You're wrong, of course... Won't bother to say why again. Some of you ladies just don't like what the Bibles saying and rebel against it...It's a matter of pride I think...
toldailytopic: Women preaching from the pulpit. Is it wrong?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
You're wrong, of course... Won't bother to say why again. Some of you ladies just don't like what the Bibles saying and rebel against it...It's a matter of pride I think...
Paul teaches that a woman may prophesy [that is to preach] providing she cover her head.
No.
"The priesthood of all believers," has been mishandled so as to teach that the laity is welcomed to all the responsibilities of the ordained. Such a position results in disintegration not because of a simple violation of order but because of disobedience.
Today we are being inundated with jargon-pious sounding "buzz words"; e.g., words like witness, testimony, ministry, fellowship, growth, discipling, sharing, as well as evangelizing. All of these words have been turned into "trigger words" which subtly mark the boundaries of an at attempt at a new orthodoxy. If someone questions the accepted usage, he is immediately suspect, as if the distinction between laity and clergy was a meaningless concept in Scripture. :AMR:
The Great Commission was originally given to the apostles, not to every single believer. This means that while it is admirable and encouraged for all Christians to be witnesses to Christ in their lives (and in their speech when the opportunity arises), there is a specific context in which gospel preaching enjoys a promised blessing by the Holy Spirit, and that context is the pulpit each Lord’s Day (See Romans 10:13-15, 17). It seems inconceivable in Paul’s mind that the preaching that produces faith would be done outside the context of a duly ordained minister whom the church has sent out on this holy errand. Yes, Paul did rejoice even when the gospel is preached by unworthy and self-serving men (Philippians 1:15-18), but that is far different from saying that the ordained ministry of the Word is in some way unnecessary or dispensable.
It was of the church that Jesus was speaking when he issued the promise that the gates of hell would not prevail against it, and it was of this church that Paul wrote to Timothy, calling it the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth (see Matthew 16:18; 1 Timothy 3:15). Thus, while all believers are called to faithfully glorify God by fulfilling their earthly callings, it is not incumbent upon them to also fulfill the Great Commission. That holy task is given to men set apart from worldly endeavors—men who, like Paul are separated to the gospel of God (Romans 1:1).
We find in 1 Cor 14:26, 33, 40, that everything in the church is to be done decently, in order, peacefully, and for edification. Elsewhere we read the office of elder was charged with the leadership and the governance of the church, and to do so they formed a presbyterium (1 Tim. 4:14).
There can also be no doubt that Christ founded the church and entrusted it with certain powers. After all, our Lord spoke of the church as being based on a rock such that even Hell could not prevail against it! To the church community, Christ gave offices, ministries, institutions, and gifts (see Romans 12:6 and forward, Ephesians 4:11, and 1 Cor. 12-14). Power, too, was given to the church. Power to determine what will and will not be in effect, that is what is permitted and what is prohibited, what will or will not be allowed in the kingdom of heaven established here on earth, the center of which is the church. This power (exousia), the power of the keys, was the ministry of Word and sacrament (Matthew 28:19). The ministry of Word and sacrament necessarily also implies the power to teach, govern, and to discipline.
The sacraments (the Supper and Baptism) are holy, visible, signs and seals instituted by God so that (1) He may make the believer more clearly understand and to reassure the believer of the promises and benefits of the covenant of grace; and (2) that the believer might confess and confirm their faith and love before God, the elect angels, and mankind.
From Scripture we find ordinary (and extraordinary) offices that were instituted by Christ: Mark 3:14; Luke 10:1; Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11
These ordinary offices were given power for the:
1. proclamation of the gospel (Matthew 10:7; Mark 3:14; 16:15; Luke 9:2)
2. administration of the sacraments (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:15; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-26)
3. feeding of the flock (John 21:15-17; Acts 20:28)
4. exercise of discipline (Matthew 18:17; 1 Cor. 5:4)
5. serving of tables (Acts 6:2)
6. right to earn a living from the gospel (Matthew 10:10; 1 Cor. 9:4 and forward; 2 Thess. 3:9; 1 Tim. 5:18)
Extraordinary power:
performing miracles (Matthew 10:1; 10:8; Mark 3:15; 16:18; John 20:23)
No person can take the honor of these unless they have been called and sent (Romans 10:15; Hebrews 5:4). These powers are for (1) building up, not for destruction, (2) the perfection of the saints, and (3) building up of the body of Christ.
For example, baptism is administered by Christ. But, in the administration of baptism, our Lord employs those whom He has charged with the distribution of the mysteries of God (1 Cor. 4:1). The testimony of the Scripture is clear in that in the New Testament baptism was administered only by those men who held offices.
