Local Church Discussions  

Go Back   Local Church Discussions > So, What About Woman?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2018, 12:48 PM   #1
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

So, I do realize that the local church was kind of hard on sisters, depending on the locality, it was harder for some sisters than others. However this is just something that I have really been wrestling with lately. Regarding women pastors my thoughts have always been along the lines of "I don't think that it's biblical but, meh, who cares". However, since I've been attending a church that has two women pastors (the lead pastor is a male) I have noticed that it seems like most of the activity in the congregation is dominated by women. So, after digging into it a little further, seeing what the Word says and reading various papers that support both viewpoints it really seems like it takes some theological "maneuvering", to support the position of women pastors. I would love to hear some of your thoughts on this.
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 03:29 PM   #2
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,821
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Hi seeking1,

I do not believe the pastoral system is according to the Scriptures. Therefore, anything that I would add would be irrelevant to your question.

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 03:44 PM   #3
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,082
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Pastors are shepherds of the flock. Both the OT and NT scriptures are filled with verses on pastor / shepherds.

Hi Drake, show me a verse about LC "Full-Timers?"

What Drake really said was, "I do not believe the LSM 'Full-Timers' system is according to the Scriptures."
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 03:51 PM   #4
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,082
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Personally I lean towards "Complementarianism" in the body of Christ. For example, I have never seen brothers serve in the nursery, but that doesn't mean it could never happen.

I Corinthians shows us that the members of His body do not all have the same gifts. That doesn't mean that the sisters are "more equal" than the brothers, it just means that not every member is gifted the same way.
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 04:15 PM   #5
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Hi seeking1,

I do not believe the pastoral system is according to the Scriptures. Therefore, anything that I would add would be irrelevant to your question.

Drake
I get your point Drake but since leaving the local church I have not found an assembly that really lines up with what the Lord has shown me. That said, I have been intentional about just being around other believers (that aren't blatantly heretical) and having my kids around other believers while overlooking doctrinal differences or at least I am trying to, hence this thread.
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 04:23 PM   #6
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Hi Ohio,

Yeah, that seems to be where I'm at and I'm having a hard time justifying anything else. What troubles me is that the argument for egalitarians employs some of the same reasoning used by the pro gay marriage bunch.
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 06:28 PM   #7
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 826
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Seeking1,

What kind of theological "maneuvering"?

Can we agree on these definitions?

Christian egalitarianism (derived from the French word égal, meaning equal or level), also known as biblical equality, is a Christian form of egalitarianism. It holds that all human persons are created equally in God's sight—equal in fundamental worth and moral status. This view does not just apply to gender, but to religion, skin colour and any other differences between individuals. It does not imply that all have equal skills, abilities, interests, or physiological or genetic traits. Christian egalitarianism holds that all people are equal before God and in Christ; have equal responsibility to use their gifts and obey their calling to the glory of God; and are called to roles and ministries without regard to class, gender, or race.

Complementarianism is a theological view held by some in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam,[1] that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, religious leadership, and elsewhere. The word "complementary" and its cognates are currently used[2] to denote this view. For some Christians whose complementarian view is biblically-prescribed, these separate roles preclude women from specific functions of ministry within the community.[3][4] Though women may be precluded from certain roles and ministries they are held to be equal in moral value and of equal status. The phrase used to describe this is 'Ontologically equal, Functionally different'.[5]

Complementarians assign primary headship roles to men and support roles to women—based on their interpretation of certain biblical passages. One of the precepts of complementarianism is that while women may assist in the decision-making process, the ultimate authority for the decision is the purview of the male in marriage, courtship, and in the polity of churches subscribing to this view.

Nell
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 07:09 PM   #8
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,418
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Thanks for that Nell. Concerning women, Paul seems to be of the egalitarian sort :

Rom 16:7* Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.*
__________________
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C Clarke - 3rd Law. There's a serpent in every paradise. Trusting in God is easy. It's trusting in man that requires a lot of faith.
Judaism is Satanic Catholicism is demonic and Christianity is christless - Witness Lee.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 07:28 PM   #9
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
So, I do realize that the local church was kind of hard on sisters, depending on the locality, it was harder for some sisters than others. However this is just something that I have really been wrestling with lately. Regarding women pastors my thoughts have always been along the lines of "I don't think that it's biblical but, meh, who cares". However, since I've been attending a church that has two women pastors (the lead pastor is a male) I have noticed that it seems like most of the activity in the congregation is dominated by women. So, after digging into it a little further, seeing what the Word says and reading various papers that support both viewpoints it really seems like it takes some theological "maneuvering", to support the position of women pastors. I would love to hear some of your thoughts on this.
Your view matches that of top theologians in the field such as Daniel B. Wallace who states that it requires exegetical gymnastics to arrive at an egalitarian conclusion.

He has written extensively about this such as here:

https://bible.org/article/some-refle...agmatic-issues

What is interesting about him is that personally he is egalitarian but professionally as an expert in NT Greek, he is complementarian and does not believe that the bible supports an egalitarian position.

As an example of the "exegetical gymnastics" Wallace talks about, consider this passage:

Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged. (Colossians 3:18–21).

Now egalitarians argue that both wives and husbands must submit to each other. Even though it only mentions wives submitting to husbands in this verse, they draw from a verse elsewhere in scripture which says "submit to one another". This is one "gymnastical jump". The second gymastical jump is regarding the part about children obeying parents. If one reads the text as if both wives and husbands submit to each other, then should parents also obey their children?? This cannot be.

If we add to this discussion that historically men have led the church, as supported by all major denominations until only in modern times, the egalitarian position is on a shallow ground of sand.

I personally believe that egalitarianism is a sign of degradation in the church. It is no coincidence that such a movement took hold in the church, around the same time as the LGBT and feminist movements in the 70's/80's. When I was in denominations in the 70's/80's, I observed as the traditional role of the man in the family, in society and in the church was being eroded bit by bit.

