First she shook the evangelical world by leaving the Southern Baptist Convention. Now Beth Moore, arguably the evangelical world’s most famous women’s Bible teacher, has begged forgiveness for supporting the theology of male headship rooted in many evangelical cultures.
In a Twitter thread Wednesday, Moore took aim at complementarianism, the 20th century theological framework that argues men and women were created for different roles and that effectively champions male headship and female submission.
For some evangelicals, complementarianism is a line in the sand. Those who question it are seen as undermining belief in the Bible. Moore said that was wrong.
“Let me be blunt,” Moore tweeted. “When you functionally treat complementarianism—a doctrine of MAN—as if it belongs among the matters of 1st importance, yea, as a litmus test for where one stands on inerrancy & authority of Scripture, you are the ones who have misused Scripture. You went too far.”
She also apologized for her past view on the matter.
Your tax-deductible gift helps our journalists report the truth and hold Christian leaders and organizations accountable. Give a gift of $30 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you will receive a copy of “Hurt and Healed by the Church” by Ryan George. To donate, click here.
” I beg your forgiveness where I was complicit,” she said on social media. “I could not see it for what it was until 2016. I plead your forgiveness for how I just submitted to it and supported it and taught it.”
I beg your forgiveness where I was complicit. I could not see it for what it was until 2016. I plead your forgiveness for how I just submitted to it and supported it and taught it. I trusted that the motives were godly. I have not lost my mind. Nor my doctrine. Just my naivety.
— Beth Moore (@BethMooreLPM) April 7, 2021
In an email to Religion News Service, Moore didn’t go quite so far as to say she has entirely abandoned complementarianism. But she no longer sees it as essential.
“I’m not going to be pushed into either category right now because that’s not my point,” Moore wrote in response to a question about whether she was still a complementarian, or its counterpart, an egalitarian. “My point is that it has taken on the importance of a first tier doctrine.”
Complementarians hold that though God created men and women with equal worth, He designed them to serve different functions. Those holding the opposing doctrine—egalitarians—believe God created men and women with equal worth and the same, or interchangeable, functions.
Apologizing for her role in supporting and elevating the importance of that theology, which she had submitted to for decades, is a major development for Moore.
Some female historians said Moore’s tweets were a decisive shift. Beth Allison Barr, a Baylor University historian and author of “The Making of Biblical Womanhood: How the Subjugation of Women Became Gospel Truth,” likened Moore to the biblical Joshua commanding the people to shout so the walls of Jericho fall down.
“She just shouted,” said Barr of Moore. “This is going to be the beginning of the end of complementarianism.”
Since 2016, Moore has taken to Twitter to criticize male evangelical leaders, but has never challenged the view that women cannot be ordained or preach from the pulpit. She often referred to herself as a “soft complementarian.”
Her shift in tone Wednesday drew predictable denunciations.
The Rev. Tom Buck of First Baptist Church in Lindale, Texas, an outspoken critic of SBC leaders, tweeted that a “plain reading” of a passage from the New Testament Book of 1 Timothy bars women from teaching or preaching the Bible to men in the church.
He was referring to a passage from the Apostle Paul’s letter to Timothy in which he said: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.”
Regarding women preaching/teaching men the Scriptures in the church, my position is based on the plain reading of 1 Timothy 2:12.
“But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.”
— Tom Buck (Five Point Buck) (@TomBuck) April 7, 2021
However, some Bible scholars point to other New Testament letters attributed to Paul that convey different attitudes. Paul also allowed his contemporary Phoebe, a female deacon, to read aloud to a house church. Paul thought highly enough of Junia, a woman, and her co-laborer Andronicus, that he commended them both as “noted among the apostles.”
But over the past 20 years, Southern Baptists, along with other evangelical denominations, launched an industry of books, devotional literature, conferences and seminary programs celebrating “the dignity” of traditional gender roles in which wives submit to their husbands in the home and only men can serve as pastors. (Some “hard complementarians” hold that women also can never teach the Bible in any setting that includes men, including small groups.)
Some have suggested that as Jesus is subordinate to God the Father, so women must be subordinate to men—a heresy for most Christians who view the three members of the Trinity as equal. (For a discussion on this doctrine, listen to The Roys Report podcast with author Aimee Byrd.)
Moore’s outsize role — she has filled arenas and concert venues for her Bible teaching conferences and sold millions of devotional books, becoming better known than any of her male counterparts — has always raised tensions around complementarianism.
In 2019 she even joked about preaching in church on Mother’s Day. Los Angeles megachurch pastor John MacArthur responded that Moore should “go home.”
For Moore, much of her reappraisal of the role of women in the church arose with the election of Donald Trump in 2016 and the pre-election debate over the now-infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, in which Trump boasted about groping women’s genitals. The ongoing sex abuse scandal in the Protestant churches and the subsequent #MeToo movement also contributed to it. Moore has acknowledged she too was sexually abused.
On Wednesday, Bible teachers in her mold, such as Jacki C. King, congratulated Moore for her words.
“I am so deeply grieved and sorry for the hurt and deep losses you have taken from your own,” tweeted King, who is also a Southern Baptist pastor’s wife. “It is the deepest sting and betrayal. Thank you for paving a way, for being faithful, for your example. I think and pray for you so often. Thank you sister.”
I am so deeply grieved and sorry for the hurt and deep losses you have taken from your own. It is the deepest sting and betrayal. Thank you for paving a way, for being faithful, for your example. I think and pray for you so often. Thank you sister.
— Jacki C King (@JackiCKing) April 7, 2021
Bob Smietana and Yonat Shimron are national reporters for Religion News Service.
English 
Spanish
108 Responses
What an interesting development.
This news will indeed generate predictable responses. Common sense tells us that men and women are indeed complementary, but the terms complementation and egalitarian and what they evoke are not biblical but invented. I can remember when women in the 70s found they could do things in the workplace they were not “allowed” to do in the church. Surely there’s enough kingdom work to do without dismissing a qualified/gifted person because she’s female.
And as far as various waves of women’s movements go, there have been good reason for them. I’ve often thought if the church had been the leader in these matters, perhaps we wouldn’t have some of the extremes and confusion we’re experiencing now.
Amen!
The term trinity is not found in the Bible but it is indeed biblical! The same can be said for complementarianism. It is Without question a biblically developed term.
Hi John – You write…
“The term trinity is not found in the Bible but it is indeed biblical!”
Was wondering…
Which Trinity are you talking about?
And if you do NOT know…
There is more than one version of the trinity…
How do you know your version is the correct one?
——-
You also write…
“The same can be said for complementarianism.”
Which complementarianism are you talking about?
And if you do NOT know…
There is more than one version of complementarianism…
How do you know your version is the correct one?
——-
Seems Comps have been trying to explain complementarianism…
Ever since they created the term back in the 80’s…
And they are NOT doin so good…
That’s what happens when man makes up terms…
NOT in the Bible…Then calls them “Biblical.”
