Church of God General Assembly, Nashville 2016
“….all ordained ministers 25 years of age and older and ordained bishops…”
Rationale: “This motion seeks to affirm the value of a new generation of ministers by giving them voice and vote in shaping the future mission, vision, and core values of the Church of God. It also expands the International General Council to include ordained women, whose anointed insights and spiritual discernment are much needed in addressing the growing complexity of fulfilling the Great Commission….”
HISTORICAL NOTES:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY AGENDA 2012: ITEM 15 WOMEN IN MINISTRY
One item that was not fully resolved at the 2012 General Assembly Agenda in Orlando was WOMEN in MINISTRY. Item 15 expressed a general desire to permit women to be fully represented in all roles within the church. It was NOT a gender issue, but rather a leadership one – an issue of ministry and of responsibility, if you will. Coming from a long line of women ministers in the churches, one cannot be impartial to the issues involved in this item. As Bishop Nick Park wrote:
The removal of these outdated and senseless gender restrictions, in my opinion, makes such obvious good sense that there’s not much more I can say on the subject. Needless to say, I will be voting for this item, even though it comes about 100 years too late!
COMMENTS ON THE 2014 CHURCH OF GOD AGENDA BY DON WARRINGTON (The Missing Item from the Agenda)
Dr. Tony Richie: 75th CHURCH OF GOD INTERNATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY: HISTORIC ENCOUNTERS…
Another concern of mine is that the entire process of the Church of God International General Assembly is male dominated. One sister, a credentialed minister attending General Assembly for the first time this session, told me that she’d never before fully realized the significance of the current Church of God policy of not allowing women to be bishops. Something about seeing all of those men bunched together down on the General Council floor with the women scattered around the edges on the other side of the short curtained barrier drives home the dividing wall between us. Having Rev. Barnett preach to the General Assembly probably speaks volumes about the fervent desire of the Church of God to find ways to include female ministers at the highest levels. I wholeheartedly applaud this action. However, such measures must not minimize our continuing commitment to free our women to serve without imposing unfair restrictions…. An authentically Pentecostal ecclesiology affirms the divine calling and employs the spiritual gifts of all the members of the body, and the whole body is better off because of it.
Dr. Kenneth J. Archer: A Pentecostal egalitarian view of humanity does not diminish, dilute, or demote maleness or femaleness but instead properly elevates both to mutual dignity, honor and love through mutual submission and service as individual followers of Jesus properly image the Social Trinity relationally in community.
Dr. Donald Dayton: “This church hosted the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention of 1848 (which first called for women’s suffrage), participated in the ordination of Congregationalist Antoinette Brown, the first woman to be ordained (founder Luther Lee preached the ordination sermon) and originally founded Wheaton College-though in recent years the church has been identified as a “holiness church” and since then has been incorporated into the fundamentalist/evangelical tradition.”
Lee Theology Department Statement on… Women in Ministry | “Statement on Women in Ministry”
“The Department of Theology supports the full participation of women in all vocations of the church. We affirm that God the Father incorporates persons into the body of his Son Jesus Christ and pours out the Holy Spirit upon them without discriminating according to their sex. We affirm that God calls women to every activity, office, and level of ordination in the church. We both renounce any restrictions on the ministry of women based solely on their sex and commit ourselves to the removal of any such restrictions. Finally, we strive to provide a learning atmosphere in which women can find their voices and discern, understand, and pursue their many indispensable vocations.”
Christopher Stephenson Before I begin, I want to stress that the following comments are my own. I make no attempt to speak on behalf of any of my departmental colleagues. The Statement speaks for the Department; I now speak only for myself. Thank you to everyone who read the statement. That is the sole reason that I shared it–for it to be read. I see little value in crafting a statement like this if no one knows that it exists. The Statement was adopted by the Department of Theology–not any other department(s), not the entire School of Religion, not Lee as an institution. If the Statement frustrates you, please do not spread your frustration around to others unnecessarily. : ) It is a Department of Theology Statement. This is a theological issue. The Statement neither mentions by name nor is directed to any single denomination or church tradition, including the Church of God. To assume that the statement relates only to the Church of God is to assume that the Church of God is the only church tradition with which the Department is concerned. That would be to assume too much. Such restrictions are undesirable in every church tradition in which they exist, not only the Church of God. At the same time, I choose to believe that the leaders of the Church of God value the insights of the professional theologians at one of its premier academic institutions. While the Statement is not directed to these leaders, I hope that it can somehow be of benefit to them. Perhaps it could encourage those who agree with it and give those who do not agree something to consider further. The Statement speaks about the Department, its stance on this issue, and its commitment to try to bring change. It neither makes demands of anyone else nor calls upon anyone else to do anything nor criticizes anyone for anything done or not done on this front to this point. To the extent that the Statement does apply to the Church of God–for it is one of the churches with such restrictions–the Statement is not a stance against the Church of God but a stance *from within it.* There are twelve full-time members of the Department. By my count:
–Ten regularly attend a local Church of God congregation–I am one of them. –Nine are members of the Church of God–I am one of them. –Six are credentialed Church of God ministers–I am one of them. (And my monthly reports are up to date. : ) –Five are ordained bishops–I am one of them. (There would be one more if she were eligible!) –One is a career missionary, married to a Church of God national/regional overseer.
“Renounce”–to reject something publicly–is the right word. I publicly reject the idea that these restrictions are adequate or desirable. With respect to the Church of God, the primary restriction in question is a matter of *polity,* not *doctrine.* It does not occur in the Declaration of Faith, Doctrinal Commitments, or Practical Commitments, but rather in the descriptions of the ministerial rank “ordained bishop.”
The International Executive Council, International General Council, and International General Assembly “renounce” aspects of Church of God polity every two years by proposing changes to it. Implicit in the mere creation of an agenda for the International General Council is a rejection of the idea that the polity is already perfect and that revisions do not need to be considered. The Statement renounces restrictions, not persons. It says nothing about the intellect, character, or sincerity of persons who support such restrictions. It refers only to the restrictions themselves.
