-
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
An assembly of only women is something that I have wrestled with. This is what I came up with and am curious about thoughts:
If there is an assembly of only women for the purpose of fellowship and one woman assists another with wrapping her mind around a teaching it can be helpful. Women supporting other women in staying in the faith and understanding of doctrine is very beneficial IF (big if here) later the woman asks her head (father or husband) if what was said is correct.
If there is an assembly of only women for the purpose of studying scripture then the scriptures are pretty clear that this should be lead by a man.
Yeah, I think that’s a good way of saying it.
While mostly in agreement, the downside to this is that then you have a man teaching other men’s wives without them being present to filter what’s coming into the house.
To me, that kind of rules out women’s conferences that include teaching instead of just fellowship. Women are supposed to learn with their husband or from their husband.
Edit: I guess too, i would wonder, if I wouldn’t let a man teach my wife without being there as a filter why would I let a woman teach my wife without me being the filter? It just doesn’t make any sense.
Last edited:
I’m just saying that I see the benefit from men having meetings together as we do at the retreats, and I have also seen benefits in real time from the ladies having meetings at the retreats as any of the attending families can attest.
If you aren’t convinced about having other godly women teach your wife, just wait until you have tried to build this poly family without it and see where that gets you. If you’re blessed beyond measure, you might survive it, but your family will never thrive in this culture without other Godly women who have been there/done that investing in your women.
This is a massively understated benefit of the community here at Bib Families.
If you aren’t convinced about having other godly women teach your wife, just wait until you have tried to build this poly family without it and see where that gets you. If you’re blessed beyond measure, you might survive it, but your family will never thrive in this culture without other Godly women who have been there/done that investing in your women.
This is a massively understated benefit of the community here at Bib Families.
Titus 2:3-5 KJV
[3] The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; [4] That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, [5] To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
As long as this is what they are teaching it’s good. Anything beyond that is out of bounds...
[3] The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; [4] That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, [5] To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
As long as this is what they are teaching it’s good. Anything beyond that is out of bounds...
Females should wear skirts and dresses only. 
Titus 2 gives the list of things they should be teaching...
That's a very practical list...basically love and submit and be sober at home and not a gossip. This list is specifically exclusive of teaching doctrine as the parallel commands to men included teaching sound doctrine. A cooking class would be more on topic than a Bible study. It's a simple list; it's only complicated because women don't want to be limited and men don't want to have to tell them no.
The father is the spiritual leader and should take the lead in educating his children. If he chooses to delegate some of that to his wife under his supervision, I won't object. But it won't look anything like the usual churchian thing where children are exclusively taught by women, whether at Sunday school or by mom at home. The fruit of that has been rotten.
There is something key here to understand. The teaching of doctrine in the assembly is primarily focused towards men. It is a doctrinal training ground for them so they can then go out from there to train their wives and children. You can see this at work in the lists in Titus 2: the teaching of men includes sound doctrine, the teaching of women focuses on right behavior towards family at home (including submission toward husband, which will enable him to spiritually lead his wife). Women don't need to be taught doctrine by other men or women; they need to be submissive so they can be washed in the water of the word by their husband. That is the system set up by the NT.
That Titus 2 was given illustrates the need for it; and I've seen a lot of marriages where the women should could have used other women in her ear getting her to submit. Unfortunately there are no women in the churches teaching submission and love; but lots teaching the opposite. If we hadn't been kicked out of church I don't know if we'd have stayed married.
The question is, are women counseling about the things in Titus 2 or about doctrine? About the later lies only danger. All the more so if women are counciled to disobey or leave the husband.
Titus 2 gives a goal that all women should strive for, it doesn’t give a ceiling beyond which they are not allowed to go, IMO.
My wives are my helps. They are to help me in carrying out the vision that I have from YHWH. Limitations put on them by other men is unacceptable. If those are the limits for your family, you have that right.
Read my post about Carl. I had two women, but mostly Karin, teaching a man doctrine right before he went to stand before his maker. What is the possible downside to that? That they might teach him bad doctrine? They were teaching him the doctrine that I would have taught him if I was there.
They are an extension of me, they do what I would do in a situation. THAT IS THEIR JOB.
The failure of male leadership is fully on the shoulders of men who fail to lead. Women can only usurp male authority in a vacuum.
Yes, we should separate from all institutions where proper leadership has been abandoned, but let’s focus on where we are going rather than complaining about that which should be behind us.
Yes, wash them with the water of the word and build them into ministers that you can trust. If you cannot trust them yet, it only means that you haven’t accomplished that goal, keep working on it. You may have picked one that will take a lifetime, so be it, this is who you chose. Quitcher bitchin and keep on keeping on.
I’m talking to all us all, all y’all but including me.
It’s about leadership, guys. Not fear, control, or arbitrary limitations.
Last edited:
That's not an arbitrary limitation, it's a protection for the body of Christ because women are easily deceived and because right authority in the body is important.
