[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Religion Title: WOMEN IN MINISTRY As I was preparing this position paper I thought it would be a good idea to provide some background, along with the reason for it. I was raised in the Church of the Nazarene. We always had male pastors. I think this church denomination was a break-off from Methodism and Baptists...I don't remember nor do I much care. I recall seeing Kathryn Kuhlman on television, though I can't recall actually watching her program, and I know virtually nothing about her. I don't know her denominational association, if any. I recall a female missionary who along with her missionary husband, visiting relatives in our congregation and giving talks about their experiences over in Swaziland. I recall going to see a Billy Graham revival in Los Angeles, California, as a teenager. He is a Southern Baptist evangelist as I understand. And, while I've heard of nuns in the Catholic church, I've only known of them as teachers or nurses, or in the last case of any interaction that I specifically am aware of was a nun as the pastoral provider in a Catholic hospital for the dialysis center patients. I fell away from Christ and all things religious or churchy as a young adult and 'wandered in the wilderness like the Israelites did for so many years. Christ's light was shone for me in the most unusual way—at least to me. I had moved to where I now reside and the home had a large satellite dish. Without instructions for operating the dish and not a genius with technology, I contacted a local firm and had the man come out to show me how it works. During his time there, he showed me a satellite channel and station that was on 24/7 that I could use as a guide. As the station appeared, the guy chuckled and talked about the 'nutcase' on the show. I thought the 'nutcase' was a charlatan or one of those 'televangelist' people preying on old folks. Beard, white or silver-haired, not wearing a suit and tie, and smoking a cigar! I wasn't about to watch that nut. It happened that the guy was Dr. Gene Scott. There were times I'd screw up the satellite operation up and would have to go to that station to get my bearings. While there, I saw some video with horses, so I stayed long enough to see it. My mind was wondering what that old geezer was doing with a bunch of young women. So, I listened for a couple of minutes and then changed channels. For some reason (probably a lack of channels to view as I wasn't paying for programming at that time), I decided I'd watch him for a few minutes just to see how quickly I could catch him changing or distorting scripture, or at least how I remembered it. And I wanted to see what kind of 'sob story' was his spiel for getting all the money from little old widows. I didn't catch him in those few minutes, and as time went on, it was necessary to watch a little longer, and then a little longer to catch him. And even longer. But I never did catch him, but I did find myself learning so much more than I ever had a a young person...and from someone who was always admonishing people to 'check it out, check it out for yourself'. But then one day, I listened to his take on the resurrection. Christ changed my life that day. So, that is the background. I am not a member of any church organization, though I do listen to the teaching/preaching by Pastor Melissa Scott over the internet (t.v., in person, and shortwave radio are also available for world-wide listening) and also a group called Torah Class, which is affiliated with the Seed of Abraham program and is a wonderful learning place for the Old Testament. And there is more at Torah Class than just the Old Testament. Dr. Scott died and his wife took over the ministry. All hell broke loose......... This got me to wondering about women in ministry. I've read through the Bible several times and found no admonition against women as ministers, missionaries, evangelists, teachers, deacons, bishops, priests, pastors, presbyters, or any other general or specific titles like bishop, presbyter, deacon, rabbi, priest, nun, or Sunday School teacher...at least not from Jesus Christ, the apostle Paul might be a different matter. Time to search for the truth. In the Old Testament, God established a priesthood which consisted of men from the Levite tribe. I can only guess as to his reasoning...one being that women in those days were considered property just as sheep and cattle and camels and slaves. It would not have been wise to put a slave or a woman in the Tabernacle because it would be like the pagans with their temples with prostitutes, and His people were to be set apart. And, I don't believe that everything couldn't be taught to the Israelites all at one time. It was necessary to teach the Israelites a little at a time. Even at that, the Israelite were always trying to adopt pagan idols/rituals, etc. Nevertheless, there were female leaders mentioned in the scriptures. I will mention below the ones that come easily to mind. MARIANMarian, Moses sister, was a prophetess. H5031 נביאה