- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Southern Baptists vote to ban churches with women pastors
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:25 pm to ElderTiger
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:25 pm to ElderTiger
quote:
Stupid - our church’s senior pastor is female and her sermons and the way she handles church business is outstanding.
Congrats on being gay
1
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:27 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
Same
Let me go do some reading, I'll be back- I'll reply to you again so you get a notification.
Thanks, I look forward to it. Again, I'm not stumping for lefty liberal, alphabet people affirming female pastors. I've just been around some incredibly shady and frankly modern day pharisee leaders in the SBC and their hypocrisy and elitist attitude rubs me very wrong; particularly considering that they seem to pick and choose what to interpret literally and what to consider context on. I think it hurts their ministry by being so inconsistent is my opinion.
For the record, I think all of these pastors, just as the bible commands, should be held to a higher standard and if they aren't living up to that standard should be removed; idc what genitals they have.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:29 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Are the homosexual women, tran women, muslim women, hispanic women, etc?
So danged confusing to keep score these days
They were the target of course. And for good reason. They're all piece of shite fake ministers preaching woke, leftist bullshite pretending to be Christians.
You want anything else verified for you or explained?
I know you trying to be smug, but why? I'll tell you how it is. No reason to mess around anymore.
This post was edited on 6/12/26 at 12:31 pm
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:33 pm to FlyingTiger06
quote:
Yes, and I also understand the role of using the human brain in interpreting texts written well over 1,000 years ago and then translated through multiple different languages and then still having multiple versions of the Bible (King James, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, Common English Bible, etc).
1) We have the texts in the original koine Greek for a side-by-side comparison of translations. The idea that something was lost or changed in translation has been proven incorrect countless times over when comparing to the original texts.
quote:
. I will take Jesus's own words and actions over those of Paul.
2) Jesus told his apostles to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit to guide them in the establishment of HIS church before he ascended to heaven. It was on the Day of Pentecost that the Holy Spirit descended and established the church (Christ's Kingdom) and salvation and forgiveness of sin was first taught.
3) Jesus appeared to Saul (Paul) on the road to Damascus. He didn't tell Saul/Paul he was saved. He told him to continue to Damascus, and when he got there it would be told to him what he must do. Paul then continued to Damascus in deep prayer and fasting, and was taught and baptized by Annanias. He then continued to preach the gospel throughout Asia Minor and then Rome as an apostle of Christ as directed by the Spirit - and thus Paul taught by the authority of Jesus.
quote:
Jesus chose to first appear to Mary Magdalane and directed her to go tell the apostles of his resurrection. So Jesus himself commissioned the first person to spread the Good News and that first person was a woman.
4) Jesus appeared to Mary and her companion(s) first, and they went and told the good news that he was risen. They were NOT given the authority to present the gospel as the apostles were given on the Day of Pentecost when redemption was first taught by Peter and the other apostles at Jerusalem. Mary was never instructed to take part in the establishment the Christ's church, nor in teaching its doctrines. She was simply told to go let the others know He was risen.
II Tim 2:15 - "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
(Note the part that says rightly dividing... That part is every bit as important as the rest of the statement.)
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:34 pm to JiminyCricket
quote:
Again, I think people are mistaking my intention here. I'm simply asking why people don't want to consider any contextual thought around 1 Timothy 2:12
Okay, I'm back.
I see this very simply and honestly don't understand the controversy.
I take this as women are not to lead and teach men.. it doesn't say they can't do Children's Ministry.
Also.. there are some differences in how this verse is interpreted, be it women in general or wives with their husbands.
The purpose of these and other worship instructions is to keep order so that we may all become equipped to know, understand, and share the gospel.
Finally, bringing the focus to the present, I think we can all agree that in churches where women have taken dominant, leadership roles- the church suffers. This isn't even only due to weakening doctrine and downright perversion of the Word- but also because it's true that many men, practically, just aren't going to be effectively led and taught by women the same as they would men.
This does not mean that women can't or shouldn't share the Gospel or raise children firmly in the Word.
It simply means we all have roles to fulfill- as God designed- and that's a beautiful thing.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:53 pm to SallysHuman
I understand your point Sally and I don’t mean to be rude at all, that wasn’t the point I was arguing. My point was to ask the SBC why is it okay to contextually interpret Paul’s message in 1 Cor but it’s absolutely not okay to take context into account for 1 Tim.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:03 pm to Shexter
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:08 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
I take this as women are not to lead and teach men.. it doesn't say they can't do Children's Ministry.
