₦airaland Forum

No Sister  ( All Christians are part of the holy nation, the royal priesthood and the chosen race that offer sacrifices of lips of praise to God. All members of this spiritual nation or priesthood are not Overseers.

The bible lays out clear cut guidelines on qualification for this position of oversight. No if, buts or may be's

[b]God's Word does not contradict itself[/b]

The Final authority on this subject is this


1 Cor 14: 33-35

33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
     As in all the congregations of the saints[/b], 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.


1 Tim 2:11,12
11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 [b]I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

1Tim 3:1-14   (Note that the role of the man and the woman ARE NOT INTERCHANGABLE)


1Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an [b]Overseer,[[/b]a] he desires a noble task. 2Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.
8Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
11 In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
12A [b]deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.

@Sister pilgrim.

Hmmmmmmnn lets not drag this on and on. It would be pointless

You are still missing the point

1 Overseers are those who teach, instruct, shephard and preside over the congregation and the whole congregation . That was a role the bible made VERY CLEAR WOMEN CANNOT occupy in the congregation. (unless you are talking about roles apart from this)

2 You keep saying Miriam was a prophetess (there were other prophetesses in the bible). Agreed. But who does the bible say she was leading in worship-- Fellow women.

3 You and Stimulus keep saying that Deborah judged in the same capacity as Men.
I listed some of the things that a male Judge did in Israel non of which Deborah did and i noted that Deborah advised a man and it was the Man who was in charge and presided over the campaign, not Deborah.

Who told you Deborah judged in the same capacity as men and why did she not perform the roles that male Judges did but had to call a man to do that? List the things Deborah did and compare them to that of a male judge like Samuel.

4 Men and Women are part of a new holy nation and a royal priesthood offering up sacrifices of praise to God, stop misquoting I Pet chapter 2 . It had nothing to do with qualifications for the position of Overseer.

5 Paul admonished all Christians on how to behave. Both older men and older women. That had nothing to do with qualification for the positions of Overseers in the congregation.

6 Women in the body of Christ are not allowed to exercise authority over men  Short and Simple and since Overseers exercise authority over the whole congregation, women are not aloowed to perform that role.

@sage,

I never expected you'd be such a self-congratulatory loser! Rather than backslap anyone in hope of scoring some sympathy, be a gentleman and go through the texts you either missed, or have deliberately refused to consider. I'm waiting for your answers to the few questions offered you just to see where you're copping out your own 'FOUNDATION'.

hmnnnnnnnnnnnnn Sister, ive gone through the bible and every thing i stated were from bible passages. I never stated a personal opinion in this. Where were women appointed as overseers in the bible and where have women led men in pure worship before?


Please stop making noise. Men who are worth any substance in their manhood don't holla so loud; rather, they calm down and look into the Word and settle their nightmares on what is taught there. You can't just come on board and rascally dismiss the ministries of those women - you didn't appoint them; God did!

[b]Hey Sister, i clearly posted the scriptures for you. Do you want me to post it again? I don't make noise. I highlight and cap posts to place emphasis on main points.

The scriptures is clear on this issue and the bible does not contradict itself. In this my current posts to you i wanted to quote the many scriptures that i cited like i did the last time but the computer that im using does not copy and im too lazy to type all those passages


Take it cool sister no beef .[/b]

@sage,

I've discussed those texts already; could it be possible that you might have something to counter the issues raised thereto?  What did the inspired apostle mean by the term PRESBUTEROS (πρεσβύτερος)?

[b]To whom and where(Mind citing specific scriptures?)[/b]


Good. And the NT clearly indicates that women were also called along with the men to shepherd the Church. Women were called exactly the same term as the male "elders" --PRESBUTEROS (πρεσβύτερος].

No Sister Women WERE NOT called to become shephards along with men. ( Mind Giving scriptural citations of where women were appointed as overseers and shephards?)


That is because you refuse to examine the texts that clearly outline the fact that women are also called to shepherd the Church.

No Sister. i based all my what i posted on the bible. Where do you get yours from and where were women appointed to serve as Overseers[?/b]


Go through the texts again, broaden your scope and take a good look at those other texts you guys have been avoiding all along. It might be very helpful to do so.

