Female Pastors

[101G]

to domenic, GINOLJC

about "REAL SHEEP", this have already been discussed, see post #54 Page 2

Now,
Deborah…was a prophetess and judged Israel. She was not a spiritual Sheppard. Why do you think Deborah would be?

Because God himself appointed her, and prophet was the HIGHEST POSITION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, that's why. and two, yes she was Spiritual, Judges 2:16 "Nevertheless the LORD raised up judges, which delivered them out of the hand of those that spoiled them. 17 And yet they would not hearken unto "their judges", but they went a whoring after other gods, and bowed themselves unto them: they turned quickly out of the way which their fathers walked in, obeying the commandments of the LORD; but they did not so. 18 And when the LORD raised them up judges, then the LORD was with the judge, and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge: for it repented the LORD because of their groanings by reason of them that oppressed them and vexed them. 19 And it came to pass, when the judge was dead, that they returned, and corrupted themselves more than their fathers, in following other gods to serve them, and to bow down unto them; they ceased not from their own doings, nor from their stubborn way.

She was not a spiritual Sheppard well that sound spiritual to me, (smile).

 

[Polt]

none in the bible?, Shepherd are to watch over the flock right?. first the position, a woman Shepherd, Rachel, Genesis 29:6. and of the NATION/CHURCH Israel, Judges 4:4 "And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time". a judge was a leader. and this woman lead the whole nation/church. yes the church.

It's academic and theological incompetence to ignore explicit teachings in the Bible and instead try to make your own doctrine through highly dubious inferences.

Rachel helped look after her dad's animals, therefore women should lead churches?

Deborah was a judge and was told by God to have a certain man to lead, therefore women should lead churches.

Phoebe was a servant, a word with the most humble of meanings, therefore women should lead churches.

Junias was said to be of note among the apostles, therefore he's a she and and an apostle, therefore women should lead churches.

 

[101G]

2 Polt, greeting
it's YOUR SAME OLD academic and theological incompetence to ignore explicit teachings in the Bible. as with domenic, see post #54 Page 2

Greeting to all in the name of the Lord Jesus.

the Lord Jesus showed me something today, a pattern of many who oppose the notion of females as a pastor. the pattern, "husbands & wives". it is constantly been brought up, many say, "the man is the HEAD of the woman". the Husband is the HEAD of the Family". or the women to be in "silent". this is the pattern. well, in the name of the Lord Jesus, I'll address this pattern. here's the answer, "IN THE LORD". example, supporting scripture. 1 Thessalonians 5:11 "Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do. 12 And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you". the Key words here is "in the Lord", those "over" us. that pattern is found through out the bible, concerning those who rule "OVER" us . the words "over you in the Lord", have nothing to do with one "over you at HOME". those who have the rule "OVER" at church is to watch, instruct, guide, and feed you with the word of God. so the excuse, "the husband is the HEAD?, and try to apply it at church, is in ERROR. that want work. not at church, the HOUSE of the Lord. for in Christ Jesus there is neither male or Female. so that crutch want work no more.

next time, we'll look at Romans 16:1 " I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea".
look at this word "commend" and find out it meaning. it's the Greek word, G4921 συνιστάω sunistao
so do your homework.

 

[Polt]

1 Thessalonians 5:11 "Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do. 12 And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you". the Key words here is "in the Lord", those "over" us.

101G, I've pointed out to you that the word "over" is from a different, even if similar, word from what Phoebe is called. I've pointed out to you that the the Greek word translated "over" often is clearly used to mean just a helper. 1 thes 5:12 could be rendered:

"And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are helping you in the Lord, and encouraging you." In fact, "them which labour among you" suggests peers, not leaders.

 

[101G]

2 Polt, Greeting
101G, I've pointed out to you that the word "over" is from a different, even if similar, word from what Phoebe is called. I've pointed out to you that the the Greek word translated "over" often is clearly used to mean just a helper. 1 thes 5:12 could be rendered:

"And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are helping you in the Lord, and encouraging you." In fact, "them which labour among you" suggests peers, not leaders.

