How can churches balance tradition with the evolving role of women in society and the church?

[jasonc]

My point is that message is more important than the messenger, substance over form. If the word of God is spiritual food, God is the cook, and the teacher behind the pulpit is the one who serves the meal. In that case, I believe most of the congregation cares more about the quality of the meal than whether it's served by a waiter or a waitress.

the fact is men have a ministry in a home

why then if it was made up that Paul lists the qualifications of the elder to have a house in order .meaning if he life is out of order how can lead the church?

1 Timothy 3:1 to 7

pauls word that isn't cultural at all in that it lists marriage members .

even my former female pastor didn't argue that .a marriage is a man and woman .
husband and wife . husband led the union .





nust be a husband ,of one wife not a wife of one husband
must

is the pastor responsible for me to raise and teach my children and my wife .

or is it me ?

church is one day a week for some or at most two and three hours at that on Sunday .
home is 24 seven . a church can be there to equip but ultimately its the parents ,chiefly the father who is lead .

I'm not gifted nor called to teach .it doesn't mean I should simply not lead or read the word to my own.

my wife being older then me rebels . I can only pray for her that doesn't mean I have no duty or that I'm not without fault when I have failed .

you said clearly it was a made up role .genders is man made . Paul made the requirements up for both deacons and elders and their wives and children to be submissive and bear fruit if being led and nurtured In the kingdom ?

even in female led churches that is required for them. my church won't ordain a female pastor .they disagree with it and as they do I do as well and see it as a secondary issue . my church rents it's sanctuary to Spanish church whose pastor is a female . my pastor has worshipped with them and they have joined our services.once in my time for a seder and for a missionary support in Ukraine .also for the anniversary . the founding pastor used to preach at one of my old churches . he felt it was secondary ,he worked with my old church who I mentioned earlier . he remembered me from that time !

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

the fact is men have a ministry in a home

why then if it was made up that Paul lists the qualifications of the elder to have a house in order .meaning if he life is out of order how can lead the church?

1 Timothy 3:1 to 7

pauls word that isn't cultural at all in that it lists marriage members .

even my former female pastor didn't argue that .a marriage is a man and woman .
husband and wife . husband led the union .





nust be a husband ,of one wife not a wife of one husband
must

is the pastor responsible for me to raise and teach my children and my wife .

or is it me ?

church is one day a week for some or at most two and three hours at that on Sunday .
home is 24 seven . a church can be there to equip but ultimately its the parents ,chiefly the father who is lead .

I'm not gifted nor called to teach .it doesn't mean I should simply not lead or read the word to my own.

my wife being older then me rebels . I can only pray for her that doesn't mean I have no duty or that I'm not without fault when I have failed .

you said clearly it was a made up role .genders is man made . Paul made the requirements up for both deacons and elders and their wives and children to be submissive and bear fruit if being led and nurtured In the kingdom ?

even in female led churches that is required for them. my church won't ordain a female pastor .they disagree with it and as they do I do as well and see it as a secondary issue . my church rents it's sanctuary to Spanish church whose pastor is a female . my pastor has worshipped with them and they have joined our services.once in my time for a seder and for a missionary support in Ukraine .also for the anniversary . the founding pastor used to preach at one of my old churches . he felt it was secondary ,he worked with my old church who I mentioned earlier . he remembered me from that time !

Despite what God has ordained, in reality, female leadership is often the result of the absence, incompetence or corruption of male leadership. Weak men create hard times, and women have to pick up their slacks. Ask yourself this - how often is your pastor - either male or female - talking about themselves? About the church organization? Giving self-help motivational speech? Spreading government propaganda? Selling products, courses or services? Or really teaching the bible, discerning the time, exposing dark spirits, and equiping the listeners? That's what I'm talking about, substance over form, not form over substance. The qualifications for church overseer in 1 Tim. 3 are one thing, whether there's anybody in your local church that can actually meet these qualifications is quite another.

You argued about the roles of husband and wife, but over the long history of the church, priests and nuns took a solemn vow of celibacy, the first thing they let go of was the prospect of earthly marriage, because to serve God is to be married to Christ, as it is written: "For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." (2 Cor. 11:2)

 

[jasonc]

Despite what God has ordained, in reality, female leadership is often the result of the absence, incompetence or corruption of male leadership. Weak men create hard times, and women have to pick up their slacks. Ask yourself this - how often is your pastor - either male or female - talking about themselves? About the church organization? Giving self-help motivational speech? Spreading government propaganda? Selling products, courses or services? Or really teaching the bible, discerning the time, exposing dark spirits, and equiping the listeners? That's what I'm talking about, substance over form, not form over substance. The qualifications for church overseer in 1 Tim. 3 are one thing, whether there's anybody in your local church that can actually meet these qualifications is quite another.

You argued about the roles of husband and wife, but over the long history of the church, priests and nuns took a solemn vow of celibacy, the first thing they let go of was the prospect of earthly marriage, because to serve God is to be married to Christ, as it is written: "For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." (2 Cor. 11:2)

so because my city I work for had a council member who owns a gay bar and has dragt shows
,two or more universal churches ,lgbt supporting churches in my county ,a unity church.

churches on every block . I'm lucky to find a church ? comprimise is ok ? you kinda imply that . I have asked my pastor about certain churches if he has net the pastor and he will tell me if they are truly churches ,some I know . I had a Lutheran one but I couldn't find it's beliefs online and he said that's an apostate church .

local abortion clinic and few go to stop it . my church does and one other plus the papists.others do support the effort to stop it .yet the clinic is feet from two churches !

