Women Pastors in the Pulpit............what sayest thou?

[Jethro Bodine]

I've seen this brought up about Deborah... that the only reason why she was put as judge over Israel was because God could not find a worthy man... but the Bible does not teach this at all.... there is no hint of any such reason in the account of Deborah that God searched and could not find a male to judge, therefore chose Deborah...

Since Deborah judged Israel around the turn of the 1100 century BC and Isaiah didn't show up until several hundred years later... it seems unlikely that Isaiah's prophecy had anything to do with Deborah... especially since Deborah's rule brought Israel a major military victory then 40 years of peace... Isaiah's prophecy concerns a curse, not a time of blessing.

And I agree with every one of your points*. I wasn't trying to say otherwise.

The point I'm making is it isn't the standard of God to put women in authority over men. There's probably some good reason why he had to do that. I personally don't believe Deborah just happened to be the next great Judge of Israel to come along. All by itself it violates God's principle of 'Adam first, Eve second'. There were probably compelling reasons. The Isaiah scripture shows the possibility that God would/could do that.


*with the exception that there may be small hints at the failures of Israel being the reason Deborah was raised up. It doesn't say it, but I believe there are hints there, as small as they are.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

A Man's haircut, wearing pants, and trying to fill a role that God intended for a man as a preacher,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I smell a feminist.

And with the history of rape and getting thrown out of cars,,,,,,,,,

I would suspect at the very least she is somewhat misandric

I have been greatly encouraged by Joyce Meyer's speaking in the past. I have NEVER heard or seen a hint of feminism in this woman. Not an ounce! Exactly the opposite. She teaches godly submission of women to their husbands.

 

[handy]

Maybe it's just me, but something about the mannish haircut and that she is wearing pants,,,,,,,,,,,,,


It just makes me think Gloria Steinem might be whispering in her ear

It's just you, Joe...

You do realize when that verse was written, all people, men and women alike, wore long flowing robes. The style of dress has nothing to do with whether it's "male" or "female"... robes, long flowing or toga style, came in men's and women's. Just as pants come in men's and women's. Old Testament people would recognize right away if a man wore women's robes or a woman wore men's robes... just as we recognize transvestite men and women today.

I don't watch/listen to Meyer, simply because I don't really watch or listen to TV preachers at all.... but there is nothing unfeminine about her attire or her hairstyle... if a man walked around dressed like her, he'd look very gay... she meets the standard of modest dress.

Jethro, I do agree that Deborah's rule over Israel was an anomaly... perhaps just to show that God can and does gift women with leadership abilities and place them in certain places at certain times... as for the hints, I agree as well, I've studied them and they are present with other, male, judges... God doesn't say why He placed Deborah as judge over His people... but He did see to it that it was recorded that she was a very capable leader.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro, I do agree that Deborah's rule over Israel was an anomaly... perhaps just to show that God can and does gift women with leadership abilities and place them in certain places at certain times... as for the hints, I agree as well, I've studied them and they are present with other, male, judges... God doesn't say why He placed Deborah as judge over His people... but He did see to it that it was recorded that she was a very capable leader.

My position exactly.

 

[DarkHorseRising]

A Man's haircut, wearing pants, and trying to fill a role that God intended for a man as a preacher,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I smell a feminist.

And with the history of rape and getting thrown out of cars,,,,,,,,,

I would suspect at the very least she is somewhat misandric

I smell an insecure male.

If you'd like to join us in the 21st century, women do wear pants. Women do have short hair. I'd tell you about driving cars and doing math, but I don't want to overload your epinephrine receptors. Yep, women are not just for popping out babies anymore!

On a more serious note, the fact that you would use her "history of rape" as an excuse to label her a feminist is repulsive. Civilized people do not use sexual assaults as justification to condemn a victim. Perhaps you are the one who is misogynistic?

 

[joethemechanic]

Sure women are for doing more than popping out babies. If they know how to be obedient, then they are good for cooking and cleaning too.

But they don't belong in the pulpit.

If they want to be productive Christians, they can cook a nice church dinner to raise funds and to bond the fellowship.

 

[Boidae21]

Sure women are for doing more than popping out babies. If they know how to be obedient, then they are good for cooking and cleaning too.

But they don't belong in the pulpit.

If they want to be productive Christians, they can cook a nice church dinner to raise funds and to bond the fellowship.

I smell a male power trip.

 

[handy]

Joyce Meyer's teaches biblical submission... there is nothing misandric about her in any way...

Unless, Joe, you've listened to her teaching and can come up with some concrete examples of feminism...

As for your thoughts on women in the church.. be very, very thankful you weren't in Rome in the early church... Paul would have been instructing you to do whatever Phoebe told you to do.

This isn't the first time you've come up with some pretty misogynistic comments of your own. I wonder what happened to you to cause you to have such disdain for your sister's in Christ... but you should nail it to the cross brother, build that bridge and get over it.

