<div class="posterous_quote_citation">via ccboise.org</div>
What are your thoughts on this week’s QOTW? –
“Women pastors / preachers? What does the Bible say about women in ministry?”
Saturday, February 5, 2011
TheLastWordVideo: Bob Caldwell "Reaping What You Sow" Pt1
DoctrineOfGod: Am I in God's hands?
Am I in God's hands?
A basketball in my hands is worth about $19. A basketball in Michael Jordan's hands is worth about $33 million. It depends whose hands it's in.
A baseball in my hands is worth about $6. A baseball in Mark McGwyre's hands is worth $19 million. It depends whose hands it's in.A tennis racket is useless in my hands. A tennis racket in Pete Sampras' hands is a Wimbledon Championship. It depends whose hands it's in.A rod in my hands will keep away a wild animal. A rod in Moses' hands will part the mighty sea. It depends whose hands it's in.A sling shot in my hands is a kid's toy. A sling shot in David's hands is a mighty weapon. It depends whose hands it's in.Two fish and 5 loaves of bread in my hands is a couple of fish sandwiches. Two fish and 5 loaves of bread in God's hands will feed thousands. It depends whose hands it's in.Nails in my hands might produce a birdhouse. Nails in Jesus Christ's hands will produce salvation for the entire world. It depends whose hands it's in.As you see now, it depends whose hands it's in. So put your concerns, your worries, your fears, your hopes, your dreams, your families and your relationships in God's hands because, you see, It depends whose hands it's in.--Author Unknown
DoctrineOfGod: WeekEnderBasics "Will God send people to hell?"
Will God send people to hell?
In Matthew 25:31-46 the Bible teaches the final judgment. The righteous will enter heaven to enjoy everlasting life but the wicked will go into eternal punishment. The thought of everlasting suffering is repulsive to many. To understand this teaching, you must be willing to study with more than just a superficial understanding of God's Word.
Hell, despite the denials of many, is real. Sin demands it. Sin is a violation of the law of God (1 John 3:4). If there were no punishment for sin, then there could be no law for law without penalty is null and void. If there is no law, there would be no sin. That would make the death of Jesus useless because if there is no sin there is no responsibility to save anyone from it. Our aversion to hell is equal to our indifference toward sin. As sin becomes more evil in our minds, hell becomes more logical. The reality of life after death also demands the reality of hell. Jesus taught, in Matthew 22:23-33, that there was life after physical death. In the account of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31, two distinct destinies are presented comfort for the righteous but punishment for the wicked depending on whether or not one serves God while living on earth. Hell was not originally prepared for man. It was prepared for Satan and his angels (Matt. 25:41). Jude 6 states that fallen angels are placed in chains awaiting judgment. Yet, when men and women join the devil in his work and live in servitude to him, they must suffer the same fate that will befall him.Hell Is Not Contrary To The Nature of God. Many people find it difficult to accept the reality of hell because they cannot understand or believe that a loving, merciful and forgiving God could create such a place and then place people in it eternally. If no punishment were given for violation of His law, then God would not be just. Being a just God, He will reward the righteous and punish the wicked.What is Hell like? Hell is eternal. It is described that way in Matthew 25:46. In Romans 16:26 God is said to be eternal. The Holy Spirit, in Hebrews 9:14, is also described as eternal. The same Greek word is used in all three passages. The word means "eternal, everlasting, without end, never to cease." Hell and the punishment meted out there will last as long as God forever. Hell is a place of darkness. Jude 13 speaks of "the blackness of darkness" to which false teachers will be confined forever. God is light (1 John 1:5) and the Father of lights (Jas. 1;17). Hell is described as darkness because it is the place farthest removed from God.Hell is a place of fire. Matthew 13:42 speaks of it as a furnace of fire. Matthew 25:41 calls it an everlasting fire. Mark 9:44-45 says the fire is never quenched. Revelation 21:8 refers to it as the lake of fire. There will be no relief from its fires because Revelation 14:11 says the smoke from the fires of torment ascends forever and ever.There is no rest there. Revelation 14:11 says the wicked will have no rest from their torment day or night. Hell is a place where there is no hope. The punishment is everlasting (Matt. 25:46) with no chance of pardon or parole.Who Will Go There? As already noted, Satan and his angels will be there (Matt. 25:41). Revelation 21:8 says the "cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars" will be there. 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 says that those who do not know God and those who will not obey the gospel of Christ will be punished with everlasting destruction. In short, all sinners who choose to remain in their sin will be found in hell. It is merciful for God to allow people to go to hell who do not want a relationship with Him as the Lord of the universe. If living your life for God sounds like hell to you in this lifetime, imagine living for God for eternity? I believe God deserves my complete obedience to Him and am convinced that I would want to do this for eternity. Are you?Why Will People Go There? People will not be in hell because God wants them to be there. He desires that all be saved (1 Tim. 2:1-4). They will not be there because God cannot save them. God is all-powerful and the gospel, His power to save (Rom. 1:16), can save to the uttermost. God sent His Son into the world so that all might have salvation (John 3:16) and He has extended His invitation to all who would come to Him (Matt. 11:28-30).If a person ends up in hell, he is lost by his own free choice. He has no one to blame but himself. Many see no need to be interested in spiritual things and are indifferent to the pleas of the gospel. Others refuse to obey the gospel or submit to the will of God. Some refuse to believe. Others just love sin more than righteousness. Some, though once obedient, become unfaithful in service. Many put off obeying until it is too late.Conclusion. Hell is real. The suffering of it is waiting for the sinful. You can escape the torments found there by giving obedience to Christ now. He will wash away the guilt of your sins and grant you hope of a life of eternal bliss in His presence.
If you fear hell, and are unsure of your own salvation, than you need to receive the free gift of Christ's salvation. Jesus prayed the night before his crucifixion to God, the Father, asking if there were any other way that man might be saved, to let "the cup" of God's wrath pass from Him. There was no other way. Jesus therefore said, "Not my will, but yours be done." Jesus paid the ultimate price for our sins.
DoctrineOfGod: WeekEnderBasics "Does God want to know me?"
Does God want to know me?
According to the Bible, you are God's masterpiece, or "workmanship" (Ephesians 2:10). He created you in His image (Genesis 1:27). God has incredible love for you (John 3:16). Hebrews 1:2 tells us God is speaking to you today.
The reason we have difficulty discerning Him is:"But your iniquities have separated you from your God; And your sins have hidden His face from you, So that He will not hear." (Isaiah 59:2)"The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men, To see if there are any who understand, who seek God. They have all turned aside, They have together become corrupt; There is none who does good, No, not one." (Psalm 14:2,3)
DoctrineOfGod: WeekEnderBasics "Who or what is God?"
Who or what is God?
