Women's pastors?

[Metal Minister]

"Usurping authority over men". It makes it sound like men are such insecure babies that they can't handle a strong woman with power.

I suspect that probably accounts for at least a portion of the opposition to women leaders in the church.
Ringo

Ok, so pure emotional tripe in an effort to "shame" people into accepting your particular unbiblical view and to abandon scripture. Sorry, no thanks.

 

[OzSpen]

I'll be honest, I don't know Greek (though I wish I did!) So I can't claim any knowledge on that one way or the other. However, if you're stating that Junia is a female apostle and held a position of authority, it would contradict Paul's own words that state a woman should not be in a position of authority. He does not qualify the statement by saying "in your church" or "in your province", etc, but simply "I do not allow a woman to..." So now you must ask, where was Paul correct, or incorrect. Where was he inspired, or not inspired. Is this a contradiction, or not?

Metal,

Could it be that there is another possibility? I'm thinking that your understanding of 'position of authority' as applied to all churches, based on 1 Tim 2:11-15 could be incorrect. Has that thought ever come to you?

Since you don't understand Greek, could that not be a possibility? I'll cite a contemporary Greek expert who is an evangelical, Dr Gordon Fee, from his commentary on 1 Tim 2:12:

Verse 12, which begins with Paul's own personal instruction (I do not permit; better, "I am not permitting," implying specific instructions to this situation), picks up the three items from verse 11 and presents them with some further detail. I am not permitting a woman to teach corresponds to a woman should learn. Teaching, of course, is where much of the problem lay in the church in Ephesus [where Timothy was located]. The straying elders are teachers (1:3; 6:3); the "worthy" elders, for whom Timothy is probably to serve as something of a model (4:11-16; cf. 2 Tim. 2:2), are "those whose work is teaching" (5:17). Indeed, Paul calls himself a teacher in these letters (2:7). But he is here prohibiting women to teach in the (house-) church(es) of Ephesus, although in other churches they prophesy (1 Cor. 11:5) and probably give a teaching from time to time (1 Cor. 14:26), and in Titus 2:3-4 the older women are expected to be good teachers of the younger ones.

Part of the problem from this distance is to know what "teaching" involved. The evidence from 1 Corinthians 12-14 indicates that "teaching" may be presented as a spiritual gift (14:6, 26); at the same time, some in the community are specifically known as teachers (cf. Rom. 12:7), while more private instruction is also given (Acts 18:26; here by a woman). Given that evidence and what can be gleaned from the present Epistles, teaching most likely had to do with instruction in Scripture, that is, Scripture as pointing to salvation in Christ (cf. 2 Tim. 3:15-17). If that is what is being forbidden (and certainty eludes us here), then it is probably because some of them have been so terribly deceived by false teachers, who are specifically abusing the OT (cf. 1:7; Titus 3:9). At least that is the point Paul will pick up in verses 14 and 15' (Fee 1988:72-73, emphasis in original).

This kind of information from a Greek exegete just might provide some possible challenges to the position you are advocating.

In Christ,
Oz

Work consulted
Fee, G D 1988. 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (New International Biblical Commentary), W W Gasque (NT ed). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers.

 

[Metal Minister]

Metal,

Could it be that there is another possibility? I'm thinking that your understanding of 'position of authority' as applied to all churches, based on 1 Tim 2:11-15 could be incorrect. Has that thought ever come to you?

Since you don't understand Greek, could that not be a possibility? I'll cite a contemporary Greek expert who is an evangelical, Dr Gordon Fee, from his commentary on 1 Tim 2:12:

This kind of information from a Greek exegete just might provide some possible challenges to the position you are advocating.

In Christ,
Oz

Work consulted
Fee, G D 1988. 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (New International Biblical Commentary), W W Gasque (NT ed). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers.

While anything is possible, and I admit my ignorance of Greek, I cannot, in good conscience, simply take your, or this one source's, word for it. Give me some time to prayerfully study what you've brought up, and seek other references.

 

[Blue Wren]

Blue Wren,



I notice that your link is to American Baptist Churches USA. When my wife, children and I lived in the USA and Canada for 7 years, we noted that the American Baptist Churches tended to have more churches and preachers of theological liberal persuasion - with a lower view of the Bible. I wouldn't expect these to be too adamant about what the Bible says about women pastors. Some Baptist churches with a higher view of biblical authority object to female pastors, particularly when I Cor 12-14 and 1 Tim 2:12-15 are in the mix.

