Women preachers or pastors

[yeshuaslavejeff]

lol. God is all. Who disagree's?

Is that a rhetorical question , and no answer wanted or needed ? Or a question seeking an answer, (even UNexpected answer).

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

God is Love. Who tries to worship females instead?

men, and women. (of the world)

 

[cannotbechanged]

1 Corinthians 6:9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

 

[Albion]

However, I don't agree that the bible is quite as clear about the subject as you believe it to be.

Sure. And you are fully entitled to think that way.

Tradition does support many biblical concepts, agreed. However, there is always the monkey wrench occasionally tossed into our accepted traditions--by God, which He allows. Deborah as a female leader of Israel, as one instance that most fits here.

It doesn't fit at all. We can go on pretending that anything done by a woman in Biblical or Early Church history that is important to the faith is, ergo, what a deacon, presbyter, or bishop would do or that it makes them ordained ministers of the Gospel, but it's not so. Doing that is just a diversion for being off-topic.

 

[ScottA]

Christ is head of the church. He is the bridegroom and the church is the bride; fact.
A Minister does NOT stand in the place of Christ. They are not illustrating the bride/bridegroom relationship that is Christ and his church. If they were, then congregations could ONLY be female. And they are not mirroring the husband/wife relationship.

Being a minister is a role - they are called to lead a local congregation/congregations; fact. It is a calling but it is also a job; they can be sacked, resign or get promotion; eventually they will retire.
A marriage is ideally for life. A husband should not be sacked (divorce), or move on to another wife, as a minister may do with a congregation. He cannot resign, but will eventually be promoted - to glory. Eve was created as a companion and helper for Adam because it was not good for him to be alone. Scripture teaches about this relationship; it is for life, it is the place where sexual union takes place. A husband should love his wife in the same way that Christ, the heavenly bridegroom, loves his church; a wife should submit to her husband in the same way that the Church submits to Christ.

To say that if God calls a woman to do a certain role then she is showing that her marriage means nothing is ludicrous, and wrong.

It is your view only that a Minister standing before his congregation is mirroring the husband/wife relationship. He is not, and Scripture doesn't suggest, or state, otherwise. If he WAS, then our Minister's contract comes to an end in 3 years time; if he wants to stay on, i.e wants that contract extended, he has to ask the church for permission and state his case. What does that mean - that in 3 years my husband has to ask me for permission to remain married to me?

That Jesus came as a man does not prove anything - he also came as a Jew, was circumcised, under Jewish law and spoke Aramaic. And?

Matthew 9:15
And Jesus said to them, “Can the friends of the bridegroom mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.

Ephesians 5:22
[ Marriage—Christ and the Church ] Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

Ephesians 5:23
For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.

Ephesians 5:24
Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her,

Ephesians 5:31-32
“For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Revelation 19:7
Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.”

Revelation 19:9
Then he said to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!’” And he said to me, “These are the true sayings of God.”

...If you choose NOT to "follow" Christ in this manner - that is your choice.

 

[cannotbechanged]

Is that a rhetorical question , and no answer wanted or needed ? Or a question seeking an answer, (even UNexpected answer).

God is good.

 

[tickingclocker]

"Albion, post: 69768414, member: 93831"]Not when we have Jesus himself referring to his "Father," praying to him, and instructing his disciples to follow suit.
---Nothing wrong with calling God "Father". I never said there was. You seem to think I was attempting to say that the tradition here, that God allowed, shouldn't be engaged? I would never say that. If God allows it, who am I to change what He allows Himself to be referred to as? Just so we are both on the same page....

But the subject concerns God's ministers in THIS life. I hope you are not going to defend your thesis by insisting that there is also no need for ministers of the Gospel in the here and now.
---I understand that. And no, I'm not going to defend any thesis by insisting or any other action. I was just thinking... all this talk, talk, talk about something that won't be worth a nod in heaven. In the here and now, yes, we know its worth ... something, on earth. But in the end? It won't be needed. I look forward to that day, when we can just... be.

 

[Archivist]

So I am to understand of your post, that if you have rejected a woman at anytime, you have blasphemed?

I said no such thing.

 

[Archivist]

The Holy Spirit is God, not some man made definition of effeminate.

As I said earlier, God is not of either gender. However, Jesus did refer to bthe Holy Spirit in the feminine.

 

[cannotbechanged]

"Albion, post: 69768414, member: 93831"]Not when we have Jesus himself referring to his "Father," praying to him, and instructing his disciples to follow suit.
---Nothing wrong with calling God "Father". I never said there was. You seem to think I was attempting to say that the tradition here, that God allowed, shouldn't be engaged? I would never say that. If God allows it, who am I to change what He allows Himself to be referred to as? Just so we are both on the same page....

But the subject concerns God's ministers in THIS life. I hope you are not going to defend your thesis by insisting that there is also no need for ministers of the Gospel in the here and now.
---I understand that. And no, I'm not going to defend any thesis by insisting or any other action. I was just thinking... all this talk, talk, talk about something that won't be worth a nod in heaven. In the here and now, yes, we know its worth ... something, on earth. But in the end? It won't be needed. I look forward to that day, when we can just... be.

Yes you may retract tick w/e, the fact is, The Holy Bible is very clear.

