Your last three minutes in the ‘big idea’ Mike were bang on. This is far more likely to be the case than the incredibly radical complimentarian position which doesn’t incorporate the context.
Very interesting thesis! Personally, I have the same take as Sandra Glahn who says the false teaching is the Artemis of the Ephesians cult. Thus, all the “misogynistic” prescriptions are addressing a local circumstance. I’ll definitely have to look more into the proto-gnostic thesis!
No. Bible scholars have contacted him before (regarding his avoidance of contexts and misuse of language) after he said "feel free to contact me so we can debate this topic" but when we was asked about he, he simply said "they won't like what I have to say about the topic haha" and left it at that. I had huge respect for Mike until this saga, he's unwilling to be confronted on it and it's disappointing. It seems he's gotten high off his own supply and believes he doesn't need to engage in any criticism of theological discussion on the topic.
I think Paul is discussing the home congregation (of believers). The reason is he uses a Jewish idiom for congregation. The idiom is "place" in 1 Tim 2:8 which is a Jewish idiomatic short form of holy place, which primarily means the Temple, but secondarily means a synagogue/home congregation.
I reckon your argument holds, even if the letter is 99% Pauline (my gut feeling). Like Glahn you're saying an Artemis-influenced Gnostic kinda view was being pushed by a few women in this particular church; they need to be silenced til sorted, but you can't extrapolate. Are there other examples of directives in the letters, which are clearly addressing a local issue, and which shouldn't be applied universally?
(haven't watched the video, but am familiar with this subject) Complementarianism, regarding men and women, was part of Paul's false and hierarchical view of Christianity. A Judge could execute a man for his sin. A Judge could teach men scripture in public. Deborah. Judges 4 and 5, else my free informal postable essay on her.
In Mike's video, he claims that there is no historical evidence for women having authority over men in the Ephesian artemis cult. I'm egalitarian, but I'd like to see someone engage him on that point.
I've watched a lot of Mike Winger videos. Not many recently. He's a pastor in the Calvary Chapel network of churches which started with Chuck Smith in the 60s. They tend to be rather conservative and mildly charismatic. I've enjoyed Mike's studies, although I haven't always agreed with them. But he tends to be very thorough, which I appreciate. Regarding egalitarianism and complementarianism, I'm not sure where I stand. I guess, if push came to shove, I would probably lean towards complementarianism. But, I think the church has more important things to worry about today than whether your pastor is male or female.
To state that birthright determines which gender can/can't teach the other is extremely important. That is at the heart of Complementarianism. A throwback to the Levitical priesthood, long gone never to come back.
if push comes to shove? huh? if "push comes to shove" -whatever that means- you would lean towards discriminating against God's choices like Miriam, Huldah, Deborah, Anna, 4 daughters of Philip, Mary called the Magdelene, the women among the 120 men and women who were ordained by the Holy Spirit to preach and spread the Gospel, Romans 3:16 women, Timothy's mum and grandmum who pastored him, etc etc etc and all the wonderful women whose voices and leadership God used in history?
I have to say Dr. Bird, there are quite a few times where you misrepresent what Mike Winger believes in this video and other dialogues about this topic when responding to his claims. There are several times where you paint a picture that is only representative of a patriarchalist view of complimentarianism that Mike simply does not hold to, and he makes that very clear in his videos. I am not denying that this view exists, but I would argue it is the miniority, and Mike would stand hand in hand with you and fight it as well. Fight his claims, not only the extreme ones. Statements such as "spiritual gifts do not only come in blue and pink" is so besides any point Mike is making. Being an overseer is not a spiritual gift, it is an office on the church that was established by Christ and the Apostles with specific qualifications. We believe one of those qualifications is to be a male. That is not saying that women lack spiritual gifts that are only reserved for men. This is just one example of the several poor representations of Mike Winger's views that are in your dialogues.
you wrote: We believe one of those qualifications is to be a male. Birthright. A throwback to the Levitical priesthood, long gone never to come back. Be careful of what Paul wrote, as a general comment.
I don’t think Dr. Bird was saying that Mike doesn’t believe that woman have spiritual gifts. Rather, he was just stating his viewpoint and why he thinks it’s important to engage this issue. Also, perhaps you didn’t make it to the end of the video where Dr. Bird explicitly states that Mike doesn’t hold to an extreme view of complementarianism. This seems to be more of an introductory video to set the stage for future content.