The Statement does not indicate a refusal to abide by the restrictions as long as they are in place–as if anyone had the ability to “ordain women as bishops anyway” in spite of the restrictions. Of course, I abide by the restrictions. Yet, in the same breath I immediately say that I want the restrictions to disappear completely because they are not funded by what I consider to be the best theological insights on the matter. Remember from the 2014 General Assembly that I am required only to “adhere to” not necessarily “agree with” all matters of polity. : )
Anyone who might feel that renouncing this small set of restrictions amounts to renouncing the Church of God as a movement per se has a significantly narrower view than my own of the essence and significance of the Church of God, which could not possibly be exhausted by any single matter of polity such as this. I do not assume that my own experiences are universal, but most of the young people among the best and brightest in the Church of God with whom I have contact see these kinds of restrictions as an incentive to leave rather than an incentive to stay. Just one more reason that I want the restrictions to disappear yesterday.
As far as the timing of the Statement, the Department finalized it about a month ago. I did not investigate whether it had been publicized elsewhere before I shared it here, but I waited to share it here as long as I did because, frankly, I did not want to prompt some of the kinds of responses in the thread during Lent. I know that this is a contentious issue for some, and there are better ways to prepare to celebrate the Paschal Mystery than contention. I recall no mention whatsoever in our departmental conversations of any attempt to influence anything that may or may not be discussed at the 2016 General Assembly. As for myself, I submitted a formal request for the removal of the ordained bishop restriction to be placed on the 2016 agenda, in response to the International Executive Council’s invitation to make such requests. I hope that we have the opportunity to consider it in Nashville.
While I was typing most of these words, my older daughter (age four) awoke from sleep and came to where I was typing because she had not seen me all day due to my teaching responsibilities. As I hugged her tightly, I cried and prayed that she would have the strength to be faithful to the Church of God and that she would not grow up in a church that keeps her at arm’s length as it currently does her mother, who, along with me, has found the strength to be faithful to the Church of God anyway. I am a fifth-generation member of the Church of God, and I want both of my daughters to be the sixth.
Again, thank you to everyone who took the time to read the Statement. Please remember that this post is my own thoughts. To the extent that they pertain to the Church of God, they are grounded in my commitment to the Church of God. The fact that I want to see change is a sign of my engagement with and concern for the Church of God. I believe that critical commitment is more valuable than apathy or complacency. The Church of God and the Department of Theology need each other, and both are better together than they could ever be if they were apart.
Dr. Skip Jenkins Thanks to everyone who has read the Department of Theology’s (DoT) recently posted statement on women in ministry; I have appreciated reading the responses on the board.
That statement, which was crafted over a month ago during a department meeting wherein all full-time, ranked faculty of the DoT were present, was a revised version of a statement the DoT had adopted back in the fall of 2007. This revision was approved by the DoT on March 03, 2016—without dissenting voice—and it comes at the END of an intentional, three semester engagement with this issue among ourselves, our students and leaders in the Church of God, Lee’s sponsoring denomination. It started with a three part symposium on Women and Authority in the Church back in the Fall 2014. The first symposium investigated the role of women in the New Testament church, the church after the apostles and the medieval church. What we found was an ebb and flow within the history of the church regarding the ministerial freedom or restriction placed on women; that is, in some periods and in some places there were women who had official positions like men. In other places, not so much. The second symposium considered the question for the contemporary church, but was not limited to the Church of God because (a) the student constituency of Lee University spans multiple denominations and (b) the students being trained in the School of Religion are not solely from the Church of God (take, for instance, our Pentecostal students from the Assemblies of God: their denomination has NO restrictions on the ordination of women nor the positions they might hold in the denomination. In fact, a woman sits on the committee that is similar to the COG’s Council of 18!) Our third symposium that semester was specific to the Church of God, and the panel that night consisted of two denominational leaders and a full professor from the COG’s Pentecostal Theological Seminary.
I think that I need to spend a moment to talk about that third symposium because the panel spoke about the ebb and flow of women’s authority, position and credentialing in the COG. A series of decisions were made from 1909-1925 that increasingly circumscribed the role of women, delimiting their functions within the church, specifically in governance AND “sacerdotal” functions (that is, performance of baptisms, communion, marriages, etc). Prior to 1925 women were allowed to do water baptisms, communion, marriages, etc—even if it was not normative—but the 1925 General Assembly (GA) decided to remove “sacerdotal rights” from women’s ministerial duties. This decision was attributed to the influence of A.J. Tomlinson, who was considered the “pastor of the church” as the general overseer. Around 1940, the COG changed the wording of its levels of credentialing so that only men could be called “licensed ministers,” and only licensed and ordained ministers could perform the sacerdotal functions. It remained this way until 1990, when women were permitted to attain the level of “licensed minister,” and thus once again were authorized by the church to perform the ordinances and officiate weddings, but they could not become an “ordained minister.” What did not come out in that symposium or the Q&A following it was this: a) 1992, women were granted the right to speak on the GA floor; (b) 2000, a call was made “from the field” to alter the wording of the credentials such that the second level, licensed minister, became an ordained minister and the third level became ordained bishop, this latter level women were not permitted to attain; (c) 2006, women began to be officially appointed as missionaries rather than simply acting under the “covering” of a husband; (d) 2010, the GA decided women could serve on Pastor’s Councils, which since the 1960s had been limited to only males; (e) and finally, in 2011, Emma Sue Web was appointed as a district overseer in California by the state overseer!
Now, back to the main narrative of the DoT’s three semester engagement on this issue. In November 2015, the SOR invited Sandra Kay Williams to be the keynote speaker at our Homecoming Alum breakfast. In that speech, she told her story (and those of other women she knows) of ministerial marginalization because of womanhood, and she pleaded for a revisiting of the polity that restricts women to full credentialing in the COG. Not 30 minutes later, after a lengthy Skype interview with Margaret Gaines, a long-time COG missionary and this year’s recipient of the SOR’s Alum of the Year award, I—along with over 100 other people—watched as the General Overseer of the COG publicly apologized to Margaret for the way the denomination treated her (and at times hampered her ability to minister). It was a righteous moment, and one that I will never forget—it was when I knew that this denomination was being led by a holy person, Mark Williams.