I'm not of that persuasion. I have a high view of Scripture but my exegesis of Scripture in context does not support an absolute silence of women in ministry - even mixed ministry to men and women.

Mission work around the world would be in a sad state if women missionaries were prevented from ministering publicly to women AND men. I've seen situations where conservative Western congregations have a very strict view of women missionaries not allowed to minister publicly in a mixed congregation when they return home on furlough, but when these same women return to the mission fields, it is straight back into mixed ministry. I find that to be hypocritical. If it is good enough for mixed ministry in Africa, it surely is good enough for mixed ministry in Australia.

The issue does get down to biblical interpretation and I'm of the view that for too long women have been silenced in ministry because of a skewed understanding of certain Scriptures.

Just one example: It is claimed in some churches that women must be absolutely silent in public ministry to a mixed congregation because 1 Cor 14:33b-34 states, 'As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission as the Law also says' (ESV).

How is it possible to have women to 'keep silent in the churches' when the very same book of 1 Corinthians 11:4 speaks of 'every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head' (ESV). The context is wives (who are women) prophesying in the church publicly. Women can't prophesy with their mouths shut. We either have a contradiction (which I don't think it is) between 1 Cor 14:33b-34 and 1 Cor 11:4 or we have the 'silence' of women in 1 Cor 14 to be addressing a different issue in the Corinthian church.

Just some thoughts to ponder.

In Christ,
Oz

Thank you again for more thoughts to consider.

The church I am attending now is very reverent of the Bible and have a high view of it. One of the appeals of it to me is that they are so dedicated to the Bible. As I wrote before when I first became a Christian I went to a Catholic church in Sweden simply because it was the closest church to me that had a regular attendance. I liked how they went to mass every day. It is not the same, as the Protestant church my family here in the US go to, just once a week. It's why I like this Baptist church, they have daily devotions together, weekly Bible study. It's much more serious. They very much believe in the Bible. They just do not come to the same conclusions about women in ministry as some other Baptists do.

From that link, from Wikipedia about the Baptists churches that do and do not ordain women it looks like most do except the Southern Baptist Convention. I hadn't realized there were so many different "types" of Baptists till I came here.
Ordination of women in Protestant churches - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes I believe women should be in mixed ministry, in missions and in their home churches.

 

[Ringo84]

Ok, so pure emotional tripe in an effort to "shame" people into accepting your particular unbiblical view and to abandon scripture. Sorry, no thanks.

Better so-called "emotional tripe" than banning women from leadership positions for no logical reason.

(Yes, I know your argument essentially boils down to "because the Bible says so". That's fine, but if women are to be banned from leadership positions, there must be a better reason than "God said so".)
Ringo

 

[Metal Minister]

Better so-called "emotional tripe" than banning women from leadership positions for no logical reason.
Ringo

If the scriptures make the prohibition, then that IS a logical reason! If God says "I don't want women in leadership roles in the church!" then guess who my final authority is. If you can't grasp the basic idea of the theópneustos scriptures being the final authority of the church, then please tell us what is, short of Christ's return.

 

[Ringo84]

Why have a belief at all if there's no good grounding for it? Are we so facile and sensitive that we just blindly believe something without any logical basis for it?

If I'm to believe something, I need to have a better reason than something you would tell a five year old. I believe in God because I've seen His effect in my life. I'm a passionate defender of the separation between church and state because I find the arguments against mixing church and state to be more persuasive than those for a "Christian nation".

Now you tell me that women can't be leaders in church...because. No reason for it; God said so. Sorry. I need better proof than that.
Ringo

 

[Metal Minister]

Better so-called "emotional tripe" than banning women from leadership positions for no logical reason.

(Yes, I know your argument essentially boils down to "because the Bible says so". That's fine, but if women are to be banned from leadership positions, there must be a better reason than "God said so".)
Ringo

A better reason than God said so.... ok, who has the final authority in your worldview, because it apparently isn't God. Does man have the final authority over God's church? Does Christ being the head of the Church hold no meaning for you? If not, we have much larger problems to hash out than whether or not women are prohibited from leadership roles in the chruch!

 

[Metal Minister]

Why have a belief at all if there's no good grounding for it? Are we so facile and sensitive that we just blindly believe something without any logical basis for it?

If I'm to believe something, I need to have a better reason than something you would tell a five year old. I believe in God because I've seen His effect in my life. I'm a passionate defender of the separation between church and state because I find the arguments against mixing church and state to be more persuasive than those for a "Christian nation".

