***
What does the Bible say about women in the church? Are wives inferior to men, to be controlled and ruled over by men? Does the Bible say women cannot lead or teach? Can they teach men?
***
Yesterday, I was reading an old article from Doug Wilson in which he mentioned this:
The Bible does give a father and husband true authority in his family. But it also gives the elders of the church true authority over that family.
Because Wilson self identifies as a Christian patriarch, I fully expect him to make comments like that, but I looked at the verse he referenced: Hebrews 13:17
17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.
Having blogging about spiritual abuse for nearly two years, I would guess that this verse is the most widely twisted verse used by guru church leaders to help keep their flock in line. I’ve never been to seminary, but using simple Bible helps online, I was quickly able to learn that a better translation for the text using text would be:
Listen to or be persuaded by those who guide you and yield to them, for they watch out for your souls. . .(which I covered in this article a while back).
Another controversial verse which domineering men have used to exert their authority over women is 1 Timothy 2:12. The idea is that if it’s in the Bible written as such, we need to accept it as such.
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one who was deceived, it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. 1 Timothy 2:11-15.
Gail Wallace from The Junia Project blog wrote a very informative article, Defusing the 1 Timothy 2:12 Bomb, completely challenging the traditional school of thought which defends male-only leadership. Kudos to the men who decide to read a scholarly article written by a ::::woman::::.
Gail’s article is very interesting and questions the dogmatic teachings that we hear from so many church leaders today.
Here is one challenge:
Interpretation should be consistent with the rest of the passage under study. As Groothuis notes “It is inconsistent to regard the dress code in 1 Tim 2:9 as culturally relative, and therefore temporary, but the restriction on women’s ministry as universal and permanent. These instructions were part of the same paragraph and flow of thought.” Similarly, if we insist that verse 12 is applicable today, to be consistent, that ruling should apply to the whole passage, including verse 15 (women shall be saved through childbearing). I find it concerning that most people who claim that 1 Timothy 2:12 is clear and applies today usually don’t have a clue as to what the verses that follow mean and how they should be applied.
I encourage you all to read the article and see for yourself. Wallace’s conclusion:
The bottom line is that in light of current biblical scholarship it’s time to acknowledge that there are too many problems with this passage to continue using it as a weapon against women called to church ministry.
Be sure to read the great information in the comments. Please check it out.
***
Ok, along these lines, I found a video excerpt from Bishop N.T. Wright. In this video, Dick Staub interviews N.T. Wright following the release of his new book, Paul and the Faithfulness of God. In this short excerpt, the subject of women in the local church is addressed. (Sorry, I’m unable to embed the video.)
The basic idea is why are we using Paul’s words for final rules on authority? Why is the church making important church teachings based on maybe one verse of Paul’s without looking at the context of all of his other verses.
H/T to Bill Kinnon for the heads up on the N.T. Wright videos. The full interview with N.T. Wright can be found here: A Four-Part Conversation on N.T. Wright’s“Paul and the Faithfulness of God.”
**
Spiritual Sounding Board 
“Having blogging about spiritual abuse for nearly two years, I would guess that this verse is the most widely twisted verse used by guru church leaders to help keep their flock in line. I’ve never been to seminary, but using simple Bible helps online, I was quickly able to learn that a better translation for the text using text would be:
Listen to or be persuaded by those who guide you and yield to them, for they watch out for your souls. . .(which I covered in this article a while back).”
Yep. I did a deep word study on that verse years ago and that is a better translation IF we are honestly looking at how some of the same words are translated elsewhere in the periscope. Here is an indepth study of that passage within context of Hebrews.
http://www.theexaminer.org/volume2/number4/rule.htm
But let’s also look at it another way. What do we do with all the “one anothers” in scripture that apply to EVERYONE in the Body? If I remember correctly, there are about 58 of them. Also what do we do with “don’t lord it over”, etc. My goodness, just the book of Matthew alone negates that bad translation of Hebrews 13:17.
LikeLike
Have you read The Blue Parakeet by Scot McKnight? If not, I’d be happy to send you my copy to check out. I think you would like it.
LikeLike
“Another controversial verse which domineering men have used to exert their authority over women is 1 Timothy 2:12. The idea is that if it’s in the Bible written as such, we need to accept it as such.
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one who was deceived, it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. 1 Timothy 2:11-15.”
Well, It CANNOT mean what they want it to mean for many reasons. One is because of the grammar. Another is because of a horrible translation of authenteo. Another is because of the historical context.
BUT, even MORE important is the fact there is NO PROHIBITION OF WOMEN LEADING/TEACHING MEN IN THE OT. None. zilch.