 

[cannotbechanged]

I said no such thing.

Good.

 

[tickingclocker]

Neither of you is correct to cherry-pick scripture and omit from your claims all the references to God being male, however.

I never said I have, nor would I. I was simply bringing up the point that God Himself refers to Himself as gender neutral as the "I Am". Is this not correct?

And God said to him, I AM WHAT I AM: and He said, Say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent Me to you. (Exod 3:14)

I get and accept the tradition of viewing God as a "He". Better that viewing the Lord as an "it". He Himself implies He is so much more than a "He". I believe this concept even goes far beyond gender!

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

When we're not in person, not face to face or not even in the same room where we can see each other,
it is next to impossible to know the condition of other posters. (even in person is hard enough to tell sometimes)

 

[JoeP222w]

I am a Baptist and there is a belief that women should not be preachers. I wonder if there are verses that contradict this belief. What if the preacher or pastor who is a woman was a true, obedient, enduring believer in Christ? What if she preached the true gospel? However, if women should not be preachers or pastors, could it be possible that she was disobedient? If not, could she be saved, but her work would be burned or would she be an example of a tare, or a false believer and she would suffer for all eternity because the Bible may have spoken against women pastors? I realize that there are people who have misinterpreted the gospel to suit their views, but are there verses to prove that women can be pastors or preachers?

I have found nothing in the Bible that commands women to be Pastors, or that women can be Pastors or Preachers.

In Paul's letters, he says that women are not to be Pastors or Teachers over men. This, in no way, is saying that women are second class citizens or sub-human, or not to be treated as equals. God has defined roles for men and women, and a difference in role does not mean that one is insignificant or unimportant. Jesus submits to the Father in role and relationship, but that in no way denies the equality in Jesus' divinity or eternality or that He is God.

 

[JoeP222w]

Stanley Grenz notes that the gospel “radically altered the position of women, elevating them to a partnership with men unparalleled in first-century society.”[21] This is seen in the New Testament. The following first century women are all ministers and church leaders mentioned in the New Testament: Philip’s daughters (Acts 21:9), Priscilla (Acts 18:26; Rom. 16:3-5, etc), Phoebe (Rom. 16:1-2), Junia (Rom. 16:7), possibly Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11), Euodia and Syntyche (Phil. 4:2-3), Nympha (Col. 4:15), Apphia (Phlm. 2), “the chosen lady” (2 John 1), “the chosen sister” (2 John 13), and probably Lydia (Acts 16:40),
http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/new-testament-women-church-leaders/

A "church leader" is not the same as Pastor/Overseer. Not all "church leaders" teach, nor are all "church leaders" called to teach.

 

[Albion]

I get and accept the tradition of viewing God as a "He". Better that viewing the Lord as an "it". He Himself implies He is so much more than a "He". I believe this concept even goes far beyond gender!

I'm with you and others to the extent that God is above genitalia and that feminine words appear in Scripture, but then we begin rationalizing a way to water that down. For one thing, you can't turn the Fatherhood of God into a human "tradition" when it's clearly stated (by Jesus himself, in fact) in Scripture. Second, being much more than a "He," which I think most Christians would sympathize with, does not validate a claim that he's a "She," yet we were reading that claim only a little while ago.

 

[JoeP222w]

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, and there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:28)

That is not really in context of the question of whether or not women should be Pastors. That passage is pointing out that no one is a Christian because of something special in and of themselves, but rather that a person is a Christian because of divine election of God. That passage is also pointing out that there are no such thing as "super Christians", but rather that all are humbled at the cross.

 

[tickingclocker]

I'm with you and others to the extent that God is above genitalia and that feminine words appear in Scripture, but then we begin rationalizing a way to water that down. For one thing, you can't turn the Fatherhood of God into a human "tradition" when it's clearly stated (by Jesus himself, in fact) in Scripture. Second, being much more than a "He," which I think most Christians would sympathize with, does not validate a claim that he's a "She," yet we were reading that claim only a little while ago.

Just to reply to your post here, and then I will rejoin the discussion when certain disruptive, rude people have been dealt with by the mods....

Now that we are back on the same page when it comes to divine gender, I didn't mention anything or even imply that God is a "she"/in addition to being a "he". God is so much more than either put together! Most Christians do grasp that. However, I failed to notice where it was mentioned that God was a "she". I don't believe God is either, technically. It's just easier to see "Him" as that to us humans.

Hard to concentrate. This is somewhat off-subject so I will close for now.

 

[ScottA]

Ephesians 5:24
Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

What about the men who don't mind that their wives being a pastor? Some men are not threatened by it. Wives are not out of being subjected to their husbands. There are some men who actually enjoy seeing their wives fulfill whatever calling God has for them.

It's not about us. It is about the standard that God has set in place for His purpose, that we can either follow or not: He minds, and we should also.

 

[ScottA]

I can understand women and men alike preaching for God, and even Paul suggests such, no more women or men, jew or greek. however, claiming women must do men's jobs, isn't logical. God is logical.

There is no male or female for humanity in the kingdom. But in the world we were placed as light upon a hill to show by example the nature of God according to the standard that He has given through marriage and as Head. We either follow His example...or we are not following Him. It's that simple.