misogyny

[wingnut-]

Just now, Davida said:

1Tim2:12-14

Hey Wingnut! in answer-Nope.

 

Ok my friend, was just making sure   I didn't think so but the thread had gone somewhat dormant and I just wanted to make sure I hadn't been misunderstood.

[Willa]

Giving honor and deference to my husband is a way of honoring God and His words.  Just because woman are not to lead in the organized church doesn't mean that we can't be in charge of other parachurch organizations.  Our pastor's wife is the acting principal of our Christian school.  She stepped into the role when no man could be found.  Likewise women may be in management roles in evangelical groups like Youth for Christ, hospitals or orphanages.

We are not to be head pastors.  But our head pastor claims that the secretaries run the church.  They were in charge of decorating the sanctuary, choosing carpet etc.  Much can be delagated to women, but we should not be in charge of men or of teaching men.  It sounds like women can prophecy under the authority of her husband.

1Co 14:3  On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.

1Co 11:5  but every wife who prays or prophesies........

This is differentiated from teaching and is allowed of women under authority to speak inspired words to encourage and console the church, or to pray.  

Women desiring to be in authority over men in the church is like the apple in the garden.  It is the one thing we are denied so some women pout, throw tantrums or rebel to our shame.  Contentment is much better and brings so much peace.

[wingnut-]

1 minute ago, Davida said:

On behalf of the people who are simply standing by what the Bible says when it comes to whether women should be Pastors, I find it incredibly unfair when some people try to accuse others of the motive of misogyny ( HATRED towards women - a nasty accusation btw) or saying it is based upon their personal feelings  (biases) towards women or beliefs for eg.. that women are not capable of teaching or whatever they seem to like to assign dark motives when the majority that say "no" to women Pastor's are just submitting to the Bible- Period.  It is NOT because they hate women, or they are prejudiced or think women are less competent  etc.... it is simply because Paul stated it & stated why and we accept it at face value.  But it seems to not matter to some people who  like to fuel their outrage about it, & then launch into these false accusations based upon their own imagination. FYI , these are the same people that will accuse in other threads  - "you can't judge someone's heart! "  but that is exactly what they are doing and it is so very hypocritical to say the least. 

 

All I can say for myself is this, scripture defines what is true or not, and the Holy Spirit confirms this.  I understand that you do not hate women and I agree, it is an unfair accusation.

God bless

[Spock]

1 hour ago, Wolf Bridges said:

That charge results from lack of comprehension of exegesis. 

You realize you're arguing that you because you are a woman are unfit to teach the word of God? Because of your God appointed gender? One could say that if someone is arguing a woman is unfit to preach the word of God that she is unable to herald, proclaim, or preach the words of God. Being she's a woman. That would then make women unable to proselytize to sinners anywhere. 

 

 

Paul's letters were to the churches he founded. His instruction to the churches he founded. 
Whereas his statement that we are all one in Christ is Godly and of Christ. 

There is a difference. Paul founded churches that he managed through what are termed his pastoral letters. 

 

 

 

Does the Bible Really Forbid Women Preachers?

A Closer Look at 1 Corinthians 14:34,35 and 1 Timothy 2:11,12 

 

 

 

Good stuff wolf. Thanks.

i have a lot of respect for davida, because she tries to follow the words of the Bible exactly as they are written.  That is a beautiful thing, someone with that much commitment to the word.

however, is that the best and correct way to interpret the Bible?  Some may say yes, but some may say no. I don't think most people would agree that every word should be taken literally from Genesis to Revelation, or even from Matthew to Revelation if you believe the OT is only for Jews and not for the church. 

Do you consider culture?  Does this even matter?  If women were not allowed an education back then, does that matter?  Should we transpose that culture bias to ours today? 

How about the intent of the book? Does it matter if it is in a letter form addressed to one person? One particular church? 

The deeper you get into this, the more challenging it becomes.

or.......you could just say, "this is too hard to figure out, so I will just apply the words as they are written back then to today without any other factors to consider."  This way may be the easiest, but is it the best way?  Is it the correct way? 

To be or not to be.....that is the question! Lol

Food for thought perhaps? 

Spock

[Spock]

27 minutes ago, Davida said:

On behalf of the people who are simply standing by what the Bible says when it comes to whether women should be Pastors, I find it incredibly unfair when some people try to accuse others of the motive of misogyny ( HATRED towards women - a nasty accusation btw) or saying it is based upon their personal feelings  (biases) towards women or beliefs for eg.. that women are not capable of teaching or whatever they seem to like to assign dark motives when the majority that say "no" to women Pastor's are just submitting to the Bible- Period.  It is NOT because they hate women, or they are prejudiced or think women are less competent  etc.... it is simply because Paul stated it & stated why and we accept it at face value.  But it seems to not matter to some people who  like to fuel their outrage about it, & then launch into these false accusations based upon their own imagination. BTW , these are the same people that will accuse in other threads  - "you can't judge someone's heart! "  but that is exactly what they are doing and it is so very hypocritical to say the least. 

