So my wife isn't allowed to teach me, but my neighbor's wife is?
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Should a woman be a pastor?
- Thread starter Rose of Sharon
- Start date
So my wife isn't allowed to teach me, but my neighbor's wife is?
You have missed a very obvious point. While there is no word for “wife” in the Bible meaning that all of the prohibitions on women preaching could simply be admonitions for wives to be submissive, there is also no word for “husband” in the Bible and so no way to tie those prohibitions to marriage. They are literally referring to men and women with no modifiers to indicate that the women referenced have been mastered by the men referenced. Which is what would it indicate that these passages were about marriage and not the conductment of church life. I’ve said this before but you have not finished swallowing the red pill yet. Your still chewing on it. You need to shed the last of your modern church thinking.
As a guy that tries to cut to the core quickly, I am impressed.
This is a guy. Nymphas And the church in his house.
You also seem to be conflating positions of authority with giftings of influence and service. Subtle distinction, Big difference.
Is this not precisely what occurred with Priscilla, Aquila, and Apollos in Acts 18? The wife wasn't teaching the husband but she was teaching a "learned man"...
Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately." - Acts 18:24-26
If anything, this is a New Covenant (NC) understanding; women having the ability to teach in the NC is the red pill on the issue, the blue pill is the "keep silent" status quo. Secondly, if a woman like Deborah could lead the entire nation of Israel in the Old Covenant (OC) - she would be disqualified from doing so in the NC?
Some of the major female prophets in the OT are Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4:4), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chron. 34:22), Noadiah (Neh. 6:14), and “the prophetess” (Isa. 8:3). Miriam claims the Lord “has spoken” through her (Num. 12:2). Deborah says to Barak: “Look, the Lord, the God of Israel, has commanded” (Judg. 4:6). Huldah similarly uses the prophetic introductory formula: “Thus says the Lord God of Israel…” (2 Kings 22:15).
In the New Testament, Luke presents Anna as a “woman prophet” (prophētis), which is the same Greek word the Septuagint uses to translate the Hebrew něbī’āh(Luke 2:36). Like the prophet Simeon who is paired with her (2:25–27), Anna is led by the Holy Spirit to speak about Jesus “to all who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem” (2:38). Is a Prophet not allowed to teach?
"There was also a prophet, Anna, the daughter of Penuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was very old; she had lived with her husband seven years after her marriage, 37 and then was a widow until she was eighty-four. She never left the temple but worshiped night and day, fasting and praying. 38 Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem." - Luke 2:36-38
This understanding is the red pill. We all arrived at Polygamy being righteous, I believe the Lord can reveal the same on this issue.
"Give my greetings to the brothers and sisters at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house." - Colossians 4:15 NIV
"Ἀσπάσασθε τοὺς ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ Νύμφαν καὶ τὴν κατ' οἶκον αὐτῆς ἐκκλησίαν."
αὐτῆς (autēs) — 170 Occurrences; nearly always translated "her." If a male was being referenced, αὐτός would have been employed as it is masculine.
Example:
Matthew 1:19
GRK: ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς δίκαιος ὢν
KJV: Then Joseph her husband, being
INT: the husband of her righteous being
Additional Examples: https://biblehub.com/greek/autou_846.htm
Nympha is female. Which poses the question, why list a woman's name and ignore the senior male Pastor/Elder at that church?
You’re reaching bud. Nothing says Priscilla did the teaching or even that it was anything more than an informal discussion. Prophesying is not teaching. None of your examples actually say what you’re saying. Speculation and maybe and what if isn’t a theology. It says he suffereth not a woman to teach a man. That’s pretty clear. An elder has to have a wife. Unless we’re okaying lesbianism you have a problem. A woman can’t speak if she can’t talk. There’s no way around this/
Women teachers and leaders is a far cry from a married couple preaching the gospel to someone. Priscilla wasn't acting as a teacher of a church. At most she was acting in an evangelistic capacity. At a minimum she invited him to their house and fed him while Aquila taught him.
I have no problem with female prophets; the NT is clear they are acceptable (1 Cor 11). But do you? Are there female prophets in your fellowship? Or are you a cessationalist making an argument of convenience? Do they cover their heads while prophesying? Or do you only take 1 Cor 11 as license to allow women to do what they want; and not actually operate according to the scriptures?
A prophet, communicating the word for word message she literally herd God tell her is very different than a teacher. Women are welcome to foretell future events. But a prophet is not a teacher and the existence of women prophets isn't an argument for women leaders and teachers.
It didn't say "her church" but "the church in her house". He greets brethren in a place such as Laodicea or those who met in Nympha's house. No where in the NT are local churches identified by their pastor/leader; NT leadership isn't that kind of leadership.
