# Women Street Preachers?



## RandPhoenix

I've been discussing women street preachers with a friend. I feel awfully uncomfortable about it. She says it's the bee's knees. Your thoughts?


----------



## Jack K

That's a bit like asking if I like my fried liver to come with horseradish. I really don't have much of a taste for either.


----------



## Curt

women - preachers?! Street or otherwise, it's wrong.


----------



## raekwon

There are worse things women (or anyone) can do on the street.


----------



## jason d

We don't let women open-air preach whenever our church is out doing "street" evangelism (which is every weekend)


----------



## Staphlobob

RandPhoenix said:


> I've been discussing women street preachers with a friend. I feel awfully uncomfortable about it. She says it's the bee's knees. Your thoughts?


 
My "thoughts" are that woman ought to be able to do anything they wish ... pastors, elders, etc. But I am a terrible sinner whose got things wrong so many times before. Consequently what I - or anyone - thinks is insignificant. "What does God say?" is all that matters. And He says "No" to the whole thing.


----------



## Tim

A street preacher is a preacher nonetheless.


----------



## Pergamum

All people who do street evangelism are not preachers. A woman is able to pass out tracts and engage someone in spiritual conversations. This is not usurping ecclesiastical authority.


----------



## puritanpilgrim

> All people who do street evangelism are not preachers. A woman is able to pass out tracts and engage someone in spiritual conversations. This is not usurping ecclesiastical authority.



Agreed. Women are helpful in witnessing to other women. I don't think they should be engaged in open air preaching. But I do think there is a definite place for women to share the gospel with other women. I have found when doing street evangelism that I do not engage a lightly clad woman the same way that I engage a man on the street. There seem to be a barrier there for me. Perhaps it's psychological. For this reason I have found it useful to have a woman. However, I haven’t found many who are interested in street evangelism. My wife has gone out with me twice, but that isn't very realistic, since we have four children at home she has to care for. I think women are especially useful in situations like pregnancy clinics and battered women shelters. Someone needs to be there to give a true gospel presentation. And sometimes it's just not the best place for a man.


----------



## Scottish Lass

puritanpilgrim said:


> All people who do street evangelism are not preachers. A woman is able to pass out tracts and engage someone in spiritual conversations. This is not usurping ecclesiastical authority.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. Women are helpful in witnessing to other women. I don't think they should be engaged in open air preaching. But I do think there is a definite place for women to share the gospel with other women. I have found when doing street evangelism that I do not engage a lightly clad woman the same way that I engage a man on the street. There seem to be a barrier there for me. Perhaps it's psychological. For this reason I have found it useful to have a woman. However, I haven’t found many who are interested in street evangelism. My wife has gone out with me twice, but that isn't very realistic, since we have four children at home she has to care for. I think women are especially useful in situations like pregnancy clinics and battered women shelters. Someone needs to be there to give a true gospel presentation. And sometimes it's just not the best place for a man.
Click to expand...

 
Women are also virtually necessary when engaging women in other cultures--a Yemeni Muslim woman (generally) is not going to even acknowledge a man that isn't her relative. But women of all cultures love to gather and talk where there are children, and that opens a door.


----------



## Tripel

Could one of you define a street preacher? I've encountered people doing street evangelism, but I can't say that I've witnessed someone preaching a sermon on the street.


----------



## RandPhoenix

One who actually preaches an evangelistic sermon on a street corner or something.


----------



## kvanlaan

> All people who do street evangelism are not preachers. A woman is able to pass out tracts and engage someone in spiritual conversations. This is not usurping ecclesiastical authority.



Agreed - I think it is essential that we _all_ share our faith, men women, children.


----------



## raekwon

RandPhoenix said:


> One who actually preaches an evangelistic sermon on a street corner or something.


 
I dunno if ANYBODY should do that, male or female.


----------



## Damon Rambo

I think we need to be careful here. Obviously the scriptures forbid women having authority in the church, or speaking in the weekly assembly. However, I cannot think of a single scripture that would forbid women from announcing the gospel on the street corner. I personally (and I believe most reformed types would agree with me) believe that the scriptures teach that God is the same, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. The pattern in the Old Testament is male leadership and male priesthood, but in regards to public proclamation, prophets, judges, etc., there were indeed females called to do such.


----------



## Mushroom

At the risk of being the resident chauvinist, isn't preaching a form of teaching? And if done on the street, aren't there going to be men hearing? If so, what do you do with this scripture?:


> 1Ti 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.


----------



## Damon Rambo

Brad said:


> At the risk of being the resident chauvinist, isn't preaching a form of teaching? And if done on the street, aren't there going to be men hearing? If so, what do you do with this scripture?:
> 
> 
> 
> 1Ti 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.
Click to expand...

 
Context. Also, comparison with Paul's other writings, and an examination of what Paul actually allowed and even praised. The context of 1 Timothy 2, is in the Church. Likewise, in 1 Corinthians...

1Co 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the _churches_ of the saints, 
1Co 14:34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. 


Clearly teaching and preaching outside the Church is not forbidden. Priscilla and Aquila instructed Apollos, at their home (Acts 18:26), and Eunice was praised for the Christian faith she imparted to her son Timothy. 

Also, woman are given specific instruction for giving prophesy (1 Corinthians 11:5), an absolutely insane thing if it were completely forbidden.


----------



## Mushroom

Damon Rambo said:


> Context. Also, comparison with Paul's other writings, and an examination of what Paul actually allowed and even praised. The context of 1 Timothy 2, is in the Church. Likewise, in 1 Corinthians... 1Co 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, 1Co 14:34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.


This, as you accentuated, refers to behavior _in_ Church. There is no such implication attached to the 1 Timothy verse.


Damon Rambo said:


> Clearly teaching and preaching outside the Church is not forbidden. Priscilla and Aquila instructed Apollos, at their home (Acts 18:26), and Eunice was praised for the Christian faith she imparted to her son Timothy.





> Act 18:26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately.


You can't derive a doctrine of female instruction to males from this one verse. It does not state plainly that Priscilla did the instructing. 

