| Author |
Message |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 585
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 5:56 am: |     |
Lynne,
You made an important point about information technology being an important catalyst in avoiding cultic deception. The arrival of online religion is as consequential as when the printing presses brought the written word to medieval Europe. With religious literacy dramatically on the upswing, cyber-Christians find new appreciation for personal freedom in Christ. Furthermore, cyberspace affords us the priesthood of all believers--an equal playing field.
Information technology is a tool that empowers and enriches the lives of even the lowest social class in our society. While cyberspace is no equal substitute for in-person relationships, it does avail us of meaningful, worldwide Christian fellowship (e.g., the Former Adventist Fellowship, etc.). The Internet was a significant and valuable tool in our quest for truth.
Dennis J. Fischer |
Lindylou
Registered user
Username: Lindylou
Post Number: 128
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 10:00 am: | |
Boy! This thread is a tough one! As I was catching up on all that was said here - I found my heart racing and my shoulders getting tense. I wanted to yell and shout and smack the computer in outrage...... but I had to take a deep breath and ask myself what was going on here.
I think that every woman here can tell stories of how their heart has been crushed by a man. We live in a world in which men have dominated and pounded down women over eons of time. This fact tends to color our perspective on many things involving gender issues.
Talk of the roles of men and women stirs me up almost as much as discussing SDA lies- but I have had to step back and take a new look at things. What is the heart of the matter? I must look to my Savior only - even focusing on Paul gets me going sometimes.... I've always thought he was a bit of a sexist.
This I do know: Both men and women were created in the image of God.
And in fact, Eve was God's crowning act of creation. I like what Stasi and John Eldredge say about this in their book "Captivating"
The longing in the heart of a woman to share life together as a great adventure comes straight from the heart of God, who also longs for this. He does not want to be an option in our lives. He does not want to be an appendage, a tagalong. Neither does any woman. God is essential. He wants us to need him-desperately. Eve is essential. She has an irreplaceable role to play. And so you'll see that women are endowed with fierce devotion, an ability to suffer great hardships, a vision to make the world a better place."
(When someone says.... "well, it was Eve who was deceived first and she tricked Adam into taking the apple too- so it was all her fault.." Aren't we forgetting that if Adam had of been the strong man he was suppose to be we might not be in the mess we are today?????)
I think that you would find that almost every woman would be happy to follow and serve and be the helpmate God desired for her if the man she was following showed godly, cherishing leadership. The whole gender issue is out of balance, not because of woman's desire to lead - but because of Satan throwing a monkey wrench in things.
I don't think the main issue is whether or not women should be ordained. It seems to me that both men and women should be looking at what we were made to be. How can we work together to reveal God's love to the world?
I know that Jesus treated women with high regard. If it wasn't for the Deborah's, Rahabs, Mary's and Aquilla's in this world, where would we be? Women want to be valued! That is why this talk of whether or not a woman should be a pastor -hits a sore spot for many. Because it seems to speak to the injured heart of a woman- we tend to think that what is really being said is that men don't value us enough to even consider us to be qualified leaders.
As the Eldredge's suggest: A woman's heart's desire is to be - part of the grand adventure, to feel beautiful (valued for who she is and what she has to offer) and a longing to have someone fight for us! (We get awfully tired sometimes doing battle all on our own!)
I think that if these issues were addressed - all others - like whether or not women should be ordained - would fall away. Things would be in balance. Guess that is what heaven will be about - balance!!
|
Randyg
Registered user
Username: Randyg
Post Number: 112
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 11:32 am: | |
Lindylou,
Wonderful post.You echo the sentiments of my wife, and I concur with your opinion. Women who are gifted in leadership should be allowed to lead. There are many facets to leadership, and I cannot think of one that I would be uncomfortable seeing a woman doing if she is gifted in that ministry.
By their fruits you will know them,
Randy |
Lynne
Registered user
Username: Lynne
Post Number: 283
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 2:31 pm: | |
Lindy Lou,
I enjoyed your thoughts on this. I agree, that if certain other issues were addressed, the issue of whether or not a woman should be ordained, would fall away.
