Posted on 08/24/2006 10:02:06 AM PDT by presidio9
A U.S. Baptist preacher has publicly defended himself for firing a female Sunday School teacher after more than 50 years on the job because he believes the Bible bans women from teaching men.
Watertown First Baptist Church Pastor Tim LaBouf, also a city council member in Watertown, N.Y., said women could fulfill any role or responsibility they wanted to -- outside the church.
"My belief is that the qualifications for both men and women teaching spiritual matters in a church setting end at the church door, period," LaBouf said in a statement on the church Web site (http://www.nnyinfo.com/firstbaptist).
LaBouf and the church board fired Mary Lambert, 81, earlier this month in a letter that cited the scriptural qualifications for Sunday School teachers, Lambert said.
"They quote First Timothy Two, 11-14: A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent," Lambert said, reading from the letter.
"I was astonished," she said. "I would not go back and teach as long as this is their thinking."
Watertown is 250 miles northwest of New York City.
William Carlsen, executive minister for American Baptist Churches of New York State, said U.S. Baptist Churches are autonomous and that there would not be many other Baptist Churches that share LaBouf's view.
"A considerable number if not a majority of American Baptist Churches have been quite aggressive in affirming the place of women's leadership roles within the church," Carlsen said.
The board of the Watertown First Baptist Church said in a statement on its Web site that the scripture rules concerning women teaching men in a church setting had only played a small part in Lambert's sacking.
"Christian courtesy motivates us to refrain from making any public accusations against her," the board said.
Good luck with your ESL studies, then.
Sarah--- I felt sorry for her then I got angry with her.....
Hagar I really, REALLY felt sorry for....."Here hunny, screw the help so you can have a kid!"
Bathsheba was another bad girl and an adulteress (and pretty much written out of the story once hubby was killed).
Rachel I don't remember much more of than 7 years and 7 more years. I felt sorry for her too because her father treated her like a prize heiffer.
Esther I just mentioned.
OK, What I am trying to say is you KNOW the men...you hear their stories, prayers, struggles, actually feel their angst and what draws them to God... you see them work through disbelief to faith. You feel their pain.
The women are just either good to start with, bad and stay bad for the most part, or property. Again, as a woman, I don't see much going on inside their pretty little heads other than being quiet and obdient or raising hell and getting into trouble (me I guess).
Plenty of that going-on here. Why should I hold back?
"I just don't see any woman I have anything in common with (other than Salome & Vashti, but they were the bad girls)..."
Do you normally have a lot in common with anyone who lived 2000 to 4000 years ago?
"Good luck with your ESL studies, then."
While communication can be a constant challenge, english is not my second language. I don't think you've impressed anyone with your ability to debate, critical thinking skills, or manners. Your moniker is quite appropiate but thats not necessarily a good thing.
Additionally, knowledge of english does not equate to being intelligent.
I'm human aren't I? In common simply means I understand them. I better understand Galileo's daughter or Abigail Adams or even Queen Elizabeth I than I do biblical characters.
Heck, I even understand Bodicca's mind better.
I don't think time in years is the issue, it's the hand of the writer....the one conveying the story.
I don't know how many of the men I have anything in common with. I know some I would like to be able to emulate.
The rest of this is long, so please read it when you have some time.
All quotes below taken from the English Standard Version as found at Biblegateway.com.
John 6:53-59
Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever." He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
Christians read this today and say, "He was talking about communion." The Jews that Jesus was talking to did not have that context. They saw this as an absolutely shocking and revolting statement. Taken at face value, this is cannibalism, which is what the early Church was accused of. Even if they had understood that he was to become a sacrifice for sin (the Jews ate the flesh of their sin offerings) drinking blood was absolutely forbidden by G-d. They were never to drink blood because the blood was the life of the creature. Blood was shed for atonement of sin because without the shedding of blood there could be no atonement, but it never passed their lips.
It was a more scandalous statement than someone today saying, "Unless you rape me you can not go to heaven." What do you think the response would be to such a thing?
John 6:66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.