Now folks can add, or subtract, at will.
And make up…err… stuff.
——-
How can WE, His Sheep, be like those in Berea?
Who searched the scriptures daily to see…
Whether these things be so. Acts 17:11.
If these things…
Trinity? Complementarianism?
Are terms NOT in the scriptures?
How do WE, His Ekklesia, KNOW?
Who is doing it Correctly? Biblically?
——-
Or do we just believe the guys with the “Titles?”
——-
In other words. Beth Moore is confirming the Genesis account that Women want to control men but, yet their desire will be to their husbands. Quite simple to understand.
Where does Genesis say that women want to control men?
Genesis 3:16
“Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” (NIV) I don’t see anything about women controlling men; quite the opposite, in fact.
Well, Susan, the phrase “Your desire will be ” is a bit enigmatic, but it is used just a few verses away in Gen 4:7 about sin having its desire for Cain. Clearly the meaning there is to dominate or devour him. While it is not airtight, it is very reasonable to accept that it means something very similar, if not the same, in Gen 3:16. This is supported by the fact that Genesis 3:16 is telling Eve negative results of the fall.
You have good eyes, Susan, because there isn’t anything there about women controlling men. And, the word that is now translated as “desire”, was previously translated as “turning”, for the entire history of the Scriptures, until a few hundred years ago.
The idea that woman will now want to “dominate or devour” man suggested above by Wayne is what the Talmud teaches, but Christians should reject this idea. God never said woman would try to usurp authority from man. Authority that God never gave man in the first place because Adam was never told to “rule over” or “dominate” his wife.
Read it again.
We can read it again, and again, and again. And again, nowhere does God or Genesis say that women will try to control men. And nowhere does God command Adam to rule over his wife. God prophecies to Eve what will happen since she is TURNING towards her husband, and away from God. “He will rule over you.” Which is exactly what happens when a wife promises to obey her husband rather than God. No one can serve two masters.
Exactly!
Walter, keep reading that passage. You obviously dont take the passage as truth and you are trying to explain it away. Granted, your opinion may be the majority and I accept that. Nonetheless, the Genesis 3 account is that Woman are created with a drive to want to control men. But, the irony is that their husbands will be over them. I see it all the time and that truth is obvious in the world. Yes, I agree I can suggest reading it 100X or 15,000X if you cannot accept that obvious truth than you won’t accept that truth.
You’re putting words into God’s mouth which is ill-advised. And you are quite possibly blaspheming God when you say, “Woman are created with a drive to want to control men.” It sounds like you are saying God created Woman to sin, which would be blasphemy, making God the author of sin. Or, maybe you are saying, along with the Rabbis, that God cursed Eve. God cursed neither Adam nor Eve, but He did curse (1) the Serpent, and (2) the ground.
One of the conditions of God’s curse on the Serpent was that there would be enmity (positive, active, and typically mutual hatred or ill will) between It and the Woman, and between Her seed and It’s seed. So it is no surprise when we see attempts to put a curse on Eve, and say it is from God, when God did no such thing. In fact, the Rabbis have long taught that it was not just a curse, singular, but Ten Curses of Eve that God pronounced. I’m not going to post the entire disgusting list here out of respect for common decency, but readers can do their own research. Who do we think Jesus was talking to in Matt 23:33 when he shouted, “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape the sentence of hell?”
You say, “I see it all the time and that truth is obvious in the world.” You see what in the world, sin? Selfishness? Well go figure, because sin is still in the world. But some of us are no longer of the world, thanks to the Seed of the Woman, Jesus Christ.
You also say, “if you cannot accept that obvious truth than you won’t accept that truth.” I know the Truth, and the Truth has made me free. You are promoting a lie that was invented by the Father of Lies.
This is such a good example of how social nuttiness results in Scripture-twisting. Without question, Scripture teaches men and women have complementary roles in marriage, i.e. male-female, husband-wife, father-mother, duh! There’s no word in the Bible for the sex neutral “parent.” The difference in biology and biochemistry in men and women screams differences in roles. The well recorded differences in male play, interests, physicality, and psychology also attest to this. However, the exact way these things play out is colored by the culture, technology, and customs of the time.
The NT gives examples of significant female teaching, leadership, prophecy, and sponsorship of local churches. However, in NT times, 95% of women spent the productive years of their lives bearing 10 babies or so with half or less surviving to adulthood, while their husbands worked seven days a week in agriculture. Widowers outnumbered widows. This hard, short life situation defined the roles of men and women. This same thing was true even into the early 20th century. To get perspective: the average lifespan in the U.S. in 1850 according to census data was 37, in 1900 46.3. A woman’s role as mother was crucial to supporting life and survival in an agrarian based economy. Your kids were your old age pension plan. With the industrial age, men took on mining, mill work, construction and other very dangerous jobs. Only recently has advances in technology and medicine greatly changed this equation, opening up new opportunities for women.
Pentecostals and a host of other Evangelicals have recognized the legitimacy of women in ministry for over a hundred years. I laud Southern Baptists for the courage to speak out against Critical Theory, but am baffled why they continue to oppose women in ministry and miracles for today.
There is irony here. It’s hard to argue that Southern Baptists have hamstrung Beth Moore and denied her opportunity. They’ve been her best constituency. Their church network has been the basis for building out her ministry. It’s a bit like watching a multi-billion dollar minority athlete complain, as he gets off his private plane to enter his mansion, that someone that looks like him can’t get ahead. If the Trump tape brought her out, you have to wonder why the tremendous Me-Too scandal which was 90% liberal male icons, like Jeffrey Epstein, didn’t drive her back. Whether true or not, she comes off as a self-centered ingrate.
Hard to take anything you say serious when you call Epstein a “liberal male icon”. I means, sure, he had a bunch of rich liberal pals, but that doesn’t make him a liberal icon anymore than his collection of rich conservative pals made him a conservative icon. I’ve mixed in liberal circles all my life and I had no idea who he was until they started showing video of Trump palling around with him (before he claim he barely even knew the guy).
Anyone that uses the word “duh” in their posts is immediately disqualified for their apparent immaturity and emotionalism!
Basically any doctrine in the Bible can be classified as a A DOCTRINE OF MAN and tossed aside if one disagrees. Just saying……
I seriously doubt that trhrowing out Complementarian theology is going to stop abuse. I just took a course on child abuse and was surprised to find out females abuse children more than males according to stats. Abuse is a matter of right and wrong. It is wrong for anyone to abuse another.
‘Moore has acknowledged she too was sexually abused.’
Sad as this is and as much as I detest this kind of abuse in women……I get a sense that this one sentence about sums up the motivation behind Moore’s current stance.
Then how do you explain she was an avowed complementarian for the last 40+ years? You can’t have it both ways.