The bottom line with regard to the topic of women in the pulpit is an issue now that mostly crosses denomination lines. Because some denominations do ordain women.
There are many people now in this forum who are now no longer SDAs and some are, or will become Prespyterian, Baptist, Pentecostal, Lutheran, Methodist to name a few.
Some here, (God forbid, some people here might say), may also be, or become Catholic. And of course, there are likely a lot of currently practicing, Seventh-day Adventists here as well. I had a Catholic grandmother, who, of all things, was a Jesus freak. After she died, I lived in her home and stayed in her bedroom which was covered with Jesus, Jesus, Jesus. Some people, even in a false gospel church, dig, and find, and fall in love with Jesus and find for themselves that Jesus is Lord.
I am very offended when I hear someone put down the Pentecostal churches because I am going to a Pentecostal church and they teach many things that I now believe. That is the denomination where I want to be. Pentecostal churches generally ordain women. So, I see this as somewhat a denominational issue.
Some denominations ordain women, some don't. And there are some people within certain denominations that don't ordain women who think the denomination should.
There is perhaps not a perfect church, but there is the Lord.
And as you said, Jesus treated women with high regard. And who is our example? Are accurate rituals and traditions, studying the bible on a Phd. level what we need to grasp first?
Just a thought here. Consider all the burdens placed on many pastors. They are to counsel everyone, they are paid to teach, to preach. Their wives are to sit quietly or they can counsel the women too, without pay of course.
My first pastor in the Adventist church, his wife wanted to help ease his burden. The church wouldn't pay her to do this, though she asked. She was disappointed. She needed to work outside the church, so her husband counseled the women, and his wife assisted him as she could, without pay. She sadly died an untimely death, and a short time after her death, her husband, ended up taking, and eventually marrying another mans wife in the church. He was moved to another church.
Here we have all of these discussions on why many Pastors leave their wives and families or are not loyal to their wives.
As the bible says, the spirit is willing and the flesh is weak. And how much weaker are the Adventist pastors out there with only breath and flesh, not spirit and flesh. And we get angry and blame them? Sure, but what are we expecting from them.
If the wife of a pastor, or an assistant pastor, a woman, could help the many women in the church body when they are in need of counsel, there would likely be fewer unmet needs and less temptation.
For now, many churches remain expecting the women, the older women, to volunteer their time. Volunteering of men and women in churches is fine to a certain extent. In our culture, time is money, for women now as well as men. Grandmothers are now watching grandkids or working for a living out of necessity.
But oh yes, now there was a book written about the feminity of the church. The women decorate the church, it is the womans fault that the men aren't coming. There is too much singing... That is feminine! Men don't like to sing! This is what the book says.. Talk about scapegoats. This is happening in churches led by Pastors, not women. Get real! Now were being blamed for being in the background, volunteering.
Maybe some men aren't attending church because they are afraid the pastors might steal their wives, maybe they are jealous of handsome pastors. There are plenty of stories out there in the world, some true!
Perhaps there are many men that would be more comfortable seeing a pastor in partnership with his wife. Not worrying about the pastor being attracted to his wife, understandably!
Lindylou, I agree - I think that you would find that almost every woman would be happy to follow and serve and be the helpmate God desired for her if the man she was following showed godly, cherishing leadership.
I think there are many men, including pastors, who want to be godly, who sometimes fall into temptation. I'm not into bashing men, even after one might fall into temptation. Being one in Christ, as men and women, we are all in this together.
And going back to the scripture in Timothy, that men were first tempted by women. Stop expecting too much from the pastors, making them counsel women, other mens wives, and not paying the women to help the churches because they can only decorate. And then blame the women for the feminine decorating which they say keeps the men away from the church. Gee, I guess if I decorate my home, that will be my husbands excuse for not coming home? It is too feminine. He can decorate the home too.
Lynne
|
Ratthedd
Registered user
Username: Ratthedd
Post Number: 7
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 4:13 pm: | |
I had hoped not to get into this fray because my opinion on this is not a popular one with this group, but the sexist attitude on this subject is rather alarming.
