From its towering white steeple and red-brick facade to its Sunday services filled with rousing gospel hymns and evangelistic sermons, First Baptist Church of Alexandria, Virginia, bears many of the classic hallmarks of a Southern Baptist church.
On a recent Sunday, its pastor for women and children, Kim Eskridge, urged members to invite friends and neighbors to an upcoming vacation Bible school — a perennial Baptist activity — to help “reach families in the community with the gospel.”
But because that pastor is a woman, First Baptist’s days in the Southern Baptist Convention may be numbered.
At the SBC’s annual meeting June 11-12 in Indianapolis, representatives will vote on whether to amend the denomination’s constitution to essentially ban churches with any women pastors — and not just in the top job. That measure received overwhelming approval in a preliminary vote last year.
Yes. This. What was considered clean and unclean to eat was amended in Peter’s vision in acts 10. So was clothing and much else of levitical law during jesus’ gospel.
Even Paul’s writings about women speaking above men needs to take into context that the church in Ephesus (modern day turkey) was led by young Timothy. The theme was pretty strict to reestablish a baseline of roles and law to apply to Ephesus, which was seen as very immoral, murderous and rebellious. I mean Paul says people should stay celibate and not marry because this can complicate a person’s relationship with God.
Without going too deep, no, this doesn’t mean women shouldn’t teach because “god” demands women to be inferior/subjugated.
If that was so why did God use women as prophets and leaders?
What Paul supposedly wrote in Timothy, if he even wrote it, was meant to address a problem occurring in that specific Church. As I was told that Church was being hijacked by one or two particularly wealthy and influential Women donors. As you pointed out Timothy was young and new to the work so he wasn’t able to handle the situation and appealed to Paul for guidance.
Paul then supposedly attempted to smack down the troublemakers with some Doctrine in his response letter.
However there’s long been contention that Paul either didn’t actually write that line or that if he did the surrounding context was cut out in order to make it seem much farther reaching than it was meant to be.
While there’s no way to really know the truth I personally find it impossible to believe that after the long and involved history that women had in the OT that the NT would suddenly require their total subservience. It simply makes no sense.
I agree that it doesn’t make sense. There was nothing in Jesus’s gospel that would imply such standards to take place in the church. It’s even written that there is no man or woman, but all are followers of Christ. Equality.