Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

[Scribe]

I apologize to all I have posted to and those who may have been reading along. Being personally attacked by some, caused me to react out of the energy of the flesh; rather than lifting up Christ, I attempted to lift up myself. This serves not my Lord and Savior.

To those who reject the proper teaching, that a woman should have her glory (long hair), veiled (1 Cor. 11:2-16), in the assembly meeting and remain silent, (1 Cor. 14:34). and are not permitted to teach, (1 Tim. 2:12), thus be a pastor, the following also can be concluded about their Theological beliefs:

1) They do not believe that the special gifts of the Spirit have temporarily ceased until the end days are present.
2) They do not believe that Salvation is ALL of GOD. It is by GRACE alone and not Grace + Faith. God's Grace ensures faith for those who are in the Eternal Covenant, (Heb. 13:20,21; Jude v.1; Eph. 2:8).
3) They do not believe in the spiritually depraved nature of man subsequent to the fall of Adam.
4) They are ARMINIAN to the CORE, in as much as they believe in "Free-Will" to the extent, that it is man's will over God's will. Thus, they deny Election and it's true extent, (Rom. 8:28-30; Eph. 1:4).
5) They deny that the SHEEP of John chapter 10 are equal to the ELECT of God. That Sheep/Elect comprise the whole of Salvation and not one less are one more will be saved. (John 6:39,65; 10:29; 17:2)
6) They deny Christ's Particular Redemption. They believe that Christ died for everyone and not just the Elect. Thus, they DEVALUE the efficacy of His redemptive work and in so doing DEVALUE Christ Himself. Jesus Christ died ONLY for the SHEEP, (John 10:11,14-15); therefore, the ELECT in the Eternal Covenant, (Mat. 20:28; 22:14; Mk. 14:24; Rom.5:15; 8:14; Heb. 9:28), and not all.
7) They deny the IMPECCABILITY of Christ and believe He was Peccable. He could have sinned but did not because it is important to them that Christ be like them in everyway. But Scripture says that Christ was born Holy, (Lk. 1:35), in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh, (Rom. 8:3; Phil. 2:7). Not in sinful flesh. Having no human father separated Him from the fall of Adam and the sin nature. To believe in the Peccability of Christ, is to not know Him at all. His Divine nature could not co-inhabit with a sin nature.

Years ago, when my brother's wife was still alive, her son was over visiting. He was a Preacher at a local Charismatic church in East Texas. My wife engaged him in a Biblical conversation, which led to her asking him: "Why do you not teach these Doctrinal things in your Church"? This question, was in response to him saying, he knew of these Doctrines. He replied: "I cannot. The people of the church would not understand these things, nor would they stand for it.". How very, very sad. Shortly thereafter, he was taken out of this world.

The Theology mentioned above, is of the same cloth as the Pharisees and Sadducees of our Lord's day. What is happening here? Why so much error? It can be summed up with this verse of Scripture:

John 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep.
John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
John 10:28 and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand.

Salvation only works one way! The same as it did here:

Acts_13:48 And as the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of God: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Therefore, if one is Christ's Sheep, His sheep do not buck against the proper understanding of God's Word. They whole heartedly embrace it. Scripture teaches that we as believers, are to be in Subjection to our Lord, Jesus Christ. Just as He was in Subjection to His Father, we too are in Subjection to each other in Christ. No Christian has a problem with being in Subjection to another. Only the sin nature hates the concept of being in Subjection to someone or something.

Feel better now?

 

[Dino246]

No... that is not my intent. But it is to vigorously defend the Truth of God's Word. Anathematizing people is not my place... that is the sole authority of God. The general post, now posted, tests whether ones faith is genuine. I cannot divorce myself from these great Biblical principles, just for the sake of discussion. We are not discussing Biology, Cosmetology or some other of man's sciences... we are discussing the Word of God. As such, one must maintain a proper witness for the cause of Christ.

What you posted does nothing of the sort. All it does is establish what you think tests the genuineness of someone's faith. Heck... it doesn't even mention the divinity, incarnation, or resurrection of Jesus!

Next time you want to argue broader theological issues, START YOUR OWN THREAD.