"God is Spirit.." (John 4:24) and "...a spirit does not have flesh and blood." (Luke 24:39)
The Bible tells us that God has revealed himself to man through the prophets:"God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets" (Hebrews 1:1).The writings of the prophets became the Holy Bible:"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine..." (2 Timothy 3:16).The final revelation of God came through his Son, Jesus:"No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him." (John 1:18)Jesus said "I and My Father are one." (John 10:31). When God spoke to Moses, Moses asked God ...... for his name. "And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'" (Exodus 3:14)When the Jewish leaders were questioning Jesus about his identity, he responded by saying, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." (John 8:58) Jesus declared himself to be God. He was either God, a liar or a lunatic. You do not call someone who called himself God a good teacher unless he truly was God. If you consider Jesus only a good teacher, and do not believe He is God, you are calling him a liar or a lunatic. You cannot have it both ways.The word "Trinity" is not found in the Bible. Yet the Bible declares this doctrine. First, God is revealed as being one God:"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one! (Deuteronomy 6:4)with three distinct persons:"...baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19)"..elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ..." (1 Peter 1:2)Because of this, we can have assurance of salvation. If Jesus is not God, then his death on the cross could not pay the price for all men's sins. If Jesus and the Father are not both God yet distinct persons, how could Jesus pray to God while He was here on earth? If the Holy Spirit is not God, then how could we grieve Him (4:30), lie to Him (Acts 5:3) or blaspheme Him (Matthew 12:32, Mark 3:29, Luke 12:10)?There are many gods that people worship. If your god is not the God of the Bible, revealed as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, you worship a false god. Listen to what Jeremiah said in Jeremaih 10:"But the Lord is the true God; He is the living God and the everlasting King." (Jeremiah 10:10)Who is the true God? Compare 1 John:"And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life." (1 John 5:20)If Jesus is not your God, then you do not know God. He wants to know you. "Be still, and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth! (Psalm 46:10)
GotQuestions: “Women pastors / preachers? What does the Bible say about women in ministry?”
Comment by Concerned Christian found at http://www.gal328.org/articles/Pauls-Neither.html Men and women have both played vital roles in the life and ministry of the Stamford Church of Christ since its founding in 1966. Now after years of study, prayer, and reflection, it is the teaching position of the Stamford Church of Christ that in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female (Gal. 3:28). We understand this to mean that distinctions of roles, privileges, rights, and status on the basis of birth (that is, on the basis of race, gender, and class) are ended in Christ. We base this conclusion on a careful and exhaustive study of Scripture. Paul when he writes the texts that have traditionally been central to our understanding of gender roles in the church—1 Corinthians 11:1-16; 1 Corinthians 14:33-35; and 1 Timothy 2:9-15—is writing under the shadow of Rome. He is giving practical and spiritual leadership to a small persecuted minority with no realistic, loving way to affect the cultural patterns enforced by an all-powerful Roman aristocracy. He himself is in and out of prison. Other church leaders-pillars like James, the Lord’s brother, and Peter-are being killed. The Roman establishment is suspicious of this new Christian faith. Christian notions of freedom and equality are undermining traditional Roman values. Paul consequently is urging followers of Christ to live in such a way as to eliminate any barriers to the hearing and acceptance of the gospel. Classical thought followed in the footsteps of Aristotle. It viewed women as imperfect versions of men. And it argued that authority and subordination are inevitable and always necessary and, moreover, the physically stronger party is always superior. As a result society was intensely patriarchal and (from our standpoint) sexist. The typical Roman father was a paterfamilias; he had life-and-death authority over his wife, children, extended family, and household slaves. Paul then is calling his readers to live as disciples of Christ within the leadership patterns of his day. He is guiding Christians in the setting in which they live; he is not making their setting valid and mandatory for all time. When Paul asks Christian women in Corinth to remain silent and submissive in church (1 Corinthians 14:33-35), he is asking them to conform to the standards of decency of that time and place. He is echoing all the finest Roman moralists; in that time a respectable woman did not speak in public. A woman speaking in public was immodestly exposing herself. Paul is writing exactly what was needed to keep the church respectable then and there. He is asking Christian women in Corinth to accommodate to contemporary standards of decency. They may pray or prophesy in their gatherings (1 Corinthians 11:5), but they must quit disrupting worship by asking questions out loud, the kinds of questions only the uneducated would ask. The immediate context is women asking questions. The broader context is Paul’s concern with the impressions church gatherings leave on outsiders (1 Corinthians 14:23). His overriding concern—and this is very typical of him—is that Christians not do what is disgraceful in their own cultures (1 Corinthians 9:19-23; Romans 12:17-18; Titus 2:3-10). Paul’s instructions to Timothy at Ephesus (1 Timothy 2:9-15) arise out of the same concerns. But they also take into account a specific heresy plaguing the Ephesian church, one involving myths and endless genealogies (1 Timothy 1:3-7) and one in which women are heavily involved and by which they have been deceived (1 Timothy 4:7; 5:13-15; 2 Timothy 3:6-7). This heresy appears to be an early form of Jewish gnosticism (gnosis was the Greek word for knowledge, and gnostics were those spiritual elitists-“know-it-alls”-who claimed to have special knowledge). The religious climate in Ephesus focused on Artemis as the Mother Goddess and encouraged notions of female primacy and superiority. This was the region that gave birth to the legends of the female-warrior Amazons; over the next several centuries this feminizing tendency would also give rise in this same region to the cult of the Virgin Mary. In response, Paul insists that women in the church at Ephesus are not to teach or have authority over men. The word translated “have authority over” in 1 Timothy 2:12 is used only here in the New Testament; a more common word for authority is used on all other occasions. But Paul needs a stronger word here. So the likely meaning is “to domineer.” Paul’s primary concern may be that uneducated women should not teach in domineering ways (often when two Greek verbs are joined as “teach” and “domineer” are here, the second qualifies the first). In any case Paul is denying that the feminine created the masculine which was a common notion in that time and place. He reminds his readers that Adam was formed first and that, far from the woman possessing special knowledge, it was she who was deceived. Paul then is not anchoring female subordination in creation; instead he is insisting that the creation story offers no room for female primacy or superiority. Our understanding of the first-century Ephesian and Corinthian contexts continues to deepen and mature, but the pattern now is quite clear. Consequently it is our conclusion that those passages that restrict women’s participation in public worship (1 Corinthians 14:33-35; 1 Timothy 2:9-15) address specific circumstances in the particular cultural context of their original first-century audiences. We take care to distinguish between what the New Testament says about the new life in Christ and the degree of implementation possible in the first-century church. Just as we would no longer use the teaching “Slaves, obey your earthly masters” (Ephesians 6:5-9; Colossians 3:22-4:1; Titus 2:9-10) to defend slavery, we will no longer use 1 Corinthians 14:33-35 or 1 Timothy 2:9-15 to silence women’s voices in our assemblies together. We believe that God has poured out his Spirit on all people, both men and women (Acts 2:17-21), and we call for an end to restricting the use of God-given gifts on the basis of gender. In doing this, we are confident that we are being fully and finally obedient to Jesus’ teachings on justice, mercy, peacemaking, mutual submission, freedom, “the last shall be first,” and self-sacrificial love. God’s way, expressed in Jesus’ life, teaching, death, and resurrection, is to empower others-to give power away so that everyone is freed to explore and develop their God-given giftedness. Restrictions on the basis of hierarchy, power, and status (e.g. Genesis 3:16) are at best an accommodation to a fallen world. In Christ Jesus there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female. We are all one. This subject of women’s roles in our gatherings is under discussion and study in many Churches of Christ today, and some have made changes on the basis of their study. Our task is to examine the Scriptures, understand their particular historical