It's extremely frustrating to me when someone says, "You're not accurately representing my complementarian view properly" even though it IS being represented accurately, and they just don't agree with the differing conclusion that person is coming to. One has to listen carefully to know the difference. If I say complementarianism is all about hierarchy in the church and marriage and that affirming hierarchy between genders upholds inherent inequality, they might disagree and say I'm misrepresenting their view, but I'm not. I'm just emphasizing something they either can't see or refuse to admit about their view. I admit there is often bad listening on both sides of this question, but only time will judge who is listening with more honesty and humility.
@@stevereilly7058 The position/title of 'teacher' is forbidden by Jesus. We all can teach. Some of us can teach much better than others of course. rabbi - religious teacher in Judaism (basic, generic definition) But as for you, do not be called Rabbi; for only One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers and sisters. -excerpt Matthew 23 -words of Jesus
Hello Rev Dr Bird. I’m wondering if you would see Paul’s bringing up the woman being saved through childbirth would be a purposeful parody of the pagan cult belief to create the rhetoric to introduce the promised seed of the woman in Genesis, in the same way he makes parody of the Corinthian churches slogans such as “all things are lawful” in order to create his rhetoric toward them about all things not being useful etc. thanks for the video.
Anytime somone starts their argument by distputing authorship I have to wonder about their view of the bible in general. I want to learn from bible students not bible critics.
@@davewhite756 Men and women are stated to have been made in God's image. A Judge could judge men of their sins. Even homicide. A Judge could teach scripture. This is all covered in my informal postable essay on Deborah. you wrote: men and women can have different roles and still be equal Complementarianism The priesthood of the New Covenant is a 2-tiered priesthood based on birthright. That false and confusing teaching, that states Christian women are less than Christian men in a spiritual way, but they really aren't, but they really are. The complementarian teaching prohibits a Christian woman from holding certain positions in a church. They can't be elders neither can they teach men. So why is that? The false teaching makes it clear that the priesthood of the New Covenant is tiered. There is a hierarchy. Those that are higher, the men, can be in leadership positions, like elder. They can teach other men. Those in the lower tier can not be in leadership positions, like elder. They are prohibited from teaching men, because the men are in the higher tier. It wouldn't make any sense. A new believer is automatically assigned their level, higher or lower, at the moment of salvation, as a birthright. Their gender determines their tier. A Christian can not move to a higher or lower tier. A Christian that is in the lower tier (woman) is not allowed to complain of the tier she was placed in. That would be sin, because God made her a woman by His choice. She should accept and also embrace her position in the lower tier. A church, is either a group of Christian men or a group of Christian men and women. A church can never be a group of Christian women, because it would be a group of only those in the lower tier. It would have no elders. But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. -excerpt 1 Peter 2 Since the teaching states that women are spiritually inferior to men, but they aren't, but they are, when did that start? But I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a wrongdoer. -excerpt 1 Timothy 2 It started with the first woman. She was deceived, and sinned because of it. So we have a teaching that accepts that men and women are fallen beings. Both genders are sinful by nature. However women are different. They are lacking the ability that men have to judge if some situation, some concept or teaching is sinful. This inability was passed down from Eve to all women. It remains to this day. A woman in our time was 'lacking' from birth, even from the womb. So what can be done? Nothing according to Complementarianism. The teaching states that even an anointing of that powerful masculine being called the Holy Spirit, is just not sufficient. It states that even the Holy Spirit can not elevate even one Christian woman to the spiritually superior level of a Christian man.
To be fair Mike does investígate both sides IMO. The difficulty is between what the bible says and how we interpret it, while trying to avoid my natural bias of being female😃.
He misrepresents and/ or misunderstanding the egalitarian scholars. I was complementarian when I started listening to Winger's series on women and was nodding along when the HS convicted me to check out the arguments myself. I did, and am now fully convinced that the interpretation I held for over 30 years was false and due to the cultural influence of patriarchy throughout history. When I went back to listen to Winger's videos, I was frustrated by his misrepresentation of the views of the egalitarians. He does not represent both sides. He represents his own side, and puts up a strawman to represent egalitarians.
