Obey (except when disagreeing with your pastor)

[2xx1xy1JD]

Maybe someone who is more familiar with the New Testament can help me out here.

Is there anything about women obeying Church leaders? I know the part about women being silent in church.

I'm just not sure how Lori's logic is working here. She's saying that women need to unconditionally submit to their husbands, which means that they are required to obey them no matter what, but in the same post she's saying that her own pastor disagrees with this interpretation.

Um, how does Lori decide that she's a bigger authority than the pastor exactly?

It would be one thing if Lori was all about "think for yourselves and interpret for yourselves", but she's clearly not. She's outright declaring that there is ONE correct interpretation, and it's hers.

Then, she's calling in the dictionary for reinforcement. Again, if you are going to do that, wouldn't it make sense to research it in Greek? (AreteJo, if you have any insight into the correct translation of Ephesians 5, let us know!)

[SteampunkLovelace]

No. Women should keep silent in church and submit to their husbands, but there is nothing about submitting to all men. There is, however, a verse in which Paul says he does not allow women to teach or have authority over men. But given the cultural context, we can probably assume that men totally had authority over women and this was okay with Paul.

[Koala]

Well, she answered!

How is the issue of teaching that your pastor is wrong handled in your church?

Could there be an issue of I Timothy 2:12 or I Corithians 14:34 or Ephesians 4:11?

Also, why is a modern English dictionary definition relevant? Shouldn't the question be what the passage means in ancient Greek, in order to be faithful to the original text?

I found this explanation of the Greek text, and was wondering if you had any comment?

http://www.preceptaustin.org/ephesians_521-22.htm

Lori:

I would never go to a pastor and tell him he was wrong. I doubt one can find a pastor that they would agree with 100% of what they teach. If I thought he was wrong on a basic tenet of Christianity, I would find a new church. If a pastor is not teaching submission the way I believe it is to be taught, I will just obey Scripture as an older woman and teach the young women myself!

Report

Kind of makes sense. Her pastor is just like Ken. She never confronts them when she thinks they're wrong, she just blogs to the world about it! :D

[SoSoNosy]

Two weeks ago, our pastor got his announcements wrong (he got the next week's announcements) about birthdays and anniversaries. He said "this week's flowers", and the entire congregation (women included) in unison said "what flowers?". He was standing on the platform, he had simply not realized there were no fresh flowers that week. Then he started to announce a wedding anniversary and it was the next week. He looked at us and said "can we just sing another song?". He was laughing too hard to proceed. I love our pastor, and would definitely feel able to question him if I thought he was wrong about something.

[AnywhereButHere]

Two weeks ago, our pastor got his announcements wrong (he got the next week's announcements) about birthdays and anniversaries. He said "this week's flowers", and the entire congregation (women included) in unison said "what flowers?". He was standing on the platform, he had simply not realized there were no fresh flowers that week. Then he started to announce a wedding anniversary and it was the next week. He looked at us and said "can we just sing another song?". He was laughing too hard to proceed. I love our pastor, and would definitely feel able to question him if I thought he was wrong about something.

Those are the kind of people I respect and am willing to listen to (not always agree with but listen to). The ones who can laugh at themselves, who aren't so puffed up with their own importance and who are willing to be questioned/answer questions.

[NotALoserLikeYou]

Lori does nothing to make women actually want to become Christians. Basically women can't participate in anything. They have no say in anything. Half of the people on earth are women and we are to believe god doesn't think we are capable of anything other than cooking, cleaning, and having sex when we don't want to?

[mirele]

Lori does nothing to make women actually want to become Christians. Basically women can't participate in anything. They have no say in anything. Half of the people on earth are women and we are to believe god doesn't think we are capable of anything other than cooking, cleaning, and having sex when we don't want to?

You forgot "having babies without number" and all the stuff that goes along, including blanket training and home schooling.

[lilwriter85]

Well, she answered!

Lori:

Kind of makes sense. Her pastor is just like Ken. She never confronts them when she thinks they're wrong, she just blogs to the world about it! :D

Interesting tidbit about Lori's pastor is that he is the father of the two members of the band Switchfoot. There was an entry on Lori's blog where she mentioned that, but she didn't say the name of her church. A quick Google search brought up the church. Lori's church is a megachurch which is described by some as a surfer type church from reviews. I looked at the church's website and they promote Mark Driscoll/Mars Hill crap, so that explained a lot.

[Arete]

Maybe someone who is more familiar with the New Testament can help me out here.

Is there anything about women obeying Church leaders? I know the part about women being silent in church.

I'm just not sure how Lori's logic is working here. She's saying that women need to unconditionally submit to their husbands, which means that they are required to obey them no matter what, but in the same post she's saying that her own pastor disagrees with this interpretation.

Um, how does Lori decide that she's a bigger authority than the pastor exactly?

It would be one thing if Lori was all about "think for yourselves and interpret for yourselves", but she's clearly not. She's outright declaring that there is ONE correct interpretation, and it's hers.