context, and then apply them to our own unique historical context in such a way that we fulfill-in our time and place-the original intent of the inspired authors. We do not believe that other Christians need to pattern themselves after us, but neither do we want to be the ones who exclude people from using their gifts when God does not. And we are deeply concerned for the lost (Matthew 9:9-13), those who today do not know their way in life but who turn to the church to find God, and find themselves to be more ethical and humane than the church. We have learned from Paul that it is our spiritual responsibility to make the teachings about God our Savior attractive (Titus 2:1-10)-yes, attractive, he says-so as to win as many as possible to Jesus as the way, the truth, and the life (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). All this is essential to keeping our focus and the focus of honest seekers on the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The light that must always be kept shining is this gospel that has the power to save, heal, transform, and rescue our lives. Comment by Sal Did Jesus Believe Women Could Lead? Comment by Rd The Bible generally indicates the male side as a pastors, because man is more stronger in leading. BUT, God will use anyone that is willing to used of Him, whether male or female, young or old. The question is the truth of the Gospel being taught? Comment by Marge I argue with no one about this……I tell them to talk/listen to Jesus. He called me to preach His Word….and at times, I have been given authority in special tasks. Comment by Kaine Thompson If you think Jesus’ work was not finished at the cross, then just so. To bind women under the law is to make the Cross of no effect. Shame on you for continuing this chauvanistic belief under the new covenant. Jesus came to set us free — male and female — not to put us under the heel of outrageous oppression. I will no longer subscribe to GotQuestions. Comment by Edith Jane In my household it is for the husband to be the Pastor, the father and the husband. I think it’s great when women teach but to be honest the only teaching from women that I feel I’m taught by is from the women of the Bible. Sarah, Ruth, Mary, etc. ever since I was a little girl I’ve always wanted to be the house wife, the submissive wife that The Word speaks of, now that I am married I enjoy being that wife! When I became a Believer and started my walk with Christ I’ve learned more and put more into my marriage. If a woman feels lead to be a pastor why stop her? Unless she is preaching a false gospel then allow it. If she is not of the Lord, God will uproot her. Comment by Tina I pray,that in my lifetime,That women will see respect given to them,by SO CALLED Christian men,that our Lord Jesus Already gave us. Most of us on a daily basis suffer through verbal,spiritual, and emotional abuse in the name of truth. Because we don’t have a voice or strength to to fight any longer. Comment by Ruth Shaw I have difficult;y ubderstanding how women are not allowed to lead over men because EVE was deceived. Comment by terry In the beginning eve was in Adam they were 1 flesh the church is the woman his bride and we are one flesh in the house of God.here we only do what’s the spirit says and the spirit comes with the name Jesus says Jn 14:26.we are instructed to live in the spirit here there is neither male nor female we are all 1.without a relationship with the spirit the letter of the book will condemn you.we all are only to do what our master says. Comment by schaffer I have a problem with one women who is preaching here because she has performed marriages in a church that is called: The United Church of Christ. This can not be the same Jesus Christ that gave His life on the cross so that people may be delivered from this bondage. She thinks it’s okay to do this. When I simply asked her what she thought God would say to her about this when she faced Him-I asked it kindly and lovingly-she said I was judging her…..so if they are preaching a lie then I am against it just like I would be if it were a man…. Comment by Alyson 1Corinthians 11:8-10 – For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head. Comment by tom I’ll not take the time to argue this ridiculous interpretation. I don’t expect the interpretation taken by your forum to be anything but this one. This is the very type of thinking that splinters congregations and in fact the church itself. You are no less guilty of leading your group away from our Lord and Savior, than those who would deny ANYONE from preaching the Gospel of our Lord. I subscribe to this forum to learn what in the world the philosophy you would perpetuate attempts to explain this week. I’m not going away just because of this falacy you perpetuate nor will I impose my beliefs on you. Your “excuse” as is written in this article is an abomination to the love our Lord showed to all of us. Shame be upon you for holding such a myopic view of what our Lord has taught us. I have written a book on this type of Christian concern; am engaged in a second and possibly a third with several clergy and lay Christians, and am engaged, as I have been for years, in continuous Theological studies. I am blessed, so very very blessed to attend a church where true Christianity is preached, taught, and practiced. Our three priests, one male and straight; one female; and one male and gay, enlighten and lead a growing congregation in the true word of the Lord; not this ridiculous false prophecy of the truly sinful. Exlusion, sirs and madams is not in my vocabulary. Discrimination, exclusion, bigotry, and prejudice, I would argue are the 4 sins encompassed in the arrogance of humankind all of which is false idolatry. Should you choose to revisit this issue with an enlightened mind, please feel free to issue your retraction on this forum and I’ll be more than happy to engage you once again. Comment by Dan Ferree I am a member of the Seventh-day Advetist Church. If the logic used by the uninformed person who wrote the comments about women ministers and preachers were to hold true, women should not be allowed to be teachers. The Biblical role of the likes of Peter and Paul were evangelists, not nested pastors. Have you not had women teachers who were very capable of teaching? The Bible does not contridict itelf. Tell me why Mary the mother of Jesus was chosen? Simply because she was a good person? I bet she was an awsome teacher of the Bible truths and that she taught Jesus well. If you doubt that, then you would have to assume that Jesus was born with all the knowlege He had as the son of God. There are far too many directions to go that lead to a dead end using your flawed, and in my opinion, unbiblical philosophy. The Bible does not contridict itself, however it does reflect the customs of the day. Please think things thoroughly through before making sensless comments that make God inconsistant and sexist. Comment by Lydia Every Easter Sunday we are given a sermon which the WHOLE CHRISTIAN believer are minister by AND THAT MINISTIERY IS: HE ROSE HE ROSE FROM THE DEAD! . From Luke 24:1-12 Matt. 28: 1-20. The first to send out this Ministry were several women, who took their ministry to all the disciples that listen and from that became Christian religion. Without that sermon, would there be any Christian? And for the God that I serve. he can and will use everyne, everything he’s made to spread his word. If you think there’s to many woman preacher & pastors, I would say that could be because of a lack of spritual leadership in men. If you don’t beleive in female pastors. leadership Comment by Ric Avelino In the Philippines, like in Mindanao, most pastors and preachers are female because the male pastors are being kidnapped or killed. Comment by windyblue I am enjoying reading all the responses to this question. One has to realize that woman back than where considered zero’s. They had no rights, there husband’s could kill them sell them. And the childern too. The husbands only wanted boys. If a girl was born, she was a nothing to them. That was the culture back than. Comment by Patty I agree with Kaine Thompson and the rest we are all one in the body of Christ, there are times if the women didn’t take a lead nothing would get done. It is really a shame at a time when we have so many powerful women of God going forth that we still cant get past the male ego. I too will no longer be subscribing to GotQestions. Comment by kevin my grandmother was a Nazarene minister from 1919 until her death in 1979. her congregation was strong and i never knew of anyone to complain about her being a minister. at one time she was even part of the old singing speer family. i know she is in heaven and everyone that ever met her was truly blessed and inspired. Comment by Mimi To Concerned Christian & All, I didn’t get to comment #2 yet but will read it later, I did read all the other comments though. I do believe that Woman have the right to Pastor, I have seen some wonderful Preachers on TV that are woman and they know how to convey the LORD’S Teachings in a real life changing way. I get fed by several woman Preachers. I believe the LORD is using them to speak to the rest of us. After all why not? Comment by Lydia Women have alway Minister, TO ME FAR BEYOND MOST MEN UNDERSTANDING, CASE IN POINT: MARK 14, 3And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head. God will use who he wants to spread the word. And god will use who he choose for his glory. PLEASE DON’T BE A JUDAS! because you don’t wanna hear the word from a