John MacArthur on Women Preachers and SBC Law Amendment | Dr Bill Roach 

After I became a Christian, I thought nothing of it. It wasn't until I was given a book by Joyce Meyer that I realized NO, women should not be preaching or pastoring a church. Now it seems when women are accepted as pastors, it's not long that anything and everything is okay in the church. If the SBC changes their minds about this, our little Baptist Church will be out!

Thank you brother! The only reason why female preachers and female pastorship is controversial is feminist movement. It is not that the Bible is not clear about that. God bless you!

Clear teaching from the Word of God...thank you

“Properly and in order.” Amen.

Amen!

Another big points at 11 min that churches differ on is does man choose God or does God choose man. 😳. Way more important than baptism

I would say the bible still teaches biblical patriarchy. I see this as the falling away. You either believe the bible or you don't.

No to women pastors.

Thanks!

Question**** why does a man take off his hat to pray?? ..... If a woman is not to have her's covered to pray???

My only criticism is that you didn't bring up 1 Timothy 2. But you did a great job explaining 1 Corinthians 14.

There are so many confusing church structures now. There are multi campus models with a main/senior pastor who preaches and the satellite campus' where the members watch the pastor from a screen. These church's have campus "pastors" who do not preach but just do announcements and function like a campus manager. It seems somewhere along the line we started overusing the title pastor so modern churches with multi-site campuses have a capital "P" pastor who preaches, and just about every worker in the church is a small "p" pastor. Worship pastor, lighting pastor, children's pastor, video pastor etc etc. That fives women the title but not the function although i am not sure if the church really is just incrementally going in that direction. The employees love that title even though they do not function as a preacher. Once you let the genie out of the bottle the churches have a hard time re-titling their female employees without generating controversy which they hate. Modern churches like this facade of happiness and everyone is getting along and do not like to rock the boat. Mike Winger has a great 40hr series on the topic and gets way down in the weeds. I think Mike Winger supports calling everyone who is not preaching a Deacon but not that many churches use deacon. I think most people also interpret the Romans 16:1-2 use of deacon as servant (for Phoebe). Winger felt that since elders wife's have no qualification but deacons wives do have qualifications (1 Tim 3:11) he thinks that may be due to them doing deacon functions. He comes down on "soft Complementarian" where he is ok with female teaching as long as they do not do it with an Pastor/elder authority. He gives some examples like a female apologist speaking at a conference or maybe a guest at a church they do not work at. I appreciate the hard work he put into the series to bring this discussion forward as his series have millions of views. I will not attend a church with female lead pastors who preach. Question - If you are in a church with male preachers but also has male and female (small "p") pastors who do not preach, do you stay and use your talents and grit your teeth or do you move on and let church know why you are leaving? fyi in my area, all the churches in driving distance overuse "pastor" and apply the title to many types of non-preaching church employees.

I hope you can answer this question. Is it ok to select a women author for a men's study or a mix study group?

❤

I have had great distress in my own congregation in trying to point out that women preaching is fundamentally and biblically wrong. One member was about to leave the "group" because of me and I was called out as responsible for her reaction. At this point I don't consider myself as member of this or any congregation in my area. They have no desire to conform with the bible and this relates with a low view of the authority of God's word. This low view is the standard view of evangelicalism here.

We need divorce chauvinism from complementarianism. That's the issue.

One of the few things I agree with JMac on. Unfortunately, he is a self admitted Calvinist teaching: Only an arbitrary pre-chosen elect will irresistibly turn to Christ, consequently all others can't. So I dare not even recommend a booklet on prayer from him, for fear that an under-discipled believer might succumb to his false gospel of Calvinism.

The Bible clearly prohibits women from ministry.

The soft complementarianism of James Merritt, JD Greear etc. is absolutely not a destination but rather just a bridge to egalitarianism. You put women in roles that will make it emotionally irresistible to people to go ahead and recognize women as eligible to be pastors without distinction. Allowing these people to undermine the Southern Baptist stance on this will undermine the overall stance on authority of the scripture because it will put in people's minds that the scripture is susceptible to being questioned and overruled on the basis of contemporary attitudes. It will hasten the triumph of gay-affirming religion in the SBC. Aside from this effect upon people's attitudes about the Bible, the women pastors themselves are not going to be median SBC female members, but they will will be highly prone to be feminists of a substantially more left-wing outlook then is normal in the SBC. It is perfectly clear in turn that political progressivism leads to theological liberalism. There is no way that women pastors is not going to lead to the SBC becoming an apostate liberal denomination like the PCUSA. Some may argue for, rather than the SBC endorsing women pastors, having the denomination simply take a laissez-faire attitude; allow the dissidents to stay in the denomination. But recent church history shows that when heresy at the fringes of a denomination is tolerated, the inexorable outcome is that heresy will become prevalent and even mandatory.

Dr. Roach, It seems that this video would have proved better as concise short-form content. It saddens many in the SBC that just because the issue is true, it does not make it a primary issue. Even Mike Law considers this a secondary issue. It seems that your commentary moves what is secondary at the most and tertiary in the least up to the level of primary, virtue signaling and saying my way not only is God's way but that it is compulsory for cooperation. Southern Baptists had for over 100 years not placed these conditions and only a monetary condition to work to promote the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If you are telling me that you cannot work with a neighboring church on a mission effort to reach the lost because they don't align on this issue, then you care more about cleanliness and less about the lost. Your video failed to bring any consideration for the fallout from this amendment and any unintended consequences. Would honestly love more content on this as the SBC Convention approaches.

When and if your a born again believer you are Ambassadors of Jesus Christ. If God tells me to teach, I'm gonna teach, if He tells me to witness I'm gonna witness. We are to listen to God's voice not man. And those who have ears (heart) will hear Him. He is our Shepherd.

Amen!