Presuming of course that Nympha is actually a female name and not another case like Junia where modern scholars choose to construe a name as feminine.
Women teaching/leading isn't a red pill, it's a feminist pill. It's a direct fruit of women's liberation with no foundation in the scriptures. Keep silent and don't teach are the status quo because they are what the scriptures very clearly command and what was universally practiced for 1900 years.
There really is not way around that. The real question isn't can a woman be a pastor, but why are some so insistent they can be in the face of incontrovertible evidence?
That’s the kind of trouble you get into when you prefer a sinaticus or vaticanus text over the Received text which has autos, masculine and Nymphas. Masculine.
You totally lost credibility with me on that one.
EDIT
Thought that may have sounded harsher than intended. So editing to try to say that for me that’s now a dead point. It also makes me wonder if this was an isolated use of T. Vat. And T Sin for cherry picking purpose to support a position OR perhaps these are a normal text that you’re used to using.
And how would I tease out those differences by text? My go to reference, at most tells me there is some dispute as to whether it is male or female.
It is impossible that Priscilla was acting in an "evangelistic capacity." Apollos was an educated teacher in the faith.
"Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately." - Acts 18:24-26
"They... explained to him the way of God more adequately."
What evidence supports this claim?
"The churches in the province of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house." - 1 Corinthians 16:19
Their house was their church... notice where they invite Apollos...
"When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately." - Acts 18:24-26
Eisegesis. This is pure speculation; the Scriptures above do not indicate this was the case at all. On the contrary, Priscilla was a "co-worker" in the faith.
"Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus." - Romans 16:3
Interesting side-note: Priscilla is often listed first in Paul's greetings (Acts 18:18-19, Acts 18:26, Rom 16:3, 2 Tim 4:19). Does this have significance? Perhaps...
Thank you for asking, no I am not a cessationist. My wife does wear a headcovering at every service as even prayer requires it (1 Cor 11:13).
What evidence supports "a prophet is not a teacher" or in other words a prophet never teaches? I personally operate in the gift of teaching most of the time, but every once in awhile I seem to have a prophetic word on something someone is secretly doing or some event that is soon to take place. Is it impossible for a teacher like me to also prophesy? Likewise, is it impossible for a prophet to also teach? Don't we often see the Prophets teaching all throughout Scripture?
In Judges 4:6, Deborah (a Prophet and Judge) says to Barak: “The Lord, the God of Israel, commands you...” Is this not precisely what teaching is? "Here is the command, now go do it." This is not merely the foretelling of a future event.
"She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, “The Lord, the God of Israel, commands you: ‘Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead them up to Mount Tabor." - Judges 4:6
Perhaps more importantly, the majority of Scripture including commands and foretellings has been written by Prophets.
"We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." - 2 Peter 1:19-21
Female Prophets are not permitted to read and explain the recorded words of both male and female Prophets to the Church?
You are correct that Scripture would never say "her church" or "his church" or "my church" because the Church has only one owner, it's Jesus' Church and we're merely caretakers. Nevertheless, each church has shepherds/elders and some had churches that met in their homes hence "the church in her house" or "the church that meets at their house" etc...
Again, what are your thoughts on Deborah leading/commanding the entire nation of Israel including the men? This is only possible for the Lord to do in the Old Covenant and not in the New? The Women's Rights Movement wasn't until 1848 AD, Deborah was somewhere around 1100 BC...
"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." - 1 Cor 14:34-35
In my first post we've established that the word for woman/wife is the same and can only be translated properly based on context; the "women" here could also be "wives". Secondly the "must be in submission, as the law says" is referring to the Husband/Wife dynamic (Genesis 3:16).
We also know "keep silent" could not possibly be "keep silent under all circumstances" as women are permitted to prophesy during service. The qualifier for the "keep silent" statement is the "If they want to inquire about something" in the middle of service; it is not a "keep silent at all times" command.
"But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved." - 1 Cor 11:5
"For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged." - 1 Cor 14:31
"39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way." - 1 Cor 14:39-40
Therefore, as is the case with 1 Tim 2:11-14, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is referring to specifically wives who want to ask questions to their husbands during service. The wives are causing disruption and ought to "ask their own husbands at home." This is because it would be disrespectful/disgraceful to disrupt the worship service. Moreover, it is likely that during this time period the wives sat apart from the husbands in their own section. If they asked a question during, they would be speaking "across the isle" so-to-speak and it would indeed be inappropriate and disruptive."For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged." - 1 Cor 14:31
"39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way." - 1 Cor 14:39-40
Ouch! lol thanks for the edit. I hope we can disagree on a topic without losing respect/credibility with one another due to the use of a certain codex.
With that said, I know I hold the minority position here but I love all of you and am thankful we've found common ground in other areas, most importantly in Christ.