From reading as many threads here as I could the past week or two it's plain to see that we've all gotten past the idea that we're saved by the law and yet this issue of "Paul's Law" seems to be clouding the issue of whether or not a woman is capable of being a pastor. 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 warns the early church against fracturing over small differences. Specifically verses 1:11-1:20 warn against holding Paul's words higher than Jesus' sacrifice. Christ died for everyone's sins, female as well as male.
I recognize that the vast majority on this forum are probably conservative Christians who cannot consider the possibility of current Bible translations to contain error, but as a realist I do have to consider the possibility. Specifically, 1 Cor. 14:34-36 are questionable not because they demean women but because these verses suddenly depart from a subject then resume the same thoughts at verse 37. Also the whole of both books of Timothy and Titus seem to have been written 60+ years after Paul's death. Regardless of that, the fact still remains that we are saved by Jesus, not Paul, and we should look to Jesus' character for advice on how to act, not Paul.
As a human father, I cannot conceive the notion of holding a son being more worthy than a daughter. How can a heavenly father, who is infinately more capable of love, place one child in higher esteem than any other? It just doesn't make sense. |
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis
Post Number: 586
Registered: 4-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 5:51 pm: | |
Ratthedd,
Actually, the two genders are NOT the same as feminists would have us to believe. God certainly did not allow women to serve as priests in the Levitical system. After all, women would have been fully capable of doing the varied priestly tasks successfully. In post-exilic Judaism, where were all the women rabbis? Why were the women kept outside of the main worship area of the temple? Therefore, would we consider God to be sexist? In the New Testament, local church leaders are admonished to be the husband of one wife--not the wife of one husband. It is not a matter of being unequal in Christ. It is a matter of having different roles to perform. Furthermore, it is not a matter of one gender being more important than another.
I grew up in a Seventh-day Adventist church where the women could only sit on the left side of the aisle and men could only sit on the right side of the aisle (European style). We had one glass of grape juice for the women and one glass of grape juice for the men during communion. When I later attended an SDA boarding academy, again we were distinctly divided by gender during worship. Even during my college days at Union College, we could sit together in Sabbath School as couples but not during the worship service. In my senior academy Bible class we were warned about the dangerous sparks of electricity that were emitted while holding hands with a special friend. :>) Now you know why I am still old fashioned about gender roles after all this exemplified training. In truth, there are worse things than growing up Adventist.
Indeed, both God and culture dictate our gender roles. Sometimes culture, especially in our day, has largely negated any distinctive gender roles. Despite all the rhetoric to the contrary, believe me, opposites still attract (smile). My gender role is not better but only different from that of my wife. After being happily married for 38 years, Sylvia and I appreciate our distinctive gender roles more than ever before. It makes both of us feel very special as God intended. Likewise, our Lord has intended distinctive gender roles in His church family.
Dennis Fischer |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 1076
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 7:32 pm: | |
I would like to clear up something about the verse in 1 Timothy 2. People keep mentioning things that the verse doesn't say and that none of us said.
Verse 14 says: "And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression." (NASB.)
First of all, Eve did not "trick" Adam. It says very clearly that Adam was not deceived. Once again, Ellen G. White is the one who contradicted God's Word and said that Adam was deceived.
No one is saying that the Fall was all Eve's fault and therefore women can't be pastors. If it was anyone's fault it was Adam's--he is the one who knowing full well what he was doing, sinned anyway. Eve was deceived.
And that is Paul's only point in that verse. He is saying that women are more easily deceived than men, and for the sake of doctrinal purity (vs. deceptive teachings) women are not supposed to be Pastors/Teachers.
I'm just telling you what Paul says.
Now either we call this sexist bigotry or we accept it as the Word of God.
Jeremy |
Lynne
Registered user
Username: Lynne
Post Number: 285
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 7:38 pm: | |
Yes Dennis, the husband of one wife, because men did have more than one wife, so they did need to be corrected on that. Women didn't do that because they were the ones who were left with the children and weaker. Until today, we have, the prostitute and the playboy. Distinctly different. Let the boys play, but cast the stones on the girls if they play. Not the other way around. Jesus doesn't want us to sin, prostitutes or playboy, both are equally wrong. But women are weaker, so easier to throw stones at.
