What does the Scriptures reveal unto us concerning Women as Leaders, Ministers, or even Pastors (Overseers) over an Assembly or Congregation?
Read slowly and carefully Scriptures presented in this study:
Luke 2:36-38 / Luke 8:1-3
I Corinthians 14:26-39 gives a detailed description on how assembly or congregational meetings should be conducted. Eytomology and Hebrew Historical Literature from studies of Israel state that, “certain” Women were unruly, gossiping, and asking questions while service took place. Also during that particular time, the assembly was separated by seating format, but not by discord. The men sat on one side of the assembly and women on the other, but were on one accord in worship. And therefore Paul may have emphasized on these incidents by suggesting on the basis of Yahudim/Jewish Law that women should ask questions at home to their husbands. Here in the scriptures we see the word “speak” in verses 26-33 edifying positions in the congregation and tells us that Elohim is not the author of confusion. The positions such as prophecy, tongues, etc…had nothing to do with Women being leaders or overseers or not being leaders of a congregation. Verse 31 states “All” can learn and all can be encouraged. There is no scriptural background or direct commandment from the Father (Our Creator) and the Son (Our Maker) in the Old or New Covenants (Testaments) stating that Women are not to minister or be an overseer over a congregation. Scriptures verify Women participating in same positions as Men:
Acts 2:17,18 / 9:36 / 17:4,11,12 / 18:18,19,26 Genesis 1:26-31> “them"
Joel 2:28 Acts 10:34, 35> “partiality"
Jeremiah 31:22 Romans 2:11
Galatians 3:26-29 Colossians>3:16-19
Colossians 2:8--23> “Messiah is the Head")
Doctrines of Men teach us matters like a woman must not or should not stand behind a pulpit. The pulpit means nothing whatsoever to the Creator. Yahushua Messiah looks at our hearts (our minds or very being) and judges us according to the works that we do. Man puts himself upon a pedestal. Don’t be disarrayed, for there are many sincere preachers as well as self appointed ministers. But whether a woman stands in a man-made pulpit does not determine her salvation as well as others. Who are we, to question Yahuah the Father and Yahushua Messiah our Savior? > Isaiah 45:9,10 / Romans 9:18-21.
There are some to say that a woman with a period (monthly cycle) should not stand in a man-made pulpit based on Leviticus 15:1-35, which gives us no reference to a woman being a minister or leader > Galatians 2:16-21). There is nothing at all wrong with going to an assembly or building. It’s a place of assembling > Hebrews 10:24,25). It is not a sacred place or ever will be in the eyesight of the Creator, because your being along with others make up the Body (Congregation) > Ephesians 1:22,23 / Ephesians 2:18-22 / Colossians 1:18,24. The Congregation is the Spiritual Body of Messiah and He is the Head and only Him………not a Man nor a Woman, but Yahushua Messiah. Yes, there are authoritative figures or persons of assemblies, but scripture even tells us how they should conduct themselves toward the flock and be labeled as overseers or brothers > Matthew 18:3-6 / Matthew 23:8-12 / Mark 10:42-45.
Should we remove the Books of Ruth and Esther from the Torah (Scriptures), because they were women? Why of course not! And man should not take it upon himself to determine, decide, or decree what is the mind of Elohim > Isaiah 55:8,9. He reveals himself through The Word. Since the Congregation is the Spiritual Body of Messiah over which He is the Head in accordance to Colossians 1:18,24 / Ephesians 1:20-23; then it really does not matter, male or female, who ministers to the congregation. There are many spirit-filled women doing a great work for Elohim. But sitting or standing behind a man-made pulpit, just as men do, does not give women or men authority over the Congregation. Yahushua is the Head of the Congregation and we all make up the Body.
What about I Timothy 2:12? >> On many instances, the Apostles had to turn from Jewish customs, even though some were not ceremonial laws, but traditions of men, and were not of the grace provided and given unto us by Messiah. Read Philippians 3:5-13 / Acts 10:9-15 and by the reasoning of your mind (Isaiah 1:18) relate these to Joel 2:28 / Acts 2:17-18 / Jeremiah 31:22 (Future Prophecies). As for legalistic righteousness, faultless; Paul once kept the law with Pharisaic meticulousness. This doesn’t mean he was wrong when he stated “I suffer not a woman to teach or usurp authority”, but based his teaching on the statues and ordinances of the Mosaic Law, which was the law given by the living Elohim. Eytomology has proven that the Monks monked with certain texts and will be explained later in this study. This passage of I Timothy 2:12 has to be read in it’s whole context. As you read you will discover the word authority, whereas the woman’s authority was taken away through disobedience in the Garden of Eden. This Scripture indicates an authoritative figure, which was given to man (male) after the fall or sin occurred initiated by the woman; but does not command a woman not to minister.
