Women preachers.....Why????

[Barrackubus]

Its amazing how liberal the recent church has become, now the apostle paul was being bigoted and was outshot by what he said by being accused of being not perfect, therefore we must question the inspiration of what he wrote, specifically when the book says all scripture is divinely inspired and was written as men were directed by the holy ghost. But thats okay, worldly progressiveness takes preference over scripture. God is okay with that now as long as we love. No need to take exact teaching from scripture in the event it may sound bigoted and nonequal. When it was.written to for teaching and order in the church, the church wasnt meant to be politically correct or progressive or.liberal it was meant to be a difference in a dark world not look.exactly.like it...

 

[Barrackubus]

It's true the church has become.politically.correct. Far away from what it was originally.intended. Not anywhere close near the.doctrine that is taught as a guide within the book that is considered holy and sound doctrine. It's has become a religion of situational ethics and has conformed to the weights of.popular opinion. When it no.longer penetrates it becomes stagnant and uneffective in producing the.change in the world we live in. When it no.longer becomes effective in the lives of those.standing outside.the religion is dead and rotting. It is a shell of it's former self, a sepuchlar of.dead mans bones.
When it no longer stays at is was like it was at the beginning then the values it represents are naught. Progressiveness has no.place in the church, because the church doesnt get more perfect over time, the.church was perfected at the beginning, and if itsn't like it was then, I would start looking around and find the problem. These vague, unclear references to something we arent exactly.to clear on arent evidences to support your claim, but they are evidences that permit.you to be.more politcally.correct.
The strongest evidence was that scripture that addressed those of the house of chloe, the word.minister means to give freely. The word.bishop as penned by Paul literally means.overseer. At no time is that position in the church to be given to a woman, because she cannot be the husband of one wife. It's your Bible. The same things are listed for the.office of a deacon later in the chapter in Timothy and pretty much has the same instructions for that of a bishop or pastor. And because of this acceptance of things not instructed by the word the modern day church has become worldly or.like.the world, and god certianly has no place there, does he??

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Progressiveness has no.place in the church, because the church doesnt get more perfect over time, the.church was perfected at the beginning, and if itsn't like it was then, I would start looking around and find the problem.

That is a statement that is patently untrue.
There have always been many "Churches"
The Churches visited by "Paul" were just some of them.

I suspect none of them were "Perfect"
If you read the Didache ( which predates any compilation of the Bible) you will find how the earliest Judo-Christian communities were organised, and taught how to be "Christian" It was adapted from and reflects the Jewish "Two ways of life. It was used by many communities throughout the first three centuries.

I recommend Aaron Milavec's book and translation.

You will find that "Bishops" did not have priestly duties until after the first two centuries. They were elected by the individual communities from worthy men. Preachers were most likely to be wandering Prophets.

Teaching of new families their slaves and individuals was by mentoring. Not by a "Priest" (there were none)

Contrary to your assertion ... the whole history of the church is one of "Progression" down various routes. What became the Catholic and Orthodox Church was one such, the Coptic and Ethiopian Churches were others.
The variety of Christian denominations today simply reflect this ""Progression" through diversity.

We should perhaps welcome its validity rather than question God's purpose is establishing his Church in this fashion.

 

[e.r.m.]

Maybe it's because we live in a more enlightened time than when the Bible was written.

Society and "popularity" is not the measuring tool for the beliefs in Christ's church, the scriptures are. That does not change. Neither Roman society, nor ours.

 

[sojourner]

Not so. There were women evangelists, preachers, and church leaders within the American Restoration Movement as early as 1845........ Your diatribe is meaningless. It's clear from other texts that women certainly*were*in positions of authority and leadership. The text to which you refer is most likely reactionary to women who already were in positions of authority in certain places. Therefore, it is a later corruption of Xy that caused women to be barred from leadership roles.





Sources please.....

Encyclopedia of the Stone/Campbell Movement

Romans 16, I Cor. 16.

 

[sojourner]

The Sin of Women Preachers! this is a link...

I find this funny, how christians are so divided even on subjects like this...I am glad I am away from it...now this fella has found just as much scripture against it than there is for it, not without thinking could have hapoened, could have been possible, in these scriptures he paints a different picture, is he wrong??

He's a fundie crackpot who hasn't done his homework.

