Female Pastors & Bible Teachers

[Rhamiel]

Matt made the point that woman leadership was likely more widely recognized in the early church than we might expect. Bishop N.T. Wright is a good starting point on this topic. Especially relevant is Junia, the female apostle.

the female decons were in the early church to help baptise women
to look at the history of the Church you see a male only priesthood, going back from Jesus onward
what Matt points out is a twisting of the original text
we have many holy women but Jesus only choose men to be the 12

 

[ImperatorWall]

What, with the husband of one wife bit? That's surprising, I've not known many complementarians who would take that as a statement of gender roles. It's in there as a prohibition of adultery and nothing more. If you take the "husband of but one wife" verse and start saying that because it talks about husbands its referring only to men, then to be consistent you've really got to go through the Bible and say that any time Paul addresses his "brothers" his words aren't intended for the women, and then you run into a whole heap of trouble.

Why would someone NOT take a statement of gender roles as a statement of gender roles?

You have confounded me.

 

[KingCrimson250]

Junia has already been discussed. There is no indication in scripture that she was an apostle.

Aside from the part where Paul indicates that she is held in high esteem amongst the apostles? There are some arguments that this means she was a layperson that the apostles approved of, but the Greek syntax seems to suggest that this implies not only apostleship on her part but that in her service she stood out among them. The lion's share of the Biblical scholarship seems to support this second understanding, anyway. That doesn't mean that it's right, but that does mean that it cannot simply be dismissed as unBiblical.

 

[Rhamiel]

Right. Sexism is legitimate and you have no reasonable explanation. Noted.

what do you mean by sexism?

he is talking about men and women being differant, if you look at any scientific study about how men and women develop from mentaly, how men and women socilize, even how they think, you will see that we are differant
if you use sexism to mean that one is better then the other then you are making a strawman because no one is saying that

 

[KingCrimson250]

Why would someone NOT take a statement of gender roles as a statement of gender roles?

You have confounded me.

You have yet to demonstrate that it is. I've established the early traces of an argument as to why it does not speak to gender roles. Especially with a language like Greek, you can't just take the fact that it uses the word "he" to mean that it's gender-exclusive.

 

[Obzocky]

The only thing the Bible is adamantly clear on, in both the OT and NT, is that women should not be in a position of leadership over men in the home, or in spiritual affairs.

Unfortunately, this could be used as a reason to ban women outright from participating in the church, but clearly women were a vital part of the church in the NT. However, to claim that these women were leaders in the church would contradict far too much of scripture to lend credence to the claim.

If it is adamantly clear why do so many present thoughtful discussions against that particular interpretation? In your opinion are they interpreting incorrectly or projecting their own beliefs onto scripture?

What is the difference between someone who takes the positive stance and someone who takes the negative stance if it all boils down to the bias of the reader?

 

[ImperatorWall]

Aside from the part where Paul indicates that she is held in high esteem amongst the apostles? There are some arguments that this means she was a layperson that the apostles approved of, but the Greek syntax seems to suggest that this implies not only apostleship on her part but that in her service she stood out among them. The lion's share of the Biblical scholarship seems to support this second understanding, anyway. That doesn't mean that it's right, but that does mean that it cannot simply be dismissed as unBiblical.

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me."

Of note among. Not "among." The Greek word for "apostles" specifically refers to the 12 selected by Christ.

Rather simple to me.

 

[Rhamiel]

King

The lion's share of the Biblical scholarship seems to support this second understanding,

not from the EO or RC
not from the first 1850 years of Christianity
so maybe lion's share is not the term you were looking for

 

[Obzocky]

You know what would be fun?
People dissecting the Greek words and cross referencing the occurrences of said words throughout the Bible. I like it when that happens. Makes me feel like i'm benefiting from an education.

(as it stands i'm still pretty neutral on the subject, i'm not exactly pro/anti female pastors, which is why this discussion is fairly interesting)

 

[ImperatorWall]

You have yet to demonstrate that it is. I've established the early traces of an argument as to why it does not speak to gender roles. Especially with a language like Greek, you can't just take the fact that it uses the word "he" to mean that it's gender-exclusive.

So your argument is that the words "husband" and "wife" in our English translation don't actually mean husband and wife?

Just trying to understand what you are saying here.

 

[KingCrimson250]

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me."

Of note among. Not "among." The Greek word for "apostles" specifically refers to the 12 selected by Christ.

Rather simple to me.

And what would that be? As far as I am aware, there is no Greek word that refers specifically to the 12.

 

[ImperatorWall]

If it is adamantly clear why do so many present thoughtful discussions against that particular interpretation? In your opinion are they interpreting incorrectly or projecting their own beliefs onto scripture?

What is the difference between someone who takes the positive stance and someone who takes the negative stance if it all boils down to the bias of the reader?

Thoughtful discussions are great, but they are not an indication of a lack of clarity.

I would need context to make any comments about the intent of the participants in said discussion.

 

[acropolis]

what do you mean by sexism?

he is talking about men and women being differant, if you look at any scientific study about how men and women develop from mentaly, how men and women socilize, even how they think, you will see that we are differant
if you use sexism to mean that one is better then the other then you are making a strawman because no one is saying that

I'm familiar with the scientific understanding of men and women and there is no scientific reason for women to be categorically excluded from leadership positions. They are just as capable as men in that regard. However, despite this, you and others are asserting that women have some innate inferiority which precludes from from assuming the role of a leader. So far so explanation has been given which is based on another other than a blind acceptance of dogma. Categorically excluding women from leadership is sexism at its finest, there is no other way to describe it.

 

[SnowyMacie]

Why can't we just all be done with this. Arguing solves nothing.

 

[Rhamiel]

If it is adamantly clear why do so many present thoughtful discussions against that particular interpretation? In your opinion are they interpreting incorrectly or projecting their own beliefs onto scripture?

What is the difference between someone who takes the positive stance and someone who takes the negative stance if it all boils down to the bias of the reader?

I think it is important to take into account the traditions of the Church, that when we read the Bible we also look at how the faith has been handed down through the ages

So your argument is that the words "husband" and "wife" in our English translation don't actually mean husband and wife?

Just trying to understand what you are saying here.

he means that some terms can be used interchangably
like when a writter in the bible addresses the reader as "brother" all people are ment
but that seems to be kinda streching it for this talk about husbands and wives...

 

[Obzocky]

Is this really an argument though, it feels more like a hot discussion.

 

[KingCrimson250]

he means that some terms can be used interchangably
like when a writter in the bible addresses the reader as "brother" all people are ment
but that seems to be kinda streching it for this talk about husbands and wives...

What I'm getting at is that the verse is not a statement of "I'm saying an elder must be male because it must be someone who has a wife." If you read the verse in that sense, then a single elder is every bit as unfit as a female elder - a position I doubt the RCC would hold to for very long

Rather, it's a statement against polygamy and unfaithfulness. It could easily be "the wife of one man" - the two are interchangeable for the message the text is attempting to imply.

 

[Fremdin]

I, for sure, am finding it hot

 

[ImperatorWall]

And what would that be? As far as I am aware, there is no Greek word that refers specifically to the 12.

652.

It can mean the specific 12, but in this case Strong's indicates "apostles" means Christian teachers in general.

So it could be either the specific 12, or the 12 + Barnabas, Timothy, etc.

 

[acropolis]

Why can't we just all be done with this. Arguing solves nothing.

There are problems worth arguing over, one of which is systematic exclusion of women for apparent reason.