Is ordination of women to be Pastors [Overseer/Bishop] orthodox?

[Paprika]

You don't understand what the term messenger meant at that time. That role was specific to the first Christians. Those who started ministries. It is the reason why it's one of the terms used for apostle. Again, we are dealing with semantics.

Definitions are essential to rigorous argument. Avoiding 'semantics' in scenarios where disputed meanings are highly relevant show that you have no intention of constructive engagement.

I am not surprised.

Then please do explain what the significance of Junia being in Christ to her supposed leadership.

Those that were mentioned by Paul where both.

Do demonstrate that if you are able to do so.

I know the point you were making.

But you ignore it.

[Jesse]

I did not say that there was no overlap in semantic domain, but that they are not identical. As you note, it can just mean messenger - so why should you conclude that it couldn't have just meant 'messenger'?

You don't understand what the term messenger meant at that time. That role was specific to the first Christians. Those who started ministries. It is the reason why it's one of the terms used for apostle. Again, we are dealing with semantics.

I fail to see any point to this statement.

I am not surprised.

Teacher is not equivalent to leader.

Those that were mentioned by Paul were both.

Way to ignore the point that I was making.

I know the point you were making.

[Paprika]

ἀποστόλος does indeed mean apostle.

I did not say that there was no overlap in semantic domain, but that they are not identical. As you note, it can just mean messenger - so why should you conclude that it couldn't have just meant 'messenger'?

It also is used for a messenger/emissary or one that was commissioned by the Lord specifically. What is a very important aspect that is over looked is when Paul calls her and Andronicus ἐν Χριστῷ.

I fail to see any point to this statement.

Consider they were also both in jail with Paul. We know that in the early church the only Christians to have been arrested where of the most prominent status. Rome wanted to make examples so they rounded up and arrested the most important and most vocal teachers of the group. Junia and Andronicus were among them.

Teacher is not equivalent to leader.

Of the scholars I have a high regard for, only two of them do not believe Junia was an apostle. Michael Heiser and Dan Wallace. But the consensus and the overwhelming data stands. Junia was an apostle of high standing.

Way to ignore the point that I was making.

[Jesse]

I have been looking at the argument from Junia, and I believe that there is a major hole: the implicit assumption that ἀποστόλος has the same semantic domain as 'apostle'.

Let us grant the assumption that the passage denotes Junia as an ἀποστόλος. The argument runs thus: she is therefore an apostle, and the English word 'apostle', being strongly associated with the Twelve and Paul, is connoted with the not least with high leadership roles in the church. Junia was hence a leader.

There is, however, an immediate question raised: if the group of apostles had been expanded beyond the Twelve and Paul, it is not clear that the connotation necessarily holds for all members of the expanded group. This is not a mere quibble about possibilities; ἀποστόλος can and (in certain contexts) does mean messenger. As ἀποστόλος does not have the same semantic domain as 'apostle', the retrojection of the leadership connotations of the English 'apostle' to Junias is not obvious and has not been justified.

ἀποστόλος does indeed mean apostle. It also is used for a messenger/emissary or one that was commissioned by the Lord specifically. What is a very important aspect that is over looked is when Paul calls her and Andronicus ἐν Χριστῷ. Consider they were also both in jail with Paul. We know that in the early church the only Christians to have been arrested where of the most prominent status. Rome wanted to make examples so they rounded up and arrested the most important and most vocal teachers of the group. Junia and Andronicus were among them. Of the scholars I have a high regard for, only two of them do not believe Junia was an apostle. Michael Heiser and Dan Wallace. But the consensus and the overwhelming data stands. Junia was an apostle of high standing.

[Paprika]

I have been looking at the argument from Junia, and I believe that there is a major hole: the implicit assumption that ἀποστόλος has the same semantic domain as 'apostle'.

Let us grant the assumption that the passage denotes Junia as an ἀποστόλος. The argument runs thus: she is therefore an apostle, and the English word 'apostle', being strongly associated with the Twelve and Paul, is connoted with the not least with high leadership roles in the church. Junia was hence a leader.

There is, however, an immediate question raised: if the group of apostles had been expanded beyond the Twelve and Paul, it is not clear that the connotation necessarily holds for all members of the expanded group. This is not a mere quibble about possibilities; ἀποστόλος can and (in certain contexts) does mean messenger. As ἀποστόλος does not have the same semantic domain as 'apostle', the retrojection of the leadership connotations of the English 'apostle' to Junias is not obvious and has not been justified.

[Cow Poke]

That's 'sister' to you!

Yes sir.

[Teallaura]

I'm all done, brother. Battle on without me.

That's 'sister' to you!

