tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post7059888800958713228..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Forum on female commentators, theologians, writersPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger143125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-71416193100232021062012-12-02T04:41:16.090-08:002012-12-02T04:41:16.090-08:00Trog and Chantry FTW on this one. Otherwise, Estel...Trog and Chantry FTW on this one. Otherwise, Estelle, read the article and Scripture and the other posts in this blog. Authentic Christian <i>praxis</i> is believingly submitted to Christ's Lordship as exercised in His inerrant, sufficient Word.<br /><br />Which necessarily also involves affirming His law about the role relations between men and women, as sketched at the post's beginning. This post (as I explain) precedes not from "Gee, did God say anything about men and women?" to "Given what God said about men and women, how do we apply in these areas?"DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-15572895936057463192012-12-02T02:40:58.270-08:002012-12-02T02:40:58.270-08:00Right, Trog.
Or, to put it another way, round rea...Right, Trog.<br /><br />Or, to put it another way, round really isn't the best shape for a wheel.<br /><br />Did it really take 60 hours for that comment to show up? Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-84513699553646414742012-12-01T21:14:59.286-08:002012-12-01T21:14:59.286-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-90196043453996226682012-12-01T21:01:55.931-08:002012-12-01T21:01:55.931-08:00So just to be clear - obeying the direct command o...So just to be clear - obeying the direct command of God is arrogant, but defying it is Spirit-filled Beatitudinal humility. Got it.trogdorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452996348717802065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-42750276987770732782012-12-01T20:19:45.719-08:002012-12-01T20:19:45.719-08:00Christ came to set the captives free, he gave sigh...Christ came to set the captives free, he gave sight to the blind and speech to the voiceless.He treated women with dignity and conversed with them as equals, much to the shock and horror of his disciples. At His Resurrection, He charged Mary Magdalene to announce to the men that He is Risen and He poured out His Spirit on men and women alike, even His mother, at Pentecost.<br /><br />The interpretation that women may not teach men or in any way tell them what to do, especially in the body of Christ, leads to arrogance which, last time I checked, is not found among the fruit of the Spirit nor the Beatitudes. <br /><br />Who can dictate through whom God will speak? Did Moses expect a burning bush? Or Balaam that his donkey would talk? And a carpenter? From Nazareth?!<br /><br />The dissonance between this spirit of arrogance and the example of my Lord, plus the many women I see God using around me, led me to re-evaluate the translations and interpretations of the passages in the epistles relating to women. I have become convinced that the traditional interpretation, as held by many on this site, is not what Paul or Peter intended and actually diminishes the Body of Christ, both the men and the women. Instead of a crown of beauty, it gives us ashes, mourning instead of joy, despair instead of praise.Estellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08755292930170825289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-17442911301357803642012-12-01T17:34:30.676-08:002012-12-01T17:34:30.676-08:00Thanks Susan, I think we are in agreement.
As for...Thanks Susan, I think we are in agreement.<br /><br />As for the question about if she would be violating Matt 18 in having her husband confront the other husband -- I think it would violate it according to the letter - but not in spirit. <br />I do not think she is required to go to her husband, or through him, but I can't see how she would be wrong. I would think that some things shared between spouses is not the same as a public accusation. The husband would have the responsibility of seeing what is true though, since he didn't witness it. <br /><br />My perspective about authority is very much shaped by the last decade (a full third) of my life in the military. <br />I think this concept bears out in other scriptures - along the line of the man being the representative head of the family.<br />I know I would probably want my child to come to me. She is only a month old right now, but I guess it's good to think of these situations.<br /><br /><br />Zorro!https://www.blogger.com/profile/11911364103500100350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-29231626901517730922012-12-01T16:28:31.414-08:002012-12-01T16:28:31.414-08:00(...cont. from above)
