Why do the Nazarene ordain women?

[Browneyes84]

I don't mean to start a debate here but the Bible does say for women not to teach men or to be in spiritual leadership roles over men. I find myself halfway believing in that and halfway not. What is the Nazarene church's viewpoint?

[AngloWesleyan]

Ironically, it was the evangelical denominations which led the way in women's ordination. I believe the Nazarenes have been ordaining women for some time now. The liberal mainline denominations didn't catch up until the mid-20th century. Apostolic churches (those which believe in some form of Apostolic Succession, including Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and most Anglican provinces) do not ordain women and never will. Biblically and historically, women may serve as deacons, but not as presbyters (priests/elders) or bishops.

[silentpoet]

I think I recall reading it was somewhere in the 40s when the Nazarene community started ordaining women. Whatever the decade, it was quite awhile back.

[hlaltimus]

The Nazarene Church itself came out of the old Holiness movement in America in the 1800's which was a sort of revitalization of the Methodist Church then and there. The same thing happened in England and accordingly produced the Primitive Methodist Church. That the Holiness movement introduced women preachers I do know, and that might explain how the Nazarene Church got it. We are currently considering joining a Nazarene Church even though I do not believe in a woman ministering over both men and women in a capacity of authority, at least. Even though I am longer a true Presbyterian, I wish there was left on this apostate planet one good, old fashioned Wesleyan Church. We miss you John.

[vicarius]

The Church of the Nazarene was ordaining women from it's official organization in 1908. You can actually go back further than that with some of the holiness churches that eventually became part of the Church of the Nazarene.

Phineas Bresee he first General Superintendant was fond of quoting Acts 2:17-18 as authority for women to be allowed to preach.

The Church of the Nazarene also cites the following Biblical refrences in support of it's recognitin of God's calling on women to preach his word. (Joel 2:28-29; 21:8-9; Romans 16:1, 3, 7; Philippians 4:2-3)

If I understand the reasoning correctly. The dispensation of the Holy Spirit is available to all. With that dispensation, comes authority from God. We also understand from Galatians 3:28 that there is no jew or greek, slave or free, nor male or female because god has made us one in Christ Jesus. Therefore God calls whom he wills to proclaim his word.

Here is the official position from the Manual of the Church of the Nazarene.



903.5. Women in Ministry
The Church of the Nazarene supports the right of women to use their God-given spiritual gifts within the church, affirms the historic right of women to be elected and appointed to places of leadership within the Church of the Nazarene, including the offices of both elder and deacon.

The purpose of Christ’s redemptive work is to set God’s creation free from the curse of the Fall. Those who are “in Christ” are new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17). In this redemptive community, no human being is to be regarded as inferior on the basis of social status, race, or gender (Galatians 3:26-28).

Acknowledging the apparent paradox created by Paul’s instruction to Timothy (1 Timothy 2:11-12) and to the church in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:33-34), we believe interpreting these passages as limiting the role of women in ministry presents serious conflicts with specific passages of scripture that commend female participation in spiritual leadership roles (Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-18; 21:8-9; Romans 16:1, 3, 7; Philippians 4:2-3), and violates the spirit and practice of the Wesleyan-holiness tradition. Finally, it is incompatible with the character of God presented throughout Scripture, especially as revealed in the person of Jesus Christ.


Links that may be useful.
http://www.nazarenepastor.org/cms/Resources/WomenClergy/tabid/180/Default.aspx
http://www.wynkoopcenter.org/Mission/Chapel/Sermon/sermon.html
http://www.ondoctrine.com/2cow0001.htm

Books about Nazarene Women Clergy

"Ordained Women in the Church of the Nazarene" by Rebecca Laird
"A Woman's Place? Leadership in the Church" by C.S. Cowles

[Texas Lynn]

In answer to the original question in the thread title, they have determined to not engage in institutional sexism. bless them for that.

[Onomatopoeia]

Probably because simply ordaining a woman doesn't automatically conflict with not placing women in leadership roles over men. Our church has a female children's pastor, which I think is an excellent case in point.

[geelee]

I'm a woman and busy with my second year training to become a Pastor. In the Church of the Nazarene that I grew up in.
I hope to be ordained some day in the future. I do not plan to pastor a ccongregation at this time, but are called to mission and evangelize. Woman was allowed to preach within the Nazerene church since the very beginning.

[Shane Roach]

I don't understand why this thread is focused only on the Nazarene. The United Methodists have women in such capacities as well.

I looked at the verses quoted to support women in ministry, and am always struck that they are universally prophetic ministries or works ministries, and not administrative in nature.

I do not understand how one serves God by doing something God said not to do. I hope all people who seek to serve the Lord in official capacities try hard not to pass off Biblical injunctions, not just concerning women in leadership but all the Biblical injunctions concerning the selection of leaders and the discipline of the church, as somehow not applying to the modern state of affairs.

I agree also with the insights of geelee, mamachick, hlaltimus, and AngloWesleyan. Obviously, if geelee finds herself being called to pastor a church I will not understand that, but the call to other ministries has never been at issue.

[Texas Lynn]

I don't understand why this thread is focused only on the Nazarene. The United Methodists have women in such capacities as well.

That was what the person was interested in.

I do not understand how one serves God by doing something God said not to do.

There's certainly no evidence God said women could not serve as clergy at all.

I hope all people who seek to serve the Lord in official capacities try hard not to pass off Biblical injunctions, not just concerning women in leadership but all the Biblical injunctions concerning the selection of leaders and the discipline of the church, as somehow not applying to the modern state of affairs.

I'm not sure what any of this means.

if geelee finds herself being called to pastor a church I will not understand that

Sometimes things which occur are not understandable for us, but that is entirely okay.

[Shane Roach]

Well, now the OP'er knows the United Methodists have the same policy. :) My point was merely to point out that this is not specific to the Nazarenes.

[vicarius]

This website provides several refrences regarding Women in ministry http://www.nazarenepastor.org/women_clergy.html.

The Masters thesis Hearing God's Call: The Role of (http://www.nazarene.org/ssm/adult/women/clergy/)Women (http://www.nazarene.org/ssm/adult/women/clergy/)Clergy (http://www.nazarene.org/ssm/adult/women/clergy/) by Richard Houseal provides some intesting historical statistics regarding the number of women in a variety of ministerial roles in the Church of the Nazarene. As a percentage, most women have not served as pastors, but served as evangelists or as "other credentialed ministers."

Stan Ingersol's "Nazarene Women and Religion Sources on Clergy and Lay Women in the Church (http://www.nazarenepastor.org/pdf/womenbio.pdf)
" provides a bibliography of works by and about women in ministry who served in several Wesleyan denominations.

Some of the links under "Ten Articles" are broken. Here are the ones that work.

Stan Ingersol, A Woman of Consequence: The Legacies of Elliot J. Sheeks (http://www.umkc.edu/KCAA/DUSTYSHELF/DS18.HTM#A%20WOMAN%20OF%20CONSEQUENCE)

Stan Ingersol, Woman in a New World: Olive Winchester’s Life in Theology and Higher Education (http://www.nazarenepastor.org/womenclergy/pdf/nhfebmar2002.pdf)

Ed Robinson, Women in Ministry: Conviction or Culture (http://www.nph.com/nphweb/html/htol/archivedICissues/Holiness/2000/00_03feature.html)

Timeline: Selected Dates in Wesleyan/Holiness History of Ordaining Women (http://www.nazarenepastor.org/womenclergy/timeline.shtml)

Rich Houseal, Needed: Missional-Minded Women to Start Churches (http://www.nazarenenewchurches.org/pdf/NSWomen.pdf)

As to women feeling called to be a pastor, if they can speak with a prophetic voice, what keeps them from performing administrative duties as well? If we recognize that God may use a woman speak his word, hasn't he granted her authority over all who hear? Ordination as an elder is merely the Church's recognition of the prophetic authority already granted by God.

[Shane Roach]

As to women feeling called to be a pastor, if they can speak with a prophetic voice, what keeps them from performing administrative duties as well? If we recognize that God may use a woman speak his word, hasn't he granted her authority over all who hear? Ordination as an elder is merely the Church's recognition of the prophetic authority already granted by God.

Prophecy is not a gift of authority. Furthermore, I have never in my life heard a man OR woman prophecy in the sense the Bible speaks of. People now try to pass prophecy off as being apt to interpret the scriptures, which is in actuality more a gift of teaching, wisdom, or knowledge.

It is not an easy thing for modern folks to hear, but the specific reasoning for women not to be raised into positions of authority were that a: it is simply shamefull to have women exercising authority over men as the clergy, and b: they are more apt to be misled.

This will draw some heavy disagreement I feel sure, but the bottom line is among those churches where women are most apt to be found in positions of administrative leadership, it seems to me that there is also a marked tendency to fall away from other issues of church discipline and policy as well.

I don't think it was for nothing that the Levites were to be men, for example.

If the Bible were less clear on the issue I might feel differently. It is not, though, and on top of that, I have never met or heard of a female pastor whose contributions to the Church outweighed the controversy over directly disobeying a clear injunction from the scriptures concerning how to choose authoritarian clergy.

If need be, I will simply seek out churches with male pastors. If a woman feels this sort of schism in the church is worth it, she must do as she feels is right, but I think that it is impossible to reconcile doing something that is forbidden by the Lord, and doing it for the Lord. You don't "serve" by exalting yourself up over the very people who established the church.

[HeatherJay]

The Church of the Nazarene was ordaining women from it's official organization in 1908. You can actually go back further than that with some of the holiness churches that eventually became part of the Church of the Nazarene.

Phineas Bresee he first General Superintendant was fond of quoting Acts 2:17-18 as authority for women to be allowed to preach.

The Church of the Nazarene also cites the following Biblical refrences in support of it's recognitin of God's calling on women to preach his word. (Joel 2:28-29; 21:8-9; Romans 16:1, 3, 7; Philippians 4:2-3)

If I understand the reasoning correctly. The dispensation of the Holy Spirit is available to all. With that dispensation, comes authority from God. We also understand from Galatians 3:28 that there is no jew or greek, slave or free, nor male or female because god has made us one in Christ Jesus. Therefore God calls whom he wills to proclaim his word.

Here is the official position from the Manual of the Church of the Nazarene.



