Women Pastors?

[John Davidson]

Not to the point where you state it is an abomination. Not even close.

Women need to know their place, and its not in the pulpit.

Its a sinful desire for a woman to wish to rule over men.

Eve was cursed with this curse in the beginning.

 

[DawnStar]

Women need to know their place, and its not in the pulpit.

Its a sinful desire for a woman to wish to rule over men.

Eve was cursed with this curse in the beginning.

Still no proof that it is an abomination is there Mr. Sunshine?

 

[John Davidson]

Still no proof that it is an abomination is there Mr. Sunshine?

All sins are abominable in the sight of God.

A women desiring to rule over men is no different.

 

[Cearbhall]

You only prove that you lack any understanding and are not qualified to teach anything.

False.

If you don't want to answer my challenges to your assertions, then simply don't respond. Desperation and ad hominen isn't your color. I won't pester you if it's clear you've left the conversation.

I'm not trying be mean, but you don't grasp the concept of peace and edification.

You'll have to elaborate. You've been speaking abstractly and jumping between topics for the whole thread.

 

[CodyFaith]

All sins are abominable in the sight of God.

A women desiring to rule over men is no different.

A)that's not true, there are specific sins that are considered an abomination, not all.
and
B)that's not how you said it. You said it singling it out as if it were a higher sin then the others, that's how you used the word abomination.

 

[John Davidson]

A)that's not true, there are specific sins that are considered an abomination, not all.
and
B)that's not how you said it. You said it singling it out as if it were a higher sin then the others, that's how you used the word abomination.

A. Untrue
B. Untrue

 

[CodyFaith]

A. Untrue
B. Untrue

Proverbs 6:16, Leviticus 20:13

and

Its an AntiChristian abomination.

Speaks for itself really.

Oh and while we're on the topic of what's an abomination in the sight of God,
Proverbs 12:22
Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight.

 

[DawnStar]

All sins are abominable in the sight of God.

A women desiring to rule over men is no different.

Where is the poop icon when you need it? Oh here it is.

 

[Cearbhall]

Women need to know their place, and its not in the pulpit.

Its a sinful desire for a woman to wish to rule over men.

Eve was cursed with this curse in the beginning.

Eve did not exist.

 

[John Davidson]

Where is the poop icon when you need it? Oh here it is.

That's very Christlike.

 

[SnowyMacie]

There's debate as to whether or not the Pastorals were even written by St. Paul, but assuming they were if we take this one passage and isolate it we end up running into a lot of problems; namely that elsewhere the New Testament--and Paul himself--doesn't take issue with women teaching and having positions of importance within the Church. If this were the only statement that Paul ever made, that might be one thing; but when the overwhelming witness of the Pauline literary corpus shows us that it's okay for women to preach and speak in the context of church, and it's okay for women to teach (Paul names a number of women whom he refers to as fellow co-workers in the Gospel) and we have a clear example of a woman teaching a man in the case of St. Priscilla teaching Apollos in the Acts of the Apostles.

Assuming Pauline authorship of the epistle here, it clearly needs to be read within the wider context of Pauline thought, not taken and isolated as though it stands on its own, at face value, no questions asked.

Of course if Paul isn't the author it's entirely possible that the pseudonymous author does have views which may have been in conflict with the rest of Paul; but since it is still Scripture it still needs to be read in light of and within the wider body of Scripture and not taken and isolated on its own.

-CryptoLutheran

Right, I have heard about the debate about the Pauline authorship of the Pastorals.

 

[Rhamiel]

The other theological argument I am familiar with is that since pastors stand and speak in Christ's stead, and since Christ was male, they must be male too. Again, the weakness of this argument is the same as point 2 offered above: Christ was a circumcised Jew but that doesn't mean only circumcised Jews can be ordained.

Christ is male, and the Church is the Bride of Christ
having a priestess would be like having two brides

the other thing is, about "well all priests would have to be Jews"
in Romans 11 St. Paul states that believing Gentiles have been grafted in

and as for circumcising

Romans 2:29
No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person's praise is not from other people, but from God.

so yes, only "Circumcised Jews" are allowed to become priests..... if you use St. Pauls definition of those words

 

[Cearbhall]

Christ is male, and the Church is the Bride of Christ
having a priestess would be like having two brides

That's a figure of speech that was chosen because it would make sense to the target audience. To suggest that having two "brides" would be a problem is to suggest that the relationship between Christ and the Church is sexual and/or romantic.

