Okay, I lurk around other forums and this was/is a very heated topic in one of the forums.

Reference was to:

1 Corinthians 14:34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says

1Ti 2:12 But I permit not a woman to teach


What's your take on UM?

Thats the way I understood it now some other might say that's the OT so it doesn't count. But the NT never said that it was ok so the law some still stand. My whole thing is that without women most churches would fall down they teach Sunday school they help take care of the toddlers, Etc.

My take is this is just another thread so you can come out and bash Christians.

Well ministering and teaching are not the same thing anyhow. The concept of the five-fold ministry recognizes Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers (Ephesians 4:11). Most likely there have been women in all these roles. Both examples you provided from Corinthians and Timothy do not encompass all these roles either but are speaking specifically about a church setting. Church is not the only place the five-fold ministry operates.

Even so I have seen women prophesying in church, no one condemned it, have seen women ministering through their song, and have seen women take the pulpit without having to teach a sermon. I have also seen women preaching but never at my churches.

Sunday school teachers are mainly women but then again they are not teaching other adult men. But in the end a minister, regardless of how you look at it, is both the man and woman when married, a man does not lead a church alone, his wife plays a vital part, and not just a part but an equal part. Expecting women to take the back seat will lead to a church to fall or become domineering with a rigid hierarchy. I have no issue though with not wanting to become a full member of a church that allows women 'preachers' but then again the office of pastor, even if their roles remain different, is still maintained by a husband and wife and not the husband alone.

Article

There was a story on MSNBC.com recently about how the vatican declared it would excommunicate all female priests. Its an interesting article.

Personally, it does not bother me. If that is what they choose to do then who is anyone else to stop them from doing it.

Clovis! "My take is this is just another thread so you can come out and bash Christians."

Do I really bash christians? Jeez, I wasn't meaning to! sorry

Interesting article, TheLivingDead, thanks.

I was married by a woman minister. She was fabulous. I loved her sermons. In the United Church of Canada anything goes. lol!

God did pick a female judge in ancient Israel because he couldn't find a man for the job.

Ahem, no where in the OT can an anti-woman verse be found. The verses he quoted were from the NT. If you would like to know the role of women in Judaism please consult This Website

Any subject pertaining to a belief that makes it appear not so "shiny happy people holding hands" OR causes emotional/mental/logical discomfort will often be accused of trying to bash the faith.

It comes with the territory. After all this is spirituality vs. skepticism. It's gonna pinch on some people's comfort zone.

It's like someone crashing your party and bringing with, your old crazy, stripping alcoholic Aunt Zelda unannounced .Of course it was easier pretending she doesn't exist but she is part of your family, like it or not.

To me these verses are just another example of how religion can be used to justify discrimination. As a woman I find it all very insulting. It "bashes" womankind.


As I said: "can be". I see very little to no female discrimination in Christianity nor in the Jewish community. It depends which branch of Christianity here we are talking about. There can be a vast difference.

That is so flattering...............?!

It is just a biblical prejudice that is way outdated and should not be listened too. The bible is nonsensical in many places if taken literally. If a fundamental christian says that every word of the bible is literal truth yet say that women are allowed to speak in church then they are contradicting it outrightly. The basic moral doctrine of the bible I agree with wholeheartedly i.e love your enemies however that doesnt mean we cannot be free thinking with it and have to conform to every supposed literal truth of scripture.

This is a great example of the conflicting messages you get from the bible on this subjects;

Jdg 4:9 And she said, I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the LORD shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman. And Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh.

Heb 11:32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:


YET, Barak (not Deborah) is listed as a hero of faith in Hebrews 11.

WHY IS Deborah not listed as a HERO OF FAITH, in Hebrews 11?
And Barak is listed?



Kaizen CJM, thanks for the link, awesome website

I agree with it being a biblical prejudice and it's heart breaking when I see some of my christian friends that actually live by this though, their husbands don't even see how it is that they belittle wives and hold them in a lesser light.

So then if it's in the NT then God doesn't want women to preach....

Aww well that was not my point at all. My point is some make posts that appear as true inquiry but all they really want to do is make an opportunity to offer their highly critical view of religion. In other words yes there will be people critical of this path or that path or all paths but there is a difference in posting to make an inquiry vs posting knowing whatever other people think you will just say the same thing. But that is expected I was just pointing it out lol

But yes some can view the hierarchy of 'teaching' as the total view of Christians to women which is not correct. That passage does not apply to the whole ministry much less to the whole view early Christians had towards women. When we see the mandates on marriage in the NT it shows that a woman belongs to the man just as much as the man belongs to the woman. They become one and equal. There is nothing sexist about that. That speaks volumes more to me regarding the NT view on women than does a mandate regarding teaching in a church setting. (1 Corinthians 7)

The conception that Christians are sexist is actually based in the Victorian era, their sensibilities, their method of social stratification. In fact many Roman women became Christians because they found it less oppressive sexually than Roman alternatives. The Mithraic mysteries did not even allow women at all to have any part...not even to follow Mithras. Without those women Christianity would not be where it is at today. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. There are other factors that led to the rise of Christianity but that was a main component.

Jesus chose the woman at the well to go out tell others about Him in that village. Many people came to believe in Jesus through her word (John 4:39).

Mark 15:40-41 shows women in the ministry of Jesus.

Tryphaena and Tryphosa in Romans 16:12 are called workers of the Lord by Paul himself but in verse 2 he commends Phoebe as a servant of the church, that she should be accepted as a saint, and commands others to help her in any way she needs. Clearly she was in charge of making things happen, in administration, in making decisions. Then in verse 3 he praised Prisca and Aquila but mentions the woman first before the man. Verse 7 mentions Junia as an apostle.

