Female Pastors

[Gerbil_of_the_Vashness]

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

Ultimately, however, I think that a husband should make the decisions with regard to the family and with those opinions in mind.

Why?

Because my father did just that and it worked for our family.

I do not see how personal experiences can be used to tell other people how to behave.

Not that I am required to defend my position but that I am willing to point out your error, I direct you to the expressions "To me, ..." and "I think ...", which indicate opinion. If you're implying that I had "[told] other people how to behave" in this case, I have not. The accurate and correct statement for you to have used would have been that I had "[told] other people what I think is the correct course of action".

You have no ability to force your will upon people, so by telling them what to do you can only tell them what you think they should do. I made no mistake here. I simply did not elaborate on what was inherently implied by my statement.

he was in no way forcing his opinion upon people. this is a public forum where people can state their opinion if they choose to. just because you hate being wrong does not mean you should start an argument with someone else over what they said.  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

SO! Women pastors!

Admittedly, I'm a little thrown off whenever I see them, but morally and spiritually, I can see no reason why they shouldn't exist. confused Like Liz (and someone else too I think) said before- if God is calling them to it, who is anyone, let alone the woman herself, to say no?  

[Priestley]

freelance lover

Priestley

freelance lover

To put it frankly, I think the idea of women not being able to be ministers or hold positions of authority in the church (or anywhere, for that matter) is an aged and backwards way of thinking, for the reasons I've listed, as well as what Priestly said.

Well, it's not that I think it's aged or backwards; it's that I think what Paul said came straight out of his Pharisee manual. Paul was a patriarch from a patriarchal society. It's pretty much the only thing he knew. To have asked him let a woman be his equal would have been one step too far for him. To me, that is a sign of insecurity in masculinity.

For society, I think women can and should do what men do if it is their choice to do it and should receive everything a man receives for doing them. Women have minds and wills just as men do and men would be wise to heed what women have to say. After all, we were all born of women. This leads me to say that such an opinion should be valued as we would expect our own opinions to be valued, especially if it is coming from our wives. Ultimately, however, I think that a husband should make the decisions with regard to the family and with those opinions in mind.

I wasn't saying that you think it's aged and backwards, I was just making a point that I agreed with everything you said in addition to what I said. Sorry if I sounded like I was putting words in your mouth, I didn't intend to.

Hey, I know you weren't saying that I thought it aged and backwards. I didn't mean to sound like I was accusing you of saying that I thought it aged and backwards, nor implying that you were putting words in my mouth. I was clarifying my point of view and elaborating on the discussion, that's all. There's nothing for which to be sorry. smile

freelance lover

What kind of decisions do you think the husbands should make? I personally think that the husband and wife should make desicions together. I don't think it's ever right for a husband to say "Well, this is how it's going to be, I'm the man." I know there are som circumstances in which this may be best (like is the wife is ill and cannot make reliable desicons herself) but as a rule of thumb I think both partners should make choices together.

I should really clarify my previously highlighted comment. By what I said, I didn't mean that I thought a husband should make every decision for his wife, nor that the husband need be consulted on every little issue without any initiative taken on the part of his wife. But neither should husband and wife make decisions independently of one another, because they are not independent.

In any case, it's a difficult question to answer. The expression "making a choice together" is more figurative than literal, because one can really only make decisions for those individuals over which one has authority (in most cases, only oneself). On a decision-by-decision basis, I would be comfortable letting my future wife make them for the family as long as I and our children were consulted, as I would expect my future wife and our children to want to be consulted if I was making decisions for the family.

freelance lover

Of course, you also said this come out of personal experience. My personal experience was very different, as my father traveled a lot when I was younger so my mom was much more present in my life than he was.

Well, my mother has also been more present in my life than he has been, but in childhood years he was the figure of authority. He wasn't just the figure of authority for being the man (even though he had a patriarchal personality), but that my mother is a Christian and subscribes to the idea of the man being head of the woman, so she was comfortable with it.  

[Priestley]

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

Ultimately, however, I think that a husband should make the decisions with regard to the family and with those opinions in mind.

Why?

Because my father did just that and it worked for our family.

I do not see how personal experiences can be used to tell other people how to behave.

