Posted on 05/12/2005 12:41:32 PM PDT by wagglebee
I personally believe that such women are mistaken in that conviction because it is inconsistent with the revealed will of God.
I personally believe that it is the responsibility for each of us to seek understanding through the Word & be less concerned about the messenger. However, each of us is given our own challenges & those faced by the different genders tend to be different.
In the beginning, man was led astray by woman. That speaks to the nature of man, rather than that of woman. As I said, each of us has our own challenges & we know who was able to get one over on her, leading her to stray. In the case of woman, it was not man. The lesson in Luke 24:10 & 11 says to me listen, but go see for yourself. Be more skeptical if the witness is a woman. Do not disbelieve, merely if the witness was a woman, for she may be speaking the truth.
I am convinced that the historic teaching of the church on the issue of women pastors and/or bishops is the true will of God concerning that issue.
Maybe you'd care to explain Huldah and Deborah to me?
But I do however object to those women who go into the pastoral ministry for the primary purpose of asserting their equality with men.
I object to anyone going into the ministry for any purpose, other than the purpose of the ministry, assisting people to find understanding in the written Word.
It of course follows that I also believe in the scripturally assigned role of men as the head of the family, and I suspect that position will earn me more scorn from the dissenting side of the aisle.
I share that understanding. However, I find it rare in men to fully understand what that role means. Too many seem to think it allows them to be heavy handed rulers. We are submissive only to those who are deserving of it, for that is in our nature. When we are loved, honored & cherished, submitting is easy & natural.
It matters for some & I have no problem with them seeking out what works for them.
Absolutely.
All true. I believe that to understand the teachings in the Bible, one must take it in it's entirety. Picking & choosing any portion to support a particular position can allow one to lose much from it's message for us.
ELCA Social Statement on Abortion
I couldn't even stand to read all of it. These people are masters at straddling the barb wire fence. They refuse to take a stand on anything.
We left this apostate church many years ago but I grieve because most of my family still attends.
I doubt very much that I can explain anything about those two OT prophets that you don't already know as well as I do. As you know, Deborah and Huldah were prophets during the time of the judges and during the kingdom age of Judah respectively. They were both chosen by God to be his messengers to Israel in the otherwise male-dominated culture of their day. The office of prophet was God's channel of communication to the political and religious leaders of Israel in the OT era, and it was of course a vitally important position during that period of time. But in spite of the claims of some modern day would-be "prophets" in TVland, I believe that office was abolished (or at least suspended, there is a mention of two prophets speaking in Jerusalem during the time of the Great Tribulation) upon the completion of the canon of scripture. I believe that in this present time all that God wants us to know about the future and our part as his children in that future is contained in his written word.
The OT prophet played a critical role in God's dealings with ancient Israel, but the role of OT prophet was not the same as that of the NT church pastor, which was an office that did not exist in the OT. The OT priesthood was not the same office as NT pastor, although it was also exclusively a male office. The biblical role of church pastor in the NT economy is analogous to the role a shepherd plays in caring for a flock of sheep that has been committed to his care. Although Paul praised several Godly Christian women who played a prominent role in the early church, they did not serve in the role of pastor.
All I can say on the matter is what I find in scripture, namely that the two women prophets you mentioned were obviously chosen by God to serve his purposes at the time in which they lived, and that it is clear (at least it is to me) that he chose not to open the role of pastor to women in the NT church age. To my mind it isn't a question of superiority or inferiority, or of one gender having been given preference over the other. It is simply a matter of a decision made by God regarding the structure of his church and the various offices within that body. I don't know why he does what he does in this matter or in many other matters, but I do know that he doesn't owe us an explanation for what he does.
I think that we have taken this discussion about as far as we can without going over the same ground again, and that when all is said and done we are essentially of the same mind. I sincerely hope that nothing I have said to you has been offensive or unkind in either tone or substance. Thanks for an interesting conversation that has given me cause to review both my opinions on the issue and the basis for those opinions.
The only purpose these clowns have is to troll here, then post about it at their circus, feeling oh-so-superior and witty. Which they are not. :)
They certainly aren't interested in the Conservative agenda, in fact they are what I might call Jeffords Republicrats.
And you might also be interested to know that a "scorched earth" policy has been declared. I guess that means they'll drink more and rant louder. LOL.
I agree with you about the time of prophets being suspended, for now. But I am watchful. In Acts 2 we are reminded of the prophecy of Joel. In the end times, prophets will be among us again.
I think that we have taken this discussion about as far as we can without going over the same ground again, and that when all is said and done we are essentially of the same mind.
I agree.
I sincerely hope that nothing I have said to you has been offensive or unkind in either tone or substance.
Rest assured, you were always the gentleman. Besides, I'm no hot house flower & am difficult to offend. Many try, but few succeed. LOL
Thanks for an interesting conversation that has given me cause to review both my opinions on the issue and the basis for those opinions.
I would like to thank you & for the same reason.
Which Scriptures? The original Hebrew and Greek or subsequent translations? What do you say when you know that men decided which of the scriptures were included in the Bible? What do you do about internal inconsistencies? You may believe that God dictated Leviticus and Deuteronomy, but does accepting them as Divine in origin mean that their prescriptions apply today?
Hadden might want to reconsider the wording of his question. Just about every divinity student learns that he has to interpret the Bible to get close to what it means and that even the devil can quote Scripture to suit his ends. If they're honest with themselves and the questioner plenty of ministers would shy away from a statement expressed in such unqualified terms.
I am not worried about a bunch of loser internet bullies. Y'know there are a few respectable people there who have some legit grievences-but our pal here is just a wanna be player. I don't hate her- I am ashamed that I ever gave her the benefit of the doubt. She is classless. Too bad- I am sure her family could use someone with their head screwed on right.I see her latest great contribution to society is mocking someone's ethnicity..(incorrectly so BTW) and showing the world what a racist she is. Is that what they have in mind for their scorched earth attack? LOL!!!
>>Chaplain Wants Christ Out of Air Force Academy<<
That's not the best choice for title.
The specific problem is that too many Jewish cadets and non-evangelical Chrisitians are reporting harrassment.
If you do not accept the authority of the Scriptures and the apostle's teaching, then you are right I suppose.
Who was your first teacher?
But the woman was deceived by the serpent.
So kind of you to spell out what I meant, when I said "we know who was able to get one over on her, leading her to stray. In the case of woman, it was not man."
Were you trying to make some kind of point by doing that?
Yes.
What was your point?
Unlike civilian pastors, chaplains are the shepherds of ALL the men and women in their units. As a chaplain, I was required to "provide" for the religious needs of ALL my people, and their families. I "performed" religious ceremonies for those in my unit, and others visiting in the area, who were of like faith and practise, but I provided fao ALL.
Ditto.
Thank you. I remember that the chaplains we had provided for very different sects of Christianity, but I didn't know more than that. I did not suspect that our Army would discriminate regarding the issue at all, but the religion I asked about is understandably (with history in mind) cautious and selective in some ways in easier civilian circumstances (thus, my question). So by your reply, I take it that our military does put ingenuity and extra effort into religious needs too, when such needs are present. And chaplains apparently train quite a bit or have the opportunity and materials to do more study. Thanks again, Brother LiteKeeper.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.