Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Women can still be part of the Kingdom of God, it's just simply a woman cannot be a pastor because a pastor is the living symbol of Christ and the pastor's wife is the living symbol of the Church. A pastor is a husband, a woman is not a husband and any woman that tries to be is not a woman of God. It really is just that simple, though obviously a wicked world in the midst of the most wicked generation to ever live in all of history portray rather their kingdom which is called Mystery Babylon, which is all a satanic inversion of God's Kingdom.

The most wicked generation to ever live in all of history was, eliminated. Only eight people were saved. See Genesis 6.

You are over-literalising Biblical analogies and extending them rather ineptly as though they were regulations to govern every aspect of our lives. The Church is not a literal virgin bride. Israel is not a literal wife. Babylon is not a literal prostitute. It's rather unwise to misuse prophetic illustrations to castigate your fellow believers.

 

[notuptome]

Paul The Apostle didn't get your religious memo.

"Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do."
1 Cor 7:8

Paul was not called by God to be a church pastor. He would have signed off on the memo because it is correct doctrine.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

Not even Jesus Himself would qualify, clearly.

We've been around this mulberry bush already, and you haven't learned.

This is a disgusting low comment about Christ. Does this reveal how you feel about the biblical Jesus?

Jesus was not called to be a church pastor. Jesus came to earth to die to make atonement for the sins of mankind. Why would anyone seek to lower Him to the level of a mere man?

Your zeal to score points in an argument has taken over your sanctification.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Paul was not called by God to be a church pastor. He would have signed off on the memo because it is correct doctrine.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

He was a leader, preacher and teacher.

So you believe single men are barred ONLY from leading small congregations?

 

[notuptome]

He was a leader, preacher and teacher.

So you believe single men are barred ONLY from leading small congregations?

Paul was an apostle.

I believe what the bible teaches are the qualifications. The little insight I have into the ministry of a pastor confirms in my mind the need for the pastor to be male and married. There are many things that a pastor must administer to in the local assembly.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Scribe]

[QU

I think you're simply straining for the gnat. Right there what you posted shows how the pastor and his wife are meant to be strictly monogamists. Note how Paul points out that if a man cannot lead his household, how can he lead the church? It is indeed because, just as it was in the beginning with the ordinances for the priests of Israel, the man is the symbol of God and the woman is the symbol of the Church. This is why there is such a strict code of monogamy for the pastors and their wives.

His reasoning is clearly stated. BLAMELESS. The examples he gives are those that fall into the category of BLAMELESS.

You can be single and still be BLAMELESS. As Paul was and Christ. You cannot however be married to more than one wife and be BLAMELESS. It is obvious that being BLAMELESS is the point not some allegory about Christ and the church and priests and what not!

Come back to the point brother. Blamelessness. Being married to more than one wife would be a shame in the church as polygamy was not to be tolerated and if there were some in the church that were already married to more than one wife they must not be appointed as elders, deacons, bishops etc. Nor if they are known to like getting intoxicated, or if they have anger issues, brawlers, etc and all these examples are of being Blameless and not some allegory each carrying some secret code about symbols as you are attempting.

 

[Scribe]

He was a leader, preacher and teacher.

So you believe single men are barred ONLY from leading small congregations?

Paul was clearly an overseer and pastor to all the churches. You point is invalid. Timothy was the pastor of the church at Ephesus and we have no record that he was married. He probably wasn't at this time. My guess is that he was mentored by Paul and followed his advice about being undistracted. All the best theologians reject the idea that a pastor must be single or must be married. Neither was ever mandated and was always a choice for the individual in the church. There is not even any support about "The One" as it is a choice which comes with both blessings and trouble in the flesh.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Paul was an apostle.

I believe what the bible teaches are the qualifications. The little insight I have into the ministry of a pastor confirms in my mind the need for the pastor to be male and married. There are many things that a pastor must administer to in the local assembly.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

You may never do so but if you were to prevent a man from pastoring a church because he was single you would be in error
All the things you have written in the post below would apply to you.

You are fighting against the word of God. You reject the teaching of the Christ of the bible and substitute one of your own creation.