neb1y'ah neb-ee-yaw' Feminine of H5030; a prophetess or (generally) inspired woman; by implication a poetess; by association a prophet's wife: - prophetess. DEBORAH was a prophetess and a judge, and such a respected leader that the big army general, Barack, wouldn't go to battle unless she went with him. He must have felt strongly that God was with her, no doubt thinking that they couldn't lose the battle if this was so. H5031 נביאה neb1y'ah neb-ee-yaw' Feminine of H5030; a prophetess or (generally) inspired woman; by implication a poetess; by association a prophet's wife: - prophetess. HULDAH was a prophetess. Of such importance that young King Josiah sent the uncovered book to her for inquiry of God. H5031 נביאה neb1y'ah neb-ee-yaw' Feminine of H5030; a prophetess or (generally) inspired woman; by implication a poetess; by association a prophet's wife: - prophetess. And as a Judge, Deborah would have dealt God's words to male and female. Now on to the New Testament. Here, we encounter ANNA, a prophetess, who stayed at the temple. G4398 PRISCILLA who was the wife of Aquila, the couple who taught Apollos more fully about the Lord. It's been suggested Priscilla's name by being mentioned several times before her husband's name seems most likely (at least to me) to be that she was the stronger character. Rom 16:3 GreetG782 PriscillaG4252 andG2532 AquilaG207 myG3450 helpersG4904 inG1722 ChristG5547 Jesus:G2424 Paul used the Greek word sunergos for our English word 'helpers'--note the plurality. PHOEBE is called a 'servant'; however, this same Strong's number G1249 is recorded as 'minister' when referring to Christ, Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Epaphrus, and several others. Strong's: diakonos THE FOUR DAUGHTERS OF PHILIP were virgins as well as prophetesses; their father was desribed as an evangelist. G4395 THE SAMARITAN WOMAN AT THE WELL, after talking a while with Jesus, went back to her village and talked with the men in such a way that suggests she was convinced He was the Messiah but used women's intuition and reported to the men in such a way that they men would be interested enough to go check him out. Sounds like another method of teaching. MARY MAGDALENE AND THE OTHER MARY went to the tomb to complete the prep of Christ's body. First an angelic being tells them he isn't there and to go tell his disciples to go to Galilee. Then Christ appears and tells them essentially the same thing: With ANNA, we have a woman telling ALL WHO WOULD LISTEN....the word ALL means male and female, not just women and children. She knew what the Messiah meant. With PRISCILLA, we have a woman teaching man—a man who is not her husband. She is a woman who Paul sings praises of. He doesn't raise hell with her for teaching a man. Further, he speaks of she and Aquila as co-laborers. Yes, it was at their home in private. So what? Like nobody would know? I would suggest that it was handled that way so as to not embarrass Apollos by making corrections or providing additional information that would lower his reputation among the church people. The use of 'co' laborers by Paul suggests her being on an equal footing with himself. With PHOEBE, we find the definition of 'servant' as a Christian teacher or pastor, and technically a deacon or deaconess. It's hard to imagine that she did not speak during assembly given the definition of her 'job'. The only difference I found was that when it was a woman, it was a servant, but when it was Christ or a man, the same word becomes minister or something else. And then the FOUR PROPHETESS DAUGHTERS of Philip were inspired speakers. It would appear they travel with their father, the evangelist. Surely if a man asked them a question, they wouldn't refuse to answer him, which essentially would be pastoring or teaching, and instead refer him to their father or some other man. This last comment is something to think about. Does a Christian woman, if approached by a man regarding Jesus Christ and salvation, supposed to say, “I can't talk to you about that so you should go see pastor so and so or priest thus and that”? Or tell him to give her his phone number and she'll have a man get back to him? That would be ludicrous. As it regards THE SAMARITAN WOMAN, the quoted scripture shows that it was due to her that the MEN came to Christ.....she brought them news of the Messiah regardless of how she did it. And probably the most important, to me, is the part of MARY MAGDALENE AND THE OTHER MARY. Here Christ himself is telling women to go proclaim the gospel, the good news. That Christ arose IS THE GOSPEL MESSAGE! Unless He arose, He would have only been another sect leader. He was sending these women as evangelizers! To men, and the other disciples which would have been women. The men heard them, but then doubted......that goes to show the low esteem with which women were held. The esteem with which women were held is an important factor. I say this because these men, as the other men of that time, grew up in a world where they were only instructed by women in early