Thanks to the Reformation, the bible was made available to everyone in the common language, since the 1500/1600's. Why has it taken so long for the egalitarians to come into the church, if the teaching is truly in the Bible? I believe the teaching is not obvious in the bible, and the movement has come about from influence of the world on the church. If egalitarianism was the teaching of the bible, we surely would have seen it adopted early in the Reformation, in the 1700's for example.

The Lord showed me that this was the doing of the anti-Christ, and not from Him. All this is done under the guise of being modern and "relevance to todays culture". Worse, compromising with the world, as churches are afraid to be unpopular with the status quo in Western society. It is not so in Eastern countries, which are appalled at the acceptance of gay marriage in the West and erosion of family values and the father figure as the head of the family and the church.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 08:11 PM   #10
HERn
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 694
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

I love the body of Christ. I have a Nazarene friend who is OK with women pastors, but would never touch an adult beverage; and several reformed friends that brew their own, but could never accept a woman elder or pastor.
__________________
Christ cares for all His sheep in whatever group.
HERn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2018, 09:39 PM   #11
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,418
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
Your view matches that of top theologians in the field such as Daniel B. Wallace who states that it requires exegetical gymnastics to arrive at an egalitarian conclusion.

He has written extensively about this such as here:

https://bible.org/article/some-refle...agmatic-issues

What is interesting about him is that personally he is egalitarian but professionally as an expert in NT Greek, he is complementarian and does not believe that the bible supports an egalitarian position.
If he's such a New Testament expert, then he should be honest about discrepancies in the NT manuscripts concern women, and their 'scripturely' demanded silence.

I can't help but think Wallace, as a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary, knows where his bread is buttered, and so has to comply with their conservative patriarchal views ... that essentially reflects back to caveman day type views.

That women are are lesser vessels is quite universal across cultures, religions, and times. Particularly among monotheist religions.

Face it, men, as physically stronger, need to subjugate women because women have better brain computers ; and because all human life come from them.

Wallace clearly supports the manly view that prolly does go back to caveman days.
__________________
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C Clarke - 3rd Law. There's a serpent in every paradise. Trusting in God is easy. It's trusting in man that requires a lot of faith.
Judaism is Satanic Catholicism is demonic and Christianity is christless - Witness Lee.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 07:15 AM   #12
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
Seeking1,

What kind of theological "maneuvering"?

Can we agree on these definitions?

Christian egalitarianism (derived from the French word égal, meaning equal or level), also known as biblical equality, is a Christian form of egalitarianism. It holds that all human persons are created equally in God's sight—equal in fundamental worth and moral status. This view does not just apply to gender, but to religion, skin colour and any other differences between individuals. It does not imply that all have equal skills, abilities, interests, or physiological or genetic traits. Christian egalitarianism holds that all people are equal before God and in Christ; have equal responsibility to use their gifts and obey their calling to the glory of God; and are called to roles and ministries without regard to class, gender, or race.

Complementarianism is a theological view held by some in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam,[1] that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, religious leadership, and elsewhere. The word "complementary" and its cognates are currently used[2] to denote this view. For some Christians whose complementarian view is biblically-prescribed, these separate roles preclude women from specific functions of ministry within the community.[3][4] Though women may be precluded from certain roles and ministries they are held to be equal in moral value and of equal status. The phrase used to describe this is 'Ontologically equal, Functionally different'.[5]

Complementarians assign primary headship roles to men and support roles to women—based on their interpretation of certain biblical passages. One of the precepts of complementarianism is that while women may assist in the decision-making process, the ultimate authority for the decision is the purview of the male in marriage, courtship, and in the polity of churches subscribing to this view.

Nell
So, one example of what I think is "maneuvering" can be found in this excerpt from the Junia Project, (the full article can be found here: https://juniaproject.com/defusing-1-timothy-212-bomb/ )where the author attempts to pick apart Paul's intent in 1Tim 2:12 however, their effort pretty much falls flat with what seems to be all smoke and no fire.

"Before we conclude that this passage is “clear” we must consider the limitations of our English translations. The most problematic issue is the rendering of the verb authentein as authority. This unusual Greek verb is found only once in scripture and rarely in extrabiblical texts, where it is usually associated with aggression. Authentein is translated as “domineer” in the Latin Vulgate and New English Bible and as “usurp authority” in the Geneva and King James Bibles.

A study of Paul’s letters shows that he regularly used a form of the Greek “exousia” when referring to the use of authority in the church (see 1 Cor 6:12, 7:4, 1 Cor 6:12, 7:4, 9:4-6, 9:12, 11:10, 2 Cor 2:8, 10:8, 13:10, Col. 1:13, 2 Thess 3:12, Rom 6:15, 9:21). So it is strange that some modern versions translate this simply as “authority”. Considering the context, it is likely that Paul was objecting to something other than the legitimate use of authority in 1 Timothy 2:12. (More on authentein here, and see a more recent follow-up post here.)

There is also the possibility that the verb didaskein (to teach) is linked here to the verb authentein in what is called a hendiadys (two words joined by a conjunction to make a single point). “Don’t eat and run” would be a modern example. So a better interpretation might be “don’t teach in a domineering way”.

Additionally, the grammar in this passage changes abruptly from the plural “women” in verses 9 & 10 to “a woman” in verses 11-15. Then it changes back to “women” in the next chapter, suggesting that Paul had a specific woman in mind, perhaps one that Timothy had written to him about. Furthermore, some scholars believe “I don’t permit” could also be accurately translated as “I am not currently permitting”. So while these verses are often used to defend male-only leadership, current scholarship suggests that the passage is anything BUT clear on the issue."


Regarding the definitions, I would not agree on those definitions. May I ask where you found them? The author is clearly being more charitable to Egalitarianism. The invocation of race is troublesome given that this is also a tactic used by the LGBT movement in an attempt to ride the coat tails of racial discrimination in order to promote their agenda. Furthermore, the definition of Egalitarianism could also be used to define complementarianism which also holds that "all people are equal before God and in Christ; have equal responsibility to use their gifts and obey their calling to the glory of God; and are called to roles and ministries without regard to class, gender, or race." Complementarians just maintain that God, as indicated by the Scriptures, has not called women to be in ministries that place them in authority over adult men. Also, the author injects Judaism and Islam into the definition of "Christian Egalitarianism", which seems like an attempt at projecting legalistic patriarchal characteristics onto that view point.
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 08:17 AM   #13
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,418
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
So, one example of what I think is "maneuvering" can be found in this excerpt from the Junia Project, (the full article can be found here: https://juniaproject.com/defusing-1-timothy-212-bomb/ )
Thanks for that, btw. I've been involved with the Church of Christ (Cambellites) here locally. They take these verses in Timothy very seriously. So I emailed the link to them. One of them is a outspoken CoC female, the other is a CoC preacher for over 50 years. Our discussions should be lively.

