Women Can't Preach

[Albion]

Very nice summary, singlecandle.

 

[Johnnz]

The way I heard it explained by a seminary
graduate was that during that time
the women would abruptly ask questions
in the middle of the assembly WHILE the
message was being preached!

For that reason Paul urged that the women
keep silent.

Agreed. It was not a universal limit for all women for all times.

What defines an elder in the church?
Read Titus. They're male.

As in Timothy. However, the Greek word for women can mean a woman or a wife. Some see Paul's words in Timothy as saying 'ditto for women leaders' rather than being the wives' of the leaders. We can't be really sure either way, but that interpretation can be argued.

Can a woman be a pastor or church leader?
Absolutely not!

Some issues with the scriptures here (dealt with previously, but posts do get lost in along debates).

Junias - an apostle ie a leading ministry carrying plenty of authority - much more than pastor.
Phoebe was a deacon, The feminisation (deaconess) is but a later construction arising from one's prior belief about women in ministry.
The two women in conflict with each other at Philippi were obviously significant people in that church. Probably they were leaders of two house churches in that city. As such teaching and leadership would be part of their functioning.

Can a woman preach the Gospel?
Yes.

Hmm. That could have some validity if that was clearly stated in the NT. But I don't see that it is. Teaching and preaching are NT terms which are never designated activities according to gender or whether done in public of in private (ie) Christian meetings).

Timothy and Titus address local situations each with specific matters requiring some correction. They express pastoral concerns, not manuals for church structures.

Remember context too. Slaves were told to submit by Paul, but today we are not into advocating slavery as a biblical principle we could return to. Paul spoke into the situation of his day. In NT Times a Roman man would typically get married around 30 to an uneducated teenage girl 15 or more years his junior. Today we have well educated women who are as competent as men. To suggest Paul was restricting women ad infinitum is a travesty of Paul's teaching.

John
NZ

 

[Albion]

Today we have well educated women who are as competent as men.

Becoming a minister of the Gospel is not the equivalent of getting a job. It is a vocation and we must approach it with religious integrity. The Bible bars women from being clergy, and history shows that there were no women clergy in the Apostolic church. That should settle it.

 

[Johnnz]

Becoming a minister of the Gospel is not the equivalent of getting a job. It is a vocation and we must approach it with religious integrity. The Bible bars women from being clergy, and history shows that there were no women clergy in the Apostolic church. That should settle it.

Gifting always trumps function in Scripture - Spirit enabling. Only if you exlcude the NT as history as, I have pointed out above.

And, the word clergy is not a biblical one - a later word which arrived much later. Let's keep to biblical terms in referring to ministry.

John
NZ

 

[Albion]

Gifting always trumps function in Scripture - Spirit enabling. Only if you exlcude the NT as history as, I have pointed out above.

The New Testament precludes the ordination of women to any clerical office or order. We also know from history that there is no record of any woman ever being in orders during the ancient church. None of the popular arguments that try to rewrite either scripture or history can get around these realities. You could, of course, say that the Bible is not to be believed or is not important, and that would leave us with nothing but emotional arguments or the concept of a church that was not founded by Christ, which would be one way to circumvent the testimony of Scripture, but otherwise, there's no avoiding it.

 

[Johnnz]

The New Testament precludes the ordination of women to any clerical office or order. We also know from history that there is no record of any woman ever being in orders during the ancient church. None of the popular arguments that try to rewrite either scripture or history can get around these realities. You could, of course, say that the Bible is not to be believed or is not important, and that would leave us with nothing but emotional arguments or the concept of a church that was not founded by Christ, which would be one way to circumvent the testimony of Scripture, but otherwise, there's no avoiding it.

I'm sorry , but church history is not Scripture. We know from very early on other influences began to infiltrate church teaching. By the 4th Century many Greek influences were well entrenched. Modern biblical scholarship is challenging such non biblical teachings.

John
NZ

 

[Albion]

I'm sorry , but church history is not Scripture.

No one said that it was, so I guess you don't owe anyone any apologies.

We know from very early on other influences began to infiltrate church teaching. By the 4th Century many Greek influences were well entrenched. Modern biblical scholarship is challenging such non biblical teachings.

None of that bears upon the topic under discussion here, however. The record of the churches on the matter of woman's ordination is consistent. There were no women clergy until relatively recent years, so there was no change caused in antiquity by any foreign influences infiltrating the church--at least so far as this particular issue is concerned.

 

[Johnnz]

No one said that it was, so I guess you don't owe anyone any apologies.



None of that bears upon the topic under discussion here, however. The record of the churches on the matter of woman's ordination is consistent. There were no women clergy until relatively recent years, so there was no change caused in antiquity by any foreign influences infiltrating the church--at least so far as this particular issue is concerned.

Greek thinking viewed women as inferior beings. Greek democracy was only for privileged men. Also, matter including our body was a hindrance to real spirituality. That early thinking quite quickly led to male clergy, then celibate clergy and to centralised church government by the far more rational men, as opposed to emotional and therefore inferior women promulgating such teaching. Rely on church history and you will buy into those preconceptions which soon became the filters through which Scripture was understood.

John
NZ

 

[Albion]

Greek thinking viewed women as inferior beings.

If so, it doesn't matter in this case because the Bible teaches--from way before the 4th century--that God reserved the clerical offices in his church for males, so there is no connection. In addition, it was JEWISH Christians who operated the earliest churches of Christ and they reserved the pastoral offices for males while appointing women to other positions of importance in the work of the congregation.

 

[Johnnz]

If so, it doesn't matter in this case because the Bible teaches--from way before the 4th century--that God reserved the clerical offices in his church for males, so there is no connection. In addition, it was JEWISH Christians who operated the earliest churches of Christ and they reserved the pastoral offices for males while appointing women to other positions of importance in the work of the congregation.

a) you are viewing scriptures through a church history, not a biblical lens

b) Your early church history is a bit short regarding gentile entry into the new community.

John
NZ

 

[Albion]

a) you are viewing scriptures through a church history, not a biblical lens

On the contrary, you are the one who tried turning to church history to save your defective argument from scripture. Remember this off-the-wall gambit of yours?--

We know from very early on other influences began to infiltrate church teaching. By the 4th Century many Greek influences were well entrenched. Modern biblical scholarship is challenging such non biblical teachings.

Or this one (after I pointed out that the above was off the subject)--

Greek thinking viewed women as inferior beings. Greek democracy was only for privileged men. Also, matter including our body was a hindrance to real spirituality. That early thinking quite quickly led to male clergy, then celibate clergy and to centralised church government by the far more rational men, as opposed to emotional and therefore inferior women promulgating such teaching.

 

[Johnnz]

On the contrary, you are the one who tried turning to church history to save your defective argument from scripture. Remember this off-the-wall gambit of yours?

Seems although we both speak English we attach different meanings to the same words. I accused you of relying on church history and I gave some examples of non biblical concepts becoming part of mainstream Christianity,which have being challenged in more recent times.

John
NZ