Originally posted by SwissGambit I never understood why so many churches have only one pastor, generally a male, who does most if not all the preaching.
Why not have a few different preachers? It would be more interesting to listen to a variety of preaching styles rather than the same old one week after week. And so what if one of the preachers happens to be a woman? It doesn't necessarily bring shame upon the men - maybe it was just her turn.
A plurality of leading elders is what we see for each church in the New Testament. There was more than one overseerer appointed for each church. There seems no limit on the number of leading elders there might be to oversee a church.
This does not insist that each elder had to be a speaker. I believe that Paul advized that an elder be "apt to teach". That does not mean each of the "team" of elders had to be a regular speaking one. An spiritually older overseer should have experience and a propensity to teach others.
But each church appears to have been arranged with a plural number of elders.
Originally posted by ASRPEE One of reasons that churches have only one pastor is finances. Many churches cannot afford to pay multiple pastor's wages.
Another more important reason is that these days there are not usually enough men who know the Scriptures well enough to preach. I attend a church that does have several men who are well capable of preaching and they do share the burd ...[text shortened]... aching is disobedience to the very God she is claiming to represent (that would be hypocrisy).
So the bottom line is your god hates vagina's. Nice god you have there. I thank mother Earth every day I am not so deluded.
Originally posted by moon1969 Is the man (and not the woman) the spiritual leader because of what Paul says in Timothy below, and is the logic/link clear. In other words, is the reason a woman is not to usurp the authority of the man is because Adam was first formed before Eve, and not deceived, but the woman was in the transgression. And that all women bear the unique burden of Eve's ...[text shortened]... m was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" 1 Timothy 2:11-14.
The reason that woman is not supposed to usurp the authority of man is because that is the way God ordered it. In the Timothy passage that you quote, Paul is referencing the story in Genesis 2 & 3. Indeed the woman was deceived and not the man, but they both transgressed. and were thus punished for their transgression. God ordained that part of the woman's punishment would be that the man would rule over her (this would include man being both the head of the family and the spiritual leader).
(KJV) Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman [God] said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Originally posted by ASRPEE The reason that woman is not supposed to usurp the authority of man is because that is the way God ordered it. In the Timothy passage that you quote, Paul is referencing the story in Genesis 2 & 3. Indeed the woman was deceived and not the man, but they both transgressed. and were thus punished for their transgression. God ordained that part of the woman's pu ...[text shortened]... lt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Originally posted by ASRPEE The reason that woman is not supposed to usurp the authority of man is because that is the way God ordered it. In the Timothy passage that you quote, Paul is referencing the story in Genesis 2 & 3. Indeed the woman was deceived and not the man, but they both transgressed. and were thus punished for their transgression. God ordained that part of the woman's pu ...[text shortened]... lt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
I understand what you are saying but it appears that Paul gives a reason here than women should be silent and not teach or usurp authority over the man.
"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" 1 Timothy 2:11-14.
What you are saying is that there is no reason. Instead, it is because god just says it is. Fine, but why would Paul give a reason. Seems like it confuses the reader. Indeed, Paul could have just simply said:
"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 [God says so.]" 1 Timothy 2:11-14 (revised).
Originally posted by ASRPEE The reason that woman is not supposed to usurp the authority of man is because that is the way God ordered it. In the Timothy passage that you quote, Paul is referencing the story in Genesis 2 & 3. Indeed the woman was deceived and not the man, but they both transgressed. and were thus punished for their transgression. God ordained that part of the woman's pu ...[text shortened]... lt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
I also understand your point about both Adam and Eve transgressing and that all of humankind bear that transgression. Yet, Paul appears to make the specific points that (1) Adam was born before Eve and (2) Eve was apparently worse, and that calculates into why the man (and not the woman) is the leader.
". . . For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression"
Paul and submissive women
11 Feb '12 12:331 edit
Back to Top