Eunice was carrying out the duty of a mother to her son, not teaching a man.


Damon Rambo said:


> Also, woman are given specific instruction for giving prophesy (1 Corinthians 11:5), an absolutely insane thing if it were completely forbidden.


Unless you accept women in pulpits, this verse must obviously be qualified by other pertinent scripture. The prophesying referred to must mean only that given to other women or to children.


----------



## Scott1

My understanding of the biblical principles would mirror their context in church.

Scripture explicitly and in implicitly in the creation order addresses this.

1) Preaching, teaching intended to mixed group audiences is qualified to men, regardless of whether "in the church building" or "open air"
2) Speaking to intended audiences of women only or young children could be done if she does not represent herself as an officer and respects any authority of the church. There may some difficulties in this in practice
3) Informal encounter style witnessing, teaching I don't think is prohibited


----------



## kvanlaan

So a woman may share her faith in conversation with a female or child only? She is then forbidden from declaring the gospel if there is an unbelieving man within hearing?  (I understand the logic, I just wonder at the application).


----------



## Damon Rambo

Brad said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Context. Also, comparison with Paul's other writings, and an examination of what Paul actually allowed and even praised. The context of 1 Timothy 2, is in the Church. Likewise, in 1 Corinthians... 1Co 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, 1Co 14:34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
> 
> 
> 
> This, as you accentuated, refers to behavior _in_ Church. There is no such implication attached to the 1 Timothy verse.
Click to expand...


Oh, but there is. This cannot be a command by Paul for the women to remain silent OUTSIDE the church during instruction, since Paul commands in 1 Corinthians that women should speak, and ask questions, when not at church. Thus, for Paul to be saying that women should be silent everywhere, is an impossibility. Do you honestly think Paul is calling on the women to take a vow of silence here, and never to speak again? In the same sentence, he tells them to be silent; so either this is in the context of the church, or else women are not ever allowed to talk, or ask questions.



> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly teaching and preaching outside the Church is not forbidden. Priscilla and Aquila instructed Apollos, at their home (Acts 18:26), and Eunice was praised for the Christian faith she imparted to her son Timothy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Act 18:26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can't derive a doctrine of female instruction to males from this one verse. It does not state plainly that Priscilla did the instructing.
Click to expand...

Sure you can. The house would not be named after the woman, unless there was no male. 



> Eunice was carrying out the duty of a mother to her son, not teaching a man.


It is still instruction. The precedent is, that women are allowed to teach at certain times. One such, would be when there were just women and children. I am establishing a second time; when not in the church.



> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, woman are given specific instruction for giving prophesy (1 Corinthians 11:5), an absolutely insane thing if it were completely forbidden.
> 
> 
> 
> Unless you accept women in pulpits, this verse must obviously be qualified by other pertinent scripture. The prophesying referred to must mean only that given to other women or to children.
Click to expand...

 [/quote]

First, prophesying is not just instruction. Prophesying is to "stand before"; it is preaching. Second, "other pertinent scripture" show that the qualifier is that women are not allowed to teach and preach in the Church. Not that they are not allowed to teach and preach to men anywhere. Your notion of this, would actually forbid me having theological discussions with my wife, since she has often instructed me in the scriptures during such conversations.

---------- Post added at 04:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:38 PM ----------




Joshua said:


> Preaching the Gospel, Carrying out the Great Commission, Doing the Work of the Ministry of Reconciliation is for _ministers_. Ergo, a woman has just as much authorization to preach on the street as an uncommissioned man (i.e. _none_). It is every Christian's _duty_ to be salt and light, to be excellent in their lawful callings, to show kindness one to another and to their neighbors, always to be ready to give a defense for the hope they have within them (i.e. "share their faith"), to testify what Christ has done for them. But _none_ of these equals "Preaching/Declaring/Proclaiming the Gospel," as such ministry of reconciliation belongs to ministers. It is _not_ every Christian's duty to be Evangelists, to seek to fulfill the Great Commission, to Baptize, etc. so on, so forth.
> 
> But I'll not beat a dead horse. If everyone's a minister, no one's a minister.The Lord has been please to have men commissioned for the ministry and to place that burden on those who are not called thereunto is _too much_.


 
I definitely disagree with this. It is every Christians responsibility to evangelize. Nowhere in scripture do we see Paul forbidding anyone from preaching the gospel; and in fact, we have Jesus doing the opposite; forbidding anyone from forbidding.

I of course agree that there are specially called men. And what are they to do? Why, equip the _saints_ for the work of the _ministry_!(Ephesians 4:12)


----------



## Puritan Scot

As Christians we are instructed *"Let all things be done decently and in order"* 1 Corinthians 14v40. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a woman witnessing for Christ on a one-to-one situation or testifying to friends or associates - this we would certainly encourage. However street preaching in the public arena should always be done under the oversight of one's local church session, who could ratify for the preaching gifts and doctrinal soundness of the men that would take part. The women could readily be involved in tract distribution and be on hand to speak to those those that might show an interest in the message.

There is nothing worse that hearing men (or even women for that matter) taking part in street preaching off their own back when they are clearly neither called nor gifted for the work - in fact they often bring shame and derision to the Gospel message. Being the "bees knees" is one thing in the eyes of men - it could very easily be the opposite in the eyes of God, who has in this particular instance clearly forbidden such *"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, and then Eve."* 1 Timothy 2v12,13.


----------



## toddpedlar

kvanlaan said:


> So a woman may share her faith in conversation with a female or child only? She is then forbidden from declaring the gospel if there is an unbelieving man within hearing?  (I understand the logic, I just wonder at the application).


 
Giving reason for the hope that lies within oneself is one thing - preaching to passers-by on the street corner is a horse of a different color.


----------



## Rich Koster

To me, one of the biggest problems with street preachers is _not being sent_. A person should be gifted and matured within the Church before being sent out for preaching. Don't confuse the rogues with solid preachers making a public proclamation of The Gospel.


