Can women talk about Jesus and the gospel?

Daniel C said:

How so?

Click to expand...

Mary Magdalene was the first witness to the resurrection; Matthew 28:1-10, Mark 16:1-3, Luke 24:1-10, John 20:1-3, John 20:10-18. This was not an accident. Jesus could have appeared first to his disciples; he chose to appear to a woman.
In Mark's Gospel the angel's message is "go, tell his disciples and Peter ....", Mark 16:7. Peter was the main source behind Mark's Gospel - no doubt he, himself, wanted those words to be included.

Strong in Him said:

Mary Magdalene was the first witness to the resurrection; Matthew 28:1-10, Mark 16:1-3, Luke 24:1-10, John 20:1-3, John 20:10-18. This was not an accident. Jesus could have appeared first to his disciples; he chose to appear to a woman.
In Mark's Gospel the angel's message is "go, tell his disciples and Peter ....", Mark 16:7. Peter was the main source behind Mark's Gospel - no doubt he, himself, wanted those words to be included.

Click to expand...

We are all aware the women went to tend to Christs body. Found the stone rolled back, and somehow you think this qualifies women to preach?

All I see in this event is the standard funeral preparation being carried out by women, who were usually delegated that role.

NathChristian said:

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

Click to expand...

Of course they can. They simply should not have recognized positions of authority or teaching in the Church.

Strong in Him said:

They didn't NOT support them.
Read Romans 16 - Paul had female co-workers, whom he commended in their hard work for the Gospel.
I'm not aware that Peter taught anything about female pastors/Ministers.

Click to expand...

I've read all the bible and no part of it supports women preaching over men.

Romans was written by Paul and Paul wrote Corinthians, ' women should be silent and have no authority over men'.

I think you are just being argumentative.

Daniel C said:

God does not make mistakes. He would not send a message through his elect/apostles that men (only) should preach and then change his mind.

Click to expand...

I didn't say He made a mistake. It wouldn't be the first time God put one of His own into an unrighteous situation for the sake of others of His own. Esther, for instance.

thecolorsblend said:

Of course they can. They simply should not have recognized positions of authority or teaching in the Church.

Click to expand...

There is a lot of conflation today in the word "teach."

Paul would not have considered every type of conveyance of information to be "teaching." To Paul, "teaching" was a master-disciple relationship, not merely someone standing in front of a group reading from a prepared lesson text.

A woman selling DVDs would not be a "teacher" in Paul's parlance.

I feel like I'm wasting my time on this thread. I'm quoting scripture and it is ignored, we can't even use the argument from silence strategy because Paul and Peter were very clear in their view women should not teach in the church.All prophets from the OT were men and Christ took the male form and Christ is the ultimate role model/leader for christians.There is no biblical evidence that God wants his church run by women.

If people here are determined to see women in church authority that's their opinion but only their opinion-not scripture so ultimately not Gods word. God sets things out to his will and not to be changed.

We all give an account for our choices on judgement day so defying God is a risk.

Best of luck all.

Daniel C said:

We are all aware the women went to tend to Christs body. Found the stone rolled back, and somehow you think this qualifies women to preach?

All I see in this event is the standard funeral preparation being carried out by women, who were usually delegated that role.

Click to expand...

I'm saying that women were first at the tomb, first to see the risen Christ, were told to go and find the male disciples and give them the news that Jesus was alive again and give them - and Peter - a message from him.

If God was so anti women in leadership, or women preachers; why give them that job?
Why did Jesus not first appear to Peter who - some claim - was the head of the church?

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.

Click to expand...

The authoritarian structure you long for (and in which you would be granted authority whether or not you are mature, wise, and moral enough to handle it, simply because of your gender) has caused great harm. My father was abusive and my mother did not intervene to protect herself or her children because he was the “head of the house.” She sought advice from others in the church who instructed her to submit to his authority. Women and children have been raped and abused because of the arcane idea of headship and submission which arbitrarily places bullies, pedophiles, and immature people in positions of power over others. If a husband is a natural leader and the wife is a natural follower, then they will fall into those roles naturally, and there is no need to command that structure. You say you accept the authority of your pastor, but he is likely in that role because he has proven himself to be a good, moral leader. Your pastor doesn’t live with you and hold authority over every part of your life.

