Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

Major · Apr 26, 2021

LOL!!!

YOU believe the Bible says women can be Pastors and now you think I am a JW.

Can you NOT be so personal and just be civil and discuss things without such diiscord. Listen......If you do not agree with what the Bible says THAT I POSTED FROM........Good! Go right ahead and do what you want to do.

I am not your judge and neither am I the enemy you are trying to make me out to be.

Good grief man.....does being shown your error Biblically always cause you to go off the rails like that???????

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

the issue was from the get-go no one said what you clearly stated and if it was said the way you just said it, and not assume it is self-explanatory there would have never been a disagreement at all.

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

the thing I am saying you are wrong about is in context to the AOG comments you made. Are you an assembles of God pastor or minister? Do you know the 16 foundational truths from the word of God the AOG and others in the pentacostel doctrine who are trinitarian follow? Do you know the bylaws and point memo's from the leadership on various subject matters like gay marriage and Baptism? If your answer is no then, you are more than 50% wrong.

Major · Apr 26, 2021

Evmur said:

NOTHING!

There is not ONE single "specific" Scripture that says woman can not pastor a church.
There is also NOT ONE SINGLE SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS A WOMAN CAN BE THE PASTOR OF THE CHURCH.

Women are nowhere restricted from proclaiming the gospel to the lost (Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).
Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3-5).
Women are nowhere restricted from teaching children.
Women seem to excel, far beyond men, in some of the spiritual gifts and fruit of the Spirit.

However, there are several Scriptures which say that the MAN is the one responsible for the Church just as he is the family. That is because the husband is the head of the Family and Jesus is the Head of the church.

In the New Testament, Paul speaks of Adam’s representative actions on behalf of all of humanity (his “federal headship”) and of Christ’s serving as the head of a new humanity (Rom. 5:12–21). Paul also repeatedly affirms God’s creation first of Adam and then of Eve and on this basis makes pronouncements with regard to the man’s headship (1 Cor. 11:8–9

; 1 Tim. 2:13).

For that reason, GOD SAID that the Pastor of the New Test. Church was to be a MAN, the HUSBAND of one wife.

1 Timothy 2:11-12, which reads,
"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet

(1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9).
Church leaders are described as the "husband of one wife," "a man whose children believe," and "men worthy of respect."

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

NOTHING!

There is not ONE single "specific" Scripture that says woman can not pastor a church.
There is also NOT ONE SINGLE SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS A WOMAN CAN BE THE PASTOR OF THE CHURCH.

Women are nowhere restricted from proclaiming the gospel to the lost (Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).
Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3-5).
Women are nowhere restricted from teaching children.
Women seem to excel, far beyond men, in some of the spiritual gifts and fruit of the Spirit.

However, there are several Scriptures which say that the MAN is the one responsible for the Church just as he is the family. That is because the husband is the head of the Family and Jesus is the Head of the church.

In the New Testament, Paul speaks of Adam’s representative actions on behalf of all of humanity (his “federal headship”) and of Christ’s serving as the head of a new humanity (Rom. 5:12–21). Paul also repeatedly affirms God’s creation first of Adam and then of Eve and on this basis makes pronouncements with regard to the man’s headship (1 Cor. 11:8–9

; 1 Tim. 2:13).

For that reason, GOD SAID that the Pastor of the New Test. Church was to be a MAN, the HUSBAND of one wife.

1 Timothy 2:11-12, which reads,
"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet

(1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9).
Church leaders are described as the "husband of one wife," "a man whose children believe," and "men worthy of respect."

very very informative, and well establish argument from the word of God.

Major · Apr 26, 2021

CS1 said:

You may be correct. I did not mean to denigrate the AOG. I apologize for that.
I got caught up in someone else's posts promoting the AOG practice of women pastors and instead of ignoring them I responded.

No....I do not "now" belong to the AOG.

I was raised in and was part the AG until about 20 years of age.
Yes, I am very aware of the 16 foundational truths.
YES...I am aware of the by laws.
YES I can point to those memos on the subject matters you asked.

