Can women talk about Jesus and the gospel?

ChicanaRose · Apr 6, 2019

bekkilyn said:
Yep, in United Methodist history, men wanted to become Deaconesses, which is a lifelong lay vocation, so they created the Home Missioner, which is the male name for a Deaconess. Deacons are an ordained role that includes both men and women, so Deacon was already taken, so they just came up with a new name that was the exact same role as the Deaconess. It's a bit confusing, but I believe Deaconesses wanted to keep their titles for historic reasons.

I know the difference between monks and nuns. This is why I made the point that men are restricted from becoming nuns. They cannot protest gender discrimination by choosing to dress like nuns. In a secular workplace, a transgender person can show up wearing a woman's clothing. But it doesn't work like that with a religious profession. There is a bit of restrictions when it comes to gender role. Monks and nuns do the same work in terms of job descriptions, but we clearly see the distinction of gender in the way that they dress, and group themselves.

Gregory Thompson · Apr 6, 2019

Romans 8 said:
Well, I would agree if it's a matter someone's own idea of control.

This is kind of the main issue plaguing the body through a number of theological issues. The perception of "greatness" follows the pattern of the world instead of what Jesus taught. The basis of greatness is service.

~Zao~ · Apr 6, 2019

Romans 8 said:
So who should decide who does what in a church? Someone must take authority no?

Wouldn’t it be so much simpler if the church taught that God is the head and we are submissive to Him in all things. Teaching that getting married to another is the pattern that God has given so that in equal submission to each other they are then following the other part of loving God as oneself.
I suppose the person that has the gift to do what is required would be the one to do what needs to be done, wouldn’t that just make sense? Even in a family?
What authority? Oh you mean taking grievances to the church instead of court? I’m sure there must be some Jethro-type persons around for that.

Romans 8 · Apr 6, 2019

LoreneDD said:
Wouldn’t it be so much simpler if the church taught that God is the head and we are submissive to Him in all things.

That's what my church teaches, doesn't yours?

Teaching that getting married to another is the pattern that God has given so that in equal submission to each other they are then following the other part of loving God as oneself.

It's not equal submission. The man is the head of the family. The wife submits to the husband. The husband is commanded to love his wife. This means to treat her with respect. There can only be one leader in any relationship. With God, He is our leader. Here on earth, we have our order. But many choose to disobey His order and make up their own.

I suppose the person that has the gift to do what is required would be the one to do what needs to be done, wouldn’t that just make sense? Even in a family?

So you're saying that whoever you deem capable should be the one that leads. But if other disagree with you? This is why the order has been set up. And if you go back a few posts to what I and the guy I quoted posted about Genesis. It all makes sense for those with the ears to hear.

~Zao~ · Apr 6, 2019

Romans 8 said:
That's what my church teaches, doesn't yours?

It's not equal submission. The man is the head of the family. The wife submits to the husband. The husband is commanded to love his wife. This means to treat her with respect. There can only be one leader in any relationship. With God, He is our leader. Here on earth, we have our order. But many choose to disobey His order and make up their own.

So you're saying that whoever you deem capable should be the one that leads. But if other disagree with you? This is why the order has been set up. And if you go back a few posts to what I and the guy I quoted posted about Genesis. It all makes sense for those with the ears to hear.

So you are the part of ears and eyes? Self-appointed no doubt. Not everyone sees things the same. Good day.

ChicanaRose · Apr 6, 2019

Loyce KG said:
We can argue till the 'cows return home'. I have settled in my heart that there are issues we shall never agree entirely about in the Christian doctrine-this being one of them. So, I decided not to sweat it. May the peace of God rule!

I think the O.P.'s original question was if she can start a Christian YouTube channel and write Christian books. By all means she can.

I don't think she expected her question to turn into an extensive dialogue in the way that it did, and I admit to have participated in.

But I find this dialogue useful in sharing various perspectives.

Gregory Thompson · Apr 6, 2019

With a YouTube channel, each person who watches and participates does so of their own volition. The format does not obligate any participation at all, so concerns conservative interpretations place on "mixed audiences" do not apply.

Romans 8 · Apr 6, 2019

LoreneDD said:
So you are the part of ears and eyes? Self-appointed no doubt. Not everyone sees things the same. Good day.

I think the heart of the problem is just that people refuse to submit. I have already stated that I have my place under my Pastor. I accept his authority in the church. But I wonder if the main issue is simply the threat of any authority. How was your family life? Did your mom rule it? Were you defiant as a child? Did your parents discipline you? I don't mean to put you under the microscope, but these factors all play a role.
With family's being so out of whack with the order previously described, it's no wonder so many are defiant to these basic commands. Originally, men were at the head of the family. Yesterday, women were at the head. Today, children seems to make the rules. It's insane. This simple order means so much more than people give it credit.

