ministrystaffingsearch.org BLOG

Dr. Smith and my fellow-servants in Christ,

Before reading your comments this morning, I had already been moved by the Spirit (not a politically correct thing to say even to church people today) and had begun typing on my computer. As I was typing, I paused to say, Lord, why am I writing this? And then I tuned in to the ministers blog and saw your topic, Age, Gender and Theology, and received my answer. I would like to suggest the following propositions (some are redundant) then, along with what you wrote, and as my answer to what you have already written. And I have a question for all of my fellow-subscribers.

Are we a part of God's, spirit-directed, spiritual organism that has been extended to the earth, or are we a part of the man-made amalgamation of religious organizations that purport to be God's church on earth, or, finally, are we rather the earthly church that is truly settled into the world ala Revelations chapter 2?

Propositions:

1. We used to believe that the church was a spiritual organism (that one had to be spiritually born into), and not a religious organization that one could simply join.

2. We used to believe that membership into God's church family could only be obtained as a result of submitting to the transforming work of the Holy Spirit. See John 3 and Rom chapter 8.

3. Today, in the name of larger memberships and for various other reasons, we seem to have relaxed, substituted and replaced God's requirements and instructions for HIS church body, with our own ideas, rules and standards.

4. In too many of today's congregations, anyone can join and immediately receive full voting power and the right to hold offices, whereby bringing well-intentioned, however, incredible carnal influences on important spiritual matters and decisionmaking at the church.

5. Today's church leadership and congregations, are made up of mostly well-intentioned, I am sure, reformed people who have never truly known Christ, yet they are acting in capacities to which they have not yet either been called to, or qualified for.

6. Decisions, elections and choices are being made today by congregations that are populated with non-converted individuals, who believe that they can decide intellectually or by consensus, the direction that the church should take, and who should fill certain positions.

7. People who are acting according to the best of their abilities and utilizing well-intentioned yet inchoate knowledge, still cannot know the will of God, because they have never known God. The same will cause others to stumble and hinder the work of God. [These same good people can never really hear from God or understand his directions. Isa. 55.8-11, or Joel 2:28-32, in effect, they can be instruments in Satan's plan of deception. Deception is Satan's number one device, in mind, to cause humans to stumble ala Hymaneus, Philetus or Alexander in Paul's letters to Timothy], and remain in the morass of spiritual seperation from God.

8. The purposes and direction of the church today, and the selecting of its leaders and other officeholders, can become as worldly-political as electing a city councilman, school superintendent, sheriff or mayor, and what may be good to man, may not be what God intended, e.g., David's selection, by God, to be King of Israel, and Saul's rejection.

9. Satan in this post-modern era has coopted the leadership and control of too many of our churches on earth see Revelations chapter 2. it has happened before, I believe that it is happening today.

10. Regarding Paul's vision of church structure and leadership. I trust that what Paul envisioned for the church when he said that the Pastor must be the husband of one wife (assumes a male), had to do with the mystery of the church, i.e, the bride and the groom, however, see #11.

11. Paul's Contradiction: One would have to wonder why Paul, an apparent murderer and/or one who had contributed to and caused the death of many of God's people, could, after being forgiven himself, assume the office of Apostle, if he were to as some believed, to be saying that his comments were addressed to those other than those in polygamous marital relationships. [Paul's writings on ecclesiastical leadership were never apparently tested in a council of other wise and saved individuals who would not have agreed with his position given the prophecies of Joel, and other texts, not to mention his own words, ...neither male nor female].

12. God's pantheon of choices for leadership or duty, throughout biblical history, would not be accepted for leadership positions in today's human-driven ministries, for they were made up of individuals who were criminals, some were murderers, adulterers, polygamists, whoremongers, prostitutes, manslayers, strikers, liars, glory seekers, goat herders, et al. Some of their names Abraham, Moses, Samson, David, Amos, Paul, and my favorite, Peter the Knife (who eventually did as he told others, to grow in grace).

