Female ordination

[rturner76]

I was recently informed that I have misinterpreted the Bible where it says things like

"I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet."

This verse doesn't actually mean that it's not allowed for women to be ordained. Can somebody put this into context and show me how this means it is ok for female ordination?

A few other passages that I have misinterpreted:

"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says."

Women can most assuredly be teachers:
"He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately."

We need women in the church, working in the church, singing, teaching, theologizing, counseling, administrating, and many other jobs in the church need women.

I am fine with saying "the church needs to change to reflect modern times." but I'm not okay with saying "what you read in the Bible is not what you read."

I'm actually not a misogynist either and I have been lead by female Pastors who were very effective. I didn't have a second thought about it at the time and I still support female ordination for those denominations that have deemed it proper.

The issue I am raising is how do we explain these verses away?

This is not an attack on female ordination, this is an opportunity to educate people on how these verses have been misinterpreted or manipulated. That is the information I am looking for anyway.

Is this a right/wrong situation or my opinion/your opinion type of discussion?

 

[Albion]

I was recently informed that I have misinterpreted the Bible where it says things like

"I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet."

This verse doesn't actually mean that it's not allowed for women to be ordained. Can somebody put this into context and show me how this means it is ok for female ordination?

It doesn't. The point about Paul's admonition concerning women being silent in church is about people talking over each other and causing commotion during worship in his own time.

It has nothing to do with women's ordination, but aside from that passage, there is a lot in the New Testament and in Jesus' own example suggesting or stating outright that deacons, priests, and bishops are to be men--and, as we also know, this was the practice of the churches from the beginning.

 

[4UallPraise]

Since I was the accuser of misinformation as I assume you are bringing egalitarian criteria to GT I would have to go no further until an answer to one question is provided

"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.”

Show me this law since it is the base of Paul’s argument.

 

[4UallPraise]

You won’t find it because it isn’t there unless it’s the Persian edict of male being in control of the household in the book of Esther. That was after exile so obviously before that time there was no such anything about male in control of household.

The thing with Paul is that if you read it from the spiritual aspect he makes perfect sense. From the Father’s p.o.v the church really has nothing to say.

 

[rturner76]

Since I was the accuser of misinformation as I assume you are bringing egalitarian criteria to GT I would have to go no further until an answer to one question is provided

"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.”

Show me this law since it is the base of Paul’s argument.

My Bible's footnote/concordance reference pointed me toward 1 Corinthians:11.

Women are to be silent and submissive, not Church leadership. I'm sorry but the Bible says it in black and white with no need for interpretation. This is not a personal conviction but what the Bible simple states in plain English translations.

Yours is a modern church view that is not morally wrong, just not Biblical.

 

[Clare73]

I was recently informed that I have misinterpreted the Bible where it says things like

"I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet."

This verse doesn't actually mean that it's not allowed for women to be ordained. Can somebody put this into context and show me how this means it is ok for female ordination?

A few other passages that I have misinterpreted:

"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says."

Women can most assuredly be teachers:
"He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately."

We need women in the church, working in the church, singing, teaching, theologizing, counseling, administrating, and many other jobs in the church need women.

I am fine with saying "the church needs to change to reflect modern times." but I'm not okay with saying "what you read in the Bible is not what you read."

I'm actually not a misogynist either and I have been lead by female Pastors who were very effective. I didn't have a second thought about it at the time and I still support female ordination for those denominations that have deemed it proper.

The issue I am raising is how do we explain these verses away?

I understand your dilemma, human culture vs. God's word. . .keeping in mind that fallen man's culture moves farther and farther from divine wisdom.
It is human wisdom that thinks it is wiser than God, knows more about how to make the product work than the Owner's Manual.
You don't have to follow the Manual, but don't be surprised when it all begins to break down.

This is not an attack on female ordination, this is an opportunity to educate people on
how these verses have been misinterpreted or manipulated. That is the information I am looking for anyway.

The Scriptures above have not been "manipulated" or misinterpreted.
They are straight forward and clear.
They are simply not in agreement with our man-centered culture.
We get to choose whether to do it God's way or man's way, and
we all get to bear the consequences of our choices

Is this a right/wrong situation or my opinion/your opinion type of discussion?