Without women running house churches, Christianity wouldn't have spread as far and fast as it did. By the 2nd century it was known as the religion of women and slaves!!!!!
coffeebreaktheology Paul was heavily influenced by his culture. His teachings/writings on the 'women in ministry' matter totally contradict the example God gave to Israel, and us. Deborah, at about 1100 B.C. Judges 4 and 5, else my free informal essay on her. Read time: 10 minutes
When the New Testament was compiled at about 400 A.D. we got good teachings and bad. It's unfortunate that some sexist teachings made it in. Perhaps to test us? This matter was actually settled at about 1100 B.C. when God made a woman a Judge over Israel.
@@davidruth7096 Judges 4 and 5, else my free informal essay on Deborah. Read time: 10 minutes postable here ...the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people... In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’ -excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
@@davidruth7096 The Judge was the primary/senior pastor/shepherd at that time period. (In case the reader in unaware, the word pastor and the word shepherd are the same word. I prefer shepherd, because it has obvious meaning to the average person.) Major modern English translations like the NASB use the phrasing ...whom I commanded to shepherd My people... In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’ -excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation Some believe that pastor (or shepherd), is a position that was created in the New Covenant. This is not true. In the Old Testament shepherds are mentioned multiple times. Often in a negative way. “My people have become lost sheep; Their shepherds have led them astray. -excerpt Jeremiah 50 For an entire chapter on worthless shepherds, the reader may check out Ezekiel 34. When the shepherd over Israel died, the people went back into sin. That is because the Judge was the most important spiritual leader of this time period. But it came about, when the judge died, that they would turn back and act more corruptly than their fathers, in following other gods to serve them and bow down to them; they did not abandon their practices or their obstinate ways. -excerpt Judges 2 Deborah, full essay read time: 10 minutes, free, postable
If you want to "stick to the text", do you think slaves should obey their masters even when they are cruel, as Paul commands? How many slaves do you own?
@@Jeowynand to borrow your line of reasoning , let’s also require children to no longer need obey their parents. Egalitarian authors like Giles Payne Bartlett for all their cultural gymnastic arguments face near 2000 years of church wisdom on male headship. And spare me the patriarchy of 2 Millenia counter arguments blah blah Androgyny and compromised orthodoxy is the bad fruit of Egalitarian domains like the Melbourne diocese in which Bird resides. Brazen women and emasculated men - it’s actually visible. Save the few Comp. parishes that have survived I should start telling my youth group you need not obey mum and dad now because after all, no one owns slaves in the West these days
Just give up, you’re not going to win this. It was not made with ill will. We are surrounded by the alternative, and frankly it always has the same outcome, progressive churches that eventually deny Christ and scripture.
If you think that he would not win, just debate him and engage with his argument. But to tell someone to just "give up" and blaming him with a slippery slope argument will not cause any positive impact Lol
The problem with his argument, is if you read Paul's qualifications of elders he uses masculine terms throughout the entire passage, and he even go so far as to save an elder is supposed to be the husband of one wife. He never gives the opposite counterpoint and says the wife of one husband but uses masculine terms throughout the entire qualifications of elders. Scripture interpret scripture and there is no female priests in the Old Testament at all. This man is making it seem like this passage is completely meaningless unless you have historical context. Which means up until modern Day history or random people in Africa with nothing but a Bible have no idea how to interpret this passage according to him because they don't know the history. The 1st Corinthians passage you can easily get because the whole passage is a rebuke, actually the whole letter is a rebuke from beginning to end. We see no examples of female priests in the Old Testament and we see no examples of female elders or pastors in the New Testament. not to change the topic but similar to baptizing infants, you have to get those ideas outside of scripture you would never get these ideas from just reading scripture..
