We grapple with a subject through the eyes of our own experiences, culture, understandings, etc
.. Its like trying to figure out a puzzle with only three of the three thousand pieces.
I know a missionary woman who was called to a Muslim country where it was unthinkable for males and females to worship together. So when the male converts went to church they left their wives at home even if they became a Christians too. So this missionary friend of mine planted churches for women and pastored them. She also discipled women, wrote books in their language, worship songs, etc. She even opened a book store and coffee shop for women, as women werent allowed to go places where men where (her supporting denomination ordained her)
Now if Paul had written a letter to the Christians of that country (which I will not disclose) who would he write to and what keeping in mind that Christ did not command his followers to uproot the cultural status quo (which in this particular country would have invited immediate death)?
Would/should that same rules apply to us?
I bring up this question because I believe that if we arrive at a Biblical interpretation that cannot be applicable in all culture of all times, we have misunderstood Paul's intent.
What is the principle behind Paul's teachings that relate to gender issues? I'm not convinced that we have uncovered it. If our conclusions are divorced from the broader message of the gospel.... might we not.... possibly..... risk error?
Do our conclusions facilitate spiritual growth and maturity, or do they lead to walls, divisions, competition, demands, etc between parties - be it gender, or whatever, then ... something is missing... surely.
Having said that, I'd say that either view- complimentarian or egalitarian can fall over the edge. I've seen it!! I've also seen either way blessed and fruitful.
So much for an answer to our original poster. Maybe the answer lies elsewhere. Someone once said: You are asking the wrong question.
| 2007/6/17 14:40||Profile|
| Re: Diane|
I think Paul would have given this woman a large thumbs up.
She had an all women ministry and in that country Paul would say, I become all things to all people.
Mike gave one previous thread earlier and Dorcas now a 2nd. Both were good. I rushed through both, both times, looking only for Ron's posts and I liked both of those threads and would encourage the other ladies to read just Ron's posts and get a feel of what he's said on them.
At least that last thread was only 12 pages long. But this thread was started just because one poor brother had a simple question, before he had to leave for camp, that wasn't addressed for him.
| 2007/6/17 14:57|
| Re: Are Women Totally Forbidden to Teach?|
Thanks Annie. Glad you liked what you found there.
I want to clarify something I said on the previous page, which I think may be open to misinterpretation, depending on one's denominational background / culture.
Quote:Here, the elders have given permission-in-principle for sisters to share (in prayer, prophecy, interpretation, testimony etc.).
... the elders there allow the Holy Spirit's leading of the sisters' ministry,
The word of God is formed through all that comes forth through the sharings of [u]all[/u] - brothers [i]and[/i] sisters - and elders, also, who feel led by the Spirit to contribute.
I really hope I haven't made this more complicated than it was before. I shall continue to look for the post I mentioned, as it would be better to quote accurately, than this sort of paraphrase.
| 2007/6/17 16:16|
| Re: Thanks!|
I read that thread last time this came up and glad you and Mike persisted in giving the links to those past discussions.
I wanted to post a link, but I didn't know where to post it.
I hope maybe that this thread is as good as any to post it on.
I can't read the entire thing, so I can't say if I would endorse the whole of it or not, but I figured I could leave it for you all to decide about it. I can't stare at the monitor too long, so there's no way for me to fully look this link over.
Any comments will be well received.
Hope this is O.K. to do here. As I said, I can't use the URL shortening function, besides many others.
| 2007/6/17 17:32|
| Re: Just a question - the same one!|
Quote:I get the feeling that some are rather ignoring this, (not that it matters as far as I'm concerned, but it is a vital aspect of this discussion).
Just a question:
Consider a small group of about 5 Christians, in a dangerous situation, such as war or persecution. Most of them are comparatively new believers with little Bible knowldge.
They are desperate for spiritual feeding, but it's impossible to go to church or contact any other groups of believers.
Maybe their Bibles have been confiscated, or they have had to flee their homes, leaving everything behind except the clothes they are wearing.
The person who is most mature and has a knowledge of the Word happens to be a woman.
Would she be allowed to teach them?
When I posted something similar earlier on this thread it was suggested that I was avoiding the issue, and going off the point. I was not, and I'm still not. This kind of situation [i]will[/i] happen, here, in the "free" world, in the not too distant future.
Maybe that's why we've been unable to really deal with the specific question about woman teaching in Bible College, because there either won't be any Bible colleges, or their teaching will be so way out that no true follower of Christ will be able to go there anyway!
| 2007/6/17 17:33|
The person who is most mature and has a knowledge of the Word happens to be a woman.