903.5. Women in Ministry
The Church of the Nazarene supports the right of women to use their God-given spiritual gifts within the church, affirms the historic right of women to be elected and appointed to places of leadership within the Church of the Nazarene, including the offices of both elder and deacon.

The purpose of Christ’s redemptive work is to set God’s creation free from the curse of the Fall. Those who are “in Christ” are new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17). In this redemptive community, no human being is to be regarded as inferior on the basis of social status, race, or gender (Galatians 3:26-28).

Acknowledging the apparent paradox created by Paul’s instruction to Timothy (1 Timothy 2:11-12) and to the church in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:33-34), we believe interpreting these passages as limiting the role of women in ministry presents serious conflicts with specific passages of scripture that commend female participation in spiritual leadership roles (Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-18; 21:8-9; Romans 16:1, 3, 7; Philippians 4:2-3), and violates the spirit and practice of the Wesleyan-holiness tradition. Finally, it is incompatible with the character of God presented throughout Scripture, especially as revealed in the person of Jesus Christ.


Links that may be useful.
http://www.nazarenepastor.org/cms/Resources/WomenClergy/tabid/180/Default.aspx
http://www.wynkoopcenter.org/Mission/Chapel/Sermon/sermon.html
http://www.ondoctrine.com/2cow0001.htm

Books about Nazarene Women Clergy

"Ordained Women in the Church of the Nazarene" by Rebecca Laird
"A Woman's Place? Leadership in the Church" by C.S. Cowles



Thanks. :wave: Excellent summary. :)

[Texas Lynn]

...the specific reasoning for women not to be raised into positions of authority were that a: it is simply shamefull to have women exercising authority over men as the clergy...

In the minds of sexists, sure. We've advanced beyond that.

...and b: they are more apt to be misled.

This would just be laughable sexist nonsense if it weren't such puerile hate speech.

...the bottom line is among those churches where women are most apt to be found in positions of administrative leadership, it seems to me that there is also a marked tendency to fall away from other issues of church discipline and policy as well.

IOW, the Mainline churches. We have indeed moved away from some of the awful tendencies of churches in the past, and that is an excellent change. It is no secret those churches which most affirm the dignity of all ordain female clergy.

I don't think it was for nothing that the Levites were to be men, for example.

Of course not, they were a sexist society.

I have never met or heard of a female pastor whose contributions to the Church outweighed the controversy over directly disobeying a clear injunction from the scriptures concerning how to choose authoritarian clergy.

The relationship of one Christin to his or her pastor is, and always has been, a voluntary one. What "authority" exists therein is mostly imaginary. One always has a right to cease such a relationship...so far.

If a woman feels this sort of schism in the church is worth it, she must do as she feels is right, but I think that it is impossible to reconcile doing something that is forbidden by the Lord, and doing it for the Lord.

The "Lord" said nothing about it. The schism are the creations of the sexists.

[vicarius]

Prophecy is not a gift of authority. Furthermore, I have never in my life heard a man OR woman prophecy in the sense the Bible speaks of. People now try to pass prophecy off as being apt to interpret the scriptures, which is in actuality more a gift of teaching, wisdom, or knowledge.

Ok, if what we call "prophecy" is more a gift of teaching, wisdom, and knowledge, are you saying God doesn't give these gifts to women? If God does give these gifts to women, then isn't she still speaking with God's authority? If she is speaking with God's authority, how should the church recognize that authority?

It is not an easy thing for modern folks to hear, but the specific reasoning for women not to be raised into positions of authority were that a: it is simply shameful to have women exercising authority over men as the clergy

Are you a pastor? Usually when I hear a man make this argument he is resisting a call to ministry. I don't know how things are in the UMC, but the Nazarene Church is short on pastors. If there are not enough men to fill the pulpits, then who else is going to do it?

b: they are more apt to be misled.

Hmm, I guess that is why women bear most of the child rearing responsibilities. God must prefer that children be raised by the gender most inclined to theological error.

If women are most likely to be misled, men are most likely to mislead. Just check the broken hearts club. I know more women whose spirits have been damaged by manipulative, deceitful, abusive men than the reverse.

If women are more likely to be misled, why do we have more women attending church and bringing their children with them while their husbands stay home? Very few married men who attend church do so without their wives. My observation is that women tend to have a greater spiritual hunger and are more spiritually stable than men.

This will draw some heavy disagreement I feel sure, but the bottom line is among those churches where women are most apt to be found in positions of administrative leadership, it seems to me that there is also a marked tendency to fall away from other issues of church discipline and policy as well.

1. If you believe this, why are you affiliated with Wesleyan churches in general, and specifically the UMC? I'm hard pressed to think of any church in the Wesleyan tradition that does not ordain women, or allow them to lead in positions of authority over men.

2. Specifically which issues of church discipline and policy are you referring to? I am aware of controversies among some denominations, but they are not universal in all denominations that ordain women. Some of the most conservative churches I know of, theologically and in personal lifestyle, ordain women.

3. Why are you focused on administration? The greater threat, if one is prone to deception, is that she then teaches that deception as truth. If a woman can teach, espouse wisdom or reveal knowledge, why can’t she make sure the bills are paid, plan the order of worship, or have oversight over the many ministries in the church?

I don't think it was for nothing that the Levites were to be men, for example.

None of them were deceived, misled the people, corrupted their office or abused their authority? What about the fact that now that we are under the new covenant there is no Jew or Greek, free or slave, male or female, aren't we are one in Christ Jesus?

If the Bible were less clear on the issue I might feel differently. It is not, though, and on top of that, I have never met or heard of a female pastor whose contributions to the Church outweighed the controversy over directly disobeying a clear injunction from the scriptures concerning how to choose authoritarian clergy.

What controversy? I've been in several churches where there were female pastors and there was no issue. I've attended several camp meetings, revivals and district assemblies where women presided in some way over the proceedings. I never saw a controversy due to their gender.

If need be, I will simply seek out churches with male pastors. If a woman feels this sort of schism in the church is worth it, she must do as she feels is right, but I think that it is impossible to reconcile doing something that is forbidden by the Lord, and doing it for the Lord. You don't "serve" by exalting yourself up over the very people who established the church.

Again, why are you affiliated with the UMC? Will you move to another district or state if you have a male pastor who is subject to the spiritual guidance and authority of a female District Superintendent or Bishop?

Who said the women were exalting themselves? If God called them, and the church recognize that calling, isn't it God who is exalting them and the church confirming God's call? Do you know how they struggled to answer God's call and submit to his will? The process of preparing for the ministry is long and arduous, the duties of a pastor are demanding, time consuming and thankless, and for the most part the pay is pathetic. Why would anyone go through all that to 'exalt themselves' when they could be better off financially and have more time to themselves and their family if they didn't feel called of God.

By the way, people didn't establish the church, God did. I know me and my 'XY' chromosome brothers didn't establish the church.

[HeatherJay]

Vicarius, I do so wish you'd let me rep you. Amen, brother. :amen:

[Shane Roach]

Ok, if what we call "prophecy" is more a gift of teaching, wisdom, and knowledge, are you saying God doesn't give these gifts to women? If God does give these gifts to women, then isn't she still speaking with God's authority? If she is speaking with God's authority, how should the church recognize that authority?

How do you you figure they have God's "authority"? If they are teaching what is in the Bible, fine. If they are not, how is it authority? If anyone of either gender has a gift and wants to serve, let them, so long as they are not violating some Biblical injunction.


Are you a pastor? Usually when I hear a man make this argument he is resisting a call to ministry. I don't know how things are in the UMC, but the Nazarene Church is short on pastors. If there are not enough men to fill the pulpits, then who else is going to do it?

I don't know about resisting any call. I know when I was in the Wesley Foundation, the pastor there lied about me and I tried to take it up with my home church, and nothing was done. I think by and large church discipline is poor everywhere I have been able to go to church, but you have to go to find other Christians don't you?

Hmm, I guess that is why women bear most of the child rearing responsibilities. God must prefer that children be raised by the gender most inclined to theological error.

What's interesting to me is that you use sarcasm, and are praised for it, when what we are speaking of here is highly important and is clearly outlined in the Bible.

If women are most likely to be misled, men are most likely to mislead. Just check the broken hearts club. I know more women whose spirits have been damaged by manipulative, deceitful, abusive men than the reverse.

My personal experience is that this is flatly false. It is entirely anecdotal, but I have not seen any tendency of men to be worse than women on this front. Obviously, where physical abuse is concerned, women simply lack the capacity by and large, but on all the other fronts no.

If women are more likely to be misled, why do we have more women attending church and bringing their children with them while their husbands stay home? Very few married men who attend church do so without their wives. My observation is that women tend to have a greater spiritual hunger and are more spiritually stable than men.

Or a lot of women are misled into relationships with non-spiritual men, whereas spiritual men select spiritual women, and are able to lead them more handily as the scripture says, because man is the head of his family as Christ is the head of the church.

I commend women who come to church despite the fact that their husbands are not spiritual, but that says nothing about the issue at hand.



1. If you believe this, why are you affiliated with Wesleyan churches in general, and specifically the UMC? I'm hard pressed to think of any church in the Wesleyan tradition that does not ordain women, or allow them to lead in positions of authority over men.

2. Specifically which issues of church discipline and policy are you referring to? I am aware of controversies among some denominations, but they are not universal in all denominations that ordain women. Some of the most conservative churches I know of, theologically and in personal lifestyle, ordain women.

3. Why are you focused on administration? The greater threat, if one is prone to deception, is that she then teaches that deception as truth. If a woman can teach, espouse wisdom or reveal knowledge, why can’t she make sure the bills are paid, plan the order of worship, or have oversight over the many ministries in the church?

The Methodist tradition is about as good as any other. I see no church that is perfect, nor indication that any church can ever be completely free from those who strain to enter the church to teach erronious doctrine. Christians must find one another however they can. I will continue to go to Methodist churches, and yet still maintain my beliefs, until the Methodsits tell me I am no longer welcome. If I go to a church where a woman is teaching and preacing in a way that seems to violate Biblical teaching, I will simply go elsewhere.

