Txgangsta :
then you have evidently only skimmed the posts here. yoyou should try reading all of what is written.
you yourself said men were the authority on faith. you also said women were the authority in the bedroom which I can only perceive as massively derogatory and sexist, unless you care to clarify otherwise.
equally you can give the reasons you perceive necessary to maintain the status quo.
jesus never had blacks or asians as disciples either and the bible makes no mention except to say that you can take foreigners as slaves, so I guess really only white men should be priests

thenumberone :

I see nothing but unsupported answers for no-women priests and a bunch of different answers for why women should be ok'd for the priesthood.

I did say men were to be the priests and said why. Then I said one of the things that women have been given jurisdiction over. It's in the Jewish Talmud (not biblical) that a man must lay with his wife every 40 days minimum, else it is grounds for the wife to divorce. It also says that sex is not for the man's pleasure, but the woman's. It's derogatory or sexist, its is part of the system (though the large majority of people don't even know what a Talmud is). Women and men together are like a crown of two interwoven precious metals. They are different metals, but of equal value.

The reasons I do not believe women should/can be priests/pastors/whatever are gender roles, the history of God-given priesthoods, and the lack of a biblical mention.

Biologically, men and women are different. I'm sure we all can agree on that. This includes the vocal chords. When a study comes out and polls people about what gender is more persuasive, there is never really a difference. However, when the person does not know they are being tested, "people will be more persuaded by a dominant personality, and that typically is a lower-pitched male voice."

http://www.speechtechmag.com/Articles/?ArticleID=66816

The other biological reason is the fact that men are more like Jesus. Each of us are equal as children of God, but men have a "y" chromosome. I know it seems irrelevant, but Christ is the high priest of Christianity. While I don't hold to a doctrine of "impersona christe", I do hold that the choice of gender for God in his own church was designed.

To give a biological point back, female figures are more persuasive to both males and females. However, the words are supposed to be persuasive, not the speaker. It's about the message, not the messager.

There are 2 God-given priesthoods. The most well known is the Aaronic priesthood. This is the Jewish one for sacrifice and the like. The second is the priesthood of Melchizedek. This one includes non-Jews and operates outside of the mosaic law (no sacrifices, shellfish is ok, etc.). Both priesthoods are all male. The book of Hebrews specifies that Jesus is in the order of Melchizedek. There is not a possibility of female priests in Christianity if we are the continuation of the Melchizedek line.

Finally, there is the omission of Jesus himself. He never says it's cool to have female priests. He could have said that was fine, especially since everyone but the Jews had priestesses in their religions. He could have come at a different time when people really wanted female priests in a male-only-priesthood. He didn't, and I'm very sure God did not oopsie.

I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:

That
ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her
in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a
succourer of many, and of myself also.

Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:

Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles.

Romans 16:1-4

Txgangsta : Exactly what religion are you since you posted this previously.
https://www.vizzed.com/boards/thread.php?id=57028&ppp=20&page=0#774337

You are a very one sided person who obviously can't accept change in a modern world.

iN008 : The modern world shouldn't effect somebody's religion or believes. If "the world" decieded that murder was alright, does that mean religions should accept it because it's generally accepted? Of course not. Now, this is something extreme, but one thing that the churh has is tradition. Very few things change in the church. For instance, in the Catholic church, one thing that changed was "Vatican II", basically meaning the Mass could be said in different languages, instead of he original Latin. Jesus intended men and only men to be priests, and that is how it will (or at very least, should) stay.

patar4097 :
This is a world heading towards Equality.
To keep a position of power in religion to only men would just be like how when the religions
in question were created when any position of power were given to males.

This is the only reason I see for religion to only give their positions of power to men as it has been like that for so long.

Txgangsta :
I really cant believe you are making the fact that jesus was a man a key point. jesus was also white yet you keep dancing around that one.
yes, exceptibg women to put out on demand isnot sexist, thats obvious equality. stating its for the womens pleasure doea not change that, nor is it generaly true.
jesus never said a lot of things. that doesent mean they cant be done. you say because he hasnt come to say otherwise its not his desire, I can equally say as he hasnt turned up he doesent oppose this equality movement.

thenumberone :

First, Jesus was not white. He was Jewish, a Semite. He looked middle eastern, not white.