This may be misguided or pa...(...cont. from above)<br /><br /><i>This may be misguided or partly off-topic, but sometimes it seems as if complementarians take a certain stance just to show how un-feminist they are. "Women preachers? We don't even let ours attend seminary!"</i><br /><br />Not only is that not how I reached my position (see above), it is not historically valid. For hundreds of years, no women attended the institutions where ministers would attend. In the 1970s that began to change. Those of us who think it’s a mistake are not taking things a step further, we’re simply saying we think those changes were a mistake. <br /><br /><i>Have the men in this discussion considered how hard it is for some women to come to celebrate what the Bible teaches about gender roles? It requires a complete shift in thinking when you grow up being told "Anything he can do, you can do better, sister!" Luckily God made His directions pretty clear and unavoidable. But when people start tacking on extra-biblical prohibitions, then that seems intolerable. "Wait, I spent years coming to terms with what God really says on this, and you're saying that that's not enough?"</i><br /><br />Wow, that really resonates. I think you’re exactly right: we are culturally programmed to approach this question in non-biblical paradigms. But ask yourself, does that mean that when we’ve begun to adopt a biblical paradigm, we’re done? Or is it just possible that it takes time to work out all the implications of that better paradigm?<br /><br /><i>I've had a lot of conversations with women who get really sad about this issue, because they feel like second-class citizens in the church, sometimes, because heaven forbid we seem a little too egalitarian. Why don't we just put a couple of fences around the Law, just to make sure the women stay in line?</i><br /><br />Don’t take this the wrong way, but after reading all your comments, this paragraph seems beneath you. Are we really going to determine this discussion based on emotional states? And working out the implications of biblical principles is not necessarily “putting fences around the law.”<br /><br /><i>When I ask, "What is according to the mind of Christ?" and look in Scripture, "there is neither Jew nor Greek, their is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). I'm not going to pull the egalitarian exegetical sleight of hand, but I would regard this as a general statement to be informed by the more specific ones. That is, unless another passage adds more information about a specific case all of those groups have the same privileges and obligations without distinction in the church. Of course, there are lots of other passages dealing with leadership; and those other Scriptures clarify that all women and a lot of men are unqualified for leadership. But if Jesus had wanted to make the point that special training was for men only, He could have told Mary, "Go help Martha in the kitchen, I can't be a man to my manly disciples while you're in the way." But He said, "But one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her" (Luke 10:42). How could that be clearer?</i><br /><br />I’m not going to argue with you here, and I’d just say that I hope I haven’t sounded anywhere as though I don’t think women ought to think, or be educated, or know the Scriptures, or study theology. My whole argument is that seminary is quintessentially ministerial (in the old-fashioned “ministry of the word” way that Dan so despises - sorry for my repeated use of that word) and that as such, both the students and professors there ought to be men who are qualified or are likely going to be qualified to fill the pastoral office. <br />Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-28480351155392176542012-12-01T16:27:58.497-08:002012-12-01T16:27:58.497-08:00Sweet Lei,
Chantry, thanks for giving such a comp...Sweet Lei,<br /><br /><i>Chantry, thanks for giving such a comprehensive answer to my question. I did mean it more in the first sense than the second.</i><br /><br />You know, I kind of thought so. Thanks for not taking my response in a negative way.<br /><br /><i>The way I see it-the seminary I went to already allowed women, and encouraged women to apply. My going or not going wasn't going to decide whether there would be women in the classroom (in fact, some of the professors were women). I wanted the best education I could get, not so I could say "I'm a graduate of such and such", but so that I would have the best tools to understand Scripture.</i><br /><br />Good point, and honestly, my issue is not so much with women who attend as with the seminaries and the way they conduct their business. If a seminary allows and encourages women students, and if a woman finds that her husband, her pastor, and her elders are all fine with her going, then who am I? Just some guy who thinks the world ought to be run differently than it is, I guess. <br /><br />My complaint is against the seminaries. I believe they have one task, and that this task is absolutely critical. I believe that by broadening their focus they have taken their eye of the goal, and along the way weakened themselves. I have grave doubts about how they arrived at their decision. Their decision being what it is, <i>I</i> still wouldn’t advise a woman to attend seminary (or anyone else with no chance of being a pastor), but then again, I don’t imagine that <i>I</i> am the head or even the counselor of every other Christian. <br /><br />The same thing goes for Dan’s initial question: he asked, “Should women be seminary professors?” and I heard, “Should seminaries have women professors?” <br /><br /><i><br />And I agree, if one takes a view that it's wrong for women to be in seminary, you don't have to present an equal alternative; wrong is wrong (just like you don't have to present a woman with an equal platform as a pastorate if you're going to say she can't speak from the pulpit). But I just can't see how your argument expresses anything more than your own personal preference.