Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

[Scribe]

Sorry nothing but propaganda from a long time apostate denomination.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

This position paper presents scriptures to show that the New Testament clearly supports women in ministry leadership and if you do not agree with the interpretation you have to present an alternative interpretation then we can examine whether your interpretation is following the rules of hermeneutics or not.

Heckling the speaker (in this case this papers presenting interpretation of scriptures) is not a rule of interpretation.

The Assemblies of God is not the only church that interprets the scriptures in this manner. Millions of nondenominational church members find this hermeneutic to be that which is closest to authorial intent. That the Word of God is very clear that women were included in ministry leadership and that it was always God's intention to include them.

Thank God, because of the ease of searching on the internet, I see the day coming when the majority of Christians will have studied this topic in the Bible for themselves and will realize what the scriptures actually say instead of what they have been told by their religious influences.

They will realize that 90% of what they have heard about women having authority over men has nothing to do with being a servant leader in ministry. I see a huge cultural shift coming into the churches toward their treatment of women as a result of learning scriptures. It is like a REFORMATION of liberating women in the Church is at hand.

The reformation did not recover the role of women in the early church and has continued to teach false doctrine inherited from the RCC and Dark Ages. Using bad interpretation of scripture to justify their false teaching to ban women from the pulpit they have done exactly what their RCC predecessors did before them.

It will take reading all of the scriptures that were presented in that paper I posted to open the eyes of those who have never seen them before. When they see them they suddenly think... "Why have I never heard these scriptures properly dealt with before?" And the answer to that will shock them.

 

[notuptome]

This position paper presents scriptures to show that the New Testament clearly supports women in ministry leadership and if you do not agree with the interpretation you have to present an alternative interpretation then we can examine whether your interpretation is following the rules of hermeneutics or not.

Heckling the speaker (in this case this papers presenting interpretation of scriptures) is not a rule of interpretation.

The Assemblies of God is not the only church that interprets the scriptures in this manner. Millions of nondenominational church members find this hermeneutic to be that which is closest to authorial intent. That the Word of God is very clear that women were included in ministry leadership and that it was always God's intention to include them.

Thank God, because of the ease of searching on the internet, I see the day coming when the majority of Christians will have studied this topic in the Bible for themselves and will realize what the scriptures actually say instead of what they have been told by their religious influences.

They will realize that 90% of what they have heard about women having authority over men has nothing to do with being a servant leader in ministry. I see a huge cultural shift coming into the churches toward their treatment of women as a result of learning scriptures. It is like a REFORMATION of liberating women in the Church is at hand.

The reformation did not recover the role of women in the early church and has continued to teach false doctrine inherited from the RCC and Dark Ages. Using bad interpretation of scripture to justify their false teaching to ban women from the pulpit they have done exactly what their RCC predecessors did before them.

It will take reading all of the scriptures that were presented in that paper I posted to open the eyes of those who have never seen them before. When they see them they suddenly think... "Why have I never heard these scriptures properly dealt with before?" And the answer to that will shock them.

Scripture agrees with you.

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[awelight]

Not sure what you are asking. Were you wondering how Deborah accomplished being a judge and a prophetess?

Has nothing to do with the church which Christ is building and you know that. Nothing in the Old Testament, on Jewish ground, about this subject, can be applied to the church proceedings. dealing with women. They didn't even know that Christ was going to build a church/Bride.

 

[awelight]

Traditions are interesting. We know from the first few Centuries (Church Father's era) only a few people of most populations could actually read. Generally, the only people who owned Bibles were the ones who could read them. And that led to even worse traditions.

I said that to say this, maybe the majority of women could not read in Paul's day. The Disciples show their knowledge of the Tanakh so Yiddish men probably were the educated ones (Paul is a great example of being educated in the Torah). Maybe part of Paul's statement here is based upon who can read God's Word vs who could not (back then).

Today, everyone can basically read enough to survive. Much different than 1,600 - 5,000 years ago.

To much human supposition trying to get around a clearly laid out commandment. Don't you think?

 

[Magenta]

Thank God, because of the ease of searching on the internet, I see the day coming when the majority of Christians will have studied this topic in the Bible for themselves and will realize what the scriptures actually say instead of what they have been told by their religious influences.

Misogynists.

 

[awelight]

They do teach and preach from the pulpit. Many much better than ten thousands of male pastors. That is not a question. You would say they are being wrong. I think they are being empowered by the Holy Spirit. You would say that they are under a New Testament Law based on how you read these verses, I would say that was never Paul's intention. And I think I have the Spirit of Christ. Fortunately these anointed women don't listen to your hermeneutic and those that agree with you and they teach and preach anyway and the church has been enriched throughout history because of it.