1 thes 5:12 could be rendered: In fact, "them which labour among you" suggests peers, not leaders.
well, well, well, my Hermeneutic expert didn't read his commentaries on1 Thessalonians 5:12
Gill commentary: and are over you in the Lord; are set in the highest place in the church, and bear the highest office there; have the presidency and government in it, and go before the saints, and guide and direct them in matters both of doctrine and practice, being ensamples to the flock; the Syriac version renders it, "and stand before you"; ministering unto you in holy things, being servants to you for Jesus' sake: and this "in the Lord"; or by the Lord; for they did not take this honour to themselves, nor were they appointed by men, but they were made able ministers of the word by God; received their gifts qualifying them for this work from Christ, and were placed as overseers of the church by the Holy Ghost: and it was only in things pertaining to the Lord that they were over them; not in things civil, which distinguishes them from civil magistrates; nor in things secular and worldly, they had nothing to do in their families, to preside there, or with their worldly concerns, only in the church of Christ, and in things pertaining to their spiritual welfare; and though they were over them, yet under Christ, and in subjection to him, as their Lord and King; governing not in an arbitrary and tyrannical way, lording it over God's heritage, usurping a dominion over the faith of men, coining new doctrines, and making new laws; but according to the word of God, and laws of Christ, in the fear of the Lord, and with a view to the glory of God, and in love to souls: hence the Arabic version renders it, in the love of the Lord; the phrase, "in the Lord", is omitted in the Syriac version:

Pool: Ver. 12,13. The apostle spake before of their private duties as Christians to one another, now of their duties to their pastors and teachers, lest by what he had said they might think the ministry needless. It seems this church was settled under officers, which is called an organical church. And though the apostle himself was driven from them by persecution, yet they were not without ministers and teachers; and they owed a great duty to them, to which he doth lovingly exhort them. And he describes them not by the name of their office, as pastors, elders, or ministers, but by the work of it.

Barnes: And are over you in the Lord. That is, by the appointment of the Lord, or under his direction. They are not absolute sovereigns, but are themselves subject to one who is over them--the Lord Jesus. On the word here rendered "are over you," (προισταμενους) Rom 12:8, where it is translated ruleth.
must I go on?.

see how transparent your. get your foot out of your mouth again.

now you said what? 1 thes 5:12 could be rendered: In fact, "them which labour among you" suggests peers, not leaders.

I suggest you get another leader, teacher

2 Polt, and jb my two Hermeneutics expert Greeting

now that those, "who are OVER you". are not hired help. LOL. but in fact leaders. to show you polt your ignorance, out of your own mouth you didn't recognize a truth. listen to yourself, "1 thes 5:12 could be rendered: In fact, "them which labour among you" suggests peers, not leaders". see that word you used?, "peers", well, polt a peer is a person who is equal to another in abilities, qualifications, age, background, and social status".
and as the commentaries states on this scripture, they, (who have the rule over you), are set in the highest place in the church, and bear the highest office there; have the presidency and government in it, and go before the saints, and guide and direct them in matters both of doctrine and practice, being ensamples to the flock". hear that also jb.

and 2 my dear sister, Selene
as the man is the "HEAD" of the family, YES AT HOME". commentary: they were over them; not in things civil, which distinguishes them from civil magistrates; nor in things secular and worldly, they had nothing to do in their families, to preside there, or with their worldly concerns, only in the church of Christ, and in things pertaining to their spiritual welfare".
sorry sister, that crutch want work either.

