Female Pastors & Bible Teachers

[WileyCoyote]

Scripture says that God gives spiritual gifts to everyone in His Body according to His will. To some he gives preaching, to some teaching, to some word of knowledge, to some word of wisdom, etc. Each gift is given for the benefit of everyone.

No where in Scripture will you find a list of which gifts are male gifts and which gifts are female gifts. (Indeed, patriarchalists (aka complementarians) who are so sure that women can't do certain things all disagree with one another over which gifts/jobs are male and which are female).

On the contrary, Scripture tells us that in Christ there is no male and female.




All of the verses in the Bible that contain the word "Pastor":

So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, (Ephesians 4:11; NIV 2010)
​

That's right. There's only one. ONE verse in the whole Bible that even mentions the word pastor.

Please note that neither the verse, nor the surrounding context, says anything about that being a gift given only to men.

On the contrary, we know for a fact that there were female apostles (Junia, Romans 16); female evangelists (the first person to preach the Good News of Christ's resurrection was a woman); female teachers (Priscilla, Lois, Phoebe) and female prophets (Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, Anna, the 5 daughters, etc).

So, the other "offices" (which is not a word Scripture uses to describe these things, btw) are obviously not "male only."

There is NO textual support for the idea that a "pastor" is a male-only job.

I understand that some bootstrap their argument as follows: the pastor is the "spiritual authority" in a church; women are not permitted by God to be in "spiritual authority" over men; ergo, women cannot be pastors.

The problem with this line of reasoning is in the faulty assumptions and, IMHO, a complete misunderstanding of what "spiritual authority" in the Kingdom of God is all about.

Pastors are not mediators between God and men, they do not sit in Moses' seat as the only voice of God for us. Jesus Christ is our "covering." Jesus Christ is the head of the Church. He has spiritual authority. He is the author and perfecter of our faith. He and He alone is responsible for the spiritual well being of the members of His Body.

Women should not have "spiritual authority" over men. Men should not have "spiritual authority" over women. Christians do not have "spiritual authority" over other Christians. Period.

We are all children of God, heirs according to the promise (note, men and women are both heirs, men don't get a special birthright by virtue of being born men; women don't get a special birthright by virtue of being women).

Jesus made it clear beyond dispute that if anyone (Jesus used a gender neutral term) wants to lead in God's Kingdom that person is to be a servant of all. Jesus told His disciples that they were to be different from the Gentile rules - they were not to "lord it over" one another or exercise authority over one another.

Would anyone deny that God has given women the ability to serve? If so, they have the qualifications for ministry (a word which means, literally, servanthood).


Other people in this thread have treated well the troublesome verses that have been used to subjugate women unjustly in the Church for centuries. I won't belabor them here.

The thing is, when you take into account the whole counsel of Scripture, it's obvious that the two cherry-picked proof texts saying women should be silent and not exercise authority over men are ambiguous at best. Once you look at the actual Greek and the context, it becomes even more obvious that what it seems to plainly indicate in English is not so plain. (For example, the word translated in some versions as "exercise authority" in 1 Tim 2 really means "have dominion, domineer, usurp authority." Indeed, the very context also seems to say in "plain English" that women are saved by having children - a concept that clearly contradicts the Gospel itself.)

When Paul commends women for doing the things he supposedly told them not to do, (see Romans 16), it is inconceivable to me that some think his statements were "plain" and "clear."

Jesus Christ came to set us (all of us) free from the curse, to redeem us from our fallen state. He didn't come only to redeem men or to endorse patriarchy.

As members of the Body of Christ it is not any of our job to say for any other member 1) what part of the Body they are or 'should' be or 2) "I have no need of you."


So, long story short. I don't believe God prohibits women from being pastors or teaching at seminaries. I believe, on the contrary, that part of the Good News of the Gospel is that the Kingdom of God isn't like the kingdoms of man that judge our worth on the external (race, gender, nationality, class, wealth, etc).

Excellent post. One of the best I have read on this subject.

