Women in the Church today

[st. Worm]

But Floatingax,

Paul spells out that a bishop, for example, should be a man married to only one women? It is direct. It is male and specifically so.

Smalcald, it should be obvious from what happened in the ELCA that those who pushed for and obtained women's ordination in that body have no interest in Scriptural authority. We can only hope and pray that the LCMS which has its supporters for this anti-biblical practice doesn't someday take this road.

sw

I attended a Lutheran church about a year ago, SW and the person teaching that day to the congregation was a woman. I did not return..there are just some things that cannot be abided..this is one, to me anyhow.

Hey, we agree on something!! Scarey isn't it? (smiles)

It was a Lutheran church in name only. Orthodox Lutheran synods do not ordain women jackie. It is nice to finally agree on something!

sw

[firehill]

I don't know what ELCA and LCMS stand for!

Well, folks, this is disintegrating into bashing. I will not sit by and be told I am deceived! I am done with this topic. I was trying to inform a bit and add to the discourse nicely, but it serves to inflame and cause people's beliefs to become even more firmly entrenched.

I am praying for most of you here that the Holy Spirit will open your eyes to the truth of the matter. We do not need division over this subject. The devil laughs at this and I will not cause him to be pleased.

Satan has attacked the church in 5 areas: The workforce (he halved it), men and their ministry (affected by Pride), women (abuse, denigrate, deny and rob of identity), God's character (bias against women show the world that God is unjust), God's image (Satan uses the rejection issue and emotional woundings to destroy the revelation of the image of God through the unity of man and woman in all areas). Satan hates us, folks! He loves this discord and this misunderstanding of God's intent for all of us to be equally serving Him, shoulder to shoulder as He created us in the first place! In Christ, we can show the world exactly how it is supposed to be...not buying into the culture that has hated women for centuries. The Greeks hated women, and the Romans also. That is how our culture is influenced.

I am now refraining from this thread. God bless you.

God bless you floatingaxe.

[st. Worm]

I don't know what ELCA and LCMS stand for!

Well, folks, this is disintegrating into bashing. I will not sit by and be told I am deceived! I am done with this topic. I was trying to inform a bit and add to the discourse nicely, but it serves to inflame and cause people's beliefs to become even more firmly entrenched.

I am praying for most of you here that the Holy Spirit will open your eyes to the truth of the matter. We do not need division over this subject. The devil laughs at this and I will not cause him to be pleased.

Satan has attacked the church in 5 areas: The workforce (he halved it), men and their ministry (affected by Pride), women (abuse, denigrate, deny and rob of identity), God's character (bias against women show the world that God is unjust), God's image (Satan uses the rejection issue and emotional woundings to destroy the revelation of the image of God through the unity of man and woman in all areas). Satan hates us, folks! He loves this discord and this misunderstanding of God's intent for all of us to be equally serving Him, shoulder to shoulder as He created us in the first place! In Christ, we can show the world exactly how it is supposed to be...not buying into the culture that has hated women for centuries. The Greeks hated women, and the Romans also. That is how our culture is influenced.

I am now refraining from this thread. God bless you.

"We do not need division over this subject."

Actually we do need division over this issue and division we shall have by God's grace.

sw

[apothanein kerdos]

What can be proven is that Paul meant something else since he simply did not say what you did, hence 'because Even ate the fruit first.' It just is not written.

And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 1 Timothy 2:14

Pesky bit of scripture.

It does seem though that your ideology of male hegemony boils down to, '...we humans need authority over us to control us...'

1) You're trying to shift me into a group so you can attack my ideaology instead of what I bring up as scripture. Likewise, by doing this, it gives you the ability to say, "well you're scripture is wrong because you're interpreting it through your false ideology" without actually responding to the interpretation. This is in any debate the last call of a dying man.

2) All humans do need authority. This is why governments were established in the first place, this is why in the church there is a defined authority, this is why the apostles were early authorities, this is why the Bible is considered an authority in our lives, etc. When we attempt to live autonomously we end up sinning.

3) Stating that women, in marriage and the church, are under the authority of men is not hegemony. This is the wrong definition because we're not trying to increase our influence over women (what hegemony is). The US invading a nation, England colonizing one, or Syria pumpin propoganda into another are all influences of Hegomony because it's an attempt to increase influence and not necessarily authority.

4) Even working with what you are attempting to say (chauvinism) what I am stating is Biblical. No one is teaching that men of any more inherent worth than women. No one is saying we are ontologically more important. What we are advocating is that the fall has certain effects that we feel to this day.

Pastoring is sheparding not controling, and Jesus is The Shepard. The shepard is not an authoritarian who controls those who follow him and nor did he 2000 years ago. His spirit, the Holy Spirit can be quenched since it does not control the christian either. He watched over and sheparded verses controled his flock. Jesus preached that those of his in authority are not to lord it over others.

1) This is a new view that did not develope in America until the 1840's (during the "Heretical Revival"...or "Second Great Awakening" as you might know it). The reason is that many people began to develop Rousseauian view of the world, where humans are merely living under a social contract and that individualism was truly how we were to act. This developed with Kantian ethics to teach that morality and authoirty were based on the individual, not on the collective.

2) This doesn't fit into what we know from the Bible. Paul writes to Timothy and delegates authority to him and then tells him where to delegate authority (1 Timothy 3)...Timothy was the sheperd of Ephesus. If the sheperd is to have no authority, why did Paul do this?

