Women's pastors?

[faroukfarouk]

It's wonderful that your father is a Baptist pastor but that doesn't mean his interpretation of the scriptures, and therefore yours as well, are the ones that are absolutely correct without fail. The Bible I read, printed in Swedish, is not how it was originally written nor does it provide all necessary information about the time period it was written in. If everyone agreed with you that all that was necessary to perfectly understand the Bible is to read it and take it absolutely literally, then there wouldn't be divinity schools and theological seminaries and people who dedicate years of their life to learning about scripture.

You are correct that each believer has the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Bible is the living, breathing, growing word of God. That is why I fully believe that God wants us each to make the most of ourselves and our gifts. To use them to glorify God. That means if there are women with the gifts and the abilities to lead a church, then they should. Don't you think women who've been ordained have felt the Holy Spirit compelling them? That the Bible is living is precisely why it's so imperative to understand the historical context of verses. All living things grow. Decrees for the way of life for 2000 years ago may or may not reflect the will of God for those of us living today. None of us follow every verse of the Bible absolutely literally because we recognize what was historical, allegorical, or timeless. You don't own slaves, do you? You recognize those verses reflected the time they were written in, correct?

I hope you are note equating following Paul literally about male preachers, with slavery? Apples and oranges.

 

[Blue Wren]

We must either abide by the clear word of God, or bow to current societal pressures. They are mutually exclusive. I've seen the other thread similar to this one, and will respond accordingly there, but here, your arguments do not hold water. The prohibition "husband of one wife" does not mean they must be married. Remember that Paul also said that if a person could remain celibate it was for the best, but not necessary. If that's the case, then he contradicted himself, which is not the case. Proper exegesis shows us that " husband of one wife" was to exclude remarried divorcee's, polygamists, and adulterers, not single men. Trying to twist this to fit a proffered social norm of today does a deep disservice to God's word.

It's not an either / or, black or white.

As I just pointed out to Jennae, we have to carefully study scripture in the historical context to determine what was timeless and universal and what reflected the time and place it was written in. You don't own slaves or stone your children when they are disobedient. You do hopefully love your neighbor.
Some things are timeless, some are not. Those who oppose women being ordained tend to object more for cultural reasons. It's not a coincidence that the areas where more people are opposed to women being ordained also were amongst the slowest to accept interracial marriage. It shows more of an objection to progress and change than reverence for scripture.

 

[faroukfarouk]

It's not an either / or, black or white.

As I just pointed out to Jennae, we have to carefully study scripture in the historical context to determine what was timeless and universal and what reflected the time and place it was written in. You don't own slaves or stone your children when they are disobedient. You do hopefully love your neighbor.
Some things are timeless, some are not. Those who oppose women being ordained tend to object more for cultural reasons. It's not a coincidence that the areas where more people are opposed to women being ordained also were amongst the slowest to accept interracial marriage. It shows more of an objection to progress and change than reverence for scripture.

You speak of reverence for Scripture, and yet seem to deny that people who follow Paul literally about male preachers are themselves trying to show reverence for Scripture. I don't understand your reasoning.

 

[Blue Wren]

I hope you are note equating following Paul literally about male preachers, with slavery? Apples and oranges.

Nope, of course not, it's an example of how we need to consider the historical context of scripture and the timeless decree.

I remember all your threads about tattoos and piercings. You don't believe in taking the scriptures against tattoos as literal, everlasting, verbatim orders against it. You presumably put those scriptures into context? The same must be done with ones about females serving as pastors.

 

[Blue Wren]

You speak of reverence for Scripture, and yet seem to deny that people who follow Paul literally about male preachers are themselves trying to show reverence for Scripture. I don't understand your reasoning.

No, I'm not doubting anyone's reverence for Scripture or their sincerity. I'm stressing the importance of context and considering God's timeless will.

Many don't understand your reasoning for tattooing. It's okay that you don't understand my reasoning for why we need to consider the context for Paul's letters to the churches and how they fit in with the cultural norms at that time when deciding about women being ordained now.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Nope, of course not, it's an example of how we need to consider the historical context of scripture and the timeless decree.