1 Tim 2:12-15
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression .
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
KJV


The day someone can translate that for me in some way that doesn't imply there was something wrong with the Apostle Paul, or that the entire Biblical plan concerning men and women is actually just wrong, I will feel more comfortable with women taking over leadership and administrative positions. Until then I will not.

[Texas Lynn]

Obviously, where physical abuse is concerned, women simply lack the capacity by and large...

Statistics vary about feamle abuse of males but it occurs and should not be minimized. Granted, more women are victims of the more dangerous forms of domestic violence, but they aren't the only ones.

...or that the entire Biblical plan concerning men and women is actually just wrong...

The idea that such a thing exists-a "Biblical" plan concerning men and women-is just simplistic. Sexist social organization is not in any form ordained by God. Just as scripture was used to justify slavery, so also is it used to justify sexism.

[vicarius]

How do you you figure they have God's "authority"? If they are teaching what is in the Bible, fine. If they are not, how is it authority? If anyone of either gender has a gift and wants to serve, let them, so long as they are not violating some Biblical injunction.

I think we are going to go in circles on this. I think if they are speaking with God’s authority, then there is nothing wrong with letting women preach or teach or otherwise serve as the senior leader (pastor) of a church. We disagree and I don’t think further discussion on this point will be productive.
I don't know about resisting any call. I know when I was in the Wesley Foundation, the pastor there lied about me and I tried to take it up with my home church, and nothing was done. I think by and large church discipline is poor everywhere I have been able to go to church, but you have to go to find other Christians don't you?

1. All I’m saying is, if you feel so strongly about this issue, step up to the plate brother.
2. Was the pastor at the WF male or female? How about the pastor at your home church? What does this have to do with your claim that churches that ordain women fall away from issues of church discipline and policy? I agree with your comment that church discipline is poor just about everywhere, even among the male only clergy of the Roman Catholic Church as evidenced by some of the highly publicized scandals in that denomination. Which begs the question, how is putting women in a position of pastoral authority weakening church discipline and policy?

What's interesting to me is that you use sarcasm, and are praised for it, when what we are speaking of here is highly important and is clearly outlined in the Bible.

Sarcasm is a sin? Sorry I offended you. I was merely making the point that the parent who spends the most time teaching children about faith happens to be a woman. It doesn’t make sense to me that God would have the one “most prone to error” be primarily responsible for teaching children about him during the critical formative years.
I’m not sure I was praised for my sarcasm. I thought the praise was for my support of women serving in pastoral leadership roles.

My personal experience is that this is flatly false. It is entirely anecdotal, but I have not seen any tendency of men to be worse than women on this front. Obviously, where physical abuse is concerned, women simply lack the capacity by and large, but on all the other fronts no.

Or a lot of women are misled into relationships with non-spiritual men, whereas spiritual men select spiritual women, and are able to lead them more handily as the scripture says, because man is the head of his family as Christ is the head of the church.

It seems you are talking out both sides of your mouth with this. You say that it is flatly false that men are most likely to mislead, then you state that women are misled by into relationships with non-spiritual men. Who is doing the misleading? I’m confused.

I commend women who come to church despite the fact that their husbands are not spiritual, but that says nothing about the issue at hand.

As to women being more likely misled into relationships with unspiritual men, most of the women I know who attend church without their husbands became Christians after they got married. (I understand this is anecdotal and you may have observed something different.)
The Methodist tradition is about as good as any other. I see no church that is perfect, nor indication that any church can ever be completely free from those who strain to enter the church to teach erronious doctrine. Christians must find one another however they can. I will continue to go to Methodist churches, and yet still maintain my beliefs, until the Methodsits tell me I am no longer welcome. If I go to a church where a woman is teaching and preacing in a way that seems to violate Biblical teaching, I will simply go elsewhere.
Ok, that’s your choice. It just seems that based on your point of view you will have to plan to change churches every few years when the bishop decides it’s time to rotate pastors. Do you skip services if a female DS or bishop is visiting? How do you address the fact that your male pastor may be subject to the spiritual and administrative authority of a woman? My parents attend a UMC where they have a female bishop. If they held your point of view, it seems that they couldn’t attend any UMC that she presides over.

1 Tim 2:12-15
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression .
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
KJV


The day someone can translate that for me in some way that doesn't imply there was something wrong with the Apostle Paul, or that the entire Biblical plan concerning men and women is actually just wrong, I will feel more comfortable with women taking over leadership and administrative positions. Until then I will not.

This takes us back to the original post. Why does the Church of the Nazarene ordain women? For which I provided references in previous posts.

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=26159024&postcount=5 (http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=26159024&postcount=5)

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=26211158&postcount=12 (http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=26211158&postcount=12)

The Church of the Nazarene has been ordaining women since it’s founding in 1908 and the practice can be traced into the late 1800 among the Holiness groups that would unite to form the denomination. They didn’t make the decision to ordain women in a vacuum. Many of the issues we have discussed mirror points of view presented as the parent bodies of the denomination came together. They concluded that it is appropriate to ordain women after much scholarly research, discussion and prayer.

Since we are going in circles with this topic, I think further discussion is futile. Please regard any questions I posed in this post as rhetorical. I will not comment further on this string.

Shalom

V

[Shane Roach]

Rom 5:12
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
KJV


Has nothing to do with the Bible's multiple verses concerning choosing elders and deacons, etc. Nor does it address the verse I already brought up. Nor does Paul say anything about it having to do with prostitution, which I feel sure it does not. Nor does Galatians 3:28 have anything to do with the subject at hand, or if it does I sure do not see the logic behind it.

The woman most honored in the Bible I think would be Mary. Mary did not become honored by becoming a great teacher or preacher, or taking authority over the church. Mary did what the Lord led her to do faithfully.

John 14:15
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
KJV

The one question from all of the rhetorical ones of the post previous that I feel compelled to answer is how do I reconcile going to church when the church is not operating as I think it ought to. First, I admit to the possibility of being wrong, and secondly, the example of the Apostles and of the early church is that no church seems to operate perfectly all the time, so it seems to me to be something of an odd challenge, to either agree with a certain position or else get out.

If it comes to that point, I will know when it is time to move on.

[MakeItSo]

The Nazarene Church itself came out of the old Holiness movement in America in the 1800's which was a sort of revitalization of the Methodist Church then and there. The same thing happened in England and accordingly produced the Primitive Methodist Church. That the Holiness movement introduced women preachers I do know, and that might explain how the Nazarene Church got it. We are currently considering joining a Nazarene Church even though I do not believe in a woman ministering over both men and women in a capacity of authority, at least. Even though I am longer a true Presbyterian, I wish there was left on this apostate planet one good, old fashioned Wesleyan Church. We miss you John.


I believe John Westley was about Jesus, not creating his OWN FAITH.

Stick with Jesus Christ and the Word of God and you will do well. Those that lift up the founders of a church movement rather than Christ get off in a ditch doctrinally.

While I know John Westley was a man of God, he wasn't into creating a cult but rather bringing people into the FAMILY OF GOD, through Christ Jesus.

I have studied Westley's teaching and I know he would be bothered by such reverence to him rather than to Christ.

[MakeItSo]

For those that love to misquote Paul, please understand the Scripture by keeping it in context.

There were many women leaders in the 1st Century Church. The Apostle Paul often greeted them in his letters to the churches.

The Nazarenes never really had an issue of gender sensitive dogma as most of the men in the Christian faith have.

Women were often ordained in the Nazarene Church and most of them were missionaries to build new churches in the mission field and to take the Gospel into all the world, along with their husbands.

Most of the Nazarene ministers are ministering FAMILIES, not just men. The wife often taught, alongside their husbands, the Holy Word of God.

I believe, according to the Bible, that women are to be covered spiritually, either by a pastor or by their husbands.

Any man who says a women cannot fulfill their call from God because they were born a female have forgotten one just Scripture, written also by the Apostle Paul in Galatians.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you all one in Christ Jesus.

Most true born-again ministers in the Nazarene church would never think to make women sub-servant and second class citizens in the Kingdom of God by saying they cannot do what God has called them and equipped them spiritually to do for the Body of Christ.

I would hope that the church holds true to the faith in Jesus Christ and that women have been saved from original sin as well. While a woman is to be submissive to her husband / covering, this, according to Scripture is the only requirement for ministry.

I think it's important to keep Scripture within the context for which it was written and realize that the teachings of Paul was to a pagan society coming out of idol worship. If a woman is being submissive to both husband and pastor, according to Scripture, she has the maturity to also teach the Word of God, in good conduct and conscience, and this is never to be forbidden.

Pricilla, according to Paul, labored with him in ministry, along with her husband Aquilla.

[MakeItSo]

Rom 5:12
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
KJV


Has nothing to do with the Bible's multiple verses concerning choosing elders and deacons, etc. Nor does it address the verse I already brought up. Nor does Paul say anything about it having to do with prostitution, which I feel sure it does not. Nor does Galatians 3:28 have anything to do with the subject at hand, or if it does I sure do not see the logic behind it.

The woman most honored in the Bible I think would be Mary. Mary did not become honored by becoming a great teacher or preacher, or taking authority over the church. Mary did what the Lord led her to do faithfully.

John 14:15
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
KJV

The one question from all of the rhetorical ones of the post previous that I feel compelled to answer is how do I reconcile going to church when the church is not operating as I think it ought to. First, I admit to the possibility of being wrong, and secondly, the example of the Apostles and of the early church is that no church seems to operate perfectly all the time, so it seems to me to be something of an odd challenge, to either agree with a certain position or else get out.

If it comes to that point, I will know when it is time to move on.



God thought women worthy enough even under the Law to use them as prophets. Perhaps God sees women in a better light than you do.

Do you think that under grace women have become nothing and under the Law women could hear God's voice and follow instructions? Now that we have the Holy Spirit of God inside us, do you not think that it is actually easier to be lead by the Lord than under the Law, whereas the Holy Spirit only came upon the women who were used by God?

There is nothing in the New Testament to indoctrinate against a gender-sensitive God. Sorry to say.

God used Deborah as a prophet and a judge (over men). And she was under the Law. We are under grace and are treated like we are worst than the witch of Endor when it comes to knowing God and being lead by the Spirit of God.

Some of us actually fear and reverence the Lord enough never to take advantage of our calling, which, btw, isn't just being the piano / organ player in church.