So seeking1, so far I don't know you from Adam's cat. But from your post I gather some things about your position on the egalitarian/complementarian question.

I gather that, you don't seem to be too fond of egalitarianism. Cuz to you it doesn't strike you as true to Timothy.

Also, I gather that you're not fond of exegesis of scripture. Like taking a look at the Greek text, context, and so forth and so on.

It also stands out that LGBTQ is anathema to you. I doubt that you'll ever be egalitarian with them.

And you seem too to be concerned about being egalitarian with race, Judaism, and Islam.

Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. But if I'm not, tell me please, just who are you egalitarian with?
__________________
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C Clarke - 3rd Law. There's a serpent in every paradise. Trusting in God is easy. It's trusting in man that requires a lot of faith.
Judaism is Satanic Catholicism is demonic and Christianity is christless - Witness Lee.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 08:54 AM   #14
UntoHim
Grateful Servant
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,452
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Geeez Harold, how many rabbit holes can you fit into one post? Give seeking1 one a break, will ya? His opening post was pretty straight forward. If you want to address that then go for it.

It's good Friday....so be good.
-
__________________
Now Unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy (Jude 24)
UntoHim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 11:02 AM   #15
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,418
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by UntoHim View Post
Geeez Harold, how many rabbit holes can you fit into one post? Give seeking1 one a break, will ya? His opening post was pretty straight forward. If you want to address that then go for it.

It's good Friday....so be good.
-
My bad. Sorry seeking1. I guess I should hold any questions until I give you the chance to reveal your position in its entirety.

Sorry again brother, or sister (I don't know yet). Consider me just an idiot.

Happy Good Friday ... if you celebrate it.
__________________
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C Clarke - 3rd Law. There's a serpent in every paradise. Trusting in God is easy. It's trusting in man that requires a lot of faith.
Judaism is Satanic Catholicism is demonic and Christianity is christless - Witness Lee.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 12:53 PM   #16
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by awareness View Post
My bad. Sorry seeking1. I guess I should hold any questions until I give you the chance to reveal your position in its entirety.

Sorry again brother, or sister (I don't know yet). Consider me just an idiot.

Happy Good Friday ... if you celebrate it.


Hello Awareness,

I am a man, by the way. This is a good write up regarding the complementarian view on woman pastors if you are interested:
https://www.desiringgod.org/intervie...become-pastors

My answers to your queries are below.

***I gather that, you don't seem to be too fond of egalitarianism.* Cuz to you it doesn't strike you as true to Timothy.***

Thus far no, it does not strike me as true to the Scriptures.

***Also, I gather that you're not fond of exegesis of scripture.* Like taking a look at the Greek text, context, and so forth and so on.***

Sure I am but, it should lead somewhere. Not just take people in circles and leave them dazed and confused.

***It also stands out that LGBTQ is anathema to you.* I doubt that you'll ever be egalitarian with them.***

Anathema? That's a little harsh but, I would certainly never be affirming of their lifestyle.

***And you seem too to be concerned about being egalitarian with race, Judaism, and Islam.***

Not sure where you got this from.


***Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this.* But if I'm not, tell me please, just who are you egalitarian with?***

You may have misunderstood but I am discussing Christian Egalitarianism, that is, Egalitarianism among believers.
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 04:05 PM   #17
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by HERn View Post
I love the body of Christ. I have a Nazarene friend who is OK with women pastors, but would never touch an adult beverage; and several reformed friends that brew their own, but could never accept a woman elder or pastor.
The scripture is more permissive of a good home brew than female church leaders.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 04:08 PM   #18
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

I think that most people would be ok if an oil rig or construction site was not in charge by a woman. But they don't see that the church is a spiritual construction site - men are just more capable of church leadership and hard work. That's why men have wide shoulders to bear the burden and women don't. Some women pastors I know of just couldn't do the work without a supportive husband beside them. Others cut their hair short and try to give a male persona.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 07:19 PM   #19
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
The scripture is more permissive of a good home brew than female church leaders.
That is absurd. Paul said an elder needed to be "the husband of one wife". That means, if you select an elder according to the scripture you will get both a brother and a sister. Everyone with any experience in the church at all knows that the wife of an elder is a "church leader".
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2018, 09:28 PM   #20
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 826
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
...Regarding the definitions, I would not agree on those definitions. May I ask where you found them? ...
The definitions are Wikipedia...at least they are a place to start.
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2018, 03:05 AM   #21
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
That is absurd. Paul said an elder needed to be "the husband of one wife". That means, if you select an elder according to the scripture you will get both a brother and a sister. Everyone with any experience in the church at all knows that the wife of an elder is a "church leader".
Must an elder also have a plurality of children? 1 tim 3.4. This cannot be the intended meaning. The meaning is that the elder must have good character and not a string of divorced and remarriages. I disagree with your interpretation also because celibacy was highly valued in early church leadership. If being married was a requirement we dont see it practiced.

Its true that there are more verses supporting the drinking of wine than female elders. Also...Jesus drank alcohol but never appointed a female disciple.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2018, 07:18 AM   #22
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,418
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
Hello Awareness,
I am a man, by the way. This is a good write up regarding the complementarian view on woman pastors if you are interested:
https://www.desiringgod.org/intervie...become-pastors.
Thanks seeking1 for clearing all that up. I think now I could tell you from Adam's cat. And thanks for the link to the complementarian view. I did read it. I guess I should admit that I'm not OCD on keeping the Bible, but hold rather to, whatever works.