Sadly RJ… this is a very typical way to discredit and silence (deny and attack) any abuse survivor… the next step is making those who are abused the bad guys, and the abusers are the victims… it’s the common DARVO sequence of minimizing and dismissing abuse…
because those who haven’t been abused are doing an amazing job of covering it up/silencing it/ignoring it/minimizing it/nothing to see here folks, just move along… maybe because some of these are the abusers…
this response of protecting leaders and the institution at the expense of the vulnerable is the exact opposite of Jesus and scripture! in fact He got phsyically angry and flipped the tables, not once, but twice… and the 2nd time after He chased out the religious spirit blocking the vulnerable from entering the temple, He healed the blind and the lame that could now access the temple… and the religious leaders were INDIGNANT about what Jesus was doing! Matt 21:12-17…
I have to wonder how much of the resistance to addressing abuses of power is a similar religious spirit?
Flood alert: baby and bathwater headed our way…
Women shouldn’t be preachers or be ordained to the ministry — Beth Moore included. You cannot make the case from the Bible for women preachers, ministers, priests, or bishops. She should stay home and be a good wife and mother.
Do you as dogmatically always turn the other cheek and always love your enemies too? Hard to make a case against either of those too, but I suspect you do.
@Jim that is cultural, but unBlblical. FATHERS are to raise the children.
In Genesis, we see God call on ABRAHAM to raise his children in the faith. In Ephesians, we read “FATHERS, raise your children.”
Far too many men – including Christian men – think they are to leave the raising of children to the women; that the primary work of men is outside the home (be it ministry or otherwise). A HUGE reason that so many children are lacking focus, purpose, discipline, and self-control in today’s society is because too many fathers are saying ‘SHE should stay home and be a good mom” and relinquishing thier GOD-GIVEN role as the PRIMARY influence and leader in raising the children.
@MH. You make a good point about fathers raising their children. But please notice what the Bible says about the role of women in the home: “(Women are) . . .to be self-controlled, pure, WORKING AT HOME, kind, and SUBMISSIVE TO THEIR OWN HUSBANDS, that the word of God may not be reviled.” (Titus 2:5 ESV) (emphasis mine).
And remember what St. Paul said about younger widows in First Timothy 5:14: So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, TO MANAGE THEIR HOMES, and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander. (1Ti 5:14 NIV) (emphasis mine).
You might also note that the adulterous woman of Proverbs 7 is “loud and wayward, and HER FEET DO NOT STAY AT HOME. (Proverbs 7:11 RSV) (emphasis mine).
And, of course, there is a whole chapter in the Bible about this, as you probably well know: Proverbs 31.
Jim, was the Proverbs 31 woman staying home when she “considered a field and planted it? Not sure how she did that staying home? How about her other business activities, like making and selling linen garments and sashes? Her husband also had elevated stature in the community bc of her.
I guess Lydia was dealing in purple goods never leaving home.
I don’t think she did all that being Suzy Homemaker with no role in the outside world.
And BTW I am a theological conservative & not a feminist at all in the liberal sense of the word. I just don’t think God calls women to sit down and shut up.
God created WoMAN to be a help mate to MAN.
He created Adam First.
DOES THIS NOT TELL US ANYTHING?
“Christian feminism” has brought us to this ugly point.
Women are teachers, not preachers…
The pulpit was assigned to Male leadership.
God is a God of Order.
He created us in HIS image…
so much time we waste trying to recreate God IN OUR IMAGE.
“He created Adam First.
DOES THIS NOT TELL US ANYTHING?”
That God got it right on the second try?
Humorous comment…but bad theology, as it denigrates the doctrine of God to imply that he is learning from mistakes or at least learning as he goes forward in creation.
He created fish before Adam….. Chronology gives no support to patriarchy
Good example.
Thank you. It was not intended to be theology, only a very modest jest, not original to me. If God feels denigrated, it’s within His power to give me the Zot.
Disrespectful. God doesn’t get ANYTHING wrong.
One reason I posted it was to see how humorless people could be. The other reason was that, as “snitchthebudgie” observed, the sequence tells us nothing about hierarchy.
Although that would be an explanation of my cat’s sense of superiority :)
L. Martin, that’s an excellent point.
yup… it wasn’t good after Adam was created, and it was VERY good after Eve… go figure?!?!
Bev, can you please provide the scriptural reference for this comment. I’ve read through Genesis 1-2 and can’t find this. I see that God called all his creation very good after he had finished not just a reference to the creation of woman. I didn’t see a separate pronouncement that the creation of man was good and the creation of woman was very good.
I’m kind of in favor of putting women in leadership with more responsibility – not less.
From what I can see they have a pretty good track record of keeping their hands off of little boys and girls. Leaving just men in charge has resulted in some pretty bad outcomes for the unprotected.
@Tony. Guess you’re not looking real hard. Some female teachers put their hands all over little boys and girls.
I don’t think I can post links here, but try a search with the terms “female teachers sex crimes” and your eyes will be opened.
No, The artist , Christian feminism did not create this. Sin did. In case you are a man, I would challenge you to consider how humbly you accept help from women. I would also challenge you to consider how you have “wrinkled, blemished, and stained” (Eph. 5) women.
Before you blame women look in the mirror.
Theartist, you do realizes don’t you that “the pulpit” is a relatively modern invention dating from the time of Luther? Many early house churches were participatory in nature with all members sharing a song, a prophecy, a testimony or a word of encouragement. Catholic Churches for centuries focused on the Eucharist not preaching. Contemporary house churches across the globe (which number in the millions, comprised of new believers from Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist backgrounds) do not have preaching at all, but structure their meetings around participatory discovery Bible study focused on obedience rather than Bible knowledge alone.
So no, God did not assign “the pulpit” to men; men invented pulpits and assigned themselves there.
But you are right when you say God created us in his image… male and female he created them.
And if you want to get technical, the original Hebrew does not say “help mate” but “Ezer” which means helper. Same word used for GOD by the way in other OT passages and I don’t think anybody would argue that the Almighty is a subordinate help mate to anyone.
The first creation account in Genesis 1 has God creating man and women (not Adam and Eve) at the same time, not one before the other. That is your first mistake in attempting to proof text. Your second will be to say Gen. 1 and 2 are different but complementary. They are not.
@theartist. Excellent point. Hit the nail on the head.
“I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.” (1Ti 2:12-14 NRSV).
See the little word “For”? In Greek it’s the word “γαρ”, which makes it clear that the reason for St. Paul’s command or precept in verse 12 (“I permit no woman to teach….”) is the original order of creation.
When looking at additional firstborn accounts in Genesis, it is clear the firstborn did not necessarily have authority (i.e. Cain/Abel, Ishmael/Isaac, Esau/Jacob, Reuben/Judah. Ultimately, Jesus as the firstborn of all humanity (Romans 8:29, Colossians 1:1,18) relativizes relationships among His people. The contrast between the first Adam and Jesus as the last Adam shows that Paul’s thought is looking forward eschatologically. He is looking to the end, not the beginning. Paul’s use of ‘first’ and ‘last’ in his narrative shows no argument for temporal priority (first) or subordination (last).
