Controversial Friday
October 23rd, 2009 . by Cary
Today on The O Word on BlogTalkRadio, I was talking about the issue between Crossroads United Method Church and the City of Phoenix. During that segment, I mentioned the fact that I had an issue with the Pastor of Crossroads being a female, since the Bible specifically speaks against women in leadership positions. Prying1, who called in, disagreed. What say YOU? let me know in the comments.
Chat ya later…
Thank you for stopping by, In GOD We Trust, God bless you all, don’t buy or breed cats or dogs while homeless pets die (spay, neuter & adopt a pet, one by one, until there are none), Wear Red on Fridays, and support Warriors for Innocence!
I guess I’m not adverse to it. Quite frankly, I just never thought about it much. I’m quite private when it comes to religion and not a massive believer in organized religions. I see the efforts too corrupted by Man. I see religion on a much smaller and personal and private level.
BZ
I can understand where you are coming from, BZ. I appreciate you letting me know your thoughts on the matter.
I think I have a big entry to make defending my position, maybe next week sometime.
Women go to Church now bareheaded, in spite of Paul’s admonition they should always cover their heads.
Much has changed since the days of the Corinthians…
Most Churches have changed too. My Sunday school teacher is female…
A good teacher she is, too!
I’m not saying they don’t make good teachers, and I’m certainly not implying that God cannot use anyone He wishes to accomplish His will. I’m just sayin’ that He also said to not have them in positions of leadership – that is, as the head of a church.
My point is, you cannot choose which scriptures you WANT to take literally, Cary.
If you intend to take some scripture literally and argue your point, you gotta take it ALL literally.
(I’m irritated by Deacons in our Church who take oaths that they take the entire Bible literally, then, when they want to stop members from having a beer or two, try to argue that the “wine” referred to in many scriptures really just means “grape juice”!)
The scripture you want to follow says women shouldn’t be head of the Church and you want to take that at its face. Are you ready to take ALL the rest of scripture literally too?
Be careful.
As you can see from the previous comments, this is not an open and shut case for many Christians and Bible scholars.
GB – good point. The thing is, Jesus came to fulfill those parts of the Old Law that we are not, as humans, able to fulfill – that is, the “present yourself blameless” and “live without sin” parts. Some of the passages you are thinking about, I believe, have to do with sacrifices and whatnot that were meant to allow humans to give sin offerings, to take the place of themselves being blameless. Other passages, while not directly related to the human condition, still give instruction on how the church is to behave and the types and kind of leaders they are to have.
If you have specific passages, I will address them – knowing full well that a conversation about the Bible can be rift with dangers, toils, and snares – even among the closest of brothers.
Joe – very good point, and why I am starting with the stand that I have. This is as I have been taught, and what I can tell from my own study of the Bible, it certainly is not the end-all and be-all answer of the subject.
You’ll get no argument from me on any point Cary, ’cause I have no claim to expertise on scripture.
But it seems to me my question is, “Do you take it literally or not?”
And your answer seems to be “Maybe”.
I can’t take the entire Bible literally, GB – there’s a lot of it that is figurative. I take the literal parts literally, and the figurative parts figuratively …