FTR, I do not disagree with this. As long as the ultimate leader of any particular flock is a male. The pastor and the deacons should be men, IMHO.
And not just any men.
quote:
I think we can all agree that in churches where women have taken dominant, leadership roles- the church suffers.
This is true for many, many institutions and organizations.
quote:
It simply means we all have roles to fulfill- as God designed- and that's a beautiful thing.
I've shared this here and in other places - I had a relatively long period of service in the reserve components of the U.S. Army (let's just call it 3 decades). During most of that time, I could be called a lower level "leader" and then a middle manager. I had great luck with female superiors and subordinates. Where it was sketchy was with female peers and that even faded with time. At the end, it was when younger/junior folks were placed into positions of authority over me (both genders) that caused me greater problems than all others combined.
Having said that, under no circumstances would I have followed a woman into combat.
This post was edited on 6/12/26 at 1:08 pm
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:08 pm to JiminyCricket
quote:
what Paul said in 1 Timothy 2:12
Timothy, both 1 and 2, are pseudepigrapha.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:10 pm to Mo Jeaux
Lmao. You're such a pathetic stupid frick
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:11 pm to Shexter
hell yeah brother.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:13 pm to MobileJosh
quote:
MobileJosh
You certainly do follow me around a lot. Why would you do that if I’m such a “pathetic stupid frick”?
Mobile.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:17 pm to JiminyCricket
quote:
My point was to ask the SBC why is it okay to contextually interpret Paul’s message in 1 Cor but it’s absolutely not okay to take context into account for 1 Tim.
That’s for them to explain, I guess.. I still agree with them taking this stance- I think it is Biblical.
All flavors get stuff wrong- minor stuff. I think we agree on the big issues.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:25 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
Finally, bringing the focus to the present, I think we can all agree that in churches where women have taken dominant, leadership roles- the church suffers.
I've seen a bunch of women talking about how they hate that the denomination they love won't let them lead.
They obviously don't love the denomination because they want to change it to their whims instead of just leaving it and going to another one.
Also, I maintain, no denomination/church lets women ministers in and just leave it at that. They will start denying scripture, or tell you that people smarter than them for thousands of years got it wrong, Jesus is A way, not THE way, homosexuality is fine, and then God is a they/them.
I could be wrong, but I just haven't found a woman lead church that maintained authority of scripture, sanctity of marriage, solo Christus, or any sort of conservation of Church history.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:27 pm to Mo Jeaux
What exactly do you mean by "follow you around"? I open a thread, read some stupid bullshite by an obvious dumbfrick, then see your name attached to it. If there is a noticeable frequency to it that's on you wee man.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:33 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
meanwhile the methodist church has women gays leading sermons talking about how Jesus would be pro-abortion. How anyone could profess to be a Christian but then follow the Methodist church is beyond me.
On a related note, my church recently installed a liberal woman pastor. What’s a good, conservative church in the bluebonnet/jefferson area in br? Don’t care what denomination.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:34 pm to MobileJosh
quote:
What exactly do you mean by "follow you around"?
Aww, playing coy. That’s cute.
It was because I used a big word that you didn’t know, right?
Anyway, this chat has been fun. I’m sure you’ll just “randomly” pop in to another thread to post an angry little man response to me at some point soon … “randomly”.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:48 pm to 3nOut
quote:
I could be wrong, but I just haven't found a woman lead church that maintained authority of scripture, sanctity of marriage, solo Christus, or any sort of conservation of Church history.
Itching ears. Definitely.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 1:58 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
Itching ears. Definitely.
I live in a 100k metroish area and there are three big churches. Baptist, Reformed non-denominational, and then a true blue "evangelical" church.
Evangelical church moves out to the 'burbs and has a big growth. Then they bring on a women's minister (which is fine, our church has one.) Then she starts preaching. I listened to the podcast and she didn't say anything out of bounds, but still not my thing. Then they bring in a female executive pastor. She starts preaching.
Then the lead pastor comes out with a book saying everybody goes to heaven.
Then the youth minister says homosexuality and transgenerism aren't sin (strong paraphrasing on my part.) Decent exodus from that.
All of the sudden some of the people that left our church 5 years ago show back up and say "we knew they were a bit more progressive, but we didn't know it would go that far.'
Dude, they've been telling you who they are for 10 years now. Listen to them.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 2:59 pm to Shexter
Such a non story. At least, it should be.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News