Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

[cv5]

Ok, so we are still disregarding the scriptures on women speaking, and going back to logic... that's fine.

Why use church history when it is rife with racism, peadophilia, false doctrines, popes (that word literally means HOLY FATHER!!!!! come on!!!) witchcraft and scandal? Oh and not to mention a HOLY SINLESS MOTHER OF GOD... eek!!! talk about putting women in positions of power.... doesn't get much higher.

Why not just use the scriptures?

Tell me please, how many believing gentiles were ordained in scripture as pastors?

Don't be mistaken, I am not referring to the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Aidan1]

the word Bishop here in Greek is episkopē which means overseer, or elder. A Pastor in the old testament is a shepherd and in the new Testament Pastor in Ephesians 4:11 from the greek is poimēn which means

1. of the overseers of the Christian assemblies
2. a herdsman, esp. a shepherd

What I am trying to see is where it states A women can not be Pastor? I have not found any verses that say that
Can a woman be an Elder, Missionary? Evangelist but not a Pastor yet I want where it says that in the Bible please

You said it, episkope and poimèn have nearly the same dutys and responsibilitys
What I wrote about this, you will find in post 1.953, there I have nothing to add.
You did not answer my question. Can a woman be husband of a man?

 

[Aidan1]

You can consider whether there is a reasonable connection between the two ideas, instead of dismissing the question with something like, "The Holy Spirit inspired it".

Yes, ore I can leave it with the hint that the Holy Spirit told this Paul to write down, without questioning it.
Ore would you say that the Holy Spirit inspired it not?

 

[Aidan1]

Under what circumstances MUST women wear a head covering according to scripture?
1 cor 11 v 5 says with equal clarity that ...every woman who prays or prophesies (never a private affair) with her head uncovered dishonors her head.

If our understanding causes a contradiction with another scripture, perhaps we need a rethink and a pray for a resolution that encompasses them ALL. Perhaps a further examination of context would make what we think is clear - to become yet clearer still.

What then is the measure? Our understanding ore the word of God?

 

[Tararose]

Don't be mistaken, I am not referring to the Roman Catholic Church.

The Roman Catholic Church pretty much Dominated For the majority of “church history“ for the last 2000 years... hence me bringing it up.

 

[Tararose]

What then is the measure? Our understanding ore the word of God?

I just quoted the word of God..... Just as you did. The reason was to show that if our understanding of a scripture makes another potion of scripture relating to the same topic out to be error - our that understanding is wrong - not the world of God.

That is my point exactly.

 

[tribesman]

I was simply taking your logic and running with it, IE. why stop at women if the logic you used in post number 1,033 - of how we decide who can and can't be ordained in church - is accurate.

I don't agree whatsoever that it is good logic - because if the logic you used was the way we decided on doctrine then it would end up in those daft and absurd scenarios I mentioned. The ones you seem so baffled about. Such as only being able to accept those of Jewish decent as "ordained elders" (You would tend to find them easily in a jewish orthodox church which is why I mentioned that) because of the biblical restrictions - the logic you presented would lead us to assume exist, and that must be implemented.

You didn't mention the things I spoke of, because I am sure you know they are ridiculous, but unfortunately, you did however use the very same logic in your post.

If you cannot see that then of course you dont get my response, and of course you feel it is poor ground for a discussion, because it will be as poor as the logic you presented - and which I persisted with to make the point.

I hope that clarifies the last response.

So, just in case there was any further confusion, to sum up:

1) do not actually agree that non-jews cannot be elders, or that we need to only attend a jewish Orthodox Church.

2)I would have to believe these things of I agree with your logic of who and who cannot be ordained - which you based on existing biblical examples of elder ordination.

*sighs* As already indicated, you mix oranges and apples by equaling ethnicity with gender and make an argumentum ex silentio.

Again, I have by no means claimed that Paul even suggested that NON-proselyte gentiles (your wording, as you wrote in your first response to me) would be to be ordained to anything in the church at that point. So, why make a point out of something that is not there?

And you still use the confusing term "jewish orthodox 'church'". Are you sure you are getting objective terms straight? Do you thereby mean messianic orthodox congregations (which in rare cases might use the term "church") or do you mean non-messianic jewish orthodox synagogues (which would never use term the church)?

You do understand that there was a difference between the church in biblical times and what happened after the jewish apostles were not on earth anymore and how things developed with the church afterwards?

You do understand that gentile believers (Christians) are not in the spiritual sense considered as gentiles anymore other than after the flesh?