Also, concerning 1 Tim 2; There could have been a local application to Ephesus. A problem with some of the women there. That can be supported by the context of 2 Tim 3.. "They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires,"
Maybe there is a hint here of something going on with the women there concerning teaching false doctrine. A local application (the church in Ephesus) that these women should not teach. And turning it into a New Testament Law that Woman can never teach the bible in the pulpit is obvious to most people a misunderstanding of authorial intent.

You say that 1 Tim 2 has no context about husband and wife but I see the mention of Adam and Eve comparable to the mention of Abraham and Sarah in 1 Pet 3. What would you call Adam and Eve if not the very first Husband and Wife?

Your argument is circular on 1 Tim. 2, and is not supported by Scripture.

Adam and Eve were given as to the reason for Paul's previous comments, Because Eve was the first in the transgression. If she had been properly in subjection to her husband, she would have called upon him before making any final decision; instead, desiring to do good for her husband, she became part of the problem.

While Adam and Eve were indeed the first husband and wife, their placement by Paul, in this Epistle, goes to the subject of Eve. Abraham and Sarah, are being used in a positive example, to which husbands and wives should follow. They are not being used in a negative example.

 

[Scribe]

Has nothing to do with the church which Christ is building and you know that. Nothing in the Old Testament, on Jewish ground, about this subject, can be applied to the church proceedings. dealing with women. They didn't even know that Christ was going to build a church/Bride.

If God gave women authority in the OT it is not sound doctrine to teach that He WILL never give women authority in the NT.
If women had more liberty under the old covenant it would be an obvious misinterpretation to suggest that they were given less liberty under the New Testament established on better promises. Paul is very clear about including women in the statement that in the Kingdom of God there is neither Male nor Female. They have been liberated from the oppression of false religion. They are free to preach and prophesy.

The establishing of the Church did not restrict women to a place lower than they had in the OT. If God in his sovereignty chose to raise up a Deborah with both authority as a judge over males and spiritual authority as a prophet that could foretell events with supernatural enabling of the Holy Spirit He can do so now and you cannot restrict Him with your bad hermeneutics.

 

[awelight]

If God gave women authority in the OT it is not sound doctrine to teach that He WILL never give women authority in the NT.
If women had more liberty under the old covenant it would be an obvious misinterpretation to suggest that they were given less liberty under the New Testament established on better promises. Paul is very clear about including women in the statement that in the Kingdom of God there is neither Male nor Female. They have been liberated from the oppression of false religion. They are free to preach and prophesy.

The establishing of the Church did not restrict women to a place lower than they had in the OT. If God in his sovereignty chose to raise up a Deborah with both authority as a judge over males and spiritual authority as a prophet that could foretell events with supernatural enabling of the Holy Spirit He can do so now and you cannot restrict Him with your bad hermeneutics.

My original statement still stands. "Liberty" as you mention, has nothing to do with the proper church operation or discipline. Liberty is a matter of Atonement. Christ has set us free and given us more liberty through His person and work, than under the OT laws. This does not mean everyone is free to do as he/she pleases. Not everyman can be an Elder/Pastor, this requires an appointment by God. Anyone -- taking that office -- who is not called of God, is a false teacher. Since women are not permitted to teach and have dominion over men -- taking that office -- means they are not called by God and are false teachers.

I didn't say these things, that is the teaching of Scripture. If one has a problem with that, then they can take it up with God.

 

[Scribe]

My original statement still stands. "Liberty" as you mention, has nothing to do with the proper church operation or discipline. Liberty is a matter of Atonement. Christ has set us free and given us more liberty through His person and work, than under the OT laws. This does not mean everyone is free to do as he/she pleases. Not everyman can be an Elder/Pastor, this requires an appointment by God. Anyone -- taking that office -- who is not called of God, is a false teacher. Since women are not permitted to teach and have dominion over men -- taking that office -- means they are not called by God and are false teachers.

I didn't say these things, that is the teaching of Scripture. If one has a problem with that, then they can take it up with God.

Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

The pastor is a servant leadership position not one of usurping authority, domineering or lording it over the flock therefore your interpretation of what a pastor is, is also suspect due to bad hermeneutics and oppressive religious dogma.

 

[Scribe]

Your argument is circular on 1 Tim. 2, and is not supported by Scripture.