Would she be allowed to teach them?
Jeanette, Since God hasnt added an appendix to the Bible for all the what-ifs Im not about to start one.
Bill Gothard and his ministry refused to offer their home-schooling programs to any family where the father wasnt functioning as the spiritual head. His rational was mere common sense: Because IT WONT WORK! And I believe that! and have seen it. (not to discount all home schooling where moms do it all)
For the same reason I would hesitate to suggest to any organization so dysfunctional as to have NO capable male leaders to conscript in a female substitute. It likely wont work. In fact, she may end up being used to prop up a system that should die, or fall on its face before the Lord.
I know a church where the men where neglecting their roles. The women had been filling in the gaps. Then they were convicted and prayed about it. God called them to surrender most of their roles. The men then were convicted and to make a long story short now that church has SEVERAL men capable of leading, preaching, and pasturing. It is the strongest church, spiritually. (and I hobnob in a lot of churches)
I add that point cautiously, though - NOT AS AN APPENDIX to Gods divine program. In fact, trying it may backfire. These women were led by God and in the end, God blessed.
I cant speak for another church or individual because God doesnt tell me what THEY should do. They need to seek God for themselves - as their HEAD.
(God has blow my advice out of the water enough times for me to say that with assurance)
EDIT: Now we can blow all that away - because, after all, God has done amazing things through women who planted churches, taught the people.. etc.... God seems to be a master at making exeptions to the rules.
| 2007/6/17 18:56||Profile|
| Re:The woman's ministry thread.|
Well, today I'm rebelling against something taught in my Church. Don't get me wrong, I love that place and most especially the Pastor, but I didn't go today - obviously ;-) because it was said that, on Sundays, we should be in Church, because the Sabbath day is Holy and should be used only for the Lord. Nothing else.
Well, when I heard that, I about fell over - because I don't watch TV or read secular anythings, except News. I spend the day with the Christian radio on and something of the Word, either the bible or websites or other books and pray. That's it --- that's all I do everyday. :-(
So, I felt that was a form of legalism, to say that we 'have' to be in Church, to be with The Lord.
Everyday is the Sabbath or any day can be given unto the Lord as a Sabbath day.
What if you have to work on Sundays ? I used to.
Well, I'm home rebelling today. I've fellowshipped with my SI family - visited some other good websites and read what I could from them and listened to the radio sermons and still felt I was with The Lord today and even in His will.
Must be something wrong with me then.
Diane, I liked this quote, because it's true about more than just this thread --- it's our responsibity before GOD.
I cant speak for another church or individual because God doesnt tell me what THEY should do. They need to seek God for themselves.
Even doing what I've been doing 7 days a week --- I still haven't attained or have attained to perfection. So how on earth do we find the time to pull the toothpick out of other's eyes or make a career out of doing it ?
Ha, Allistair Begg calls them "toothpicks".
I love that guy.
We share our opinions here I think. And if God lays a Scripture or ten on our hearts we post 'em. I'm too weak physically to arm wrestle anymore. 5 yr.s ago, I lifted patients almost twice my weight by myself - now I can barely lift my cat.
Until something is impressed into your spirit from The Lord, you can't obey in spirit & truth, that would be legalism --- only GOD can bring His children to the point where He wants them to be.
Yes, "They need to seek God for themselves."
That's the only one GOD will ask us about when we see Him.
Sabbath rest should be in our 'spirits' 24/7 ~ Bless God!
I wish that rest for us all, in Him.
| 2007/6/17 19:26|
Be ye followers of me, even as I also [am] of Christ.
1Cr 11:2 ¶ Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered [them] to you.
1Cr 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
If this is positional then God is above Christ.
The Glory of God is Christ and the glory of the man is the woman. The man is the Glory of Christ. This does not make anyone greater than the other. It does give obedience to the Son when He says My Father is greater than I. All the while knowing that He is His Father's Glory.
The same would be true of the man, knowing the Christ is greater than He is but the he is the glory of Christ. Think about what would Christ be without God the Father, what would man be without the Son and what would woman be without the man. The woman would be nothing and the man without Christ is nothing. Today being Fathers day lets take the man what would he be without the woman? He would have no glory as a husband or father, thus the woman is His Glory. Without the woman man could not be the head. Without the woman Jesus could not be the Son or Savior.
So God has His glory in the Son and the Son has His glory in the man and the man has his glory in the woman. If women are causing problems in the Church and making confusion of all that is said then women would be told to keep silent in the church. If that was for all women then Paul would not have said for women to prophesy they must have their head covered.
