A question to protestants

[Albion]

All of that flies in the face of a number of New Testament verses which clearly describe the leadership of the church, names the offices, gives the qualifications, and so on. To have any Christian talk as though none of this is found in scripture is baffling to me.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Hi. I grew up in a Catholic family, lived an atheist life of sin and returned to God through Catholicism. I knew nothing about other denominations.
My big issue was with Marion devotion, my parents being Portuguese are devoted to Our Lady of Fatima. But when I inquired about it in a Catholic forum I was labelled a Protestant.

"What is that?" So I looked into it. I always thought that Catholics where the original religion which held the bible sacred and then the denominations split off with new books, dogmas and doctrines. I was shocked to learn that its the Catholics that have a heap of other stuff besides the bible.

I learnt about "sola scripture" and that the protestants adhere to the bible and so began to wonder if I was even a Catholic anymore or a Protestant now as I believe in sola scripture and not the opportunity for humans to add doctrines to it without any bible foundation.

So now I"m surprised to learn that there are female priests in the Protestant priesthood.

"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." Timothy 2:11-14 ESV

Scripture is quite clear on that topic, what happened "sola scripture" in this case?

It really does not matter what denomination you research you will find a degree of error in all of them. It is unfortunate that the will of the flesh and not the will of The Father sometimes consumes the mortal spirit. That being said, the only way to stay on the narrow path that leads to the narrow gate is to "walk in His Holy Spirit". Jesus Christ said "seek and ye shall find". I must admit ,being on this thread now for a few years, that this is the first time I read an OP that made my heart leap for joy! A fellow Christian exercising the gift of discernment across denominational lines.
Blessings

 

[Redwingfan9]

Hi. I grew up in a Catholic family, lived an atheist life of sin and returned to God through Catholicism. I knew nothing about other denominations.
My big issue was with Marion devotion, my parents being Portuguese are devoted to Our Lady of Fatima. But when I inquired about it in a Catholic forum I was labelled a Protestant.

"What is that?" So I looked into it. I always thought that Catholics where the original religion which held the bible sacred and then the denominations split off with new books, dogmas and doctrines. I was shocked to learn that its the Catholics that have a heap of other stuff besides the bible.

I learnt about "sola scripture" and that the protestants adhere to the bible and so began to wonder if I was even a Catholic anymore or a Protestant now as I believe in sola scripture and not the opportunity for humans to add doctrines to it without any bible foundation.

So now I"m surprised to learn that there are female priests in the Protestant priesthood.

"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." Timothy 2:11-14 ESV

Scripture is quite clear on that topic, what happened "sola scripture" in this case?

There isn't one protestant church and so you'll get varying views on this issue. I oppose women serving in positions of leadership in the church (elder, deacon etc.) 1 Tim is quite clear on the matter and so are the various discussions of the qualifications for elders and deacons. A pastor is a teaching elder and is subject to the qualifications of an elder which means women can never serve in that roll.

 

[Not David]

"there is ONE mediator between God and man" 1 Tim 2:5
"if he were on earth today - He (Christ) would not be a priest at all" Hebrews 8



Which are statements about the entire congregation not about one person serving as priest over the others.

Confessing to a priest is a specific act relying on holy orders, the mark of the soul and many other things that might be easily fit into the OT priestly cast / ministries but does not fir the NT church model according to Hebrews 8 even Christ himself was not a priest on earth. Ad Heb 7 points out - Judah was not in the class of the priesthood.

Yet the verse in James overrules the idea that confession breaks the mediation of God and man.

 

[Strong in Him]

I oppose women serving in positions of leadership in the church (elder, deacon etc.) 1 Tim is quite clear on the matter and so are the various discussions of the qualifications for elders and deacons.

If you interpret them a certain way, and say "this proves that God can't call women to ordination", then they are clear to you.
But hundreds would disagree, and what God IS doing today is calling women to ordination. This is a fact, and God would not go against his word if he had previously forbidden it - yet those who don't see it that way, will dismiss this and blame the women for being disobedient.

IA pastor is a teaching elder and is subject to the qualifications of an elder which means women can never serve in that roll.

Except they can and do. God is calling women to serve him in this way, and has been for some time.
Deborah was judge over all Israel, and she, Huldah, Miriam, Isaiah's wife and Philip's daughters all prophesied and gave the word of God to men. The early church had deaconesses and Phoebe was a deacon.

 

[Redwingfan9]

If you interpret them a certain way, and say "this proves that God can't call women to ordination", then they are clear to you.
But hundreds would disagree, and what God IS doing today is calling women to ordination. This is a fact, and God would not go against his word if he had previously forbidden it - yet those who don't see it that way, will dismiss this and blame the women for being disobedient.