Those who have a (KJV) King James Bible should turn to 1John 5:7, 8 and compare to ISR Writings which are currently used for the restoring of accuracy...and if you don’t have both, I suggest you find a fellow-believer or purchase the original Hebrew text correctly translated to English and you will discover the following >>>
The KJV renders 1John 5:7, 8 in this fashion: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the Water, and the blood: and these three agree in one”.
The original Hebrew text (ISR and others) translated correctly to English with no man-made additions through reprinting renders 1 John 5:7, 8, pure: “Because there are three who bear witness: the Spirit, and the water, and the blood. And these three are in agreement.
This is what happens when someone monks with the text. Catholicism added words to the KJV in order to promote their “Trinity Theory”. With all due respect to the reader, my advice is that you find an original text. For the KJV through reprinting is full of italics and distorted terms such as hell, vain, and thy, thee which are Shakesperian and not inspired. Yet the original text still holds what we read from Paul and we know that Yahuah is not an author of confusion, but Satan is. For some strange odd reason, many believers believe or think that they are immune to errors introduced by the enemy. This was illustrated to show what men have done to keep us in bondage under religious order instead of having us in Spiritual Power.
Catch your breathe and stop thinking so hard. Theologians and Eytomologists agree that this is the only part of the text that was brutally monked with. So breathe out and know that His Word is pure and we must study and research in order to stop settling for the status-quo. The Writings are in their purest form except for 1 John 5:7, 8 in the KJV due to Catholicism reprinting and we will see later what happen with “a woman is not suppose to preach” concept.
For Paul without doubt was a chosen vessel for the kingdom’s work and his writings are all pure > Proverbs 30:5,6. The Father reveals in the entire Writings how we should live and also allowed the Set-Apart Spirit filled inspired writers to indicate, depict, and illustrate every concept, rather right or wrong, to be reviewed in order to establish a clear understanding of His Plan > II Timothy 2:15,16.
Exodus 15:20,21 >>Prophetess
Judges 4:4/5:7 >>Leader
Nehemiah 6:14 >>Prophetess
Isaiah 8:3 >> Prophetess
Luke 2:36-38 >> Prophetess
If and when Yahuah restores anything, it was always for the better and not for the worst > Hebrews 13:8 (Our Maker and Savior). Genesis 1:27,28 > read it slowly and carefully. The context specifically states that the term “Man” means male and female and they both were given dominion over the earth. Until the fall in Genesis 3:16, the scripture states that man shall rule over a woman, but was not the Creator’s will, but a plan placed into effect because of disobedience. Jude 3 speaks directly to us: “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that you should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”
This original faith and life style established in Genesis 1:27,28 / and in the early Congregation as you have read in the Scriptures of the book of Acts, is being restored now as well as prophecies being fulfilled, such as Jeremiah 31:22, just before the Savior Yahushua Messiah returns to earth. Acts 3:21 says the Heaven must receive the Savior until the times of restitution of all things. Restitution means re-establish from a state of ruin. This includes the restoring of the Father and Son’s Names, which have been replaced with titles, such as God, Lord, and the Greek name, ‘Jesus’ through reprinting or translations from Hebrew to Greek and from Greek to various languages. But no one is held accountable for what they do not know >> James 17:4 / Luke 12:47,48 / Acts 17:30.
VIEW ON THIS TOPIC FROM LEW WHITE:
Galatians 3:26-29 states that there is no distinction between men and women in their fellowship with Yahuah, however as we interact with one another there are subtle distinctions and rules WE make up. Let's consider women, and what Shaul is accused of saying about them, shall we?
Shaul (Paul) seems to make a statement that sounds very discriminating against women: "As in all the congregations of the qodeshim (saints)*, women should remain silent in the assemblies. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the assembly." 1 Corinthians 14:32-35 (*qodeshim, "saints", would be all Israel of Shaul's day, who met together to study).
