The black church as we know it is the only institution in the black community that is still the last one to do away with segregation and seperation, in the Black church we do not let our women in the pulpit i must be honest a women can preach to me she can't pastor me. I have not been converted on that issue yet.

Views: 167

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Dr. Gadsden, I have to make a point.
When or if I'm wrong, I have no problem in admiting and learning from my experience. My Point: Men have to learn to be humble.....And Women must learn to be humble as well. What I notice is that there is a lot of growth we have on our part and there is a lot of healing that needs to happen with the Women of God. You have been hurt beyond ny ability to make it right but not God's. I see your point and understand your views but have you begun to experience your healing. Learning how to love past the hurt and truly forgive without holding on to that pain. You can never release the pain when you hold on the not only the memory but the person as well. Forgive them, even if they don't change.

From the beginning of this wonderful post, I have maintained that no one should ever separate you from God purpose for your life. But sometimes it the validatation factor which causes us to seek the approval or the desire to show those who we felt were not in our corner that we are who we are. Let me remind you about how the bible tells us of disciple who "went back and walked with him no more" John 6:66.

Even as a young male minister, i have experienced my troubles as well, however I know our troubles are never equal but I had to learn how give attention to those things which are for God's good and let the other stuff go. Once I let go, if I ran into that person again, I could turn the other cheek knowing that their spirit has no power over me.

My prayer is that we all reach beyond our own expectations on our way to God's expectations. That we continue to grow in Christ and in the Favor of our God. THat we overcome ever obstacle, walk by faith, in the power and annointing of our Father, who loves us all.

Conitnue to be strong.
Rev. Moore,

I have never been hurt by male or female preachers (Pastors). My father is a Baptist Pastor, uncles and aunts are Pastors from different denominations as well as my baby brother whom has given me support beyond the norm.

Please do not get confuse by my responses to this post. I am a Minister of the Word of God, whom seek the truth and not myths. I have seen hurt among other women preachers and a lot of healing.

As I minister to the body of Christ, I must rightly divide the Word of truth. Before I give any information, I seek out references on all scripture that, I study and seek God for clarity and understanding.

Many might refuse to allow me to teach or preach at their churches because of my knowledge and insight. But that is their fault and insecurities which I refuse to fight. The way I teach and preach scares many because of their inability to do what the Word of God say, "STUDY AND SHOW THYSELF APPROVED". MANY (preachers) DEAL WITH THE SURFACE AND NOT THE WHOLE TRUTH.

We (Ministers of the Gospel) must remember, we must teach and not scream at the people because we will be judge by God harder than the lay people. Because He expects us to guide them with the Word which was given to us.
Please Rev. Moore do not take this the wrong way but my knowledge and the explanations on subject matters should not scare anyone whom God has called and chosen to spread the Gospel at any cost.

Why is it alright for the men of Gospel to teach and preach while given indepth knowledge while ministering alright? When a women does the same thing, she is label as angry and hurt? When both individuals went to school of the Spirit (God) and Seminary for insight on what thus says the Lord.

Once again, I am not an angry Woman Preacher but a knowledgeable preacher of the Word.
Also, I am not against different styles of preaching. Do what you do as long as the Word of truth gets out. We are to please God not man.
Dr. Gadsden,
When I respond, I respond knowing that others may read and recieve the intent of what was written. I know you response are derived from that which is contained in you already. You keep doing what you are doing and you will help elevate us all.

You don't motivate.
Thanks, my brother!

You are correct , some will think that women whom are educated in the word, spiritually as well academically come off angry but its not us, its God developing us to teach the generation of believers who will follow HIM to gain understand of whom HE is.
1 Corinthians 11:3-16
11:3 But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.
11:4 Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered disgraces his head. 11:5 But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered disgraces her head, for it is one and the same thing as having a shaved head. 11:6 For if a woman will not cover her head; she should cut off her hair. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, she should cover her head. 11:7 For a man should not have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of the man. 11:8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man. 11:9 Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for man. 11:10 For this reason a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11:11 In any case, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 11:12 For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman. But all things come from God. 11:13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 11:14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace for him, 11:15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering. 11:16 If anyone intends to quarrel about this, we have no other practice, nor do the churches of God.

