| Re: women|
I was wondering what others might think about this. I am finding that it to be more and more true as I grow in Christ and learn to lay my life down for others:
The Lord chose to compare a family with the Trinity. In so doing, He called the head of the family, the man, after His own name, Father. Then He likened the children in the family to His own Son. The second named person in the trinity. So, we have in the family a person who represents God the Father, and we have a person who represents God the Son. By process of elimination, we come to realize who represents the Holy Spirit in the family. There is only one person left, and thats the lady. That means that you-the woman, wife, motherrepresent the Holy Spirit. If you would like to find your duties in life, just find in the Bible what the Holy Spirit is supposed to do. He comforts; so does Mother. He teaches; so does Mother. He instructs; so does Mother. He leads; so does Mother. Think of all the ministries the Holy Spirit has in the world. Hes the unseen One; so is Mother. He is the one who gives the others attention; so does Mother. If you want to know what your duties are in the family, all you have to do is find out the duties of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity, for you are the Holy Spirit of the home.
Ive heard it said before that woman was not taken from mans head to lord over him, nor from his heel to be crushed by him. But this magnificent creation of God was taken from mans rib, near his heart, so she could be loved and protected by him.
There she is Miss Universe! She was created because all of the perfection of the Garden did not give Adam what he needed.There she stands with the beauty of Sarah as she made Abraham her lord, with the courage of Deborah as she stood beside Barak in the battle against the enemy, with the unselfishness of Hannah as she prayed for and reared her son, with the devotion of Rizpah as she vowed to protect even the dead bodies of her own, with the royalty of Esther as she stood before the king and spared a nation. There she is again with the grace of Lydia, the poise of Mary, the humility of Phoebe, the friendship of Dorcas, the faith of Rhoda, the ambition of Salome. The patience of Anna, the loveliness of Rachel, the love of Jochebed, the gentleness of Elisabeth
Im sure you get the idea.
Take your Bible, look up the term Holy Spirit, and find all He does. Then decide that you are going to do what He does. Get alone somewhere with God and tell Him
Oh God thank you for making me a woman
help me to be the kind of woman you need. Im satisfied with being a woman. That where I go things will become brighter. ~Chris Cheedie
I am finding that this is what is going on with my husband and I. He is doing a small group at work studying My Utmost for His Highest. I give him the insight and the extra "depth" to understand it better and then he takes that wisdom into the small group. The group members are really growing. They think he is so smart and wise. :-D
I thought the Holy Spirit analogy was good. I felt it witnessing to me right away.
Any thoughts on this?
Walking with Him, Chanin
| 2004/4/21 9:04||Profile|
| Re: Can women preach/teach in church?|
I thought I would hold my fire on this one for a while. The original question of this thread was "Can women preach/teach in church?". I haven't noticed that anyone has specifically mentioned the 'in church' context so I will add a word or two.
1st Corinthians is unique in the way it gives us a glimpse into 'a church' meeting together in the 1st century. It is very different to what most folk experience as 'a church meeting' and yet this was clearly the norm in the earliest days. 1st Corinthians is also significant in the opening verses in the way that Paul clearly expected this letter to be read by more than the church in Corinth. It is written to "the church of God which is in Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours." Those who interpret Paul's instructions as having just local significance seem to have missed this important point. The the writer of this letter was very conscious that he was not just writing to Corinth. What he wrote to Corinth was what he was teaching in every church. For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church. (1Co 4:17 KJV)
Added to this we see that in the later chapters Paul was evidently referring to the gathering of the saints in Corinth. cf And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. (1Co 14:35 KJV) There is a clear distinction here between 'at home' and 'in the church'. We know that Priscilla and Aquila took Apollos home with them and taught him together, but that was not 'in the church'. We know the stories of Deborah, Huldah etc but those were not 'in the church' either.
This question also distinguished between 'preaching' and 'teaching'. Have we addressed that in our forum?
| 2004/4/21 14:31||Profile|
Quote:I don't know if I got at what you mean here, but I distinguished between preaching in "church" (i.e. a church meeting) to the congregation, and preaching outside "church" to the heathen, or preaching (more likely teaching) to children at home. Or at least I remember distinguishing between them, my memory is far from perfect.
