women speaking in church

[Valleyofash]

I believe that women have a very important place in the church. But that place is not to teach or have any kind of authority over a man, or to speak during the assembly of the saints: "Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness." (‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2‬:‭11-12‬ ASV) and "let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law. And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church. "(‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭14‬:‭34-35‬ ASV). So I have to disagree with that last statement @ph8th , because Paul , inspired of the Holy Spirit, told the church at Corinth that women should do the exact opposite of "Woman as any and all that belong to Him should speak and teach as prompted by Him."

In love and hope,
Jacob

Women deserve to have an equal opportunity in everything a man has. It is closed minded and naive to say a woman has no rights of any kind.

 

[Redeemed11]

Women deserve to have an equal opportunity in everything a man has. It is closed minded and naive to say a woman has no rights of any kind.

That may be man's view, but the New Testament it very clear that men and women are not the same in many respects. They serve in different capacities, and just because leadership is not a capacity for women to serve in doesn't change the importance of their role in the church. I never said they don't have rights of any kind. I even emphasized what a big role they play in my congregation personally. Just because the Bible speaks against something you believe in doesn't take anything away from the Bible, just from that belief.

 

[B-A-C]

Women deserve to have an equal opportunity in everything a man has. It is closed minded and naive to say a woman has no rights of any kind.

So it's everything or nothing?

 

[Valleyofash]

That may be man's view, but the New Testament it very clear that men and women are not the same in many respects. They serve in different capacities, and just because leadership is not a capacity for women to serve in doesn't change the importance of their role in the church. I never said they don't have rights of any kind. I even emphasized what a big role they play in my congregation personally. Just because the Bible speaks against something you believe in doesn't take anything away from the Bible, just from that belief.

My point of view is an equal opportunity view. While it's true that men and women are different, that's only a physical difference. Some of the women in my life are the best leaders, teachers, and commanders. It's unfair to say what they should and shouldn't be allowed to do, on any part of society.

 

[Grace]

I believe in a line of authority. So if your husband says it is ok and the pastor says it is ok, then what would hinder a woman teaching or speaking in church?

 

[Grace]

Use your imagination for a moment...Lets say a man is traveling to your town, and he visits your church. Imagine that he is carrying a letter of introduction written by his pastor, saying that he is a deacon of the church in his town. This would indicate that he is functioning in the office of a deacon (diakonos) in his church. With that in mind.....

Romans 16:1: "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a diakonos of the church in Cenchrea."
Romans 16:2: "I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me."

A lady named Phoebe was traveling to Rome, and the apostle Paul wrote some words of introduction for her, saying that she was a diakonos of the church in Cenchrea. This is exactly the same as the example above. Therefore, it's reasonable to believe that Phoebe functioned in the office of a deacon at her church. Some people might argue that Phoebe was simply a "servant," and that she didn't hold the "office" of a deacon. However, the above passage doesn't make such a distinction. The essential definition of the office of a deacon is that a person is a "diakonos" in the local church and the above passage specifically describes Phoebe in this way.

 

[Redeemed11]

My point of view is an equal opportunity view. While it's true that men and women are different, that's only a physical difference. Some of the women in my life are the best leaders, teachers, and commanders. It's unfair to say what they should and shouldn't be allowed to do, on any part of society.

Use your imagination for a moment...Lets say a man is traveling to your town, and he visits your church. Imagine that he is carrying a letter of introduction written by his pastor, saying that he is a deacon of the church in his town. This would indicate that he is functioning in the office of a deacon (diakonos) in his church. With that in mind.....

Romans 16:1: "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a diakonos of the church in Cenchrea."
Romans 16:2: "I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me."

A lady named Phoebe was traveling to Rome, and the apostle Paul wrote some words of introduction for her, saying that she was a diakonos of the church in Cenchrea. This is exactly the same as the example above. Therefore, it's reasonable to believe that Phoebe functioned in the office of a deacon at her church. Some people might argue that Phoebe was simply a "servant," and that she didn't hold the "office" of a deacon. However, the above passage doesn't make such a distinction. The essential definition of the office of a deacon is that a person is a "diakonos" in the local church and the above passage specifically describes Phoebe in this way.