----------



## Peairtach

Did the Apostles have women preaching with them on the street? No.


----------



## Jack K

If the preaching is not under the auspices of a church, it should be. If it _is_ under the auspices of a church, then proper qualifications to preach apply whether the preaching is done inside a church building or on a street corner. It does not cease to be the proclamation of the church when it leaves the building.

Casual conversation would be another matter. But that's not what this is.


----------



## RandPhoenix

She goes out with groups of men and women with her church to do the street preaching. I suppose it's a ministry of the church she attends. She told me of one time where she went out preaching with some fellows, only to have them drop back and pray while she did the preaching. This made me quite uncomfortable. She agrees that women can't be in pastoral ministry... she just doesn't see this as the same thing.


----------



## Pergamum

Scottish Lass said:


> puritanpilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All people who do street evangelism are not preachers. A woman is able to pass out tracts and engage someone in spiritual conversations. This is not usurping ecclesiastical authority.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. Women are helpful in witnessing to other women. I don't think they should be engaged in open air preaching. But I do think there is a definite place for women to share the gospel with other women. I have found when doing street evangelism that I do not engage a lightly clad woman the same way that I engage a man on the street. There seem to be a barrier there for me. Perhaps it's psychological. For this reason I have found it useful to have a woman. However, I haven’t found many who are interested in street evangelism. My wife has gone out with me twice, but that isn't very realistic, since we have four children at home she has to care for. I think women are especially useful in situations like pregnancy clinics and battered women shelters. Someone needs to be there to give a true gospel presentation. And sometimes it's just not the best place for a man.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Women are also virtually necessary when engaging women in other cultures--a Yemeni Muslim woman (generally) is not going to even acknowledge a man that isn't her relative. But women of all cultures love to gather and talk where there are children, and that opens a door.
Click to expand...

 
Very true.

Which brings up an important point about the effectiveness of street evangelism over other forms of evangelism that women could be engaged in...especially in Mslm countries.

---------- Post added 10-21-2010 at 12:11 AM ---------- Previous post was 10-20-2010 at 11:54 PM ----------

I consider myself very evangelistic, but I just haven't seen much success in the West with street preaching. It seems similar to getting an unsolicited phone call. It is a cold contact and no personal relationship is made. Christian women could do so much better with focusing on their own circles of friends. Whitefield set up his preaching place mostly in fields and people voluntarily came; they were not hounded. Angry-looking people harassing passers-by on a corner does not appear to show the love of Christ, but seems to more likely show mental illness to the spectators.


----------



## kvanlaan

> Giving reason for the hope that lies within oneself is one thing - preaching to passers-by on the street corner is a horse of a different color.



Good - that's what I wanted to hear someone say (to clarify the difference).


----------



## KMK

Until we come to a working definition of 'street preaching', we will never get anywhere in these conversations. Nailing down what it is is like trying to nail jello to the wall. The bottom line is this:



> LBC 26, Paragraph 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it.



If what is happening on the street deserves to be called 'preaching the word', then those doing it must be 'approved and called by the church'. If it is not 'preaching the word', then why call it 'street _preaching_'?


----------



## he beholds

I think a woman is allowed to witness to people and share the Gospel with anyone she meets, anywhere. (OK, I'll give in a bit and say, not if she happens to be inside the church when she wants to do this witnessing.) There is no way I'd keep silent if the opportunity to share the Gospel came but the hearer was a man. I am fairly certain God has not required that. So if street preaching is the same, principally, as just sharing the Gospel, then I'd have to say that I believe women may do this. I think women may not teach in a way that puts her in authority over someone. Sharing the Gospel is the kindest, sweetest thing a person can do and it in no way puts someone under the sharer's authority. Church membership does that. 
Now, I don't know exactly what "street preaching," so if it is different than simply sharing the Gospel, and it does require a relationship of authority and submission, then a woman should not do it. But I highly doubt that if a pastor were to prop up on a street corner and begin preaching the Gospel that he'd A) now actually have spiritual authority over these people and B) even assume that he has spiritual authority over these people.


----------



## Rich Koster

KMK said:


> Until we come to a working definition of 'street preaching', we will never get anywhere in these conversations. Nailing down what it is is like trying to nail jello to the wall. The bottom line is this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LBC 26, Paragraph 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If what is happening on the street deserves to be called 'preaching the word', then those doing it must be 'approved and called by the church'. If it is not 'preaching the word', then why call it 'street _preaching_'?
Click to expand...

 
Agreed. I would equate recognizing the gifting and being trained up and sent out with 'approved and called by the church' . We're not talking about a chat about Jesus over a Starbucks, we're talking about loud voices addressing people in public forum.


----------



## Jack K

he beholds said:


> I think a woman is allowed to witness to people and share the Gospel with anyone she meets, anywhere. (OK, I'll give in a bit and say, not if she happens to be inside the church when she wants to do this witnessing.) There is no way I'd keep silent if the opportunity to share the Gospel came but the hearer was a man. I am fairly certain God has not required that. So if street preaching is the same, principally, as just sharing the Gospel, then I'd have to say that I believe women may do this. I think women may not teach in a way that puts her in authority over someone. Sharing the Gospel is the kindest, sweetest thing a person can do and it in no way puts someone under the sharer's authority.



I agree with you. If God gives you the opportunity to share the gospel as you meet people, then share away. I'd even say you're free to share the gospel around the coffeepot at church, as long as you don't make it appear that you speak authoritatively for the church. The irony in all this is that your conversation with a friend at Starbucks is probably more likely to get that friend interested in Christ than is any street preacher that friend may encounter. So while I say street preachers ought to be regarded as any other preacher and therefore be men appointed by the church, that is in no way saying your role in evangelism is less important. It may, in God's providence, be much more important. God has used women who eagerly share the Good News they know to grow his church ever since a few of them (all named Mary) came running back from an empty tomb 2000 years ago. Never doubt that he can use you also, even though you don't preach.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

Would like to see a video of a female street preacher. None found at YouTube.