I haven't noticed that anyone has specifically mentioned the 'in church' context
Quote:I don't think we've discussed that, at least not in this thread. To me most, if not all, of the sermons I heard until recently were "teaching," in that the moral state of the audience was not forcibly addressed (though sometimes it was addressed). Then I heard a good Holiness preacher, and he "preached." One might, only partly joking, define it thus:
This question also distinguished between 'preaching' and 'teaching'. Have we addressed that in our forum?
[i]Preaching[/i] n. pree-ching
1) the Christian recreation where a congregation selects an individual to scream at them, preferably with Biblical support, for anywhere from 15 minutes to 4 hours.
2) the practice whereby an individual selects themselves to perform the aforementioned, but in public among a less willing audience.
I'll leave a serious definition to someone more qualified.
As for the stuff you quoted, Chanin, I find it interesting, but I'm inclined to think there is no earthly type of the Trinity, and that all such attempts to analogize (is that a word?) the Trinity into an earthly example will have serious flaws. For example, the attempting to compare it with the tripartite nature of man (if you believe we have body, soul, and spirit), Jesus can be paralleled with the body (being the only member with one), and "the Holy Spirit" sort of leaps out as a parallel with the spirit, but that leaves the Father (by process of elimination, as was used in the quoted article to loosely suggest the "motherhood" of the Holy Spirit) as the soul, which doesn't make a lot of sense (to me, at least).
Biblically, just briefly, I'd mention Matthew 1:18 ("...[Mary] was found with child of the Holy Ghost") and that the idea of "Comforter" may have a very different connotation than we're used to; as I understand it there's a tapestry of the 1066 invasion of England by William the Conquerer, and it depicts either William or the English commander prodding his troops with a spear, the caption being "[whoever] comforting his troops." That connotation is certainly consistent with my experience with the Holy Ghost, and is something I'd generally attribute to a masculine, rather than feminine, being, if I had to choose. I may be totally off-base reading that connotation in to the text, though, I wonder if anyone knows more about the issue.
I also thought I'd at least make the quip that every time I know of where the idea of "God the Mother" has emerged, there's been trouble. But I won't advance it as a serious argument, not wanting to be mean.
If I may espouse my own opinion on the matter (a right I perhaps too often presume), which I acquired more or less in total from a book, I'd say that we humans are intended the "vessels," "receptacles," etc, in essence the "spiritual female." Your average Texan cowboy Christian might have some difficulty with the idea of being spiritually "female," but I think it's at least reasonable given the references to the Church as the "Bride" of Christ. It's quite possible I've taken this in entirely the wrong direction, if so feel free to let me know.
| 2004/4/21 17:19||Profile|
I don't know if I got at what you mean here, but I distinguished between preaching in "church" (i.e. a church meeting) to the congregation, and preaching outside "church" to the heathen, or preaching (more likely teaching) to children at home. Or at least I remember distinguishing between them, my memory is far from perfect.
a Corinthian/1st century true meeting of a church took place under the Lordship of Christ and the conscious leading of the Holy Spirit. It had no 'order of service' or 'designated preachers'. We might get closer to understanding what a New Testament teacher is if we reminded ourselves that such a person was not expounding Ephesians, as it had not been written. The preacher/evangelist relayed the good news. The preacher/herald proclaimed what God had accomplished in Christ. I see no reason in the book why a woman may not do this. The teacher was, almost certainly to my mind, systematising and standardising revelation. Such a person, in the church, was setting doctrinal standards and limits; the New Testament does not allow a woman to do this.
| 2004/4/21 17:34||Profile|
About the analogy of the Trinity to the family:
I did think it was interesting and relatable where in Gen. 2:18 The Lord makes a helper suitable for Adam - then in John 14:16 Jesus comforts His disciples with the promise of the Holy Spirit, refering to Him as "another Helper".
I am not saying that women are the same as the Holy Spirit- I am just relating the similarities in the job of a "helper". If a women wants to know how to be a "helper"- look at what the Holy Spirit does. Comforts, teaches, etc....
I thought it was neat.
Walking wiht Him, Chanin
| 2004/4/21 17:49||Profile|
Quote:I agree with that. Evangelism is fine, sharing testimonies (personal or otherwise) is fine, etc.
The preacher/evangelist relayed the good news. The preacher/herald proclaimed what God had accomplished in Christ. I see no reason in the book why a woman may not do this.
Quote:I agree with that too.
The teacher was, almost certainly to my mind, systematising and standardising revelation. Such a person, in the church, was setting doctrinal standards and limits; the New Testament does not allow a woman to do this.