 

[Stravinsk]

Inserting another thought:

To those who've said that the belief that women should not be in a position of spiritual leadership means that women are spiritually inferior to men. That's not correct for me, and I'm sure it's not the case for countless others who think the same way I do. IMHO things work best when there is a leader, and God chose men to be the leaders. That doesn't mean a man is better than I am as a human being; it means God designed him to lead. One of the most beautiful things in the world is when a woman hushes up, steps back, and lets the man take charge, while she encourages and supports him. Watching a man realize that he's actually ALLOWED to be a man is absolutely amazing. I hate to see pushy, mouthy, nagging women who stifle the guys they love - perhaps without realizing it - and watching the guys retreat into themselves instead of flourishing and blossoming into all they want to be for their families. Ladies, just because you're able doesn't mean you should. Let him take the lead, tell him that you admire him for what he's doing, be sure to thank him for the things he does, and watch how he thrives.

Can God equip a woman to lead if the situation demands it? Yes, He can. For example, I have to be the head of my household, since I'm a single mother. Do I feel God designed me to be the family leader? Heck no. It's a struggle for me, and I can ONLY do it with His constant help and strengthening. It doesn't offend or threaten me in the least to say that I want a husband, that I would gladly defer the pressures of being leader and provider to him, and I would relish falling into the role of wife and mother instead of trying to be everything. And it doesn't make me feel inferior or suppressed to say that I believe God designed me to be a help-mate, a partner, and NOT the leader of my (hopefully) future family. I can say it without flinching because I know who I am in Christ, I know my skills and talents and strengths, and I'm not LESS than anything.

/rant

All of it, especially the bolded part.

 

[Brad2009]

You know what Tamara? Go ahead and belabor the points, because I've poured over the text in this thread and treated it with respect. You just impose your own meanings, provide zip for references and sit back and congratulate yourself. I hate your posts, so smug, so certain of the superiority and moral correctness of modern western civilization.

So far, everyone who agrees with you has been guilty of everything they accuse me and my side of (eg. ignoring context, culture). Your post, naturally, hints that your side would never DREAM of doing such things, YOUR side is much more lofty in its treatment of the text, putting it in its proper context and all. THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT YOU DON'T ACTUALLY DO THAT.

I'll just ignore and give it up if you respond with more pithy non-cited assertions. I've done this over and over and over. Either be rigorous or go home.

Edit: I'll leave it in its current form; that was my knee-jerk reaction. I like you Tamara, I've actually agreed with you on alot of things. This one I just can't do. I haven't seen a rigorous liberal interpretation (that isn't disingenuous in part) wrt this topic yet and I've read more than a few. But you are a smart woman and I wouldn't say otherwise. I do not mean to insult you, I do respect your mind... I just am totally convinced that liberal theology and feminism are corrupting influences in this day. If you're going to say I ignore context, you better back it up. I've seen from your side alot of assertions which were not substantiated and were actually real abuses of the text, just in this short thread alone.

 

[TanteBelle]

OK, controversy time...

Disclaimer: I just want to preface this by reminding everyone to remain civil and to realise that (even if we might want to) we're probably not going to change someone's theological position with a single post.

So, my question is: what is everyone's stance on female pastors? Biblical or not? Also, what about female teachers at Bible College/Seminary? Is it the same? Or because its not a church does your position change?

FWIW I believe the Bible is clear that women should not be in authority over men in the church. But the reason I'm asking this is that I'm considering enrolling at a Bible College where I would be taught by a woman. I'm sure she's totally capable and knows the material etc. But I'm not sure if its theologically ok.
I really hope I don't sound sexist or misogynistic by even asking this. I just want to make sure I wouldn't be going against God's word. This area (gender roles) has been an area I've had a lot of trouble coming to terms with since I became a Christian (partly due to my upbringing).

Thanks,
JJ

I don't believe that women should seek to preach or teach men. However, scripture clearly has it that God Himself has in His own time for His own reasons picked out women to preach, teach, judge, and prophecy. It's a fine line because a lot of folks say 'God told me this' when quite in fact, God never even whispered the thought. I believe that a woman shouldn't seek it out at all, however, nothing's going to stop a woman from doing so if God calls her out on it.

 

[JasperJackson]

Thanks for your reply Tamara, especially re the definition of a pastor. Now, by no means do I have any idea of biblical Greek, but it seems you do so I'd be interested in your answer.
My (ESV) study bible tells me that the terms pastor, overseer and elder are all synonyms for the same office. Is that true? What is the difference?

 

[JasperJackson]

.

 

[Tamara224]

You know what Tamara? Go ahead and belabor the points, because I've poured over the text in this thread and treated it with respect. You just impose your own meanings, provide zip for references and sit back and congratulate yourself. I hate your posts, so smug, so certain of the superiority and moral correctness of modern western civilization.