The construction of the statement was placed on the DoT’s agenda in January 2016, but was tabled until March because of other, institutional responsibilities that took the entirety of the January and February meetings. The delay in its posting to the DoT’s FB page was a miscommunication between me and the department secretary—there was no other reason for its tardiness, nor was there some strategic plan for its posting “on that day.” Now, some responses to the statement see us as “drawing battle lines,” or “being at odds” with the denomination, or even as “renouncing the bible.” Truthfully, those kinds of posts surprised me. First, while I admit that the word “renounce” may sound harsh, we meant it in the strictest, grammatical sense of the word, namely, to reject something publicly. Since statements of the type we posted are often formulated with concise wording, we chose a word (renounce) that could be elongated to this idea: “we announce in public that the DoT rejects, as biblically or theologically necessary, the restrictions still placed on women’s credentialing or judicial functions.” Chris Thomas, an ordained bishop in the COG and a professor at the Pentecostal Theological Seminary, published an essay in the book, Toward a facebook of Preaching (chp 6), in which he explored the biblical texts surrounding this topic, determining that restrictions on women are not biblically necessary. My own colleague in the DoT wrote an essay in that same book wherein she argued that being “Made in the Image of God (Gen 1:26-27),” coupled with Acts 2 and the Day of Pentecost, provide a theological justification for women preachers and the removal of all credentialing restrictions. Thus, our “renouncing” of restrictions is not a rejection of the bible nor its authority in our lives or its foundational place in our theology.
Secondly, we posted a “statement,” not a declaration or a resolution. So, rather than imagine ourselves as “drawing battle lines” for war, we were engaging in a conversation. Think about this: a true conversation between people only occurs when a series of statements are made that illicit response and dialogue. The DoT is talking, we are discussing; we publicized this to invite more conversation partners and to move our talking outside the “ivory tower” of the academic environment. What surprised me the most was the supposition from some respondents that GA decisions are inviolable and unalterable, and therefore undiscussable. But this is not the impression that I get when I read the Minutes of the first few GAs. They did not see themselves as setting up laws that were timelessly binding because only Christ was the Law Giver who had such authority. Rather, they gathered to interpret and apply scriptures in their current, historical setting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In fact, a motto of those first GAs was, “Walk in the Light as Light is shed on our path.” Early on, Tomlinson would say things like, “This is what we have done in the past, now let’s see if there is new light from the Holy Spirit for our present.” The idea was this: it is the church’s responsibility to continually return to its judicial or governing decisions to make sure that the Holy Spirit did not have something “new” to say to the Body.
Thirdly, insofar as the above is correct, the DoT does not see itself as “at odds” with the denomination. Our loyalty to the COG does not prohibit us from discussing issues. The faculty of the DoT are indeed loyal to the COG—the Statement is not a stance against the Church of God but a stance from within it. There are twelve full-time members of the Department, ten of whom regularly attend a local Church of God congregation—I am one of them. Nine are members of the Church of God—I am one of them. Six are credentialed Church of God ministers (I am not one of those because the TN board required my wife to be interviewed before I could be credentialed, but she refused to be interviewed because she was not going to subject herself to interrogation by a board that would not ordain her). Five are ordained bishops, and one of us is a career missionary, married to a Church of God national/regional overseer. We love this church, and we work to train students to minister within this church we so dearly love.
I am a fourth generation COG Pentecostal. My great-grandMOTHER was a founding member and first pastor of the Sandy Valley COG in Ohio (she was removed from the position when a man wanted the job, even though the church wanted her to remain pastor!). My great-grandfather was one of 13 charter members of the Canton Temple COG, in which church I was dedicated as a baby by Raymond Crowley—former General Overseer of the COG, and by which church I was sent off into ministry in April 1990. I went to Duke Divinity school after graduating Lee in 1994. At Duke I was forced to intellectually defend my Pentecostal heritage and practice (at least one time receiving a lower grade because of my refusal to recant my belief in the Holy Spirit’s continuing empowerment and present revelation to the church and Christians). And now I spend my days teaching, defending and modeling my Pentecostal spirituality and theology to hundreds of men and women in my classes each week at Lee University. And my DoT colleagues are no different than me, even if their personal stories are not identical to mine. Further, our disagreement over this polity issue is certainly not the same as a rejection of the theological commitments contained in the COG’s declaration of faith, which each of us subscribe to. In fact, 2.5 years ago the DoT sponsored a special service on Baptism in the Spirit where over 90 students came forward for prayer to receive the baptism (view the service athttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE7oNKaVR98 ), 2 years ago we had a special healing service (view the service at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWKCsjXHcP0 ), last semester we had a special service on the end times (view at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJoU25AazOE ); plus, in the summer of 2015 we had a special service dedicated to sanctification and the pursuit of holiness, and this semester we had a breakfast and prayer service for those seeking spiritual gifts (over 50 students were present, at least half of them were NOT COG).
We are a faithful bunch who love the Lord, are dedicated to prayer and searching the scriptures, and who seek the guidance and power of the Holy Spirit each day for ourselves, our students and our denomination. Come and meet us; let us meet you, and let’s see what the Holy Spirit will do among us!
“This issue suffers from the lack of “”reasoned feedback”” of the Church of God media.
This is an agenda item up for discussion by the general council and passed on to the general assembly for vote.
Yet the church is seemingly told how to vote rather than be informed about the voting process. Thus three elements are being resisted: the mind of the people, the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the instruction of scripture.”
I agree it’s the people in power want it so they push it! I think there being threatened by someone.
“””if you have a dog in this fight..”” is a law they should acknowledge.
The administrative people need to lead the church not drive the church.”
That is an awesome truth
I learned that in military
Some of these comments are without any foundation atr patently absurd
Ok prove it. Prove me wrong.
All anyone who disagrees gets is disrespectful talk see if this changes
An item up for discussion not dictated.
Nope it’s been PUSHED for last 4 gc from above.
I have been told by several Ordained Bishops that if it is passed at the GA that women can be Ordained Bishops, they are resigning from the CoG and turning in their ministerial credentials.
62% was against last time why is it still here!!!
the resistance of the old school church is wore down to nearly nothing.