</i><br /><br />Thank you for seeing the internal consistency of my argument, that is heartening. I wholly admit that my opinion is my own, but I can’t say I like the language “personal preference.” That suggests that I just don’t <i>like</i> women in seminary, as though it were all just a matter of style. It’s a short step from suggesting that I’m anti-woman. <br /><br />In fact, my position is one of carefully considered conviction, based on 1) a biblical understanding of the unique place of preaching in the ministry of the church (<i>contra</i> Jim P.’s comment, I’m afraid), 2) a historical understanding of what seminaries are and what they are meant to do, 3) a biblically-informed conviction that this purpose must be fulfilled and that seminaries are therefore justified - provided that they meet this aim, 4) a varied seminary experience in which I was often convinced that diverse goals and a needlessly diverse (not racially or culturally, but diverse in terms of goals) student body distracted an otherwise excellent faculty from performing their main task, and 5) roughly twenty years of reflection on the nature and challenges of ministerial education. <br /><br />In other words, it’s not a matter of preference. If my conclusions are wrong, they’re wrong in substance. My problem isn’t that women in the classroom somehow offends my sensibilities. <br /><br />(cont...)Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-48502063271210511702012-12-01T14:45:13.915-08:002012-12-01T14:45:13.915-08:00More seriously, Jim, to seize the teachable moment...More seriously, Jim, to seize the teachable moment:<br /><br />The reason you're able to enjoy this discussion on common ground is because we police our metas, and folks who hate this Biblical doctrine have given up on us as a waste of time (or have been banned).<br /><br />I could point you to some blogs where you can see what happens when that isn't the case. In short, a discussion like this could never happen. The meta would be overtaken by folks insisting that you prove <i>to their satisfaction</i> that round really is the best shape for a wheel.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-55846075894956061982012-12-01T14:39:09.746-08:002012-12-01T14:39:09.746-08:00Here I simply must step in.
Please refrain from u...Here I simply must step in.<br /><br />Please refrain from using "impact" as a verb, unless you're referring to colons or wisdom teeth.<br /><br />Thank you.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-29953489454085367122012-12-01T14:29:55.657-08:002012-12-01T14:29:55.657-08:00Hi Zorro!
I was thinking so fast last night that ...Hi Zorro!<br /><br />I was thinking so fast last night that I knew I wasn't completely clear in what I said (not that it was all correct, either). I used Matthew 18 as an example because Rachael mentioned that the brother who spoke harshly with his wife thought Rachael had violated 1 Tim 2:12. Under this framework, if only sisters were present to witness the episode, none of them (in this brother's mind) would have any justification to confront him. I don't know if I had read Rachael's comment correctly, but I had assumed that Rachael was the only third party present. If that were indeed the case, then I think she had every right to confront him then and there. (Yes, you and I both agree that the sin is not just toward the wife alone--anyone present, being scandalized by it, can say something.) <br /><br />The latter part of my comment was half-baked. Still thinking about the brother in Rachael's particular example, I surmised that the brother would probably consider it more appropriate if Rachael's husband confronted him about it instead. But let's say Rachael, the only third party present, felt scandalized, kept silent, and then told her husband, then wouldn't she be violating Mt 18:15? That was my reasoning. I realize that there is probably flaw somewhere, but right I'm a bit too tired to see it, so this poor attempt at clarification will stand as is.<br /><br />As for women enrolling in seminaries, I wonder what our brothers here think of Westminster in SoCal. They do admit female students there (not for pastoral prep., of course).Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08289347868497438542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-51875560391260837102012-12-01T14:13:44.293-08:002012-12-01T14:13:44.293-08:00First, I find this discussion very helpful. I'...First, I find this discussion very helpful. I'm jazzed that most here are complementarian realizing that so many outside of this discussion are not.<br /><br />Some observations considering what has been discussed:<br /><br />1. Given that we are all at various stages of sanctification, the church will likely never see ideal biblical familial situations as normative until the resurrection:<br /><br />a. Many men are less educated or even less inclined to seek education than their wives or daughters.<br /><br />b. Many men are absent in the family.<br /><br />c. Most men who are present don't lead their families as they ought.<br /><br />2. Nothing in 1 mitigates the biblical principles.<br /><br />3. But it should cause us to consider the place of teaching and learning in the church in light of the situation of our members. In other words, how should we preach and teach in order to minister to the needs of the people we are called to minister to? Too many pastors don't take thin into consideration. The idea is to talk in other people's sleep and wonder why it doesn't make a difference. Something is missing if this is the caliber of pastor we are turning out in our seminaries. I've known several men who have done better. I've never known a female pastor (and I have known several) who has done better.