|
Post by Steve Noel on Mar 23, 2006 15:53:04 GMT -5
I've noticed several women that are taking place in the theological discussions here. This seems to me to be a real lack in the Church today. Why does it seem that most of the people that speak or write about theology are men? There are exceptions of course, but there does seem to me to be a lack. Is this just my limited perspective or have others noticed this too?
At any rate I'm encouraged to see you ladies participating. God bless!
Steve
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Mar 23, 2006 16:03:51 GMT -5
I think it has a lot to do with views on what a womans role is in the church. I did some research on this and found two conflicting views. I am not sure where I fall on this issue and I have hesitated to post it because of the lack of women on this MB but maybe this is a good place to dissuss it. Here are the articles... This one is written by Catherine booth... www.cresourcei.org/cbooth.htmland this one was on Jon MacArthur's site www.biblebb.com/files/RD-001WP.htm
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 23, 2006 16:30:17 GMT -5
ejuliot.. i know this my be a wee bit long.. but it is the original copy..enjoy!! Part one of three Blessed Regards.... Female Ministry; or, Woman's Right to Preach the Gospel, by Catherine Mumford Booth
Published: London, Morgan & Chase, 1859
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMALE MINISTRY; OR, Woman's Right to Preach the Gospel. By MRS. BOOTH.
"And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy."--Joel.
London: MORGAN & CHASE, 38, LUDGATE HILL. PRICE ONE PENNY. Quantities can be had at considerable reduction from MR. BOOTH, Gore Road, Victoria Park Road, London, N.E.
PREFACE.
The principal arguments contained in the following pages were published in a pamphlet entitled Female Teaching, which, I have reason to know, has been rendered very useful.
In this edition all the controversial portions have been expunged, some new matter added, and the whole produced in a cheaper form, and thus, I trust, rendered better adapted for general circulation.
Our only object in this issue is the elicitation of the truth. We hold that error can in the end be profitable to no cause, and least of all to the cause of Christ. If therefore we were not fully satisfied as to the correctness of the views herein set forth, we should fear to subject them to the light ; and if we did not deem them of vast importance to the interests of Christ's kingdom, we should prefer to hold them in silence. Believing however that they will bear the strictest investigation, and that their importance cannot easily be over-estimated, we feel bound to propagate them to the utmost of our ability.
In this paper we shall endeavour to meet the most common objections to female ministry, and to present, as far as our space will permit, a thorough examination of the texts generally produced in support of these objections. May the great Head of the Church grant the light of His Holy Spirit to both writer and reader.
FEMALE MINISTRY; OR WOMAN'S RIGHT TO PREACH THE GOSPEL.
THE first and most common objection urged against the public exercises of women, is that they are unnatural and unfeminine. Many labour under a very great but common mistake, viz. that of confounding nature with custom. Use, or custom, makes things appear to us natural, which, in reality, are very unnatural; while, on the other hand, novelty and rarity make very natural things appear strange and contrary to nature. So universally has this power of custom been felt and admitted, that it has given birth to the proverb, "Use is second nature." Making allowance for the novelty of the thing, we cannot discover anything either unnatural or immodest in a Christian woman, becomingly attired, appearing on a platform or in a pulpit. By nature she seems fitted to grace either. God has given to woman a graceful form and attitude, winning manners, persuasive speech, and, above all, a finely-toned emotional nature, all of which appear to us eminent natural qualifications for public speaking. We admit that want of mental culture, the trammels of custom, the force of prejudice, and one- sided interpretations of Scripture, have hitherto almost excluded her from this sphere; but, before such a sphere is pronounced to be unnatural, it must be proved either that woman has not the ability to teach or to preach, or that the possession and exercise of this ability unnaturalizes her in other respects; that so soon as she presumes to step on the platform or into the pulpit, she loses the delicacy and grace of the female character. Whereas, we have numerous instances of her retaining all that is most esteemed in her sex, and faithfully discharging the duties peculiar to her own sphere, and at the same time taking her place with many of our most useful speakers and writers. Why should woman be confined exclusively to the kitchen and the distaff, any more than man to the field and workshop? Did not God, and has not nature, assigned to man his sphere of labour, "to till the ground, and to dress it"? And, if exemption is claimed from this kind of toil for a portion of the male sex, on the ground of their possessing ability for intellectual
Page 4
and moral pursuits, we must be allowed to claim the same privilege for woman ; nor can we see the exception more unnatural in the one case than the other, or why God in this solitary instance has endowed a being with powers which He never intended her to employ.
There seems to be a great deal of unnecessary fear of women occupying any position which involves publicity, lest she should be rendered unfeminine by the indulgence of ambition or vanity ; but why should woman any more than man be charged with ambition when impelled to use her talents for the good of her race. Moreover, as a labourer in the GOSPEL her position is much higher than in any other public capacity; she is at once shielded from all coarse and unrefined influences and associations; her very vocation tending to exalt and refine all the tenderest and most womanly instincts of her nature. As a matter of fact it is well known to those who have had opportunities of observing the private character and deportment of women engaged in preaching the gospel, that they have been amongst the most amiable, self-sacrificing, and unobtrusive of their sex.
"We well know," says the late Mr. Gurney, a minister of the Society of Friends, "that there are no women among us more generally distinguished for modesty, gentleness, order, and right submission to their brethren, than those who have been called by their Divine Master into the exercise of the Christian ministry."
Who would dare to charge the sainted Madame Guyon, Lady Maxwell, the talented mother of the Wesleys, Mrs. Fletcher, Mrs. Elizabeth Fry, Mrs. Smith, Mrs. Whiteman, or Miss Marsh with being unwomanly or ambitious. Some of these ladies we know have adorned by their private virtues the highest ranks of society, and won alike from friends and enemies the highest eulogiums as to the devotedness, purity, and sweetness of their lives. Yet these were all more or less public women, every one of them expounding and exhorting from the Scriptures to mixed companies of men and women. Ambitious doubtless they were; but theirs was an ambition akin to His, who, for the "joy that was set before Him, endured the cross, despising the shame:" and to his, who counted all things but dung and dross, and was willing to be regarded as the off-scouring of all things that he might win souls to Jesus and bring glory to God. Would that all the Lord's people had more of this ambition.
Well, but, say our objecting friends, how is it that these whose names you mention, and many others, should venture to preach when female ministry is forbidden in the word of God? This is by far the most serious objection which we have to consider--and if capable of substantiation, should receive our immediate and cheerful acquiescence; but we
Page 5
think that we shall be able to show, by a fair and consistent interpretation, that the very opposite view is the truth. That not only is the public ministry of woman unforbidden, but absolutely enjoined by both precept and example in the word of God.
And, first, we will select the most prominent and explicit passages of the New Testament referring to the subject, beginning with 1 Corinthians xi. 1-15: "Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, dishonoureth her head: for that is all one as if she were shaven," etc. "The character," says a talented writer, "of the prophesying here referred to by the apostle is defined 1 Corinthians xiv. 3, 4, and 31st verses. The reader will see that it was directed to the 'edification, exhortation, and comfort of believers;' and the result anticipated was the conviction of unbelievers and unlearned persons. Such were the public services of women which the apostle allowed, and such was the ministry of females predicted by the prophet Joel, and described as a leading feature of the gospel dispensation. Women who speak in assemblies for worship, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, assume thereby no personal authority over others; they simply deliver the messages of the gospel, which imply obedience, subjection, and responsibility, rather than authority and power." Dr. A. Clarke, on this verse, says, "Whatever may be the meaning of praying and prophesying in respect to the man, they have precisely the same meaning in respect to the woman! So that some women at least, as well as some men, might speak to others to edification, exhortation, and comfort. And this kind of prophesying or teaching was predicted by Joel ii. 28, and referred to by Peter (Acts ii. 17). And, had there not been such gifts bestowed on woman, the prophecy could not have had its fulfilment. The only difference marked by the apostle was, the man had his head uncovered, because he was the representative of Christ: the woman had hers covered, because she was placed by the order of God in subjection to the man; and because it was the custom both among Greeks and Romans, and among the Jews an express law, that no woman should be seen abroad without a veil. This was and is a custom through all the East, and none but public prostitutes go without veils; if a woman should appear in public without a veil, she would dishonour her head--her husband. And she must appear like to those women who have their hair shaven off as the punishment of adultery." See also Doddridge, Whitby, and Cobbin.
We think that the view above given is the only fair and common-sense interpretation of this passage. If Paul does
Page 6
not here recognise the fact that women did actually pray and prophesy in the primitive Churches, his language has no meaning at all; and if he does not recognise their right to do so by dictating the proprieties of their appearance while so engaged, we leave to objectors the task of educing any sense whatever from his language. If, according to the logic of Dr. Barnes, the apostle here, in arguing against an improper and indecorous mode of performance, forbids the performance itself, the prohibition extends to the men as well as to the women; for Paul as expressly reprehends a man praying with his head covered as he does a woman with hers uncovered. With as much force might the doctor assert that in reproving the same Church for their improper celebration of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. xi. 20, 21), Paul prohibits all Christians, in every age, celebrating it at all. "The question with the Corinthians was not whether or not the women should pray or prophesy at all, that question had been settled on the day of Pentecost; but whether, as a matter of convenience, they might do so without their veils." The apostle kindly and clearly explains that by the law of nature and of society it would be improper to uncover her head while engaged in acts of public worship. We think that the reflections cast on these women by Dr. Barnes and other commentators are quite gratuitous and uncalled for. Here is no intimation that they ever had uncovered their heads while so engaged; the fairest presumption is that they had not, nor ever would till they knew the apostle's mind on the subject. We have precisely the same evidence that the men prayed and preached with their hats on, as that women removed their veils, and wore their hair dishevelled, which is simply none at all. We cannot but regard it as a signal evidence of the power of prejudice, that a man of Dr. Barnes's general clearness and acumen should condescend to treat this passage in the manner he does. The doctor evidently feels the untenableness of his position; and endeavours, by muddling two passages of distinct and different bearing, to annihilate the argument fairly deducible from the first. We would like to ask the doctor on what authority he makes such an exception as to the following: "But this cannot be interpreted as meaning that it is improper for females to speak or to pray in meetings of their own sex." Indeed! but according to the most reliable statistics we possess, two-thirds of the whole Church is, and always has been, composed of their own sex. If, then, no rule of the New Testament is more positive than this, viz. that women are to keep silence in the Churches, on whose authority does the doctor license them to speak to by far the larger portion of the Church.