childhood; women were lowly educated; held in such low regard that they were not used as a witness, etc. It was just a natural reaction to dismiss what they said. I've read a couple of places where Jewish men pray each morning thanking God they weren't born a woman. IIRC, it was Josephus who said something to the effect that a bad man was better than a good woman. But Christ never felt that way, nor talked that way, nor acted that way. All were equal to him. I will have one last thing to say from Christ at the end. Jesus Christ was a Jew, born in Judea. His grew up basically in a Jewish neighborhood and lived the customary Jewish person's life. He would have had contact with gentiles, though not a great amount given his age. His ministry started with the Jews, their religion, their culture. A culture that didn't think much of women. They were essentially to be barefoot and pregnant. You were not well thought of if you attempted to educate women. It was a man's world, though women prostitutes at/around temples was a different matter. But He would talk to anyone—lawyers, rabbis, children, men, and women. Not only would he speak to women, even the 'unclean' women, he held them in high regard. And now we come to the apostle Paul. I love Paul. I think of him as my Banty rooster apostle. Small in stature, but with the tenacity of an eagle! I love this apostle even though I often have to read his diatribe more than once or twice to get a more complete understanding of what he is saying. His style of arguing is alien to me. It is with Paul's writings that so much of the argument(s) regarding women in ministry arise and its been offered up that he contradicts himself. I know the Bible does not contradict itself. I also know that man's traditions make void the word of God. From Jesus Christ: Mar 7:9 AndG2532 he saidG3004 unto them,G846 Full wellG2573 ye rejectG114 theG3588 commandmentG1785 of God,G2316 thatG2443 ye may keepG5083 your ownG5216 tradition.G3862 Mar 7:13 Making the word of God of none effectG208 G3588 G3056 G2316 through yourG5216 tradition,G3862 whichG3739 ye have delivered:G3860 andG2532 manyG4183 suchG5108 like thingsG3946 doG4160 ye. From the apostle Paul: Col 2:8 BewareG991 lestG3361 any manG5100 spoilG4812 youG5209 throughG1223 philosophyG5385 andG2532 vainG2756 deceit,G539 afterG2596 theG3588 traditionG3862 of men,G444 afterG2596 theG3588 rudimentsG4747 of theG3588 world,G2889 andG2532 notG3756 afterG2596 Christ.G5547 Jesus Christ and Paul agree on this fact. So, if there is anything that seems to contradict, it is man that is having a problem with scripture. This could be either to not understanding the meaning of the word(s) due to translation, to the copyists errors in times past, or whatever. I have no problem with a wife submitting to her husband. I believe that a wife should be submissive to her husband in the physical world. I do not believe she is to accept him in the spiritual world as her head. We only have one Master in the spiritual realm, and it definitely is not our human husband. I have even seen this argued as 'a wife submits to her husband, and the husband submits to Jesus Christ. This would put women unable to talk directly to God, much like my understanding that the Catholic church has parishioners confess their sins to a priest, who apparently forwards them on—that is, unless they consider themselves as equal to Christ in forgiving sins department...and I totally reject that. Christ died for all, and all includes men AND women. Before Adam and Eve sinned, they were equals. Once there was sin, she was made to be submissive. But now that Christ has removed sin from Christians, we are again as equals. Gal 3:28 There isG1762 neitherG3756 JewG2453 norG3761 Greek,G1672 there isG1762 neitherG3756 bondG1401 norG3761 free,G1658 there isG1762 neitherG3756 maleG730 norG2532 female:G2338 forG1063 yeG5210 areG2075 allG3956 oneG1520 inG1722 ChristG5547 Jesus.G2424 The word ALL is defined as: While making reference to the Old Testament, it should be noted that God used an ass to speak for Him. He also used a bush. And a whale helped Him make an important point to a prophet. God can use anyone or anything He wants to make his point or get something across. Yes, even a woman. He is unlimited. I, for one, don't want to be saying who God can or can't use—God knows everyone's heart and He knows who He will use for whatever purpose. In other words, God will handle it all. I believe much of the problem regarding women in ministry is due to how the Corinthian Epistles are interpreted. It's necessary to understand a bit about the culture of Corinth and its influence on the church there. It's important to understand that 1 Corinthians was written in response to a report and a letter that the Corinthians had written to Paul. Paul takes the first few chapters to write about himself and Timothy, and some other things. Then in Chapters 5 and 6 go into some specifics, such as fornication, and treating one's body as the temple of the Holy Spirit. Beginning in Chapter 7, Paul starts to respond to matters that the Corinthians brought up in their letter to him. Verses 1 through 17 refer to marital matters; and then there are some verses regarding circumscism, slavery, and more on marital situations. Notice Verses in 8 through 12 how Paul indicates the difference between who is speaking, i.e., the Lord or I (himself). This is important. Paul knows the difference and states it. I Corinthians 11:5 talks about it being wrong for a woman to pray or to prophesy with her head uncovered. Stands to reason, then, if her head is covered she is allowed to pray and prophesy, i.e., inspired speech. Paul was smart enough, educated enough that he would have said that women were not to speak at all, to sit in silence for the duration, or even more direct words........but he didn't. Chapters 12 and 13 deal with the disbursement of gifts by the Holy Spirit. And now for Chapter 14 and its infamous verse: and the verse prior to the 34th: and the following verses which help make sense of what is being said: I brought up the 33rd verse because it says that God is the author of peace and not chaos. Chaos appears to have been what was happening in the church at Corinth during meetings were uneducated or ill-informed wives asking out loud questions to their husbands (or others for that matter) to help them understand what was being said, whether by tongue or regarding doctrine, or whatever....to the point that it would disrupt the meetings, causing chaos. BUT, notice in Verse 36, that Paul says “What”? The word what seems to be a negative disclaimer. Sort of like, 'Are you nuts? Where'd you come up with this line of thinking? “Do you think the word of God came from out of you and you dispense it to the rest of us? It is obvious this didn't come from Paul—he's astounded. It seems he is iterating what they had written in their letter. It is too bad we do not have the letter the Corinthians wrote to him. Ephesus seems to be much like Corinth culturally. Wealth, pagan worship, crossroads of travel are but a few ways. I Timothy 2: 1Ti 2:9 In like mannerG5615 also,G2532 that womenG1135 adornG2885 themselvesG1438 inG1722 modestG2887 apparel,G2689 withG3326 shamefacednessG127 andG2532 sobriety;G4997 notG3361 withG1722 broided hair,G4117 orG2228 gold,G5557 orG2228 pearls,G3135 orG2228 costlyG4185 array;G2441 No doubt, the church at Ephesus was experiencing the same sort of disruptions as Corinth, though in the choice of words for silence, here Paul uses a definition that would include 'bustle', or moving around. More importantly, Paul uses the word “I” rather than 'the Lord saith”. Furthermore, according to the Fuller Theological Seminary website, Verse 12 uses the Greek word “authenteio' to usurp authority over. The website explains this way: “ The term translated “to have authority” (authentein) occurs only here in the New Testament and was rarely used in the Greek language. It is not the usual word for positive, active authority. Rather, it is a negative term, which refers to the usurpation and abuse of authority. Thus, the prohibition (2:11–12) is against some abusive activity, but not against the appropriate exercise of teaching and in the church. The clue to the abuse implied is found within the heretical activity outlined in 1–2 Timothy. The heretics evidently had a deviant approach to sexuality (1 Timothy 4:3; 5:11–15) and a particular focus on deluding women, who were generally uneducated (2 Timothy 3:6–7).” If none of what I have addressed with Paul is correct, then I believe we should throw all of Paul's writings out because one could spend their life trying to figure out the truthfulness or accuracy of anything he has said—and quite possibly we'd be looking at siding with what we call heretics! Heaven forbid. And finally, while my Savior's teachings and actions are sufficient for me, and Acts 2 where the Holy Spirit filled each follower and passed out gifts to ALL (that includes the women that were there) is proof positive, what is now effectively closing the book for me on this topic is reading in Revelations 2 where our Lord is having John write to the church at Thyratira: Rev 2:20 NotwithstandingG235 I haveG2192 a few thingsG3641 againstG2596 thee,G4675 becauseG3754 thou sufferestG1439 that womanG1135 Jezebel,G2403 which callethG3004 herselfG1438 a prophetess,G4398 to teachG1321 andG2532 to seduceG4105 myG1699 servantsG1401 to commit fornication,G4203 andG2532 to eatG5315 things sacrificed unto idols.G1494 Notice the bolding and underlined portions. A woman was teaching. It was WHAT she was teaching that Jesus Christ abhorred. The second verse says nothing about her act of teaching men. There are more names that could have been brought to the table. No doubt there are other arguments to be made. Certainly, there will be lots of disputation. I look forward to hearing your opinions. Just no names or garbage language, please.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: redleghunter, Murron, AKA Stone (#0)
Murron would you mind letting redleghunter know an article has been posted here.
Done, darlin!
(Thomas Jefferson: "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.")
redleghunter said she will respond, if not tomorrow, then one day this week.
(Thomas Jefferson: "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.")
Great. Thanks so much, Murron.
You're welcome...
(Thomas Jefferson: "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.")
I'm a "he" but LOL.
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
Interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
I do apologize! &;-)
(Thomas Jefferson: "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.")
Certainly not as well written as those posted by you on another website which I've read over the years, but I think I've provided enough evidence to back up my position. I believe Christ's words, as written by John, would be of most value as you view such matters. Thank you for your comments.
I didn't attempt to correct this gender issue.....truthfully because, while I thought you were a male, I've not seen this addressed before (at least that I recall), so I thought Murron could well know more than I.....
I was particularly struck by your addition of the exclamatory question mark, Paul's WHAT?! The old manuscripts do not have punctuation, so we have to extrapolate. The tension in that letter between what came before and what comes after has always bothered me. It doesn't make sense. It is sort of like Jesus seeming to say 'I am saying make friends with filthy lucre', which makes no sense at all in context, because both before and after he says no. Jesus sure makes sense when one realizes that he is asking a question, in effect: 'The children of this world are better at handling money than the saints. So, am I saying to go make friends with filthy lucre? No. I'm telling you to be attentive.' This can be disputed, and would be (by those who like 'filthy lucre'!), but seeing it that way certainly resolves a tension quite easily. Paul's "What?" here is in the same vein. Maybe that's what he meant, maybe it isn't, but it is certainly interesting, because if it is what he said, it resolves all of the apparent tension in the document. You're not a Catholic, but I'll point out that a vast number of the saints are female, including the saint whom God chose to be his messenger, at the head of an army to liberate France: Joan of Arc.
The understanding I've used of Paul's 'what?' seems to me to be the only way this can be read to where he makes sense. As I noted, I've had difficulties in reading/understanding Paul's writings. I've been conflicted as just a reading suggests that he is forked tongue when it comes to women speaking in public. But keeping in mind who he was writing to, it makes sense if understood this way. I've noticed Joan is one of your heros of the faith, so to speak. I take your word that there are many, many women saints.
No issues at this end sister, none at all. Was 25% done with your article before work and family events pulled me away. Will finish it tomorrow and comment.
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
Sister, if you can provide the exact controversy in detail of Dr. Scott's wife taking over the ministry I would appreciate it. It is one statement in your background information, which I believe led you to write this article. It will help me understand your approach to the remainder of the article, which I believe is well researched. Thanks!
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
There were some in the congregation that held that no woman was to be preacher/teacher/pastor. I think some even said that Dr. Scott said that, though I never heard him say that. He didn't think of himself as an evangelizer, but rather a pastor/teacher. I felt he, as well as she, are more like teachers. They both consider(ed) themself as under shepherds, leaders of a flock of sheep, in the biblical sense. I didn't have an opinon on the matter based on any biblical readings that I could recall, so that was sort of what started me searching. And the search wasn't an all at once attempt. I came across the great Pauline letters which seemed to tell women to sit and shut up and yet he was commenting on women covering their heads to speak in church, praising women who seemingly started churches in their homes, and such--things which seemed to make Paul speak with a forked tongue--something I couldn't believe. It just sort of happened over time as I had so many other questions I was looking for answers to, as well as reacquainting myself with the Bible. I had to 'unlearn' a lot of what I thought Christianity is...and I didn't want to go thru that again.