[b][b]Open your bible Sister. The role of Overseers in the congregation is clear and the bible makes it clear that women are not allowed to perform that role. Am i missing a text of the bible where women were allowed to be appointed as overseers? [/b]

Hi sage,

Good to read once more from you. Here are a few things you have missed and only tried to push just a few verses in support for a male only leadership in the Church:

1.
This issue has been much discussed; and some people have felt that visiting the OT may be of very little benefit to understanding worship in the NT. However, even when you revisit the issue, I'd like to simply say this:

       In the NT, both males and females are priests together (I Pet. 2:5 & 9)

There's nothing wrong with revisiting the OT worship specifications. The only thing I'd advise here is that we don't forget what the NT says about the fact that both MALES and FEMALES are priests in the CHURCH.


[b][color=#000099]My answer.

Most people on this forum have been misquoting 1 Peter 2:5,9. The issue beign discussed in that chapter (and indeed for most of 1st Peter {PLS READ THE WHOLE CHAPTER}) was NOT the appointment of overseers in the congregation, but the need for all christians to change their way of life to conform to that of those who had been ushered into a new convenant
It was discussing the obligation that now rested on all Christians who have become a part of what Peter described as this spiritual priesthood, chosen race, special possesion or holy nation (to emphasize that through their calling, they are apart from the rest of the world in their primary pursuits and way of life.)
Heb 13:5 CLEARLY SHOWS WHAT KIND OF SACRIFICES CHRISTIANS UNDER THE NEW CONVENANT OFFER ie THE SACRIFICES OF PRAISE TO GOD WHICH BOTH CHRISTIAN MEN AND WOMEN HAVE TO RENDER
HOW DOES 1ST PETER CONTRADICT THE DIVINELY ORDAINED INSTRUCTIONS BY PAUL[/color][/b]2.


This is where it gets really interesting. I'd like you to take a very close look at the examples of the following and perhaps offer us WHY God chose these women to do exactly the same as the men did as far as leadership is concerned:

    (a) Micah 6:4 -- God sending Moses, Aaron and Miriam

My Answer

You keep missing the point sister. The three of them were sent by God, Miriam was a Prophetess YES but what role could they play is the question.

Moses and Aaron LED AND HAD OVERSIGHT OVER THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY OF ISRAEL in matters pertaining to Worship.
Miriam of the other hand could lead ONLY FELLOW WOMEN in worship   

(b) Judges 4 & 5 -- Deborah the prophetess

    (c) 2 Kings 22 & 2 Chron. 34 --  Huldah the prophetess

[b][color=#000099]My answer
To address this issue first we have to take a look at the background of the time of the Judges. (Judges Chap 2) It was a time of disunity in which Israelites for the most part were worshiping false gods. They also disregarded God's instructions and were fighting and killing each other. Things were not at their best
Deborah, like Miriam, was also a prophetess who knew the will of God. But What role could she play in comparison to the male Judges?
Male Judges like Samuel, Gidieon presided over the motions of worship. They led and gave final Instructions and the people were subject to their authority. They gave the final go aheads for wars and had authority to PRESIDE OVER ISSUES and even execute people(Judges 7:15-22, 1st Sam Chap 13-15).
Deborah on the other hand having learnt the will of God, called a Male judge and advised him on what to do. The Male Judge was the one who took the lead and presided over the people of Israel in that campaign[/color][/b]

There are definitely more; but you may not have seen them (many people don't, actually). So, please go to those texts and offer an explication as to WHY God chose those women in leadership over His people (contrary to your assertion that God chose only men to lead).

[b]My answer
Please, im begging you to show me (From any part of the bible) where women had authority over, presided and led Men in matters of worship.[/b]


Where is it written that any believer leads the 'pure worship' of NT Christian believers?

My answer

[b]Yes Sister. Hebrews chapter 13:7 and 17 clearly admonishes christians to submit to the authority of the overseers in the congregation who take the lead among them and to imitate their faith[/b]

Please look carefully at what you're trying to infer:

(a) the choosing of the apostles could not be confused for those who were called 'overseers'. These are two distinct issues.