I ask this, since as long as terms are not clearly defined between us, there is no profitable ground for any rational discussion. Your wording "jewish orthodox 'church'" is a tad bit interesting sounding though, yet utterly confusing.

Back to topic: No women were ordained to any offices in biblical times, this is what we know and for that very issue is what suffices for us to know.

Those who want to deny this and anachronistically impose their own, and contrary, position on this matter, both into scripture and church history, goofs out, to put it as politely as can be.

 

[tribesman]

...Why use church history when it is rife with racism, peadophilia, false doctrines, popes (that word literally means HOLY FATHER!!!!! come on!!!) witchcraft and scandal? Oh and not to mention a HOLY SINLESS MOTHER OF GOD... eek!!! talk about putting women in positions of power.... doesn't get much higher.

Why not just use the scriptures?

Tell me please, how many believing gentiles were ordained in scripture as pastors?

Forget a serious discussion with that tone, dear. Pie-trowing is not edifying anyone.

 

[Truth7t7]

I just quoted the word of God..... Just as you did. The reason was to show that if our understanding of a scripture makes another potion of scripture relating to the same topic out to be error - our that understanding is wrong - not the world of God.

That is my point exactly.

Gods word isn't in error, it's very clear and simple on the subject of women in the Church below

Gods Words Are Very Clear On A Womans Role In The Church, And They Aren't Changing Anytime Soon.

Silence, Subjection, Obedience

(It Is A Shame For Women To Speak In The Church)

1 Timothy 2:11-14KJV
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

1 Corinthians 14:33-35KJV
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

 

[mustaphadrink]

God is not the Author of confusion bro He would not give wimmin the gifts of prophecy, word of wisdom and knowledge if'n He did not intend them to share these gifts with the assembly. Moreover He would not authenticate ministries led by women as we have seen Him do. He is not confused.

You need to read the whole of Timothy to get the sense in which Paul is speaking.

Furthermore

Timothy is a personal letter to Timothy not a letter to the church.

So Pauls injuction to appoint Elders in EVERY church is irrelevant? I always thought that EVERY meant EVERY, not just some or none.

And the subject of the thread is women pastors. Not women prophesying or exercising the gifts of the Spirit.

And you seem to be saying because a woman leads a church today, it authenticates women pastors. So let me tell you something and I won't charge you for it. No where in scripture does it authenticate pastors of any kind as leaders of the church. Its leadership was in the hands of the Apostles, Prophets and Elders.

But as you claim, God had authenticated non scriptual pastors to lead the church because they lead the church.

Does that mean God approves of molesting children because some churches molest children?

 

[Evmur]

So Pauls injuction to appoint Elders in EVERY church is irrelevant? I always thought that EVERY meant EVERY, not just some or none.

And the subject of the thread is women pastors. Not women prophesying or exercising the gifts of the Spirit.

And you seem to be saying because a woman leads a church today, it authenticates women pastors. So let me tell you something and I won't charge you for it. No where in scripture does it authenticate pastors of any kind as leaders of the church. Its leadership was in the hands of the Apostles, Prophets and Elders.

But as you claim, God had authenticated non scriptual pastors to lead the church because they lead the church.

Does that mean God approves of molesting children because some churches molest children?

The posts I responded to were the ones that state women must not speak or be in any kind of leadership, this is clearly unpauline

 

[Evmur]

NO there not. YOU do not even know the meaning of righteous my brother or you would not have said that.

"Righteous" means .......
In Psalm 7:11a we read “God is a righteous judge.” The word righteous in the Hebrew is “tsaddiy” which means just, lawful, and correct. The word righteous in the New Testament comes from the Greek word “dikaios” which means observing divine laws or upright, faultless, innocent, and guiltless.

Are you saying that Moses and David and Sampson and even Paul were righteous?????

NO my friend. They were yust like you and me.....sinners, depraved and destined for hell! THEN God touched them and used them inspit of what they were.

SALVATION is the free gift of God NOT righteousness, because even after we are saved we still sin!!!!

The cornerstone doctrine of the Christian faith is that Christians are declared righteous, not because of any deeds that they have or will do, but because Christ paid the penalty for their sins when He died on the cross.

skew whiff

We are the righteousness of God.

You say the words but do not understand them.

When you say God is just lawful and correct that means if'n He says we are righteous then we are righteous, because He says so. That is the only righteousness that has ever been conferred upon men.