 

[Rhamiel]

That's a figure of speech that was chosen because it would make sense to the target audience. To suggest that having two "brides" would be a problem is to suggest that the relationship between Christ and the Church is sexual and/or romantic.

it is not sexual

but it is complementary in a way that the figure of speech is used makes sense

also, it sounds a bit dismissive to call it simply a "figure of speech"

so it is not physically a marriage, but it could be seen as something that reflects a "mystical reality"

 

[Cearbhall]

but it is complementary in a way that the figure of speech is used makes sense

Yes, women and wives in that culture had a role that made this figure of speech logical.

 

[Rhamiel]

Yes, women and wives in that culture had a role that made this figure of speech logical.

well culture does have a huge impact on a persons development
biology does play a factor too

 

[timewerx]

I'm glad I don't go to Church anymore. People would rather argue over authority rather than submit to God. Woman are wrong to do this. They should teach other woman and stop trying to cause needles discord. Its unspiritual.

It's not entirely arguing.

It's about investigating or challenging a long-held belief.

When men themselves doesn't want to have their position in Christianity challenged or investigated, isn't it self serving since they are always in a better position all throughout the history of the Christian religion?

And men have no proof they have superior wisdom, nor superior moral standards, nor superior spirituality than women. Thus, what women think cannot be disregarded.

Remember when Christ rebuked His male disciples over the action of Mary. They failed to see the Truth which Mary saw.

Just how many more such mistakes we could have repeated to this day because we did not let women speak?

 

[W2L]

It's not entirely arguing.

It's about investigating or challenging a long-held belief.

When men themselves doesn't want to have their position in Christianity challenged or investigated, isn't it self serving since they are always in a better position all throughout the history of the Christian religion?

And men have no proof they have superior wisdom, nor superior moral standards, nor superior spirituality than women. Thus, what women think cannot be disregarded.

Remember when Christ rebuked His male disciples over the action of Mary. They failed to see the Truth which Mary saw.

Just how many more such mistakes we could have repeated to this day because we did not let women speak?

I believe what paul says about a woman being subject to her husband, To me it just seems wrong for a woman to preach that the Church is the bride of Christ and is subject to her husband, when she herself is not. If a wife is not subject to her husband then the analogy is useless.

I also think we need less teachers not more. Woman are commanded to teach other woman. That should be sufficient. James says there shouldn't be many teachers anyway, but today we promote them like they are a good thing. I myself don't care what others do because I don't follow teachers. I'm not sexist either, I'm just telling you what I believe.

 

[timewerx]

I believe what paul says about a woman being subject to her husband, To me it just seems wrong for a woman to preach that the Church is the bride of Christ and is subject to her husband, when she herself is not. If a wife is not subject to her husband then the analogy is useless.

I already told you earlier, I don't believe Paul's teaching on the matter.

Even the "bride" analogy of the Gospels is just a figure of speech that is taken out of context in Paul's teachings for reasons I don't know.

The husband and wife hierarchy is just a worldly invention. The concept does not exist in God's Kingdom for good reasons.

Matthew 22:30
At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.

John 15:15
I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.

 

[W2L]

I already told you earlier, I don't believe Paul's teaching on the matter.

Even the "bride" analogy of the Gospels is just a figure of speech that is taken out of context in Paul's teachings for reasons I don't know.

The husband and wife hierarchy is just a worldly invention. The concept does not exist in God's Kingdom for good reasons.

Matthew 22:30
At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.

John 15:15
I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.

So Paul used a bad analogy then? Revelation uses it as well. Why would God use a bad analogy? Surely he could have used something better? Right? AS far back as Genesis we see that the wife is subject to the Husband. You can say you have spiritual insight into this, and that other are foolish to take paul at his word, but that's on you. Many men and woman take paul at his word on this and I'm one of them.