Female Pastors

[marksman]

1. Christ being the good shepherd has nothing to do with women being pastors.........and you ignore the biblical fact that Christ is the one we should follow.

Sorry but you are deluded in thinking that.

2. Christ being head of the Church has nothing at all to do with women being pastors.......and you ignore the biblical fact that men represents Christ as head of the household. And this is what I addressed. Women cannot be pastors because they are not head of anything.

Once again you are deluded if you think that. Like your penchant to make scripture say what it doesn't say, you make me say what I haven't said. You have drawn your own conclusion like the pig walking down the street pulling a string of sausages.

3. Christ being the high priest has nothing to do with women being pastors.......and you ignore the biblical fact that only men were called to be priests in both the old and new testaments. And this is what I addressed. God called only the sons of Aaron and Levi to be priests. He never called their daughters. Christ chose only men to be Apostles. He did not choose any woman.

And you have chosen to ignore the new testament scripture that talks about the priesthood of ALL believers and that includes women.

4. Christ being a man has nothing to do with women being pastors.......and you ignore the biblical fact that men have authority, which women are not supposed to take from (See 1 Timothy 2:12).

And you have put your spin on something that has nothing at all to do with the ministry of men and women in the terms you describe.

And how is it "unbiblical" when it was taken from the Bible.

This statement probably more than any other shows that you are either deluded or clutching at straws to make your case.

Did you know that there are over 40,000 denominations worldwide and all of them claim what they believe is "biblical" because it is taken from the bible.

If that is the case, why does the Catholic church claim to be the only one true church which it obviously isn't as all these other denominations have biblical beliefs taken from the bible?

 

[Asyncritus]

Hi Marksman

How about toning down the remarks a bit?

Remember: 'In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves'.

Otherwise the moderators will probably be breathing down your neck pretty soon. If they haven't done so already.

 

[Dodo_David]

Perhaps this argument is a case of a mountain being made out of a mole hill.

The Apostle Paul wanted to make sure that the infant Church did not needlessly cause any social controversy that would have resulted in Roman authorities shutting down congregations. In that day, allowing a woman to teach in public probably would have stirred up protests, which the Roman authorities would have responded to.

 

[Selene]

Perhaps this argument is a case of a mountain being made out of a mole hill.

The Apostle Paul wanted to make sure that the infant Church did not needlessly cause any social controversy that would have resulted in Roman authorities shutting down congregations. In that day, allowing a woman to teach in public probably would have stirred up protests, which the Roman authorities would have responded to.

This is incorrect. The Roman authorities were pagans, and they did have female priests. They were priestresses. Christianity and Judaism were the only ones who did not have any female priests. All the rabbis in Judaism during those times were men. All the priests in Christianity during those time were men. Only the pagans had female priests during those times. Female priests were abundant among the pagans.

And you have chosen to ignore the new testament scripture that talks about the priesthood of ALL believers and that includes women.

I did not ignored it. I already answered it in my post #12.

 

[marksman]

Hi Marksman

How about toning down the remarks a bit?

Remember: 'In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves'.

Otherwise the moderators will probably be breathing down your neck pretty soon. If they haven't done so already.

Just to put you in the picture. I am autistic and we always call a spade a spade not because we are trying to put people down but that is the only way we know how to speak because of a deficiency in the brain. Christians of all varieties try to put us right and even exclude us because of this disability but it is like trying to turn a dog into a cat. It just ain't going to happen.

It is easy for me because I am autistic to listen to an autistic person speak. I do not read into it like so many do and try and analyse motives as I know that he/she is just stating what they see is the situation using language as they understand it as they do not have the capacity to do otherwise.

That are not into nuances or able to read between the lines. Generally speaking, those on my side of the Autism spectrum are not aggressive or derogatory towards other people. All they want is to be accepted for what they are and to accept others as they are.

One of our characteristics is to study and study and study and find out all they can about a topic, leaving no stone unturned. Until they have done this they very rarely give an opinion about anything but when they do, you know that they are well versed in the topic.

