Women in the Pulpit?

[benshelpmeet]

Should women be in the Pulpit?


Years ago in not so distant past this would not even been an issue, but times are changing, We need to not just go with the modern flow, but know what the bible has to say on this issue and make decissions based on scripture and honor God.

On another board I got in a decussion with a woman who believed with all her heart that God wanted her to be the pastor of her church. She said she was the pastor. She preached to the congregation there at her church and felt justified in her own site, but what does the bible have to say on this issue?


Go to this site and read this helpful article:

www.geocities.com/balancedword/wp/wp1.html

[Sojourner]

Good article, thanks for posting it. Just a few notes from my past.

1. When i began attending the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY in 1995, one of the first changes current President Dr Mohler was making was letting students and churches know that the school will not endorse women in the pulpit serving as a pastor. Of course, women were allowed to get their education there, including the D.Min. and PhD tracks, but they seminary did not believe that women should be serving as pastors.

2. At that time my wife was working on her MDiv with me, one of the core requirements was a class called "The Ministry of Proclomation", or a preaching class. She did not want to take it, but did regardless and did benefit from it. The Prof was African-American and sympathetic to the ladies in the class (as are all of the preaching profs) and they do encourage ladies that although they are not called to preach in the role of a pastor, they none the less have a message because of what Christ has done in their hearts. The class was a benefit to my wife in terms of teaching, but also helped reassure her in her Biblical conviction concerning women and preaching.

3. I went through the battle over whether or not women should be serving as a pastor and/or elder in a church. I was on staff at a church with a group of elders i did not have any say so in appointing...and i was very much in the minority. Which is partly why, i'm convinced, i am no longer on staff at that church. My point to them was the Bible is clear that the elder is the "husband of one wife" and until they find a way for a woman to be the husband of one wife, i'm standing on what the Bible says.

The bad thing about women who take on the role of pastor is that they first of all find a way to compromise that truth of scripture...and then it snow balls. If you look at the majority of women pastors, many of them are liberal in their views of scripture, salvation, the God head and on social issues like homosexuality and abortion. And it all starts with compromising one "little" truth.

in HIS grip
bobby

[funnyd]

If you started attending Southern in 1995, you missed the really stormy years there. Dr. Mohler's predecessor, Roy Honeycutt, was one of the liberal sympathizers that the SBC conservatives spent the better part of 2 decades trying to root out.

Dr. Mohler's specific comments about women preachers were probably a result of the fallout over the firing of professor Molly Marshall, who was not only in favor of women preachers, but was also found to be a universalist. Up until Dr. Mohler's arrival, the school was a spiritual cesspool full of teachers who denied the inerrancy of Scripture, the virgin birth of Jesus, and even the necessity of the salvation experience!

I highly recommend you read the book The Baptist Reformation by Jerry Sutton. He details the liberalism that nearly destroyed the SBC and the efforts made by Paige Patterson, Paul Pressler, Jerry Vines, Adrian Rogers, and many others to pull the convention back to is Biblical roots. The chapter about Southern Seminary is particularly eye-opening.

- David

[Sojourner]

In 1995, when i started, it was the beginning of the end of the liberalism at Southern. The hateful protests by the extreme liberal students had passed, but there was still a very vocal liberal minority there. I saw that last of the liberal profs leave during the first couple of years i was there.

I hadn't read the book you mentioned, but i did read one called, and i'm not real sure of the title, "House on Shifting Sand" (i think) written in the mid 80's showing why the conservative ressurgence was needed in the the SBC and how for 50 years Southern Seminary had led the way into the murkiness of liberalism. Up to the year before i began attending Southern, there were a handful of teachers in the school of theology teaching nothing short of heresy. The effects of those 50 years are very evident in the some of the SBC churches of KY also. I went to college in South MS where there are more baptists than people, and Southern was a joke there.

[mavmin]

May a Woman Pastor?