Um, wow Brad. Feeling challenged? I would ask you to please take a look at what you just said to me and ask yourself what spirit you said it in.

I'm sorry I don't provide chapter and verse references when I quote or reference Scripture. I know it's a failing of mine. I tend to assume that we're all familiar enough with Scripture to recognize it when we see it. I forget that not everyone is. And that's my fault. I shouldn't be that way. I just don't memorize chapter and verse references. I remember content but not exactly where it's found.

FTR, check out 1 Corinthians 12-14 for the stuff about the gifts and how God gives according to each as He wills.

As to your charges of my being smug and all that. I can only say that you've read tone into my post that isn't there.

I have every right to be sure of my position on this, Brad. Just as much right as you do. It may be that we'll never see eye to eye on it. But there's no need to start making the argument personal.

Mostly

So far, everyone who agrees with you has been guilty of everything they accuse me and my side of (eg. ignoring context, culture). Your post, naturally, hints that your side would never DREAM of doing such things, YOUR side is much more lofty in its treatment of the text, putting it in its proper context and all. THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT YOU DON'T ACTUALLY DO THAT.

Did you expect me to do a full discourse of this very controversial topic in one post? People have written 1000 page books on the topic, for crying out loud.

Brad, I simply shared a short overview of my opinion on this matter. It seems highly unreasonable to me that you seem to demand I do a full, scholarly thesis on every possible argument in this very big topic.

I'll just ignore and give it up if you respond with more pithy non-cited assertions. I've done this over and over and over. Either be rigorous or go home.

It's a little too late to "ignore" it, Brad.

You've already made it clear that you despise me, personally. Now why on earth do you think that I would willingly engage in discussion with you when you've made it quite clear that anything I do say on the matter will be treated with disdain and that I will again be subjected to being reviled?

Thanks for your reply Tamara, especially re the definition of a pastor. Now, by no means do I have any idea of biblical Greek, but it seems you do so I'd be interested in your answer.
My (ESV) study bible tells me that the terms pastor, overseer and elder are all synonyms for the same office. Is that true? What is the difference?

I don't know any more Greek than the lexicons tell me. I'm at the mercy of other scholars, as we all are.

I don't know why the ESV study bible says that. I wonder, is that a commentary portion? We have to remember that commentary is just one man's interpretation.

I know the word pastor means "shepherd". I know that bishop means "overseer." Elder means elder, obviously. I don't know how it could be said that those words are all synonymous. Especially considering the history of the Church. It's obvious that historically, they have not been considered the same 'office' by most churches. Most evangelical churches have pastors and elders. The RCC has bishops and elders (not the same thing). Many churches don't have the "office" of pastor at all.

I think most Traditional churches think the evangelical "office of pastor" is odd. You should ask Kirk, he can give you the Lutheran perspective on it.

 

[kevlite2020]

How dare you not write a dissertation and post it on here!!!! What an insult, making just a normal post with some information. Rude.

 

[Brad2009]

Um, wow Brad. Feeling challenged? I would ask you to please take a look at what you just said to me and ask yourself what spirit you said it in.

I'm sorry I don't provide chapter and verse references when I quote or reference Scripture. I know it's a failing of mine. I tend to assume that we're all familiar enough with Scripture to recognize it when we see it. I forget that not everyone is. And that's my fault. I shouldn't be that way. I just don't memorize chapter and verse references. I remember content but not exactly where it's found.

FTR, check out 1 Corinthians 12-14 for the stuff about the gifts and how God gives according to each as He wills.

As to your charges of my being smug and all that. I can only say that you've read tone into my post that isn't there.

I have every right to be sure of my position on this, Brad. Just as much right as you do. It may be that we'll never see eye to eye on it. But there's no need to start making the argument personal.



Did you expect me to do a full discourse of this very controversial topic in one post? People have written 1000 page books on the topic, for crying out loud.

Brad, I simply shared a short overview of my opinion on this matter. It seems highly unreasonable to me that you seem to demand I do a full, scholarly thesis on every possible argument in this very big topic.



It's a little too late to "ignore" it, Brad.

You've already made it clear that you despise me, personally. Now why on earth do you think that I would willingly engage in discussion with you when you've made it quite clear that anything I do say on the matter will be treated with disdain and that I will again be subjected to being reviled?

