How Ladies can be a Bishop?

[Albion]

I don't have a problem with the concept of men and women being different - only that those differences somehow affect women's ability to preach.
Ringo

Except that ability to preach is not in question. Everyone knows that some women can preach better than some men. It has nothing at all to do with whether or not they should be deacons, priests/presbyters or bishops.

 

[Cjwinnit]

Except that ability to preach is not in question. Everyone knows that some women can preach better than some men. It has nothing at all to do with whether or not they should be deacons, priests/presbyters or bishops.

True - God, in many ways, is not a meritocrat. If he was, the Pharisees would have been the Disciples, not James, John, Peter and the rest.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

This is pretty clear:
“Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I
permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she
is to keep silent”(1 Tim.2:11–12).

It does not get any clearer.

Most Churches which ordain women claim that they are "Sola Scriptura"; yet in the ordaining of women and consecrating women to the office of Bishop, they negate their claim to Sola Scriptura. I could not accept female ordination as valid, nor could I accept ordinations performed by female bishops as valid either.

While I do not wish to offend, I will not compromise my faith or belief, which is soundly supported in Scripture.

 

[TheDag]

Would somebody more theologically adept than myself like to make the case for female bishops that would include the reasoning behind not following Paul's instructions?

Well that isn't me but I will say this. It is generally accepted that if a interpretation of the bible conflicts with another part of the bible then the interpretation must be wrong. In the bible we see women in positions ofleadership in the church and depending on your denomination there is female bishops in the bible*. This would mean there is more to what Paul is saying then what it appears. There must be some other reasoning.


*There is sufficient evidence for me to believe some denominations change a name from female form to the male form to support the view woman can not be priests. Denominations like the RCC would disagree with this statement.

 

[Albion]

Well that isn't me but I will say this. It is generally accepted that if a interpretation of the bible conflicts with another part of the bible then the interpretation must be wrong. In the bible we see women in positions ofleadership in the church and depending on your denomination there is female bishops in the bible*.

Uh, no. There are women in leadership, of course. This is beyond dispute. However, it doesn't make them clergy. And there is NO evidence from Scripture that women were ever bishops, nor has that argument been featured by the pro-WO (women's ordination) side in any of the churches that have bishops and recently decided to add women to the number. That should tell you something about the credibility of that argument.

 

[TheDag]

Uh, no. There are women in leadership, of course. This is beyond dispute. However, it doesn't make them clergy. And there is NO evidence from Scripture that women were ever bishops, nor has that argument been featured by the pro-WO (women's ordination) side in any of the churches that have bishops and recently decided to add women to the number. That should tell you something about the credibility of that argument.

I may have got the job title wrong but it has been mentioned here and is a very common argument used by the pro-Wo group.

please read through my next post in response to wordsoflife

Edit to add: Actually church leaders were equivalent of clergy

 

[TheDag]

“As in all the churches of the saints, the women should
keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to
speak,but should be subordinate,as even the law says …what
I am writing to you is a command of the Lord” (1 Cor.
14:33–34,37).

Reading verses 35 & 36 does not make it as clear cut as this statement indicates. Once again one must also consider the context. What was being written about? Disorderly worship. So one must ask the question what was making worship disorderly? why does it say women should make inquiries at home? That actually is very significant to the passage. The explanation by LCMS ignores that completly. That destroys its credibility.

“Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent”(1 Tim.2:11–12).

The issue I have with this is that it is based on faulty reasoning. I just don't understand how the outright disobediance of Adam is so much better than Eve being deceived. A simple reading of the account of the fall shows that Adam was willfully disobediant.

Of course there is also the question of the phrase "I do not permit". Naturally that will be affected by ones view of the bible. I have the unusual view that the bible is the inspired word of God while you don't. So it would be hard to actually discuss this due to that basic difference.

We believe that God has gifted men and women with different responsibilities and duties. For example,men are gifted by God to be husbands and fathers;women are gifted by God to be wives and mothers.

but then this statement becomes meaningless if you say it differently like men & women are gifted to be co-helpers and parents. Suddenly there is no distinction between what was just said. SAimply phrasing it one way does not change the fact they have just said the same thing about both men & women.

There are many ways for women to serve as full-time church workers in The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod,including service as teachers, directors of Christian education, directors of Christian outreach, deaconesses and parish nurses.

See this to me is nothing but hypocrisy. If women are to be silent and learn in submission then how on earth can they be teaching? They can't possibly. So the LCMS says their belief is women are not to teach but they are happy for women to teach! We must take cultural context into consideration. At the time of writing children did not go out to sunday school. They were in the church with everyone else so clearly women are not to teach the kids at church either. Teach them at home - fine. It is something I never could understand as a person who grew up attending a lutheran church with same belief at the time.

Women are the weaker vessel and are to be in submission and subjection to the male who is the head.

and men are to submit to women as well. I know it is more convienient to overlook that instruction for many. How do you deal with it?

Yes, you are wrong as it is a matter of scripture. You are a liberal. I may be mistaken but aren't you also for abortion and homosexual marriage.