woman! Comment by Anonymous Gentlemen (and I write this salutation knowing full well that no women will read my reply) Your treatise on women serving as pastors is both offensive and illogical. You hide behind certain Biblical passages to make your point. All right then, would you also hide behind the passages that seem to bless slavery? Or would you hide behind the passages that cite God’s Old Testament OK to slaughter all who the Israelis conquer and who are not believers. Further, if you are going to base your opinions on strict interpretations of the Bible, then how about explain why Jesus did not say anything about women not serving as spiritual leaders? It would seem that if this was such a gross sin he would have said something about it. I have had three church experiences with women pastors and I have found them to be the equal of men in all aspects of their calling. Please take me off your mailing list at once. I would rather hear Christian commentary that expounds on Christ’s message of love, peace and salvation rather than elitist religious bigotry. Yours sincerely, William P. Blackman Comment by Debbie I take my understanding from Scripture. In 1TIM 3:16,the Holy Spirit wrote the requirements for the office of Pastor (Elder, Bishop); Comment by Julia I disagree with your article I’m afraid… I have just one question: If God did not intend me to teach in the church why would He bless me with the gift of teaching? In Christ we are all equal: there is neither slave nor free, man nor woman. Comment by Terry I cannot believe why Christians do not accept the simple ,plain words of Scripture. Your answer to “Women Pastors” is spot on. Quoting Gal 3:28 there is neither male nor female in Christ is taking this verse out of context.Paul is speaking about salvation here. Comment by Andrew I disagree. I am a nazarene and our head pastor is a man but his wife is also a pastor and she is a very very godly person. I believe with everything that god is using her to do great things. She is a pastor and very good pastor that humbly gives herself unto the spirit. I believe that god can use ANYONE NO MATER AGE GENDER RACE OR BACKGROUND. Comment by Peggy Meton I am so glad that God is the head of my life because if I lean on what man think or fell about this issue I would be confuse. God said your sons and your daughter shall prophesy!!! and most importantly God call whomever he want to preach the gospel. I am so glad and excited about all the gift of the Holy Spirit and God send them where he see fit. So I totally disagree with your comment or question of the week. Another thing God is not the author of comfusion so this need not to be an issue if you understand the Holy Spirit and that God call whomever he want to preach the gospel, to teach and whatever he wants to do.Rely on the Holy Spirit because there are great men and women of God and their gift are perfected and to edify the church. Comment by Spot On Great post! All the arguments against this post are from illogical, non-Biblical and cultural points of view. Go check the Greek. Paul is not addressing a cultural anomaly for only the Ephesians. I’m sure many on this post will call me a chauvinist. And the same people who would choose to label me as such probably have experienced a real chauvinist or an absent father (or worse). Comment by David Patterson This is a ridiculously narrow-minded and inaccurate interpretation. I think someone needs to go back to Sunday school and learn about the folly of taking Scripture out of context. Comment by Debbie Julia, Comment by Juanita Gilbo Ricard God does call both men and women to preach the Gospel. Some of the greatest preachers have been women. Evangeline Booth for one. When this great servant of God spoke, not even a baby cried. When the Scripture says that women are not to speak in the Church, it was referring to those who would call out asking what was said by the speaker. Dale Evans said that she had asked a tour guide in Jerusalem about that verse. The tour guides had to be up on all the history of the Bible. He told her that in some synagogues the women had to sit in a balcony and sometimes they could not hear what was being said so they would call out what did he say? So they said for the women to be quiet and to learn at home. God calls even children to preach. I have heard some womderful Holy Spirit filled children speak. God calls those who are willing. Don’t let legalism get in the way of your dedication to the LORD. It is so sad how some folk have misinterpreted the Scriptures. Comment by Este Smith I am so dissapointed at this post. Gotquestions has lost all credibility for me, and left me with more questions than ever. Unsubscribing, and hoping that the damage done by this ridiculousness doesnt reach farther. Comment by alvin All the womans names in Romans 16 are an interesting and well known study. Cultural issues are helpful, but we did not live back there. Historical guesswork is not equal to scripture. Comment by R God is going to use any person who is obedient to Him, even the case of Balaam,in the 24 chapter of Numbers, a donkey. We serve a awesome powerful God who created the everything around us including us humans. If wanted to He can have rocks cry out the gospel. During the triumphal entry of Jesus He said “these very rocks would cry out.” Comment by Dr. Ashley M. Classen The scriptural quotes concerning women not being suited for ministry constitute nothing more than “proof-texting” – there are equally as many or more Old and New Testament quotes support women in ministry. Prima Facie evidence suggests that had God not meant for women to spread the Gospel, it would have been a man or men first at the tomb to spread the good news of the Resurrection. Women in ministry are here to stay. Get over it !!! Comment by Paula Alyson, why stop at 1 Cor. 11:10? Read through v. 12 and see how Paul forcefully rejects “first come, first served”: all men come from women, but everything comes from God. Too many Christians believe Jesus did nothing but pay for sins, but He did much, much more. He taught an up-side down kingdom to that of the world: “Not so among you”, “the first shall be last”, etc. God did not suddenly become “a respecter of persons”, or change his mind about looking on the heart instead of the flesh. Being “in Christ” is RADICALLY DIFFERENT from the world, even the patriarchal world of Bible times. The pattern Jesus and Paul gave us is that those with authority, real or otherwise, are to lay it down and take on the role of a servant. Not a “servant leader” (as if only men can follow Jesus there!), but a humble, no-name, lowly, last-in-line servant. Nobody fights for that last place, so those who fight for position are not humble; it’s that simple. And this all applies to not only the gender issue but also the worldly (yes, worldly) clergy/laity division. Terry, Gal. 3:28 is NOT about how various groups of people can be saved, but about how things are for those who are already “in Christ”. Does “not so among you” stop applying when women are present? Does God really look on the flesh now? Remember that PRIDE goes before a fall. Debbie, the lists of gifts of the Spirit are not divided into “pink” and “blue”. Comment by Paula PS: as for the “arguments” of the article, please see my analysis of 1 Timothy. Comment by Ivor If the lord gives a women the SPIRIT to teach,preach,be a pastor,that is her calling. Comment by Grandpa EC All, Whenever self is on the throne, biblical subordination tends to be a very galling yoke and a very heavy burden (whether in homes, in classrooms, in churches, in workplaces, in communities, or in nations). 2 Corinthians 5:15 points the way to the only solution that will have God’s blessing, “He died for all that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.” Yoked with God’s risen Son, and empowered by the same Spirit by which he prayed, “Not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42 and Hebrews 9:14), the yoke will become surprisingly “easy” and the “burden” amazingly “light” (Matthew 11:28-30). That doesn’t mean I’ll immediately know the areas in which God wants me to submit to someone else, but it will go a long way toward making my home or my classroom or my church, etc., the kind of place God wants it to be. Comment by Rambo More than I ever, ever wanted to know! Let me crawl back in my cave with Ezekiel! I would like to mention Paul was never married, never had a daughter… but I think his mother was a woman. Similar subject is women in combat! When a female, gay or otherwise, is willing to risk their life for our freedom… I am humbled and greatful for my safety and the safety of my children. If a female cop shoots an intruder in my house, I’m not going to be doing CPR on the perptrator! Jesus’ disciples were all male, but if I understand correctly and following… disciples included all races, genders, etc. I “prefer” male leaders, in fact I “prefer” all male leaders with red hair and green eyes… As far as I’m concerned, both genders have some serious catching up to do. I disagree with a lot on GQ, in fact, the only person I don’t disagree with is Jesus, the Christ! More than Einstein, we still don’t have Jesus figured out! But, I don’t come to this GQ site, or any other site, because I agree with them. I come to this site because our gracious host allows differing theological perspectives, however they are perceived. As moderator of this site, the moderator is entitled to take any stance he OR she so chooses, right or wrong! I can see a new church in town: First Female Baptist Church… Female