[Shane Roach]

I don't really know what it is I am supposedly misreading. I already covered each of these points, and neither have I ever said women should not be in ministry at all, but there is definitely something about the role of women in both family and church that is to do with submission, which is the opposite of taking authoritarian roles.

I am sorry if that makes me anathema to some of you, but at the same time I cannot just abandon what seems to be very clearly layed out and spelled out, and repeated, in the Bible.

It's somehow upsetting to me that women who chose to fulfill their roles in godliness then are apparently being told that they are second class. We all have our roles to fill, and doing so is never second best. Everyone has different gifts and different ministries. It's no more second class to be a woman than it is to have gifts that do not lead to leadership roles and be a man.

So, obviously people are going to believe what they believe, but much of this that keeps being repeated has nothing to do with how I came to this belief, or with the scriptures, or anything at all that I can really relate to, which is why I believe as I do.

Funny thing is, I started out with the opposite belief and had to be dragged into it more or less over years of studying the scriptures both Old and New. It is obviously not a teaching that is hip with the times, and I wish I could be cool and progressive with the rest of you and still be honest, but I cannot see your arguments anymore. They simply do not appear to be true, though I respect that you hold them with honest intent.

[MakeItSo]

Despite the prominence of men in ancient Israelite society, God still sometimes called women as leaders. When Josiah needed to hear the word of the Lord, he sent Hilkiah the priest and others to a person who was undoubtedly one of the most prominent prophetic figures of his day: Huldah (2 Kings 22:12—20). Deborah was not only a prophetess, but a judge (Judges 4:4). She held the place of greatest authority in Israel in her day. She is also one of the few judges of whom the Bible reports no failures (Judges 4,5).

We also see Moses' sister, Miriam, called a prophetess.


Although first-century Jewish women rarely, if ever, studied with teachers of the Law the way male disciples did,3 Jesus allowed women to join His ranks (Mark 15:40,41; Luke 8:1—3)–something the culture could have regarded as scandalous.4 As if this were not scandalous enough, He allowed a woman who wished to hear His teaching "sit at his feet" (Luke 10:39)–taking a posture normally reserved for disciples. Other Jewish teachers did not allow women disciples; indeed, disciples were often teachers in training.5 To have sent women out on the preaching missions (e.g., Mark 6:7—13) might have proved too scandalous to be practical; nevertheless, the Gospels unanimously report that God chose women as the first witnesses of the Resurrection, even though first-century Jewish men often dismissed the testimony of women.


Joel explicitly emphasized that when God poured out His Spirit, women as well as men would prophesy (Joel 2:28,29). Pentecost meant that all God’s people qualified for the gifts of His Spirit (Acts 2:17,18), just as salvation meant that male or female would have the same relationship with God (Galatians 3:28). Subsequent outpourings of the Spirit have often led to the same effect.

[MakeItSo]

I don't really know what it is I am supposedly misreading. I already covered each of these points, and neither have I ever said women should not be in ministry at all, but there is definitely something about the role of women in both family and church that is to do with submission, which is the opposite of taking authoritarian roles.

I am sorry if that makes me anathema to some of you, but at the same time I cannot just abandon what seems to be very clearly layed out and spelled out, and repeated, in the Bible.

It's somehow upsetting to me that women who chose to fulfill their roles in godliness then are apparently being told that they are second class. We all have our roles to fill, and doing so is never second best. Everyone has different gifts and different ministries. It's no more second class to be a woman than it is to have gifts that do not lead to leadership roles and be a man.

So, obviously people are going to believe what they believe, but much of this that keeps being repeated has nothing to do with how I came to this belief, or with the scriptures, or anything at all that I can really relate to, which is why I believe as I do.

Funny thing is, I started out with the opposite belief and had to be dragged into it more or less over years of studying the scriptures both Old and New. It is obviously not a teaching that is hip with the times, and I wish I could be cool and progressive with the rest of you and still be honest, but I cannot see your arguments anymore. They simply do not appear to be true, though I respect that you hold them with honest intent.


We are all called to be submissive to authority, not just women.

If a person is submissive, they actually qualify for authority.

Jesus said the greatest in the Kingdom was a servant.

I don't think I could ever submit to someone in authority if they, themselves, submitted to no one.

As long as a women is submissive to her covering, she is given the same privileges as men are.

Because a women submits to her husband, does that mean she cannot be in authority over her children?

I believe submissiveness and authority go hand and hand and the two are not in competition with one another.

Jesus walked in authority but was submissive to His Father in Heaven.

We should all desire to walk humbly with our God and to take the authority IN CHRIST we all have been given in the spirit.

[Shane Roach]

Judg 4:4-9
4 And Deborah , a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.
5 And she dwelt under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in mount Ephraim: and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment.
6 And she sent and called Barak the son of Abinoam out of Kedesh-naphtali, and said unto him, Hath not the LORD God of Israel commanded, saying, Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naphtali and of the children of Zebulun?
7 And I will draw unto thee to the river Kishon Sisera, the captain of Jabin's army, with his chariots and his multitude; and I will deliver him into thine hand.
8 And Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go.
9 And she said, I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the LORD shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman. And Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh.
KJV

It appears as if Barak was in a bit of rebellion at the time. There were certainly never any female Levites.

Again, I do not know what you want me to do. Simply ignore things?

There are women who believe as I do, and so I do not feel guilt over this. It is a belief that comes from the scriptures and from an understanding of gender roles, which to the best of my ability to understand is being assailed in modern times.

If you have specific answers to the specific verses I have mentioned, that might be helpfull, but at the same time I have been through this rather extensively, so much like debates about homosexuality, even though I may not be politically correct, I do not anticipate hearing any new information.

[Shane Roach]

Despite the prominence of men in ancient Israelite society, God still sometimes called women as leaders. When Josiah needed to hear the word of the Lord, he sent Hilkiah the priest and others to a person who was undoubtedly one of the most prominent prophetic figures of his day: Huldah (2 Kings 22:12—20). Deborah was not only a prophetess, but a judge (Judges 4:4). She held the place of greatest authority in Israel in her day. She is also one of the few judges of whom the Bible reports no failures (Judges 4,5).

We also see Moses' sister, Miriam, called a prophetess.


Although first-century Jewish women rarely, if ever, studied with teachers of the Law the way male disciples did,3 Jesus allowed women to join His ranks (Mark 15:40,41; Luke 8:1—3)–something the culture could have regarded as scandalous.4 As if this were not scandalous enough, He allowed a woman who wished to hear His teaching "sit at his feet" (Luke 10:39)–taking a posture normally reserved for disciples. Other Jewish teachers did not allow women disciples; indeed, disciples were often teachers in training.5 To have sent women out on the preaching missions (e.g., Mark 6:7—13) might have proved too scandalous to be practical; nevertheless, the Gospels unanimously report that God chose women as the first witnesses of the Resurrection, even though first-century Jewish men often dismissed the testimony of women.


Joel explicitly emphasized that when God poured out His Spirit, women as well as men would prophesy (Joel 2:28,29). Pentecost meant that all God’s people qualified for the gifts of His Spirit (Acts 2:17,18), just as salvation meant that male or female would have the same relationship with God (Galatians 3:28). Subsequent outpourings of the Spirit have often led to the same effect.

The examples you are using are universally of prophets. I am speaking here of the selection of elders and bishops which are specifically to be men, universally. There was no exception, nor have you yet chosen to address the verse I spoke of before.

I repeat, I have never once said women should not exercise their gifts in service of the Lord.

[MakeItSo]

I don't really know what it is I am supposedly misreading. I already covered each of these points, and neither have I ever said women should not be in ministry at all, but there is definitely something about the role of women in both family and church that is to do with submission, which is the opposite of taking authoritarian roles.

I am sorry if that makes me anathema to some of you, but at the same time I cannot just abandon what seems to be very clearly layed out and spelled out, and repeated, in the Bible.

It's somehow upsetting to me that women who chose to fulfill their roles in godliness then are apparently being told that they are second class. We all have our roles to fill, and doing so is never second best. Everyone has different gifts and different ministries. It's no more second class to be a woman than it is to have gifts that do not lead to leadership roles and be a man.

So, obviously people are going to believe what they believe, but much of this that keeps being repeated has nothing to do with how I came to this belief, or with the scriptures, or anything at all that I can really relate to, which is why I believe as I do.

Funny thing is, I started out with the opposite belief and had to be dragged into it more or less over years of studying the scriptures both Old and New. It is obviously not a teaching that is hip with the times, and I wish I could be cool and progressive with the rest of you and still be honest, but I cannot see your arguments anymore. They simply do not appear to be true, though I respect that you hold them with honest intent.


Then why does God call women into ministry if being a minister is against God and the Holy Bible?

Some churches teach that God's perfect plan for every woman is to be a wife and mother. Period. If you are not married and do not have children, then you are not fulfilling your "calling".

Bearing children or "being fruitful and multiplying" was a commandment of God to both men and women.

In some churches, women are routinely taught that the best way for them to serve God is to get married, make their husbands happy, and have children. They think this should be the sole focus of women's lives. And to be honest, when God has given a woman a husband and children, especially young children, focusing her primary energies and gifting on her family truly is the most important way she serves God in that season of her life. But is that ALL her life?

"For in the last days I shall pour out My Spirit on ALL FLESH and your sons and DAUGHTERS will prophecy". (Joel)
Acts 2:17-18 “In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and DAUGHTERS will PROPHESY, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on my servants, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN, I will POUR OUT MY SPIRIT in those days, and they will PROPHESY.”

God does not see women as mere wives and mothers but also to be used by God in ministry purposes.

1 Corinthians 11:4-5 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. And every WOMAN who PRAYS or PROPHESIES with her head uncovered dishonors her head — it is just as though her head were shaved.


So, the Bible verse clearly states that a woman PRAYS and PROPHESIES, she needs her head covered (or to have a spiritual covering).


This does not prevent a woman from prophesying or edifying the Body of Christ in her gifts, but rather gives doctrine as to the spiritual standing she must possess to fulfill her calling.



So . . . what about single women?

Women ministered in the gift of prophecy, which is illustrative of being used in the 1 Corinthians 12 gifts of the Holy Spirit. • “Philip the Evangelist...had four unmarried daughters who prophesied.” The evangelist had four spiritually gifted daughters who prophesied.
According to Scripture, single women are to solely focus on Christ Jesus.

