Should a woman be a pastor?

[steve]

What would have happened at the tree if Eve had understood and employed this?

It appears from the Hebrew wording that he was standing right there and watched the whole thing go down.
It wasn’t about anything she said.

My personal opinion is that her eyes were opened with her first bite and that he realized that she now had something that he did not have, thus he willingly chose to join her.

 

[PeteR]

or if Adam had had the backbone to tell her "No".

Which explains exactly why both genders must learn, often with great difficulty, their God assigned roles. Man has to get a backbone and woman has to learn to hear and follow her head.

 

[Cap]

What if Adam willfully ate the apple knowing that was the only way to save her. Not unlike Christ becoming sin to save the church.

1 Timothy 21:4And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

 

[PeteR]

What if Adam willfully ate the apple knowing that was the only way to save her. Not unlike Christ becoming sin to save the church.

But, he didn't save her. Rather, in him we all died.

For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
1 CORINTHIANS 15:21‭-‬22 NASB

 

[Cap]

But, he didn't save her. Rather, in him we all died.

For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
1 CORINTHIANS 15:21‭-‬22 NASB

So he did save her, as we are all saved by resurrection, so was she as the church, one day.

 

[PeteR]

So he did save her, as we are all saved by resurrection, so was she as the church, one day.

No, I think Adam had another option after she had eaten. He could gave manned up and turned to Elohim and said, 'I messed up and did not cover my woman. I did not stop her when she ate. Do with ME what is right...'

What you are doing is making Adam out to be a hero for rebelling and following her instead of standing for righteousness.

Fact: All mankind, indeed, all of Creation suffers because Adam did the wrong thing(s).

 

[rockfox]

No, I think Adam had another option after she had eaten. He could gave manned up and turned to Elohim and said, 'I messed up and did not cover my woman. I did not stop her when she ate. Do with ME what is right...'

What you are doing is making Adam out to be a hero for rebelling and following her instead of standing for righteousness.

Fact: All mankind, indeed, all of Creation suffers because Adam did the wrong thing(s).

Adam could have opposed her rather than go along with it. And if she did it anyway, God would have made him a new woman.

 

[Nikud]

Genesis 3:17 Then to the man He said, “Because you listened to your woman’s voice and ate of the tree which I commanded you, saying, ‘You must not eat of it’:

There's a whole conversation which she convinces Adam to eat were not privy to. When did it take place?

Genesis 3:6 Now the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a thing of lust for the eyes, and that the tree was desirable for imparting wisdom.

Here?

So she took of its fruit and she ate.

Or here??

She also gave to her man who was with her and he ate.

Like the conversation we don't know what Adam was doing when the woman was being deceived. Most assume that Adam was standing there twiddling his thumbs only to be handed an fruit and eat of it.

We know it was Adam's decision to disobey the Instruction of God that we all were punished for.

Would there have been a punishment for him if he obeyed the Instruction of God, even though he failed at teaching her properly. He added to what God had told him when he instructed her.

Genesis 2:17 But of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil you must not eat. For when you eat from it, you most assuredly will die!

Genesis 3:2 …“Of the fruit of the trees, we may eat. 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God said, ‘You must not eat of it and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

Him adding to the Instruction of God made it easier for her to be deceived. We know that teachers will receive a stricter judgment. So its still possible he would have received a punishment. Then again there's no specific rebuke or punishment for Him for doing this.

It is possible also that she rested on her own understanding and added to His Instruction which made it easy for her to be deceived. Which hits the heart of this Thread.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

I’ve always wondered how Philips daughters prophesied. Nothing I’ve found has listed their prophecies, or how they made them known, but the four of them were well known for it.

 

[Nikud]

I’ve always wondered how Philips daughters prophesied. Nothing I’ve found has listed their prophecies, or how they made them known, but the four of them were well known for it.

Just pondering that.hmmm

 

[Nikud]

1 Cor 14: 34:

"34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says."

All you torah people what does the law say about this? What is Paul referring to here?

There is no Torah Command for women to be silent that I've found and I went through them all and a few reference sources when this was brought up. There's a Rabbinical command from that Era that says women cant speak in the assembly because their voices are sexually provocative and might lead men to sin. Some of the histories of the early church point to this as what was being addressed. It was being used to say women couldn't prophesy or speak in tongues. Which went against Acts 2:17-18, Joel 2:28-32, Acts 21:9 (Phillips daughters Prophesying without rebuking them) and a few others places in scripture I cant remember. Like in Acts ,other places 1 Corinthians amongst a few others, Sha'ūl rebukes tradition and Oral Law here.

