I come from a position that is still unsure what the Bible teaches on this matter. What concerns me the most though is the ‘against’ position which makes reference to the warning ‘If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.’ When I hear the ‘against’ position I’m left doubting whether I’m safe in God’s hands if I ended up with being ‘for’ women’s ordination. This to me sounds very un-Lutheran. Shouldn’t the starting point for all Lutheran decision making mean: ‘Because I’m safe in God’s hands (the gospel)’ I’m ‘freed’ according to my new nature to discern what the Spirit is saying to the Church through the Word. If I’m in doubt that I’m safe in God’s hands as the basis for decision making, then this makes the ‘condemning fear’ the basis for decision making which clouds our ‘freed’ spirit which has come about through the power of the gospel. The ‘against’ view also makes the assessment that those who would receive the sacrament/ministry from a woman would put into question the validity of the sacrament. This to me sounds like the ancient church heresy of Donatism. Even if the ‘command’ of the Lord is true from the ‘against’ position my reading of the Greek is that the consequence is talking about ‘he’, singular and not plural. Thus the consequence doesn’t involve those who receive from the ministry of women, but the prophet himself is personally accountable to God. And even if the prophet is personally accountable in the sense of judgment, is this really talking about ‘hell’? I notice that that some manuscripts say as an alternative translation: ‘If he is ignorant of this, let him be ignorant.’ This changes the meaning of the text in indicating that it’s not talking about God’s judgment.