Womens roles in the church

All Glory To God said:

Well Paul gives a pretty demanding list to be a Pastor, like sober, run his home well, not a novice, good reputation with non-Christians. So I'm seeing something different than you in what it takes to be a Pastor.

Click to expand...

Except that that's not a definitive list.
It says nothing about faith, experience of God, being born again, accepting Christ's deity etc etc - all of which is vital, I would have thought.

I wonder how many actually note, and believe, these verses anyway?
Take a look:
"An overseer must be beyond reproach, faithful to his wife (so he must be married), temperate, respectable, self controlled, hospitable, not given to drunkenness, not violent, able to teach, not quarrelsome, able to manage money. He must manage his own family and make sure that his children obey him", 1 Timothy 3:2-4.
So, have any preachers/ordination candidates been turned down because they are single/like a drink/have a bit of a temper/are hopeless with money/infertile? No? Why not, as these things are on the "list"? And if they haven't, and people overlook that ordination candidates might lack one or more of these things; how can they then get dogmatic about the fact that their gender's "wrong"?

myst33 said:

What did I interpret?

Click to expand...

Oh it's a matter of definition. That's the polite thing in my experience!

Strong in Him said:

And God is entitled to choose whomever he wishes.

Click to expand...

I agree. And I think he chose and told us in scripture by his Apostle Paul who they are:

1 Timothy 3:1-7
This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

Titus 1:6-9
if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, 8 but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.

Strong in Him said:

Except that that's not a definitive list.
It says nothing about faith, experience of God, being born again, accepting Christ's deity etc etc - all of which is vital, I would have thought.

I wonder how many actually note, and believe, these verses anyway?
Take a look:
"An overseer must be beyond reproach, faithful to his wife (so he must be married), temperate, respectable, self controlled, hospitable, not given to drunkenness, not violent, able to teach, not quarrelsome, able to manage money. He must manage his own family and make sure that his children obey him", 1 Timothy 3:2-4.
So, have any preachers/ordination candidates been turned down because they are single/like a drink/have a bit of a temper/are hopeless with money/infertile? No? Why not, as these things are on the "list"? And if they haven't, and people overlook that ordination candidates might lack one or more of these things; how can they then get dogmatic about the fact that their gender's "wrong"?

Click to expand...

I think you are saying that this scripture doesn't really count. Am I right?

Strong in Him said:

Except that that's not a definitive list.
It says nothing about faith, experience of God, being born again, accepting Christ's deity etc etc - all of which is vital, I would have thought.

I wonder how many actually note, and believe, these verses anyway?
Take a look:
"An overseer must be beyond reproach, faithful to his wife (so he must be married), temperate, respectable, self controlled, hospitable, not given to drunkenness, not violent, able to teach, not quarrelsome, able to manage money. He must manage his own family and make sure that his children obey him", 1 Timothy 3:2-4.
So, have any preachers/ordination candidates been turned down because they are single/like a drink/have a bit of a temper/are hopeless with money/infertile? No? Why not, as these things are on the "list"? And if they haven't, and people overlook that ordination candidates might lack one or more of these things; how can they then get dogmatic about the fact that their gender's "wrong"?

Click to expand...

Isn't it fun to argue with those who have turned "gender" into their own personal little god and gatekeeper to the Gospel? Like Metallica said, "Nothing else matters!" I am wondering though if they'll ever figure out how to actually debate a point rather than simply stating something to the effect of, "If you don't agree with MY lens of scripture, then you don't think scripture counts nyah nyah nyah got your nose!"

LoveofTruth said:

Again I disagree strongly with your idea of authority in the body...
The churches for the most part are not walking in the order of God and there is great division among many groups as you must be aware today. Because of the great divisions and confusion Christ sends workers from smith out at times. Many churches are not functioning the way they should where they are eager to receive strangers and hear their testimony and where we can work together and they would then come to know those who labour among them in the Lord by their word and their life testimony.

