female preacher

[Mike McK]

Hi Mick McK

I'm a woman, and a pastor.

No, you're not. If you're acting as a pastor, then both you and your church need to repent.

 

[Rose_bud]

No, you're not. If you're acting as a pastor, then both you and your church need to repent.

My brother, I believe you're missing a crucial aspect of God's redemptive work. Unintentionally, your views on restricting ministry by gender might be hindering the very impact God desires to have on His world.

Your passion to address sin is commendable, and I share your concern (I have already forgiven you for personally attacking the ministry God has gifted, as I'm aware your understanding may be limited in this regard). However, I urge you to consider how restrictive ministry opportunities based on gender might actually hinder the vessels God wants to use to spread, to preach and teach His gospel message. (Not that men and women in opposition will ever be able to contend or restrict, as I ultimately answer to God in this regard). As this message of the Person of Christ to is too powerful and too important, the only message that is powerful enough to change and impact a broken world. God has already addressed the impact of sin by breaking into our world through the Person of Jesus. We (both men and women) have been called, regardless of office and location to continue to faithfully carry this message forward.

 

[Strong in Him]

Isn't this why you are so zealous to affirm a woman's right to stand in a spiritual place of authority over men?

No.
A woman has the right to do what God calls her to do - just as a man does.

Or happen to be the pastor ...

I don't know what kind of church you go to, but how does the Pastor "rule over" their congregation?
No vicar/Minister in my 60+ years has ever ruled over me, nor his other members. They have never told me what to study at school or whether to go to university. I might have wanted to talk things over with them - though actually I never did - and they would have offered to pray with me. But they had no say in how or where I studied, whether or not to marry, have children, move house or whatever. They could not even make me attend their churches. They did not tell me that I had to accept that a passage of the Bible meant what they told me it meant. Even if any had once tried, I am now an adult and can make up my own mind.

And this is one of the problems: you are trying to interpret Scripture using our culture. Instead of maintaining the cultural context God's Word is given in which should help you interpret Scripture.

And you are saying that God cannot call women today because (your interpretation of) Scripture forbids it.

Agreed. I pointed that out earlier: Christ is the Head of the church. Husband is head of the household.

Except in households where there are no men.
And if your definition of "head of the household" means, "one who makes all the decisions while everyone else does as he says", you're wrong.

Men are the appointed leaders in the church.

Not because I want it to be that way, it is the way God established/es in His Word.

And for about the 10th time; if he had, he would not call women to ordination.
If he had, and it was perfectly clear that it was a divine command, men would correct women instead of training and ordaining them. Although many Christian women wouldn't even consider ordination an option.
Or are you saying that there are women who delight in disobeying God?

Glad to see you submitting to a man's teaching.

Paidiske is a woman.

Says Paidiske? Says commentaries? Sorry, but what they like to think is also irrelevant. Because it still remains, the instructions clearly identify who is in view: a man. If you want to fall back on popular commentary positions, okay, doesn't change the context of the Word of God.

So you are saying that the English meaning of a verse is more accurate, and important, than what the author meant at the time, the language he was writing in, the culture of the day and what was going on at the time?

So you're guessing? Your arguments are based on guessing?

No, that's a logical conclusion.
Why would Paul tell women not to do something if they weren't doing it?

Can we consider that a long intervening span of time and a culture unlike the original setting—had no impact on the teaching?

?? They asked about a man being able to divorce his wife - they did not ask if it was permissible for a woman to divorce her husband. The reason for that was that it wasn't allowed in that culture - hence, no need to ask about something that is not allowed.
It's the same principle.
Paul didn't say that female overseers must be the wife of one husband; a) because I don't think women could be overseers then and b) because they couldn't have more than one husband. Women - certainly in Jesus' time - were owned by me; first their fathers, then their husbands.

More rationalizing of a simple principle that goes back to beginning of God's instruction.

It doesn't.

And, for the record, women cannot be priests; the proper term would be priestess.

Oh of course, forgive me; women are doctoresses, or judgesses, aren't they?

 

[Mike McK]

My brother, I believe you're missing a crucial aspect of God's redemptive work.

God's redemptive work does not involve you and your church being in rebellion to His Word.

Unintentionally, your views on restricting ministry by gender might be hindering the very impact God desires to have on His world.

So, you're saying God did not stop to consider the consequences of His prohibiting women from the pulpit?

Your passion to address sin is commendable, and I share your concern

If you did, you would not be defending your sin.

(I have already forgiven you for personally attacking the ministry God has gifted, as I'm aware your understanding may be limited in this regard).

You can make all the personal attacks you like, but that's still not going to change the Bible's prohibition against women in the pulpit.

However, I urge you to consider how restrictive ministry opportunities based on gender might actually hinder the vessels God wants to use to spread, to preach and teach His gospel message.

If God wanted women pastors, He would not have prohibited them.

We (both men and women) have been called

But not by God, as God prohibits women in the pulpit.

 

[Rose_bud]

God's redemptive work does not involve you and your church being in rebellion to His Word.

I disagree. To understand God's Word, we consider the cultural, historical, and literary contexts of Scripture and apply its principles to our situation. (A point that has been addressed and appears to be ignored on this thread).

So, you're saying God did not stop to consider the consequences of His prohibiting women from the pulpit?

That misrepresents my view. I'm emphasizing the importance of contextual understanding. Ignoring these contexts can lead to mishandling the text and misunderstanding God's intentions.