<br /><br />4. The key pastoral training isn't in seminary, but in active pastoral ministry over a period of time.<br /><br />5. If we exhort people to read their Bibles, we are remiss if we don't give them every educational tool to understand what they are reading. I know too many people who read their Bible all the time and aren't positively impacted by it. They approach it with bad ideas and come away with similarly bad ideas. They approach it with a bad attitude and come away with a bad attitude. Then they lift themselves up as great Christians because they read their Bible all the time.<br /><br />6. Providing the best education we can for our pastors doesn't mean that we should be chintzy in educating non-pastors. All Christians are all called to be ministers and we should all endeavor to understand God better through the study of his revelation to us. The Body of Christ is the best source for this and the teachers among us should work diligently to teach the rest with the highest quality of teaching they can.Jim Pembertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01446388434272680014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3115419769025293212012-12-01T14:10:59.232-08:002012-12-01T14:10:59.232-08:00This may be misguided or partly off-topic, but som...This may be misguided or partly off-topic, but sometimes it seems as if complementarians take a certain stance just to show how un-feminist they are. "Women preachers? We don't even let ours attend seminary!" <br /><br />Have the men in this discussion considered how hard it is for some women to come to celebrate what the Bible teaches about gender roles? It requires a complete shift in thinking when you grow up being told "Anything he can do, you can do better, sister!" Luckily God made His directions pretty clear and unavoidable. But when people start tacking on extra-biblical prohibitions, then that seems intolerable. "Wait, I spent <i>years</i> coming to terms with what God really says on this, and you're saying that that's not enough?" <br /><br />I've had a lot of conversations with women who get really sad about this issue, because they feel like second-class citizens in the church, sometimes, because heaven forbid we seem a little too egalitarian. Why don't we just put a couple of fences around the Law, just to make sure the women stay in line?<br /><br />When I ask, "What is according to the mind of Christ?" and look in Scripture, "there is neither Jew nor Greek, their is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). I'm not going to pull the egalitarian exegetical sleight of hand, but I would regard this as a general statement to be informed by the more specific ones. That is, <i>unless another passage adds more information about a specific case</i> all of those groups have the same privileges and obligations without distinction in the church. Of course, there are lots of other passages dealing with leadership; and those other Scriptures clarify that all women and a lot of men are unqualified for leadership. But if Jesus had wanted to make the point that special training was for men only, He could have told Mary, "Go help Martha in the kitchen, I can't be a man to my manly disciples while you're in the way." But He said, "But one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her" (Luke 10:42). How could that be clearer? Sweet Leihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15835011153637770402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-50085590041956968312012-12-01T13:32:23.071-08:002012-12-01T13:32:23.071-08:00Chantry, thanks for giving such a comprehensive an...Chantry, thanks for giving such a comprehensive answer to my question. I did mean it more in the first sense than the second. <br /><br />The way I see it-the seminary I went to already allowed women, and encouraged women to apply. My going or not going wasn't going to decide whether there would be women in the classroom (in fact, some of the professors were women). I wanted the best education I could get, not so I could say "I'm a graduate of such and such", but so that I would have the best tools to understand Scripture.<br /><br />And I agree, if one takes a view that it's wrong for women to be in seminary, you don't have to present an equal alternative; wrong is wrong (just like you don't have to present a woman with an equal platform as a pastorate if you're going to say she can't speak from the pulpit). But I just can't see how your argument expresses anything more than your own personal preference.Sweet Leihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15835011153637770402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-68339864605350085952012-12-01T12:19:43.640-08:002012-12-01T12:19:43.640-08:00Mr. Greenwell, if you read my comments that way, t...Mr. Greenwell, if you read my comments that way, then you misread me completely. I would refer you to my initial comment farther above.<br /><br />Mr. Zorro, I was only responding to the idea that women shouldn't directly benefit from seminary education (without a need to make a career out of it), particularly those who do not have husbands to ask our questions (I would also refer you to my initial comment above). <br /><br />Good day, sirs.