Further, the teachings from Scripture about the elder and/or teaching elder are clearly directed towards men who were called, tested, examined, and laid hands upon, and sent to offer the means of grace of Word and sacrament. Folks, even our Lord was appointed to His office (Heb. 5:4-5)!
I am not denying the believer should refrain discussing their faith with others. This is not the issue. Of course we are to share our experiences of faith with others, even having a ready defense for that which we hold dear. But there is a limit on the authority each person may claim for themselves, else we have anarchy. Making disciples is not about "witnessing", "sharing testimonies", etc. In Matthew 28:19, disciples are made. How? By baptizing and teaching. This is the proper grammar of the passage.
I maintain that this view of "sharing the gospel" by any and all is not what the Great Commission is about. Rather it is about identifying the proper responsibility for the ministry of Word and sacrament and the commands contained thereto. If a person honestly believes that the Lord's commands in the Great Commission apply strictly to themselves, then they need to get busy traveling to nations, teaching, discipling, and baptizing. These are not either-or options and we cannot ignore James 3:1!
For more see here.
AMR
*
My dear AMR this must be a record post for you and no links....those of us who admire you always knew you had it in you. :chuckle:
Now I am in the library and on a time constraint, alas, but let's make a start.
Is "laity" at all a scripture term? Here is the great commission "Go ye [those disciples who were present, not just the twelve but more like the 500 who Paul said saw Him alive at one time, men and women ] into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. These signs will follow those who believe.
They will
in My name they will lay hands on the sick and they shall recover, they will cast out devils and speak in new tongues......."
My dear do you suppose that any of these things are possible without preaching?
In acts we see that because of the persecution after Stephen the disciples went everywhere both men and women preaching the gospel as they went, we know that Philip stayed in Samaria with his four daughters who were preachers. Paul stayed with them breifly.
Come come AMR I think when Paul preached at the shrine to the unknown God at Athens he did so with all due order and decency, just as the Lord had on the mountainside and from a smelly ol' fishing boat.
These ideas of yours I must say are very Catholic, and indeed my beef against the reformation [as wonderful as it was] is that they did not reform sufficiently the ministry whereby the new doctrines should be administered.
Merely calling a Priest a Presbyter is no reformation. Was Calvin ordained after the fashion you speak of?
Witness, testimony, ministry, growth, evangelising etc are all thouroughly NT words, what possible objection can you have to the gentle word "sharing?" I believe in proclamation preaching above all other.
We need a new orthodoxy, we need to come out of the 16th and 17th centuries, we do not want new doctrines but we need more light upon the grand old doctrines of the early Puritans [a much warmer and more gentle sort of Puritanism that followed later with it's politicisation....not unlike the christian far right of today]
As I have said the 16th century reformed the doctrines but left the ministry largely unreformed.
God the Holy Ghost is a congregationalist, He gives His gifts to just whosoever He pleases, as a free grace believer you have slipped back into the bad old ways of the Catholics with their college and seminary produced candidates for the ministry. That is the way of free will believers, they get an idea that they have somme ability to serve in the church so they take that as a call from the Holy Ghost....subconsciously maybe they did not wish to dig the road.
The genuine calling and anointing and enabling is being and has been lost from among free grace churches, their doctrines [oft times] are free grace but their practices are [oft times] free will.
What you say about baptism is plain nonsense, for Jesus did not baptise neither did Paul but left it to others not especially appointed but disciples. I have not my bible with me but I do believe you will find that elders are to be appointed by the assembly. In the NT the assembly is all, the assembly is everything, even Paul when called upon to discipline in the matter of grave sin at Corinth commanded the assembly to take the neccesary action.
The problem with the church from the very earliest times after the apostles is THEY DO NOT TRUST that the Holy Ghost is able to govern in the assembly. It is true that bishops and elders are Divine ordinances and ministries but not to lord it over the people's faith. Even Paul did not, not even over churches he had planted.
Aw I could take you task my brother, quoting Ephesians about the ministries God has appointed for the church....which of these ministries do you approve of and believe are still availiable for the assembly today?
And where are they.....let me tell you something if they were operating as they did in the NT testament, preaching the gospel that was preached in the NT in the same way it was preached in the NT [with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven] you would have NT results....make no mistake about that, God has not lost His power, what He did in Wesley/Whitefield's day He can do today.
But dear AMR people HAVE gone into all the world, men and women, whole cities and nations have been won to the Lord...Africa is ALIVE with the gospel, did you know that the Chinese church, I mean the house churches not the state church has more members than N. America.....where did they come from? I can tell you it was not the ICM or WEC. And women have been at the forefront.
No, no share, preach, tell out, witness, who cares? if God be with us folks will get saved.
Last edited:
ThePresbyteers
New member
Are we that thirsty to return to racism?
What do slavery, circumcision, and the subordinate role of women have in common?
All three of these seem to be supported by Scripture. However, slavery is no longer valid and the necessity of circumcision as a requirement for membership into the Christian church has been abandoned. I will argue that the subordinate role of women also should be abandoned on the same grounds as the previous two, especially in regard to the ordination of women as ministers in the Church.
If Paul allowed slavery, which we today condemn, can we say on the basis of “progressive revelation” that if he were alive today God would inspire him to change his mind on both the slavery issue and on women's ordination?
Paul did not endorse slavery. On the contrary, the principles he laid down for modifying slavery led to the abolition of slavery in Christian countries.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
BC,
I have answered these objections from Scripture. You are confusing lawful ordination with other matters. Certainly believers may share their testimonies with others. This is not the exhortation of preaching by those called and lawfully sent. For that matter your evangelistic efforts in a prison should be controlled by your church. See to it that they are aware of what you are doing and consent.
AMR
She won't listen. She's in rebellion against what the Bible says, with regards to women in the church...
If we are to abandon this part:
Ephesians 5:22-33
New International Version (NIV)
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Then we'll have to abandon this part as well:
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
Totton and all... when you respond to a long post please do not quote the entire thing within your post.
Copy only the parts you want to respond to and quote just those parts. It makes for far better reading.
Thanks. :up:
I must correct myself in saying that the first assemblies chose who should be elders and overseers, I see now that Paul chose certain persons as Timmy and Titus and they were the appointers of elders and such, Paul instructed Timmy to commit what he had taught him on to faithful men.
But in the matter of ordinations and the passing on of ministry there is a golden reformation truth which must not be overlooked.
We must always look at first instances.
We see that the FIRST instance of the Holy Spirit coming was that He "fell" on them and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost. We see also that the first instance of His coming upon the Gentiles was that He "fell" on them while Peter was yet speaking...it is as though the Holy Ghost wanted to make a point and we see in later disputes just how important that point was for when God does something remarkable or new in the church the testimony is such as is very difficult [impossible] for men after to gainsay it.
The problem with ALL systematic ordinations and sacraments is exactly the same as sacraments as practiced in the Catholic church....they require not the inner work of the Holy Ghost...they can be and indeed they certainly are flaked and by and by fall into abuse. So you have men indeed ordained by men [since they have met all the requirements that men put upon them] but they have never been chosen or ordained by God.
This in a nutshell is the history of the church and of all denominations. Chosen of men but not by God.
What is the answer?
The answer is not complex or difficult, the simplicity of the answer like the simplicity of faith itself is to go back to the beginning. And the beginning was that the assembly waited upon God in prayer until He fulfilled His promise to them and baptised them with the Holy Ghost and power.....men and women, men and women. Giving gifts as He will.
I think a great many good brethren will think such an event undecent and disorderly....
But in the matter of ordinations and the passing on of ministry there is a golden reformation truth which must not be overlooked.
We must always look at first instances.
We see that the FIRST instance of the Holy Spirit coming was that He "fell" on them and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost. We see also that the first instance of His coming upon the Gentiles was that He "fell" on them while Peter was yet speaking...it is as though the Holy Ghost wanted to make a point and we see in later disputes just how important that point was for when God does something remarkable or new in the church the testimony is such as is very difficult [impossible] for men after to gainsay it.
The problem with ALL systematic ordinations and sacraments is exactly the same as sacraments as practiced in the Catholic church....they require not the inner work of the Holy Ghost...they can be and indeed they certainly are flaked and by and by fall into abuse. So you have men indeed ordained by men [since they have met all the requirements that men put upon them] but they have never been chosen or ordained by God.
This in a nutshell is the history of the church and of all denominations. Chosen of men but not by God.
What is the answer?
The answer is not complex or difficult, the simplicity of the answer like the simplicity of faith itself is to go back to the beginning. And the beginning was that the assembly waited upon God in prayer until He fulfilled His promise to them and baptised them with the Holy Ghost and power.....men and women, men and women. Giving gifts as He will.
I think a great many good brethren will think such an event undecent and disorderly....
"lawful" ordination, "lawfully" sent, :sigh:
Luther and Calvin or any of the reformers would have failed the test and indeed DID fail this test. Many of the martyrs of Bloody Mary would have failed the test.
Spurgeon signally failed this test. He went for an interview with the principal of a famous bible college and by a freak event [uh huh] was shown into the wrong room, while he waited an inordinate time in one room the principal waited a similar length of time in another.
Spurgeon went home in great dispondancy, while he walked down the country lanes to his village a great voice boomed behind him "seekest thou great things for thyself? seek them not"
[You can't tell me Spurgeon would not have been Charismatic] Thereafter Spurgeon never again sought the approval of men.
Oh he was unique, oh he was unique.