Does any of this have anything to do with what ‘bishop’ refers to in the Bible? Isn’t a pastor of a local church a ‘bishop’ in the Biblical sense? Why all the hubub over the title and not the substance?
No has to do with certain women wanting to have their way over the majority wants. They just want to be as the most high
Lol
Resign away. What a ridiculous argument. Grown men misusing scripture because women threaten them.
“women threatening men to misuse scripture is more like it!!!
Men are scared of the women!”
It has been said that a nation is a group of people united by a common misconception about their racial/ethnic/historic origins….the same could be said about those insisting God has imbued the male gender with the latent mantle of leadership in the church, and calling that “biblical”…it’s “biblical” in that the Bible is being misused in the endeavor, but it’s still a misconception; still a fundamental misunderstanding of why Christ came, lived, died, was raised from the dead, ascended, and gave us all gifts..and it wasn’t for the sake of men and women being ensconced in the patriarchy you envision, Charles! “There is therefore now no male or female in Christ!” We haven’t even begun in any meaningful way to explore what that means, but I cringe at the thought of what awaits those that have thwarted the ministry gifts of God over a person’s genitalia!
Gregory Aslan Chopoorian I have heard this ad nausium , we did not write the bible but Paul did. Take it up with him. I am tired of the threats from their side about holding women down! “But I cringe at the thought of what awaits those that have thwarted the ministry gifts..” Really!?! The ONLY thing women are restricted from is Senior Church Leadership. They are Pastors,Evangilist, Prophets, praise leaders, teachers! Anything, they Sit on state boards which by the was most men who are not Bishops don’t get to do. In NO WAY AT ALL are women restricted from ministry gifts and it’s a lie and disingenuous to claim otherwise. Why are women wanting what GOD said they should not do? Unless it’s that reason because God said don’t do it? Sounds familiar a little bit. The sanctimonious derision that the so called egalitarian side has for anyone who would DARE disagree is wrong on so many levels. I have read same chapters in the Greek and Hebrew and I know what it says. 62% shot it down and still keeps being brought up again and again! Do you really think that will persuade me to go against what God said? In that case you all have the misconceptions.
The entire political systems of denominational hierarchy tends to thwart ministries of both male and female who try to please those over them in man-made structures. I find little biblical support for the way the American Church (including the COG) has evolved. This is a problem with essentially all denominations over time.
Charles Page are you a Baptist as stated on your FB profile?
“Women being Ordained Bishops is not on the agenda for GA 2016. I read through the agenda many times and it is not there. Where are you getting this faulty information.
There is on the agenda voting for Ordained ministers (used to be called Licensed ministers and definitely not Ordained Bishops) to be part of the General Council at GA.”
“It is not that the men are threatened.
I just want a lady to explain how they can discount the verses on male headship and bishops yet still hold firm to other scriptures by the same author.
Seems double minded to me.”
Oh we are just plain wrong according to posters who put words in people’s mouths.ðŸ˜
Wade T. Foster, the CoG has many women preachers who are ordained (used to be known as Licensed Minister). The GA agenda, as it has been presented in the past several times, but always voted down, will then permit women to be part of the General Council at the G.A. since they are presently Ordained ministers although not classified as an Ordained Bishop. That is why this forum addresses the issue of women possibly being a part of the General Council, again as I have stated, was voted down in past Assemblies.
It’s a means to an end
If this is all it takes to bring us down, we are not as strong as I thought we were.
We could just vote it down again. I would.
Then they will put it back next time AGAIN
LINK will be posted in a bit. What is your answer?
I personally know several women than can preach better than most men in this group in general (no one in particular meant). And pls dont post that video that has been circulated all over the internet lately
Mary preached the resurrection to the lead apostles of her day http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/did-you-know-that-pentecostals-were-the-leaders/
Of course they can. If they are denied a pulpit, they will preach anyhow, wherever they are.
Is there a difference between preaching and pastoring in this debate?
Yes, ever read Acts 2:17?
I’m sorry but when you said holy bible (kjv) are you implying that’s the only version that’s holy or that you want your scriptures from the kjv
Preach, yes. Pastor, no.
Interesting but not Biblical. Man is head of the house but not head of the church. Only Christ is the head of the church. The problem with the church today is namely when men begin thinking they are the head of the church and not Christ Alan N Carla Smith Charles Page Ricky Grimsley
“Scripturally we pull a Grimsley Ephesians 5:23 â–º
For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church…”
Have you ever heard about Phebe?
Charles Page You are a living testimony that we have come to a point in history where the men-leaders within the Pentecostal traditions have long lost the answers.Am I right or am I right?
So therefore there are still squabbles among men and women in the Pentecostal churches who still believe that women cannot preach.
We’ve long establish women can preach. The question argued is if they should be allowed to. But who are we to say if GOD has called a woman to preach, gave her a message and the anointing?
Some things seem to have lost their context these days.
Exactly! Are we talking Bible or feelings here? Let’s do theology. King James was gay. What does he has to say about women preachers?
It is important to look at the whole counsel of Scripture in balance, and not to allow two passages to stand on their own, to tell us the opposite of what God did throughout the rest of history, with women.
How come people that feel women shouldnt preach dont use the same scriptures to say their head must always be covered and they cant speak at all?
Peter Ciple If by his enemies you mean his ex boyfriend whom he kicked out – sure
Here is the LINK: GOD SAID TO BE FISHERS OF MEN. https://www.facebook.com/334435539991308/photos/a.334437783324417.58385.334435539991308/818763874891803/?type=3&theater
Anne of Denmark? Just look at her – love dearly – ya right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_of_Denmark
Let’s focus on the question about women preaching. 🙂 We will have a next topic about King James. Fair?
All the royals were inbred and ugly.
Great discussion ya’ll but some of us are in church about this time and haveto listen to our pastor preaching. She is the best preacher in this county 🙂
Lol nice
Yap arguing theology with people who skipped church on Wed night Charles
Michele davenport can really preach. Im gonna give charles her number for a revival.
Charles goes to a 6-member men-only church
The AC is out in my church. I bet my bible study may only have 6 tonight.