See edit (it was before your post, prolly in the space between your first quoting my post and the appearance of your post).

If we are to get anywhere, you are going to have to be explicit with your references. I think your side abuses the text (all the while crying that my side takes things out of context), if that's not clear enough. Prove me wrong if you can.

Yes your post made my angry... dang right. You said things about how my side cherry-picks the text with zero support after I'd been pouring over the text with references this whole thread. And I found it dang smug how you offered none of your own, and act like your points are obviously correct.

What spirit are either of us in Tamera? I'm happy to let God decide between us and pray for necessary rebuke in heart or mind (to either of us). I hope you can agree to that; thats as open-minded as I can be on this subject (unless you will explicitly show the textual support that you take as obvious, that I will take seriously).

 

[Boondock_Saint]

There is certainly nothing in the bible that says you have to pick a female paster over male paster. Or that you have to give the church with a female paster a chance.

If I ever come across a church with a female paster again, I will do what I did the last time. Walk out.

 

[Tamara224]

See edit (it was before your post, prolly in the space between your first quoting my post and the appearance of your post).

If we are to get anywhere, you are going to have to be explicit with your references.

Where do you think we're going? Are you willing to honestly engage with me on this topic with civility?

I think your side abuses the text (all the while crying that my side takes things out of context), if that's not clear enough. Prove me wrong if you can.

I don't think it's possible to prove anything to you, Brad. You seem to have an unreasonable standard of proof.

Yes your post made my angry... dang right. You said things about how my side cherry-picks the text with zero support after I'd been pouring over the text with references this whole thread. And I found it dang smug how you offered none of your own, and act like your points are obviously correct.

To say that I've offered no references in my post is patently false. I didn't tell you chapter and verse, true, but I quoted and paraphrased at least 6 passages of Scripture.

I'm sorry it angered you. But I don't believe that "your side" takes the whole counsel of Scripture into account.

You have every right to disagree with me. You have every right to think that I'm taking things out of context. I have every right to think the same about you.

What spirit are either of us in Tamera?

TamAra. I'm just telling what I believe, Brad. I didn't personally attack you for posting something I disagree with.

I'm happy to let God decide between us and pray for necessary rebuke in heart or mind (to either of us).

Very good. I hope that we all are always open to letting God decide and lead us into all truth.

I hope you can agree to that; thats as open-minded as I can be on this subject (unless you will explicitly show the textual support that you take as obvious, that I will take seriously).

I'm not sure what you're asking for here. Do you want me to go back and edit my post to include chapter and verse references to all the Scripture I quoted? Or do you want me to expound on how I interpret the Scripture you provided?

 

[Tamara224]

Edit: I'll leave it in its current form; that was my knee-jerk reaction. I like you Tamara, I've actually agreed with you on alot of things. This one I just can't do. I haven't seen a rigorous liberal interpretation (that isn't disingenuous in part) wrt this topic yet and I've read more than a few. But you are a smart woman and I wouldn't say otherwise. I do not mean to insult you, I do respect your mind... I just am totally convinced that liberal theology and feminism are corrupting influences in this day. If you're going to say I ignore context, you better back it up. I've seen from your side alot of assertions which were not substantiated and were actually real abuses of the text, just in this short thread alone.

I don't adhere to either liberal or feminist theology. I'm Christian egalitarian and a Biblical inerrantist. And I don't mean to be rude, Brad, but if you haven't read any rigorous scholarly works on my perspective, you haven't read as much as you think. I'm not even close to the smartest, most educated or scholarly person who has written on this topic.

If you want to read some real scholarly work - from the point of view of someone who believes Scripture is inspired and infallible - check out this blog. Women In Ministry Scroll down a bit and on the right hand side you'll see a categories section. You can check out work about specific Biblical passages.


And I really appreciate your kind words.

 

[benf]

IMO, brad wasn't being uncivil, he just seems rather frustrated you don't seem so concerned about validating your position with scripture as he did his. You just kinda seemed to throw some verses out (minus the book/chapter reference), ignore the the arguments brad posted (on page 5 I think) for his, and that was that.

All IMO totally.

 

[acropolis]

Well if people thousands of years ago were horribly oppressive to women I guess everyone has to be for ever and ever.

