Ordain a Lady

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
It is to a disciple of Jesus.



Theorizing about what Paul might or might not say in a situation he hasn’t encountered and addressed is a minefield.
It is a minefield... yet necessary.
Reality is reality, and the Holy Spirit is here to guide us... unless you believe that the Bible is the only way the Holy Spirit has comunicated with men and will communicate with men.

In the end of the day, we all in encounter circumstances in our lives for which no explicit advice can be drawn from the Bible.
Should I marry Lisa or not ? Should I pursue a Major in Maths or Arts? Should I buy a bigger house or save the money for later? Should we disconnect Uncle Tim from the respirator?
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Sure. Your experience resonates with me.
I have been considered apostate 4 times. (Did I already tell you that? If I did, I'm sorry)

First when I was rebaptized as a Seventh Day Adventist after having been baptized a Catholic.
Second when I was rebaptized as a Latter Day Saint (mormon) after having been SDA
Third when I left the Mormon church to become an atheist.
A fourth one I get for the three prior religions when I declared myself a Baha'i. (We make a kind of Shahada).

Rebaptism is a repudiation of the earlier baptism. It is a rejection of the previous theological system and it leads to persecution and, sometimes, torture and loss of life.
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Paul speaks the thoughts of God and Messiah unless he says that he isn’t, which he does on rare occasion. Paul is speaking here the thoughts of Yahweh and Jesus.
I guess that's the safer "default rule" -- unless Paul says his message is not from the Lord, we should presume that it is. But when he does say his message is from the Lord (like as in 1 Cor. 7:10 and 1 Thess. 4:15), I'd have to ask myself "why is he bothering to mention this?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthias

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
It is to a disciple of Jesus.
Why do you think that?
What stops you from thinking that God says different things to different peoples having different needs at different times?
The disciples of Jesus changed their minds because God revealed to them different things at different times to meet different needs.
What did God revealed to Peter before meeting Cornelius? Why didn't God reveal that in Pentecost?
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
It is a minefield... yet necessary.
Reality is reality, and the Holy Spirit is here to guide us... unless you believe that the Bible is the only way the Holy Spirit has comunicated with men and will communicate with men.

The Holy Spirit isn’t going to say that Paul just didn’t know that there was going to be something new under the sun. Rejecting Paul’s teaching, no matter how it is done, isn’t following Paul and Jesus.

In the end of the day, we all in encounter circumstances in our lives for which no explicit advice can be drawn from the Bible.
Should I marry Lisa or not ? Should I pursue a Major in Maths or Arts? Should we disconnect Uncle Tim from the respirator? Should I buy a bigger house or save the money for later?

Funny that you should mention that. From time to time people I ministered to would ask me auestions just like those. They didn’t understand, and often weren’t satisfied, when I told them that that isn’t how it works.
 

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
I guess that's the safer "default rule" -- unless Paul says his message is not from the Lord, we should presume that it is. But when he does say his message is from the Lord (like as in 1 Cor. 7:10 and 1 Thess. 4:15), I'd have to ask myself "why is he bothering to mention this?"

Exactly, RedFan and @Matthias

For some recommendations, Paul explicitly states they come from his own mind.
For some others, Paul explicitly states they come from the Lord.
For the majority, Paul does not explicitly state anything.

To me, and I can be wrong of course, all what Paul wrote was inspired by God. But that doesn't mean that God gives the same recommendation to all people at all circumstances. Paul didn't wrote his letters thinking in you and me. He wrote them to specific communities or persons. The Holy Spirit then make us take from those letters what is applicable to our lives today.

God is One and Unchanging.
But we are many and changing.
So revelation of the One, Unchanging God, has to reach the many, changing men.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spyder

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
I guess that's the safer "default rule" -- unless Paul says his message is not from the Lord, we should presume that it is. But when he does say his message is from the Lord (like as in 1 Cor. 7:10 and 1 Thess. 4:15), I'd have to ask myself "why is he bothering to mention this?"

That’s a good question. I think the best answer is because it was something which was brought to his attention and he had no choice but to address it. I don’t think it was something that just popped into his mind and he thought he should say something about it before it might happen. It came from something which had happened, was happening and may have been in response to a question that someone put to him about it.
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
To me, and I can be wrong of course, all what Paul wrote was inspired by God. But that doesn't mean that God gives the same recommendation to all people at all circumstances. Paul didn't wrote his letters thinking in you and me. He wrote them to specific communities or persons. The Holy Spirit then make us take from those letters what is applicable to our lives today.