What "law" is Shaul speaking of here? There is no TORAH prohibition which forbids women from speaking in a group-study of Torah. Could it have been an Oral Law (Talmud) tradition that clung to this Pharisee of Pharisees? Possibly; but there are more likely possibilities. Every scholar's commentary on this subject stumbles in the dark to find a shred of evidence in Torah against women speaking, so the "law" which Shaul seems to be citing about women not speaking could be a social norm in that time and place. To Shaul (or whoever monked with the text) it may have been "disgraceful" for a woman to speak in the assembly, but he also seems to be using the word "law". The Greek word "law" in this sentence is #3551, NOMOS - and generally is defined as LAW. However it can mean principal, or RULE. In that life-setting, it may have been an acceptable RULE or principle to wear a toga and go barefoot into an eating establishment. That would not be acceptable today, in most modern, civilized areas of the world. It should be clear that people can't pick and choose which Commandment to obey, but Shaul's writings are twisted constantly to say what people want to hear; to negate a Commandment, or make NEW ones. Shaul doesn't have the authority to ADD or TAKE AWAY from the Torah, yet in practice that's exactly what we see people doing with his writings.
Someone ELSE may have done this, as we'll see. Keep your mind open to the possibility that monks may have caused certain doctrinal details to appear in the Greek texts, to give their behavior credibility. When Yahuah clearly declares we are NOT TO WORK, but rather to rest on the seventh day of each week as He rested, many people dodge obeying this and explain it away. But, when Shaul declares that women are NOT TO SPEAK, even though Yahuah didn't mention it, THAT RULE THEY WANT TO ENFORCE.
Here's proof that marriage exists in the animal kingdom:
No one is sure about Shaul's marital experience, but we assume he was single for the latter part of his life. Personally, I'd rather take advice on marriage from someone who has at least been married, and even more preferably from someone who is in a successful relationship. In the Scripture quoted above, "they should ask their own husbands at home", "they" would be women in the assembly, and married in order to have "husbands at home".
Shaul doesn't assume that any woman in the assembly would be unmarried if we take this verse to its logical conclusion, yet in other places he clearly recommends "singleness". Taken as a whole, Shaul's advice sends mixed messages (or whoever monked with the text didn't clean up their mess very well). His personal advice can be different from yours, or mine, and yet we can still accept one another. One person may want to wear a hat, another may show up without one - no big deal.
What we have today that we know as the "gospels" and letters of the earliest disciples of Yahushua were all passed down to us through what is known as the "Alexandrian Cult". These were early "church fathers" such as Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom, and many others. It started during the second century with Marcion and Irenaeus. They chose what was "in" and what was "out" -- and they fiddled and tweaked what was accepted, but you'll have to study about that for yourself. From what they passed down to us in the Greek today, which only dates back to the 4th century at the most, Shaul would apparently forbid women in the assembly to open their mouths; I want to hear the Voice of Yahushua no matter who it is that is speaking. Some "leaders" prefer that young children and babies be kept out of the assembly, to minimize the crying and disruption. I vote that we accept all, and let the women speak, answer questions, and live with it -- like the male lion is doing in the photo above! I recognize what men have done to this planet. I also recognize the blazing intellect that my wife has. If I were to have to live without her wisdom, I'd be in serious trouble. This coming August 18, 2006 we'll have been married for 33 years. She learns things from me, however it's a 2-way street in our house.
The best Scriptures I know of concerning how women are to conduct themselves in general
as wives and among the believers are:
Ephesians 5:22-28 (probably the very best)
1 Tim. 3:11, 5:1, 2
1 Pet. 3:1-6
Titus 2:3, 4
These were penned by an unmarried man, and yet they are generally VERY good advice. Shaul may have had some traumatic experiences with the female species, because he recommended that single people remain so, as he was. This advice goes against not only the normal pattern of every historical society which have all been based on the family unit, but is also very different from his own culture. Rabbis, Lewite (Levite) priests, and practically any average man of Shaul's time would have been an oddity (QUEER, FREAKY) if they were unmarried. I'm not suggesting that Shaul was a recovering homosexual, but he had obviously chosen to remain single for the reign of Yahuah - as had Yahushua.
The topic of "celibacy" is against the Command to "be fruitful and multiply", given directly from the Voice of Yahuah to men at Gen. 1:28, 8:17, 9:1, and 9:7. In fact, the word "celibacy" is not found in the Scriptures - check any concordance. If it is a good thing, and Yahuah would have us be celibate to serve Him better, why did He not tell us or instruct us? Those who may seem to read it into what Shaul taught in his letters have 2 possibilities to decide between.
Either the idea of "remaining single" was figurative language and simply misunderstood, or it was ADDED by Catholic monks to give legitimacy for their own vows.
Shaul's "orders" to not allow women to speak in the assembly is one that causes a great deal of confusion, but when we assemble to study together, it's the women that bring the most to the whole affair. In the context of the verse quoted above, Shaul was discussing the details of how to conduct and maintain order in the assemblies. What Shaul may have meant was he didn't want "women-talk" in the assembly, or the clucking, gossiping, and prattling that often is seen at common family gatherings or social affairs. But, men are equally capable of being "boisterous", so that needs to be toned-down also. Our gatherings are moderated and led, but everyone has the opportunity to speak to the whole group from their seat, as it should be. At 1 Corinthians 14:26, Shaul tells us that when we assemble, EACH ONE has the ability to speak; then a few verses later states that the women can't speak! You can't have it both ways.