Church of Christ… I’m going to start my own church… The Last…. Being a male nurse, I’ve had elderly female patients ask me to send my wife in! Cool! I disagree with our host even posting the subject! But, I will still come back… Rambo Comment by Paula I agree, Grandpa EC… humility is for all; submission is for all. And not the Orwellian way of defining submission differently depending on the flesh of the person submitting, because all believers are to submit to each other. Any submission that is always one-way and want “final say” is nothing but “lording over”, regardless of how kindly it may be exercised (the “benevolent dictator”). So there is no guessing which areas God wants any of us to submit; just always treat every believer, regardless of race, class, or gender, as better than yourself. Comment by john morrison If your interpretation of scripture is correct and I don’t believe it is then you have to discount the total ministry of The Salvation Army as being out of God’s will since they have been ordaining women officers/pastors since 1865. They are active proclaiming the Good News in over 105 countries of the world and have active full time ministry in almost every town in this country with a population over 25,000…and part time ministries in hundreds of others under 25,000. Comment by Thomas John Morrison, by that logic, we would have to say that the Mormon Church is being blessed by God. After all, Mormonism is growing faster than Biblical Christianity. Mormon churches are being planted all over the USA and all around the world. No, a ministry prospering does not mean that ministry is in agreement with God’s Word on all issues. God blesses the Salvation Army, not because of it ordaining women ministers, but because they proclaim the Gospel (Isaiah 55:11). Comment by Michael James Stone I accept the Sovereignty of God to use anything anywhere anytime he wants to. That includes a woman teaching. If a woman wants to teach, has prayed about it, and God told her to, there is nothing wrong with a woman teaching. The Issue is religious preference. If I don’t want to go to that Church that has a woman teacher, I am given as great a freedom in Christ by Grace to not go to or participate in that ministry and still be a “part of” the Body of Christ. How so? Because it is not “My church” that is the issue but the Lord as he leads a person, and in these days, God saving to the Uttermost, that even “children” are leading some services…… BUT, Has there ever been a woman priestess? No. The fact is the “judeo” aspect of Judeo-christianity recognized a “order” from which we could “think thru” or “examine” the scriptures to see how God has arranged “order” or unique and distinctive roles for men and women. Does this eliminate a “teaching” role of w woman Pastor? No. But it does stop the one place no woman can go. The aspect of a Priest in the function of a “Temple” in israel will never allow a woman to act as “Aaronic” priesthood. But is a High Priest in an “aaronic role” a Pastor? No. Women as Teachers and shepherds have existed since Moses met his wife tending goats because no man was there. The “Paul” debate as an absolute was never treated originally as empirical because in “Messiah” if someone had a story to tell about their personal experience with God, back then, they shared it and people “wanted” to hear it. But the abuse of power is the issue and the “forcing an issue” that does not exist. If a person is guided by love and submits to one another in love, for the sake of God’s Love, the issue would not come up. But when it does, it is never about Women usurping, but people neglecting a “more excellent way. When I read all the argument, I wonder at who looks to God and says “I will” for the sake of those who do not know so they may know. When a man tells me a Woman Pastor is wrong I ask Him, Can you gestate a child? I know you can impregnate, but can you gestate? No? Then is a woman usurping your authority by “gestating” what you cannot do? In like manner, areas exist wherein we are all “called” and chosen to be “fit” vessels for God’s honor. Some areas of honor are going to be inclusive of teaching and not limited by us but chosen as God see’s fit to teach us to Trust Him and not Man or Woman or Interpretations of Men or Women. The recognition Paul had was “heated” discussion and interruption of “normal” debate and related to societal norm of “style” Paul was familiar and dare I say many Jewish homes know today. Most Jewish men know full well there is a “way” to lead that does not mean a woman is not in charge and vice versa. In any given scenario, there is always a motivating factor and a mitigating factor. What is the motivation? and What is the mitigation? That is why the argument is NOT absolute and God did not put it in the Ten Commandments. Thou shalt have no other teachers but a Man. That fact is thou shalt have NO OTHER TEACHERS MALE OF FEMALE but the Spirit of God in you who shall teach you. “and they shall be taught of God…” not by Man or by woman, but by “My Spirit” said the Lord. If that Spirit dwells in a person and i heard the “voice” of the Lord, I listen to the voice, not the “vessel” it is in. In this way NO man may glory, nor may any woman, but God alone and to the individual responding to the Spirit of God, He receives from God, not the vessel, teaching. If you go to a Doctor you may have preferences, but I take the expert to work on the issue I have. Male or Female. It is still true there is no “woman priest” in scripture, but it is also true there is no pregnant man.
42 Comments »
This strong church bias against women in leadership is peculiar when we examine Jesus’ own inclusive attitude toward the women who followed Him. Jesus affirmed the equality of women in the midst of a culture that denied them basic human rights. He called them to be His disciples during a time when religious leaders taught that it was disgraceful even to teach a woman.
We read in Luke 8:1-3 that the women who followed Jesus were a vital part of His traveling ministry team: “The twelve were with Him, and certain women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities–Mary called Magdalene, out of whom had come seven demons, and Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many others who provided for Him from their substance” (NKJV).
These women were not just stragglers who stayed at the back of Jesus’ entourage watching Him from a distance. They were Jesus’ disciples in the fullest sense, and we have every reason to believe that He commissioned them to minister in His name.
When Jesus sent the Holy Spirit upon the church, as recorded in the book of Acts, many of these same women were in the upper room and received empowerment on the day of Pentecost (see Acts 1:14; 2:1-4). Those who were Christ’s disciples had been commissioned to go into all the earth as witnesses, but they had been instructed to wait until the Holy Spirit came upon them to empower them to fulfill this commission (see Acts 1:4-5).
When the Holy Spirit came to fulfill this promise of empowerment for ministry, both men and women, including Jesus’ own mother, received Him. This was noted by Peter, who then recited the verse from Joel’s prophecy: “‘”Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy”‘” (Acts 2:17, emphasis added).
If Christ commissioned only men to the ministry of the gospel, why did He send the power for that mission upon both men and women?
The women in the upper room were not the only women Jesus commissioned. In the story of His visit with the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:7-42), we read that after Jesus revealed His true identity to her, the woman began telling others about Him (vv. 28-29). Here we see perhaps one of the clearest pictures in the Bible of Christ as an ordainer of women.
The gospel account tells us that after the woman’s encounter with the Savior, “Many of the Samaritans of that city believed in Him because of [her] word” (v. 39). Why would the Messiah send this woman into her village to tell others about His power if He was opposed to the concept of women in ministry?
Interestingly, this was the first recorded instance in which Christ commissioned someone to evangelize beyond the narrow confines of the Orthodox Jewish community. To prophetically demonstrate that the gospel would ultimately spread to “‘Samaria, and to the end of the earth’” (Acts 1:8), He sent a woman evangelist to preach!
We must remember the cultural context of this passage. In Palestine at the time of Christ, women were not considered reliable witnesses because they were believed to be ignorant and easily deceived.
Yet, to whom did Jesus announce His resurrection on Easter morning? And whom did He commission to tell others that He had triumphed over the grave? Was it not His brave women disciples?
Because of cultural biases, Christ’s male disciples did not believe the testimony of the women when they gave the astounding report about the open tomb. Yet Jesus appeared to the twelve and confirmed the witness of the women, and by doing so He intentionally refuted the idea that women could not offer faithful testimony. Indeed, He affirmed the ministry of the women and challenged His narrow-minded male followers to do the same.
When Jesus said to Mary Magdalene, “‘Go to My brethren and say to them, “I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God”‘” (John 20:17), was He not affirming her as a witness of the gospel? Was He not commissioning her both to go and to speak for Him? Why then do we deny women the opportunity to carry this message?