Since a woman could be a pastor in the Old Covenant, a woman can be a pastor in the New Covenant. Simple really. I suggest my free scripturally-based essay on Deborah. Full read time: 10 minutes postable here Men and women are perfectly equal spiritually. She was a pastor, according to the scriptures. This is how the Judges are described in Chronicles, by God. ...the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people... In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’ -excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation ___________________________________________________________________ In the Old Covenant, now gone never to come back, the priests had to have a certain genetic code. They had to be from the line of Levi and male. Also perfect physically. If a priest broke his foot and it didn't heal properly he was no longer to be a priest. His heart toward God was irrelevant, as his body was permanently damaged. The Old Covenant has passed away, so the new priesthood is no longer based on genetic code plus a perfect body. It isn't based on birthright. So it isn't based on the male gender. If it was still based on the male gender, then it would still have to be based on birthright. And coming to Him as to a living stone which has been rejected by people, but is choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices that are acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. -excerpts 1 Peter 2
@Szpak-123 when you say essay, did you make this up or is this an actual paper you wrote? Because with all due respect you're comparing two passages that have nothing to do with one another, 1st Peter chapter 2 has nothing to do with pastors and the slightest, now first Peter chapter 5 does mention elders, but first Peter chapter 2 is nothing to do with teaching at all. There was no female priests or teachers or rabbis in the Old Testament and there are none named in the book of Acts. Now, I have yet to meet somebody that has said that women cannot teach at all, women can teach other women and especially children since women typically are more patient than men in that category. But women are not to fulfill the office of elder as a man. They can be deacons to the women, they can be teachers in a woman's Bible study, and they can teach children but they are not permitted to teach to men in a pastoral role. Like I said earlier, you would never get anything other than that idea from the scriptures. Susan Heck is a perfect example of this.
@@michaeldorsey4580 you wrote: when you say essay, did you make this up or is this an actual paper you wrote? It is an informal essay by me. I go to multiple Old Testament books to explain the story of Deborah AND what a Judge was. To say a woman could be a Judge over Israel in the Old Covenant but can't be an elder in the New is all Paul. Paul taught a false and hierarchical view of Christianity. Men over women. Men over men. He was heavily influenced by the culture of his day.
@@Szpak-123 awwwe so you don't believe the Bible is the word of God and that God can speak clearly through fallible men. Got it. Deborah being a judge was a judgment over israel, it was not a good thing. That happened one time in the history of israel, the only other time I can think of a female leader being in charge was Jezebel and she was the wife of the worst King in the history of Israel. Just because something happened does not mean it's a normal thing, God spoke through a donkey that doesn't mean God is constantly speaking through donkeys. Also I'm sorry but this is almost a meaningless conversation because you don't believe God can speak clearly and consistently through broken men. And you don't believe that all scriptures breathe out by God for corrections of the man of God can be approved for every good work. You believe God is struggling and failed to communicate clearly with us, so honestly I'm having a hard time even having a conversation like this...
@@Szpak-123 and just some icing on the cake, Paul talks greatly about women that have helped him in his ministry both in the book of Romans and to Timothy and I believe to the Colossians or the Philippians one of the two... So Paul had no problems working with women just so you know..
I have more videos on the Bible and interpretation on my channel: www.youtube.com/@earlychristianhistorywithm8684
Charitably done sir. Please do continue this series, much needed. Hope to cross paths again soon
Your last three minutes in the ‘big idea’ Mike were bang on. This is far more likely to be the case than the incredibly radical complimentarian position which doesn’t incorporate the context.
Very interesting thesis! Personally, I have the same take as Sandra Glahn who says the false teaching is the Artemis of the Ephesians cult. Thus, all the “misogynistic” prescriptions are addressing a local circumstance. I’ll definitely have to look more into the proto-gnostic thesis!
Jump to 18:30 to get past the intro and into Mike (Bird)'s perspective. Well worth hearing, thank you.
Do you think you could get to debate Mike Winger?
I doubt Winger would debate a respected scholar on this one…
No. Bible scholars have contacted him before (regarding his avoidance of contexts and misuse of language) after he said "feel free to contact me so we can debate this topic" but when we was asked about he, he simply said "they won't like what I have to say about the topic haha" and left it at that. I had huge respect for Mike until this saga, he's unwilling to be confronted on it and it's disappointing. It seems he's gotten high off his own supply and believes he doesn't need to engage in any criticism of theological discussion on the topic.
Andrew Bartlett's book is excellent on this subject.
The best book I've read on this topic.
Thanks, Mike!
Thank you for the concise video!
Well done Michael!!
Thanks for doing this!
I think Paul is discussing the home congregation (of believers). The reason is he uses a Jewish idiom for congregation. The idiom is "place" in 1 Tim 2:8 which is a Jewish idiomatic short form of holy place, which primarily means the Temple, but secondarily means a synagogue/home congregation.