I remember all your threads about tattoos and piercings. You don't believe in taking the scriptures against tattoos as literal, everlasting, verbatim orders against it. You presumably put those scriptures into context? The same must be done with ones about females serving as pastors.

Since you refer to it, do preachers today shave? is a reasonable question in the light of the relevant chapter of Leviticus.

However, we are in the church context of the New Testament and Paul's Epistles are for the New Testament church.

 

[faroukfarouk]

No, I'm not doubting anyone's reverence for Scripture or their sincerity. I'm stressing the importance of context and considering God's timeless will.

Many don't understand your reasoning for tattooing.

Well, why in the light of tattoos or no tattoos (??) would people be expected to set aside Paul's guidance about preachers?

Again, apples and oranges.

 

[faroukfarouk]

It's okay that you don't understand my reasoning for why we need to consider the context for Paul's letters to the churches and how they fit in with the cultural norms at that time when deciding about women being ordained now.

So what Paul in 1 Corinthians 11 teaches about God being the head of Christ, and Christ being the head of every man, and the man being the head of the woman, is supposedly only relative to transient cultural norms 2000 years ago?

Would those same transient cultural norms also apply to the emblems of the bread and the cup which are also taught in that same chapter by Paul?

You're right; I don't follow your reasoning.

 

[Blue Wren]

Jennae: The Bible does not mean anything different today from what it did 50 years ago.

Actually, we have continued to learn more about the Bible, the historical context of it, and the original languages, and by doing so that alters our understanding of it. The NIV translation of the Bible many use today didn't exist 100 years ago, nor did the Message bible. 100 years ago there more segregated churches, too.

Jennae didn't get my point and that's fine.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Actually, we have continued to learn more about the Bible, the historical context of it, and the original languages, and by doing so that alters our understanding of it. The NIV translation of the Bible many use today didn't exist 100 years ago, nor did the Message bible. 100 years ago there more segregated churches, too.

Jennae didn't get my point and that's fine.

The philosophy of translation differs from one version to another, but this does not prove that the most recent version is therefore more accurate.

Again, racists 100 years ago in the US south do not project anything onto Bible believing congregations and their reading of Paul's Epistles in Canada or anywhere else.

 

[Blue Wren]

Since you refer to it, do preachers today shave? is a reasonable question in the light of the relevant chapter of Leviticus.

However, we are in the church context of the New Testament and Paul's Epistles are for the New Testament church.

Goodness. English is my native language. You and Jennae aren't understanding what I'm saying at all. I'll try to explain it more clearly to you both when I'm less tired.

 

[Ringo84]

Are there any real reasons for not allowing women to be pastors, aside from stuff about the order of creation?
Ringo

 

[Saricharity]

I think I did get your point. I do understand what you are saying. I just disagree.

I don't know as much as my father about the scriptures. He studies it more than I do obviously. I just know that my dad believes scripture is very clear on leadership in the church. Our church has a very clear guidelines set up based on scripture.

 

[Saricharity]

Are there any real reasons for not allowing women to be pastors, aside from stuff about the order of creation?
Ringo

There are two passages that list qualifications: 1 Tim 3:1-7 & Tit 1:5-9
Bible Qualifications For Pastors

Creation order is not even an issue.

 

[Ringo84]