[DesertBerean]

If I wasn't clear I was trying to convey that this isn't some new movement within the A/G, since 1935 we've ordained women.

I found a link where the A/G General Superintendent George O. Wood talked about the SBC position on female ordination and I think it's interesting. http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/2001..._exploring.cfm

Superintendent Wood's article is a good reflection of my thoughts about women taking the lead (or senior) pastorship.

I mentioned I was reading more of the Spirit's role and impact in the OT. I'm impressed by how people regarded the action of the Spirit as God's last word (no joke intended). Wood's observations on the work of the Spirit in Cornelius ' s house is what my thoughts are about the work of the Spirit.

I believe Paul was dealing with a situation Timothy was facing. There must have been a large group of women causing confusion and not only in church matters. In the instructions regarding widows, Paul made his famous statement that anyone not taking care of their family were worse than the pagans. Then, after listing the requirements for widows to receive support from the church, and forbidding younger widows to receive such help, he added, "and if any woman who is a believer has widows in her family, she should help them and not let the church be burdened with them..." this is one more challenge to the women to show their godliness. There are other rebukes to women..."old wives' tales", and "dress modestly, with decency and propriety...". His lengthy criticism of younger widows, in my opinon, shows what confusion there was in Ephesus.

[Cow Poke]

And which Apostles were?

I'm all done, brother. Battle on without me.

[Teallaura]

Yup! Still not a PASTOR or BISHOP.

And which Apostles were? In Scripture, please.

Nobody said God disapproved. The statement was that she didn't appear to be "appointed by God", which was an earlier claim, unsubstantiated.

If God didn't disapprove then she is appointed by God - as is true of any government, remember?

More to the point, if God doesn't disapprove of a woman clearly in a leadership role (judge of Israel) then there's no reason to believe He changes His mind on the matter.

WHO is saying that?

You can have cake or you can eat cake - you can't have cake and eat it too. If the prohibition in Tim is universal then it's nonsensical to talk about women in any leadership roles whatsoever over men - and 'men' start at 13 when Tim would certainly still have been under his mother and grandmother's influence.

Refuting an argument what wasn't made isn't very fruitful.

It's part of the overall argument.

Nope. It doesn't. There are a lot of things we (The New Testament Church) do/does differently than they did in the OT.

Yep, does. If universal, Paul is expressly forbidding women to have leadership over men - there can be no half-way mark without coming into conflict with this verse. And 2 Tim is in the NT, not the OT.

[robrecht]

Are we talking about the same passage? 1 timothy 2???

Oops, I thought you were referring to 1 Timothy 3,2.

[phat8594]

I don't find it that problematic. Aside from the general cultural parameters of the author and communities of the time, the emphasis in the Greek word order indicates that the intent was to eliminate polygamy among episcopoi, who are indeed being thought of as male, but not to emphasize male sex as opposed to female sex with respect to eligibility. Polygamy was a practice among some upper classes, but polyandry was not an issue.

Are we talking about the same passage? 1 timothy 2???

[Cow Poke]

Prophetess, remember.

Yup! Still not a PASTOR or BISHOP.

Pretty accurate one, too - so it God disapproved why is He letting her just keep doing it?

Nobody said God disapproved. The statement was that she didn't appear to be "appointed by God", which was an earlier claim, unsubstantiated.

If women are never to lead,

WHO is saying that?

the existence of a female judge refutes that argument in its entirety.

Refuting an argument what wasn't made isn't very fruitful.

If they can lead a little, 2 Tim becomes problematic for the other side of the argument.

Nope. It doesn't. There are a lot of things we (The New Testament Church) do/does differently than they did in the OT.

[Teallaura]

Deborah as a judge - whatever her responsibilities - has nothing to do with women being bishops. Besides, there seems to be nothing to indicate that she was "appointed by God" to do this. If that's the best example we can come up with, it's a pretty weak case.

Prophetess, remember. Pretty accurate one, too - so it God disapproved why is He letting her just keep doing it?

If women are never to lead, the existence of a female judge refutes that argument in its entirety. If they can lead a little, 2 Tim becomes problematic for the other side of the argument.

[Cow Poke]

Which doesn't make it a requirement - David was a military leader and didn't lead every campaign so even if it were, there's no proof Deborah wasn't also a military leader seeing as she went with Barak and he wanted her in the first place. Not enough information there to contradict the plain reading - Deborah was a judge of Israel.

Deborah as a judge - whatever her responsibilities - has nothing to do with women being bishops. Besides, there seems to be nothing to indicate that she was "appointed by God" to do this. If that's the best example we can come up with, it's a pretty weak case.