I'm a male too, but resent the short shrift women have gotten from the beginning ... the Genesis story basically threw them under the bus. But I understand that a woman became the mother of God. Can you get any higher honor than that? And look at the intimacy young teen Mary shared with the Spirit of God! No man has ever achieved that.

And I hope you had a good Friday, and hope you enjoy the Easter Bunny and Egg ... the feminine symbols and celebration of the fecundity of Spring.

And by the way all. If we're gonna be OCD about scripture, let's not forget about Sophia (wisdom), that was elevated in Proverbs 8, to being Gods' consort from the beginning. That's an outstanding honor to women too.
__________________
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C Clarke - 3rd Law. There's a serpent in every paradise. Trusting in God is easy. It's trusting in man that requires a lot of faith.
Judaism is Satanic Catholicism is demonic and Christianity is christless - Witness Lee.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2018, 11:50 AM   #23
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
Must an elder also have a plurality of children? 1 tim 3.4. This cannot be the intended meaning. The meaning is that the elder must have good character and not a string of divorced and remarriages. I disagree with your interpretation also because celibacy was highly valued in early church leadership. If being married was a requirement we dont see it practiced.

Its true that there are more verses supporting the drinking of wine than female elders. Also...Jesus drank alcohol but never appointed a female disciple.
So you disagree with the scriptural qualifications for an elder, yet use these same scriptural qualifications to claim that women cannot have church leadership roles.

Can you please let me know what "scriptural basis" you have to say that women cannot have church leadership roles?
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2018, 02:24 PM   #24
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
So you disagree with the scriptural qualifications for an elder, yet use these same scriptural qualifications to claim that women cannot have church leadership roles.

Can you please let me know what "scriptural basis" you have to say that women cannot have church leadership roles?

You are misinterpretating the passage. This well known evangelical apologetics site explains why and provides scriptural basis:

https://www.gotquestions.org/women-elders.html
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2018, 02:55 PM   #25
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
You are misinterpretating the passage. This well known evangelical apologetics site explains why and provides scriptural basis:

https://www.gotquestions.org/women-elders.html
Just answer the question. This link refers to the verses you have just said should not be interpreted literally, but rather according to your logic.

What is your scriptural basis to say that women cannot be church leaders?

Since everyone knows that an elder's wife is a church leader it seems beyond any reasonable interpretation of Paul's word in Timothy and Titus.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2018, 04:06 PM   #26
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,418
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
Just answer the question. This link refers to the verses you have just said should not be interpreted literally, but rather according to your logic.

What is your scriptural basis to say that women cannot be church leaders?

Since everyone knows that an elder's wife is a church leader it seems beyond any reasonable interpretation of Paul's word in Timothy and Titus.
The way I understand it is, all localities are antonymous. So elders are whatever the locality selects, male or female.
__________________
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C Clarke - 3rd Law. There's a serpent in every paradise. Trusting in God is easy. It's trusting in man that requires a lot of faith.
Judaism is Satanic Catholicism is demonic and Christianity is christless - Witness Lee.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2018, 07:45 PM   #27
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
Just answer the question. This link refers to the verses you have just said should not be interpreted literally, but rather according to your logic.

What is your scriptural basis to say that women cannot be church leaders?

Since everyone knows that an elder's wife is a church leader it seems beyond any reasonable interpretation of Paul's word in Timothy and Titus.
The link interprets the verses you use differently to you and explains that the emphasis is on the man not the wife or children. I consider gotquestions a reliable resource for mainstream evangelical beliefs and it shows that your view is not a reasonable, average interpretation.

Did you read what it said about the average person?:

As a result, just a cursory reading of this passage would lead the average person to conclude that the role of an elder/overseer must be filled by a man. The phrase “husband of one wife” also indicates that the office of elder is assumed/intended to be fulfilled by men. The same points are also made in the parallel passage of Titus 1:5-9.

So based on this paragraph your interpretation is not that of an average person and you cannot claim that yours is a "reasonable interpretation". I think many Christians would disagree that a elders wife or elders children or family dog are "church leaders".

You have no authority to declare that your own private interpretation is a "reasonable interpretation" given that I can find the majority of bible commentaries on biblehub explicitly disagree with your interpretation:

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_timothy/3-2.htm

Benson:

the husband of one wife — This neither means that a bishop must be married, nor that he may not marry a second wife; which is just as lawful for him to do as to marry a first, and may, in some cases, be his bounden duty. But whereas polygamy and divorce, upon slight occasions, were both common among the Jews and heathen, it teaches us that ministers, of all others, ought to stand clear of those sins.

Barnes:
The husband of one wife - This need not be understood as requiring that a bishop "should be" a married man,

Poole:
he apostle commanding ministers to be the husbands but of one wife, doth not oblige them to marry, if God hath given them the gift of continency

Gill:
though this rule does not make it necessary that he should have a wife

A literal interpretation of this passage as requiring an elder to be married is not a view held by the majority of bible scholars or churches in history. This then is a good example of you conducting "exegetical gymnastics" and stretching the truth or going beyond what scripture says to make the bible support an egalitarian viewpoint.

If the best support you can find for female elders is to infer that an elder *must* be married and to then infer that an elder's wife is also a "church leader" then this shows there is no strong basis for the egalitarian position.

Your view must take two "exegetical gymnastic leaps" to support female elders:

1. "Elders must be married" - not well supported by biblehub commentaries or gotquestions.org. We must therefore reject the thinking that this is an average or reasonable interpretation.
2. An elder's wife is a "church leader" - this would not be an average or reasonable interpretation, just as saying that the President's wife is the "President of the USA", or Bill Gates wife is the "head" of Microsoft (she is, or was, only a project manager). Although I can imagine a wife of a leader providing support and advice from time to time, this does not mean they could or should be seen as having equal authority.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 10:15 AM   #28
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

I get it. Paul said that a prerequisite of being an elder is "husband of one wife" but "got questions" says that doesn't mean "the husband of one wife" but rather that he is a man. Paul said that he raised his family well, but got questions says that doesn't mean he actually raised his family well, but rather that he is a man. I asked a simple question, what is your scriptural basis. You didn't need to give me all this, simply say "I don't have scriptural basis, rather I base this on got questions.