Adam and Eve were given as to the reason for Paul's previous comments, Because Eve was the first in the transgression. If she had been properly in subjection to her husband, she would have called upon him before making any final decision; instead, desiring to do good for her husband, she became part of the problem.

While Adam and Eve were indeed the first husband and wife, their placement by Paul, in this Epistle, goes to the subject of Eve. Abraham and Sarah, are being used in a positive example, to which husbands and wives should follow. They are not being used in a negative example.

It is probable that the women in Ephesus were being deceived by some of the false teachers and this had a local application. They should submit to the judgment of their husbands who were trying to correct them and deliver them from the false teaching they were falling into. Paul might have been instructing them Timothy to tell their husbands to correct them and the women should be submissive to that correction. Maybe their false teaching included dressing like a harlot for attention.

There is a very real possibility that this is a local application addressing a local problem not a ban on all women being used in preaching and ministry offices in the church for all time which should be obvious to a Spirit Filled saint that would not be the intention of Paul's words here. But hundreds of years of oppressive false teaching using these verses is being broken by becoming more biblically literate.

Genesis 2:18–25 Some expositors have taught that all women should be subordinate to adult men because Eve was created after Adam to be his “helper” (NIV; “help meet”, KJV). Yet the word ezer (“helper”) is never used in the Hebrew Bible with a subordinate meaning. Seventeen out of the twenty times it is used, it refers to God as the helper. Eve was created to be a help (kenegdo) “suitable” or “corresponding to” Adam, not a subordinate.
Some argue that God created men and women with different characteristics and desires, and that these differences explain why leadership roles should be withheld from women. Others attribute these perceived differences to culture and social expectations imposed on children from birth to adulthood. Physical differences and distinctive biological functions are obvious; but it is only by implication that gender differences can be made to suggest leadership limitations.
First Timothy 2:11–15 The meaning and application of Paul's statement, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:12), have puzzled interpreters and resulted in a variety of positions on the role of women in ministry and spiritual leadership.

From the above survey of passages on exemplary women in ministry, it is clear that Paul recognized the ministry of women. There were obvious problems in Ephesus, some relating to women. Some women were evidently given to immodest apparel and adornment (1 Timothy 2:9). The younger widows were “into the habit of being idle... And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to” (1 Timothy 5:13). In his second letter to Timothy, Paul warned against depraved persons (possibly including women) who manipulated “weak-willed,” or “gullible,” women (2 Timothy 3:6).

A reading of the entire passage of 1 Timothy 2:9–15 strongly suggests that Paul was giving Timothy advice about dealing with some heretical teachings and practices specifically involving women in the church at Ephesus. The heresy may have been so serious that he had to say about the Ephesian women, “I am not allowing women to teach or have authority over a man.” Other passages show that such exclusion was not normative in Paul’s ministry.

 

[Dino246]

Not everyman can be an Elder/Pastor, this requires an appointment by God. Anyone -- taking that office -- who is not called of God, is a false teacher.

Hogwash and codswollop. Paul wrote, "If anyone sets his (neuter) on being an overseer, he (neuter) desires a noble task."

Since women are not permitted to teach and have dominion over men -- taking that office -- means they are not called by God and are false teachers.

Hogwash and codswollop. False teachers are those who teach false things. Any believer can teach the gospel. Further, authentein does not mean "have dominion".

I didn't say these things, that is the teaching of Scripture.

No, it is not. It is your interpretation of Scripture.

 

[Scribe]

Hogwash and codswollop. Paul wrote, "If anyone sets his (neuter) on being an overseer, he (neuter) desires a noble task."


Hogwash and codswollop. False teachers are those who teach false things. Any believer can teach the gospel. Further, authentein does not mean "have dominion".


No, it is not. It is your interpretation of Scripture.

codswallop (Britain, Australia, slang) Senseless talk or writing; nonsense; rubbish. quotations

 

[KingdomBrat]

To much human supposition trying to get around a clearly laid out commandment. Don't you think?

I don't know. I do know that less than a few hundred years ago women and children were still considered property, not wife and children. Whatever view women withheld 2,000 years ago is not the same as it is today. If women's views today did not matter, then Harvey Weinstein got robbed. It does not seem Paul would place a person into position who (1) was illiterate and (2) viewed as property to lead. What would have been the [reasoning] behind such a move? Naturally back then, man was designated for all positions.