Euodia and Syntyche are mentioned in Phillipians 4 as being part of the ministry.

People seeing sexism in the whole of the NT are basing their opinion on stereotypes.

I don't recall Jesus ever making a point to leave the WOMAN out of anything. AMF, he entrusted a female to anoint his body, not his beloved disciples. Anyway, when Jesus sent out those hundreds to spread the word, women were also included in this, and also were given gifts of the spirit.
If there is any bias against women in the bible, it's clearly a result from that time frame & its' stance/opinion women.
Jesus, to me, was/is the example, and he made no judgments on the female based merely on that fact alone.

I personally (as you are well aware of),think that there is not enough of this "highly critical view" concerning religion, however I can say the same for politics, the media and society as a whole.

Rational thought are not dirty words.

We are just trying to get people to reason & think for themselves instead of teaching them to believe something. We do come with this option . I saw it in the "user's manual"

There are young brains on this forum and they are very sponge- like in consistency.

I think a new age has dawned upon us.


If people are gonna put a buncha their eggs into a basket, then they better be aware of what material it's made out of.

So in other words you do not think women should be ministers...you do not think anyone should be hmm lol k got it i think...

I think women should be ministers in the Church of Reality


I'm outta here.......................

it's just another example of the cultural thinking then. of course it's wrong. but so are so many things in the bible. it just shows how outdated it is and how we've outgrown foolish thinking. ( most of us)

If this subject was that important to God, why didn't Jesus mention it in the Gospels?

This was not the word of God but it came from a human being. Jesus was not quoted directly here.

The thread title is slightly misleading due to the definition of the term "minister". By biblical standards all Christians are ministers of God - it was only later that the term "minister" came to be representative of a Pastoral role within a church. So in the most absolute sense of the term, all Christians, regardless of gender or education, are ministers already.

But I guess the thread starter is asking more directly about pastors and preachers. In this case, we have the two quotes which were given in the first post (which are both from the New Testament, not the Old). First, 1 Corinthians 14:34. It is helpful to remember the cultural standing that women had in this society. Most were not permitted to go to the Synagogue to be taught by men, so their knowledge of the Old Testament was virtually non-existent - this was a cultural influence, not biblical, and unfortunately was how things were in those days. The early Christian church gave women unprecedented Rights, one of these being they were able to attend church gatherings alongside the men. But because of their lack of knowledge, the early church was also plagued by the women interrupting talks and dissertations because they did not have the background understanding of the Old Testament that the men did. As a result of this, Paul tells them not to interrupt during the service because it interrupts other people from learning and gaining more knowledge. Instead, if you have a question, ask your husband at home (I noted that you didn't quote verse 35 straight after this, which says "If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." Indeed it was disagraceful for them to interrupt other people, but this was no fault of theirs, they simply did not have the knowledge base that the men knew already.

It would be akin to somebody who had never heard about Christianity walking into a church today, listening to the Sermon, and every five minutes putting their hand up and saying "Excuse me, could you explain what you mean by statement x?" It would be a disgrace, because they indeed are interrupting everyone else who are trying to listen and have already heard the basics - instead, this person should keep quiet, and ask questions afterwards in an appropriate manner at a time that is not disruptive.

In the same vein is written 1 Timothy 2 (the other passage quoted). Paul writes that women are not allowed to teach. This is partly due to the aforementioned cultural understanding. Women simply did not have the knowledge base to be able to teach the men. This wasn't their fault, but society. Society had put them in a position where they didn't have the required knowledge to teach others (men). Would you let a Truck driver lecture in University about Particle Physics when the truckie had never even heard that term before? Of course not! Then how could a woman in this period of history teach men, when it was the men who had the knowledge and the women did not!!!! Paul's warning not to let women teach was quite understandable for the time.

That said, I know from here on in I'll probably be slammed for my beliefs, but I still believe these statements are applicable today. While women can have great influence in the Church, given many responsibilities, I believe that the job of the Pastor (which encompasses far more than simply Preaching once a week in a pulpit) is ultimately decreed by God to be for men. That does not mean that a woman is useless, or less than men, but rather that God has given us different roles within the Church. The role of the Pastor (what the Bible would probably call the "Overseer") is for men. Other roles can be for men and women, and women can indeed be a great influence and treasure for all the Church. When it comes to discipleship (mentoring/teaching others in a one-on-one setting) men should disciple other men, and women should disciple other women. Men should not disciple women, and that goes for the Pastor as well - he should not disciple a woman because that is not his Role. All people within the body of Christ (believers) have their roles to play, and just because a woman cannot biblically be a pastor, that doesn't make them inferior nor does it mean that they can't do anything - there are many roles within the Church, and in the end, no one is superior to anyone else, because just as Jesus Christ, all Christians are servants to each other, no one superior - all one, in Christ.

Hopefully this makes sense

Remember that the people who wrote the books in the NT where Jews first Christian second.


The Jewish faith believes women were unclean because of the monthly period.



However as far as a family is concerned. A woman could enter into a contract just like a man could. The only thing is if she was married her husband had 3 days to get her out of it.



Also something to think about. Eve was taken from the side of Adam, So that she could walk beside him not above or below him.

No...........this is the true version of events that happened .

God creates Adam, and soon Adam is complaining that he's all alone in the Garden of Eden. So God says, "Okay, I'll make you a companion, a beautiful creature who'll cook and clean for you. It will be able to converse intelligently on any subject, and never ever complain or argue."

Adam says, "That sounds great."

God says, "The only thing is, it will cost you an arm and a leg."

Adam says, "That's too expensive!! What can I get for a rib?"


I'm sure you heard that one before, couldn't help myself................