A barrister writing us on the above passage, says "Paul
Page 7
here takes for granted that women were in the habit of praying and prophesying; he expresses no surprise nor utters a syllable of censure, he was only anxious that they should not provoke unnecessary obloquy by laying aside their customary head-dress or departing from the dress which was indicative of modesty in the country in which they lived. This passage seems to prove beyond the possibility of dispute that in the early times women were permitted to speak to the "edification and comfort" of Christians, and that the Lord graciously endowed them with grace and gifts for this service. What He did then may He not be doing now? It seems truly astonishing that Bible students, with the second chapter of the Acts before them, should not see that an imperative decree has gone forth from God, the execution of which women cannot escape; whether they like or not, they 'shall' prophesy throughout the whole course of this dispensation; and they have been doing so, though they and their blessed labours are not much noticed."
Well, but say our objecting friends, hear what Paul says in another place:--"Let your women keep silence in the Churches, for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn(*) anything, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for women to speak in the Church" (1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35). Now let it be borne in mind this is the same apostle, writing to the same Church, as in the above instance. Will any one maintain that Paul here refers to the same kind of speaking as before? If so, we insist on his supplying us with some rule of interpretation which will harmonize this unparalleled contradiction and absurdity. Taking the simple and common-sense view of the two passages, viz. that one refers to the devotional and religious exercises in the Church, and the other to inconvenient asking of questions, and imprudent or ignorant talking, there is no contradiction or discrepancy, no straining or twisting of either. If, on the other hand, we assume that the apostle refers in both instances to the same thing, we make him in one page give the most explicit directions how a thing shall be performed, which in a page or two further on, and writing to the same Church, he expressly forbids being performed at all. We admit that "it is a shame for women to speak in the Church," in the sense here intended by the
(* "Learning anything by asking their husbands at home," cannot mean preaching. That is not learning, but teaching "the way of God." It cannot mean being inspired by the Holy Ghost to foretell future events. No woman having either taught or prophesied, would have to ask her husband at home before she knew what she had done, or understood what she had said. Such women would be only fit to "learn in silence with all subjection." The reference is evidently to subjects under debate.)
Page 8
apostle; but before the argument based on these words can be deemed of any worth, objectors must prove that the "speaking" here is synonymous with that, concerning that manner of which the apostle legislates in 1 Corinthians xi. Dr. A. Clarke, on this passage, says, "according to the prediction of Joel, the Spirit of God was to be poured out on the women as well as the men, that they might prophesy, that is teach. And that they did prophesy or teach is evident from what the apostle says (1 Cor. xi.), where he lays down rules to regulate this part of their conduct while ministering in the Church. All that the apostle opposes here is their questioning, finding fault, disputing, etc., in the Christian Church, as the Jewish men were permitted to do in their synagogues (see Luke ii. 46); together with attempts to usurp authority over men by setting up their judgment in opposition to them; for the apostle has reference to acts of disobedience and arrogance, of which no woman would be guilty who was under the influence of the Spirit of God."
The Rev. J. H. Robinson, writing on this passage, remarks: "The silence imposed here must be explained by the verb, to speak (lalein), used afterwards. Whatever that verb means in this verse, I admit and believe the women were forbidden to do in the Church. But what does it mean ? It is used nearly three hundred times in the New Testament, and scarcely any verb is used with so great a variety of adjuncts. In Schleusner's Lexicon, its meaning is traced under seventeen distinct heads, and he occupies two full pages of the book in explaining it. Among other meanings he gives respondeo, rationem reddo, præcipio, jubeo; I answer, I return a reason, I give rule or precept, I order, decree." In Robinson's Lexicon (Bloomfield's edition), two pages nearly are occupied with the explanation of this word; and he gives instances of its meaning, "as modified by the context, where the sense lies, not so much in lalein (lalein) as in the adjuncts." THE PASSAGE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ONE OF THOSE TO WHICH HE REFERS AS BEING SO "MODIFIED BY THE CONTEXT." Greenfield gives, with others, the following meanings of the word: "to prattle--be loquacious as a child; to speak in answer--to answer, as in John xix. 10; harangue. plead, Acts ix. 29.; xxi. To direct, command, Acts iii. 22." In Liddel and Scott's Lexicon, the following meanings are given: "to chatter, babble; of birds, to twitter, chirp; strictly, to make an inarticulate sound, opposed to articulate speech; but also generally, to talk, say."
"It is clear then that lalein may mean something different from mere speaking, and that to use this word in a prohibition does not imply that absolute silence or abstinence from speaking is enjoined; but, on the contrary, that the prohibition applies to an improper kind of speaking, which
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 23, 2006 16:32:57 GMT -5
Part Two Page 9
is to be understood, not from the word itself, but, as Mr. Robinson says, from 'the context.' Now, 'the context' shows that it was not silence which was imposed upon women in the Church, but only a refraining from such speaking as was inconsistent with the words, 'they are commanded to be under obedience,' or, more literally, 'to be obedient:' that is, they were to refrain from such questionings, dogmatical assertions, and disputations, as would bring them into collision with the men--as would ruffle their tempers, and occasion an unamiable volubility of speech. This kind of speaking, and this alone, as it appears to me, was forbidden by the apostle in the passage before us. This kind of speaking was the only supposable antagonist to, and violation of 'obedience.' Absolute silence was not essential to that 'obedience.' My studies in 'Biblical criticism,' etc., have not informed me that a woman must cease to speak before she can obey; and I am therefore led to the irresistible conclusion, that it is not all speaking in the Church which the apostle forbids, and which he pronounces to be shameful; but, on the contrary, a pertinacious, inquisitive, domineering, dogmatical kind of speaking, which, while it is unbecoming in a man, is shameful and odious in a woman, and especially when that woman is in the Church, and is speaking on the deep things of religion."
Parkhurst, in his lexicon, tells us that the Greek word "'lalein,' which our translation renders speak, is not the word used in Greek to signify to speak with premeditation and prudence, but is the word used to signify to speak imprudently and without consideration, and is that applied to one who lets his tongue run but does not speak to the purpose, but says nothing." Now unless Parkhurst is utterly wrong in his Greek, which it is apprehended no one will venture to affirm, Paul's fulmination is not launched against speech with premeditation and prudence, but against speech devoid of these qualities. It would be well if all speakers of the male as well as the female sex were obedient to this rule.
We think that with the light cast on this text by the four eminent Greek scholars above quoted, there can be no doubt in any unprejudiced mind as to the true meaning of "lalein" in this connection. And we find from Church history that the primitive Christians thus understood it, for that women did actually speak and preach amongst them we have indisputable proof. God had promised in the last days to pour out His Spirit upon all flesh, and that the daughters as well as the sons of mankind should prophesy.
And Peter says most emphatically, respecting the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, "This is that which is spoken of by the prophet Joel," etc. (Acts ii. 16, 18.)
Page 10
Words more explicit, and an application of Prophecy more direct than this does not occur within the range of the New Testament.
Commentators say, "If women have the gift of prophecy, they must not use that gift in public." But God says, by His prophet Joel, they shall use it, just in the same sense as the sons use it. When the dictation of men so flatly opposes the express declaration of the "sure word of prophecy," we make no apology for its utter and indignant rejection.
Presbuteros, a talented writer of the Protestant Electoral Union, in his reply to a priest of Rome,(*) says:--
"Habituated for ages, as men had been, to the diabolical teaching and delusions practiced upon them by the papal 'priesthood,' it was difficult for them, when they did get possession of the Scriptures, to discern therein the plain fact, that among the primitive Christians preaching was not confined to men, but women also, gifted with power by the Holy Spirit, preached the gospel; and hence the slowness with which, even at the present time, this truth has been admitted by those giving heed to the word of God, and especially those setting themselves up as a 'priesthood' or a 'clergy.' As shown in page 66, God had, according to His promise, on the day of Pentecost poured out his Holy Spirit upon believers--men and women, old and young--that they should prophesy, and they did so. The prophesying spoken of was not the foretelling of events, but the preaching to the world at large the glad tidings of salvation by Jesus Christ. For this purpose it pleased God to make use of women as well as men. It is plainly the duty of every Christian to insist upon the fulfilment of the will of God, and the abrogation of every single thing inconsistent therewith. I would draw attention to the fact that Phoebe, a Christian woman whom we find in our version of the Scripture (Rom. xvi. 1) spoken of only as any common servant attached to a congregation, was nothing less than one of those gifted by the Holy Spirit for publishing the glad tidings, or preaching the gospel. The manner in which the apostle (whose only care was the propagation of evangelical truth) speaks of her, shows that she was what he in Greek styled her, a deacon (diaconon) or preacher of the word. Our translators speak of her (because she was a woman) only as 'a servant of the Church which is at Cenchrea.' The men 'deacons' they styled ministers, but a woman on the same level as themselves would be an anomaly, and therefore she was to be only the servant of men ministers, who, in the popish sense, constituted the Church!"
(* We strongly commend this pamphlet to the perusal of our readers. It contains much valuable information as to the origin of much of the popish nonsense of our times. Published by the Protestant Electoral Union 14, Tavistock Street, Covent Garden, Price 6d.)