“For Moore, much of her reappraisal of the role of women in the church arose with the election of Donald Trump in 2016 and the pre-election debate over the now-infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, in which Trump boasted about groping women’s genitals. The ongoing sex abuse scandal in the Protestant churches and the subsequent #MeToo movement also contributed to it. Moore has acknowledged she too was sexually abused.”
Dear author of this piece: Please explain exactly what connection Donald Trump has to Beth Moore reappraising the role of women in the church? I’ll wait………..
Thought so. You just had to find a way to put in a dig at Trump because that is where you live. None of this is to forgive his (Trump’s) aberrant behavior, but to identify that it/he has become the woke culture’s raison d’être – to scream about someone who is not president anymore and tie every issue to his existence, as if he is the source of the beliefs of those who might, in this case, actually have a view towards supporting complimentarianism. And which you apparently by your inference in this article clearly don’t.
How is it a dig when Moore herself said this was the reason? What’s a reporter to do, call Moore a liar for no reason?
It is perhaps more telling the way you reflexively jumped to Trump’s defense at the very mention of his name.
I thought it strange that Moore, Lucado, and Piper could sit so quietly while Clinton and Obama took the nation into the moral sewer, only to find the courage to speak out when Trump ran for president and they merely piled on what the media was already shoveling out.
I didn’t agree with how Johnny M. and others treated Beth Moore but she has COMPLETELY jumped the shark and as far as I know is on the borderline of abandoning the true Gospel entirely if she hasn’t already. When she went after the Babylon Bee with a straight face was bad enough… when she started pimping the modern-day Gnosticism of the CRT cult and promoting racism (against her fellow whites) was much worse. It is clear that being a rock star in the eyes of the far-left fakestream is more important to BM than serving Christ.
Speaking of Johnny M., now that we have established Beth Moore’s pastoral license and declared her a true Sheppard of God’s church, I’m so looking forward to Julie Roy’s deep-dive into Beth Moore’s personal finances and net worth. Any guesses on who is worth more between the two? Go get her Julie!
“against her fellow whites”? Huh?
I thought we are “fellow believers”, who are to confront one another on sin – including the sin of racism – regardless of our skin color. Do we ignore sin because it’s committed by someone of our same race? (I guess I shouldn’t call out a “fellow black person” when I see them exhibiting racist behavior?) I thought what made someone my “fellow” was our shared belief in Christ, not being of the same race.
I’m going to give the benefit of the doubt and simply say I don’t think that phrase came off as intended. :-/
M H, you are most gracious at extending the benefit of the doubt.
Personally,
Whatever is not in the Creeds regulates certain issues to important but secondary issues. I personally would not feel comfortable having a female Pastor over me. Paul did go back to Creation when talking about women not having authority over men in the Church. It is a slippery slope. There are teachings that we are expected to uphold, even though the world thinks we are bigots. And it is not an issue of talent.
What I find troubling is that the Mainstream Church were the first to have female Pastors but then it did not stop there. It became none-practicing homosexuals, then practicing, then married, then lesbians in meaningful relationships, then married women etc. Soon, polygamy will be an issue. I do not believe I have ever heard a well thought out answer to this slppery slope nor Paul’s reference to Adam and Eve. If someone can explain, I would appreciate it.
I do not follow Beth Moore and I feel bad for her situation, but it seems she may need to be watchful as she seems to be on a slippery slope. I do not question her heart, intentions or spirituality.
Ah yes, polygamy is always at the end of the slippery slope…. except it has never happened. I’ve heard the same complaint for over 50 years, yet not once has it remotely threatened to come to pass. But then, unlike gay marriage, at least polygamy has a rather strong Biblical precedent…
Perhaps you have missed the news, Tacitus. https://gaypagessa.com/2021/03/04/thrupple-makes-history-as-legal-fathers/
But polygamy was never presented as a good thing in the Bible. Look at King David or Solomon with his 100s and 100s of wives…
Well, we technically got the tribes of Israel due to polygamy….
MH, The tribes of Israel resulting from polygamy does not mean that it was condoned by the Lord. The Lord is gracious and merciful, and He works out His plan, despite our sin and reluctance to obey Him. We can do nothing to thwart His plan. And I praise God for that! Because of Grace, J.
Vance- While this comment may not satisfy your request for an explanation, I think it’s safe to say that Paul’s reference to Adam and Eve shows that the issue is not a cultural issue, nor ability or talent issue, but a foundational issue that God established in the beginning for the sexes of complementary roles. Now, in Paul’s referencing Adam and Eve, he goes further than the creation declaration for Eve being a helpmeet to Adam, and states that Eve was deceived but Adam was not. That’s a loaded issue as the reason Paul gave, but he does transcend culture by appealing to creation. We have to ask why was the fact that she was deceived and Adam was not- disqualify her for teaching men and/or having authority over men. The interaction between Eve and the serpent seems to indicate that Adam was standing by observing and not exercising leadership, but rather following her lead instead of protecting her and being obedient to God. It seems that they both got things out of order and sin resulted. The rest of the story is history…
Though interestingly, the curse fell on Adam for the following reasons?
1. Where was Adam anyways when the talking serpent had that conversation with Eve?
2. The woman was deceived, but Adam _knowingly_ ate of the fruit.
3. The curse fell on Adam (and as a result) the whole universe suffered the Fall.
This shows to that Adam abrogated his responsibilities, tried to blame the woman, etc. from the very beginning.
Ever think that maybe, just maybe the whole issue about woman pastors would not even show up if churches throughout the centuries had actually Biblically-qualified elders and pastors from the beginning? That the parishioners would actually have the stones to deal with them in leadership.
Need I remind you that the whole reason woman judges showed up in OT Israel, was because no-properly qualified man stepped up to the plate. One could argue that all those woman pastors are damning to to all the male pastors as Deborah was to the OT Israelites. The Song of Deborah in Judges 5 alludes to this.
Actually, in your point 2. Adam blamed God…not Eve. You might want to re-read that…“The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.” Gen 1:12. Also, in the curse in verse 16(b), God made clear the consequences would be tough for everyone, including women … might also be worth a closer read to understand the stress in the system. Life out of the garden is tough.
That passage states he willingly ate the fruit, no questions asked, no hesitation, knowing full he was not to. As for the curse, remember as the NT points out the nature of the curse and Adam’s role in it. It was because of Adam’s sin as 1 Corinthians 15:22 and Romans 5:12 points out. You may want to read up what the totality of Scriptures say about Adam and the curse (that would be known as hamartiology).
Yes Adam blamed God for the woman God gave him (and men have been blaming women every since).
I notice you could not bother address my point about Deborah. Perhaps because you cannot argue otherwise
That’s correct.
