SBC Votes For Women Pastors!? 

Thank you for being honest and taking the time to correct that! God bless!

Exactly!

Really. It's sad.

And the SNC has decided to look the other way?

Stick it out buddy. Go where God calls you, Stay where God calls you. May He bless you with much fruit in that needful place.

"Waiting On God" Andrew Murray...addresses being in a dry place...yea, I know he isn't SBC, but then neither are the NT writers

Bless you Sister.

Which leads to women pastors. If they can find a way to get around what the Bible says, they can find a way to allow woman pastors.

ALL SCRIPTURE IS INSPIRED BY GOD. GOD NEVER CHANGES. SO IF YOU CHANGE SCRIPTURE IN ANY WAY YOU ARE SINNING AGAINST GOD. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. GOD WILL JUDGE. I BELIEVE IN ALL THE BIBLE IS TRUE AND CAN’T BE WRONG IN ANY WAY BECAUSE GOD IS ALL TRUTH AND TO CHANGE IT YOUR SAYING GOD IS A LIAR. I WOULDN’T WANT TO BE ANYONE OF THOSE WHO DO. DEPART FROM ME I NEVER KNEW YOU IS NOT WHAT I WOULD WANT TO HEAR AS THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT OF THE FAITH IN CHRIST BY CHANGING SCRIPTURE TO PLEASE SINFUL PEOPLE.

They are pro hibted from ruling at ANY level as you indicate

It's inherent. One cannot humbly submit to the text and yet presume to take authority God forbids

This is why feminism is destroying our churches. People are afraid to speak out against women who refuse to submit to male leadership

It's always about submission. Men and women sin when they don't submit- in the case of ladies, it just happens to be more visible. This is perhaps the most visible version of this.

Christianity doesn't change. Churches change. Most people who attend church are doing so out of tradition than for spiritual reasons

It's a great falling away.

“The” …. Better yet “His”church remains faithful to the Lord God, His Spirit, & Word. Why do we need to shrine anything? Is not the Word of God sufficient enough? Does God need the voting of man to clarify His own Word? Choose whom ye shall serve

Apparently leftist women think God’s way is wrong.

@@JC-Genesis15.6if you are implying the Catholic Church, then no, it doesn’t. If you mean the church in the sense of true believers, then yes

God has His own who have not bowed the knee to Baal.

Graphic, sad, true depiction.

that's always the vote, ultimately. yep.

Precisely this.

💯

💯

Good point. But don’t underestimate the ability of effete “men” to do the wrong thing either.

@@IamDoogy Agreed. It’s all connected.

If women are prohibited to be deacons, why would God approve of women being pastors? That's like saying women can't be an assistant manager of a company but they can be the CEO.

Because there's no such thing, there is only male pastors. Whatever you are receiving over children is not a pastoral position. And if we are family integrated the question vanishes because you don't have age segregation

@@LintCollectionwomen aren’t prohibited from being deacons though. See: Phoebe. Again, Deacon isn’t a position that lords authority over a man, it just means a specific kind of servant.

Women and children shouldn't have separate pastors. Everyone should be under the authority of the church elders. When you separate people by sex or age, you are sending the message to believers that women and children are unable to receive the truth of the bible unless there is a woman teaching them.

@@nerychristian I don’t think anyone’s debating that. That’s mostly a response to who women *can* preach and teach and usurp authority of.

Not many wise women who are causing division in the church. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Exactly. All funds are fungible!

2. Why is this a question? Lack of imagination. They do not need to give public testimony by didactic exhortation of mixed assembly

We should stop using the term pastor. Biblical churches had elders. Elders were the ones who taught in the churches. By using the word Pastor, we create the idea that churches are supposed to be led by one man. It was never supposed to be that way.

@@nerychristian i think the range of meaning of those words is too broad for the distinction you're making to be valid. Better to emphasize the plurality without going too far and confusing people with dubious semantics

That's because the Pastor is a made up position. The way the church is described in the new testament, the local churches were led by the elders. And the deacons were in a support role. Pastors were created by men who wanted to have complete control over the congregation. People are afraid to speak up or question a man who calls himself a pastor. The leadership of the church was meant to be more democratic, with the congregation appointing men who had the qualities of an elder. One man should never have so much power over a congregation

@@nerychristian Respectfully, you are speaking in ignorance. Not that you are saying true things which you would think differently about if you had more context, but that you have spoken falsehood and don't know what Tor m you're talking about at all

All are equally Christians. That doesn't mean women can be pastors.

More than 0% of them yes

My b thought you meant the electoral college

Because the education system is already feminized. Those children that the women are teaching will one day become the leaders of the church. Children need to hear teaching from strong male leaders. Otherwise they will grow soft. Children should actually be sitting in the congregation listening to the pastor. Children aren't stupid. We need to stop treating children as if they can't understand something unless they can see it in a Veggie Tale format

Nobody’s debating that.

Why do women have to be the ones to teach children? If a man can teach his children in the home, why can't he do so in the church?