 

[Scribe]

No... that is not my intent. But it is to vigorously defend the Truth of God's Word. Anathematizing people is not my place... that is the sole authority of God. The general post, now posted, tests whether ones faith is genuine. I cannot divorce myself from these great Biblical principles, just for the sake of discussion. We are not discussing Biology, Cosmetology or some other of man's sciences... we are discussing the Word of God. As such, one must maintain a proper witness for the cause of Christ.

Imagine your surprise if you get to heaven and find out that those who did not agree with Calvin's philosophy are there too? Will you want to leave?

 

[Dino246]

Imagine your surprise if you get to heaven and find out that those who did not agree with Calvin's philosophy are there too? Will you want to leave?

He might think he's in the other place.

 

[Angela53510]

Has anyone read 1 Timothy 2, verse 9 - 12 ?

The question is, have you read it in Koine Greek, or just in English translations?

Back in the 16th century, when Erasmus and the KJ committee was translating the Bible into English, all they had was 7 corrupt Greek manuscripts. They did the best they could!

They also did not have access to thousands and thousands of contemporaneous documents, like we do! So the word authentein, translated as "usurp authority" was the only translation they had. It is extremely weak. For one thing, the normal word used in Greek for "Authority" is exousia. Paul wrote that word in many places, such as Romans 13. So, authentein is an infinitive, non- linear, and because authority is a noun, an extra word had to be added. Either "usurp" or "exercise." In translating, it is normal to use a one to one correspondence. One word in Greek translates into one word in English. So instead of translating one word into English, somehow they had to use 2 words, which sends up red flags right there.

In fact, Greek scholars know there are almost 50 words used to translate authentein. The most common is "to domineer" which is the English infinitive. If men weren't so willing to accept this bad translation because it confirms their prior beliefs, someone might have actually looked deeper, and found a better word. In saying a woman is not to domineer a man, that is the truth. As Soul Weaver already said, it is actually mutual. Ephesians 5:21:

"Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord."

In verse 21, the submitting is mutual. So a woman should not domineer a man, nor a man a woman.

Verse 22 actually in Greek is lacking the word "hupotasso" which means submit. So, nothing there about men lording it over women.

I argued over this with my second year Greek professor, Bill Mounce. He finally sent me to his commentary on the pastoral officials. He had over 40 pages written on this. But in the end, he agreed with me that it all comes down to the word authentein. He believed the older definitions, because that is how he was raised. But he agreed I could be right.

One thing I didn't mention, which is really important to know. Authentein is a hapax legomena. That means it is a word that is only found ONCE in the whole Bible. So nothing to compare with inside the Bible. That is why the contemporaneous literature from Paul's time becomes so important, which the older translations couldn't figure into. So, to make a doctrine out of a verse that literally is not translatable, a debated verse, just doesn't hold up. You would need many more verses, especially with no doubts about the word, or the 1st century culture, in order to make something more than a speculative doctrine.

I'm studying the atonement in theology right now. There are hundreds, if not thousands of verses referring in different things about the atonement. And lots of room to discuss models or motifs, without running out of support verses.

I'll be glad when Jesus tells the men how wrong they are about this doctrine. And I do thank the men on this forum who support women in our journey away from patriarchal societies from 2000 years ago.

 

[Angela53510]

Imagine your surprise if you get to heaven and find out that those who did not agree with Calvin's philosophy are there too? Will you want to leave?

No Calvinist or Reformed people I know would ever say a born again by the Spirit of God believer would not get into heaven because of their soteriology. In fact, the opposite. If God saved us, which I truly believe, to deny someone a place in heaven that God has chosen is verging on blasphemous. You might get some supralapsarians who believe that, but they go far from the Bible if they claim that.

Maybe read a bit more to find out what Calvinists and Reformed people believe, instead of throwing up condemning statements based on unbiblical lies.

 

[Blain]

The bible dictates that God is no respecter of person and he used women many times in the old testament as prophetess's a prophet or prophetess is a seat of authority in scripture as they are held all the more accountable for what they claiim to speak in his name many of these women were used by God to save the his people many times including many men

Don't forget also how kingship and klingdoms are a common theme in scripture yes a king is the head of the kingdom but if there is no king the queen is the head likewise if a man will not step up to the plate of the calling then he will use a women he uses the willing not whether they are a man or a women besides as far as I have seen many of the churches I have been to had men pastors and they spoke but everyone around me seemed dead bored and there was no life in their teachings maybe a change of pace could create a spark?

