I am an experienced worship leader and choir director. My husband relocated to a new state and joined a church that does not allow female worship "leaders". So, I sing background vocals and occasionally lead a song. We LOVE the church and the teaching but I am so hungry to be used more in worship. I really don't have a relationship with the team. We practice, then worship. The men worship leaders do not mentor women. And the women in charge are really singers with an admin role. We've had a few "stage training" sessions on how to clap, how to have eye contact, what to wear, how much makeup to wear. But nothing spiritual. No team worship time. I am used to having deep worship time with my team members and strong spiritual friendships. I have none of that on this team and it really hurts. I know they value me for what I contribute, but at the same time, I'm spiritually being really STUNTED in this ministry. How do I know when it's time to step down? Am I being selfish?
I almost discounted this idea, but there is something to it. I'm not sure the ultimate solution to the free will antinomy is "different frames of reference", but it seems to isolate facts and help realize that there is more in this universe than we can explain. I think we truly have free will and that God is sovereign.
A "block" in Hebrew logic is not exactly the same as a 'frame of reference' although it is similar. Frame of reference still is looking at the whole but from a particular viewpoint. A block has that unique viewpoint but applies ONLY to what is in that block.
In that way Hebraic logic can hold 2 mutually exclusive things as true at the same time as long as they are in differing blocks.
But that is a whole OTHER discussion.
The discussion might be: is there such a thing as an isolated fact? (In God's view, there is not - Psalm 139) In someone else's view?
Wulf - I'd say that the neither male nor female also needs to be seen in the context of neither Jew nor gentile, slave or free. Those very clearly exist here and now, and in fact God seems to have special plans still involving the Jews. That says to me that these things are still recognised in our temporary, passing world, but will no longer be distinctions in the world to come. As for Priscilla, that is at best ambiguous.
I would very much take that attitude that God is always calling people to step forward and serve Him, but if the only ones who respond are women (as seems to be so much the case in the Anglican church) then He honours that, even though it brings shame on the men of that church. I don't mean that women leading is shameful, but that Men have not stepped up to lead is very distinctly shameful and having women in church government exposes that shame.
I'd say that the neither male nor female also needs to be seen in the context of neither Jew nor gentile, slave or free. Those very clearly exist here and now, and in fact God seems to have special plans still involving the Jews.
I agree with you on this. I take those passages to mean that we are all one before the Lord and have equal access to salvation and that there is even footing before HIS throne.
It does NOT mean that the members of each pairing does not have specific callings and responsibilities.
That being said, there is no reason a woman can't lead worship in my mind. But even if someone thought so, a reading of the passage about head coverings should help as it gives a provision for women who do have a public ministry and wish to signal that they aren't trying usurp authority from men. Public ministry doesn't have to = authority.
I was really answering Wulf, because we're both involved in a stream that is trying to positively push women toward governmental roles.