So for me to enter into a assembly (knowing what the Lord has shown me) and to see a one man or woman dominating over the church where none can use their gifts and edify each other and to say that I should have “joined” them, is not the way God led me. I was not to join their error but in love to help my brothers and sisters and to speak what the Lord sent me to speak on. The Lord would speak to me many times as I waited snd ministered and I was told that the Pastors , so called, that I was encountering would not receive me but others would.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that it is unreasonable to expect to walk into a church, not accept their processes or discipline, but expect to minister with authority there. I suspect that that is part of the reason you have had so much difficulty.

Just to give you one example, where I am we have a legal responsibility to ensure that people who exercise leadership and teaching roles are screened for child safety (hold a working with children check, submit to a police check, that sort of thing). We would have to refuse formal ministry to anyone who refused to do so, not because of the content of their message, but because we are not able to just ignore these legal obligations, nor the safety of our vulnerable people.

LoveofTruth said:

By the way I highly value every woman saint in the churches.

Click to expand...

This is not true, as long as you place limitations on their ministry which you would not accept for yourself.

myst33 said:

Well, it happened in the USA in the 70's. Its natural there was a cultural context tied to the place and time.

Click to expand...

Possibly. As I said, you would have to check the LCA records to confirm that.

LoveofTruth said:

I haven’t missed out on anything. M
The sad thing is you have missed out on body ministry with the whole body and limited your edification to one or two women. Read Ephesians 4:15,16 and Colossians 3:15,26 consider

Click to expand...

What you wrote makes no sense. How have I missed out on ministry with the body of Christ?

All Glory To God said:

I agree. And I think he chose and told us in scripture by his Apostle Paul who they are:

Click to expand...

Considering all the 100's of female priests in the world, it seems like not many people agree with you.

Strong in Him said:

Considering all the 100's of female priests in the world, it seems like not many people agree with you.

Click to expand...

There are probably many more than 100's. 8^)

Considering that the requirements to spiritually lead others aren't dependent on physical strength, there is absolutely no reason that women can't perform any and all acts/deeds required for Christian ministry.

Any reasons to the contrary are dependent on the law, to which Christians are dead (or are supposed to be).

All Glory To God said:

I think you are saying that this scripture doesn't really count. Am I right?

Click to expand...

No, I'm asking you to be consistent in your interpretation of it.
You say a woman can't be ordained because this passage says that the overseer must have a wife and be able to manage HIS children? Fine; that means an ordination candidate HAS to be married, (the passage says so) and HAS to have children. A man should also be excluded from ordained ministry if he has a temper, is not self controlled, likes a drink or has ever been drunk, is bad with money and fails to make his children obey him - Scripture says so.

So can't home in on one detail in this passage and conveniently ignore all the others.
And, as I said before, it says nothing about faith or being born again.

The most obvious thing is that the women were already qualified by default in their behavior. They weren't running around drunk with prostitutes and young boys and neglecting their households as the men were doing, so Paul said that if a MAN wants to be an "overseer" he needs to get his act together. Chances are there was a group of these rowdy overseer-wannabees in the Ephesus church that needed to be taken down a few notches.

Archivist said:

Possibly. As I said, you would have to check the LCA records to confirm that.

Click to expand...

Its possible that they wrote it down, but its necessary that any of us are products of our time and place. Luther, LCA, you, me.

And it shapes our views. If they came with the idea in a muslim country, in a jewish community, in Japan... or in the medieval era, that would be revolutionary. In the USA in 70's its natural.

The time and place alone do not make it right or wrong, because culture is changing constantly and manytimes in circles. In the USA in 2300 it may be considered a bad idea, again.

Strong in Him said:

Considering all the 100's of female priests in the world, it seems like not many people agree with you.

Click to expand...

And they are sinning. That is the whole point of my first message and protesting of women pastors. Another member simplified the issue into just going to a church that has a man that is the pastor but that's not enough. I want to call out people who are sinning when they are disobeying Gods commandments.

Far from it. Women who follow God's call to ministry are neither disobedient nor sinning. It is not a sin to say "yes" when God calls.

All Glory To God said:

And they are sinning.

Click to expand...