[b]No Sister. John 21:15-17, Acts16:4,5; 2:14; All of Chapter 15,  Chap 2:14, 8:14-17, 10:24-48 clearly shows that when the christian congrgation was formed, it was the Apostles who served as overseers that took the lead in matters pertaining to worship. Later the apostles helped to appoint ,under the directions of the holy spirit, spiritually qualified and mature men as overseers in the various congregation to have oversight of the congregations.[/b]

(b) If you are making out all the disciples to be ONLY MEN, may I ask you what you think of Rom. 16:7 - "Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me"?

Sister, i never said all disciples of Christ are men. I stated that the apostles who later had oversight over the church and also appointed other qualified men as overseers were all men. {Jesus had women disciples(so it would be outrageous for anybody to say all Jesus disciples are men ) and so did the first century congregation)
(c) How many apostles do you see in the New Testament?

[color=#000099]The ones mentioned in the scriptures only   [/color]


(d) What does Ephesians 4:11 mean to you?

[b]My answer

Paul discussed the fact that all true Christians had one hope, faith and baptism in that chapter and the gifts in men that God had provided to to nourish the Congregation and help the members maintain their faith and that included the apostles, shephards and teachers within the congregation. Christians are as of one body under Christ and within that body there are guidelines set out by the holy spirit on who could perform shepharding and teaching duties. (N/b. In God's eyes a man and his wife are one and is seen as one body. But within that one body, God's word also outlined how authority and headship take place
I don't see how this or Paul contradicts himself or all the other bible passages nor how it supports women having authority over men
This passage also was not discussing the qualifications or requirments of overseers[/b]



What do you understand by the term PRESBUTEROS (πρεσβύτερος)? Is that a term that was used for only male elders?

[color=#000099]Paul admonished older men, older women, younger men and younger women on how to behave. In what context are you talking about and who was he adressing. Was it the overseers of the congregation or who?[/color]

After a thorough examination of the above
any questions are welcome

@TV01

I appreciate the manner in which you tackled this topic for the most part.

Most people here are propagating their own thoughts rather tha stating what is found in the bible.

At the end of the day we get accused of propagating a Man only world .

The thing is that neither of us or any other person in this forum is in a position to reexpound, rethink, renegotiate or restate what is in the bible.

People carry on with this topic like there is room for negotiation as pertaining to roles within the congregation.

But the bible is clear on the role of elders and what women are not allowed to do WITHIN).


neither Tayo D arguments, nor Stimulus nor Pilgrims has ANY FOUNDATION ON THE BIBLE.

Neither does bogus arguments quoting the prophecy of Joel, Miriam leading fellow women in worship, women in the congregation admonished to teach fellow women, nor the case of Deborar, nor the fact that the Christian body is seen as one by Christ (Both males and females) CONTRADICT THE DIVINELY SET QUALIFICATIONS FOR APPOINTMENT TO POSITIONS OF OVERSIGHT IN THE CONGREGATION.

Summarry

From the bible it is the duty of Elders/Bishops/Overseers to Have authority over, teach, preside over, shephard, instruct and oversee the Church.

On the other hand Women CANNOT have authority over, teach, instruct, preside over, instruct or shephard the flock[/color].


So women [color=#990000]cannot serve as a member of the body of the Elders in the congregation[color=#770077][/color]

Now to SUM THIS DISCUSSION UP

Apostle Paul had under the guidiance of the holy spirit participated in making appointment of elders throughout the congregations.[/i]Now in writing he outlines EXACTLY WHAT GOD’S WILL IS TOWARDS THE APPOINTMENT OF OVERSEERS IN THE CONGREGATION.

1 Cor 14: 33-35

33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
      As in all the congregations of the saints[/b][/color][color=#770077], [b]34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.


1 Tim 2:11,12
11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 [i]I DO NOT PERMIT a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

1Tim 3:1-14   (Note that the role of the man and the woman ARE NOT INTERCHANGABLE)


1Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer,[a] he desires a noble task. 2Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.
8Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
11In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
12A [b]deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.

From Adams creation his wife had to follow his lead with regards to spiritual matters
In times past, God passed down spiritual directions and actions to be implemented through the Male heads of households or communities (Gen 7:17, 12:1-5). When the nation of Israel was constituted, God selected a MALE ONLY priesthood to take the lead in matters pertaining to worship and MALE ONLY Levites to help them with this issue(Deut 33:10). When the nation of Israel came under the rulership of Kings, who had a mandate to lead the Israelites in a path of spiritual righteousness, God selected only MALES as kings.

