Female Deacons

[Poor Beggar]

Yes, the husband of One wife, not two or three wives. There were Jewish men in the assembly who may have had more than one wife because they were coming from Judaism, where polygamy was allowed. It would not be necessary to make this rule for women seeing that women were never allowed, even in Judaism, to have more than one husband.

Yep.

 

[Albion]

Maybe it was this post that counted as dismissing Church History?

Nothing that intricate. I just meant that I reported on what is known about how the early church operated--and believe me, we know a lot! But you said that, although no women are mentioned in the New Testament as deacons, history doesn't record any, there is something called a deaconess that's not just the female version of a deacon, the difference is well known, the qualifications for males is spelled out while there's nothing about women deacons there, etc. ....you will go by "context." Well, what is all of this if not "context?"''

By the way, I've read the material on Pliny. He says that he arrested two women WHO SAID THAT they were deaconesses. The whole passage calles them deaconESSES, not deacons...and they are that only to the extent that they claimed to be such!

 

[Poor Beggar]

Nothing that intricate. I just meant that I reported on what is known about how the early church operated--and believe me, we know a lot! But you said that, although no women are mentioned in the New Testament as deacons, history doesn't record any, there is something called a deaconess that's not just the female version of a deacon, the difference is well known, the qualifications for males is spelled out while there's nothing about women deacons there, etc. ....you will go by "context." Well, what is all of this if not "context?"''

By the way, I've read the material on Pliny. He says that he arrested two women WHO SAID THAT they were deaconesses. The whole passage calles them deaconESSES, not deacons...and they are that only to the extent that they claimed to be such!

So you are saying that deaconesses aren't deacons? The word seems to be the same in my bible.
Did they have different functions in the early church? Certainly. That makes sense in light of complementarianism. But the office would be equivalent and would reflect Genesis 2:23.
Were they ordained as clergy? According to the Council of Chalcedon of 451 they were. But not unless aged 40 or older. That sure sounds like a counter to the OP's assertion.

 

[mikedsjr]

Dismissing church history is bad, but also counting church history as authoritative and equal to Scripture is bad too. Its like saying a 3rd century church had a women presbyter, so it must be okay. That doesn't equal Scriptural truth. That could equal a church gone south and acting like the churches today who discount doctrine and lift up mystical thought.

I think its good to look at history for background. But doctrine must be supportive from Scripture...

 

[Poor Beggar]

Dismissing church history is bad, but also counting church history as authoritative and equal to Scripture is bad too. Its like saying a 3rd century church had a women presbyter, so it must be okay. That doesn't equal Scriptural truth. That could equal a church gone south and acting like the churches today who discount doctrine and lift up mystical thought.

I think its good to look at history for background. But doctrine must be supportive from Scripture...

Yeah, that's what I said earlier, too. It's good for filling in the gray areas at times.

 

[Hank77]

But that isn't the whole of the qualifications listed there. If women were allowed to be deacons, it is almost certain that there would be some comment about the qualifications which did apply to them--even if we accept your point here.

I think it does, in fact it mentions them first before men deacons.

YLT
1Ti 3:8 Ministrants--in like manner grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not given to filthy lucre,
1Ti 3:9 having the secret of the faith in a pure conscience,
1Ti 3:10 and let these also first be proved, then let them minister, being unblameable.
1Ti 3:11 Women--in like manner grave, not false accusers, vigilant, faithful in all things.

So both women and men deacons must be like the overseer.
There is a strong witness here that women were not being disqualified as deacons in Timothy's church either.

Also, in both the Tyndale and Geneva Bibles, the word diakonon is translated as minister, even when speaking of Phoebe. It is not until the KJV of 1611 where it is changed to servant in this verse referring to Phoebe.

As far as Phoebe goes, why would Paul go to the trouble of assuring the church in Rome of Phoebe's qualifications as a deacon and a leader in the church if her only service was to deliver his letter physically to someone else? There would have been no need for him to do that unless maybe....she was going to read the letter and answer their questions/teaching about what Paul was saying in that letter. They would need to know, from Paul himself, that she was qualified to do so. Whoever explained it would have needed to be Jewish, as well.