Scripture Interpretation:
1 tn Or “the husband is the head of his wife.” The same Greek words translated “man” and “woman” can mean, as determined by context, “husband” and “wife” respectively. Such an approach is followed by NAB, TEV, NRSV, and NLT (with some variations).
2 sn Paul does not use a word specifying what type of “covering” is meant (veil, hat, etc.). The Greek word he uses here (ἐξουσία exousia; translated symbol of authority) could be (1) a figure of speech that may substitute the result (the right to participate in worship) for the appropriate appearance that makes it possible (the covered head). Or (2) it refers to the outward symbol (having the head covered) as representing the inward attitude the woman is to possess (deference to male leadership in the church).
3 sn Paul does not explain this reference to the angels, and its point is not entirely clear. It seems to reflect an awareness that angels are witnesses to church life (cf. Eph 3:10) and would be particularly sensitive to resistance against God’s created order.
4 sn Paul does not mean nature in the sense of “the natural world” or “Mother Nature.” It denotes “the way things are” because of God’s design.
5 sn No word for veil or head covering occurs in vv. 3-14 (see the note on authority in v. 10). That the hair is regarded by Paul as a covering in v. 15 is not necessarily an argument that the hair is the same as the head covering that he is describing in the earlier verses (esp. v. 10). Throughout this unit of material, Paul points out the similarities of long hair with a head covering. But his doing so seems to suggest that the two are not to be identified with each other. Precisely because they are similar they do not appear to be identical (cf. vv. 5, 6, 7, 10, 13). If head covering = long hair, then what does v. 6 mean (“For if a woman will not cover her head, she should cut off her hair”)? This suggests that the covering is not the same as the hair itself.
Understanding “Headship”
By now you are, no doubt, asking the question, “But isn’t the husband the head of the wife?” Keep reading.
The answer to that question hinges on the translation of the Greek word kephale translated “head” in Ephesians 5:23 and 1 Corinthians 11:3, and whether it means “authority over” or “source of life.”

In the New Testament the word “head” (kephale) is used the same way as the word “head” (ro’sh) is in the Old Testament. It stands for “chief” in speaking of Christ as “head of the corner.” Matthew 21:42, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11, Ephesians 2:20, and 1 Peter 2:7 are all referring to Psalm 118:22, “The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone.” To understand that verse one must understand the significance of the “chief cornerstone” of a building when the Psalmist penned those words.

In ancient times a huge stone was used as the headstone or cornerstone to give support to the entire building. The walls of the building were built in such a way that they wrapped around that chief cornerstone, giving the building the support that it needed. Christ is just that kind of support to the Church, binding its members together.

Ephesians 4:15, 16 says, But speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects unto Him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by that which every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body to the building up of itself in love.

Colossians 1:16-18 reminds us,
For in Him all things were created (He gave life), both in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities - all things have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

There is that chief cornerstone, again, holding things together. Then those verses go on to say that even as He is the One who holds everything else together, “He is also head of the body, the Church.” In other words, He gives life to the Church and holds it together. This whole passage is not talking about “authority” but “source of life.”

Colossians 2:18, 19 tells us to

Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head from whom the entire body being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments grow with a growth which is from God.

Ephesians 1:20-23 speaking of Jesus, tells us that God . . . seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come. And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fulness of Him who fills all in all.
But the Church is not there under His feet in this Headship of government, but, rather, is at His side. As Ephesians 2:6 says we are “seated with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus.” Further more, in Revelation 3:21, Jesus didn’t say, “This is My throne; keep away.” He said, “He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.”

All through these passages, Jesus is using the head/body metaphor and is speaking of the “head” as that which gives life to the body. None of these passages refer to Christ’s government. They represent Him as the supporter, nourisher, and builder of the body, not Her ruler. It is in this same way that man is the “head” of the wife.
Recent scholarship has increasingly concluded, after continued study of ancient biblical, secular, and medical writings, that kephale means “source of life” rather than “authority over.”