Page 11
The apostle says of her--"I commend unto you Phebe our sister, who is a minister (diaconon) of the Church which is at Cenchrea: that ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you." To the common sense of disinterested minds it will be evident that the apostle could not have requested more for any one of the most zealous of men preachers than he did for Phebe! They were to assist "her in whatsoever business she" might require their aid. Hence we discern that she had no such trifling position in the primitive Church as at the present time episcopal dignitaries attach to deacons and deaconesses! Observe, the same Greek word is used to designate her that was applied to all the apostles and to Jesus Himself. For example: "Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister (diaconon) of the circumcision" (Rom. xv. 8). "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers (diaconoi) by whom ye believed" (1 Cor. iii. 5). "Our sufficiency is of God; who also hath made us able ministers (diaconous) of the new testament" (2 Cor. iii. 6). "In all things approving ourselves as the ministers (diaconoi) of God" (vi. 4). The idea of a woman deacon in the "three orders!"--it was intolerable, therefore let her be a "servant." Theodoret however says, "The fame of Phebe was spoken of throughout the world. She was known not only to the Greeks and Romans, but also to the Barbarians," which implies that she had travelled much, and propagated the gospel in foreign countries. See Doddridge, Cobbin, and Wesley, on this passage.
"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles; who also were in Christ before me" (Rom. xvi. 7). By the word "kinsmen" one would take Junia to have been a man; but Chrysostom and Theophylact, who were both Greeks, and consequently knew their mother tongue better than our translators, say Junia was a woman. Kinsmen should therefore have been rendered kinsfolk; but with our translators it was out of all character to have a woman of note amongst the apostles, and a fellow-prisoner with Paul for the gospel: therefore let them be kinsmen!
Justin Martyr, who lived till about A.D. 150, says, in his dialogue with Trypho, the Jew, "that both men and women were seen among them who had the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit of God, according as the prophet Joel had foretold, by which he endeavored to convince the Jews that the latter days were come."
Dodwell, in his dissertations on Irenæus says, "that the gift of the spirit of prophecy was given to others besides the apostles; and, that not only in the first and second, but in the third century--even to the time of Constantine--all sorts and ranks of men had these gifts; yea, and women too."
Page 12
Eusebius speaks of Potomania Ammias, a prophetess, in Philadelphia, and others, "who were equally distinguished for their love and zeal in the cause of Christ."
"The scriptural idea," says Mrs. Palmer, "of the terms preach and prophesy, stands so inseparably connected as one and the same thing, that we should find it difficult to get aside from the fact that women did preach, or, in other words, prophesy, in the early ages of Christianity, and have continued to do so down to the present time to just the degree that the spirit of the Christian dispensation has been recognised. And it is also a significant fact, that to the degree denominations, who have once favoured the practice, lose the freshness of their zeal, and as a consequence, their primitive simplicity, and, as ancient Israel, yield to a desire to be like surrounding communities, in a corresponding ratio are the labours of females discountenanced."
If any one still insists on a literal application of this text, we beg to ask how he disposes of the preceding part of the chapter where it occurs. Surely, if one verse be so authoritative and binding, the whole chapter is equally so; and therefore, those who insist on a literal application of the words of Paul, under all circumstances and through all time, will be careful to observe the apostle's order of worship in their own congregations. But, we ask, where is the minister who lets his whole Church prophesy one by one, and himself sits still and listens while they are speaking, so that all things may be done decently and in order? But Paul as expressly lays down this order as he does the rule for women, and he adds, "The things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord" (ver. 37). Why then do not ministers abide by these directions? We anticipate their reply--"Because these directions were given to the Corinthians as temporary arrangements; and, though they were the commandments of the Lord to them at that time, they do not apply to all Christians in all times." Indeed; but unfortunately for their argument, the prohibition of women speaking, even if it meant what they wish, was given amongst those very directions, and to the Corinthians only: for it reads, "Let your women keep silence," etc.; and, for aught this passage teaches to the contrary, Christian women of all other Churches might do what these women were forbidden to do; until, therefore, learned divines make a personal application of the rest of the chapter, they must excuse us declining to do so of the 24th verse; and we challenge them to show any breach of the Divine law in one case more than the other.
Another passage frequently cited as prohibitory of female labour in the Church, is 1 Timothy ii. 12, 13. Though we have never met with the slightest proof that this text
Page 13
has any reference to the public exercises of women; nevertheless, as it is often quoted, we will give it a fair and thorough examination. "It is primarily an injunction," says the Rev. J. H. Robinson, "respecting her personal behavior at home. It stands in connection with precepts respecting her apparel and her domestic position; especially her relation to her husband. No one will suppose that the apostle forbids a woman to 'teach' absolutely and universally. Even objectors would allow her to teach her own sex in private; they would let her teach her servants and children, and perhaps, her husband too. If he were ignorant of the Saviour, might she not teach him the way to Christ? If she were acquainted with languages, arts or sciences, which he did not know, might she not teach him these things? Certainly she might! The 'teaching,' therefore which is forbidden by the apostle, is not every kind of teaching any more than, in the previous instance, his prohibition of speaking applied to every kind of speaking in the Church; but it is such teaching as is domineering, and as involves the usurpation of authority over the man. This is the only teaching forbidden by St. Paul in the passage under consideration."
"If this passage be not a prohibition of every kind of teaching, we can only ascertain what kind of teaching is forbidden by the modifying expressions with which didaskein stands associated: and, for anything these modifying expressions affirm to the contrary, her teaching may be public, reiterated, urgent, and may comprehend a variety of subjects, provided it be not dictatorial, domineering, nor vociferous; for then, and then only, would it be incompatible with her obedience."
The Rev. Dr. Taft says, "This passage should be rendered 'I suffer not a woman to teach by usurping authority over the man.' This rendering removes all the difficulties and contradictions involved in the ordinary reading, and evidently gives the meaning of the apostle." "If the nature of society," says the same writer, "its good and prosperity; in which women are jointly and equally concerned with men; if in many cases their fitness and capacity for instructors, being admitted to be equal to the other sex, be not reasons sufficient to convince the candid reader of woman's right to preach and teach because of two texts in Paul's epistles, let him consult the paraphrase of Locke, where he has proved to a demonstration that the apostle, in these texts, never intended to prohibit women from praying and preaching in the Church provided they were dressed as became women professing godliness, and were qualified for the sacred office."
"It will be found," says another writer, "by an examina-
Page 14
tion of this text with its connections, that the teaching here alluded to stands in necessary connection with usurping authority, as though the apostle had said, the gospel does not alter the relation of women in view of priority, for Adam was first formed, then Eve."
"This prohibition," says the before-named barrister, "refers exclusively to the private life and domestic character of woman, and simply means that an ignorant or unruly woman is not to force her opinions on the man whether he will or no. It has no reference whatever to good women living in obedience to God and their husbands, or to women sent out to preach the gospel by the call of the Holy Spirit."
If this context is allowed to fix the meaning of didaskein in this text, as it would in any other, there can be no doubt in any honest mind that the above is the only consistent interpretation; and if it be, then this prohibition has no bearing whatever on the religious exercise of women led and taught of the Spirit of God: and we cannot forbear asking on whose skirts the mischief resulting from the false application of this text will be found? Thank God the day is dawning with respect to this subject. Women are studying and investigating for themselves. They are claiming to be recognised as responsible human beings, answerable to GOD for their convictions of duty; and, urged by the Divine Spirit they are overstepping those unscriptural barriers which the Church has so long reared against its performance.
Whether the Church will allow women to speak in her assemblies can only be a question of time; common sense, public opinion, and the blessed results of female agency will force her to give us an honest and impartial rendering of the solitary text on which she grounds her prohibitions. Then, when the true light shines and God's words take the place of man's traditions, the Doctor of Divinity who shall teach that Paul commands woman to be silent when God's Spirit urges her to speak, will be regarded much the same as we should now regard an astronomer who should teach that the sun is the earth's satellite.
Another argument urged against female preaching is, that it is unnecessary; that there is plenty of scope for her efforts in private, in visiting the sick and poor and working for the temporalities of the Church. Doubtless woman ought to be thankful for any sphere for benefiting her race and glorifying God. But we cannot be blind to the supreme selfishness of making her so welcome to the hidden toil and self- sacrifice, the hewing of wood and the drawing of water, the watching and waiting, the reproach and persecution attaching to her Master's service, without allowing her a tittle of the honour which He has attached to the ministration of His gospel. Here, again, man's theory and God's order
Page 15
are at variance. God says, "Them that honour me I will honour." Our Lord links the joy with the suffering, the glory with the shame, the exaltation with the humiliation, the crown with the cross, the finding of life with the losing of it. Nor did He manifest any such horror at female publicity in His cause as many of His professed people appear to entertain in these days. We have no intimation of His reproving the Samaritan woman for her public proclamation of Him to her countrymen; not of His rebuking the women who followed Him amidst a taunting mob on His way to the cross. And yet, surely, privacy was their proper sphere. On one occasion He did say, with reference to a woman, "Verily, I say unto you, wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her" (Matt. xxvi. 12; see also Luke vii. 37-50).
As to the obligation devolving on woman to labour for her Master, I presume there will be no controversy. The particular sphere in which each individual shall do this must be dictated by the teachings of the Holy Spirit and the gifts with which God has endowed her. If she have the necessary gifts, and feels herself called by the Spirit to preach, there is not a single word in the whole book of God to restrain her, but many, very many to urge and encourage her. God says she SHALL do so, and Paul prescribes the manner in which she shall do it, and Phebe, Junia, Philip's four daughters, and many other women actually did preach and speak in the primitive Churches. If this had not been the case, there would have been less freedom under the new than under the old dispensation. A greater paucity of gifts and agencies under the Spirit than under the law. Fewer labourers when more work to be done. Instead of the destruction of caste and division between the priesthood and the people, and the setting up of a spiritual kingdom in which all true believers were "kings and priests unto God," the division would have been more stringent and the disabilities of the common people greater. Whereas we are told again and again in effect, that in "Christ Jesus there is neither bond nor free, male nor female, but ye are all one in Christ Jesus."
We commend a few passages bearing in the ministrations of woman under the old dispensation to the careful consideration of our readers. "And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time," etc. (Jud. iv. 4-10). There are two particulars in this passage worthy of note. First, the authority of Deborah as a prophetess, or revealer of God's will to Israel, was acknowledged and submitted to as implicitly as in the cases of the male judges who succeeded her. Secondly, she is made the military head of ten thousand men, Barak refusing to go to battle without her.
