for women in Christianity.   That is not what I believe.  Culture changes constantly.  We know better about the nature of men and women now than they did in ancient days.

Originally posted by BT
For whatever reason God has said that they can not be leaders over men in the Church. I don't know why (besides what is written). I'll make you a deal... when we get to heaven, you and I will ask him. Ok sister?

Click to expand...

Interesting offer, but no thank you.  If I'm wrong, I'd prefer to be elsewhere.

Originally posted by Job_38
   No, we are obligated to follow Gods WORD. If you what you say is true, then salvation can be gained by work, because our society says differently.

Click to expand...

That's an invalid slippery slope argument.