Now you tell me that women can't be leaders in church...because. No reason for it; God said so. Sorry. I need better proof than that.
Ringo

So I'll ask again, who has the final say over Christ's church?

 

[Ringo84]

What is it about women that make them unqualified to be leaders? Is there an explanation for that beyond pat Sunday school answers that boil down to "God's ways are not our ways"?

I'm not looking for pat answers. If I'm going to adopt a certain view, I need to have a logical basis for it.
Ringo

 

[Metal Minister]

What is it about women that make them unqualified to be leaders? Is there an explanation for that beyond pat Sunday school answers that boil down to "God's ways are not our ways"?

I'm not looking for pat answers. If I'm going to adopt a certain view, I need to have a logical basis for it.
Ringo

I'm going to ask one last time Ringo, then I will be done with this charade. If you refuse to answer, I'm putting you on ignore, and will be done with you. What is the final authority of Christ's church?

 

[OzSpen]

While anything is possible, and I admit my ignorance of Greek, I cannot, in good conscience, simply take your, or this one source's, word for it. Give me some time to prayerfully study what you've brought up, and seek other references.

Metal,

One of the toughest verses to interpret in the context of 1 Tim 2:11-15 is v. 15, 'Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control' (ESV). What does that mean when there is the singular 'she' and the plural 'they'? How can a woman be 'saved through childbearing' when that would be works and there is the practical issue that some women have died in child birth?

In 1 Tim 2:12, 'I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man' (ESV), there are three verbals:

• 'I do not permit' is Greek present tense which indicates continuing or continuous action. It means, 'I am not permitting', so it seems to be addressed to a situation in Ephesus where Timothy is. What is Paul not permitting?
• 'a woman to teach'. 'To teach' is a present tense infinitive, so again the present tense means, 'a woman to continue to teach', thus inferring a contemporary situation in the present time in Ephesus.
• 'to exercise authority', authentein, is a present tense infinitive so it is talking about the woman continuing to exercise authority and she is not permitted to do this.

So the meaning is that gunaiki (a woman, not the definite, the woman) is creating an issue and she is not being permitted to continue teaching and to continue exercising authority over andros (a man, without the definite article).



So, this verse is not making a general application to ALL women in the church but to a particular woman in the church at Ephesus. What could she have been doing for Paul to close her down in teaching and exercising authority? We know from 1 Tim 1:3; 6:3 that there were certain people who were teaching false doctrine. Could this woman have been one of them and she was closed down by this instruction?


I'm of the view that 1 Tim 2:11-15 has been used as a defining section of the NT to close down all women in public ministry among men when it was addressed to a specific circumstance in the Ephesian Church. It was never meant to apply to all women in ministry, but to all women who were promoting false doctrine. By application, the same should apply to men who promote false teaching. They should be silenced in the church by not being permitted to teach.


Just some thoughts from a fellow traveller.


Oz

 

[Metal Minister]

Metal,

One of the toughest verses to interpret in the context of 1 Tim 2:11-15 is v. 15, 'Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control' (ESV). What does that mean when there is the singular 'she' and the plural 'they'? How can a woman be 'saved through childbearing' when that would be works and there is the practical issue that some women have died in child birth?

In 1 Tim 2:12, 'I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man' (ESV), there are three verbals:


[*]'I do not permit' is Greek present tense which indicates continuing or continuous action. It means, 'I am not permitting', so it seems to be addressed to a situation in Ephesus where Timothy is. What is Paul not permitting?
[*]'a woman to teach'. 'To teach' is a present tense infinitive, so again the present tense means, 'a woman to continue to teach', thus inferring a contemporary situation in the present time in Ephesus.
[*]'to exercise authority', authentein, is a present tense infinitive so it is talking about the woman continuing to exercise authority and she is not permitted to do this.

So the meaning is that gunaiki (a woman, not the definite, the woman) is creating an issue and she is not being permitted to continue teaching and to continue exercising authority over andros (a man, without the definite article).

So, this verse is not making a general application to ALL women in the church but to a particular woman in the church at Ephesus. What could she have been doing for Paul to close her down in teaching and exercising authority? We know from 1 Tim 1:3; 6:3 that there were certain people who were teaching false doctrine. Could this woman have been one of them and she was closed down by this instruction?