AMR


----------



## interalia

I guess I would say that I cannot believe what I am reading, but I know better. Some of you need more grace in your lives if you would rather parse analytical definitions of "preach/teach" over "casual conversation" over the promotion of the Gospel; be the method effective or not.

Furthermore, even if the prooftexts of 1 Tim were correct, does the maleness of the nonbelieving passer-by man really support the view that a regenerate woman keep her mouth shut? In other words, would you really say that because a woman preaches on the street in earshot of men who are unregenerate, then she must stay quiet? I do not think the Gospel takes a back seat to the presence of testosterone when speading the Gospel.

---------- Post added at 09:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 PM ----------




Richard Tallach said:


> Did the Apostles have women preaching with them on the street? No.



Not so sure we can be certain of that: Romans 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. (KJV)


----------



## Pergamum

In Paul's letters he speaks of several women co-workers. For instance, Prisca or Priscilla, Euodia, and Synteyche. Paul greets Mary who "has worked hard for you" (Romans 16:12), and the beloved Persis who "has worked hard in the Lord" (16:12). This seems to designate Gospel work. However, we need not conclude that these women were street preachers or preached in any way, there being many ways of working in evangelism besides preaching.


----------



## KMK

KMK said:


> interalia said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I would say that I cannot believe what I am reading, but I know better. Some of you need more grace in your lives if you would rather parse analytical definitions of "preach/teach" over "casual conversation" over the promotion of the Gospel; be the method effective or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know where you are? This is Puritanboard. The main point of this discussion board is to 'parse analytical definitions' contained in the confessions. If these are things you don't like to discuss, then maybe this isn't the board for you.
Click to expand...

 
After rereading this post I realized it sounds 'angry' and that wasn't my intention. But since the edit tool doesn't seem to be working, I will rewrite it here:

Do you know where you are? This is Puritanboard. All we do here is to 'parse analytical definitions' of words contained in the confessions. 

Seriously, if these are things you don't like to discuss, then maybe this isn't the board for you.


----------



## Mushroom

interalia said:


> I guess I would say that I cannot believe what I am reading, but I know better. Some of you need more grace in your lives if you would rather parse analytical definitions of "preach/teach" over "casual conversation" over the promotion of the Gospel; be the method effective or not. Furthermore, even if the prooftexts of 1 Tim were correct, does the maleness of the nonbelieving passer-by man really support the view that a regenerate woman keep her mouth shut? In other words, would you really say that because a woman preaches on the street in earshot of men who are unregenerate, then she must stay quiet? I do not think the Gospel takes a back seat to the presence of testosterone when speading the Gospel.


God is able to use any means He desires to harvest His children from among humankind, even the reprobate, but that does not mean that we are to emulate a reprobate simply because God used him for that purpose. 



> 2Ti 2:20-21 Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable. (21) Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work.


There are honorable and dishonorable uses for God's vessels, all end up garnering glory to His name, but His people are to strive to be of honorable uses. Going about the business of evangelizing in a manner contrary to the instruction of scripture is a dishonorable use, even if you want to portray that fact as 'parsing analytical definitions'. Nadab and Abihu ran into a little trouble over 'parsing analytical definitions' about what was acceptable fire and what was 'strange'. The scripture declared what fire was to be used in worship and where it was to come from, and it declares that women are not to teach men. I will place my trust on God's word rather than my own idea of what sounds sensible.


----------



## Augusta

There is an important distinction being missed here. When a Minister speaks the word he does it with *authority *that is God given. It is as if God were speaking calling all men everywhere to repent and believe the gospel. Jesus spoke as one having authority. Women are NOT to do this. So preaching a gospel message is out for women. It is an exercise of authority that she has not been given. HOWEVER

Women giving a reason for the hope that is within you is not calling someone to repentence. Sharing the wonderful things God has done for you is not calling people to repentence. The men calling people to repentence are men who must give an account. Those are the things that I know, I would be very careful not to overstep this except in dire circumstances. (like stranded in a deadly situation and asking someone with me if they are prepared to meet their God)


----------



## Montanablue

On a recent trip to New York, I saw a woman who was standing on the corner of a street reading Scripture. No expounding, just straight Scripture reading. 

What do you guys think of this? I had 2 thoughts: One was that it didn't seem to be terribly effective. People weren't paying any attention. The other was that since she only reading, it wasn't actually "preaching"


----------



## Jack K

Montanablue said:


> On a recent trip to New York, I saw a woman who was standing on the corner of a street reading Scripture. No expounding, just straight Scripture reading.
> 
> What do you guys think of this? I had 2 thoughts: One was that it didn't seem to be terribly effective. People weren't paying any attention. The other was that since she only reading, it wasn't actually "preaching"



I would say there's nothing inherently wrong with anyone reading Scripture aloud on a public street corner. But to fully judge such an action you need to know motives, intentions, etc. and perhaps consider the results.


----------



## interalia

[/QUOTE]There are honorable and dishonorable uses for God's vessels, all end up garnering glory to His name, but His people are to strive to be of honorable uses. Going about the business of evangelizing in a manner contrary to the instruction of scripture is a dishonorable use, even if you want to portray that fact as 'parsing analytical definitions'. Nadab and Abihu ran into a little trouble over 'parsing analytical definitions' about what was acceptable fire and what was 'strange'. The scripture declared what fire was to be used in worship and where it was to come from, and it declares that women are not to teach men. I will place my trust on God's word rather than my own idea of what sounds sensible.[/QUOTE]

If that is the case, then what about Acts 18:24-28?:

24Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, competent in the Scriptures. 25He had been instructed in the way of the Lord. And being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately. 27And when he wished to cross to Achaia, the brothers encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him. When he arrived, he greatly helped those who through grace had believed, 28for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that the Christ was Jesus.

According to Scripture, Priscilla clearly taught Apollos, a man. I know the rebuttal will be, "but it was with her husband Aquila", but then again, 1 Tim 2:12 does not qualify "I do not permit a women to teach..._unless under her husband or another man_". So since Scripture is inerrant and interprets itself, then certianly there is either a cultural or unknown issue confounding Paul's statement in 1 Tim 2:12.