 

[notuptome]

It is probable that the women in Ephesus were being deceived by some of the false teachers and this had a local application. They should submit to the judgment of their husbands who were trying to correct them and deliver them from the false teaching they were falling into. Paul might have been instructing them Timothy to tell their husbands to correct them and the women should be submissive to that correction. Maybe their false teaching included dressing like a harlot for attention.

There is a very real possibility that this is a local application addressing a local problem not a ban on all women being used in preaching and ministry offices in the church for all time which should be obvious to a Spirit Filled saint that would not be the intention of Paul's words here. But hundreds of years of oppressive false teaching using these verses is being broken by becoming more biblically literate.

Genesis 2:18–25 Some expositors have taught that all women should be subordinate to adult men because Eve was created after Adam to be his “helper” (NIV; “help meet”, KJV). Yet the word ezer (“helper”) is never used in the Hebrew Bible with a subordinate meaning. Seventeen out of the twenty times it is used, it refers to God as the helper. Eve was created to be a help (kenegdo) “suitable” or “corresponding to” Adam, not a subordinate.
Some argue that God created men and women with different characteristics and desires, and that these differences explain why leadership roles should be withheld from women. Others attribute these perceived differences to culture and social expectations imposed on children from birth to adulthood. Physical differences and distinctive biological functions are obvious; but it is only by implication that gender differences can be made to suggest leadership limitations.
First Timothy 2:11–15 The meaning and application of Paul's statement, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:12), have puzzled interpreters and resulted in a variety of positions on the role of women in ministry and spiritual leadership.

From the above survey of passages on exemplary women in ministry, it is clear that Paul recognized the ministry of women. There were obvious problems in Ephesus, some relating to women. Some women were evidently given to immodest apparel and adornment (1 Timothy 2:9). The younger widows were “into the habit of being idle... And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to” (1 Timothy 5:13). In his second letter to Timothy, Paul warned against depraved persons (possibly including women) who manipulated “weak-willed,” or “gullible,” women (2 Timothy 3:6).

A reading of the entire passage of 1 Timothy 2:9–15 strongly suggests that Paul was giving Timothy advice about dealing with some heretical teachings and practices specifically involving women in the church at Ephesus. The heresy may have been so serious that he had to say about the Ephesian women, “I am not allowing women to teach or have authority over a man.” Other passages show that such exclusion was not normative in Paul’s ministry.

Scripture is not Paul's opinion. Scripture is not Paul's cultural view of things in the church. All scripture is given by inspiration of God. 2 Tim 3:16

Only makes me wonder about the position the denomination takes on the blood of Christ.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[mustaphadrink]

As is usual in a discussion of this type, all sorts of verses are bandied about to justify the ministry of women. Those that do, usually ignore Paul's instructions to Timothy and Titus re the matter. I do not believe that you can make any decision regarding this until you understand Paul's instruction to Timothy and Titus. Other verses brought up to abrogate Timothy and Titus do not cut it.

The other thing is the prevelance to teach that because women can do this, they can do anything. Not so. The same as man who is appointed a deacon can be an Elder. Not so. In the group I am involved in there is a man who clearly has the calling of a deacon. He loves the role and all that it entails and we all recognise that is his calling. He has no desire to be anything other than a deacon.

No one is saying women can't do anything. They can do what they are called to do and the Holy Spirit will not call them to do what is not sanctioned in scripture.There are two ministries which are obviously the role of women one being prophecy and the other being a shepherd. That is a biblical shepherd not a modern day version of it.

Shepherds (pastors) did not run the church in the NT regardless of whether they were male or female. That is the role of Elders and they were always men. In the NT the older women were told to teach the younger women to be good wives. That is shepherding.

Prophecy is a very important ministry and one which we have neglected. if we had not you will find that many prophecies would be given by women and that is as important as any other type of ministry.

The argument today about women in ministry is due mainly to the fact that they are serving in areas which God has not called them to. I know here in Australia the floodgates opened because a woman in the Anglican church kept fighting for women to be made ordained ministers, not on the basis of what the word said, but on the basis of equality which is not in the word..

When she won her cause, the AOG started to appoint husbands and wives as "the ministers." Before that it was a man that was paid to lead.

When you step away from the pattern church in the New Testament you get into all sorts of problems of your own making and before long you are no longer the church that God intended. The group that I am part of said last Friday that they gert more out of our meeting on Friday that we ever do from Sunday morning. That is because our Friday meeting follows the pattern set out in scripture, Sunday morning does not.

 

[Dino246]

Scripture is not Paul's opinion. Scripture is not Paul's cultural view of things in the church. All scripture is given by inspiration of God. 2 Tim 3:16

All Scripture was indeed given by inspiration of God... IN A PARTICULAR CONTEXT. Ignore that context, and you cannot help but misinterpret the message.