It's okay but don't call a woman or a man who leads that ministry a pastor

There should not be a separate "children's ministry", that is Rick Warren pragmatism

lol, this is why seminaries are a waste of money, any "real" Greek student knows that the meaning of the word deacon in the original language means: a waiter, a servant, or a minister, one who can teach. So which definition should we apply? Since we know that Paul says specifically that women are not permitted to teach or have any authority over a man (1 Tim2) and that in 1 Tim 3:8-13 that men are to be deacons, the most likely meaning applied to Phoebe is “servant.” Let’s look at the words Paul uses when referring to a deacon. In 1 Tim 3:8 8Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. 9They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. 11Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. 12Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. 13For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus. Romans 16:1 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant/deacon of the church in Cenchrea. Some translations will say servant, some deacons, but why the confusion as it is plain to see as Paul says men are to be deacons in 1 Tim 3:8? 1 Tim 3:8 Greek = Deacon διάκονοι (diakonoi) Romans 16:1 Greek = Servant διάκονον (diakonon) used also in Romans 15:8 “For I tell you that Christ became a "servant" to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs, and in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy.” If we replaced servant with deacon in 15:8 passage obviously it would make no sense. So why do many want Phoebe to be translated into a deacon? We can clearly see in 1 Tim 3:8 and Romans 16:1 not only are the Greek words different but also hold to their own separate usages. Anytime there is an appointment as to elect in order to fill a need it is always men, as exemplified in Acts 6:2. 2And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. 3Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. 4But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5And what they said pleased the whole gathering, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. 6These they set before the apostles, and they prayed and laid their hands on them. The apostles had every opportunity to choose women. Are they Christian bigots? Obviously not. Anytime an “appointment” is made in the context of choosing it is always men.

They were NOT Paul's requirements. Paul said it was the commandment of God(1 Cor. 14:37)! So yes, the Bible DOES forbid female pastors. Phoebe was an _assistant_ in the congregation, not a minister herself. That is why Paul commends her for being a _helper_ in Rom. 16:2. You prattle about how much you supposedly know about the Greek, but nothing about the language remotely implies that she was ever a pastor.

@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Nope. Phebe was a diakonos, the exact same word that Paul uses for the requirements for deacons in 1 Timothy chapter 3. Deacons, according to chapter 3 have the exact same requirements as Paul gives for pastors/bishops/elders earlier in that chapter. To claim otherwise is to ignore the plain sense, commonly accepted meaning of the Greek. That was the argument, if you read the whole case I laid out instead of jumping on a reactionary, emotional outburst defending your church tradition over textual authenticity. Since you didn't read it the first time, the rest of the argument is that Paul, in Ephesians 4:11, gives a list of 5 ministry positions or ranks that God gave the church: Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist, Preacher and Teacher. Paul affirmed in Romans 16:3 that a woman named Junia was an apostle, and affirmed that women were allowed to prophesy in the worship service at Corinth (that makes them prophetesses, the second position in the church). In all of these cases, Paul could have condemned the churches for their errors, but instead he refused to do that, choosing in the case of Junia to commend her and Phebe in their service to the Lord. Now, if Paul has no problem with a female apostle, prophetess or deaconess, and two of those are, along with the position of Pastor, given by God to the church, and an Apostle in the Bible ranks higher than a Pastor, why would he rule out women pastors? Especially since he gives the same requirements for a pastor and a deacon. Furthermore, you completely skipped over the elect lady who John addressed his 2nd epistle to who, it has been argued, is the female pastor of the church he calls her children.

@@theeternalsbeliever1779 By the way, what you did was a straw man argument as I never even implied that she was a pastor, only that she was recognized as a deacon in the church at Cenchrea, and that the position of deacon has the same requirements as that of a pastor which you claim prohibit a woman from serving in that position. My point in addressing the Greek was that it doesn't of necessity require a man to fulfill the requirements as a mixed gender audience or candidate pool would be addressed in the masculine by custom.

@@heymichaelc Nice attempt at being insulting, but again, the Greek in Timothy chapter 3 where Paul gives the requirements for the pastor and the deacon, do not of necessity forbid women from being pastors as the custom of the day in the Koine Greek was to address a mixed gender audience or, in this case, a mixed gender candidate field using the masculine gender. As to your extended tome on the use of the word servant, so what? Many Greek (and Hebrew) words have multiple meanings. Whether the translation translates the word to servant or transliterates it to deacon is a decision that is often determined by the theological framework of the translator, just as the King James version tranliterates baptidzmo into baptize rather than translating it as immersion to avoid conflicts with the Anglican Church practice of infant baptism. So, citing what is essentially a subjective decision as proof of your point, doesn't really settle the case.

Send a check to their church

?

You don't like that?

Way it should be!

Yes, they would...if you were talking about murdering unborn babies. It's just game to find a way to do what they want to do.

Agreed. From what we are seeing outside the church, that seems to be the next step within the SBC.

If the Bible does not have teeth no guard dog will help. I was a member of a non-SBC church. Clear statements in the constitution were ignored not due to ignorance but a refusal to look into the scriptures. They became opinions. What is happening at the SBC is sorrowful.