 

[notuptome]

The question is, have you read it in Koine Greek, or just in English translations?

Back in the 16th century, when Erasmus and the KJ committee was translating the Bible into English, all they had was 7 corrupt Greek manuscripts. They did the best they could!

They also did not have access to thousands and thousands of contemporaneous documents, like we do! So the word authentein, translated as "usurp authority" was the only translation they had. It is extremely weak. For one thing, the normal word used in Greek for "Authority" is exousia. Paul wrote that word in many places, such as Romans 13. So, authentein is an infinitive, non- linear, and because authority is a noun, an extra word had to be added. Either "usurp" or "exercise." In translating, it is normal to use a one to one correspondence. One word in Greek translates into one word in English. So instead of translating one word into English, somehow they had to use 2 words, which sends up red flags right there.

In fact, Greek scholars know there are almost 50 words used to translate authentein. The most common is "to domineer" which is the English infinitive. If men weren't so willing to accept this bad translation because it confirms their prior beliefs, someone might have actually looked deeper, and found a better word. In saying a woman is not to domineer a man, that is the truth. As Soul Weaver already said, it is actually mutual. Ephesians 5:21:

"Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord."

In verse 21, the submitting is mutual. So a woman should not domineer a man, nor a man a woman.

Verse 22 actually in Greek is lacking the word "hupotasso" which means submit. So, nothing there about men lording it over women.

I argued over this with my second year Greek professor, Bill Mounce. He finally sent me to his commentary on the pastoral officials. He had over 40 pages written on this. But in the end, he agreed with me that it all comes down to the word authentein. He believed the older definitions, because that is how he was raised. But he agreed I could be right.

One thing I didn't mention, which is really important to know. Authentein is a hapax legomena. That means it is a word that is only found ONCE in the whole Bible. So nothing to compare with inside the Bible. That is why the contemporaneous literature from Paul's time becomes so important, which the older translations couldn't figure into. So, to make a doctrine out of a verse that literally is not translatable, a debated verse, just doesn't hold up. You would need many more verses, especially with no doubts about the word, or the 1st century culture, in order to make something more than a speculative doctrine.

I'm studying the atonement in theology right now. There are hundreds, if not thousands of verses referring in different things about the atonement. And lots of room to discuss models or motifs, without running out of support verses.

I'll be glad when Jesus tells the men how wrong they are about this doctrine. And I do thank the men on this forum who support women in our journey away from patriarchal societies from 2000 years ago.

Men continue to attack Gods word to undermine it's authority. From Adam and Eve forward women are never given authority over the man.

God has set apart the office of pastor for men. Women are a very valuable component in the church and the church does not run well if they are absent. The church does not run well if the pastor is not gifted to the church by God. God is not concerned with what modern cultural sensitivities dictate. Culture does not define church practices but church practices define culture. We must conform to Gods will not endeavor to make God conform to our will.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Scribe]

No Calvinist or Reformed people I know would ever say a born again by the Spirit of God believer would not get into heaven because of their soteriology. In fact, the opposite. If God saved us, which I truly believe, to deny someone a place in heaven that God has chosen is verging on blasphemous. You might get some supralapsarians who believe that, but they go far from the Bible if they claim that.

Maybe read a bit more to find out what Calvinists and Reformed people believe, instead of throwing up condemning statements based on unbiblical lies.

I have heard that not even Calvin taught the things that those who claim to be Calvinists say.

 

[Dino246]

Men continue to attack Gods word to undermine it's authority. From Adam and Eve forward women are never given authority over the man.

Perhaps you have attacked God's word by removing Judges from your copy. Deborah was one of the Judges... or did you conveniently forget?

 

[notuptome]

Perhaps you have attacked God's word by removing Judges from your copy. Deborah was one of the Judges... or did you conveniently forget?

You completely misapply what Deborah did in Israel. You also omit the contribution made by Barak. Certainly her office of judge in Israel was not to be compared to pastor of a church.

Historically Israel was in a state of decline after the death of Joshua so you need to ask why God did not raise up another leader like Joshua.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

All due respect to John Gill, he certainly knows more Greek than me, since I know nothing of the Greek language yet, but do plan to take three years in seminary and I am not really looking forward to it. However, the editors behind the ESV do know Greek and their combined knowledge probably exceeds John Gill but I really would not know. The ESV has become a favorite translation of mine, but many of the other English translations seem to agree that it should be "her"

I don't think it was Paul's intention of Calling Nymphas family his church.