Then, she's calling in the dictionary for reinforcement. Again, if you are going to do that, wouldn't it make sense to research it in Greek? (AreteJo, if you have any insight into the correct translation of Ephesians 5, let us know!)

There are two words in Ephesians 5 that Lori clearly does not understand, agape and hypotasso. To the ancient Greeks, agape was the highest form of love, love in the spiritual sense of the word. It was also something that ancient Greeks did NOT associate between husband and wife. Husband and wife were an unequal relationship, and the Greeks believed that agape-love was only possible between two equals. Two equals who were uniting spiritually. Hypotasso is what is translated as submission in English. It means to "put under" or to "put in order". Paul was calling Christians to put themselves under one another, for women to put themselves under their husbands, for men to put themselves under Christ. All of these relationships were based on everyone practicing agape-love toward one another. In other words, Jesus did not view the Church as filled with his drones or his slaves to order around, but on the same level and worthy of spiritual union with him. A wife was worthy of spiritual union with her husband, all your fellow Christians were worthy of spiritual union with each other. You put yourself under "submission" voluntarily, and always with the understanding that the other person was practicing agape-love as you were supposed to.

If there is no agape-love, there should be no submission. Paul is clearly linking one with the other in Ephesians 5. The symbolism of the man loving his wife like a part of his own body is extremely important, and underlines once again that his attitude toward his wife is someone he wants at his side in a spiritual union. This interpretation Lori peddles of listening to your husband even if he is in grave sin or even if you disagree is monstrous. I'll say it again, a woman (or man) who does not understand the cultural context that Paul is writing in has no business interpreting his letters. Agape-love for a wife was absolutely revolutionary thought in the Greek world that Paul is writing in. Greek women were for having the next generation or for being cocubines, the end. Paul comes along and is basically instructing husbands to love their wives as they had previously thought they could only love another man. This was never supposed to be a get-away-with-abuse card for men. Women are not instructed to submit if no agape is present. Submission is predicated on the condition of a love so great it will even sacrifice itself for the beloved. It isn't meant to be a means of forcing a woman or any Christian to stay under that which will not treat them justly. Submission IS NOT UNCONDITIONAL. Submission and obedience are also two different words with different meanings in Greek.

So yeah, Lori can be in submission to a pastor without obeying his every word. It's just too bad that she doesn't understand that it works the same way for a wife to a husband.

[snarkopolis]

There are two words in Ephesians 5 that Lori clearly does not understand, agape and hypotasso. To the ancient Greeks, agape was the highest form of love, love in the spiritual sense of the word. It was also something that ancient Greeks did NOT associate between husband and wife. Husband and wife were an unequal relationship, and the Greeks believed that agape-love was only possible between two equals. Two equals who were uniting spiritually. Hypotasso is what is translated as submission in English. It means to "put under" or to "put in order". Paul was calling Christians to put themselves under one another, for women to put themselves under their husbands, for men to put themselves under Christ. All of these relationships were based on everyone practicing agape-love toward one another. In other words, Jesus did not view the Church as filled with his drones or his slaves to order around, but on the same level and worthy of spiritual union with him. A wife was worthy of spiritual union with her husband, all your fellow Christians were worthy of spiritual union with each other. You put yourself under "submission" voluntarily, and always with the understanding that the other person was practicing agape-love as you were supposed to.

If there is no agape-love, there should be no submission. Paul is clearly linking one with the other in Ephesians 5. The symbolism of the man loving his wife like a part of his own body is extremely important, and underlines once again that his attitude toward his wife is someone he wants at his side in a spiritual union. This interpretation Lori peddles of listening to your husband even if he is in grave sin or even if you disagree is monstrous. I'll say it again, a woman (or man) who does not understand the cultural context that Paul is writing in has no business interpreting his letters. Agape-love for a wife was absolutely revolutionary thought in the Greek world that Paul is writing in. Greek women were for having the next generation or for being cocubines, the end. Paul comes along and is basically instructing husbands to love their wives as they had previously thought they could only love another man. This was never supposed to be a get-away-with-abuse card for men. Women are not instructed to submit if no agape is present. Submission is predicated on the condition of a love so great it will even sacrifice itself for the beloved. It isn't meant to be a means of forcing a woman or any Christian to stay under that which will not treat them justly. Submission IS NOT UNCONDITIONAL. Submission and obedience are also two different words with different meanings in Greek.

So yeah, Lori can be in submission to a pastor without obeying his every word. It's just too bad that she doesn't understand that it works the same way for a wife to a husband.

AreteJo thank you for the knowledge. Now if we could put that knowledge in an IV drip and hook Lori and the minions up to it we probably could cure some of the stupid. As for pastors, my father once said "Before they were men of God, they were just men. Too bad many of them think they were anointed, instead of appointed.

[Arete]

Before they were men of God, they were just men. Too bad many of them think they were anointed, instead of appointed.