Great treatment of the Pauline authorship of the pastoral epistles.
I reckon your argument holds, even if the letter is 99% Pauline (my gut feeling). Like Glahn you're saying an Artemis-influenced Gnostic kinda view was being pushed by a few women in this particular church; they need to be silenced til sorted, but you can't extrapolate. Are there other examples of directives in the letters, which are clearly addressing a local issue, and which shouldn't be applied universally?
(haven't watched the video, but am familiar with this subject)
Complementarianism, regarding men and women, was part of
Paul's false and hierarchical view of Christianity.
A Judge could execute a man for his sin.
A Judge could teach men scripture in public.
Deborah. Judges 4 and 5, else my free informal postable essay on her.
Yes! Was wondering when the great Mike Bird was going to weigh in on all the noise and bring in some much needed context that Winger seems unaware of.
More to come!
Good video Mike😊👍
In Mike's video, he claims that there is no historical evidence for women having authority over men in the Ephesian artemis cult. I'm egalitarian, but I'd like to see someone engage him on that point.
My substack this week does exactly that! Big video on Paul vs Artemis contra Winger out on 20 Jan!
I've watched a lot of Mike Winger videos. Not many recently. He's a pastor in the Calvary Chapel network of churches which started with Chuck Smith in the 60s.
They tend to be rather conservative and mildly charismatic.
I've enjoyed Mike's studies, although I haven't always agreed with them. But he tends to be very thorough, which I appreciate.
Regarding egalitarianism and complementarianism, I'm not sure where I stand. I guess, if push came to shove, I would probably lean towards complementarianism.
But, I think the church has more important things to worry about today than whether your pastor is male or female.
To state that birthright determines which gender can/can't teach the
other is extremely important. That is at the heart of Complementarianism.
A throwback to the Levitical priesthood, long gone never to come back.
True. Might not be that important of a dispute for the male half of the human race. But it is a life-defining question for the other half.
@@alyssa_trulytree… very, very good point👍😊
if push comes to shove? huh? if "push comes to shove" -whatever that means- you would lean towards discriminating against God's choices like Miriam, Huldah, Deborah, Anna, 4 daughters of Philip, Mary called the Magdelene, the women among the 120 men and women who were ordained by the Holy Spirit to preach and spread the Gospel, Romans 3:16 women, Timothy's mum and grandmum who pastored him, etc etc etc and all the wonderful women whose voices and leadership God used in history?
Are there female Anglican priests in your church?
yes. My vicar is female. They may even be considering a female Archbishop of Canterbury.
@@coffeebreaktheology2634 may I ask if there is also the same openness to same sex relationships?
@@coffeebreaktheology2634 Thankfully, there are still Faithful Anglicans who oppose the innovation and heresy known as women's "ordination".
Yes and bishops.
I have to say Dr. Bird, there are quite a few times where you misrepresent what Mike Winger believes in this video and other dialogues about this topic when responding to his claims. There are several times where you paint a picture that is only representative of a patriarchalist view of complimentarianism that Mike simply does not hold to, and he makes that very clear in his videos. I am not denying that this view exists, but I would argue it is the miniority, and Mike would stand hand in hand with you and fight it as well. Fight his claims, not only the extreme ones. Statements such as "spiritual gifts do not only come in blue and pink" is so besides any point Mike is making. Being an overseer is not a spiritual gift, it is an office on the church that was established by Christ and the Apostles with specific qualifications. We believe one of those qualifications is to be a male. That is not saying that women lack spiritual gifts that are only reserved for men. This is just one example of the several poor representations of Mike Winger's views that are in your dialogues.
you wrote:
We believe one of those qualifications is to be a male.
Birthright. A throwback to the Levitical priesthood, long gone never to come back.
Be careful of what Paul wrote, as a general comment.
I don’t think Dr. Bird was saying that Mike doesn’t believe that woman have spiritual gifts. Rather, he was just stating his viewpoint and why he thinks it’s important to engage this issue. Also, perhaps you didn’t make it to the end of the video where Dr. Bird explicitly states that Mike doesn’t hold to an extreme view of complementarianism. This seems to be more of an introductory video to set the stage for future content.