διάκονον (diakonon) — 2 Occurrences

Romans 15:8 N-AMS
GRK: γὰρ Χριστὸν διάκονον γεγενῆσθαι περιτομῆς
NAS: has become a servant to the circumcision
KJV: was a minister of the circumcision
INT: indeed Christ a servant has become of [the] circumcision

Romans 16:1 N-AFS
GRK: οὖσαν καὶ διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας
NAS: Phoebe, who is a servant of the church
KJV: which is a servant of the church
INT: being also servant of the church

Rom 16:1 And I commend you to Phebe our sister--being a ministrant of the assembly that is in Cenchrea--
Rom 16:2 that ye may receive her in the Lord, as doth become saints, and may assist her in whatever matter she may have need of you--for she also became a leader of many, and of myself.

leader = protastis = what should we know about this word? The article at the link below......
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2013/04/phoebe-was-she-an-early-church-leader

 

[Poor Beggar]

I think it does, in fact it mentions them first before men deacons.

YLT
1Ti 3:8 Ministrants--in like manner grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not given to filthy lucre,
1Ti 3:9 having the secret of the faith in a pure conscience,
1Ti 3:10 and let these also first be proved, then let them minister, being unblameable.
1Ti 3:11 Women--in like manner grave, not false accusers, vigilant, faithful in all things.

So both women and men deacons must be like the overseer.
There is a strong witness here that women were not being disqualified as deacons in Timothy's church either.

Also, in both the Tyndale and Geneva Bibles, the word diakonon is translated as minister, even when speaking of Phoebe. It is not until the KJV of 1611 where it is changed to servant in this verse referring to Phoebe.

As far as Phoebe goes, why would Paul go to the trouble of assuring the church in Rome of Phoebe's qualifications as a deacon and a leader in the church if her only service was to deliver his letter physically to someone else? There would have been no need for him to do that unless maybe....she was going to read the letter and answer their questions/teaching about what Paul was saying in that letter. They would need to know, from Paul himself, that she was qualified to do so. Whoever explained it would have needed to be Jewish, as well.

διάκονον (diakonon) — 2 Occurrences

Romans 15:8 N-AMS
GRK: γὰρ Χριστὸν διάκονον γεγενῆσθαι περιτομῆς
NAS: has become a servant to the circumcision
KJV: was a minister of the circumcision
INT: indeed Christ a servant has become of [the] circumcision

Romans 16:1 N-AFS
GRK: οὖσαν καὶ διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας
NAS: Phoebe, who is a servant of the church
KJV: which is a servant of the church
INT: being also servant of the church

Rom 16:1 And I commend you to Phebe our sister--being a ministrant of the assembly that is in Cenchrea--
Rom 16:2 that ye may receive her in the Lord, as doth become saints, and may assist her in whatever matter she may have need of you--for she also became a leader of many, and of myself.

leader = protastis = what should we know about this word? The article at the link below......
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2013/04/phoebe-was-she-an-early-church-leader

You covered my points better than I. Thank you.

 

[LaSorcia]

@ timothy 3 gives a list of requirements for being in the leadership of a church. One of them was being a man of one wife. That should automatically rule out female preachers and deacons.

Only males were legally allowed to commit adultery through an additional marriage. Paul had no reason to state "a woman of only one husband" as that's all that could have existed.

Sexism as seen in this thread has no place in the body of Christ. I could list bible verses, do exegeses, discuss history, but I've found that men who are so interested in telling women what they are NOT supposed to be doing have little interest in the truth, just in power.

I have never heard a single man say, "brother, if your wife wants to do something during Monday night football, then you do what she wants to, because we are supposed to sacrifice ourselves for her." I have never seen a single man trying to discuss how they can "honor women, the (muscularly) weaker vessel". What a surprise!

 

[Albion]

So you are saying that deaconesses aren't deacons?

Exactamundo!!

The word seems to be the same in my bible.

That's because the word, in Greek, is not gender specific. It means "servant." I hope you aren't going to insist that there's only one way to serve the church or that all who serve must have the same qualifications.

Did they have different functions in the early church? Certainly.

Good.

That makes sense in light of complementarianism. But the office would be equivalent and would reflect Genesis 2:23.

You're guessing, of course. You may feel that, according to Genesis 2:23 or some other verse, men deacons and women deaconesses ought to be considered identical in rank, responsibility, etc. But they were not. This is the argument for women's ordination in recent years--the women OUGHT to be considered equally "entitled." But that's an issue for today and for your own church to decide. My contribution here was to point out that, in the early church, women were not deacons. So, scratch that from the arguments that could validly by used by advocates of women's ordination. Their claim has to stand solely upon their interpretation of selected Bible passages and, as we all know, there are different interpretations made by sincere Christians. It's also noteworthy that women's ordination, despite the verses commonly used by advocates of women's ordination in our own times, was not thought right to do until the advent of Women's Lib, yet the same Bible was there all the while.