He only knew the baptism of John, not that of Christ. So while he could argue for Jesus from the scriptures, I'm sure it was the talk of the town, he didn't have knowledge of the full gospel. So yes, an evangelistic situation. It's not a classic one like we think today (convincing an atheist), but it came during a time when an apostle would come into a town, preach the message to the Jews first (many mature believers) and then go to the Greek.
Yes, because we don't know the full extend of what she actually did; I gave the possible range. Co-worker in what way? That's consistent with her being an evangelist or the wife of an apostle. This was a statement by the same man who said he didn't allow women teachers; she wasn't one of those.
Good for you all!
Teachers, prophets, evangelists and elders were all different roles. (Eph 4:11) Maybe prophets do teach at times, but it's not definitive of the role. A woman who is a prophet shouldn't stick to the message she literally received and leave the exposition of doctrine to men.
A judge isn't a teacher of doctrine nor an elder. Nor are we the national of Israel. Paul's New Testament requirements for an elder are that he be a married man. The modern church doesn't have magistrates or judges and we don't have any armies to send.
Nothing in the text indicates that the person they met at was the elder. Especially since churches had multiple elders and this greetings all mention just one house. You're reading what you want to believe into the text. And it contradicts Paul's clear requirement than elders be married men.
What is because of disruption? You're reading that into the text. Or was it because of submission, as Paul actually says. You're presuming this means asking the husband about dinnerplans or something like that. It could actually be to ask a question of the teacher. During this time period the socratic method was alive and well; teaching through questions. Her husband is her spiritual leader, let her ask him at home. She should instead 'learn in silence with all submission' as Paul says elsewhere.
Look, it doesn't matter how hard you try to force fit these little instances to your desire for women teachers and leaders, Paul is adamantly clear in the scriptures that those are to be men only. That's just how it is whether I like it or not...
I completely agree with Paul that women are not to Teach.
But
There’s teaching and then there’s Teaching.
If a pubescent boy asks his mother how to spell a word, she runs afoul of the legalistic requirement that she not teach.
Here’s where I have a foot firmly planted on each side of the line. If a woman is bringing new revelation, she is attempting to Teach. If she is sharing information that her head (generally her husband) has signed off on, she is teaching and I have no problem with that.
True story:
Earlier today Karin called me and told me that she had received a call from some people that she had known for years. People who had not walked with Yah in any way, the husband antagonistic towards Yah. They didn’t live like heathens, they actually were heathens.
Well, he had himself an encounter in the middle of the night that scared the devil out of him. Except that the devil didn’t leave. He called Karin wanting to get his life his life straightened out and become a patriarch.
Karin told them that she would pass it on to me, because women don’t teach, don’t cha know. I informed her that she would be teaching them as an extension of me. As my representative.
So she is starting in Genesis with them to give a history and a groundwork to build salvation on.
So yes, she is their pastor/shepherd/teacher. One who leads them to spiritual water , food, and safety. She knows them in ways that I don’t and she has a relationship with them where she is trusted. She will be far more effective than I in that situation.
But she is not a Pastor or a Teacher.
But
There’s teaching and then there’s Teaching.
If a pubescent boy asks his mother how to spell a word, she runs afoul of the legalistic requirement that she not teach.
Here’s where I have a foot firmly planted on each side of the line. If a woman is bringing new revelation, she is attempting to Teach. If she is sharing information that her head (generally her husband) has signed off on, she is teaching and I have no problem with that.
True story:
Earlier today Karin called me and told me that she had received a call from some people that she had known for years. People who had not walked with Yah in any way, the husband antagonistic towards Yah. They didn’t live like heathens, they actually were heathens.
Well, he had himself an encounter in the middle of the night that scared the devil out of him. Except that the devil didn’t leave. He called Karin wanting to get his life his life straightened out and become a patriarch.
Karin told them that she would pass it on to me, because women don’t teach, don’t cha know. I informed her that she would be teaching them as an extension of me. As my representative.
So she is starting in Genesis with them to give a history and a groundwork to build salvation on.
So yes, she is their pastor/shepherd/teacher. One who leads them to spiritual water , food, and safety. She knows them in ways that I don’t and she has a relationship with them where she is trusted. She will be far more effective than I in that situation.
But she is not a Pastor or a Teacher.
Last edited:
faithfulsistersifethe2nd
New Member
I don't know if this subject has been broached but I would love your input. My husband is adamant that a woman has no right to be a preacher. Now he says that a woman can be a teacher and periodically teach but they have no right to stand on stage and be a solid preacher of a church. He said that once this happens, the men are failing as leaders and if he were ever to see this, he would either confront the woman or walk out. I believe it does mention in the bible somewhere where the women are supposed to be silent. What are your thoughts? I hope that I don't start a wildfire here!