 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 |
bonnie knox |
I'm curious to know in what way a woman thinks that disqualifies her from being a deacon (or deaconess, if you will)? What part of her brain is she not using? Women actually have more connective tissue between the two hemispheres of the brain than men do (not that I think that has anything to do with being a deacon). Yes Adam was made before Eve, but after foxes, snakes, and weasels. (Sorry, couldn't resist.) 
| diakoneo wrote: | Regardless of how you like to interpret the scripture, the fact remains there is a large difference in the way that male and females think and act. In case you haven't noticed Men for the most part use one part of the brain, while women use the other. Our differences are very important. Those differences are used to determine the way God set things in order. When we use the order that God ordained all will be well, but when we refuse....chaos ensues!
It seems, in his letter to Timothy, Paul goes clear back to Adam and Eve with the purpose to give a quick explanation of WHY things should be the way they are.
1 Timothy 2:11. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
It is not to degrade women...plain and simple! 1 Peter 3:7. Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
Rather we give honour to women and put not such a burden as superintendence! We are heirs together having our differences, each complimenting the other. |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
11/3/11 12:24 am
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| |
diakoneo |
| bonnie knox wrote: | I'm curious to know in what way a woman thinks that disqualifies her from being a deacon (or deaconess, if you will)? What part of her brain is she not using? Women actually have more connective tissue between the two hemispheres of the brain than men do (not that I think that has anything to do with being a deacon). Yes Adam was made before Eve, but after foxes, snakes, and weasels. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
| diakoneo wrote: | Regardless of how you like to interpret the scripture, the fact remains there is a large difference in the way that male and females think and act. In case you haven't noticed Men for the most part use one part of the brain, while women use the other. Our differences are very important. Those differences are used to determine the way God set things in order. When we use the order that God ordained all will be well, but when we refuse....chaos ensues!
It seems, in his letter to Timothy, Paul goes clear back to Adam and Eve with the purpose to give a quick explanation of WHY things should be the way they are.
1 Timothy 2:11. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
It is not to degrade women...plain and simple! 1 Peter 3:7. Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
Rather we give honour to women and put not such a burden as superintendence! We are heirs together having our differences, each complimenting the other. |
|
I was referring to the whole "women are left brain, men are right brain" deal. Do you deny that there is a difference
I did not mean to respond to the deacon/deaconess thing, but rather the Bishop/Overseer issue. I believe a deacon/deaconess is a sevant/minister and we are all called to that, though we may not have a "title"  |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3382
11/3/11 6:58 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| The very same scriptural reasoning that says bishops must be men says deacons/ministers/servants must be men too. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/3/11 7:02 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
mytimewillcome |
| Quiet Wyatt wrote: | | The very same scriptural reasoning that says bishops must be men says deacons/ministers/servants must be men too. |
Okay. So why does the COG allow women to be ordained and pastor a church? |
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3658
11/3/11 12:34 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| mytimewillcome wrote: | | Quiet Wyatt wrote: | | The very same scriptural reasoning that says bishops must be men says deacons/ministers/servants must be men too. |
Okay. So why does the COG allow women to be ordained and pastor a church? |
It is not my aim to support the anti-women-in-leadership argument. I am FOR women in leadership, even as bishop/overseer/pastor. I am simply endeavoring to show that the supposed support for the anti-women-in-leadership position is not nearly as ironclad as is typically assumed. Since Paul obviously did not restrict women from serving as deacons/ministers/servants of the church as Phoebe was, his apparent restrictions against female leadership in 1 Tim 3 are shown to be not universally consistent in his writings in the New Testament period. Since Paul's writings are not restrictive of women in ministry in the NT times, they are not restrictive of women in ministry in our times either.