We have to bear in mind that the word "diakonos" existed before it was used to describe a position in the church. It means "servant" (which is why it is translated as such in so many versions). The position is even only for a man. In the specifications given in Timothy we read "Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well." (‭1 Timothy‬ ‭3‬:‭11-12‬ ESV) And as I have said earlier, a woman can be a wonderful servant, not serving in positions that are for men only, and without disobeying God's commands.

@Valleyofash
As I said... It may be your view, but it is not one found in the New Testment. Again... We cannot just take what we like and discard what we don't like when it comes to the Bible. And when it comes to women they have restrictions on what they can and cannot do; just like men do. Don't think it's just women! Not every man can be and elder or a deacon in the church. There are qualifications to be met for those positions, restrictions put on then. Same with the roles of women in the church: there are restrictions put on them by God.

 

[Redeemed11]

I believe in a line of authority. So if your husband says it is ok and the pastor says it is ok, then what would hinder a woman teaching or speaking in church?

I would have to reply to that last question with this: God. "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." (‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2‬:‭11-12‬ ESV)

 

[Grace]

I would have to reply to that last question with this: God. "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." (‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2‬:‭11-12‬ ESV)

So if the authority over the women says it's ok!?!

 

[Valleyofash]

We have to bear in mind that the word "diakonos" existed before it was used to describe a position in the church. It means "servant" (which is why it is translated as such in so many versions). The position is even only for a man. In the specifications given in Timothy we read "Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well." (‭1 Timothy‬ ‭3‬:‭11-12‬ ESV) And as I have said earlier, a woman can be a wonderful servant, not serving in positions that are for men only, and without disobeying God's commands.

@Valleyofash
As I said... It may be your view, but it is not one found in the New Testment. Again... We cannot just take what we like and discard what we don't like when it comes to the Bible. And when it comes to women they have restrictions on what they can and cannot do; just like men do. Don't think it's just women! Not every man can be and elder or a deacon in the church. There are qualifications to be met for those positions, restrictions put on then. Same with the roles of women in the church: there are restrictions put on them by God.

What I say next will not make you like me, just a heads up. I'm christian, as are you, obviously. But do you really live your life according to the new testament? I don't think that is a fair and just way to live. It forces you to only follow a certain set of principles for the entirety of your life. Why would you live a certain way if that way makes you seem closed minded, ignorant, and sexist? I don't get it, please explain to me.

 

[Grace]

We have to bear in mind that the word "diakonos" existed before it was used to describe a position in the church. It means "servant" (which is why it is translated as such in so many versions). The position is even only for a man. In the specifications given in Timothy we read "Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well." (‭1 Timothy‬ ‭3‬:‭11-12‬ ESV) And as I have said earlier, a woman can be a wonderful servant, not serving in positions that are for men only, and without disobeying God's commands.

1 Timothy 3:12: "A deacon [diakonos] must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well."


Well, let's consider some questions for a moment. Does your church (or other churches that you know) have any deacons who are unmarried? If so, then those churches are not interpreting 1 Timothy 3:12 (above) in its most literal sense. Does your church (or other churches that you know) have any deacons who are childless? If so, then those churches are not interpreting 1 Timothy 3:12 (above) in its most literal sense. Does your church (or other churches that you know) have any deacons who don't manage their children very well (perhaps their children are "wild" or they don't obey very well or they're hard to handle, etc.)? If so, then those churches are not interpreting 1 Timothy 3:12 (above) in its most literal sense.

So the question is, how literally are we supposed to take 1 Timothy 3:12? If Paul intended for his statement to be taken completely literally then that's fine, it just means that Phoebe was not a deaconess and that deacons must all be married men who manage their children and households well.

But is it possible that Paul did not actually intend for his statement in 1 Timothy 3:12 to be taken in its most literal sense? Consider that Paul made many male-oriented statements such as the following, which we don't interpret in their most literal sense:
Romans 8:14: "because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God."

Romans 8:19: "The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed."
Also Romans 9:3,4; Galatians 3:26; 4:5-7; Ephesians 1:5; Thessalonians 5:4,5.

Paul had a tendency to speak in the masculine form by referring to "sons" and "brothers," and notice that we mentally interpret these statements as if Paul had said, "sons and daughters" and "brothers and sisters." In the majority of male-oriented statements that Paul made, we don't take them completely literally. In fact, in English we tend to speak in the masculine form as well, without meaning it completely literally. For example, imagine that you hear someone say, "If a Christian commits a sin then he should repent and confess his sin and God will forgive him." When we hear statements like this, we mentally interpret such statements as if they're referring to men and women, just as we mentally interpret Paul's statements above as if they're referring to men and women.

