Women pastors

[OopsMartin]

The direct connection may be missing, but I see one even if you do not. I'll leave it be.

Shalom Rumple,

I'm sorry, but saying that women tended sheep (the animals) is not Biblical support for the theory that women should be pastors of people. You are reading something into the Scriptures that is simply not there for doctrine. It's a nice thought, but it's not correct exegesis.

Exegesis? This word has been shown to me before. No, I do not or my method is not.

I simply read the Bible and talk to God. Once in a while I am led to study a certain matter. Hopefully, most of the leading is by the Holy Ghost showing me the Way to more Truth.

Actually it's not exegesis, more like noting word meanings. He was noticing that women were animal shepards then (and today) as well as the men. The connection being that since Christ chose the analogy of sheparding which was done by both men and women, why think of Biblical sheparding as only done by men. Same thing can be done with the word for minister/serve. It was something that both men and women did so why when looking at spiritual serving should it be limited to men.

Was that something like your point Rumple? I think it is a valid observation but not a tie breaker.

[OopsMartin]

Shalom Firehill,

The "Shepherd" Jesus is talking about in this passage is not women pastors.

This is just waaaaay to big of a stretch. There is no Biblical support for saying that because women may tend animals means that women should be ordained as pastors. That's what's called a Red Herring fallacy.

Then Jesus is talking about men pastors? Is that a stretch? I don't see 'men' in there anywhere. Do you?

LOL. It would seem reasonable that since both men and women were animal shepards that when Christ was talking about spiritual sheparding by only men, He would have said "male/men shepards".

[firehill]

Shalom Firehill,

The "Shepherd" Jesus is talking about in this passage is not women pastors.

This is just waaaaay to big of a stretch. There is no Biblical support for saying that because women may tend animals means that women should be ordained as pastors. That's what's called a Red Herring fallacy.

Then Jesus is talking about men pastors? Is that a stretch? I don't see 'men' in there anywhere. Do you?

LOL. It would seem reasonable that since both men and women were animal shepards that when Christ was talking about spiritual sheparding by only men, He would have said "male/men shepards".

Yep! Christ would have used an anology that only pertained to men but he didn't.

And who was his audience? Men only? Nope.

6 Those who heard Jesus use this illustration didn

[st. Worm]

Someone I know who I trust said that in churches that start ordaining women as pastors, within 2 years of doing so have also ordained homosexual pastors. I'm not sure how true or accurate that statement is, but I trust the person who told me and at this point have no reason to doubt his word.

~ Regards, PA

actually, if that were true, there would be more "homosexuals" trying to pastor.....

there are several (denominations as some would say) that do ordain women and have not even remotely concidered those that are living in sin ( homosexuals for instance ) The Assemblies is one that has had women working in the ministry for a very long time, and yet, the women have to stand to the heavy standard of living an upright and blameless life, as their male counterparts do....

a person livng in sin is not living an upright nor a blameless life.....

a person can be innocent and not be blameless.... there is a differance....

blameless means there is no way anyone can point fingers... a person that is innocent can do things to attract undue, unwarrented attention and bad publicity.... ( such as going to a bar every day after work and not drinking anything but soda, the appearance is not blameless.... )

anyways, the 2 year thing is not correct....

mike

Actually, there are many denominations that have ordained women in pastoral and associated positions for at least a hundred years. I saw a list once. Long list. It included Quakers, Assembly of God, Church of God, Foursquare, Methodist and several others I don't recollect at the moment. In the 1800's when women fought for the right to vote and other privileges, along with the fight for the release of slaves, it did open more doors for women in the near future.

White males were the prejudicial preferreds of most of the world for many eons. We have the history of communism and the KKK's to remind us of that. You'd think by now that we would realize it is best if everyone earn their privileges and recognition by proving their worthiness instead of having select groups handed privileges they don't deserve.

At least you are now being honest. You are no longer trying to twist God's word on the subject to fit your personal agenda. You are now being honest enough to argue from the unbelieving world's perspective. And your prejudice against males is also coming through loud and clear. Women rulers in the world have not shown themselves to be any less oppressive than men so your reasoning there (nice KKK and communism examples) is exceedingly flawed.

sw

[OopsMartin]

Someone I know who I trust said that in churches that start ordaining women as pastors, within 2 years of doing so have also ordained homosexual pastors. I'm not sure how true or accurate that statement is, but I trust the person who told me and at this point have no reason to doubt his word.

~ Regards, PA

actually, if that were true, there would be more "homosexuals" trying to pastor.....

there are several (denominations as some would say) that do ordain women and have not even remotely concidered those that are living in sin ( homosexuals for instance ) The Assemblies is one that has had women working in the ministry for a very long time, and yet, the women have to stand to the heavy standard of living an upright and blameless life, as their male counterparts do....

a person livng in sin is not living an upright nor a blameless life.....

a person can be innocent and not be blameless.... there is a differance....

blameless means there is no way anyone can point fingers... a person that is innocent can do things to attract undue, unwarrented attention and bad publicity.... ( such as going to a bar every day after work and not drinking anything but soda, the appearance is not blameless.... )

anyways, the 2 year thing is not correct....

mike

Actually, there are many denominations that have ordained women in pastoral and associated positions for at least a hundred years. I saw a list once. Long list. It included Quakers, Assembly of God, Church of God, Foursquare, Methodist and several others I don't recollect at the moment. In the 1800's when women fought for the right to vote and other privileges, along with the fight for the release of slaves, it did open more doors for women in the near future.