 

[Selene]

Just to put you in the picture. I am autistic and we always call a spade a spade not because we are trying to put people down but that is the only way we know how to speak because of a deficiency in the brain. Christians of all varieties try to put us right and even exclude us because of this disability but it is like trying to turn a dog into a cat. It just ain't going to happen.

It is easy for me because I am autistic to listen to an autistic person speak. I do not read into it like so many do and try and analyse motives as I know that he/she is just stating what they see is the situation using language as they understand it as they do not have the capacity to do otherwise.

That are not into nuances or able to read between the lines. Generally speaking, those on my side of the Autism spectrum are not aggressive or derogatory towards other people. All they want is to be accepted for what they are and to accept others as they are.

One of our characteristics is to study and study and study and find out all they can about a topic, leaving no stone unturned. Until they have done this they very rarely give an opinion about anything but when they do, you know that they are well versed in the topic.

Being autistic is no excuse to put anyone or any Christian denomination down. To say this below is already a "put-down" because there is nothing in this statement explaining HOW my conclusion was in error.

Once again you are deluded if you think that. Like your penchant to make scripture say what it doesn't say, you make me say what I haven't said. You have drawn your own conclusion like the pig walking down the street pulling a string of sausages.

And if you had read the entire thread, you would have known that I had already provided an answer on that biblical scripture about everyone being a "nation of priests" back in the beginning in my post #12.

 

[marksman]

This is incorrect. The Roman authorities were pagans, and they did have female priests. They were priestresses. Christianity and Judaism were the only ones who did not have any female priests. All the rabbis in Judaism during those times were men. All the priests in Christianity during those time were men. Only the pagans had female priests during those times. Female priests were abundant among the pagans.


I did not ignored it. I already answered it in my post #12.

Two things. The new Testament Church did NOT have PRIESTS. They had Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Shepherds and Teachers.

The government of the New Testament Church was Elders chosen from within the congregation. There were no such things as priests, popes, bishops, vicars, rectors, primates, metropolitans, etc. etc. These are products of a church that is not "His Church" as in "I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

To be a nation or a kingdom of priests means that we are all called to be a holy people....to be like Christ who is our High Priest. It does not mean that women are to be ordain as priests.

And funny enough it does not mean that MEN are to be ordained priests. That is why God tore the veil at the entrance to the holy of holies, which meant that he did away with the old levitical priesthood and replaced it with the priesthood of all believers which means we no longer need a priest to stand between us and God we can access God for ourselves. If we need a priest then we do not need salvation.

Anyone who calls himself a priest and wears funny clothes is saying that he doesn't believe God tore the veil and that the levitical priesthood is still in place.

Being autistic is no excuse to put anyone or any Christian denomination down. To say this below is already a "put-down" because there is nothing in this statement explaining HOW my conclusion was in error.

If you stopped to read what people said instead of jumping to conclusions to defend your patch, you would realise that autistic people DO NOT use it as an excuse to put people down. What they do do is accept the fact that they have a disability and there are always some people who don't or won't accept that fact.

What you are saying is that a person who has lost his leg in an accident cannot use it as an excuse for not being able to do certain things that other people with two legs can do.


In other words, you are being totally cold and dismissive.

Please note, Autistic people do use put downs. I repeat. Autistic people do not use put downs.

And one thing puzzles me in the extreme. If you believe in the priesthood of ALL believers (#12) why do you go on so much about the priesthood of the chosen few? Not logical.

 

[Selene]

Two things. The new Testament Church did NOT have PRIESTS. They had Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Shepherds and Teachers.