There are about 180 times in the Old Testament when the Hebrew word ro’sh clearly did mean “ruler,” “commander,” or “leader,” but the Septuagint translators rarely used kephale in translating these portions. They
used other Greek words that more accurately defined “chief” when meaning a person of authority.

Kephale would have been the natural word to use in all the 180 instances if the word had been commonly understood to mean “leader or chief.” Its rare usage indicates that translators knew that kephale did not carry this meaning.10

Furthermore, examination of the seven passages where Paul used kephale in reference to Christ indicates that, when they are read with common Greek meanings of kephale, we see a more exalted Christ than when we read “head” primarily with the meaning of “authority over”.

11 Colossians 2:19 points to Christ as the source of life. Ephesians 4:15, 16 emphasize the unity of head and body and present Christ as the nourisher and source of growth.

Just as Christ personally brings His Church to perfection (Ephesians 4:11-13) by means of the five-fold ministry (apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher) “for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ,” so the husband’s desire should be to build up his wife until she becomes all God intended her to be.

Whom Should We Obey?

Aren’t we supposed to obey Christ? Yes, absolutely, because He is God! He is KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS! But that is not what these verses are talking about. These verses aren’t dealing with His Lordship as One Who should be obeyed, but with the headship of Jesus, the One Who is the “Source of Life” for His Body.

The Greek word that clearly means authority is exousia, not kephale. Christ’s authority over the Church and over the world is established in other passages of Scripture which use this Greek word exousia. Some examples are:
“But in order that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” – then He said to the paralytic, “Rise, take up your bed, and go home” (Matthew 9:6). And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth “ (Matthew 28:18).

For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man (John 5:26, 27).
In all three of these passages, the Greek word used is exousia, a word that does carry a clear meaning of authority.

However, a husband is not King of Kings and should not take Christ’s position as lord of his wife. A woman must answer to her spiritual Master in exactly the same way as a man must. A husband, as the matrimonial head, is a fellow-servant of the King and the one to whom God has given the responsibility of infusing into his wife the fullest life possible.

Jesus, in Matthew 20:25-28, made it very clear how fellow-disciples were to relate to one another. He said the Gentiles exercised authority over one another, but that it was not to be so among His followers. Rather, “whoever would be first let him be your servant.” This is the key to every relationship.

Philippians 2:3-8 admonishes, do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bondservant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Jesus is the perfect example of One Who came to serve mankind, unworthy as we are. The problem with humanity, and even the Body of Christ today, is that there is more interest in having authority over people — that is, being “in charge” — than a desire to live in a position of humility and servanthood.

Each of us, as Christians in general and husbands and wives in particular, so desperately need to follow Jesus’ example and embrace the brokenness of servanthood rather than revel in the selfishness of being served.
Men lets understand gender bias. first we must truly understand the word of God and break traditions that make women second class citizens because of what you have heard and mis interpreted scriptures which support superiority over gender.

Does Male Headship Indicate Authority?
The Old Testament are husbands "placed in the position of `masters,' `owners,' and `lords' over their wives." In the New Testament, in contrast, the Greek word for "head" may mean either "master" or "source," and - although she does not explicitly say this, we must assume it for her argument to be complete - when used to denote the husband's relation to the wife, it means "source."

First, neither Testament teaches that husbands ought to be owners of their wives. The New Testament, however, cites approvingly the fact that "Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord" as exemplary for Christian wives (1 Peter 3:6), whom it exhorts, "be submissive to your own husbands. . . . For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves [with "chaste and respectful behavior"], being submissive to their own husbands" (1 Peter 3:1, 5).

In the new covenant, the hierarchical position of men over women no longer exists, for as Galatians 3:28 states: `There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus' (NIV). One does not represent the other."

To argue that this verse eliminates all legitimate differences in roles between men and women?
Including the fact that a woman is a proper spouse for a man but not for a woman, and a man for a woman but not for a man?

If not, then we must learn what differences it does and does not eliminate from the immediate and larger context. It will not do simply to assert that this verse eliminates differences in authority and submission.

The context of Galatians 3:28 concerns salvation, with union with Christ. This, Paul concludes, comes about in the same way for every one - Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female - namely, by faith (Galatians 3:23-27). Thus one may continue to recognize the differences in roles taught, for instance, in Ephesians 5:22-33 without denying the truth of Galatians 3:28.

