Pursuing a Man vs. Waiting to be Pursued

[jess9450]

The primary responsibility of a husband to his wife, beyond loving, providing for, and protecting her, is leadership in spiritual matters. The woman cannot and should never attempt to take that role. She is not designed or intended for it.

Can you explain to me a marriage in which the woman has the gift of ministry and her husband does not. Are you saying she shouldn't use that gift because she is a woman?

 

[ImperatorWall]

Can you explain to me a marriage in which the woman has the gift of ministry and her husband does not. Are you saying she shouldn't use that gift because she is a woman?

A woman with spiritual gifts is to employ them appropriately in accordance with what Scripture says about the roles and responsibilities of women. To be blunt, this means not teaching or leading in an official or organized context.

While her gifts may make her a boon to her husband, they in no way give her the right to usurp his authority as the spiritual head of his house. Rather, she should be using her gifts to exhort and encourage him to lead.

 

[Paulie079]

Can you explain to me a marriage in which the woman has the gift of ministry and her husband does not. Are you saying she shouldn't use that gift because she is a woman?

I would just say, Jess, that a) this has nothing to do with ability, but with obedience to Scripture regarding the roles God has given men and women, but also b) that the woman possessing a gift of ministry does not necessarily mean that she can't be led spiritually.

 

[Rose of Eden]

A woman with spiritual gifts is to employ them appropriately in accordance with what Scripture says about the roles and responsibilities of women. To be blunt, this means not teaching or leading in an official or organized context.

While her gifts may make her a boon to her husband, they in no way give her the right to usurp his authority as the spiritual head of his house. Rather, she should be using her gifts to exhort and encourage him to lead.

I personally disagree with this. I believe that the woman shouldn't be the leader in a marriage (as in, in the dynamics of her marriage, she should allow her husband to lead even if she's been given the gift of ministry), but I don't think women should never have an official or organized leading role. If a woman's gift is ministry, I see nothing wrong with her being a leader and ministering outside of the dynamics of her marriage. Now, I'm not sure how I feel about female pastors, so I wouldn't support her being a pastor of a church, but I see nothing wrong or un-Biblical with such a woman leading, say, a womens' small group Bible study, some kind of service ministry project the church is doing, or even the worship singers and musicians if she's the best and most capable person for the role.

 

[ImperatorWall]

I personally disagree with this. I believe that the woman shouldn't be the leader in a marriage (as in, in the dynamics of her marriage, she should allow her husband to lead even if she's been given the gift of ministry), but I don't think women should never have an official or organized leading role. If a woman's gift is ministry, I see nothing wrong with her being a leader and ministering outside of the dynamics of her marriage. Now, I'm not sure how I feel about female pastors, so I wouldn't support her being a pastor of a church, but I see nothing wrong or un-Biblical with such a woman leading, say, a womens' small group Bible study, some kind of service ministry project the church is doing, or even the worship singers and musicians if she's the best and most capable person for the role.

A distinction must be made between leading a Bible study and being a leader in the church. They are not the same thing. One organizes and oversees a group study. The other is responsible for the lives and spiritual well being of the sheep under his care, and is visibly active in playing a key role in decision making and worship. Doing the latter is where a woman is outside of her God given role.

 

[Rose of Eden]

A distinction must be made between leading a Bible study and being a leader in the church. They are not the same thing. One organizes and oversees a group study. The other is responsible for the lives and spiritual well being of the sheep under his care, and is visibly active in playing a key role in decision making and worship. Doing the latter is where a woman is outside of her God given role.

I would argue that leading a Bible study or small group or any other project is being a leader in the church. Churches consist of many leaders, in a hierarchy sort of; some leadership roles are big, some small, some official, some unofficial. But I think what you're getting at is that you don't think women should take one of the big leadership positions in a church, such as pastor or associate pastor or something like that. Am I right?


*Edited to add: And by the way, yes, small group leaders and Bible study leaders often do oversee and care for the spiritual lives of those they lead. Not to the extent of a senior pastor, but to a lesser extent, yes, they often do.