Now, knowing that these crutches have been eliminated. lets continue.
Romans 16:1 " I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea". hold it here for a few.
lets look at this word "commend". it's the Greek word, G4921 συνιστάω sunistao
commend, according to Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Greek and Hebrew Dictionaries
G4921 συνιστάω sunistao (soon-is-tah'-o) (or (strengthened) sunistano soon-is-tan'-o, or sunistemi soon-is'-tay-mee) v.
1. to set together
2. (by implication) to introduce (favorably)
3. (figuratively) to exhibit
4. (intransitively) to stand near
5. (figuratively) to constitute
[from G4862 and G2476 (including its collateral forms)]
KJV: approve, commend, consist, make, stand (with)
Root(s): G4862, G2476

to set together, see that Polt, they are "PEERS",
G4921, sunistemi lit., "to set together" (sun, "with," histemi, "to stand"), hence signifies "to set one person or thing with another by way of presenting and commending"
according to Thayer's Greek Definitions
1. to place together, to set in the same place,to bring or band together
a. to stand with (or near)
2. to set one with another
a. by way of presenting or introducing him
b. to comprehend
3. to put together by way of composition or combination, to teach by combining and comparing
a. to show, prove, establish, exhibit
4. to put together, unite parts into one whole
a. to be composed of, consist
- Origin: from G4862 and G2476 (including its collat. forms)

Looking at definition #1,2, and 3 by Thayer. Polt they are "PEERS", Place together, to STAND. that's just what our sister Phebe did. she stood in the churches, just as the apostles, prophets, teachers, and the rest in leadership who was male. that's why the apostle Paul said that she was a succourer, and that is the counter part of the Male in that "SAME", position. G4368 προστάτις prostatis (pros-tat'-is) n.
1. a patroness, i.e. assistant
[feminine of a derivative of G4291]
KJV: succourer

the male in the "overseer" position, G4291 προΐστημι proistemi (pro-is"'-tay-mee) v.
1. to stand before
2. (in rank) to preside
3. (by implication) to practise
[from G4253 and G2476]
KJV: maintain, be over, rule
Root(s): G4253, G2476

How hard is it to understand?.

next time, we will look at, "to constitute", and "Practise"

 

[Polt]

well, well, well, my Hermeneutic expert didn't read his commentaries on1 Thessalonians 5:12
Gill commentary:

101G, do you post your messages while sitting down or standing up? I want to know if you're a sitdown comic or a standup comic.

To prove your view about Phoebe from one verse, you appeal to expert authority on a different verse that uses a different word. And, then you completely ignore your own expert authorities when they call Phoebe a helper rather than a ruler.

Now, back to giving you more credit than is due, it's valid to point to another verse to demonstrate the range of meaning of one word. But, it's not valid to point to another verse to prove what a word must mean in all contexts, especially when the context of that other verse doesn't require the word to mean what it's translated as.

You could avoid your silly arguments by ceasing to promote a false doctrine.

 

[101G]

2 Polt,

 

[101G]

2 Polt, and jb my two Hermeneutics expert, Greeting, IN THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS THE CHRIST

Romans 16:1 " I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea".
looking at this word "commend". it's the Greek word, G4921 συνιστάω sunistao
commend, according to Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Greek and Hebrew Dictionaries
G4921 συνιστάω sunistao (soon-is-tah'-o) (or (strengthened) sunistano soon-is-tan'-o, or sunistemi soon-is'-tay-mee) v.
1. to set together
2. (by implica. tion) to introduce (favorably)
3. (figuratively) to exhibit
4. (intransitively) to stand near
5. (figuratively) to constitute
[from G4862 and G2476 (including its collateral forms)]
KJV: approve, commend, consist, make, stand (with)
Root(s): G4862, G2476

we have already look at definition #1, "set together". now we will look at definition #5 above, (figuratively) to constitute

to constitute, G5537, according to Thayer's Greek Definitions
1. to transact business, esp. to manage public affairs
a. to advise or consult with one about public affairs
b. to make answer to those who ask for advice, present enquiries or requests, etc.
1. of judges, magistrates, rulers, kings
2. to give a response to those consulting an oracle, to give a divine command or admonition, to teach from heaven
a. to be divinely commanded, admonished, instructed
b. to be the mouthpiece of divine revelations, to promulgate the commands of God
3. to assume or take to one's self a name from one's public business
a. to receive a name or title, be called

looking at definition #2, with a & b. this sound exactly like, what the apostle Paul did. 2. to give a response to those consulting an oracle, to give a divine command or admonition, to teach from heaven. (set together is correct).

a. to be divinely commanded, admonished, instructed. (the same as our brother the apostle Paul).

b. to be the mouthpiece of divine revelations, to promulgate the commands of God. (now if don't sound like what the apostle Paul did. Glory to our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ).