I have a different and radical interpretation. In my interpretation when Paul says that the elder is the husband of one wife, I interpret that to mean that he is the husband of one wife. Likewise, when it says he raised his family well, I interpret this to mean that he raised his family well. I realize that taking Paul as the primary authority over such luminaries as "got questions" is a radical and unpopular way to interpret the Bible.

But here is where it gets interesting. If the elder is the "husband of one wife" then that means you are not simply choosing the man, you are also choosing the woman (you know, the elder women who are charged with teaching the younger women -- i.e. church leaders). When the Bible says that the man shall be joined to his wife and the two shall be one flesh, I take that as well. I suppose got questions can explain that away as well. So if the man is the "husband of one wife" it stands to reason that the woman is the wife of one husband. If the man is credited with "raising his family well" it also stands to reason that the wife should also be credited with raising the family well.

Since two thirds of church members are women it stands to reason that you need both men and women church leaders, a position supported by Paul's charge to the elder women to teach the younger women.

Since the straightforward reading of Paul is logical, and much better aligned to the scripture than the gymnastic interpretation of got questions, why the need for such a twisted misogynistic interpretation? What happens if you have a man, your best Bible teacher, and he is not married, or is divorced, or his kids are the stereotypical "pastor's kids"? Well then, in that case you need someone to spin the word of God to make excuses.

Please note, "gifted teacher of the word" is not a prerequisite for an elder.

Your Bible teacher does not need to be an elder. But what the church needs from the elders is to be an example for the flock, and to counsel the saints to help them primarily with their marriage and family. Hence the prominence of these prerequisites.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 03:23 PM   #29
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

My scriptural basis is the correct interpretation of the passages cited in the gotquestions article. It is confirmed to be a sound interpretation when considering what the biblehub commentators have to say. Most commentators say that the verse is prohibiting polygamy not celibacy. This puts your view at odds with the most reasonable and logical interpretation.

In short...if the elder is meant to be a husband and wife team or husband or wife then
1 Tim 3:1-7 would say 'they'...not 'he'.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 04:23 PM   #30
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

It would be a reasonable interpretation if the verse you quoted about celibacy referred to the position of elder of the church. Since it doesn't your "reasonable" interpretation is nothing more than a non sequitur with Catholic spin doctors explaining how their church leaders could be celibate.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 04:30 PM   #31
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Are all those bible commentaries I quoted and GotQuestions.org "Catholic spin doctors" ? Or are you talking about the translator's use of the male pronoun "he" or "his" rather than "they"? Was it a cleverly crafted spin by the Catholics to convince the KJV translators to use all male pronouns? You would prefer to insert wild conspiracy theories than simply admit that you may be wrong. A logical and normal reading of a verse which uses all male pronouns is to conclude that elders are male, not female or "male and female".

Consider the male pronouns in 1 Tim 3:4, which comes after introduction of the wife in verse 2 ("...A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife"):

4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full[a] respect.

If your reading is correct that both the male and/or female are elders, then verse 4 should say like this:

4 they must manage their own family well and see that [B][B]their children obey them , and they must do so in a manner worthy of full[a] respect.

This would be obvious to an average English speaking person, which is why my interpretation is plain and logical and yours is not.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 05:23 PM   #32
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

I feel you have to read every verse in Paul that is relevant to this question. When I do this I see a very definite emphasis on the man, while at the same time recognize that he refers to the role that women take in church leadership.

So then, what is the reason? That is where interpretation comes in.

1. He is a husband of one wife -- not interpretation, simply the word.

2. He has raised up his family well -- not interpretation, simply the word.

Why then the emphasis on the man rather than a more 50/50 approach? I think (my interpretation) that this is because the church is not 50/50, but rather 65% women and 35% men. If he doesn't put his thumb on that scale it will quickly become 80% women and 20% men.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 05:33 PM   #33
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

I don't necessarily disagree with your last explanation even though I disagree with your first because I think the use of the male pronoun only is telling. I think that female leaders can make the church "too feminine".

Some statistics seem to support this:

http://archive.decaturdaily.com/deca...1/church.shtml

The author of "Why Men Hate Going to Church" thinks the church is so feminine it's driving men away..
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 07:52 PM   #34
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

But I think that is a result of your interpretation. If you take a male bias, and allow that men only who aren't married can be leaders, then you have to expect the pendulum will swing the other way.

When the church is "too feminine" it is simply because women are doing what the men did.

The problem is families: Marriage and children. That is why we need elders who are an example of a proper family who have raised their children well. They are the ones who need to be set up as an example to the rest of the saints, they are the ones we need to counsel the saints.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 08:46 PM   #35
UntoHim
Grateful Servant
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,452
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Ok guys, time to let seeking1 have the thread back.

No more posts until seeking1 has a whack at this thing.

seeking1, the floor is yours.

-
__________________
Now Unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy (Jude 24)
UntoHim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2018, 05:48 PM   #36
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Thanks UntoHim, but I'm o.k. watching Evangelical and ZNP duke it out, that's fine but. I think that they are still on topic, unlike other threads that I've seen go way off topic.

My intent in starting this thread was hearing from (ex) local-churchers on this topic. Given that the Local Church, IMHO, is a traditional patriarchy style of church where the men dominate all aspects of leadership and condescension towards women is an accepted norm I wanted to see where people here fell on the spectrum.
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 09:20 AM   #37
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Something to consider:

3 that aged women likewise be reverent in demeanor, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good; 4 that they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be sober-minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed:

I think the use of "aged" women and "train" in this translation (ASV) is due to the reticence to use the term "elder" and "teach".

Still, Paul is charging these aged women to teach or train the younger women.

So my question is this. Paul gives explicit criteria for selecting elders, deacons and even widows who are to be enrolled in church care. Where does he give the criteria for selecting these elder women who are to train others if it is not the same section in Timothy where he explains how to select elders?
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 03:41 PM   #38
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
Something to consider:

3 that aged women likewise be reverent in demeanor, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good; 4 that they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be sober-minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed:

I think the use of "aged" women and "train" in this translation (ASV) is due to the reticence to use the term "elder" and "teach".