White males were the prejudicial preferreds of most of the world for many eons. We have the history of communism and the KKK's to remind us of that. You'd think by now that we would realize it is best if everyone earn their privileges and recognition by proving their worthiness instead of having select groups handed privileges they don't deserve.

At least you are now being honest. You are no longer trying to twist God's word on the subject to fit your personal agenda. You are now being honest enough to argue from the unbelieving world's perspective. And your prejudice against males is also coming through loud and clear. Women rulers in the world have not shown themselves to be any less oppressive than men so your reasoning there (nice KKK and communism examples) is exceedingly flawed.

sw

MOI? prejudiced against my own gender...... ahahahahahaha unbeLIEVable. hehehehehe

Let's just say that I'm am prejudiced against all negative prejudicial positions, no matter who they harm and who they show preferential treatment for precluding Biblical sinful behavior.

hehehehe that was a good one. talk about reaching.

And my personal "agenda" is God's Truths that set the captives free.

[Vickilynn]

Shalom Firehill,

The "Shepherd" Jesus is talking about in this passage is not women pastors.

This is just waaaaay to big of a stretch. There is no Biblical support for saying that because women may tend animals means that women should be ordained as pastors. That's what's called a Red Herring fallacy.

Then Jesus is talking about men pastors? Is that a stretch? I don't see 'men' in there anywhere. Do you?

Shalom Firehill,

Cute, very cute. This passage is not even talking about pastors. That's why it's a Red Herring fallacy.

The Shepherd is Jesus. He is the Gate as well.

V11: 11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

V 14-15 14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.

15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.

[Vickilynn]

Shalom Firehill,

The "Shepherd" Jesus is talking about in this passage is not women pastors.

This is just waaaaay to big of a stretch. There is no Biblical support for saying that because women may tend animals means that women should be ordained as pastors. That's what's called a Red Herring fallacy.

Then Jesus is talking about men pastors? Is that a stretch? I don't see 'men' in there anywhere. Do you?

LOL. It would seem reasonable that since both men and women were animal shepards that when Christ was talking about spiritual sheparding by only men, He would have said "male/men shepards".

Shalom,

Nope. The "stretch" is saying that ANYONE other than Jesus is the Shepherd here. He is not talking about pastors in this passage, but Himself, the Good Shepherd. See verses 11, 14-15.

[Vickilynn]

Bible.org

Jesus: The True Shepherd of Israel

(10:1-5)

1

[st. Worm]

Someone I know who I trust said that in churches that start ordaining women as pastors, within 2 years of doing so have also ordained homosexual pastors. I'm not sure how true or accurate that statement is, but I trust the person who told me and at this point have no reason to doubt his word.

~ Regards, PA

actually, if that were true, there would be more "homosexuals" trying to pastor.....

there are several (denominations as some would say) that do ordain women and have not even remotely concidered those that are living in sin ( homosexuals for instance ) The Assemblies is one that has had women working in the ministry for a very long time, and yet, the women have to stand to the heavy standard of living an upright and blameless life, as their male counterparts do....

a person livng in sin is not living an upright nor a blameless life.....

a person can be innocent and not be blameless.... there is a differance....

blameless means there is no way anyone can point fingers... a person that is innocent can do things to attract undue, unwarrented attention and bad publicity.... ( such as going to a bar every day after work and not drinking anything but soda, the appearance is not blameless.... )

anyways, the 2 year thing is not correct....

mike

Actually, there are many denominations that have ordained women in pastoral and associated positions for at least a hundred years. I saw a list once. Long list. It included Quakers, Assembly of God, Church of God, Foursquare, Methodist and several others I don't recollect at the moment. In the 1800's when women fought for the right to vote and other privileges, along with the fight for the release of slaves, it did open more doors for women in the near future.

White males were the prejudicial preferreds of most of the world for many eons. We have the history of communism and the KKK's to remind us of that. You'd think by now that we would realize it is best if everyone earn their privileges and recognition by proving their worthiness instead of having select groups handed privileges they don't deserve.

At least you are now being honest. You are no longer trying to twist God's word on the subject to fit your personal agenda. You are now being honest enough to argue from the unbelieving world's perspective. And your prejudice against males is also coming through loud and clear. Women rulers in the world have not shown themselves to be any less oppressive than men so your reasoning there (nice KKK and communism examples) is exceedingly flawed.

sw

MOI? prejudiced against my own gender...... ahahahahahaha unbeLIEVable. hehehehehe

Let's just say that I'm am prejudiced against all negative prejudicial positions, no matter who they harm and who they show preferential treatment for precluding Biblical sinful behavior.

hehehehe that was a good one. talk about reaching.

And my personal "agenda" is God's Truths that set the captives free.

Let's get down to the nitty gritty dude. Which of the feminine denominations are you with? And yes, your statement reflected bias against males whether you are one or not. But then again many weak men in feminist denominations have decided to allow women to take over their church just like you. That is essentially how it happened. And based on your prior post, blaming men for the world's problems, apparently you have bought into their feminine world view. Step up to the plate and be a man and take your church back.

sw

[Emily~Anne]

Vickilynn, you are such a blessing to this board.