It's not a limitation put on them by me, but by scripture...
Do you reject this teaching of Paul's?
Not at all.
I totally agree with you that the churches should be led by men and taught by men.
I just disagree that women cannot ever, anywhere, under any circumstances teach anything. The key is whose authority do they teach by? NEVER their own.
That is a qualification Paul does not list.
And that disproves your claim. In the NT the churches were all to have elders. And yet Paul STILL said they were not allowed to teach.
Ultimately none of us teaches of our own authority, not if we are on God's side. Your's is a distinction of no meaning. If that was the case Paul wouldn't have written the way he did but rather than say 'do not allow to teach' would have said 'make sure she only teaches under the authority of a man'. But he didn't.
There is no way around it. God doesn't want women teaching doctrine. End of story. I know that's hard, we'll have to tell women 'no', we'll have to set aside our own way of doing things. But we must anyway.
But if I teach in a church, I teach under the authority of the deacons/elders/leaders.
The whole issue with women is: under whose authority do they teach?
And that disproves your claim. In the NT the churches were all to have elders. And yet Paul STILL said they were not allowed to teach.
I was illustrating how I recognize the authority of any church that I would speak in. My authority does not override theirs. That part had nothing to do with women teaching.
Blessings on you, my brother, I gotta run.
The whole issue with women is: under whose authority do they teach?
And that disproves your claim. In the NT the churches were all to have elders. And yet Paul STILL said they were not allowed to teach.
I was illustrating how I recognize the authority of any church that I would speak in. My authority does not override theirs. That part had nothing to do with women teaching.
Blessings on you, my brother, I gotta run.
Properly defined and expressed, all authority should be demonstrated by the parent/child relationship.
God is our Father!.
Jesus said as the Father sent Him so He sends us. He also said, If we reject Him we are actually rejecting the One who sent Him.
An earthly father has the right to send even a younger child to bring a message or instruction to an older child. The child has no authority unless the father gives it. A mother can speak in her own authority as long as it does not cross the fathers will. There are realms in which we have to respect the authority of others Areas where we have our own authority, and if the Father so directs we must always obey. God does honor His Kingdom and the Gifts and Callings He has given. He does not bring rebuke and chastisement through a lesser gift or calling to a higher one. Samuel though bringing a message of Judgment to Eli was called to be a Prophet and was speaking at the Lords direction.
As to Doctrine Paul never rebuked Pricilla for her part in instructing Apollos, or Philips daughters for prophesying.
Paul's instructions were not a one size fits all, for all time and eternity! Paul was speaking to a time and place.
Paul did not promote a ideology of Law but rather of Grace. Remember It was the Law crowd that persecuted him and got him arrested. If Paul was so supportive of the Law then they would have defended him. Paul was not trying to establish a new Law or more Law for the believer. Rather follow to Spirit in Love and you no longer need Law.
Paul circumcised Timothy but NOT Titus !! Thus showing that to follow the leading of the Spirit is paramount and Law cannot be the rule of the Body of Christ !
God is our Father!.
Jesus said as the Father sent Him so He sends us. He also said, If we reject Him we are actually rejecting the One who sent Him.
An earthly father has the right to send even a younger child to bring a message or instruction to an older child. The child has no authority unless the father gives it. A mother can speak in her own authority as long as it does not cross the fathers will. There are realms in which we have to respect the authority of others Areas where we have our own authority, and if the Father so directs we must always obey. God does honor His Kingdom and the Gifts and Callings He has given. He does not bring rebuke and chastisement through a lesser gift or calling to a higher one. Samuel though bringing a message of Judgment to Eli was called to be a Prophet and was speaking at the Lords direction.
As to Doctrine Paul never rebuked Pricilla for her part in instructing Apollos, or Philips daughters for prophesying.
Paul's instructions were not a one size fits all, for all time and eternity! Paul was speaking to a time and place.
Paul did not promote a ideology of Law but rather of Grace. Remember It was the Law crowd that persecuted him and got him arrested. If Paul was so supportive of the Law then they would have defended him. Paul was not trying to establish a new Law or more Law for the believer. Rather follow to Spirit in Love and you no longer need Law.
Paul circumcised Timothy but NOT Titus !! Thus showing that to follow the leading of the Spirit is paramount and Law cannot be the rule of the Body of Christ !
@Jim an Apostle it's been awhile since you and I directly interacted. I have an novel Idea. We should start a thread you and I cover scripture line by line explaining what we believe. Nobody else post. Just you and me. Tit for tat. We could even cover topics suggested on another parrallel thread. Things like Headship, how to keep Harmony in the home (of course we'd have to use our homes and whats been going on in them as the example), law or no law, tithing which reminds me of this Pastor I met at the San Antonio retreat 2 years ago he had these nice alligator loafers on, said they cost him $800, bragged on how his congregation paid for them. I'll let you open the thread we can call it Monday Night Theological Debate.
Last edited: