Can Women Pastor ?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Already did that and you chose to ignore it. If there's nothing further you care to discuss, this is over between you and I. I'm not going to discuss this issue with you when you refuse to accept citations that I post because they aren't good enough for you, as if you are somehow more 'in the know' than scholars who have studied the Bible for decades.

I haven't yet arrived. I admit that....something you cannot do for yourself.

Sorry, but I just don't have the brains or the wits to battle with the unending knowledge you appear to have.

I'll just stick to my simple KJV Bible.

Where did you provide the reputable translation that adopts the word as "preached" as relayed to Deborah:___________? YOU are the one who apparently "knows more than the Bible scholars"....since NONE of them have chosen to translate this term as you say! Hmmm, wonder why?

I certainly have much to learn, but I don't know of a serious scholar alive who does not consult [i.e, Cross Reference] various Literal Translations for congruity. What about those in Asia, Africa, etc. who do not even read, or speak English [& certainly don't own a KJV]....I suppose they're out of the loop?????? And what did folks do until 1611, when the KJV was completed? I guess they couldn't be saved, or understand the Scriptures????????

[rdp]

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Paul also said that he'd rather that all men live as he did......single. Do you really think God has that same preference?

When was the last time you greeted one another with a holy kiss?

The same Holy Ghost inspired Paul to write that command too. Pucker up.

In I Cor. 7, Paul explicitly says that the single life is his own personal preference. Then, he also endorses the marriage life in the same chp., Eph. & elsewhere. But when it comes to the woman preacher issue [i.e., immediately after expounding the issue, (I Cor. 14:37)], he plainly says, "If any man think himself a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you ARE THE COMMANDMENTS OF THE LORD." How in the world you do not fear to disobey an explicit "commandment of the Lord" is beyond me.

I actually agree w/ you regarding the "holy kiss," & wish that it would be implemented in our western world. The reason it's not is because of our perverted culture [which is irrelevant]. But, I will say that the brotherly/sisterly hug & touching of the cheek [& even kiss in some cases] accurately applies the principle of what Paul/Peter were teaching thru this injunction.

Typical Heavenlyone "theology,": I cannot explain I Tim. 2, I Cor. 14, etc., so I'll try to point out inconsistencies in oreder to render these unexplainable passages ineffective! Sad, so sad..................

O', & by the way, It's not about me having some sort of "superior knowledge" as you scornfully implied above. It's about simply reading the Bible & believing what it says.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

"Question: Did the Holy Spirit inspire Paul to forbid the practice of women teaching/preaching in the church in I Tim. 2, or not:__________? "

I think you will likely see the earth reduced to dust before you get an answer on this. LOL. You've been waiting for one for about 52 page snow haven't you?

LOL.....I know, I really don't even know why I keep responding. I guess I just wanted to see what they had to offer.

Absolutely unreal................blessings. RDP.

[simplyme]

Originally Posted by rdp

LOL.....I know, I really don't even know why I keep responding. I guess I just wanted to see what they had to offer.

Absolutely unreal................blessings. RDP.

I don't either, lol but I commend you for trying..,
YES it IS absolutely UNREAL., maybe someone
should pinch you, so that you might "wakeUP",
It'd be nice if it really WAS 'just a nightmare', lol
REALITY can be sooo hard to take.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by simplyme

I don't either, lol but I commend you for trying..,
YES it IS absolutely UNREAL., maybe someone
should pinch you, so that you might "wakeUP",
It'd be nice if it really WAS 'just a nightmare', lol
REALITY can be sooo hard to take.

Amen. Be careful, they just might claim you were "preaching" above!

[simplyme]

Originally Posted by rdp

Amen. Be careful, they just might claim you were "preaching" above!

LOL!

[Tim Rutledge]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Can females be used in the office of a Christian pastor and in Eldership roles ?
Yes or No ? What say ye ?

No.

[Jeffrey]

Pardon me for re-living this thread. I am a product of a woman's ministry, and a supporter of women participating in worship and the ministry of the church. What I am not positive concerning, is how we reconcile some of Paul's very explicit concerns with our reality today. Are we consistent with the Text? What specifically does it mean?

1 Cor 14:34-35 (Paul emphasizes the Law in v34)

1 Timothy 2:9-15 (Paul appeals to creation here, another reference to the Old Testament, applying it to under the New Covenant)

Titus 2:1-5 gives an example of what women SHOULD do, instead of NOT this time around.

This subject comes up many times with emotional and anecdotal arguments. I'm curious with how we get around this issue today in the church.

That women participate in the community is understood (Romans 13 for example, Priscilla in Acts -- though that's sometimes explained that she was with her husband), but what is the proper role? Should she teach men? Should she assume senior leadership over a congregation? As a pastor? Should she speak prophecy to other men?

How do we reason this with scripture. I understand the context of Paul's remarks were extreme disorder (in the case of Corinth) and his other remarks in Titus and Timothy were in other contexts. Yet, we have consistent remarks on his part in these three instances, as well as references pointing back to the Old Testament (and we could include the first part of 1 Cor 11 for more of his "pointing back" with regard to the social order set-up by God).

Curious as to opinion. Instead of a new thread, figured we just use this one.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

I see, allowing the literal text to speak for itself is now relegated to "flushing them down the toilet"????????? Still waiting on your Biblical example of a woman "preaching" from the Scriprures to men [as modern women "preachers" do]:________________? Those pesky blanks!

I agree, "Scripture does not contradict Scripture," thus, I Tim. 2, I Cor. 14 ,etc. stand alone! Wish I had the time to explain Biblical hermeneutics a bit, but do not.

I've repeatedly told you that Biblical prophecy is a spontaneous utterance of God [much like interpretation of tongues w/out the tongue]....not a "sermon from the Scriptures".

Sheesh, are slow of understanding?????????

Actually, the word "prophesy" in Paul's letters is "inspired utterances or speech," but could possibly mean preaching, since that's an inspired proclamation. There are many who believed "I desire that all prophesy" is not Paul's admonishment that everyone should have the gift to prophesy, but that all should proclaim/preach/tell.

Paul doesn't say a "sermon from the Scriptures," so our discussion should center around what he actually said. "Teach," "speaking," (we must know what that means, because obviously women can speak at church), usurp authority, etc...

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

As I've already told you, chp. & vs. divisions did not come into play until the 1300's. Originally, there were NO chp. divisions, the thought simply continued. So, it only reveals poor scholardhip for one to appeal to Chp. & vs. divisions.

You want to say some one is a poor scholar because he uses chapter and verse? Again read the whole book Paul changes subjects in the book, further more I Timothy does not say that Paul is instructing a person in how to conduct themself in the church![/QUOTE]

That's debatable. The "Women's Instructions" in 1 Timothy 2 most certainly can be looked at in the context of public worship. Chapter 3, in fact, gets right into the business of selecting leaders for the church. The focus here is likely not on individual houses, but on conduct at public gatherings.