13. Gideon's Army, style churches of today are bloated in terms of numbers, and contain non-believers, the frightened and unqualified.

14. The church must get back to basics. First the leadership and members of the church must be born again into the church in order even see the Kingdom (understand how it works).

15. The church must be led by the Spirit of God, if we have not his Spirit even with the best of intentions we are none of his.

16. Today's Bishops, Prelates, Councils, are not going to speak up in fear of having their congregations shrink from the proverbial, Gideon style numbers of 32000 to 300.

17. Our mission as ministers should be one and one only, i.e., to follow in every way, the one who God has sent!

Sadly, and as I close, I heard one of the most prominent ministers in America today, say at a recent conference, that, "The Church Is A Business". The problem, he left it just as he said it. Oopps!!


Rev. C. Solomon
Peace & Grace,

Suggested reading for all of my male brothers in Christ:: "The Fear of Women", Wolfgang Lederer, MD, is a must read for all of us in church leadership. Our gender biases

On age, gender and theology in churches I agree with Dr. Smith and Rev. C. Solomon. It seems to always come down to "my way" or "the Lord's way". It seems that many churches are more bias than corp. America ever thought of being. They rob themselves of potentially wonderful leaders that would be an asset to the goal of sanctification and Christlikeness. Instead the individuals who perhaps because of many things that are not measureable, yet have the greatest value to a congregation have to remember what Jesus said, "Forgive them, they know not what they are doing". Like the pharisees of old, they look for a sign and do not recognize it when they see it.
They fall into the trap again of rewarding the appearence of merit and not merit itself.
Peace & Blessing my prayers for the right door to be opened unto you.
Rev. Dr. William H. Hill

Dr Linda Smith, I agree with your summary statement 1-5 in your opening paragraphh. With the exception of Number 1 (I am a male)
I fit the rest of those items you called out, I have gray hair, too old, I'm Pentecostal, oops, I didn't go to seminary I went to a Bible institute not good. When healthy my wife seeks her own area a fills the void. uh oh a trouble maker. The issue beside the above and what you indicated is I know there are churches all over that have not had a pastor for sometimes several years. I am called to be a pastor, when I visit a church, and the pastor finds out I am there, a buzz starts as they don't want me there, as I might take something over. God will open the door for me and you and your husband as the churches do not have power against God. The other BIG issue , I have no idea if you have noticed it, but I have visited at least two dozen churches in the past year, and no Altar Calls? Visitors in the place , and congregation members that need to respond and No altar calls. God Bless You
and I trust He will open the doors for you or start your own church that what everyone else does that gets bturned down.

Linda,

You started out with "assuming you were called." I think it is important to start there. See, I think it is utterly beside the point. I think that all Christians are called. Just few respond. We are all called to minister and to serve. I don't see scripture talking about being called to get paid, however. So what is the point? I think you will be happier if you aren't thinking, but I was called to be a full-time paid pastor, why don't they select me!? Of course you are called, Linda, but now you need to find an area of service.

But that doesn't address the prejudice, does it? First, my theology believes you should be able to serve and even to preach, so that is not the issue. But I do believe you need to be under the authority of a male senior pastor or administrative pastor. Why? Pauls admonition.

Have you considered lovingly but firmly confronting thess people that say these things? In other words, if they have no way to support their refusal, then call them on it.

As Rev Solomon so nobly put it... many churches are being run as human institutions.. they are sinning by doing so. And they wouldn't have taken Paul either!

Thanks for your thoughts.

1. Biblically, women pastors are a no-no. Hard to be the husband of one wife as a woman and a womanis not to teach bit a pastor is to be apt to teach. Women are not called. Sorry, but they aren't.

2. Agreed that age should not be an issue as long as the person is capable healthwise to perform the duties. After all, an elder was usually an older thus elder person albeit Timothy was maybe 21. Room for both ends of the spectrum. 1 Tim 3 qualifications should apply not degrees or years.

3. Doctrine is very important and if the church is not charismatic then those who hold those doctrines need not apply be they balanced or not. Seek a church of like doctrine.

