The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING)

[handy]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Let's look at the Romans passage in the full context... it's clear it is speaking of Adam, not "men as a species"...

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. Romans 5




The context makes it clear, sin entered into the world through one man (not the species) and that man was Adam.

 

[handy]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Again, Adam didn't need to know about good and evil. He only needed to do as God told him to. But he didn't... he wasn't deceived, he knew the serpent wasn't speaking the truth, he knew what God had said, but he ate of the fruit anyway.

At any rate, it's a moot point. Romans 5 makes it clear... sin entered this world through Adam. As I mentioned earlier, they didn't even feel the effects of sin until Adam ate of the fruit.

 

[Stan53]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Let's look at the Romans passage in the full context... it's clear it is speaking of Adam, not "men as a species"...

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. Romans 5

The context makes it clear, sin entered into the world through one man (not the species) and that man was Adam.

Sure, let's look at the context.

Romans 5: 12-21
12 Therefore, just as through one man(anthrōpos = a human being, whether male or female) sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men(same Greek word and meaning except plural), because all sinned— 13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam(Greek word used is also Adam, which means "the red earth" and NOT necessarily his name.) who is a type of Him who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. 20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

The rest of the above noted scripture, does not directly attribute the first sin to Adam. If "the one" was directly linked to Adam himself I would agree, but it is not.

My purpose is NOT to indict women as a gender, but just to show what the Word actually says.

 

[handy]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Yes, I think most people are aware that the word Adam (in the OT) means mankind... but this is the New Testament and the context is clear, this is talking about the one man Adam... the man who sinned in Genesis, and it was though his sin that death came into the world.

That would be the purpose of the "one" that so often repeated throughout the text.


The "transgression of the one", the "one who sinned", Adam... the man, not the species.

There are times when Adam is translated as mankind.. it's not in this text and for good reason. The text is speaking of Eve's husband, the one that God gave the commandment to. I don't think there is any use of Adam in the New Testament that is speaking of anyone other than Adam himself.

The text does indeed directly tie Adam to the first transgression...

The fact that the name Adam has a meaning of the red earth has nothing to do with the fact that Paul is speaking of the first man here. Unless one wants to try to say that it was the earth itself that sinned...

I can think of only one place in the new testament that uses Adam's name as a metaphor and that is 1 Corinthians 15:45... However, the metaphor is in reference to Christ... where Paul touches on the same truth that he writes to the Romans about... that Adam was a "type" of Christ... Christ was the second Adam. The first Adam brought about death to all, the second Adam brings life everlasting.

Really, just the fact that Paul mentions how Adam "is a type of Him who was to come" makes it clear that he is speaking of an individual, not a species. (Rom 5:14)

 

[Stan53]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Yes, I think most people are aware that the word Adam (in the OT) means mankind... but this is the New Testament and the context is clear, this is talking about the one man Adam... the man who sinned in Genesis, and it was though his sin that death came into the world.

That would be the purpose of the "one" that so often repeated throughout the text.


The "transgression of the one", the "one who sinned", Adam... the man, not the species.

There are times when Adam is translated as mankind.. it's not in this text and for good reason. The text is speaking of Eve's husband, the one that God gave the commandment to. I don't think there is any use of Adam in the New Testament that is speaking of anyone other than Adam himself.

The text does indeed directly tie Adam to the first transgression...

The fact that the name Adam has a meaning of the red earth has nothing to do with the fact that Paul is speaking of the first man here. Unless one wants to try to say that it was the earth itself that sinned...

I can think of only one place in the new testament that uses Adam's name as a metaphor and that is 1 Corinthians 15:45... However, the metaphor is in reference to Christ... where Paul touches on the same truth that he writes to the Romans about... that Adam was a "type" of Christ... Christ was the second Adam. The first Adam brought about death to all, the second Adam brings life everlasting.

Really, just the fact that Paul mentions how Adam "is a type of Him who was to come" makes it clear that he is speaking of an individual, not a species. (Rom 5:14)

Adam means the same thing in the NT.

"The One" is explained by Paul in 1 Tim 2:14; And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

I have no problem with what Rom 5:14 says in this regard.
Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.
This still does not say Adam sinned first. If Eve allowing herself to be deceived was NOT a sin, then why did God issue a punishment to her in Gen 3:16. Look at v13, where God says to Eve; “What is this you have done?†Seems to me God did not approve.

In any even this is way off topic now, so I won't pursue it anymore.
God Bless

 

[handy]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

There really isn't scriptural support for your idea that Romans is speaking of the species or of Eve (but called Adam ? ) or anything other than it was Adam by which sin came into the world... jumping from Romans to 1 Timothy, just to try to make it Eve really doesn't work. Just take Romans for saying what it says, sin entered the world through Adam. The guy. Paul had no trouble pointing out Eve's problem... if sin entered the world through Eve, Paul would have said so, not made these overly convoluted, confusing and illogical statements that when he said Adam, he really meant species, and not just the species but actually Eve.

Also, if someone is "allowing" herself to be deceived, then she really isn't being deceived. However, Eve was deceived.

Sorry guys, Adam owns this one.

But, you are correct in that we have strayed from the topic.

At least somewhat....

Because it was the fact that Eve was deceived that keeps women from being in authority in the Church.

And, although this isn't particularly popular or politically correct, I do see a correlation between churches that have women pastors and teachers and the same being under deception... The ELCA comes to mind, as does mainstream Presbyterian and Episcopalian.

We women in a general way (always exceptions for individuals) do tend to respond to things in a more emotional way.. and I think that allows us to be more easily deceived.

Not that some men are even more susceptible to deception than some women, or that some women are not far wiser than some men. However, God seems to have made it clear that women are not to hold authority in the church.

We all are to be preachers of the Gospel though... and, as I mentioned earlier, Paul certainly wasn't shy at all of partnering with women ministers and using them extensively in the ministry. The male authority in the Church will be wise to utilize all the gifts of all the members, male or female.

 

[Kidron]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

There really isn't scriptural support for your idea that Romans is speaking of the species or of Eve (but called Adam ? ) or anything other than it was Adam by which sin came into the world... jumping from Romans to 1 Timothy, just to try to make it Eve really doesn't work. Just take Romans for saying what it says, sin entered the world through Adam. The guy. Paul had no trouble pointing out Eve's problem... if sin entered the world through Eve, Paul would have said so, not made these overly convoluted, confusing and illogical statements that when he said Adam, he really meant species, and not just the species but actually Eve.

