Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Women in Authority - scripturally defensible.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    Thanks. Yes, I believe the Bible.
    So you believe in so-called "Eternal Subordination of the Son" (ESS)? That's a controversial topic still being hashed out. I'm sure others are much more informed about it than I.
    Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

    Beige Federalist.

    Nationalist Christian.

    "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

    Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

    Proud member of the this space left blank community.

    Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

    Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

    Justice for Matthew Perna!

    Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      There seems, to me, to be a whole lot of work taking place to justify a woman being the head - or lead pastor - of a Church. In my experience, that's part and parcel of a whole package of other "let's do it this way instead of the Bible way", including same sex 'marriage', same sex 'clergy', etc...
      That's a common objection. But some denominations -- the AG and Foursquare come most readily to mind -- have accepted (but not always promoted) women in all ministry positions for about a hundred years without yielding to "same sex" stuff. They never viewed it as being "instead of" what the Bible said.



      The "big picture" of spiritual leadership is that the man is to be the head of the home, Christ is to be the Head of the Church, and a man is to be the pastor of a church. That we have to go to extremes to find exceptions or justifications for an alternative is, for me, a bit troubling.
      To me, this makes the fallen state normative where it should not be. I don't believe there was any hierarchy until the Fall; the original "created order" was one of equal partnership. Everything under the Obsolete Covenant still assumed the fallen condition. While certainly *many* things will not be as they should until the Lord returns, I believe some things, especially relationships, are supposed to be different among us who are "new creations" in a New Covenant.


      There are plenty of 'churches' out there that will allow a woman to be 'pastor', as well as a whole range of other 'allowances'. (Even a BAPTIST Church that ordained a trans-gendered 'pastor' who left his family and 'came out' as a lesbian".
      I'm sure. Unlike the issue at hand, where there are Scriptural arguments both pro and con, I'm not aware of any "pro" arguments w.r.t. LGBT.

      But fear not!!!! Dinosaurs like me will soon no longer be roaming the planet, and people will do what people will do!

      But make no mistake about THIS ---- I have enjoyed the interchange.
      Don't act like the discussion is over.
      Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

      Beige Federalist.

      Nationalist Christian.

      "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

      Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

      Proud member of the this space left blank community.

      Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

      Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

      Justice for Matthew Perna!

      Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        Just one more thought.... (for now)

        That something has to be "spiritually defensible" is somewhat of a red flag for me --- as opposed to "spiritually ordained" or supported or indicated or commanded....
        That is one area that people don't agree on. Are you allowed to do it unless the Bible explicitly forbids it or do you not do it unless the Bible explicitly allows it. Unfortunately for us, there is a lot of grey in the Bible where you can't quite apply either rule. This seems to apply to this thread as well.
        "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

        "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

          I think you meant "Scripturally defensible," assuming you're referring to the thread title.
          Correct.

          And I think tabito may have borrowed my usage from a post in the SBC thread.
          I assumed so.

          It depends on the situation. For something like the deity of Christ, I don't believe the contrary view can be reasonably defended from Scripture.
          Agreed.

          But on the topic at hand, I believe support can be marshaled on both sides. I find the egalitarian case stronger, but I would hesitate to declare it "the" Biblical view.
          And I'm more interested in hearing other viewpoints than arguing my own.

          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

            So you believe in so-called "Eternal Subordination of the Son" (ESS)? That's a controversial topic still being hashed out. I'm sure others are much more informed about it than I.
            Meh --- I believe that Jesus, as a human on the planet, subjected Himself to the Father, to the Cross, to God's plan for Redemption... But I do believe that the three persons of the Trinity get along just fine.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
              That's a common objection. But some denominations -- the AG and Foursquare come most readily to mind -- have accepted (but not always promoted) women in all ministry positions for about a hundred years without yielding to "same sex" stuff. They never viewed it as being "instead of" what the Bible said.
              Well, yeah, but they're just weird.

              To me, this makes the fallen state normative where it should not be. I don't believe there was any hierarchy until the Fall; the original "created order" was one of equal partnership. Everything under the Obsolete Covenant still assumed the fallen condition. While certainly *many* things will not be as they should until the Lord returns, I believe some things, especially relationships, are supposed to be different among us who are "new creations" in a New Covenant.
              Not sure how you can see it that way, as God created man first, then created for him "an helpmate". And, yes, I'm familiar with the argument that this does not mean "inferior", nor do I believe Eve was "inferior".