It's a "Word of God" or "word of man" type of discussion.

 

[rturner76]

Women have the most important job of Christiandom. Raising Christian babies. It is the modern age that has made women want to be men and men want to be women. The churches are confused between what the feel is right and what the Bible says.

Nobody wants to be a racist, sexist, xenophobe but there are many passages in the Bible that support immoral action (ex. Slaves should obey their masters. Leviticus laws about executing homos, disobedient children, rape victims who didn't scream loudly enough.

Should we follow all of these Biblical laws today? Of course not but it doesn't change what the Bible says. We have to decide if we want to disagree with the Bible to observe a higher morality or if we follow the letter of the law of the Bible and forbid sin?

 

[rturner76]

It's a Word of God or word of man type of discussion.

Think you nailed it here.

 

[4UallPraise]

My Bible's footnote/concordance reference pointed me toward 1 Corinthians:11.

Women are to be silent and submissive, not Church leadership. I'm sorry but the Bible says it in black and white with no need for interpretation. This is not a personal conviction but what the Bible simple states in plain English translations.

Yours is a modern church view that is not morally wrong, just not Biblical.

Paul defining the law? What law? You’ll need more witness than that.

 

[rturner76]

So Paul had no point of reference for his statements in the Bible? I think that's denominational thinking to negated Paul. Most denominations believe the writings of Paul. Are there any other parts of the Bible you throw out because you don't know what part of OT scripture the author is referencing?

 

[4UallPraise]

People who are unbelievers do make use of the scriptures for orderly households, but Peter explains that if there is an unbeliever and a believer unequally yoked then silence is the solution as to avoid harm i.e.: Jesus silent before accusers. Believers would follow the example of mutual submission more in keeping with Christ and the church.

 

[4UallPraise]

So Paul had no point of reference for his statements in the Bible? I think that's denominational thinking to negated Paul. Most denominations believe the writings of Paul. Are there any other parts of the Bible you throw out because you don't know what part of OT scripture the author is referencing?

Nice talking’ to ya

 

[rturner76]

I know it is always much easier to adjust the Bible to our beliefs than adjust our beliefs to what the Bible says so I don't blame people for throwing out/

It's kind of one of those things where you either believe the Bible or your own philosophy. If I was a woman, I wouldn't want to be told what I am and am not allowed to do. The Bible does this so other you believe it or you don't but you can't change the meaning of scripture to fit your wouldview.

 

[rturner76]

Nice talking’ to ya

Sorry if I hurt your feelings. I guess we just disagree on what the Bible says. Bummer

 

[4UallPraise]

Bummer you can’t back up any of your statements.

 

[rturner76]

Bummer you can’t back up any of your statements.

I backed it up with the Bible. You back yours up with philosophy. Is your human philosophy more informative than the Bible itself.... No go by the Bible or go home to your denomination's particular rules that contradict the Bible.

 

[Isilwen]

I backed it up with the Bible. You back yours up with philosophy. Is your human philosophy more informative than the Bible itself.... No go by the Bible or go home to your denomination's particular rules that contradict the Bible.

Maybe it is your interpretation and your denomination's rules that contradict the Bible?

I was a cradle Catholic, so I am well aware of the Catholic teaching on this.

 

[rturner76]

Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness.
If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. ...

And so train the young women to love their husbands and children,

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God

I know it sucks to be submissive and Gloria Stemem says you don't have to any more but the Bible doesn't agree.

 

[rturner76]

Maybe it is your interpretation and your denomination's rules that contradict the Bible?

I was a cradle Catholic, so I am well aware of the Catholic teaching on this.

Great so you can show me where Female ordination is acceptable. CHapter and Verse please.

Or should we go by what the Bible says?

 

[rturner76]

Bummer you can’t back up any of your statements.

Do you mean my Bible verses I posted? I can see how someone who disregards the Bible would be confused when she reads verses from it and is expected to believe it as is.

Did I say it was fair or right? No, I said it's what the Bible says.