No flock, Sherlock. Notice that these are disciples who abandoned Him. It was cool up to now, Boss, but this is plain crazy and we won't be a part of it any longer.
John 6: 67-69
"You do not want to leave too, do you?" Jesus asked the Twelve.Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God."
Note that Peter did not say, "This does not bother us." He said, "Where will we go?"
To Peter, as to all of us, the issue isn't whether Jesus makes us comfortable. In fact, if Jesus makes you comfortable you probably need to look at your faith a bit. When you read the letters of Paul in historical order he goes from calling himself an undeserving Apostle to a sinner to the chief of sinners. He was clearly never comfortable with Jesus.
The question isn't whether Jesus makes us comfortable, but whether He is the Holy One of G-d.
If He is not, then no biggie. Go after whatever floats your boat. But if He is...
When Peter says, "You have the words of eternal life," he is not talking about Heaven versus Hell. That's unending life, not eternal life. People are unending, but not eternal. Our lives have a starting point. Peter was not referring to whether he was going to Heaven or Hell. Peter was referring to the ability of Jesus to infuse us with G-d's life - the Holy Spirit. I don't follow Jesus because I would go to Hell if I didn't. I follow Jesus because the relationship with G-d is the greatest reward anyone can offer me. To have G-d place His Spirit in me, I can not tell you what that is worth.
You should know by now that I believe He places His same Spirit in women as in men.
Shalom b'Shem Yeshua.
Shalom.
Be who and what you want to be. Don't blame others for it.
Shalom.
Doesn't matter. You've made an impression.
Shalom.
Thanks,
You really are helping.
And one day, I just may re-write the Bible as if all the writers were female ;) It's a thought!
Anne Rice has had the courage to write the parts of Christ's life that aren't in the Bible (and taken some lumps for it). Why not do as you have suggested. If you let the Holy Spirit within you be your guide you may provide a very powerful teaching tool for women looking for G-d, and for arrogant men who need a reality check.
Shalom.
Thank you. My work here is done. LOL
This scripture is speaking of the marriage relationship at home. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the general relationship between all males and all females. How do we know this? Simple. You quote 1Tim2:12. But you leave out he following 3 verses which correlate and complete the thought. I will type them for you:
For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. (1Tim2:13-15)
The word "for" in verse 13 connects and correlates these scriptures with the previous. The word "they" in verse 15 proves that the author is speaking of husband and wife and NOT the general relationship between all males and all females. Also, in verse 15 it speaks of the WIFE being saved trough childbearing which can only relate to the marriage relationship in the home. It is unethical to only quote vs 12 and leave these out. But its done all the time to prove the false doctrine of demanding women's silence in the church.
It is an insult to God to promote the theory that women must be silent in the church. IN 1Cor14:34, 35, the author is repeating a quote from the corinthians letter (similar to what I did in italics above). We know this from 1Cor 7:1. In 1Cor 14:36, the author rebukes the corinthians for even thinking such a thing. "what? came the Word of God out from you?"
The first person to preach Jesus as the Messiah was a woman (Luke2:36). And she never left the temple and taught everyone in Jerusalem that came to the temple looking for the Messiah.
It is astounding that these scriptures have been misquoted, misused, and misinterpreted to promote a false doctrine.
Here is the context if anyone is interested
Therefore, I desire that men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In the same way also, I desire that women adorn themselves in decent clothing, with modesty and sensibleness, not adorned with braiding, or gold, or pearls, or costly clothing, but with good works, which becomes women professing godliness. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I do not allow a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. But she will be kept safe through childbearing, if they continue in faith and love and holiness with sensibleness.
(1Ti 2:8-15 MKJV)
"It is unethical to only quote vs 12 and leave these out. But its done all the time to prove the false doctrine of demanding women's silence in the church."
Who was demanding a womans "silence" in the church? I surely wasn't.
Did you read the lead article? Sorry, but I was responding to a question posed by mountn man.
No thanks. There are many other ways to get your 'message' across, without changing the Word. Beth Moore has managed to lead many women to understand their role in God's plan without trying to rewrite scripture.
Your posts make you sound like you hate men and blame God for for the way you respond to them.
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.