I am also aware of the practice of speaking in tongues as evidence of salvation and the unbiblical 2nd blessing teaching and the prosperity gospel.

But all of that is a completely different thread matter. If you want to start a thread on such things......please let me know and I will be more than happy to join in.

Major · Apr 26, 2021

CS1 said:

Again......please understand that I did not start this thread to be argumentized. AGAIN......All I did was post 1 Timothy 3:1-2 and you see the response.

But as you will see......many have made me out to be Satan on this. THAT speaks to a deeper problem IMPO!

One of the actions I have seen from many years of speaking the truth of God's Word is that when people do not accept what GOD SAID......
those people who say that they are Christians.....go into the personal attack mode. It is actually "universal" and makes no difference which Christian forum you go to read.

If you will read through the posts you will see that I have not said yes they should or NO they should not.

I have tried to say that it was GOD who said it not me.

Major · Apr 26, 2021

CS1 said:

THis thread is 108 pages!

What I said on the 1st post was NOT WHAT I SAID and I did clearly say that it was from the Scriptures.

Again, You maybe correct....but then, when did the Scriptures ever need to have a "do not assume" warning?

Now to save anyone from going back to the very 1st post, allow me to post the exact words found there...........

"It is not my intention to cause an argument or division among the faithful with that question just discussion in a Christian and civil manner.

I have always simply posted the Word of God as it is written. I post this question in order to properly attempt to teach the Word of God....PEROID!

1 Timothy 3:1-2.........
"This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach".

According to the written Word of God, a Pastor can only be a "Male/Man".

Now, before anyone argues that point or disagree with me, remember that the "One" who said..."In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" also was the "One" who said......
"if a "MAN" desire the office of a bishop".

The old Major did not have anything whatsoever to do with what Jesus Christ placed into the Word of God. The old Major just reads it and accepts it as it is written so your disagreements will be with Christ and not me!!!!"

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

The idea that speaking in tongues as evidence of salvation has never been the AOG, Four Square, COGIC, or COG. That is Oneness and apostolic churches. No I am not wanting to but, I think it is important to be correct in the comments about Baptist, AOG, and any other denomination you may say believe this to that.

That being said You are clearly unlearned in the AOG Position on the so-called term of the second blessing. it is important to be many here use the term as a way to discredit a denomination. The official position is this from the official site on the term or understanding of a "second blessing ".

# 6

Even though Spirit baptism is a gift of God's grace, it should not be called “a second work of grace” or “a second blessing.” Such language implies that a believer can have no experience or experiences of divine grace between conversion and Spirit baptism.

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

LOL, again you need to know the terms of what is appropriate Apologetics sir, = defending the faith: is to formulate a biblical argument to refute error, heresies. and false teachings.

it was a compliment I was giving you.

Major · Apr 26, 2021

CS1 said:

I have no desire to argue. I have no need to.

What I can do and will do is tell you exactly the way I was taught as a 16 year old to say when speaking to others about Jesus Christ in 1957 from my AOG pastor in Winter Garden Fl (Lakeview Assembly of God).............
"Are you a born again believer...WITH THE EVIDENCE OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES TO VERIFY IT"?

The IMPLICATION was that IF YOU ARE born again then you will speak in tongues.

We were then taught to respond......."If you don't then you need to be saved and I am inviting you to join us at our church."

As a group of teenagers, that is what was told to us when we were encouraged to visit our friends and neighbors.

As for the 2nd Blessing...........
While the concept of a second blessing is taught in a wide variety of churches, the phrase is not found anywhere in the Bible. The Bible does speak often of the baptism of the Spirit, as well as the sanctification of believers, but not in the context of a second blessing or a second stage of the life of faith.

John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist movement, is generally credited with originating the term second blessing. He taught that the second blessing was an act of God whereby a believer was granted deliverance from both inward and actual sin.

CS1.....It is my understanding that the moment the lost sinner accepts Christ he receives ALL that God has at the moment of salvation.

