women pastors.

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
1 Timothy 3 provides the criteria for a man who desires to be a pastor. It begins (in the NKJV):

"This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work."

It does not say, "If a person desires..." Why?

Given the cultures of the world at the time, a female "bishop" or pastor would have been seen as ludicrous. When Paul said he thought women ought to remain silent and learn in full submission (1 Timothy 2), he was presenting an idea that would have had some up in arms. "What? A woman is permitted to learn?" That idea would have seemed just as wild in that culture, but that's why Paul (basically) followed it with, "Woah, guys, I still don't think it's a good idea for women to teach." In that culture, men wouldn't listen to a woman who tried to teach a man.

Paul's statements seem misogynistic from our perspective, but he was actually advocating for additional freedoms for women. It's also important to note he puts it in personal terms: "I exhort...I admonish...I do not permit..."

In short, Paul was taking the culture of the day into account, yet advocating for women to learn. In cultures where men don't have a problem being led by women, I don't see why a woman couldn't be a pastor. It's not expressly forbidden by God in the modern day, but was prohibited in a time when the culture would not recognize the value of a woman.

Arguments regarding Eve's sin and Adam's sin made sense in the Judaic mind, but in Galatians, Paul recognized there is no difference in God's eyes for the children of God (Galatians 3:28). He exhorted the Philippians (in Philippians 4:2) to help the women who had "labored with him in the Gospel." Not every woman can lead, nor can every man. But if God does good through a pastor--whatever their sex--then praise God. I see no reason why God could not or would not call a woman to lead, save for if the culture in which she lived would not hear her because of their own arrogance.

Men are certainly meant to be leaders, but in some cases, men have been unwilling to do what women were willing to do. I have seen as much in churches, where entire branches of ministry were dissolved because the church would rather hire a man than give an opportunity for a woman to lead. Oddly, the church I went to that took 1 Timothy 2 as applicable today allowed women to teach children, to sing solos, to be part of choir, to teach other women, and to serve on committees, but would not allow women to teach men.

What does the Bible say about women leaders in government? Should a woman be President?
Generally speaking, God designed men for positions of leadership. But, apart from leadership in the church and family, which is given to men alone, the Bible doesn’t expressly forbid women from positions of government.
 
Upvote 0

Waddler

Live a story worth telling well.
Jul 19, 2014
2,502
591
38
Colorado Springs, CO
✟19,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
That seems a separate issue from female pastors, though I don't recall anything in Scripture specifically forbidding women from government. I have extra-biblical reasons for not currently wanting a female POTUS, but it has nothing to do with her gender.

There were highly respected queens within Judaism, so the idea of female leadership wasn't completely foreign in biblical times. Esther was obviously respected as a queen and civil servant.
 
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
That seems a separate issue from female pastors, though I don't recall anything in Scripture specifically forbidding women from government. I have extra-biblical reasons for not currently wanting a female POTUS, but it has nothing to do with her gender.

There were highly respected queens within Judaism, so the idea of female leadership wasn't completely foreign in biblical times. Esther was obviously respected as a queen and civil servant.

Do you think the reason its unbibical is because it detracts from eve's punishment?
 
Upvote 0

Waddler

Live a story worth telling well.
Jul 19, 2014
2,502
591
38
Colorado Springs, CO
✟19,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Do you think the reason its unbibical is because it detracts from eve's punishment?
I don't think women in leadership is unbiblical. It's not always a good idea to have a female leader, nor is it always a good idea to have a male leader, but there's nothing in Scripture I've seen that would prohibit women from leadership wholesale.
 
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Citizen of the Kingdom

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 31, 2006
44,327
14,493
Vancouver
Visit site
✟303,748.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
These articles show without doubt it is unbibical for women to be in leadership over men. Women in Ministry | Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry
What is it that you have to gain that your promoting the idea of women forbidden in scripture so much? Obviously if it were true before the Roman council took over the running of Christianity that women were in leadership positions (which is undeniable) then it's still true today.

I would appreciate just an answer to the question rather than a diversion to samantics on the meaning of leadership.
 
Upvote 0

Waddler

Live a story worth telling well.
Jul 19, 2014
2,502
591
38
Colorado Springs, CO
✟19,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
These articles show without doubt it is unbibical for women to be in leadership over men. Women in Ministry | Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry
Any article would only convince me of anything if it presented proper evidence. From the beginning, in CARM's explanation of why it bothers to touch on the issue of women as pastors at all, it inappropriately explains Titus 1:5-6. As I explained previously, cultures in biblical times would have found women in leadership a laughable concept, so it naturally follows the Apostles would instruct churches to appoint men into leadership positions.

To use an analogy in my own experience, I was in a mental health group where the group of men had developed biases against women. Their wives had cheated on them, left them, and so forth, so they saw women as evil, backstabbing people. When a female therapist attempted to lead the group, it was obvious almost no one was going to take her seriously, so the sponsoring institution made the decision to replace her with a male therapist.

It was not the female therapist who had a problem, but the men she was attempting to help. The Apostles recognized the biases of their culture against women, and conceded that to make progress, men should be appointed as leaders. Had they lived in a culture where women were already accepted as being equal to men in the eyes of God, they might have listed qualities for female leadership.

The cultures in which the Apostles ministered had justifications for denying women leadership roles, but that doesn't mean those justifications were right. Eve was Eve, but she was not all women. The argument that women in leadership diminishes Eve's punishment is fallacious because Eve was one woman, and she is dead. Also, the curse put upon Eve was for Eve alone, not a curse for all women in perpetuity.