              I'm sure. Unlike the issue at hand, where there are Scriptural arguments both pro and con, I'm not aware of any "pro" arguments w.r.t. LGBT.
              They're workin on that, I'm sure.

              Don't act like the discussion is over.
              As long as it's friendly.

              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View Post

                That is one area that people don't agree on. Are you allowed to do it unless the Bible explicitly forbids it or do you not do it unless the Bible explicitly allows it. Unfortunately for us, there is a lot of grey in the Bible where you can't quite apply either rule. This seems to apply to this thread as well.
                Yeah, I place decisions in, basically, three categories....
                A) Those things God's Word says specifically NOT to do
                2) Those things God's Word says specifically TO DO
                C) Those things which don't really have spiritual significance - like what color shirt I wear.

                And, of course, those things where we see a pattern in the Bible to which a notable exception needs to be made to justify the decision.

                We see no example in Scripture where leadership for a congregation or church or group of people is granted to a female. We only have instances where it could be surmised.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

                  I think you meant "Scripturally defensible," assuming you're referring to the thread title.

                  And I think tabito may have borrowed my usage from a post in the SBC thread.

                  It depends on the situation. For something like the deity of Christ, I don't believe the contrary view can be reasonably defended from Scripture. But on the topic at hand, I believe support can be marshaled on both sides. I find the egalitarian case stronger, but I would hesitate to declare it "the" Biblical view.
                  [[Looked up "tabito" - well I'll be ... its an obsolete word with the same meaning, and the same kanji]]

                  I've been using "scripturally defensible" for quite a time, as a short-hand term for "the matter is not satisfactorily resolved by reference to scripture, which makes it adiaphora," that is, "a matter upon which Christians may legitimately disagree." Hence, the opposing viewpoint may not be declared wrong.

                  Argument that women may not hold leadership positions is one that I encountered during my first forays into Christian chats, and equating support for women priests to support for gay priests along with it (back then LGBTQ+ wasn't a thing - though I think LGB might have been.) My response, then as now; "the Bible does not declare womanhood to be a sin."

                  1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                  .
                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                  Scripture before Tradition:
                  but that won't prevent others from
                  taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                  of the right to call yourself Christian.

                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                    Well, yeah, but they're just weird.



                    Not sure how you can see it that way, as God created man first, then created for him "an helpmate". And, yes, I'm familiar with the argument that this does not mean "inferior", nor do I believe Eve was "inferior".
                    Well, it appears you do believe she was inferior in rank, even if not in worth. I don't believe the text supports that.

                    In ch. 1, there is no distinction between man and woman in terms of bearing the image of God, nor in their status as His vice-regents tasked to subdue and rule the earth.

                    In ch. 2, where you see "helpmate," I see "suitable partner" (CEV) or even "strong ally" (Bartlett, Men and Women in Christ, consistent with the way "ezer" is often, or even usually, used in the OT).

                    There is no hierarchy implied in the text until ch. 3, where it is presented as an unfortunate consequence of the Fall.

                    They're workin on that, I'm sure.



                    As long as it's friendly.
                    I meant to add a smiley there, but I got distracted. My kitty was having a rough day with fever and vomiting, but she's better now.
                    Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                    Beige Federalist.

                    Nationalist Christian.

                    "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                    Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                    Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                    Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                    Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                    Justice for Matthew Perna!

                    Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                      Yeah, I place decisions in, basically, three categories....
                      A) Those things God's Word says specifically NOT to do
                      2) Those things God's Word says specifically TO DO
                      C) Those things which don't really have spiritual significance - like what color shirt I wear.

                      And, of course, those things where we see a pattern in the Bible to which a notable exception needs to be made to justify the decision.

                      We see no example in Scripture where leadership for a congregation or church or group of people is granted to a female. We only have instances where it could be surmised.
                      We also do not see any clear places where it is forbidden.
                      Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                      Beige Federalist.

                      Nationalist Christian.

                      "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                      Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                      Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                      Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                      Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                      Justice for Matthew Perna!