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 23, 2006 16:34:25 GMT -5
Part Three Page 16 Again, in 2 Kings xxii. 12-20, we have an account of the king sending the high-priest, the scribe, etc., to Huldah, the prophetess, the wife of Shallum, who dwelt at Jerusalem, in the college; to inquire at her mouth the will of God in reference to the book of the law which had been found in the house of the Lord. The authority and dignity of Huldah's message to the king does not betray anything of that trembling diffidence or abject servility which some persons seem to think should characterize the religious exercises of woman. She answers him as the prophetess of the Lord, having the signet of the King of kings attached to her utterances.
"The Lord gave the word, and great was the company of those that published it" (Ps. lxviii. 11). In the original Hebrew it is, "Great was the company of women publishers, or women evangelists." Grotius explains this passage, "The Lord shall give the word, that is plentiful matter of speaking; so that he would call those which follow the great army of preaching women, victories, or female conquerers." How comes it that the feminine word is actually excluded in this text? That it is there as plainly as any other word no Hebrew scholar will deny. It is too much to assume that as our translators could not alter it, as they did "Diaconon" when applied to Phebe, they preferred to leave it out altogether rather than give a prophecy so unpalatable to their prejudice. But the Lord gives the word and He will choose whom He pleases to publish it; not withstanding the condemnation of translators and divines.
"For I brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee out of the house of servants; and I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam" (Mic. vi. 4).
God here classes Miriam with Moses and Aaron, and declares that He sent her before His people. We fear that had some of our friends been men of Israel at that time, they would have disputed such a leadership.
In the light of such passages as these, who will dare to dispute the fact that God did under the old dispensation endue his handmaidens with the gifts and calling of prophets answering to our present idea of preachers. Strange indeed would it be if under the fulness of the gospel dispensation, there were nothing analogous to this, but "positive and explicit rules," to prevent any approximation thereto. We are thankful to find, however, abundant evidence that the "spirit of prophecy which is the testimony of Jesus," was poured out on the female as fully as on the male disciple, and "His daughters and His handmaidens" prophesied. We commend the following texts
Page 17
from the New Testament to the careful consideration of our readers.
"And she (Anna) was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. And she coming in that instant, gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of Him to all them that looked for redemption on Jerusalem" (Luke ii. 37, 38). Can any one explain wherein this exercise of Anna's differed from that of Simeon, recorded just before? It was in the same public place, the temple. It was during the same service. It was equally public, for she "spake of Him to all who looked for redemption in Jerusalem" (see Watson on this passage).
Jesus said to the two Marys, "All hail! And they came and held Him by the feet, and worshipped Him. Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go, tell my brethren that they go before me into Galilee" (Matt. xxviii. 9, 10). There are two or three points in this beautiful narrative to which we wish to call the attention of our readers.
First, it was the first announcement of the glorious news to a lost world and a company of forsaking disciples. Second, it was as public as the nature of the case demanded; and intended ultimately to be published to the ends of the earth. Third, Mary was expressly commissioned to reveal the fact to the apostles; and thus she literally became their teacher in that memorable occasion. Oh, glorious privilege, to be allowed to herald the glad tidings of a Savior risen! How could it be that our Lord chose a woman to this honour? Well, one reason might be that the male disciples were all missing at the time. They all forsook Him and fled. But woman was there, as she had ever been, ready to minister to her risen, as to her dying Lord-- "Not she with traitorous lips her Savior stung, Not she denied Him with unholy tongue; She, whilst apostles shrunk, could danger brave; Last at the cross, and earliest at the grave. "But surely, if the dignity of our Lord of His message were likely to be imperiled by committing this sacred trust to a woman, He who was guarded by legions of angels could have commanded another messenger; but, as if intent on doing her honour and rewarding her unwavering fidelity, He reveals Himself first to her; and, as an evidence that He had taken out of the way the curse under which she had so long groaned, nailing it to His cross, He makes her who had been first in the transgression, first also in the glorious knowledge of complete redemption.
"Acts i. 14, and ii. 1, 4. We are in the first of these passages expressly told that the women were assembled with the disciples on the day of Pentecost; and in the second,
Page 18
that the cloven tongues sat upon them each, and the Holy Ghost filled them all, and they spake as the Spirit gave them utterance. It is nothing to the point to argue that the gift of tongues was a miraculous gift, seeing that the Spirit was the primary bestowment. The tongues were only emblematical of the office which the Spirit was henceforth to sustain to His people. The Spirit was given alike to the female as to the male disciple, and this is cited by Peter (16, 18), as the peculiar speciality of the latter dispensation. What a remarkable device of the devil that he has so long succeeded in hiding this characteristic of the latter day glory! He knows, whether the Church does or not, how eminently detrimental to the interests of his kingdom have been the religious labours of woman; and while her Seed has mortally bruised his head, he ceases not to bruise her heel; but the time of her deliverance draweth nigh."
"PHILIP THE EVANGLELIST HAD FOUR DAUGHTERS, VIRGINS, WHICH DID PROPHESY." FROM EUSEBIUS, THE ANCIENT ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORIAN, WE LEARN THAT PHILIP'S DAUGHTERS LIVED TO A GOOD OLD AGE, ALWAYS ABOUNDING IN THE WORK OF THE LORD. "MIGHTY LUMINARIES," HE WRITES, "HAVE FALLEN ASLEEP IN ASIA. PHILIP, AND TWO OF HIS VIRGIN DAUGHTERS, SLEEP AT HIERAPOLIS; THE OTHER, AND THE BELOVED DISCIPLE, JOHN, REST AT EPHESUS."
"And I entreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellow-labourers" (Phil. iv. 3).
This is a recognition of female labourers, not concerning the gospel but in the gospel, whom Paul classes with Clement, and other his fellow- labourers. Precisely the same terms are applied to Timotheus, whom Paul styles a "minister of God, and his fellow-labourer in the gospel of Christ" (1 Thess. iii. 2).
Again, "Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my helpers in Christ Jesus; who have for my life laid down their own necks; unto whom not only I give thanks, but all the Churches of the Gentiles" (Rom. xvi. 3, 4).
The word rendered helpers means a FELLOW-LABOURER, ASSOCIATE COADJUTOR,(*) working together, an assistant, a joint labourer, a colleague.(**) In the New Testament spoken only of a co-worker, helper in a Christian work, that is of Christian teachers.(***) How can these terms, with any show of consistency, be made to apply merely to the exercise of hospitality towards that apostle, or the duty of private visitation? To be a partner, coadjutor, or joint worker with a preacher of the gospel, must be something more than to be his waiting-maid.
(* Greenfield.) (** Dunbar.) (*** Robinson.)
Page 19
Again, "Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which laboured much in the Lord" (Rom. xvi. 12). Dr. Clarke, on this verse, says, "Many have spent much useless labour in endeavouring to prove that these women did not preach. That there were prophetesses as well as prophets in the Church we learn, and that a woman might pray or prophesy provided that she had her head covered we know; and, according to St. Paul (1 Cor. xiv. 3), whoever prophesied spoke unto others to edification, exhortation, and comfort, and that no preacher can do more every person must acknowledge. Because, to edify exhort, and comfort, are the prime ends of the gospel ministry. If women thus prophesied, then women preached."
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. iii. 28). If this passage does not teach that in the privileges, duties, and responsibilities of Christ's kingdom, all differences of nation, caste, and sex are abolished, we should like to know what it does teach, and wherefore it was written (see also 1 Cor. vii. 22).
As we have before observed, the text, Corinthians xiv. 34, 35, is the only one in the while book of God which even by false translation can be made prohibitory of female speaking in the Church; how comes it then, that by this one isolated passage, which, according to our best Greek authorities,(*) is wrongly rendered and wrongly applied, woman's lips have been sealed for centuries, and the "testimony of Jesus, which is the spirit of prophecy," silenced, when bestowed on her? How is it that this solitary text has been allowed to stand unexamined and unexplained, nay, that learned commentators who have known its true meaning as perfectly as either Robinson, Bloomfield, Greenfield, Scott, Parkhurst, or Locke have upheld the delusion, and enforced it as a Divine precept binding on all female disciples through all time? Surely there must have been some unfaithfulness, "craftiness," and "handling of the word of life deceitfully" somewhere. Surely the love of caste and unscriptural jealousy for a separated priesthood has had something to do with this anomaly. By this course divines and commentators have involved themselves in all sorts of inconsistencies and contradictions; and worse, they have nullified some of the most precious promises of God's word. They have set the most explicit predictions of prophecy at variance with apostolic injunctions, and the most immediate and wonderful operations of the Holy Ghost in direct opposition "to positive, explicit, and universal rules."
Notwithstanding however all this opposition to female ministry on the part of those deemed authorities in the
(* Disinterested witnesses every one will allow.)
Page 20
Church, there have been some in all ages in whom the Holy Ghost has wrought so mightily, that at the sacrifice of reputation and all things most dear, they have been compelled to come out as witnesses for Jesus and ambassadors of His gospel. As a rule, these women have been amongst the most devoted and self-denying of the Lord's people, giving indisputable evidence by the purity and beauty of their lives that they were led by the Spirit of God. Now, if the word of God forbids female ministry, we would ask how it happens that so many of the most devoted handmaidens of the Lord have felt themselves constrained by the Holy Ghost to exercise it? Surely there must be some mistake somewhere, for the word and the Spirit cannot contradict each other. Either the word does not condemn women preaching, or these confessedly holy women have been deceived. Will any one venture to assert that such women as Mrs. Elizabeth Fry, Mrs. Fletcher of Madely, and Mrs. Smith have been deceived with respect to their call to deliver the gospel messages to their fellow-creatures? If not, then God does call and qualify women to preach, and His word, rightly understood, cannot forbid what His Spirit enjoins. Further, it is a significant fact, which we commend to the consideration of all thoughtful Christians, that the public ministry of women has been eminently owned of God in the salvation of souls and the edification of His people. Paul refers to the fruits of his labours as evidence of his Divine commission (1 Cor. ix. 20). "If I am not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord." If this criterion be allowed to settle the question respecting woman's call to preach, we have no fear as to the result. A few examples of the blessing which has attended the ministrations of females, may help to throw some light on this matter of a Divine call.