Except they can and do. God is calling women to serve him in this way, and has been for some time.
Deborah was judge over all Israel, and she, Huldah, Miriam, Isaiah's wife and Philip's daughters all prophesied and gave the word of God to men. The early church had deaconesses and Phoebe was a deacon.

I would submit that God is not calling women to serve as elders and pastors. What we are seeing today is nothing more than an example of the spiritual and theological declension of the modern church.

Offering a prophacy in the Old Testament does not equal leading men in worship. It does not equal serving in the role of priest or pastor. As for Phoebe, she wasn't a formal deacon but was rather a servant of the church. She was likely a widow who was disowned by her Jewish family and as such spent her time in service to the church. That's a far cry from the elected office of deacon.

 

[Strong in Him]

I would submit that God is not calling women to serve as elders and pastors.

Yes, I'm sure you would - that's how you read the few Scriptures that appear to say this.
But there are many born again, children of God who KNOW him, have heard his call and say otherwise. Not to mention male clergy and theologians who agree with them and train them.

What we are seeing today is nothing more than an example of the spiritual and theological declension of the modern church.

So God is clearly powerless to stop women standing before a church and saying "God called me to be ordained"; he is unable to lead his sheep in paths of righteousness for his name's sake, Psalms 23:3, and he clearly doesn't mind if his children lie i his name? Or maybe the Holy Spirit isn't able to lead us into all truth after all?

Offering a prophacy in the Old Testament does not equal leading men in worship.

In Huldah's case, the male priests chose to go to her for a word from God, when they could have gone to a male prophet. They took the word that Huldah gave them back to the king and a revival started.
That is far more hands on than standing at the front of a church announcing hymns and reading prayers. The congregation worship. The preacher doesn't make us or do it for us, they only lead us and speak out a word from God - just as Huldah, Deborah and Mary Magdalene did.

As for Phoebe, she wasn't a formal deacon but was rather a servant of the church.

The Greek word can be translated as deacon, servant or minister. This word is used of Jesus and Paul when he ministered to the churches. Same word, also used of Phoebe.

She was likely a widow who was disowned by her Jewish family and as such spent her time in service to the church. That's a far cry from the elected office of deacon.

Like I said, same word that is used of Jesus and Paul is used of Phoebe.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

...or speaking in tongues or falling down in the aisles or any other such affectations.

However, my point was much more basic or fundamental to the Christian experience than any cheerleading for or against the church one's neighbor attends.

It's a shame, I think, that your comment above started out on the right track but then switched to just a recitation of specific grievances, thereby negating what you had written immediately before it about the church ("made up of all those who are genuinely converted to Christ").

Each church has its own characteristics, and as you mentioned, Pentecostal churches are no exception, and they are not immune in any way to have people more involved in their brand of churchianity as any other church of whatever denomination.

I see that my description of what I think is churchianity has struck a bit of a nerve with you, and I would have been surprised if it didn't.

I did not set out to criticise any particular church but to show that many professing Christians make their church their god, and many in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movement make their particular big-name preacher or teacher their god. This is why when their church or big-name personality fails them in some way, they depart from the faith. They don't depart from Christ, because they were never His in the first place.

It is interesting that Peter and Judas did all the same things, experienced the miracles of Jesus, sat under His teaching, knew that He was going to die and shed His blood for their sins, heard what He said to the Pharisees - in all there were no outward differences in the discipleship of both men right up until when Judas went out to betray Jesus. Peter also betrayed Jesus. But the difference between them was that Peter had a good heart, but Judas didn't. But even the other disciples whom they both had very close fellowship with over three years, didn't know that Judas was the bad egg, and when Jesus said that one of them was going to betray them, they all thought it might have been one of them.

The point I am making is that we can't tell by appearances which person is a true Christian and which one just has churchianity, because each one will behave exactly the same on the outside. One of the clues of churchianity is making distinctions between one type of church and another and saying that Catholics are more true to the faith than Protestants and vice versa, or that Pentecostals are closer to the cutting edge of what God is doing than Evangelicals or vice versa.

For the true believer, the church brand is only incidental, and he or she attends there only because the Holy Spirit has led them to that particular church, and if the Holy Spirit decided to lead them out of that church to another of a different denomination, they would transfer without hesitation, because they are following Christ, not a particular brand of church.

The test for you would be if the Holy Spirit told you to leave your Anglican church and go join a Baptist one, would you go without hesitation, or would you resist because you believe that your church is superior to the others?

 

[sdowney717]

Hi. I grew up in a Catholic family, lived an atheist life of sin and returned to God through Catholicism. I knew nothing about other denominations.
My big issue was with Marion devotion, my parents being Portuguese are devoted to Our Lady of Fatima. But when I inquired about it in a Catholic forum I was labelled a Protestant.