Also, if someone is "allowing" herself to be deceived, then she really isn't being deceived. However, Eve was deceived.

Sorry guys, Adam owns this one.

But, you are correct in that we have strayed from the topic.

At least somewhat....

Because it was the fact that Eve was deceived that keeps women from being in authority in the Church.

And, although this isn't particularly popular or politically correct, I do see a correlation between churches that have women pastors and teachers and the same being under deception... The ELCA comes to mind, as does mainstream Presbyterian and Episcopalian.

We women in a general way (always exceptions for individuals) do tend to respond to things in a more emotional way.. and I think that allows us to be more easily deceived.

Not that some men are even more susceptible to deception than some women, or that some women are not far wiser than some men. However, God seems to have made it clear that women are not to hold authority in the church.

We all are to be preachers of the Gospel though... and, as I mentioned earlier, Paul certainly wasn't shy at all of partnering with women ministers and using them extensively in the ministry. The male authority in the Church will be wise to utilize all the gifts of all the members, male or female.

Ive not discovered a place in the New Testament where it authorizes a woman to >pastor< a church or a congregation.

And you are correct Handy, the woman was created for the man to be his helper.
Or as it says in Genesis...."it is not good for the man to be alone", = Eve

Or as the story goes, she was created from his rib so that she is to be at his side in life..

On a lighter note,..... if you study the NT scriptures where Paul is authorizing how to pick a pastor/bishop, then if he is correct, a woman can be a pastor as long as she is the "husband of one wife".
And i dont think he is speaking of Chaz Bono.

Other then that, the NT seems to indicate she (the woman) can preach, teach, evangelize, missionary, martyr, and of course try to run the church her husband pastors.
(just kidding)




K

 

[BobE]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

1) What Approach to women in ministry is consistent with Precise Biblical Teaching?

My understanding is that it is Errant for a church to appoint a woman as a pastor because in (1st Timothy 3) the list of qualifications for a pastor include that he be a MAN and faithful to his wife. Since one has to be a man to be a faithful husband it is only logical that women are excluded from this office. Furthermore (1st Timothy 3:5) likens church shepherding to FATHERHOOD and NOT MOTHERHOOD, thus making it pretty obvious that God intended this to be an office that only men should hold. All of the references to being a pastor address men and not women. From this it's clear that God reserves the role as shepherd to men. More evidence is in (1st Corinthians 11:3 indicates that man is head of woman).
However, what does the Bible say about ordaining women as ministers, preachers, and under-shepherds? The specific scripture that makes this question a difficult one is (1st Corinthians 14:34) which says "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law."
Now after researching the topic there seem to be two schools of thought on this matter.

Though A is that Paul's letter was specifically to the church in Corinth whose female population may have been unruly and Paul's intention wasn't to silence women everywhere but the specific church women who were in Corinth. People with this belief also look at the Greek translation of the word for "women" in this verse which is GYNAIKES. This word also means "wife." For example: in (Ephesians 5:22) where wives are told to submit to husbands, the word GYNAIKES is used for the word "wife." (Fun-fact: that's how we get the word "gynecologist" in English.) They use the fact that the word for wives also means women, to mean that Paul wasn't talking about all women just the wives in Corinth and how they ought to defer to their husbands in terms of teaching and leadership. People who interpret the Scripture this way will often cite examples of female leadership in the Bible such as; Priscilla, Deborah, and Anna-the-prophetess as evidence that a female can be a minister or a pastor. Overall they dismiss the need to apply this scripture to every woman in every church and limit it to Paul's intent to address a specific problem in Corinth.

Now onto School of Thought B
These people believe the Bible prohibits women from holding positions of leadership in the Bible Citing the same chapter and verse in 1st Corinthians as is mentioned above (1st Corinthians 11:34). Moreover they refer to Paul's letter to timothy (1st Timothy 2:12) where it states "I do not permit a woman to teach." In response to School of though A, they state that the word GYNAIKES is used many other places to refer to women in general and not just wives such as (Luke 24:22) where women are amazed at the resurrection of Jesus. Because the word is used so widely to apply to both married and un-married women, they state that there is no reason to assume Paul was just talking about the married women and that he must have been addressing the church as a whole. Also they argue that nothing else Paul said in those verses indicated that he was trying to address only Corinth.

Personally I believe that God's law is sovereign so i will not accept any answer such as "the church needs to get with the times: (which i heard when i asked a presbyterian chaplain). Man has an obligation to reflect God's law, not the other way around!

With all of that said, it's clear the Bible forbids women as pastors but considering those verses: What is the Correct teaching on women as leaders or teachers in any capacity in church?

2) What is the exact meaning of Paul's teaching about hair and coverings of hair in (1st Corinthians 11: 13-15)
That's it!

It's a short question

Unfortunately, the short question requires a fairly long answer. Phoebe was a "Diakonos." Paul was also a "Diakonos." Typically when translated from Greek, the English word is "minister." Phoebe, however, is called a "servant" in English translations. Other words used to describe women in ministry (e.g. prostatis), are translated "ruler" when applied to men, and "servant" when applied to women.

Junia, a woman, was an apostle. This is clearly a position of church leadership in the New Testament. Some English translations identify her as a man, named Junias.

In the New and Old Testaments, women may be judges, ministers, prophets, teachers or apostles.

Prohibitions against women in these forms of ministry largely began in the 3rd and 4th centuries. The church was becoming a Roman institution and its doctrines were being shaped by Roman patriarchs like St. Augustine. His view on women is summed up in the following quote:

It is the natural order among people that women serve their husbands and children their parents, because the justice of this lies in (the principle that) the lesser serves the greater…This is the natural justice that the weaker brain serve the stronger. This therefore is the evident justice in the relationships between slaves and their masters, that they who excel in reason, excel in power. (Augustine, as cited in Wijngaards, 2010, emphasis mine)

This view was relied upon when the role of women in the church was codified and standardized in 1140 A.D. by Gratian. Gratian's viewpoint was last cited in 1983 as authoritative.

