tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post8464914897777507070..comments2024-03-18T18:19:19.002-07:00Comments on bylogos: Female Deacons and Church Unityjohn bylhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05766117392831032432noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-34625989658085455282010-08-17T04:08:55.169-07:002010-08-17T04:08:55.169-07:00many thanks that is very interesting.many thanks that is very interesting.Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06242793531954844979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-71392089884215725742010-08-16T15:48:23.487-07:002010-08-16T15:48:23.487-07:00Hi Henry
Thanks for your question. It seems to me...Hi Henry<br /><br />Thanks for your question. It seems to me Calvin's approach is more consistent to other biblical texts dealing with male headship. Calvin notes that 1 Cor.11:5, while forbidding women to pray or prophesy with heads uncovered, does not commend that they should pray or prophesy. (see the parallel, also in 1 Cor. concerning eating meat offered to idols, where Paul first seems to allow it but later prohibits it).<br /><br />Calvin (Commentary on 1 Corinthians): <br /><br />"Every woman praying or prophesying. Here we have the second proposition — that women ought to have their heads covered when they pray or prophesy; otherwise they dishonor their head. For as the man honors his head by showing his liberty, so the woman, by showing her subjection. Hence, on the other hand, if the woman uncovers her head, she shakes off subjection — involving contempt of her husband. It may seem, however, to be superfluous for Paul to forbid the woman to prophesy with her head uncovered, while elsewhere he wholly prohibits women from speaking in the Church. It would not, therefore, be allowable for them to prophesy even with a covering upon their head, and hence it follows that it is to no purpose that he argues here as to a covering. It may be replied, that the Apostle, by here condemning the one, does not commend the other. For when he reproves them for prophesying with their head uncovered, he at the same time does not give them permission to prophesy in some other way, but rather delays his condemnation of that vice to another passage, namely in 1 Corinthians 14. In this reply there is nothing amiss, though at the same time it might suit sufficiently well to say, that the Apostle requires women to show their modesty — not merely in a place in which the whole Church is assembled, but also in any more dignified assembly, either of matrons or of men, such as are sometimes convened in private houses."john bylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05766117392831032432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-6731600861209329682010-08-15T06:57:07.462-07:002010-08-15T06:57:07.462-07:00Hi Dr Byl,
may I briefly ask what is your church&...Hi Dr Byl,<br /><br />may I briefly ask what is your church's (and your own) interpretation of 1Cor14:34 in light of 1Cor11:5? Do you take the Grudem/Carson approach (that it is only referring to judging prophecy) or do you take a more literal approach such as: <br /><br />http://www.bible-researcher.com/women-prophesying.html<br /><br />Thanks<br /><br />HenryHenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06242793531954844979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-88569329197599229222010-03-24T10:04:06.409-07:002010-03-24T10:04:06.409-07:00Hi Brad
Thanks for your thoughts. I refer you to ...Hi Brad<br /><br />Thanks for your thoughts. I refer you to the detailed discussion by Schwertley on 1 Tim.3:8-13 http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/deacon.htm#Timothy<br /><br />He argues that, if it is to refer to "women" rather than "wives" then it is more plausible that it refers to "deaconesses" in the sense of the order of widows (1 Tim.5:9), whose duties differed from that of male deacons.john bylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05766117392831032432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-60927279164517575192010-03-23T09:51:55.641-07:002010-03-23T09:51:55.641-07:00I think it might be of interest to note that if yo...I think it might be of interest to note that if you look at 1 Timothy 3:8-13 as Paul is laying out the qualifications for deacons following the qualifications of elders that he adds in the line translated "In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything." vs 11.<br /><br />In Greek the word translated "their wives" is only the word "wives" or "women" and could very well imply that these are qualifications for a female deacon. <br /><br />It also might be important to note that deacons are servant evangelist and have no authority over the body that is the responsibility of the Elders. And when we look at Elders qualifications there is nothing at all said about the "wives" or "women" listed in the qualifications. <br /><br />Also in Romans 16:1 the word translated "commend" is the same as the word for ordain. This is just something to think about.bradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252866294624230111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-46255216062014073932010-02-24T14:52:52.203-08:002010-02-24T14:52:52.203-08:00Why do some men continually ignore the female prop...Why do some men continually ignore the female prophets in the bible. We can do more than bake for consistory meetings...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-43419716844897876142010-01-21T12:08:01.024-08:002010-01-21T12:08:01.024-08:001. In the 'Form for Elder and Deacons' of ...1. In the 'Form for Elder and Deacons' of the CanRC, Filp.1:1 and Acts 6:1-7 are the Scripture references at this paragraph:<br /><br />"For the sake of this service of love, Christ has given deacons to His church (Filp.1:1) When the apostles realized that they would have to give up preaching the Word of God if they had to devote their full attention to the daily support of the needy, they assigned this duty to seven brothers chosen by the congregation (Acts 6:1-7). It is therefore the responsibility of the deacons to see to the good progress of this service of charity in the church."<br /><br />2. The meaning of a word is not only determined by etymology, but also use and context. The word 'diakonos' basically has a primary (one who serves in different settings, Rom.16:1) and secondary meaning (the specific office of someone who serves, 1 Tim.3). Context must determine which one to use. Christ, Paul, other persons and even the devil's followers are called 'diakonos' (Rom.15:8; 1 Cor.3:5; 2 Cor.11:14,15; Col.1:17; etc.), but that does not mean any of them stood in die 'office of deacon'. <br /><br />In one of our Afrikaans translation's over here, the 'diakonon' of Rom.16:1 were translated as 'deaconess', probably with some agenda, and not as 'servant' as most other translations of the Bible do here. The context of Rom.16:1 is also not about 'deacon offices', but 'greetings' to and different people's servanthood. Maybe the word 'helper' (prostatis) in v.2 should be given more attention about what her calling actually was. Maybe she was one of the 'prominent woman' of Acts 13:50; 17:12 and used her influence to help and protect the Lord's flock, also her officers, like Paul ?Slabberthttp://proregno.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-29885658455779528092010-01-21T11:37:15.589-08:002010-01-21T11:37:15.589-08:00Hi Dennis
Yes, that seems to be the case.
