BaptistLife.Com Forums.

Did anyone ever consider that Paul's command to the women in Corinth might have to do with the issue of the disruptions in worship that were taking place in Corinth? I don't know a way to be certain on this, but it makes sense in the context of the book. What do you think?

I have never believed in inerrancy as defined by the Chicago Statement of 1978 (which is the only definition with which I have to work). I am convinced that we often misuse Paul's letters by taking something out of the context of being part of a two-way conversation, the other side of which we do not have, and trying to universalize that which may have been given a completely different meaning by the receiving church. It's like listening to one side of a phone call. Paul contextualized his responses based on the situation of the church, and we are often left to wonder what he meant. If I have to take my stand by what would appear a universal word for the church, "There is no longer Jew nor Greek, the is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ" (Galatians 3:28 NRSV).

ED: Being an RE guy, that is another reason I wouldnt be a Methodist.

I like the quatrilateral too Keith, all descriptors of religious authority have strengths and weaknesses. If I would place authority for Biblical interpretation in the hands of one person though, it would be Jesus. I thought the 1963 BFM making Jesus the criterion for interpretation of scripture was a good guide. Some Christians seem to act as if Paul trumps Jesus.

The whole inerrancy debate doesn’t carry much meaning for me any longer as it isn’t a part of the faith tradition i’m now in, though like you a took a lot of heat for that when I was a Southern Baptist years ago.

But any theory of Biblical authority has to take into account the falibility of human interpretation. That’s where inerrancy fails. Even if the Bible were perfect, none of us are perfect and so we can’t guarantee perfect interpretation. (And IMO only God is perfect.)

I like the doctrine of Biblical sufficiency. That is the Bible contains all things necessary for salvation. Not all things. Just all things necessary for salvation.

As to the President’s actions today. They were horrible and predictable.

I didn’t know you knew Laura! We ran into each other again on Facebook after many years. She did some supply preaching for me once when I was in Petersburg, Indiana. That’s such a long time ago! A different state, different denominations, etc.

While nearly all Southern Baptists agree on no women pastors, there is great diversity about what women are permitted to do. We were not allowed to have my mother's funeral at the SBC church where she was an active member 52 years because I asked two women to read scripture at the service.

The "establishment" has no authority to tell a church who it can call as a pastor. If you do a search, you'll find that somewhere between 30-40 currently affiliated SBC congregations have women pastors. There'd be a lot more than that if favorability to the idea were more widespread among the current church leadership. If a church really had the will to call a female pastor, I don't think wanting to "buck" the establishment or not would be a factor. And even as the SBC appears to be emerging from the grip of the conservative resurgence leadership, and there was a spate of discussion about whether or not a woman could be elected president of the SBC, I don't see a lot to move it toward women serving as pastors.

CBF has had a female exec for more than half a decade, and has moved quite a bit to the left on LGBT issues, but with essentially no restrictions from anywhere on calling women as pastors, I don't see that there's been a rapid, widespread expansion of CBF congregations ordaining women or calling them as pastors. A few, mostly their core, spend a lot of time handing out certificates, but it doesn't seem that a large segment of the churches are all that open to the idea, at least, not enough to prevent a long line of ordained women from forming, and mostly moving out of denominational circles.

My impression is that most pastorally inclined (called?) Baptist women either stuff it or move on to UCC or UMC or another denomination open to the work of the Spirit in their lives. We have quite a few female pastors in Evergreen, but I'm not sure how reflective that is of overall ABC trends.

This obsession with calling women as pastors, especially in CBF circles and especially as lead-pastors or senior-pastors, approaches ludicrousness and is demeaning to women. The SBC is constantly ridiculed over this but more than half of all SBC individual members are women who seem to be okay with the current protocol. Folks vote with their feet but these women (certainly not slavishly) stick with the SBC. This is not likely to change. This is not a matter of intellect, spirituality or most anything else. On a nit-picky note and as a personal observation, men's voices are eminently better collectively than women's for preaching. Dress-code is another area for thought regarding both sexes. Perhaps as generations morph into next-generations, this might change. This is doubtful but a look at churches/denominations now making homosexuality perfectly normal is suggestive of change for better or worse, depending on one's outlook.