Now as to the CoG and women in ministry, it is manifest that we have not been consistent at all scripturally or logically. In order to be consistent with both the New Testament and our Holiness roots, we should affirm equal privileges in ministry for women as well as men. Since in the New Testament a shepherd/pastor IS a bishop/overseer, ladies if they are granted the right to pastor in the CoG, should be granted the title of bishop as well. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/3/11 2:33 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Quiet Wyatt wrote: |
It is not my aim to support the anti-women-in-leadership argument. I am FOR women in leadership, even as bishop/overseer/pastor. I am simply endeavoring to show that the supposed support for the anti-women-in-leadership position is not nearly as ironclad as is typically assumed. Since Paul obviously did not restrict women from serving as deacons/ministers/servants of the church as Phoebe was, his apparent restrictions against female leadership in 1 Tim 3 are shown to be not universally consistent in his writings in the New Testament period. Since Paul's writings are not restrictive of women in ministry in the NT times, they are not restrictive of women in ministry in our times either. |
The premise is flawed. Phoebe was a 'servant.' Deacon means 'servant.' Deacons are servants of the church, not the 'leaders.' The elders 'rule' or lead in the church. Deacons serve--that doesn't mean all deacons lead. A deacon might minister in feeding the poor. That doesn't mean the deacon is a decision maker over the church. Nowhere are we told to submit to the deacons.
Now, Baptists will have a group of people called 'deacons' who make decisions for the church. That's just Baptist terminology, not Biblical terminology.
Why don't we apply verses about deacons to deacons and verses about overseer to overseers? If I had an M.D. and a license to practice medicine, does that mean you would automatically trust me to manage your 401K or give you financial advice? Wouldn't it make more sense for me to have Certified Financial Planner certification or some other relevant qualification in the type of job I was actually working in?
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/3/11 7:25 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
What you're missing or ignoring is the plain fact that Paul says deacons are to be the husband of one wife just like bishops are to be.
Of course your definitions of submission and authority are flawed too.
Last edited by Quiet Wyatt on 11/3/11 8:23 pm; edited 1 time in total |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/3/11 8:18 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| Where we may find agreement is with regard to the fact that all ministers are servants, including bishops. Jesus said the greatest in the kingdom must be the servant of all. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/3/11 8:21 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Something I think you are missing |
Poimen |
There is (IMO) a difference in generic deacons, or servants, and positional deacons ... the same as there is a difference in generic prophets or prophetesses, and positional prophets. The office of deacon, and prophet for that matter, is not necessarily the same as the gifts or functions of service and prophesy.
It seems clear, to me, that Paul's instructions to Timothy concern the office of Deacon, and not merely the generic function or gift of serving (important though that is).
Furthermore, the Bible is clear to me that the role of headship belongs to the man; the husband specifically, and the man generally. That is, such is the God ordained and creative model and intent. The church should reflect that despite the culture, regardless of it's disdain or it's abuse thereof.
Something to think about anyhow.
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher
Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay." |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
11/3/11 10:11 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | Furthermore, the Bible is clear to me that the role of headship belongs to the man; the husband specifically, and the man generally. That is, such is the God ordained and creative model and intent. |
If by headship, you mean rule, I don't think the scripture supports that being the creative model and intent. The rule mentioned in Genesis 3:16 was a result of the Fall. Genesis 1:27,28 shows that dominion was given to man (as in mankind - male and female) over creation. It doesn't say that part of mankind was given dominion over another part. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
11/3/11 11:37 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Rule is included in headship, yes. |
Poimen |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | Quote: | | Furthermore, the Bible is clear to me that the role of headship belongs to the man; the husband specifically, and the man generally. That is, such is the God ordained and creative model and intent. |
If by headship, you mean rule, I don't think the scripture supports that being the creative model and intent. The rule mentioned in Genesis 3:16 was a result of the Fall. Genesis 1:27,28 shows that dominion was given to man (as in mankind - male and female) over creation. It doesn't say that part of mankind was given dominion over another part. |
When coupled with the revelation of Scripture elsewhere it actually does show that. Coupling 1 Corinthians 11:8-12 with Genesis 2:21-23 makes it abundantly clear that the headship of man was the original creative intent and work of God. This relationship was created before the fall, not as a result of the fall. Rather because of the fall the peaceful and natural co-exstience of these intended complimentary roles and functions would be diminished and perverted. Fallen man would abuse headship, and fallen woman would usurp and resist headship. But headship was established in the creation of the sexes, not as a result of the fall.
While there was no qualitative inequality between them, man and woman thus being equals & both created in the image and likeness of God, there was nevertheless order and government within the relationship ... distinction in role, function, and authority; with headship (including both rule, to use your term, and responsibility) being given to/placed on man.
The woman ruled with man, not along side but apart from Him. The Scripture makes it unequivocally clear that woman was created for the man, and not man for the woman. This speaks directly to the divine intent as to role and function in the order of the sexes. Woman is to be the help-meet of man. And such shall be as long as we remain in these mortal bodies, and as long as marriage remains possible.