At a missionary meeting held at Columbia, March 26th, 1824, the name of Mrs. Smith, of the Cape of Good Hope, was brought before the meeting, when Sir Richard Otley, the chairman, said, "The name of Mrs. Smith has been justly celebrated by the religious world and in the colony of the Cape of Good Hope. I heard a talented missionary state, that wherever he went in that colony, at 600 or 1000 miles from the principal seat of government, among the natives of Africa, and wherever he saw persons converted to Christianity, the name of Mrs. Smith was hailed as the person from whom they received their religious impressions; and although no less than ten missionaries, all men of piety and industry, were stationed in that settlement, the exertions of Mrs. Smith alone were more efficacious, and had been attended with greater success than the labours of
Page 21
those missionaries combined." The Rev. J. Campbell, missionary to Africa, says, "So extensive were the good effects of her pious exhortations, that on my first visit to the colony, wherever I met with persons of evangelical piety, I generally found that their first impressions of religion were ascribed to Mrs. Smith."
Mrs. Mary Taft, the talented lady of the Rev. Dr. Taft, was another eminently successful labourer in the Lord's vineyard. "If," says Mrs. Palmer, "the criterion by which we may judge of a Divine call to proclaim salvation be by the proportion of fruit gathered, then to the commission Mrs. Taft is appended the Divine signature, to a degree pre-eminently unmistakable. In reviewing her diary, we are constrained to believe that not one minister in five hundred could produce so many seals to their ministry. An eminent minister informed us that of those who had been brought to Christ through her labours, over two hundred entered the ministry. She seldom opened her mouth in public assemblies, either in prayer or speaking, but the Holy Spirit accompanied her words in such a wonderful manner, that sinners were convicted, and, as in apostolic times, were constrained to cry out, 'What must we do to be saved?' She laboured under the sanction and was hailed as a fellow-helper in the gospel by the Revs. Messrs. Mather, Pawson, Hearnshaw, Blackborne, Marsden, Bramwell, Vasey, and many other equally distinguished ministers of her time." The Rev. Mr. Pawson, when President of the Wesleyan Conference, writes as follows to a circuit where Mrs. Taft was stationed with her husband, where she met with some gainsayers:--'It is well known that religion has been for some time at a very low ebb in Dover. I therefore could not help thinking that is was a kind providence that Mrs. Taft was stationed among you, and that, by the blessing of God, she might be the instrument of reviving the work of God among you. I seriously believe Mrs. Taft to be a deeply pious, prudent, modest woman. I believe the Lord hath owned and blessed her labours very much, and many, yea, very many souls have been brought to the saving knowledge of God by her preaching. Many have come to hear her out of curiosity, who would not have come to hear a man, and have been awakened and converted to God. I do assure you there is much fruit of her labours in many parts of our connection."
Mrs. Fletcher, the wife of the sainted vicar of Madeley, was another of the daughters of the Lord on whom was poured the spirit of prophecy. This eminently devoted lady opened an orphan house, and devoted her time, her heart, and her fortune, to the work of the Lord. The Rev. Mr. Hodson, in referring to her public labours, says, "Mrs.
Page 22
Fletcher was not only luminous but truly eloquent--her discourses displayed much good sense, and were fraught with the riches of the gospel. She excelled in that poetry of an orator which can alone supply the place of all the rest--that eloquence which goes directly to the heart. She was the honoured instrument of doing much good; and the fruit of her labours is now manifest in the lives and tempers of numbers who will be her crown of rejoicing in the day of the Lord." The Rev. Henry Moore sums up a fine eulogium on her character and labours by saying, "May not every pious churchman say, Would to God all the Lord's people were such prophets and prophetesses!"
Miss Elizabeth Hurrell travelled through many counties in England, preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ; and very many were, through her instrumentality, brought to a knowledge of the truth, not a few of whom were afterwards called to fill very honourable stations in the Church.
From the Methodist Conference, held at Manchester, 1787, Mr. Wesley wrote to Miss Sarah Mallett, whose labours, while very acceptable to the people, had been opposed by some of the preachers:--"We give the right hand of fellowship to Sarah Mallett, and have no objection to her being a preacher in our connection, so long as she preaches Methodist doctrine, and attends to our discipline."
Such are a few examples of the success attending the public labours of females in the gospel. We might give many more, but our space only admits of a bare mention of Mrs. Wesley, Mrs. Rogers, Mrs. President Edwards, Mrs. Elizabeth Fry, Mrs. Hall, Mrs. Gilbert, Miss Lawrence, Miss Newman, Miss Miller, Miss Tooth, and Miss Cutler, whose holy lives and zealous labours were owned of God in the conversion of thousands of souls, and the abundant edification of the Lord's people.
Nor are the instances of the spirit of prophecy bestowed on women confined to by-gone generations: the revival of this age, as well as of every other, has been marked by this endowment, and the labours of such pious and talented ladies as Mrs. Palmer, Mrs. Finney, Mrs. Wightman, Miss Marsh,(*) with numberless other Marys and Phebes, have contributed in no small degree to its extension and power.
We have endeavored in the foregoing pages to establish, what we sincerely believe, that woman has a right to teach. Here the whole question hinges. If she has the right, she has it independently of any man- made restrictions which
(* The record of this lady's labours has long been before the public. "English Hearts and Hands," in a truly fascinating manner, describes the wonderful success with which those labours have been attended. Well has it been for the spiritual interest of hundreds that no sacerdotal couclave has been able to place the seal of silence upon her lips, and assign her to 'privacy as her proper sphere.')
Page 23
do not equally refer to the opposite sex. If she has the right, and possesses the necessary qualifications, we maintain that, where the law of expediency does not prevent, she is at liberty to exercise it without any further pretensions to inspiration than those put forth by that male sex. If, on the other hand, it can be proved that she has not the right, but that imperative silence is imposed upon her by the word of God, we cannot see who has authority to relax or make exceptions to the law.
If commentators had dealt with the Bible on other subjects as they have dealt with it on this, taking isolated passages, separated from their explanatory connections, and insisting on a literal interpretation of the words of our version, what errors and contradictions would have been forced upon the acceptance of the Church, and what terrible results would have accrued to the world. On this principle the Universalist will have all men unconditionally saved, because the Bible says, "Christ is the Saviour of all men," etc. The Antinomian, according to this rule of interpretation, has most unquestionable foundation for his dead faith and hollow profession, seeing that St. Paul declares over and over again that men are "saved by faith and not by works." The Unitarian, also, in support of his soul-withering doctrine, triumphantly refers to numerous passages which, taken alone, teach only the humanity of Jesus. In short, "there is no end to the errors in faith and practice which have resulted from taking isolated passages, wrested from their proper connections, or the light thrown upon them by other Scriptures, and applying them to sustain a favourite theory." Judging from the blessed results which have almost invariably followed the ministrations of women in the cause of Christ, we fear it will be found, in the great day of account, that a mistaken and unjustifiable application of the passage, "Let your women keep silence in the Churches," has resulted in more loss to the Church, evil to the world, and dishonour to God, than any of the errors we have already referred to.
And feeling, as we have long felt, that this is a subject of vast importance to the interests of Christ's kingdom and the glory of God, we would most earnestly commend its consideration to those who have influence in the Churches. We think it a matter worthy of their consideration whether God intended woman to bury her talents and influence as she now does? And whether the circumscribed sphere of woman's religious labours may not have something to do with the comparative non-success of the gospel in these latter days. Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. Female Ministry; or, Woman's Right to Preach -
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Mar 23, 2006 20:13:09 GMT -5
This was actually the article that I posted a link to. I have read it and I am still not sure where I stand, If you read the other article that I posted a link to it presents a very different picture. I don't agree with Robert Lewis Dabney or Tony Capoccia because I am a street preacher but I don't know if I would go as far as Catherine Booth does in saying that a woman can essentially be a preacher in the church.
|
|
|
Post by Jules on Mar 23, 2006 20:23:18 GMT -5
oh my that was a LONG post. I'm sorry I didn't read it, my eyes are past 30 years old and can't take it I noticed too that few women are on this board, and even fewer participating in the doctrinal discussions. Can anyone tell us exactly how many women are on this board anyway? Why there are so few women in evangelism or speaking about doctrine I don't know. Perhaps for fear of appearing to "teach" men. Women can preach that is clear. I used to think we couldn't but then after much prayer, and asking myself the questions below, I changed my mind. But women can't lead when men are present. Or have authority over a man. Or teach a man. Now, that being said, discussions on a board such as this make for an interesting situation. As a woman who accepts Paul's teachings on women in the Bible with a hearty AMEN, I ask myself some questions before engaging in anything anymore. 1) is the situation one in which men are in authority and leading (in the case of this board, YES, as Miles, Jesse and Jeff are in charge) 2) does my input or involvement undermine the authority of a man in any way? 3) am I following the lead of the men on the board? 4) are my actions respectful of the men? (this one is hard, because you never know what men are thinking 5) are my motives for wanting to speak in the first place to glorify God, edify the church, equip the saints, etc...or is it because I want attention, responsibility, authority, etc. These are just some of the things I ask myself in order to remain within the boundaries of God's order. Since we are not in physical contact with each other, some of these are no brainers. But we are the church, right? So we behave as if we were in a church setting, shouldn't we? I'm going to start a new thread about women on the street now..so hang on! I've been wanting to ask this question for months now and get feedback from men who are active on the streets...
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Mar 23, 2006 20:42:08 GMT -5
I am amazed by the wisdom and knowledge the women on this board have, as well as many of the men. It is a great blessing and an encouragement to see God raising up so many men and women.
I have never had a problem with women preachers or preaching. I think women have had some of the most powerful ministries ever since the days of the bible (Catherine Booth, Maria Woodworth Etter, etc.).