 

[Tamara224]

IMO, brad wasn't being uncivil, he just seems rather frustrated you don't seem so concerned about validating your position with scripture as he did his. You just kinda seemed to throw some verses out, ignore the the arguments brad posted (on page 5 I think) for his, and that was that.

All IMO totally.

It was not my intention to pick one person in this thread and go about proving why I think he or she is wrong.

It was my intent to simply state my position on the matter and address one argument (i.e. women shouldn't be in authority over men) with one of the reasons I don't believe it.

To say I just "threw some verses out" is silly. First I'm accused of not using Scripture references at all, then I'm accused of just throwing some out there. Now I'm getting frustrated.

Are you going to get after Brad for not addressing all of the egalitarian arguments instead of just putting his own forth?

I understood the OP to be a request for each person to state his or her own position on the topic. I did so. Now, if anyone wants to debate me, I'm game. But a good place to start would be the actual content of my post.

 

[leothelioness]

Blind post:

I still feel a bit weird when I see a female pastor, but that's pretty much because I was raised Baptist and am not used to it. I don't really have any moral or Biblical opposition to it, though.

 

[Tamara224]

Well if people thousands of years ago were horribly oppressive to women I guess everyone has to be for ever and ever.

You know, this is what I don't get about being accused of being "PC" and influenced by secular feminism for my position on this.

If feminism were historically an aspect of unChristian cultures, I'd be much more inclined to believe that I'm just being influenced by modern culture.

Oppression of women and male dominance have been the norm throughout human history in all cultures.

And the truth is, feminism didn't start with secular culture in the 1970s. Feminism - that is, equality for women (not the misandric bra-burners we hear the most about) - began within Christianity, when Christian women and men recognized that the Gospel of Jesus Christ turns the world systems on their heads.

 

[miss-a]

Women being in ministry is fine, and contrary to popular opinion, it's quite biblical for them to even teach men as long as they are not the final authority over men. For example, men can and do glean tremendously from Beth Moore teaching on Life Today every wednesday. www.lifetoday.org/beth. But any man or woman listening should have a pastor or more mature person in the faith mentoring them in real life. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Beth is teaching under the authority of a male, James Robison, who runs Life Outreach International, and she lives under the authority of her husband.

Likewise (no gasping) my pastor's wife preaches to the congregation on his behalf sometimes when he is away. She runs everything by him first and is under his authority, his lead and covering. If she can't do this and still be biblical, then what is up with us as Christians? Can we say out of one side of our mouths that a man and wife are "one flesh," and out the other that he can preach to the congregation but she can't. I don't think so.

And for folks upset about Joyce Meyer, well Joyce is very clear that she is not a pastor, doesn't want to replace anyone's pastor, that she is under the authority of her husband and pastor, and what more do we want? (And though folks say she's a health/wealth preacher, I've never once heard her preach that and I used to listen to her frequently. )

So can a woman be a pastor. Well, though like one other poster said (maybe more, but I didn't read them all) I feel a bit ill at ease with a female pastor, but I think scripturally a woman could be like an associate pastor, not a senior pastor, but an assistant who does not have ultimate authorityover the church. I don't think we can argue that scriptually. But here's the thing, if a guy is not comfortable with that, he doesn't have to go to her for spiritual counsel, he can still confide in a male pastor if he wants.

 

[Stravinsk]

There's one thing (correct me if I've missed it) that Tams misses in all her arguments.

To deny it is to admit it's not Scripture, or that it was added to the text - basically - to deny it is to admit God's lack of inspiration in putting it there - that it is not "God breathed":

1 Tim 2: 11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Paul clearly gives the reason.

He doesn't say the reason is "the women at that church were being obnoxious."
He doesn't say the reason is that particular women were causing trouble.

What he DOES reference is the very beginning of sin, and how that sin came to Adam. Through a woman's teaching. Through a woman's deception. Ultimately Satan, of course, who used the woman to influence the man. Clearly Paul is making a connection that trancends all cultural context.

But Tams simply doesn't like it. So she is using dismissive and specious arguments in true deceptive lawyer fashion. Don't think we can't see through it. Tams, don't be an Eve, the fruit you're offering is rotten, but your talking it up as if it's fresh from the tree of life.

 

[leothelioness]

Women being in ministry is fine, and contrary to popular opinion, it's quite biblical for them to even teach men as long as they are not the final authority over men.

I would agree with this.