The question really is may a woman pastor rather than can a woman pastor. The following quote from U.S. News and World Report shows that they can and do pastor.
More Women Preachers - "Women are admitted to the ministry in about 80 Christian denominations and to the rabbinate in Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist Judaism. They account for a third of all students in seminary programs." (Aug 10, USN & WR) Leadership by women is becoming more and more prevalent, even in Southern Baptist churches. The largest church in the world is in Korea, pastored by David Yonggi Cho, a charismatic, and women make up two-thirds of the 700 pastors who help guide this megachurch (1994 Charisma). What the Bible says seems to no longer matter. -Calvary Contender, Huntsville, AL
I have always wondered about folks that call themselves Christians and then proceed to deny or redefine everything the Word has to say. I don't mean plain folks that sin. We may acknowledge the Word is true, but our flesh may deceive us and our lusts draw us away, but when asked the true believers will acknowledge that what they did was sin. We will not deny it. We will not say the Bible doesn't say it was sin. We may try to justify our sin and pass the buck like Adam and Eve, but we will not deny what the Word says about sin or our particular act or attitude.
I am talking about theologians that claim to be Christians yet deny Inspiration, Incarnation, Salvation, the Virgin Birth, etc. etc. I am puzzled as to why these people did not become social workers or analysts or whatever instead of preachers and theologians. A Buddhist monk ought to believe in Buddha and his teachings as should a Moslem believe in Mohammed and his teachings. If a person wants to be a Christian then they ought to believe in Christ and His teachings. They ought to be disciples and not masters. They should not think that they could teach Christ a thing or two or second-guess Him. Yet, these enlightened ones feel they can just rip out Scripture and deny the very One they claim to follow. I find it at best hypocritical and at the worse blasphemous. They need to find another line of work. At least leave the ministry and be honest unbelievers rather than wolves in sheep's clothing. Although, I should not be astonished for these kind were prophesied about in 2 Cor. 11:14, 2 Peter 2:1 and Jude 4. These I expect and can dismiss as liars for so also is their father (John 8:44).
I do get worried though when true believers start hem-hawing around and feel like after 2000 years of Church history and teaching that they have somehow gotten special revelation and will set us on the right path. Not that the Church has never erred or had need of prophets to restore her. Revival is constantly needed. However, when we start leaving the traditional or orthodox teaching in pursuit of what smacks of bowing to cultural pressure then I question the new revelation these folks have received.
I once stopped and challenged two Mormon missionaries to prove to me they were correct and I would convert. As you can see, I am not a Mormon. We discussed many subjects, but one was their revelations. The Mormons once taught that if a black man were saved he would turn white. They also did not allow black men to become Elders. It has been awhile back, but as I recall, about the time the IRS was fixing to pull their tax-exempt status over this issue their prophets received revelation that the black man could now be an Elder. That is just a bit suspect for an old boy like me and I informed the Elder that I was speaking to that if the IRS ever decided that tax-exempt status would withdrawn if the Mormon Church did not ordain women their prophets would get another amazing revelation. He said it would never happen. I hope he remembers the Baptist bible college student that told him that when it happens. Maybe he will wake up and convert.
That is an example of "faith" bowing to social or cultural pressures. I believe that we Bible-believing Christians are doing the same thing in regards to women in the pastorate. We live in an age of women's liberation and political correctness and we kow-tow to that nonsense.
I just find it hard to believe that for all these years every godly theologian that could parse Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic upside down and backwards just did not see the sexism in the Bible and seek to rectify God's error. How could they have missed everything that today's enlightened scholar now sees so clearly? Were they slaves to their culture? The fiery Luther who could not recant because the Word of God held his mind captive could not see the nuances that make it fine for a woman to pastor? I have great doubts that he would have missed that in his search for the truth as he found the liberty of grace and salvation by faith. He dismissed the celibacy of monks and nuns as man's fabrications. I believe he would have torn down the wall of sexism if he had seen it in the doctrine of men only in the pastorate. Tyndale, Wycliffe, Moody, Torrey, Spurgeon, and many other great saints of God whose oratory, interpretational skills and knowledge of the Scripture make our modern day scribes look like they failed kindergarten did not see what these new kids on the block see. God moved in those men of old in ways that our current batch of theologians can only write about in awe and wonder. May we all soon experience His glory where we can stand in awe and wonder and not just have the hearing of the ear! Then we will be set aright in our theology and write from a fresh fullness of His Spirit and Presence!
One thing that we must remember when we study the Scriptures is that the chapter and verse divisions are not inspired. They were added for ease of reading and as a method to aid memorization. With that in mind, let us start I Tim 3 back in 2:11. I hope that this will hope clear up some confusion about a few issues.
Paul will be discussing the qualifications of a pastor and a deacon and starts out with some instruction to women. I believe Paul is going to answer some questions before they are asked which I a great way to end controversy although in our day it is a great way to start it.