Since Paul had a tendency to speak in the masculine form without intending for it to be taken completely literally, then perhaps this is what he was doing when he said that a diakonos must be the husband of one wife and must manage his children and his household well (1 Timothy 3:12). He might simply have meant something like, "If a deacon is married, then he or she must be a one-woman man or a one-man woman, and if he or she has kids then he or she must be able to manage his or her children and his or her household well." Notice how awkward it is when we try to be as specific as possible in such a statement, which is why we rarely use "he or she" and "his or her" in English. Instead, we tend to use "he" and "him" even when we're referring to men and women in general.

What it boils down to is that if a church or denomination takes 1 Timothy 3:12 in its most literal sense then we would expect their deacons to all be married men who manage their children and their households well. But if a church or denomination takes 1 Timothy 3:12 as being simply a masculine form of speech (similar to many other male-oriented statements that Paul made), then we wouldn't be surprised if they have female deacons.

 

[Redeemed11]

I actually am proud to say yes, my church is very biblical and only has deacons who fit the description in this passage. We have 8 in total. I have to disagree with your previous statement about if the authority says it is ok then it's fine. I personally believe God's authority supersedes any man's. If you can provide a New Testament scripture saying this then that would be more substantial. I also have to disagree with how you are applying the idiomatic language of the Greeks here. We must read around the text (read it in context and also draw parallels with the rest of the scripture) to understand what is meant when. It we apply the other things Paul has said about women not being an authority over a man to this verse, and this verse with this verse we see that a man is qualified. Just as it is with an elder (pastores). @Grace

 

[tulsa 2011]

One of the early leaders of the group that I was involved with from 2003 to 2010 in Internet groups - Christian Yahoo Groups - was a woman. We thought that Joel 2: 28 "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions" gives women an open door for leadership - if they are qualified to lead. We were also interested in the teachings of Dean Gotcher on the importance of the dialectic, which, as it developed in the 20th century, is an argument against that which is absolute truth or absolute morality. The dialectic becomes an argument for one position against a second position - and often the dialectic is used to defend a relationship of affection which means the relationship is put above absolute truth. Whatever person, group, theology, belief system or church denomination one has a relationship with is defended by the dialectic against the truth, which can be scripture. Supposedly, women are somewhat more likely to consider relationships more important than absolute truth, which is a reason for not wanting women to rule over men as far as Biblical doctrine is concerned. But now in the 21th century many men are likely to put relationships above absolute truth. And the ideology in which the dialectic operates from has weakened the role of the Father as Patriarch and head of the family. And this ideology - called Transformational Marxism - has weakened the family itself.

Men may not necessarily be more psychologically and spiritually qualified than women now in 2015 to lead other Christians - outside the churches. The Capital C Church at this time goes against I Peter 5: 2-3, "Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock." People who want to control the spiritual beliefs of others, male or female, may be drawn into the Capital C Church to do that. Outside the church system, women who are qualified to lead, that is, do Bible studies to be read by others, preach or open up prophecy, should be allowed to do so. If leaders, either men or women, teach contrary to the scriptures interpreting scriptures, the others should show them the problem,as Paul says in I Corinthians 14: 29, "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge."

 

[Valleyofash]

I can't believe how ignorant you seem dude (not you tulsa). This is gonna get me a lot of crap soon as I "spout my blasphemous words", but I do mean what I say, so please try to understand that I'm not being blasphemous. God is not always right, yet he does do everything for a reason. I'm sorry if I offended you.

 

[Redeemed11]

What I say next will not make you like me, just a heads up. I'm christian, as are you, obviously. But do you really live your life according to the new testament? I don't think that is a fair and just way to live. It forces you to only follow a certain set of principles for the entirety of your life. Why would you live a certain way if that way makes you seem closed minded, ignorant, and sexist? I don't get it, please explain to me.

I follow the New Testament (or the New Covenant) because that's the one we are under in this age. Jesus died so we could have a better covenant than the old one. This one is perfect and offers salvation now, not a rolling forward of sins like the Jews had with sacrifices and yearly atonement. We have a perfect sacrifice that was given around 2000 years ago for us ALL, so that we no longer have to follow the Old Law, we now have the perfect law of liberty through Jesus Christ (James 1:25). We know this law is abolished from Hebrews 8 and Hebrews 9. Please read these for a full understanding of how we are under a New Covenant (one under Christ).