You question the word of God not to explore it's teachings more fully but find some means to make Gods word conform to your sense of moral superiority.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

If history is not your subject it's time you owned up to that and allowed yourself to be corrected.
There are absolutely no scriptural grounds for preventing a single man from being a pastor. None.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Paul was clearly an overseer and pastor to all the churches. You point is invalid. Timothy was the pastor of the church at Ephesus and we have no record that he was married. He probably wasn't at this time. My guess is that he was mentored by Paul and followed his advice about being undistracted. All the best theologians reject the idea that a pastor must be single or must be married. Neither was ever mandated and was always a choice for the individual in the church. There is not even any support about "The One" as it is a choice which comes with both blessings and trouble in the flesh.

How is my point invalid?

Please show me were I was arguing that single men can't serve as pastors or overseers.
I have been consistently arguing exactly the opposite.

 

[Scribe]

How is my point invalid?

Please show me were I was arguing that single men can't serve as pastors or overseers.
I have been consistently arguing exactly the opposite.

Sorry Lucy. That was meant to be a reply to notuptome.

 

[Scribe]

Paul was not called by God to be a church pastor. He would have signed off on the memo because it is correct doctrine.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Paul was clearly an overseer and pastor to all the churches. You point is invalid. Timothy was the pastor of the church at Ephesus and we have no record that he was married. He probably wasn't at this time. My guess is that he was mentored by Paul and followed his advice about being undistracted. All the best theologians reject the idea that a pastor must be single or must be married. Neither was ever mandated and was always a choice for the individual in the church. There is not even any support about "The One" as it is a choice which comes with both blessings and trouble in the flesh.

 

[Magenta]

was not called to be a church pastor. Jesus came to earth to die to make atonement for the sins of mankind. Why would anyone seek to lower Him to the level of a mere man?

Pastors shepherd the flock and Jesus is our shepherd. I am not sure how you can miss that association?

Also, Jesus lowered Himself to be a man among men. Again... how do you miss this?

 

[Scribe]

Paul was an apostle.

I believe what the bible teaches are the qualifications. The little insight I have into the ministry of a pastor confirms in my mind the need for the pastor to be male and married. There are many things that a pastor must administer to in the local assembly.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I can understand your reluctance to reexamine the text for fear of departing from what you perceived to be an immutable fact of scripture. However, consider Wayne Grudem (Editor of the ESV translation) as a well respected theologian you might have heard of. I doubt that you seriously think that Wayne Grudem is trying to make the Word of God fit into his own view of things. He is known for seeking the best hermeneutic, authorial intent, and is expert in the original languages, and his books are used in Bible Colleges world wide.

Do the Qualifications for Leadership Require That Elders and Deacons Must Be Married? When Paul says that an elder or deacon must be the “husband of one wife,” it is unlikely that he means that every elder or deacon must be married, for two reasons:

1. Both Jesus and Paul (1 Cor. 7:7–8; 9:5) were single, and it is unlikely that Paul would have given a requirement for eldership that not even he or Jesus himself could fulfill.

2. Paul also gives requirements about children, saying that an elder must be someone whose “children are believers” (Titus 1:6) and “he must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive” (1 Tim. 3:4). He says that deacons must be “managing their children and their own households well” (1 Tim. 3:12). It is unlikely that Paul is requiring that elders must have two or more children (the nouns are plural, implying more than one). Rather, it seems that Paul is speaking about the most common kind of situation, a married man with children, and the sense of the passage is, “If he has children, the children should be believers and submissive to their parents.” Similarly, the “husband of one wife” passages should be understood to mean, “If he is married, he should have only one wife” (or “he should be faithful to his wife”). That would be the most common situation for an elder or deacon, and Paul is speaking about the ordinary cases, giving a picture of the typical approved overseer or deacon as a faithful husband and father, and not absolutely requiring marriage or children.

Grudem, Wayne. What the Bible Says about Divorce and Remarriage (p. 50). Crossway. Kindle Edition.

 

[Dino246]

You are fighting against the word of God. You reject the teaching of the Christ of the bible and substitute one of your own creation.

You question the word of God not to explore it's teachings more fully but find some means to make Gods word conform to your sense of moral superiority.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Yada yada yada...

Your accusations are empty bleating.