4. Non-denominational vanilla churches open themselves up to takeover by Liberals or others because trying to appeal to everyone is not biblical. Christ lost more people than He gained by stating clear doctrine. He was inclusivevly exclusive. Seeker churches normally entertain the Epicureans and nuture the Nicolaitanes. Stope the loaves and the fishes and they will soon close their doors.

It is very hard to be a Calvinistic, Arminian, Pre-Trib, infant baptizing, immersionist, covenant theology church so that all can attend. Find out who you are and what you believe and wave the flag proudly rather than hide under a generic label or deceive folks into thinking you are a vanilla church but are in reality Presbyterian or Southern Baptist with a vanilla name. Contend for the faith not captitulate for capital and census.

I am submitting this excellent commentary for JJ Miller, which I believe will add to our discussion. And believe me JJ, I am just learning this blogging business myself(-: I trust that this will be okay.

I will respond to your questions, disagreements and concerns in another window. And thank you for challenging my viewpoints, I believe that we as Christians need to do more of that.

Rev. C. Solomon


Here are JJ Miller's words:

I am sorry, were you making a philosophical statement, or a biblical interpretation about Paul’s “Contradiction.” Point 11 you made. What is Paul’s Contradiction?

I assume that by saying that there was no ecclesiastical body to approve Paul’s message about Church Leadership, that you are saying that you don’t think Paul’s writings were inspired writ. That is fine as a Philosophical position. But I then don’t understand the very sound warning you give in Points 1 thru 10. Can you help me to see your point?

For instance, if we conclude that parts of the bible are flawed, like Paul’s teaching on leadership (which I don’t see as a contradiction, but perhaps I miss understand you on that point), then why are you concerned that people in leadership may not be converted individuals? How can we even be sure what being converted means…. Maybe that is a contradiction too… seems to me that Jesus talked about the requirements of entering the kingdom while Paul talked about gracious provision on our behalf. Seems like you are taking Paul’s view there…if I understand you.

You make some very good points, but I really missed your point there.

BTW, I would have no qualms of a woman being the head or CEO of a company… I used to work for the largest corporation in America with a woman CEO. She did great. I have no hesitancy about a woman serving in the local church. Even teaching and preaching in the congregation. That is fine with me. But taking Paul’s word to heart, I believe that within the church (not a business) that it needs to be under the authority of a man. Why? Because that is the biblical teaching, not because I think it is better or that I think women can’t do it. In other words, I would allow this dear woman to exercise her gifts (even preach, if that is her area) as long as there were an Administrative Pastor (qualified male) who lead the church. Why? Bible mandate. Any other reason is non-sense.

You might ask why God would want that? Why would God have a perfectly wonderful Christian female leader and then not have her be the ultimate leader? Submission. Not women submitting to man. But Submission in the body of Christ. Oh, to be sure there are plenty of men who are not submitting to their leaders, but that is wrong too. Christ submitted to the Father.. Why is man any better than woman? He is not. That is not the point at all. It is a matter of submission and unity. Was Christ inferior to the Father? Not. Yet, he submitted.

I do believe that we are WOEFULLY lacking in promoting female leadership within the church (under the proper leadership). You know what is really hypocritical? Most conservative churches will allow a woman to sing the most POWERFUL SERMONS OF FAITH, the most doctrinally inspiring songs, and yet, they would turn blue over the same woman talking those words. Nuts, huh!?


I would put this in a blog form on the site… but I don’t know how.


J. J. Miller

Dr. Smith

I have served in the pulpit for the service of my Lord, and I have seen what you have expressed. I am 46 yers old and my wife is 22, because of the age difference we have not been accepted in man's church. So, I understand the position that you have taken, but I do agree that although the woman that is called to service should go into service but under the leadership of a male senior. I believe that you could be an associate pastor and be able to bring the same message to God's people and feed His sheep. Don't become discouraged, in all things seek His wisdom and guidance. I will pray that the Lord will bless you with His ministry and in His service.