Daniel C said:

I've read all the bible and no part of it supports women preaching over men.

Romans was written by Paul and Paul wrote Corinthians, ' women should be silent and have no authority over men'.

I think you are just being argumentative.

Click to expand...

I've read the Bible too.
In the OT women were prophetesses - men CHOSE to consult them to receive a word from God.
Deborah was judge over the whole nation.

"Read the Bible", "read the Bible in context" and "interpreted the Bible a certain way", are different things. Quoting verses out of context does not prove anything.

If you are a literalist in the way you read Scripture, then "women being silent" means "women being SILENT" - no singing, praying, prophesying or reading the Scriptures. Paul also wrote 1 Corinthians where he instructs women how to pray and prophesy, and 1 Corinthians 12 where he teaches about the gifts of the Spirit - with no word at all that these are only for men. And, as I said, he had female co-workers, and knew that Priscilla taught Apollos.

I think maybe you are not sure how to read Scripture.

RDKirk said:

There is a lot of conflation today in the word "teach."

Paul would not have considered every type of conveyance of information to be "teaching." To Paul, "teaching" was a master-disciple relationship, not merely someone standing in front of a group reading from a prepared lesson text.

A woman selling DVDs would not be a "teacher" in Paul's parlance.

Click to expand...

Good point... more hands on, more one on one walking together...

God Bless!

Strong in Him said:

Female pastors is not about feminism.

Click to expand...

Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law. If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”

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

Click to expand...

1 Corinthians 11 St. Paul talks about women preaching (prophesying) in church. In Romans 16 Paul mentions a female apostle named Junia. In the Acts of the Apostles we have a woman named Priscilla, who along with her husband, taught Apollos.

The issue being discussed in 1 Timothy isn't about women not talking, teaching, etc; it's about a particular issue happening. Paul uses the word αὐθεντεῖν (authentein) which has the meaning of something like "usurp" or to act autocratically. The issue isn't women teaching or speaking in the context of the Church; the issue seems to be that certain women were acting on their own authority over and against others in the Church. Such a problem would not be a woman-only problem, it would be just as problematic for men to usurp authority and act on their own.

This passage has frequently been used in modern times to try and make women into second class Christians; where historically women have had a voice in the Church. As we see in Scripture itself, as well as in the early history of the Church with women such as St. Thekla or St. Felicity. The idea that women have no role in the Church except to be quiet as a mouse and offer no input, and do nothing whatsoever is not a biblical idea, it isn't a traditional Christian idea, it's a purely modern idea--an innovation that is contrary to the biblical and traditional practice of Christianity.

-CryptoLUtheran

Daniel C said:

I feel like I'm wasting my time on this thread. I'm quoting scripture and it is ignored, we can't even use the argument from silence strategy because Paul and Peter were very clear in their view women should not teach in the church.All prophets from the OT were men and Christ took the male form and Christ is the ultimate role model/leader for christians.There is no biblical evidence that God wants his church run by women.

If people here are determined to see women in church authority that's their opinion but only their opinion-not scripture so ultimately not Gods word. God sets things out to his will and not to be changed.

We all give an account for our choices on judgement day so defying God is a risk.

Best of luck all.

Click to expand...

All the prophets from the OT were Jews, Christ was a Jew, there is no biblical evidence that God wants His church run by Gentiles.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

All the prophets from the OT were Jews, Christ was a Jew, there is no biblical evidence that God wants His church run by Gentiles.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

I wonder if that might not have been an issue of the early church that Paul was addressing to the Jews in the church at Rome. Maybe they had the problem that only Jews could be leaders in the congregation, and that required Paul's direct address.

Daniel C said:

I feel like I'm wasting my time on this thread. I'm quoting scripture and it is ignored,

Click to expand...

I wasn't ignoring you - I was quoting other Scriptures which show that women were NOT silent; they prayed, prophesied, taught and shared the Good News.
The question is, what do you make of that; are these Scriptures contradicting one another?
My answer is 'no, they are not; women can speak and teach' - therefore, when Paul appears to disallow this, there must be something else going on.

Daniel C said:

we can't even use the argument from silence strategy because Paul and Peter were very clear in their view women should not teach in the church.

Click to expand...

Where does Peter say this?

Daniel C said:

All prophets from the OT were men

Click to expand...