Another thing to keep in mind, when you were growing up, women were given the ability to have more of what you call a traditional role, as a homemaker. Most families cannot do this anymore, not by choice, but because of economics. That doesn't make the woman any less feminine for having to go to work as it might have been in your day. Nor will the men in the workplace lose their masculinity if a woman gets a higher position because she is more qualified for a particular position.
He separated us male and female. He colored our hair, eyes, personality, ad infinitum it almost seems. Yet he knows the number of hairs on each of our heads - Wow. He is awesome! And yes, He is He and He will always be He! He is God, He is the strongest, He is the Mighties! He wants us to build each other up and not tear each other down.
I am not a liberal. You won't find me working on my vehicle as my husband does. My husband cooks on the grill and I cook in the kitchen. My husband doesn't wear skirts. He rough and tumbles my kids, something I don't want to do. They love it. No, I don't believe in mom and mom or dad and dad. God made mom and dad distinctly different.
But I don't see that as the same thing as a woman serving in a leadership position in a church. She is not alone in that position, without the body, made up of both male and female. How many male pastors make mistakes and are corrected by the church body? Is there much more a problem with a woman making a mistake and being corrected by the church body?
No matter what we believe with regard to this issue, obviously not everyone will see it the same way on this forum.
If a person leans to the right, he or she might start leaning too far to the right. If someone leans to the left, it is natural to start leaning a bit too far to the left.
If we stay centered in Jesus, he will reveal His divine truth to each of us individually.
Lynne
|
Lynne
Registered user
Username: Lynne
Post Number: 286
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 8:08 pm: | |
Jeremy,
Oh, I get it! A man sins (ie. lies to a women). The women believes him, she is deceived.
For doctrinal purity, the man must only be a Teacher/Pastor because he only sinned, but the women, she was deceived, she was deceived first.
Do not both men and women sin and deceive? Are men not deceived too. Excuse me, but there are plenty of men who are Seventh-day Adventists... Who sins and deceives more and in what order?
And before you blame it on EGW, what about Joseph Smith?
Lynne
|
Cindy
Registered user
Username: Cindy
Post Number: 794
Registered: 7-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 8:28 pm: | |
Yes, to "stay centered in Jesus" is my desire, also.
It seems to me that if we take the Timothy text literally--for all time, for all churches--we must also disallow women from "teaching" males in mixed groups or even preaching occasionally, except women to women!
This would, of necessity, do away with so many wonderful teachers and preachers. There must be a better way to explain this passage!
A recent post even said "there is no basis for women as elders/lead or teaching pastors" and then went on to imply that those who felt a "supposed call" or "supposed gift" in this area were really being led by ...(an evil spirit?).
Do we really believe that women who feel called to teach or preach just have a "supposed" call?
We live in the glorious grace given us now IN CHRIST! The NEW WINE of the NEW COVENANT is poured out on all His sons and daughters--men and women alike!
grace always,
cindy |
Ratthedd
Registered user
Username: Ratthedd
Post Number: 8
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, February 12, 2006 - 7:36 pm: | |
It seems to me that if Adam was present at the tree of knowledge of good and evil when Eve was deceived (Gen 3:6), then he was likewise deceived at the same time.
I think it's chauvenistic to think that there is some fault with being female that makes you more likely to be deceived or that makes you unfit to hold a leadship position within the church. It's an outdated middle-eastern tradition that really holds no place in western society.
Gen 1:27 explains that God created both sexes in his image, why would only one half be suitable for leadership? Judges 4 clearly shows that God sees leadership potential in women, why else would he have put Deborah, a woman, in a leadership position?
While it does not fall in line with Paul's leadership examples, old gnostic texts indicate that Mary Magdalene was one of the leaders of the apostles after Jesus ascended because he had confided things to her that he never did with the other disciples. Again, this is not from canonized scripture, but I'm not sure that the MEN who were responsible for choosing which manuscripts to include would have ever allowed a text that gave women equal treatment, or worse--better treatment, to even be considered.