Of course Patriarchy reigned in the OT because of the fall and God worked with, around and through their sin in many areas including patriarchy. But there is NO prohibition for women leading/teaching. No law constraining women in that respect. Some try to make the fact there are no female Levite Priests so that is the prohibition. But they make much more of the Levite Priesthood than there was. They were not ‘teaching”/leading.
So many people miss that FACT there is no prohibition against women leading or teaching men in the OT. Think about it…but now we have Jesus Christ, through Paul making a NEW more restrictive law for his daughters in the New Covenant? Does that make sense? After the Cross, it is MORE restrictive for women than in the OT?
LikeLike
“Similarly, if we insist that verse 12 is applicable today, to be consistent, that ruling should apply to the whole passage, including verse 15 (women shall be saved through childbearing). I find it concerning that most people who claim that 1 Timothy 2:12 is clear and applies today usually don’t have a clue as to what the verses that follow mean and how they should be applied.”
Yep, it is downright cruel how this is presented by too many pastors/teachers. All because they have the foundational premise wrong and totally ignore historical context. But they are shy about teaching the rest of it as a command for today because that would mean women must have children to be saved. A work of salvation for women only! Never mind barren women could NOT be saved. So they teach this as a “role” and include motherhood as a role for salvation. it is still teaching works salvation. Sigh. So many false teachers out there!
First of all, the grammar in that passage is singular so Paul is referring to “A” woman so it is not universal. Next, the Greek word, Authenteo, which was wrongly interpreted as “authority over” actually tells us she is teaching something very sinister/murderous. That word is only used once in the NT in this passage and has very sinister connotations in Koine Greek.
Next, we know the wonder of the world, the temple Artemis was in Ephesus which had a fertility cult (popular because so many women died in childbirth). It was scary back then folks. That cult (also called Diana) taught that Eve was formed first so that matches what we see in that passage with Paul correcting that in saying Adam was formed first. Next, Paul is making a play on words…she will be saved by THE childbearing….referring to Messiah…. even if she dies in childbirth. Jesus Christ is the Savior. Not the fertility cult.
If we go back to chapter 1 Paul even talks about those deceived out of ignorance, like himself and those who deceive on purpose. He tells Timothy, “Let her learn” but he also says, “I do not now give permission for her to teach”. And notice, when people are deceiving on PURPOSE, Paul names names. Like Hy and AL. He does not when they are deceived out of ignorance. Let her learn, he says.
Another note: The use of Gune and Aner translated as ‘she and they” most likely refers to her and her husband. Gune can be woman/wife and Aner can be “man/husband”
LikeLike
Not trying to change the subject (because this is a good area to discuss) but I had some thoughts in this article:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/women/2014/february/toxic-leaders-in-our-ranks.html
It appears to me that some former servicemen and ex-public servants (who all believed they were in positions of authority) decide to become pastors. I find it fascinating that some of these people go from one realm of having authority to another realm where they (think) they can have authority and take their toxic ways with them.
To be clear, I AM NOT saying that all former servicemen and public service persons are toxic in their leadership. But the idea of ‘leading’ seems to draw people that like to be in authority over others, which is actually unbiblical as far as a leader in the Christian context is concerned.
On another note, female leaders can just as easily be toxic as male leaders.
LikeLike
Very interesting, but not surprising Bridget. CON was a former serviceman and Miano was a former deputy.
And think-going into the pastorate gives someone very intimate privilege into the private lives of individuals and families – far more than a serviceman or police officer would have because a pastor is dealing with families and getting to know them on an ongoing basis. Frightening.
LikeLike
”’Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.”’
What always tickled me about is sentence is the patriarch’s are normally ‘groaning’ when they bring up this scripture. You ever notice that?
It seems like its always along the lines of you aren’t following my authority over you. Insert image of Cartman from South Park! Yep, pretty much no advantage to anyone.
LikeLike
It’s a very good post, and I posted there myself.
LikeLike
There are a number of bloggers who write about the inequality in church ministry that many women face. It is good to have some positive and helpful posts which can inform and liberate both women and men around this issue. Carolyn Custis James at Whitby Forum.com has some good articles which address the issues of Woman and Spiritual Abuse in the Church. The following are 5 links. Notice the insightful Comments as well.
Part 1: This Can of Worms Must be Opened! June 10/13
http://www.whitbyforum.com/2013/06/this-can-of-worms-must-be-opened.html
Part 2: The Perfect Storm June 17/13
http://www.whitbyforum.com/2013/06/the-perfect-storm.html
Part 3: The Many Faces of Spiritual Abuse June 24/13
http://www.whitbyforum.com/2013/06/the-many-faces-of-spiritual-abuse.html
Part 4: Identifying the Triggers of Spiritual Abuse July 3/13
http://www.whitbyforum.com/2013/06/identifying-triggers-of-spiritual-abuse.html
Part 5: Standing Up to Spiritual Abusers July 10/13
http://www.whitbyforum.com/2013/07/standing-up-to-spiritual-abusers.html
LikeLike
Julie Anne
You ask…
“What does the Bible say about women in the church?”