<br /><br />Barbarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16604068110452745043noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-39633360596497054452012-12-01T11:15:33.547-08:002012-12-01T11:15:33.547-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Jeremiah Greenwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08299973303636654588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-16588083566615133452012-12-01T11:08:51.634-08:002012-12-01T11:08:51.634-08:00**to clarify - I am not saying the internet replac...**to clarify - I am not saying the internet replaces the Church as <i>the</i> place where the saints are equipped. But as far as being a resource for knowledge, it is great.Zorro!https://www.blogger.com/profile/11911364103500100350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-24090582735697666012012-12-01T11:06:13.051-08:002012-12-01T11:06:13.051-08:00Barbara - I published my response to you before I ...Barbara - I published my response to you before I saw your second comment --<br />You make an excellent point about the availability of free online education. You will not get any titles from it -- but I certainly find no lack of knowledge or expertise, all for free. And beyond that - lots of people who have had that training who are willing to respond to genuine questions about things that may not have been addressed elsewhere on the internet.<br />Anybody with an internet connection today has an almost limitless amount of things to learn from.<br /><br />I, at least, am satisfied.<br />Now you do not get practical experience so much from the internet.<br />Like so many others have already argued - pastoral training is much more than a books education.<br /><br />Fifty years ago, maybe less, a person who wanted to learn much more about the Bible would probably need to get to a school or be under someone who specialized in it.<br />Today we have the internet. <br />What is lacking from internet learning, necessarily, is widespread pastoral education/apprenticeship. Which is what churches/seminaries would hopefully be doing.Zorro!https://www.blogger.com/profile/11911364103500100350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-6605767207926298642012-12-01T10:56:22.355-08:002012-12-01T10:56:22.355-08:00To clarify: it seems that what is in view in Denny...To clarify: it seems that what is in view in Denny's article is the public teaching of the Bible in a parachurch setting (which of course doesn't address your question about woman writers and commentators and if their work is analogous to the public teaching of the Word or not).Aaron Snellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08551668915973379312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-9683172881078590212012-12-01T10:53:16.845-08:002012-12-01T10:53:16.845-08:00Barbara, that sounds an awful lot like this:
&quo...Barbara, that sounds an awful lot like this:<br /><br />"What about the people in Third World Countries who don't have the bible? You can't tell me God isn't saving them because they don't have a bible. Because of this I believe that scripture is insufficient; God has to be doing something for them to or else it wouldn't be fair."<br /><br />You see, one form of judgment on a nation is that women are given places of authority (Isaiah 3:12).<br /><br />And I don't mean to say that the situation you're presenting is God's judgment on that person; it could be, but I'm not going to make the same mistake as the disciples with the blind man. But just because you have a widow and/or orphan who has no care-giver doesn't mean that the rules change, especially considering what the scripture teaches about honoring our parents. That's where mercy and the church come into play, and it is that child's responsibility to honor their unbelieving parent as much as possible without violating the command of God.Jeremiah Greenwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08299973303636654588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-32095014198729692432012-12-01T10:51:25.087-08:002012-12-01T10:51:25.087-08:00Barbara - I would rather talk about what scripture...Barbara - I would rather talk about what scripture says, no what it doesn't. "what-if" questions could be asked all day and very few people are satisfied by the answers.<br />I do think you can look to scripture for the answer. <br />A woman in that situation, I would think, is to be treated the same as a woman whose husband is an unbeliever, or in his 70's and has Alzheimers. I know scripture elsewhere speaks about what to do with unbelieving spouses, I don't see how it would not be the same with unbelieving parents. <br /><br />How is the <i>honor</i> which we are commanded to give to parents and different than the <i>honor</i> we are commanded to give a spouse?<br /><br />Did God make a mistake by giving a Christian non-Christian parents?<br /><br />In the same way, there are situations where a person is married to a non-Christian, or a "never-will be" Christian. Paul gives great advice as to how to comport yourself under those circumstances.<br /><br />I also think that is why orphans and widows - those who are outside of the natural structures of living - they are singled out as particular people who must be helped and ministered to. <br />Both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. One example is in James chapter 1 which says "Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world."<br /><br />I'm no pastor, but if I were you, if you are in a "what if..." situation like you asked, you might want to present that to a pastor...Zorro!https://www.blogger.com/profile/11911364103500100350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-34029666264248678782012-12-01T10:50:32.507-08:002012-12-01T10:50:32.507-08:00Dan -