 

[ImperatorWall]

I would argue that leading a Bible study or small group or any other project is being a leader in the church. Churches consist of many leaders, in a hierarchy sort of; some leadership roles are big, some small, some official, some unofficial. But I think what you're getting at is that you don't think women should take one of the big leadership positions in a church, such as pastor or associate pastor or something like that. Am I right?

Well, we have vastly different understandings of what church is. I disagree completely that it is a hierarchy. The pastor is only differentiated by his spiritual gifts, which in no way make him superior to the other brothers or sisters in Christ.

As for "big" leadership positions, I think a safe criteria is that women should not be elders or pastors in the church. Nor do I think they should be teaching in a context that requires them to give instruction to men, specifically married men who may be older than they are.

 

[Rose of Eden]

Well, we have vastly different understandings of what church is. I disagree completely that it is a hierarchy. The pastor is only differentiated by his spiritual gifts, which in no way make him superior to the other brothers or sisters in Christ.

It's not a hierarchy of superiority, it's a hierarchy of responsibility. And every single church, no matter what size, that I've ever walked into has functioned in that way. Now the hierarchy is not always official (it's sometimes unofficial, assumed, or understood), but it's there and it in no way implies superiority, only responsibility.

And hierarchies are the only way to get anything done amongst a group of imperfect humans (which we all are). Hierarchies divide the work and responsibilities and create various leaders to ensure that their responsibilities are being met. Without a hierarchy, all of the work and responsibility would fall on a very small group of people and they wouldn't be able to handle it. Hierarchies divide that all up.

 

[ImperatorWall]

It's not a hierarchy of superiority, it's a hierarchy of responsibility. And every single church, no matter what size, that I've ever walked into has functioned in that way. Now the hierarchy is not always official (it's sometimes unofficial, assumed, or understood), but it's there and it in no way implies superiority, only responsibility.

And hierarchies are the only way to get anything done amongst a group of imperfect humans (which we all are). Hierarchies divide the work and responsibilities and create various leaders to ensure that their responsibilities are being met. Without a hierarchy, all of the work and responsibility would fall on a very small group of people and they wouldn't be able to handle it. Hierarchies divide that all up.

My point was that the only leaders in a church are those men who are raised up by the Spirit. Any sort of hierarchy of responsibility for the sake of getting things done has little to do with being a "leader" in the church.

 

[Rose of Eden]

My point was that the only leaders in a church are those men who are raised up by the Spirit. Any sort of hierarchy of responsibility for the sake of getting things done has little to do with being a "leader" in the church.

Well, either you're wrong...or the churches you go to have some extremely tired, stressed out pastors! Because a small group of, say, 5 people can't run an entire church by themselves. They need the woman who runs the daycare system and daycare staff (a leader); they need the worship leader (another leader); they need the youth leaders to help the youth pastor out (also leaders); they need the Bible study and small group leaders to oversee the every day spiritual needs of each of their small little groups (more leaders); they need people to initiate, head up, and lead service projects in the community (leaders); and much more. Call those people by any name you want, but they're still leaders in the church. They have small leadership roles, but they still lead something and some people. And they're still vital to the body of Christ.

I dunno, maybe you come from a tiny church or something. Perhaps a church of 20 members is fine with just a pastor, associate pastor, and youth pastor leading everyone and everything, but more than that and those people just can't handle that amount of work.

 

[Paulie079]

I would just clarify that what 1 Timothy and Titus say is that the office of elder/overseer is to be held only by men. That would include pastors obviously. But this is the only office in the church given this distinction. Perhaps that would help to clarify the difference of opinion on the idea of leadership within the church. I think this is also important so that we're not adding in anything that is not laid out in Scripture.

 

[Rose of Eden]

Well, hopefully you're learning from this. It is a risk, putting yourself out there to be rejected, but it's worth taking. And you seem like a lovely person. I think a lot of guys would love to have a chance with you.