It's extremely frustrating to me when someone says, "You're not accurately representing my complementarian view properly" even though it IS being represented accurately, and they just don't agree with the differing conclusion that person is coming to. One has to listen carefully to know the difference.
If I say complementarianism is all about hierarchy in the church and marriage and that affirming hierarchy between genders upholds inherent inequality, they might disagree and say I'm misrepresenting their view, but I'm not. I'm just emphasizing something they either can't see or refuse to admit about their view.
I admit there is often bad listening on both sides of this question, but only time will judge who is listening with more honesty and humility.
I think you miss his point. Overseer may not be a gift but teacher is.
@@stevereilly7058
The position/title of 'teacher' is forbidden by Jesus. We all can
teach. Some of us can teach much better than others of course.
rabbi - religious teacher in Judaism (basic, generic definition)
But as for you, do not be called Rabbi; for only One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers and sisters.
-excerpt Matthew 23
-words of Jesus
Hello Rev Dr Bird. I’m wondering if you would see Paul’s bringing up the woman being saved through childbirth would be a purposeful parody of the pagan cult belief to create the rhetoric to introduce the promised seed of the woman in Genesis, in the same way he makes parody of the Corinthian churches slogans such as “all things are lawful” in order to create his rhetoric toward them about all things not being useful etc.
thanks for the video.
I'm not sure about that.
Anytime somone starts their argument by distputing authorship I have to wonder about their view of the bible in general. I want to learn from bible students not bible critics.
Well, the fact is that people do dispute the authorship, you can't pretend it's not happening.
Jesus taught of equality.
Paul repeatedly taught that Christianity was hierarchical. Men
over women and also men over men.
@@Szpak-123 men and women can have different roles and still be equal
@@davewhite756
Men and women are stated to have been made in God's image.
A Judge could judge men of their sins. Even homicide.
A Judge could teach scripture.
This is all covered in my informal postable essay on Deborah.
you wrote:
men and women can have different roles and still be equal
Complementarianism
The priesthood of the New Covenant is a 2-tiered priesthood
based on birthright.
That false and confusing teaching, that states Christian women are less than
Christian men in a spiritual way, but they really aren't, but they really are.
The complementarian teaching prohibits a Christian woman from holding
certain positions in a church. They can't be elders neither can
they teach men. So why is that?
The false teaching makes it clear that the priesthood of the New Covenant
is tiered. There is a hierarchy. Those that are higher, the men, can be in
leadership positions, like elder. They can teach other men. Those in the
lower tier can not be in leadership positions, like elder. They are prohibited
from teaching men, because the men are in the higher tier. It wouldn't make
any sense.
A new believer is automatically assigned their level, higher or lower,
at the moment of salvation, as a birthright. Their gender determines
their tier. A Christian can not move to a higher or lower tier.
A Christian that is in the lower tier (woman) is not allowed to
complain of the tier she was placed in. That would be sin, because
God made her a woman by His choice. She should accept and also
embrace her position in the lower tier.
A church, is either a group of Christian men or a group of Christian men and women.
A church can never be a group of Christian women, because it would be
a group of only those in the lower tier. It would have no elders.
But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
-excerpt 1 Peter 2
Since the teaching states that women are spiritually inferior to men, but
they aren't, but they are, when did that start?
But I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a wrongdoer.
-excerpt 1 Timothy 2
It started with the first woman. She was deceived, and sinned because of it. So we
have a teaching that accepts that men and women are fallen beings. Both genders
are sinful by nature. However women are different. They are lacking the ability
that men have to judge if some situation, some concept or teaching is sinful. This
inability was passed down from Eve to all women. It remains to this day. A woman
in our time was 'lacking' from birth, even from the womb.
So what can be done? Nothing according to Complementarianism. The teaching
states that even an anointing of that powerful masculine being called the Holy Spirit,
is just not sufficient. It states that even the Holy Spirit can not elevate even
one Christian woman to the spiritually superior level of a Christian man.
Apologist vs apologist - love it.
Mike vs Mike 😁
Thank you! And I love that--"an unceasing festival of tortured exegesis" 😂
To be fair Mike does investígate both sides IMO. The difficulty is between what the bible says and how we interpret it, while trying to avoid my natural bias of being female😃.