Please keep in mine that when I show the my understanding of the context is not forbidding women to speak in a church setting, I am not saying it is giving permission for women to be teachers, look to someone other than her Head for biblical instruction, or interrupt a teaching. We do have to keep in context the whole letter, what is said before and after.

26 What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a teaching, has a interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to Elohim. 29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. 30 But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; 32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; 33 for Elohim is not a Elohim of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

There are a few Greek manuscripts that show the next two verses are a quote, He's quoting someone else there. (rabbinical practice treats the oral law as Torah, they say it is Torah)

34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but tare to subject themselves, just as the Torah also says.
35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

Next verse is a rebuke and followed by clarifying that the things Sha'ūl is writing about in concerns to prophecy and tongues are the Lords command. Notice it is not the "If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home" he is rebuking but the oral Law used to forbid women from Prophesying, speaking in tongues, basically manifesting the Holy spirit.

36 Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?

37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s precept.

38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.

39 Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues.

40 But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.

I want to reiterate No where in these verses is it giving permission for women to be teachers, look to someone other than her Head for biblical instruction, or interrupt a teaching. Nor is it forbidding women to greet others or join in praise and worship of God. There are other scriptures that show women are not suppose to be teachers and learn in submission, this one is not about that though. I Timothy 2:11-12 is a great Example 11 A woman must be still and receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.

Even if you believe there is no Torah any more, or that the Holy spirit was revealing a new commandment by saying that this verse is commanding complete silence of women in an assemble you are saying other parts of the New Testament are false as well as the prophecy that fore told the pentacost.

My 2 cents take it or leave.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

It may also be worth while to add to the statements of Papias already given, other passages of his in which he relates some miraculous deeds, stating that he acquired the knowledge of them from tradition. The residence of the Apostle Philip with his daughters in Hierapolis has been mentioned above. We must now point out how Papias, who lived at the same time, relates that he had received a wonderful narrative from the daughters of Philip. For he relates that a dead man was raised to life in his day. He also mentions another miracle relating to Justus, surnamed Barsabas, how he swallowed a deadly poison, and received no harm, on account of the grace of the Lord.

Acts 21:8. And the next day we that were of Paul’s company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.
And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.

 

[Nikud]

It may also be worth while to add to the statements of Papias already given, other passages of his in which he relates some miraculous deeds, stating that he acquired the knowledge of them from tradition. The residence of the Apostle Philip with his daughters in Hierapolis has been mentioned above. We must now point out how Papias, who lived at the same time, relates that he had received a wonderful narrative from the daughters of Philip. For he relates that a dead man was raised to life in his day. He also mentions another miracle relating to Justus, surnamed Barsabas, how he swallowed a deadly poison, and received no harm, on account of the grace of the Lord.

Acts 21:8. And the next day we that were of Paul’s company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.
And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.

I was reading this today aswell. Also found it interesting that he also said Mathews original writings of Yeshua where in Hebrew and they did the best they could to translate it, another thread though. I haven't found much details on what the narrative was. It seems from what I can piece from other histories they were only making prophecies of predictions not giving prophecies of instruction have you come across anything different.

 

[Pacman]

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 NASB
[34] The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. [35] If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

Perhaps the only thing he is saying is from the law is for them to subject themselves to their head. We are applying it to the keep silent part but what if that’s not what he meant. Remember Peter tells us that Paul is hard to understand...

Perhaps the men in that assembly were telling their women not to speak and Paul was simply supporting their authority over their women...

 

[Phillip]

I said earlier in this thread I would be doing some research. A little of what I found was in Ephesus, the worship of Diana, sister of Zeus. The teaching of Diana was that Eve came first then Adam. Adam sinned by eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil first. (Note exactly opposite of the scriptural truth) But Eve, the woman, could eat it and was fine. Men were to be submissive to women. Women did all the teaching in the Diana temple. The women of Diana worship would receive special revelation from Diana that men could not. Supposedly, these women were excellent teachers, although they taught a false doctrine. Women of Diana were temple prostitutes by night, dressed the part and came dressed in prostitute clothes into the Diana temple. Put braids of gold, pearls and expensive stuff in their hair.

Now fast forward to the teachings of Jesus showing up in Ephesus. These Diana worshippers accepted Jesus as their savior and started going to study under the church. Their hearts had changed, but that whole ‘renewing of the mind’ idea had not taken hold yet. The women thought, since women were smarter and men should be submissive to them, the former Diana worshippers started teaching. Also started teachings those things taught in Diana worship. In addition, they came to church, still in the style of clothing they wore while being a prostitute.