Coming down to the Christian era.

When Jesus walked the earth, he had many disciples including women who wanted to follow his footsteps. These women (including his mother) COULD NOT take a leading role in matters pertaining to pure worship. When Jesus selected those that would be his Apostles and subsequently take the lead in the Church (Acts 2:14, 8:14-17, 10:24), Jesus selected only MALES. Similarly when a replacement for 1 of the twelve was made it WAS NOT OPEN TO ANY OF THE FEMALE DISCIPLES who had toiled with Jesus (and since this appointment was made under the guidance of the holy spirit, it gives a strong indication as to what the will of God was towards who could be an overseer).
Later when some issues in worship had to be addressed, the Apostles appointed ONLY MEN TO SERVE AS DEACONS (Acts Chap 7:1-7) to work under their authority to oversee certain issues.
Appointment of elders in Churches was done under the guidance of Holy Spirit. These Elders HAD TO TEACH, INSTRUCT, SHEPHARD, PRESIDE OVER AND OVERSEE THE AFAIRS OF THE CHURCH (Acts 14:23, 16:4,5, )
[b]When other matters arose that needed directives and instructions the Apostles and these MALE Elders under the direction of the Holy Spirit issued these AND THE WHOLE CHURCH HAS TO FOLLOW THEIR LEAD AND WERE SUBJECT TO THEIR AUTHORITY).([/b]Acts Chapter 15)

It never seems to stop puzzling me on why people who watch west ham and wigan would make a comment on the premier playmaker of the premier club in world footballs recent history.

8 champions league final appearances in the last 18 years. Forza Milan, Forza Pirlo . Grazie Milan, Grazie Il capitano, Grazie Pirlo.


And as a side note

European league performances in the last 18 years in Champions league

Italian teams.  13 final appearances  

Spanish teams  8  "    "

English teams   4


You guys need to stop kissing the premierships ass

@Jackal and Ruudie

HAVE ANY OF YOU WATCHED PIRLO BEFORE PLAY A LEAGUE GAME before

Have any of you guys watched Pirlo playing for Italy except in the world cup

Fifa and Uefa obviously rate him as the best visionary passer of the ball in the world. The best to have ever kicked a ball if you go by some accounts.

If you guys think you are better than FIfa and Uefa technical committes then

B/4 you guyz can say anything about Pirlo, watch him in the League, then you will understand why people that Know him KNOW he is the best midfielder in the world and by a long distance

Most people in here must be crazy

Kitaun you are so right. I need to give you a high five.

Riquelme can never clean Pirlo's boot. Pirlo is better than any Midfielder in the world, and by some miles IMO

See what watching too much premiership has done to people.

If you guyz did not kiss the premierships ass so much you might have realised that

1 Pirlo's six years in Milan has conicided with the one of the best for years of any Proffesional club in the history of football.

2 Pirlo has won everything to be won in football except 4 two of them. One he will win in December, the other one next summer.

3 Pirlo holds the record for Milan in number of freekicks for a season. Last season he scored Four freekicks in less than 3 months.

4 Pirlo had the highest number of Man of the match awards in the last world cup. I cant remember when last that happed in Morden history.

5 Pirlo singlehandedly carried a group of young kids to a bronze medal position in the olympics

6 Rated so highly by Fifa, Uefa picked him as the obvious candidate for their technical school instructions when it came to passing the ball

7 The whole AC Milan is built to suit Pirlo's style of play Thats the level of his quality.

In the last qualifiers, i was going through player statistics in Eurosport and the average Midfielder in Europe ( Including any midfielder on earth you can think of) had about 45-60 completed passes.

Pirlo had 100   :ocompleted passes and two perfect assists.

People say Kaka shone in that 2005 Champions league. Well 3 accurate and pinpoint passes from Pirlo to a speeding Kaka ( all resulting in goals though one  discounted) was what made that Final what it was/is


DID ANYBODY HERE FOLLOW AC MILANS DOUBLE WINNING SEASON OF 2002-2003 OR THE NEXT YEAR AS THEY ROMPED TO THE SERIA A TITLE?

IM SICK OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW NOTHING ABOUT PIRLO TALKING TRASH

HE IS MILES AHEAD OF ANY MIDFIELDER IN THE WORLD (LIKE HE SHOWED IN THE WORLD CUP).