John Calvin, imported much of Augustine's philosophy into the Protestant Reformation. He concluded for example that Eve was created to be subordinate to Adam. He believed this despite the fact that the word used to describe Eve as a helper "ezer" is also used repeatedly of God. God is our helper, just as Eve was Adam's. Clearly he is not subordinate.

English translations of the Bible bear the mark of Augustine's theological influence. Words are changed, words are added, headings are added, and context is lost. As a result, Paul's letters to the Corinthians seem at times to endorse patriarchal traditions (e.g. your reference to head coverings, hair etc.) Contrary to cultural misperceptions, however, Paul clearly promotes equality between the sexes in Corinth:

“You need to learn, however, that in Christ woman is not different from man, and man is not different from woman. Woman may come from man, but man is born of woman. And both come from God” (1 Corinthians 11:11-12, TIB, emphasis mine).

So, to answer your first question: "What is the Correct teaching on women as leaders or teachers in any capacity in church?" The Bible indicates that women can lead, teach, preach and prophesy. They may be ministers, apostles or prophets, or anything else God calls them to be.

To answer your second: "What is the exact meaning of Paul's teaching about hair and coverings of hair in (1st Corinthians 11: 13-15)." This requires an accurate understanding of the cultural, literary and situational context of Paul's letter--and an unbiased translation. Not a casual undertaking to be sure ^_^.

P.S. Since the third century, a verse in 1 Timothy 2: 12 prohibiting ritual sex and murder has been mistranslated to say that (all) women must remain silent in church, and never have authority over a man. The mistranslation is of the word authentein, a word used only once in the Bible. The context was a letter to the pastor at Ephesus, the city with the largest temple to Diana. Diana was worshipped via ritual sex and human sacrifice. Her adherents were not modestly attired, and they trusted in Dianna to protect them in child-birth. I'd encourage anyone to re-read 1 Timothy chapter 2 in light of this historically verifiable context. Modesty is mentioned by Paul, child-birth is mentioned, as are forbidden worship practices (e.g. authentein). Women converting from this religion to Christianity were encouraged to put aside their former attire (that of temple prostitutes) trust Christ in child-birth, and not mix their former teaching with the gospel. This happens to be the passage of the Bible most people reference when saying that women may not be "pastors" or "ministers."


Hopefully all of this information will help shed light on an important topic.

 

[felix]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

BobE, it is true that God created Eve as a helper to Adam and the same word helper is used to even refer God. However, God also cursed Eve that Adam will rule over her which you must never forget.

(1Tim 2:11-14) Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

The issue is not female pastors or ministers but not allowing them to teach or have authority over men.

In 1Tim 2:11-13, Paul even gives reason why it is not allowed. Nowhere He mentioned about any cultural reference. Are you suggesting that the reason given in Bible which is inspired by Holy Spirit is wrong and asking Christians to take unbiblical reasons not found in Scripture?

 

[felix]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

I lean towards Adam... it tends to be common with men to add to the commandments and laws. Eve might not have been as susceptible to deception if she fully and accurately understood the commandment.. and it was Adam's job to teach it to her.

Since the Scriptures don't spell it out, it's just conjecture either way... but I still lean towards Adam being the one that embellished the commandment.

Another thing to keep in mind was that their eyes were not opened and they didn't feel shame until after Adam ate of the fruit.

I hear a lot of people blame Eve for bringing sin into the world. The bible doesn't teach this at all.... it was Adam.

(1Tim 2:14) And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

While Eve was the first to fell into transgression, she wasn't referred by God too when He spoke in Gen 3:22. Does that mean Eve does not know good and evil?

(Rom 5:12) Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned --

Even in the same verse Rom 5:12, death spread to all men. Does this mean it did not spread to women?

Whether God speaking in Gen 3:22 or Paul speaking in Rom 5:12, it is well understood that it includes women because woman is from man and glory of man.

Even in the curse, Man did not inherit any of the curses of woman but woman inherited all the curses of man. Man don't have any labor pains or any of the curses given to woman but if you look at the curses of man,

(Gen 3:17-19) Then to Adam He said, "Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat of it':

1. "Cursed [is] the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat [of] it All the days of your life.
2. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, And you shall eat the herb of the field.
3. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread Till you return to the ground,
4. For out of it you were taken; For dust you [are,] And to dust you shall return."

Ruth is a good example in Bible where she worked in fields for food. Other examples include in Pro 31 for virtuous wife. I haven't seen a single woman who don't become dust after their death. While God did not cursed woman with that, why did she become dust? Because, woman is a glory of man and inherits everything from man including curses.

 

[BobE]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

BobE, it is true that God created Eve as a helper to Adam and the same word helper is used to even refer God. However, God also cursed Eve that Adam will rule over her which you must never forget.

(1Tim 2:11-14) Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

The issue is not female pastors or ministers but not allowing them to teach or have authority over men.

In 1Tim 2:11-13, Paul even gives reason why it is not allowed. Nowhere He mentioned about any cultural reference. Are you suggesting that the reason given in Bible which is inspired by Holy Spirit is wrong and asking Christians to take unbiblical reasons not found in Scripture?

Hi Felix, and thank you for your reply. The point I was highlighting regarding the word "helper" for both Eve and God is that it does not indicate subordination. In creation, both woman and man were created in God's image, and both shared equally in the stewardship of creation.

When sin entered the world, things went amiss. I'd like to copy and paste a section of a text I wrote on the subject. In it, I explore the meaning of the curse you make reference to:


"Immediately prior to the first mention of patriarchy (male domination) is the account of humanity’s temptation by Satan, and our “fall” into a sinful, cursed state:

Now the serpent [identified as Satan according to the Bible’s book of Revelation 20:2] was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’” And the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. (Genesis 3:1-6, NKJV)

The story continues as God confronts the serpent, the woman and the man with their actions. The serpent was confronted for being the tempter, whereas the man and the woman were confronted with their choice to give in to temptation, rather than listen to God’s counsel. God’s description of the consequences of these actions begins with the following words: “Because you have done this, you are cursed…” (Genesis 3:14, NKJV). The specific ramifications of humanity’s fall are then spelled out; one of them is male domination (Genesis 3:14-19, NKJV).