No they weren't, I've told you - Deborah, Miriam and Huldah were prophetesses. So was Isaiah's wife.

Daniel C said:

There is no biblical evidence that God wants his church run by women.

Click to expand...

There is no Biblical evidence that he doesn't.
Jesus said "I will build my church". Did he teach that women were to have no place in leadership in it? No.

Daniel C said:

If people here are determined to see women in church authority that's their opinion but only their opinion-not scripture so ultimately not Gods word. God sets things out to his will and not to be changed.

Click to expand...

Not to be changed?
God is always changing the way he works. Once he told them to build a tabernacle and he travelled round with them. Years later he commanded Solomon build a temple - and centuries after that, Jesus came, lived among us and then taught that he would be IN us and WE would be temples of the Holy Spirit.
Once, people offered animal sacrifices, then Jesus came and offered his life as a sacrifice for us. Jews don't believe this, but even THEY don't offer animal sacrifices any more.
Through Isaiah, God once said to them, "See, I am doing a NEW thing", Isaiah 43:18-9.
Through Jeremiah he said that he would one day make a NEW Covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Through Joel he prophesied that his Spirit would be poured out on all, Joel 2:28-29 - incidentally, that included women, who would also prophesy.

Daniel C said:

We all give an account for our choices on judgement day so defying God is a risk.

Click to expand...

It is - and if he has called us to preach or be Ministers and we ignore or disobey him; what then?
What if God were to say to some people after death, "why did you prevent women from speaking and sharing the Gospel?" What then? I hope they would have an answer.

Daniel C said:

I feel like I'm wasting my time on this thread. I'm quoting scripture and it is ignored, we can't even use the argument from silence strategy because Paul and Peter were very clear in their view women should not teach in the church.All prophets from the OT were men and Christ took the male form and Christ is the ultimate role model/leader for christians.There is no biblical evidence that God wants his church run by women.

If people here are determined to see women in church authority that's their opinion but only their opinion-not scripture so ultimately not Gods word. God sets things out to his will and not to be changed.

We all give an account for our choices on judgement day so defying God is a risk.

Best of luck all.

Click to expand...

I know the feeling. I have pointed out that the scriptures people quote are addressed to specific people, not to the entire church, and the negapusses flatly refuse to abandon their bigotry.

RDKirk said:

I wonder if that might not have been an issue of the early church that Paul was addressing to the Jews in the church at Rome.

Click to expand...

I think there is certainly some kind of disharmony between Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome that Paul is addressing; I don't know that this is specifically one of those issues. Paul seems far more interested in getting the point across that we're all sinners, and therefore we're all under the same judgments from God--and conversely, we are all under the same Gospel of salvation. Hence Paul's bait-and-switch from Romans 1 to Romans 2.

-CryptoLutheran

Romans 8 said:

Yes. This is the "touchy subject" that I mentioned earlier. Satan intentionally went for the weakest link and chose/tricked the woman into transgressing the law. It's simply a matter of how we were made differently. Women were made to be subordinate. Men were made to be leaders. Women are more susceptible to deceit.

Another interesting verse is Isaiah 3:12 talks of weak effeminate rulers, or it's literal meaning that the women were calling the shots. Either way, women as rulers is asserted as a negative connotation:

Isa 3:12 My people—infants are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, your guides mislead you and they have swallowed up the course of your paths.

Click to expand...

Isaiah 3 is one of my favorite passages to use, complimentary to the abundance of other verses that explicitly address the roles of men and women, to demonstrate how abhorrent the contradiction of these roles are to God (even likening it to children ruling over parents). Jeremiah 51:30 also demonstrates that men becoming like women is an accursed state, since it was a result of the judgment of God, not His blessing.

ViaCrucis said:

I think there is certainly some kind of disharmony between Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome that Paul is addressing; I don't know that this is specifically one of those issues. Paul seems far more interested in getting the point across that we're all sinners, and therefore we're all under the same judgments from God--and conversely, we are all under the same Gospel of salvation. Hence Paul's bait-and-switch from Romans 1 to Romans 2.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

I think part of that disharmony was sparked by the fact that the Jewish Christians had been away from the scene for several years because of Claudius' expulsion. The gentile Christians had carried on by themselves until the Jews returned. If the gentiles had accepted Jewish leadership before, they may not have been quite willing to accept it afterwards.