1 Tim 2:11-15

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

I know of no other way to approach this than directly. It is pretty straightforward.
For the NIV folks it does not come across any different.

1 Tim 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. (NIV)

Some thought subjection was a dirty word. Full submission seems stronger to me.

In the layout of the first century church worship, men sat in the front and women in the back. Before you get all sideways about that let's look at this through a modern educational perspective. When I was in college, back in the old days, they often told us what our grade would be by the roll we sat in. The A roll was up front which meant all the back roll Baptists among us were going to be the D and F people. All rules have an exception. Some of us did well in the back, but we had to work a little harder at it because of distractions and the greater temptation to doze, chatter, write love notes etc.
With that in mind, let us look at this setup. Men were to be the leaders. If you want your leaders trained the to be all that they can be then you want them as close to the speaker as possible. Remember there were no microphones and amplifiers in those days. Since women would have access to the leaders via their fathers or husbands they had opportunities to pick up on anything they missed by asking questions when they got home.

1 Cor 14:34-35
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. (KJV)

This actually accomplished several things. The men got to practice what they learned by teaching their wives and family and it also gave the wives some quality time with their husbands. It kept the man aware of his responsibility to love his wife like the Lord did the church and as he taught her she would respect him and grow closer to him. Independence of either sex is a modern thing. They were to be one flesh and mutually dependent (not co-dependent) upon each other and the Lord. The system does not seem that bad. Maybe we need to have a revival and return to that first century practice.
Now some women were maybe more zealous, aggressive, impatient or whatever and they would shout out questions during the service. Some would chatter to one another about their understanding or opinions about what was being taught. And if their husband happened to be near them they might have even elbowed him and asked a question. This would be disruptive to the service and hinder their learning as well as anyone else present. With that understanding, women being silent in church and asking their husbands at home makes sense and in keeping with the injunction to let everything be done in decency and in order which happens to show up five verses after the instruction to ask the husbands at home. (I Cor 14:40) Is it hard to see the correlation?
Now, if all that were really meant to be sexist, it would have been easier to just dump the women out on the street and keep them out of the service. It is just an injunction to behave well in the church. If you are honest, you will admit that you have seen some of the same things going on in the church today.
I once was a candidate at a church where the women sat on one side and the men on the other. How this Brethren church got my resume I will never know, but I went and ministered to them. My wife was not real fond of the seating arrangement. One reason is that she is kind of shy and did not like being dropped into a group of strangers. Another reason is that she is an elbower. Whenever the preacher says something that she deems I ought to take note of I get an elbow in the ribs. I must be getting better because she doesn't do that near as often as when we were younger. ;-) From the pulpit, I have seen many women whispering to one another or to their husband during my preaching. It only proves what one of my professors always said was true, "Human nature hasn't changed since Adam and it won't until after the Rapture."
I don't believe that it is teaching that a woman must be mute whenever she enters a church building or that she cannot sing or teach women or children. She is not to teach men and especially as a pastor-teacher (Eph 4:11) because that means she would have authority over men and that is an usurping authority as the next verse says should not be done. She is to learn in silence. The silence is tied to learning, which normally takes place during a service of some kind.