 

[sojourner]

Its amazing how liberal the recent church has become

Why is it amazing? The church has always had its liberal elements -- including Jesus.

specifically when the book says all scripture is divinely inspired and was written as men were directed by the holy ghost.

No, Timothy said all scripture is divinely inspired -- and he wasn't talking about anything in the NT when he said it.

worldly progressiveness takes preference over scripture.

No, adequate textual exegesis takes precedence over inadequate textual exegesis.

No need to take exact teaching from scripture in the event it may sound bigoted and nonequal.

We can only come to a conclusion of approximate teaching -- and then only after adequately exegeting the texts in question.

the church wasnt meant to be politically correct or progressive or.liberal

Neither was it meant to be narrow, scholastically irresponsible or willfully ignorant...

Your diatribe is still meaningless, because your arguments have no basis in fact.

 

[sojourner]

When it no longer stays at is was like it was at the beginning then the values it represents are naught.

The church is living and organic -- and as such, it needs to grow, develop, change. Only when stasis is insisted upon does the church die.

Progressiveness has no.place in the church, because the church doesnt get more perfect over time, the.church was perfected at the beginning, and if itsn't like it was then, I would start looking around and find the problem.

The church, by definition, is progressive, since Jesus represented a vast departure from the Judaism of the day. The church is not perfect, because the church is comprised of human beings, who, by definition, are not perfect.

Apparently, you're looking for problems that just aren't there.

The strongest evidence was that scripture that addressed those of the house of chloe, the word.minister means to give freely. The word.bishop as penned by Paul literally means.overseer. At no time is that position in the church to be given to a woman, because she cannot be the husband of one wife. It's your Bible.

Your "analysis" of the texts is laughable at best and abysmal at worst.

The same things are listed for the.office of a deacon later in the chapter in Timothy and pretty much has the same instructions for that of a bishop or pastor. And because of this acceptance of things not instructed by the word the modern day church has become worldly or.like.the world, and god certianly has no place there, does he??

You're making theological mountains out of textual molehills.

3rd verse, same as the first: Your arguments are baseless, because they have no basis in fact.

 

[sojourner]

Society and "popularity" is not the measuring tool for the beliefs in Christ's church, the scriptures are. That does not change. Neither Roman society, nor ours.

And the scriptures are better understood the more enlightened we become.

 

[Xian Pugilist]

Why do Xians claim to be indwelled by the Spirit AND the FLESH at the same time when scripture says it can't happen? Rom 8:9.

The answer is, people take what they want to use oppressively literally as written, and things that oppress them they don't take literally as written. The bottom line is, people suck, people are mean, people use the faith as a tool, not as a guide book on how to grow in Love as Christ commanded.

If you aren't under the lady preacher why do you care? There were lady preachers and teachers in the NT and Paul commended them as such. To take the hard nose approach you imply there, leads for a lot of dancing to be done.

If it bothers you, don't attend, avoid the conflict.

DO you also command people dress like you, cut their hair like you, get bit by rattlesnakes, speak in tongues, blah blah blah.... all of these are things based on how SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE interpreted the Bible, or a part of it.

Tell you what, Bible teaches Unity comes through works, not debate. So why don't we hold hands with the lady preachers and run a soup line or something....

In the book of I Timothy the bible states that if any man desire the office of a bishop he.desireth a good thing, the account gives an instructive account on the qualifications of this man.

If the Bible contains this account then why within.the last years of my life am I seeing women in authoritive positions that also include bishop and or pastor. While.the.scripture exhorts women to learn in silence it seems they are now making alot.of noise.... Why is.this and why all.the women preachers??

 

[e.r.m.]

And the scriptures are better understood the more enlightened we become.

Contradicting the scriptures though negates enlightenment.

 

[Barrackubus]

Contradicting the scriptures though negates enlightenment.

My point exactly!!!!

 

[sojourner]

Contradicting the scriptures though negates enlightenment.

One has to first understand what the scriptures are really saying in order to contradict them. Blind adherence to what one *beleives* they say makes for really baaaad doctrine. Like the one proposed here by the OP.

 

[sojourner]

My point exactly!!!!

See above.

 

[Barrackubus]

The Bible teaches as commanded by Paul that women are to learn in silence. That women are not to ursurp authority over a man. Paul the apostle was saying just that, not to be argued, not to he changed because of progressiveness and compromise. Paul wasn't looking for arguement when he said that if any man desires the office of a bishop he must be the husband of one wife...

