Women teaching seminary- biblical?

[staythecourse]

My point was that you were arguing (at least initially) that Molly Marshall was dismissed from Southern solely because she was a woman and as I noted nothing could be further from the truth. In her case she would have been dismissed either way just as a lot of men were at that same time due to their liberal beliefs.

I agree, Chris,

My sources did not have that she was fired for theology but for teaching in an area she had no right to teach in. But to reiterate, there in no women teaching men at a large and distinguished institution like SBTS for a reason and it's a clarion note to wise women to stay out of theological professorships over men. It makes a clear statement to many wise and learned women out there who may be tempted to get in a role they have no biblical right to take.

 

[Pergamum]

If a women can teach at the university level, than she can teach some peripheral classes at seminary, i.e. languages, history, logic or philosophy.

I have already before expressed that systematics, etc, should be reserved for men.



There need not be even a "woman theologian" at the seminary since one can teach philosophy without being ordained. Define "theologian."


I am afriad that many think that a woman is not allowed to teach a man anything; but I think the NT stresses the ecclesiastical authority of a man. And in many roles in Bible schools and some roles in seminary a woman might even be able to teach without her role being blurred or her being mistaken to exercise an ecclesiastical authority role.



Being overly-restrictive with the Word of God and people's lives is just as much sin as being overly-permissive.

 

[staythecourse]

I hear you Chris - a separate thread on the validity, benefits, and weaknesses might be in order... But it's Thanksgiving in the US (I read your thread on how the people you are among responded to Thanksgiving Day Perg and am glad they had a positive response) and I gotta bird to eat with 2 (count 'em TWO) of my pastors. One went to seminary and one did not!

 

[Pergamum]

If you believe that all seminary and bible school professors should be ordained elders, than logically this would exclude women. I do not see why a Bible School course in philosophy needs to be taught by an ordained elder, unless all seminaries and Bible schools were subordinated underneath the local church and the authority of such school was the leadership of said local church (which is not the present case of seminaries).



Staythecourse: Whatever your sources are, why don't they reflect the news sources I have already linked, which clearly put the root cause of Dr. Marhsall's dismissal on errant theology.
-----Added 11/27/2008 at 12:36:41 EST-----
Happy Thanksgiving and God bless; I'm signing off - thanks for the good thread.

 

[staythecourse]

If a women can teach at the university level, than she can teach some peripheral classes at seminary, i.e. languages, history, logic or philosophy.

I have already before expressed that systematics, etc, should be reserved for men.



There need not be even a "woman theologian" at the seminary since one can teach philosophy without being ordained. Define "theologian."


I am afriad that many think that a woman is not allowed to teach a man anything; but I think the NT stresses the ecclesiastical authority of a man. And in many roles in Bible schools and some roles in seminary a woman might even be able to teach without her role being blurred or her being mistaken to exercise an ecclesiastical authority role.



Being overly-restrictive with the Word of God and people's lives is just as much sin as being overly-permissive.

My thank button quit.

I'll think about that more and see if that is not getting too close to the fire. The last statement is a good truth and we agree there for certain P.

 

[Ivan]

My point was that you were arguing (at least initially) that Molly Marshall was dismissed from Southern solely because she was a woman and as I noted nothing could be further from the truth. In her case she would have been dismissed either way just as a lot of men were at that same time due to their liberal beliefs.

I agree, Chris,

My sources did not have that she was fired for theology but for teaching in an area she had no right to teach in. But to reiterate, there in no women teaching men at a large and distinguished institution like SBTS for a reason and it's a clarion note to wise women to stay out of theological professorships over men. It makes a clear statement to many wise and learned women out there who may be tempted to get in a role they have no biblical right to take.

Let me add a personal note here. At one time I was considering getting another Masters degree and going on to a PhD. I visited Southern Seminary and sat in on one of the classes taught by the woman in question. In my personal opinion from that one class it was evident that she was very liberal(saying she is liberal is actually being kind to her). Hence, I didn't attend Southern.

Regardless her gender, I believe the trustees of the seminary had good reason to dismiss her.

 

[TimV]

I am afriad that many think that a woman is not allowed to teach a man anything;

Can you name one person here? Or are you thinking about some other people you know?

but I think the NT stresses the ecclesiastical authority of a man.

What do you mean by ecclesiastical? A building? A denomination? The Church, which includes all believers, which the Greek word of origin means?

You mentioned the lady from your bible study who would never clamor to lead. But why do we consider teaching in seminary to be “leading” in the biblical sense?

What do you think this verse from James 3 means?

1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2For we all stumble in many ways.

If one determines to look at the broad picture without quibbling to the point of reducing everything to meaningless rhetoric, then the lady in my Bible Study can indeed teach men by answering questions during the study, the several ladies here who've asked about the subject can witness Christ at work, the lady here who is in charge of the church choir does her thing with a pure conscience and my daughters can teach kids they baby sit.

It would be absurd to make this verse mean everyone who teaches anything.

It's talking about a gift and calling, that is used in the Church, which doesn't mean a building and on Sunday.

If you believe that all seminary and bible school professors should be ordained elders, than logically this would exclude women. I do not see why a Bible School course in philosophy needs to be taught by an ordained elder, unless all seminaries and Bible schools were subordinated underneath the local church and the authority of such school was the leadership of said local church

It's neither logical nor reasonable. The gift and office of the Teacher isn't restricted to or defined by a building.

 

[cbryant]

2 Kings 5:22 is the verse everyone is referring to in regard to the 'school of the prophets.' This verse is weak support for not allowing women to teach in a seminary because. 1) there are no more prophets (Christ being the last) and 2) the context of the verse is Gehazi trying to deceive Namaan. The only examples of 'seminary type training' is of either Christ and the Apostles to which there were no women and no qualifications for succession. One could use Acts 18:26 (Priscilla and Aquila) but I think that would be stretching the context of the verse.

My personal conviction is that if a Seminary is for the sole or primary purpose of training men for the pastorate then I believe that those training those individuals should be pastors themselves thus being men. While the instruction aspect can be done by the non-ordained, but the shepherding aspect cannot. One of my professors told us in one of my classes, "This is my pastorate and you are my flock." Also, even if a Seminary has secondary purposes via other degree schemes (Master of Arts type schemes, doctorate degrees, etc) that do allow for those not seeking ordination (open to both men and women) then the primary purpose and reason should not be overridden just because there are those who's reason for being at the seminary is not to seek ordination.