 

[Dino246]

As is usual in a discussion of this type, all sorts of verses are bandied about to justify the ministry of women. Those that do, usually ignore Paul's instructions to Timothy and Titus re the matter. I do not believe that you can make any decision regarding this until you understand Paul's instruction to Timothy and Titus. Other verses brought up to abrogate Timothy and Titus do not cut it.

The other thing is the prevelance to teach that because women can do this, they can do anything. Not so. The same as man who is appointed a deacon can be an Elder. Not so. In the group I am involved in there is a man who clearly has the calling of a deacon. He loves the role and all that it entails and we all recognise that is his calling. He has no desire to be anything other than a deacon.

No one is saying women can't do anything. They can do what they are called to do and the Holy Spirit will not call them to do what is not sanctioned in scripture.There are two ministries which are obviously the role of women one being prophecy and the other being a shepherd. That is a biblical shepherd not a modern day version of it.

Shepherds (pastors) did not run the church in the NT regardless of whether they were male or female. That is the role of Elders and they were always men. In the NT the older women were told to teach the younger women to be good wives. That is shepherding.

Prophecy is a very important ministry and one which we have neglected. if we had not you will find that many prophecies would be given by women and that is as important as any other type of ministry.

The argument today about women in ministry is due mainly to the fact that they are serving in areas which God has not called them to. I know here in Australia the floodgates opened because a woman in the Anglican church kept fighting for women to be made ordained ministers, not on the basis of what the word said, but on the basis of equality which is not in the word..

When she won her cause, the AOG started to appoint husbands and wives as "the ministers." Before that it was a man that was paid to lead.

When you step away from the pattern church in the New Testament you get into all sorts of problems of your own making and before long you are no longer the church that God intended. The group that I am part of said last Friday that they gert more out of our meeting on Friday that we ever do from Sunday morning. That is because our Friday meeting foillows the pattern set out in scripture, Sunday morning does not.

Phoebe was a deacon commended by Paul. That means either Paul contradicted himself (not a viable option), or his instructions to Timothy about limiting who can be a deacon cannot mean "women may not be deacons". The same restrictions are given regarding elders, and if they don't preclude women from being deacons, they don't preclude women from being elders either.

 

[mustaphadrink]

Phoebe was a deacon commended by Paul. That means either Paul contradicted himself (not a viable option), or his instructions to Timothy about limiting who can be a deacon cannot mean "women may not be deacons". The same restrictions are given regarding elders, and if they don't preclude women from being deacons, they don't preclude women from being elders either.

That is you point of view but you have not given us an exegesis of the passage involved. So we have to guess and as I don't do that, so what you say is not very helpful.

 

[Scribe]

That is you point of view but you have not given us an exegesis of the passage involved. So we have to guess and as I don't do that, so what you say is not very helpful.

8In the same way, deacons b are to be worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

11In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything

People who think that Paul excluded women miss verse 11. He knew that women were involved in ministry.

 

[Scribe]

That is you point of view but you have not given us an exegesis of the passage involved. So we have to guess and as I don't do that, so what you say is not very helpful.

Phoebe was a diakonos in the ekklēsia. in Corinth's port city of Cenchreae. She is not mentioned in the Corinthian correspondence, but she has a prominent place in Rom. 16:I. The term diakonos in Paul's letters does not necessarily denote the same office that "deacon" or in this case "deaconess" later represented. It is clear from 1 Cor. 3:5 and 2 Cor. 3:6; 6:4; 11:15; 11:23 that Paul used diakonos for leadership roles in the Christian community, since he applies it to himself and Apollos. It does not necessarily imply a role subordinate to other church offices, but it does imply a self-perception as one subordinate to God and as a servant to the ekklēsia. that one has been called to serve. It is possible that it refers to someone who is a preacher and teacher, possibly even a traveling missionary.

Paul also calls Phoebe a prostatis, which in view of the context in Romans 16 likely means "patroness," not "protector" or merely "helper." There is clear evidence that women in the Roman world could assume the legal role of prostatis. A papyrus document has been discovered that speaks of a woman becoming the prostatis of her fatherless son in 142 B.C. Furthermore, perhaps one-tenth of the patrons, protectors, or donors to collegia mentioned in inscriptions are women. "As a general rule, then, women as benefactors should be imagined playing their part personally and visibly, out in the open."

Bill Witherington