My wife and my friend's wife preach all the time at all the places we preach.
|
|
|
Post by Juli on Mar 24, 2006 1:00:43 GMT -5
I came from a denomination where women ran the church - they did all the "service" except for the token male duties such as pastor, deacon, serving Lord's Supper, etc. They also ran the discussions in the co-ed classes and bible studies. All the while giving lip service to being under the authority of men. Most women in the denomination I grew up in were unable to discuss doctrine simply because they have no interest in it or knowledge of it. After all, they were too busy running the church Those women that knew any amount of doctrine knew the teachings on women in the church, and were confused and didn't know if they COULD speak or if so, under what circumstances. So they ones who actually had something to contribute rarely did out of fear they'd be disobedient or disrespectful to the men. They saw the damage women running their mouths in general did, and it makes them hesitant to say anything. Being under authority and willingly submitting is the perfect picture of our relationship to Christ. The women who can't submit to earthly authority will have a hard time submitting to heavenly Authority. I see brash, aggressive, bossy, opinionated and prideful women who call themselves believers all the time. Hardly the picture described in Peter 3 and Titus 2.
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 24, 2006 9:59:45 GMT -5
I haven't read those articles because I haven't time, so forgive me where I am repeating what has already been stated.
I know there have been some influencial women preachers in the past but does it have any support in the Scriptures??
The prophet Isaiah was condemning Israel when he said women ruled over them. Isa. 3:12.
“Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. But I do not allow a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, was in the transgression” 1 Tim. 2:11-14.
Some people refer to Deborah as defense but why did God make her a judge in Israel (Judges 4:4-5)? The answer is not difficult. God’s perfect will is for men to lead. That is too clear to misinterpret, but when men will not assume their responsibilities, God uses women. The men in Deborah’s day were very weak and cowardly. This is seen in the fact that Barak, the captain of the armies of Israel, refused to go into battle unless Deborah went with him. What a brave man! What a hero! The woman had to remind him that God had said it is time to fight; the woman had to encourage and challenge him to go; the woman had to go with him!
“And Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go” Judges 4:8
I think that teaching children is ok because the woman ought to teach their own children. However, I just feel very uncomfortable about a women preaching in a meeting where there are men present.
My conscience doesn't feel comfortable with female open air preachers or evangelists either.
I know the bible talks about female 'prophets' :
"And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him. And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy." Acts 21:8,9
"And there was one Anna, a prophetess..." Luke 2:36
But it must be noted that to 'prohesy' doesn't always mean to 'preach'. It can also mean 'singing'.
"After that thou shalt come to the hill of God, where is the garrison of the Philistines: and it shall come to pass, when thou art come thither to the city, that thou shalt meet a company of prophets coming down from the high place with a psaltery, and a tabret, and a pipe, and a harp, before them; and they shall prophesy" 1 Sam 10:5
"Moreover David and the captains of the host separated to the service of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and with cymbals: and the number of the workmen according to their service was" 1 Chron 25:1
Especially in this following passage where it is discussing a formal worship service where men and woman are present and it indicates that women may pray and 'prophesy'. If this is speaking about preaching then it is in conflict with the other passages that forbid such, so it must mean singing:
"But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven." 1 Cor 11:5
So I conclude that I believe that generally, where it refers to female prophets, they are singers not preachers.
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 24, 2006 10:24:20 GMT -5
Well i look at it this way:::: "'If my house was on Fire, and i was about to burn up...and i looked out the window, and saw only a women that could help, ( would i refuse, out of pride because she is a women that can save this house and myself), or would i scream please help me!!!"
"Then i look at what does it means to fundamental be an opposition to God?" People who tell other people they have to worship God this way or that , the word of God is clear...In John 4:23,24.. The Word of God reads:
23But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24 God is Spirit: and they that worship him MUST worship Him in Spirit and in truth... In Spirit is where True Worship begans, and one must come to God in complete sincerity and with a spirit that is directed by the Life and activity of the Holy Spirit.. Therefore, worship must take place according to the TRUTH of THE FATHER that is REVEALED in the SON and RECEIVED through the SPIRIT.. "ANYONE "who advocate a worship that sets aside the TRUTH(JESUS CHRIST) and doctrines of the Word of God has in reality set aside the ONLY FOUNDATION for TRUE WORSHIP.... Jesus Christ is the TRUTH, and to live in union with Jesus Christ requires speaking the Truth, and those that claim to have fellowship with Christ Jesus and to process salvation, (But YET!!!!!! not live and SPEAK!!!!!! according to the TRUTH which is Christ Jesus, the word of God says TO BE DECEIVED.. 1 John 1:6 6If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
So another question? Does a women not speak in Spirit and Truth and Dishonour God, of does she hold tight to the traditions of men...?
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 24, 2006 10:31:03 GMT -5
A woman, just like a man, first and foremost obeys the scripture and by doing so obeys God.
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 24, 2006 10:43:24 GMT -5
So Armen.. why..do people push this issue, to say what they say?Remembering always that True Worship takes place in Spirit and in Truth.. John 4:23 It involves the human spirit and not just the mind, as well as the manifestations of the Holy Spirit.. Our Christian Worship must always line up with the NT pattern in Acts 7:44
44Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen. God Bless, and i Praise God and Honor His word, that His Glory in Christ Jesus be shone...
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 24, 2006 12:37:23 GMT -5
Manna,
I'm not quite sure what you're saying or getting at. What issue are people pushing and what are they saying?
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 24, 2006 13:13:30 GMT -5
Armen.. forgive me , please let me explain..Just as surely as God had a pattern for the tabernacle under the old covenant.. He has also a pattern for His Church under the new. The NT apostles did not arbitrarily or haphazardly decide how the church was to fashioned, no sir.. it was the father and the son, through the Holy Spirit recorded in the Gospels, Acts, The epistles, and in the letters to the seven churches..who established the apostolic pattern for the church.. The problem here, is that you believe a certain way( in what you quoted, why you believe that women are to be silent, but if you read the history of the Corinthian church, you will see not who's who, but who's when and why)..but when it comes to Divine revelation to obey God, you agree..am not pickin.. i am trying to understand you, how does this line up, with the Holy Scripture says let your ye be ye, and nay be nay.
You see tragically after the apostolic age of the church they to began to depart from " Divine Revelation" and to make things worst, started to modify God's heavenly pattern by accommodating itself in culture, and organizing according to human, and earthy ideas.. that resulted in a repeated history, you see that with the Jewish nation in the OT as a lesson.. When man made patterns will result in such when men turn away from the Apostolic pattern as God's timeless standard for the church, we get ( the Modern Church).. That is why we must contend for the Faith before we can witness... Jude 1:3 3Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. In other words that is why i exhort you, and myself, and to anyone that will hear, to contend for the Faith...who deny the authority of the Holy Scriptures or distort the ancient Faith( not man -made) as presented By Christ Jesus and the Apostles and proclaiming it as redemptive truth to all people.. Blessed Regards, In Christ Jesus For His Honor and Glory Manna
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 24, 2006 13:38:06 GMT -5
A prayer I have recently began to offer regularly is that God would show me what NT Christianity REALLY is. I've just noticed that this subject has went off on a tangent. When I first read it I thought it was to do with woman preachers, but that was not how it started. I'm sure Steve wasn't expecting this to diverge onto woman preaching!
As far as the main subject, women and theology; I whole heartedly commend ANY one, male or female, who take time to study doctrine and theology.
Nevertheless, a woman preaching is not fulfilling the desire that God wants for them to worship, "in...truth." This is my belief that is founded, firstly, on the Bible and secondly, conscience.
God bless!
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 24, 2006 13:55:52 GMT -5
A prayer I have recently began to offer regularly is that God would show me what NT Christianity REALLY is. I've just noticed that this subject has went off on a tangent. When I first read it I thought it was to do with woman preachers, but that was not how it started. I'm sure Steve wasn't expecting this to diverge onto woman preaching! As far as the main subject, women and theology; I whole heartedly commend ANY one, male or female, who take time to study doctrine and theology. Nevertheless, a woman preaching is not fulfilling the desire that God wants for them to worship, "in...truth." This is my belief that is founded, firstly, on the Bible and secondly, conscience. God bless! Armen...Bless you.,. But that is it, I am a women.. ;D.. and the only thing that i can boost about is that i am a Sinner Saved by the Grace of God, and because if we have "The Truth of God" we can't shut ..as well as i teach...what i have seen, heard, and proclaim..I am a witness, of His Goodness., even if i didn't speak a word" The Very Rocks would cry out.....Blessed be the Lord My God, in Christ Jesus..
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Mar 24, 2006 14:24:04 GMT -5
I am listening to a David Wilkerson sermon called "The Outside Looking In Part 2" and he mentioned that his mother was a street preacher! I'm not sure if he meant just speaking the words on the street or up with a stool. Anyways he said, "she was a powerful street preacher."
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Mar 24, 2006 14:24:22 GMT -5
I am listening to a David Wilkerson sermon called "The Outside Looking In Part 2" and he mentioned that his mother was a street preacher! I'm not sure if he meant just speaking the word on the street or up with a stool. Anyways he said, "she was a powerful street preacher."