Here I believe is the rub davida:

it is one thing to say to,yourself,  "I ain't  ever going to a church with a WOMAN giving the message; no way no how. I will only listen to a MAN!" 

Its another thing when you are out on the streets saying this to the whole world, "don't go into any church that has  a woman giving the message or shepherding the flock. This is not of God, but rather is of the devil. God absolutely does not give those gifts to a woman...he only gives them to a man!" 

See the difference?

on the first one- you decide for yourself what you think is best with no harm to anyone else.

on the second one, you are actively involved in trying to get your will promoted because you believe your application and exegesis of scripture is correct and the only one allowed.  Thus, any woman who attends seminary in order to be a missionary or pastor you will do all in your power to prevent this because you don't believe for one second God may actually be involved in this. 

Thoughts? 

[Wolf Bridges]

43 minutes ago, Willa said:

Giving honor and deference to my husband is a way of honoring God and His words.  Just because woman are not to lead in the organized church doesn't mean that we can't be in charge of other parachurch organizations.  Our pastor's wife is the acting principal of our Christian school.  She stepped into the role when no man could be found.  Likewise women may be in management roles in evangelical groups like Youth for Christ, hospitals or orphanages.

We are not to be head pastors.  But our head pastor claims that the secretaries run the church.  They were in charge of decorating the sanctuary, choosing carpet etc.  Much can be delagated to women, but we should not be in charge of men or of teaching men.  It sounds like women can prophecy under the authority of her husband.

1Co 14:3  On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.

1Co 11:5  but every wife who prays or prophesies........

This is differentiated from teaching and is allowed of women under authority to speak inspired words to encourage and console the church, or to pray.  

Women desiring to be in authority over men in the church is like the apple in the garden.  It is the one thing we are denied so some women pout, throw tantrums or rebel to our shame.  Contentment is much better and brings so much peace.

You're suppose to honor your husband. And he you. You're united as one in marriage. 

The scriptures don't say God said to the whole world of the faithful who are one in Christ that one gender is not able to preach. Saying that and arguing that is first moving from an ideal that is being argued. That which in this case says, God will not call women into his service to deliver the good news. 

 

[Wolf Bridges]

29 minutes ago, Spock said:

Good stuff wolf. Thanks.

i have a lot of respect for davida, because she tries to follow the words of the Bible exactly as they are written.  That is a beautiful thing, someone with that much commitment to the word.

however, is that the best and correct way to interpret the Bible?  Some may say yes, but some may say no. I don't think most people would agree that every word should be taken literally from Genesis to Revelation, or even from Matthew to Revelation if you believe the OT is only for Jews and not for the church. 

Do you consider culture?  Does this even matter?  If women were not allowed an education back then, does that matter?  Should we transpose that culture bias to ours today? 

How about the intent of the book? Does it matter if it is in a letter form addressed to one person? One particular church? 

The deeper you get into this, the more challenging it becomes.

or.......you could just say, "this is too hard to figure out, so I will just apply the words as they are written back then to today without any other factors to consider."  This way may be the easiest, but is it the best way?  Is it the correct way? 

To be or not to be.....that is the question! Lol

Food for thought perhaps? 

Spock

Yes, culture is certainly part of the times Paul was speaking of. And the ancient Jews in his time were very strict in the roles of women being just so. 

Paul was a Pharisee. He knew the law and he knew how the law was applied to men and women. 

I believe that is what makes Paul's declaration about our being one in Christ so outstanding. Because of the culture of the time being one that communicated just the opposite when it came to women and their place. And also as pertained to other cultures and intercourse with them. 

Paul's declaring there are no divides between the Greek culture and the Jew, or men and women, was radical in those times. Only God could make such a decree as that. Man's laws divide. God's covenant unites. 

[OneLight]

5 hours ago, Spock said:

You can't be serious One Light.  We had a whole thread about women pastors and many people, several women I may add, and even you, quoted that passage in Timothy and said, " there you go, women are not to teach men and not to have authority over men. "

My word are "None of these posts says women cannot work in ministry.  Some say they cannot hold specific offices, but never a blanket statement like you claim.".  Notice very carefully that I did not refer to threads, but posts, meaning posts within this thread.

[OneLight]

4 hours ago, Allroses48 said:

The passages indicating women shouldn't serve in leadership roles in church were only directed towards one certain audience. I believe it was Corinth and it doesn't apply to us today. 

I am interested in finding out what other passages in scripture are not meant for us today?  Care to share?

[Spock]

20 minutes ago, OneLight said:

My word are "None of these posts says women cannot work in ministry.  Some say they cannot hold specific offices, but never a blanket statement like you claim.".  Notice very carefully that I did not refer to threads, but posts, meaning posts within this thread.

What year did you graduate from Law School? ?