The government of the New Testament Church was Elders chosen from within the congregation. There were no such things as priests, popes, bishops, vicars, rectors, primates, metropolitans, etc. etc. These are products of a church that is not "His Church" as in "I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Elder is another name for "priest." Let's take a close look at the Greek word "elder." According to Strong's biblical translation, the Greek word for "elder" is "presbyteros." See the weblink below for the evidence taken from Titus 1:5:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Tts&c=1&t=NKJV&p=0#s=t_conc_1130005

Now, what is the "Latin" translation of "presbyteros". The Latin Translation is presbyter. See the evidence below from Dictionary.com

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/priest?s=t

So, if one were to translate from Latin to English, what would be the English word? It would be priest. Again refer back to the dictionary above. Therefore, the correct English translation is "priest."

In conclusion, this is MY EXPLAINATION of HOW you are in error. How are you in error? You are in error because you started with the English word "elder" instead of the Greek word. The New Testament books were written in Greek. It was never written in English. And your error was starting with the English word "Elder" instead of the Greek word "Presbyteros." Therefore, you are in error to say that the New Testament did not have "priests."

And funny enough it does not mean that MEN are to be ordained priests. That is why God tore the veil at the entrance to the holy of holies, which meant that he did away with the old levitical priesthood and replaced it with the priesthood of all believers which means we no longer need a priest to stand between us and God we can access God for ourselves. If we need a priest then we do not need salvation.

God did not tear the veil at the entrance of the holy of holies so that WOMEN would become priests. If you read in the Old Testament, it tells you that the Santuary consisted of two parts separated by a veil: the outer Holy Place and the inner Holy of Holies (See Exodus 26:31-33). Only priests were allowed to sacrifice in the outer Holy Place. One of the priests was appointed High Priest, and only he can enter the Holy of Holies and only once every year to offer blood atonement. This veil showed the separation between the Old Covenant priests and the chosen High priest. This part in the Old Testament also prefigures the coming of Christ, the High Priest who will make a blood atonement - His own blood.

Thus, the torn veil as testified in Matthew 27:51 shows that in the New Covenant, there is no longer be a separation between the sacrifice offered by priests and Christ, the High Priest. Now, with Christ's death, all people have access to the presence of God and are no longer separated from Him. The earthquake, the splitting of the rocks, and especially the resurrection of the dead saints indicate the coming of the final age.

Anyone who calls himself a priest and wears funny clothes is saying that he doesn't believe God tore the veil and that the levitical priesthood is still in place.

Again, this is just another put down. You believe that the Levitical priesthood is gone?? That is not what the Bible says. It says that the Levitical priesthood will last forever.

Jeremiah 33:18 And there will always be Levitical priests to offer burnt offerings and grain offerings and sacrifices to me.

So, what exactly do you have to say about Jeremiah 33:18?? Jeremiah predicted that there will ALWAYS be Levitical priests. Are you saying that Jeremiah is wrong??

What you are saying is that a person who has lost his leg in an accident cannot use it as an excuse for not being able to do certain things that other people with two legs can do.

No, what I am saying is that a person who has lost his leg has no excuse for putting anyone or any denomination down. On the other hand, he is excused from walking.

I see. The only thing I would say that is not factual is your last statement that the ordination of women is a 21st Century thing. Women in several Methodist, Independent Baptist, Holiness and Pentecostal churches served as pastors and ordained clergy in the 19th and 20th Centuries. I believe God call whom He calls and wherever He places them that is where He wants them. Are all women called to pastor? No of course not! Are all men called to pastor/priesthood? No not at all. The most important thing is that God confirms His Word and honors His Word more than the vessel by which the Word is brought through! Whether male or female, laity or clergy the message of the gospel is the most important aspect of Christian life and ministry! If a woman is serving as a pastor let her preach the unadulterated gospel of Jesus Christ and live that holy gospel and if a man is a pastor let him do the same! Jesus is the centerpiece of it ALL!
Blessings!!

Then I stand corrected. Women's ordination did not begin until the 19th century........certainly not in Early Christianity. God has always been true to His word and He has never called any woman to be a pastor of His Church (people). That is the truth found in the Bible. However, He has called a woman such as Rachel to be a sheperd of a flock of real sheep.....that has four legs and wool (See Genesis 29:9). So, yes, a woman can lead and take care of a flock of sheep......that is "sheep" with wool and four legs.....but not be a pastor of a Church.