Some scholars suggest that God, through the curse, was putting the woman, Eve, back in her rightful place, in subordination to Adam. They argue that Eve, after giving in to temptation herself, either compelled or seduced Adam into eating the forbidden fruit. In so doing, they say, she usurped his rightful authority and plunged the world into darkness. Dr. M.R. Dehan summarized this view of humanity’s fall in the form of a love story:

Adam was away fellowshipping with God when this tragedy took place. As soon as he realized what had happened, his deep love for Eve forced him to lovingly, willingly, voluntarily forsake his intimacy with God and join himself to his now sinful wife as a token of his great, sacrificial love. (Trombley, 2003, p. 112)

The main problem with Dehan’s account is that according to the book of Genesis, none of it actually took place. When Eve was being tempted by the devil, Adam was right there with her: “She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate” (Genesis 3:6, NKJV). Adam wasn’t tempted by Eve. He was present with his wife, while they were both tempted by the devil.

Furthermore, the idea that the curse was putting Eve back in her rightful place is based on the notion that she was originally created to be Adam’s subordinate. We’ve already seen, earlier, that this assumption has no support in the Genesis account. Every passage that talks about the relationship between the first man and the first woman before their fall into temptation depicts them as equals.

Stevens (1986) explains that the curse of male domination is “not what God intended” for humanity (p. 123). It is the tragic outcome of their choice to separate themselves from the goodness of God. In line with this understanding, Trombley (2003) provides the following paraphrase of the Genesis curse:
Eve, because you have sinned, and because Adam has sinned, circumstances have changed. You’ll have a normal desire to be with him; you’ll keep turning toward him, but he’ll rule you. He doesn’t have my nature any longer…. He’s a tyrant. (p. 129)

History bears witness to the accuracy of the curse found in the book of Genesis: “From the Fall of man, women have been oppressed, opposed, dominated, cruelly ruled, and subjugated to man’s selfish gain” (Trombley, 2003, p. 129). Is this putting a woman back in her rightful place? Nothing could be further from the truth."

You may also remember that in Galatians chapter 3, Jesus is portrayed as taking this curse upon himself, that we may all be free from it. Hence the passage explaining that in Christ, there is neither male, nor female.

Regarding Paul's letter to Timothy, I'm reading it as a letter from one church leader to another. That is it's literary and historical context. It was written to Timothy when he was pastoring a church in Ephesus. Paul does not need to spell this out to the intended audience, because Timothy was the intended audience, and he was aware of the context. I have no doubt it was an inspired letter, but it was a letter nonetheless.

I'm also highlighting that it was not originally written in the English of the King James Bible. Unfortunately, the KJV mistranslates a key word in the passage, as well as demonstrating ignorance of its context, a context that passed into history more than a thousand years prior to the KJV.

Another passage from the book I wrote highlights this:
The main problem with this verse is that the Greek word translated “to have authority” simply did not have this meaning at the time it was written. The word in question is “authentein,” and for emphasis I’ll repeat my original assertion: it did not mean “to have authority” over a man. Trombley (2003) points out that the word is used exactly one time in the entirety of the Bible (p. 198). This may account for some uncertainty regarding its meaning. Another Greek word, “exousia,” is used in the New Testament 32 times, and has been accurately translated “to have authority.” Exousia, however, is not the word used by Paul in 1st Timothy 2:12. Instead, he chose “authentein.” Through an extensive literature review, Trombley was able to ascertain the meaning of this word during Paul’s time. It was used repeatedly in literature other than the Bible to describe something both sexual and murderous (Trombley, 2003, pp. 198-204). It was not until the third or fourth century--Augustine’s time--that the word began to be associated with usurping authority (Trombley, 2003, p. 199).

So, in the Greek New Testament (early manuscripts that I have with me at the moment) there is no prohibition against women having authority over men in 1 Timothy. No, something both sexual and murderous is being prohibited. Women are also encouraged to dress modestly and look to Christ for salvation in childbirth. This makes sense given the context of Paul's letter. Diana worship and the gospel were being mixed in Ephesus at the time of this letter. Former adherents of Diana practiced ritual sex and sacrifice, dressed as temple prostitutes (because they were) and worshipped Diana to protect them in childbirth.

To ignore that 1 Timothy is a letter, to ignore the historical context of the letter, and to mistranslate a key passage in it creates a message that bears little resemblance to what Paul was likely attempting to convey to his younger associate. I say this with complete confidence that the letter was inspired by the Holy Spirit. The problem is not with the original letter, but rather with patriarchal bias and poor scholarship on the part of medieval translators, and the theologians (like Augustine) they relied on to guide their assumptions.

 

[felix]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Hi Felix, and thank you for your reply. The point I was highlighting regarding the word "helper" for both Eve and God is that it does not indicate subordination. In creation, both woman and man were created in God's image, and both shared equally in the stewardship of creation.

However, we are referring to a period after the fall. It is true that women was not initially created under man (as the curse clearly indicate man's rule over women as a consequence of disobedience).

Having a historical reference for interpretation is not necessary for Scripture because, Scripture interprets Scripture by itself. This is why most people get deceived by referring historical and non biblical books for explanation yet other verses fail to align with this historical explanation.

Isa 3:12 is a clear indication that God did not allow women to rule over men and people. Not only that, in the law for temple work, there is not a single women was allowed. Not a single disciple chosen by Jesus was a women. This is the same when it comes to shepherd/pastor.

As I previously stated, Scripture DOES allow women to be preachers, teachers, etc as long as they DON'T teach and have authority over men in the church or assembly. E.g, Aquila and Priscilla in Acts 18:26.

• According to the book of 1 Timothy 3:1-4 and Titus 1:7, the qualification for a Bishop (or overseer) can only be males.
• The role of overseer is given to Elders as we see in Acts 20:28 and 1Pet 5:2
• Similarly deacon (translated as minister and servant) can also be only males as we see in 1Tim 3:12.

Being an Elder is not a church role but bishops and deacons are. Anyone who is older inside the church is generally referred as Elder in Scripture. The role of overseeing the flock is given to Elders. However, among these elders, bishops and deacons are "appointed" as in Titus 1:5-7.