Wonder how they did revivals back in the day without any AC
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 has traditionally been linked with 1 Timothy 2:8-15 by leaders in the Church to systematically deny women the right to utilize their God-given gifts in ministry.
“Seriously though.
I grew up strict Mennonite. Most of you have heard my story.
We wore long dresses, large head coverings, and never trimmed ONE hair!
And God called me to preach. Out of a family born and bred in this women-oppressive culture/church… I alone am called to preach. Out of seven sisters, I alone. Out of the 175+ offspring of my mother, I alone have been called to preach.
it has cost me everything, to obey the call of my God.
How much have you left, to obey God?”
There’s also this one thing – there are women out there with more theological degrees than half of the preacher men in this group taken together. And they will not keep quote just because …
Preach yes, pastor no. 🙂
Tell it to pastor Maria Woodworth-Etter, pastor Aimee Semple McPherson and pastor Kathryn Kuhlman… How did they do it?
“Phebe had her own church. Romans 16:1-3 (KJV)
1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:
2 That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also.”
“And how’s it possible for a soman to guide a man? I thought they shouldn’t.
I don’t think women can’t know as much as men- just the role of a leader is made for men.”
Historical evidence reveals that both men and women were active participants in all areas of ministry in the early Christian church. Scripture, the external writings of church leaders, historical and archeological records, and church artifacts testify that women served as ministers, deacons, church leaders, apostles and even bishops
“God does not change.
God used women to be prophetesses and worship leaders of the congregation of the Lord in the Old Testament.
Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, etc.
The word of the Lord came to women, just as it did to men.
We even have inspired scripture given through women, by the Holy Ghost, in both the New and Old Testaments.
Priscilla was used by God to teach Apollos (a young male preacher) The Way more perfectly.
And Phebe was a diakonos of the church.
That’s the same word used to describe male ministers.
Funny thing though. When the KJV translators came to the portion describing Phebe, those prejudiced men allowed their “”druthers”” to color their choice of English words. She was given a more lowly designation–only a “”servant.””
The problematic passages used to cow women into silence are not definitive, by any means. The whole balance of Scripture weighs AGAINST a literal application of those passages!
Because God does not change!”
“I challenge anyone to show me which passage of the Old Testament was being referenced, in I Cor 14:34.
“”As also saith the law”” ought to be easy to verify. so, let’s have it.”
Many have misinterpreted some scriptures about women keeping silent in the church.
Some men have denied women the opportunity to utilize the full extent of their gifts for God’s glory. This denial is based on a few highly problematic passages in Scripture, such as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:12.
“And for hundreds of years.
Just as the Protestant church dared to question the teachings of the Catholic church on infant baptism and Apostolic succession, even so, today’s generation is free to dare to question the self-perpetuation teachings of the male-dominated Protestant church.
And we are finding massive intellectual holes in their arguments. They just don’t hold up under careful exegetical study.”
Well since I am already illogical and unscriptural for trying to dialogue through an opposing view, what happens with Genesis 3:16?
Please show me how that is a commandment to women to remain silent in the assembly?
“Word-for-word, it says thusly:
1Co 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches; for it is not permitted to them to speak: but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
If you look carefully at Genesis 3:16, it isn’t even a commandment to women to obey their husbands. No more than it was a commandment in verses 17-19, for men to obey ANY of those things spoken to them!
None of the curse is a command. All it is, is a warning.
Prediction, not prescription.”
Corey Forsyth have you wondered about the other side of you argument – Which one creates a homosexual (uni/one sex) culture? – The place where only men preach or the place where both women and men minister to raise and mature a new spiritual generation?
I see lots of “shall” and “will” in Genesis 3:16-19. That seems more like a command than an option.
Lots has happened to the family since Genesis 3:16-19
“Corey Forsyth, just in case you are wondering what law Paul was referencing in I Corinthians 14:34, He was quoting what became later known as the Mishnah, once it was written down. In Paul’s time, it was only in oral form, as the traditions of the Pharisees.
You see, God never commanded women to be treated the way the Pharisees treated them. God never said for women to be silent in the assembly. Nor did He ever say they had to absolutely obey their husbands. (After all, wasn’t Abigail seen as a godly women, after disobeying her husband, and calling him a fool?)
The Pharisees invented the women’s court–a place distant from even the outer court that God prescribed for both genders together.
The Pharisees invented rules allowing men to divorce their wives for speaking so loudly her voice was heard outside the house.
The Mishnah says these words:
“”A woman’s voice is a filthy thing, and should never be heard in public.””
I’ve read the Mishnah. It’s there.
It wasn’t written down yet, in Paul’s day.
But he was a student of Gamaliel, and was a Pharisee of the Pharisees. He knew this law, and this was what he was referencing.
Does that mean Paul was telling the Corinthian church to obey the Mishnah?
NO.
What we must understand, is that I Corinthians is an answer to a letter full of questions the church had written to Paul. We don’t have that original letter. All we have is the letter containing Paul’s answers.
And it takes a lot of insight and study of the Greek to decipher which are Paul’s words, and which are the questions.
To be continued…”
Yes in the last days your sons and daughters shall prophecies !!
I say yes too.
“In 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (KJV), these women were women who were married and had no knowledge of the scriptures. They were asked not to SPEAK during the sermon while the preacher was preaching. Likewise men who didn’t know the scriptures were to keep quiet and listen. The congregation go to church to hear the Word of God and learn. The scripture here did not say ALL women. And since the man was head of the home under Jesus he is supposed to know the scripture but as you can see some of you men don’t have a clue. IN THIS SCRIPTURE “”SPEAKING”” IS NOT “”PREACHING””. You cannot be carrying on your own conversation in church while the preaching is going on. The women who would have been preaching would not be the ones who are referred to here. HUSBANDS LET YOUR WIVES LISTEN AND LEARN IF THEY DO NOT KNOW. NOT WOMEN SHUT YOUR MOUTH AND STAY QUIET BECAUSE YOU ARE A WOMAN AND YOU CAN’T READ OR WRITE. This scripture is for all who want to go and disrupt the service. It also applies to children and men. When you go in church there is a way that it is done. You sit down and listen, not open your big mouth and disrupt and behave disorderly – for all – men, women and children.
