i'm still watching, so maybe they'll come to this, but there is often debate here about women being silent in churh and not being among those who share. How is that addressed in the biblical church?
I got up too early and only got through to the end of the 5th one.
It must be election time!! That is a kind of "vote winner" question!! Will this win the women's vote? I tell you exactly how Biblical churches adress this, the same way denominations do only on a smaller/ bigger scale!
Depending on which denomination/ free church set up you go to depends on the common practice to rules of that group. In the same way some Biblically set up churches have come to the unanimous agreement that women should be silent. However, not many as far as I know. Some let women speak but insist they wear hats!
I say smaller/ larger scale, because if all Christians were in Biblically set up churches, then as they explained, there would be a lot more "churches." Therefore there would be a lot more variation between them as to what they feel is good practice.
As for my own understanding and what I would throw into the debate, both women being silent and women having their heads covered are given as examples of bad teaching, and are not meant to be taken as commands. There is a pattern that I have noticed in PAuls writings that shows he is giving examples of bad teaching, not many have seen it the way I do, but to me it stands out as very obvious.
The most obvious verse to quote for being able to speak is Paul saying "When a woman prays or prophecies!" You can't prophecy without speaking and you can't prophecy on your own!
Unfortunately there are people who I would say are "under New Testament Law" in their attitude to "The Commands" as they see them and are very strict. But you meet these kinds of people in denominational churches too!
I was so pleased to find somewhere where "Biblical Church" had been thrashed out in such a straight forward and current way. I'm still waving the flag, and it is good to feel others waving the flag too.
Here is an article from a house church person, on a house church website about headcovering for women. It is probably the best and fullest explanation of the passage I have seen. I haven't reread it so I hope it still says what it said when I did!!
I have to say that I did detect some negativity towards women. One pastor I met was boarderline bigot, but was oblivious. He would tell jokes like, "How long does it take a man to open a can of beer?" "It should be open when she gives it to you!"
I once gave a talk and put in it lots of anti men jokes, and he hated it, he said he was against such negativity about men. It was a good test to see whether he was truely balanced or not. He would claim he isn't against women but makes comments all the time, yethates comments against men!! Kind of why we parted company really! We are warned to keep good company otherwise we will be corrupted.
There is something else facinating about Biblical church that I noticed. If you go into most congregational churches, you will see a church that is mostly women with most of the "official" jobs taken by the few men there are. However, in biblical churches there is a really good balance and possibly even more men than women. My view on this was because there was autonomy and masculinity allowed for the men.
In congregational churches, you have to sit down and shut up, or be a bit effiminate (Many pastors here are "gentle" men) There isn't room for opinionated men, but there is within the biblical church.
The thing is that in congregational churches there is a lot of, "You can't say that!!!" it might offend someone. As if there is no room for people and there opinions. "We really want you here" they say, "But keep your opninions to yourself!" Well, I'm affraid I am my opninions!!
In biblical church each person is allowed to share. That means each person is allowed to voice. Voicing ourselves is so essential to growth. How can you move on if you can't even hear where you are? It isn't until I say something that I realise I didn't realise I thought that!
Having a voice, and being about what we are about, that is Christian conversation in our fellowship time, (as opposed to the ministry time) allows us as much as the ministry time to hear where we are. The "And what do you do for a living?" over coffe at the end of a service, is like chatting in the bar at the theatre.
There is also supposed to be a psychology that women secretly fantacise about their pastors and wish that their useless husbands could be spiritual and sensitive like them. (How spiritual or sensitive is that?)
On balance I feel that women are not given to be elders within the New Testament. But that said, I feel there is a very strong Biblical principle that when men wont be men about the things of God, God will raise up women to do it. That is what I see in scripture. that wouldn't be what I would do if I didn't have scripture!!
I think it is only fair that a church that is predominately women should be fairly balanced with female leadership!!
It isn't that I think God doesn't think that woman can do leadership. As I say He raises up women when the men wont do what He wants. However, I think it is a case of "that isn't the role that He intended for them." in the same way He never intended for us to be fallen sinners, but we do it so well! (Sorry that wasn't meant to be sarcastic about women elders, just people! Women do leadership as well as men, but that doesn't mean that He wanted the to do that.)
There is another psychology that says that when a woman wants to be a leader of men she has to be more of a man than the men. And I think that's the problem, God wanted the women to be women and not try and outdo the men. Maggie Thatcher (sorry about her) is an example of a masculine woman. A lot of business women are hard nosed sour faced women who have bigger balls than the men they lead. But is that God's blueprint for any woman? Is that why wmoen have estrogen and men have testosterone?
There are a lot of examples of where people are very good at not being the ideal example, and the bible shows us the ideal example. There are some amazing pictures for women in the bible, and these shouldn't be over looked. One of my favourites is of the women in the garden of the tomb touching Jesus' feet.
In the old testament the feast on that Sunday was the high priest would go into the field with a metal ring. He would throw it over the ripe barley (or whatever) He would cut just that one piece that the ring fell on and then only hold it at the base. He would then lift it up to heaven and wave it to GOd to give God the glory.
On that day Jesus said do not touch me tell my people I ascend. In the same evening he told Thomas to touch him. He had ascended, given God the glory as the first fruit of the harvest and then returned. Meerly waved. Who had the role of holding the base of the first fruit of the harvest? The women! When was a woman ever a priest?
4 comments:
i'm still watching, so maybe they'll come to this, but there is often debate here about women being silent in churh and not being among those who share. How is that addressed in the biblical church?