All the following English translations use her and that is a lot of Greek Scholars combined.
New International Version
Give my greetings to the brothers and sisters at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house.

New Living Translation
Please give my greetings to our brothers and sisters at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church that meets in her house.

English Standard Version
Give my greetings to the brothers at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house.

Berean Study Bible
Greet the brothers in Laodicea, as well as Nympha and the church that meets at her house.

Berean Literal Bible
Greet the brothers in Laodicea, and also Nympha and the church in her house.

King James Bible
Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house.

New King James Version
Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea, and Nymphas and the church that is in his house.

New American Standard Bible
Greet the brothers and sisters who are in Laodicea and also Nympha and the church that is in her house.

NASB 1995
Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea and also Nympha and the church that is in her house.

NASB 1977
Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea and also Nympha and the church that is in her house.

Amplified Bible
Give my greetings to the brothers and sisters at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church that meets in her house.

Christian Standard Bible
Give my greetings to the brothers and sisters in Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her home.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Give my greetings to the brothers in Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her home.

American Standard Version
Salute the brethren that are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church that is in their house.

Contemporary English Version
Give my greetings to the followers at Laodicea, especially to Nympha and the church that meets in her home.

Nympha, is a woman's name. So presumably the church at laodicea was meeting in her home. That's what the text suggests.

 

[Dino246]

You completely misapply what Deborah did in Israel. You also omit the contribution made by Barak. Certainly her office of judge in Israel was not to be compared to pastor of a church.

Historically Israel was in a state of decline after the death of Joshua so you need to ask why God did not raise up another leader like Joshua.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I didn't misapply anything. YOU stated, "From Adam and Eve forward women are never given authority over the man."

Barak's contribution and the state of Israel are both irrelevant; the fact that Deborah was the judge makes your statement incorrect. Period. End of story.

 

[ourforgiveness-com]

Greetings brothers,

In regards to the question: can a woman take the office of a bishop/overseer, the answer is no.

1 Timothy 3:2 answers this question.

1 Timothy 3:2 (KJV)​

“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;”

A break-down of the Genders for each Greek word​

“A-τὸν (ton)-Definite article /Masculine/singular) bishop-ἐπίσκοπον (episkopon)-Noun /masculine/singular) then must be blameless-ἀνεπίληπτον (anepilepton)-adjective/masculine), the husband-ἄνδρα (andra)-Noun/masculine/singular) of one-μιᾶς (mias)-feminine) wife-γυναικὸς (gunaikos)-Noun/feminine/singular), vigilant-νηφάλιον (nephalion)-adjective/masculine), sober-σώφρονα (sophrona)-adjective/masculine), of good behaviour-κόσμιον (kosmion)-adjective/masculine), given to hospitality-φιλόξενον (philoxenon)-adjective/masculine), apt to teach-διδακτικόν (didaktikon)-adjective/masculine);”

Unlike Greek nouns, adjectives have variable gender. A single adjective may have masculine, feminine, and neuter forms. An adjective uses masculine endings if it modifies a masculine noun, feminine endings if it modifies a feminine noun, and neuter endings if it modifies a neuter noun. This rule can also be understood in other languages, such as, in Spanish. To change (A-τὸν (ton)-Definite article /Masculine/singular) into a Definite article /feminine/singular), the Greek would have to read: τὴν-(ten)-Definite article /feminine/singular) followed by the modification of the Noun to a feminine and also the adjectives. Consider 1 Corinthians 11:9

1 Corinthians 11:9 (KJV)​

“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”

“Neither was the man created for the-τὴν (ten)-Definite article /feminine/singular) woman-γυναῖκα (gunaika)-Noun /feminine/singular); but the woman for the man.”

And of course, the verse itself tells you that a Bishop must be a husband of one wife. It does not say "a spouse of one". nowhere in this verse is a neuter Gender.


Thank you. and God Bless.

 

[notuptome]

I didn't misapply anything. YOU stated, "From Adam and Eve forward women are never given authority over the man."