 

[Albion]

I think it does, in fact it mentions them first before men deacons.

YLT
1Ti 3:8 Ministrants--in like manner grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not given to filthy lucre,
1Ti 3:9 having the secret of the faith in a pure conscience,
1Ti 3:10 and let these also first be proved, then let them minister, being unblameable.
1Ti 3:11 Women--in like manner grave, not false accusers, vigilant, faithful in all things.

So both women and men deacons must be like the overseer.

But there is no connection, in the case of women, to these virtues qualifying them for the diaconate.

 

[Albion]

I think it does, in fact it mentions them first before men deacons.

YLT
1Ti 3:8 Ministrants--in like manner grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not given to filthy lucre,
1Ti 3:9 having the secret of the faith in a pure conscience,
1Ti 3:10 and let these also first be proved, then let them minister, being unblameable.
1Ti 3:11 Women--in like manner grave, not false accusers, vigilant, faithful in all things.

So both women and men deacons must be like the overseer.

Like...but that doesn't connect women to the dicaconate as is the case with men.

There is a strong witness here that women were not being disqualified as deacons in Timothy's church either.

There is no witness that they were qualified as deacons...and that's what the early church believed. This is what's relevant, not suppositions about what is NOT in scripture.

As far as Phoebe goes, why would Paul go to the trouble of assuring the church in Rome of Phoebe's qualifications as a deacon

He didn't do that.

and a leader in the church

Ah, "leader." Now, that's correct. She was a deaconess. Nothing cited here refutes that.

 

[Poor Beggar]

Exactamundo!!


That's because the word, in Greek, is not gender specific. It means "servant." I hope you aren't going to insist that there's only one way to serve the church or that all who serve must have the same qualifications.


Good.


You're guessing, of course. You may feel that, according to Genesis 2:23 or some other verse, men deacons and women deaconesses ought to be considered identical in rank, responsibility, etc. But they were not. This is the argument for women's ordination in recent years--the women OUGHT to be considered equally "entitled." But that's an issue for today and for your own church to decide. My contribution here was to point out that, in the early church, women were not deacons. So, scratch that from the arguments that could validly by used by advocates of women's ordination. Their claim has to stand solely upon their interpretation of selected Bible passages and, as we all know, there are different interpretations made by sincere Christians. It's also noteworthy that women's ordination, despite the verses commonly used by advocates of women's ordination in our own times, was not thought right to do until the advent of Women's Lib, yet the same Bible was there all the while.

I'm sorry but your statement about one word meaning two things is so illogical I can't address the rest of your points.

 

[Poor Beggar]

Only males were legally allowed to commit adultery through an additional marriage. Paul had no reason to state "a woman of only one husband" as that's all that could have existed.

Sexism as seen in this thread has no place in the body of Christ. I could list bible verses, do exegeses, discuss history, but I've found that men who are so interested in telling women what they are NOT supposed to be doing have little interest in the truth, just in power.

I have never heard a single man say, "brother, if your wife wants to do something during Monday night football, then you do what she wants to, because we are supposed to sacrifice ourselves for her." I have never seen a single man trying to discuss how they can "honor women, the (muscularly) weaker vessel". What a surprise!

Yes, there has been definite sexism in this thread, rather than good reasoning. However, the church doesn't exist to champion feminism. It exists as God says it does. You will have to show some Scripture to make your points and being willing to receive at least some feedback on it.
Also telling a woman what she's supposed to do isn't sexist if it is correct. If you look at your post, you are essentially telling men what to do and yet no one has accused you of misandry.My wife helps me all the time by pointing out where I need to grow.
I've heard plenty of men tell other men in the church they need to make it a point to help their wives out more. Maybe try a different church?
Lastly, is there something in the text that suggests " weaker vessel" refers to muscularity? Please show me. I'm open.
All I'm hearing is a dislike for God's authority being masqueraded under a thin guise of feminism. Use Scripture to show me I'm wrong.

 

[Poor Beggar]

Exactamundo!!


That's because the word, in Greek, is not gender specific. It means "servant." I hope you aren't going to insist that there's only one way to serve the church or that all who serve must have the same qualifications.