Are they?

If they are sinning:
i) they are also lying when they publicly testify that God called them to their ministry. So why doesn't God do something to stop them, correct them for their own good, and prevent his people from being led astray?
ii) They must also being very knowledgeable/devious/clever to be able to fool all those male pastors into accepting them and their call, training and ordaining them.
iii) They must also have been able to deceive the entire church. Church members will know if someone is training for ordination and, if they feel they are not very good/not called, a lot of people would say something. At an ordination service people are asked if it is their will that a person be ordained, and if they will support them in prayer.
iv) What is the result of the "sin" of these women?
The Gospel is preached - the same Gospel preached by men; people are converted, taught, encouraged in their faith, comforted, challenged; the sick are visited, people are married, buried and baptised. Does a marriage/baptism become invalid before God if a woman performed it? Are non Christians not really converted?
I can assure you that I, and doubtless many others, have been helped, encouraged, taught and greatly benefitted from the ministry of female ministers. Does God now use sin to bless his people? Does God inspire disobedient sinners to speak his message, preach the Gospel and make disciples?
v) These women are your sisters in Christ. Most, if not all, will be born again, filled with the Holy Spirit and are children of God. Are you just going to dismiss them ALL as being sinners?
Why didn't the Spirit prevent them from being ordained? It's a long process, which involves much discussion, prayer and practical work - at any point, God could say to those women, or the men training them, "they are disobeying me; I don't want this." Or are you implying that everyone involved knows perfectly well that they are sinning and they just go ahead anyway? The Holy Spirit does not need to fill, guide, bless, inspire, strengthen etc those who are disobeying and sinning against God.

Have you actually thought this through?

All Glory To God said:

That is the whole point of my first message and protesting of women pastors.

Click to expand...

That's your opinion.

All Glory To God said:

Another member simplified the issue into just going to a church that has a man that is the pastor but that's not enough. I want to call out people who are sinning when they are disobeying Gods commandments.

Click to expand...

a) You're not, and they're not.
You are sharing your opinion that God has forbidden women to preach or be ordained, and anyone who disagrees with that opinion is wrong.
You could say, "well I disagree. I don't understand it, but I'm glad that people are being blessed and helped by the ministries of women preachers and pastors. Anyone who is sincerely serving God and follows what they believe to be his calling, is to be admired; if they have got it wrong, God can and will correct them, since it is his will and his work."
You have said nothing like that; only, "they are all sinning and my job is to challenge sinners and call them on their sin."

Don't you believe God is able to challenge people about their sin and lead them to repentance? That is also the work of the Holy Spirit.

All Glory To God said:

And they are sinning. That is the whole point of my first message and protesting of women pastors. Another member simplified the issue into just going to a church that has a man that is the pastor but that's not enough. I want to call out people who are sinning when they are disobeying Gods commandments.

Click to expand...

Except this is an issue upon which Christians can and do disagree. Yes, Paul does say certain things regarding the role of women in the church. But Paul also lists a female deacon and a female apostle in his letters, and he says that "there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus." John tells us that it was a woman who was first to preach the Good News of the risen Christ. We know from the Old Testament that Deborah was a judge and prophet. We know that Miriam was also a prophet,

What we are hearing from you is not that this is an issue upon which Christians disagree, but that it is a sin for a woman to be a pastor. Again, you are entitled to your interpretation of scripture, but that is all you are giving is you interpretation. Other Christians read scripture and come up with different answers.

myst33 said:

Its possible that they wrote it down, but its necessary that any of us are products of our time and place. Luther, LCA, you, me.

And it shapes our views. If they came with the idea in a muslim country, in a jewish community, in Japan... or in the medieval era, that would be revolutionary. In the USA in 70's its natural.

The time and place alone do not make it right or wrong, because culture is changing constantly and manytimes in circles. In the USA in 2300 it may be considered a bad idea, again.

Click to expand...

"Its possible that they wrote it down?" No, it would be in the minutes of the LCA assembly. You need to do your research if you are going to understand why it was done. You can't just make an assumption.