I just challenge what seems to me an uncritical assumption about what we are saying are proper roles for women and teaching, especially outside the church. Clearly Scripture shows women taught men, clearly Scripture says Paul does not allow...I think we need to be more careful before suggesting that spreading the Gospel by women is "dishonorable use".


----------



## Pergamum

I Tim 2:12 seems to denote exercising ecclesiastical authority over a man. Telling someone the Gospel in day-to-day life is not trying to be an ecclesiastical authority. I think there are difference in meaning to preaching, teaching, evangelizing, witnessing, etc. And to prove that we should not have women "preachers" is not the same as to prove that women ought not to be very evangelistic and explain the Gospel to those who need it.

Again, Paul says that some women "worked" for the Lord and this seems to denote evangelistic work.

---------- Post added at 05:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:16 AM ----------

This whole issue relates to the role of women in missions. I believe that women can hold vital roles even on church-planting teams (after the model of Pauline practice we see in the NT). Every member of a church-planting team need not be an ordained, elder-qualified male, there can be teachers and support personnel as well. We see that Paul was not a Lone Ranger but worked with many others, to include women. And since Carey, over 60% of missionaries have been female, and have done vital evangelistic work, even while being careful not to usurp authority from male church leadership.


----------



## Mushroom

interalia said:


> they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately




As stated earlier in this thread, that "they took him" does not infer with any certainty that Priscilla did the explaining. In fact, that is only assumed by the modern mind. In ancient Rome women did not do a great deal of 'explaining'. So your proclamation that "According to scripture, Pricilla clearly taught Apollos" might not be so clear at all. The picture of this event that would see the 'taking' as them taking him into their home, Priscilla cooking a meal and Aquila explaining the gospel more clearly to him at the table is no less valid than the modern view, which would have all three sitting and both Priscilla and Aquila expounding. In fact the former would be more congruant with the custom of the times, and in line with what scripture teaches elsewhere. I find it a tad humorous that one would build an entire doctrinal tenet from this one part of a verse that was clearly not given for that purpose.

Preaching is a part of worship. Proper worship is delineated by the RPW according to the Confessions to which we hold. You may call it 'parsing analytical definitions', I call it the command of the Lord.


----------



## SolaScriptura

I believe it is inconsistent with the Scriptures or our Confessions for an unordained person to be preaching unless that person is under care and is being examined/considered for office. Since only men are to be ordained to offices of the church, women are by definition ruled out.


----------



## Mushroom

Pergamum said:


> This whole issue relates to the role of women in missions. I believe that women can hold vital roles even on church-planting teams (after the model of Pauline practice we see in the NT). Every member of a church-planting team need not be an ordained, elder-qualified male, there can be teachers and support personnel as well. We see that Paul was not a Lone Ranger but worked with many others, to include women. And since Carey, over 60% of missionaries have been female, and have done vital evangelistic work, even while being careful not to usurp authority from male church leadership.




This I believe is biblical. Preaching is a specific function of a Church Office. There are plenty of areas of service that are perfectly within the bounds of scripture for women and unordained men. Preaching is not one of them.


----------



## Jack K

Pergamum said:


> I Tim 2:12 seems to denote exercising ecclesiastical authority over a man. Telling someone the Gospel in day-to-day life is not trying to be an ecclesiastical authority. I think there are difference in meaning to preaching, teaching, evangelizing, witnessing, etc. And to prove that we should not have women "preachers" is not the same as to prove that women ought not to be very evangelistic and explain the Gospel to those who need it.
> 
> Again, Paul says that some women "worked" for the Lord and this seems to denote evangelistic work.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 05:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:16 AM ----------
> 
> This whole issue relates to the role of women in missions. I believe that women can hold vital roles even on church-planting teams (after the model of Pauline practice we see in the NT). Every member of a church-planting team need not be an ordained, elder-qualified male, there can be teachers and support personnel as well. We see that Paul was not a Lone Ranger but worked with many others, to include women. And since Carey, over 60% of missionaries have been female, and have done vital evangelistic work, even while being careful not to usurp authority from male church leadership.



Right. Many liberals would have us assume that if a woman may not preach, any evangelistic gifts she may have are going unused. Or some conservatives would have us think that if she has a passion for evangelism, that passion is wrong since she may not preach. Both arguments depend on an assumption that you can't be effective in evangelism, or complete as an evangelistic person, without being a preacher or having elder-type authority.

We need to strongly affirm people who don't have elder gifts and aren't called to that sort of ministry. We need to encourage them that they _are_, in their way, supremely gifted by the Spirit to serve the cause of Christ, including the expansion of his church. If we fail to do this, the liberal argument in particular will end up ruling the day.


----------



## Boosterseat_91

I don't think the proper distinction is between speaking with authority or speaking without authority. It seems to me (correct me if I'm wrong) that this would only allow women to share their testimony. Though a testimony may give an opportunity for evangelism, it is not evangelism in itself. Therefore, this seems to restrict women from evangelism (for evangelism is sharing the gospel message and the gospel message includes a call to repentance). Also, using Bible passages in their proper context is ultimately what has the authority because even a man saying something against Scripture has no authority (and where Scripture is silent, you follow verses such as "wives be submissive to your husbands"). 

We all agree that women are forbidden to be preachers/pastors within the church. The Bible is clear women are not to have authority over men in the local assembly. However, does this apply to every area of life? Are women not allowed to be over a man, say, at their job? Is it wrong for women to make a speech in front of a crowd that contains men? I don't think we can say that. I think the better question would be to ask is: Are there any means in Scripture that are specifically forbidden to be used in evangelism (considering that the Gospel message is shared correctly)? because i think the office in question does not pertain to a preacher/pastor but that of an evangelist.

The main problem seems to be that to say women cannot "street preach" is using the regulative principle outside of the church assembly which, as others have pointed out, would forbid women from talking at all.

