I don't understand throwing in the red herring of "total authority over the flock" and such. I never said anything at all to that effect. I only addressed doctrinal authority in teaching. Yes, there are some "pastors" who lord it over their following, and elder groups that lord over their followers, but I never gave a whisper of approval for such. There are many good pastors, and there are bad ones. There are good elders, and there are bad ones.
But, that's ok. I agreed with you that the organizational structure is man-made, and that doesn't seem to sink in, so I'll back out of this peacefully.
Have a blessed one.
MM
Hi MM,
I was responding to this point you made. Sorry I wasn`t clearer and seemed like a red herring.
That would be like me pointing at the hand full of women who led as doctrinal authorities, and did little more than create a cultic branch or total departure of the varying types we can point at today. Not all women would mislead.
Then my thoughts on this statement you made. I don`t think I have ever not recognised the offices of Apostles, Prophets, Pastors, teachers & Evangelists, elders, deacons, helps, administrations, & prophecy, healings, miracles, discernment, wisdom, etc etc. Sorry if I gave that impression. I think I would have been referring that each part in the Body of Christ has a gift of Christ and is needed by all to be recognized, appreciated and received.
Referencing the unity and mutual submission as the mechanism for there being no distinctions in function within the Church is a fallacious over-application of that principle, being forced upon all other stand-alone principles as the chief, governing definition.
I see that you and most of us understand about man`s organisations, (& I have received much when I was a part of that). Yet I do perceive that the general thought about this topic `Are women pastors biblical?` is seen in the context of man`s organisation and NOT the Body of Christ. That I think was the balance I was trying to present.
Marilyn.