Are you sure you're not misunderstandin...Dan -<br /><br />Are you sure you're not misunderstanding Burke? I read him to be in agreement with the overall thrust of the comments here. Aaron Snellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08551668915973379312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-89539748655243773592012-12-01T10:41:04.900-08:002012-12-01T10:41:04.900-08:00...to continue - I agree regarding instruction in ......to continue - I agree regarding instruction in the church - absolutely. But there were women in Pauls' day who had left their fathers' homes before coming to faith out of a Pagan world. They have no husbands, no fathers. But they have the church and their Lord. A practical concern, though, is that the pastors and elders - those in the church these women would go to for the answers they seek - are other womens' husbands. When there is a consuming hunger and thirst for the word day in and day out, especially as an older person coming to faith and as Spurgeon once put it, nearly afraid to put one foot in front of the other lest you offend your God (A Caution to the Presumptuous, from his Park Street Pulpit days)--- all those questions of your pastor can make his wife a little nervous. Most womens' ministries are home-and-family-focused, and rightly so, but they don't have much to say to older working divorced women without growing families). And when your dad isn't able to field your questions, but the hunger and thirst to know God in truth and in His Word is there and burning, moment by moment with a million questions almost like a preschooler, one goes to the only one she can go to: the Author - and it is by His great grace that He has provided good bible teaching online and especially through such formats as online offerings to listen and be taught by various seminary offerings so that we can seek out the answers to the questions that burn in our hearts. Absence of a husband and/or of a father just leads us to the One who is the husband to the widow and father to the fatherless. As a woman, I cannot despise the good, sound teaching available to me through these venues. The only one capable of satisfying that thirst is God Himself, and He uses those in mighty ways as they become part of the larger means by which I am equipped to serve others while knowing firsthand His faithfulness to His promise to be found by those who seek Him with all of their hearts.Barbarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16604068110452745043noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-62982551446977798512012-12-01T10:22:15.239-08:002012-12-01T10:22:15.239-08:00Zorro!
And if her father is in his 70s and has Al...Zorro!<br /><br />And if her father is in his 70s and has Alzheimers? Or if he is an unbeliever? <br /><br />Barbarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16604068110452745043noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-306819002177006782012-12-01T09:28:44.296-08:002012-12-01T09:28:44.296-08:00For myself, I've always seen the difference be...For myself, I've always seen the difference between men's and women's roles in the church as being similar to the difference between a leader and a guide. A leader's job is not only to give instructions, but to urge those under their authority to follow those instructions. <br />In contrast to this, a guide's job is to give help to those who choose to ask for it and to be, in a way, subordinate to those they are helping. This fits with my understanding of how women can advise men if they are asked for help. <br /><br />A pastor's role is definitely that of a leader, not of a guide. Preaching to a church is a leading role: it should be about telling the congregation how their actions reflect on their faith and what should be done to prevent (or remedy) any slip-ups in living a godly life. This is why I disagree with allowing women to occupy ministerial positions in the church: because that would be putting women into the leading role of a pastor and in authority over men in the church.<br />On the other hand, writing a book about general Christian faith (and different aspects of living according to it) seems to me to be a way of offering people a guide, a helping hand if you like. No writer, male or female, should force anyone to read their book. It is the choice of the individual whether to read a book and to try to glean information from it and I do not see anything wrong with a woman writing a book on Christianity that other people might find helpful.<br />The same should apply to a seminary on Christianity which has a female speaker. No one in the audience should be forced to listen to it, but if they feel that they could learn something from the female speaker they should at least have the option to listen.<br /><br />In any case, this is only my opinion as a Christian young woman (and aspiring writer, I feel compelled to mention.) I have only made my comment so long for fear of not being clear enough and not because I feel that my opinion is more valuable than anyone else's. I apologise if I've offended anyone; that was not my intention.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06636895570124097699noreply@blogger.com