Not that I am required to defend my position but that I am willing to point out your error, I direct you to the expressions "To me, ..." and "I think ...", which indicate opinion. If you're implying that I had "[told] other people how to behave" in this case, I have not. The accurate and correct statement for you to have used would have been that I had "[told] other people what I think is the correct course of action".

You have no ability to force your will upon people, so by telling them what to do you can only tell them what you think they should do. I made no mistake here. I simply did not elaborate on what was inherently implied by my statement.

Even if you had elaborated on the implications of your statement, it would be not make your statement any more relevant to the discussion, nor your accusations against me any less baseless.  

[Priestley]

Fushigi na Butterfly

SO! Women pastors!

Admittedly, I'm a little thrown off whenever I see them, but morally and spiritually, I can see no reason why they shouldn't exist. confused Like Liz (and someone else too I think) said before- if God is calling them to it, who is anyone, let alone the woman herself, to say no?

I'm thrown off by them because I'm so used to seeing men in the position of minister/pastor/priest.  

[Priestley]

Gerbil_of_the_Vashness

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

Because my father did just that and it worked for our family.

I do not see how personal experiences can be used to tell other people how to behave.

Not that I am required to defend my position but that I am willing to point out your error, I direct you to the expressions "To me, ..." and "I think ...", which indicate opinion. If you're implying that I had "[told] other people how to behave" in this case, I have not. The accurate and correct statement for you to have used would have been that I had "[told] other people what I think is the correct course of action".

You have no ability to force your will upon people, so by telling them what to do you can only tell them what you think they should do. I made no mistake here. I simply did not elaborate on what was inherently implied by my statement.

he was in no way forcing his opinion upon people. this is a public forum where people can state their opinion if they choose to. just because you hate being wrong does not mean you should start an argument with someone else over what they said.

Easy with the baseless accusations, there.  

[zz1000zz]

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

I do not see how personal experiences can be used to tell other people how to behave.

Not that I am required to defend my position but that I am willing to point out your error, I direct you to the expressions "To me, ..." and "I think ...", which indicate opinion. If you're implying that I had "[told] other people how to behave" in this case, I have not. The accurate and correct statement for you to have used would have been that I had "[told] other people what I think is the correct course of action".

You have no ability to force your will upon people, so by telling them what to do you can only tell them what you think they should do. I made no mistake here. I simply did not elaborate on what was inherently implied by my statement.

Even if you had elaborated on the implications of your statement, it would be not make your statement any more relevant to the discussion, nor your accusations against me any less baseless.

I do not understand. I do not think anything I said would amount to "accusations." Regardless, I offered reasoning to explain myself. Here you dismiss the reasoning with the word "baseless," but you do so without even addressing my explanation. Even if my reasoning was incorrect, that I offered reasoning means my "accusations" were not baseless.

Imagine that during a conversation amongst friends this statement was made, "You should go to the store." Clearly, this is telling the person how to behave. However, nobody would assume one person was bossing the other around. Instead, it would be understood the statement is a suggestion. This suggestion is one person's opinion, presumably based upon something. Because neither person has authority over the other, "suggesting" and "telling" are the same thing. Only when formality is introduced does this change.

I especially do not understand the mentioning of relevance. I asked for the reason behind an opinion. I then questioned the justification for that reason. I do not understand.  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

Priestley

Fushigi na Butterfly

SO! Women pastors!

Admittedly, I'm a little thrown off whenever I see them, but morally and spiritually, I can see no reason why they shouldn't exist. confused Like Liz (and someone else too I think) said before- if God is calling them to it, who is anyone, let alone the woman herself, to say no?

I'm thrown off by them because I'm so used to seeing men in the position of minister/pastor/priest.

That's the same reason it throws me off too. 3nodding  

[Matt Pniewski]

First of all, Head of Household is not the same thing as Pastor. Nothing wrong with a female Pastor.


Second of all, all are equal in the eyes of God.


I've realized that one parent as head of household just plain doesn't work. Didn't for mine growing up, doesn't now, and probably won't work for any of my relationships. Frankly, I see it as being less than productive to have one person as the head of household. Of course, my dad and my Stepmom run the closest I've seen to a decent household in my life, and that's an equal relationship. Growing up, it was my dad. Recently, it was my mother. Neither of them could do it. My Stepdad is ineffectual.