He misrepresents and/ or misunderstanding the egalitarian scholars. I was complementarian when I started listening to Winger's series on women and was nodding along when the HS convicted me to check out the arguments myself. I did, and am now fully convinced that the interpretation I held for over 30 years was false and due to the cultural influence of patriarchy throughout history. When I went back to listen to Winger's videos, I was frustrated by his misrepresentation of the views of the egalitarians. He does not represent both sides. He represents his own side, and puts up a strawman to represent egalitarians.
@@lightandperspective7785 paul was in the same cultural milieu of patriarchy, and there is enough testimony to that in his writings.
@@lightandperspective7785 my story almost exactly!! Mike Winger turned me into an egalitarian.
Without women running house churches, Christianity wouldn't have spread as far and fast as it did. By the 2nd century it was known as the religion of women and slaves!!!!!
coffeebreaktheology
Paul was heavily influenced by his culture. His teachings/writings on
the 'women in ministry' matter totally contradict the example God gave
to Israel, and us. Deborah, at about 1100 B.C.
Judges 4 and 5, else my free informal essay on her.
Read time: 10 minutes
Interesting you say "One Timothy" and not "First Timothy". Is this a deliberate reason?
It doesn't make any difference… The Greek texts call them a and B
@ but do you say “the first letter of Paul the apostle to Timothy” or “the one letter of Paul the apostle to Timothy”
You would thing think the Bible would be explicitly egalitarian since it would be a departure from practice.
When the New Testament was compiled at about 400 A.D.
we got good teachings and bad. It's unfortunate that some
sexist teachings made it in. Perhaps to test us?
This matter was actually settled at about 1100 B.C. when
God made a woman a Judge over Israel.
@ which isn’t a priest nor pastor.
@@davidruth7096
Judges 4 and 5, else my free informal essay on Deborah.
Read time: 10 minutes postable here
...the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people...
In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’
-excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
And not a priestess. Do you have one example of a priest/pastor?
@@davidruth7096
The Judge was the primary/senior pastor/shepherd
at that time period.
(In case the reader in unaware, the word pastor and the word
shepherd are the same word. I prefer shepherd, because it has
obvious meaning to the average person.)
Major modern English translations like the NASB use
the phrasing ...whom I commanded to shepherd My people...
In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’
-excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
Some believe that pastor (or shepherd), is a position that
was created in the New Covenant. This is not true. In the Old Testament
shepherds are mentioned multiple times. Often in a negative way.
“My people have become lost sheep;
Their shepherds have led them astray.
-excerpt Jeremiah 50
For an entire chapter on worthless shepherds, the reader may
check out Ezekiel 34.
When the shepherd over Israel died, the people went back into sin. That is because the Judge was the most important spiritual leader of this time period.
But it came about, when the judge died, that they would turn back and act more corruptly than their fathers, in following other gods to serve them and bow down to them; they did not abandon their practices or their obstinate ways.
-excerpt Judges 2
Deborah, full essay read time: 10 minutes, free, postable
I am sticking with 1 Tim 2 on this one. Paul is way too blatant and in your face
society has gotten out of control
adhere to the text
If you want to "stick to the text", do you think slaves should obey their masters even when they are cruel, as Paul commands?
How many slaves do you own?
@@Jeowynand to borrow your line of reasoning , let’s also require children to no longer need obey their parents. Egalitarian authors like Giles Payne Bartlett for all their cultural gymnastic arguments face near 2000 years of church wisdom on male headship.
And spare me the patriarchy of 2 Millenia counter arguments blah blah
Androgyny and compromised orthodoxy is the bad fruit of Egalitarian domains like the Melbourne diocese in which Bird resides. Brazen women and emasculated men - it’s actually visible. Save the few Comp. parishes that have survived
I should start telling my youth group you need not obey mum and dad now because after all, no one owns slaves in the West these days
@@Jeowyn100% agree. Even if a Complementarian wants to defend their position the "it's so obvious" argument will not be a best one
@@Jeowyn100% agree. Even if a Complementarian wants to defend their position the "it's so obvious" argument will not be a best one
@@Jeowyn100% agree. Even if a Complementarian wants to defend their position the "it's so obvious" argument will not be a best one
Just give up, you’re not going to win this. It was not made with ill will. We are surrounded by the alternative, and frankly it always has the same outcome, progressive churches that eventually deny Christ and scripture.
