reformed baptist church's attitude towards women

Status
Not open for further replies.

a

Puritan Board Freshman
as some of you may know, i am quite new to this whole reformed theology thing... growing up in SBC, there are many questions i have regarding reformed churches and stuff...


this question concerns a reformed baptist church in texarkana, ar and its attitude towards women...


i was discussing with my mother today that i was looking for a church home in the dallas area, and that many of you were suggesting places to try out... she asked if these churches were calvinist, and i told her yes - reformed baptist churches and presbyterian churches...

i could tell there was a sudden concern in her voice after i told her this... this has been a sensitive subject for my mother and i (me making some sort of change in my beliefs)... i'm sure you can understand her concerns, as do i - so i'm just always careful to reassure her that i am testing everything with scripture...

so anyway, her countenance changed when i mentioned reformed baptist churches... i asked her what was her concern with this... she told me she knew a man from the reformed baptist church in texarkana, and she wasn't at all impressed with him... she said he was basically degrading of women, and almost held them as slaves... she may have been exaggerating a little, but i'm not sure... she said he has since been divorced...

to sort of confirm this sort of attitude, i had a teacher at school who was a member of that same reformed baptist church, and she had told us that women do not speak at their church...

my mom and i both realize that every church instance is going to be different in belief and behavior, but it was nonetheless a concern of hers...

having this conversation urged me to ask you guys about the biblical attitude and treatment of women... what is the biblical truth? and does the reformed baptist church have a formal statement regarding women? or is there a stereotype of common occurence of the reformed baptist church regarding women?


i am genuinely concerned about this - actually, i've never been taught in any depth what the bible really says about the difference between men and women - their roles in the family, in the church, etc...


your help on this matter is so greatly appreciated... please don't hold my ignorance against me...

ace

[Edited on 5-14-2004 by ace]
 
Ace,
The reformed baptist men love their wives. Woman are not degraded. The examples followed are biblical........all of the reformed baptists I know, love the word, revere it, fear God and based upon that, love their wives etc.

Most times I see this type of attitude in woman whom are NOT [i:1c24cb0f12]reformed[/i:1c24cb0f12]. Coming from outside of the ranks of refomed circles, I can understand the complaint. Elsewhere in the world, i.e. the Charasmatics, woman are elevated unbiblically, hence leading to the venemous misconception.

[Edited on 5-14-2004 by Scott Bushey]
 
You bring up a good topic of conversation Ace. This is most certainly a very touchy subject in the world right now. But the Bible is the Word of God and I certainly believe is inerrant and infallable. The issues might be confused.

If you really want to understand the Biblical concept of Manhood and how it is distinct from that of womanhood I would suggest reading the following verses.

Start with [b:063688a230]Genesis 3:16[/b:063688a230] - God's punishment to Eve in the garden. God gave all men and women roles in life.

Next, move on to [b:063688a230]1 Timothy 2:8-15[/b:063688a230] - Paul's direction to the young church on roles in worship. Notice how Paul refers back to the fall in Genesis.

Continue through to [b:063688a230]Ephesians 5:22-33[/b:063688a230]. Pay attention that men are given instructions and women are given instructions. Men are not told to force the women to submit and women are not told to nag the men to love them.

Back to [b:063688a230]1 Tim 3:8-13[/b:063688a230]. Deacons are described as having wives. There is really no direct Biblical concept for giving women a platform to lead men in the church. I actually suggest that God directs us to have women stop teaching boys around age 13.

Ponder on [b:063688a230]1 Tim 5[/b:063688a230]. Notice the loving, kind and gentle spirit that we are to have for all people. Even when you have to confront an older man or woman about sin, do it as if they were your own father or mother.

If I received any teaching in any church that I was a member that was harsh or degrading towards women I would politely bring it to the church officer's attention and would resign my membership if need be.

Now, I am aware that there are those that take offense to the clear teaching of Scripture and will call that degrading. But, what are they then upset at? Not us, but at God for creating an order that they disagree with.
 
1 Tim 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

is this what you are referencing for women not to teach boys over 13?


what of women's silence in the church today? or womens dressing, braided hair, etc... ?


thanks you guys - thanks for taking the time to answer such queries...
ace
 
Now we're getting to some meat. See why this is such a touchy subject?!?!? :bs2:

For a direct verse, yes this is pretty solid. In the beginning of this letter v.1 Paul says, "Paul, a apostle of Jesus Christ, by the commendment of God our Savior and the Lord Jesus Christ, our hope,"... He's not just offering an opinion. He's creating an picture for how the church is supposed to be and what should be done in the church for worship.