"What is that?" So I looked into it. I always thought that Catholics where the original religion which held the bible sacred and then the denominations split off with new books, dogmas and doctrines. I was shocked to learn that its the Catholics that have a heap of other stuff besides the bible.

I learnt about "sola scripture" and that the protestants adhere to the bible and so began to wonder if I was even a Catholic anymore or a Protestant now as I believe in sola scripture and not the opportunity for humans to add doctrines to it without any bible foundation.

So now I"m surprised to learn that there are female priests in the Protestant priesthood.

"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." Timothy 2:11-14 ESV

Scripture is quite clear on that topic, what happened "sola scripture" in this case?

See if there are Reformed Churches near you, they follow Sola Scriptura, or try harder to stay biblical.

 

[prodromos]

For the true believer

You forgot to add the (™)

 

[Albion]

I see that my description of what I think is churchianity has struck a bit of a nerve with you, and I would have been surprised if it didn't.

I really hope that what you are saying here is just for effect and not that you actually believe it.

I did not set out to criticise any particular church but to show that many professing Christians make their church their god, and many in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movement make their particular big-name preacher or teacher their god.

Except that that is not what you wrote.

 

[Helmut-WK]

All of that flies in the face of a number of New Testament verses which clearly describe the leadership of the church, names the offices, gives the qualifications, and so on. To have any Christian talk as though none of this is found in scripture is baffling to me.

You don't say what you are referring to. Do you want to say that denying women the possibility to serve as a church leader flies in the face of a number of NT verses?

 

[Helmut-WK]

Offering a prophacy in the Old Testament does not equal leading men in worship. It does not equal serving in the role of priest or pastor.

The problem is, that there is no role of "priest or pastor" in the NT. Instead, there are different roles:

• Leading the church (different names for that office: "being over you, 1.Ts 5:12 ESV, elders Acts 20:17, overseer Ats 20:28, the letter term are rendered as "priests" or "bishops" in some translations)
• prophets, i.e. people who tell the church what wants from them now
• teachers, i.e. people who explain the doctrine, what Jesus said and what scripture means
• evangelists, i.e. people who win outsiders by preaching the gospel to them
• maybe more I'm open to suggestions

It is not NT teaching that these roles should be united in a single person. We see female prophets in the NT, so at least this aspect of "pastor's role" can be filled by females.
And then we have to ponder on the fact that a female was apostle (Junia in Rom 16:7).

And what you say about "leading in worship" does not fit to 1.Cor 14, where it is said that everyone contributes to the worship. There is no leading role, even a prophet had so be quiet when another is lead by God to speak.

As for Phoebe, she wasn't a formal deacon but was rather a servant of the church.

You make a distinction that is never made clear in the NT. If it existed in NT times (this may well be the case), there is no evidence for Phoebe being no formal deacon. You declare her no real deacon out of your will, nothing more.

 

[Augustus_33AD]

Hi. I grew up in a Catholic family, lived an atheist life of sin and returned to God through Catholicism. I knew nothing about other denominations.
My big issue was with Marion devotion, my parents being Portuguese are devoted to Our Lady of Fatima. But when I inquired about it in a Catholic forum I was labelled a Protestant.

"What is that?" So I looked into it. I always thought that Catholics where the original religion which held the bible sacred and then the denominations split off with new books, dogmas and doctrines. I was shocked to learn that its the Catholics that have a heap of other stuff besides the bible.

I learnt about "sola scripture" and that the protestants adhere to the bible and so began to wonder if I was even a Catholic anymore or a Protestant now as I believe in sola scripture and not the opportunity for humans to add doctrines to it without any bible foundation.

So now I"m surprised to learn that there are female priests in the Protestant priesthood.

"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." Timothy 2:11-14 ESV

Scripture is quite clear on that topic, what happened "sola scripture" in this case?

May God bless you in your return to the Holy Catholic faith.

 

[Helmut-WK]

God is calling women to serve him in this way, and has been for some time.
Deborah was judge over all Israel, and she, Huldah, Miriam, Isaiah's wife and Philip's daughters all prophesied and gave the word of God to men. The early church had deaconesses and Phoebe was a deacon.

You forgot to mention Junia, who was an Apostle (Rom 16:7), and Priska (affectionately called Priscilla in a number of verses), who taught (together with her husband) the evangelist Apollos some important lessons on baptism and the Holy Spirit (Acts 18:26).
This means that apostleship and teaching men is not entirely forbidden for women.

 

[Helmut-WK]

So God is clearly powerless to stop women standing before a church and saying "God called me to be ordained"; he is unable to lead his sheep in paths of righteousness for his name's sake, Psalms 23:3, and he clearly doesn't mind if his children lie i his name? Or maybe the Holy Spirit isn't able to lead us into all truth after all?