He had a bad season last year admittedly but Riquelme or anyother person is not fit to clean his boots.

YOU GUYZ SHOULD STOP INSULTING PIRLO ON THIS FORUM.

And keep on kissing the premierships ass and talking trash.

wow

ive been away for a while. When did sister Pilgrim join the debate .
Its getting hot in here .

@Pilgrim. Ive gone thru your argument and you are making the same mistake that Stimulus is making


TV01 is trying to bring it accross to you that those that are allowed to teach, shephard and lead within the Church and on Church issues as the letter to Titus directed are the Elders. All true Christians came/come under the shepharding care of this Elders and followed/follow their lead. And the holy spirit reserved that role exclusively for men.

Ehe i said i was gonna make a concise discussion from the bible but ive been away for a while.

Now that im back 4 a while im feeling so lazy , Il be back soon though

@ Stimulus


Your argument with Deborah and Miriam do not hold water at all. Neither does you your arguments with the apostle quoting Joel and the other New testament scriptures that you quoted also. You are trying to make it look like they played the same role with the Men who had authority and that somehow that now means that women can become Shephards in the Church. That idea does not come from the bible.
(This was part of the reason why i mentioned the example of Korah. Korah had no intentions of delibrately displeasing God, nor did he dispute the fact that God gave out spiritual instructions through Moses. But presumteous thinking when it came to leadership in spiritual matters and trying to assume a position he thought Moses was Hoarding and he thought he and other qualified men were also entitled to but were beign denied by a class promoting Moses was his pitfall) (It was the same trap Athaliah and Miriam [whom you keep mentioning] feel into and one who another prophetess like Miriam, Deborah, advoided by showing Godly subjection to divinely constituted authority

The reason why the Holy Spirit appointed only Men as Shephards in the first century was because of a devine precedent that preceeded the Law of Moses. It is a precedent that had been devinely instituted from Creation and Shows up time and again Before the law, Under the Old convenant and Under the New convenant as well.

Im working on a project now but il Come back and handle this issue in detail most likely this weekend

@TV01

Looks like you have even answered the questions i wanted Stmulus to answer. I was typing this up, left my desk and came back later to post it b/4 i read your comments. .

Besides

You will need to do this to clarify yourself


First Il like you make this issue clear.



1 Compare the roles of a Male Judge like Samuel to the role that a female judge like Deborah could play. (And include the role Miriam could play)

2 What role did/could women in the first century Church play within the Church?

@Stimulus


The work of women in the body is always appreciated like i said b/4 and they have different gifts which they use in the ministry and in fufilling their commision of lauding the Christ

SO

Let us sum up this topic and make it concise and remove ambiguity

Given that authority over the Church is given to Elders appointed by Holy Spirit and it was/is their duty to Oversee, Preside over, Shephard, Lead, Teach, Issue directives, within the Church

1 Explain which of these roles you say a woman can take on and in what context within the Church and

2 How that relates with the principle of headship within the Church


and lets hold it against the light of Bible truth.

Talk about irony

These religious leaders who call themselves "Christians" realise that

Flag salute/worship, Pledges/oath of alligience, anthems, the spirit of patriotism and Nationalism and Promising to serve the nation with all your life constitues worship of the nations.

Irronically they dont have the moral authority to say that the principles by which wordly Kingdoms operate and that of Christianity is such that you cannot Serve the Nation and Serve the True God at the same time.

Rather they try (But ultimately fail) to rationalise how one can worship the nation and God at the same time (From a Christian standpoint)


I guess that goes to confirm Revelation


The worlds masses really worship the wild beast primariy.

Some just claim to also worship the true God but we know that God does not accept worship of him and the wild beast at the same time

Talk about irony

These religious leaders who call themselves "Christians" realise that

Flag salute/worship, Pledges/oath of alligience, anthems, the spirit of patriotism and Nationalism and Promising to serve the nation with all your life constitues worship of the nations.

Irronically they dont have the moral authority to say that the principles by which wordly Kingdoms operate and that of Christianity is such that you cannot Serve the Nation and Serve the True God at the same time.

Rather they try (But ultimately fail) to rationalise how one can worship the nation and God at the same time (From a Christian standpoint)


I guess that goes to confirm Revelation


The worlds masses really worship the wild beast primariy.