A Gospel That Empowers Women
In conservative Christian circles women are expected to live contentedly in the background, presumably to focus on domestic duties, because this is their humble, God-ordained “place” in life. It’s a place of invisible service and of godly but quiet influence over children and the home, or perhaps over the church nursery, Sunday school class or women’s Bible study.
Women, of course, are told it is an honor to live in the shadow of their husbands or other male authorities and a disgrace for them to assume a place of significant spiritual authority. But we need to ask: Where did we get this warped idea when it was not the perspective of Jesus, nor is it promoted anywhere in the Scriptures?
The Bible, in fact, contains a rich record of women who were placed in authority by God. We must consider the way God used them before we attempt to pull an isolated verse out of context to build a doctrine that restricts the ministry opportunities of women. Consider the following biblical women and the level of authority they were given:
Miriam. There is no question that Moses’ sister was considered a leader in ancient Israel. This is confirmed in Micah 6:4: “‘I brought you up from the land of Egypt, I redeemed you from the house of bondage; and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam’” (emphasis added). She represented the authority of God to the people in the same way Moses did. She spoke for God. That’s why she is described in Exodus 15:20 as a prophetess.
Deborah. Among the judges of Israel, Deborah was the only one other than Samuel who held the respected position of prophet. She is referred to as a prophetess in Judges 4:4, and her attentiveness to God’s purpose and strategy resulted in an impressive military victory for Israel that secured peace for 40 years (see Judg. 5:31).
Deborah functioned as a civil ruler and was so respected for her anointing and spiritual insights that Barak, Israel’s military commander, refused to go into battle without her.
Deborah, who is called “‘a mother in Israel’” (Judg. 5:7), presents an intriguing problem for conservative church leaders today who want to promote the view that women cannot function in senior positions of spiritual authority.
Huldah. After 50 years of paganism and spiritual adultery in Israel, King Josiah assumed the throne and rediscovered the Book of the Law, which had been hidden in the temple. When it was read aloud, he immediately repented and turned to the Lord, then sent his high priest to seek out a faithful follower of God who could speak for Him. To whom did he turn? To Huldah, a prophetess who obviously had remained faithful to the Lord during one of the darkest periods in Israel’s history (see 2 Kin. 22:14).
We know little about this woman except that she lived in Jerusalem with her husband, Shallum, and that her prophetic message to Josiah came true. The fact that Israel’s high priest, Hilkiah, and his associates sought her out to make their inquiry of the Lord shows that she had earned a reputation for hearing from God.
Esther. Although Esther did not function in a place of ecclesiastical authority, her life proves that God can and does use women in strategic positions of influence to further His purposes. Indeed, He singled out this young Jewish woman and thrust her into the place of an intercessor and deliverer, not unlike Moses, and her prayers and courageous actions literally saved her people from genocide.
Phoebe. Paul commended Phoebe to the church at Rome and asked them to “receive her in the Lord” when she arrived from Cenchrea to work among them (Rom. 16:1-2). Although he refers to her as a “deacon” (diakonon in Greek), scholars have translated the word as “servant” in many Bible versions. But it is more accurate to categorize Phoebe with men such as Stephen and Philip, whom Paul describes with this same Greek word.
Paul’s commending of Phoebe to the Roman church was his way of enduing her with apostolic authority, and he obviously expected the early Christians to follow her instructions when she arrived. She was sent by Paul to carry out specific plans, probably related to evangelism and church planting.
Priscilla. Along with her husband, Aquila, this woman was a noted laborer in the early church, and it was this couple’s influence that helped launch the apostolic ministry of Apollos (see Acts 18:24-26). It would be safe to say that they also functioned as apostles, since Paul refers to them in Romans 16:3 as “fellow workers in Christ Jesus.” We are told that they had a church “in their house” (v. 5) and that this brave couple “risked their own necks” to save Paul’s life (v. 4).
Philip’s daughters. Acts 21:9 says that Philip the evangelist had four daughters who were “prophetesses” (NASB). The term used here is taken from the same root word used in Acts 15:32 to describe two male prophets, Judas and Silas.
We know nothing about the daughters, but we can assume that their influence was significant enough to be mentioned in the biblical record. Obviously they were engaged in public speaking, and their words carried the same level of authority as those of Agabus, a male prophet who is mentioned in Acts 21:10. Philip’s daughters were, in essence, women preachers who experienced a high level of respect for their spiritual insights and level of giftedness.
Lois and Eunice. The apostle Paul commends these two women, Timothy’s mother and grandmother, for shaping the young man’s ministry through their instruction and example. Although it is an obscure passage, it is a crucial one because so many churches today use Paul’s letters to Timothy to justify misguided policies that limit the scope of women’s ministry.
It is ironic that people twist Paul’s words “I do not permit a woman to teach” (1 Tim. 2:12, NKJV) in order to make a blanket prohibition against women teaching men, when in 2 Timothy 1:5 Paul commends Lois and Eunice for teaching Timothy the faith!
There are several other examples of women who held positions of spiritual authority in the New Testament church. Like Jesus, the apostle Paul had women disciples whom he trained and commissioned to preach and evangelize on the front lines. Where are the women who “share the struggle” of apostolic ministry today? How tragic that the church in the 21st century has not empowered an entire army of women with the authority necessary to take cities and nations for Christ.
Who Says Women Can’t Lead?
The prophet Joel predicted that one day the Holy Spirit would be poured out on the church and, as a result, our “‘sons and daughters [would] prophesy’” (Joel 2:28, emphasis added). This passage clearly indicates that when the New Testament age began, both men and women would be empowered and commissioned to carry the message of the gospel to the world. God’s Holy Spirit would no longer rest simply on isolated individuals as was the case under the old covenant.
In the Pentecostal age, all believers, regardless of gender, ethnicity or social status, would have full access to the graces of the Spirit and would speak the utterances of God.
If preaching were to have been limited to men only, Joel would not have mentioned daughters in his prediction. He would have said instead, “In the last days, I will pour out My Spirit, and your sons will prophesy while your daughters serve quietly in the background and pray for the men.”
That is not what the Bible says. It clearly states that women will preach. They will lead. They will be on the front lines of ministry. Like Deborah, they will take the church into enemy territory and watch as the Lord gives victory. Like Esther, they will not keep silent. Like Phoebe, they will co-labor with apostles to establish churches in unevangelized regions.
If this is the clear mandate of Joel 2:28, why do churches that pride themselves on faithful adherence to a literal translation of the Bible reject it? There is no biblical basis for the popular notion that prophesying or preaching is a uniquely masculine act.
Both genders have been called to minister in the Holy Spirit’s power, and we grieve the Spirit when we restrict the full release of that power by forbidding women to speak God’s Word or use their talents in His service. We will answer to God for limiting His work by restricting the flow of His Spirit through women who have been called to speak for Him.
We need to understand that the Bible does not lock women into the stereotypical mold of silent wimps. In the book of Proverbs, godly wisdom is portrayed as a fearless woman who stands in the middle of the city and “cries out” (Prov. 8:3). She declares: “‘To you, O men, I call, and my voice is to the sons of men’” (v. 4).
Not only does she preach authoritatively, but she preaches to men. This allegorical woman is not leading a women’s Bible study in her home. She is evangelizing men in the central square of a major city. Yet how many leaders of major denominations in the United States would tell this woman preacher to sit down and shut up?
It is tragic that eloquent women preachers in former centuries had to defend their skills and anointing to clergy. It is even more tragic that equally anointed women preachers today must continue to defend themselves. When are we going to stop quenching the Holy Spirit by denying our sisters their right to prophesy? To keep them silent is to tune out the voice of the Spirit. To reject their leadership is to reject the Lord.
God bless you all!