Romans 8 · Apr 6, 2019

ChicanaRose said:
I think the O.P.'s original question was if she can start a Christian YouTube channel and write Christian books. By all means she can.

I don't think she expected her question to turn into an extensive dialogue in the way that it did, and I admit to have participated in.

But I find this dialogue useful in sharing various perspectives.

There was another thread based on a similar subject, but as always it got squashed. So, some of us didn't get to finish our thoughts on the matter, but...I think it's an important topic.

ChicanaRose · Apr 6, 2019

Romans 8 said:
I think the heart of the problem is just that people refuse to submit. I have already stated that I have my place under my Pastor. I accept his authority in the church. But I wonder if the main issue is simply the threat of any authority. How was your family life? Did your mom rule it? Were you defiant as a child? Did your parents discipline you? I don't mean to put you under the microscope, but these factors all play a role.
With family's being so out of whack with the order previously described, it's no wonder so many are defiant to these basic commands. Originally, men were at the head of the family. Yesterday, women were at the head. Today, children seems to make the rules. It's insane. This simple order means so much more than people give it credit.

Exactly. So much emphasis on "serving in humility" yet if this is truly one's attitude, why does the slightest distinction of roles or levels of hierarchy bother her?

bekkilyn · Apr 6, 2019

ChicanaRose said:
I know the difference between monks and nuns. This is why I made the point that men are restricted from becoming nuns. They cannot protest gender discrimination by choosing to dress like nuns. In a secular workplace, a transgender person can show up wearing a woman's clothing. But it doesn't work like that with a religious profession. There is a bit of restrictions when it comes to gender role. Monks and nuns do the same work in terms of job descriptions, but we clearly see the distinction of gender in the way that they dress, and group themselves.

However, the organization of monks and nuns is a human-created organization, so just because they chose to group themselves in that manner at some point in history does not in any way mean that God forced them to do so or that he wouldn't approve of just having a monastic organization where all are described by the same title.

CGL1023 · Apr 6, 2019

JackRT said:
The issue of womens' role in the church is not as clear cut as some people would want to think. The letters of Paul, which date to the middle of the first century AD, provide some clues. For example, Paul greets Prisca, Junia, Julia, and Nereus' sister, who worked and traveled as missionaries in pairs with their husbands or brothers (Romans 16:3, 7, 15) as equals and co-workers. Junia is praised as a prominent apostle, imprisoned for her faith. Mary and Persis are commended for their hard work (Romans 16:6, 12). Euodia and Syntyche are called his fellow-workers in the gospel (Philippians 4:2-3). Women were the leaders of house churches (Apphia in Philemon 2; Prisca in I Corinthians 16:19), Lydia of Thyatira (Acts 16:15) and Nympha of Laodicea (Colossians 4:15). Women held offices and played significant roles in group worship, such as the deacon Phoebe (Romans 16:1) and women were certainly praying and prophesying during worship (I Corinthians 11). An order of widows served formal roles of ministry (I Timothy 5:9-10). Women prophets included Mary Magdalene, the Corinthian women, Philip's daughters, Ammia of Philadelphia, Philumene, the visionary martyr Perpetua, Maximilla, Priscilla (Prisca), and Quintilla.

When we look at the bible, both old and new testaments, we realize that they emerged from an extremely patriarchal society. This society devalued women to the extent that they were not even considered to be persons before the law. Not only were they devalued but they were in many ways considered to be of inferior intellect and of a carnal nature even moreso than the male. Patriarchy was simply part and parcel of their world view --- they simply were unable to think of the role of women in any other way. Today we know that women are the intellectual and spiritual equals of men and in every respect except physical size and strength. Jesus himslf seems to gave been largely gender blind in that he numbered women among his disciples and apostles and even close friends. Paul, at first, appears conflicted until we realize that the pastoral epistles (1 and 2 Timothy and Titus) were actually written pseudonomously some 60 years after Paul's death. This was more than enough time for patriarchy to once again take charge. In my personal opinion patriarchy just might be the ugliest evil that humanity has ever inflicted on itself. It still exerts its malevolent influence in some circles even today. As a Christian I am convinced that we should make every effort to ensure the full equality of women in every aspect of the life of our churches and in society at large.

Any organization, religious or secular and including marriage, that fails to include women in leadership roles right up to the very top is guilty of several evils. First, it is the insult to the women themselves by viewing them as less worthy. Second, it is the insult to God by denigrating half of God’s creation. If we continue to treat women in this way, then the human race is condemned to stand on one foot, see with one eye, hear with one ear and think with one half the human mind ---- and it shows.

So, the short answer to your question is NO.

Yours was a terrific response. I recognize that if the bible is taken out of context you end up with nonsense but that is as far as I had gotten with it. You went the rest of the way.