I'm of the view that 1 Tim 2:11-15 has been used as a defining section of the NT to close down all women in public ministry among men when it was addressed to a specific circumstance in the Ephesian Church. It was never meant to apply to all women in ministry, but to all women who were promoting false doctrine. By application, the same should apply to men who promote false teaching. They should be silenced in the church by not being permitted to teach.

Just some thoughts from a fellow traveller.

Oz

I was going to post this anyway, in regards to the discussion of the verses that you've brought up here. Dr. MacArthur goes indepth, breaking down the verses. The fact that he is quite probably one of the best bible expositors of our time, including his knowledge of the biblical languages and historical information, makes his sermons very enlightening. I strongly urge everyone, regardless of which side of the debate you fall on, to listen. At worst, it's an hour of time spent in God's word and study. I can't think of a much better "waste" of time for me!

http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/54-17/gods-high-calling-for-women-part-4?term=1 Timothy 2:12

 

[OzSpen]

Originally Posted by Metal Minister

I was going to post this anyway, in regards to the discussion of the verses that you've brought up here. Dr. MacArthur goes indepth, breaking down the verses. The fact that he is quite probably one of the best bible expositors of our time, including his knowledge of the biblical languages and historical information, makes his sermons very enlightening. I strongly urge everyone, regardless of which side of the debate you fall on, to listen. At worst, it's an hour of time spent in God's word and study. I can't think of a much better "waste" of time for me!

God's High Calling for Women, Part 4

Metal,

I have John MacArthur's entire set of NT commentaries and I've benefitted greatly from exposure to them in my own ministry. However, Gordon Fee has spent his life as a NT Greek exegete and NT Greek textual critic. He knows Greek like the palm of his hand. His commentary on 1 Corinthians is a massive 880 pages (published by Eerdmans 1988 in the New International Commentary series). Gordon Fee's purpose in 1 Corinthians and in his commentary on 1 and 2 Timothy is very different from that of a renowned expository preacher such as John MacArthur Jr.

The major problem I have with MacArthur's exposition on women in ministry is circular reasoning. He begins (no women in public ministry among a mixed audience) where he concludes (no women in public ministry among a a mixed audience). We can't have a logical discussion when this kind of logical fallacy is used.

Why don't you take a read of this article by N T Wright that I've only accessed this afternoon?

Wright, N T 2004. Women’s service in the church: The biblical basis, a conference paper for the Symposium, ‘Men, Women and the Church’ (online). St John’s College, Durham, September 4. Available at: Women’s Service in the Church: The Biblical Basis by N.T. Wright (Accessed 16 December 2014).

Did you notice what you did in your response to me? You did not deal with any of the issues I raised in my spending a lot of time in providing exegesis of 1 Tim 2 challenge a traditional perspective. Providing a link to John MacArthur material does not deal with the issues I raised about 1 Tim 2. Why did you do this?

Oz

 

[Saricharity]

These kind of discussions always seem to be circular. One person quotes a verse and uses original languages to say it's Ok for women to hold a position of leadership...and then someone counters with something else. It makes my head spin.
My huge fear is how liberal Christianity has become. I am a woman...granted still wet be hind the ears as my grandpa always tells me, but I definitely do not this as being restrictive. God calls pastors to lead and be overseers. It is not an easy road. It is a honour but it's stressful and gut wrenching. Frankly, I can see why God would not call a women to be the Lead pastor or elder in a church...it simply is a draining, emotional and sometimes viotile calling. My father is often out until the wee hours of the morning. He handles some very messy situations that most women would not be able to handle.
From my point of view, it is a gift from God than men and women have been given special roles. Women are natural nurturers and we excel at children and woman's ministries.
God created us so he knows how we can best utilize our spiritual gifts.
I don't feel like I'm being held back because I will never be a pastor. On the contrary, I feel quite secure in the knowledge that God has this world in His hands. It is only when we as humans try to push our agendas that things go wrong. Just because God says women cannot be in leadership does not mean our leadership skills cannot and will not be used. There are so many others things we can do. I think women should stop concentrating on what they arent equipped and created to do and start obeying and seeking to do what God has called them to do. We are much more peaceful in our spirits and happier. In fact everyone is much happier when they do what God calls them to do. .

(P.s. If you feel like God is calling you into leadership, then by all means be a leader...just don't disobey scripture. I believe God will speak clearly to your heart if you seek His Will.)

