Where in the bible does it say that women cant be ministers?

Originally posted by marg6043
Incredible !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A women bashing thread here in ATS.

I see that for what it looks many of our so call Christians followers of their own interpretation of the bible will love to see women bare footed, pregnant, siting in the back of the cars and following men 3 feet behind.

Oh hell, this Sharia law

But in Christan version.

What a joke, denied Ignorance people.

The only "woman bashing " here seems to only be coming from women.
Remarks like "bxxxxxxx and prxxxxxx" have not been used by any males (I think), and will probably not be tolerated here. The thread starter asked a question, and has been receiving some well researched answers, for and against the subject. Please let's not get too carried away with emotions here; I for one am receiving some good information both ways. You may not agree with what you read, but maybe we shouldn't turn it into a rant.

Thank you Helen,
I do disagree that this was the intent of Jesus, These laws and rules were in place within an ancient culture where women were little more than property.
It is the same sort of translation and inference which created MAry Magdelen out to be a whore.

And just in case anyone wonders my personal stance, I chose to quite my career to stay home and be a mother to my son, to be at home when he gets out of school, I also do 90% of the cleaning and chores and errands, and Leave the yardwork and heavy lifting to my male counterpart.

reply to post by helen670


Great point!
Exactly.

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by Phenomium
We don't want them pregnant! Just another way for a woman to squeeze the life out of a man by USING children to get free money. Most women pop out a kid these days, and knowing the support of the court is inevitably on THEIR side nearly 100% of the time,

Sherman set the wayback machine to 1659.........

Wow that is a whole lot of ignorance in one post.

At anyrate is is off topic and if you wish to further delve into your theories about the fairer sex, there is a thread in BTS called RANTS.

Otherwise, kindly stay ON topic which the last time I checked was Where in the bible does it say that women cant be ministers?

I type too slow, I see a male has finally gotten a little too enthusiastic here as well........

[edit on 13-2-2008 by Yknot]

Originally posted by sobolwolf
Fast forward to the last 50 years or so, now the female of the species has been handed this burden thru political correctness. I say burden because they haven't evolved over countless millions of years to handle this added responsibility, a responsibility with which they fail dismally through no real fault of their own. the family unit has been destroyed, via the ability of the woman to argue with the main, even the ability to leave the man. With argument comes resentment, with submission comes peace.

So in your opinion woman should have no right to an opinion, should submit to their husbands whims no matter if they are wrong or right, she should not have the abililty to leave the man, what about when the husband cheats on her, mistreats her either verbally physically or emotionally, what if he is an abusive drunk.

Oh wait a minute she should just submit to him and not argue, that is why he hits her!!!

reply to post by Clearskies


Im guessing female soldiers may well pee standing up because frankly its easier when in the field.
I can also pee standing up because i have spent a lot of time backpacking and it only take one black widow bite on your bum to no longer squat!

I do know testosterone filled men. But ya know what they were told how to live their life for 18 years by a woman, and she did a darn fine job im sure if you ask them.

I see there is no easy answer to this.

I left the board to read things from different sources and like YNOT pointed out there is good arguements from both sides.
I choose to believe that it was written in a time where women were basically nothing otherthan property...It would be like when the Constitution was written...when it mentioned man it didn't mean mankind. It meant man and only the white man...

You can tell me I'm smoking crack but that is the way I see it.

Sorry if anyone thinks this has turned into a bash women thread. It honestly wasn't intended to be that. I actually read the statement in another thread on this forum and thought BS but thought I would ask and find out the truth.

thanks again for helping me with this

Originally posted by Clearskies
Only because of the curse!

ZOINKS! C-c-curse? Let's get outta here, Scoobs!

You think you have to be sad to appreciate happiness? NO! But, because of the curse, we have sin and pain.

Actually yes, I do. Think of it this way. For the entirety of your childhood, you are with your parents. They teach you, feed you, clothe you, house you. Then you're on your own. Do you appreciate your parents' efforts with you more, or less than you did when you were dependent on them?

