Can Women Pastor ?

[Sister Alvear]

Sister Dana..this might interest you...

Thus there is support for “authenteo” as meaning “to proclaim oneself the author or originator of something.” If we apply this meaning of “authenteo” to 1 Timothy 2:12, we would have “I do not allow a woman to teach nor to represent herself as the originator or source of man.” This then might be a prohibition against a woman teaching a mythology similar to that of the Gnostics in which Eve predated Adam and was his creator. Certain Gnostic myths also included the notion that Adam, who had been deluded, was liberated by the Gnosis of his more enlightened spouse. (Catherine Clark Kroeger, "The Meaning of 'Authenteo'", from "Women, Authority & The Bible" by Alvera Mickelsen, ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986, pp. 229-232).

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

Sister Dana..this might interest you...

Thus there is support for “authenteo” as meaning “to proclaim oneself the author or originator of something.” If we apply this meaning of “authenteo” to 1 Timothy 2:12, we would have “I do not allow a woman to teach nor to represent herself as the originator or source of man.” This then might be a prohibition against a woman teaching a mythology similar to that of the Gnostics in which Eve predated Adam and was his creator. Certain Gnostic myths also included the notion that Adam, who had been deluded, was liberated by the Gnosis of his more enlightened spouse. (Catherine Clark Kroeger, "The Meaning of 'Authenteo'", from "Women, Authority & The Bible" by Alvera Mickelsen, ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986, pp. 229-232).

Ho-Hum, I suppose 1000 translators missed something that ya'll see?!?!? Isn't this written by a woman above?? Kinda' makes you go "Hmmmmmmm"!

[Jeffrey]

RDP, who in the NT "expounded from the Scriptures" regularly at gatherings? Where do you get that from? The first 30-60 years of Christianity was without copied "scripture" in fact. Eventually, some of the communities read Paul's writings.

The delineation of Elders, Deacons, Bishops and elders did not even have specified functions until the 2nd Century, when a church hierarchy was formed. Earlier mentions of "elders" and "overseers" were informal leadership roles, not quite developed until the 2nd Century. The Didache gives us some good background on this.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

RDP, who in the NT "expounded from the Scriptures" regularly at gatherings? Where do you get that from? The first 30-60 years of Christianity was without copied "scripture" in fact. Eventually, some of the communities read Paul's writings.

Paul expounded from the OT Scriptures, who wrote 2/3 of the NT, see the last few verses of Acts. Besides, isn't that what we do today in teaching the Church?

The delineation of Elders, Deacons, Bishops and elders did not even have specified functions until the 2nd Century, when a church hierarchy was formed. Earlier mentions of "elders" and "overseers" were informal leadership roles, not quite developed until the 2nd Century. The Didache gives us some good background on this.

The Didache is a highly debateable document, as you surely know. Besides, I'm appealling to Scripture, not history.

Here's your favorite comment of mine...."Gotta' go!" Try to look in later.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

The Didache is a highly debateable document, as you surely know. Besides, I'm appealling to Scripture, not history.

Here's your favorite comment of mine...."Gotta' go!" Try to look in later.

Well actually it was controversial with adding it to the canon (which it at first was added -- RCC still has it added to its collection of Apostolic Fathers.

"Appealing to scripture, not history" is what pains me the most. Historical context frames enlightens us as to what was going on when the Text was written, and therefore helping us to further understand the author's intent, purpose and meaning. For the life of me, I don't understand how you throw out historical evidence and claim to be the "champion of scripture." This is why I pester you about your so-called "Hermeneutic" claims.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Well actually it was controversial with adding it to the canon (which it at first was added -- RCC still has it added to its collection of Apostolic Fathers.

Pls. don't tell me that you're one of those who infer that this was written by the Apostles themselves!! It was thrown out of the canon for goooooooood reason!

"Appealing to scripture, not history" is what pains me the most. Historical context frames enlightens us as to what was going on when the Text was written, and therefore helping us to further understand the author's intent, purpose and meaning. For the life of me, I don't understand how you throw out historical evidence and claim to be the "champion of scripture." This is why I pester you about your so-called "Hermeneutic" claims.

"Pester" away, makes no difference to me. When you constantly deride well known terms such as "epistemology," etc., it only reveals your own lack of studiousness.

And for about the umpteenth time now, I'll say that I'm well aware of the historical/cultural aspect of Scripture. Problem is, you'll get a myriad of opinions as to what that is, since 1st century records are so scanty. I shy away from those who render the plainess of a verse such as I Tim. 2:11-15....making the Word of God of no effect. That's all I'm saying.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

"Pester" away, makes no difference to me. When you constantly deride well known terms such as "epistemology," etc., it only reveals your own lack of studiousness.

And for about the umpteenth time now, I'll say that I'm well aware of the historical/cultural aspect of Scripture. Problem is, you'll get a myriad of opinions as to what that is, since 1st century records are so scanty. I shy away from those who render the plainess of a verse such as I Tim. 2:11-15....making the Word of God of no effect. That's all I'm saying.

Where do I begin?

I didn't "deride" the word "epistemology," I chuckled at YOU. You amuse me in a weird way. (And I hope you weren't connecting "epistemology" to "epistles" either lol)

On the one hand, you recognize the historical/aspect of Scripture, and on the other you seem to think you can interpret a Text without it. Say what you mean and mean what you say.

[Jeffrey]

Paul expounded from the OT Scriptures, who wrote 2/3 of the NT, see the last few verses of Acts. Besides, isn't that what we do today in teaching the Church?

There wasn't a finalized OT canon or Scripture at the time. Certain scrolls of books may have been available, but likely not. Much of the OT quotes from NT passages are out of oral tradition.

Your second statement -- what we do today in Church is irrelevant to understanding the author's meaning, and what they did then in church. Since you've used the word "eisegesis" so many times in this thread, I'll go ahead and give the word correct application: what we do today does not read into the Text of what they did then.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

There wasn't a finalized OT canon or Scripture at the time. Certain scrolls of books may have been available, but likely not. Much of the OT quotes from NT passages are out of oral tradition.

Well you're arguing against what the text actaully says again. Paul argued "from the Law and prophets,".....what in the world can't you see about that?

Your second statement -- what we do today in Church is irrelevant to understanding the author's meaning, and what they did then in church. Since you've used the word "eisegesis" so many times in this thread, I'll go ahead and give the word correct application: what we do today does not read into the Text of what they did then.

Well said, now then, I'm still waiting on your biblical example of a NT "woman preacher":__________?

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Well said, now then, I'm still waiting on your biblical example of a NT "woman preacher":__________?

Well, conveniently, you ignore the whole message of what I said, and zone in on your canned responses (same way you treat the Text).

You keep wanting to inject your own definition as to what preaching is, by saying "it's when one expounds from the Text." That's not accurate in the least.