Still, Paul is charging these aged women to teach or train the younger women.

So my question is this. Paul gives explicit criteria for selecting elders, deacons and even widows who are to be enrolled in church care. Where does he give the criteria for selecting these elder women who are to train others if it is not the same section in Timothy where he explains how to select elders?

Notice the part about being in subjection to their husbands. This means if the husband is an elder his aged wife who could be considered an 'elder' to the women in their care are not qualified to lead a church. The elder woman teaches the younger women to be in subjection as she herself is. The egalitarian view of equality is wrong. This rules out both a single aged elder female leading a church and also a married female whether she is an elder to the younger women or not.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 04:36 PM   #39
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
Notice the part about being in subjection to their husbands. This means if the husband is an elder his aged wife who could be considered an 'elder' to the women in their care are not qualified to lead a church. The elder woman teaches the younger women to be in subjection as she herself is. The egalitarian view of equality is wrong. This rules out both a single aged elder female leading a church and also a married female whether she is an elder to the younger women or not.
Interesting take. I have a different view, but definitely, your interpretation fits neatly into mine.

12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ... 23 and those parts of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness; 24 whereas our comely parts have no need: but God tempered the body together, giving more abundant honor to that part which lacked;

So I would ask you a few simple questions.

1. In the church, which are our comely members, the brothers or the sisters? (Hint -- anyone who is married knows there is only one right answer).

2. On which members has Paul bestowed more abundant honor, the brothers or sisters?

3. Which members have no need? (This is a little tougher to understand but as your earlier post about how brothers refuse to go to churches that seem "too feminine" suggests, one of these requires their ego to be stroked and for one there is no need).

4. Which members are "lacking" in the church -- brothers or sisters?
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 05:27 PM   #40
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
Interesting take. I have a different view, but definitely, your interpretation fits neatly into mine.
There is some overlap in our interpretations. I don't see a major issue if the woman is considered (honorary) elders as long as the woman is in subjection to her (real) elder husband, as the Scripture says. I do not see a strong case for equal male-female eldership or women-only elders. The language in the original Greek or in our English translations does not allow for it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ... 23 and those parts of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness; 24 whereas our comely parts have no need: but God tempered the body together, giving more abundant honor to that part which lacked;

So I would ask you a few simple questions.

1. In the church, which are our comely members, the brothers or the sisters? (Hint -- anyone who is married knows there is only one right answer).

2. On which members has Paul bestowed more abundant honor, the brothers or sisters?

3. Which members have no need? (This is a little tougher to understand but as your earlier post about how brothers refuse to go to churches that seem "too feminine" suggests, one of these requires their ego to be stroked and for one there is no need).

4. Which members are "lacking" in the church -- brothers or sisters?

The reason why Paul bestowed more honor on the sisters is because the woman is the weaker vessel (1 Peter 3:7). It is because they are the weaker vessel that they are suited for being elders to the weaker women (young women) but not to the men and women (the whole church).

There is another point which I believe makes the egalitarian viewpoint highly unlikely and it is that menstruation was a taboo topic in many cultures including Judaism and early Christianity which prevented women from leadership in various church rituals due to ritual impurity. This would have ruled out a young woman being considered for church leadership:

Ezekial 18:6 he....neither hath come near to a menstruous woman,
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 05:45 PM   #41
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
There is some overlap in our interpretations. I don't see a major issue if the woman is considered (honorary) elders as long as the woman is in subjection to her (real) elder husband, as the Scripture says. I do not see a strong case for equal male-female eldership or women-only elders. The language in the original Greek or in our English translations does not allow for it.

The reason why Paul bestowed more honor on the sisters is because the woman is the weaker vessel (1 Peter 3:7). It is because they are the weaker vessel that they are suited for being elders to the weaker women (young women) but not to the men and women (the whole church).
I don't think you understood my view. I think that Paul bestowed more abundant honor on the brothers because their ego needs it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
There is another point which I believe makes the egalitarian viewpoint highly unlikely and it is that menstruation was a taboo topic in many cultures including Judaism and early Christianity which prevented women from leadership in various church rituals due to ritual impurity. This would have ruled out a young woman being considered for church leadership:

Ezekial 18:6 he....neither hath come near to a menstruous woman,
Unfortunately for that position you are combining the Old creation with the New Creation. In the New Creation there is no male or female.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 05:57 PM   #42
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
I don't think you understood my view. I think that Paul bestowed more abundant honor on the brothers because their ego needs it.
That's a novel twist on the Scripture. I don't think Paul told the husbands to honor their wives because their ego needs it. The context is about bestowing honor on the weaker parts not the stronger. Sometimes you come up with strange interpretations and honoring men's egos is not the most obvious and logical interpretation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
Unfortunately for that position you are combining the Old creation with the New Creation. In the New Creation there is no male or female.
In the new creation there is also no marriage. What does this mean for your theory that male elders must be married? You can't pick and choose which parts of the New Creation you want to follow. A church which follows the New Creation idea should have no male or female distinctions, and also no marriage or children either. Until then, the Old Creation is still very much with us.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 06:16 PM   #43
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
That's a novel twist on the Scripture. I don't think Paul told the husbands to honor their wives because their ego needs it. The context is about bestowing honor on the weaker parts not the stronger. Sometimes you come up with strange interpretations and honoring men's egos is not the most obvious and logical interpretation.