Is there such a thing as a 2nd Blessing. YES.......Also a 3rd, and 4th, and 5th and more and more as long as we live, God will continue to bless His children.

Major · Apr 26, 2021

CS1 said:

I understand that.

I was giving you a personal explaination.

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

I do know there are many in many denominations who have preachers and pastors who do make mistakes. Speaking in tongues for salvation started in 1913. And broke off from aog and others because of the standing on the trinity and tongues for salvation.

John Wesley and his brother were part of the holiness movement, the term second blessing was corrected years ago by my AOG and Four Square. which most of the doctrine with the exception of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit was from the Southern Baptist. were before 1906. In fact, history recorded the witness of empowering of the Holy Spirt was earlier in 1890. there were many different terms that have become clearer over time.

Angela53510 · Apr 26, 2021

I've held off from posting much in this thread. Basically, I believe bad translations, starting with the KJV and many other contextual issues have created a false doctrine, to the detriment of many women. If God calls a woman, no one should impede her from answering that call. Here are some reasons I believe the Bible has been badly translated!

Actually "authentein"
which KJV translates as "usurp authority" is not a good translation. First it is a hapax legomena, a word found only once in the Bible in 1 Tim 2:12. That means you cannot compare it to other uses in the Bible.

Second, Paul always used exousia for the word authority, a noun. See Romans 13. In fact, the word is a simple infinitive. By translating it as 2 words, a noun and a verb, you are actually "adding" words to the Bible. It should be translated by a verb, preferably an infinitive.

Third, in recent times, many contemporaneous documents have been found using the infinitive "authentein." There are more than 50 definitions of "authentein" but the most common usage is "to domineer." That means a better translation would be "a woman is not to domineer a man!" I agree that women should not domineer men, and vice versa. Eph 5:20 says, "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." That means women to men, men to women, slave to free, free to slave, new to Gentile and Gentiles to Jew (Gal 3:28) no one should be domineering over another member of Christ. But Ephesus is an interesting story. It had the Temple to Artemus, Roman - Diana) which was one of the 7 wonders of the ancient world. Paul also had problems in Ephesus, when the silversmiths got angry for the loss of business, as people turned to worship the living God. The priestesses of Diana ran their society. They were arrogant, power hungry and people listened to them. If these women got saved, it would take a lot of teaching to show them the errors of their way. Or more likely, they just went to the church in Ephesus to disturb the peace and Christians. Of course Paul would tell Timothy, in a private letter, to rebuke these women!! They should NOT be domineering.

As far as new translations, who are the translators? Men, with an interest in keeping the status quo! Further, my Greek prof was on many translation committees. When he and his father were on the ESV, they were told it would be an "all new" translation. They did a much improved version of the Lord's Prayer. The management threw it out, because they wanted to keep the "traditions of the KJV" even though they were wrong. My prof and his father left that committee, and went for a new committee working on something a bit more open. He disagreed with me on the issue of women being pastors. He told me to read his pastoral commentary on that passage of Scripture. I did! All 47 pages of it! Then I asked him if I was right, and it was improperly translated, then would that one word make a total difference, and would allow women to be pastors? Although he did not agree with me in the debate about women pastors, he agreed that if that one word, "authentein" was translated as "not to domineer" it would definitely change the meaning of not only the verse and Bible, but the NT and the whole Bible, and a lot of erroneous doctrine!

I think a lot more research needs to be done, to prove me right about the translation of authentein, but when you combine it with the context of the wicked city of Ephesus, to say nothing of answering the question of why Paul didn't use exousia, when he wrote that passage and used authentein, instead, it points strongly that 1 Tim 2:12, simply is simply not a good text to use that women cannot be leaders in the church! It is a proof text, that fails, as most of them do!

As for "not teaching, remaining silent, and submitting fully, that is actually the formula new men studying with a rabbi were taught. So rather than the women being expelled, they were given the opportunity to learn, as members of the body of Christ!

There is much more, from a lack of western understanding of chiasms, which was a literary device often used in Greek and Roman writings, to the way men ignore that Priscilla & Aquila were a teaching couple, and because Priscilla is mentioned first twice, it means she was the lead teacher, and many more things, which I don't have time to answer in this short time!

