WOMEN IN MINISTRY: A BIBLICAL VISION

The Wesley Theological Journal ^ | Spring 96 | Sharon Clark Pearson

[xzins]

Thanks for coming by, N3. Read the section "women in the early church."

The section you cited is one of the different ways (she mentions 3(?) of them doesn't she) that people handle the issue of women in the bible.

[ScottM1968]

"This is a Nazarene Church theological site. I doubt that the lady is a liberal. She is relying extensively on scripture, and she appears to take it very seriously."

You may need to check yourself again. Although the site itself claims to be "Nazarene," it is called the "Wesley Theological Journal" and has as its first reference links to John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist church you call "liberal."

I love open-minded conservatives (and I consider myself to be quite libertarian). She is a liberal, though. It is possible you've let too many liberal teachings enter your mind.

[P-Marlowe]

From Adam clarke's Commentary:

1Co 14:34 -

Let your women keep silence in the churches - This was a Jewish ordinance; women were not permitted to teach in the assemblies, or even to ask questions. The rabbins taught that "a woman should know nothing but the use of her distaff." And the sayings of Rabbi Eliezer, as delivered, Bammidbar Rabba, sec. 9, fol. 204, are both worthy of remark and of execration; they are these: yisrephu dibrey torah veal yimsaru lenashim, "Let the words of the law be burned, rather than that they should be delivered to women." This was their condition till the time of the Gospel, when, according to the prediction of Joel, the Spirit of God was to be poured out on the women as well as the men, that they might prophesy, i.e. teach. And that they did prophesy or teach is evident from what the apostle says, 1Co_11:5, where he lays down rules to regulate this part of their conduct while ministering in the church.

But does not what the apostle says here contradict that statement, and show that the words in chap. 11 should be understood in another sense? For, here it is expressly said that they should keep silence in the church; for it was not permitted to a woman to speak. Both places seem perfectly consistent. It is evident from the context that the apostle refers here to asking questions, and what we call dictating in the assemblies. It was permitted to any man to ask questions, to object, altercate, attempt to refute, etc., in the synagogue; but this liberty was not allowed to any woman. St. Paul confirms this in reference also to the Christian Church; he orders them to keep silence; and, if they wished to learn any thing, let them inquire of their husbands at home; because it was perfectly indecorous for women to be contending with men in public assemblies, on points of doctrine, cases of conscience, etc. But this by no means intimated that when a woman received any particular influence from God to enable her to teach, that she was not to obey that influence; on the contrary, she was to obey it, and the apostle lays down directions in chap. 11 for regulating her personal appearance when thus employed. All that the apostle opposes here is their questioning, finding fault, disputing, etc., in the Christian Church, as the Jewish men were permitted to do in their synagogues; together with the attempts to usurp any authority over the man, by setting up their judgment in opposition to them; for the apostle has in view, especially, acts of disobedience, arrogance, etc., of which no woman would be guilty who was under the influence of the Spirit of God.

But - to be under obedience, as also saith the law - This is a reference to Gen_3:16 : Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. From this it is evident that it was the disorderly and disobedient that the apostle had in view; and not any of those on whom God had poured out his Spirit.

1Ti 2:12 -

Nor to usurp authority - A woman should attempt nothing, either in public or private, that belongs to man as his peculiar function. This was prohibited by the Roman laws: In multis juris nostri articulis deterior est conditio foeminarum quam masculorun,; l. 9, Pap. Lib. 31, Quaest. Foeminoe ab omnibus officiis civilibus vel publicis remotae sunt; et ideo nec judicis esse possunt, nec magistratum gerere, nec postulare, nec pro alio invenire, nec procuratores existere; l. 2, de Reg. Juris. Ulp. Lib. i. Ad Sab. - Vid. Poth. Pand. Justin., vol. i. p. 13.

"In our laws the condition of women is, in many respects, worse than that of men. Women are precluded from all public offices; therefore they cannot be judges, nor execute the function of magistrates; they cannot sue, plead, nor act in any case, as proxies." They were under many other disabilities, which may be seen in different places of the Pandects.

But to be in silence - It was lawful for men in public assemblies to ask questions, or even interrupt the speaker when there was any matter in his speech which they did not understand; but this liberty was not granted to women. See the note on 1Co_14:34, 1Co_14:35 (note).

[xzins]

John Wesley was no liberal.

Nor is this lady, imho, after reading her. She appears to have a high view of scripture ...

[ScottM1968]

Again, you and xzins continue to use Methodist sources to validate Methodist leanings.

What is wrong with using the Bible and staying away from more liberal interpretations by men?

Adam Clarke bio:

http://www.gospelcom.net/chi/DAILYF/2002/08/daily-08-26-2002.shtml

[xzins]

Adam Clarke must've been a liberal... :>)

Excellent citation, P-M. You probably got an A+ in research, didn't you?

[xzins]

It's 2 AM EST here gentlemen, and I've gotta get some shuteye. Outta here for the time being.

Adios

X

[connectthedots]

[1] ‘This article is dedicated to Dr. Marie Strong, my mentor and model, who passed into eternity January 18, 1995, and is now enjoying her reward. As a min­ister of the gospel for sixty years and as a Bible professor for over thirty years at Church of God (Anderson) colleges, “mother” Marie lived out her ministry in a church body (Church of God) that has sought to be an expression of the vision this article represents.

The Church of God (Anderson) is hardly liberal.