Adam knowingly sinned, blaming God AND the woman. Eve was tricked. Adam was not. And Paul does not subordinate women in spite of what “the church” has taught for hundreds of years. Every English translation fails to convey Paul’s intent in those passages. As Peter said, “His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures to their own destruction.” (2P 3:16)
Paul did not subordinate women. Neither did Jesus. Jesus commanded us all to humble ourselves and serve each other. He told his disciples they were not to be called Rabbi. This whole idea of having men to rule over other men was inherited from the Rabbis, not from Jesus, and now they call it “Discipleship”. The Body of Christ was never supposed to follow the Synagogue in how it functions, but that is exactly what “the church” has done.
And the passage states that Adam was NEXT TO EVE, which also means he stood by and said/did nothing during the entire exchange with the serpent.
Also, Beth Moore has clearly stated MANY times that she writes and leads Bible studies for WOMEN. Men started attending as her ministry grew, but her message is still target primarily for women. Is she supposed to stop when she sees a man in attendance? Why are there no questions asked of the men who choose to attend a study designed by a woman for women?
I do think the role of women in the church is a “disputable” matter. In other words, no one’s salvation hinges on their beliefs about it. We can go back and forth with plenty of examples and interpretations of scripture.
As for me, I view the role of women as similar to the role of marriage and family. It is God’s design that children be conceived and raised in a two parent household consisting of a mother and father. You can go outside of this design, but you are stepping outside of His design – and inviting other risks and challenges – by doing so. Going outside of this design does NOT stop God’s plan, though. He can and will raise up single mothers or children from broken homes to complete His will.
Same thing for role of women. God’s design is for Godly men to be leading their families, churches and communities. Unfortunately, we live in a culture where that structure is declining (for too many reasons to list here). Every church I have attended had a membership where women FAR outnumbered the men, and outside of the pastor and a few ushers or deacons, getting men to serve was a chore. So what are the women to do? Again, being outside of God’s design does NOT stop His plan. He will raise up whoever is necessary to complete His will – even women.
Just like I hate the trend of relationship books being heavily focused on coaching women on what to do/not do (as if men are perfect), I hate the trend of making the conversation on how wrong the women are rather than asking “Where are the men?!?!”
This is warfare in a traditional sense. In war, you take out the men first, leaving the women and children vulnerable. As it is in the physical, it is in the spiritual: Satan is taking the men out of our churches, homes, and communities. What will it take for us to start asking questions of the MEN on how and why this is happening?
Good reply.
MLF… Paul’s reference to A & E was correcting false teaching coming from new converts who had converted from cultic worship of artemis and other gods/goddesses/ along w the gnostic influence that included that some believed Eve was created first… it was a HUGE mess of twisted beliefs in Ephesus (& surrounding region) at the time, and Paul is correcting some of the cultic influence coming into the Ekklesia of Ephesus, where Timothy is ministering…
Ephesus/Asia minor was a hotbed of evil and demonic activity (see Acts 19 and Rev 2-3 – “synagogue of satan” “throne of satan”, “satan’s so called deep secrets”, etc)… the cult of “artemis of the Ephesians” (again, see acts 19) believed women were superior (she is a goddess after all), AND because artemis was born before her twin brother apollo… so it was assumed by some new converts to “the Way”, that God created women before man… Paul is correcting this error re creation, that is coming from various cultic beliefs…
when the lens of how cult worship was practiced in Ephesus, especially by those who followed artemis, I believe it becomes fairly clear Paul is correcting syncretism in the local Ekklesia that is being imported with the many new converts referred to in Acts 19…
most of the worship practices of the gods/goddesses have not been generally known in the past, but now we can access some of that information via internet… many of the rituals are still secret and it’s possible this information was burned w the sorcery/witchcraft paraphernelia in Acts 19… many of those who believed now came and openly confessed their evil deeds. a number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly…
it’s time we do a serious study of the influence of artemis, etc in Ephesus… we do an injustice to scripture when we refuse to acknowledge the HUGE influence of cultic worship in the region at the time… the temple of artemis in Ephesus was one of the 7 wonders of the ancient world… a BIG DEAL… I believe the list of evil in 1 Tim 1:9-10 is a list of cultic ritual practices going on at the time… including human sacrifice and temple prostitution/perversions, etc… some of the rituals were very evil… and Paul had lived in Ephesus for 3 years.,. he knew what was going on!
One can’t help but conclude her newfound beliefs were not from thoughtful study of the Scriptures, but from social pressures. Mind you, I support females being pastors. I don’t think the Scriptures preclude any role in the church based solely on gender. But her switch at this time…it doesn’t add up for me.
Bill… Beth’s shift makes sense, and especially at this time (at least from my perspective)… I’m thankful to read that she is recognizing something is off with the “complementarian” view… it takes time to process something like this…
I believe God is exposing deceptions and distortions of His word, how His word has been nullified in some ways through traditions of MAN and traditions of the ELDERS… see Matt 15/Mark 7… He warns us through His word dozens of time to watch out for deception… numerous times scripture says “do not be deceived…” so let’s pray for where I/you/we/Beth/God’s sons & daughters are being deceived, that He would show us specifics, and that we would recognize these deceptions, help make things right and share His truth!
the understanding of women in the Ekklesia has been one of the areas that has been significantly influenced by patriarchal traditions over the centuries and millenia… it will take some time to unravel all of the theological/translational twistings over the ages, but I believe that process is in progress…
test everything!
stay tuned!
In “Once an Insider, Now Without a Church Home”, the author, Amanda Farmer, makes the observation that complementarianism in the vein of CBMW instantly removes half the opposition to a pastor or elder board.
When women’s voices (their power) are taken away from them through this type of teaching, it concentrates power very effectively in the men. From there, other means are employed to concentrate power into smaller and smaller groups or one person.
Regardless, Moore makes the more important point: complementarianism is not a first-rank doctrine. It’s important to church polity and Christian theology, but it doesn’t separate evangelical Christians from each other the way some teachers (ie, MacArthur) have taught.
I think folks like MacArthur would probably argue that scriptural inerrancy is first-rank doctrine. Maybe I’m wrong.
The problem I see with MacArthur is that he confuses scriptural inerrancy with interpretive inerrancy. In other words, his interpretations are akin to inerrant because his interpretations correctly communicate what the Bible writer’s were communicating. You can see this kind of attitude in people who use words and phrases like “Biblical”, “what the scripture clearly teaches”, “a plain reading of scripture”, etc… to give their interpretations inerrant authority.
“confuses scriptural inerrancy with interpretive inerrancy”
Exactly.
Still waiting for MacArthur and his ilk to focus on the inerrancy of Matthew 5:29:
“ If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.”
It should be interpreted literally, should it not? And with the frequency of sexual immorality amongst these male pastors it’s pretty clear what part they would need to tear off.
The complementarians consistently apply their doctrine of inerrancy inconsistently, however it best benefits their hold on power.
Well said.
With MacArthur, EVERYthing is first-rank doctrine. Scriptural inerrancy is his hallmark, but he also wields the superlative sword on nearly everything he teaches.