---------- Post added at 07:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 AM ----------

I'm curious...would this also forbid women from witnessing to any male even if it is one-on-one? Would that be considered usurping man's authority by taking on the office of "teacher" which is often synonymous with "pastor"?


----------



## KMK

Boosterseat_91 said:


> I don't think the proper distinction is between speaking with authority or speaking without authority.




Actually, it is an issue of authority. The Reformed view is this:

Christ is the head of the His churches.
Christ effectually calls sinners into his churches through the ministry of the word.
This ministry of the word is ordinarily incumbent upon elders and pastors, but others may, if called and approved by the church, minister as well.

The following are from LBC chapter 26:



> Paragraph 4. *The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church,* in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner;7 neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.8





> Paragraph 5. *In the execution of this power wherewith he is so intrusted, the Lord Jesus calls out of the world unto himself, through the ministry of his word,* by his Spirit, those that are given unto him by his Father,9 that they may walk before him in all the ways of obedience, which he prescribes to them in his word.10 *Those thus called, he commands to walk together in particular societies, or churches*, for their mutual edification, and the due performance of that public worship, which he requires of them in the world.11





> Paragraph 10. *The work of pastors being constantly to attend the service of Christ, in his churches, in the ministry of the word *and prayer, with watching for their souls, as they that must give an account to Him;19 it is incumbent on the churches to whom they minister, not only to give them all due respect, but also to communicate to them of all their good things according to their ability,20 so as they may have a comfortable supply, without being themselves entangled in secular affairs;21 and may also be capable of exercising hospitality towards others;22 and this is required by the law of nature, and by the express order of our Lord Jesus, who has ordained that they that preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel.23





> Paragraph 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, *yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it*.24


----------



## Boosterseat_91

KMK said:


> Boosterseat_91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the proper distinction is between speaking with authority or speaking without authority.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it is an issue of authority. The Reformed view is this:
> 
> Christ is the head of the His churches.
> Christ effectually calls sinners into his churches through the ministry of the word.
> This ministry of the word is ordinarily incumbent upon elders and pastors, but others may, if called and approved by the church, minister as well.
Click to expand...

 
Yes, actually that is my point. Women do not have authority to preach _in church_. There is a difference between preaching a sermon before the body of believers as an authority over them and "preaching" before a crowd of unbelievers on a street declaring the gospel message. 

It seems to me that your arguments don't relate so much to women street preachers as it does to evangelism as a whole, that no one can evanglize without first having the approval of the church. If you equate declaring the gospel message as "preaching" and that women can never "preach" than you are saying women can never share the gospel message. However, on the other hand, if you make a distinction between the ministry of the Word by ordained elders and pastors to the local assembly for the equipping of the saints for the work of evangelism and the ministry of the Word by the body to unbelievers to work in them either condemnation or give opportunity for the Holy Spirit's work of regeneration, then there is surely nothing unbiblical about women street preachers (though they are admittingly rare).


----------



## Damon Rambo

KMK said:


> Boosterseat_91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the proper distinction is between speaking with authority or speaking without authority.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it is an issue of authority. The Reformed view is this:
> 
> Christ is the head of the His churches.
> Christ effectually calls sinners into his churches through the ministry of the word.
> This ministry of the word is ordinarily incumbent upon elders and pastors, but others may, if called and approved by the church, minister as well.
> 
> The following are from LBC chapter 26:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 4. *The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church,* in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner;7 neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.8
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 5. *In the execution of this power wherewith he is so intrusted, the Lord Jesus calls out of the world unto himself, through the ministry of his word,* by his Spirit, those that are given unto him by his Father,9 that they may walk before him in all the ways of obedience, which he prescribes to them in his word.10 *Those thus called, he commands to walk together in particular societies, or churches*, for their mutual edification, and the due performance of that public worship, which he requires of them in the world.11
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 10. *The work of pastors being constantly to attend the service of Christ, in his churches, in the ministry of the word *and prayer, with watching for their souls, as they that must give an account to Him;19 it is incumbent on the churches to whom they minister, not only to give them all due respect, but also to communicate to them of all their good things according to their ability,20 so as they may have a comfortable supply, without being themselves entangled in secular affairs;21 and may also be capable of exercising hospitality towards others;22 and this is required by the law of nature, and by the express order of our Lord Jesus, who has ordained that they that preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel.23
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, *yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it*.24
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 
And as I have stated, my Church "authorizes" (and commands) EVERY member to share the gospel, in whatever way they can!


----------



## KMK

Boosterseat_91 said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boosterseat_91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the proper distinction is between speaking with authority or speaking without authority.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it is an issue of authority. The Reformed view is this:
> 
> Christ is the head of the His churches.
> Christ effectually calls sinners into his churches through the ministry of the word.
> This ministry of the word is ordinarily incumbent upon elders and pastors, but others may, if called and approved by the church, minister as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, actually that is my point. Women do not have authority to preach _in church_. *There is a difference between preaching a sermon before the body of believers as an authority over them and "preaching" before a crowd of unbelievers on a street declaring the gospel message.*
Click to expand...

 
The idea that those in the church are only believers and a crowd on the street are only unbelievers is not a Reformed distinction. The Reformed view of preaching is that application must be made to all sorts of people no matter the venue. See Perkins on sermon application, for example.

You seem to be drawing a distinction between preaching under the authority of the church, and preaching under the authority of something else. The question is, what is that 'something else'? And is it fair or helpful to call it 'preaching'?

BTW, I have not argued against women preachers in this thread. I have only argued that 'ministers of the word' are to be called and approved by the church.


