- Mar 4, 2005
- 27,914
- 7,993
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Saying that a deacon must be the husband of only ONE wife, does not in any way state that a woman must never be allowed to hold this role of office, or will never receive this calling from God.
Firstly, because some men, apparently, had more than one wife at that time - just as they used to in the OT; yet a woman would never have been allowed to have more than one husband. They were still fairly repressed at this point. Secondly, because women were still seen as second best and had few rights then, so I shouldn't think many women were deacons - although Phoebe was.
Again, this verse does not say, "a woman must never be a deacon". To argue "well it mentions having a wife. Only a man can have a wife so therefore this must be saying that only a man can be a deacon - and this is in God's word so it must be his command and will that only men be deacons/be ordained", is reading into the text.
They were all Jews also - yet how many people argue that Gentiles can't be Pastors/Ministers because none of the 12 were Gentiles?
Yes it is.
1 Timothy 2:12 says "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent."
And the argument is that if Paul said it, God commands it.
So if God doesn't allow women to have authority over men, why did he raise up Deborah to be judge, prophetess and have authority over the whole nation of Israel - who were God's people?
Why did Huldah, a prophetess, tell men what God was saying, 2 Kings 22:18-20? Why did the male priests choose to consult a prophetess when they could have gone to Jeremiah or Zephaniah? Why did the Lord bring a spiritual revival to the country - through the prophecy of a woman - if he did not allow women to be in authority over men? And the verse in 1 Timothy doesn't even say "have authority". It says "snatch authority violently, by force"; that's what "usurp" means.
Women did teach, prophesy and do God's work, as he called them to. To say, "well this wasn't in a temple or religious building, so that's ok" is missing the point.
There is no place in the Bible which says that women can, and must never, be priests.
Why didn't Jesus teach this and make it perfectly clear - if in fact it is God's will?
No one's saying that.
Or at least, some men might be saying that ordained women do this; but does anyone seriously believe that one of God's children, who loves him, his word and wants to serve him, would deliberately say "I KNOW what God says on this subject and I'm going to choose to disobey"? I don't believe so.
And do you follow God's word - ALL of it?
Do you keep the Jewish law? Do you observe their Sabbath, and stone to death anyone who doesn't keep it? Do you offer animal sacrifices? Wear clothes made from only one fibre? Abstain from certain foods? Keep away from anyone with a skin condition, women at certain times of the month or anyone else who is bleeding? If you are a woman, do you remain housebound for a few days each month, or consider yourself unclean after the birth of a boy, and doubly so after the birth of a girl?
If you do, congratulations on being consistent. Though it would be interesting to know how you view the passages from Hebrews which say that the law was only a shadow of what was to come, the verses from Jeremiah, and Hebrews, which speak of God making a NEW Covenant, which means the old one was void, and the words of Jesus when he said that he came to fulfil the law.
If you don't keep the Jewish law as written in Leviticus; maybe for the above reasons - why not? Leviticus is in God's word; those compiling the Bible didn't cut it out as being irrelevant or non essential, and you have just stated that we have to obey ALL of God's word.
The verse that you quoted about a deacon being the husband of one wife; in that passage, it also says that deacons should be temperate, hospitable, self controlled, not given to drunkenness, able to teach and manage their family and see that their children obey them.
So if a deacon must be a husband of one wife, he MUST be a husband. He MUST, according to your interpretation of this passage, have children, be able to teach, not have a temper, etc etc. So God's word teaches that a deacon - the leader of a church - must have a wife and children, must be a teacher, be respectable etc etc. Do you, and the whole church, obey that? Would you tell a gifted deacon/Minister that they were not in God's word because they were single, or that they, or their wife, was barren? What about Catholic priests or monks? How many people write threads on this forum complaining that their Minister's children disobey him, or that he loses his temper sometimes - so therefore he should not be a Minister because he is disobeying God's word?
You can't apply just one verse from that passage and not the rest of it. And you have just argued that we need to keep ALL of God's word.
No one is saying that.
That is another thing I have found on this issue - that people assume that female Christians who preach, and/or are ordained, are only doing it to assert their rights/be feminists/keep up with the world.
That is not the case. Some of us are saying, "I follow God and I am doing this because he has told me that it is his will for my life; that he has called me and given me the gifts to do it."
Like I said; do you keep ALL of God's word?
So you really think that the world cares that women should be ordained as Ministers and allowed to preach just as men do? Unlikely; Scripture makes it clear that the world doesn't care about the things of God. And as I said, implying that Christian women only want, and do, this to keep in step with the word or to assert their feminist agenda, is rather insulting.
Upvote
0