Im emphasizing the importance of the message and work of Lord Jesus to adress the condition of our world, whereas you appear to want to oppose and prohibit it.

If you did, you would not be defending your sin.

I'm not defending sin. I'm advocating for the Gospel, the message and work of the Person of Christ, the only solution to sin.
I'd caution not to make unfounded accusations.

You can make all the personal attacks you like, but that's still not going to change the Bible's prohibition against women in the pulpit.

My brother you initiated this conversation by personally attacked the ministry God has gifted me. I won't vindicate myself; God does that through the fruit of His work. Engage with the substance of the discussion, rather than deflecting with accusations.

If God wanted women pastors, He would not have prohibited them.

That oversimplifies biblical teachings. Scripture provides examples of women serving in significant ministry roles (which has been thoroughly addressed throughout these threads). We must consider the entirety of God's Word, rather than relying on isolated passages.

But not by God, as God prohibits women in the pulpit.

God does not prohibit the vessels that spread His word, that would be contrary to His plan for the salvation of humanity.
Restricting women's participation in ministry is undermining God's work. God's sovereignty isn't bound by our traditions or interpretations.

 

[RamiC]

No, you're not. If you're acting as a pastor, then both you and your church need to repent.

Firstly, you seem to have forgotten to tell us why you have the authority to to declare this. Are you St Paul?

Secondly, it makes no sense. If all women are indeed forbidden to be pastors or preachers because they are women, then only actually doing it would be a sin, I have not seen a verse in the Bible that even appears to forbid just pretending.

Of course if 1 Timothy 2 12 is actually more like this, which is what those who can accept women leading churches and teaching do think (at least all those in this thread, then there is nothing for anyone to repent of.

 

[RamiC]

No, it wasn't a friendly heads up, it was an attempt to interact in a discussion in a way that is contrary to Christian Doctrine and Discussion. You seek to silence those who hold a differing view by getting them in trouble, rather than engaging in a debate the way people should. That is, present your arguments, address theirs.

Do you really think the moderators on here cannot see who said what by reading the thread?

 

[Strong in Him]

God's redemptive work does not involve you and your church being in rebellion to His Word.

But she isn't.

So, you're saying God did not stop to consider the consequences of His prohibiting women from the pulpit?

He hasn't.

If you did, you would not be defending your sin.

Preaching the Gospel is sin? Since when?

If you did, you would not be defending your sin.

Preaching the Good News, teaching the faith and helping others is not sin.

You can make all the personal attacks you like, but that's still not going to change the Bible's prohibition against women in the pulpit.

It doesn't even mention the word "pulpit" never mind prohibit women from entering it.

If God wanted women pastors, He would not have prohibited them.

He hasn't.

But not by God, as God prohibits women in the pulpit.

No, he doesn't.

 

[Strong in Him]

No, you're not. If you're acting as a pastor, then both you and your church need to repent.

In your opinion.
But not that of her church.

 

[Rose_bud]

That's between you and God.

Ofcourse, our ultimate accountability is to God. I dont believe I indicated otherwise.

Sure you are. You're telling us all how you're entitled to a pastoral ministry.

Ministry is not an entitlement, whoever believes this is mistaken. Ministry is first and foremost a gift of service. The response to a call of sacred work, that requires absolute obedience and dependence on God. If it wasn't, it would just be another work to glorify the creation instead of the Creator.

And you are a liar, since I never attacked you or the ministry you claim God gave you. I simply pointed out that God does not allow women in the pulpit.

It is regarded as an attack of my character when you stated I am "sinning along with my church" (I forgive you but will not tolerate continous slander of my character)

Again, you lie.

See above regarding slander.

You haven't shown one verse showing a woman in any sort of pastoral ministry.

I didn't have to, like I stated in the post that was conveniently not cited. This thread is loaded with the evidence of this. I wasn't going to rehash this and continue in circles. But if you would like to respectfully engage the arguments again we can.

We're not talking about evangelism, honey. We're talking about pastoral ministry.

I respectfully request that you refrain from adressing me as honey. It's a term reserved for my husband. You may call me Rose_bud or sister.

What do you think pastors do when an unbeliever enters the congregation? Also evangelism is rooted in the understanding of one who proclaims and announces the coming of a Kingdom. As Christians we announce that the inbreaking of the Kingdom has arrived in the Person of Jesus Christ, who died, was buried and resurrected. We demonstrate this understanding in our proclamation and in our actions through the empowerment of His Spirit. It's His message, we are merely the messengers.

If God's word says women aren't allowed to be pastors, then women aren't allowed to be pastors and it's heresy for you to assume God has not stopped to consider the consequences of His prohibition.

It is not heresy when the means of God's message is opposed.
Instead we should re-examine our interpretations of Scripture, considering the broader narrative of God redemptive work for humanity. There are many examples of those who did this. Examples coming to mind in OT is Tobias and Sanballat. As the temple was being repaired, they opposed the work, but God's work prevailed. And we now know, we are His temple that are being built up. In the NT as the disciples were empowered to share this message, the religious leaders of the day all opposed them, but they continued regardless. The message of their risen Lord and Saviour was too important. They were progressively and continually persecuted, but as the opposition progressed, so did the growth of the Church (Acts 2-6). I take comfort in this understanding, His work will continue, regardless of the attempts at silencing.

 

[tampasteve]

ADMIN HAT ON

This thread is closed for review.

ADMIN HAT OFF

Edit: The thread is staying closed.