I learned a lot from all of this actually! But yeah, it definitely is a risk, but not just because of rejection. Besides rejection of course, I also fear things like humiliation and ridicule. But it's a risk that I need to push myself to take, otherwise I may miss out on a great guy.

Be glad its only your assumptions, every word I type out I know how stupid it sounds.

Oh Toro!

 

[Isambard]

Probably. Except that would be a very different situation.

No. Its really not.

Races of humanity are totally equal in terms of their duties and responsibilities on earth. Genders of humanity are equal in dignity and worth, but not in terms of their duties and responsiblities. Men and women are asked by God to do different things because they are created to do different things.

Not according to the Bible. God and ancient theologians were fine with the idea that some ethnicities were created just to be smited so God could show off. Others, had their duties and responsibilities as slaves.

The "ultimate immutable revelation of GOD" was amended when such notions were no longer politically popular.

And as you might notice, you can't just separate spiritual traits from physical, emotional, and mental traits, because they're all tied together.

No they are not. What you describe as 'spiritual traits' are entirely cultural and thus an incredibly poor defense of the supposed reasonable gender roles you're proposing.

 

[redblue22]

Most of my life I did not mind the very aggressive woman. I'm a little more conservative now. Besides, once you allow that door to open, it is hard to close. Aggressive women also like to suddenly turn it on and off and pretend they weren't that way. So, I'm cautious.

I am a believer that it is easier to pursue more girlfriends than just one. When I have pursued only one girl--as implied in this topic--it has not worked out well. I find that if I pursued several girls at once--even if they were friends--it worked out just fine.

But I've already admitted I have no idea what I'm doing in pursuing.

I also would say that if a girl does not respond, takes me for granted, or I have to defend myself, then I lose my creativity and passion in reciprocating pursuing.

Maybe that is why pursuing many is easier. They hold each other accountable in a group. And they don't neglect or stick you privately thinking you are somehow dependent on them. a group of girls will appreciate your pursuing and see good things in you. And besides, they pursue right back in short time.

For some reason the lone girl thinks you aren't all that good looking or smart and thinks you are desperate because you are pursuing. the more you pursue, the more she sits back and does nothing. so the only real strategy is to let them pursue. And the work of drawing boundaries with consequences in a relationship where I pursue a bit can get old if they keep testing the lines.

 

[ninzae]

I've been thinking more about this and I think I don't like to pursue also because I'm completely stupid. I definitely am not good at showing interest. Not only is there all the other stuff that I explained, but I miss subtle cues and don't really know how to pursue anyone. I mean, it makes as much sense to me to show up uninvited to an all girl party as to ask the cute red haired girl out after class. The probability seems the same. And the worst part is the all girl party usually turns out with better results.

I mean, even here that one time I tried to be flirty and weird and show a little interest in you Rose. I so missed the hint that you weren't interested. You wrote me to "quit it." I felt so embarrassed. Sorry about that.

I don't think that having difficulty in showing your interest or having the boldness to pursue makes you stupid. If that's the case we have a lot of "stupid" Christian men.

I've had many discussion about this very issue with some of my friends. This is a real "struggle" most Christian men face nowadays. I come from an international church and I see this phenomena across different nationalities and age group.

This is also frustrating for us women because we do not want to do "all" the work. I personally do not have problem showing some signs of interest here and there but I expect a man to at least confirm his interest by words or actions.

Redblue22, you might not like the idea of pursuit but someone's gotta do it. You are lucky if a nice lady will start it off for you and you just follow the trail. Most probably, she is waiting for you to start it off so she can follow the trail.