 

[oldbadger]

The Bible teaches as commanded by Paul that women are to learn in silence. That women are not to ursurp authority over a man. Paul the apostle was saying just that, not to be argued, not to he changed because of progressiveness and compromise. Paul wasn't looking for arguement when he said that if any man desires the office of a bishop he must be the husband of one wife...

Let me ask you:- Do you still follow the teachings, directions and letters of Paul? Are you a 'Pauline' Christian' at this time? If not...... what are you worrying about?

Many Christians do not follow Paul's directions, or the Trinity that he 'kind of' outlined for others to later establish, etc. Since you are no longer a Christian, should you have any right to moan about what Christians are doing? Many have never accepted the mass of stuff that Paul seemed to conjure out of nowhere, yet still accept Jesus as one of the Prophets of God.

Let the female priests, vicars, ministers, deacons, bishops, teachers and leaders flood in! Christianity might just survive if they do. I don't expect to see a female Archbishop in my lifetime, but frankly, I would love to!

 

[Barrackubus]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions....

The fact that I am no longer a practicing Christian is of no value here, but what is at value here is the questions on the table. These are some of the very questions that led me away from Christianity, the fact that it has compromised so much, all with good intentions of course, I don't doubt that at all, not in the business to hurt anybodies feelings. Got to be politically and socially correct in order to maintain survival because the times have changed, and the times have changed the church. Goodbintentions lead to compromise despite the teaching of the scripture. What I am argueing about Christianity is that it is showing signs of absorbtion into and by other systems outside it'd own structure. This a law of the universe, not enlightment, everything changes until it is no longer lije it was. Equal rights, feminism and all things alike has entered into the church world. These are signs of breaking down......i wonder....two thousand years from now what will Christianity be then...

 

[sojourner]

The Bible teaches as commanded by Paul that women are to learn in silence. That women are not to ursurp authority over a man. Paul the apostle was saying just that, not to be argued, not to he changed because of progressiveness and compromise. Paul wasn't looking for arguement when he said that if any man desires the office of a bishop he must be the husband of one wife...

If Paul actually wrote it -- which there is debatable, and only after it has been learned why he would have written that particular injunction to that particular audience. Was it to foster amity in a culture where male dominance was becoming increasingly prevalent? Was it to censure women broadly for doing something socially that was wrong, or was the author really speaking about ministry in particular? Was the author writing scripture with scriptural authority, or was he writing a letter with human authority? What was that authority -- the authority of an apostle, or some implied authority by virtue of writing an addendum to one of Paul's letters after the fact?

We just don't know. What we do know by biblical precedent is that, in early Xy, women did take leadership roles, and that, at some point, that leadership was called into question in some way. Is that important to us in 21st century America? Not in the least. Here (in many denominations) women are free to answer their call to ordained ministry without reproval from others.

 

[sojourner]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions....

The fact that I am no longer a practicing Christian is of no value here, but what is at value here is the questions on the table. These are some of the very questions that led me away from Christianity, the fact that it has compromised so much, all with good intentions of course, I don't doubt that at all, not in the business to hurt anybodies feelings. Got to be politically and socially correct in order to maintain survival because the times have changed, and the times have changed the church. Goodbintentions lead to compromise despite the teaching of the scripture. What I am argueing about Christianity is that it is showing signs of absorbtion into and by other systems outside it'd own structure. This a law of the universe, not enlightment, everything changes until it is no longer lije it was. Equal rights, feminism and all things alike has entered into the church world. These are signs of breaking down......i wonder....two thousand years from now what will Christianity be then...

If you're not a Christian, then you really don't have a dog in this fight. When you quit the religion, you also quit having a say in whether what we do is right or wrong, in terms of what we determine may be within the bounds of righteousness.

Xy has always been culturally absorbed, and it always reappears as a parable to cultural dehumanization and oppression -- such as you're advocating here with not allowing women to be leaders.

 

[oldbadger]

The fact that I am no longer a practicing Christian is of no value here,

Your second sentence...... see? Now that was easy, wasn't it? You (you and I!) need to give Christians the right to decide how they will continue. And to my pantheist mind that would probably be best if they introduced total gender balance into all of the Christian faith, everywhere (1) and seriously reviewed Pauline Christianity (2). Back to basics. Back to Jesus. Back to gender equality and balance. Wow..... what a new genesis for christians everywhere.