Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??
- Thread starter Major
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Yes you are correct, these things will be argued until the coming of the Lord. However, we were not called into His service, to be content in not discovering the Truth laid out before us in Scripture. Our sole purpose as witnesses, is to handle the Truth correctly.
As far as something being forced, as you put it, I give the following in support of this view:
Albert Barnes -
But if any man seem to be contentious - The sense of this passage is probably this: “If any man, any teacher, or others, “is disposed” to be strenuous about this, or to make it a matter of difficulty; if he is disposed to call in question my reasoning, and to dispute my premises and the considerations which I have advanced, and to maintain still that it is proper for women to appear unveiled....
Neither the churches of God - The churches elsewhere. It is customary there for the woman to appear veiled. If at Corinth this custom is not observed, it will be a departure from what has elsewhere been regarded as proper; and will offend these churches.
John Gill
But if any man seem to be contentious,.... That is, if anyone will not be satisfied with reasons given, for men's praying and prophesying with their heads uncovered, and women's praying and prophesying with their heads covered; but will go on to raise objections, and continue carping and cavilling, showing that they contend not for truth, but victory, can they but obtain it any way; for my part, as if the apostle should say, I shall not think it worth my while to continue the dispute any longer; enough has been said to satisfy any wise and good man, anyone that is serious, thoughtful, and modest; and shall only add,
we have no such custom, nor the churches of God; meaning, either that men should appear covered, and women uncovered in public service, and which should have some weight with all those that have any regard to churches and their examples; or that men should be indulged in a captious and contentious spirit; a man that is always contending for contention sake, and is continually cavilling and carping at everything that is said and done in churches, and is always quarrelling with one person or another, or on account of one thing or another, and is constantly giving uneasiness, is not fit to be a church member; nor ought he to be suffered to continue in the communion of the church, to the disturbance of the peace of it. This puts me in mind of a passage in the Talmud
.
"The Rabbans teach, that after the departure of R. Meir, R. Judah said to his disciples, do not let the disciples of R. Meir enter here, מפני שקנתרנין הן, "because they are contentious".''
T. Bab. Nazir, fol. 49. 2. & Kiddushin, fol. 52. 2.
Adam Clarke
But if any man seem to be contentious - Ει δε τις δοκει φιλονεικος ειναι· If any person sets himself up as a wrangler - puts himself forward as a defender of such points, that a woman may pray or teach with her head uncovered, and that a man may, without reproach, have long hair; let him know that we have no such custom as either, nor are they sanctioned by any of the Churches of God, whether among the Jews or the Gentiles.
So you say it seemed forced in my explanation? Was it forced by these men as well?
As far as something being forced, as you put it, I give the following in support of this view:
Albert Barnes -
But if any man seem to be contentious - The sense of this passage is probably this: “If any man, any teacher, or others, “is disposed” to be strenuous about this, or to make it a matter of difficulty; if he is disposed to call in question my reasoning, and to dispute my premises and the considerations which I have advanced, and to maintain still that it is proper for women to appear unveiled....
Neither the churches of God - The churches elsewhere. It is customary there for the woman to appear veiled. If at Corinth this custom is not observed, it will be a departure from what has elsewhere been regarded as proper; and will offend these churches.
John Gill
But if any man seem to be contentious,.... That is, if anyone will not be satisfied with reasons given, for men's praying and prophesying with their heads uncovered, and women's praying and prophesying with their heads covered; but will go on to raise objections, and continue carping and cavilling, showing that they contend not for truth, but victory, can they but obtain it any way; for my part, as if the apostle should say, I shall not think it worth my while to continue the dispute any longer; enough has been said to satisfy any wise and good man, anyone that is serious, thoughtful, and modest; and shall only add,
we have no such custom, nor the churches of God; meaning, either that men should appear covered, and women uncovered in public service, and which should have some weight with all those that have any regard to churches and their examples; or that men should be indulged in a captious and contentious spirit; a man that is always contending for contention sake, and is continually cavilling and carping at everything that is said and done in churches, and is always quarrelling with one person or another, or on account of one thing or another, and is constantly giving uneasiness, is not fit to be a church member; nor ought he to be suffered to continue in the communion of the church, to the disturbance of the peace of it. This puts me in mind of a passage in the Talmud
."The Rabbans teach, that after the departure of R. Meir, R. Judah said to his disciples, do not let the disciples of R. Meir enter here, מפני שקנתרנין הן, "because they are contentious".''