It wasn't his plan. He knew the choice they would make, but, he let THEM make it!

He knew. Exactly my point. He knew what would happen. He put the tree there, he sent the serpent to tempt them. It was planned. The pair could have opted out - but God knew they wouldn't. You can't throw a monkeywrench into the plans of an omnipotent, omniscient being.

Why was it planned this way?

To grant humanity true free will, I would think. Prior to the serpent, humanity lived as children, blind and unquestioning of their creator. They did not know free will was an option. God sends the serpent to tell them that they CAN choose to disobey God. And they do so, gaining the knowledge needed to make more decisions and further assert their free will.

They had TWO trees that were their destiny. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and evil, and The Tree of Life(from which, the fruit grew)
One to cause death and the other one to give eternal Life!

Let's see, which one did they choose?
THE WRONG one!

Depends on if you think eternal life is a good thing and that ignorance is bliss. Myself, I don't fear death, and I'd rather keel over someday than spend an eternity picking my nose in a garden.

That's YOUR ultimate existence? You think We should ALWAYs keep a few child molestors and murderers so we can appreciate when we're not murdered or our children aren't molested? Not in My Book!

If option B is total obliviousness, then yes, I think I'll take the risk, and deal with it as it comes up.

It doesn't say that At All!
It says Not to Pray so That you are seen, just to BE seen. You know?
Like, if it's so the congregates will draw their breath in and think, "Oh, how pious! He/she is SUCH a humble, powerful servant!" P-R-I-D-E.

And church is nothing but a public social competition of piety and decorum. I know people who spend hundreds on their "sunday clothes."

Originally posted by jedimiller
true. and that's because woman messed everything up for us. eating the apple. it's not that woman aren't smart, but they are too passionate and take things to heart. this does not make them appropiate to be pastors. because they would focus on personal beliefs and less on the bible. try letting a woman speak for 3 hours and you'd know what I mean.


Sorry girls. I love you!

And any girl that would love you after reading that needs to give their head a shake.

There is a long list of insanity in Bible laws.

If your brother dies, marry his wife and have kids. Du 25:5
Don't let cattle graze with other kinds of Cattle (Leviticus 19:19)
Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)
Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)
If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die. (Leviticus 20:10).
If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death. (Leviticus 20:14)
If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed. (Leviticus 20:15-16).
If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their people" (Leviticus 20:18)
People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)
Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death. (Leviticus 20:27)
If anyone, even your own family suggests worshipping another God, kill them. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)
Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake. (Leviticus 21:9)

I could do this all day. If we all followed the Bible word for word there would be about 10 people on Earth.

EDIT: Although I will add that for Christians all of these laws are destroyed by Jesus. Jesus destroyed the church and its old laws and rebuilt it in three days, (his resurrection). Christians need only to follow the two simple commandments that Jesus gave them. 1. Love your God above all other things. 2. Do onto others...


[edit on 13-2-2008 by zerotime]

Yeah there certainly are some bizzare rules in the old testament. They make absolutely no sense, why on earth would an all wise loving God tell people to do that? Of course when Jesus came some rules changed. He never really gave any wacky rules like telling someone to go sleep with his brothers wife.

reply to post by kaferwerks


Hello, Kaferwerks. I see your original question has already been answered but here are the verses, contexts, and explanations. The articles dissect your questions very well and point out other passages that show female leaders, evangelists, deacons, and apologists working with Paul and in the early church. pretty interesting read:

Women in the Early Church.
Paul's Passages Relating to Women.

The entire article series is great but those two answer your specific questions.

Originally posted by sobolwolf

I have nothing against women, they have their place as do us men. It is just right that each should know their place. And in this day and age nobody knows their place, thus the confusion, strife and the breaking of families that we see.

Oh! Now I get it! I'm glad you explained it, since I haven't evolved enough to understand things on my own.