Next "practise"., which is an old English word, now "practice".

 

[Polt]

101G Romans 16:1 "I commend..."

The mechanisms of 101G's brain:

"Commend" has five definitions given 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Definition 5 has three definitions given 1, 2, 3.

The second definition of the fifth definition of the word commend is, "to give a response to those consulting an oracle." Because the second definition of the fifth definition of the word commend can mean a person a who passively relays a divine message, it is proved that Phoebe ruled over Paul and therefore women are to be pastors.

 

[Ruth]

Any women who claims she should be the head over any church is in sin.

She can be a teacher,but it would be over women and children.

 

[101G]

2 Ruth greeting.
Now there you go again, "Any women who claims she should be the head over any church is in sin". did we not point out the difference between the church family, and the secular family HEAD?. get off the Headship at church, there is only one head there, and that's the Lord Jesus. he works through "FEMALES", and "males. for there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus. Ruth read the topic "HEADing again. this have nothing to do with a husband and wife. I guess you didn't read that. Oh well, see post #325 page 11.

and two, do you really hear yourself. "She can be a teacher,but it would be over women and children". so I guess there's a different truth for women, and another truth for men?, is this what you're saying?. for is not the truth the same for men as well as women?. I hope so. and the only reason why a woman can't teach a man truth is because of her gender?. that sounds like discrimination to me. for God is no respector of person, but according to you this don't apply to the truth. because of ones gender?. now that's sin to me. listen, James 2:8 "If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: 9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors"

now what are you saying about SIN?. let the transgressor speak.

2 Polt , my Hermeneutic expert, greeting from the Lord Jesus.
get out of the flesh, a Pastor is a pastor, be ye male or female. your post shows that you're still in the flesh. listen to yourself, "it is proved that Phoebe ruled over Paul and therefore women are to be pastors". now listen to the apostle, Romans 8:5 "For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. 8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

well Polt, you mind the thing of the flesh, instead of the Spirit.

 

[Polt]

did we not point out the difference between the church family, and the secular family HEAD?. ... so I guess there's a different truth for women, and another truth for men?

Yes, Jesus is the head of the church, but he appointed men to oversee the church, first the Apostles and then the Overseers/Pastors. If you concede that the man has the role of head of his secular family, including the wife, how can a wife be the head of her husband at Church as the pastor? And, if you concede that the man has the role as the head of the family, what does that mean of your chant that in Christ there is no male or female?

 

[101G]

2 Polt,
Yes, Jesus is the head of the church, but he appointed men to oversee the church, first the Apostles and then the Overseers/Pastors. If you concede that the man has the role of head of his secular family, including the wife, how can a wife be the head of her husband at Church as the pastor? And, if you concede that the man has the role as the head of the family, what does that mean of your chant that in Christ there is no male or female?

you asked, "how can a wife be the head of her husband at Church as the pastor?". head?, or do you mean to say "RULE OVER", HIM?. even Mary was the Lord birth mother, but salvation came by what she brought forth. one is not without the other. scripture, now listen real good polt, 1 Corinthians 11:11 "Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord". (did you get that, in the Lord). 12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God". please re-read those verses for your edification. now here's the simple answer, just in case you didn't get it, it's a spiritual matter, not a secular matter. for in christ Jesus there is neither male nor female.

from your last response, either you can't read with understanding, or you just can't understand, which one?, I know not. listen for the last time, "as the man is the "HEAD" of MOST family, YES AT HOME", but not at church. commentary: they were over them; (not as HEADS, no man is the head of another Man). but over them, not in things civil, which distinguishes them from civil magistrates; nor in things secular and worldly, they had nothing to do in their families, to preside there, or with their worldly concerns, only in the church of Christ, and in things pertaining to their spiritual welfare".

now as for conceding, following your role as head. not all families have a man as the head, some have women . so your little summery as man as head just went out the door, and Oh yes, close it behind you. 2 Timothy 3:7 "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth".

maybe the problem is husbands are leaving Christ at the Church door step, and not taking him home with them. for Christ should be in the Home also. and maybe husband want have such a big empty "HEAD".