Paul K,
Thanks for commenting on what Moore indeed said — teachings about men and women are not core doctrines. “Of first importance,” per I Corinthians 15:3,4, is “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”
The Lord rebuke all these false teachers. Indeed in the last days many will fall away, many false teachers will emerge. The Bible is very clear that the woman was created as the men’s helper, not less important, but precious to be treated with respect. But the men is the leader of the home, the men is to lead the church, not the woman, the men are to teach men, not women. Our roles are just as important but quite different. To make the Bible say what it doesnt say to match the times our tickle our ears is just wrong. Dont get me wrong we have a super important and crucial role at home, in the workplace and in the church but lets keep roles and gender as God intended.
That’s not what the Bible teaches.
the ideas re women might seem “very clear” because translators subtly added/deleted things to make it seem so… sadly, some translators are the ones who are making the Bible say what God did not intend it to say re women…
for example: the Greek word “authentein” – used only this 1x in the NT (in I tim 2:12), is now most commonly translated as “authority” in English… but it meant something significantly different in Paul’s time then how we understand “authority” today… it literally meant to kill with one’s own hand – murder, suicide, sacrifices of animals… that makes sense with the ritual sacrifices going on at the time… see Paul’s list in 1 Tim 1:9-10… 3 of these refer to killing people… Paul is quite likely referring to the “evil deeds”/ritual practices of the occult going on in the region (see Acts 19 for more info re sorcery and re artemis who was worshipped throughout the province of Asia & the world)…
the understanding of “authentein” has morphed over the centuries… again, this Greek word is used only this 1x in the NT… we now can research how it was used in other Greek literature during Paul’s era… and it’s not a plain and clear “authority” as we have generally translated and understood it… it’s a violent authority that was likely being practiced by goddess’ priestesses and other occultic leaders at the time…
that’s just one example of a seemingly subtle change that has had huge impact on our understanding of 1 Tim 2:12…
Well said, Bev. Your linguistic observations are supported in the literature most notably by Kenneth Bailey and R.T. France. A ‘plain reading’ of Scripture would imply some necessary understanding of Greek…
God will be the rewarder of women who today courageously stand up and preach the Gospel with boldness against tremendous hateful backlash and CONDEMNATION from so called self righteous “Christian men”
God can use anyone for His Kingdom – even speaking through the mouth of a donkey if necessary.
I have witnessed hardened male prisoners and the security guards on their knees in tears giving their hearts to Jesus when a woman preacher boldly came and spoke about the Love of Jesus for them.
Remember the words of Jesus to the woman caught in the act of adultery after her male accusers walked away. “ Neither do I condemn you”
When will we see a “Roy’s Report” on the millions BM has taken from unsuspecting women/churches in order to now deceive them? She now believes the feminist line of men and women being equal in all things without regard for Scripture which speaks the opposite. She now supports the LGBT+ movement, and is “WOKE” beyond belief. And to think, all this started in 2016! Interesting. BM needs to repent and repay!
Where can one find this unequivocable proof that BM supports LGBTQ+? Has she specifically said so, published her specific stance on this issue? I’m genuinely interested in finding out.
DJ,
Mrs. Moore has refused to respond to a letter sent to her by six women Bible teachers: Susan Heck, Debbie Lynne Kespert, Michelle Lesley, Martha Peace and Elizabeth Prata. This came about because she had a passage removed from one of her books that taught homosexuality is a sin.
You can Google: Beth Moore’s Beliefs on Homosexuality Are Called into Question in Open Letter from Bible Teachers
The women asked Mrs. Moore these questions:
Do you believe homosexuality is inherently sinful?
Do you believe that the practice of the homosexual lifestyle is compatible with holy Christian living?
Do you believe a person who dies as a practicing homosexual but professes to be a Christian will inherit eternal life?
Do you believe same-sex attraction is, in and of itself, an inherently sinful, unnatural, and disordered desire that must be mortified?
Why have you been so silent on this subject in light of your desire to “teach the word of God?”
They conclude the letter saying they “ask these questions to you out of genuine concern.”
That was in 2019. To my knowledge, she has never responded.
Here is a response from Moore in 2019 about the removal of some of the content about homosexuality from her book:
https://twitter.com/BethMooreLPM/status/1146878644398301185
“After taking 3 years to pray and to test the fruit, it became clear to me that my words in this section, words that exceeded Scripture, were stopping many from God’s words which follow. It wasn’t a doctrinal shift. When our words keep people from God’s words, we’ve overspoken.”
4:29 AM · Jul 5, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
Then at 9:48 AM that morning, she had another tweet in which claimed to be the victim of a witch hunt by hyper-fundamentalists.
A fuller discussion of these things can be found here: https://churchwatchcentral.com/2019/07/08/the-open-letter-to-beth-moore-finally-receives-a-response/
Another red flag about Moore regarding this topic is her ongoing, unqualified affirmation of pro “gay marriage” friend Jen Hatmaker over the years.
Hmmm? Pastors???
Does anyone know a Male pastor? A FeMale pastor?
Who meets the 17+, very tough qualifications?
For the elders who desire to be overseers?
Given by Paul? And most likely Jesus?
In 1 Tim 3, and Titus?
And yet they all claim to be called by God.
Giving themselves these clerical titles, in blatant violation of Jesus’s orders in Matt 23.
Pastor means Herdsman. So does Cowboy. Why not change all their titles to Cowboy as that is what they really wannabe.
Hi Walter
Yup…
“And yet they all claim to be **called** by God.”
“Giving themselves these clerical titles,”
But, then these so-called **called,** ‘titled” pastors, overseers…
“Ignore,” or “Twist,” the 17+, tuff Qualifications…
So they can maintain those “clerical titles.”
“Titles,” that come with, Power…
Profit, Prestige, Honor…
Glory, Recognition.
ALL those things highly esteemed among men
But, is abomination in the sight of God. Lu 16:15
——-
Jer 50:6
“My people” hath been “lost sheep:”
**THEIR shepherds**
have caused them to *go astray,*
1 Pet 2:25
For ye were as *sheep going astray;*
BUT are now returned to
the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
Walter – Here is a look at just three Qualifications from Titus…
Most “Titled” pastors, overseers, “Ignore,” or “Twist.”
1 – For a bishop (overseer) “Must Be” *BLAMELESS.*
2 – JUST. 3 – HOLY.
Titus 1:5-8 KJV
5 …ordain elders in every city…
If any be *BLAMELESS,*
the husband of one wife,
having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
For a bishop “Must Be” *BLAMELESS,*
as the steward of God;
NOT self willed,
NOT soon angry,
NOT given to wine,
NO striker,
NOT given to filthy lucre;
a lover of hospitality,
a lover of good men,
sober,
*JUST,* *HOLY,*
temperate;
1 – *Must Be*
Strongs #1163, die. – It is necessary (as binding).
Thayer’s – necessity established by the counsel and decree of God.