What about Adams part in this. He was there with her, God had made him head over hes wife, which means not to boss but to guide her. He did not do this, he ssstood quietly by and did not interceed with his wife but after she made her decision he pertook also, just because eve gave it to him. I honestly believe Adam did greater wrong because he did not use his athority over hes wife to instruct her and went against God’s admonision to not eat of this one tree. Who failed the most here? This is hard for me to understand.
God doesn’t think any less of women but he did assign us a role and possition. Women are not to have spiritual authority over a man.
Men can learn from women as long as the woman does not sit in a pssition of shepherd or church elder over the man. These are God assigned roles. That the world calls it sexist is irrelavent to the church. We are not of the world and shouldn’t be holding their views.
Shall we stop the WORD of GOD because there is no available male to preach the Word?
As back than woman had to fight for everything. As they do now.
Glass ceilings, and if a woman breaks through that for a job How wonderful. I call them sexist. Even back in the bible. They where.
And totally disregard for a womans abilities.
Many churches today refuse to allow a woman to preach the Lords word, they think she is some dummy. And should just sit there and listen because they believe a man has all the knowledge of the bible.
And God called HIM to preach. When women do become a Pastor, the church goes into an uproar, and many MEN, leave. As well as woman who believe that a woman has her place, in the church. I attended a church just like that. A woman was not allowed to preach Gods word.
No matter how much knowledge she had. And yet there where some who just kept on going and Got some Religion’s go change that rule.
And they are wonderful ministers. And know God’s word. And are Pastor’s of there own churches. Now Lets look at a few, Joyce Meyers, who got thrown out of her church if she would not stop preaching, She left and now she is preaching God’s word, all over the world, and leading people to the Lord.
As well now WE have Woman of Faith, which is all women. Preaching the Lords word. And that was started by A Man,Oh, dear, a man thought a woman was good enough to preach Gods word.
I believe the Lord can Lead ANYONE to preach his word Men Or Woman.
And we need to look at the culture back than to see Why Paul said that. And if God wants a Woman to preach his word, and be a pastor,
who is anyone to say they should not.
In my church yes we have a male pastor but the bishop is a Woman. Oh dear look out all you sexist’s. Its not a man.
And we do have Woman who will preach sermons too.
So to me many churches as well as people are still living in the bibical times. And have refused to change. It is sad.
I am in agreement with your post and absolutely agree with this paragraph. Thank you for sharing the information that you have provided in comment #1.
“We believe that God has poured out his Spirit on all people, both men and women (Acts 2:17-21), and we call for an end to restricting the use of God-given gifts on the basis of gender. In doing this, we are confident that we are being fully and finally obedient to Jesus’ teachings on justice, mercy, peacemaking, mutual submission, freedom, “the last shall be first,” and self-sacrificial love. God’s way, expressed in Jesus’ life, teaching, death, and resurrection, is to empower others-to give power away so that everyone is freed to explore and develop their God-given giftedness. Restrictions on the basis of hierarchy, power, and status (e.g. Genesis 3:16) are at best an accommodation to a fallen world. In Christ Jesus there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female. We are all one.”
4And there were some that had indignation within themselves, and said, Why was this waste of the ointment made?
5For it might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and have been given to the poor. And they murmured against her.
6And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me.
7For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.
8She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying.
9Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.
10And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray him unto them.
11And when they heard it, they were glad, and promised to give him money. And he sought how he might conveniently betray him.
Boerne, Texas
“This [is] a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.” (1TIM 3:1) The rest of the verses go on to desribe the qualities of such a one. The word “man” in the KJV is (tis): a certain one, so we might be inclined to say, “Why not a certain woman?” In the Greek text the Holy Spirit used a singular, masculine noun; not plural, not feminine. There are not many pastors of one church body, nor are they women. Women may serve in a deaconess type role, but not as the executive officer of a local church body. Either we accept the Word of God as written in grammar ordained or we ignore it. I personally would not want a woman for a pastor. On the other hand, I have heard some awesome teaching from women while their male counterparts can’t teach their way out of a paper bag. Paul also gives a list of qualifications for the elder of a church body in TITUS 1:5-9. This is one of those topics that people really get emotional about. I will accept God’s Word…
MARANATHA
No wonder there are so many cults.Somebody mentioned conditions in Rome. In 1 Tim Paul goes right back to Genesis.To say Paul is writing under the shadow of Rome. To we interpret the Bible differently depending where it is written from.
The real issue I see while reading this post and comments is the lack of men leading from a Biblical perspective. I saw a comment above that stated women have to step up and to get anything done. Sadly, this is too often the case and women are put in situations God did not intend.
I believe women have a teaching gift. I just don’t believe they have a shepherding gift which the Bishop, Elder or whatever version you read describes in 1TIM 3 and TITUS 1. Neither do many men either, I have found out.
MARANATHA
If anyone ever discovers the original antique Romans epistle, the last words will be in the handwriting of the apostle Paul, the rest will be in the handwriting of Tertius Romans 16:22. It was written under the hospitality of Gaius in the following verse, and I BELIEVE(since everyone else here is adding guesses) due to the wording of Romans 16:1 the deaconness Phoebe is ‘commended’ as arriving carrying that epistle, instead of ‘greeted’ as those later mentioned who were part of the church of Rome, and also because of the geographical location of Cenchrea and Rome (indicates she was the person who carried the epistle to Rome). This is why the very explicit blank check instructions are given to the receiving church about only this one individual. On Pauls own recommendation they were to receive and assist in whatever way she needs. She was not just a nice person who poured coffee.
-The great commision is given to every believer.
-Every man child alive knows that mothers know how to preach.
-Study of scripture is needed by and allowed to all.
-We are all to instigate one another to love and good works.
I admit that motherhood is a holy calling, and any other position may be a step down or at least to the side. Thank God for women, wives and mothers.
Most of the scriptures used by both sides have been mentioned already, so I will not repeat them.
When you check how much women are allowed to do in the scriptures, and who their submission is to- God himself and one man whom they themselves select and no other- the arguement becomes restricted to a very narrow set of issues:
Who gets to stand behind a pulpit- who gets to direct marrying and burying- who gets to have the final say in church rulings.
Well, the final say belongs to Jesus Christ alone.
Since women are needed to discipline male children in the home, the teaching issue only applies to adult males.
You all can argue over Pauls statement about what he personally did or did not allow a (married in the greek?) woman to do in the public gathering with the adult males of the church. I just know that it will take every believer to reach a nation that needs God as much as ours.
And that is without the wider task of making Gods love known worldwide.
Any who are leaving just because this issue is discussed, might be sidetracked on that larger goal.
Please don’t limit God to just men to preach the gospel. If there isn’t a man there He will use a woman or child, God will get through with with His beautiful good new to us humans.
Whatever your view regarding the QOTW, I hope you will find the following thoughts helpful.