In 1 Tim 2:8 and on we see that Paul is likely addressing some issues going on in the church at Ephesus. I don't believe that he is saying that women should literally not speak inside the church building, but rather that women should not be given spiritual authority over a man as it is not fitting in the law that has been already laid down by God. Paul is not arguing from a cultural perspective on this, he is going right back to creation. "For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression..."

I think this teaching is pretty clear. I can find no Biblical grounds for women to have spiritual authority over men in the Christian church. If anyone has some Biblical text or an argument I would love to hear it.
 
I do not know of any Reformed Baptist church or any RB men either that treat their wives or any women badly. If a man did this he should be disciplined by the church.

Now then, some out there who are not reformed may be overreacting to the fact that a church that is being obedient to Scripture will not have women in authority over men in the church. Many in the SBC world I came from had the women running everything in the church, including teaching Sunday School to men, etc. But when you have a church ruled by elders instead of by democratic committees made up if any member of the body, then you find only men in places of authority.

Women are commended and expected to teach other women and to serve the body in many different ways. So not having women in authority does not mean that they cannot minister.

And I do agree that the verses about silence refer to teaching and having authority over men. It does not mean, as some have taken it, that a woman must not utter a single word while the church is meeting. One guy who was part of the forum here a while ago actually was looking for a church that would not let the women even sing in church because he thought they should be absolutely silent when in the presence of any men other than their immediate family!! :rolleyes:

A proper Biblical understanding of the roles of men and women seem out of place to feminists, liberals, or the Biblically uneducated. Far from being harsh or degrading, if a church truly treats people the way God commands, then men and women both will be esteemed and treated better within the church than they would ever be treated in the world where God assigned roles are reversed and distorted.

Phillip
 
PastorWay wrote:
"A proper Biblical understanding of the roles of men and women seem out of place to feminists, liberals, or the Biblically uneducated. Far from being harsh or degrading, if a church truly treats people the way God commands, then men and women both will be esteemed and treated better within the church than they would ever be treated in the world where God assigned roles are reversed and distorted. "

I just had to say amen to that!

Ace, I just wanted to add a women's prospective that I find biblical submission very beautiful, difficult, but beautiful. Difficult only in that it is hard to submit to anyone, even a godly husband, as it goes against our nature and that is why God clearly instrcuted women to do it. It is beautiful though as it a picture of Christ and His church.

I find the misuse and disregard for the scripture supporting biblical submission full of sinful pride and arrogance. The misuse being from the man that wants to "lord over" his wife that she is to submit to him and disregards her thoughts and feelings, and that from the women who wants to rule her husband (and/or the church), disregarding the fact that God has plainly told her to do this (submit).

I grew up believing that is was wrong for a woman to be a pastor (though I was never really taught why, it just came from comments my parents would make), but when I was 21 and going to bible school I was taught otherwise and for a couple of years held to the belief that it was okay for women to teach men in the church. I was taught that the references to women not to have authority over men and to be silent simply met that women were not to have authority over their own husband (they should not teach their own husband) and that they should not speak out during the service making interuptions, asking their husbands question, etc... . After thinking this through it really made no sense at all. By reasoning this thought out is would make it wrong for a woman to teach her husband at home but okay to preach to him from the pulpit, or it would only be okay for a single woman to preach, etc... . Obviously this makes no sense.

One argument that I have heard is that it doesn't make sense that God wouldn't want women in ministry, He is cutting His supply in half. This is just riduclous reasoning, God can do and use whomever He wants! Also, many try to say that women like Lydia and Pheobe were in the office of deacon but the word for deaconess can also be translated servant. You can also look at the way God set up the church, men were always the leaders as the 12 apostles were all men, the seven deacons in Acts 6 were all men. This is not to say that woman were not important they just play different roles and God has appointed different jobs for us.

Hope that helps Ace.

Anne

[Edited on 5-14-2004 by sailorswife]
 
Joshua wrote:
"Anne, are you teaching him something? :"

I hope so! But of course I have no authority over him as this is not a church and I am not in a formal teaching position (I know you are joking though!).
 
Well said Anne! Having been friends with you two since about 1997 (wow, has it been that long?) I can very truely attest that the Lord has definately worked great things in your lives by bringing you together.

Anne is definately a testament to the care of her husband.
 
folks, thanks so much...

all of your answers are of such great help...

my sincerest thanks to you all...


i've heard it said that when scripture instructs women to be silent, it was a specific instruction for a specific body of believers who were having trouble with some women in their church...

i think it's clear that scripture as a whole addresses this love/submit relationship, but is there any truth to this? or is this just an excuse to say that it "doesn't apply today..." ?


thanks again, so much!
ace
 
[quote:446a291b56][i:446a291b56]Originally posted by ace[/i:446a291b56]
i've heard it said that when scripture instructs women to be silent, it was a specific instruction for a specific body of believers who were having trouble with some women in their church...
[/quote:446a291b56]

Paul is clear in 1 Cor. 11 that his arguments apply to more than just Corinth. The problem was that Corinth was departing from the traditions that Paul had taught them. If any differ from what Paul was saying, then they are departing from the established practice of the "churches of God."