 

[IanLC]

Whether the gospel is preached from male lips or female lips Jesus gets the glory! Whether a man or woman serves as pastor let him/her serve to the glory of God and preach the unadulterated gospel of Jesus Christ and live holy! This thread on Female pastor's is beating a dead horse and needs to be closed.

 

[Asyncritus]

Hi Marksman

Thanks for your reply.

I like people who talk straight - I can usually understand what they mean and where they're going.

So is Paul, a straight- talker.

And I think he's perfectly clear on the point:

! Tim.2 .11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Question is: Where is she not to teach?

The answer must be, 'in the church'.

Women can do everything as part of their religion, EXCEPT THIS ONE. When we read about the women deacons (like Phoebe, and Priscilla, and Agabus' daughters) -they are clearly performing important roles in the church organisation, such as it was. There can be no doubt that women can do these things, and it is a waste of time to say otherwise.

But the same Paul, who listened to Agabus' daughters, and commends Phoebe and Priscilla, says that he did not permit a woman to teach, or to usurp authority over a man. This MUST be 'in the church', at the breaking of bread services.

The church services are the Christian equivalent of the temple services under the Law, and as we know, women performed various background functions in the temple, but were NEVER priests.

The pattern is clear. Women are permitted, and commended, for performing those functions. But this is the one thing they are NOT permitted to do.

Paul re-iterates this in 1 Cor 11: 3 where he re-iterates the hierarchical structure of the church:

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

That is why IN THE CHURCH SERVICES, and in the church services alone, women are not permitted to speak and/or lead the services.

The man stands in the position of Christ in the church, and just as it would be most unseemly and plain wrong for a man to take over a church service if Christ Himself was present, just so it would be wrong and equally unseemly for a woman to take over a church service when the men are present. Hence the very clear statement:

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

But I asked for someone to comment on the meaning of the above 2 verses, and you are pre-eminently the one to do so, judging by your remarks on the subject.

In conclusion, though, I would reiterate to you the apostle's comment:

24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

Thx

 

[Dodo_David]

As I said earlier, the Apostle Paul guarded against anything that would needlessly cause social unrest. Had Paul permitted women to teach, then the Jews would have stirred up trouble. When Jews in Jerusalem stirred up trouble for Paul, the Roman soldiers placed Paul under arrest.

So, is Paul's teaching about female teachers a universal teaching or one that pertained to the culture of Paul's day?

In all honesty, I do not know.

What I do know is this: Paul said, "I do not permit a woman to teach."

By the way, in Acts we are told that Paul appointed presbyters to rules the congregations established by Paul.

The Greek word presbyter is translated into English as elder.

In his last meeting with the presbyters in Ephesus, Paul told them that they were episcopals.

The Greek work episcopal is translated into English as overseer.

It doesn't matter what Latin versions of the Bible say, because the New Testament was written in Koiné Greek, not Latin.

 

[Selene]

The Greek word presbyter is translated into English as elder.

In his last meeting with the presbyters in Ephesus, Paul told them that they were episcopals.

The Greek work episcopal is translated into English as overseer.

It doesn't matter what Latin versions of the Bible say, because the New Testament was written in Koiné Greek, not Latin.

If you look at Dictionary.com, it shows that "elder" is synonymous to "priest." See the weblink below:

http://thesaurus.com/browse/Elder?__utma=1.1534723656.1361284502.1379278575.1379303960.45&__utmb=1.6.9.1379304684522&__utmc=1&__utmx=-&__utmz=1.1379303960.45.44.utmcsr=google|utmccn=(organic)|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=(not%20provided)&__utmv=-&__utmk=215134615

However, "priest" is a more accurate word because "elder" means "an old person."

 

[marksman]

If you look at Dictionary.com, it shows that "elder" is synonymous to "priest." See the weblink below:

If you look at the original Greek elder is NOT synonymous with priest.

