Paul is very clear in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 about the position of the woman in the Church.
Paul is talking here about two objects, the Church and the family, not about governments, corporations and all other secular organizations.
This does not mean that woman are not allowed to proclaim the gospel or teach a bible class.
The final dissision in Church or family has to be made by the man, and therefore the leadership.

Leadership positions have been held by women in the Bible - Deborah or even Miriam; however, the Levites did not have priests that were women. The New Testament has pastoral requirements that appear gender specific to men. This does not mean that women are not to proclaim or preach the gospel as the entire church in Acts when they were scattered went out preaching the gospel. Other pasages do not put women off the hook when it comes to such a responsibility. To say that people think women are unclean or apply some other Scripture to it unnecessarily, diminish the real oposition that some may have to women in the specific role of a pastor or bishop and appears shortsighted. If people say that women can not proclaim Gods message or have a ministry in the church that would another matter.

There is a distinct difference between the Church and the world. There is no hypocrisy in having different standards. As for counting Spong among the "Church" and hearing his opinion on it, he also denies the deity and salvific work of Christ and the inerrancy of Scripture. I'm not surprised at anything he has to say regarding doctrine or church polity.

I think "it", whether it is about leadership of a church, nation, or family, should be about ability and never about the sex of the leader. I, my family and I, had a "women" pastor for many years, and we had a wonderful church. After my husband died, my daughter & I had to move, we now have a "man" pastor, but this church is equally as wonderful. "...and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kindom for such a time as this?" Esther 4:14. One Jewish orphan saved ALL "HER" people from total distruction. Again, I must say in my opinion, of course, it is not about gender, but more about heart and ability.

If we look at the Apostle Peter's response to the accusation of drunkeness on the day of Pentecost, we'll find him quoting the Prophet Joel, "In the last day, I will pour out my spirit upon 'all' flesh. Your sons and 'daughters' shall prophecy. Your young men shall have visions and your old men shall dream dreams".
This proclaims that both men and women shall be oracles of God, speaking his message to a dying world.
If we look in the Old Testement, we'll notice Deborah, who was both a prophetess and a judge over Israel.
Lastly, let me remind you of what God spoke to Peter (concerning Cornelius and the gentiles), "What I have made clean, let no man call common". I believe that that says it all.
Rev. Donald Miskel

Galatians 3:28 "There is neather Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor
female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus".

Ask Jesus, He tells us we are all one in Christ Jesus
Bob
Bobalojam@msn.com

Great question! Great article!
A new book discusses this issue and presents a sound conclusion about women in ministry and leadership positions in church. You all should read it. The author discusses all the controversial texts that refer to women in the church and presents a clear and harmonious position that absolutely clarifies this issue. The book has just been published by Xulon Press. The book is DRESSED FOR MINISTRY by Izes Calheiros. It can be bought online from Xulon Press and all the other sites such as Amazon, BarnesandNoble, etc.
Check it out!

If Deborah could be a judge in the Old Testament, why could't Sara Palin be our vice presitnt.

In 1 Tim 2:13, the word for man is aner.

While this word is more often translated man, it is also translated husband, and I think husband fits better with the rest of the Bible.

It is very clear from Genesis 3 on that a wife is not to rule over her husband.

But, as has been mentioned, Deborah was the leader of the nation-church of Israel. As a prophet and Judge, I would say that her authority was both secular AND Spiritual. She gave messages from God and judged Israel. There are several more prophetesses in the Old and new Testament. Jesus first sent some of His women disciples to tell His men disciples He had Risen. Young men are urged not to forget their mothers' teachings in Proverbs. In Philipians 4, Paul mentions two women who have done gospel work with him. In Acts 18, Priscilla, co-teaching with her husband, showed Apollos a better understanding of the gospel.

Given this, I think the best interpretation is women should not teach or usurp the authority their husbands.

I was readily excited to see the title or Albert Mohler’s recent article “A Woman Can Lead a Nation, But Not a Church?”, expecting to see a strong scriptural discourse defending one position (for or against women in positions of leadership) or another. What I found, however, was a trite article trashing those who did not believe as Mr. Mohler did.

Where is the defense of his views? Other than a passing reference to First Timothy, chapter three, he cites no scripture in his argument. He talks of Sally Quinn’s ‘reasoning’ and ‘logic’ (being secular), but he never tips his hand to the reader that he is using anything other than his own ‘reasoning’ and ‘logic’.

He cites a quote by John Spong, then cites NOT the weakness of his argument but instead launches into an assault on Spong’s character. That’s tacky and unacceptable. Why not tell us what Ted Haggard’s view is, or Jim Baaker, or maybe Benny Hinn? Maybe we could get a quote from Todd Bentley?

Actually, I believe that Spong may have something to his argument (hey, even a bad golfer could accidentally hit a hole in one!) Some religious organizations do not allow women leadership because they believe it is unbiblical based on their knowledge and interpretation of the bible. However, some others don’t allow it because of fear, prejudice, and man-made tradition. When this second scenario is true, it IS evil.

Many conservatives (of which I count myself as one) ascribe to a different view than Mr. Mohler. I’m no theologian, or even a church leader, but I can see what God is doing before our very eyes and cannot deny this. Women are stepping forward and leading, often because men are abdicating their very responsibility to do so. God’s name will be exalted in all the earth, using whatever means he sees fit.

Balack had to be brought to his senses by a mule. Jonah was swallowed by a great fish before he’d obey. And the very rocks would have cried out

I don't see anything in scripture that says a woman doesn't have the ability to lead.
In the Old Testament Debra was the leader of Israel for a time.
The Proverbs 31 woman was a leader in her home and in her community. In the New Testament Aquilla AND Pricilla led a church in their home.
IN this case Pricilla was under the SPIRITUAL leadership of her husband.
1 Timothy 2:12 "I do not allow a woman to teach or have authority over a man." Paul is talking about SPIRITUAL authority. This is no way means that a woman can't be a leader in secular government. IF God has given her the desire and the ability; and her family is in agreement, then why not?
This is true for a man to.His family better back him or he won't be very affective.
Lest you say Paul's words were cultural and only applied to women of his day, read Paul's reason for this instruction..."For Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived.." The restriction is on SPIRITUAL leadership so I say , Sara you go girl!

Dear Saints,
I'm wondering why it is we in The Church find it difficult to live our lives according to Scriptures,that make it perfectly clear on this about how The Church is to be run.I think the following verses make the point:Prov.3:5-6 and Prov.14:12.

GOD BLESS!