I'm glad you have nothing against women. After all, you did come out of one.

Maybe one day I'll learn what my place is. Until then, I will continue going off to work. I'll continue making more money than my husband (who is perfectly okay with it), at the job that I got because my grades were so good (in fact, in a class of around 160, only five people were ranked higher than me, two of which were men). I write laws. I do a lot of work that affects a few hundred thousand people every day. I'm good at it.

When you figure out what "my place" should be, let me know. I could use a good laugh every now and again.

you mean you aren't failing dismally at the burdern that the feminists placed on you.

I forwarded my hubby a link to this thread, and he is fairly testosterone driven man who was raised in a highly conservative family with a father who was pentacostal and held revivals. Imagine my terror when first meeting the family....i was too nervous to say more than three words for months months...they were convinced i was shy and quiet

He said that not only did he find this whole thing amazingly sexist, but that his father...the pentacostal minister would have as well.

He quoted what his dad had once said, "wisdom isnt attached to ones genitalia, and if it was it most likely would be found in the creature with only a single brain" he was pentacostal but also had a sense of humor and was a kind tolerant loving man that I highly respected and who also assured me of my place in heaven knowing full well my religious beliefs.

Then He told me to get in the kitchen and make him a chicken pot pie...so I shot him the bird, I guess I still dont know my place!

I find it interesting that people want to confuse religious dogma with current social trends. Having a woman as a preacher is in no way related to whether or not she can run a corporation. Either you believe what is written or you don't, it is as simple as that.

Men are to lead the church not women. Now that being said, does that mean that a woman could not in any circumstance lead? I would say she can lead if there is a lack of a suitable male to do so. Though once a male is found that can take over she is to step down and let him lead. In the absence of a male leader, one is to be actively sought. God instructed men to lead the church and their families not women.

The problem with modern society is that the men fail to lead or just plain do not know how. So men, reach in your pants and see if you can find something and step up to the plate and lead your families.

Should women have their opinions heard in the family decision process, yes she should. However, it is up to the man to weigh the "facts" and come to the final decision. Right or wrong the burden rests on his shoulders. It is also not the womans place to ridicule him should he error in that decision, that causes strife within the family. Nor should the man ridicule his wife for her opinion. If you do you will cut off a valuable asset in your decision making process.

BTW, my wife is my XO, you cross her you cross me, I am the Captain and I believe in the chain of command and the buck stops on my desk not hers. I need the input of my wife to make sure the ship runs properly.

[edit on 2/14/2008 by pstrron]

Zerotime (I think) has listed a few of the 'insanities' found in the bible.
How hard is it to understand that some of the ideas in the said book are outdated? I haven't seen a female preacher/minister, but I don't think the idea would bother me.

And I certainly don't understand it when people say "if this is against the bible...", and then go on to ignore a few things that don't look too good (but which the bible advocates). I guess, as has been mentioned, it's a case of picking whatever suits one's desires.

As I see it the world at that time was male-dominated, so I am not surprised that they would consider that area theirs (as they still do), which is no excuse at all.

IMHO Paul's words carry his own bias (and he was no more than a human), and so I would not follow them to the letter.

Come to think about it, is there a reason why Jesus didn't choose women when he was selecting his twelve disciplines? I can't think of something they (as women) would not have been able to do as satisfactorily as men.

I would just like to come at this question from a different angle but before i do, i believe that most people are against women ministers because of what was said 2000 yrs ago. others are against them because they don't like the idea of a woman knowing more than they do and should keep their place in society. others just don't like change.

This was said to a totally different culture than we have today and i also believe that in those days men stayed at the front of the church and women gathered at the back and even today we see that those at the back tend to chatter away during the service. Hence, they were told to keep quiet.
Another thing, ask any women ministers what they believe their role to be, they don't see themselves ABOVE men but TEACHERS of the word of God to all.