 

[Redeemed11]

I can't believe how ignorant you seem dude (not you tulsa). This is gonna get me a lot of crap soon as I "spout my blasphemous words", but I do mean what I say, so please try to understand that I'm not being blasphemous. God is not always right, yet he does do everything for a reason. I'm sorry if I offended you.

I do not think that you can truly be a christian if you do not believe that everything God says it correct. We need to start with something much greater than the role of women in the church, and that is the perfection of God.

 

[Grace]

I actually am proud to say yes, my church is very biblical and only has deacons who fit the description in this passage. We have 8 in total. I have to disagree with your previous statement about if the authority says it is ok then it's fine. I personally believe God's authority supersedes any man's. If you can provide a New Testament scripture saying this then that would be more substantial. I also have to disagree with how you are applying the idiomatic language of the Greeks here. We must read around the text (read it in context and also draw parallels with the rest of the scripture) to understand what is meant when. It we apply the other things Paul has said about women not being an authority over a man to this verse, and this verse with this verse we see that a man is qualified. Just as it is with an elder (pastores). @Grace

Women is not over a man if those in authority allow her to speak!

 

[Redeemed11]

s

Women is not over a man if those in authority allow her to speak!

If I give my son (not that I have a son just speaking hypothetically) permission to lead a group of older kids, he is still in authority over those kids whether I gave him permission to be or not. The fact that it is authority over other men doesn't change just because one man gives this lady permission to exercise it. And that man would not be following the pattern we find in this passage either by giving that authority over to a women (an act that he has not been given permission from God to do).

 

[Travis]

Now, in regards to 1 Corinthians 11. In 1 Cor 11:5 we read how women could prophesy and pray.. I have not nor will I deny this. But does that mean it was during the worship service?

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by worship service, but, when the body assembles itself as the congregation in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, women certainly can pray and prophesy in the meeting, and be totally in line, biblically. The problem is that we don't meet together even remotely close to how the scriptures show us the first churches did so, which should be our base model we go off of. Do I know exactly how we should do things? Naw. But I know enough of the scriptures to know we are miles off. Churches should have elders. Elders in a church should only ever be men. Elders should be the ones teaching, preaching, etc. They are the ones running the show, as far as we are humanly speaking. If the Holy Spirit is not ultimately running the show, then most everything is in vain anyway. A woman being asked to pray publicly, or a woman having a prophecy given to her by the Lord, and sharing that with the whole congregation, assuming the elders of the church permit her to do so, is not in any way contrary to the scriptures. For the elders to not permit a woman, whom the Lord has truly given a word to share, is to quench the Holy Spirit. That takes discernment and judgement, hence why Elders need to be mature and godly.

Our culture/cultures are completely and utterly messed up when it comes to the roles men and women should play. Since most churches care more about what psychology and sociology say about these roles than what the Word of God teaches us, we have all kinds of mess on our hands. If men would start acting like men, and women would start acting like women we wouldn't even have to have many of these conversations, because the natural order of things would be apparent to all in the church, and people would just naturally fall in line.

The church in the western world is a mess..... I certainly don't know how to fix it. I pray that God would clean it up though.

Travis

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

I think it is important that we all understand that we are not given authority to deifne morality for ourselves. Our opinions are worthless, it is only God's judgement that holds weight.

There have been many woman who have ministered to me and taught me through my walk. I pray they continue.
Being born of spirit we are spirit .......... are spirit beings male and female?

Galatians 3:28 (NASB)
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is a]"neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Woman as any and all that belong to Him should speak and teach as prompted by Him.

What you may not realize is that your argument applies to homosexuality as well. If females can take on male roles, and males take on female roles, if believers are no longer male or female but in fact a spirit which has no sexual identity, then there is absolutely no different between a heterosexual marriage and a homosexual marriage.


We can not just "follow our heart", our hearts are depserately wicked. We must realize that The Holy Spirit will not contradict God's word, and therefore if we feel that The Holy Spirit is calling us to do something that God's word has told us not to... then it is not The Holy Spirit but it is our own evil desires or the desires of a demonic spirit persuading us.