Sister you have mail!
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
Rowdee, thanks for posting Women in Ministry and I apologize for not getting back much sooner. Your post is very well researched. I agree with you that Jesus broke down some huge barriers with regards to women and their station in Pharisaic Judaism. The woman at the well in John 4 is a perfect example. Jesus not only spoke to a woman directly (without her husband present) but a Samaritan woman. Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene before His male disciples. We are clearly seeing the Master telling us Salvation has come to men and women and Jesus sees souls that need His Saving Grace. That is clear to me. I mentioned above Pharisaic Judaism for a reason. Jesus spent a good portion of His earthly ministry tearing down the walls of MANMADE laws which obscured the Truth of His Law. The Pharisees, Scribes etc. created more human made laws to prop up what they would deem as righteousness. What we would call anything created by man in the name of righteousness is called self-righteousness. Jesus "called their hand" on these manmade rules. I think some of these Pharisaic manmade additions put women in a much stricter role in their society. Where I may differ, I don't believe, given the NT evidence, that Jesus was telling us that men and women are interchangeable in roles in life or the church. Men still beget children, and women still bear children. That may sound silly, but that fact remains since the beginning with Adam and Eve. We also know Jesus affirmed marriage as one man with one woman as it was from the beginning. He thus made it clear a man or woman should not have multiple marriage parnters. So these matters were confirmed by Christ. But what about the Church? We know several if not more than several women followed Christ as disciples. The Gospels are evidence of this. We also know from the evidence of the Gospels Jesus chose 12 men to be His main disciples and follow-on apostles. These 12 (minus the son of perdition) and later Paul were the main sowers of churches in the known world. We see in Acts and the Epistles as Paul moved along on his missionary journeys, he planted churches and various people were raised up to lead those local churches. We see from the Epistles (Titus and Timothy come to mind) where Paul outlines the qualifications for overseers for the local churches. Paul does state that these overseers will be men and that they should have only one wife, the wife should be a believer and the children as well; not given to too much wine and the list goes on. I think if overseer was intended to be either a position for a man or woman, Paul would have made it clear. In my opinion, I think Jesus would have made it clear as well by choosing a woman as one of the original 12. So I think it is clear an overseer (today we would call a pastor) should be a believing man along with the other qualifications. What about other roles in the Church. The NT gives us many roles women should be participating in, and in other places I see some silence. I do not see women barred from teaching a bible study to all adults. I am sure this happened in the early Church especially when we see at least one church where the members were either all women or mostly women. Women were clearly seen in Acts as active evangelizers. That happens today as well and is sound in my opinion. It was a Vacation Bible School lady teacher who led me to the Gospel message. She also was a very key personality in teaching me what the Bible said about obedience and the sanctification "process." I was among a few teen- aged boys who accompanied her to nursing homes where she would read the Bible, sing songs to the elderly as the Christian boys wheeled in the residents and served them cookies and coffee. I saw first hand how to preach the Gospel on a very personal level in public. So she (I to this day call her my 'spiritual mom') was teaching me and many other young men. When I reached the age of about 17, I was "handed over" along with the other young men to receive our Bible studies with the elders (overseers). So other than overseer, I don't see many restrictions for women in the local churches. You have to understand I was a member of a very small church with no regional, national or international affiliation. The only affiliation was that it was a NT evangelical church. I think that wonderful small church kept to the letter and spirit of the early small local churches. Now, this is my opinion again. The Bible does show us a clear example of a woman who did lead over men. That would be Deborah. I view the Deborah situation as a clear example of when men fail to lead, God will raise up the most capable to replace them. This was Deborah. This happened in the times of Judges. The men of Israel were timid or ignored their duties, therefore God raised up Deborah to deliver the nation. I think also today that if qualified men do not stand up to lead as overseers, that women will fill the role. You probably see it more than I do but this is something I see a lot. You have several women coming to the Lord while already married. They find a church and find that 75% of the congregation are women in the same position (unsaved husbands). That type of church is going to have a lot of women leaders and teachers. I think what it all comes down to is we need to ask The Father through the Son where He wants us to obediently serve Him in His Church--The Body of Christ. His Holy Spirit will lead us to His Word and His Will for us.
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|