Except that there were female overseers in the form of deaconesses:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaconess#cite_note-Jewette-20 When Paul mentions Phoebe, "our sister Phoebe [the] ἀδελφήν which means (sister) of the church of Cenchreae", he adds "she has been a helper of many and of myself as well". In describing her role and his in the congregation, Paul uses the Greek verb meaning "to be at the head of, to rule, to direct". In addition, Paul also speaks of other female ministers such as Mary, Tryphaena, Typhosa and Persis whom he writes "worked hard in the Lord" and "workers in the Lord" (v. 12). The contribution of these women is described by the same verb, χοπιάω, used to describe "toil" and "labour" (Matthew 11.28; John 4.6). Moreover, Paul uses this verb to describe his own work for the Lord and other apostolic labours. In addition, Mary's labour described as "among you" or "for your benefit" (v. 6) suggest a recognized role of ministry within the church. Probably these women had a ministry with other women, rather than over the whole church, because Paul prohibited women from teaching men in 1Timothy 2:10-12. Thus they were also excluded from leadership over the congregation, because church leaders had to be able to teach - rather than having a prohibition to teach the congregation(1Tim 3). Women, serving alongside Paul, thus probably taught other women. Since Paul´s prohibitions only refer to the church, they might have been involved in evangelistic preaching to men and women, as long as they were not part of the church. [21] The church at Philippi is another example of early female involvement in important parts of church's ministry.[citation needed] In Paul’s letter to the Philippian church, he addresses the three women Euodia, Syntyche and a third, for which he uses the affectionate term, syzugē to mean "mate" (Phil. 4:1–3).[22] Through the Pauline epistles it is clear that deaconesses and other women exercised important roles identified and recognized as central within the office of the church.

Deaconess - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ringo

 

[Blue Wren]

I think I did get your point. I do understand what you are saying. I just disagree.

I don't know as much as my father about the scriptures. He studies it more than I do obviously. I just know that my dad believes scripture is very clear on leadership in the church. Our church has a very clear guidelines set up based on scripture.

Okay, good. Then we just disagree with one another but understand. Many other Biblical scholars and Baptists pastors disagree with your father, and I thank God for that because I'm very glad to have the female pastors in my life who helped me to become a Christian. Where I grew up, there weren't as many churches nearby and most people are atheists. A female pastor helped me. Your church's guidelines fortunately have no bearing on the guidelines other churches follow.

 

[Saricharity]

Okay, good. Then we just disagree with one another but understand. Many other Biblical scholars and Baptists pastors disagree with your father, and I thank God for that because I'm very glad to have the female pastors in my life who helped me to become a Christian. Where I grew up, there weren't as many churches nearby and most people are atheists. A female pastor helped me. Your church's guidelines fortunately have no bearing on the guidelines other churches follow.

That's wonderful that you had Christian women speak into your life.
Ive had some speak into my life too and come along side and guide me....most especially my momma.

 

[Blue Wren]

That's wonderful that you had Christian women speak into your life.
Ive had some speak into my life too and come along side and guide me....most especially my momma.

Maybe there's so many churches in this world and so many different understandings of scriptures for a reason. Maybe your church is where you belong and it works believing that women shouldn't be pastors. Other churches thrive with women in leadership. I never would have become a Christian had it not for a female pastor.

 

[actionsub]

Going back to the OP, at least in the US, the "American Baptist" denomination ordains women, as does the more conservative Arminian "General Baptist" denomination. There are also some smaller Baptist groups that spun off from the Southern Baptists that will also ordain women, too.

 

[Blue Wren]

There are two passages that list qualifications: 1 Tim 3:1-7 & Tit 1:5-9
Bible Qualifications For Pastors

Creation order is not even an issue.

I hope this is helpful to you, Jennae.

Christian Ethics Today

I did look this up tonight and pray about it. You confused me so much because I had thought Baptists had women as pastors. I am very new to this, this thread was so discouraging and upsetting. It looks like there's a lot of different beliefs within the Baptist denomination. Yours is one of the ones that doesn't ordain woman. It looks like most others do. Surely all those churches would have read those verses you posted, too. They just don't find the same meaning in them that you do.

Ordination of women in Protestant churches - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Baptist organizations in Germany and Switzerland (Bund Evangelisch-Freikirchlicher Gemeinden, Bund Schweizer Baptistengemeinden) ordain women.

The Southern Baptist Convention does not support the ordination of women; however, some churches that are members of the SBC have ordained women.

Cooperative Baptist Fellowship churches actively encourage and ordain women to ministry, including as pastors.

Baptist groups in the United States that do ordain women include American Baptist Churches USA, North American Baptist Conference, Alliance of Baptists, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc. and Progressive National Baptist Convention.

----

My family I'm living with while I'm here are Christians and their church also ordains women. I had thought the only ones who hadn't were Catholics until I came here.