God is One and Unchanging.
But we are many and changing.
So revelation of the One, Unchanging God, has to reach the many, changing men.
That raises an interesting question: whether Paul's ban on female clergy was a nod to the mores of the times, or whether it still holds 2,000 years later.
 

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
The Holy Spirit isn’t going to say that Paul just didn’t know that there was going to be something new under the sun.
Why not? Of course the Holy Spirit does that with every inspired writer.
Over and over.

Did Jesus teach Paul that physical circumcision was going to be optional? Or was it the devil?
Did Jesus teach Paul that he shouldn't ask whether the meat he was eating had been offered to the idols? Or was the devil?
How can you be sure that Paul was not an apostate from Judaism, and that his claims of receiving revelation from Christ are a fraud?

God reveals new things for new times.
It has been so since biblical times.
 

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Why do you think that?

I think that because, as a disciple of Jesus, I’m instructed to have the mind of Jesus.

What stops you from thinking that God says different things to different peoples having different needs at different times?

Nothing. I see very clearly in scripture that he has.

The disciples of Jesus changed their minds because God revealed to them different things at different times to meet different needs.

Okay.

What did God revealed to Peter before meeting Cornelius?Why didn't God reveal that in Pentecost?

What God revealed to Peter before meeting Cornelius covers a lot of ground. God’s timing is in God’s hands.
 

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
That raises an interesting question: whether Paul's ban on female clergy was a nod to the mores of the times, or whether it still holds 2,000 years later.
Yes. It is indeed an interesting question that should be approached investigating what was happening at churches during Paul's time, and what is happening now. A question that should be addressed under the guidance of the Spirit, assessing carefully the results of each decision and learning from our mistakes. A question that I, as a non-Christian, could not address properly.

From a Baha'i perspective, the equality of women and men is paramount in this era. It is God's will.
The education of little girls, and their full economic, social and political development is key for the establishment of the Kingdom of God.

 
  • Like
Reactions: RedFan

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Exactly, RedFan and @Matthias

For some recommendations, Paul explicitly states they come from his own mind.
For some others, Paul explicitly states they come from the Lord.
For the majority, Paul does not explicitly state anything.

To me, and I can be wrong of course, all what Paul wrote was inspired by God. But that doesn't mean that God gives the same recommendation to all people at all circumstances. Paul didn't wrote his letters thinking in you and me. He wrote them to specific communities or persons. The Holy Spirit then make us take from those letters what is applicable to our lives today.

Paul was thinking about all of the present (in his day) and future (beyond his day) disciples of Jesus. He wrote his letters for my benefit.

God is One and Unchanging.
But we are many and changing.
So revelation of the One, Unchanging God, has to reach the many, changing men.

Listen to, believe and obey Jesus is my position. His revelation is final, definitive, and authoritative, as far as I’m concerned. I can’t go beyond that.
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yes. It is indeed an interesting question that should be approached investigating what was happening at churches during Paul's time, and what is happening now. A question that should be addressed under the guidance of the Spirit, assessing carefully the results of each decision and learning from our mistakes. A question that I, as a non-Christian, could not address properly.

From a Baha'i perspective, the equality of women and men is paramount in this era. It is God's will.
The education of little girls, and their full economic, social and political development is key for the establishment of the Kingdom of God.

It's hard for me to be objective on this. My wife is an Episcopal priest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pancho Frijoles

Pancho Frijoles

Active Member
May 22, 2024
651
186
43
58
Mexico City
Faith
Other Faith
Country
Mexico
Paul was thinking about all of the present (in his day) and future (beyond his day) disciples of Jesus. He wrote his letters for my benefit.
I agree that you and me benefit from Paul´s message... from all Bible authors indeed.
But one thing is to say that we profit spiritually from Paul, and a very different thing that Paul was thinking in disciples of Jesus in the XXI century.
Paul never claimed that, to start with. He was explicit in that he was writing to the Christians of a given city or region, or to a specific person. He makes all kind of references to very specific issues in the church. Particularly social issues, some of which are rarely seen today. Furthermore, he was not aware of issues emerging in Christian communities in regions he had not preached. What were the issues of early Christians in Mesopotamia, Egypt and Persia?

So, since you have read Paul letters, I am intrigued to understand how you came to the conclusion that "Paul was thinking about all the present and future disciples of Jesus".

Was Moses thinking in all present and future Jews when He gave the Law? Did He need to state explicitly that such law was temporary and that some day Jews should think and act under a new law?
 