 

[Boidae21]

This isn't the first time you've come up with some pretty misogynistic comments of your own.

And here I edited my post because it sounded a bit harsh. Maybe I should have left it as is?

 

[DarkHorseRising]

Sure women are for doing more than popping out babies. If they know how to be obedient, then they are good for cooking and cleaning too.

But they don't belong in the pulpit.

If they want to be productive Christians, they can cook a nice church dinner to raise funds and to bond the fellowship.

View attachment 2528

 

[Kidron]

The Bible has plenty of examples of women in leadership roles.

"Women in Leadership roles in the Bible"

would be a very thin book, DarkHorse.

We'd have to get rid of Ester as she is not in a leadership role, and we'd have to get rid of Mary, as she is not in a leadership role.

So, tell us, oh ye of redundant continual opinions without any proof, of the "plenty of examples of women in the bible in leadership roles".

take your time.
You'll need it to find any using a bible.

Now remember........we are looking for you to show us women in "leadership roles", using a bible as your proof text.




K

 

[Brightmorningstar]

I think the two key examples for me are the prohibitions to leadership and teaching in the Corinthian epistles and the apparent leaders such as deacons in Romans. This in the overall Bible context of the man as the head of the woman. I see 1 Cor 7 saying the husband's body belongs to the wife, adn vice versa and whilst the man is the final decision maker he needs to make those decisions in conjuction with the woman. Although the testimony of women wasnt accepted at the time God chose women to be the first to see Jesus had risen from the dead.
To me, women teachers yes, but ultimatley under a man.
But this isnt a salvation issue, as important as it is. I am perfectly happy to attend churches that have both views.


NB half the problem again is the liberals in the church with their secular humanism equality ideas

 

[Grazer]

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

 

[Brightmorningstar]

Oh dear. False teachers gather around them people who itching ears hear what they want to hear.
I concur with much of what the above link says, but its potentially from the same poor starting point of humanism..
Like this
But as I mentioned on Monday, when first-century rabbis like Jesus and Paul allude to the stories of the Torah,
Doh! Jesus is the Son of God and Paul preached what he received from the risen Jesus.

The prohibitions for women in the epistles are for me one of the most problematic things in the NT. How do we understand these in holistic context? I think holistically they should be addressing just women in those churches, though the text suggests not.
That is why I cant take a side on this issue, but can support both churches that allow and do not allow women in overall leadership (providing the churches are not apostate humanist)

 

[DarkHorseRising]

"Women in Leadership roles in the Bible"

would be a very thin book, DarkHorse.

We'd have to get rid of Ester as she is not in a leadership role, and we'd have to get rid of Mary, as she is not in a leadership role.

So, tell us, oh ye of redundant continual opinions without any proof, of the "plenty of examples of women in the bible in leadership roles".

take your time.
You'll need it to find any using a bible.

Now remember........we are looking for you to show us women in "leadership roles", using a bible as your proof text.




K

Your knowledge of the Bible would be an even thinner book.

Mary Magdalene, instructed by Christ to share the message of the resurrection with the Apostles (Matthew 28:10 and John 20:17). She also took part in organizing the logistics of travel with Jesus (Luke 8:3)

Women are allowed to be prophets, in fact Christ has said this will happen (Acts 2:17). One example is Anna in Luke 2, who was so heavily involved in worship that she never left the temple. She taught and preached about Jesus to all who would listen.

Phoebe was mentioned by Paul as a deacon of the church at Cenchrea, and instructs readers (presumably including men) to help her (Romans 16:1). Same with Lydia and Dorcas, they clearly had high positions in their churches and were well qualified to preach the Gospel.

Then there's Junia, who was described as "outstanding among the apostles" (Romans 16:7), which sounds like she did a bit more than cook and clean for her husband.

It's odd that you don't consider Esther, because she was Queen of Persia (and to head you off at the pass, Queens were people of high power. Sheba, for example, with her naval fleet and five tons of gold. Also Cleopatra). Esther took initiative to save God's chosen people from genocide. It's worth noting that if the Davidian lineage had been cut off, scripture would not have been fulfilled. Esther may also have had a hand in influencing the king to rebuild Jerusalem, which was also necessary for scripture to be realized. Obviously God would not allow human events to thwart His will, but it's quite telling that He very clearly used Esther in an important position to fulfill His plan.

Both Deborah and Huldah were prophetesses of some note, with Deborah leading the Jewish people for 4 decades, leading in a political, military, religious, and judiciary capacity (Judges 4 & 5) and Huldah being consulted by one of the most God-fearing of kings (Josiah, 2 Kings 22).

Miriam too, she's mentioned alongside Moses and Aaron as leaders of Israel as they wander throughout the desert (Micah 6:4, along with events throughout Exodus). She specifically took decisive action in Exodus 2, to save Moses life, brokering a deal with the Pharaoh's daughter and ensuring God could keep His promise to Israel.