Now let’s see if these details add a little extra light to these verses;

1Timothy 2:
8 So I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or dispute.
9 Likewise the women are to dress in suitable apparel, with modesty and self-control. Their adornment must not be with braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive clothing, 10 but with good deeds, as is proper for women who profess reverence for God. 11 A woman must learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first and then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, because she was fully deceived, fell into transgression. 15 But she will be delivered through childbearing, if she continues in faith and love and holiness with self-control.

If you noticed, Paul spoke of many of the things mentioned that were taking place in the church. Which is why, specifically, verse 13 and 14 needed to be addressed to correct the teachings of Diana. Verses 9 and 10 dealt with dressing modestly as opposed to a prostitute.

As a side note, in the Greek language, some words were gender neutral. There were other words that that refer only to men; translated to English as Men. As we know, the meaning could be man or husband. Then the word woman, in the same manner, could mean woman or wife.

That leads to gender neutral terms. If a crowd of 1,000 women were in a room (think Solomon) and one man, the room would be talked of as the ‘men’. When one man, male, were present in a crowd, the crowd was referred to as masculine. We don’t have a term such as this in the English language.

I haven’t gotten very far on my study of this subject, but I plan on studying further.

 

[PeteR]

A little of what I found was in Ephesus, the worship of Diana, sister of Zeus. The teaching of Diana was that Eve came first then Adam. Adam sinned by eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil first. (Note exactly opposite of the scriptural truth) But Eve, the woman, could eat it and was fine. Men were to be submissive to women. Women did all the teaching in the Diana temple. The women of Diana worship would receive special revelation from Diana that men could not. Supposedly, these women were excellent teachers, although they taught a false doctrine. Women of Diana were temple prostitutes by night, dressed the part and came dressed in prostitute clothes into the Diana temple. Put braids of gold, pearls and expensive stuff in their hair.

Very interesting, particularly to note how the adversary presents a mirror image, just flips the whole picture of Eden. Interesting, too, that it is rooted in Greco-Roman paganism.... Juno, Zeus' wife, was goddess of marriage and monogamy.... Diana and Juno, twin ladies of feminism.

 

[Mojo]

You use “What if’s” to to evaluate and make wiser decisions. Then you move on to “What now”. We are in the “What now” era. Many are still not learning from their pasts. Many have learned. Unfortunately, those that are still making unwise decisions have no clue their decisions are bad.

@Phillip
I lean your direction on the "what now" of living in this era. I believe that there are examples in the NT of how things were being done at that time and place that aren't necessarily the absolute models of what should be done (see my posts on paid clergy, music in the church, etc.)

But, in this regard, I do believe Paul was speaking by Holy Spirit and Apostolic authority when he forbade a direct teaching and leadership role of women over men. It really doesn't seem like it's a thing that would evolve over time. If there was silence on it, I could understand that Grace would allow Christian Liberty to take over, but Paul seems pretty adamant and vocal, not obtuse.

 

[rockfox]

1 Cor 11 is another passage that relates women prophets; they were to cover their head when they prayed or prophesied. And women prophets are mentioned by name. Whether they were allowed to publicly prophecy in the assembly is a different question. But prophecy is neither leadership nor teaching so it isn't relevant to the question at hand.

 

[Nikud]

Before the verse 1 Cor 14: 34 and after it Paul is speaking of prophesy and Tongues. Thats the context. It is relavent to the verse. The only way to not make it ilrelevant is to try to divorce the verse from the context that surrounds it.

The fact that this verse does not adress woman leadership or teaching makes it irrelevant to this thread. There's far better verses that actually adress that, which cannot be disputed.

Plus, 37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s precept.

This was written to address the man or men of this congregation not the women, context shows it was a rebuke of a teaching forbidding women to prophecy or speak in tongues of an assembly.

We don't need to cherry pick and twist scripture to make a point about women teaching and leading that's already made in other parts of scripture.

 

[rockfox]

Before the verse 1 Cor 14: 34 and after it Paul is speaking of prophesy and Tongues. Thats the context.

What is the context? Not just that, but general order in the assembly....

What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

That from v26, it covers teaching as well.

The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

You say the context of this, v34, is tongues and prophesy, but aside from v26 notice it says 'if they desire to learn let them ask their own husbands'. That's talking about knowledge acquisition, not her giving a prophecy or tongue. It's about her interacting with those who are teaching. Technically I guess she could have a question of a prophet, but then 'ask husband' doesn't make sense since most husbands aren't prophets.

But it is fair to say that "not permitted to speak" covers all these things; and if they can't speak to ask a mere clarification for knowledge sake, how much more for taking the floor to teach or prophecy.