Actscelerate.com

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/8/12 8:06 pm**

Nah, I just made that up.

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **3/8/12 9:14 pm**

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/8/12 9:19 pm**

It sure seemed like you were implying I just made that up or that I was saying something that is not true. I have no reason whatsoever for making something like this up, nor can I imagine anyone having a reason to just make something like that up.

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **3/8/12 9:19 pm**

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1865 **3/8/12 9:22 pm**

This is an example of word study fallacy. I Timothy is intended to outline requirements for overseers and deacons. Romans 16 is not a statement on requirements for a deacon. The fact that Phoebe was a servant of the church is not a proof that she occupied an office of a deaconess.

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/8/12 9:27 pm**

It is precisely the same word as Paul uses in 1 Tim. 3. Not 'deaconess' but 'diakonos', the very same word translated as 'deacon' 'minister' or 'servant'.

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **3/8/12 10:30 pm**

Delete

Acts-dicted Posts: 9027 **3/9/12 6:19 am**

delete
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 5657 **3/9/12 9:40 am**

Golf Cart Mafia Associate Posts: 2118 **3/9/12 9:49 am**

Another perspective

Friendly Face Posts: 379 **3/9/12 11:21 am**

I find the entire book of 1 Timothy to be problematic regarding the issue of women in authority. I don't think anyone on either side of the debate can undervalue the complexity of the content. If we take it completely literally (verse by verse), then the debate becomes more than a debate on just women in authority...there's many tough sayings in the book.

If we try to look at it contextually, we may jump off into personal opinion more than fact.

Here's what I do know...

1) There were clearly issues with the women in the Ephesian church. We cannot undervalue this premise. Notice Paul's salutation to Timothy "As I urged you when I went into Macedonia--remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine, (4) nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith. (5) Now the purpose of the commandment is love from a pure heart, from a good conscience, and from sincere faith, (6) from which some, having strayed, have turned aside to idle talk," (1 Tim 1:3-6)

Notice what Paul writes later of young widows "(13)And besides they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and not only idle but also gossips and busybodies, saying things which they ought not...(15)For some have already turned aside after Satan" (5:13-15) If we view the New Testament exhortations regarding government as "descriptive rather than prescriptive", then this may help explain Paul's stance in 1 Tim. Is there any explicit statement that expresses these views for every local church or was this specific to the Ephesian church?

2) Paul writes in the masculine, because he is talking about men. It is obvious that 1 Tim 3 would be written in terms of the man, because Paul prefaces it this way "This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work." Could it be that the passage is gender specific by virtue of writing style not interpretive intent?

3) The deacon/deaconess argument is flawed. Romans 16 is not a contradiction of 1 Timothy 3. Someone on here wrote something to the effect that diakonos can be translated as "deacon, minister, servant" and this is very true. Paul's use of "presbuteros" (Elder) is a great example of this. The word is used to translate as "elder women" (1 Tim 5:2) and "elders that rule" (1 Tim 5:17).

So there is a difference between the office of the elder and mature/elderly people but the same word. Likewise there could very easily be a difference between Romans 16 (Greek1249 - deacon, servant, minister) and the office of a deacon (1 Tim 3:10 - Greek 1247). We cannot say without a doubt that Phoebe was or was not holding the office of the deacon. We truly don't know, but there is a slight difference in the Greek word.

I just want to state for the record that I am deeply conflicted about this issue. I'm personally at a point that I'm really neutral on the issue. There can be good discussion on both sides. I would vote yes to women Bishops, because I believe that they are already serving the biblical role of bishops as pastors. I believe the COG took a stance on this without really wanting to. Now its just a matter of control and ego.

I would just love for the COG to make up its mind and deal with the consequences. I personally feel to vote down the bishops issue for women and then to allow women on church councils was hypocritical. I wish we would either be 100% against it or 100% for it as a denomination. I felt that the church and pastor council vote was simply trying to appease women and that's unfair to great women of God.

I believe its hypocritical to allow women to pastor, but not allow them to be Bishops. We need to make a stand either way.

Here's an idea...just get rid of the stupid "bishop" title anyway...actually, how about not using bishop, deacon or elder...that'll be good. Very Happy

_________________
Joshua Henson
Senior Pastor at Pensacola Worship Center
www.pwccog.com
www.ecclesialleadership.com

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/9/12 11:32 am**

Now here is a funny thing: Paul says in 1 Tim 3 that a deacon should be the husband of one wife. Then when the very same apostle says in Rom 16 that the lady Phebe IS a deacon/servant/minister, the fact is dismissed as a 'word study fallacy.'

It is not unlike when John MacArthur tries to deny that Paul says in 1 Cor 11 that wmen may prophesy, since a few chapters later Paul says women must keep silent in the churches.

Sounds like a presupposition fallacy is what's really going on. :lol

Friendly Face Posts: 379 **3/9/12 11:49 am**

Friendly Face Posts: 379 **3/9/12 11:53 am**

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/9/12 11:54 am**

Though one is the noun form and the other is the verb form, interestingly enough it is the noun form which Phebe is referred to as, which would be the 'office' (if in fact our concept of 'office' is even correct).

In one of the most powerful statements on ministry and leadership which Jesus ever gave, it is clear that He didn't see the office or title as having real meaning apart from the verb of serving:

Matt 20:25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. 26 “It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, 27 and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

The terms above for "serve" and "servant" are the verb and noun forms for deacon/servant/minister.

If we say a man is pastoring, do we mean he's not a pastor? (False shepherds excepted, of course).

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12817 **3/9/12 12:01 pm**

How can a person truly serve if they are not a servant? How can anyone truly minister if they are not a minister?

Friendly Face Posts: 379 **3/9/12 12:01 pm**

Friendly Face Posts: 379 **3/9/12 12:06 pm**

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1865 **3/9/12 8:51 pm**

Let's look at another fallacy QW. Galatians 3:28 is often cited as a proof for women overseers and/or deacons. The supposition is that all gender distinctions/roles are set aside in Christ. Using this logic, one could easily use this as support that a homosexual lifestyle isn't sinful. After all, if there are literally no male or female roles....well you can connect the dots.

However Galatians 3:28 is talking about the call to salvation and the nature of faith. Truly anyone (male, female, bond, free, Jew, Gentile) can accept the call to salvation. To use this text as a proof that women are acceptable deacon(esses) would be an inappropriate use of this text. I view the usage of Romans 16 and the case of Phoebe as a similar fallacy. Romans 16 is not set forth as a list of qualifications for the office of a deacon. I Timothy and Titus clearly are. And they make it clear that a bishop or a deacon should be a male.