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher
Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay." |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
11/4/11 1:21 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Quiet Wyatt wrote: | | What you're missing or ignoring is the plain fact that Paul says deacons are to be the husband of one wife just like bishops are to be. |
And he lays out a separate set of qualifications for 'their women' but he doesn't for bishops.
| Quote: |
Of course your definitions of submission and authority are flawed too. |
How so?
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/4/11 2:44 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| Link wrote: | | Quiet Wyatt wrote: | | What you're missing or ignoring is the plain fact that Paul says deacons are to be the husband of one wife just like bishops are to be. |
And he lays out a separate set of qualifications for 'their women' but he doesn't for bishops.
| Quote: |
Of course your definitions of submission and authority are flawed too. |
How so? |
See the wife-beater thread.
Absolutely incredible. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/4/11 2:27 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Quiet Wyatt wrote: |
See the wife-beater thread.
Absolutely incredible. |
Feel free to comment on the thread with specifics if you will.
I am the type of person who doesn't like to go to the final conclusions without going through all the steps in the reasoning process. I think people should know step by step where they get their conclusions from scripture. That's my approach to the wife-beating thread.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/4/11 2:41 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| I think you spent just a little too much time living in an Islamic-majority country. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/4/11 2:46 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Quiet Wyatt wrote: | | I think you spent just a little too much time living in an Islamic-majority country. |
Maybe you've spent too much time in this country.
Normally, I like most of your posts. You seem pretty level-headed about a lot of issues. But you aren't saying anything I find helpful here.
If you are going to make little pithy quips like you have been doing and include my name, the phrase 'wife beating', and say 'absolutely incredible' on a public forum, I'd appreciate a little more detail than that. If you think I'm off in some way, then help me out as a brother in the Lord by pointing it out specifically instead of leaving these kinds of comments. I don't find these kind of comments helpful.
Indonesians predominantly claim Islam as their religion. But it is not the middle east. Most women where I lived didn't cover their heads, some did, but their heads and not their faces. There were plenty of women who chewed out their husbands and things like that in Indonesia, though in general there is more of an idea that women should be diligent around the home and even be submissive to their husbands. I never heard of Muslims there endorsing wife-beating or things like that. Indonesia seems to have a really toned down version of Islam with a few exceptions. And there is a perception of Arab men as having a tendency toward cruelty from stories from stories brought back by maids who worked in Saudi Arabia.
Maybe the submission discussion can go in the other thread. Most of my comments in there that dealt specifically with the topic were paraphrases from I Peter. I also bolded portions of the passage. What do you take issue with specifically
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/4/11 4:00 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| I honestly could not care less if you find my posts 'helpful' or not. After reading your 'wife beater' post, and knowing your past refusal to change your mind on any position you hold, I must say I honestly don't care to hear one thing more you might have to say on any subject from now on actually. You may consider yourself duly ignored by me from now on, and I promise I won't be responding to any of your comments in this or any other thread again. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/4/11 5:49 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
Quiet Wyatt,
I was thinking you were a pastor for some reason, and I thought pastors wanted to help people. If I were in error about something, it would be helpful if someone could point out why.
I'm very surprised by your reaction here. I wonder if you've really read the other thread carefully. It does ask difficult questions, but I don't understand the reason for your reaction. I don't see where I have insulted you in past interactions, so I am somewhat confused by this.
I don't change my positions on issues easily or quickly. I do change some of my views over time, but only if I have a good reason, too. That seems extremely typical of posters on Actscelerate. I doubt you change your beliefs quickly, either.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/4/11 6:42 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Daniel Rushing |
| It has been said before, but I'll say it again. The most prophetic (allbeit pathetic) thing that happened at GA during this very discussion was the Soddy Daisy Prophet. He clearly exhibited that genitalia has nothing to with leadership qualifications. |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3063
11/7/11 11:05 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
Link,
I am a pastor.
Anyone who would even SUGGEST that wives ought to submit to abuse is simply an enabler of abuse and a coward, not to mention a complete idiot. I would GLADLY say this to your face too.
Some people are simply beyond help though, so I hold out no hope for you.
Last edited by Quiet Wyatt on 11/7/11 11:28 am; edited 1 time in total |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/7/11 11:21 am
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