Was wondering….
Which church are WE, His Ekklesia, His Body, His Sheep, talking about?
the church of man? – Or – The Church of God?
I’m NOT so fond of “the church of man.” The 501 (c) 3, non-profit, Tax $ Deductible, Religious $ Corporation, the IRS calls church. Built on the Doctrines of Man and Traditions of Man that Make Void The Word of God. Mk 7:13.
Should WE, His Bride, His Sheep, His Disciples call an IRS Corporation…
The Church of God? – NO –
But that’s what “WE,” His Ekklesia, His Bride, His Sheep do every Sunday Morning, when WE, His Body, His Church, say WE “Go to Church.” In the Bible, did any of His Disciples ever decide to, or say it was important to, Go To Church? Join a church? Tithe to a Church? – NOPE – So why do WE? His Ekklesia, His Church, His Sheep, You and me?
In the Bible, did any of His Disciples call themselves, or call other Disciples, Leaders? Church Leaders? Christian Leaders? Spiritual Leaders? Leadership? – NOPE – So why do WE?
When Gail Wallace says….
“there are too many problems with this passage to continue using it
(1 Tim 2:12) as a weapon against **women called to church ministry.**
Which church is Gail talking about?
the church of man? – Or – The Church of God?
Do women really want to lead, and teach, and have power, profit, prestige, honor, glory, recognition, reputation, in “Today’s Corrupt Religious System?” – the church of man? Just like the men who desire this power, profit, prestige?
My experience with **women called to church ministry.** is NO different.
No matter how loving… eventually…
No matter how humble… eventually…
No matter how much a servant… eventually…
Women will “Exercise Authority” like the Gentiles. A No, No, Mark 10:42-43.
Women will Lord it Over God’s heritage. You and Me. A No, No, 1 Pet 5:3.
And that is always the beginning of “Spiritual Abuse.”
Pastor/Leader = exercise authority = lord it over = abuse = always
Ps 138:6
Though the LORD be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly:
but the proud he knoweth afar off.
Ps 40:4
Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust,
and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies.
LikeLike
Julie Anne
Now “The Church of God,” where Jesus is the head of the Body,
Is much more friendly, and accepting, and equal. 😉
IN-clusive – ALL can have the highest position… Just like Jesus, as man.
We ALL can be servants. NO leaders. Well, NO human leaders.
Only Jesus. Who calls Himself the “ONE” Leader. 😉 Mat 23:10 NASB.
In The Church of God, Jesus, is the head of the body, The Church. Col 1:18.
The “same Spirit” that raised Christ from the dead lives in You – Lives in me.
And those “Led” by the Spirit are the Sons of God. You and Me.
And, In The Church of God, in Christ, in His Body…
Gender, Male, Female, does NOT exist.
Where I live in the Body of Christ, Gender, Male, Female, does NOT exist.
Where I live in “The body of Christ” it’s about – Who knows Jesus? Who is Hearing “His Voice?” Who has a living Christ within? Who has the Spirit of God dwelling in them? Who has been taught by God? Who has a revelation from God? Who is exhibiting “the Fruit of the Spirit?” Who is moving in the “Gifts of the Spirit?”
Where I live – WE, His Ekklesia, His Sheep, His Disciples, are all “ONE.” 🙂
Gal 3:27-28
For as many of you as have been
baptized into 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.
Does this verse say male and female are equal?
Or, does this verse say – In Christ, Male and Female does NOT exist?
And WE, His Ekklesia, His Sheep, His Church – Are All “ONE.”
So, Was wondering….
Which church are WE, His Ekklesia, His Body, His Sheep, talking about?
Which church do WE, His Ekklesia, His Body, His Sheep, belong to?
the church of man? – Or – The Church of God?
LikeLike
Julie Anne
And it’s easy to know which church your living in.
When a wanna-be “church leader” quotes Heb 13:17 and says…
He is that Leader, in Heb 13 – that you are to obey and submit to.
You have found yourseelf in – the church of man… 😉
Run, Run for your life….
Run to Jesus…
LikeLike
gotta love Piper’s warm fuzzy tweet this morning.
LikeLike
Julie Anne,
Nicely done!
Here’s a link to another article to add to the mix and for prayerful consideration.