Elders are old people who can guide younger people in the way of the Lord. These can be women too as long as men are like children to her as we see in 3 John 1:1. Some of these Elders "voluntarily" devote their service for church who are appointed to do God's service inside the church who become bishops and deacons. All these are "inside" church - not outside the church.

totopic

Hence, coming to the OP, women preaching is

• acceptable anywhere that is not a church assembly, e.g, Bible Study, small group, gospel preaching, street preaching etc.
• acceptable over younger men and women who are like children to her.

EDIT: Women can be deaconess based on Rom 16:1. However, based on the translation of John 2:5 and John 2:9 as servants, I think a deacon could simply mean a servant of God doing His service in church - not necessarily preaching in church assembly.

 

[Furz]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preacing? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING)

if that is the case,show me a command that i must have long hair? did jesus say that? jesus being a jew would have long hair not short hair.

We must look at much in the temporal and textual context which is in the Bible. At that time, women were not as been taken for worthy to accomplish priestly tasks. This had to do something with the patriarchal, Jewish conception of the world and can not be explained to the place, everything here exactly.
Christ had appointed both men and women to the intellectual service. Phoebe was a deaconess. Lydia (I refer at the names to the German notation) was a leader of a house church which corresponds to the later title of a bishop. . and Priszilla was a female apostle (just like Junia from Romans 16:7). The office of a deaconess existed in the Roman Catholic church up to the 6th century and was then disestablished. Why? Because women should be forced back again in the role of the silent and obidient wife and mother.

 

[BobE]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

However, we are referring to a period after the fall. It is true that women was not initially created under man (as the curse clearly indicate man's rule over women as a consequence of disobedience).

Having a historical reference for interpretation is not necessary for Scripture because, Scripture interprets Scripture by itself. This is why most people get deceived by referring historical and non biblical books for explanation yet other verses fail to align with this historical explanation.

Isa 3:12 is a clear indication that God did not allow women to rule over men and people. Not only that, in the law for temple work, there is not a single women was allowed. Not a single disciple chosen by Jesus was a women. This is the same when it comes to shepherd/pastor.







As I previously stated, Scripture DOES allow women to be preachers, teachers, etc as long as they DON'T teach and have authority over men in the church or assembly. E.g, Aquila and Priscilla in Acts 18:26.

• According to the book of 1 Timothy 3:1-4 and Titus 1:7, the qualification for a Bishop (or overseer) can only be males.
• The role of overseer is given to Elders as we see in Acts 20:28 and 1Pet 5:2
• Similarly deacon (translated as minister and servant) can also be only males as we see in 1Tim 3:12.

Being an Elder is not a church role but bishops and deacons are. Anyone who is older inside the church is generally referred as Elder in Scripture. The role of overseeing the flock is given to Elders. However, among these elders, bishops and deacons are "appointed" as in Titus 1:5-7.

Elders are old people who can guide younger people in the way of the Lord. These can be women too as long as men are like children to her as we see in 3 John 1:1. Some of these Elders "voluntarily" devote their service for church who are appointed to do God's service inside the church who become bishops and deacons. All these are "inside" church - not outside the church.

totopic







Hence, coming to the OP, women preaching is

• acceptable anywhere that is not a church assembly, e.g, Bible Study, small group, gospel preaching, street preaching etc.
• acceptable over younger men and women who are like children to her.

Hi Felix, although you say that only men can be deacons. Phoebe, a woman, was a deacon. I think I highlighted this in an earlier post, and this fact is not consistent with your position:

"Our sister Phoebe, a deacon in the church in Cenchrea, will be coming to see you soon. 2 Receive her in the Lord, as one who is worthy of high honor. Help her in every way you can, for she has helped many in their needs, including me" (Romans 16:1-2 NLT).

The Greek word used of Phoebe is διάκονος, which is usually translated "deacon," unless you are reading an English version with a gender-bias against women, in which case διάκονος is translated "servant" only in reference to Phoebe. The King James version does this. Remember all that information I supplied about gender-bias, church history and Bible translation? This is a clear and disturbing example.

Also, God did in fact allow women to rule over men in the Old Testament. Deborah is a well-known example. She was a judge in Israel, over men and women alike. She also gave instructions to the male leader of Israel's army. This also is not consistent with your position.

And, although the oppression of women is indeed a curse, Jesus took this curse upon himself, according to Galatians chapter 3. This passage explains that as a result of this, there is no more division between men and women in Christ. In fact, I think the whole Bible is a story of redemption from the curse that resulted from sin. Your view of the curse seems to neglect Christ's redemption of us from it. It also seems to ignore clear examples in the Old Testament of God raising women above it (e.g. Deborah).

In the New Testament, women were prophets, apostles, deacons and teachers. Priscilla, in fact, clearly taught a man about the gospel. They were not limited to speaking only to women, children, or outside of church assemblies. Some of these assemblies, in fact, took place in women's homes.

If you're open to it, I think that you will find that the Bible provides an incredible number of examples that are not consistent with the tradition you have been taught. Jesus cautions us against confusing the traditions of men with the laws of God. This is all too common a problem in religious circles. It was prevalent in Jesus' day, and I believe it is common in our own.

Also, I'm wondering if you read my earlier comments on the curse and on the translation of 1 Timothy chapter 2, particularly the mistranslation of the word authentein?

Also re. this comment of yours: "Having a historical reference for interpretation is not necessary for Scripture because, Scripture interprets Scripture by itself." I also think that if you are open to it, you will see that people interpret Scripture through their own personal and cultural biases very often. If you remove any comment from its original context, you can perceive it to say almost anything.

Re. this comment: "Not a single disciple chosen by Jesus was a women." The disciples were sent initially to the house of Israel. Women were not allowed to speak according to the oral traditions of the time. Jesus chose male spokespersons likely because they were legally allowed to speak. Also, after the breaking of the curse via Christ's death and resurrection, the first people he chose to carry the message of his triumph were all women: Mary, Mary and Johanna. They told the disciples the "good news," and the disciples (all male) ironically did not believe. The message was then also proclaimed to the Gentiles, some of whom accepted women teachers and witnesses, despite Roman prejudices.

 

[felix]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Hi Felix, although you say that only men can be deacons. Phoebe, a woman, was a deacon. I think I highlighted this in an earlier post, and this fact is not consistent with your position.

I just did a edit on the old post.