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 24, 2006 14:27:10 GMT -5
I am listening to a David Wilkerson sermon called "The Outside Looking In Part 2" and he mentioned that his mother was a street preacher! I'm not sure if he meant just speaking the word on the street or up with a stool. Anyways he said, "she was a powerful street preacher." ;D
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Mar 24, 2006 17:04:44 GMT -5
This is an interesting point brought up by Catherine Booth I am not sure how I feel about it. Romans 16:1, 2 "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also." The original greek for servant is diakonos. It can mean an attendant, that is, (generally) a waiter (at table or in other menial duties); specifically a Christian teacher and pastor (technically a deacon or deaconess): - deacon, minister, servant. Other uses of this are in: Meaning ministers: 1Cor 3:5, 2Cor 3:6, 2Cor 6:4, 2Cor 11:15 (2), 2Cor 11:23 Meaning servant: Matt 23:11, Mark 9:35, John 12:26, Rom 16:1 Matt 22:12-13 (2), John 2:5, John 2:9 Meaning Deacons: Phil 1:1 (2), 1Tim 3:8, 1Tim 3:12 So I conclude that I believe that generally, where it refers to female prophets, they are singers not preachers. Act 21:8,9 " And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him. And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy." Act 2:17,18 "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy..." The word for prophesy here is prophēteuō and it means... to foretell events, divine, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office: - prophesy. In Luke 2:36,37 "And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity; And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day." The word used here is prophētis and it means a female foreteller or an inspired woman: - prophetess. The word used in Samuel 10:5 and 1 Chron 25:1 is nâbâ' which means A primitive root; to prophesy, that is, speak (or sing) by inspiration (in prediction or simple discourse): - prophesy (-ing) make self a prophet. The word used in 1 Cor 11:5 is prophēteuō again and it means... to foretell events, divine, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office: - prophesy. In all humbleness, the verses you used to prove that to prophesy was signing aren't the same words used in verses about women prophesying. This is hard to deal with in the light of this verse... 1Timothy 2:11,12 "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." Because these women obviously spoke and were not silent. The four daughters even prophesied over Paul. I also find this difficult... 1Timothy 2:15 "Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." When contrasted with 1 Corinthians chapter 7 where Paul speaks about being celebate. Is a woman not saved if she does not bear children?! Or if she doesn't marry? I really do not know what to make of this. I am very cautious because I do not want to brush away any scriptures. I want to know the unbiased truth.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Mar 24, 2006 17:15:24 GMT -5
Although this was not exactly what I had in mind for this topic it's obviously an area that should be addressed. I personally have not studied this out enough to make an intelligible point here, but I thought I would post where my denomination (Assemblies of God) stands on this issue. I encourage everyone to at least read the section entitled The Bible as Final Authority as it really applies to all our theological discussions here. The Role of Women in Ministry
"Supernatural manifestations and gifts of the Holy Spirit have played a distinctive role in the origin, development, and growth of the Assemblies of God. From the earliest days of our organization, spiritual gifting has been evident in the ministries of many outstanding women. Divine enablement has also been seen in the spiritual leadership of women in other Pentecostal groups. The Pentecostal movement believes that the 20th-century outpouring of the Spirit is a true fulfillment of the scriptural prediction, "Your daughters shall prophecy... and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my Spirit" (Joel 2:28, 29).
The Bible as Final Authority The history and current practice of the Assemblies of God give demonstration that God can and does bless the public ministry of women. Yet there is currently much debate concerning the proper role of women in spiritual leadership. So it is appropriate to ask if Scripture describes any limits to this public ministry. We all agree that Scripture must be our final authority in settling questions of faith and practice. But when born-again, Spirit-filled Christians, following proper hermeneutical principles, come to reasonable but differing interpretations, we do well not to become dogmatic in support of one position. We affirm the inerrancy and authority of Scripture. We desire to know for certain what God expects of us. When we come to a sure understanding of His divine Word, we are committed to declaring and obeying those clear instructions. But we also exercise caution in giving authoritative importance to interpretations that do not have indisputable support from the whole of Scripture. Although the Holy Spirit may be active in the work of translation and interpretation, we cannot claim inerrancy for interpretations (even of extant Hebrew or Greek texts).
Historical and Global Precedent In the early days of most revivals, when spiritual fervor is high and the Lord's return is expected at any time, there is often a place for, and acceptance of, the anointed ministry of women. Over time, however, concerns about organization and lines of authority begin to emerge, and the group moves toward a more structured ministry. As institutional concerns come to the forefront, the spiritual leadership of women is accepted less readily, and church leadership becomes predominately male. The experience of the Assemblies of God has been no exception to this progression.
Twentieth-century practice among Pentecostals around the world reveals evidence of a genuine struggle to apply biblical truth in various cultural contexts. In some settings, female spiritual leadership is readily accepted; in others, though women may have limited ministry, leadership posts are withheld from them. At times there is inconsistency between the leadership a female missionary has at home and that which she has on the field, or between her opportunities and those of a national female. Indeed, culture has influenced the extent of leadership a woman has been allowed to share. The Church must always be sensitive to cultural concerns, but it must look to Scripture for the truth that applies to all times and cultures.
Biblical Examples of Women in Ministry Old Testament history includes accounts of strong female leadership. Miriam was a prophet, one of the triumvirate of leaders God sent to Israel during the Exodus period (Exodus 15:20). Deborah, as prophet and judge, led the army of the Lord into successful combat (Judges 4 to 5). Huldah, also a prophet, authenticated the scroll of the Law found in the temple and helped spark the great religious reform in the days of Josiah (2 Kings 22; 2 Chronicles 34).
The New Testament also records ministering women in the Church Age. Tabitha (Dorcas) is called a disciple and had a ministry of helps (Acts 9:36). Philip had four virgin daughters who prophesied (Act s 21:8,9). Euodia and Syntyche were Paul's coworkers who shared in his struggle to spread the gospel (Philippians 4:2,3). Priscilla was another of Paul's exemplary "fellow workers in Christ Jesus" (Romans 16:3,4, NIV). In Romans 16, Paul greets a multitude of ministering persons, a large number of them women.
Phoebe, a leader in the church at Cenchrea, was highly commended to the church at Rome by Paul (Romans 16:1,2). Unfortunately, biases of modern English translators have sometimes obscured Phoebe's position of leadership, calling her a "servant" or "helper", etc. Yet Phoebe was diakonos of the church at Cenchrea. Paul often used this term for a minister or leader of a congregation and applied it specifically to Jesus Christ, Tychicus, Epaphras, Timothy, and to his own ministry. Depending on the context, diakonos is usually translated "deacon" or "minister." Though some translators have chose n the word deaconess (because Phoebe was a woman), such a distinction is not in the original Greek. It seems likely that diakonos was the designation for an official leadership position in the Early Church.
Junia was identified by Paul as an apostle (Romans 16:7). But many translators and scholars, unwilling to admit there could have been a female apostle, have since the 13th century masculinized her name to Junias. The biblical record shows that Paul was a strong advocate of women's ministry.
The instances of women filling leadership roles in the Bible should be taken as a divinely approved pattern, not as exceptions to divine decrees. Even a limited 34-4191 of women with scripturally commended leadership roles should affirm that God does indeed call women to spiritual leadership.
A Biblical Survey of the Role of Women in Ministry Of primary importance in defining the scriptural role of women in ministry is the biblical meaning of "ministry". Of Christ our great model, it was said, "For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45). New Testament leadership, as modeled by Jesus, portrays the spiritual leader as a servant. The question of human authority is not of primary significance, though it naturally arises as organization and structure develop.
Genesis 2:18-25 Some expositors have taught that all women should be subordinate to adult men because Eve was created after Adam to be his helper ("help meet", KJV). Yet the word ezer ("helper") is never used in the Hebrew Bible with a subordinate meaning. Seventeen out of the twenty times it is used, it refers to God as the helper. Instead of being created as a subordinate, Eve was created to be a "suitable" (kenegdo) helper, or one "corresponding to" Adam.
Some argue that God created men and women with different characteristics and desires, and that these differences explain why leadership roles should be withheld from women. Others attribute these perceived differences to culture and social expectations imposed on children from birth to adulthood. Physical differences and distinctive biological functions are obvious; but it is only by implication that gender distinctives can be made to suggest leadership limitations.
Paul's Emphasis on Charismatic Ministry Ministry in the New Testament is charismatic in nature. It is made possible and energized as the Holy Spirit sovereignly distributes spiritual gifts (charismata) to each member of the body of Christ (Romans 12:6-8; 1 Corinthians 12:7-11,27,28; Ephesians 4:7-12; 1 Peter 4:10,11). While some gifts are a spontaneous work of the Spirit and others are recognized ministry gifts to the Body, all are given for service without regard to gender differentiation. For example, the gift of prophecy is explicitly for both men and women: "Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" (Acts 2:17). That women received and exercised this gift of the Spirit is well attested in the New Testament (Acts 21:9; 1 Corinthians 11:5).
If Peter found certain statements by Paul hard to understand (2 Peter 3:16), then it is no surprise that we, who are removed by 1900 additional years of history, would share his struggle in interpreting some Pauline passages. And we, like Peter (2 Peter 3:15), must respect and love our brothers and sisters who hold alternative interpretations on issues that are not critical to our salvation or standing before God. We only request that those interpretations be expressed and practiced in love and consideration for all of God's children, both men and women.
First Corinthians 11:3-12 The statement that "the man is the head of the woman" has for centuries been used to justify the practice of male superiority and to exclude women from spiritual leadership. Two alternative translations for kephale ("head"), debated widely by contemporary evangelical scholars, are (1) "authority over" and (2) "source" or "origin." Both meanings can be found in literature of Paul's time.
Taking the passage as a whole, the second meaning fits as well as or better than the first meaning, leading to the summary statement of verse 12: "As the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things [are] of God." Even the relationship between the eternal Son and the Father--"the head of Christ is God" (11:3)--fits better as "source" than "authority over" (cf. John 8 :42). Without attempting to resolve this debate, we do not find sufficient evidence in kephale to deny leadership roles to
women (in light of biblical examples of women in positions of spiritual authority, and in light of the whole counsel of Scripture).
First Corinthians 14:34-36 There are only two passages in the entire New Testament which might seem to contain a prohibition against the ministry of women (1 Corinthians 14:34 and 1 Timothy 2:12). Since these must be placed along side Paul's other statements and practices, they can hardly be absolute, unequivocal prohibitions of the ministry of women. Instead, they seem to be teachings dealing with specific, local problems that needed correction.
There are various interpretations of what Paul was limiting when he said, "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak" (14:34). Options include (1) chatter in public services, (2) ecstatic disruptions, (3) certain authoritative ministries (such as judging prophecies), and (4) asking questions during the service. Yet, Paul does allow women to pray and prophesy in the corporate service (1 Corinthians 11:5).
Although we may not solve all the difficulties of this chapter, we do conclude that this passage does not prohibit female leadership, but like the rest of the chapter, it admonishes that "all things be done decently and in order" (1 Corinthians 14:40).