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (KJV)
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”
“About 1 Timothy 2:8-15 (KJV), there was a woman who was promoting false teaching in the church in Ephesus. Paul wants to stop this, and so he commands that this particular woman is to learn quietly, and is not permitted to teach. This is a disciplinary action against a woman who, like the “Jezebel†mentioned in Revelation 2:20, was causing problems by false teaching. Paul had no intention of it being applied to other women, just the one causing turmoil in the church.
1 Timothy 2:8-15 (KJV)
8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
Point well made Robert Borders
Yes lady’s can preach if god calls her two
I tell you. Street preachers go through some things. God protect them in the name of Jesus. Street Preacher attacked by angry woman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PbpHsG-yp4
Women can preach just can’t be elders
Anger can be fueled oppression.
Feminism is the result of fueled oppression
Feminism is just like any other cause in America. People have real grievances and then once the movement gains enough momentum its gets co-opted by the government and radicalized to destroy family and morality.
I wouldn’t call this feminism. I call it a woman being a servant of God.
Such is the case
Ordained Minister but not Bishop
God’s church doesn’t allow eldership for women
“I don’t get into the intricate details of this subject. I understand the emotion behind it as well as the educated arguments. I didn’t write the doctrine I just abide by those over me in the Lord.
I have a book somewhere that suggests Paul used the same title for Phoebe as he did for himself concerning his title. Maybe do a study…”
We don’t really call people elder in Pentecostal church. I never really heard it. If they are aged then even if they are pastor or minister they are an elder.
It is like saying only elders go to Heaven as in the JW church. So that would mean no women would be in Heaven.
Does getting older makes you an elder – biblically speaking?
“The CoG has 3 levels.
Exhorted
Ordained Minister
Ordained Bishop
As of now women may go through steps 1 and 2.
They can minister in most situations and hold certain positions. One of those positions is pastor.”
I would like to see a statement from the COG as to why they feel our interpretation of the passages that discuss this is correct.
Pastor is a Hebrew masculine word there is absolutely no feminine to it please stop the theological spin to bring your ideas and prove the lets be exegetical. It was the woman who deceived the man.
Rick Jr Wadholm, any chance of getting your thoughts?😃
So why does no one advocate that women not even speak…? Is that also not part of the scriptures?
“1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
You said Eve did what to Adam?
My Bible sets the stage as Eve was deceived and Adam just deliberately chose to fall.”
“To use this verse as a basis to put forth a teaching that women are in general more easily deceived, get into a whole host of problems…
1. If women are more easily deceived than men, then why would it be okay for them to teach each other, in the absence of men?
Wouldn’t that just be asking for massive deception among the women in the church?
2. If women are more easily deceived, and yet are allowed to teach children in the absence of men, then you have the next generation of men being trained to think wrongly, by their mothers.
3. If women are more easily deceived than men, and are allowed to teach each other and to teach children, but not men… why is that okay? Why is okay for women and children to be taught by deceived people?
Are the souls of women and children of less value than the souls of grown males?
None of this makes any sense.
Therefore, I have arrived at the conclusion that Paul wasn’t talking AT ALL about whether women are more easily deceived than men.
He was correcting a specific false teaching that was coming into the church. A pagan/Jewish cult of Artemis, which taught the moral and spiritual superiority of women over men.
And it is historically verifiable that there were many cults of Artemis, all of which asserted female spiritual superiority, and all of which urged women to grasp for power over men.”
“Mary Ellen Nissley
I was referring to MichaelGreen’s comment.
But, your (1)
That is why the aged women are supposed to teach and train the younger women
(2) that is why the Father’s were instructed to teach their children when they rise up and lay down, in their houses and their fields, etc.
– just because there is an empty space does not mean we just fill it. We wait and give ourselves to God in prayer for His mind on the topic – since scripture can never contridict itself.
(3) is a restatement of points 1&2 so it has been dealt with.
The sad thing is that you said, “”I have arrived at the conclusion””.
Regardless of your other lines of reasoning you can’t get around that Eve was deceived after she had an understanding of what God had said and what He expected. She usurped authority which is also what we are discussing in the NT.
I will for the sake of this conversation (for now) accept your historical (facts) as you stated.
I will ask in light of that if you know what God meant when He stated to Eve in Genesis 3:16
“”Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.””.
Thy desire shall be to thy husband?.
It was not what most people think, it is far deeper.
And then the last portion, “”Thy husband, and he shall rule over thee””…
So from Genesis to Paul all under God’s direction we are Biblically (OT and NT) back to what the women (wife) of the house foes is supposed to be under the direction and supervision of the husband. In the church, under the direction of the husband, Pastor, and church leadership. If the husbands, pastors, and church leadership does not do their part, guess who answers for it before God?”
God’s plan
“1) if women are easily deceived, then NO woman should be teaching another woman. Aged or otherwise. (Age does not automatically make a woman wise. I care for the aged. And I have known some very very foolish aged women.)
I repeat. If the souls of women and children matter, then deceived people should not be teaching them!
2) Seriously, is that why you think Fathers are supposed to teach their children? Because their mothers are so deceived?
Why allow women to teach kids Sunday School classes?
If women are more easily deceived than men, they should ONLY be allowed to teach in the presence of men, so the men could correct them, if necessary!
3) Number 3 is NOT a reiteration of numbers 1 and 2!
Number 3 is the ROOT of the problem with numbers 1 and 2! Deal with the question, sir.
Are the souls of women and children of less value than mature male souls? Because that is the ONLY reason the church would allow deceived people to take charge of teaching them behind closed doors, away from the undeceived males!”
“Michael Green,
Look carefully at what God said to Adam and to Eve:
Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow THOU SHALT bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and HE SHALL rule over thee.
Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow SHALT THOU eat of it all the days of thy life;
Gen 3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and THOU SHALT eat the herb of the field;
Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face SHALT THOU eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust SHALT THOU return.
To Eve:
A. Multiplied sorrow.
B. Multiplied conception.
C. Childbirth sorrow
D.Desire toward husband, coupled with “”he shall rule over thee.””