23 and those parts of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor [Paul bestowed more abundant honor on the brothers]; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness [the brothers are "our uncomely parts" though we generally refer to this in the reverse -- sister is the better half, fair sex, etc]; 24 whereas our comely parts have no need [the sisters have no need. Even with Paul giving the chief leadership role to brothers we still have 65% of church members are sisters]: but God tempered the body together, giving more abundant honor to that part which lacked [Paul gave more abundant honor to the brothers by giving them the chief leadership role]

Sometimes there are ugly situations and you need someone to be the "ugly" one (dealing with scam artists, abusive people, wolves in sheep's clothing). In that case the brothers are much more suited to being "ugly" when it is necessary. But for the most part we would like the testimony and expression of the church to be beautiful, in which case the sisters are clearly very well suited.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
In the new creation there is also no marriage. What does this mean for your theory that male elders must be married? You can't pick and choose which parts of the New Creation you want to follow. A church which follows the New Creation idea should have no male or female distinctions, and also no marriage or children either. Until then, the Old Creation is still very much with us.
We deal with the Old creation in our testimony to the world. Our families are still old creation which is why salvation is personal, each person has to receive Christ. However, they are sanctified by a believing spouse or parents. But your claim that a woman's menstrual cycle would make her unclean for spiritual service to the Lord is contrary to Paul's word that in the New Creation there is no male or female. Peter also contradicts that with the word that "we are a royal priesthood".

If you are in the Old creation then you are in the sabbath rest and are not suitable for spiritual service. Only those in the new creation are called to be fellow laborers with Christ. But, all unbelievers are in the old creation and many new believers are also mostly in the Old creation. God is not the author of confusion.

In my understanding both brothers and sisters are essential and need to be tempered together. Salvation is very much about families and marriage. Many of those who come into the church need counseling concerning these matters. Many need mentors because they didn't have proper fathers and mothers. But, when you get into the new creation the distinction between male and female does not exist. By that I am referring to the function of the spirit and the gifts of the spirit.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 06:52 PM   #44
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

For anyone that is interested, here is a video of a pastor answering the "Can women be pastors?" question. I have watched, probably 2 dozen videos on the subject but I really liked how this guy (who I had never heard of) laid it out.

https://youtu.be/3oOnPVunV8I
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2018, 09:17 AM   #45
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
For anyone that is interested, here is a video of a pastor answering the "Can women be pastors?" question. I have watched, probably 2 dozen videos on the subject but I really liked how this guy (who I had never heard of) laid it out.

https://youtu.be/3oOnPVunV8I
He really dives deep into head covering (36 minutes) but skims over the aspect of a woman being an elder or pastor.

His key verse concerning church leadership is that Adam was created first and was not deceived, Eve was created second and fell into transgression. It seems to me that women have a key weakness that men don't have, they are the comely members and drop their defenses when anyone appreciates their comeliness. They also have an aversion to being "ugly". Men on the other hand are not the comely members and do not have the same aversion to being "ugly" when necessary.

I also appreciated the lengthy discussion on the biblical hierarchy. Christ -- head of man -- Man head of woman -- woman head of child.

So what happens when a man becomes a pastor, is his mother still his head?

He ties this into "the woman will be saved through childbearing". He makes an interesting point, she is not saved from hell, she is saved from second place. So then, the hierarchy is not a straight line, it is a circle.

The woman doesn't understand why she is "second place" to the man, but learns at home by raising children and listening to the children with the same questions as to why they are second place to the mom.

Also, this matter of head covering, it applies to everyone. Everyone has their head covered. Elders do not have the authority to "hire and fire" or to "give raises" or to assign work. It is Jesus who saves, Jesus who will reward us at His throne and Jesus who calls. Elders will also be rewarded or punished at the throne, they also need the Lord's salvation, and they also are called by the Lord.

He also connects the verse in 1Cor about Paul not permitting a woman to speak in the meeting with the context about speaking in tongues. It is not a overarching rule but rather specific to the exercise of tongues during a church meeting.

Finally, he points out again and again that these gender specific roles in the NT are so that we would raise our family well.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2018, 09:10 PM   #46
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 826
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
...Adam was created first and was not deceived..
So, which is worse, willful sin or sinning because you were deceived? The serpent deceived the woman, but the man knew what he was doing was sin, but he did it anyway. Somehow not being deceived seems to be a “badge of honor” for a man, but that could only mean he acted willfully. How is that a good thing?
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2018, 04:34 AM   #47
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,082
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
So, which is worse, willful sin or sinning because you were deceived? The serpent deceived the woman, but the man knew what he was doing was sin, but he did it anyway. Somehow not being deceived seems to be a “badge of honor” for a man, but that could only mean he acted willfully. How is that a good thing?
Good point. Seems to me they both were deceived. Adam, however, heard from God first-hand.
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2018, 08:36 AM   #48
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
So, which is worse, willful sin or sinning because you were deceived? The serpent deceived the woman, but the man knew what he was doing was sin, but he did it anyway. Somehow not being deceived seems to be a “badge of honor” for a man, but that could only mean he acted willfully. How is that a good thing?
The post you are quoting from was a summary of the positions taken from the youtube video that seeking1 referenced. Since I have summed up 45 minute video with a very brief post I think it would be more fair to actually listen to his video and then discuss what he said. In my post I made it clear that this is a key verse to the position he takes.

That said I do think this is a very interesting verse to discuss, it is crucial to the discussion (I agree with the pastor on that point, that this verse is critical) and I would like to be involved in a discussion on it. However, I am not interested in "which is worse". Instead, I believe this event reveals strengths and weaknesses of both men and women, as a result it is important in determining what roles we are each more suited to.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2018, 11:46 PM   #49
Evangelical
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,822
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Scripture is fairly clear that only the woman was deceived. Adam was not deceived and ate the fruit knowing that it was a sin (1 Tim 2:14). Adam's sin was willful, and greater than the woman's - for this reason death came through Adam directly (Romans 5:12), not Eve.

God declared that the one who had the greater sin (the man) would have the greater responsibility in the church. This may seem unfair as the one who committed the least sin should have preference but God does not make decisions in this way - God makes decisions based on His infinite wisdom.

I believe it is this way for some reasons:

Adam's sin was worse, so God had more to forgive the man, and therefore God showed more grace and love to Adam than Eve (Luke 7:47).

The ability to fall into error without knowing it (deceived) is potentially worse than willful error in regards to leadership. If the leader is deceived then it is blind leading the blind. But if the leader knows their sin, then at least they know. Even though willful sin is worse, it is easier to correct tha deception.

As an example, it is really hard to correct someone who doesn't know they have sinned or even what the concept of sin is, like a small child or an animal. If you correct them once, they will probably repeat their mistake.