Barak's contribution and the state of Israel are both irrelevant; the fact that Deborah was the judge makes your statement incorrect. Period. End of story.

No you continue to argue from a failed viewpoint. You assume God made Deborah a leader over Israel. What you really see is man placing women in leadership roles not God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Scribe]

No you continue to argue from a failed viewpoint. You assume God made Deborah a leader over Israel. What you really see is man placing women in leadership roles not God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

She was also a prophetess and foresaw that a woman Jael would be the one to take down Sisera not Barak, so this supernatural manifestation and calling her a prophetess and a judge puts God's authorship upon her office not men.

 

[Scribe]

Greetings brothers,

In regards to the question: can a woman take the office of a bishop/overseer, the answer is no.

1 Timothy 3:2 answers this question.

1 Timothy 3:2 (KJV)​

“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;”

A break-down of the Genders for each Greek word​

“A-τὸν (ton)-Definite article /Masculine/singular) bishop-ἐπίσκοπον (episkopon)-Noun /masculine/singular) then must be blameless-ἀνεπίληπτον (anepilepton)-adjective/masculine), the husband-ἄνδρα (andra)-Noun/masculine/singular) of one-μιᾶς (mias)-feminine) wife-γυναικὸς (gunaikos)-Noun/feminine/singular), vigilant-νηφάλιον (nephalion)-adjective/masculine), sober-σώφρονα (sophrona)-adjective/masculine), of good behaviour-κόσμιον (kosmion)-adjective/masculine), given to hospitality-φιλόξενον (philoxenon)-adjective/masculine), apt to teach-διδακτικόν (didaktikon)-adjective/masculine);”

Unlike Greek nouns, adjectives have variable gender. A single adjective may have masculine, feminine, and neuter forms. An adjective uses masculine endings if it modifies a masculine noun, feminine endings if it modifies a feminine noun, and neuter endings if it modifies a neuter noun. This rule can also be understood in other languages, such as, in Spanish. To change (A-τὸν (ton)-Definite article /Masculine/singular) into a Definite article /feminine/singular), the Greek would have to read: τὴν-(ten)-Definite article /feminine/singular) followed by the modification of the Noun to a feminine and also the adjectives. Consider 1 Corinthians 11:9

1 Corinthians 11:9 (KJV)​

“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”

“Neither was the man created for the-τὴν (ten)-Definite article /feminine/singular) woman-γυναῖκα (gunaika)-Noun /feminine/singular); but the woman for the man.”

And of course, the verse itself tells you that a Bishop must be a husband of one wife. It does not say "a spouse of one". nowhere in this verse is a neuter Gender.


Thank you. and God Bless.

And yet Pricilla taught Apollos in the way of Jesus more perfectly. So women do teach the bible to men in the New Testament and therefore we know that Paul was talking about a woman's attitude toward her husband (1 Tim2:11-12 and 1 Pet 3:4-6) and that he was talking about being blameless when he said not to marry more than one wife, and a single man can be a pastor as well as a woman if God so calls. Understanding authorial intent requires knowing the whole bible.

 

[Scribe]

Since I was called by God to fellowship with a denomination that does ordain women since it started over 100 years ago I have been surprised to find the mentality of people that think that God banned women from preaching, teaching, or pastoring.
I was not even aware of it for many years and did not know the extent at which they have gone about to establish a New Testament Law that not even Moses taught.

Let me just remind everyone that Jesus is a real person not just letters on a page. If you have a relationship with Jesus and the Holy Spirit and give Him your whole heart in total surrender hating sin and loving righteousness, there will be a discerning when it comes to these kinds of questions.

Certainly the God of the whole earth will do right? You will know when an interpretation could not possibly be correct if it excludes women from all the things promised to men in regards to service in the Kingdom of God.

If someone tries to teach you that only men are called to be Kings and Priests and to reign on the earth you should be able to hear the Holy Spirit telling you that is not true.

 

[Dino246]

No you continue to argue from a failed viewpoint. You assume God made Deborah a leader over Israel. What you really see is man placing women in leadership roles not God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

You are obviously unable to admit your error, and instead you resort to eisegesis. That’s pathetic.

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

On this is suggest read the scriptures and conform yourself to the scriptures. Don't read into it or attempt to explain any of it away.
Who is your God, the God of the scriptures or the God that is your feelings?