Without a doubt, the misogyny that plagues the middle east has found its way into our own society. I propose that nothing can grow in a restrictive environment--how can we expect our churches to grow if we keep telling 1/2 the members that they are unfit for anything other than decorating and cleaning? It is true that men and women are wired differently--for the most part men are more capable of abstract thought, but women are better at language skills. Why not harness the powers that god gave each in order to further his work? Why must we always cling to outdated, sexist philosphies in order to further MAN's cause rather than use all of god's children to further GOD's cause? |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1327
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Monday, February 13, 2006 - 2:09 pm: | |
Ratthedd,
You seem to express a distrust for the Bible. That sarcastic "MEN" who were choosing manuscripts" does show what your estimation of God's Holy Word means. If you are interested in a very readable book that shows that we can trust the integrity of the manuscripts, then read Lee Strobel's book "Case for Christ". For a more scholarly, but still very readable then get a hold of Wayne Grudem's "Systematic Theology". Ultimately it is the Holy Spirit that testifies to our hearts that these scriptures are indeed God's Word.
Stan |
Ratthedd
Registered user
Username: Ratthedd
Post Number: 9
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 9:32 am: | |
Stan,
Not so much a distrust of the Bible but rather a distrust for humans achieving perfection. I understand where you're coming from re: the holy spirit's guidance in manuscript selection and transalation, but if the holy spirit were so closely involved would we have as many translations of the Bible as we have today? How do we reconcile things like the recent controvery over Zondervan changing certain texts to reduce perceived gender bias by changing "man" to "mankind", for instance?
Perhaps the holy spirit is still working on translation of the god's original message recognizing that older, male-centric societies were incapable of understanding god's plan for using women in the ultimate salvation of mankind?
Just a thought. I'll check out the two books you mentioned.
Erik. |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 1084
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 10:22 am: | |
Erik,
The original languages actually did not say "man" but "human," in most cases where the KJV translates it "man." So translating it as gender-neutral is only making it more true to the original language.
Why do we have so many translations? It is actually a good thing. With so many good translations available to us, it actually helps us get a better picture of what the original languages actually meant.
The Bible nowhere says that women aren't supposed to help spread the Good News. There are many roles in the Church for women, and many roles for men. Sometimes these roles are different, but that doesn't make one gender's roles less important.
Jeremy |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3402
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 11:49 am: | |
Perhaps, Erik, "the gods" did water down their messages to accommodate "older, male-centric societies" who "were incapable of understanding god's plan for using women in the ultimate salvation of mankind."
God, however, is a different person and totally unlike "the gods" or "god". Actually, I'm sure you know this fact, but I'm sensing in your post an attempt to equate them.
Knowing God leads one to a completely different world view than does believing in god.
I second Stan's book recommendations. I'm praying for you, Erik.
Colleen
|
Seekr777
Registered user
Username: Seekr777
Post Number: 390
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 12:58 pm: | |
Eric, FYI Wayne Grudem's "Systematic Theology can also be bought as an eBook. I have it installed on both my computer and my PDA.
I never thought I'd say this about a systemic theology book but I read it as a devotional some days to quietly meditate on and read the Bible references. He even includes the words of a hymn to meditate on in each section of the book.
In Christ,
Richard
rtruitt@mac.com
|
Seekr777
Registered user
Username: Seekr777
Post Number: 391
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 1:23 pm: | |
Dennis, you mention the growth of cults in third world countries. I suppose this brings up what do we call a cult?
I know the charismatic churches are making deep inroads into the Catholic numbers in S. America etc. While here in America most mainline churches are losing members. This is not limited to just SDAs but is happening in many churches.
In Christ,
Richard
rtruitt@mac.com
|
Tisha
Registered user
Username: Tisha
Post Number: 181
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 1:35 pm: | |
I have an honest question here -
I believe the Bible to be inspired. I believe the truths remain truths. BUT - how do I contend with the cultural bias of the day, at least in that part of the world? I know that women were held as possessions, had little authority of their own, and were generally kept apart from men's dealings. There were some notable exceptions, however.