This *must be* is the same Greek word. – You *must be* born again. Jn 3:7
Seems to be a small word but very important. Yes?
1 – BLAMELESS
Strongs #410 anegkletos – unaccused, irreproachable, blameless.
Thayers – cannot be called into account, unreproveable, unaccused.
Dictionary – Without fault, innocent, guiltless, not meriting censure.
2 – JUST
Strongs #1342 – dikaios {dik’-ah-yos} from 1349;
Thayers – righteous, observing divine laws, innocent, faultless, guiltless.
3 – HOLY
Strongs #3741 – hosios {hos’-ee-os}
Thayers – undefiled by sin, free from wickedness,
religiously observing every moral obligation.
Now that’s three tough qualifications for elders…
Who desire to be an overseer. Yes?
How many pastors, overseers, today, who honestly examine themselves, seriously considering these three qualifications, can see themselves as BLAMELESS, JUST, and HOLY, innocent, without fault, above reproach, undefiled by sin, and thus qualify to be an pastor? overseer? And, if they can see themself as *blameless?* Is that pride? And no longer without fault? ;-)
If WE, His Ekklesia, His Church, His Sheep, His Body…
Take seriously the tough Qualifications in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9…
The number of Biblically Qualified, pastors, elders, overseers…
Is quite small. :-)
But, will these UN-qualified, pastor/leader/reverends…
“Remove Themselves?”
And be a good example to the flock?
What is popular is NOT always “Truth.”
What is “Truth” is NOT always popular.
A.Amos… I have to wonder how much porn is impacting the attitude/belief toward women as well… the stats are upwards of 50% and in some groups pretty close to 100% that have a problem with porn… porn literally warps the mind… not just the brain, but the mind… attitudes toward the vulnerable, particularly women & Children…
and God gave them over to the depravity of their minds… Romans 1 type of warping… this depravity spawns sexual abuse… and women and children are most often the victims… and men are most often the offenders…
also Hosea 4 has been basically ignored… it talks about a spirit of prostitution (porn is one way this spirit operates!) Hosea also indicates the men are responsible for the adultery/prostitution going on… it seems a religious spirit combined with a spirit of prostitution will keep blaming the women instead of the men owning up to their responsibility… could this be what happened to the women killed in Atlanta recently?
Hosea 4:14 warns us that a people who do not understand this will come to ruin… I have to wonder if that path of ruin is what we are witnessing more and more?
Bev, you are spot-on in your observations. The pornography and prostitution factor can’t be overstated. And why do preachers ignore Hosea 4 as well as Matt 5:27-30? Instead of preaching that Jesus meant exactly what he said, they lie and tell you that Jesus set the bar so impossibly high that you can’t ever be truly obedient. That you have to just believe that His obedience has been magically transferred to your account. This is a false Gospel. The True Gospel is that Jesus does offer forgiveness, but then He says, “Go and sin no more!”
I also noticed reading Hosea 4 verse 8: “They (the priests) feed on the sins of My people and set their hearts on iniquity.”
The pimps, prostitutes, and porn stars aren’t the only ones getting paid in this system. Pastor also gets his cut.
Thank you Amos Love! I very much appreciate your insights, scripture references, and definitions of terms. I pray others take notice. Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.
Walter – Thank you for the kind words…
And I also appreciate your insights…
Especially when you write…
“Giving themselves these **clerical titles,**
“Titles.” AAARRRGGGHH :-(
A pet peeve… And I love to pet my peeves…:-)
Yeah, I’m-a-thinkin…
This “comp vs eagal” thing is about who can have the “Titles.”
And the Power, Profit, Prestige, Honor, Glory, Reputation…
That comes with these man-made “clerical titles.”
That we NOW have in Christian-dumb.
I’ve collected a real list of “Titles.”
That are NOT in the Bible.
For one of His Disciples.
NO, really. A whole list.
——-
Over the years I’ve noticed…
“Titles” become “Idols”
“Idols” of the heart – Ezek14:1-11 KJV
And God now talks to you according to your “Idols.”
“Pastors” become “Masters”
A big No, No. Mat 23:10 KJV, Mat 6:24 KJV
Can you serve two masters? NOPE…
“Leaders” become “Deceivers”.
Isa 3:12 KJV, Isa 9:16 KJV, Mat 15:14 KJV
Why follow man? When you can follow Jesus?
——-
“Titles” become “Idols”
“Pastors” become “Masters”
“Leaders” become “Deceivers”.
“Titles” will Separate
“Titles” will Elevate
“Titles” will be used to control and manipulate.
——-
Job 32:21-22 KJV
Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person,
neither let me give “Flattering Titles” unto man.
For I know not to give “Flattering Titles;”
in so doing my maker would soon take me away.
What is popular is NOT always “Truth.”
What is “Truth” is NOT always popular.
Walter
Jesus warned His Disciples about “Tradtions.”
Making the word of God of “none effect”
through your tradition… Mark 7:13 KJV
The Bible also warns WE, His Ekklesia, about…
Commandments of Men… Doctrines of Men…
Philosophies of Men… Precepts of Men…
That will become “Our Traditions.”
Here ia a list of “Titles” we find in our Christian lexicon”
But, do NOT exist in the Bible…
For one of His Disciples.
1 – Pastor. 1a -Pastor/Leader/Reverend.
2 – Shepherd. 2a – Under Shepherd.
3 – Senior Pastor.
4 – Lead Pastor.
5 – Teaching Pastor.
6 – Executive Pastor.
7 – Youth Pastor.
8 – Singles Pastor.
9 – Worship Pastor.
10 – Reverend.
11 – Holy Reverend.
12 – Most Holy Right Reverend.
13 – ArchBishop.
14 – ArchDeacon.
15 – Canon.
16 – Prelate.
17 – Rector.
18 – Cardinal.
19 – Pope.
20 – Doctor.
21 – M.Div.
22 – Chief Executive Apostle.
NO kidding. There really is a, Chief Executive Apostle.
Saw him with my own eyes.
Houston – We have a Problem
Titles – Titles – Everywhere
Except in the Bible…
Those are all excellent points Amos, and wow! what a list of titles. That is one heck of a High…errr…Archy! It reminds me of the times when the very first Disciples of Jesus were debating among themselves who might get to be second-in-command. And at one point, somebody’s mama even began lobbying for her boys. But Jesus was having none of it. “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven,” he said. And he used an actual child as a visual aid for the lesson, in case there was any confusion about what he meant by “child”.
(Matt 18:1-5, Mark 9:33-37, Luke 9:46-50, Matt 20:20-28, Mark 10:35-45, Luke 22:24-27)
So, Jesus has settled that discussion, right? Well how do we have all these entitled people arguing about their entitlements? “The Bible says I get to be the one standing up on stage on Sunday morning lecturing to people about God.” Well, I’m sorry sir, but Jesus said you’re never getting into heaven with that attitude.