You purposely omitted Abraham who is the father of our faith because you know the scripture says "Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness ... we also have believed God and it is accounted to us as righteousness"

 

[Major]

skew

We are the righteousness of God.

You say the words but do not understand them.

When you say God is just lawful and correct that means if'n He says we are righteous then we are righteous, because He says so. That is the only righteousness that has ever been conferred upon men.

You purposely omitted Abraham who is the father of our faith because you know the scripture says "Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness ... we also have believed God and it is accounted to us as righteousness"

Evmur......You have NO idea why I did not include Abraham! NONE! Stop trying to be a guru because it is embarrassing for you.

Evmur, you seem to have completley misunderstood what I have tried to say. It seems to me that your Pentecostal faith has clouded your understanding.

You see my friend, righteousness means counted to us, imputed to us; pick your word — through faith, which comes from God as a gift in the moment that you receive it by faith. That would be because Jesus has done that righteousness. There was NONE in us so what we have if through Christ.

Romans 3:10....
"As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one"!

Christ has performed that righteousness, and his is counted as ours. We call that imputed righteousness. The other use of the word would be righteousness that we ourselves are acting out or living out in our daily lives.

The Bible teaches us that there is "Perfect and Progressive " righteousness. The first is an imputed gift counted as ours. That gift is received through faith. The second kind is an imparted gift — not an imputed gift but an imparted gift.

The first kind of righteousness is perfect. The second kind of righteousness is progressive.

We will someday be perfected — at the end of our lives, when God completes our process of becoming practically, personally, perfectly righteous. But right now, in this life, this righteousness is not yet perfect. And the relationship between these two kinds of righteousness is that we can’t make any progress in practical, lived-out righteousness until we are accepted by God, forgiven for our sins, and declared to be perfectly righteous with the imputed righteousness of God in Christ.

 

[Dino246]

Yes, ore I can leave it with the hint that the Holy Spirit told this Paul to write down, without questioning it.
Ore would you say that the Holy Spirit inspired it not?

You are willing to argue the point, but not to think about it. That's silly.

 

[Aidan1]

You are willing to argue the point, but not to think about it. That's silly.

There is nothing to think about. For me this is clear. You are the One who has problems with what is written.
Whats with my question?

 

[Dino246]

There is nothing to think about. For me this is clear. You are the One who has problems with what is written.
Whats with my question?

I don't have problems with what is written; for me it's clear too, just in a different way than for you.

 

[Aidan1]

I don't have problems with what is written; for me it's clear too, just in a different way than for you.

What is different?

 

[tribesman]

There is nothing to think about. For me this is clear. You are the One who has problems with what is written.
Whats with my question?

Totally true. He, and others like him, do have problems with the word of God. I have put this fellow (with a few others of similar mind) on ignore long ago, seeing he only want to find a reason to argue and bounce the same thing back and forth, limitless.

Yes, people who want to impose their own mindset after own taste and their own anachronistic ideas unto scripture and church history have a big problem. What they do is not only presumptuous, it's very dishonest and ugly too. It speaks of a very goofy state spiritually.

 

[tribesman]

So Pauls injuction to appoint Elders in EVERY church is irrelevant? I always thought that EVERY meant EVERY, not just some or none.

And the subject of the thread is women pastors. Not women prophesying or exercising the gifts of the Spirit.

And you seem to be saying because a woman leads a church today, it authenticates women pastors. So let me tell you something and I won't charge you for it. No where in scripture does it authenticate pastors of any kind as leaders of the church. Its leadership was in the hands of the Apostles, Prophets and Elders.

But as you claim, God had authenticated non scriptual pastors to lead the church because they lead the church.

Does that mean God approves of molesting children because some churches molest children?

Yup, sits like a nail in the coffin. You are dealing with dishonest people who read in their own wishful thinking into scripture. Totally disregarding both scriptural and church historical norms.

There be too many spiritual nobodies and clowns out there who want to make "God" in their own image. Beware of such.

 

[cv5]

Totally true. He, and others like him, do have problems with the word of God. I have put this fellow (with a few others of similar mind) on ignore long ago, seeing he only want to find a reason to argue and bounce the same thing back and forth, limitless.

Yes, people who want to impose their own mindset after own taste and their own anachronistic ideas unto scripture and church history have a big problem. What they do is not only presumptuous, it's very dishonest and ugly too. It speaks of a very goofy state spiritually.

Totally agree. I hear the hissing of the serpent of Genesis three.