"In the Greek," anthropos refers to both male and female, and should be translated as `person.' Perhaps a word like `people' or `humanity' would more accurately communicate the meaning of those passages."

First, only sometimes does anthropos (anthropoi in the plural) refer to both male and female; sometimes it refers only to males. The same is true of the English man (or men) and of equivalent terms in other languages.

Might people or humanity be a better translation of the generic anthropos? Perhaps. Unless, of course, there is something significant about the fact that while anthropos may designate either people in general, inclusive of females, or male human beings specifically (e.g., Matthew 11:8; Luke 7:25, etc.),[5] it would never designate women specifically, and one would never have used gune ("woman") to designate people in general, inclusive of males. It is my contention that this apparently universal phenomenon in human language reflects a truth rooted in creation, fall, and redemption: that because the male First Adam preceded the female in creation and represented the whole human race (male and female) in the fall, and because the male Last Adam represented all His chosen people (male and female) in His death, resurrection, and ascension, male headship, in the sense of both authority and representation, is part of the warp and woof of the reality God intended in creation and is restoring through redemption.

Writers of the Greek New Testament did, after all, have an available option to using anthropos to denote people in general: they could (and sometimes did) use polloí.[6] Might we lose something significant in translation by opting for people instead of men (generic) as the translation for anthropoi where the New Testament uses that i
Sometimes I feel that there are some in the church today that actually believe that they are the only people God has or that He can use. None of us are indespensible. All of us are replaceable. If Men refuse to serve, God is still going to get His will done with or without them. It is a fact that many congregations have survived because of faithful sisters who yeilded to the call of God in their lives when many brothers refused. I've known brothers who you have to coax and pet to get them to do anything in the Church and its work in the world. I've known brothers who were as stubborn as Balaam when it came to thinking and doing God's will. By the way, God used a donkey to "pastor" him and guide him from going to certain destruction. I've been a baptist pastor for 32 years and have had God's Spirit delete from my heart many beliefs that I that I had been taught and adopted for own in regards to the role of women in ministry. The idea that God will not use a woman to lead today, just does'nt make any good common sense to me. Tell that to my 4 siblings who, due to the absensce of a Father, were "pastored" very soundly by a God fearing grandmother and mother. Tell me that a woman in certain circumstances cannot guide a male in becoming a strong, all male, God fearing man and I will tell you about a Grandmother who could be just as feminine as any other woman and yet told me that she was not going to allow me and my brother to grow up soft and effeminate. So she taught us how to box by sitting "indian style" on the floor and sharing chest punches with us. At 13, I thought I carried a pretty good punch but I soon realized after getting up off of my backside after receiving a left jab from my grandmother, what it must feel like to be kicked by a mule. Listen, God did not sit in Heaven and scratch his head wondering who he was going to find to be a father figure for us. He just raised up and used a woman who at 25 contracted polio and lost 75 percent of her eyesight and had to use a crutch and walking stick all of her life. But often she would tell us that she had prayed and asked God to let her stay here long enough to help her daughter raise us. God answered that prayer and when we were all grown, she told us that she was now ready to go home. Brothers can sit back and analyze and argue points of scripture to justify keeping a woman in her "place" at church. And yet watch the same time they will not come and allow themselves to be used by God. God will continue to raise up people, regardless of gender, who will answere the call to service. And so at the risk of continuing to face scornful ridicule of my Baptist bretheren, I will continue to be open to all God called ministers regardless of what camps they are loyal to or whether they speak, pray or prophesy in tounges or whether they are addressed as Sister, Evangelist, Prophet or Prophetess, Reverend or Pastor. Every year each Saturday morning during the month of February, our church hosts a prayer revival. Evangelist Sheila Jackson from Holy Temple COGIC leads this anointed service. Initially some of our members felt that allowing her to minister would force them to become "holiness". After 4 years, all of us have come to realize that it is not the vessel God uses but it is the contents of the vessel. We will not trade the blessings of God that we recieve for the fear of becoming un-baptist because we raise our hands in praise and worship and allow ministers to flow under the unction of the Spirit in whatever biblical way that the Spirit urges them to. Finally, I was present at a funeral service recently. The Pastor of the Baptist church was a seasoned and well respected man. One of the ministers present was a woman from the AME camp. She was a member of the deceased family as well as a Pastor. As we lined up to walk in the church, the host pastor told her, "I generally don't allow women in my pulpit, but I'll make an exception this time." The sister showed more humility than I expected and as she walked in with us, she took a seat in the audience. There was plenty of seats in the pulpit available for her, but she respectfully honored the Pastor's "general" rules concerning what he called "his pulpit". We have to be very careful about developing a warped sense of ownership in the house of the Lord. Yes, be "zealous" for guarding the pulpit from both men and women who don't need to be there. But don't walk around "jealous" of the pulpit, with a pregnant ego that refuses to give birth the "reasonable service" and any and all who have been truly called of God to minister to the people of God. JMS
Rev. Charles Moore thoughts