Anthony D. Sexton ACS
anthonysexton@msn.com

Consider Paul's background, Pharisee, the Sanhedrin, male dominated culture et al, how did that influence the ecclesial church structure that he envisioned and implemented for the Gentile churches of his time.

Paul, in Romans 7, vs 25, noted that he did not have a commandment of the Lord on the topic of Virgins, so he gave his valuable and learned opinion, and who would deny him the right to do so. I suspect that he did the same in other instances.

My mom was an assistant pastor and a pastor for a combined 30 years. One day we were having a discussion about women preachers. At the time, there was a lot of revisionist teaching going on with respect to what Paul wrote about women and their place in the church, and what Paul really meant in his writings.

I dissapointed my mom, initially, when I said no mom, I believe that Paul meant exactly what he said. For he was a product of his time. However, it appeared that as he began to grow in Jesus Christ (even using this phrase once, "I have learned..."), some of his original positions changed.

Having said that, in point # 11, Paul's conclusions did not seem to take into consideration what the prophet Joel saw, that was to come in the future (among other things), in my view. Which future, Paul's or our present time? I don't know. I simply know that God's transcendant plan goes beyond my limited and present view or understanding.

I believe that God will have the very stones to cry out if necessary in order to bring the truth to his people. I believe that we should receive the stones, the aged, the women or whomsoever God sends, particularly when many men have forfeited what may have actually been a divine birthright, given that the name Theos, was considered masculine. Go figure(-:. I suspect that God knew that would eventually happen!

I believe that when God moves us beyond bias, we might be able to move to the next step in God's revelatory plan. Perhaps we will not be here to see it though.

Rev. C. Solomon
Peace & Grace,

Inspired by JJ, let me submit my response in two parts, as we all know I am so long-winded, nevertheless my preface.

Defensible But Not Flawless, that is how I see the Bible, and the two are not mutually exclusive. JJ and others, I kind of break the rules held by most denominations and mainstream churches when I say things like this. On the other hand I believe that I am doing what we all do in Christendom every day, except others have a hard time admitting it. Here is an example, in Le.:17,7, Deut. 32:17, Ps. 106:37, Mk. 1:32, Lu 9:1, and there are many more texts where the Bible refers to devils.

Yet, in our churches today, in our bible commentaries and in our sermons, most preachers and teachers openly disagree with the Bible, and say that there is only one devil, oops!. If I were to say, then aren't you contradicting scriptures, for the Bible clearly says that there are devils? The response I would get from most would be, well these are translation errors. Then if I follow the Socratic method, my next question would be then, is the Bible flawless or not? Checkmate!

There are many other examples that I could use to show that all of us parse the writings, and we do not all agree on what has been said in every instance, particularly, when we exegete, and compare other biblical texts.

We could do the same with every book in the Bible, whether in the poetical, historical, legal, or other group of books. We could also examine each author in the bible and do the same. Most of our churches, denominations have taken an indefensible position, i.e., saying that there aren't any erorrs, every word is true, believe all of it or believe none of it. To disagree with that position is tantamount to apostasy.

The next step many take is to go go about trying to reconcile and/or make every author and every text agree. I don't believe that we have to do that and there is enough written to support my position. I don't believe that they all agreed, ala James and Paul, Peter and Paul, et al.

A pastor friend of mine heard me say that once, and quickly chastised me saying, you cannot say that, why not?

Do we forget or ignore the fact that the canon was compiled by human beings per Emperor Constantine, as I recall. We have made the canon sacrosanct, which contains many of God's truths, instead of the living Word which is absolute and irrefutable, which is the Truth. Did God want us to worship the canon or his living word?

[Perhaps that is why Jesus would apparently go out of his way at times and violate a few of the 613 precepts, to help people to keep looking toward God, which is a Spirit, rather than to get locked into a dispensational truth].