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Angela53510 said:

I've held off from posting much in this thread. Basically, I believe bad translations, starting with the KJV and many other contextual issues have created a false doctrine, to the detriment of many women. If God calls a woman, no one should impede her from answering that call. Here are some reasons I believe the Bible has been badly translated!

Actually "authentein"
which KJV translates as "usurp authority" is not a good translation. First it is a hapax legomena, a word found only once in the Bible in 1 Tim 2:12. That means you cannot compare it to other uses in the Bible.

Second, Paul always used exousia for the word authority, a noun. See Romans 13. In fact, the word is a simple infinitive. By translating it as 2 words, a noun and a verb, you are actually "adding" words to the Bible. It should be translated by a verb, preferably an infinitive.

Third, in recent times, many contemporaneous documents have been found using the infinitive "authentein." There are more than 50 definitions of "authentein" but the most common usage is "to domineer." That means a better translation would be "a woman is not to domineer a man!" I agree that women should not domineer men, and vice versa. Eph 5:20 says, "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." That means women to men, men to women, slave to free, free to slave, new to Gentile and Gentiles to Jew (Gal 3:28) no one should be domineering over another member of Christ. But Ephesus is an interesting story. It had the Temple to Artemus, Roman - Diana) which was one of the 7 wonders of the ancient world. Paul also had problems in Ephesus, when the silversmiths got angry for the loss of business, as people turned to worship the living God. The priestesses of Diana ran their society. They were arrogant, power hungry and people listened to them. If these women got saved, it would take a lot of teaching to show them the errors of their way. Or more likely, they just went to the church in Ephesus to disturb the peace and Christians. Of course Paul would tell Timothy, in a private letter, to rebuke these women!! They should NOT be domineering.

As far as new translations, who are the translators? Men, with an interest in keeping the status quo! Further, my Greek prof was on many translation committees. When he and his father were on the ESV, they were told it would be an "all new" translation. They did a much improved version of the Lord's Prayer. The management threw it out, because they wanted to keep the "traditions of the KJV" even though they were wrong. My prof and his father left that committee, and went for a new committee working on something a bit more open. He disagreed with me on the issue of women being pastors. He told me to read his pastoral commentary on that passage of Scripture. I did! All 47 pages of it! Then I asked him if I was right, and it was improperly translated, then would that one word make a total difference, and would allow women to be pastors? Although he did not agree with me in the debate about women pastors, he agreed that if that one word, "authentein" was translated as "not to domineer" it would definitely change the meaning of not only the verse and Bible, but the NT and the whole Bible, and a lot of erroneous doctrine!

I think a lot more research needs to be done, to prove me right about the translation of authentein, but when you combine it with the context of the wicked city of Ephesus, to say nothing of answering the question of why Paul didn't use exousia, when he wrote that passage and used authentein, instead, it points strongly that 1 Tim 2:12, simply is simply not a good text to use that women cannot be leaders in the church! It is a proof text, that fails, as most of them do!

As for "not teaching, remaining silent, and submitting fully, that is actually the formula new men studying with a rabbi were taught. So rather than the women being expelled, they were given the opportunity to learn, as members of the body of Christ!

There is much more, from a lack of western understanding of chiasms, which was a literary device often used in Greek and Roman writings, to the way men ignore that Priscilla & Aquila were a teaching couple, and because Priscilla is mentioned first twice, it means she was the lead teacher, and many more things, which I don't have time to answer in this short time!

Well, I do believe the word of God shows us women will be used in the ministry, however the word of God as a normative God has called and used men 99.9 percent of the time.

Adam was created first
Abraham was called
Moses was chosen,
Joshua took over
all the Writing prophets were men
All the apostles were men.
The Priest of the home is a man

God is going to judge the man Harder than the women Because it was men who were to not allow Damdible snakes in the garden but he wimped out and blamed it on the women Oh Yes God is going to hold every man accountable for the children they fathered, the wives they left, the divorces they had and the call they failed to do. YEP, men are responsible completely. On that day they will wish they were women LOL.

tourist · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

Huh? Eh?

