So. If a man who is called to the ministry in some form or fashion has a cousin (female) who has been working at a seminary (denomination undisclosed) for a couple years as staff. But is now a vice president over a seminary. How is he supposed to respond? How should any biblically faithful bond servant respond?
Do not answer with the American/ Egalitarian train of thought. But what do the scriptures actually indicate towards the idea of a woman being in leadership over a place of learning where MEN ARE TRAINING FOR PASTORAL MINISTRY?
Yes, I could not agree more. That a seminary is not a church. It is an institution. But, keeping in mind the nature of a seminary is far different than a general college or university.
If it bothers you, offends your conscience so that you find it impossible to study in that context or vote approval as a board member, or vote funds as a member in a church supporting the institution--in short, if it be sin for your participation (whatsoever is not of faith is sin), then you should make whatever separation brings your conscience peace.
If it bothers you that someone else doesn't take so strong a sin-stance with respect to an issue you find intolerable, you should either find a way to live with a brother of a different attitude; or (which could be "and") seek to lovingly and patiently persuade him to come over to your conviction. There is no Bible verse (simple proposition) that could remove all doubts in the matter about which you reveal your passion. It will take reasoning from the Scriptures to make the case you intend.
Whatever institution so stirs you was organized, built, and run by people who predate all your interest. You are far down the line of investors, faculty, leadership, and students. So much of what we engage with in our time is an inheritance of the past. By the time we become parties of interest, we are one among thousands such. If I begin to shout to get the attention of the myriads, is it because the theater is actually on fire (if I think so)? Perhaps the heat is only turned up, and an orderly withdrawal of those who need the cool will save their lives--an effect brought about by rational explanation in a normal tone conveyed to people with reason to trust me. The point is not that you are wrong, or right; but that you might be torn to pieces (Mt.7:6), and still no one's life is saved. The theater (or seminary) may not catch fire; or, the whole place could collapse in ruin for a danger unrelated to your perceived concern.
I might be sympathetic to your exact concern. But in your post there is no reasoning, no appeal to Scripture (aside from vague chapter references). Effective presentations
marshal the evidence, organizing and deploying it in ways both winsome and confrontational (depending on the audience). Sometimes, the work of building a presentation reveals weakness in the argument; or that the present state of the argument is actually quite complex only masked by superficial simplicity--a condition that only empowers someone with a contrary position, able to penetrate and exploit either a flaw or a point of Gordian peril. By taking care, an excellent representation of a position could be prepared, that would persuade some who find it compelling.
Finally, telegraphing to respondents what sort of replies you find contemptible signals rage, along with a predetermined mindset. Your queries aren't really investigatory. You have a strong opinion, and will consider beneficial any additional firepower the opinions of others contribute; but in general, my impression is: you already "know" the answer or category of response you are prepared to countenance as legitimate. This thread is about validation of your hostility to the situation described.