Jesus said in John chapters 14 and 16, ... I will send you another comforter to teach...and when the Spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all truth.... I believe that he did that, and that his Spirit will help us to parse the defensible (but not without flaws), 66 books of the canon.

For there are scribal errors, texts without manuscript support, errors with chronology, numerical errors, and probably transcriptional or interpretive errors. Don't forget that this all male group, had their biases and at the same time were products of their own cultures. Some fought to keep the book of Revelations for example, out of the canon.

The other thing is that the Spirit will help us to do is to understand God's unfolding plan, portions of which we have not been and may not be a part of. It will help us to understand how God's plan unfolds and builds on itself through time, i.e., step by step and line upon line and precept upon precept. Sometimes we get locked into a particular period of understanding and revelation, and we won't go beyond that.

Rev. C. Solomon

In support of Dr. Linda Smith's topic, Age, Gender and Theology..don't mix. Can we get down and get dirty on this topic?

Consider bias in religion, whether it is based on age, color, gender, national origin, denomination, size: I have often wondered how we can rid the world of bias, racism and separatism, when we cannot resolve the problem within.in the church! And, how often are we blocking out the will of God, given our own internal biases or as noted New York theologian Dr. C. Eric Lincoln noted, 'a consciousness of kind.

A few vignettes to consider:

Vignette #1: A couple of decades ago I was in a discussion with my cousin Katrina, not the hurricane. Katrina explained that a mutual minister friends of ours was not saved. I replied, oh no, did he backslide? Katrina explained, no, he never was saved. I asked then, why did your dad (her Pastor as well), seat him in the pulpit when he visited your church. She explained that he was simply being nice...she went on to explain, you know that he is from the Church of God in Christ (Trinitarians), my cousin was from the Apostolic Church (Jesus Name).

Vignette #2: Years ago, a major full-Gospel organization split or disseminated if you prefer over north and south/black and white issues, and in part over the ordaining of black bishops within their body, i.e, The Pentecostal Assemblies of the World (PAofW). Out of it spring up many other groups, but for the sake of this discussion, the United Pentecostal Church (UPC), the white full-gospel born again Apostolics.

Vignette #3: Blacks were allowed to attend various churches during the colonial and post-colonial periods of our Country, however, blacks were relegated either to balconies, the back or sides of the sanctuary. Out of that experienced emerged Bishop Richard Allen and the African Methodist Episcopal Church, and eventually other black church organizations.

Vignette #4: In some of our early churches, similar to what was taking place in Jewish synagogues and some of the new testament churches, women were separated from the men during worship.

Vignette #5: Number 13:1, Moses, marries an Ethiopian woman, "a sistah". Miriam and Aaron speak against Moses

Vignette #6: Under the Mosaic Law Dispensation, there was to be no race mixing.

Vignette #7: Jeremiah feels that there is something wrong with the skin of the Ethiopian. Can the Ethiopian change his skin? Why should they want to, Jeremiah?

Vignette #8: Peter does not eat unclean things, Acts. 10:14.

Vignette #9: Paul withstands Peter to his face given his duplicity, Gal. 2:11-14.

Vignette #10: The Jews and the Samaritan (dogs), don't mix. John 4:9.

Vignette #11: Go up thou bald head...! See 2 Ki 2:23.

Vignette #12: In the early days of Catholicism, black females had to create their own Order of Nuns. They could not be a part of the existing white Orders.

Vignette #13: In the Church of the Latter Day Saints, for years blacks were considered cursed, and could not be a part of the church and later the Priesthood (some changes have been made over the past 2 decades).

Vignette #14 In America, the Ku Klux Klan, invoked a Jewish Jesus, the cross and the bible, but hated Jews (and blacks). Schizophrenic or what?

Vignette # 15: Rev. Dr. Billy Graham openly repents for declining to support Dr. King at the 1963 March on Washington.

Vignette # 16: Rev. Dr. Jeff Hayford acknowledges and repents, given that during his scholastic basketball days, he would run to the showers and wash his hands after shaking hands (at the end of games) with black players.