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.






13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

There are those who like to write off a lot of things in the New Testament because they think that a lot of teaching is merely a culture thing and can be changed with culture as culture changes. They have a bit of a problem here. Paul ties his previous teaching and the following to the creation and the fall. In essence, they are eternal teachings since they cannot be changed and certainly from a culture far removed from Paul's. The roles of men and women were set at creation and means they are not cultural things that can be changed.
When I taught on the fall, I suggested that the man being made the leader and the woman placed in subjection was actually a part of the curse placed on man and not the woman. Since Adam was created first he was accountable for Eve. Why was she able to be deceived? If she had a question, why weren't they communicating? Where was he when all this was going on? If absent, why was he? If present, why did he not step in? Why did he eat if he was not deceived? Why did he not run like a wild man to God and intercede for Eve? I am sure you have other questions.
What we do know is that the race did not fall until Adam ate. Death entered through Adam and is destroyed by Christ, the second Adam. Eve may have been the first sinner, but Adam was indeed the first failure. He lost it all. Any conjectures we have are truly that. It may have been a romantic thing. He knew she was going to die and he did not want to live without her so he ate. It may have been a selfish thing. He wanted to eat, but used her as a guinea pig. He also misunderstood the concept of death and when she did not immediately drop over or seem to suffer any harm, then he felt it safe to eat. We have not been told all those things and we may never know. The bottom line is that God held Adam responsible and accountable and the same is true for all the male descendents of Adam. Adam blew his leadership role. Men, how are we doing? Conversely, Eve blew her helpmeet role. Ladies, how are you doing?

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

It means that if she stays close to God she will not die during childbirth. This was a very big issue at that time and still is in some countries to this day. Please note that while Paradise was lost through the actions of both sexes, it is also regained through the use of both. Christ came as a man to regain what Adam lost, but since He chose to be born of a woman and give her a part in redemption it is a picture example of what happens to the forgiven sinner. We are now given a part in God's redemption of the world as we live in faith, charity, holiness and sobriety. It is sad that we dwell on the fall and point fingers at each other when we should be raising holy hands together rejoicing that He used both and is using both in redemption. Our roles may be different, but our goals are to be the same.

CHAPTER 3

1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

Now, we get down to the topic issue. Since it is the role of the man to lead and have authority. A woman would have difficulty being a bishop/overseer. The office requires one to have authority. A woman is not to have authority over a man so how could a woman pastor a church? This is outside of the biblical roles of women.
Again, the question is not of ability. Can a woman deliver a sermon? Sure, many do as the quote from USN & WR states. Can a woman perform the myriad duties of a pastor? Sure, those same ladies would have to do those duties. Would it even be possible that she could perform those duties better than some men? Yep. I have no doubts about it because there are men in the ministry that God did not call nor equip and they are doing a poor job. Therefore, another man or woman neither called nor equipped could do a better job than some of those men. The question is not ability, but permission and authority to pastor.
I do believe that God has called and equipped women to minister. Paul mentions women who ministered to him and the saints. Women are called to teach other women. (Titus 2:3-5) Women teach children. (2 Tim 1:5; 3:14-15) Some of those children grow up to be men and leaders. Being a godly mother and grandmother may bring you more rewards in Heaven than some pastors get. Your influence may reach father than theirs. One can only guess the rewards a Susanna Wesley might get since she raised two sons who shook the world.
All men and women are called to minister. The word means servant. It may not be as flashy a term as Pastor, but it is just as needed and can provide even more rewards. Look at our world. Do children need ministering? Who best has the ability to nurture a hurt and lonely child? Who has the most influence on a child? Compare the number of times you hear "Thanks, Mom" to "Thanks, Dad" from folks who receive public recognition. Who do "Da Boys" say, hello to most when they catch the camera on them? A child may love and respect their Dad, but they will always cling to Mom. Talk about a man's Dad and he may cuss you, but talk about his Mother and he will bust you.