BlessedPeace

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2023
5,917
4,613
113
Bend
youtube.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
“Founded in 1975, the Women’s Ordination Conference (WOC) is a grass-roots driven movement that promotes activism, dialogue, and prayerful witness to call for women’s ordination and gender equity in the Roman Catholic Church.”

This is a music video the WOC produced for the cause.


The lyric which caught my attention: ”Don’t listen to Saint Paul, ’Cuz I can lead the way.”

Setting aside that this a Roman Catholic fight, it is an issue that has come up and continues to come up in Protestant circles.

”Don’t listen to Saint Paul” is an argument which I don’t find persuasive.

Can that hurdle be cleared using scripture?
Paul approved women Apostles in service to his Gospel and churches.


Man's arrogance presumes women would never be called by God to preach.
Jesus had women on the company of himself and his companions. 12 Disciples are named as each coming from one of the 12 tribes. That doesn't mean the women with Jesus were not Disciples too.
They were because Jesus/Yeshua was teaching them all. And they were all there when he issued the command for the great commission.

God calls whom he will to his Salvation. Yet,he would never call a woman to lead his church or preach his good news? Nonsense.

Sin entered the world by one man!

Men aren't superior vehicles to deliver salvations message. One of their number is why we need saving.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedFan

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
It's hard for me to be objective on this. My wife is an Episcopal priest.

I understand your dilemma. Put your wife before what Paul said about women being in a leadership position in the church over men? All I can tell you is what you already know: Paul didn’t go along with that in his day.

We’ve started down the “What would Paul say if … he was alive in the 21st century?” game. Might as well keep playing for a while.

First up. Homosexuality. Paul stated his position on the matter.

”Come on, Paul. Get with it man. This isn’t the 1st century. Don’t tell me you still think it’s an abomination in the 21st century! People who practice it won’t inherit the kingdom? Really? Better catch up with the times, old boy. Love is love and who we engage in sexual relations with is none of your concern. Man with a man, woman with a woman. You’re so out of touch with God. God is love! We want our church back and you’re standing in the way. Give us what we want ... or we’ll make a catchy music video.”

Next up. Public nudity. (Man o man. Now he’s gonna have the gaul to tell us how women should properly dress.)

”Paul. Paul. Paul. There is nothing wrong with the human body. God himself created them male and female. Why are you so hung up about the human body? Women are to dress modestly? Ha! This the 21st century. We have churches now where people can attend in nothing but their birthday suits, if they want to. Even the pastors are naked in the pulpit. That’s taking it too far? Who says? That’s just your own repressed thinking holding you down. Get your mind out of the gutter! Free your mind. Got to get back to the garden as it was before they got in trouble. Not a single person had so much as a hat on their head. God was certainly fine with that. That was his set up; that was his will, his intention, and his doing. With all due respect, we don’t think you know as much about God and what he thinks as you think you do. Be reasonable, man. But if you can’t be reasonable then at least go back and read Genesis again; ruminate on it for a while and get back with us. You’re a smart man. We know you’ll come to the decision that is right for modern times. See you at the swim suit optional family and friends pool party!“

How much further do we want to go down this miserable trail? How much longer would you like to play this foolish game? Once we start, when does it stop and where will we be?

When Paul is bodily resurrected and returns with Jesus, he’s going to … well, see how far we’ve gotten away from his teaching. What he says and does after that remains to be heard and seen. I don’t think it ends well for those who have jumped the rails.

P.S.

I think I should probably make clear to you and our readers, to remove any possible doubt, that that is the end of the game for me. We could add many other scenarios (I almost did a third scenario - abortion - as the cherry on top of the shake) but I think the two I gave are sufficient to address the point and avoid a brawl.
 
Last edited:

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Paul approved women Apostles in service to his Gospel and churches.


Man's arrogance presumes women would never be called by God to preach.
Jesus had women on the company of himself and his companions. 12 Disciples are named as each coming from one of the 12 tribes. That doesn't mean the women with Jesus were not Disciples too.
They were because Jesus/Yeshua was teaching them all. And they were all there when he issued the command for the great commission.

God calls whom he will to his Salvation. Yet,he would never call a woman to lead his church or preach his good news? Nonsense.

Sin entered the world by one man!

Men aren't superior vehicles to deliver salvations message. One of their number is why we need saving.