Deborah, a prophetess the highest office in the old testament, and here husband didn't have a problem with it. Arron was a High Priest but his sister was a prophetess, the only one seems to have a problem with women in position is you, and a few others. I suggest you get over it, and if you can't I suggest you go to God in prayer for yourself and let him answer you. but ask in faith.

P.S. by the way, when I use head, not as authority, that I use as "rule over"

 

[Wormwood]

[SIZE=medium]101G,[/SIZE]


[SIZE=medium]I would disagree strongly with your hermeneutics on this issue. You keep referring to Paul's comment in Galatians that their is neither male nor female in Christ. This passage has to do with salvation and not church leadership. Those who put their faith in Christ belong to Christ and are equal. This does not mean that there are no role distinctions. This does not mean that there are no leaders in the church, no teachers, no adults and no children. This means that we are of equal value, but role distinctions are still very clearly evident. You are trying to make this verse say something about church leadership and that is NOT the intention of this verse. [/SIZE]


[SIZE=medium]However, verses that do speak on church leadership are very clear on the matter and do not contradict one another (1 Tim. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 14:34-35)[/SIZE]


[SIZE=medium]To be honest, I have a hard time reading your writing because the grammar is very unclear...such as[/SIZE][SIZE=medium]: maybe the problem is husbands are leaving Christ at the Church door step, and not taking him home with them. for Christ should be in the Home also. and maybe husband want have such a big empty "HEAD"[/SIZE]



[SIZE=medium]If you are saying that unbelieving husbands in the home infers that women should be able to pastor a church then that seems like quite a leap. Also, I find your Greek commentary to be very suspect. Do you really know Greek or are you just recycling someone elses ideas. If you know Greek, I would be happy to discuss those issues further. Finally, your comments on giftedness and ability seem off base. In my opinion, the point in scripture has to do with God's order. This is not about who is smarter or better, but about God's design. This is not unlike the homosexual hermeneutic that suggests that all love is equal. Well, actually your definition of love or ability has nothing to do with it. This is about what God desires and his design. After all, since when does God need the most gifted and intelligent to lead?[/SIZE]

 

[101G]

2 Wormwood
in respect to person?. is not the principle the same James 2:1 "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons". finish reading the rest of the scriptures and tell me that this is in reference to salvation

In the name of the Lord Jesus, greeting, excuse my manners.

while you're still reading those scriptures in the Book of James.

two, I highly disagree with you on Galatians, concertinaing salvation
i would disagree strongly with your hermeneutics on this issue. You keep referring to Paul's comment in Galatians that their is neither male nor female in Christ. This passage has to do with salvation and not church leadership. Those who put their faith in Christ belong to Christ and are equal. This does not mean that there are no role distinctions. This does not mean that there are no leaders in the church, no teachers, no adults and no children. This means that we are of equal value, but role distinctions are still very clearly evident. You are trying to make this verse say something about church leadership and that is NOT the intention of this verse.

once you finish James then we will look at the verses in Galatians

 

[Wormwood]

101G,

I think I understand what you are trying to say, though it is difficult because of your punctuation and grammar. Forgive me if I am barking up the wrong tree, but I am giving this a shot.

The context of James is talking about Christians judging each other based on wealth. Thus, some people were being shown favoritism based on their possessions while others were being mistreated and ignored because of their poverty. I really dont see how you are trying to make a connection here with roles in the church. Are you suggesting that the role of elder being reserved for men is akin to mistreating a poor person in the church? This seems way off the mark.