What if Shaul had said it was his opinion that MEN should not speak in the assembly, but should rather learn from their wives at home? If a woman believer has an unbelieving hubby, wouldn't you suppose it would be natural for her to teach him? We teach our children IN OUR HOMES, as the Torah instructs - yet people often find themselves carting-off their children to hear someone else teach them.
"What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification". 1 Corinthians 14:26
Here's 2 witnesses from Scripture: At Exodus/Shemoth 15:20, Miryam "the prophetess", the sister of Mosheh and Aharon, went out before the assembly of all Yisrael with "all the women", and they lifted up their voices in praise, and with dances. A similar thing happened at Judges/Shophetim 5, where Deborah sang before Yisrael and Yahuah. There are many other examples we could use, but all we need is the minimum of 2 witnesses.
In the final analysis, a logically thinking person would have to come to the conclusion that someone monked with the Greek, just a little bitty-bit. For many centuries, the Catholics purged any scrap of Hebrew they found from the libraries, synagogues, and homes - killing and burning people who had knowledge. The only remaining documents were what they held, written in Greek. Among the thousands of copies of these Greek manuscripts, NO TWO HAVE BEEN FOUND THAT MATCH ONE ANOTHER. There you have it folks. Contradictions and weird policies that don't seem to have any precedents may have to be attributed to manipulation of the text, the "lying pen" of the scribes. I don't doubt Shaul, but there's plenty of room for doubt in my mind concerning the monks and their copying work. They were forced to take VOWS OF SILENCE so they couldn't discuss the Truth, nor what they were working on with one another. The Catholic tradition, rooted in the Pagan fusion of religions, required VOWS OF POVERTY AND CELIBACY. Did they bring these things into the text, or twist out of shape what Shaul really meant? Contradictions don't point to any flaws in what Shaul originally wrote, but they sure seem to point to what was done to his writings later on. Shaul wouldn't have said "each one", then a few verses later say "women can't speak". He knew that the Scriptures clearly revealed this:
"Then you will know that I am in Israel that I am Yahuah your Elohim and that there is no other; never again will my people be shamed. And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people Your sons and daughters will prophesy your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Even on My servants, both men and women I will pour out my Spirit in those days I will show wonders in the heavens and on the Earth, blood and fire and billows of smoke. The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of Yahuah And everyone who calls on the Name of Yahuah will be saved; for on Mount Tsiyon (Zion) and in Yerushaliyim (Jerusalem) there will be deliverance, as Yahuah has said, among the survivors whom Yahuah calls.” Joel 2:27-32
Shaul didn't necessarily contradict this, someone else who was "towing a company line" probably did. Yahushua is recorded speaking to a "Samaritan woman" for most of Yahuchanon chapter 4. If this woman could address the Creator-in-flesh Yahushua, converse with Him, then why do we imagine that women are not able to address others (regular human beings) in an assembly? There is a cultural blockage now, and there was then; notice that Yahushua's own talmidim thought it to be inappropriate that He be engaged in a conversation with a woman:
"Just then His disciples returned and were surprised to find him talking with a woman. But no one asked, 'What do you want?' or 'Why are you talking with her?'" John 4:27 Note: the argument below, based on "the body of Scriptural law", (whatever that may be).
HERE'S A QUITE SIMPLE, AND I FEEL CORRECT, VIEW ON THIS TOPIC FROM BARRON:
RE: Your article "Women speaking in the assembly"
Almost all people lock onto the upsetting phrase "They [women] are not allowed to speak, ..., as the law says", but cannot find it in the Torah. Actually, it says, "They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission as the law says." Submission is the Torah issue here; speaking is the local application.
The Torah says this in Genesis 3:16 - "and he shall rule over you." Don't forget 1Peter 3:1-6.
Basically, if the husband instructs his wife to remain silent in the assembly, then it is certainly disgraceful for her to not submit. (Just as we submit to Messiah). If a man allows his wife to speak in assembly, then she can speak freely and it is not a violation of Torah. Presumably, the Corinthian assembly followed some Jewish traditions that segregated the women and children in the synagogue, such that they remained silent (or whispered among themselves) while listening to the men's questions and discussion. Our American traditions are far different since we married folk sit together and naturally encourage each other to join the discussion, and then have difficulty understanding Paul's culturally-distant application of Torah.