Commentary:

In a story that we are all familiar with recorded in Mt. 22:23-33, a question was raised by the Sadducees, i.e, Whose wife shall she be in the Resurrection. Jesus said, in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Does anyone else believe that this is where God is trying to get us to now, a color blind, genderless, ageless society (like the Angels), or am I jumping the gun?

In Paul's letter to the Galatians, Galatians 3:26, Paul juxtaposed that, "... ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Neither race, nor gender, neither slave... just children of God.

Isn't this what we should be aspiring to as believers. And if we did, would this also help us to receive the one whom God has sent ala Joel 2:28? Keep in mind that God sent his prophets, and most notably he sent Jesus Christ, and neither the prophets nor Jesus were received in most instances.

Can any of these items, as Dr. Smith, who does not need my help, so eloquently explained, hinder us from receiving the one that God has sent. Men, we really need to talk about this and do some introspection!

Forgive my folly, but i couldn't get men to join me at women's professional basketball games, you should have heard the comments. Are we all biased, or do simply have different understandings of what the Bible requires?

Are we a part of the age where God is breaking down the partition walls.

Peace & Grace,
Rev. C. Solomon

Hey, where did everybody go? Not so long ago, I attended a Saturday morning service for men, at a friend's church. There were about 100 men in attendance.

One of the associate ministers of the church was teaching about Christian Marriages, however, he veered off course and began a discourse on what I call, sexism in the bedroom. He explained that only males could be initiators in the bedroom. I wondered, now where did he get that from?

So I raised my hand and gently asked, how does that fit in with other texts in the bible like the Song of Solomon? He danced around for a while, but could not come up with a reasonable explanation or any scriptures to support his supposition.

Could this be another example of what happens when we permit male bias to drive our churches?

Rev. C. Solomon

No, I wouldn't call that "male bias" (woman not initiating things in the bedroom), but rather, just very poor exegesis and theology. Your rightly pointed out Song of Solomon. :)

Dr. J, we are pleased, and I am sure that others feel the same way, having you aboard.

To all of you, the Lord has been dealing with me about 2 Kings 22:8-15, and Genesis 3:16, with respect to this topic. I believe that these discussions about religous and biblical topics are important for the future of the church. Hopefully we can all help and learn from each other, for I learning from each of you~

In 2 Kings 22 verse 15, "And she said unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Tell the man that sent you to me...". My emphasis of course is on God speaking directly to the woman, and telling her to go and tell the man.

1) If we reckon everything that we have been taught in our religous and cultural traditions, shouldn't it have been the other way around?

2)How is it that the King, the Cleric and the other men of the company, in leadership positions, could not hear from God, but instead had to rely on this lowly female keeper of the wardrobe?

3). How can one lead, properly, if he cannot hear from God?


In the latter part of Genesis 3:16, God explains to Eve that, "... your husband will rule over thee".

Let's consider the state of man woman relationships prior to the fall by exploring this text.

1). Was their an established power order put into place prior to the fall?

2). Was man to be a head over the woman, or to rule over her prior to the fall? And did this relate to marriage only, or to other religous and civil matters.

3). Was God establishing an order of power here, i.e., that man would rule over women at al, or was God making a pronouncement of what would occur as a consequence of her Eve's part in the fall, ie., a ruling curse?

I hope to hear from you all!

Ladies and Gentlemen, as one who has run the gauntlet of church hiring practices myself, I have empathy with those who find it odd that knowledge, experience, abilites and giftings are often overlooked in such a process.

It does not surprise me at all when I see small home based church meetings and idependent churches springing up and growing while the attendance is declining in many of the typical churches.

Perhaps, by refusing to hire leaders that do not fit into the prescribed mold, they are actually alienating many of the congregation in the process.

You see, many people are looking for something that is real and true. They can recognize a "cookie cutter" leader. Many are not interested in one who has been packaged to meet the specifics of a demographic. If a leader can aid them in getting closer to God then the personal details seem less important.