 

[Metal Minister]

Originally Posted by Metal Minister http://www.christianforums.com/t7856138-10/#post66780658
Metal,

I have John MacArthur's entire set of NT commentaries and I've benefitted greatly from exposure to them in my own ministry. However, Gordon Fee has spent his life as a NT Greek exegete and NT Greek textual critic. He knows Greek like the palm of his hand. His commentary on 1 Corinthians is a massive 880 pages (published by Eerdmans 1988 in the New International Commentary series). Gordon Fee's purpose in 1 Corinthians and in his commentary on 1 and 2 Timothy is very different from that of a renowned expository preacher such as John MacArthur Jr.

The major problem I have with MacArthur's exposition on women in ministry is circular reasoning. He begins (no women in public ministry among a mixed audience) where he concludes (no women in public ministry among a a mixed audience). We can't have a logical discussion when this kind of logical fallacy is used.

Why don't you take a read of this article by N T Wright that I've only accessed this afternoon?

Wright, N T 2004. Women’s service in the church: The biblical basis, a conference paper for the Symposium, ‘Men, Women and the Church’ (online). St John’s College, Durham, September 4. Available at: Women’s Service in the Church: The Biblical Basis by N.T. Wright (Accessed 16 December 2014).

Did you notice what you did in your response to me? You did not deal with any of the issues I raised in my spending a lot of time in providing exegesis of 1 Tim 2 challenge a traditional perspective. Providing a link to John MacArthur material does not deal with the issues I raised about 1 Tim 2. Why did you do this?

Oz

I felt MacAurthur did a fairly good job addressing your points. However if you want an even more in depth look, give me a little time. I'm trying to do this in while at work as well.

 

[OzSpen]

Jennae,

So are you saying that all women in leadership positions in the church among men and women are being disobedient to God?

Why don't you make contact with Billy Graham's daughter, Anne Graham Lotz, and discuss her disobedience by being a woman in ministry. Here are her contact details at: 'Anne Graham Lotz'.

Catherine Mumford Booth was the co-founder of the Salvation Army. Why don't you read her article 'Female ministry or Woman's right to preach the Gospel'?

Oz

These kind of discussions always seem to be circular. One person quotes a verse and uses original languages to say it's Ok for women to hold a position of leadership...and then someone counters with something else. It makes my head spin.
My huge fear is how liberal Christianity has become. I am a woman...granted still wet be hind the ears as my grandpa always tells me, but I definitely do not this as being restrictive. God calls pastors to lead and be overseers. It is not an easy road. It is a honour but it's stressful and gut wrenching. Frankly, I can see why God would not call a women to be the Lead pastor or elder in a church...it simply is a draining, emotional and sometimes viotile calling. My father is often out until the wee hours of the morning. He handles some very messy situations that most women would not be able to handle.
From my point of view, it is a gift from God than men and women have been given special roles. Women are natural nurturers and we excel at children and woman's ministries.
God created us so he knows how we can best utilize our spiritual gifts.
I don't feel like I'm being held back because I will never be a pastor. On the contrary, I feel quite secure in the knowledge that God has this world in His hands. It is only when we as humans try to push our agendas that things go wrong. Just because God says women cannot be in leadership does not mean our leadership skills cannot and will not be used. There are so many others things we can do. I think women should stop concentrating on what they arent equipped and created to do and start obeying and seeking to do what God has called them to do. We are much more peaceful in our spirits and happier. In fact everyone is much happier when they do what God calls them to do. .

(P.s. If you feel like God is calling you into leadership, then by all means be a leader...just don't disobey scripture. I believe God will speak clearly to your heart if you seek His Will.)

 

[OzSpen]

I felt MacAurthur did a fairly good job addressing your points. However if you want an even more in depth look, give me a little time. I'm trying to do this in while at work as well.

Metal,

But you didn't address even one of the points I raised with you at #94, not one. You simply deflected to an article by John MacArthur. That does not deal with the matters I raised with you.

I urge you not do this while at work. In my part of the world, that is called robbing the boss of his time, unless you are doing this in your lunch break or some other downtime when you are not working on the job. How can you justifiably be online to CF while you are at work? Perhaps I don't know your situation. Do you have permission from the boss to be interacting on CF?

 

[Metal Minister]

Metal,

But you didn't address even one of the points I raised with you at #94, not one. You simply deflected to an article by John MacArthur. That does not deal with the matters I raised with you.

Please read what I wrote.

 

[OzSpen]

Please read what I wrote.

I did, and you didn't address the specific issues I raised in #94.