Good.


You're guessing, of course. You may feel that, according to Genesis 2:23 or some other verse, men deacons and women deaconesses ought to be considered identical in rank, responsibility, etc. But they were not. This is the argument for women's ordination in recent years--the women OUGHT to be considered equally "entitled." But that's an issue for today and for your own church to decide. My contribution here was to point out that, in the early church, women were not deacons. So, scratch that from the arguments that could validly by used by advocates of women's ordination. Their claim has to stand solely upon their interpretation of selected Bible passages and, as we all know, there are different interpretations made by sincere Christians. It's also noteworthy that women's ordination, despite the verses commonly used by advocates of women's ordination in our own times, was not thought right to do until the advent of Women's Lib, yet the same Bible was there all the while.

I guess the best I can say is, you do realize that adding "esses" is something we do in English, right? They are all deacons just as waitresses are waiters. A female deacon, I'll add "ess" if it helps you, is simply a deacon whose job is a bit different because she's a woman. Kind of like how I can sling heavy stuff off shelves at work because I'm make, but the women in my profession still have the same job title.
I don't know how else to help you.

 

[Poor Beggar]

Since the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message (BFM) the convention added to paragraph VI that "the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture." I can only speculate as to why the convention needed to make this addition. I feel that now is the time to add the office of deacons is limited to men as qualified by Scripture. I base this on 1Timothy 3:10-12.

The reason I bring this up is because one of our local SBC church has female deacons and I feel this is wrong. I am curious how other Baptist men and women feel about this and would be interested in any Scripture canceling out what we know from the above verses.

Larry, it seems so far we've realized there have been female deacons and at times in church history they've been ordained. We will probably never all agree on whether they should have been.

 

[Larry Smart]

Larry, it seems so far we've realized there have been female deacons and at times in church history they've been ordained. We will probably never all agree on whether they should have been.

Thank you. I have been reading along as you folks discussed the issue. It's been a learning opportunity for me!

 

[Job8]

How would you explain Paul's clear reference to Phebe as a deaconess? What about women speaking instructions to the church in 1 Cor. 11:5?

Paul called Phebe "a servant of the church at Cenchrea", NOT "a deaconess". The Greek word there is diakonon (from diakonos) which simply means "servant", and from which the English word "deacon" is transliterated. A deacon is a servant of the church, primarily involved with the temporal needs of the church, as opposed to the elders.

Now, the real issue is whether God intended to have BOTH deacons and deaconesses. If He did then it would be reasonable to expect that just as the OFFICES of elder and deacon are spelled out in Scripture, there would be a distinct OFFICE of "deaconess" also within Scripture, indicating all the necessary qualifications. The fact that this does not exist, and that there is never any mention of deaconesses per se should make it clear enough that there was no such office. Just as a man-made priesthood came into existence, a man-made "deaconess" office came into existence.

Please note that if indeed there was such an office, it would have been mentioned in Philippians 1:1: Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons: [episkopos (= bishop) speaks of oversight whereas presbuteros (= elder) speaks of chronological and spiritual maturity. Both words refer to the shepherds of the churches].

 

[Poor Beggar]

I just wanted to shout out real quick that we will all communicate better if we actually read the previous comments through.

 

[Bluelion]

Yes, there has been definite sexism in this thread, rather than good reasoning. However, the church doesn't exist to champion feminism. It exists as God says it does. You will have to show some Scripture to make your points and being willing to receive at least some feedback on it.
Also telling a woman what she's supposed to do isn't sexist if it is correct. If you look at your post, you are essentially telling men what to do and yet no one has accused you of misandry.My wife helps me all the time by pointing out where I need to grow.
I've heard plenty of men tell other men in the church they need to make it a point to help their wives out more. Maybe try a different church?
Lastly, is there something in the text that suggests " weaker vessel" refers to muscularity? Please show me. I'm open.
All I'm hearing is a dislike for God's authority being masqueraded under a thin guise of feminism. Use Scripture to show me I'm wrong.

Do you think a man is suppose to tell a woman what to do? Is that what God said? show me? There is a family order with the man being the head and the family the body just as Christ is head of the church and the church the body. When Paul described the body of Christ its funny but i never heard him put women at the bottom of that body? why not Paul was clearly telling us the different roles in the true church, the body of Christ, why did he not say women are the feet, but he said there are different parts.back to the family.