First Timothy 2:11-15 The meaning and application of Paul's statement, "I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man" (1 Timothy 2:12), have puzzled interpreters and resulted in a variety of positions on the role of women in ministry and spiritual leadership. Is the prohibition of women teaching and exercising authority a universal truth, or was Paul reporting his application of divine truth for the society and Christian community to which he and Timothy ministered?
From the above survey of passages on exemplary women in ministry, it is clear that Paul recognized the ministry of women. Yet there were some obvious problems concerning women in Ephesus. They were evidently given to immodest apparel and adornment (1 Timothy 2:9). The younger widows "learn to be idle,... and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not" (1 Timothy 5:13). In his second letter to Timothy, Paul warned against depraved persons (possibly including women) who manipulated "weak-willed", or "gullible", women (2 Timothy 3:6, NIV).
A reading of the entire passage of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 strongly suggests that Paul was giving Timothy advice about dealing with some heretical teachings and practices involving women in the church at Ephesus. The heresy may have been so serious that he had to say about the Ephesian women, "I am not allowing women to teach or have authority over a man." But we know from other passages that such an exclusion was not normative in Paul's ministry.
First Timothy 3:1-13 This entire passage has been held by some to confirm that all leaders and authorities in the Early Church were intended to be, and indeed were, males. It is true that the passage deals primarily with male leadership, most likely because of majority practice and expectations. When there were women leaders, like Phoebe, they would be expected to meet the same standards of character and behavior.
Translations of verse 11 present evidence of the translator's choice based on personal expectations. The word gunaikas can be translated as either "wives" or "women," depending on the translator's assumptions concerning the context. One rendering leaves the impression that these are qualifications for deacons' wives; the other suggests this exhortation is addressed to female spiritual leaders.
Although the first-century cultural milieu produced a primarily male church leadership, this passage along with other biblical evidence of female spiritual leadership (e.g., Acts 21:9; Romans 16:1-15 ; Philippians 4:2,3) demonstrates that female leadership was not prohibited, either for Paul's day or for today. Passages which imply that most leaders were male should not be made to say that women cannot be leaders.
Galatians 3:28 Those who oppose allowing women to hold positions of spiritual leadership must place contextual limitations on Galatians 3:28. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."
Some interpreters restrict the meaning of this triad to salvation by faith or oneness in Christ. That truth is certainly articulated throughout Scripture. Yet the verse carries a ring of universal application for all our relationships, not just an assurance that anyone can come to Christ. "Neither Jew nor Greek.... neither bond nor free... neither male nor female"--these are basic relationship principles to which faithful followers of Christ must give highest priority.
The God of the Bible has "no respect of persons" (Romans 2:11; cf. also 2 Samuel 14:14; 2 Chronicles 19:7; Acts 10:34; Ephesians 6:9). He calls whom He will and gives gifts and ministries as He chooses; man must not put limitations on divine prerogatives. In Christ we are truly set free from sin and its curse, which separate from God and elevate or demean according to race, social standing, or gender.
Therefore We Conclude After examining the various translations and interpretations of biblical passages relating to the role of women in the first-century church, and desiring to apply biblical principles to contemporary church practice, we conclude that we cannot find convincing evidence that the ministry of women is restricted according to some sacred or immutable principle.
We are aware that the ministry and leadership of women are not accepted by some individuals, both within and outside the Christian community. We condemn all prejudice and self-promotion, by men or women. The existence in the secular world of bigotry against women cannot be denied. But there is no place for such an attitude in the body of Christ. We acknowledge that attitudes of secular society, based on long-standing practice and tradition, have influenced the application of biblical principles to local circumstances. We desire wisely to respect yet help redeem cultures which are at variance with Kingdom principles. Like Paul, we affirm the Great Commission takes priority over every other consideration. We must reach men and women for Christ, no matter what their cultural or ethnic customs may be. The message of redemption has been carried to remote parts of the world through the ministry of dedicated, Spirit-filled men and women. A believer's gifts and anointing should still today make a way for his or her ministry. The Pentecostal ministry is not a profession to which men or women merely aspire; it must always be a divine calling, confirmed by the Spirit with a special gifting.
The Assemblies of God has been blessed and must continue to be blessed by the ministry of God's gifted and commissioned daughters. To the degree that we are convinced of our Pentecostal distinctives--that it is God who divinely calls and supernaturally anoints for ministry--we must continue to be open to the full use of women's gifts in ministry and spiritual leadership.
As we look on the fields ripe for harvest, may we not be guilty of sending away any of the reapers God calls. Let us entrust to these women of God the sacred sickle, and with our sincerest blessings thrust them out into the whitened fields."
|
|
|
Post by Jules on Mar 25, 2006 16:27:46 GMT -5
there is certainly a difference between gifts within the body of believers and that of official roles and positions of authority in the church. To my knowledge, no where in the Word does it imply that women do not have the same GIFTS as men, and that would include prophesy and preaching (telling the gospel, preaching is not the same as a Pastor)
Now, a pastor is someone in authority in the church, as is a deacon or bishop. Howver, a deacon in the NT and a deacon now (an offical position of authority) should be noted. Because of the limitations that are clear to women as far as not being in leadership or authority over a man, this rules out the ROLES of pastor, deacon (as it is known today) and bishop. Also, teaching a man in the church is prohibited. WHen it comes to prophesy and tongues, both gifts, although prophesy is also listed as a position in the church, women should not speak in church. The passages that are in disagreement of Paul's about women not speaking in church, whatever they mean, most certainly (at a minimum) include prophest and tongues IN THE CHURCH because the entire chapter is about those two subjects.
My personal conviction is that because the Great COmmission was given to all believers, and no where does it say women are not to obey this command, women preaching (that is, speaking the gospel to lost people) is not only OK< but expected. A woman who uses the excuse that she can't "preach" because of NT restrictions doesn't have a good grasp on the text and could possible (not always but possibly) be using it as an excuse to be disobedient to the Lord's command.
We can be deacons (servants, not authorities) in the church, as Phoebe was.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Fuller on Mar 26, 2006 0:11:02 GMT -5
Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood by John Piper and Wayne Grudem offers the most complete and extensive refutation of the egalitarian position. All of the authors in this book are well-established scholars, and each chapter provides a book’s worth of insight. The entire book is available in this one Adobe Acrobat file that you may view on-line or download and save to your computer:
www.cbmw.org/rbmw/rbmw.pdf
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 31, 2006 6:01:27 GMT -5
Huh?? If women can be deacons, how are they supposed to be THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE? 1 Tim 3:12 Phoebe was a SERVANT....every Christian is a servant. What Paul meant was that she was a faithful, sincere and godly servant. She was a great encourager and helper (read Roman 16:2). She was NOT a deacon (unless she was a husband??).
Women can witness and testify but they ought not to preach.
Brother Steve,
This is not directed at you in any way, but what your denomination has put out about the role of women I consider to be unbiblical, modern trash! It is sad to see that women cannot see their role in the church and have to puch themselves into positions that God never naturally intended for women.
ejuliot,
you're refutation on what I stated about women prophets doesn't hold. If the women were singing about the judgment to come, or hell, or the second advent of Christ, then they would be fulfilling the role of a future-telling prophetess.
God bless!
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Mar 31, 2006 10:08:17 GMT -5
Becareful there, Armen. The greek word diakoneo for deacon means "to be a servant, attendant, domestic, to serve, wait upon". BLB
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 31, 2006 10:43:52 GMT -5
Yeah but brother, the bible says a deacon HAS to be the husband of one wife. How is that possible for a woman?
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Mar 31, 2006 12:13:40 GMT -5
Yeah but brother, the bible says a deacon HAS to be the husband of one wife. How is that possible for a woman? "Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households. " Armen, I see this stating that a deacon cannot have more than one wife, not that a deacon must have a wife, and must be a man. You see him stating that he must also be a good manager of his children. So by the way you're reading this, a deacon must be a male, with one wife, and have multiple children. That means a single male cannot be a deacon as well, nor a married male without children. This would mean Paul could not have ever been one because he was single, but we know he was once one of helps, a servant, aka: deacon. If we took this way of reading verses throughout scripture, then women couldn't even be saved because Jesus sais " he who repents and believes will be saved" (paraphrased). So can I take it that the 'elect' are only men then? (yes, that's sarcasm... to make a point) I'm curious, do you believe women should not speak in church? [ 1 Cor 14:34]
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 31, 2006 12:46:49 GMT -5
Yeah but brother, the bible says a deacon HAS to be the husband of one wife. How is that possible for a woman? "Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households. " Armen, I see this stating that a deacon cannot have more than one wife, not that a deacon must have a wife, and must be a man. You see him stating that he must also be a good manager of his children. So by the way you're reading this, a deacon must be a male, with one wife, and have multiple children. That means a single male cannot be a deacon as well, nor a married male without children. This would mean Paul could not have ever been one because he was single, but we know he was once one of helps, a servant, aka: deacon. If we took this way of reading verses throughout scripture, then women couldn't even be saved because Jesus sais " he who repents and believes will be saved" (paraphrased). So can I take it that the 'elect' are only men then? (yes, that's sarcasm... to make a point) I'm curious, do you believe women should not speak in church? [ 1 Cor 14:34] Brother, I see the deacon first of all as one that is deliberately appointed. The church appoints deacons to serve in the necessities of the church. That doesn't mean that others can't help out though. However, how can one be appointed to look after the necessities of the church family when he hasn't proved that he can look after his own family? Hence I believe that a deacon should be a man that is married to one woman and has at least one child. Thereby others can see if he can order his own family properly before he's in a position to help organising the church family. About Paul: firstly we do not know that he wasn't married. He had a great insight to marriage and he may have been married at one stage and his wife may have died. Secondly, do the scriptures clearly indicate that Paul had the appointed 'office' of deacon? As far as women speaking in church. They can pray and sing as indicated in 1 Cor 14. They can also teach children as they have a right to teach their own. I believe that they are to witness too. But as far as teaching male adults, I believe it to be prohibited by the scriptures. God bless!
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Mar 31, 2006 14:27:16 GMT -5
understood...
|
|