Romans 16:1-2 I commend to you our SISTER PHOEBE, A SERVANT of the church in Cenchrea. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a GREAT HELP to many people, including me.


Romans 16:12 Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those WOMEN who WORK HARD in the Lord. Greet my dear friend Persis, another WOMAN who has WORKED VERY HARD in the Lord.

Acts 18:25-26 [Apollos] had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When PRISCILLA AND AQUILA heard him, they invited him TO THEIR HOME and EXPLAINED to him the WAY OF GOD MORE ADEQUATELY.


In THIS VERSE ABOVE, we see that Priscilla ALSO taught the "ways of God", along with her husband to Apollos.


2 Timothy 1:5; 3:15 I have been reminded of YOUR sincere FAITH, which FIRST lived in your GRANDMOTHER Lois and in your MOTHER Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also ... [3:15] and how from INFANCY you have known the holy SCRIPTURES, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.




Joyce Meyer is a perfect example of someone totally submitted and commited to her husband. While she is the "teacher" of the Word, her husband labors with her in the faith.


Most of those she teaches is WOMEN, yet, some men have chosen to sit under her ministry.


She didn't wake up one day and say, "How can I lord over men". This came with the fruit of ministry by teaching the truth of the Word of God TO WOMEN, men followed.


God will produce what He so desires, regardless of the gender. While the gender-sensitive class of leaders in the Body of Christ that are specifically told to be MEN are : Bishops, Deacons and Elders in the church.


The 5 - Fold ministry callings are:

Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers. These such positions were not given a gender but rather have to do with individual callings.


While I, myself, am single, never married, no children, I believe my calling specifically is to women, though men have undoubtedly learned from my own experiences and study of the Word, I hold a Bible College Degree and have had hands laid on me by the presbetary of my church to fulfill the call of God on my life.


I have taught once behind a pulpit to the "choir" about the Tabernacle of worship in regards to praise and worship having to do with Outer Court, Inner Court and Holy of Holies worship music. I was asked to teach this study to the choir BY A PASTOR.


Since I was in full submission to this pastor to teach this class about "praise and worship" to the choir (which consisted of both men and women singers), I do not see anything wrong in doing so since it was the pastor who asked me to teach the class.


Now I'm being told that I am condemned for teaching men about praise and worship, even though my MALE PASTOR asked me to.


Okay!



Romans 8:1-4
Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. 3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

[MakeItSo]

The examples you are using are universally of prophets. I am speaking here of the selection of elders and bishops which are specifically to be men, universally. There was no exception, nor have you yet chosen to address the verse I spoke of before.

I repeat, I have never once said women should not exercise their gifts in service of the Lord.


According to the WORD, Bishops, Deacons and Elders are considered MEN, you cannot find that true about Pastors, Teachers, Prophets, Apostles or Evangelists, which are the "pulpit" minsters.

While I believe some Bishops like TD Jakes teaches and preaches behind a pulpit, the "function" he is doing is more of a Pastor than a Bishop, but whatever.

There are "offices" held by men only. But the five fold ministry callings in Ephesians are not the same as "offices".

There is no such thing as the "office" of a teacher. It is a ministry gifting and calling, not an "appointment".

[Shane Roach]

According to the WORD, Bishops, Deacons and Elders are considered MEN, you cannot find that true about Pastors, Teachers, Prophets, Apostles or Evangelists, which are the "pulpit" minsters.

While I believe some Bishops like TD Jakes teaches and preaches behind a pulpit, the "function" he is doing is more of a Pastor than a Bishop, but whatever.

There are "offices" held by men only. But the five fold ministry callings in Ephesians are not the same as "offices".

There is no such thing as the "office" of a teacher. It is a ministry gifting and calling, not an "appointment".

I am not familiar with Nazarene organization, but in the United Methodist church for example, you have to be an elder to be a pastor of a church, and the vast majority of assistant pastors are as well.

I admit, the modern church organization makes the titles somewhat difficult to sort through Biblically, and I do not believe there is some Biblical injunction for a woman never to give her testimony in public or anything like that.

I will be back around tomorrow if you care to continue. Thanks for keeping the temperature of the discussion moderate. I know it is not an easy thing to talk about, and truthfully it is not easy for me either.

[Texas Lynn]

I wonder if there's correlation between those against female clergy and those who do not want a female to be President.

[Shane Roach]

Bearing children or "being fruitful and multiplying" was a commandment of God to both men and women.

I believe people are referring to this verse:

1 Tim 2:15
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
KJV

I'm not sure what you think of it, and since I have already said I don't object to women in the ministry so long as they do not "usurp authority over the man" it may be moot, but there appears to be a more specific calling to women concerning childbearing as opposed to the command to be fruitfull in Genesis.

God does not see women as mere wives and mothers but also to be used by God in ministry purposes.

Here, again, despite affirming the importance of these works, you for some reason choose to belittle them. They are not "mere" wives and mothers? Childbearing is the one thing a woman can do that no man can ever claim to do better. Mary's obedience in the matter of bearing Jesus causes her to be referred to as blessed. I think you make too light of this.

According to Scripture, single women are to solely focus on Christ Jesus.

I'm don't understand where you are going with the above.

Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers. These such positions were not given a gender but rather have to do with individual callings.

Eph 4:11-13
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ
KJV

There is nothing here really to distinguish these from other passages concerning gifts of the spirit.

Eph 4:7-8
7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
KJV

Whatever gifts the Lord gives a person, surely they are to use them, but these say nothing about which gifts are or are not associated with authority or how it is to be arranged within the church. I am not saying women cannot serve in these capacities, I am saying that being a prophet, for example, does not automatically exempt a woman from still needing to be carefull how her actions could be dishonoring in the sense of instructing or taking untoward authority over men, which the story of Deborah makes clear is a shame for a man.

Now I'm being told that I am condemned for teaching men about praise and worship, even though my MALE PASTOR asked me to.

You are certainly being told no such thing by me. I have several times asked for you or anyone concerned that I am misinterpreting things here to address the specific verses that I think we all know are the cause of this controversy. So far, though you have been very thorough in explaining other verses, you have not explained the ones I am concerned with. In fact, I have several times already stated I do not object to women teaching or preaching in all forms, and now repeat it again in the hopes that the extraneous points can be eliminated from this discussion. Someone early on even asked me why I specified authoritarian positions. Your post affirms my own understanding that there are certain positions reserved to men, or at least you seem to indicate you see that. So where do we differ then?

I don't understand the problem.

[MarkEvan]

If I may just add one point that I believe has been missed, although it is of vital importance to understanding why women should not hold authority over men. Paul tells us that the reason that women are not to have authority over men because the rolls of each are reflections of Christ and the church.
Christ is the head of the church and to reflect this spiritual truth man is the head of woman. For woman to take authority over man (to become his head), is a contradiction of this truth.
Obviously there are other reasons but this is the meaning that sticks out to me as to why women should not hold positions of authority over men, I would like to hear others interpretations of such verses if they disagree.

As to Deborah, yes God will use women to hold such positions, but only when men refuse to, hence Barak saying that he would only go if Deborah did.

[Texas Lynn]

women should not hold authority over men.

I think this is part of the talking past one another right here. Those of us in mainline churches which ordain female clergy look at the concept of "pastoral authority' in askance. We tend to look at most notions of authority in askance. Much of the viewpoint in the establishment of the Protestant churches was a reaction to illegitimate authority. Simply put, a church hierarchy as we see it does not retain any particular authority over the individual per se as some sort of middleman between God and the individual. We reject that notion. We have clergy, but the relationship is collegial and mutual. We respect their leadership but are entirely free to reject it without repercussions.

Most non-female-ordaining church bodies do not have similar notions of authority. Among the more fundamentalist/evangelical sects which often emphasize a form of individual freedom (Baptists used to do this but are moving away from it) the prohibition of female clergy is generally based on sexist notions of social organization.

I suppose the major notion causing this divide is the concept of a pastor "having authority" over us, whatever gender that pastor is, is laughable; but to others, that's what their ingrained with. Thus the concept is entirely different.

IOW making the argument "women should not have authority over men" to us is kind of like saying "free throws are not permitted in (American) football."

[MarkEvan]

Hi texas lynn,


I think this is part of the talking past one another right here. Those of us in mainline churches which ordain female clergy look at the concept of "pastoral authority' in askance. We tend to look at most notions of authority in askance. Much of the viewpoint in the establishment of the Protestant churches was a reaction to illegitimate authority. Simply put, a church hierarchy as we see it does not retain any particular authority over the individual per se as some sort of middleman between God and the individual. We reject that notion. We have clergy, but the relationship is collegial and mutual. We respect their leadership but are entirely free to reject it without repercussions.

Most non-female-ordaining church bodies do not have similar notions of authority. Among the more fundamentalist/evangelical sects which often emphasize a form of individual freedom (Baptists used to do this but are moving away from it) the prohibition of female clergy is generally based on sexist notions of social organization.

I suppose the major notion causing this divide is the concept of a pastor "having authority" over us, whatever gender that pastor is, is laughable; but to others, that's what their ingrained with. Thus the concept is entirely different.

IOW making the argument "women should not have authority over men" to us is kind of like saying "free throws are not permitted in (American) football."


I would agree that we are free to reject those in positions of authority or leadership, we do not have to agree with or do what they say, however I believe that to not do as these people tell us, will have repercusions on our lives. The authority they exercize over us is for our best interests (provided these people are giving scriptural advice) if we choose to reject that then, it is generally down to sin or our not desiring to submit to any person. The bible tells us to submit to those who teach the word to us and look out for our souls, (heb 13), so to reject their authority would be of a grave consequence to us if they were truely looking out for our souls. Pastors do in some degree hold middle ground, bear in mind that most people accept that a pastor is a shepherd, someone who leads the sheep and takes responsibility for them, also generally it is the pastor who does most of the teaching in churches and will be judged greater because they are teaching and therefore leading Gods peopel, (James).

You took one part of my post and failed to quote on the references to scripture and the meaning of that, as I said if you disagree what would you say it means, that man is the head of woman just as Christ is the head of the church.