On what do you base the view that abortion is wrong? I expect you to address the scripture that said killing an unborn baby and doing no harm to the pregnant mother is not worthy of death despite the law being a life for a life. I haven't seen one single person address that. They quote all kinds of passages but never ever deal with the fact the bible does not demand life for life when an unborn baby is killed.

 

[Albion]

I may have got the job title wrong but it has been mentioned here and is a very common argument used by the pro-Wo group.

please read through my next post in response to wordsoflife

Edit to add: Actually church leaders were equivalent of clergy

No, the ranks of the clergy in Christ's church are identified in Scripture, and we know from history the functioning of each. There were many other "leaders" of one sort or another, but they were not clergy and did not engage in clerical duties. The same holds true today, of course. Many churches which do not practice WO have women as heads of the parish council, lay readers (during the liturgy), Sunday School superintendents, eucharistic ministers, etc. etc. and there is no controversy.

(BTW, I did read your post to wordsoflife, but it deals with a different topic, one that I haven't taken up.)

 

[wordsoflife]

Reading verses 35 & 36 does not make it as clear cut as this statement indicates. Once again one must also consider the context. What was being written about? Disorderly worship. So one must ask the question what was making worship disorderly? why does it say women should make inquiries at home? That actually is very significant to the passage. The explanation by LCMS ignores that completly. That destroys its credibility.
[/SIZE]

The issue I have with this is that it is based on faulty reasoning. I just don't understand how the outright disobediance of Adam is so much better than Eve being deceived. A simple reading of the account of the fall shows that Adam was willfully disobediant.

Of course there is also the question of the phrase "I do not permit". Naturally that will be affected by ones view of the bible. I have the unusual view that the bible is the inspired word of God while you don't. So it would be hard to actually discuss this due to that basic difference.


but then this statement becomes meaningless if you say it differently like men & women are gifted to be co-helpers and parents. Suddenly there is no distinction between what was just said. SAimply phrasing it one way does not change the fact they have just said the same thing about both men & women.


See this to me is nothing but hypocrisy. If women are to be silent and learn in submission then how on earth can they be teaching? They can't possibly. So the LCMS says their belief is women are not to teach but they are happy for women to teach! We must take cultural context into consideration. At the time of writing children did not go out to sunday school. They were in the church with everyone else so clearly women are not to teach the kids at church either. Teach them at home - fine. It is something I never could understand as a person who grew up attending a lutheran church with same belief at the time.


and men are to submit to women as well. I know it is more convienient to overlook that instruction for many. How do you deal with it?


On what do you base the view that abortion is wrong? I expect you to address the scripture that said killing an unborn baby and doing no harm to the pregnant mother is not worthy of death despite the law being a life for a life. I haven't seen one single person address that. They quote all kinds of passages but never ever deal with the fact the bible does not demand life for life when an unborn baby is killed.

My response to you has already been given in my previous posts and what I have written stands and speaks for itself. You cannot get around the scriptures that speak against women being clergy without completely denying scripture. According to God's Word you are wrong and there is no wiggle room to allow women clergy. As far as abortion goes it is murder, but I don't expect a liberal like yourself to recognize the truth of God's Word.

 

[Lovely Lane]

My response to you has already been given in my previous posts and what I have written stands and speaks for itself. You cannot get around the scriptures that speak against women being clergy without completely denying scripture. According to God's Word you are wrong and there is no wiggle room to allow women clergy. As far as abortion goes it is murder, but I don't expect a liberal like yourself to recognize the truth of God's Word.

Speaking for yourself is fine, but there are many who disagree and respect and encourage their women clergy, women bishops included.

 

[wordsoflife]

Speaking for yourself is fine,

I'm not "speaking for myself", I gave the LCMS statement on the issue. This is the view of the entire denomination.

but there are many who disagree and respect and encourage their women clergy, women bishops included.

There are of coarse Churches with women clergy but they are in direct disobedience to God's Word.

 

[Lovely Lane]

I'm not "speaking for myself", I gave the LCMS statement on the issue. This is the view of the entire denomination.



There are of coarse Churches with women clergy but they are in direct disobedience to God's Word.

lol Like I said, speak for yourself. Your opinion is simply an opinion. I don't know what LCMS believe, nor care what it considers biblical.

 

[wordsoflife]

lol Like I said, speak for yourself. Your opinion is simply an opinion. I don't know what LCMS believe, nor care what it considers biblical.

I'm not speaking for myself only this is the belief of my denomination. Go back to post #33 where I posted the LCMS belief.

 

[Bethesda]

I'm not speaking for myself only this is the belief of my denomination. Go back to post #33 where I posted the LCMS belief.

As a genuine question then how does

“As in all the churches of the saints, the women should
keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to
speak,but should be subordinate,as even the law says …what
I am writing to you is a command of the Lord” (1 Cor.
14:33–34,37).
“Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I
permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she
is to keep silent”(1 Tim.2:11–12).

tie in to
'There are many ways for women to serve as full-time church workers in The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod,including service, as teachers, directors of Christian education, directors of Christian outreach, deaconesses and parish nurses.'