----------



## KMK

Damon Rambo said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boosterseat_91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the proper distinction is between speaking with authority or speaking without authority.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it is an issue of authority. The Reformed view is this:
> 
> Christ is the head of the His churches.
> Christ effectually calls sinners into his churches through the ministry of the word.
> This ministry of the word is ordinarily incumbent upon elders and pastors, but others may, if called and approved by the church, minister as well.
> 
> The following are from LBC chapter 26:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 4. *The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church,* in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner;7 neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.8
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 5. *In the execution of this power wherewith he is so intrusted, the Lord Jesus calls out of the world unto himself, through the ministry of his word,* by his Spirit, those that are given unto him by his Father,9 that they may walk before him in all the ways of obedience, which he prescribes to them in his word.10 *Those thus called, he commands to walk together in particular societies, or churches*, for their mutual edification, and the due performance of that public worship, which he requires of them in the world.11
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 10. *The work of pastors being constantly to attend the service of Christ, in his churches, in the ministry of the word *and prayer, with watching for their souls, as they that must give an account to Him;19 it is incumbent on the churches to whom they minister, not only to give them all due respect, but also to communicate to them of all their good things according to their ability,20 so as they may have a comfortable supply, without being themselves entangled in secular affairs;21 and may also be capable of exercising hospitality towards others;22 and this is required by the law of nature, and by the express order of our Lord Jesus, who has ordained that they that preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel.23
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, *yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it*.24
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And as I have stated, my Church "authorizes" (and commands) EVERY member to share the gospel, in whatever way they can!
Click to expand...

 
Just for clarification, Damon, does your church subscribe to one of the Reformed confessions?


----------



## Boosterseat_91

I didn't mean to exclude believers from the crowd but only to make an emphasis on the evangelistic aspect. Of course, on the other hand, there may very well be unbelievers in the church as well, but I didn't mean to exclude them either just put emphasis on the equipping of the saints, sorry if that was confusing.

The distinction I am trying to emphasis is the distinction between the office of a pastor/teacher/preacher and that of every believer which is to be an apostle, an evangelist, an ambassador for Christ. If we define preaching as speaking before a crowd, than we might call "speech" class "preaching" class. If it is exclusively speaking the Word of God in front of a crowd, then what are the qualifications for the crowd? For instance, once I was witnessing to a man in the break room at my job. Others were present and listening, though the dialogue was only between us two. Is this a crowd? Here's another example: I was trying to witnesses to an atheist at school, but soon others, who were of a like mind with the atheist, joined in. Should I have, at that moment, said, "Whoa, I'm a woman and I have not been called and approved by the church to do this so we have to stop talking now"?

_Every_ believer is called to preach the gospel and I think that means to declare the gospel to a minimum of one person but that there is no maximum that you can preach to at a time. So if preaching means a proclamation of the gospel, then yes, it can be called preaching.

Women are to be refrained from the office of pastor and from having any authority over men in the local church. However, this in no way excludes them from the duty of every Christian which is to _preach_ the gospel everywhere.


----------



## he beholds

Boosterseat_91 said:


> I didn't mean to exclude believers from the crowd but only to make an emphasis on the evangelistic aspect. Of course, on the other hand, there may very well be unbelievers in the church as well, but I didn't mean to exclude them either just put emphasis on the equipping of the saints, sorry if that was confusing.
> 
> The distinction I am trying to emphasis is the distinction between the office of a pastor/teacher/preacher and that of every believer which is to be an apostle, an evangelist, an ambassador for Christ. If we define preaching as speaking before a crowd, than we might call "speech" class "preaching" class. If it is exclusively speaking the Word of God in front of a crowd, then what are the qualifications for the crowd? For instance, once I was witnessing to a man in the break room at my job. Others were present and listening, though the dialogue was only between us two. Is this a crowd? Here's another example: I was trying to witnesses to an atheist at school, but soon others, who were of a like mind with the atheist, joined in. Should I have, at that moment, said, "Whoa, I'm a woman and I have not been called and approved by the church to do this so we have to stop talking now"?
> 
> _Every_ believer is called to preach the gospel and I think that means to declare the gospel to a minimum of one person but that there is no maximum that you can preach to at a time. So if preaching means a proclamation of the gospel, then yes, it can be called preaching.
> 
> Women are to be refrained from the office of pastor and from having any authority over men in the local church. However, this in no way excludes them from the duty of every Christian which is to _preach_ the gospel everywhere.


 I totally agree with this and if someone thinks we are wrong, would you please show me through Scripture the truth? (If this sounds sarcastic or something it isn't. Obviously if the Bible is calling something wrong I want to know it!) If we must, we can ignore the word "preach," because I don't think either of us mean that a woman sharing the Gospel is authoritative. Instead we (or at least I) mean that it is proper for a woman to share the Gospel with anyone, even a man. And if that is all that a woman street preacher is doing, ie, sharing the Gospel, then I say that is fine. (I'd typically not see it as beneficial personally, but I've seen via the Way of the Master people that street preaching isn't always crazy people with the-end-is-near signs.). 

Using the Way of the Master example, where no one is "preaching" as if on a pulpit or as if with authority, would it be wrong for a woman to be included in their apologetics? Does Scripture prohibit women from sharing the Gospel? If this is a different topic, someone can split this into a new thread. In my mind, it is the same topic, so I don't want to overkill.


----------



## Tripel

I don't have a whole lot to offer to the discussion, other than to say that I agree with Boosterseat and Jessica.

A woman preaching/teaching the Gospel on a street corner is not an issue of authority. You don't need to have authority to proclaim the Truth. You need authority to pastor a flock, under which falls teaching within the church.