I think if we are going to deal with the issue of roles in the church as they relate to leadership, we need to stick with those verses that are speaking about that issue. Trying to pull in verses about salvation or mistreating the poor and forcing it to speak on the Bible's teaching on roles and church leadership is poor hermeneutics in my opinion. Let's allow the text to deal with its topic. James and Paul were not 21st century Western Americans. They would not see role distinctions as oppression and I believe your view has a lot more to do with imposing contemporary cultural views onto the authors than anything they actually believed.

 

[101G]

2 Wormwood,
I'm talking bible principle.
to all who follow this topic, greeting from the Lord Jesus the Christ.
lets look at a basic bible principle. some say, "Jesus pick only men". so that's that and it not going to change. I say wrong. this we keep hearing over and over only men. well in the name of the Lord Jesus, lets address this principle of, "men only". by understanding another principle we can see the meaning and the worth of men only here. lets get it from the bible. Ephesians 3:1 "For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, 2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: 3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: 7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power". HOLD IT, what was the principle?. that the Gentile was fellowheirs of the same body, "but it was not known to the Jewish nation at that time". but now is made known by HIS Holy Apostles and prophets. here's the principle. just because the Gentiles was not apart of the nation of Israel in the beginning. but later, upon Christ coming, making known salvation for all people, not just the "JEWS ONLY" is salvation. but fellowheirs with Israel. it was not so in the begining, being separate, but now it is made known, and we're one body in Christ Jesus. as the same principle apply to the woman in ministry. before there was no women ministers, starting out with the first ministers chosen by Christ. BUT NOW, NOW, NOW, THERE ARE WOMEN MINISTERS. just as the Gentile was, from a prejudice, Jewish, historical, view thought that all non Jews was not worthy of salvation. the same is true of unlearned men concerning women in ministries today. prejudice, ignorant, unlearned men, "NOT IN MY PULPIT". but now is revealed unto us by the Holy Scriptures. the same principle is applied to women in leadership. this is a basic bible principle, of "NOT KNOWING GOD MIND". so we have the Holy Spirit to teach us. he searches the deep things of God, the mind of God. which bring us back to the first principle of God. Hebrews 5:12 "For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe".
so if you think that everything is set in stone according to YOUR KNOWLEDGE, one better think twice. what was once unknown and misunderstood is now made known, and understood.

but I warn you. when you reject the one who he, the Lord Jesus sends, you're not rejecting the sent person. you're rejecting the Lord Jesus himself. supporting scripture, Matthew 10:40 "He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me".
don't be like the stiff necked Jews, believing that there are no women called of God into the ministry. don't be that narrow minded. for with God all thing are possible.


2 Wormwood, In the name of the Lord Jesus, greeting.

I disagree with your assessment that the passage in Galatians that you quoted that "males and females" there pertain to salvation. when you said, "This passage has to do with salvation". this is what I disagree with you on. question, was these people saved or unsaved?. if these was unsaved show the scripture proving that?.
I'll be waiting for your answer.

 

[Wormwood]

101G,

Paul, in Galatians 1:9 said that if anyone preaches another Gospel than the one he preached, they should be eternally condemned. Right? I agree with you that Paul brought new revelation as an Apostle about God's dealing with Gentiles through Jesus Christ. This same Paul said their is no other Gospel and also said that it is wrong for women to be elders in the church. (1 Tim. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 14:34-35) Paul made it clear that his Gospel was from God and that his Gospel was the only Gospel. It was not a changing and transforming message, but the "last word" from God in Jesus Christ. This same Paul also made it clear what God's desires were for the church in terms of its order, message and leadership. Its why we have the Bible. So are you trying to tell me that you are an Apostle and God has given you a new message about church leadership that contradicts the Bible and the message of Paul?