So, how do I grasp the truth in the messege? Is the cultural bias part of the truth, or is it something to factored in when interpreting scripture?
As a woman, I have a hard time reconcilling what the Bible says in Galatians 3:28 -
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female--for all of you are one in Christ Jesus"
-with the notion that there are specific "jobs" or "duties" that are gender based, other than bearing children and within marriage.
While I believe there are gender differences, there is a range of abilities/atributes that overlap. If a man is better at empathy and wants to be a couselor, nurse, etc. that position is not closed to him even though "traditionally" it is a more feminine role. If a woman is analytically inclined and wants to be an engineer or astronaut, that position is not closed to her, even though that is a more "traditional" male position. In these instances each would probably be in a minority position, but still would do the job better than someone who was the "right" gender, but less naturally inclined to the role.
So, why is that different in the Church? Is one set of rules only for Church? Why does the title of Pastor demand a male person while the title of Engineer can mean either male or female? What about the Church is different than the Truth we live by elsewhere in our lives. Why can I be a female engineer that leads men and women, but not (if I was inclined, which I'm NOT!) be a Pastor, which also leads men and women. As I woman I bring different attributes to my role whether an Engineer or a Pastor, as do the men who fill these roles. Each would have strengths, and weaknesses, whether male or female. Should not each person be assessed as an individual when the decision is made about the role they fill?
I'm not trying to be arguementive, really. I just can't seem to get past the feeling that lots of "rules" about gender are based on an outdated cultural heritage, rather than on God's Truth.
I know that in the Bible there are specific guildelines for marriage. I understand how that would be the best possible way to sustain a marriage. But are these male-female roles also required outside of marriage?
Has the Church used a misinterpretation of the Bible to hold women down? I don't believe that I have to be a "man" in a woman's body to have attributes more traditionally ascribed to men. I love being a woman! I cherish the things that woman hold dear. I'm not trying to "be a man". I just want to understand how much society has been mislead by a wrong understanding about the "roles" of men and women.
I hope I don't sound angry, it's not written in anger. I guess I'm more frustrated and sad, discouraged, whatever, about this topic that nevers seems to get resolved.
I want to know what God wants for me - not what my fellow men want from me. I want to fulfill God's purpose for my life. I want to be a role model for my children and grandchildren. I want them to know what a true Christian woman looks like, using all the strength that God has given me, yet still being humble and allowing God to speak to me. I want to show them not how to "be right" but how to grow and learn what God's will is for them.
-tisha |
Seekr777
Registered user
Username: Seekr777
Post Number: 392
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 1:55 pm: | |
Java,
Thanks for asking about my family. Somedays I don't know if i should be laughing or crying.
Annie expressed an interest in going back into a resident program and with the help of God and a church member she was placed in a program this past Friday evening. If she sticks to it she will be there for two months. The first two weeks are with no communication with the outside "world".
. . . I wrote more but deleted it and will send in an email. Thanks for taking the time to ask. If it was not for my trust and knowing I'm in HIS hands things would be very lonely.
In Christ,
Richard
rtruitt@mac.com
PS: Colleen I was trying to get to the Friday evening meeting but this was of more importance.
|
Belvalew
Registered user
Username: Belvalew
Post Number: 953
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 3:04 pm: | |
Tisha, when I opened up this question on this board I was hoping that we could handle the information in a more adult manner than the folks at R/S. For the most part we have done so, but like you I feel we have failed to address the cultural aspect of these admonisions of Paul. They were made by Paul to the Church of his day. I'm not trying to negate the fact that he was inspired, but he was still addressing the church of his day. Paul also said that in Christ there is no slave or free, no male or female. In my opinion that one statement opens the door for women in a more enlightened age to have a more active role in the church (meaning leadership roles). I don't see why a woman can't be ordained in a ministerial role. I think someone a few days ago said something that pushed my buttons, and that was the fact that a lead pastor can/should, perhaps, be a man, but that doesn't keep women from fulfilling ministerial roles and still be living within the will of God. I've experienced that setup for too long to say that it is wrong. I've known some wonderful ministers who were women. Their insights have helped to expand the thinking of more than the women in my church (Presbyterian).