All the best! : )

 

[ImperatorWall]

Well, either you're wrong...or the churches you go to have some extremely tired, stressed out pastors! Because a small group of, say, 5 people can't run an entire church by themselves. They need the woman who runs the daycare system and daycare staff (a leader); they need the worship leader (another leader); they need the youth leaders to help the youth pastor out (also leaders); they need the Bible study and small group leaders to oversee the every day spiritual needs of each of their small little groups (more leaders); they need people to initiate, head up, and lead service projects in the community (leaders); and much more. Call those people by any name you want, but they're still leaders in the church. They have small leadership roles, but they still lead something and some people. And they're still vital to the body of Christ.

I dunno, maybe you come from a tiny church or something. Perhaps a church of 20 members is fine with just a pastor, associate pastor, and youth pastor leading everyone and everything, but more than that and those people just can't handle that amount of work.

What you are describing is a non-profit business enterprise, not the church of Christ.

Don't confuse the two. The church organization is not the ekklesia, the body of Christ.

The body of Christ is nourished by men who are called and equipped to lead. If they feel they are lacking such men, prayerfully seeking Godly men to meet the need is what should be done. They should never attempt to fill the role with women because there seem to be not enough willing and able men to be found. Not only that, but the Godly women I know and have talked to would never even attempt to take such a role, knowing it is not what God wants of them.

 

[Rose of Eden]

What you are describing is a non-profit business enterprise, not the church of Christ.

Don't confuse the two. The church organization is not the ekklesia, the body of Christ.

The body of Christ is nourished by men who are called and equipped to lead. If they feel they are lacking such men, prayerfully seeking Godly men to meet the need is what should be done. They should never attempt to fill the role with women because there seem to be not enough willing and able men to be found. Not only that, but the Godly women I know and have talked to would never even attempt to take such a role, knowing it is not what God wants of them.

I'm talking about your typical church in America. I'm not necessarily talking about the body of Christ, but most churches are included in the body of Christ anyway.

And that's not a "non-profit business enterprise," that's how churches run. Have you ever been involved in a church? As in actually involved, not just going to the main services, sitting down, and then heading straight home as soon as its done? Because to me, it sounds like you haven't. A church needs more than its pastors and elders to effectively serve and minister to its people, believe it or not. Like I said, you can call them by any name you want you want, but it is what it is.

But I'm done with this. It's very clear that you have some obscure vision of what a church should be that's not planted in reality. We're not getting anywhere. So please don't derail my thread any further.

 

[ImperatorWall]

I'm talking about your typical church in America. I'm not necessarily talking about the body of Christ, but most churches are included in the body of Christ anyway.

And that's not a "non-profit business enterprise," that's how churches run. Have you ever been involved in a church? As in actually involved, not just going to the main services, sitting down, and then heading straight home as soon as its done? Because to me, it sounds like you haven't. A church needs more than its pastors and elders to effectively serve and minister to its people, believe it or not. Like I said, you can call them by any name you want you want, but it is what it is.

But I'm done with this. It's very clear that you have some obscure vision of what a church should be that's not planted in reality. We're not getting anywhere. So please don't derail my thread any further.

As I said, you are not discussing the church as revealed to us in the Bible.

No, I have never been involved in the church as an organization in any sort of official capacity. I doubt I'll ever be a member of a church. But I have been, and continue to be, involved in the church of Christ, of which I am a member, as we are all called to be.

 

[Rose of Eden]

As I said, you are not discussing the church as revealed to us in the Bible.

No, I have never been involved in the church as an organization in any sort of official capacity. I doubt I'll ever be a member of a church. But I have been, and continue to be, involved in the church of Christ, of which I am a member, as we are all called to be.

The body of Christ consists of churches as well. But since you've never been involved in a church I can understand your perspective now. If you were to get involved, say, in serving with a church, you would soon see that the pastors and leaders called by God need the help other Christians to do smaller tasks. It breaks down the work that needs to done. And by "work," I mean serving, witnessing, ministering to people, evangelizing, spreading the Gospel, stuff like that. It's like Jesus said, "the harvest is plenty but the workers are few."

 

[pressingon17]

If I talk to young ladies I clam up and studder and sound like an idiot. I have a problem showing I'm interested or even just trying to get to know them better.