God Once Appointed a Woman to Judge Israel

[elijah23]

Read about it in the fourth and fifth chapters of the Book of Judges.

 

[DarkHorseRising]

Read about it in the fourth and fifth chapters of the Book of Judges.

Dude! That part of the Bible is off-limits in certain circles of Christianity. It might give people crazy, stupid ideas like women being capable of anything other than cooking, childbearing, and pleasing their man. Next thing you know, they'll come across verses on kindness and forgiveness.

Be a good Christian and just read Genesis 19 ten thousand times. One cannot be reminded enough about God's wrath.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Dude! That part of the Bible is off-limits in certain circles of Christianity. It might give people crazy, stupid ideas like women being capable of anything other than cooking, childbearing, and pleasing their man.

I have never heard anything so ridiculous in the church. I give lots of credit for the church acknowledging the passage--even those who are vehement about women not being in leadership in the church.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I have never heard anything so ridiculous in the church. I give lots of credit for the church acknowledging the passage--even those who are vehement about women not being in leadership in the church.

Not most churches, no, but apparently some do believe so.=/

They try to shrug Judges 4 and 5 off by saying the only reason a woman was in charge was because all of the men were too weak and scared to do anything...or something like that. Which doesn't really prove their point or make much sense, if you ask me.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Not most churches, no, but apparently some do believe so.=/

They try to shrug Judges 4 and 5 off by saying the only reason a woman was in charge was because all of the men were too weak and scared to do anything...or something like that. Which doesn't really prove their point or make much sense, if you ask me.

May I ask how that is making that part of the Bible off limits, as dark suggests?

That belief is actually confronting it head on, not ignoring it and pretending like it doesn't exist. Not even close.

Deborah was in charge. I don't know what can be misunderstood here that we need to ignore it. I don't think anyone does that.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I didn't intend to imply that parts of the Bible should be off limits. I don't believe anything like that.
I was referring to the belief that women shouldn't be anywhere but in the home. (A belief that I don't share because the Bible doesn't say that.)


I meant that some say that women can't have leadership skills and/or shouldn't be in a place of leadership, but that they say that God made an exception that one time because no man was up to the task.
Whether that was the case or not, Debora did have leadership skills and she even went into battle if I remember correctly. Kind of knocks the claim of "women can't/shouldn't have leadership skills" on it's butt.

 

[Mike S]

Read about it in the fourth and fifth chapters of the Book of Judges.

You know, I doubt this comes as a surprise to any Christian. It's a pretty well known part of the Bible.

And Deborah was not the only strong women used by God in Israel's history.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I meant that some say that women can't have leadership skills and/or shouldn't be in a place of leadership...

...over a man, in the church and in the home. Correct.

 

[elizabethbraddock]

...over a man, in the church and in the home. Correct.

Hm, except:

Deborah was a judge, which meant she had authority over men. She was the chief ruler of Israel for 40 years, as well as commanding generals and their armies. She did the work of an evangelist, prophetess, judge, and preacher. God gave her authority over the mighty (Judges 4:4-5; Judges 5:13).

Miriam was a prophetess and song leader in Israel (Exodus 15:20; Numbers 12:1; Micah 6:4).

Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz's mother was a prophetess (Isaiah 8:3).

Anna prophesied and never left the temple (Luke 2:36-38).

Phillip had four daughters who prophesied (Acts 21:9).

Priscilla helped Paul in his preaching, and together with Aquila, she taught Apollos more accurately (Acts 18:26).

Phebe also helped Paul, and Paul sent her to the Roman church, and assisted the Roman church to assist her in any way she commands. She delivers the Book of Romans to them, and Paul again mentions Priscilla as a fellow worker, not someone subordinate to him (Romans 16:1-3).

In Paul's letter to the Philippians, he asks them to help a group of women who labored side by side with him in the Gospel (Philippians 4:3).

We also know that God is not a respecter of persons (Acts 10:34), and that "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28)."

 

[Jethro Bodine]

"12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve." (1 Timothy 2:12-13 NIV1984)

"3 Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3 NIV1984)

Wherever you see this not happening in a church or a home, something is wrong. That doesn't mean God doesn't allow it (think single mothers), but it does mean something went wrong in regard to the man's role. Something is wrong when a woman has to take charge, or seizes authority, in the church or the home. That is not what God intended, but obviously will allow instead of there being no authority.


Read the context of this Isaiah verse. Isaiah is not commending them for the fact that women and youths rule over his people:

"12 Youths oppress my people, women rule over them." (Isaiah 3:12 NIV1984)


For some reason these are the verses that get ignored in some parts of the church thinking that somehow the story of Deborah is the more compelling evidence that women are equally called to hold positions of authority over men in the church and the home.

 

[DarkHorseRising]

"12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve." (1 Timothy 2:12-13 NIV1984)

"3 Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3 NIV1984)

Notice how in both of those statements, Paul uses the word "I" to qualify the statements. Did you miss that?

In the first, he's clearly explaining his philosophy towards a specific church (I forget what city, but you can look it up). *HE* doesn't permit it.

The second is clearly shown throughout the references mentioned above to not have been applied in any time period, Biblical ones through to today. This leads me to believe it may have had another meaning that you're not getting.

Wherever you see this not happening in a church or a home, something is wrong. That doesn't mean God doesn't allow it (think single mothers), but it does mean something went wrong in regard to the man's role. Something is wrong when a woman has to take charge, or seizes authority, in the church or the home. That is not what God intended, but obviously will allow instead of there being no authority.

What about women who are called by God to take leadership roles? You're limiting His power by suggesting he's not able to set women in positions of authority.