Schwe...Hi Dennis<br /><br />Yes, that seems to be the case. <br /><br />Schwertley writes:<br /><br />"Aside from a few rare exceptions,the church throughout its entire history has interpreted Acts 6:1-6 as the institution of the diaconal office."<br /><br />"The Constitution of the RPCNA...officially recognizes Acts 6:1-3 as the institution of the diaconal office."<br /><br />Also, in the Belgic Confession Acts 6 is cited in connection with the deacon's office (Art.30 & 31). The CanRC form for ordination of deacons cites Acts 6 as the institution of the office of deacon.<br /><br /><br />See also, for example, the article of George Knight mentioned by Slabbert (http://www.esra.za.org/ (Go to the 'Vrou in die ampte' link). Knight writes:<br /><br />"The seven elected at Jerusalem were elected ‘to serve tables’ (Acts 6:2, using<br />the correlative verb form of the noun diakonos, namely, diakonšo), and the description of their office in correlation with that of the apostles(the first elders, see 1 Peter 5:1) leads one to recognize that they were the first ‘deacons'."John Bylnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-679879747383056052010-01-21T10:31:16.222-08:002010-01-21T10:31:16.222-08:00mea cupla- there is the use of the word to describ...mea cupla- there is the use of the word to describe "serving tables" - contrasted with "serving the word." Are you saying that the function the seven provide is the equivalent of the office of deacon in the NT?<br /><br />Dennis VenemaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-63120849953536314402010-01-21T09:53:01.396-08:002010-01-21T09:53:01.396-08:00Hi John,
A quick scan of the greek shows that th...Hi John, <br /><br />A quick scan of the greek shows that the term diakonos is not used to refer to the seven men appointed in Acts 6:1-6. I think to use this passage as "clear teaching on the office of deacon" is thus in question. Interestingly, Peter says their appointment is to allow the twelve to continue serving the word (diakonia tos logos). The usage of servant/deacon language here is tied to what I would argue is a teaching function (serving the word). <br /><br />I think what one considers "clear teaching" and what one considers "obscure" must also be open to examination. <br /><br />Best,<br /><br />DennisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-38924739478946509822010-01-21T08:39:37.184-08:002010-01-21T08:39:37.184-08:00Dennis
Thanks for your comment. And Slabbert, tha...Dennis<br /><br />Thanks for your comment. And Slabbert, thanks for your useful links.<br /><br />I should add that Brian Schwertley, in the above article I linked, has a long discussion on Romans 16:1-2. He concludes that Phoebe belonged to the order of widows. Let me quote just one paragraph:<br /><br />“The duty of interpreters is to interpret Scripture within both a narrow and a broad context. Scripture is to be used to interpret Scripture. The clearer passages are to be used to shed light on the more difficult and ambiguous passages. Everyone acknowledges that Romans 16:1-2 cannot be properly understood in isolation. When the different interpretations are compared, we should pick the interpretation that best fits in with the more explicit passages on church ecclesiology. Those interpreters who believe that Phoebe was an ordained deacon in the same office with male deacons have a serious problem. The clear passages on the subject (Ac. 6:1-6; 1 Tim. 3:8-10, 12) contradict their assertion. Thus they are forced to reinterpret the clear passages to somehow not contradict their interpretation of a disputed, ambiguous passage. Those interpreters, such as Calvin and Rutherford, who argue that Phoebe was in the order of widows do justice to the immediate as well as to the broader context. They are not forced into embarrassing exegetical gymnastics to circumvent the clear teaching of Acts 6:1-6 and 1 Timothy 3:12.”john bylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05766117392831032432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-18267131424094328502010-01-21T04:26:56.121-08:002010-01-21T04:26:56.121-08:00See here who Febe was:http://www.cprf.co.uk/pamphl...See here who Febe was:http://www.cprf.co.uk/pamphlets/phebe.htm<br /><br />See also here, dr. George Knight's article why women cannot be deacons: http://www.esra.za.org/ (Go to the 'Vrou in die ampte' link). The article itself is there in English: "Should women be elected to the office of deacon?"Slabberthttp://proregno.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3772414331480635861.post-63878472168411137582010-01-20T21:51:21.848-08:002010-01-20T21:51:21.848-08:00John, what of Phoebe in Rom. 16? She is called a d...John, what of Phoebe in Rom. 16? She is called a diakonos of the church, and commended by Paul for her role, is she not? Note too that in the greek Phoebe is so called with the masculine form of the noun (diakonos). <br /><br />Dennis VenemaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com