I find it curious that you want to discuss any and every Scripture except the ones that speak on this very issue. But because you insist, let's look at Galatians:

1) The entire book of Galatians is dealing with how a person is saved. Here are a few excerpts to prove this point...

“Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods. But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.” (Galatians 4:8–11, ESV)


“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (Galatians 3:1–3, ESV)

“For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.” (Galatians 3:10–14, ESV)

This is the context of the whole book. Paul is trying to show the Galatians that they are not saved by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus.

2) Now lets look at the immediate context of the passage in question:

“So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.” (Galatians 3:24–29, ESV)

Paul here is dealing with how people are saved. Are they saved by the law or are they saved by faith in Christ Jesus? That is the question. His point is that the law was "our guardian" until Christ came. NOW, we are justified by faith, not law. Everyone who puts faith in Jesus is a "son of God." So who gets to be a "son of God" by faith in Christ Jesus? Jews only? No. Jews, Greeks, slave, free, male and female. We all share equally in God's salvation by faith in God's grace. We are all heirs of Abraham, not based on our heritage, gender, or prestige, but based on faith in Jesus. This is the point of the text. It has to do with how a person is saved and who can be saved. All are saved and equal partakers of God's promise of blessing to Abraham based on faith in Christ.

So, again, this text has to do with salvation and not church leadership. The Galatians were slipping into false teaching that they had to obey the law and obey Jewish customs to be saved. Paul is saying, "No." You aren't saved by being a Jew, but rather all are saved by faith..no matter your gender, heritage or social position.

 

[101G]

2 Wormwood,
I find it curious that you want to discuss any and every Scripture except the ones that speak on this very issue. But because you insist, let's look at Galatians:
1) The entire book of Galatians is dealing with how a person is saved. Here are a few excerpts to prove this point

this just prove my point. the entire book is speaking to "SAVED PEOPLE IN THEIR WALK OF SALVATION". and the same scriptures you used to make your point. is the same scriptures that shoot your ownself in the foot with. you use these scriptures. “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (Galatians 3:1–3, ESV)"

“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?. if these people was unsaved, how could they be bewitched. bewitched from what?. especially after the gospel been preached to them. and two, "Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?". do the unsaved have works according to the Spirit, NO. the saved work because they are already SAVED. and you do not work to get saved. see how the gospel was before YOUR EYES, and yet you failed to see the meaning. you can have the gospel preached and yet understand it not.

then you said, "Paul here is dealing with how people are saved. Are they saved by the law or are they saved by faith in Christ Jesus? That is the question".

did you not hear the scriptures you gave?, ""Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?", DID YOU RECEIVE", not are you going to receive. they already had receive. the question are you going to be fooled by another gospel?. which is not another.

now to the scripture at hand. Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus".
please read your commentaries on the verses in question, starting with John Gill, Pool, Barnes, and (JFB) Jamieson, Robert, and Fauss. I believe you will get the message, loud and clear. these are your commentaries. you make the call.

and lastly, I agree with you that Paul brought new revelation as an Apostle about God's dealing with Gentiles through Jesus Christ. This same Paul said their is no other Gospel and also said that it is wrong for women to be elders in the church. (1 Tim. 2:11-12 (http://biblia.com/bible/niv/1%20Tim.%202.11-12); 1 Cor. 14:34-35 (http://biblia.com/bible/niv/1%20Cor.%2014.34-35)) Paul made it clear that his Gospel was from God and that his Gospel was the only Gospel. It was not a changing and transforming message, but the "last word" from God in Jesus Christ


these are the same old questions asked over and over. just like you misunderstood what the apostle was saying in Galatians, so here also. I refere you to view page 6 posts #168, #172. page 8 post #238. page 11 post #301, #305, these will give you the crust of the matter.

as for, " Paul made it clear that his Gospel was from God and that his Gospel was the only Gospel. It was not a changing and transforming message, but the "last word" from God in Jesus Christ

NO CHANGING, ONLY REVEALING. it's called revelation KNOWLEDGE. meaning wisdom and understanding given by the Lord Jesus Christ, so that we may understand the Gospel that's being preached. that's why we have apostles, prophets, teachers, and pastors to give REVELATION KNOWLEDGE. not our own opinions. but to understand what is written. so read your commentaries and start to understand.