Biblical Logic: "Dishonest Tricks of Argument" -H4C
 | |||
 | |||
 | |||
 | |
 |
| |
| Dishonest Tricks of Argument |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Emotional Language Faulty Distribution (2) Making a statement in which "all" is implied but "some" is true (pp 27-38) Approach: Put the word "all" into the statement and showing that it is then false. Invalid Sampling (3) Proof by selected instances (pp 32-37) Approach: Dealt with (a) dishonestly by selecting instances opposing your opponent's contention or (b) honestly by pointing out the true form of the proof (as a statistical problem in association) and either supplying the required numerical facts or pointing out that your opponent has not got them. Reductio Ad Absurdum (4) Extension of an opponent's proposition by contradiction or by deliberate misrepresentation (pp 39-43) Approach: State again the more moderate position which is being defended. Evasion of Truth (5) Evasion of a sound refutation of an argument by the use of a sophistical formula or other distracting method (pp 41-44) Approach: Analysis of the formula and demonstration of its unsoundness. Distraction (6) Diversion to another question, to a side issue, or by irrelevant objection (pp 44-48) Approach: Refuse to be diverted from the original question, but stating again the real question at issue. Non Sequitur (7) Proof by inconsequent argument (pp 49-50) Approach: Ask that the connection between the proposition and the alleged proof be explained, even though the request for explanation may be attributed to ignorance or lack of logical insight on the part of the person making it. Lesser of Two Evils (false dilemma) (8) The argument that we should not make efforts against X which is admittedly evil because there is a worse evil Y against which our efforts should be directed (pp 50-52) Approach: Point out that this is a reason for making efforts to abolish Y, but no reason for not also making efforts to get rid of X. Appeal to Moderation (Hegel's Fallacy) (9) The recommendation of a position because it is a "golden mean" or "consensus" between two extremes (pp 52-54) Approach: Deny the usefulness of the principle as a method of discovering the truth. In practice, this can most easily be done by showing that our own view also can be represented as a mean between two extremes. Appeal to Casuistry (10) Pointing out the logical correctness of the form of an argument whose premises contain doubtful or untrue statements of fact (p 58) Approach: Refuse to discuss the formal logic of the argument but point out the defects of its presentations of alleged fact. Formal Fallacy (11) The use of an argument of logically unsound form (pp 58-64) Approach: Since the unsoundness of such arguments can be easily seen when the form of the argument is clearly displayed, an opponent who does this can be dealt with by making such a simple statement of his argument that its unsoundness is apparent. For one's own satisfaction when reading an argument of doubtful soundness, it will often be found useful to make a diagram. Circular Reasoning (12) Argument in a circle (p 64) (13) Begging the question (pp 65-66) Approach: Both 12 and 13 can be dealt with in the same way as 11; by restating your opponent's argument in such a simple way that the nature of the device used must be clear to anyone. Ambiguity (14) Discussing a verbal proposition as if it were a factual one, or failing to disentangle the verbal and factual elements in a proposition that is partly both (pp 67-77) Approach: Point out how much of the question at issue is a difference in the use of words and how much (if at all) it is a difference as to fact or values. Tautology (15) Putting forward a tautology (such as that too much of the thing attacked is bad) as if it were a factual judgment (pp 71-72) Approach: Point out that the statement is necessarily true from its verbal form. Speculations (16) The use of a speculative argument (pp 78-83) Approach: Point out that what is cannot be inferred from what ought to be or from what the speaker feels must be. Equivocation (17) Change in the meaning of a term during the course of an argument (pp 88-94) Approach: Get the term defined or by substituting an equivalent form of words at one of the points where the term in question is used and seeing whether the use of this form of words will make true the other statements in which this term is used. False Dilemma (18) The use of a dilemma which ignores a continuous series of possibilities between the two extremes presented (pp 103-105) Approach: Refuse to accept either alternative, but pointing to the fact of the continuity which the person using the argument has ignored. Since this is likely to appear over-subtle to an opponent using the argument, it may be strengthened by pointing out that the argument is the same as saying, "Is this paper black or white?" when it is, in fact, a shade of gray. False Continuity (19) The use of the fact of continuity between them to throw doubt on a real difference between two things (the "argument of the beard") (pp 105-108) Approach: Point out that the difference is nevertheless real. This again may be made stronger by pointing out that application of the same method of argument would deny the difference between "black" and "white" or between "hot" and "cold." Inadequate Definition (20) Illegitimate use of or demand for definition (p 109) Approach: If an opponent uses definitions to produce clear-cut conceptions for facts which are not clear-cut, it is necessary to point out to him how much more complicated facts are in reality than in his thought. If he tries to drive you to define for the same purpose, the remedy is to refuse formal definition but to adopt some other method for making your meaning clear. The True Believer (21) Suggestion by repeated affirmation (pp 111-114) (22) Suggestion by use of a confident manner (pp 114-115) (23) Suggestion by prestige (pp 115-118) Approach: The best safeguard against all three of these tricks of suggestion is a theoretical knowledge of suggestion, so that their use may be detected. All three devices lose much of their effect if the audience see how the effect is being obtained, so merely pointing out the fact that the speaker is trying to create conviction by repeated assertion in a confident manner may be enough to make this device ineffective. Ridicule is often used to undermine the confident manner, or any kind of criticism which makes the speaker begin to grow angry or plaintive. Invalid Authority (24) Prestige by false credentials (pp 115-118) Approach: When practical, expose the falsity of the titles, degrees, etc, that are used. The prestige then collapses. Use of Technical Jargon (25) Prestige by the use of pseudo-technical jargon (pp 116-118) Approach: Ask in a modest manner that the speaker should explain himself more simply. False Humility (26) Affectation of failure to understand backed by prestige (pp 118-119) Approach: Provide another explanation. Interrogation Tactics (27) The use of questions drawing out damaging admissions (pp 199-120) Approach: Refuse to make the admissions. The difficulty of this refusal must be overcome by any device reducing one's suggestibility to the questioner. Appeal to Authority (28) The appeal to mere authority (pp 122-125) Approach: Considering whether the person supposed to have authority had a sound reason for making the assertion which is attributed to him. Getting to "Yes" (29) Overcoming resistance to a doubtful proposition by a preliminary statement of a few easily accepted ones (pp 128-130) Approach: Knowledge of this trick and preparedness for it are the best safeguard against its effects. Appeal to Prejudice (30) Statement of a doubtful proposition in such a way that it fits in with the thought- habits or the prejudices of the hearer (pp 133-135 and p 157) Approach: A habit of questioning what appears obvious is the best safeguard against this trick. A particular device of value against it is to restate a questionable proposition in a new context in which one's thought-habits do not lead to its acceptance. Faulty Assumptions (31) The use of generally accepted formulae of predigested thought as premises in argument (pp 161-166) Approach: The best way of dealing with predigested thinking in argument is to point out humorously and with a backing of real evidence that matters are more complicated than your opponent supposes. Appeal to Ignorance (32) "There is much to be said on both sides, so no decision can be made either way", or any other formula leading to the attitude of academic detachment (pp 166-167) Approach: Point out that taking no action has practical consequences no less real than those which result from acting on either of the propositions in dispute, and that this is no more likely than any other to be the right solution of the difficulty. Mere Analogy (33) Argument by mere analogy (pp 169-178) Approach: Examine the alleged analogy in detail and pointing out where it breaks down. Bad Analogy (34) Argument by forced analogy (pp 178-179) Approach: Expose by showing how many other analogies supporting different conclusions might have been used. Incite to Anger (35) Angering an opponent in order that he may argue badly (pp 146-147) Approach: Refuse to get angry however annoying our opponent may be. Special Pleading (36) Special pleading (pp 154-156) Approach: Apply the opponent's special arguments to other propositions which he is unwilling to admit. Appeal to Selfishness (37) Commending or condemning a proposition because of its practical consequences to the bearer (pp 157-158) Approach: Form a habit of recognizing our own tendencies to be guided by our prejudices and by our own self-interest, and of distrusting our judgment on questions in which we are practically concerned. Ad Hominem Attacks (38) Argument by attributing prejudices or motives to one's opponent (p 159) Approach: Point out that other prejudices may equally well determine the opposite view, and that, in any case, the question of why a person holds an opinion is an entirely different question from that of whether the opinion is or is not true. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)