Weak point. God does not stop everything we wish should be stopped. He did not top the RC church in the about 1000 years bfrom the beginning of their split from the Orthodox church to Luther, to name one example.

In Huldah's case, the male priests chose to go to her for a word from God, when they could have gone to a male prophet.

Namely, Jeremiah.

 

[Helmut-WK]

Then where is it? What wrote with His own hand can not be changed by anyone.

You talked to a member of an Orthodox Church, which counts the commandments as in the LXX column in the table in Wikipedia (the term "LXX" is somewhat misleading, for there is no numbering in the text, it is just that Greek Orthodox count in that way, other Orthodox churches following them).

The comparison of "A/C" (catholic) and "L" (Lutheran) is instructive: Both have essentially he same numbering, but their 9th commandment is different. This is due to the fact that Lutherans base their numbering in Ex 20, while Catholics base their numbering on Deut 5. Looking on the differences in text between these two versions of the Dekalogue makes clear there is no real difference, only superficial change in wording (e.g. word order). This means. that the 9th and 10th commandment of Catholics and Lutheran are really one, they have only nine commandments and artificially split the last one into two, which yields to different results because the word order of Ex 20 and Deut 5 is not the same there.
This is almost like the Jews, who speak of "10 words" (a term to be found in the Bible, unlike "10 commandments"), counting the Prologue ("I am he LORD, ...") as the first word, and then 9 commandments (2nd to 10th word).

The Samaritans add a 10th to the 9 commandments: Put the stones with the law engraved on the mountain where the blessing is spoken to the people (Deut 27:12-13) instead on the mountain where the curse is spoken to the people (against Deut 27:1-8) - remember Gal 3:10-12?

As to the reformed and other Protestants, you know how they count.

But is counting in another way the same as skipping?

 

[Helmut-WK]

They include the "images" part in the 1st commandment

In practice, they ignore it. Images are venerated, like the golden image of JHWH, who brought Israel out of Egypt, at Sinai (Ex 32:4-5).

 

[Zachm531]

Hi. I grew up in a Catholic family, lived an atheist life of sin and returned to God through Catholicism. I knew nothing about other denominations.
My big issue was with Marion devotion, my parents being Portuguese are devoted to Our Lady of Fatima. But when I inquired about it in a Catholic forum I was labelled a Protestant.

"What is that?" So I looked into it. I always thought that Catholics where the original religion which held the bible sacred and then the denominations split off with new books, dogmas and doctrines. I was shocked to learn that its the Catholics that have a heap of other stuff besides the bible.

I learnt about "sola scripture" and that the protestants adhere to the bible and so began to wonder if I was even a Catholic anymore or a Protestant now as I believe in sola scripture and not the opportunity for humans to add doctrines to it without any bible foundation.

So now I"m surprised to learn that there are female priests in the Protestant priesthood.

"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." Timothy 2:11-14 ESV

Scripture is quite clear on that topic, what happened "sola scripture" in this case?

They probably use the same excuses that catholics use to defend having a “mother” church leader. I used to be catholic and many times women went to the podium and spoke.

 

[mmksparbud]

You talked to a member of an Orthodox Church, which counts the commandments as in the LXX column in the table in Wikipedia (the term "LXX" is somewhat misleading, for there is no numbering in the text, it is just that Greek Orthodox count in that way, other Orthodox churches following them).

The comparison of "A/C" (catholic) and "L" (Lutheran) is instructive: Both have essentially he same numbering, but their 9th commandment is different. This is due to the fact that Lutherans base their numbering in Ex 20, while Catholics base their numbering on Deut 5. Looking on the differences in text between these two versions of the Dekalogue makes clear there is no real difference, only superficial change in wording (e.g. word order). This means. that the 9th and 10th commandment of Catholics and Lutheran are really one, they have only nine commandments and artificially split the last one into two, which yields to different results because the word order of Ex 20 and Deut 5 is not the same there.
This is almost like the Jews, who speak of "10 words" (a term to be found in the Bible, unlike "10 commandments"), counting the Prologue ("I am he LORD, ...") as the first word, and then 9 commandments (2nd to 10th word).

The Samaritans add a 10th to the 9 commandments: Put the stones with the law engraved on the mountain where the blessing is spoken to the people (Deut 27:12-13) instead on the mountain where the curse is spoken to the people (against Deut 27:1-8) - remember Gal 3:10-12?

As to the reformed and other Protestants, you know how they count.

But is counting in another way the same as skipping?

Yes, I know that, it's just----why change anything at all? Or is it to minimize that there are images and they pray to them---and please spare me the age old thing about--no we don't pray to them they are just symbols---it is what every one says---including Hindus. They are images and they do to bow down to them and I've seen them do it.