Women are clearly given a role to preach the Gospel, as they were present at Pentecost and received the gift of tongues along with the male followers (Acts 1 & 2). Unless you think the Holy Spirit made a mistake somehow.

Galatians 3 makes it clear that "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

I could go on, but frankly it's pretty stupid of me to even type this much, as you're just going to either ignore the evidence or find some ridiculous way to dismiss it.

 

[Brightmorningstar]

Apart from that being one of the best and most convincing summaries I have seen for women in leadership, it is spoiled by the final presumption that this evidence automatically overrules the evidence against.

But I must say thanks DarkHorseRising from me at least, for a very helpful post.

 

[Kidron]

Deuteronomy 22:5
King James Version (KJV)
5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.

Im pretty sure that Jesus, Paul, and the New Testament manuscripts predate "pants"., "jeans", or the "zipper" in the front.

So, whatever Paul was wearing in AD 40, be certain to tell Joyce Meyers and Handy to stay out of it if they decide to preach in your pulpit.;)



K

 

[handy]

Im pretty sure that Jesus, Paul, and the New Testament manuscripts predate "pants"., "jeans", or the "zipper" in the front.

So, whatever Paul was wearing in AD 40, be certain to tell Joyce Meyers and Handy to stay out of it if they decide to preach in your pulpit.;)



K

I promise, I never wear tunic and mantle secured with a girdle...

DarkHorseRising, that was a really good summary of how women were very busy within the Church... Jesus did not despise women disciples (remember how He told Martha not to be so worried, that Mary sitting at His feet learning from Him was a better choice?) and Paul certainly didn't ignore the many gifted women that he knew.

The thing is, if one looks at the overseers, the bishops, the elders and the rulers of the Church... they are indeed all men. The women worked side by side, even being sent by the leadership to do important tasks (Phoebe sent to Rome)... but they tended to work with male leadership, not be the final authority. Even women who were clearly prominent in the church, such as Priscilla and Junia, are presented as being united with their husbands in ministry. Phoebe worked directly under Paul.

As usual, Satan's tactics seem to be to pull us into error... doesn't really matter which error, just as long as the church errs. Somewhere after the first century, the church caved to the long standing societal pressure of treating women as little more than chattel. That lasted for a very long time. Then, with the rise of the feminist movement, the church started embracing women as equals again... but only to swing to the other side, arguing that the Bible really doesn't say what it seems to very clearly say.

Now, there's a very good case to be made that Paul's strictures about women in leadership and teaching positions are not applicable to the entire church for all time, but rather limited to the special climate surrounding Corinth and Ephesus where women leading and teaching would serve as a hindrance to the gospel... I've seen the case, studied it and agree that it very well may be correct... but still, in my own spirit, I have to agree that women, while every bit as gifted as men and should be using their gifts every bit as much as men, should do so under the headship of male leadership in the church. I've walked both sides of this issue for about 15 years now... and I see that women submitting to male authority in the church makes for stronger, more stable churches.

 

[Kidron]

Your knowledge of the Bible would be an even thinner book.

Mary Magdalene, instructed by Christ to share the message of the resurrection with the Apostles (Matthew 28:10 and John 20:17). She also took part in organizing the logistics of travel with Jesus (Luke 8:3)

Listen, Dark Horse, your previous comment was concerning "women in authority/leadership positions in the bible:.
I'll now readdress that, as you have now spun your response off the chart.

So, that Jesus told a woman here or there to do something......that is your idea of a leadership role?
Is that the best you can do?
That you can find some female in the OT who finished a job or was available..........that is your idea of a "women in a leadership role"?
So, as i said, your proof is pretty thin, razor thin, regarding women in Leadership roles, as found in the bible.
Now I mentioned Ester, so, you want to borrow mine?
I suppose that next you'll be saying that the mother and grandmother of Timothy were in "leadership roles" because they are mentioned in the scriptures.
And yes, Mary the mother of Jesus is mentioned in the bible, yet this mentioning is, according to you, a leadership position in the bible?
Thin,, thin, ......going, going..................................gone., unless by "Leadership", you mean....."mentioned".
And according to your needlessly elongated reply, i guess that is how you see it.
Ok, you think a bible mention is a leadership role.
Well great.
That means the Donkey who gave the Messiah a ride, was in a leadership position.;).........as after all, the ass got an honorable mention.;)





K

..................

 

[DarkHorseRising]

..................

That's your rebuttal?? I couldn't write something more vague if I tried. You argued that there are no women in leadership roles; I gave you a list of many who were. Then you complain I wrote too much and am somehow wrong, but won't touch on ANY of the examples I gave. Instead, you hand-pick people I never mentioned, and argue for why THEY aren't examples of it. You're a cowardly debater and your strawman arguments are juvenile at best. You didn't give me a single rebuttal as for why the women I mentioned don't deserve to be called leaders.