Even though I am the head I do not tell my wife what to do, God says honor your wife, Adam said at last bone of my bone flesh of my flesh, meaning woman is equal to man in all ways being flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone. Did you miss that part. So man has natural authority yes. I ask my wife like an adviser, and we decide together. Sometimes i tell my wife you decide, sometimes she feel so strong about something I can not over ride her, so times its me that feels that strong about something, but my wife is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh, we are two made one. I want my wife to decide, i want her to be able to lead in case I need her to just as she may need me to. We are equal and that is love. Thinking you are to tell a woman what to do is sexism, its all ego. I know women who knock out most men if they tried, and I am not joking they trained for 20 years how to knock a person out. So a guy like you certainly could not lead those women. So then people say oh their sinning. we do not bow to Angels and we do not bow to men and Woman certainly don't need to do these things because she is a woman.

~STAFF EDIT~

You know why guys want to tell women what to do, its like the woman said for power. I was powerful in this world even now i am like a nuclear bomb if my training goes off. I never need to tell a woman what to do. That is not how you lead people any ways. I trained for years on leadership and a Leader never wants to tell his military what to do, that is called a manager. A leader teaches his people what to do and lets them do it. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day but teach him to fish and he eats for life. God said to lead. Judge Deborah, who is higher than a pastor BTW, Tried to get the men of Israel to lead but they would not so she did. Maybe if men were actual leading women would not need to rise up and lead other men. Hate to see what happens to a man telling a woman what to do while The Holy Spirit is speaking through that woman.

well there is some feed back oh here is a little more I forgot.

I like how women come to these threads about women pastors and then tell the men that women should not teach men. Question is not that women trying to teach the men in that thread?lol so she is doing what she is preaching against. I mean really no one else can see the hypocrisy there? and the men arguing for women to not teach men fall in line behind this woman and praise her for teaching other men. I have seen it happen, are you kidding no one else can see the Hypocrisy by the people teaching this junk?

 

[twin1954]

Do you think a man is suppose to tell a woman what to do? Is that what God said? show me? There is a family order with the man being the head and the family the body just as Christ is head of the church and the church the body. When Paul described the body of Christ its funny but i never heard him put women at the bottom of that body? why not Paul was clearly telling us the different roles in the true church, the body of Christ, why did he not say women are the feet, but he said there are different parts.back to the family.

Even though I am the head I do not tell my wife what to do, God says honor your wife, Adam said at last bone of my bone flesh of my flesh, meaning woman is equal to man in all ways being flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone. Did you miss that part. So man has natural authority yes. I ask my wife like an adviser, and we decide together. Sometimes i tell my wife you decide, sometimes she feel so strong about something I can not over ride her, so times its me that feels that strong about something, but my wife is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh, we are two made one. I want my wife to decide, i want her to be able to lead in case I need her to just as she may need me to. We are equal and that is love. Thinking you are to tell a woman what to do is sexism, its all ego. I know women who knock out most men if they tried, and I am not joking they trained for 20 years how to knock a person out. So a guy like you certainly could not lead those women. So then people say oh their sinning. we do not bow to Angels and we do not bow to men and Woman certainly don't need to do these things because she is a woman.

~STAFF EDIT~

You know why guys want to tell women what to do, its like the woman said for power. I was powerful in this world even now i am like a nuclear bomb if my training goes off. I never need to tell a woman what to do. That is not how you lead people any ways. I trained for years on leadership and a Leader never wants to tell his military what to do, that is called a manager. A leader teaches his people what to do and lets them do it. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day but teach him to fish and he eats for life. God said to lead. Judge Deborah, who is higher than a pastor BTW, Tried to get the men of Israel to lead but they would not so she did. Maybe if men were actual leading women would not need to rise up and lead other men. Hate to see what happens to a man telling a woman what to do while The Holy Spirit is speaking through that woman.

well there is some feed back oh here is a little more I forgot.

I like how women come to these threads about women pastors and then tell the men that women should not teach men. Question is not that women trying to teach the men in that thread?lol so she is doing what she is preaching against. I mean really no one else can see the hypocrisy there? and the men arguing for women to not teach men fall in line behind this woman and praise her for teaching other men. I have seen it happen, are you kidding no one else can see the Hypocrisy by the people teaching this junk?

Blue, your argument is circular. You assume your conclusion and then argue from it instead of arguing to your conclusion.