Some just claim to also worship the true God but we know that God does not accept worship of him and the wild beast at the same time

@TV01

I want you to read this. I read the paper yesterday and i wento to the site

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/07/faith-shouldnt-.html#more


Faith shouldn't be red, white and blue
Patriotism and religion each hold a prominent place in the American story. That’s as it should be. To wed the two, however, is a disservice to patriots and to the faithful.
By Tom Krattenmaker

The Fourth of July is a time for Americans to honor our country and, for the many religious people among us, to honor God. But as the fireworks explode on Independence Day, let's resist an all-too-common tendency these days to drape the American flag around the Christian cross. Let's remember that religion is not patriotism, that patriotism is not religion — and that when we combine them both with a glorification of American military might, something has gone disturbingly askew.

(Illustration by Sam Ward)

Sadly, the distinction between faith and martial-tinged patriotism seems lost on some of our most fervent advocates for the military and religion. Rewind to Memorial Day weekend, when a Christian organization called Task Force Patriot USA and other groups staged a three-day salute to the troops at Stone Mountain Park in Georgia. Drawing about 100,000 people, the celebration featured Christian worship services and Bible giveaways, speeches by retired military personnel and Air Force jet flybys.

Not to single out Christianity. After all, a cross-themed celebration of the military is harmless next to jihadists who kill in the name of religion. And U.S. troops certainly deserve appreciation. Yet one has to ask: Do Christian worship and Bibles really belong with demonstrations of U.S. military might?

For one evangelical leader here in Oregon, the conflation of patriotism and Christianity reached the point where he took action that's considered anathema in many conservative church communities: He publicly spoke out against what was happening at his church.

Bob Hyatt, now pastor of the upstart Evergreen Community in the Portland area, worked on the staff of a local megachurch in the fevered period immediately after the 9/11 attacks. Despite being raised and educated in a strict Christian conservative environment in which the United States was regarded as God's favored nation, Hyatt was aghast to find the sanctuary frequently decked out in red-white-and-blue bunting with a pair of 50-foot American flags. In the Sunday service nearest the Fourth of July, congregants recited the Pledge of Allegiance and sang patriotic songs. As the pattern continued through the early months of the Iraq war, Hyatt could hold his tongue no longer. At a pray-for-our-troops rally at the megachurch, he took a turn at the microphone and cited the teachings of Jesus in making the unpopular suggestion that the congregants also pray for Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi people. He went on to write an Internet article titled, "Profoundly Disturbed on the Fourth of July," which was not well-received at the church and led to his leaving its staff.

'We were worshiping America'

Reflecting on those patriotic services, Hyatt wrote: "We had taken a time that belonged to the worship of God and turned it toward the appreciation of a country, a political system, a flag. We said that we were worshiping God through the singing of those patriotic songs, the saying of the Pledge of Allegiance and the rest, but in fact we were worshiping America."

There is considerable practical wisdom in the old saying about atheists in foxholes. A complete separation of faith and patriotism in a time of war is as unlikely as expecting religious soldiers not to turn to God in the face of enemy fire, and as unreasonable as expecting Christian believers to pray equally for al-Qaeda fighters and U.S. troops. Right or wrong, we have a long tradition of political and military leaders invoking God in non-neutral ways during times of war.

During the crucial D-Day invasion, President Franklin Roosevelt took to the airwaves with an appeal to "Almighty God" to "lead (our men) straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith."

Would those words arouse the ire of Americans today? Of some, probably. My own response to Roosevelt's religious invocation is colored by indelible memories of my visit to the World War II cemetery in Normandy. I still have vivid mental pictures of the graves of the American soldiers, of the crosses laid out in row after solemn row. Interspersed throughout the cemetery were many Stars of David, rising over the graves of the fallen Jewish soldiers whose role in the fight has special poignancy.

No doubt, faith has long played a role in the American military, but it has been an inclusive faith, one respecting a diversity of denominations and religions, with chaplains of different stripes available to assist soldiers on their own religious terms. Contrast that with what's been happening in the military in recent years, where sometimes-coercive Christian evangelizing has triggered lawsuits and lent a crusader overtone to the fight against terrorism. Contrast that inclusive tradition with rhetoric that portrays Jesus as America's "commander in chief" and efforts by a group called Christian Embassy to proselytize to our diplomatic corps and military leadership. Is militaristic Christian nationalism really where we want to take this country and our dominant religion?