Women can be deaconess based on Rom 16:1. However, based on the translation of John 2:5 and John 2:9 as servants, I think a deacon could simply mean a servant of God doing His service in church - not necessarily preaching in church assembly or a pastor.

Also, God did in fact allow women to rule over men in the Old Testament. Deborah is a well-known example. This also is not consistent with your position.

Deborah was a prophetess and a judge not a ruler. The very reason Israel want a king is because they did not have a ruler. They had only judges. Judging is not necessarily ruling or having authority over men.

And, although the oppression of women is indeed a curse, Jesus took this curse upon himself, according to Galatians chapter 3. This passage explains that as a result of this, there is no more division between men and women in Christ. In fact, I think the whole Bible is a story of redemption from the curse that resulted from sin.

In Christ there is no more division. We are not speaking about equality here but roles.

In the New Testament, women were prophets, apostles, ministers and teachers. They were not limited to speaking only to women, children, or outside of church assemblies. Some of these assemblies, in fact, took place in women's homes.

If you're open to it, I think that you will find that the Bible provides an incredible number of examples that are not consistent with the tradition you have been taught.

As I said, scripture clearly spell out to be silent in 1Cor 14:34. I believe scripture does not contradict and it is complete and full. If there is another verse that seems to say something, I will carefully consider but in no way add weight-age to one verse over another. Hence, I consider, women can do all activities outside the church assembly as I can find verses for it. However, I cannot find a single verse where women preached in churches to prove 1Cor 14:34 plain interpretation as wrong.

 

[Grazer]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

This makes some interesting points;

http://rachelheldevans.com/mutuality-let-women-speak

 

[cupid dave]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preacing? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING)

1) I wouldn't belong to any church that treated women as inferior or incapable of holding a leadership position.

The problem with church today is that there are few men in attendance, and only after they have spent away their wild oats and fanned the flames of the present sexually promiscuous culture that teaches the next generation of teenagers to follow suit.

The women need to preach prudence and practice it.

The nation is now pagan, where 1/3 of all pregnancies every year end in illegitimate births, 1/3 in abortions, and only 1/3 to married couples who may or may not stay married with such liberal No Fault escape clauses from responsibility to Family.

The nation does not need more preachers of the sort we presently have at the pulpit.

 

[BobE]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

I just did a edit on the old post.

Women can be deaconess based on Rom 16:1. However, based on the translation of John 2:5 and John 2:9 as servants, I think a deacon could simply mean a servant of God doing His service in church - not necessarily preaching in church assembly or a pastor.



Deborah was a prophetess and a judge not a ruler. The very reason Israel want a king is because they did not have a ruler. They had only judges. Judging is not necessarily ruling or having authority over men.



In Christ there is no more division. We are not speaking about equality here but roles.



As I said, scripture clearly spell out to be silent in 1Cor 14:34. I believe scripture does not contract and it is complete and full. If there is another verse that seems to say something, I will carefully consider but in no way add weight-age to one verse over another. Hence, I consider, women can do all activities outside the church assembly as I can find verses for it. However, I cannot find a single verse where women preached in churches to prove 1Cor 14:34 plain interpretation as wrong.

Hi Felix, thank you for your very thoughtful responses to my earlier post. I'd like to say something in response to the following comment you made:

"Women can be deaconess based on Rom 16:1. However, based on the translation of John 2:5 and John 2:9 as servants, I think a deacon could simply mean a servant of God doing His service in church - not necessarily preaching in church assembly or a pastor."

Here is an excellent study done on the use of the words diakonos and prostatis in relation to Phoebe's role in the early church.

by Elizabeth A. McCabe
"Despite the vast number of English translations to choose from in today’s age, no substitute exists for reading the biblical text in its original language.[1] While English translations generally provide a satisfactory reading, some passages are more accurate than others. In particular, verses detailing women’s roles may not provide an accurate description of the nature of their status in antiquity, often slighting women of their function in the early church. This paper will critically examine Phoebe as a diakonos and a prostatis in Rom 16:1-2 to illuminate her status in the first century.
Phoebe: A Diakonos

Of all New Testament women, Phoebe might be the most hotly debated in terms of her role in the early church. She is described in Romans 16:1 as a diakonos, which is generally masked in English translations as “servant.” However, diakonos is the same word that Paul uses to describe his own ministry (1 Cor 3:5; 2 Cor. 3:6, 6:4, 11:23; Eph 3:7; Col 1:23, 25), but it is unlikely that this parallel could ever be gleaned from English translations alone.

"Phoebe: A Prostatis
In addition to being identified as a diakonos, Phoebe is also identified as a prostatis in Romans 16:2. Because prostatis is a hapax legomenon, translations have often been at odds to define this term, most settling with “helper.” But is “helper” true to the nature of this position in antiquity? In determining the proper definition and connotation of prostatis, I will examine its verb form proistēmi in the New Testament to gain a better understanding of the semantic range of prostatis.

Proistēmi in the New Testament
The verb form of prostatis, proistēmi, occurs eight times in three different contexts in the New Testament. These contexts include church leadership (Rom 12:8; 1 Thess 5:12; 1 Tim 5:17), household management (1 Tim 3:4, 5, 12), and the practice of good deeds (Titus 3:8, 14). For the purposes of this article, the first context, proistēmi in church leadership, will take priority in my analysis.
In 1 Tim 5:17, the term hoi proestōtes is used in describing the presbuteroi. This verse can be translated, “Let the elders who rule [hoi proestōtes] well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the Word and in teaching.” Hoi proestōtes is rendered by different nuances in translations, including “rule” (American Standard Version: ASV, English Standard Version: ESV, King James Version: KJV, New American Standard: NAS, New King James Version: NKJV, New Revised Standard Version: NRSV); “direct the affairs of the church” (New International Version: NIV, Today’s New International Version: TNIV); “do their work” (New Living Translation: NLT); and “well-leading” (Young’s Literal Translation: YLT). In whatever fashion, proistēmi is utilized, however, a leadership capacity is being conveyed. Some type of leadership position is in order, for proistēmi can be defined as “to exercise a position of leadership, rule, direct, be at the head (of),”[10] which are all perfectly appropriate here."

To sum up, the Greek word prostatis is translated as leader or ruler--particularly in the church--only when the term is applied to men. When the exact same word is used of Phoebe, she is described as a "servant."