T. Bab. Nazir, fol. 49. 2. & Kiddushin, fol. 52. 2.Adam Clarke
But if any man seem to be contentious - Ει δε τις δοκει φιλονεικος ειναι· If any person sets himself up as a wrangler - puts himself forward as a defender of such points, that a woman may pray or teach with her head uncovered, and that a man may, without reproach, have long hair; let him know that we have no such custom as either, nor are they sanctioned by any of the Churches of God, whether among the Jews or the Gentiles.
So you say it seemed forced in my explanation? Was it forced by these men as well?
Verse 26 proves the proper Biblical understanding. Aquila was a man:
Act 18:2 And he found a certain Jew named Aquila, a man of Pontus by race, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to depart from Rome: and he came unto them;
The two were married, so we can't tell from verse 26 if both or only Aquila spoke to him. It mat have been both. However, the key point in this verse is: ... they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more accurately. Are better translated: "they took him aside" They did not correct him in the meeting, they pulled him aside and quietly discussed the matter.
This does not help your case for assembly meetings and proper conduct. No one ever said that women can't teach. Certainly not myself. Timothy's grandmother taught him. Women are forbidden to teach in assembly meetings not in adjacent gatherings or at home. One must make the proper distinction between the assembly meeting of the saints and being in the church building. Paul didn't say that a woman was not to speak in the church building - as one teaching or having fellowship - but only during the assembly meeting.... are some may say, worship service.
Act 18:2 And he found a certain Jew named Aquila, a man of Pontus by race, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to depart from Rome: and he came unto them;
The two were married, so we can't tell from verse 26 if both or only Aquila spoke to him. It mat have been both. However, the key point in this verse is: ... they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more accurately. Are better translated: "they took him aside" They did not correct him in the meeting, they pulled him aside and quietly discussed the matter.
This does not help your case for assembly meetings and proper conduct. No one ever said that women can't teach. Certainly not myself. Timothy's grandmother taught him. Women are forbidden to teach in assembly meetings not in adjacent gatherings or at home. One must make the proper distinction between the assembly meeting of the saints and being in the church building. Paul didn't say that a woman was not to speak in the church building - as one teaching or having fellowship - but only during the assembly meeting.... are some may say, worship service.
Yes church has changed and not for the good either. There is a continuing disrespect for the house of God, displayed by so-called Christians. All though it is doubtful if Christ is even in those buildings. Clothing does not make a believer but when one can dress nicely and choses not to, this shows disrespect for the Lord. They show more respect for an upper level business meeting or for a fine dinning experience, than they do for the King of kings and Lord of lords.
S
No he never said any such thing. He told the women who were asking questions out of order to be silent in the church and ask their husbands at home. They prophesied in the Assemblies (see Philips daughters)
Believing that God does not want women to speak in the Assemblies (worship service) is a view of God that is messed up based on bad hermeneutics. Women do speak, do teach and do preach in Assemblies and God is empowering them by His Holy Spirit since the days of Pentecost to do so. God demonstrates their correct hermeneutics by empowering them with the Holy Spirit and exposing the bad interpretations that satan has used to twist scriptures to exclude the from preaching but fortunately we have triumphed over the leaven of the pharisees and any woman who feels called by God to a preaching ministry can pursue credentials through the Assemblies of God and find Global opportunities and acceptance with the fastest growing evangelical denomination in the world.