[mavmin]

Take another look and see how young women are doing? No pain, hurt or confusion there right? Somewhere a generation or so of older women have abdicated their call to ministry and the young women are suffering from it. They are more likely to do drugs, be promiscuous, and allow themselves to be abused than any other time in our history. Who will minister to them? Male pastors have limited ministry to women who have grown to hate or mistrust men. Who can better understand these women than women? Ladies, you have a calling and an equipping to minister in a way so powerful that you can literally change the world if you will submit to the role God has given you instead of seeing it as a second-class, hand me down thing of oppression. The world needs you and the Lord has called you. Will you answer His call?


2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

If there is still any doubt that a woman was not meant to pastor, this verse should end the discussion for reasonable folks who believe the Bible to be the Word of God. Of course, if you do not hold that basic premise then it would not matter if it were in the Bible 900 times from Genesis to Revelation you would find all kinds of intricate ways to dispute it with your vast enlightenment. Such a pity that wisdom shall die with you. (Job 12:2,3)
For the rest of us, plain language makes plain sense. A woman will have a hard time being the husband of one wife. Since homosexuality is a sin and not condoned there is no room for a same sex marriage here where one woman could call herself the "husband." While I am here, I openly rebuke SBC churches that sanction same sex marriages and I trust the Convention will quickly remove them from fellowship as well as those who have women pastors. Soul liberty does not include blatantly disregarding the clear teachings of the Word.
Secondly, just a few verses ago, Paul instructed under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and eternal principles that women were not to teach in the assembly. This would make it kind of tough to pastor. The Greek word that is translated as teach is the same in both passages. Paul therefore leaves no doubt that the pastor-teacher is to be male. There are no ifs, ands, ors or what about in this passage.
We have a couple of choices. We either maintain our belief that Bible is from cover to cover the preserved, verbal-plenary, inspired word or God or it isn't. If it isn't then we have no assurance of anything. The foundations are destroyed and the righteous cannot stand. (Psalms 11:3). If it is all that then we have a couple of choices. We can obey it or not. If we do, all is well. If we don't then things turn out not so well. This really is one of the easier things to obey. If we mess this up how will we handle the tough issues and choices.

3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

These are good characteristics for either sex regardless of our place in the body and need no discussion.

4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

Here is another reference to the man being the head of his home and the one God holds accountable. How he rules his own house gives a clue as to how he will take care of the church. When we are faithful in little God gives us more. Since the church is to be a large family then how a man's small family operates gives a clue to his leadership capabilities and whether he could deal with a large family.

6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

Ouch, here is one we go to both extremes on in the church. There are many places where a guy gets saved and because he is a good old boy and zealous someone thinks he has the call and they ship him off to Bible College or put him in a position of leadership six months after he is saved. Depending on his own natural maturity, he will be strongly tempted to think he is some special pumpkin since he is such a hit in the church so soon and that will open up the door to his fall. Instead of realizing where his real strength and wisdom for ministry comes from he will rely too much upon himself and if he has some success he will get arrogant. He won't last long after that. When he falls, his pride will be damaged and it may be years if ever that he attends church or attempts anything for God.
It does not matter how promising a person may be; they need to mature in the Lord. Paul was highly educated, mature and zealous when he was called and God still hid him three years in the wilderness before his ministry started. The disciples were with Christ three years before He left them with the full responsibility of the ministry. I am not saying three years is a magic number, but there does need to be a time of maturity and growth.
On the other extreme, there are some that feel a person is a novice until he has attended ten years of schooling and three years of apprenticeship somewhere. We need to get back to where we are spiritual enough to truly discern when God is calling someone else or us to a larger ministry or place of responsibility. Subjective emotions, charming personalities and a laundry list of degrees or experiences are not the ways to call pastors or evaluate our own call.