Read the context of this Isaiah verse. Isaiah is not commending them for the fact that women and youths rule over his people:

"12 Youths oppress my people, women rule over them." (Isaiah 3:12 NIV1984)

Women and youths were doing a better job than men. And for the record, the women referred to in that verse are not the Godly ones.

For some reason these are the verses that get ignored in some parts of the church thinking that somehow the story of Deborah is the more compelling evidence that women are equally called to hold positions of authority over men in the church and the home.

You're coming across as quite chauvinistic and insecure. If you don't want to have a female pastor, go find a church with a male pastor. But you don't get to declare that all females in the world should give up whatever positions they have and submit to any male that walks across their path.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Notice how in both of those statements, Paul uses the word "I" to qualify the statements. Did you miss that?

Did you miss how he uses creation as the basis for his judgment, not culture, not times, not special circumstances?

The second is clearly shown throughout the references mentioned above to not have been applied in any time period, Biblical ones through to today. This leads me to believe it may have had another meaning that you're not getting.

It has a meaning you're not getting. Women are not the ones who are to have headship--a position of authority--over a man in the home or the church. That doesn't mean a woman can't encourage, or teach, or prophesy to men. It means they are not to have AUTHORITY over a man.

And for the record, the women referred to in that verse are not the Godly ones.

That's what Isaiah says, but it doesn't explain his unqualified statement about women and youths being over them. We know from Paul that it was never intended to be that way from a creation standpoint. Man is head of woman in the home and the church.

You're coming across as quite chauvinistic and insecure.

Then you think Paul is too, then.

If you don't want to have a female pastor, go find a church with a male pastor.

Yes, just as you, as an unbeliever, can choose to sit under any authority you want--or none at all. So what's your point?

But you don't get to declare that all females in the world should give up whatever positions they have and submit to any male that walks across their path.

Every woman has to approach the temptation to desire authority over a man like any other temptation. Somehow sexual sin, and women in leadership seem to be two temptations that somehow validate themselves as being from God because they 'feel' right.

What's different about them is women in leadership has not been categorically wrong, as sexual sin is. God used Deborah to shame the lack of strong leadership of the time, not to somehow teach us that women can be pastors, and elders. If that were true, Paul would have said so. He knew the scriptures better than you and I and everyone else here put together and his conclusion is women was ordained by virtue of creation to be in submission to the authority of a man in the home and the church, not in that position of authority.

 

[txgirlmaddy]

"12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve." (1 Timothy 2:12-13 NIV1984)

"3 Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3 NIV1984)

Wherever you see this not happening in a church or a home, something is wrong. That doesn't mean God doesn't allow it (think single mothers), but it does mean something went wrong in regard to the man's role. Something is wrong when a woman has to take charge, or seizes authority, in the church or the home. That is not what God intended, but obviously will allow instead of there being no authority.


Read the context of this Isaiah verse. Isaiah is not commending them for the fact that women and youths rule over his people:

"12 Youths oppress my people, women rule over them." (Isaiah 3:12 NIV1984)


For some reason these are the verses that get ignored in some parts of the church thinking that somehow the story of Deborah is the more compelling evidence that women are equally called to hold positions of authority over men in the church and the home.

good point, completely agree

 

[reba]

2.5: Respect each others' opinions. Address issues, not persons or personalities. Give other members the respect you would want them to give yourself.

 

[BobE]

I didn't intend to imply that parts of the Bible should be off limits. I don't believe anything like that.
I was referring to the belief that women shouldn't be anywhere but in the home. (A belief that I don't share because the Bible doesn't say that.)


I meant that some say that women can't have leadership skills and/or shouldn't be in a place of leadership, but that they say that God made an exception that one time because no man was up to the task.
Whether that was the case or not, Debora did have leadership skills and she even went into battle if I remember correctly. Kind of knocks the claim of "women can't/shouldn't have leadership skills" on it's butt.

Well said!

 

[BobE]

...over a man, in the church and in the home. Correct.

"Over a man" Deborah was a judge and ruler over Israel, men and women included.

"In the Church" Phoebe was a deacon and minister in the church, and Junia was an apostle. These are all positions of leadership.

"In the home" Ephesians 5 teaches men and women to "submit one to another" in the fear of God (verse 21). In fact verse 22, regarding wives, does not even contain the word "submit" in the New Testament Greek manuscripts. Some Bible's insert the verb again, and attempt to separate verses 21 and 22 by adding a non-biblical heading. Sometimes the heading is "Wives Submit to Your Husbands." Sometimes the heading is "Instructions for Family Life" etc.. In actual fact, verses 21 and 22 in the Greek manuscripts are one sentence. Mutual submission is taught (commanded) both in the church and in the home. Any attempts to change this by adding additional commands for women or adding non-biblical headings actually change the meaning of the epistle.

Husbands are called to love their wives as Christ loved the church, and "lead" by setting an example of sacrificial service, not by exercising authority over them: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— 28just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Matthew 20:25-28 (NIV).

Despite this, some church traditions still teach that women were made by God to defer to men, and that husbands (and male pastors, deacons, elders) are to exercise authority over them. Under these traditions, women are viewed as more prone to error than men, simply because they are female. Maleness, apparently, protects one from error and sin--not the blood of Christ, or the work of the Holy Spirit.

This idea does not have its origin in the oldest, most reliable biblical manuscripts. No, it can be traced to the influence of St. Augustine, Jerome, Chrysostom, in the 3rd-4th Centuries, when the church became a very Roman institution. Rome was a profoundly patriarchal culture. Women were blamed (literally) for problems in the empire, and the Senate (all male) passed laws to limit their freedoms. Augustine and others were strongly influenced by this culture, and Jerome translated one of the first authoritative Bibles not in Greek or Hebrew--the Latin Vulgate. This set the tone for church tradition for more than a thousand years.