However, "priest" is a more accurate word because "elder" means "an old person."

Priest is NOT a more accurate word because Elder means an older person (not old) chronologically and is used 25 times in the New Testament when it speaks of leadership of the church.

The facts are that the [SIZE=14.399999618530273px]word[/SIZE] priest in Greek is either "archiereus" or " hiereus" and priestly office is "hierosune" and refers to the Old Testament [SIZE=14.399999618530273px]priestly[/SIZE] office.

When it is used in the New Testament in the context of the church the word is "hierateuma" and refers to EVERY BELIEVER as in "a royal priesthood."

The word Elder is "presbuteros" meaning an older, senior person and a plurality of Elders is a [SIZE=14.399999618530273px]presbytery.[/SIZE] If Elder was synonymous with priest, the scripture would have not used presbuteros.

In fact the NT NEVER uses the greek words for priest for any ministry in the NT Church. I wonder why?

As a matter of interest, I do not use the world's [SIZE=14.399999618530273px]explanation[/SIZE] for words to understand what the scripture means. The best commentary on the bible is the bible so everything we need is there.


Selene, on 15 Sept 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

Elder is another name for "priest."

No it is not.

Let's take a close look at the Greek word "elder." According to Strong's biblical translation, the Greek word for "elder" is "presbyteros." But it is not the Greek word for priest.

So, if one were to translate from Latin to English, what would be the English word? It would be priest. Again refer back to the dictionary above. Therefore, the correct English translation is "priest."

For your information as a teacher of English, the english word is Presbytery. Saying it is priest is complete nonsense.

In conclusion, this is MY EXPLAINATION of HOW you are in error. How are you in error? You are in error because you started with the English word "elder" instead of the Greek word. The New Testament books were written in Greek. It was never written in English. And your error was starting with the English word "Elder" instead of the Greek word "Presbyteros." Therefore, you are in error to say that the New Testament did not have "priests."

And you are desperately clutching at straws to dig yourself out of the hole you have well and truly fallen in.

God did not tear the veil at the entrance of the holy of holies so that WOMEN would become priests.

I never said he did. yet another straw man to dig yourself out of a hole.

Now, with Christ's death, all people have access to the presence of God and are no longer separated from Him.

Are you sure you know what you are saying as that is identical to what I said.

Again, this is just another put down.

Let me say it again, autistic people do not do put downs. REPEAT. Autistic people do not do put downs.

You believe that the Levitical priesthood is gone?? That is not what the Bible says. It says that the Levitical priesthood will last forever.

Yes for those who are under the levitical priesthood which as a Christian I am not. My high priest is jesus and I answer to him and don't need anyone to go to him on my behalf and get my sins dealt with that is why I have never been in a confessional box. I talk to God himself, not some religious person who thinks that God needs him to sort out other people.

No, what I am saying is that a person who has lost his leg has no excuse for putting anyone or any denomination down. On the other hand, he is excused from walking.

Such a silly statement.

Then I stand corrected. Women's ordination did not begin until the 19th century........certainly not in Early Christianity.

And there was no ordination for men in the New Testament Church.

God has always been true to His word and He has never called any woman to be a pastor of His Church (people).

And he has never called A man to be a pastor of his church. Church leadership has always been by a plurality of unpaid local Elders.That is the truth found in scripture.

 

[aspen]

The word "priest" is ultimately derived from Greek, via Latin presbyter,[1] the term for "elder", especially elders of Jewish or Christian communities in Late Antiquity. It is possible that the Latin word was loaned into Old English, and only from Old English reached other Germanic languages via the Anglo-Saxon mission to the continent, giving Old Icelandic prestr, Old Swedish präster, Old High German priast. Old High German also has the disyllabic priester, priestar, apparently derived from Latin independently via Old French presbtre. The Latin presbyter ultimately represents Greek presbyteros, the regular Latin word for "priest" being sacerdos, corresponding to Greek hiereus.