Aidan1 · Apr 26, 2021

CS1 said:

It seems to me that you are closing your eyes and ears. So you cant see and hear.
Why I should repeat and repeat and repeat?

Angela53510 · Apr 26, 2021

Major said:

Again, your translation is wrong. There are no word "man" or "he" in 1 Tim 3:1 in Greek. And by Koine Greek, I mean all 5 Koine Greek versions listed on Biblegateway.com!

"Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task." 1 Tim 3:1 NIV

"Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος· εἴ τις ἐπισκοπῆς ὀρέγεται, καλοῦ ἔργου ἐπιθυμεῖ." 1Tim 3:1 Koine Greek SBL

Man is άνδρες or sometimes του ανθρώποs although anthropos usually means humankind or humans, humanity these days, (because it includes men and women!) He, on the other hand, is αὐτός or autos.

You don't need to read Greek to see that andres, autos & not even anthropos, are found in this verse. More adding of words by the KJV and some modern versions?? I think so! It is totally gender neutral verse! So we need to throw this verse out as a proof text, because it adds "men" and "he," pwhere there are none of those words in Koine Greek! Let's look at from an interlinear perspective:

Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος·
Trustworthy [is] The Word

εἴ τις ἐπισκοπῆς
If anyone aspires to [being]

ὀρέγεται, καλοῦ ἔργου ἐπιθυμεῖ."
An overseer, a good work [is] desired!

So, no more nonsense about "men and he," being in that verse! Sorry, but sometimes just reading the Bible in English does NOT give you the right answer, but the wrong one!

Further, "of one wife, a husband" is obviously a specific instruction that men should not be polygamists!

"μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα," 1 Tim 3:2
Of one woman a husband.

Or inverting it to make sense in English "A husband of one wife" as opposed to "a husband of many women/wives!"

Further, later in this chapter, this is found in verses 3:8-10:

Διακόνους (accusative masculine plural) which means "deacons." It is not male as in referring to men only, but rather it is masculine in gender. It can be used for a woman or a man!
(Compare Romans 16:1)

"Συνίστημι δὲ ὑμῖν Φοίβην τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἡμῶν, οὖσαν καὶ διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ἐν Κεγχρεαῖς," Romans 16:1 Koine Greek SBL

Here Φοίβην or Phoebe is an accusative noun (meaning it is an object), and women are referred to by the exact same word as in 1 Tim 3:1, which is διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας or deacon of the church in Cenchrea. Plus, only a few words before she is called "a deacon of the church Cenchrea" Paul refers to her as "ἀδελφὴν ἡμῶν," Phoebe, our sister and also a deacon of the church in Cenchrea." Very specific, she a deacon at a specific church, while acknowledging she is "our sister" [in Christ].

Therefore, she is directly revealed as a deacon, or leader in a specific church, by Paul.

Finally, returning to 1 Tim 3:11-12,
Paul discusses what the necessary qualifications are for a woman deacon!

Paul used γυναῖκας in verses 8& 11, which could be women, but more likely is a referral to women who are deaconesses. Why do I think it is deaconesses? For one thing, Phoebe has been called a leader or deacon in Romans 16:1, but also 1 Tim 3:10 says, διακονείτωσαν, which is in the Imperative, (a command) to "Let them serve as deacons!" The men must allow the women who fulfill the other qualities (respectable, not double-tongued, not drinking wine too much, respectable, etc.) become deacons of the church. In other words, female leadership! Women in authority!

Again, if you want to discuss theology, take of couple of years each of seminary level Greek & Hebrew! English is simply inferior when it comes to making good doctrine! And when trying to prove a point that was added 1500 years after the earliest manuscripts were written!!

CS1 · Apr 26, 2021

Aidan1 said:

never mind Major was able to explain it very well.