[P-Marlowe]

Excellent citation, P-M. You probably got an A+ in research, didn't you?

Actually I tutored other students in legal research while in law school.

"Adam Clarke (1760-1832) was one of the most influential Methodists to follow John Wesley. His monumental commentary on the Bible has been a standard reference work for over a century and has been widely used by all evangelical denominations. Its thorough and authoritative scholarship has been recognized by Arminians and Calvinists alike."

But this commentary is on my e-sword so it was easy to find:

P-Marlowe Esq. J.D.

[ScottM1968]

I will use Adam's esteemed words to validate my position:

"All that the apostle opposes here is their questioning, finding fault, disputing, etc., in the Christian Church, as the Jewish men were permitted to do in their synagogues; together with the attempts to usurp any authority over the man, by setting up their judgment in opposition to them; for the apostle has in view, especially, acts of disobedience, arrogance, etc., of which no woman would be guilty who was under the influence of the Spirit of God."

What this states that that no woman could have authority over men or attempt to usurp what they had.

For Mr. Clarke to use 1 Cor. 11:5 as a basis for women speaking at a teacher in Scripture is bizarre. That reference is as follows (NIV):

"4He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5I would like every one of you to speak in tongues,[c] but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues,[d] unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified."

Additionally, speaking occasional words to correct I do not consider "teaching" as in having authority or control over men. Even if we ignore the completely male references in the above passage, "prophesy" is not "teaching" to any great extent. It is speaking up on behalf of God when no one else does. That is generally a brief comment or two, not structured education or assigned position.

[P-Marlowe]

gain, you and xzins continue to use Methodist sources to validate Methodist leanings.

I am not now nor have I ever been a Methodist. My Church does not ordain women as pastors and I doubt that they ever will. Ergo, I have no dog in this hunt.

That being said, I do recall that the late great Walter Martin took a very similar scriptural approach to women in the ministry that Adam Clarke espoused and I have always held the opinions of Walter Martin in high regard.

Thus while I attend a church that does not allow women to be pastors, I am not at all convinced that women have no place in the pulpit. Indeed, the pulpit is never mentioned in scripture. It is a tradition.

BTW do women in your church wear gold or pearls? Are they required to wear coverings on their heads?

[ScottM1968]

I merely state that the sources that were quoted all stem from Methodist apologists and included links to prove said associations.

I cannot prove one way or the other your assertion that Walter Martin felt that women should be in authority over men. In the end, the Bible says otherwise.

It is also telling that you choose to attend a church that would not allow women to preach (again, as a true leader).

For many years I did attend a church that required women (only those who had accepted Christ) to wear a small head covering and no ornamental jewelry (some did have watches which were exchanged at the wedding, but I do not recall women wearing them at church). However, I currently do not attend there.

There is a big difference between the authority issue (imparted by God to men throughout the Bible) and other issues. However, I do encourage people to not wear jewelry and I do not even wear a watch, let alone other items.

I can be relatively consistent in my walk but I can only encourage others to do that which is right.

[P-Marlowe]

I cannot prove one way or the other your assertion that Walter Martin felt that women should be in authority over men.

I'm not sure I said that. I recall Martin expressing the opinion that as long as the ultimate authority over the church body is in the hands of a male authority, that whatever position a women held in subjection to that male authority would not be unscriptural.

In my Church the pastor has all authority over the body and there is no authority above the senior pastor. There is no Bishop or other ruling authority and thus it clearly would be unscriptural for a woman to pastor at my church. But I suggest that teaching and pastoring are two different functions. If teaching in the church is forbidden for women, then I would suspect that we'd have to close all the Sunday Schools. But then Sunday School is not exactly scriptural either, is it?

[ScottM1968]

In the churches I've attended, by the time boys become men they are up with the rest of the adults learning with them.

So again, men in my experience and from my biblical knowledge are not subjected to the formal teaching of women.

It is also my belief that those we consider ministers be under those we would have as elders or bishops, although elders can speak as ministers. I would be interested to know how your church nominates its elder/minister and if it follows the description of the elder position in Titus.

[xzins]

Thanks, PM, for sharing about Adam Clarke. Impressive signature block.

[Frumanchu]

Clarke's is a good commentary for reference, one I wish I had for Libronix.

Also available online at http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/.

[xzins]

What this states that that no woman could have authority over men or attempt to usurp what they had.

Actually, you're partially right. The word "authority over" in Greek has a unique usage. It is almost parallel to our idea of tyranny, that one has killed the legitimate leader and stolen his role. It is not, therefore, merely being in charge...it is the idea of the woman who bosses her husband around...the classic "bossy female" the one who insists on being the "queenie" of the house.

Paul was put off by that....as are most men (and women) who I know of.

There are literally millions of the following:

Judge: "You admit breaking into the dress shop four times?"

Defendent: "Yes, your honor."

Judge: "What did you steal?"

Defendent: "A dress, Your Honor."

Judge: "One dress? And yet you admit breaking in four times!"

Defendent: "Well, your Honor, you see the first three times my wife didn't like the color."

[xzins]

CoG Anderson simply is not liberal. I fully agree with you.

[Corin Stormhands]

Thanks for the ping. I'll read it later.

[kingsurfer]

My Mother as started to train as a Baptist Minister.
The general consensus is that if there are not enough men who are willing to dedicate their lives to preaching then women are welcome.

Many women in my extended family virtually keep their churches together. Some people disagree with this but I doubt that God will be too upset.