Yes, sin entered the world through Eve and Adam, and the punishment is death, but that is the only curse we inherited as the children of Adam and Eve. A husband is to rule over his wife and she is to submit to her husband, but a wife is permitted to defy her husband's leadership if he is acting outside of God's leadership.

You state women should not lead men, and in the case of a marriage, that is true if the husband is leading in the will of God. If not, a wife can and should stand up for what is right, even if she defies her husband in doing so. However, there is nothing in Scripture in its proper cultural and scriptural context that prohibits women from leadership.
 
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I believe God established gendered hierarchies in the family and the church. When possible, they should be followed. But these structures become impractical if followed legalistically. Just as love trumps personal liberty, love also trumps hierarchical structures.

That is an opinion-I believe the hierarchies exist because of Eve's sin.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,140.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
1 Timothy 3 provides the criteria for a man who desires to be a pastor. It begins (in the NKJV):

"This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work."

It does not say, "If a person desires..." Why?

Actually, in the Greek, it does not say "if a man." It says ei tis, "if anyone." The translators took an ungendered term and translated it in a gendered way.
 
Upvote 0

SistrNChrist

Newbie
Aug 17, 2006
345
127
41
NYC
✟30,387.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
There is no private interpretation of scripture. Some things in the bible are not totally clear, but this isn't one of them. The problem isn't understanding what it says because it is very clear. The problem is that people don't like what it says and so they invent another meaning to suit their preferences.
There may be no private interpretation, but there is a cultural one. Fact is, that a lot of the teachings Paul wrote in regards to women, as well as other things, were fully based in the cultural context of the first century church, and don't apply to us today. For example, the real reason Paul wrote that a woman should be silent in church was because back then, the churches were separated with women sitting on one side of the church and their husbands clear on the other side, so whenever a woman had a question about what Paul taught, she had to yell across to her husband, and you can imagine the disruption that occurred then. So really, that scripture was about not disrupting the service, and not about a woman not being allowed to be in a position of authority.
 
Upvote 0

thesunisout

growing in grace
Supporter
Mar 24, 2011
4,761
1,399
He lifts me up
✟159,601.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There may be no private interpretation, but there is a cultural one. Fact is, that a lot of the teachings Paul wrote in regards to women, as well as other things, were fully based in the cultural context of the first century church, and don't apply to us today. For example, the real reason Paul wrote that a woman should be silent in church was because back then, the churches were separated with women sitting on one side of the church and their husbands clear on the other side, so whenever a woman had a question about what Paul taught, she had to yell across to her husband, and you can imagine the disruption that occurred then. So really, that scripture was about not disrupting the service, and not about a woman not being allowed to be in a position of authority.

But that isn't the reason that Paul gives for the command:

women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they wish to inquire about something, they are to ask their own husbands at home; for it is dishonorable for a woman to speak in the church

The reason given is that it is dishonorable for a woman to speak in the church. This is what I mean about inventing our own interpretations because the plain meaning is offensive to our cultural sensibilities.
 
Upvote 0

SistrNChrist

Newbie
Aug 17, 2006
345
127
41
NYC
✟30,387.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
But that isn't the reason that Paul gives for the command:

women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they wish to inquire about something, they are to ask their own husbands at home; for it is dishonorable for a woman to speak in the church

The reason given is that it is dishonorable for a woman to speak in the church. This is what I mean about inventing our own interpretations because the plain meaning is offensive to our cultural sensibilities.
I think he means dishonorable as in disruptive to the whole service, for the reasons I have previously stated above. Learning the cultural context in which Paul wrote this epistle, as well as all his others, will be very helpful in sorting out what is meant to be a command for all time versus what was just culturally applicable to the 1st century church, but no longer has that same relevance/application now.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

thesunisout

growing in grace
Supporter
Mar 24, 2011
4,761
1,399
He lifts me up
✟159,601.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think he means dishonorable as in disruptive to the whole service, for the reasons I have previously stated above. Learning the cultural context in which Paul wrote this epistle, as well as all his others, will be very helpful in sorting out what is meant to be a command for all time versus what was just culturally applicable to the 1st century church, but no longer has that same relevance/application now.

The text doesn't say that, though. If it was dishonorable then, it is dishonorable now. The commands of God are not measured by the culture; the culture is measured by His commands. What you've done is allowed yourself to reason away Gods commands, which leads to deception.
 
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I just was watching a video about if women should hold spiritual leadership roles in the church. It breaks it down really well. I used to think "what's wrong with that? If she can do a good job then let her." But now I understand getting more into the Word. It's hard though, living in a world that took opportunities from broken homes to create an environment where women are now competing with men.


what is spiritual authority? Should I not read books by Stormie Omartin as a man?
 
Upvote 0

Sammy-San

Newbie
May 23, 2013
9,020
848
✟104,569.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I'm not saying that having women pastors is a sin, but based on how women are set to be submissive to the head as the church is submissive to Christ, I wouldn't jump to put a female on that authority. If it happens, then fine, I wouldn't knock it. But I'm not gonna totally ignore the fact that its part of womanhood.

Fall of man - Wikipedia

They reason that "if the Apostle Paul was forgiven for what he did ignorantly in unbelief" including persecuting and murdering Christians, "and thereafter was given a ministry, why would the same forgiveness and ministry be denied women" (for the sins of their foremother eons ago)?
 
Upvote 0