Dr. Gadsden, you are correct in the reading on Gen 1:28, but that was the relationship before the fall of Man. In Gen 3:16 however, God himself says in the B clause "Your desire shall be for your Husband, and he shall rule over you." Before Sin, She was named Woman - the female compliment to Man, but after Sin she was renamed by Adam, who had the covering and authority over her to call her Eve - meaning to Live and the mother of all living. What are your thoughts on this?

Response to Gen 1:28
Part 1
"Blessing" was a major element of the Lord's creation design (Gen. 1:28).

Genesis 1:28 Then God blessed them, God and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living creature that moves on the earth." (NKJ)
Genesis 2:23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man." (NIV)

The word woman in Hebrew is the feminine form of man (ish = man, ishshah = woman), and Adam called her woman recognizing in her the female version of himself--a human being--his perfect counterpart.

Genesis 1:28 – This is the first commission given to man. It is part of the Adamic covenant. It was given in the first dispensation—the Dispensation of Innocence. It has five points which you should be able to easily see. There is no record of this commission ever being removed. How are we to fulfill this commission today?

God is speaking to both when He commands them to multiply, subdue and have dominion. Dominion is over the creatures, not each other. It is also important to note that subdue, kabash in Hebrew, indicates that there is something in the earth that is hostile and must be conquered.

The biblical verse Genesis 1:28 grants humankind Three Great Blessings:
1. to be "fruitful"
2. to "multiply"
3. to take "dominion"

Christian thinkers are divided on God's motivation. While there is general agreement that the Creation was to "glorify God", there is a sharp split over whether God was lonely and desired companionship or kinship.
• God did not create the universe because he was lonely and needed fellowship
• "God was lonely. Without his partner He is lonely."

Part 2
Genesis 1:28 introduces two other major themes in the Pentateuch. With regard to God's design for man, the ideas of the "earth/land" and "fruitfulness" are seminal issues when it comes to the creation of mankind. Significantly, these three creation themes of "blessing," "land," and "fruitfulness" reappear in God's covenants with Noah (Gen. 9:1), Abraham (Gen. 12:2,3; 13:14-17), and Israel (Num. 6:24-26; Deut. 6:1-3).

Something deadly lies in between the creation design of "blessing, fruitfulness, and land" (Gen. 1:28) and the next mention of these themes in the covenants. It is sin and rebellion. That Moses still reiterates these creation themes even after man's fall is most significant. His message from God is that the Creator intends to re-establish His original design for mankind. He will do this through His gracious covenants.

The surety of God's promises, some still believe that the covenant promise of the land was conditional or that it has already been fulfilled. This school of thought rejects a realized Messianic kingdom on the earth. Though too limited in scope to answer objections against a future Messianic kingdom, the thesis of this article is to show the connection between paradise lost and paradise regained. What was promised to Abraham and his children is nothing less than what was given to Adam and Eve in paradise. God gives the same promises to the spiritual children of Abraham (Rom. 4; Gal. 3).

What mankind lost in Adam's rebellion, God planned to restore through the seed of faithful Abraham. The covenant themes of blessing, fruitfulness, and land are creation themes (Gen. 1:28). They are a bridge of hope that crosses over the curse and chaos described in t


© 2024   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service