Well, that was simple. Thanks for the definitions of preaching/teaching, never quite thought of it that way before.
| 2004/4/21 18:07||Profile|
| Re: hierarchy|
Hi Ron, Yes upon reflection maybe hierarchy is not the best descriptive to use,although i did mean it in the purest sense of the word.
We need to remember that all we know of the Word of God (I mean a person here not an utterance) is what has been revealed in connection with His human mission. In that mission He chose submission to the will of the Father, and in that role 'the Father is greater than I'. According to Philippians 2:6ff He emptied himself, He took upon Himself the form of a servant, He humbled Himself, He became obedient to death. Notice, these were all His choices. In a hierarchy they would have been imposed not chosen. In His essential nature He is co-equal, co-substantial, co-eternal.
Thanks for that.I also mentioned the misuse of words such as submisive, authority, dominance, etc in one of the earlier threads.I concluded that from the perfect relationship man had and then after the fall,mans being was first spiritual and then became carnel.And ever since. Until the second adam came there was no way out.I also take the line of Keith's posts in the main,
I think your points about the early church Ron are very helpful to this debate :-D
| 2004/4/21 18:43||Profile|
One final question...what do those of you who say women shouldn't preach think about women of God in modern history? I mean such pioneer missionaries/ministers as Lillian Trasher, Florence Steidel,Aimee Semple McPherson, etc. Women who were alone (or dominant in the ministry) yet served God with all of their hearts. There are other women as well, and I would be glad to get their names. All of the work they accomplished...all of the souls added to the kingdom of God. Was God's hand and blessing not upon their ministries? I guess I don't understand that if it is not scriptural for a woman to preach then how did these women do so much for God? If they were in defiance of Scripture, why were they blessed and used so mightily? I am not trying to be argumentative...I truly don't understand how they could do so much, yet according to some be in defiance to Scripture. I really would appreciate any thoughts. :)
| 2004/4/22 0:25||Profile|
First, there's the question of whether they were really acting contrary to Scripture; were they exerting spiritual authority over Christian men? were they laying down doctrine?
Second, God has used many that were pretty far off on this and other issues. I don't want to speak ill of Martin Luther, but I've read a number of very disfavorable things about him, nonetheless God used him mightily. John Calvin was apparently not without his dark side, but God used him. I've not heard anything against Charles Finney's moral character (indeed I'd be very surprised to hear such), but I've noticed that he's generally known for two things: strange (many say heretical) theology, and being mightily used of God. I don't want to compare women preachers with Judas, but I think there's something in the fact that God worked through him as he worked through the other apostles (if Judas hadn't exhibited any of the gifts of the Spirit, I doubt the other apostles would have had as much trouble determining who the traitor was when Jesus mentioned it).
Indeed, overstepping one's gender role could be seen as a fairly minor offense compared with the flaws in some of God's more famous vessels. Doesn't mean it's not an offense, but I think that's either proven or not at this point.
edit- oh, and I forgot to mention the entire Catholic church
| 2004/4/22 0:44||Profile|
Auckland, New Zealand
Quote: Who are they? I can only vaguely recall hearing the first name.
...what do those of you who say women shouldn't preach think about women of God in modern history? I mean such pioneer missionaries/ministers as Lillian Trasher, Florence Steidel,Aimee Semple McPherson, etc.
In fact you have raised an interesting point; I mean the most famous woman preacher I can think of would be Catherine Booth (husband of William Booth who founded the Salvation Army). And when it comes down to it she is more known for the fact that she [i]was[/i] a preacher than her actual preaching. The most famous Woman of God that come to my mind were not preachers.
But really, we shouldn't bring protagonism into the debate. The question is not whether woman preachers bring results, or are famous, but rather is it according to the Word of God?
I guess I don't understand that if it is not scriptural for a woman to preach then how did these women do so much for God?
Was Jeremiah a successful preacher? There are many things that come into the Church that appear successful but are wrong.
The only reason I am speaking out against this is because I believe the Scriptures are clear on the issue, and I long to see the Church becoming obedient to all that God has called both men and woman to.
I am looking at the quote from Finney above me right now, Revival is a renewed conviction of sin and repentance, followed by an intense desire to live in obedience to God.
And as Ravenhill says, We have to make up our minds if this Book is absolute or obsolete. It's either got the answer for our generation or forget it.
| 2004/4/22 4:49||Profile|