IOW making the argument "women should not have authority over men" to us is kind of like saying "free throws are not permitted in (American) football."

Help..... whats a free throw, (apart from obviously being a free throw) is it the same as a free kick in football?

[Texas Lynn]

I would agree that we are free to reject those in positions of authority or leadership, we do not have to agree with or do what they say, however I believe that to not do as these people tell us, will have repercusions on our lives. The authority they exercize over us is for our best interests (provided these people are giving scriptural advice) if we choose to reject that then, it is generally down to sin or our not desiring to submit to any person. The bible tells us to submit to those who teach the word to us and look out for our souls, (heb 13), so to reject their authority would be of a grave consequence to us if they were truely looking out for our souls. Pastors do in some degree hold middle ground, bear in mind that most people accept that a pastor is a shepherd, someone who leads the sheep and takes responsibility for them, also generally it is the pastor who does most of the teaching in churches and will be judged greater because they are teaching and therefore leading Gods peopel, (James).

That's fine but I'm going to have to disagree with what you've said. Nothing like that is needed.

You took one part of my post and failed to quote on the references to scripture and the meaning of that, as I said if you disagree what would you say it means, that man is the head of woman just as Christ is the head of the church.

That's nice poetry but otherwise puts forth an outmoded notion of the marital dyad.

Help..... whats a free throw, (apart from obviously being a free throw) is it the same as a free kick in football?

No. it's a procedure in basketball whereby action is stopped and the player designated to do it is able to shoot while other players are in a stance where they don't interfere until the ball is released. The analogy was a fancy way of saying "N/A".

[aigiqinf]

Many churchs ordain woman.

[MarkEvan]

Hello Texas Lynn,

Originally Posted by MarkEvan http://www3.christianforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=26301356#post26301356)
I would agree that we are free to reject those in positions of authority or leadership, we do not have to agree with or do what they say, however I believe that to not do as these people tell us, will have repercusions on our lives. The authority they exercize over us is for our best interests (provided these people are giving scriptural advice) if we choose to reject that then, it is generally down to sin or our not desiring to submit to any person. The bible tells us to submit to those who teach the word to us and look out for our souls, (heb 13), so to reject their authority would be of a grave consequence to us if they were truely looking out for our souls. Pastors do in some degree hold middle ground, bear in mind that most people accept that a pastor is a shepherd, someone who leads the sheep and takes responsibility for them, also generally it is the pastor who does most of the teaching in churches and will be judged greater because they are teaching and therefore leading Gods peopel, (James).

That's fine but I'm going to have to disagree with what you've said. Nothing like that is needed.


What don`t you think is needed, the position of pastor that I have discribed?


That's nice poetry but otherwise puts forth an outmoded notion of the marital dyad.


Why thankyou, I`m not usually known for my poetic tendancies. However the way I understand it, it is God who says this, or gives this commandment through Paul. Paul it seems to me always makes the distinction of when he is speaking in his own authority or with the authority of God, on this occasion he does not say, "it is I not the Lord who says this" leading me to believe that this comes from God. I would not say that God`s word ever becomes out dated (if thats what you mean by outmoded), Jesus himself says that "Heaven and earth will pass away but His word will by no means pass away," then we know that "He is the same yesterday, today and forever," scripture therefore teaches that what God taught 2000 years ago and what He teaches us now are one and the same thing, the meaning and relavance of scripture remains. Would you say that God changes His mind on these and other issues, or does society decide what we as Christians are to accept as truth from the scriptures?


No. it's a procedure in basketball whereby action is stopped and the player designated to do it is able to shoot while other players are in a stance where they don't interfere until the ball is released. The analogy was a fancy way of saying "N/A".

I see. What if God said it was applicable?

[Texas Lynn]

What don`t you think is needed, the position of pastor that I have discribed?

No mortals have an intermediary role between the individual and God. At best a Pastor, in a church of free individuals, is a guide and a leader. Authoritarian clergy in this day and age, i am sure you must be aware, is indeed a rarity, and that is as it should be.

However the way I understand it, it is God who says this, or gives this commandment through Paul. Paul it seems to me always makes the distinction of when he is speaking in his own authority or with the authority of God, on this occasion he does not say, "it is I not the Lord who says this" leading me to believe that this comes from God. I would not say that God`s word ever becomes out dated (if thats what you mean by outmoded), Jesus himself says that "Heaven and earth will pass away but His word will by no means pass away," then we know that "He is the same yesterday, today and forever," scripture therefore teaches that what God taught 2000 years ago and what He teaches us now are one and the same thing, the meaning and relavance of scripture remains. Would you say that God changes His mind on these and other issues, or does society decide what we as Christians are to accept as truth from the scriptures?

I'd regard such beliefs as dangerous. I think human understanding of God's ways has changed and will change again. I do not believe gender roles are in any form god-ordained, and the claim they are is an aspect of an institutional sexism. The letters of Paul are valuable in many aspects, but their use to keep women down is a net negative.

I see. What if God said it was applicable?

Since I do not believe he did, that is a moot point as I see it.

[MarkEvan]

Hi Texas, do you mind if I call you Texas?

First off let me appologies if it seemed that I ever implied that Pastors or such people have intermediary roles, I don`t believe they do, Christ is the only mediator and the only one capable of fullfilling that role. However I do believe that such people who teach are responsible for those who they teach, "beware those by whom the stumbling block comes," and James says that "teachers will be judged harsher." If I were a teacher I would have to be very carefull about what I taught, people do accept what others say just because they say it from the "pulpit."


I'd regard such beliefs as dangerous. I think human understanding of God's ways has changed and will change again. I do not believe gender roles are in any form god-ordained, and the claim they are is an aspect of an institutional sexism. The letters of Paul are valuable in many aspects, but their use to keep women down is a net negative.


As far as I believe the views I expressed were scriptural, with the references to prove that. If however as you say human understanding of Gods word has changed then were the early church fathers and the Apostles also, wrong in what they taught? Ultimately Human understanding will always change because it comes from the flesh, spiritual understanding will always remain the same, what He revealed to Paul is exactly what he revealed to John Wesley and what He reveals to each person today, the meaning of Gods word never changes, and anyone who is truely led by the Spirit will always believe what Paul did.
Paul clearly wrote down the roles of both sexes, women are to be subject to their husbands in all things, and husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the church, to deny this would be to deny the basic obviouse meaning of the scriptures, the meaning as understood by John Wesley, the meaning that Christ taught Paul. I`m sorry that you believe that the teaching I express is sexist or keeping women down but this is the view that is clearly expressed in scripture.

Again I am sorry if what I have said is harsh, but I have tried to put what I see as the scriptural principle in a way that is clear.

thankyou
Mark

[Shane Roach]

Mark,

Before you get the wrong idea about Methodism in general, there is no teaching that there are no longer authoritarian clergy. The United Methodist Church operates under what is called "The Book of Discipline" which outlines the authority of various clergy and contains a system whereby issues of doctrine and practice are reviewed and enforced.

[Texas Lynn]

As far as I believe the views I expressed were scriptural, with the references to prove that. If however as you say human understanding of Gods word has changed then were the early church fathers and the Apostles also, wrong in what they taught?

It is not so much a matter of right and wrong as of changing times.

When they taught the sun revolves around the earth, they were clearly wrong. concerning social organization however ambiguity is the norm.

Ultimately Human understanding will always change because it comes from the flesh, spiritual understanding will always remain the same, what He revealed to Paul is exactly what he revealed to John Wesley and what He reveals to each person today, the meaning of Gods word never changes, and anyone who is truely led by the Spirit will always believe what Paul did.

This would be reason enough to reject Christianity were it true, but it is not. Human understanding always changes. The word may not change it but our understanding of it does. The view you express is nothing but a hollow platitude.

Paul clearly wrote down the roles of both sexes, women are to be subject to their husbands in all things, and husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the church, to deny this would be to deny the basic obviouse meaning of the scriptures, the meaning as understood by John Wesley, the meaning that Christ taught Paul. I`m sorry that you believe that the teaching I express is sexist or keeping women down but this is the view that is clearly expressed in scripture.

That is your opinion only-it is not based on fact at all but only on your own emotional attachment to sexist social organization. Wesley was not known for his sexism; his greatest "teacher" was his mother.

Again I am sorry if what I have said is harsh, but I have tried to put what I see as the scriptural principle in a way that is clear.

If there was any basis for your pronouncements here the harshness might be offensive but as it is it is merely sad and pitiful.

[Texas Lynn]

Mark,

Before you get the wrong idea about Methodism in general, there is no teaching that there are no longer authoritarian clergy. The United Methodist Church operates under what is called "The Book of Discipline" which outlines the authority of various clergy and contains a system whereby issues of doctrine and practice are reviewed and enforced.

Whatever the Discipline says Methodists are not generally known for interfering in people's personal business like some authoritarian sects.

[Shane Roach]

Whatever the Discipline says Methodists are not generally known for interfering in people's personal business like some authoritarian sects.

While Methodists were at the forefront of the Temperance movement, I think you're right about that in general these days. What that has to do with the existence of authority within the Methodist church to dictate its policy and discipline is unclear to me.

[MarkEvan]

Hi Texas,

It is not so much a matter of right and wrong as of changing times.

When they taught the sun revolves around the earth, they were clearly wrong. concerning social organization however ambiguity is the norm.

But changing times should not change our view as to what is socially correct from scripture, the meaning of the scriptures remains the same reguardless of how the times change, we as christians are not to be conformed to the way the world thinks, that is what sets us apart the fact that we hold the scriptures and what they teach to be true in any time, otherwise what do we say is applicable and what is not, we no longer have a rule by which we can judge what is right or wrong, what you are saying is that we ultimately decide what is right not God. But the scriptures say that He has given them so that we may know what is good.



This would be reason enough to reject Christianity were it true, but it is not. Human understanding always changes. The word may not change it but our understanding of it does. The view you express is nothing but a hollow platitude.


I agree human understanding does always change, but we do not interpret the scriptures from "human" understanding, we interpret the scriptures through the Spirit of truth who guides us in all the truth, what He teaches us must be the same as what He taught Paul, Peter, John and all the other great men of God who have been since, because the meaning of scripture always remains the same, if it changes where is this taught in scripture?