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama recently spoke of the danger to our critical thinking ability when we become too convinced of America's righteousness and God's allegiance with the United States. While acknowledging the evil of the 9/11 attacks, Obama sounded this note of caution: "The danger of using good vs. evil in the context of war is it may lead us to be not as critical as we should be about our own actions."

Obama went on to cite the prisoner abuse scandals at Abu Ghraib and "unjust" detentions at Guantanamo as examples of the abuses of which we are capable when we become too convinced of our inherent God-sanctioned goodness.

'The light is the light of Christ'

The progressive evangelical leader Jim Wallis has sounded similar warnings to Christians who might go too far in mixing their patriotism and faith. Wallis has repeatedly chided President Bush for voicing a theology that speaks of America as "the hope of all mankind the light (that) shines in the darkness."

Wallis acknowledges the biblical foundation of such language, but he adds, it is important to note that, "In the gospel, the light shining in the darkness is the Word of God, and the light is the light of Christ. It's not about America and its values."

God and country — the two live side-by-side in the hearts of many tradition-minded Americans. Yet faith and patriotism are different ideals that at times require vastly different allegiances. Given the reality of religious pluralism in America, the government cannot rightly become the instrument of any one form of belief. Conversely, our country will not always do right — no nation can — and only by maintaining its distinct identity can religion retain its ability to call people to conscience.

May patriots honor the flag on the Fourth of July. And may religious people revel in the beauty of their faiths. But let's remember that being Christian is not a requirement of patriotism. And that patriotism is most assuredly not a requirement of being religious. Let's honor the flag and faith — by keeping a reverent measure of distance between the two.

Tom Krattenmaker, who lives in Portland, Ore., specializes in religion in public life and is a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.

@TV01

I like the way you present your points. Very detailed and concise

Infact thi sums up the whole discussion. The point ive been trying to make

TV01:
~ Women can minister/teach other women and juveniles and with authority (from the eldership). They can also counsel privately anyone that can benefit from their maturity, but they cannot in the presence of mature qualified and available men teach or presume overall leadership of the congregation. If one wants to see this ministry as a form of "leadership", I won't be semantic, but it is not shepherding the flock or overall leading the church. Biblically/historically, could/were women ever shepherds?
~ Women have roles, abetted with skills, talents, gifts and of course the same Spirit and grace afforded to men. Their are joint heirs and equally valued by God.


God bless
TV

@Tv01

Once again so straight to the point and accurate.

I wonder where people get their ideas from and Where in True Christianity women could shephard the flock

Guyz i have an idea

This issue can be clarified if we examine the Scriptures to see the role Elders(a role reserved only for Men appointed under the guidiance of the spirit) played.


@ Stimulus (After answering the 2 questions that i asked) and Tayo D

If you guys can use the scriptures to outline the role of Elders in the Church, then we all can see clearly what role women played/play in True worship.

Tayo D had a point

Ive made quite a number of points but i need to put it in a concise manner, its all over the place. I would do that to ensure that we do not go over the same thing over and over again

But briefly i know my Points have covered the following

1 Precedents seen in the bible as regards to leadership in pure worship

2 What past examples show us as to the seriousness of the issue (some people think its a personal issue)

3 Qualifications for the position of Elder as outlined by the holy spirit.

4 How First Century Christianity Functioned and the example of Jesus and the early Christians

Also as a note below

Parrallels exist b/w pure worship in Israel and under Christianity

1 In Israel Men, Women and Children were all called into the Old Convenant. Under the new convenant all also have an opportunity to worship God

2 All Israelities were entitled to the same blessings and rewards for staying a faithful course. All true Christians are entitled to that too today.

3 However only select people could lead the people in worship in accordance with God's arraingments. the same was true of First Century Christianity.

4 Like in Israel, the people that led in Worship were not in anyway more exaulted in the eyes of God than the rest who could not. They were all one in the eyes of God as long as they stayed the course.