Second, gender roles is not race rolls. I deny any sort of race rolls.

Third, women are not to put out on demand. In face, men have to put out on demand.

Fourth, God is omniscient. God desired to start a church. If God wished this church to have women priests, he would have designed it that way. Instead, he decided this church was to come from the Jews, a group has never had approved priestesses.

Fifth, all the power to continue the church was given to men. Mary Magdalene was not one of the 12. She could have been very easily, but God, being omniscient, did not design the church to operate as such. The women were still important in formation of his church because they are not to be left out by any means, but the organization was not originally designed with women priests. If it was supposed to and didn't, that means the church we have today is "better" than what Jesus set up.

Sixth, Jesus never criticized homosexuality either, but I will still say homosexual activity is a sin. He did not mention this, therefore we default to the old teaching. Coming from the Jews, homosexual activity was never ok'd, and this is the position we adopt. With priestesses, we do the same thing. He never mentioned priestesses, so we go with the old teaching. If it had changed, he would have mentioned it. This applies for both priesthoods.

Finally, he will not turn up just because of some equality movement. I promise you, while "lets make men into women and women into men" program irritates him, but not enough for him to come back. Him coming back means final judgment. This isn't worth it.

iN008 : The world is heading toward equality. I have no problem with this. I have a problem with denying reality. I have a problem when a kingdom the isn't "the world" is being criticized by the world for not being more like the world. Doesn't sound like tolerance to me.

Brigand : Lets take all the fluff and poetry out.

"I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been the benefactor of many people, including me. Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus. They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them."

I have no problem with women deacons. I have a problem with women priests. A deacon has nearly every authority of a priest with exception of consecration of the Eucharist and confirmation of doctrine (they are the teaching authorities). That's it.

Txgangsta :
I dunno if you have seen semites, they are essentially just tanned white people. if jesus had been from sudan or saudi arabia he would be distinctly non white. that being said though, that still cuts out a massive swathe of people.
second: gender discrimination is as bad as race discrimination.
3rd
in a few years time, you will realise how ridiculous that statement is.
4th
and no blacks, europeans, americans or people he doesnt directly choose.
jesus doesent mention a lot of things the old testament tells you not to do either, but no doubt you ignore those parts of the old testament. cherrypicking.
you promise me it irritates him? but this is massive news, one among us has the power to hear jesus and the authority to speak in his name. how long has this been going on for? praise the lorda!

thenumberone :

There used to be immense racism against semites. Jesus wasn't white. Acts records the preaching to an Ethiopian. History records the Axum Empire, a Christian empire in Ethiopia. Jesus' parables reflect that the Jews should be loving toward the Samaritans (biggest enemy). Paul wanted to go preach in Persia, but was led to Greece instead. Race is not an issue for Christian worship.

I agree, gender discrimination is as bad as race discrimination. I don't agree this is discrimination. I see this as no different than saying "Men cannot be pregnant". It's not that women are not allowed, it's that it is impossible according to Christian theology. If you want to deny the theology, you deny Christianity in the first place. This is Christianity.

Jesus does not choose those specific races mentioned, no, but his disciples do (as stated above). He personally treated the Samaritans (especially the women) just as important as any Jew.

Part of the Old Testament is fulfilled, the Mosaic Covenant. You've probably already been told this. You seem smart enough. Stop pretending to be dumb.

Txgangsta :
having a different opinion doesent make you dumb. the way you talk to people doesent win you any battles.
you are dancing around the core points here so I dont think either of us can gain much from continuing can we.

thenumberone :

I doubt anything I say will have a great affect. It seems you are very sure that women are being mistreated. All I can say is that myself and others like me do not view women less valuable than men, and neither does our God. Men and women have different functions, and this is simply one of the functional differences.

Of course women can be priests lets face it women are usually more affectionate and organised than men, also women in general feel more comfortable talking to other women about their problems. I don't see why anybody would be against this.