Women elders?

[stanuel]

Well, this is meant to be the area for healthy debate and I can't think of much that gets people more healthily debating than the role of women in church leadership! I'll start the ball rolling and let's see where we end up!

Jesus appointed twelve men to be his leadership team - if he wanted women to lead churches why didn't he include at least one woman?

[Shann]

Although I try to stay out of these discussions as they often get over my head, I think the answer is obvious--women were looked at totally differently back then. However she did show his love and respect for women several times throughout the Gospel. The kind way in which he treated the prostitutes, Mary, Martha, the hemorrhaging woman to name a few off the top of my head all show the great respect as well as possibly the knowledge of how important women would become in this world.

[Paula22466]

Jesus appointed twelve men to be his leadership team - if he wanted women to lead churches why didn't he include at least one woman?

Because men get all freaked out when women try to lead.

[stanuel]

I think the answer is obvious--women were looked at totally differently back then.

Yes, absolutely...although Jesus didn't seem to bow to societal pressure in any other situation, touching lepers, eating with tax collectors, allowing prostitutes to wash his feet, driving the money lenders out of the temple, calling the teachers of the law 'hypocrites'...the Bible clearly treats women very differently to the way you'd expect from a text written so long ago; they were the first eyewitnesses of the risen Christ and are named as notable members of church congregations...but never as elders.

Because men get all freaked out when women try to lead.

Is that an argument for or against women eldership? I'm assuming against; God created eldership as a male only role so gave men the 'freak out' gene in case we went against his plan?!

[Paula22466]

Because men get all freaked out when women try to lead.

Is that an argument for or against women eldership? I'm assuming against; God created eldership as a male only role so gave men the 'freak out' gene in case we went against his plan?!

The 'freak out' gene is not given by God, it's from the devil.

[jo555]

I think the answer is obvious--women were looked at totally differently back then.

Yes, absolutely...although Jesus didn't seem to bow to societal pressure in any other situation, touching lepers, eating with tax collectors, allowing prostitutes to wash his feet, driving the money lenders out of the temple, calling the teachers of the law 'hypocrites'...the Bible clearly treats women very differently to the way you'd expect from a text written so long ago; they were the first eyewitnesses of the risen Christ and are named as notable members of church congregations...but never as elders.

Because men get all freaked out when women try to lead.

Is that an argument for or against women eldership? I'm assuming against; God created eldership as a male only role so gave men the 'freak out' gene in case we went against his plan?!

Absolutely, Jesus did not bow down to societal pressures, but he did take into consideration other factors, which I believe are things like unnecessary offenses and priorities. Jesus also abided by the law, but didn't let it rule his heart (the greater good). And, he followed traditions and customs at times too. It may help to review his answer to the apostles about paying taxes, and what Paul wrote about not eating certain foods if it unnecessarily offends someone and hinders them from moving forward.

Now, I do believe there is neither male nor female, neither Jew nor Gentile, in Christ as scriptures say. Yet, because we don't always remain in the Vine, there has been a structure set up to help us continue to grow and such. In those instances, whatever scriptures have laid out in regards to structure would apply. And, those really have to be viewed in context and such.

[Colswann1]

I think the reason why Jesus did't pick women as disciples was because he would have though they could best be occupied being at home looking after the kids.

[jo555]

I think the reason why Jesus did't pick women as disciples was because he would have though they could best be occupied being at home looking after the kids.

Typical. Another man just trying to keep us barefoot and pregnant.

Just kidding!


In all honest, I'm not too big on women's lib, even as I appreciate the things it has brought in.

[stanuel]

I hear y'all, but it sounds a tad too convenient for me. There are quite a few Bible passages that need explaining away with the context card...what do you make of 1 Timothy 2:12?

[Colswann1]

I hear y'all, but it sounds a tad too convenient for me. There are quite a few Bible passages that need explaining away with the context card...what do you make of 1 Timothy 2:12?

Nice to have a fellow blunt yorkshireman in here rocking the boat. You can take over from me--but watch out for the sisterhood they can give you a rough time. Women are big in here and we men are in a minority--we must stick together.
But then a young handsome man may get a different reaction from the ladies.