But my Dad and Stepmom keep things as equals, equal say and responsibility. Which is why I'm glad he married a crazy feminist.  

[Priestley]

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

I do not see how personal experiences can be used to tell other people how to behave.

Not that I am required to defend my position but that I am willing to point out your error, I direct you to the expressions "To me, ..." and "I think ...", which indicate opinion. If you're implying that I had "[told] other people how to behave" in this case, I have not. The accurate and correct statement for you to have used would have been that I had "[told] other people what I think is the correct course of action".

You have no ability to force your will upon people, so by telling them what to do you can only tell them what you think they should do. I made no mistake here. I simply did not elaborate on what was inherently implied by my statement.

Even if you had elaborated on the implications of your statement, it would be not make your statement any more relevant to the discussion, nor your accusations against me any less baseless.

I do not understand. I do not think anything I said would amount to "accusations." Regardless, I offered reasoning to explain myself. Here you dismiss the reasoning with the word "baseless," but you do so without even addressing my explanation. Even if my reasoning was incorrect, that I offered reasoning means my "accusations" were not baseless.

This is the result of a misunderstanding. At first, I made the suggestion about husbands making family decisions without providing reasoning. You then asked for this reasoning. I used my parents as a model, and provided the reasoning behind why it worked, thinking but failing to mention that the same would work for other marital couples. I hadn't until now realised that you hadn't made that connection. Without having considered that you were simply stating your inability to make said connection, I took "I do not see how personal experience can be used to tell someone what to do" as implying that I was giving orders. Thinking that you were implying that I was giving orders, I made clear in my response that I was offering a suggestion. By "you have no ability to force your will upon others", I thought you were implying that I was forcing my will upon others, rather than pointing out for me that I could (informally) only do what I had been doing in the first place: making a suggestion. I think this has become a case where you have been stating the obvious and it has appeared to me as an opposing argument. I apologise for misunderstanding you.

zz1000zz

I especially do not understand the mentioning of relevance. I asked for the reason behind an opinion. I then questioned the justification for that reason. I do not understand.

I was referring to this discussion you and I are having as not being relevant to the thread. As for your original statement, I understand it was a request for further explanation rather than a veiled accusation. It would have been better to have asked me via PM.  

[Priestley]

Is the idea of women in church ministry actually a threat to the Church? Is it only seen that way by men in church ministry? Could the issue not be because it is a threat to the Church but in actuality be a threat to those men who hold positions of dominance, control and power within it?

These are all questions that are running through my mind right now. I thought I would offer them up to grease the wheels a little. smile  

[freelance lover]

Fushigi na Butterfly

Priestley

Fushigi na Butterfly

SO! Women pastors!

Admittedly, I'm a little thrown off whenever I see them, but morally and spiritually, I can see no reason why they shouldn't exist. confused Like Liz (and someone else too I think) said before- if God is calling them to it, who is anyone, let alone the woman herself, to say no?

I'm thrown off by them because I'm so used to seeing men in the position of minister/pastor/priest.

That's the same reason it throws me off too. 3nodding

Maybe this is why I don't have a problem with them- the church I grew up in and attended for pretty much my whole life has a female pastor, and the church I served at this summer had a female pastor as the head pastor. I think I'd feel uneasy in a church that didn't have a woman in some sort of pastoral position, along with men. Of course that would
depend on the church and a lot of other things.

And I think when it comes to the man being the head of the household thing, it should be based on a relationship by relationship basis. Some women will want to man to be able to take charge and prefer to be submissive. I don't think I could be in a relationship with a guy who insisted on being mainly dominate. I'm far too independant, and while I'm more than willing to compromise, I dislike having people make desicions for me. I suppose a previous relationship I was in which ended disastoriously was kind of like that. The guy though he knew me so well, even after we grew apart, that he could make assumptions and choices for me and they'd be correct. It was just infuriating and belittling. I think, really, how each couple wants their life to be laid out depends on them and whatever works best for them and points them closer to God.  

[Priestley]

Matt Pniewski

First of all, Head of Household is not the same thing as Pastor.