If one is to take what Paul wrote literally then it seems a blanket ban - he doesn't qualify to say i only mean ordained ministers. I've always been confused in that aspect in terms of missionaries too, who often in effect are the only Christian leaders and teachers in a place - and in many cases are women. Are they only allowed to teach women?

 

[TheDag]

No, the ranks of the clergy in Christ's church are identified in Scripture, and we know from history the functioning of each. There were many other "leaders" of one sort or another, but they were not clergy and did not engage in clerical duties. The same holds true today, of course. Many churches which do not practice WO have women as heads of the parish council, lay readers (during the liturgy), Sunday School superintendents, eucharistic ministers, etc. etc. and there is no controversy.

(BTW, I did read your post to wordsoflife, but it deals with a different topic, one that I haven't taken up.)

Yet once again we have a posting (this time from you) in direct conflict with your stated beliefs. When will the double standard in the belief end?

 

[TheDag]

There are of coarse Churches with women clergy but they are in direct disobedience to God's Word.

and so is the LCMS according to what you have said or are you now claiing to have posted a liw before? You clearly stated that women do not have to learn in quietness and submission. You have clearly stated woman can teach. Both of these go against the LCMS official position. So which is it? Are they hypocrites or just really really bad at trying to follow Gods word?

My response to you has already been given in my previous posts and what I have written stands and speaks for itself. You cannot get around the scriptures that speak against women being clergy without completely denying scripture. According to God's Word you are wrong and there is no wiggle room to allow women clergy. As far as abortion goes it is murder, but I don't expect a liberal like yourself to recognize the truth of God's Word.

You did not deal with it. Did you read my entire post or just the first word or none of it? According to the stated beliefs of LCMS both you and the LCMS are happy to ignore Gods word. I guess a conservative like you can't be expected to recognise the truth of God's word. Either answer the question or say you don't want to discuss it or say you don't know the answer. Don't just insult people which also goes against the LCMS instrustion you posted to not be antagonistic towards those with diferent belief.

As for the abortion comment if you have truly studied God's word on the matter then you will have an explanation that explains where the bible appears to teach that killing an unborn baby is not murder. The only other alternative is that you believe the OT does not mention muder is wrong. I think that unlikely so what is your explanation or are you simply repeating what you have been told without studying it for yourself? That is not belief and it is not even faith. That is blindly following man which is not something the bible instructs us to do.

Please show me exactly where it says abortion is muder. If you can do that please also provide an explanation for how the ible does not contradict itself. As I said earlier if a interpretation of scripture causes the bible to contradict itself then the interpretation must be wrong. I don't believe the bible contradicts itself. So what is your explanation or do you believe the bible contradicts itself. Should be a simple enough question to answer if you have actually worked out things yourself as per biblical instruction rather than just accepting what someone teaches without checking if it is true.

 

[Albion]

Yet once again we have a posting (this time from you) in direct conflict with your stated beliefs. When will the double standard in the belief end?

There is no double standard. If you think what I write is in 'direct conflict' with my stated beliefs, you obviously got confused somewhere along the line.

 

[Lovely Lane]

I'm not speaking for myself only this is the belief of my denomination. Go back to post #33 where I posted the LCMS belief.

yeah I read it. Didn't see where they said....

There are of coarse Churches with women clergy but they are in direct disobedience to God's Word.

As I said, you are speaking for yourself. And I really don't care as to what you think about women clergy. The OP is the issue, not what LCMS believes. I doubt that any women in Pakistan could hold any position of leadership or authority in church or at work. Bet the LCMS have mission-work there.

 

[Ringo84]

Except that ability to preach is not in question. Everyone knows that some women can preach better than some men. It has nothing at all to do with whether or not they should be deacons, priests/presbyters or bishops.

Then what does the ban on women pastors involve, if not ability?

The issue I have with this is that it is based on faulty reasoning. I just don't understand how the outright disobediance of Adam is so much better than Eve being deceived. A simple reading of the account of the fall shows that Adam was willfully disobediant.

Thank you, because I was going to make this exact point.

What rationale does the verse in question give for denying women the ability to preach? It says that men were "created first" and that Adam was not deceived - only Eve.

Following this logic, would we allow animals to preach before man? After all, the second creation story in Genesis clearly states that animals were created before men.

(Assuming, of course, that Adam and Eve were real people) It's also not true that Adam was not deceived. Adam was deceived - both of them were convinced by the serpent to partake of the fruit.

That's supported by the scripture that says God cursed both Adam and Eve equally - not one more than the other. So to say that "only" Eve was deceived misreads the entire story.

This is one reason why I say that the entire rationale for denying female pastors is a house of cards.
Ringo

 

[Albion]

Then what does the ban on women pastors involve, if not ability?

The priesthood and the episcopate are callings, not church jobs. Scripture is clear that God gives each of us different gifts and roles to play. This is likened, in the New Testament, to the body with hands, heart, etc. all working together but each doing something different from what the others do. And we have the example of the gifts of the Holy Spirits which we are told are given to some, but not necessarily all of them to every last person, and that this is according to God's will. There is plenty enough in Scripture to indicate that whom he calls into the ordained ministry is not according to "equal opportunity hiring." And we have specific information that only males can meet the qualifications.