Eve was deceived, not Adam. That’s true. But also true is what Paul said about women leading the church. Men and women have God designed roles. Men aren’t superior to women; they aren’t smarter than women. Women aren’t superior to me; they aren’t smarter than men. In Messiah there are neither male nor female - and yet, here we are; males and females in Messiah, each with roles to play - by design; some best suited for women, others best suited for men. Women are to teach other women, and children in their care, be they male or female. Women financially supported the work of Jesus and the apostles. Somen opened their homes for the church to meet. Women were even permitted by Paul to prophesy in church, in an orderly fashion. What they weren't’ permitted to do was to teach men and to lead the church.

Paul was repressing women? That’s feminist propaganda. Paul was appealing to order and design.

Please watch the video, if you haven’t already. Those women want what they want and what they want is for men and women not to listen to what the Apostle says about it. They know better than he does. It’s a fact, the woman warbles, that God called women to be priests! Really? It’s a fact because she says it’s a fact? An argument that wouldn’t have stood up in biblical times and isn’t, at the moment, standing up in the Catholic church. The woman says we should look at the Protestant church. They ”schmooze” her - a siren call which she laughs off. Liberalism is taking over. Did I near someone in the back say“ United Methodist”? Liberalism has been taking over for quite a long while now. Whole denominations have abandoned many of their long held doctrinal beliefs. (Please forgive me for not remembering and quoting the words of the Sparkle Creed - written and brought to us by a female pastor, and rapidly gaining popularity with many female pastors; no doubt some male pastors, too. We can look them up, if you’d like to.)

The patriarchy is, she wants us to believe, the culprit. Men, in general, (Paul and the pope, in particular) are holding women down. “Rise up, rebels! Throw off the yoke of Paul! Someone get the pope out of the way! Men and women, dance and sing the song of the rebellion! We want our church back and let the women lead the way.”

The rebels are too liberal for Paul. I think I’ve made it clear that I stand with the Apostle against them. If Paul is going to take heat for what he said about women, I’ll take it with him.

P.S.

Provided for your viewing pleasure, or displeasure, whichever the case may be: The Sparkle Creed, read for us by a female pastor.


If you, or others, are interested in the background story on the Sparkle Creed (and the female pastor who authored it), I’m providing a link to an article devoted to the subject.


I think it’s safe to say that Paul, at the very least, would be appalled. More than likely, he would take swift action to put an end to this, remove her from the church, and turn her over to Satan (cp. 1 Corinthians 5:5).
 
Last edited:

Matthias

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2022
19,556
13,642
113
Kentucky
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
I agree that you and me benefit from Paul´s message... from all Bible authors indeed.
But one thing is to say that we profit spiritually from Paul, and a very different thing that Paul was thinking in disciples of Jesus in the XXI century.

I don’t think Paul even thought there would be a 21st century and Jesus still not returned.

Paul never claimed that, to start with. He was explicit in that he was writing to the Christians of a given city or region, or to a specific person. He makes all kind of references to very specific issues in the church. Particularly social issues, some of which are rarely seen today. Furthermore, he was not aware of issues emerging in Christian communities in regions he had not preached. What were the issues of early Christians in Mesopotamia, Egypt and Persia?

You‘re correct that Paul was writing to Christians, even Christians of a given city or region, or to a specific person. He wasn’t writing to persons who were not in the church. I’ll say this as diplomatically as possible: You don’t self-identify as a Christian. You self-identify as a Baha’i. I haven’t heard you say that the Baha’i faith is part of the church. If you were to make such a statement it would mot be well received by Christians. In short then, Paul, as you yourself have said, wasn’t writing to you. You interpret his writings in such a way as to make them acceptable to your Baha’i faith.

I’ll point out something that you know and didn’t say, at least not in this post. Paul instructed his letters to be passed around among the churches which he was in contact with.

Back to the scattered church and your question about what was going on in the churches in Mesopotamia, Egypt and Persia at the time. We only know what the Bible tells us what was going on. The other Apostles were preaching the same gospel that Paul preached - the only gospel - the gospel which Jesus himself preached. Were the problems the same in all of the churches the other Apostles were in contact with? For example, were there issues with [Christian] women dressing appropriately in Mesopotamia, Egypt and Persia? Given the pagan culture in those locations, I would suggest to you that there were. We might ask if there were unique problems for the churches in those locations, something which the [Christian] people faced there that perhaps [Christian] people weren’t faced with in churches which Paul (and his group of evangelists, I should add) weren’t faced with? The best I can do with that question is to say that maybe there were, the Bible is silent on it if there were, and that pagan culture presented virtually the same challenges everywhere the church came into contact with it.