The Men who took the lead in the First Century congregation were not more exaulted in God's eyes than other Christians. They all would be rewarded in the same way either male or female. But even at that, the Holy spirit appointed only Men to take the lead. This was no mistake

And Stimulus

I don't understand understand you on the issue of the apostles too

You said that the Church was not yet formed then. I don't know what point you are trying to make with that.


Jesus had chosen his apostles and had assigned them Leadership roles among his followers. These apostles took the lead in the Church in Leading and Issuing directives.


Now my questions to you is

1 Why did Jesus Choose only men as his apostles and gave them Leadership roles in the Church that was to be established despite having faithful women who had toiled with him around him? Why did he not assign them any leadership role?

2 Can you please define what Leadership roles you say a woman can assume and what you mean by[b] difference in Leadership and worship[/b] (Bearing in mind that decisions affecting the congregations are the responsibility of the Elders and this decision making body were ONLY MEN as led by God's holy spirit)

ok Stimulus, take it easy bro

We have established that using Christian and Biblical Standards

1 Women cannot teach in the church

2 They are not allowed to try to Take over authority from men.

NOW COMES THE QUESTION OF WHAT ROLE CAN THEY PLAY AS REGARDS TO LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE BODY OF THE CHRIST.

Now we need to also go back and examine true Christianity as it was led by God.

When issues that needed leadership and handling came up in the first century issues like the Jew-Gentile divide and Circumcision, the holy spirit guided the Elders to give spiritual directives on the matter and to preside over such issues.
The case of becoming Elders or Presiding and Overseeing the flock was the duty of the Elders. It was/is not a role open to women. Before men could become appointed as oversears of the flock, they had to display the friutage of God's holy spirit and these appointments were made under God's guidiance.

Men appointed under the influence and Guidiance of Holy spirit were the only ones who lead the flock.


You mentioned Eph Chap 4. Il come back and analyze that and some of the other Scriptures you stated and discuss women as found in the body of the Christ

@Stimulus

The problem really stems from the fact that you are trying to make it look like the oversight of the congregation which were done by only Men who were elders in the first century congregation under the guidiance of the holy spirit is somehow discriminatory and that if women are not allowed to lead that that somehow points towards discrimination.

@Stimulus and Tayo D

I used the examples of how true worship has been constructed throughout human history to shows that leadership roles have been reserved for certain people. in the christian congregation that role was open only to men. That does not mean the others worshiping God did not or do not have the same measure of his blessing and cannot serve in other capacities in the worship of God nor will not get the same reward

The reason i cited the examples i did was to show that humans might not fully comprehend why God makes certain arraingments when it comes to worship and leading in worship.

For eg some people in Israel might not have understood why God choose a certain group of people over another, and it might have even looked unjust in the eyes of humans but if they were to have God's approval, they had to subject to his will and follow the way of worship he approved of.

IN LIGHT OF THIS WHAT PEOPLE SHOULD REALLY ASK IS WHAT ROLE DO WOMEN PLAY IN THE BODY OF THE CHRIST? and not if they are allowed to Preside over the flock

@Stimulus


What i don't understand though is that are you somehow suggesting that God's holy spirit directing only men to take the role of Elders and to have oversight of the flock in the first century was somehow Chauvunistic and discriminatory Does Jesus assigning the duty of Shepharding the flock to his male disciples somehow sexist?

Both Jesus and the First century Christians acted under the guidiance of God's holy spirit and fully had God's favour.

When Paul gave out the qualifications for those who would serve as Elders and Oversee the flock, it was clear that such positions of Oversight was reserved for Men
( In Timothy)

When issues affecting the first century congregation were to be decided, the holy spirit directed only men as elders to take leadership decisions (In Acts)

On a number of occassions that directives had to be issued to Congregations all over the world, the Elders were the ones that would take the lead in making decisions as regards to worship

Jesus Christ before he asscended to heaven had chosen only men as his apostles. When he gave instructions as to Oversight of the flock, it was to his male apostles (despite the presence of women disciples)

The hard work of women in worshiping God are appreciated even in the scriptures.

Paul compared the work of women who declear the good news of the kingdom of Christ to the nations to a Large army and he sent out commendation and encouragement to women who had laboured with him in his efforts.

But the question is who is to Oversee and preside over the Flock in worship?

I believe for us to do that we have to keep human reasoning to the side
and examine closely the example of the Master Jesus Christ and the First Century Christians who did God's will.