Now, i believe that we have a God of change and he knows that culture and the role of women has changed drastically in the last 50 years alone, never mind 2000. Women are just as good as men (if not better ) at a lot of things and ministering to churches whose congregations are mainly women anyway, is one of them.
A lot of the churches work is dealing with people and there are many who need help and advice, mainly of a personal nature and women feel far more comfortable with a female minister that a male. I know some male ministers who are total clods when it comes to being able to help people with emotional problems.
There are a lot of women out there who would love to be able to speak to a woman minister but can't.

I won't go into the journey to becoming a minister except to say that women are called into the ministry by God. There is no doubt about it.
So, if God is doing the calling who are we to think that we know better.

One last thing. How do i know these things?
I'm married to one.

My first post on the site, this thread has inspired me to stop lurking!

I have never understood why we should automatically debar 50% of the population from following a particular career path/lifestyle because of the cultural attitudes prevelant a couple of millenia ago.

I am an atheist, but my wife is Christian. We were married last year by a female vicar and I find it extraordinary that she could be considered different from her male counterparts. The ministry at our local church has 4 vicars and she is far and away the best of them (not to say the others aren't any good!). This attitude towards women by certain religions/branches of religions baffles me utterly. IMHO any section of any church that debars women from ordination is doing itself a disservice.

As an aside, here in Blighty we have been ordaining woman into the church of England since 1994 and in 2006 more women were ordained than men (BBC News). Whatever troubles are facing the Church of England nowadays, an abundance of x chromosomes amongst the clergy is not one of them.

___________________
"Fast forward to the last 50 years or so, now the female of the species has been handed this burden thru political correctness. I say burden because they haven't evolved over countless millions of years to handle this added responsibility, a responsibility with which they fail dismally through no real fault of their own. the family unit has been destroyed, via the ability of the woman to argue with the main, even the ability to leave the man. With argument comes resentment, with submission comes peace.

The bible is about submission, as the man submits to the chruch, the woman submits to the man. There is the saying that too many chefs spoil the broth just as too many chiefs cause disharmony in the tribe."
----------------------------------------------------------


There's a story in the bible about a women.
She's out there, buying vineyards, making and selling wine, taking care of the kids, weaving the clothe for the clothing, and all kinds of stuff....
the story ends with the husband sitting all day at the gates of the city, chatting with the elders...

when women were trying to get the right to vote, one of the leaders of the movement was in front of the NY State Congress pleading the case.
The men were by law, given the right over the wife's wages...which were pennies to the dollar when compared to the men's. They were given the right by law, to send their young children anywhere to anyone, to be workers for the person, and once the man decided, well, the women could do nothing! The men, were given by law, the right to beat both the wife and the children, and there was no recourse for the women to take...guess what...
that speech ends with the drunken men sitting on the curb of the main street, gossiping and carrying on....

From king's david's time, to the early 1900's, and not much had seemed to have changed!! the women and children, worked their arses off.....while many of the men, sat at the gates of the city, and chatted!!!

Maybe it took women to use her voice to get man to evolve any!!!

ahh...the women can now leave the man!!! how horrendous!!!
never mind that the men were leaving the women ever since moses' time!!!
and oh, no, never, ever let the women to argue with the man, but let her remain silent, and pray to god, that he will talk for her!!! and, well, let the man do as he will!!! even if it means that the man leads the whole family to hell!!!
and people wonder why I say that hey, I can't be a christian!! The first commandment that is given to me as a women is to submit to the husband, and well, all other commandments are to come from him, or at least any actions I might take regarding any commandments from God must be approved by the man first!!
thus, salvation, in reality, isn't really open to all women, or children, just those who's husband approve!!

seems to clash with many of the other parts of the bible to me!!

reply to post by dawnstar

and people wonder why I say that hey, I can't be a christian!!

Don't worry about a few Neanderthals who still think they can club women and take them back to their caves.
I think in this day and age women seem to wear the pants anyway.
That way of thinking left the church a long time ago.


[edit on 14-2-2008 by jon1]