 

[Wormwood]

101G,

You are not reading what I am writing very carefully. "The entire book of Galatians is dealing with how a person is saved." Notice, I did not say that the book was an evangelistic effort to save the Galatians. Rather, it is teaching them/reminding them how a person is saved. They were saved by grace and now they are trying to earn their salvation by the law. This is why Paul is saying that they are in danger of "falling from grace." Again, this book is on how a person is saved...by grace and not law. Period. This is not about church leadership or role distinctions in the church or society.

As far as the commentaries, I don't know what you mean by "my commentaries." I did not write them. But if you want me to quote some commentaries on the text, very well:

But in Christ women come to faith (v. 26), baptism (v. 27), and salvation (v. 29) on the same terms with men. They are equally acceptable to God, and equally loved.
This does not, however, cancel out the separate and distinct roles of men and women in the home or in the church. It was after Paul had written this verse in Galatians that he affirmed certain limitations on the role of women (1 Cor 11:3–16; 14:33–36; 1 Tim 2:8–15). The statement "neither male nor female" must be understood in terms of eligibility for salvation, especially in this context of faith and baptism (vv. 26–27).

The College Press NIV Commentary: Galatians

Only by wrenching Gal 3:28 from its context and importing into it an ideology derived from somewhere else can this verse be turned into a manifesto for liberation theology. Moreover, the propriety of women leaders in the church must be decided through careful exegesis of those passages that touch on that issue. Galatians 3:28 cannot legitimately be used either as evidence or counterevidence in this debate. It is regrettable that recent discussions of this theme have obscured the amazing good news Paul set forth in this verse. There is a unity in the body of Christ and an equality of access to salvation through faith in Jesus. Paul’s Galatian opponents had been saying that in order for Gentiles to become Christians they first had to become Jews, that circumcision was essential to salvation. Paul had shown that in the aeon, "the now age," inaugurated through the death and resurrection of Christ, a new reality had come to light. Although circumcision never saved anyone in the first place, as Paul demonstrated in the case of Abraham, there was a time when we were placed "under" the harsh tutelage of the law, subjected to the demonic forces that hold sway in this present evil world. But, since Jesus Christ has shattered the bonds of death, hell, and the grave, this is no longer true. Jesus is Victor! He has perfectly fulfilled the law of God and emerged triumphant over all the hosts of hell. We witness to this triumphant victory in the death-burial-resurrection of baptism. Thus in respect to our standing before God, Jewish blood, free birth, and male sex count for nothing. The call of the gospel is radically egalitarian and completely universal: "Come, all you who are thirsty, come to the waters" (Isa 55:1); "Whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life" (Rev 22:17).

The New American Commentary: Galatians

It is not that the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles, slaves and free men, male and female no longer exist, as a literal rendering might suggest (RSV, NAB, NEB), but that in union with Christ Jesus, those who are baptized are all one, and that there is no difference between them because of their nationality, their social standing, or even their sex. In other words, the distinctions which exist are no longer important and present no impediment to any of these persons becoming children of God.

Galatians: A Translator's Handbook on Paul's Letter to the Galatians

Every author I read says what I am saying. This text is about how people "become children of God" and equal eligibility for salvation. This text has nothing to do with feminism or egalitarianism. Paul was thinking nothing of the sort in this context.


Revealing? According to what Paul clearly teaches in the NT, this would be revealing a contradiction because Paul plainly says that he did not permit women to be teaching elders of the church. Women did prophesy and they did help Paul in his mission and ministry. No one is arguing that. However, they were not overseers nor did they have authority in this manner. Paul made it clear that he did not permit this because of God's created order and the fall. This is not a cultural or time sensitive issue that needs further revelation. Paul set a standard and he based it on God's creative act.