Right, but the scripture does not make the distinction between a woman who is head of the household and a woman who is a pastor. The distinction is only made for purposes of discussing specifically female pastors in this thread. The only reason I spoke about women in other contexts like such as the household is that Curse's scripture applies to women in general.

Incidentally, I never said a man should be head of the household but rather that he should have the final say in decisions, insofar that I think it is impossible for two people to make a single decision together. It's entirely possible that two people can be in agreement about a decision, however, as in a marriage proposal. They are similar concepts but also quite different.

Matt Pniewski

I've realized that one parent as head of household just plain doesn't work. Didn't for mine growing up, doesn't now, and probably won't work for any of my relationships. Frankly, I see it as being less than productive to have one person as the head of household. Of course, my dad and my Stepmom run the closest I've seen to a decent household in my life, and that's an equal relationship. Growing up, it was my dad. Recently, it was my mother. Neither of them could do it. My Stepdad is ineffectual.

But my Dad and Stepmom keep things as equals, equal say and responsibility. Which is why I'm glad he married a crazy feminist.

I suppose it depends on the conditions of the relationship and the personalities involved. I'm sorry it didn't work out.  

[Matt Pniewski]

Priestley

Matt Pniewski

First of all, Head of Household is not the same thing as Pastor.

Right, but the scripture does not make the distinction between a woman who is head of the household and a woman who is a pastor. The distinction is only made for purposes of discussing specifically female pastors in this thread. The only reason I spoke about women in other contexts like such as the household is that Curse's scripture applies to women in general.

Incidentally, I never said a man should be head of the household but rather that he should have the final say in decisions, insofar that I think it is impossible for two people to make a single decision together. It's entirely possible that two people can be in agreement about a decision, however, as in a marriage proposal. They are similar concepts but also quite different.

Matt Pniewski

I've realized that one parent as head of household just plain doesn't work. Didn't for mine growing up, doesn't now, and probably won't work for any of my relationships. Frankly, I see it as being less than productive to have one person as the head of household. Of course, my dad and my Stepmom run the closest I've seen to a decent household in my life, and that's an equal relationship. Growing up, it was my dad. Recently, it was my mother. Neither of them could do it. My Stepdad is ineffectual.

But my Dad and Stepmom keep things as equals, equal say and responsibility. Which is why I'm glad he married a crazy feminist.

I suppose it depends on the conditions of the relationship and the personalities involved. I'm sorry it didn't work out.

Don't be. I've got plenty of fun stories.


But my point both times was this: What's more important here? Yeah, I convoluted a simple point, but is it more important for the Pastor to be good or is it more important for them to be a male? Same thing as head of household.

Really, it's counter productive to put the man in charge when, quite frankly, a woman can do better in the same position. When do we say "The bible says" and when do we go "Dude, that guy has totally screwed everything up, but at least we have a man instead of a woman!" Do we look for another man, or do we put the more qualified woman in charge.

It just doesn't work to allow gender to determine these things. I'm not speaking as a liberal or as a Christian. I'm just speaking as somebody who thinks this is a huge breech of common sense.  

[Kazydi]

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

Ultimately, however, I think that a husband should make the decisions with regard to the family and with those opinions in mind.

Why?

Because my father did just that and it worked for our family.

I do not see how personal experiences can be used to tell other people how to behave.

Not that I am required to defend my position but that I am willing to point out your error, I direct you to the expressions "To me, ..." and "I think ...", which indicate opinion. If you're implying that I had "[told] other people how to behave" in this case, I have not. The accurate and correct statement for you to have used would have been that I had "[told] other people what I think is the correct course of action".

You have no ability to force your will upon people, so by telling them what to do you can only tell them what you think they should do. I made no mistake here. I simply did not elaborate on what was inherently implied by my statement.

You hate being wrong, don't you? In no way was he instructing anyone to do anything. Besides, aren't you doing the same thing in your rebuttal?

Either way, I do believe that men are are more of the leaders, but I don't think that the women are any less important. It's a teamwork thing. We're supposed to work together. Guys blaze the trail, while the women, keep everyone secure on the way there, in a sense. I'm not quite sure how to put what I'm feeling in writing, but just know that both of us are needed. Both of us are crucial in spreading God's Word.