If you think that he would not win, just debate him and engage with his argument. But to tell someone to just "give up" and blaming him with a slippery slope argument will not cause any positive impact Lol
The problem with his argument, is if you read Paul's qualifications of elders he uses masculine terms throughout the entire passage, and he even go so far as to save an elder is supposed to be the husband of one wife. He never gives the opposite counterpoint and says the wife of one husband but uses masculine terms throughout the entire qualifications of elders.
Scripture interpret scripture and there is no female priests in the Old Testament at all. This man is making it seem like this passage is completely meaningless unless you have historical context. Which means up until modern Day history or random people in Africa with nothing but a Bible have no idea how to interpret this passage according to him because they don't know the history.
The 1st Corinthians passage you can easily get because the whole passage is a rebuke, actually the whole letter is a rebuke from beginning to end.
We see no examples of female priests in the Old Testament and we see no examples of female elders or pastors in the New Testament. not to change the topic but similar to baptizing infants, you have to get those ideas outside of scripture you would never get these ideas from just reading scripture..
Since a woman could be a pastor in the Old Covenant, a woman
can be a pastor in the New Covenant. Simple really.
I suggest my free scripturally-based essay on Deborah.
Full read time: 10 minutes postable here
Men and women are perfectly equal spiritually. She was a pastor, according to the scriptures. This is how the Judges are described in Chronicles, by God.
...the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people...
In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’
-excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
___________________________________________________________________
In the Old Covenant, now gone never to come back, the priests
had to have a certain genetic code. They had to be from the line
of Levi and male. Also perfect physically. If a priest broke his foot
and it didn't heal properly he was no longer to be a priest. His heart
toward God was irrelevant, as his body was permanently damaged.
The Old Covenant has passed away, so the new priesthood is no longer
based on genetic code plus a perfect body. It isn't based on birthright.
So it isn't based on the male gender. If it was still based on the male
gender, then it would still have to be based on birthright.
And coming to Him as to a living stone which has been rejected by people, but is choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices that are acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
-excerpts 1 Peter 2
@Szpak-123 when you say essay, did you make this up or is this an actual paper you wrote?
Because with all due respect you're comparing two passages that have nothing to do with one another, 1st Peter chapter 2 has nothing to do with pastors and the slightest, now first Peter chapter 5 does mention elders, but first Peter chapter 2 is nothing to do with teaching at all.
There was no female priests or teachers or rabbis in the Old Testament and there are none named in the book of Acts.
Now, I have yet to meet somebody that has said that women cannot teach at all, women can teach other women and especially children since women typically are more patient than men in that category. But women are not to fulfill the office of elder as a man.
They can be deacons to the women, they can be teachers in a woman's Bible study, and they can teach children but they are not permitted to teach to men in a pastoral role.
Like I said earlier, you would never get anything other than that idea from the scriptures.
Susan Heck is a perfect example of this.
@@michaeldorsey4580
you wrote:
when you say essay, did you make this up or is this an actual paper you wrote?
It is an informal essay by me. I go to multiple Old Testament books
to explain the story of Deborah AND what a Judge was.
To say a woman could be a Judge over Israel in the Old Covenant
but can't be an elder in the New is all Paul.
Paul taught a false and hierarchical view of Christianity. Men over
women. Men over men. He was heavily influenced by the culture
of his day.
@@Szpak-123 awwwe so you don't believe the Bible is the word of God and that God can speak clearly through fallible men. Got it.
Deborah being a judge was a judgment over israel, it was not a good thing. That happened one time in the history of israel, the only other time I can think of a female leader being in charge was Jezebel and she was the wife of the worst King in the history of Israel.
Just because something happened does not mean it's a normal thing, God spoke through a donkey that doesn't mean God is constantly speaking through donkeys.
Also I'm sorry but this is almost a meaningless conversation because you don't believe God can speak clearly and consistently through broken men. And you don't believe that all scriptures breathe out by God for corrections of the man of God can be approved for every good work.
You believe God is struggling and failed to communicate clearly with us, so honestly I'm having a hard time even having a conversation like this...
@@Szpak-123 and just some icing on the cake, Paul talks greatly about women that have helped him in his ministry both in the book of Romans and to Timothy and I believe to the Colossians or the Philippians one of the two... So Paul had no problems working with women just so you know..