 

[Dodo_David]

In the Greek New Testament, the Greek word for priest is ἱερεύς, which is transliterated as hiereus. See Luke 1:5 for an example.

In the Greek New Testament, the Greek word for elder is πρεσβύτερος, which is transliterated as presbuteros. See 2 John 1:1 for an example.

In Acts 14:23, we are told that Paul and Barnabas appointed πρεσβυτέρους to govern a local congregation, not ἱερεῖς.

The New Testament writers wrote the books of the New Testament in Koiné Greek, not Latin. So, we need to look to the Greek New Testament for scriptural accuracy, not any Latin version of the Bible.

 

[marksman]

In the Greek New Testament, the Greek word for priest is ἱερεύς, which is transliterated as hiereus. See Luke 1:5 for an example.

In the Greek New Testament, the Greek word for elder is πρεσβύτερος, which is transliterated as presbuteros. See 2 John 1:1 for an example.

In Acts 14:23, we are told that Paul and Barnabas appointed πρεσβυτέρους to govern a local congregation, not ἱερεῖς.

The New Testament writers wrote the books of the New Testament in Koiné Greek, not Latin. So, we need to look to the Greek New Testament for scriptural accuracy, not any Latin version of the Bible.

Thankyou Dodo David and not any secular dictionary as some are wont to do here.

 

[Selene]

The word "priest" is ultimately derived from Greek, via Latin presbyter,[1] the term for "elder", especially elders of Jewish or Christian communities in Late Antiquity. It is possible that the Latin word was loaned into Old English, and only from Old English reached other Germanic languages via the Anglo-Saxon mission to the continent, giving Old Icelandic prestr, Old Swedish präster, Old High German priast. Old High German also has the disyllabic priester, priestar, apparently derived from Latin independently via Old French presbtre. The Latin presbyter ultimately represents Greek presbyteros, the regular Latin word for "priest" being sacerdos, corresponding to Greek hiereus.

The English word "Priest" was ultimately derived from the Greek word. The English word "Elder" did not even derived from the Greek word at all. It's origin is German. This is why when one looks at the OLDER Bibles that were published before the Reformation Period, the word "Priests" was used for the English translation.

Elder is another name for "priest."

No it is not.

Let's take a close look at the Greek word "elder." According to Strong's biblical translation, the Greek word for "elder" is "presbyte? It would be priest. Again refer back to the dictionary above. Therefore, the correct English translation is "priest."

Excuse me......but YOU were the one who said that there were no priests in the New Testament. Priest and elder are English words. The English dictionary says that "elder" is synonymous with priest. <_<

 

[mjrhealth]

Its no wonder the devil has so much fun with christians, oh how silly you all look to him bickering and arguing amongst yourselves, we are all in unison, but we cant agree , we worship the one God, we just cant decide which one He is. Get over yourselves, and let God be God, untill you do, you will be useless and unfruitfull. Again, God will use whom He chooses to do as He pleases wheter you agree or not, so get over it, you are the ones who are missing out by locking God in a box, and tossing the Key. Let Him out, He is more usefull when you let Him be Himself.

In all His Love

 

[marksman]

Excuse me......but YOU were the one who said that there were no priests in the New Testament. Priest and elder are English words. The English dictionary says that "elder" is synonymous with priest. <_<

As I have already said, I do not refer to a dictionary to gain truth. My source is the word of God.

And...if you believe what you do, why do you spend so much time here putting MEN right. Surely that is the opposite of your demand for no women priests?

 

[marksman]

The English word "Priest" was ultimately derived from the Greek word. The English word "Elder" did not even derived from the Greek word at all. It's origin is German.

[SIZE=10pt]Exodus 24:9[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] And Moses and Aaron went up with Nadab and Abihu, and seventy from the elders of Israel. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Numbers 11:16[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] And Jehovah said to Moses, Assemble to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom you have known that they are elders of the people, and its officers. And you shall take them to the tabernacle of the congregation; and they shall station themselves there with you. [/SIZE]

I did not know the Germans were part of the children of Israel.