Since God is on the side of the weaker vessels and the weaker things of this world and gives them more honor, who has the most honor in the course of Headship? It is something like this, what do you use a hammer and shovel for. Would you pound a nail with a shovel? I guess you could, but what a mess. Would you dig a ditch with a hammer? It sure would take a lot longer.
I am just saying God has a way of making His creation work and He has set things as He want them. I see no reason that woman can not teach a man as long as her head is covered, with the intention of not lording it over the man. The same for the man with long hair, if he teaches with long hair or his head covered as long as his mind is on Christ then his teaching has short hair. Remember the Spirit of the Law and not the letter?
Just some things to think and pray about.
1Cr 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.
1Cr 11:5 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.
Is it not the covering of the heart of the woman that is Honor? Not the Letter of the Law, in wearing hats in church. If a woman's heart does nothing without knowing who and what her husband is and wants, is this not the Spirit of the Law, wives honor and give submission unto him.
1Cr 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
1Cr 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
Is the man not to love and honor his wife like Christ did the church? It must be his heart that is uncovered unto the Glory that he is to Christ in obeying and submitting to God in Christ Jesus that gives the husband the ability to love like Christ did the Church.
1Cr 11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
1Cr 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
Who's glory is who's? She being the glory of the man makes her what to the man?
1Cr 11:10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on [her] head because of the angels.
1Cr 11:11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
All together in Christ and Christ in God, and Christ in us and us in Christ and God.
1Cr 11:12 For as the woman [is] of the man, even so [is] the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
1Cr 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
Your heart ladies.
1Cr 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
Your heart men. If your heart say cut it then cut it.
1Cr 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
The heart Ladies, if your heart says don't cut it don't. There is no rule in the Church.
1Cr 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
1Cr 11:17 ¶ Now in this that I declare [unto you] I praise [you] not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.
1Cr 11:18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
Ladies teach or don't teach. If your heart says teach with it's covering teach, because your heart is your husbands and Christs
1Cr 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
We must have these thing in the church to see who is approved. Is it approved by the Law of works or the Law of Love for all.
Just saying what has come to me this day of a Father of 7 whom I am not a father without them, they should receive the greater honor for putting up with me. Without a woman and son's and daughters' I would not be a father.
That is why God love us so much and Gave His Only Begotten Son that we might become His son's and daughters. Amen
In Christ: Phillip
| 2007/6/17 20:58||Profile|
Well, I'm home rebelling today.
My! My! Annie! Why not till now? After all, your beef is nothing new.
How about trying this one on for size:
"So, Jeremiah [Annie], if you're worn out in this footrace with men,
what makes you think you can race against horses?
And if you can't keep your wits during times of calm,
what's going to happen when troubles break loose like the Jordan in flood?
Jer. 12:5,6 The Message
still felt I was with The Lord today and even in His will.
Rebelling can be delightful, cant it! :-P
| 2007/6/17 21:19||Profile|
| Re:More "p" words.|
PEC'CANT, a. [L. peccans. See Peccable.]
1. Sinning; guilty of sin or transgression; criminal; as peccant angels.
2. Morbid; bad; corrupt; not healthy; as peccant humors.
3. Wrong; bad; defective; informal; as a peccant citation. [Not used.]
PEC'CANT, n. An offender. [Not used.]
Whenever I go on line, my server pops up the word for the day. Peccant is for 6/18/07
Yesterday it was -
"compunction", n. [L. To prick or sting.]
1. A pricking; stimulation; irritation; seldom used in a literal sense.
2. A pricking of heart; poignant grief or remorse proceeding from a consciousness of guilt; the pain of sorrow or regret for having offended God, and incurred his wrath; the sting of conscience proceeding from a conviction of having violated a moral duty.
So maybe at this rate we'll get some "forgiveness" word tomorrow. :-D
There's even a lot of 'p' words in the definition for compunction. ha.
Actually Diane, your verse was good and I went off the 'puter and took it to heart. Believing as I do, that 'nothing' is by accident.
You know why I didn't go to Church ? The deeper reason is because my Pastor is not there, awaiting massive heart surgery this week.
If he doesn't come back then I won't neither.
Sort of heavy on me sis.
Friday I found out my SIL is probably going to die of pancreatic/billary cancer.
Last week, my husband became unemployed.
We're down to one vehicle, out in sorta the country and it's not in the best shape.
Mostly missing the Pastor kept me home and also cuz I don't really have that much omph, as you know.
But, your verse is a strengthener after all.
When looking at it and then all these things above, you can see how it fits.
Thank you and thank you for your prayers and Thanks to anyone else who may pray.
Love and gratitude.
| 2007/6/18 0:38|