To Adam:
A. Cursed ground. (lifted after the Flood. Gen 8:21)
B. Eating in sorrow.
C. Thorns and thistles.
D. Eating the herb of the field.
E. Eating bread with sweat on face.
F. Death.
Now. some simple observations:
1) Is ANYTHING addressed to Adam, a command?
Look at the language used: “”THOU SHALT””
2) Which things said to Eve did God address to her using the words, “”Thou shalt””? Give birth in pain. This is the only one.
Yet, do you not allow painkillers in childbirth?
3) That ONE double phrase “”thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee, is the ONLY part of this WHOLE PASSAGE interpreted as a command toward Eve!
All the THOU SHALTS addressed directly to Adam, are not interpreted as commands at all!
I don’t hear of any Christians enforcing growing thistle and thorn gardens… nor having an accountability program with the men, to make sure they never eat, unless they work up a sweat first… Nor have I ever heard of a church rule enforcing veganism on the men of the church, exclusive of the women.
(***********If you interpret that which is said to Eve, as a command, then you must be consistent with how you interpret what is said to Adam. It’s a simple rule of Bible interpretation. Be consistent within a passage.*******)
4) Yet, look at the language used: “”He shall””. If this was a command, and God was saying ADAM SHALL (as a command) rule over Eve, then God would have been speaking this toward ADAM, not toward Eve!
The fact that “”he shall”” is addressed to Eve, and not to Adam, is indicative that this was a warning of what Adam would be doing, because of his sinfulness.
5) This is further borne forth by looking at the next chapter. PRECISELY IDENTICAL Hebrew wording is found in the last line of Genesis 4:7. .
and it was a warning to Cain.: A very solemn warning.
That if Cain didn’t stop his direction, he would do harm to Abel, despite the fact that Abel loved him.
Cain would rise up to dominate his brother, and would hurt him horribly. Even to the point of killing him.
******* Conclusion:
Look at the entire passage. If all the other things listed are nothing but predictions of sad things that would happen as a result of the fall, then the only consistent and logical interpretation of “”he shall rule over thee”” is the same. It is only a prediction of hurtful male domination, despite the fact that women love their husbands.
The whole passage is predicting, not prescribing.”
Sorry to many variables I could do the same and justify rape. The Bible is not for private interpretation to make it fit your desire.
Show me the rules for a woman pastor in the Bible.
Church structure, government, and actual practice of ministry will be totally changed in the coming years.
“Mary Ellen Nissley
Read 2 Tim 2:3, 4, & 5 and then I will continue the thought of women teaching women.
(Women that have been proven and observed as Spiritually mature and well established in the Faith).
I hope (rubbing my chin) that not all women are deceived… is that what you are presenting?
I hope we have some qualified women of God.
I think fathers are supposed to teach their children because
Deut 6 &7 (verse 2 enlightens this).
Also. I find it very symbolic that the last thing said in the Old Testament is one of the main points for the forerunner of the Christ (Jesus)
Malachi 4:6
And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
Luke 1:17
And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.
That is why my sister.
Because it is BiBlE.
I have no issue with women teaching as long as they are scriptural and in line with the vision of the Church, Pastor, and leadership. (As long as it is done biblically).
The Bible is our first and only standard.
So you want me to deal with the question…
Ok
Copy of your number 3
3. If women are more easily deceived than men, and are allowed to teach each other and to teach children, but not men… why is that okay? Why is okay for women and children to be taught by deceived people?
Are the souls of women and children of less value than the souls of grown males?
3a) if women are more easily deceived… allowed to teach each other… children.. but not men,,,
Are all women deceived?
Are all incompetent? Those that are not deceived, and are well grounded are told to teach the younger women/wives. [This was answered in my previous post on #1, so it is a reiteration]
3b) why is it OK for women and children to be taught by deceived people. …
[This was answered by me on my previous post under #2]
Again I ask you, are all the women in church teaching that you know deceived? There is something wrong if you are sticking to this thought with deceived women. (I would have to examine my teachers and leaders if this was going on around me – said in jest).
3c). Are the souls of women and children of less value than the souls of grown males?……
You are the one saying their teachers are deceived (you paint the picture that all of their teachers are corrupted). All souls are equal to God. Yet He had recorded for us His guidelines for His ministry and house. I am just wise enough to know the God sees everything and He in the light and weight of eternity said it is to be as He stated it. So are we trying to be like Mrs Eve back in Eden?
Let’s examine a couple of things…
1 Corinthians 14:34-35
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Remain silent. …. learn at home. (The ladies of the day were asking questions of their husbands during service and causing disturbances),, so then don’t let them speak but stay orderly and peaceable (quiet). In this chapter Paul also addresses anyone else that is in error in other ways causing confusion in the Church. (So it is not just the women).
Also
1 Timothy 2:11-12
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Notice the same thought here except for it does not explicitly say, “”in the church”” but does mention silence, subjection, and usurping authority over the man (man better translated as the husband).
So in my opinion as long as she has been taught the Bible accurately (especially by her husband), and as long as she is not running beyond her husband’s authority or “”boundaries””. She then is not overriding her husband.
Now I will ask again,
Are all women deceived in your opinion?
Do we have any biblically qualified women leaders.
(By the way,,,, my wife is a very anointed Ordained Minister in the Church of God Cleveland, TN).”
Who is the spiritual leader in your house?
Read the Bible there are positions for woman in the church.
Not to have authority over a man in the church.
Who was Timothy addressing? And is your opinion greater than God’s plan?
If it is God’s plan that Adam was supposed to rule over Eve, in Genesis 3:16, then it must also be God’s plan for Adam to raise gardens of thistles and thorns… to only ever eat bread if his face was sweaty… and to only ever eat plants.
Solomon had 300 wives does this mean I can have 300 wives too. What your doing is called rationalization of your desire and trying to get scripture to agree.
Look up exegesis
I THINK you mean, SHOULD women preach. Obviously they CAN because there is strong evidence that they DO – I guess you are asking if it’s right for them to do so? Question 2 is a non-question, r a highly loaded question to say the least. Why (KJV)? Why not Greek and Hebrew texts?