7 Moreover, he must have a good report of them, which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

It is good if the lost folks have no quarrel with your pastor or have some secret from
the past on him. It is often tough for a guy that was a local rowdy to get saved, train and then return to serve in his hometown. Even if he was not the guy voted most likely to be in jail folks will say I knew this guy when he was knee high to a grasshopper and what makes him so holy. Jesus went through that in His hometown and you can expect the same. (Matt 13:57) Have you witnessed to your relatives lately? Is that tough or what? "Why I remember when I changed your diapers, you little upstart! Who do you think you are to preach to me?" Don't you hate when they bring up the diaper thing? Man, I'm forty-six and I still have people who remember changing my diaper! I must have been awfully cute if everyone was getting in on that task! Too bad I lost it! The cuteness that is, I'm glad I lost the diaper although sadly I am getting older and may have new people who remember me in diapers! Oy vey!
Pastors are no where near respected like they were in the old days and it will be tough to have a good report with the lost, but it can happen. Also, remember you can't please everybody. Some lost folks will hate you and some will love you even if they think you are a nut. Come to think of it that works in the church as well as without. All you can do is be faithful to your calling and fix what you can and then leave the rest of it in His hand!

8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.

While a deacon is not a pastor, he should also be full of the Holy Ghost (Acts 6:3). Deacons were first selected to provide meals to widows and to make sure there was no favoritism between the Jewish and Greek widows. They were and still are servants, not associate pastors. Some places have pastors that are deacons and deacons that are pastors and they wonder why the church is a wreck. When the roles are reversed nothing can be done efficiently.
Deacons are to handle whatever might be called secular kind of things so that the pastor can devote himself to study and other types of ministry. The pastor is not called to be a plumber, electrician, etc. The deacons should handle these things. The deacon was not called to be a teacher or preacher in those days, but Philip was eventually called to be an evangelist. Stephen died as the result of a strong evangelistic message given to the Jews which caused them to stone him, but a lad named Saul was there and we do not know the impact that had on him.
A deacon also working with the poor will learn things about the family that need not to be shared all over town and in the church hence his need to be serious, not doubletongued or two faced as we would say it. He should not be able to be bought or find ways of pulling from the Samaritan's purse for his own use. He will at times have to minister spiritually to folks as he is ministering to them things of a physical or material nature so being full of the Holy Ghost and holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience is definitely an asset. They need to be as above reproach as a pastor also and not a new believer.

11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

Note these ladies are wives of the deacons. They are not deaconesses. No such office is given here. However, for a man to be an effective minister he has to have a supportive wife. His wife may accompany him on his missions. If he is going to the home of a widow or a single mother, she had better go with him. That just keeps everyone from trouble. Her being a part of his ministry makes her privy to the same information he has and she needs to have some of the same character traits required of her husband or there will be needless scandal in the church.

12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith, which is in Christ Jesus.

Again if a man cannot keep his own house in order how can he help anyone else? The office is to be one of great dignity/degree. It is an honor to be chosen by your brothers and sisters and to have the elders lay hands on you. The fact that you will be involved in a greatly needed public ministry gives you an opportunity to exercise the boldness in the faith these folks have seen in you.

14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly:
15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. (KJV)

Paul was expecting to be in Ephesus soon, however there were some things that he wanted to tell them just in case he was delayed. His purpose was to provide Timothy instruction on how folks ought to behave in the house of God.
The whole book is an instruction manual for church life. It covers prayer, worship, church government, respect of Elders, women, widows, rich, servants, heretics, false doctrine, seducing spirits and devils. It covers a great deal in such a small treatise. Paul did not write things just to be scribbling or doodling. He was very serious and adamant about the things he wrote. He wrote with the authority that God gave and through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. What did he think of folks that wanted to argue about what he wrote?


