The arguement that women are not called to be pastors!

[Deborah13]

but I was a bit disappointed to discover that the "Christian Think Tank" is a single IT executive.

Not sure where you got the idea he is single, maybe he is now? He had three children of his own and at least one step-son.
"Education: BS, MS in Computer Science // BA, ThM in theology // one year+ toward a Ph.D. in philosophy (never to finish)." http://christianthinktank.com/webbio.html
Not sure why you are disappointed...?

I decline to become involved in Bible-verse battles, even when I am convinced "my verses" are more persuasive than "your verses." They inevitably go nowhere and devolve into shouting matches and hurt feelings.

You will not see shouting matches on this sight. The mods are quick to put a stop to nonsense, which is one of the reasons I have stayed here and left places like Carm.
For me it is not a win/lose proposition. It's all about learning.

Most pertinent to the discussion of women pastors, Jewish law has prohibited women as rabbis until very recent times;

The Karaite Jews have records showing a woman rabbi (The Teacher) in the 11th century. That sect has always allowed women equal status with men, in the community, as they do today.
There are also Jewish writings that it has been argued, show that women were allowed in the the Pharisee and Sanhedrin sects. But I haven't attempted to study that out.
I used to look at the Law of Moses and see what I was taught. The whole society was geared to male dominance,, blah, blah, blah.... The more I studied and looked for examples in the scriptures, I came to realize that many of what appeared to be unfair to women wasn't really at all. God made laws to protect them from men.
We think the dowry or bride price was paid by the father to the groom. Not so. It was the groom who paid the bride price. He didn't actually give it to the father. It was a pre-nuptiul agreement to protect the wife from being left desolate at his death or if he divorced her for any reason, other than her committing fornication, he had to pay up.
If a man did divorce his wife, he had to give her a writ of divorcement, so that she could remarry.
We think a daughter had to marry whomever the father/male head of household chose. Nope. We can turn to Rebecca, who was given the final say as to whether she would go to be Issac's wife.
But I definitely agree that it was set up with the major positions held by men, that is just obvious.
PS couldn't pull up the page you posted from the blog. Searched through the 4/2004 posted and couldn't find it.

 

[Deborah13]

Deb, I think you were missing my point........but what you wrote is very informational!

I was trying to say that men are supposed to be "look at me, look at me"....................so we don't get killed. They do.
Just as in the Catholic church. Cardinals wear red, to show that they are willing to be killed.

Ok, gotcha' now. 2 I'll have to think about that in terms of humans. With animals that is definitely a good thought.

 

[Deborah13]

Deborah, I'm hurt.

If I thought you meant that, I would apologize.

 

[Runner]

Not sure where you got the idea he is single, maybe he is now? He had three children of his own and at least one step-son.
"Education: BS, MS in Computer Science // BA, ThM in theology // one year+ toward a Ph.D. in philosophy (never to finish)." http://christianthinktank.com/webbio.html
Not sure why you are disappointed...?

"Single" as in "a one-man band," not as in "unmarried." "Disappointed" in that I had hoped a site calling itself "Christian Think Tank" would actually be a Christian think tank; he addresses the fact that he had initially hoped to establish something more in this vein, but this does strike me as a bit like me calling myself a Mega Church.

 

[Deborah13]

"Single" as in "a one-man band," not as in "unmarried." "Disappointed" in that I had hoped a site calling itself "Christian Think Tank" would actually be a Christian think tank; he addresses the fact that he had initially hoped to establish something more in this vein, but this does strike me as a bit like me calling myself a Mega Church.

Ah...
I think that is what forums are for.

 

[Runner]

I don't have this particular title, but I have found almost all of the recent multi-view books (Two Views, Three Views, Four Views and even Five Views) to be outstanding. I have at least 25 of these titles on my Kindle and regard them as one of the most valuable sections of my library. They typically present a wide spectrum of scholarly views on a difficult issue, and the beauty of most of them is that each contributor gets to comment on all of the others' contributions. The debates are by no means always friendly. "Counterpoints" is one series of these, but not the only one. I just periodically run a search on Amazon for "three views," "four views," etc., and see what's new. There is also Women In Ministry: Four Views, which may be excellent but is dated 1989.

Two Views on Women in Ministry (Counterpoints: Bible and Theology) Paperback – September 13, 2005
by James R. Beck (Editor), Stanley N. Gundry (Series Editor), Linda L. Belleville (Contributor), Craig L. Blomberg (Contributor), Craig S. Keener (Contributor), Thomas R. Schreiner (Contributor)
View attachment 6448

 

[LovethroughDove]

Ok, gotcha' now. 2 I'll have to think about that in terms of humans. With animals that is definitely a good thought.

Another thought. I almost started a post with this subject, and about women and child bearing. The scripture about women child bearing
1 Timothy 2:15 But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness and propriety.

Could it be, we have children (spiritual children) (believers) because of what we bear? This is why we aren't out front (preachers, pastors, priests) We are vital to child bearing believers.

I know my Grandmother's faith, bore in me my faith!