Yes Walter
“…ALL these enTITLED people arguing about their enTITLEments…”
——-
When, as you pointed out, Jesus said…
“The Greatest” shall be…
Last of all, Servant of all.
“The Greatest” shall be as the younger;
and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.
——-
Isa 3:12 KJV
O my people, they which lead thee
cause thee to err,
and destroy the way of thy paths.
Isa 9:16 KJV
For the leaders of this people
cause them to err;
and they that are led of them are destroyed.
In Ephesians 4:11, we read: “So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers”.
So yes, pastors are mentioned in scripture.
Here we go again, focusing on an individual as opposed to the person of Christ. Does it really matter what Beth Moore believes? If you’re following her teaching, you better be certain it’s the word of God she’s expounding, otherwise, you’re falling into the trap of following man/woman, and we’ve seen to many instances of that this century. Fallen people of the faith bringing so many down with them. Treating evangelical leaders as celebrities is idolatry! Is it a wonder we have so many spiritually weak minded followers in the church today. Study thyself approved!
Hi M H
Yes, pastors are mentioned in scripture.
Only once, in the NT, as you quoted, in Eph 4:11.
And eight times in the OT. All in Jeremiah…
Six times God is NOT happy with pastors… Oy Vey!!!
You’re NOT likely to hear these verses from the pulpit. :-)
Seems, in the Bible, God WARNS His Ekklesia, His Body…
About THE PASTORS who will, who have…
Scattered His flock, and…
Driven them…
Away…
Jeremiah 2:8 KJV
…”The Pastors” also transgressed against me,
and the prophets prophesied by Baal…
Jeremiah 10:21 KJV
For ”The Pastors” are become brutish, ( beastly, carnal )
and have not sought the LORD: therefore they shall not prosper,
and all their flocks shall be scattered.
Jeremiah 12:10 KJV
Many “Pastors” have destroyed my vineyard,
they have trodden my portion under foot…
Jeremiah 22:22 KJV
The *wind shall eat up ALL “Thy Pastors,”
(*wind = ruwach = breath, mind, spirit.)
Jeremiah 23:1 KJV
Woe be unto ”The Pastors” that destroy
and scatter the sheep of my pasture!
Jeremiah 23:2 KJV
…thus saith the LORD God of Israel
against ”The Pastors” that feed my people;
**Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away,**
and have not visited them: behold,
**I will visit upon you the evil of your doings,**
saith the LORD.
YUP… The pastors have scattered His flock…
And driven them away…
——-
Jer 50:6
“My people” hath been “lost sheep:”
**THEIR shepherds**
have caused them to *go astray,*
Notice, it says, THEIR shepherds.
1 Pet 2:25
For ye were as *sheep going astray;*
BUT are now returned to
the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
M H
Yes, pastors are mentioned in scripture.
And, almost nothing of what todays “Titled” pastors…
Get paid to do… is in the scriptures…
In the Bible? Can you name?
One of **His Disciples** who took the “Title” pastor?
Or shepherd? Or leader? Or reverend?
One of **His Disciples** who called them self pastor?
Or shepherd? Or leader? Or reverend?
One of **His Disciples** who called another Disciple pastor?
Or shepherd? Or leader? Or reverend?
One of **His Disciples** who was “Hired” as a…
Paid, Professional, Pastor, in a Pulpit?
Preaching, to People in Pews?
Weak after Weak?
In a church?
NOPE…
——-
If being one of **His Disciples** is important? To you?’
Wouldn’t what Jesus taught **His Disciples** be important?
Wouldn’t what **His Disciples** DID, be important?
Did Jesus ever teach **His Disciples** to take the “Title” pastor?
Or shepherd? Or leader? Or reverend?
NOPE…
Did any of **His Disciples** ever take the “Title” pastor?
Or shepherd? Or leader? Or reverend?
NOPE…
——-
What is popular is NOT always “Truth.”
What is “Truth” is NOT always popular.
I don’t view pastor as a title, but moreso as a role. The pastors who have really helped me and my family grow in our faith don’t go around being referred to as “Pastor ___” . A couple of them aren’t even on formal ministry staff, but they extend pastoral care to those around them as part of their personal ministry. In all cases, pastor is a role they take seriously, because they see it as part of their calling. Same with those I know who are teachers or evangelists. They don’t go around saying I’m “Teacher __” or “Evangelist __” (nor are they referred to as such), but teaching and evangelizing is what they DO as part of their God-given calling. They also have a clear gift for it.
I see nothing wrong with that, and won’t throw out the baby with the bath water.
And BTW you’re changing your argument. Your initial post lists pastor as the first among a list of terms that “do not exist” in scripture. (YOUR words). Now you are saying pastor IS in scripture. I think you should be clear.
And to answer Amos’s reply – we can absolutely point to disciples who served in the ROLE of evangelist. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say those of us who are Gentile believers should be grateful for the evangelism of Paul and Peter.
M H
Much agreement when you write…
“I don’t view pastor as a title, but moreso as a role.
The pastors who have really helped me
and my family grow in our faith
don’t go around being referred to as “Pastor ___” .
A couple of them aren’t even on formal ministry staff,”
“They don’t go around saying I’m “Teacher __” or “Evangelist __”
(nor are they referred to as such),
but teaching and evangelizing is what they DO
as part of their God-given calling.”
——-
Yes… The “Title,” pastor, teacher, is NOT needed…
To feed His Sheep… To care for His Sheep…
And, In the Bible, NOT one of His Disciples…
Thought it was important for them to…
Have the “Title” pastor. Or teacher. Or reverend.
——-
Job 32:21-22 KJV
Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person,
neither let me give “Flattering Titles” unto man.
For I know not to give “Flattering Titles;”
in so doing my maker would soon take me away.
——-
The only “ONE” in the Bible…
Who refers to HImself as…
The “ONE” Leader
The “ONE” Teacher
The “ONE” Shepherd
IS
{{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}}
M H
You write..
“And BTW you’re changing your argument. Your initial post lists pastor as the first among a LIST OF TERMS that “do not exist” in scripture. (YOUR words).”
——-
Sorry, if I did NOT explain myself properly.
What I wrote is about a list of “TITLES.”
That most of us use in Christianity…
That is NOT found in the Bible…
For one of His Disciples…
NOT a list of TERMS, as you stated.
——-
This is from my comment @ APRIL 11, 2021 AT 8:48 AM
Here ia a list of “Titles” we find in our Christian lexicon”
But, do NOT exist in the Bible…
For one of His Disciples.
1 – Pastor. 1a -Pastor/Leader/Reverend.
2 – Shepherd. 2a – Under Shepherd.
3 – Senior Pastor.
Etc…
——-
And other sheep I have, which are NOT of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall “Hear My Voice; “
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Voice – One Fold – One Shepherd – One Leader
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
She’s a wolf. I guarantee she’ll have a lot more “apologies” for finally admitting what she’s always believed. She’s just coming out now that it profits her the most.