If you know you are called to the ministry, then by all means get into ministry. It doesn't matter who you are, what you look like, how old you are, or what your background is. There are countless souls being lost in our nations right now who are desperate for the truth that you have to share.

Don't give up because of man's ideas and opinions. Those things have no value in eternity but your calling does.

Go into all the world.

A Serving Son of Christ
Mark Wicks

I don't know about the rest of it, but if they aren't accepting your educational credentials you should ask yourself whether you should keep touting them. If you have a doctorate that is from an institution approved by a USDE-recognized accrediting agency, then churches should accept that (assuming that they aren't ultra-separatist). But if it is something from an unaccredited source - even if it isn't a diploma mill and you did have to work for it - then don't use it. Let your knowledge stand on its own. Whining and blaming them won't change the situation. And insisting on the title "Dr" when there is legitimate doubt over the validity of the claim only stands to weaken any credibility they would otherwise grant you.

What would change the situation is earning a degree that no one can dispute. Many South African universities will supervise your doctoral research without having you relocate. The fees are low (generally between $1,800 and $4,000 because of the exchange rate) and the academic quality is sound. Pass your dissertation on to a lector at one of those universities and they can either grant you your degree or help you tighten your dissertation up. However, if you don't have a dissertation of at least 220 pages showing evidence of: 1) solid literature review; 2) familiarity with international conversation on the topic through materials in other modern languages; and 3) a well-defended thesis or analysis that is original and relevant (including graduate-level spelling, grammar, and rhetorical ability), then don't waste anymore time (yours or anyone else's) claiming that you have a doctorate in theology.

Wow, Chris. . .your comments are a great example to make part of my point. My degree IS accredited. I did earn it. I did have a dissertation that was published. I HAVE taught in Bible Colleges as a guest lecturer. To the others who have commented, let me clarify that God is not a man, God is a Spirit (John 4:24) and, according to Jesus a spirit does not have flesh and bone. But I don't really tink I'll change any of the readers here theologically.

Oh, and Chris, I'm really NOT whining. I was asked to write this article and stated some facts and opinions. I am, along with my husband, very active in ministry. I've not let individual opinions and prejudice stop me in serving. My husband and I are planting yet another church in which he will be listed as the Senior Pastor for the sensibilities of the less informed. I will be doing the preaching and teaching even to men. God will be honored, Jesus will be proclaimed, people will be saved.

Just looking at the big picture and the health of the institution of the American Church. We are our own worse enemies. Always have been. We have, for the most part failed to find the balance between maintaining Biblical truths and applying them in an equitible way. The same organization that will reject women, ordains homosexual males. This kills our credibility before we even get the chance to preach the gospel. Jesus was much more accepting of people and thus, more successful than the American church is proving to be in these latter days.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

WOW everyone!!! You've all been really busy commenting! I was blessed to see that some of you actually really thought this one out and used biblical references etc.

Most telling on the whole subject was how many comments focused on the gender part and not the age or race part. I would say our common enemy, satan, has us focused where he (I use a male pronoun our of necessity, not because satan has a gender) wants us.

One suggestion, please fully research the original language (greek) when considering Pauls message about "bishop must be the husband of one wife".

Secondly, if we are going to so literally and strictly apply these passages in the way some are suggesting, I would submit no male paster always fulfills the rest of the requirements listed, i.e. blameless, your children always under subjection, not soon angry, etc, etc.

As a matter of fact in another Pauline epistle (I Timothy 5:23) he says to no longer drink water, but drink wine. I'm sure most of you do not apply this literally.

As a woman minister and pastor, I do have male authority, the same one you have. . .Jesus. (It will come as a relief to some of you that my husband has taken the lead of Senior Pastor, if for no other reason that to circumvent problems for others in this area).

Again, thank you to those of you who address the other topics of race and age.

I say, let's just all do the job and in the end, when Jesus has come back for The Church, some of us will be surprised at what was approved of by God.

You shall know them by their fruits.

God bless, keep the comments coming.