1 Tim 6:3-5
3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. (KJV)

OUCH!!!! Oh, Paul where is thy tact? He is just as tough in other passages. He did not write as the scribes and Pharisees. Paul knew the danger of error and as a good under shepherd to the flock and loving mentor to Timothy he could do no more than attack the wolves that would destroy the flock. No Pastor worth his salt can do anything less today. He may seem fanatical or unloving to some, but then they have no clue the dangers in this world.
Bottom line? May a woman pastor? No, she may not according to the word of God. If the Bible said otherwise, I would preach as strongly in favor of women pastors as I now do against them. I have no personal grudge or agenda. I am just a messenger. If the message is offensive, please take it up with the author. His office is open twenty-four hours a day seven days a week. If you approach Him correctly you will always get an audience and leave with wisdom. May we seek Him often!

[mavmin]

Another question is. "Are women allowed to teach the Bible in any manner?" If we remove the manmade chapter and verse divisions it makes it easier to answer both questions.

1 Tim 2:11-3:12

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the 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.
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

The husband of one wife thing ought to be the death knell of woman pastor ideaology but some ignore that.

Let's look at the word teach. Paul says a woman should not teach, "I suffer not" but a pastor must be apt to teach.

Both are speaking about teaching the Word. In both places they are tenses of the same word. It is hard for a woman to learn in silence if she is the one doing the teaching. A pastor must be able to teach.

Now in Titus, the older women are commanded to teach the younger, but the word is different.

4994 sophronizo (so-fron-id'-zo);
from 4998; to make of sound mind, i.e. (figuratively) to discipline or correct:
KJV-- teach to be sober.

It is teaching but a far different subject matter than what is being taught in Timothy 2 & 3.

Now, this is a blow to almost every sect of Christianity for we don't have problems with women teaching the Scripture as long as it is not in the pulpit. The Scripture doesn't speak to a pulpit, except when it comes to a pastor being required to be able to teach and not even then. Jesus taught in the field, marketplace, house and synagogue. He taught all ages and both genders (so much for all the divisions we came up with creating the generation gap). The location of the teaching is not the issue but rather who has the authority to do so. This is strictly reserved to men, not to women. I did not write the Book, I only preach it and teach it.

Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. (KJV)

This is the only NT example of a woman teaching and it isn't a good thing.

Call it a part of the curse or a protective measure by God for women or whatever you want but women should not teach the Bible period. Geographical position, duty title or age/gender of students has nothing to do with it.

How I suspect we got started on this is when Sunday School was started it was only meant to be a means of educating the poor children in the 3 Rs with a dab of devotional or religious training that was most likely done by Mr. Raikes or an associate. The 3 Rs may well have been taught by women and when we swapped Sunday School over to a full fledged discipleship program we turned it over to the women who were doing the program already. We just switched curriculum and that in error. It appeared to work, and we are so pragmatic, thus we kept it to the point where we never questioned it again. It is now in such bedrock within nearly all sects that that to suggest anything else is tantamount to questioning the Virgin Birth.

Anyway, since this group appears to be challenging much of what is going on Christianity nowadays here are a couple of other points for you to ponder. Shalom!

[prv31wife]

I really believe that women should not pastor nor give the sermon. The scriptures are clear on this issue and I don't understand for the life of me, why churches allow such disobedience.
Is it because they have bought into this Gloria Steinem mindset? For you younger people Gloria Steinem was a pioneer back in the 70's in this whole femiNazi movement. She was instrumental in the whole equal rights for women nonsense.
It just boggles my mind how the church picks and chooses which scriptures to obey in order not to offend anyone.

[George]

Thank you for that brief yet very important exposition. I am one of those who had not seen anything wrong with women teaching other women. It appears that was because I had accepted the practice and not compared it with scripture. You have given me something to study now. I appreciate and challenge that causes me to dig more in the Bible.

In Christ,
George