                      Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                        Meh --- I believe that Jesus, as a human on the planet, subjected Himself to the Father, to the Cross, to God's plan for Redemption... But I do believe that the three persons of the Trinity get along just fine.
                        I think some in the "complementarian" camp argue that Jesus is eternally subordinated to the Father, and use that as justification for subordination of women (or at least wives). This has invited a charge of theological novelty and/or Arianism heresy, and some attempts to redefine what subordination within the Trinity might mean. But it's really quite beyond me. I'd have to have a *much* better grasp of it to accuse someone of heresy.
                        Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                        Beige Federalist.

                        Nationalist Christian.

                        "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                        Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                        Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                        Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                        Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                        Justice for Matthew Perna!

                        Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          A lady not so long ago said that she was committed to her church, but found it disappointing that women are prohibited from roles as priests and elders, much more the archbishop. I responded that her aim was too short, she should be aiming for prophet or apostle, rather than the lowly ranks of priest or even archbishop. Our lecturer wasn't exactly gruntled: not sure why - but the look on his face made words unnecessary.
                          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                          .
                          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                          Scripture before Tradition:
                          but that won't prevent others from
                          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                          of the right to call yourself Christian.

                          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

                            I think some in the "complementarian" camp argue that Jesus is eternally subordinated to the Father, and use that as justification for subordination of women (or at least wives). This has invited a charge of theological novelty and/or Arianism heresy, and some attempts to redefine what subordination within the Trinity might mean. But it's really quite beyond me. I'd have to have a *much* better grasp of it to accuse someone of heresy.
                            Arius claimed that Jesus was not God. The suppositions that OT references to the person of Wisdom were about Logos preincarnate, and that God is impassible (unable to change or suffer) was shared between Arians and orthodox. In Arius view, Wisdom having been created, and Jesus quite demonstrably having suffered and died, the conclusion that Jesus was not God was inescapable. In the orthodox view, the creation of wisdom was re-interpreted, and preserving the impassibility of God meant producing a concept of Christ that made him not entirely human, which forced some rather contorted interpretations of scripture.
                            As Thomas Torrance notes,
                            Theologians have been willing to go to great exegetical lengths to reconcile large portions of scripture with their understanding of God’s metaphysical attributes. Hence, any scripture that ascribed change or suffering to God was typically interpreted to depict God as he appears to us, not as he actually is.[1]
                            [1] Gregory A Boyd. The Crucifixion of the Warrior God: Interpreting the Old Testament’s Violent Portraits of God in the Light of the Cross Volumes 1&2 (sample). (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2017), KL 679-681

                            I will leave comment about viewing scripture through lenses of presuppositions and "isms" unsaid.

                            Last edited by tabibito; 06-29-2021, 06:34 AM.
                            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                            .
                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                            Scripture before Tradition:
                            but that won't prevent others from
                            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                            of the right to call yourself Christian.

                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                              We also do not see any clear places where it is forbidden.
                              Ah, the silence from Scripture argument!

                              Again, the model God gave us for the family is that men are the heads of households, and one of the qualifications for elder is that he manage his household well.
                              The Scriptural support, such as it is, for a woman to be a pastor or elder is really shaky.

                              So far, I've seen nothing that gives me comfort (from Scripture) that women in the main role of leadership of a local church is acceptable.


                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                                I think some in the "complementarian" camp argue that Jesus is eternally subordinated to the Father, and use that as justification for subordination of women (or at least wives). This has invited a charge of theological novelty and/or Arianism heresy, and some attempts to redefine what subordination within the Trinity might mean. But it's really quite beyond me. I'd have to have a *much* better grasp of it to accuse someone of heresy.
                                Yeah, that's not something I've ever dealt with much at all. In a practical sense, the mere fact that the Bible identifies "Father" and "Son" is unavoidable. Again, They seem to make it work.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
                                35 responses
                                166 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by KingsGambit, 03-15-2024, 02:12 PM
                                4 responses
                                49 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                                Started by Chaotic Void, 03-08-2024, 07:36 AM
                                10 responses
                                119 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post mikewhitney  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 02-29-2024, 07:55 AM
                                14 responses
                                71 views
                                3 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 02-28-2024, 11:56 AM
                                13 responses
                                59 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Working...
                                X