I got up too early and only got through to the end of the 5th one.
It must be election time!! That is a kind of "vote winner" question!! Will this win the women's vote? I tell you exactly how Biblical churches adress this, the same way denominations do only on a smaller/ bigger scale!
Depending on which denomination/ free church set up you go to depends on the common practice to rules of that group. In the same way some Biblically set up churches have come to the unanimous agreement that women should be silent. However, not many as far as I know. Some let women speak but insist they wear hats!
I say smaller/ larger scale, because if all Christians were in Biblically set up churches, then as they explained, there would be a lot more "churches." Therefore there would be a lot more variation between them as to what they feel is good practice.
As for my own understanding and what I would throw into the debate, both women being silent and women having their heads covered are given as examples of bad teaching, and are not meant to be taken as commands. There is a pattern that I have noticed in PAuls writings that shows he is giving examples of bad teaching, not many have seen it the way I do, but to me it stands out as very obvious.
The most obvious verse to quote for being able to speak is Paul saying "When a woman prays or prophecies!" You can't prophecy without speaking and you can't prophecy on your own!
Unfortunately there are people who I would say are "under New Testament Law" in their attitude to "The Commands" as they see them and are very strict. But you meet these kinds of people in denominational churches too!
I was so pleased to find somewhere where "Biblical Church" had been thrashed out in such a straight forward and current way. I'm still waving the flag, and it is good to feel others waving the flag too.
2 more videos to watch. i have to take aaron to school. i'm really enjoying this series, Richard. thanks!
Glad you're enjoying them.
Here is an article from a house church person, on a house church website about headcovering for women. It is probably the best and fullest explanation of the passage I have seen. I haven't reread it so I hope it still says what it said when I did!!
http://www.ntrf.org/articles/article_detail.php?PRKey=36
I have to say that I did detect some negativity towards women. One pastor I met was boarderline bigot, but was oblivious. He would tell jokes like, "How long does it take a man to open a can of beer?" "It should be open when she gives it to you!"
I once gave a talk and put in it lots of anti men jokes, and he hated it, he said he was against such negativity about men. It was a good test to see whether he was truely balanced or not. He would claim he isn't against women but makes comments all the time, yethates comments against men!! Kind of why we parted company really! We are warned to keep good company otherwise we will be corrupted.
There is something else facinating about Biblical church that I noticed. If you go into most congregational churches, you will see a church that is mostly women with most of the "official" jobs taken by the few men there are. However, in biblical churches there is a really good balance and possibly even more men than women. My view on this was because there was autonomy and masculinity allowed for the men.
In congregational churches, you have to sit down and shut up, or be a bit effiminate (Many pastors here are "gentle" men) There isn't room for opinionated men, but there is within the biblical church.
The thing is that in congregational churches there is a lot of, "You can't say that!!!" it might offend someone. As if there is no room for people and there opinions. "We really want you here" they say, "But keep your opninions to yourself!" Well, I'm affraid I am my opninions!!
In biblical church each person is allowed to share. That means each person is allowed to voice. Voicing ourselves is so essential to growth. How can you move on if you can't even hear where you are? It isn't until I say something that I realise I didn't realise I thought that!
Having a voice, and being about what we are about, that is Christian conversation in our fellowship time, (as opposed to the ministry time) allows us as much as the ministry time to hear where we are. The "And what do you do for a living?" over coffe at the end of a service, is like chatting in the bar at the theatre.
There is also supposed to be a psychology that women secretly fantacise about their pastors and wish that their useless husbands could be spiritual and sensitive like them. (How spiritual or sensitive is that?)
On balance I feel that women are not given to be elders within the New Testament. But that said, I feel there is a very strong Biblical principle that when men wont be men about the things of God, God will raise up women to do it. That is what I see in scripture. that wouldn't be what I would do if I didn't have scripture!!
I think it is only fair that a church that is predominately women should be fairly balanced with female leadership!!
It isn't that I think God doesn't think that woman can do leadership. As I say He raises up women when the men wont do what He wants. However, I think it is a case of "that isn't the role that He intended for them." in the same way He never intended for us to be fallen sinners, but we do it so well! (Sorry that wasn't meant to be sarcastic about women elders, just people! Women do leadership as well as men, but that doesn't mean that He wanted the to do that.)
There is another psychology that says that when a woman wants to be a leader of men she has to be more of a man than the men. And I think that's the problem, God wanted the women to be women and not try and outdo the men. Maggie Thatcher (sorry about her) is an example of a masculine woman. A lot of business women are hard nosed sour faced women who have bigger balls than the men they lead. But is that God's blueprint for any woman? Is that why wmoen have estrogen and men have testosterone?
There are a lot of examples of where people are very good at not being the ideal example, and the bible shows us the ideal example. There are some amazing pictures for women in the bible, and these shouldn't be over looked. One of my favourites is of the women in the garden of the tomb touching Jesus' feet.
In the old testament the feast on that Sunday was the high priest would go into the field with a metal ring. He would throw it over the ripe barley (or whatever) He would cut just that one piece that the ring fell on and then only hold it at the base. He would then lift it up to heaven and wave it to GOd to give God the glory.
On that day Jesus said do not touch me tell my people I ascend. In the same evening he told Thomas to touch him. He had ascended, given God the glory as the first fruit of the harvest and then returned. Meerly waved. Who had the role of holding the base of the first fruit of the harvest? The women! When was a woman ever a priest?
Post a Comment