I did! That's why I said what I said.Read post #50.
I did! That's why I said what I said.Read post #50.
It isn't so much about culture, really, although that may play some minor role, depending on just what point one is trying to make.A point that always needs to be under consideration is the culture at the time.
So in today's world I prefer to listen to those based on their knowledge rather than their sex.
I can tell you right now in today's culture that I would much much much rather be taught by a woman scholar who has studied ancient culture, ancient Semitic language, and has studied ancient writings of the Jews and how they understood idioms, symbolism, and metaphors in scripture than listen to a man like Hal Lindsey try to convince me that the "locusts" in Revelation are modern military helicopters.
It seems to me that we had a disconnect originally.A point that always needs to be under consideration is the culture at the time.
So in today's world I prefer to listen to those based on their knowledge rather than their sex.
I can tell you right now in today's culture that I would much much much rather be taught by a woman scholar who has studied ancient culture, ancient Semitic language, and has studied ancient writings of the Jews and how they understood idioms, symbolism, and metaphors in scripture than listen to a man like Hal Lindsey try to convince me that the "locusts" in Revelation are modern military helicopters.
The culture.There has been lots of changes in culture throughout history.
As to the question of whether God changed then I would have to remind that God didn't have a problem with Deborah (a woman) to judge over His people and that Athaliah (a woman) ruled over Judah as their monarch on the throne for 6 years between the rule of King Jehoram and King Ahaziah.
So I ask you, was it God that changed or the culture?
So none of the judges over God's people taught them anything through their judgements?Deborah was a judge, not a teacher.
So was David.Athaliah was a murderer
Adam was not deceived and yet committed the same sin as Eve anyway.Because the woman was deceived in the beginning, they are not worthy of teaching man.
I love this wonderful statement: "shouldn't ever lose sight of the principles of grace".It isn't so much about culture, really, although that may play some minor role, depending on just what point one is trying to make.
Regardless, whether its cultural or simply practical, the thing to remember is that you shouldn't ever lose sight of the principles of grace when considering anything Paul taught. Paul was NOT setting up a new law for Christians where it is some sort of sin to have a woman teach in a church or to hold a position of authority over any man and the requirements for an elder are not a higher standard that certain men must reach before being qualified to lead their church. Instead, it is simply that men seeking to be elders ought to be good Christian men and, as a general rule, it is best for men to lead women instead of the other way around, but, if there comes a situation where that isn't the case, then we have counter examples in the bible that tell us that it's not the end of the world if a woman is entrusted with being put in charge of something.
I can't say, as I wasn't there.So none of the judges over God's people taught them anything through their judgements?
Please don't try to justify a woman's sin because a man did the same thing.So was David.
Paul says his reasons in 1 Tim 2:9-14..."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;Adam was not deceived and yet committed the same sin as Eve anyway.
How does that make Adam a better teacher?????
You weren't there with Adam & Eve.I can't say, as I wasn't there.
None of that excludes that God sometimes used a woman as leadership role of His people.Were there any women chief priests ?
Woman scribes ?
Woman Pharisees ?
Woman synagogue leaders ?
You are mistaken to think I justify what either Adam or Eve did.Please don't try to justify a woman's sin because a man did the same thing.
None of that justifies what either Adam or Eve did.The woman sinned first.
She was created for the man, not the man for the woman.
The same Paul wrote this to the whole church at Colossae:If we toss out the admonission about women teachers, will we also toss out the admonissions about modest apparel and sobriety ?
Maybe long hair for a covering will be next ?
How far astray is still safe to you ?
Correct.You weren't there with Adam & Eve.
Once, if you consider a judge a leader.None of that excludes that God sometimes used a woman as leadership role of His people.
Good.You are mistaken to think I justify what either Adam or Eve did.
Correct, but Eve was first.None of that justifies what either Adam or Eve did.
No.The same Paul wrote this to the whole church at Colossae:
Colossians 3(16) Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.(17) And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.Should we toss that out????
In short, there is a difference between recognizing what are best practices vs. turning those best practices into a new set of laws.I love this wonderful statement: "shouldn't ever lose sight of the principles of grace".
I offer further scripture of Paul addressing the church of Colossae in support of women in Christ being just as apt to teach:
Colossians 3(16) Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.(17) And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
I also believe that when you have an assembly gathered together that it would be best to have men in charge to keep the congregation orderly because if things get unruly and disorderly then men would be better equipped to physically control the crowd.
And I believe that is the role of a church deacon, to be a proven one that keeps things orderly and safe as he does those of his own house.
Paul provides the answer to the subject of woman teaching men here..."Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.As I sit down to explore the intriguing question of whether women can serve as pastors, my mind begins to navigate through the intricate landscapes of tradition, belief systems, and societal expectations. The journey is filled with twists and turns, much like the theological debates that have echoed through the corridors of religious institutions for centuries.
The Sanctuary's Traditions
In the hallowed halls of the sanctuary, tradition stands as a sentinel, guarding the age-old practices that have shaped the ecclesiastical landscape. I find myself pondering the roots of these traditions and questioning their resilience in the face of a changing world. Can the sacred walls withstand the winds of transformation, or will they crumble under the weight of progressive ideals?