There is strong evidence of gender bias in translation here. I should also probably highlight that the term deaconess does not translate from the Greek text. There is only one word for both men and women, diakonos, which is properly tranlated "deacon." Some church traditions define the roles of deacons and deaconesses differently. This is not consistent with the biblical text.

Translated correctly, you would have ample evidence that women cannot only preach and teach in the church, they can also assume positions of leadership and occupy the role of minister. If you are reading an English Bible derived from the King James, that would explain the problem.

Also, the verses you are using to suggest that women cannot preach in church read as follows:
"1 Corinthians 14:34-35

King James Version (KJV)

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Ironically, this verse says nothing about women "preaching" or being "pastors." No, it is much more prohibitive. If this passage is taken as a universal decree, women may not speak at all. They may not even ask questions. They are to remain utterly silent.

The issue of women as preachers or pastors is simply not being discussed. It is also interesting to note that Paul, in other passages, explains how women should prophesy and pray (which involve speaking) in church. Paul also commends women who were teachers of men (Priscilla), ministers (Phoebe) and apostles (Junia). In fact all of these women are mentioned in Romans chapter 16. All of the commended roles involve teaching (which involves speaking) and/or leadership in the church. Imagine being a teacher, minister or apostle without being permitted to speak where Christians were gathered.

If one wants to understand what Paul was saying in his letter to the Corinthian church, again I think it would be helpful to become aware of the context. As I've said earlier these were letters written between Christians. The letters had a context. We can only accurately understand them in light of this context, and the Bible itself often does not supply it. The original audience knew the context; they did not need to be reminded of it.

Paul mentions for example that he is responding to issues raised by the Corinthian church in an earlier letter to him. What did this letter say? We don't know. We don't have it. There is evidence, however, that Paul was attempting to address and correct patriarchal traditions that originated in Corinth, not from Paul or God. In this way the letter to the Corinthians resembles our exchange here. English translations, again particularly the King James and New King James, do not seem to acknowledge this. At times Paul seems to refer to Corinthian patriarchy and then correct it: “You need to learn, however, that in Christ woman is not different from man, and man is not different from woman. Woman may come from man, but man is born of woman. And both come from God” (1 Corinthians 11:11-12, TIB, emphasis mine).

Also, "church" in Paul's time was not the same thing as "church" in our time. Patriarchal translations of the Bible seem not to recognize this. There was no priesthood, no sanctuary, no alter etc. in the early church. Christians predominantly met in each other's homes; often these homes belonged to women, and some of these women were diakonos, the ministers. To suggest that women could not speak, would be forbidding them to speak in their own homes when other Christians had gathered to meet with God. I do not believe this is what Paul is advocating. It contradicts his other instructions as well as other clear biblical examples of women's roles, particularly if English tranlations do not alter the text.

Please remember that texts were so altered that for centuries a woman named Junia was treated as if she was a man, because admitting she was a woman--and an apostle--contradicted a patriarchal understanding of two verses in Paul's letters, one of which was badly mistranslated as well.

 

[BobE]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

This makes some interesting points;

http://rachelheldevans.com/mutuality-let-women-speak

What an excellent resource! Thanks for the link. I was not familiar with this, and the author explains exactly what I'm trying to convey.

Here's a snippet:
"How do we read the epistles?

“I think Paul would roll over in his grave if he knew we were turning his letters into torah.â€
—F. F. Bruce​

We forget sometimes that the epistles are just that: letters.
In our rush to find proof texts to support our various positions, we tend to skip past the initial greetings that designate the recipients of the message— “to the church of God in Corinth,†“to the churches in Galatia,†“to God’s holy people in Ephesus,†“to Timothy,†“to Titusâ€â€”or those odd little details that remind us that we are essentially listening in on someone else’s conversation--“I have made a fool of myself,†“I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else,†“When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus in Troas, and my scrolls, especially the parchments.â€(You don’t see that last one on many desk calendars.)
I’ve never once heard a sermon preached on the passage in which Paul tells Titus “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons†(Titus 1:12–13), and yet, if these words are truly the inerrant and unchanging words of God intended as universal commands for all people in all places at all times, then the Christian community needs to do a better job of mobilizing against the Cretan people, perhaps constructing soe “God Hates Cretans†signs!"

The rest is well worth reading also!

 

[felix]

Re: The Correct Position on women Preaching? (Not women PASTORS, JUST WOMEN PREACHING

Here is an excellent study done on the use of the words diakonos and prostatis in relation to Phoebe's role in the early church.

by Elizabeth A. McCabe
"Despite the vast number of English translations to choose from in today’s age, no substitute exists for reading the biblical text in its original language.[1] While English translations generally provide a satisfactory reading, some passages are more accurate than others. In particular, verses detailing women’s roles may not provide an accurate description of the nature of their status in antiquity, often slighting women of their function in the early church. This paper will critically examine Phoebe as a diakonos and a prostatis in Rom 16:1-2 to illuminate her status in the first century.
Phoebe: A Diakonos

Of all New Testament women, Phoebe might be the most hotly debated in terms of her role in the early church. She is described in Romans 16:1 as a diakonos, which is generally masked in English translations as “servant.†However, diakonos is the same word that Paul uses to describe his own ministry (1 Cor 3:5; 2 Cor. 3:6, 6:4, 11:23; Eph 3:7; Col 1:23, 25), but it is unlikely that this parallel could ever be gleaned from English translations alone.

The meaning of "servant" for word "diakonos" comes from John 2:5 and John 2:9. However, there is a difference between words used in scripture for servant and ministering. i.e, servant is a hired worker but a minister is not necessarily a servant but both doing the same role.

"Phoebe: A Prostatis
In addition to being identified as a diakonos, Phoebe is also identified as a prostatis in Romans 16:2. Because prostatis is a hapax legomenon, translations have often been at odds to define this term, most settling with “helper.†But is “helper†true to the nature of this position in antiquity? In determining the proper definition and connotation of prostatis, I will examine its verb form proistēmi in the New Testament to gain a better understanding of the semantic range of prostatis.