That is your opinion only-it is not based on fact at all but only on your own emotional attachment to sexist social organization. Wesley was not known for his sexism; his greatest "teacher" was his mother.

Wesleys greatest teacher was the Holy Spirit, I know you would agree with that so maybe I am being a bit padantic. I agree Wesley was not known for his sexism, but he was known for his adherance to scripture and what I have told you about his views is true, if you don`t believe me, then I surgest that if you have a copy of his "explanatory notes on the new testament" then check what he says on all the passages concerning a womans role in the church and her attitude towards her husband.


If there was any basis for your pronouncements here the harshness might be offensive but as it is it is merely sad and pitiful.

I am truely sorry you think that.


Mark

[msbojingles]

Ok, a few scriptures and I'll gladly bow out!

Judges 4:4

Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. (which was regardless of Barak - that was a completely separate issue over war and the Word of the Lord).

Romans 16:1 (amp)
NOW I introduce and commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deaconess of the church at Cenchreae,



Malachi 3:6
6For I am the Lord, I do not change

Psalm 102:26-28
26 They will perish, but You will endure;
Yes, they will all grow old like a garment;
Like a cloak You will change them,
And they will be changed.
27 But You are the same,
And Your years will have no end.
28 The children of Your servants will continue,
And their descendants will be established before You.”




also "man" in 1 Timothy chapter 2 verse 12 is Strong's number 435, which in two out of three possible meanings means "husband" or "betrothed"

"aner" (strong's lexicon)

1) with reference to sex
a) of a male
b) of a husband c) of a betrothed or future husband

also, of "women" in the same verse.

Strong's lexicon
1135. gune goo-nay' probably from the base of 1096; a woman; specially, a wife:--wife, woman

which corresponds directly with the word of God that a woman doesn't have authority over her husband, and also keeps in line with Paul's other writings regarding women deaconesses.

There are many ministries with women at the front line, but they operate under the covering of their husbands, which falls in line with this scripture.

[Morgaine1205]

Happy Birthday, Ms. Bojingles! :)

[msbojingles]

Thanks Morgaine! :D

[Shane Roach]

The last sentence of this post I have no problem with, but the verses used to arrive at its conclusion I have some troubles understanding.

Ok, a few scriptures and I'll gladly bow out!

Judges 4:4

Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. (which was regardless of Barak - that was a completely separate issue over war and the Word of the Lord).

What separate issue? The entire theme of this story is Barak's disobedience. I do not think that is an issue to be ignored.

There's no statement in the Bible that I am aware of that women can not hold positions of authority at all. It is specific to the church, and then also specific to roles where they might be called on to exercise authority over men in the church. Again I point out, as I have before, that Levites were universally male. That is the distinction between a Judge, who has authority over things outside the Temple, and the Levites who tend to the things within the temple.

1st Timothy is not without its rather blunt counterpart in the Old Testament either.

Eccl 7:27-29
27 Behold, this have I found, saith the preacher, counting one by one, to find out the account:
28 Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found.
29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
KJV

No, I am not trying to say that all women are bad, and with the work of the Holy Spirit I know that things are different now to an extent. And yes, I am aware the verse before is speaking of an un-Godly woman. But that verse is speaking of both men and women in the context of those who seek and find wisdom.

The point here is that the idea of women being less astute in matters of discernment than men is not strange to the Bible, nor indeed is the distinction between men and women concerning gender roles.

I am familiar with women who use such things as this percieved error in the Bible to undermine the Biblical authority in matters that have nothing to do with this specific subject. Why then assert that Deborah ruled without any recourse to Barak, or why deny the theme of his disobedience and subsequent shame? Why dismiss this very imortant and obvious issue from these verses? Is it just because it tends to undermine the use of this example to prop up the assertion that women should take headship in the church now? Why make this assertion that Deborah's part in this story has nothing to do with Barak's behavior?

Romans 16:1 (amp)
NOW I introduce and commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deaconess of the church at Cenchreae,

You are bound to be as aware as I that this word is not universally the same as "pastor". I have said, and want to remain clear about this, that I am concerned here with the exercise of authority over men, and of authority to establish proper doctrine within the church. This is why I constantly emphasize women should not take positions where they are in authority over men, whereas I do not try to say that they should not speak, teach, preach, evangelize, or otherwise give their testimony. Of course they should give their testimony! And there are, as you say later, many ministries, but there is no place that I can see for ministries where women take authority over men within the church.

Malachi 3:6
6For I am the Lord, I do not change

Psalm 102:26-28
26 They will perish, but You will endure;
Yes, they will all grow old like a garment;
Like a cloak You will change them,
And they will be changed.
27 But You are the same,
And Your years will have no end.
28 The children of Your servants will continue,
And their descendants will be established before You.”

I have no idea what your intention is here, but perhaps I never will since you seem intent on bowing out.

also "man" in 1 Timothy chapter 2 verse 12 is Strong's number 435, which in two out of three possible meanings means "husband" or "betrothed"

"aner" (strong's lexicon)

1) with reference to sex
a) of a male
b) of a husband c) of a betrothed or future husband

also, of "women" in the same verse.

Strong's lexicon
1135. gune goo-nay' probably from the base of 1096; a woman; specially, a wife:--wife, woman

which corresponds directly with the word of God that a woman doesn't have authority over her husband, and also keeps in line with Paul's other writings regarding women deaconesses.

There is no confusion of the word woman here. It is the common word used for woman. Nor is the word here used for man uniquely speaking of husbands. It does not make sense in that context.

1 Tim 2:8-15
8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
KJV

It is obviously talking in a broader sense than individual married couples.

There are many ministries with women at the front line, but they operate under the covering of their husbands, which falls in line with this scripture.

I don't believe anyone has argued that women operating under the authority of their husbands, or for that matter, operating under the authority of the church itself, have anything to be ashamed of in the good work they do for the Lord.

It troubles me though that any man who takes a stand on this issue is attacked and argued with, whereas women will turn a blind eye to other women who support the leadership role of women in the church even if that belief also comes attached to many, much more obvious anti-scriptural teachings. This is anecdotal, but it tends to confirm in reality the concept of women being easily decieved or led astray that I speak of as concerning 1 Timothy.

The specific reason women are not to take authoritative roles in the church appears to be that women are uniquely easier to mislead spiritually than men. Thus, women taking positions at the head of the church organization can bring more heretical teachings, doing great damage to doctrine. There are those who argue that doctrine is not the foremost concern of Christians, but doctrine can be broken down to the point where I see it commonly in this forum's "Appologetics" section, for example, that it is taught that Christ is not necessary for salvation. Men are of course not blameless in this, but when the Bible gives an instruction, goes on to give an explanation for that instruction, and then I turn to the world around me and see confirmation of that explanation all around, I begin to wonder a lot as to why there is such resistance to that instruction.

It is perhaps possible to make too much of doctrine, but surely it is possile to make too little of it as well.

I hope I have not stepped too hard on your toes, and I respect if you choose not to respond, but I felt I had to clarify my position in relation to the things you brought up.

[Shane Roach]

I wanted to say happy birthday too, but I didn't want to spoil it by sliding it into the middle of a big long controversial post. :(

Still, HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!:clap:

I uh, was gonna give you birthday reps but you have them turned off! lol

[msbojingles]

Shane,

While I understand your position, and you may think others are the ones twisting the bible, many others -not just women - see otherwise.

"I have no idea what your intention is here, but perhaps I never will since you seem intent on bowing out. "

My intent was to bring life from the word to the person who originally posted. I did not post in response to you, and I am not here to argue over semantics. If you desire to interpret the bible as you do, that is your business - obviously the Nazerene church and the Methodist church as well as AOG and many other evangelical churches do not agree with your viewpoint and believe as I and many other people do, and the work of the Lord will continue regardless of either of our views.

Also, the scripture from Psalm has to do with "God never changes" and if He called women then, how much moreso would He now?



I understand your point about Barak, but Deborah was not the leader of the army - she was the leader of Israel. In that one instance, Barak was in disobedience. But he was never the leader of Israel - ever, nor was he supposed to be - and there is absolutely no biblical evidence that says otherwise.

I have seen ministries where a woman is a pastor - working along side a husband.

Like I said, I was responding to the sister who originally posted, and I am absolutely not going to argue with you. I know that I cannot change your view. God is the only one who can change any of us, and if you feel that I am wrong, I ask you to please pray for me and that God would reveal the error of my thinking.

Thank you for the birthday wishes! And God bless you.

[Shane Roach]

Shane,

While I understand your position, and you may think others are the ones twisting the bible, many others -not just women - see otherwise.

"I have no idea what your intention is here, but perhaps I never will since you seem intent on bowing out. "

My intent was to bring life from the word to the person who originally posted. I did not post in response to you, and I am not here to argue over semantics. If you desire to interpret the bible as you do, that is your business - obviously the Nazerene church and the Methodist church as well as AOG and many other evangelical churches do not agree with your viewpoint and believe as I and many other people do, and the work of the Lord will continue regardless of either of our views.

Also, the scripture from Psalm has to do with "God never changes" and if He called women then, how much moreso would He now?



I understand your point about Barak, but Deborah was not the leader of the army - she was the leader of Israel. In that one instance, Barak was in disobedience. But he was never the leader of Israel - ever, nor was he supposed to be - and there is absolutely no biblical evidence that says otherwise.

I have seen ministries where a woman is a pastor - working along side a husband.

Like I said, I was responding to the sister who originally posted, and I am absolutely not going to argue with you. I know that I cannot change your view. God is the only one who can change any of us, and if you feel that I am wrong, I ask you to please pray for me and that God would reveal the error of my thinking.

Thank you for the birthday wishes! And God bless you.

I can't speak to any experience with the Nazarene church, but my experience with the Methodist church is that this position was taken without Biblical backing under political and social pressure, and I have yet to see it presented Biblically.

Concerning Barak and Deborah, you go from saying she was Judge to she was the leader of Israel. She was not the leader of Israel. I am not aware of any Judge in Israel that ever usurped the authority of the Levitical priesthood. Further, she was not a military leader, as you have said, and this is in stark contrast to most of the Judges. She sat as Judge over Israel, and she was a prophet, and she gave the word of the Lord to Barak, who apparently had heard it already and was in a sort of rebellion or suffering from fear. He refused to go unless she should accompany him. As a result, God delivered the enemy into the hand of a woman instead of Barak, and not only that, but did not deliver the enemy into Deborah's hand either. It was a completely different woman. This too is in stark contrast to most of the stories about Israel's Judges.