There now. I've got that off my chest! (I personally have no desire to be a minister, but I have a dear friend who is getting the SDA run-around, and has for years. She is a licensed "Bible Worker." That's the SDA word for woman minister. At present they have her out on a limb doing "church planting." Most likely if anything takes root they will send her somewhere else and send in a man to take over for her. |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1294
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 3:31 pm: | |
Tisha, to me the context of Galatians is talking about being a part of the covenant of God, not the roles of women within the church. I read the text saying that we are all saved by Christ...not by our nationality, gender or social status. read verse 29...If you are "of Christ", then you are a seed of Abraham, heirs according to the promise. The context isn't church roles. It's salvation.
That is very different than some of the other texts that are talking about the qualifications of pastors or elders, etc. |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 1089
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 3:48 pm: | |
I wonder if we're not looking at it all wrong if we think of Paul's guidance as "holding women down." Aren't all of us who are members of the Body of Christ, servants of Christ? If we look up to the Pastors/Teachers as high-up "leaders" then something has gone wrong with how we look at the Body of Christ. Jesus said that the greatest of all is the one who serves. All of us, including the Pastors/Teachers, are supposed to be servants.
"Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. But the greatest among you shall be your servant." (Matthew 23:11-12 NASB.)
So we aren't even supposed to be talking about "leadership roles."
Regarding culture, once again I must say that Paul's statements about Adam and Eve have nothing to do with a specific culture. Also, there is no "cultural bias" in God's Word. Every single word is inspired by God.
If 1 Timothy 2:11-15 is being "misinterpreted," will someone please give the "correct" interpretation? 
Jeremy |
Lynne
Registered user
Username: Lynne
Post Number: 293
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 5:58 pm: | |
Tisha,
For some people here, they have made up their minds by what they have been taught and what they believe the scripture says on this matter. You are not alone in what you believe. Many of us agree with you, men and women alike. We believe we have accurately interpreted scripture and we don't need a theology degree to understand what is already clearly stated in the bible. And there are people with theology degrees that believe as we do.
Anyway, my personal feeling on the matter is, I think that is likely why we are seeing growth in many Charismatic churches as opposed to a lot of the traditional churches. Most interpret scripture on this matter as we do. They are very progressive in many ways. It makes it easier for everyone in the body to do the will of God.
Lynne.
|
Tisha
Registered user
Username: Tisha
Post Number: 183
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 6:22 pm: | |
Thanks Lynne for the encouragement.
The truth is that I don't really know what to believe at this point. I just know that sometimes religion has been used to "keep" women "in their place". I want to be open to God's leading me into Truth. I don't want to rebel just because I feel threatened. I want a healthy understanding of the male/female "debate". I want to have open, unbiased (not really possible!) discussion of the issue. I always come away from the discussion of this topic just as confused as before. I don't want to make any firm statement on what I believe, because I don't really know! Having said all that, I still know that I am saved by Grace. I choose to worship with other Christians that believe that also (and the other few basics), regardless of their understanding of other non-salvational issues. As long as there is respect for differences, then I'm OK! Someday I will know for sure just what God's plan is/was when I meet Him in person!
-tisha |
Lynne
Registered user
Username: Lynne
Post Number: 294
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 - 10:05 pm: | |
Tisha,
What is important to me is what the bible says to me, not what somebody says the bible says. I don't think confusion is from God. So if an issue confuses me I back away from it until I can have time to study or look into it when I am alone.
Personally, some of those non-salvation issues are important to me because when I became an Adventist, I believed John 3:16 and felt secure in Jesus, though a bit unconfortable in Adventism. All those little deceptions and errors added up and hurt my spiritual well being in a big way.
I don't want to be deceived at all when it comes to the bible now. I'm not being rebellious, I'm just not letting anyone else control my mind again even in small ways. As a result, I want to see scriptural proof of opinions that seem contradictary to the bible to me. I may not agree with somebody elses interpretation of some scripture, and I'm okay with that. I'm also comfortable with not having all of the answers as well. Personally, I just want the whole Armor of God.
Lynne
|
|