But an adult who has full faculty of reason is potentially easier for God to correct and deal with, learn from their lesson and move forward. An example is David and Bathsheba - this was a willful sin on the part of David to kill her husband and it seems he started the affair, but Bathsheba was probably deceived or coerced by David into committing sin but she also shares some of the blame for not being faithful to her husband. For this reason David gets the harsher punishment and Bathsheba does not seem to be punished.
Evangelical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 07:13 AM   #50
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Wow! I guess this is what Paul means when he says we see through a glass darkly. I think your interpretation is colored by your experience of leaders willfully sinning in the LRC.

I agree with you that most of us would prefer a leader who was not easily deceived. I think we would also prefer a leader who was loyal to us and took responsibility for our error.

Again, I am not interested in proclaiming judgement as to whose sin was greater. Perhaps your interpretation is correct, perhaps Adam, after having been joined to Eve and become one flesh with her didn't want to be cut off from her. Perhaps like Truman he said "the buck stops here" and was willing to take responsibility for the fall. One thing that the preacher on the youtube video that Seeking1 got right is that there are possibly 30 different interpretations of this question.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2018, 08:03 AM   #51
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,821
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Evangelical>" ...and Bathsheba does not seem to be punished."

That the child from that sinful act died was punishment enough. Later she bore Solomon showing God's righteousness, mercy, forgiveness, and determination and wisdom to accomplish His purpose of the ages.

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2018, 04:09 PM   #52
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical View Post
Scripture is fairly clear that only the woman was deceived. Adam was not deceived and ate the fruit knowing that it was a sin (1 Tim 2:14). Adam's sin was willful, and greater than the woman's - for this reason death came through Adam directly (Romans 5:12), not Eve.
So, I dont think this was a matter of whose sin was worse/greater. I think what Paul is getting at is the fact that there is a created order. Many scholars argue that the fact that Paul goes all the way back to creation in addressing women teaching means that he is not just confronting a local cultural issue but, he is giving this as a universal principle for the church everywhere. I know that the "A" word is a touchy subject here. But God is a God of order with order comes authority. We see this playout in the angelic realm when Michael would not bring a charge against the enemy over the body of Moses. Paul is just bringing that to light here.

So, yes Eve sinned 1st but sin did not enter into humanity because of her transgressions, because she was not the head of humanity, Adam was the head of humanity. That is why Romans 5 tells us that " just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men" The cause of Eve's sin was her desire for authority, her desire to have her eyes opened and be as the Most High. Sound familliar? Maybe the serpent knew he couldn't get the man? Perhaps he tried already? The man had already been working the garden by himself prior to the creation of the woman. Perhaps the the enemy saw something in the relationship between Adam and Eve that he could take advantage of? Who knows?

But we do know that Paul, as directed by the Holy Spirit, saw fit to use this as grounds to forbid women from being in authority positions over men in the church. I think that much is clear and I think that it has been clear for almost 2000 years and that the church has been abiding in this principle since Paul wrote it. It is only in recent times (the last 70-80 years) that it is being challenged. Why is that?
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2018, 04:38 PM   #53
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
The cause of Eve's sin was her desire for authority, her desire to have her eyes opened and be as the Most High. Sound familliar?
Interesting that this was the cause of the fall, and it is also interesting that this portion in Timothy is about the woman's salvation.

3 how shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation?... 6 But one hath somewhere testified, saying,

What is man, that thou art mindful of him?
Or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels;
Thou crownedst him with glory and honor,
And didst set him over the works of thy hands:
8 Thou didst put all things in subjection under his feet.


Prior to Jesus becoming Lord of All He was first made a little lower than the angels.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2018, 05:31 PM   #54
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 826
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
... The cause of Eve's sin was her desire for authority...
Is that a verse? Where?

Nell
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2018, 05:50 PM   #55
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
Is that a verse? Where?

Nell
We all know it is not and it wasn't my intent to convey that it was a verse. But the proposition was that "you will be like God". So you tell me, what was Eve looking for?
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2018, 05:55 PM   #56
seeking1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 29
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah View Post
Interesting that this was the cause of the fall, and it is also interesting that this portion in Timothy is about the woman's salvation.

3 how shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation?... 6 But one hath somewhere testified, saying,

What is man, that thou art mindful of him?
Or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels;
Thou crownedst him with glory and honor,
And didst set him over the works of thy hands:
8 Thou didst put all things in subjection under his feet.


Prior to Jesus becoming Lord of All He was first made a little lower than the angels.
Amen! I'm in. But this is from Hebrews?
seeking1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2018, 07:13 PM   #57
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,794
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
Amen! I'm in. But this is from Hebrews?
Hebrews 2 quoting Psalm 8
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2018, 07:55 PM   #58
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 826
Default Re: Egalitarianism Vs. Complementarianism

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeking1 View Post
We all know it is not and it wasn't my intent to convey that it was a verse. But the proposition was that "you will be like God". So you tell me, what was Eve looking for?
That was only part of the conversation. The context was 1) The most subtle serpent approached Eve with a question. 2) She replies with what God said, including a phrase God had not said. 3) More conversation with the woman. 4) Her husband was standing there but did not join the conversation. 5) She eats, and gives to her husband. The rest is history.

What was she "looking for"? The verses don't really imply that she had a motive. It seems that to her it was a conversation with a subtle, and I'll say manipulative serpent that DID have a motive. She bought it. According to her confession, she was deceived. She was clearly in over her head, trying to hold her own with the subtle manipulator. Her husband just stood there watching. He was not deceived about what was happening, but neither did he join the conversation, which might have helped her. She was younger and probably less mature than her husband.

Maybe she did want to be "like God" but since she didn't initiate the exchange, that was probably not foremost in her mind. It seems that she was trying, as best she could, to answer the serpent's questions on her own, but that did not go well for her.

Just my thought.

Nell

Genesis 3 King James Version (KJV)
3 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Last edited by Nell; 04-07-2018 at 08:34 PM.
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:23 PM.


3.8.9