Proistēmi in the New Testament
The verb form of prostatis, proistēmi, occurs eight times in three different contexts in the New Testament. These contexts include church leadership (Rom 12:8; 1 Thess 5:12; 1 Tim 5:17), household management (1 Tim 3:4, 5, 12), and the practice of good deeds (Titus 3:8, 14). For the purposes of this article, the first context, proistēmi in church leadership, will take priority in my analysis.
In 1 Tim 5:17, the term hoi proestōtes is used in describing the presbuteroi. This verse can be translated, “Let the elders who rule [hoi proestōtes] well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the Word and in teaching.†Hoi proestōtes is rendered by different nuances in translations, including “rule†(American Standard Version: ASV, English Standard Version: ESV, King James Version: KJV, New American Standard: NAS, New King James Version: NKJV, New Revised Standard Version: NRSV); “direct the affairs of the church†(New International Version: NIV, Today’s New International Version: TNIV); “do their work†(New Living Translation: NLT); and “well-leading†(Young’s Literal Translation: YLT). In whatever fashion, proistēmi is utilized, however, a leadership capacity is being conveyed. Some type of leadership position is in order, for proistēmi can be defined as “to exercise a position of leadership, rule, direct, be at the head (of),â€[10] which are all perfectly appropriate here."

To sum up, the Greek word prostatis is translated as leader or ruler--particularly in the church--only when the term is applied to men. When the exact same word is used of Phoebe, she is described as a "servant."

There is strong evidence of gender bias in translation here. I should also probably highlight that the term deaconess does not translate from the Greek text. There is only one word for both men and women, diakonos, which is properly tranlated "deacon." Some church traditions define the roles of deacons and deaconesses differently. This is not consistent with the biblical text.

The same verse Rom 16:2 regarding Phoebe also speaks about "prostatis" to Paul himself and others.

Case 1: Ruler or Leader.
Is she a ruler / leader of Paul?

Case 2: Helper or Succourer.
Is she a Helper/Succourer (one who helps in need) to Paul?

Case 1 is simply wrong and contradicts Paul's own words with 1Tim 2:12.


Translated correctly, you would have ample evidence that women cannot only preach and teach in the church, they can also assume positions of leadership and occupy the role of minister. If you are reading an English Bible derived from the King James, that would explain the problem.[/QUOTE]

"role of ministering" is very different from a "Pastoral role". Minister is a broader term that can be simply considered servant of God but the "role" for a Pastor is to shepherd the flock of God. You cannot equate "ministering role" to "pastoral/shepherd role" just by using the word "Minister" which we commonly use today.

Also, the verses you are using to suggest that women cannot preach in church read as follows:
"1 Corinthians 14:34-35

King James Version (KJV)

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Ironically, this verse says nothing about women "preaching" or being "pastors." No, it is much more prohibitive. If this passage is taken as a universal decree, women may not speak at all. They may not even ask questions. They are to remain utterly silent.

The issue of women as preachers or pastors is simply not being discussed. It is also interesting to note that Paul, in other passages, explains how women should prophesy and pray (which involve speaking) in church. Paul also commends women who were teachers of men (Priscilla), ministers (Phoebe) and apostles (Junia). In fact all of these women are mentioned in Romans chapter 16. All of the commended roles involve teaching (which involves speaking) and/or leadership in the church. Imagine being a teacher, minister or apostle without being permitted to speak where Christians were gathered.

If one wants to understand what Paul was saying in his letter to the Corinthian church, again I think it would be helpful to become aware of the context. As I've said earlier these were letters written between Christians. The letters had a context. We can only accurately understand them in light of this context, and the Bible itself often does not supply it. The original audience knew the context; they did not need to be reminded of it.

Paul mentions for example that he is responding to issues raised by the Corinthian church in an earlier letter to him. What did this letter say? We don't know. We don't have it. There is evidence, however, that Paul was attempting to address and correct patriarchal traditions that originated in Corinth, not from Paul or God. In this way the letter to the Corinthians resembles our exchange here. English translations, again particularly the King James and New King James, do not seem to acknowledge this. At times Paul seems to refer to Corinthian patriarchy and then correct it: “You need to learn, however, that in Christ woman is not different from man, and man is not different from woman. Woman may come from man, but man is born of woman. And both come from God†(1 Corinthians 11:11-12, TIB, emphasis mine).

Also, "church" in Paul's time was not the same thing as "church" in our time. Patriarchal translations of the Bible seem not to recognize this. There was no priesthood, no sanctuary, no alter etc. in the early church. Christians predominantly met in each other's homes; often these homes belonged to women, and some of these women were diakonos, the ministers. To suggest that women could not speak, would be forbidding them to speak in their own homes when other Christians had gathered to meet with God. I do not believe this is what Paul is advocating. It contradicts his other instructions as well as other clear biblical examples of women's roles, particularly if English tranlations do not alter the text.[/SIZE][/FONT]

I am not objecting the fact that women can be pastors or preachers but only under the condition that the audience are like children to her or to an audience of women.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 commends with the first letter to Timothy in 1Tim 2:12 which has nothing to do with Corinthian church.

(1Tim 2:12) And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.

It is true that church is not a building and it is an assembly or group of people. However, as I mentioned earlier as in case of Priscilla and Aquila, there is nothing wrong in teaching the right way of God if someone error either in small groups or home meetings but not before the church assembly. Just because a woman shared her house to be a home church does not mean she can teach or have authority over men coming to that church.

Please remember that texts were so altered that for centuries a woman named Junia was treated as if she was a man, because admitting she was a woman--and an apostle--contradicted a patriarchal understanding of two verses in Paul's letters, one of which was badly mistranslated as well.

I don't think so. The reference regarding him/her simply means that he/she is a relative and a fellow prisoner with Paul. Even if she is a female, what makes you think that she is an "apostle"?

As you know the word "apostle" simply means "messenger" or a "delegate" for Christ but "apostle" was a name given by Christ Himself and He named only the 12 which He confirms in Rev 21:14. The title "Apostle" is not the same as the role of messenger for Christ. The title "Apostle" does not increase in number however, "the role of messenger for Christ" is one of the role in Church.

(Luke 6:13) And when it was day, He called His disciples to [Himself;] and from them He chose twelve whom He also named apostles:

Messenger for Christ or essentially preaching the gospel is not inside the church. No one is going to preach the gospel to a Church for a church does not require gospel as they are already believers. I would relate "Messenger for Christ" to be more like a missionary.