They can and they should and they must…
They CAN and DO often better than many men!
Preaching w/o scriptural warrant
“Charles Page how come women shouldnt preach but they are allowed to speak?1 Corinthians 14:34 KJVS
[34] Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.”
What about men who are wolves in sheep’s clothing who have their own “church” but are satan worshipers fooling the people and hurting the women because they did not know. The men had them silenced even in their home. Some women are still treated like garbage and therefore because they do not know better they end up doing foolish things because the man is controlling them because they are stupid, ignorant men who do not know who Jesus is. What a terrible thing! This “man claiming to be a pastor” having “authority” over a “church” needs deliverance. The South African pastor who fed congregation with snakes; Beaten up and Church burnt down https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCpP1I7JdPc
Because the women are still depressed. This is not what God wants at all. They can’t ask questions at home even so they do not know better. Who is going to teach them? Where are the women of God here? What is wrong with this man? He is a liar. Where have you seen anything like this? I think the woman has a medical condition of fibroids or not sure if she was really pregnant. But for God’s sake what is this from a pastor of authority? Obinim praying for a pregnant woman Full Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psNSAwD6bRQ
Yes women can preach. The Churches that says women to keep silent. Their women doesn’t keep silent. They teach , sing. They are not silent. When I use to work at the hospital as nurse aid. A nurse told me that the Bible said women wasn’t suppose to preach. I told her. It’s isn’t in there. Her husband was a pastor of a church. She said let me get a Bible. I knew where she was going in the Bible. So I got a Bible in one of the rooms. They use to keep Bible in hospital rooms. I opened the Bible to the same Scripture. It said I suffer not a women to teach nor to absorb authority over a man. I ash her where was preach. I said the Bible said teach. I said you have women Sunday School teachers at your Church. And the Bible says teach. And besides. When you are ask to preach. You are not taking authority over the men. They ask. They give permission. It also says if you want to know anything ask your husband at home. Well I don’t have to ask what he said if I’m there and hear the same message. You have to go back to Jewish times. When women sit in one place and the men in another. I’ve been told that Jewish history. That was calling out to men. What’s going on , causing disturbance. Paul said the women keep silent. Ask your husband at home. Some says business meetings. What. Ever it was in Joel in the Old Testament And in the Book of acts also. In the last days. He would pour out Sprit ion all flesh. And your sons and your daughters will prophecy. That means four telling. Or preaching.
“Some need to do more studying Gods word !! Everyone has opinions and likes and dislikes !
But you need to believe the word of Almighty God !! Gods does the calling of both he uses whosoever his wills .Becareful what you say !!!”
I hope and pray that does not happen. Im am grateful for the women in this great Church yet I do not favor women becoming Bishop.No were do we find he word where God wanted women over men in the Church. May God bless this church
The title of this piece is a little misleading. The item on the GA agenda doesnt call for making women bishops but for allowing ordained ministers the right to vote in General Council whether male or female. They would still not be authorized to hold positions open only to bishops.
The COG needs to quit kicking this to the next GA and make a complete and positive statement allowing women the full standing of Bishop. If not the COG will be marginalized (or continued to be) by future generations who have embraced a restorative Kingdom of God theology. We need a united and passionate clarion call from our leaders to prophetically speak vision to our GA on this issue. This is not a committee issue or a religion department statement (no disrespect intended). This is the time(Nashville) for a Joshua-like vision that we will “take this land” voice! Pentecostals led racial integration in its birth (and lost it) — lets finlalize this issue once and for all in our movement. I say — YES. Lets lead and not play catch up to the Spirit.
Actually I must disagree. The collection of the two items is equally divisive. We are presented with an item that attempts to do several things all together without our prior consent. This is not Christ’s way of doing things.
Where is the original text that the motion author claims to have submitted? Why was it not presented to us for a prior discussion? Why are we given something as divisive as this out of the box motion and expected just to vote over it without any questions?
Actually Tony, when you put two and two together is all and the same thing. As usual, the motion is not seeking to establish or empower but to mislead the voter to believe one thing while opening the door for another. Does it matter if women are bishops when in the next motion proposes we do away with the bishop title?
I wonder how was this preposterousity conceived in the mind of the motion proposer? So in the first motion we accept that women and younger minister could vote on the floor without being bishops. Then, in the next motion we remove the bishops titles – to put it simply these two motions give women and young minister the highest ordination level but not before removing it from the already ordained bishops. Hooray I say unto thee – this is the way we do things…
There will be lots on unhappy ministers because of these divisive ways to present a motion. I too wonder where’s the original text and who so masterfully crafted the final text of the motion after proposed by the original poster?
#ourcog Ordaining Women Bishops to the Ministry: Discussion on Church … https://t.co/g0xOvs9zLC #nash16 … https://t.co/XfZzN6b1Ah
#ourcog Ordaining Women Bishops to the Ministry: Discussion on Church … https://t.co/g0xOvs9zLC #nash16 … https://t.co/Lq8rVJsCik
What this ITEM is NOT?
It is not a gender issue, but clearly a leadership one
It is not a theological issue – even conservative theologians agree with women ministers in the church
It is not a liberal issue – historically, some of our most conservative ministers have been women
It is not a cultural issue – although many would like to take it there
It is an issue of choice – the right the make choice and the right to give choice to others.
With all this in mind, should ITEM 15 be revisited in 2016?
How do you think it will benefit the church worldwide?
@edstetzer Limiting women in ministry and young ministers is a primary failure in many denominations today https://t.co/QHalphMFFM
RT @nash16_com: @edstetzer Limiting women in ministry and young ministers is a primary failure in many denominations today https://t.co/QHa…
#ourcog Ordaining Women Bishops to the Ministry: Discussion on Church … https://t.co/g0xOvsrbac #nash16 … https://t.co/0lFbLiFHeG
#ourcog Ordaining Women Bishops to the Ministry: Discussion on Church … https://t.co/g0xOvsrbac #nash16 … https://t.co/HUFuGu69RN
#ourcog Ordaining Women Bishops to the Ministry: Discussion on Church … https://t.co/g0xOvsrbac #nash16 … https://t.co/W2gvuJqhXi