[Shann]

No Colin looks make no difference. I blame things on that pesky y chromosome. It interfere with that common sense steam of thought. I still say though the custom st the time treated women as servants only put on the earth to do man's bidding, but Jesus did the opposite. He treated them with respect and could feel their pain as well as he could feel his own. If Jesus had put women in a powerful position such as his disciples he would be jeopardizing her and her family. There is a reason behind everything. I believe God selected Mary, a young unwed mother to give birth to his son because he knew in the future their would be young unwed mothers and their children. He knows personally how much it hurts to be called a bastard. He arranged situations like this so he would truly understand the pain his children would go through in the future. There is nothing quite as comforting as knowing you are not along. How awesome to have a Savior who truly gets it first hand.

There were many women who were crucial to Jesus' ministries both during his life and after. Lydia did amazing things in the early church. Jesus did not look down on women but treated them with respect and love and for me that says it all. We are each given certain gifts and regardless of the y chromosome, He expects us to live up to his expectations. Think about how much faith God has in each one of us. He knows of what we are capable and will except no less so if he created a female to be a leader he has his reasons that may be way beyond our understanding.

[Paula22466]

what do you make of 1 Timothy 2:12?

The Pauline letters are literally overrun with evidence of women in roles such as traveling evangelists and serving as local leaders in the church, not to mention Paul calls many women by authoritative names.

In Romans 16, Paul addresses 16 women in his greeting

In Romans 16 Paul addresses Junia, a woman, by the title of "apostle"

In Romans 16, Paul calls a woman named Phoebe a diakonos or deacon. Even for those who will not translate this word into "deacon," it’s hard to deny the most conservative translation would still have Phoebe being a leader in her local church, with a recognized ministry.

In Philippians 4, Paul tells us two women, Euodia & Syntche were with Barnabus and himself preaching the gospel.

Several places Paul speaks of Priscilla & Aquila (naming Priscilla first which is significant) as being "church leaders." We also know Paul used Priscilla to teach Apollos in Acts 18.

In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul makes it clear that women did pray and prophesy openly in church, and he did not admonish but simply instructed on the how.

In light of all this evidence, and more, which I don’t have time to list, would you think that your one verse (I Tim 2:12) is a “sit down and shut-up” verse to women? (as many men, unfortunately, would like to interpret)

[Come forth]

Maybe women should not be leaders because they get too emotional;

But what do you then do with all the emotional, ranting, raving men that bully all the emotional, loving women?

I support what Paula says. To quote a few Scriptures without understanding their context and reading them in light of ALL of the Word is always dangerous. The New Testament is full of women leaders/elders/preachers and, praise God for His awesome ability to use who He wishes to use, they did a fantastic job.

But not only the new, also the old. Was not Deborah a judge? Also a prophetess? Who chose her to fill that role? Want to argue with Him?

Just one other small thing, going back to emotional reasoning. There is no way this man is going to tell his wife that she is not a great spiritual leader. Not only because of the cost, but also because it is a sin to lie.

Blessings, Graham.

[jo555]

I hear y'all, but it sounds a tad too convenient for me. There are quite a few Bible passages that need explaining away with the context card...what do you make of 1 Timothy 2:12?

Nice to have a fellow blunt yorkshireman in here rocking the boat. You can take over from me--but watch out for the sisterhood they can give you a rough time. Women are big in here and we men are in a minority--we must stick together.
But then a young handsome man may get a different reaction from the ladies.

Ha! That gave me a good laugh.

Some brave Englishmen in here.

Getting a taste of what we women have had to put up with, hum?

Be nice or I will cry . . . Them emotions, ya know, being used to my advantage.

[Paula22466]

I support what Paula says. To quote a few Scriptures without understanding their context and reading them in light of ALL of the Word is always dangerous. The New Testament is full of women leaders/elders/preachers and, praise God for His awesome ability to use who He wishes to use, they did a fantastic job.

Thank you! So nice to find a man who agrees.

Just one other small thing, going back to emotional reasoning. There is no way this man is going to tell his wife that she is not a great spiritual leader. Not only because of the cost, but also because it is a sin to lie.

This is interesting. I have noted in my particular church, the very men ( the good 'ole boys) who take the most pride in these so called "shut up and sit down" passages are the same men who openly and admittedly submit to their wives (as scripture calls all believers to submit to one another). The submission is mutual as far as I can tell, but inside the church, for some unknown reason to me, they enjoy spouting their bigoted remarks. What a shame.