So, since you have read Paul letters, I am intrigued to understand how you came to the conclusion that "Paul was thinking about all the present and future disciples of Jesus".

Paul gradually came to understand and said that the church would continue on after he died. He warned about the wolves that would savage the church after he was gone. History shows that it happened in the first century and continues on, even to this day. That Paul was thinking about the disciples of his own day (mid 1st century) is evident in his teaching, preaching and letters. That Paul was thinking about the disciples beyond his day should also be evident, the only thing I would say he was uncertain about is how long beyond his own day the disciples would be without him and before Messiah returned. Church history attests to the fact that the disciples are still waiting for the Messiah to return. When Paul is bodily resurrected as Jesus is returning and finds out how long that time has been, I think he would say that he had no idea that it would be as long as it is. He gives us every reason to believe that he thought the time for Messiah’s return was imminent in his lifetime or shortly thereafter.

Was Moses thinking in all present and future Jews when He gave the Law?

Moses was thinking about the Jews in his time and Jews beyond his time when he was given the Law. He speaks to his immediate successor, Joshua, about them keeping the Law in the land of promise, before the Jews entered it. (I’m confident that you’ll recall that God did not allow Moses to enter the land; he only allowed Moses to see it from a mountain before he died.) Moses knew that the Messiah would be a Jew and that he would be raised up from among the people after Moses‘ day.

Did He need to state explicitly that such law was temporary and that some day Jews should think and act under a new law?

No. Moses told the people what would happen and what they should do if / when they broke the Law. He spoke prophetically about the Messiah and instructed the people to listen to him whenever he appeared. The prophet Jeremiah later spoke about the new covenant. The plan of God was unveiled over time, in fact, centuries. Paul discusses at length the reason for the Law and the Christian’s relationship with it.
 

BlessedPeace

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2023
5,917
4,613
113
Bend
youtube.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Eve was deceived, not Adam. That’s true.
Adam was with her and did not assert a leadership role. Instead,he followed the enticement of the serpent. And he ate the forbidden fruit.

But also true is what Paul said about women leading the church.
Paul said we are all one in Christ. No male,no female,no Greek,no Jew.

Paul boasted of the blessed work of women serving the church.

Scripture must harmonize. Paul would be remiss to state we are all one in Christ, stating the traditional roles are in effect done away, only to later state women cannot lead the church.
When they most certainly did with his knowledge,thanks,and praise, as regarded his own churches.

You have to think what you're being asked to believe. Either Paul was a leader who respected the women who served beside him in church, or he was a hypocrite who talked out of both sides of his mouth when he insisted women are not permitted to do what he praised them for in other epistles.

And by the way. Paul does not call people in service to God. God does!

Paul does not make the rules for God's church! God does!

That video? Isn't proof women are not fit to pastor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rita

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I suspect that rejection of female clergy may be incorrectly based on Paul's teachings on husband-wife relations. First up is 1 Cor. 14:34-35: “the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” Paul cites “the Law” as his authority. (Yup, the same “Law” that he elsewhere says we are not under, see Rom. 6:14, Gal. 5:18.) What Old Testament directive supports him? I can find none aside from Gen. 3:16: “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” But there is nothing here about women keeping silent. Indeed, rather than a general statement about the relative position between men and women, this verse is about the special relation between husband and wife. If this is the “Law” that Paul meant to invoke, his words would only apply to married women. A female minister whose husband was not in the congregation can’t possibly run afoul of this “Law.”

Then there is 1 Tim. 2:12: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” This too looks to be specific to husband and wives. The word γυναικὶ used in this verse can be translated either as “woman” or as “wife” – the proper meaning being a matter of the passage’s context. No one would doubt for example, that γυναικὶ should be translated as “wife” in Matt. 19:5, or in 1 Cor. 7:3, 14, 27 and 33. So should it be in 1 Tim. 2:12, according to Luther: “Here we properly take ‘woman’ to mean ‘wife,’ as he reveals from his correlative phrase (v. 12) ‘to have authority over man,’ that is, over her husband. He calls the husband ‘man,’ so he calls the wife ‘woman.’ Where men and women have been joined together, there the men, not the women, ought to have authority. . . . He wants to save the order preserved by the world—that a man be the head of a woman, as 1 Corinthians 11:3 tells us.” Martin Luther, Lectures on 1 Timothy, found in Luther’s Works, vol. 28, Hilton C. Oswald ed. (Concordia, 1973), 276–77.