Point taken, I did learn how to do that once...I'll have a practice
Mind you that was a pretty meaty post by AMR
God is emotional. How is that a bad thing?
I agree
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
It was not a major Reformation issue. It is Biblical. Plese speak to your Pastor about your odd views on the matter of calling, lawful ordination, and sending. You are out of accord with Scripture.
AMR
They can't preach or teach in the church assembly. Paul says women are to remain silent. How can a woman preach or teach if she must remain silent. Both you women are wrong!!!
I agree that church govt [which never let any of us forget ultimately rests with the Head of church] is not my strong point my dear brother. I was saved in my own home with a salvation I do see others have experienced for manifest power and glory but which outside of the bible and apart from those times in the church when the Holy Ghost has moved with notable power, refreshing His people and renewing His work.
I do not now belong to a "church" other than church at it's simplemost expression, that is to say that a few us meet who are of one heart and accord to seek the Lord in prayer and bible study and breaking of bread. I assure you brother we have proved the promise true "where 2 or 3 are gathered in My name there am I"
It was not a major reformation issue as you say....the ref in itself was a major advance so far as doctrine was concerned [enough to occupy the minds of a generation] however insomuch as it was NOT a major ref issue that was a weakness in the ref itself.
God poured out the new wine but men have put it into old wineskins, and I will show you the reason for that.
The reformers including Calvin relied every bit upon the arm of the state as the Catholic church before it had. Even in Geneva at its height of glory the church did not appoint the elders but the local government...you cannot but admit this is a major flaw and weakness. Just like the the revivals of the OT days when much mischief was removed but never were the high places removed from the days of Jereboam son of Nebat onwards.
I would take a great deal more notice of voices like yours [and I do not mean disrespect, not at all] if looking around I SAW anything like a NT testament church.
The closest I have seen and I spent a few wonderful months while staying in a certain area of London was a Brethren assembly of the exclusive sort....aw they are sweet brethren and they LOVE the bible, if you can show them in the bible a thing they will always honour the written word above their doctrinal stance.Looking at the history of those Breths I think Bristol and Plymouth must have been near heaven on earth before J.N.Darby began his rampage tearing the work to pieces. And what was the issue?
Authority in the church, should it be centralised? or kept [which is entirely scriptural] within the local assembly?
I BELIEVE that where 2 or 3 are gathered there the Lord is.
There is something the Lord values as precious and He will let an awful lot go in order to have it in His church...that is unity of heart and mind....how else would you account for the spiritual success of such movements of God as the Salvation Army? they were UNITED in heart and mind.
I was not saved by your church or any other church although the area where I was staying must have a 1, 000 more different evangelical churches of different persuasions...to whom should I go? and I'll tell you I DID have the Holy Ghost, and I DO have the Holy Ghost.
I did join a local assembly and was baptised there, I was soon and amazed and appalled by them "how can they have fallen so low?" I simply could not grasp in my mind how they would meet twice on Sunday and a few odd bods turn up on Wednesday night for prayer meeting......and they were a Pentecostal church.
What knocked it all on the head for me was when we went to the park to preach and joined all the other evangelical preachers screaming condemnation and damnation at all and anybody that passed by.
Oh my heart ached and breaked....these same dear brothers and sisses who just now were singing such sweet songs and giving such glorious testimonies about how patient and lovely the Lord has been to them....no, no, my brother.
There IS no way that God can use such preaching....people are in trouble and need help. But they are told that God is angry with them and is going to damn them.....oh dear oh dear.
The message I have recieved is that God has sent Jesus to bless me in turning me away from my sins, that means He loves me and is not angry, that means He is ready and willing to help me in all my troubles.
His sleeves are rolled up not in readiness for a fight but in readiness to do a work of salvation. He has bared His holy arm.
Last edited:
ThePresbyteers
New member
In Jesus days, they were referring to a different kind of yapping during worship.
Today, we are not to treat women like dogs.
Major Biblical misunderstanding
Why do you think God won't allow women to fulfill these roles?
I see in one of your earlier posts you say it has to do with the creation and the fall. Do you think God just chose these defined roles for men and women from the start? Was there a reason for it?
Why can a woman teach a man outside the church but not inside the church?
Or, let me ask a slightly different question. Would it be true to say that you don't think it's wrong for a women to teach or preach a sermon in church, but it is wrong for them to do the other things associated with being a pastor, like administering the sacraments?
For example, would it be wrong for a woman to be a guest speaker or something like that and preach a sermon or a series of sermons in a church?
Last edited:
Wellllllll nooooooow Your Grossness, if women must keep silence in church there is no need for them to be in church. They may stay home and their husbands can fill them in.
Or, they may find a church which allows them to participate fully, not just clean the toilets, cook and clean and bake.