Aidan1 · Apr 26, 2021

Angela53510 said:

Again, your translation is wrong. There are no word "man" or "he" in 1 Tim 3:1 in Greek. And by Koine Greek, I mean all 5 Koine Greek versions listed on Biblegateway.com!

"Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task." 1 Tim 3:1 NIV

"Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος· εἴ τις ἐπισκοπῆς ὀρέγεται, καλοῦ ἔργου ἐπιθυμεῖ." 1Tim 3:1 Koine Greek SBL

Man is άνδρες or sometimes του ανθρώποs although anthropos usually means humankind or humans, humanity these days, (because it includes men and women!) He, on the other hand, is αὐτός or autos.

You don't need to read Greek to see that andres, autos & not even anthropos, are found in this verse. More adding of words by the KJV and some modern versions?? I think so! It is totally gender neutral verse! So we need to throw this verse out as a proof text, because it adds "men" and "he," pwhere there are none of those words in Koine Greek! Let's look at from an interlinear perspective:

Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος·
Trustworthy [is] The Word

εἴ τις ἐπισκοπῆς
If anyone aspires to [being]

ὀρέγεται, καλοῦ ἔργου ἐπιθυμεῖ."
An overseer, a good work [is] desired!

So, no more nonsense about "men and he," being in that verse! Sorry, but sometimes just reading the Bible in English does NOT give you the right answer, but the wrong one!

Further, "of one wife, a husband" is obviously a specific instruction that men should not be polygamists!

"μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα," 1 Tim 3:2
Of one woman a husband.

Or inverting it to make sense in English "A husband of one wife" as opposed to "a husband of many women/wives!"

Further, later in this chapter, this is found in verses 3:8-10:

Διακόνους (accusative masculine plural) which means "deacons." It is not male as in referring to men only, but rather it is masculine in gender. It can be used for a woman or a man!
(Compare Romans 16:1)

"Συνίστημι δὲ ὑμῖν Φοίβην τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἡμῶν, οὖσαν καὶ διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ἐν Κεγχρεαῖς," Romans 16:1 Koine Greek SBL

Here Φοίβην or Phoebe is an accusative noun (meaning it is an object), and women are referred to by the exact same word as in 1 Tim 3:1, which is διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας or deacon of the church in Cenchrea. Plus, only a few words before she is called "a deacon of the church Cenchrea" Paul refers to her as "ἀδελφὴν ἡμῶν," Phoebe, our sister and also a deacon of the church in Cenchrea." Very specific, she a deacon at a specific church, while acknowledging she is "our sister" [in Christ].

Therefore, she is directly revealed as a deacon, or leader in a specific church, by Paul.

Finally, returning to 1 Tim 3:11-12,
Paul discusses what the necessary qualifications are for a woman deacon!

Paul used γυναῖκας in verses 8& 11, which could be women, but more likely is a referral to women who are deaconesses. Why do I think it is deaconesses? For one thing, Phoebe has been called a leader or deacon in Romans 16:1, but also 1 Tim 3:10 says, διακονείτωσαν, which is in the Imperative, (a command) to "Let them serve as deacons!" The men must allow the women who fulfill the other qualities (respectable, not double-tongued, not drinking wine too much, respectable, etc.) become deacons of the church. In other words, female leadership! Women in authority!

Again, if you want to discuss theology, take of couple of years each of seminary level Greek & Hebrew! English is simply inferior when it comes to making good doctrine! And when trying to prove a point that was added 1500 years after the earliest manuscripts were written!!

Angela, you studyed greec. And you can explain it in a good way.
But you are not free from putting your view into the text.
If you read 1.tim 3, 1-5, and also Titus 1,5-9 then you cant deney that the text adressed man/male. Ore you must say that ALL bible translations are wrong.

About Phoebe in Romans 16,1 is nothing said in the text what her Service im the church was. To say she was leader ore deaconess is a specualation.
About 1. Tim 3, 11, can meant a deaconess ore the wife of the deacon.
1. TIM 3,8-10 and 12-13 adresses a male, no female.

Are WOMEN Pastors Biblical??

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member