 

[Dino246]

This is a disgusting low comment about Christ. Does this reveal how you feel about the biblical Jesus?

Jesus was not called to be a church pastor. Jesus came to earth to die to make atonement for the sins of mankind. Why would anyone seek to lower Him to the level of a mere man?

Your zeal to score points in an argument has taken over your sanctification.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Your unbiblical restrictions are the problem. I'm just pointing out the irrationality of them.

 

[Scribe]

Yada yada yada...

Your accusations are empty bleating.

...bleating?...

 

[Truth7t7]

First, Thayer is not a good source to use. There is a lot wrong, including having some very Liberal definitions.

Second, this definition in Thayers is not the gospel truth. In fact, it could have been written as a "person." Greek has had a flaw with regards to translations. The word "anthropos" means man, humanity, world. In the older Bibles (but also newer ones) some places have translated anthropos as "man" consistently. However, this term is mostly neutral. It means a person or people. Long ago, like when I was young, the word "man" included women. In Greek, if it refers specifically that is a man, the word "andras" or άνδρας is used. In some languages, like Spanish and French and German, there is a neutral word for person- in German it is mann, which means anyone. In the early 2000s, it came down that it was no longer acceptable to say "men" for both men and women. Yet, we don't have a neutral word for it in English. So, language hunters erased one word, without allowing for a gender neutral word to replace it.

At any rate, use of the word "man" in a lexicon means the translator was probably using it to include both sexes. And even if he was not, what some bad Greek lexicon says is irrelevant to what we are talking about. It is simply confirming your bias.

No Lexicon is needed, read it before your eyes, will you deny the plain truth of scripture before your eyes, you wont change Gods truth below

Women Are Excluded From Being A Bishop/Pastor/Leader

The Man That Takes Care Of The Church Of God.

A Married "Man", Ruling His Own House Well, He, His, Women Are Excluded, Simple

1 Timothy 3:1-5KJV
1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

 

[notuptome]

Your unbiblical restrictions are the problem. I'm just pointing out the irrationality of them.

From a heart that spurns the holiness and purity of Christ I suppose it could seem irrational.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

I can understand your reluctance to reexamine the text for fear of departing from what you perceived to be an immutable fact of scripture. However, consider Wayne Grudem (Editor of the ESV translation) as a well respected theologian you might have heard of. I doubt that you seriously think that Wayne Grudem is trying to make the Word of God fit into his own view of things. He is known for seeking the best hermeneutic, authorial intent, and is expert in the original languages, and his books are used in Bible Colleges world wide.

Do the Qualifications for Leadership Require That Elders and Deacons Must Be Married? When Paul says that an elder or deacon must be the “husband of one wife,” it is unlikely that he means that every elder or deacon must be married, for two reasons:

1. Both Jesus and Paul (1 Cor. 7:7–8; 9:5) were single, and it is unlikely that Paul would have given a requirement for eldership that not even he or Jesus himself could fulfill.

2. Paul also gives requirements about children, saying that an elder must be someone whose “children are believers” (Titus 1:6) and “he must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive” (1 Tim. 3:4). He says that deacons must be “managing their children and their own households well” (1 Tim. 3:12). It is unlikely that Paul is requiring that elders must have two or more children (the nouns are plural, implying more than one). Rather, it seems that Paul is speaking about the most common kind of situation, a married man with children, and the sense of the passage is, “If he has children, the children should be believers and submissive to their parents.” Similarly, the “husband of one wife” passages should be understood to mean, “If he is married, he should have only one wife” (or “he should be faithful to his wife”). That would be the most common situation for an elder or deacon, and Paul is speaking about the ordinary cases, giving a picture of the typical approved overseer or deacon as a faithful husband and father, and not absolutely requiring marriage or children.

Grudem, Wayne. What the Bible Says about Divorce and Remarriage (p. 50). Crossway. Kindle Edition.

Gruden is using the same false argument that Jesus and Paul did not meet the qualifications of pastor. It is a false argument that relies on the carnal mind and a cold heart toward the things of Christ. Neither person was called to be a pastor, Jesus came to die for sinners and Paul was an apostle.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Dino246]

No Lexicon is needed,

This from the person who quoted the lexicon in the first place. Facepalm.