Believing that God does not want women to speak in the Assemblies (worship service) is a view of God that is messed up based on bad hermeneutics. Women do speak, do teach and do preach in Assemblies and God is empowering them by His Holy Spirit since the days of Pentecost to do so. God demonstrates their correct hermeneutics by empowering them with the Holy Spirit and exposing the bad interpretations that satan has used to twist scriptures to exclude the from preaching but fortunately we have triumphed over the leaven of the pharisees and any woman who feels called by God to a preaching ministry can pursue credentials through the Assemblies of God and find Global opportunities and acceptance with the fastest growing evangelical denomination in the world.
The TRUTH is all there is!!!!!!! Discussion , debate or what ever you want to call it... How we handle the TRUTH of God is the point of our existence as Christians. I discuss the Truth to help others and to be helped. I do not enter into pointless debate. Sooner or later one has to call what is being said what it truly is or be guilty of the following warning:
Mat 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls before the swine, lest haply they trample them under their feet, and turn and rend you.
My personal concern for handling the TRUTH is in these passages of Scripture:
1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1Co 3:12 But if any man buildeth on the foundation gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble;
1Co 3:13 each man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire; and the fire itself shall prove each man's work of what sort it is.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as through fire.
Mat 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls before the swine, lest haply they trample them under their feet, and turn and rend you.
My personal concern for handling the TRUTH is in these passages of Scripture:
1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1Co 3:12 But if any man buildeth on the foundation gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble;
1Co 3:13 each man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire; and the fire itself shall prove each man's work of what sort it is.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as through fire.
In other words - you believe what you believe regardless of what one can show you from Scripture. You are so sure of yourself, that you no longer question what you may understand. So halleluiah, you have arrived.
Don't really want to be cute or sarcastic here but.... Really !!!!!! There is a difference between defending the truth of God's word and being unteachable.
Don't really want to be cute or sarcastic here but.... Really !!!!!! There is a difference between defending the truth of God's word and being unteachable.
At this point, I will just say: What ever dude.
Interesting that the churches did not see things this way until just recently in time. Check out the history for yourself. All this crap which is being taught today started after 1900. The first woman, ordained as a preacher, not until around 1956. This was the same time period when women stopped using a head covering.
So you hold to the fact, that the churches of God, had it all wrong for more than 1800 years. That none of the great commentators of the 1600's through the 1800's knew what they were talking about. It is more likely the following has taken place:
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves.
and
2Pe 2:1 But there arose false prophets also among the people, as among you also there shall be false teachers, who shall privily bring in destructive heresies, denying even the Master that bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
Interesting that the churches did not see things this way until just recently in time. Check out the history for yourself. All this crap which is being taught today started after 1900. The first woman, ordained as a preacher, not until around 1956. This was the same time period when women stopped using a head covering.
So you hold to the fact, that the churches of God, had it all wrong for more than 1800 years. That none of the great commentators of the 1600's through the 1800's knew what they were talking about. It is more likely the following has taken place:
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves.
and
2Pe 2:1 But there arose false prophets also among the people, as among you also there shall be false teachers, who shall privily bring in destructive heresies, denying even the Master that bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
S
Those verses were applicable in their own day as well. The same false teachings orchestrated by the same demons. Forbid to marry, command to marry, respect toward angels with head coverings, sabbath keeping, diets, on and on.
The catholics taught crazy things using the scriptures for over 1000 years that did not mean it was proper interpretations. Imagine how many times the reformers were told that their interpretations could not be correct because they were not popular until recent times.
The catholics taught crazy things using the scriptures for over 1000 years that did not mean it was proper interpretations. Imagine how many times the reformers were told that their interpretations could not be correct because they were not popular until recent times.
-
1
- Show all
I pray that all who enter discussion here, do not ever question that God loves each one of us, as proven by Jesus' entire life here. Yet while God loves us, as individuals, He does not love the erroneous thoughts, speech, actions, practices, beliefs, theologies. See Revelation 2, for while God loves the Nicolaitans (as persons), God does not love their deeds or their doctrine. God hates every false "way".