1) We are trying to live our lives in accordance with the will of the Creator of the Universe. This is of utmost importance to us.
2) We are imperfect humans who often make mistakes in understanding God and God's will.
We do our best, but because of #2, we occasionally realize that we need to correct something that we've been believing or doing for a while. We'll see that we mistook a cultural custom for God's will, or that we misunderstood a passage of Scripture, or that one of our important ethical principles has implications that we simply didn't pay attention to before. And then we make corrections. It's not a simple majority vote; it's more like conversations and prayer and reflection and more conversations over a very long period of time. We're still genuinely trying to discern God's will.
My rebuttal to that would be, if the holy text concisely and clearly states something, how can one reconcile opposing that within the framework of understanding God's intent?
While there are certainly allegorical and vague things in each of the holy books that scholars and interpreters can disagree on, there are certain things that are pretty straight forward.
For instance (in the context of what the OP stated, which was hoping that that their church would accept the idea of female leaders)
How would one reconcile what they want, with a verse like this?
KJV Bible: But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence
Torah: Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve
Quran/Hadith: Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler
If followers of said texts are going to use those texts as a guide for several other aspects of their lives based on other verses, what's the rationale for ignoring these particular verses while holding fast to the others?
Either those books represent the will of the creator of the universe or they don't. To me (no matter how you slice it), it comes across as selectively choosing which rules one wants to follow in order to keep them in the good graces of their social circles.
It should be noted, I ask the same tough questions of people approaching it from a conservative angle as well. I've had several posts where I critique the conservative side for taking such a hard line on homosexuality, but seemingly taking a a much more lax attitude on gluttony (despite the multiple verses that equate gluttony with idolatry)