Theological Reflections
As I delve into the theological realms, I am met with a tapestry of interpretations and scriptural exegesis. The verses, once black and white, now seem to blur into shades of gray. I contemplate the myriad perspectives on biblical passages that have been both a source of strength and contention. Can the divine word be a compass that guides us through the complexities of gender roles, or does it require a nuanced understanding beyond conventional interpretations?
Societal Paradigms
Beyond the confines of the pulpit, societal norms cast a shadow on the question at hand. I witness the intricate dance between cultural expectations and the desire for equality. Can the pulpit, traditionally occupied by men, be reshaped to accommodate the voices of women, or does it remain a stronghold of patriarchal structures unwilling to yield?
Personal Reflection
In the quiet moments of contemplation, I find myself wrestling with my own preconceptions and biases. How much of my perspective is shaped by the lens of my upbringing, and can I transcend those influences to embrace a more inclusive understanding of leadership within the church? Is my hesitation a product of genuine concern for doctrinal integrity, or does it mirror a resistance to change?
A Community in Flux
The question of women serving as pastors extends beyond individual contemplation to the broader context of a community in flux. I witness the conversations, the debates, and the occasional uncomfortable silence that permeates the congregation. Can a community evolve without losing its essence, or is this question destined to be a fault line that divides rather than unites?
In the end, the question lingers in the sanctum of my thoughts, weaving its way through the fabric of my understanding. Can women serve as pastors? The answer seems elusive, obscured by the layers of tradition, theology, societal norms, personal reflections, and the collective consciousness of a community. As I conclude this exploration, I am left not with an answer but with a profound sense of the complexity that resides within the folds of this seemingly straightforward question.
I don't think Athaliah is a good person to use when arguing for women's ordination.There has been lots of changes in culture throughout history.
As to the question of whether God changed then I would have to remind that God didn't have a problem with Deborah (a woman) to judge over His people and that Athaliah (a woman) ruled over Judah as their monarch on the throne for 6 years between the rule of King Jehoram and King Ahaziah.
So I ask you, was it God that changed or the culture?
2Ki 11:1 And when Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was dead, she arose and destroyed all the seed royal.
2Ki 11:2 But Jehosheba, the daughter of king Joram, sister of Ahaziah, took Joash the son of Ahaziah, and stole him from among the king's sons which were slain; and they hid him, even him and his nurse, in the bedchamber from Athaliah, so that he was not slain.
2Ki 11:3 And he was with her hid in the house of the LORD six years. And Athaliah did reign over the land.
Well, one could say that no one was a good person to use since all have sinned.I don't think Athaliah is a good person to use when arguing for women's ordination.
Huh? She murdered her way to the throne. She killed all the people in line for inheriting it except one and that one was hidden in the temple for six years.Well, one could say that no one was a good person to use since all have sinned.
But it does show that the ancient Jews did not ban women from sitting on the throne.
And she ruled on the throne for 6 years.She murdered
And until Joash was old enough to be awatr of what was going on he was hidden. Then the high priest found reliable men in the army and instructed them to to protect Joash with their lives and when he had secured the king made it known Joash had survived. You see Athaliah's response. She would have killed Joash too to retain her power, but there were still enough men in the army who were honest to protect him. And when the people knew they made a very noisy celebration. That tells me Athaliah was not liked among the people or the spiritual leadership of the nation. That's why they killed her.And she ruled on the throne for 6 years.
It wasn't because she was a woman.And until Joash was old enough to be awatr of what was going on he was hidden. Then the high priest found reliable men in the army and instructed them to to protect Joash with their lives and when he had secured the king made it known Joash had survived. You see Athaliah's response. She would have killed Joash too to retain her power, but there were still enough men in the army who were honest to protect him. And when the people knew they made a very noisy celebration. That tells me Athaliah was not liked among the people or the spiritual leadership of the nation. That's why they killed her.
If no one had cared how evil she was she would not have been killed.
How would you know that? The Bible doesn't tell us that? The Bible does tell us that a bishop and an elder must be men. I don't think the argument about culture is a good argument either. Cultures always change God does not.It wasn't because she was a woman.
Several evil monarchs ruled on the throne.
Heb_13:8 Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and today and forever.
Mal_3:6 For I, Jehovah, change not. Because of this, you sons of Jacob are not destroyed.
Ancient haters of God allowed a woman to sit on the throne. (Matt 6:24)Well, one could say that no one was a good person to use since all have sinned.
But it does show that the ancient Jews did not ban women from sitting on the throne.
Why would you not consider a judge a leader. Samuel was a prophet.Correct.
Once, if you consider a judge a leader.
I don't.
Good.
Correct, but Eve was first.
No.
Women have lots of scripture describing how they are to behave themselves.
Why they want men's duties too is not understandable.
1Sa 7:6 And they gathered together to Mizpeh, and drew water, and poured it out before the LORD, and fasted on that day, and said there, We have sinned against the LORD. And Samuel judged the children of Israel in Mizpeh.
Jdg 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.
Jdg 4:5 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.