3) Jesus isn't an authority? Yeah....that's just idiotic. If He has no authority over us, then He had no right to die.

God himself directly spoke what the very effects of the fall would be in Genesis. What he did not speak was that women would have less authority than men, remember?

To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you will bring forth children; yet your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." Genesis 3:16

Pesky bit of scripture.

Also, above in your second statement you left out a very telling effect of the fall which is the 'desire' of the woman for her husband and his 'rule' over her. It is not written that an effect of the fall would be that woman would have less authority than man. Such perception is just that and an interpretation. There is a difference between the ideas of 'being ruled over' by fallen nature and 'having less authority' in the body.

Paul, and almost all Jews, have interpreted it the way I am stating. Burden of proof is on you to show how Paul was wrong.

Also, since in marital oneness, the ultimate relationship of male/female husband rulership over wife is a result of the fall then so is male hegemony a result of the fall because it does not even require a degree of relationship.

Start using the proper term and you might have a point somewhere down the road.

[Smalcald]

Well there are two issues. One is sexism in the church, which indeed exists and is a sin. The other is adherence to scripture.

We cannot ignore scripture in our zeal to eliminate sexism. I don't consider the Elders and Deacons in my congregation "above" myself as a failed sinning human; they are equally condemned and dead in their trespasses without Christ. From a worldly perspective several of them are frankly not that bright (not that I am any sort of genius), but that is not relevant. They are called to these posts, and they hold them in a biblical manner, thus on spiritual matters I will refer to them.

But that does not mean I believe women are less then men, or that women should not and cannot hold power in earthly matters, or are in any way less capable than men.

[Kabowd]

Pastoring is sheparding not controling, and Jesus is The Shepard. The shepard is not an authoritarian who controls those who follow him and nor did he 2000 years ago. His spirit, the Holy Spirit can be quenched since it does not control the christian either. He watched over and sheparded verses controled his flock. Jesus preached that those of his in authority are not to lord it over others.

Are you asserting that Christ does not have authority over His flock? Do you believe Christ has authority over the church?

[Smalcald]

Well there are some really interesting issues and concepts in what firehill said dealing with power, control and authoritarianism, and how those worldly things get handled within the Christian faith.

I would just say that true humility, is almost the inverse of power and control and abuse.

[Kabowd]

There's always opportunity for abuse no matter which way you go, which is just another result of the fall. The potential for abuse does not nullify specific commands and guidelines set forth in Scripture though. If anything, this only gives further reasons why humans need authority, discipline and guidance...not less of it.

[Smalcald]

There's always opportunity for abuse no matter which way you go, which is just another result of the fall. The potential for abuse does not nullify specific commands and guidelines set forth in Scripture though. If anything, this only gives further reasons why humans need authority, discipline and guidance...not less of it.

Sure I am not disagreeing tess.

But I just think in many ways the Christ view of authority is different from our human view. For example power and the love of power, has no place in a Christian leader or an individual Christian, the same would go with control, and people who like to control and have a need for control of others in relationships or organizationally. These concepts are totally inverse from the concept of humility as preached by Christ. The Shepherd analogy is a good one. For those of us who have worked in agriculture, we can see that indeed herding is not controlling.

So when I see men in particular who have issues around power and control, then we must be very careful they don't confuse that prideful state of mind with the spiritual command for the role of men and women, and the spiritual roles they hold in the church and in the home.

[Kabowd]

There's always opportunity for abuse no matter which way you go, which is just another result of the fall. The potential for abuse does not nullify specific commands and guidelines set forth in Scripture though. If anything, this only gives further reasons why humans need authority, discipline and guidance...not less of it.

Sure I am not disagreeing tess.

But I just think in many ways the Christ view of authority is different from our human view. For example power and the love of power, has no place in a Christian leader or an individual Christian, the same would go with control, and people who like to control and have a need for control of others in relationships or organizationally. These concepts are totally inverse from the concept of humility as preached by Christ. The Shepherd analogy is a good one. For those of us who have worked in agriculture, we can see that indeed herding is not controlling.

So when I see men in particular who have issues around power and control, then we must be very careful they don't confuse that prideful state of mind with the spiritual command for the role of men and women, and the spiritual roles they hold in the church and in the home.

I agree, however, I think people often use the potential for abuse argument as a means of disregarding Scripture. People are fallen, and of course we will not always reflect things the way God intends them. But again, we are each responsible for our own choices. God demands obedience and abhors rebellion. I can't refuse to obey authority figures in my life simply because they are human and fallible, or because they could abuse their authority. My responsibility is to obey, and God deals with them on their part. Of course they should lead with love and tenderness, be sacrificial and self-less....but that's between them and God. And also, we can't see Christ as only a tender Shepherd and forget that He is also a disciplinarian. Hebrews 12 teaches us that the Lord disciplines those who are His, those that He loves. Discipline is part of love, as much as we'd rather it wasn't sometimes. Even in the analogy of Christ and the Church...the Bride submits to the Bridegroom through obedience. Of course, a husband should love his wife like Christ loved the church...but her obedience to him doesn't hinge on his obedience to the Lord. That's why I say we should each focus on our own roles and our own responsibility to obey...instead of trying to use someone else's disobedience (or potential for it) as an excuse for our own disobedience.