1 Cor. 11:16
But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

You may also notice that Paul was not the only one to teach on the role of women but Peter also (1 Peter 3). So the two major apostles, one to the Jews and the other to the Gentiles, both held to the same position.
 
When defining the role of an individual, our present culture will usually examine ones ability and use that criteria to pedicate the role. But when thinking biblically the role of an individual is defined by scripture, not ability.

An example of this might be the Seraphim and Cherubim. They are at least 'ministering spirits' (they may be angels of high rank) whose role is to guard paradise and guard and move the throne of God. Their ability seems to far exceed their role. Their ability would seem to fit them for world domination (as Satan attempted) but they follow their God ordained role to sit above and move the throne. Everyone in the body of Christ has a role and scripture, not majority opinion and not ability, must be our guide. :wr50:
 
Steve (king_of_fools), and anyone else please comment as well...


i want to ask you a little more about your statement:
"I actually suggest that God directs us to have women stop teaching boys around age 13. "

recalling 1 tim 2:12 for reference... ("I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.")...


is your position a common position of the reformed churches, or is this more of a personal conviction of your own? the reason i ask is because of the specificity you provided with the age of 13...



i just wanted to get yours, and everyone's, opinion on this statement about women not teaching any boys/men over the 13-ish age...

does this come from the idea that jewish kids become a man at about 13 with their bar mitzfah or something like that?


also, if that is the case, at my old church it was common for a husband-wife couple to be the sunday school leaders for the high school kids... in many cases, the woman would be the more dominant teacher and the men less educated, less willing, less confident, etc... (though this was not always the case)... any thoughts on this?

thanks so much...
ace
 
Well, the issue really come back to the question, "when does a boy become a man?" As far as this discussion goes in this topic right now, it's a secondary issue, but it doesn't hurt to try to define when this transformation takes place.

When does a boy's feelings change from baseball and bugs to girls and other things of the sort? When does his understanding of things begin to develop to the sort that he could make it on his own in the world. I've done some thought on this and making a decision based on age seems like the best method to define this change on average.

I think that young people growing up in the American society right now are kept immature for as long as possible. In days of old, 16, 15, 14 and yes, even 13 year old males used to begin their apprentiships with their chosen fields and would essentailly begin their adult lives. My great-grandfather left home at age 13 and rode the rails all across the country searching for work. He ended up doing just fine. Now, in the modern times, we don't fully call someone an 'adult' until they reach the age of 18, even though we put the alcohol age limit at 21. Other countries have much lower age limits for this sort of thing, like age 16 with far less disasterous and immature attitudes towards alcohol consumption.

At the university I graduated from, the Baptist Student Mission group on campus was run by a woman. She lead the bible study, the weekly arminiam praise and worship, etc. and this was targeted for the 18-24 year old college-crowd! I went once and that was enough for me. Another guy from chuch kept going and eventually the female leader left and a closet calvinist came in. We'll see what happens.

To wrap up, I am not aware of any specific doctrinal statement giving any specific guidance on this specific issue. If there were any such formal writing I would love to read it. In practice, most reformed churches that I have ever visited stop teaching having women teach right around the Jr. High (middle school) level.
 
[quote:513970f5a5][i:513970f5a5]Originally posted by maxdetail[/i:513970f5a5]
PS, there lots and lots of info and resources to be found here:

http://www.cbmw.org/


The Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Check out the Danver's Statement. [/quote:513970f5a5]

I second this site. It is the best place avalilable on the web. There is also an excellent question and answer section.
 
[quote:23e6e4229e][i:23e6e4229e]Originally posted by joshua[/i:23e6e4229e]
[quote:23e6e4229e][i:23e6e4229e]Originally posted by ace[/i:23e6e4229e]
...at my old church it was common for a husband-wife couple to be the sunday school leaders for the high school kids... in many cases, the woman would be the more dominant teacher and the men less educated, less willing, less confident, etc...

ace [/quote:23e6e4229e]I dominated mine!:D Just Joshin' [/quote:23e6e4229e]


yeah, i think the "teachers" at our church were afraid of having you in their class... even though you were Arminian at the time... :D
 
[quote:bf1c81eb99][i:bf1c81eb99]Originally posted by joshua[/i:bf1c81eb99]
It was the red hair. [/quote:bf1c81eb99]


hahahahaha

it was the one red hair
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top