Gregory Thompson · Apr 6, 2019

bekkilyn said:
However, the organization of monks and nuns is a human-created organization, so just because they chose to group themselves in that manner at some point in history does not in any way mean that God forced them to do so or that he wouldn't approve of just having a monastic organization where all are described by the same title.

Very similar to the order of priests of a particular Christian tradition who only can be celebate.

PaulCyp1 · Apr 6, 2019

That statement by Timothy simply reveals that the Apostles had not yet completely broken away from the many rules and regulations of Judaism, in which they had been raised. Jesus made it very clear that men and women are equal in all respects. He did select men to be the first leaders/priests/bishops of the one Church He founded, and His Church continues that practice today, because it does not have the authority to change a rule instituted by God Himself. However, unordained women in His Church can do everything unordained men can do, no exceptions.

Gregory Thompson · Apr 6, 2019

I find the appeal to Eve curious, since when we're born again we are no longer part of the old fallen world, but the coming world that God is creating.

Foxfyre · Apr 6, 2019

NathChristian said:
Hi guys
1 Timothy 2:11-15 says women should be quiet.

Does it mean that women can't write books about christ or women can't have a youtube channel about bible teachings?

Thanks

There is nothing in the New Testament or Old Testament for that matter that says women should be quiet in all circumstances.

The passage in Timothy was explained to me by a wise bishop--a guy--who puts Timothy and his writings into the context of their time. The early church congregations almost certainly followed the Jewish tradition of having the women sit with women and the men sitting with men. In the synagogues, the women were seated behind a lattice barrier at the rear rather than in the main seating area.

This sometimes no doubt made it difficult for the women to hear the speaker and they probably called out WHAT DID HE SAY? or WHAT DID YOU SAY? Also in the patriarchal society that took awhile to reform itself, men would not tolerate being instructed by women and it was important that the men as head of their families learn and grow in the faith and then they could instruct their families. As for the Genesis analogy used, I just took that as Timothy struggling to find a rationale for the rules he was initiating.

Abraxos · Apr 6, 2019

Daniel C said:
Peter said women are the weaker vessel. Christian Forums

Should the weaker vessel (women) be preachers or should the stronger vessels (men) be preachers?

1 Peter 3:7 (KJV)
Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

A more accurate translation:
Husbands, the above goes for you too. Live with your wives in the realisation that the wife has the weaker livelihood. Show her honour. She is a joint-heir with you in the spiritual favour in life. If you don't, your prayers will be blocked!

ἀσθενής (asthenés) in the comparative, "weaker" the word could mean:

a. of body, sickly, weak.
b. of mind, weak, feeble.
c. in power, lacking, weak.
d. in property, poor. For "weaker" financially.

In the case of 1 Peter 3:7, with σκεῦος (skeuos) following, it means to be in a disadvantaged position for getting a living. So, "weaker" not in the sense of what you seem to interpret as to mean "weaker" as in incapable of teaching, or strong enough to lead.
σκεῦος (skeuos) For the Greek idiom, σκεῦος κτᾶσθαι (skeuos ktasthai), is to gain control of one's living. The same applies in 1 Thessalonians 4:4, σκεῦος (skeuos), is a common word with a variety of meanings. It means an implement, equipment, a living (as in one's financial state), furniture, goods, ship's tackle. With ἀσθενής (asthenés), it means to be in a disadvantaged position for getting a living. Numerous petitions in the papyri attest to the disadvantaged position of women in general, even those from the higher social classes.

1 Peter 3:7 is actually referring to the sociological circumstances of the day, not their inability to lead or to teach.

Paidiske · Apr 6, 2019

ChicanaRose said:
Exactly. So much emphasis on "serving in humility" yet if this is truly one's attitude, why does the slightest distinction of roles or levels of hierarchy bother her?

It's a matter of what you're gifted and called to do. If your gifting is for leadership, teaching, and so forth, then being denied a role in which that can be expressed is a form of quenching the Spirit; and it is often a great and difficult grief for the person who experiences it.

It's not a matter of wanting to be higher than others, but given scope to actually serve. Different churches structure their roles differently, so in some this is more of a problem than in others.

Daniel C · Apr 6, 2019

@Abrarxos. Oh so you can translate the original better than the authors of the KJV can you? Because what you say and what they say is different. I'm going to put my trust in the tried and tested 500 year old version and not you.

What you say about Peters message is false. He was not referring to womens status in society but them as a people as that part of the letter he was writing was addressing marriage and gender.

bekkilyn · Apr 6, 2019

Because we all know that God didn't inspire any scriptures at all until the holy English language of the early 17th century came into being and the KJV was magically produced.

Can women talk about Jesus and the gospel?

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Wisdom’s child

Well-Known Member

Wisdom’s child

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Contemplative Christian

citizen of heaven

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Nemo vir est qui mundum non reddat meliorem.

Clara bonam audax

Well-Known Member

Contemplative Christian

Similar threads