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

so because my city I work for had a council member who owns a gay bar and has dragt shows
,two or more universal churches ,lgbt supporting churches in my county ,a unity church.

churches on every block . I'm lucky to find a church ? comprimise is ok ? you kinda imply that . I have asked my pastor about certain churches if he has net the pastor and he will tell me if they are truly churches ,some I know . I had a Lutheran one but I couldn't find it's beliefs online and he said that's an apostate church .

local abortion clinic and few go to stop it . my church does and one other plus the papists.others do support the effort to stop it .yet the clinic is feet from two churches !

I've never mentioned anything about gay or abortion, not a single word, why did your mind instantly go there? Also, what I'm implying is what apostasy sounds like, judging by the contents of the message.

 

[Rodger]

And yet Adam had abdicated his authority. He had revised God's instruction (compare Gen. 3:2-3 and 2:16-17), caved in to Eve when forbidden fruit was presented to him (Gen. 3:6), blamed Eve for his fault, and subtly blamed God for giving Eve to him (Gen. 3:12). Whenever you pound hard on your talking point "Adam was created first", don't forget these inconvenient facts.

My dear friend......You are just a little off.

It was Eve, when tempted, picked the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
It was Eve, who after she picked the fruit, ate it.
It was the Eve who then gave the fruit to Adam.
It was Eve who blamed her sin on the serpent.
It was Eve who changed the Word of God.God did not say- "neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."

Genesis 3:2-6 makes all of this very, very clear. Eve was the 1st to sin, then lead Adam to sin however..
the Bible never states that Adam’s sin was worse than Eve’s. Both were punished for their sin (Gen 3:16–19).

Adam was created first from the dust of the ground, and Eve was created from a rib taken from Adam’s side. From these verses and others in Genesis 1–3 it is clear that the husband was created to be the leader in the marital relationship and that the wife was created to be the helper (Gen. 2:18).

As the leader and federal head of the family, it was Adam’s responsibility to protect and provide for his family. This leadership role was clearly demonstrated when God talked with Adam and Eve following their sin.

 

[Free]

No they're not, they are your own opinions, especially your misogynistic statement "only men can can serve as pastors and teachers of the whole congregation".

I have clearly stated that if God has ordained certain roles for men and women, and says that women are not to serve as pastors or teachers of the whole congregation," then that is what matters. It's unfortunate for you that you so lack humility. If I am correct, then you are calling God a misogynist. You would do well to accept that you could be wrong and I could be right.

One last time: there is nothing misogynistic on my part. Besides, you say you dislike labels and "abhor . . . identity politics," despite your continual use of them:

"I hate these artificial labels. I reject to be defined by them." HERE

"I'm not a fan of labels. What I abhor the most is identity politics." HERE

"Biggest Dislikes: . . . putting labels on other people, being put a label on myself" HERE

"I'm not a fan of labels, including trinitarian." HERE

"My most important point is that don't be divided by these labels, and don't play identity politics." HERE

"Look, I don't care about labels and I don't judge anybody by their labels," HERE

There are quite a few more, if you want to see them. Perhaps you should treat others the way you want to be treated.

Of course, and that has no bearing to anything the bible has said.

Then prove it. Your opinions don't matter here.

Rom. 16:1-2. Pheobe was a deacon of Cenchrea, she was entrusted with the book of Romans, and the Roman church was told to assist her.

Yes, there is one deaconess mentioned in the NT. Deacons were in charge of practical tasks within churches. Within the context of this discussion, however, where were women put in positions of authority--teachers, pastors, elders?

God is not a racist, classist or sexist, all are heirs of God through faith. As long as Eve was made in God's image as a partner equal and comparable to Adam, God loves His daughters as much as his sons.

Of course. Love and equality have nothing to do with what we're discussing. The issue is whether or not the Bible says God has ordained gender roles within the Church.

The issue is women's right to teach God's holy words,

See, now you're arguing from culture to interpret what the Bible says. We are always to argue from Scripture to culture and not let culture dictate what the Bible says or doesn't say. I already gave the only passage about women teaching and it is that older women are to teach younger women.

your "ifs" are just your opinion with no bearing in the Scripture.

They're based on a legitimate understanding of the passage. The sooner you accept that there can be multiple legitimate understandings of some things in the Scripture, the better off you'll be. So far, what I've given seems to be a much stronger position.

The context of 1 Tim. 2:8-15 is about proper behavior and conduct in the church for both men and women,

Yes, I know. And Paul says women are to be silent and not teach "or exercise authority over a man" on the basis of both the order of creation of man and woman and who sinned first to cause the Fall.

you have repeatedly taken 8:11-12 out of that context in your previous posts.

So you say. Show me exactly how I have done so.

In fact, Mary Magdalene was instructed by Christ to inform the disciples of His resurrection, sister Pheobe entrusted to bear and teach the Romans letter, and Aquila and Priscilla were allowed to correct Apollo, none of them was silenced.

Nor why should they be? Christ elevated the status of women, no doubt. You seem to go beyond Scripture and state something that isn't stated:

Rom 16:1 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church at Cenchreae,
Rom 16:2 that you may welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints, and help her in whatever she may need from you, for she has been a patron of many and of myself as well. (ESV)

It is likely that Pheobe brought the letter, but there is nothing said about her teaching it.

Aquila and Priscilla corrected Apollos, but I've already addressed this by pointing out that it isn't in the context of the assembled church--there is nothing to indicate that she is in a position of authority over any man, never mind Apollos.

God has ordained the church as the BODY of Christ. Pastor, priest, bishop, worship leader or reverend is not the head, Christ is, He has the highest authority, He is the one and only spiritual head over both men and women in the church, that's what God really said.

Okay, but what does this have to do with this discussion?

Your justification of "gender roles" is taking God's name in vain.

If you say so, then it must be so, although you haven't provided anything solid regarding your position or the supposed error of mine.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. ... And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. (Col. 1:15-18)

Okay. What does this have to do with this discussion?