----------



## Damon Rambo

KMK said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KMK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boosterseat_91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the proper distinction is between speaking with authority or speaking without authority.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it is an issue of authority. The Reformed view is this:
> 
> Christ is the head of the His churches.
> Christ effectually calls sinners into his churches through the ministry of the word.
> This ministry of the word is ordinarily incumbent upon elders and pastors, but others may, if called and approved by the church, minister as well.
> 
> The following are from LBC chapter 26:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 4. *The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church,* in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner;7 neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.8
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 5. *In the execution of this power wherewith he is so intrusted, the Lord Jesus calls out of the world unto himself, through the ministry of his word,* by his Spirit, those that are given unto him by his Father,9 that they may walk before him in all the ways of obedience, which he prescribes to them in his word.10 *Those thus called, he commands to walk together in particular societies, or churches*, for their mutual edification, and the due performance of that public worship, which he requires of them in the world.11
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 10. *The work of pastors being constantly to attend the service of Christ, in his churches, in the ministry of the word *and prayer, with watching for their souls, as they that must give an account to Him;19 it is incumbent on the churches to whom they minister, not only to give them all due respect, but also to communicate to them of all their good things according to their ability,20 so as they may have a comfortable supply, without being themselves entangled in secular affairs;21 and may also be capable of exercising hospitality towards others;22 and this is required by the law of nature, and by the express order of our Lord Jesus, who has ordained that they that preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel.23
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paragraph 11. Although it be incumbent on the bishops or pastors of the churches, to be instant in preaching the word, by way of office, *yet the work of preaching the word is not so peculiarly confined to them but that others also gifted and fitted by the Holy Spirit for it, and approved and called by the church, may and ought to perform it*.24
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And as I have stated, my Church "authorizes" (and commands) EVERY member to share the gospel, in whatever way they can!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just for clarification, Damon, does your church subscribe to one of the Reformed confessions?
Click to expand...

 
Both me, and my Pastor subscribe to the LBCF. However, the Church is not strictly reformed. It subscribes only to the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. However, I am in prayer that this situation will change, as the doctrine preached and taught is reformed, as is a large percentage of the congregation (and the rest would not know what "reformed" is!). My Pastor has done a wonderful job in slowly turning the boat around, so to speak.

Since our Church is essentially led by my Pastor at the moment, with no elder oversight, I would definitely say that the authorization and command for all to evangelize comes from the reformed leadership of our church, though.


----------



## KMK

Boosterseat_91 said:


> I didn't mean to exclude believers from the crowd but only to make an emphasis on the evangelistic aspect. Of course, on the other hand, there may very well be unbelievers in the church as well, but I didn't mean to exclude them either just put emphasis on the equipping of the saints, sorry if that was confusing.
> 
> The distinction I am trying to emphasis is the distinction between the office of a pastor/teacher/preacher and that of every believer which is to be an apostle, an evangelist, an ambassador for Christ. If we define preaching as speaking before a crowd, than we might call "speech" class "preaching" class. If it is exclusively speaking the Word of God in front of a crowd, then what are the qualifications for the crowd? For instance, once I was witnessing to a man in the break room at my job. Others were present and listening, though the dialogue was only between us two. Is this a crowd? Here's another example: I was trying to witnesses to an atheist at school, but soon others, who were of a like mind with the atheist, joined in. Should I have, at that moment, said, "Whoa, I'm a woman and I have not been called and approved by the church to do this so we have to stop talking now"?
> 
> _Every_ believer is called to preach the gospel and I think that means to declare the gospel to a minimum of one person but that there is no maximum that you can preach to at a time. So if preaching means a proclamation of the gospel, then yes, it can be called preaching.
> 
> Women are to be refrained from the office of pastor and from having any authority over men in the local church. However, this in no way excludes them from the duty of every Christian which is to _preach_ the gospel everywhere.


 
Here's the problem. In one paragraph you admit there is no clear definition of the word 'preach', and then in the next you state, "Every believer is called to preach the gospel." How can one agree or disagree with this statement if there is no clear definition of the word? The word 'preach' has come to mean so many different things that it is basically meaning_less_. 

I really doubt there is much disagreement on this thread over the role of women in relationship to the ministry of the word, but each side is willing to fight to the death to protect _their_ definition of the word 'preach'.


----------



## Boosterseat_91

Well, there were more problems than that but those have been cleared up I'm assuming?...anyways, I never admitted there was no clear definition for the word "preach." I asked rhetorical questions to hopefully exfoliate the false definitions of the word "preaching." This should have been clear since I gave my definition of preaching in the next paragraph. You can call it preaching, or witnessing, or evangelism...I think these words all convey the same idea in the context of sharing the gospel outside of the local assembly; that was my point.


----------



## Damon Rambo

KMK said:


> Boosterseat_91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't mean to exclude believers from the crowd but only to make an emphasis on the evangelistic aspect. Of course, on the other hand, there may very well be unbelievers in the church as well, but I didn't mean to exclude them either just put emphasis on the equipping of the saints, sorry if that was confusing.
> 
> The distinction I am trying to emphasis is the distinction between the office of a pastor/teacher/preacher and that of every believer which is to be an apostle, an evangelist, an ambassador for Christ. If we define preaching as speaking before a crowd, than we might call "speech" class "preaching" class. If it is exclusively speaking the Word of God in front of a crowd, then what are the qualifications for the crowd? For instance, once I was witnessing to a man in the break room at my job. Others were present and listening, though the dialogue was only between us two. Is this a crowd? Here's another example: I was trying to witnesses to an atheist at school, but soon others, who were of a like mind with the atheist, joined in. Should I have, at that moment, said, "Whoa, I'm a woman and I have not been called and approved by the church to do this so we have to stop talking now"?
> 
> _Every_ believer is called to preach the gospel and I think that means to declare the gospel to a minimum of one person but that there is no maximum that you can preach to at a time. So if preaching means a proclamation of the gospel, then yes, it can be called preaching.
> 
> Women are to be refrained from the office of pastor and from having any authority over men in the local church. However, this in no way excludes them from the duty of every Christian which is to _preach_ the gospel everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the problem. In one paragraph you admit there is no clear definition of the word 'preach', and then in the next you state, "Every believer is called to preach the gospel." How can one agree or disagree with this statement if there is no clear definition of the word? The word 'preach' has come to mean so many different things that it is basically meaning_less_.
> 
> I really doubt there is much disagreement on this thread over the role of women in relationship to the ministry of the word, but each side is willing to fight to the death to protect _their_ definition of the word 'preach'.
Click to expand...

 
My disagreement regards the idea that women are not allowed to preach. They are. They can preach to women and children in the church (not men), and they can preach to everyone outside the church. They are forbidden from exercising authority in the church (which would include preaching in the pulpit); that is it. Everything else is fair game.


----------