As I said, that is a tale whose lesson is the exact opposite of what you seem to want to characterize. In that instance, Deborah did not in any way violate what would later become the teaching for the church. She did not exercise authority over the Temple, and she did not exercise authority over Barak. She judged issues pertaining to the law. The Levites continued to judge matters dealing with the Temple, cleanliness, whether or not someone was to be "put out of the congregation", and so forth. She did not even take full authority over the entire nation militarily. This is very distinct from all the various other Judges, who did, as I mentioned. No one argues that she was not much the exception to the rule either, and yet for example, in the United Methodist church, there is now a push to try to reach numerical equality in ministry positions.

The idea that God never changes is one that appears to cut the exact opposite way, then. What does God say of women when He creates them?

Gen 2:19-22
19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
KJV


This is certainly not a picture of one who is created to rule over man. Indeed, after the fall, we find this:

Gen 3:16
16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
KJV

The phrase, "thy desire shall be to thy husband," is translated elsewhere, and I think it is an important thing to know.

Gen 4:6-7
6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
KJV

Here we see that "thy desire shall be towards him," does not mean that women will simply love their husbands, or deisre to be with them, but that that the desire spoken of here is one of wanting to possess. (No, I am not saying women are equivilent to sin. I am speaking here about the sense of the phrase, "thy desire shall be towards him.") Instead, the man will rule over her. This is the ordinance of the Lord. To change it within the church is to very much teach a God that has changed in some very fundamental way, it seems to me.


You choose not to debate the verses in the OT and the New that run counter to your beliefs. That's all well and good, but by posting what you did, you invite, well... debate. Indeed, I am not sure how you characterize it as not debating since you did not ask a question, but rather made statements in support of a premise.

Finally, I would add that I still do not understand where you differ from me in the final analysis, so I do not know why you find it necessary to try to characterize the verses you quote as you have. You keep saying that you think the woman should be under the authority of her husband in these things, but yet you continue to act as if I am in opposition to women in ministry, when I have been at great pains to say that I am in total agreement with you concerning the issue of simple teaching or preaching. But where doctrinal authority or authority over the congregation is concerned, it seems clear to me that men are to hold those positions. I further explained why, which is because of the verse that says outright that there is an issue with women and their discernment of spiritual things.

And again, the issue of how women do not seem to ever stand up to other women who teach unorthodox doctrines when they come in conjunction with this matter of women in ministry follows directly on the heals of that concept. If a woman uses the idea of women in ministry as a shield, and argues that things have changed, and that it was sexism that caused the teaching concerning women in the ministry, and goes on to use the same arguments to preach acceptance even of outright sin or the denial of Jesus, the teaching concerning women in leadership acts, it appears, as a screen, such that few women who support women in the minsitry will say a word to counter other false teachings of a woman so long as she is actively supporting the right of women to take authority under the same banner of ending prejudice of some sort or other, even as I pointed out, up to and including "prejudice" of saying that Christ is not necessary for salvation. Needless to say this disturbs me deeply. There are examples of some of these things, though not all of them, right here in this thread.

I also know, and have heard from two women privately now concerning this very thread, that there is no shortage of women who understand these verses as I do. So again, it is not an issue of sexism. It is an issue of Biblical teaching and of church discipline and order.

I am in prayer often concerning this and other issues of church discipline, but I also will continue to explain my views. The two are not mutually exclusive. :)

[Sophia7]

Mod Hat On

I am reopening this thread. Please stay on topic and keep in mind Rule 2.1 when posting:

2.1 No Flaming

You will not "flame" other members or groups of members. Flaming includes, but is not limited to:
- Ridiculing, insulting, or demeaning another member or group of members;
- Ridiculing another member's beliefs;
- Ridiculing public figures important to another's beliefs;
- Stating or implying that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christian;
- Asking loaded questions that directly cause flames in response;
- Using sarcasm to attempt any of the above; and
- Threats of any sort.

Mod Hat Off

[Browneyes84]

I didn't even realize that those things were even occuring...

[HeatherJay]

We're having revival next week...we have a female pastor leading it. :thumbsup: I'm excited. ;clap:

[MarkEvan]

Hi Msbojingles,



HAPPY BIRTHDAY

(Sorry its a bit late, if I had a brain I would of sent
you a pm :doh: .)

Wait a minute....how did Morgain now it was your birthday?

[Morgaine1205]

Because last week, she had the "Happy Birthday" slogan flashing by her name! :)

[MarkEvan]

Hmm...yes that could be a bit of a give away :blush: .

[msbojingles]

Hmm...yes that could be a bit of a give away :blush: .
^_^
Thanks for the birthday wishes anyways!! ^_^ :hug:

[Abiel]

I am so glad I belong to a churh with a settled position on this issue.

[MarkEvan]

I am so glad I belong to a church with a settled position on this issue.

About Msbojingles birthday? ;) :D :D

[HeatherJay]

My pastor's thought on the comments he's gotten about us having a woman lead revival next week...

Them : "How can you allow a woman to lead revival and preach at your church?"

Pastor : "I don't allow it...God does."

Snap. ;)

[MarkEvan]

Can I ask Heather what you believe Paul meant when he said that, "I do not permit women to teach or have authority over man?"

Thanx

Mark :) .

[HeatherJay]

Can I ask Heather what you believe Paul meant when he said that, "I do not permit women to teach or have authority over man?"

Thanx

Mark :) .
Yes, you can. :) I believe he was speaking in the context of his time and in the context of the types of women that frequented the temple with purposes other than worshipping God on their minds.

Beyond that, there's no point in arguing (consider the track record of this thread, lol)...we'll just have to agree to disagree.

But I very much support the position of the Church of the Nazarene...we feel that all are called to purpose by God. And if God calls a woman to preach, then who are we to deny that call? We believe that in Christ, all are equal...there is no Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female. God has a purpose and a plan for all of us...and He doesn't hand out assignments based on gender. But, there seems to be a prevalent line of thinking that "If God wanted you to be a preacher, He'd have made you a man." :doh: I, personally, find such thinking to be pretty close minded and ignorant of Scriptural teachings beyond those few statements made by Paul.

[Texas Lynn]

Quote:
It is not so much a matter of right and wrong as of changing times.

When they taught the sun revolves around the earth, they were clearly wrong. concerning social organization however ambiguity is the norm.
But changing times should not change our view as to what is socially correct from scripture, the meaning of the scriptures remains the same reguardless of how the times change, we as christians are not to be conformed to the way the world thinks, that is what sets us apart the fact that we hold the scriptures and what they teach to be true in any time, otherwise what do we say is applicable and what is not, we no longer have a rule by which we can judge what is right or wrong, what you are saying is that we ultimately decide what is right not God. But the scriptures say that He has given them so that we may know what is good.

This is an excellent argument against taking scripture literally in any case. Thank you.




Quote:
This would be reason enough to reject Christianity were it true, but it is not. Human understanding always changes. The word may not change it but our understanding of it does. The view you express is nothing but a hollow platitude.

I agree human understanding does always change, but we do not interpret the scriptures from "human" understanding, we interpret the scriptures through the Spirit of truth who guides us in all the truth, what He teaches us must be the same as what He taught Paul, Peter, John and all the other great men of God who have been since, because the meaning of scripture always remains the same, if it changes where is this taught in scripture?

Wrong. All scriptural interpretation is done through human understanding and nothing else.



Quote:
That is your opinion only-it is not based on fact at all but only on your own emotional attachment to sexist social organization. Wesley was not known for his sexism; his greatest "teacher" was his mother.
Wesleys greatest teacher was the Holy Spirit, I know you would agree with that so maybe I am being a bit padantic. I agree Wesley was not known for his sexism, but he was known for his adherance to scripture and what I have told you about his views is true, if you don`t believe me, then I surgest that if you have a copy of his "explanatory notes on the new testament" then check what he says on all the passages concerning a womans role in the church and her attitude towards her husband.

Fortunately we aren't bound by Wesley's sexism or Paul's.

[MarkEvan]

Hi Heather, you are right there is no point arguing about this subject, I can be wrong on this as can you, but the most important thing for any christian is Love, ultimatly being right or wrong on this issue is insignificant next to love.

Hi Texas, i`m going to call it a day, if I were to continue then I would only be repeating myself, anything you want to know about what I believe on this, I have already put in other posts. I have enjoyed talking with you, and hope that our disagreement on this will not put me in a bad light in your eyes. Again the most important thing for any Christian is that they walk in Love.

To both of you, the reason that I believe what I do is not because I want to put women down, it`s because that is what I see scripture teaching.

And finally to texas, I`v always wanted to ask....why does your avatar have a "five o`clock shadow?"

[HeatherJay]

Hi Heather, you are right there is no point arguing about this subject, I can be wrong on this as can you, but the most important thing for any christian is Love, ultimatly being right or wrong on this issue is insignificant next to love.

Hi Texas, i`m going to call it a day, if I were to continue then I would only be repeating myself, anything you want to know about what I believe on this, I have already put in other posts. I have enjoyed talking with you, and hope that our disagreement on this will not put me in a bad light in your eyes. Again the most important thing for any Christian is that they walk in Love.

To both of you, the reason that I believe what I do is not because I want to put women down, it`s because that is what I see scripture teaching.

And finally to texas, I`v always wanted to ask....why does your avatar have a "five o`clock shadow?"
I fully believe that you have no nefarious motives behind your belief...lol, neither do I. I think we're all just trying our best to understand the Message the Lord has for us. I'm fine with the fact that we don't agree on this one tiny insignificant little detail. ;) I've enjoyed the conversation, too, my brother. :hug:

[MarkEvan]

I fully believe that you have no nefarious motives behind your belief...lol, neither do I. I think we're all just trying our best to understand the Message the Lord has for us. I'm fine with the fact that we don't agree on this one tiny insignificant little detail. ;) I've enjoyed the conversation, too, my brother. :hug:

Thankyou.

(only one more post till I reach 100, still thats a long way off 13000, how long h