LikeLike
Hiccup—the link: http://www.messianicjudaism.me/yinon/files/Women-Rabbis-MJRC-Revision.pdf
LikeLike
“Are wives inferior to men, to be controlled and ruled over by men?” Yikes! Is that the only choice given to someone who hasn’t signed off on an egalitarian belief? Are those my only choices?!? I’m a military veteran and a 20-year paramedic, who now serves as pastor of a small, urban, wildly multi-cultural congregation, so my words might not carry much weight, but… When the issue of gender roles and equality in the home and church are framed in such black and white terms from both sides of the debate, there is little room for a good discussion, let alone a workable resolution of the issue. It seems if a person believes there is no reasonable constraint on women serving in absolutely every office and position in a church that she appears to others to be gifted for, then that person is branded (by the opposing side) as sub-biblical, and secular, perhaps even theologically liberal (read, heretical). On the other hand, if a person acknowledges a reasonable, biblically defensible doctrine that applies a limitation on a woman serving in even one role or office in the church, that person is branded an ignorant, sub-biblical, most-likely-abusive, fundamentalist, patriarchal blockhead, whose probably got something he’s trying to hide–and who certainly has missed the obviously compelling, usually recent, scholarship that challenges his/her position in the matter. Both sides accuse the other of power-grabbing, Neither side is willing to be convinced of its blind-spots, academic weaknesses, or agenda-driven doctrines. Neither concedes that there are healthy, loving marriages and (yes) churches that hold to the opposite doctrine regarding the issue. I suspect that the most ardent soldiers on both sides of the complementarian-egalitarian battle struggle, and mostly fail, at achieving the life of submitted humility that Jesus calls all of His followers to pursue.
LikeLike
Here’s a scholarly article on “head,” “headship,” and “authority.”
http://www.searchingtogether.org/kephale.htm
LikeLike
Ken, when you make the following statement, you are implying that there must be constraint placed upon the female gender or there is no reason:
” It seems if a person believes there is no reasonable constraint on women serving in absolutely every office and position in a church that she appears to others to be gifted for, then that person is branded (by the opposing side) as sub-biblical, and secular, perhaps even theologically liberal (read, heretical). “
LikeLike
Ken, re: your first question. Are you asking me? Because I believe the question should be asked to the patriarchs who espouse such teachings.
LikeLike
Ken:
” I suspect that the most ardent soldiers on both sides of the complementarian-egalitarian battle struggle, and mostly fail, at achieving the life of submitted humility that Jesus calls all of His followers to pursue.”
It’s all well and fine that you would like to be diplomatic here, however, this is not what this is about at all. It has everything instead with being able to be all one has been gifted and equipped to do in one’s marriage, as a woman, and as an heir in Christ Jesus.
What I am hearing you say is this—it’s all about who has the authority and power and basically, neither position wants to give into the other. Then you surmise this by stating, ” I suspect that the most ardent soldiers on both sides of the complementarian-egalitarian battle struggle, and mostly fail, at achieving the life of submitted humility that Jesus calls all of His followers to pursue.
LikeLike
Julie Anne,
Given the small window to view what we write and then wanting to review and edit if necessary, didn’t quite put this the way I had intended. So resubmitting.
Ken:
” I suspect that the most ardent soldiers on both sides of the complementarian-egalitarian battle struggle, and mostly fail, at achieving the life of submitted humility that Jesus calls all of His followers to pursue.”
It’s all well and fine that you would like to be diplomatic; however, this is not what this is about at all. It has everything instead with being able to be all one is able, be it male or female. We are all one in Christ Jesus, possessing the Holy Spirit.
It’s not a struggle for me to be an egalitarian. It’s a struggle for others to accept me as one in Christ with them. I know who I am in Him, apart from any male who would like to think they have some type of church or marital authority over others, simply due to their gender.
LikeLike
@Julie Anne: Yes, I was asking you, because your question was not clearly directed at “patriarchs who espouse such teachings.” My point was that the way the question was posed, and the article that followed it, doesn’t seem likely to attract a productive discussion with those types of people, but will (as the responses seems to bear out) welcome the complimentary comments from those who share your views already. Do you really expect for John Piper, or those who follow him or support him, to engage you when you describe his tweet as “warm, fuzzy”? That seems more a signal to others that Piper is considered a foe, and neither he nor those who agree with him will find much welcome on this site. Just sayin, it goes both ways…
@ uriahisaliveandwell: I wasn’t attempting diplomacy, but clarity. Perhaps I am not aware of “what it is all about.” But let me ask you this: Who is keeping you from being all that you are called to be? Who is holding you back? What ministry are you wanting to serve in today that a leader has shut you out of? And if you feel he was going against the plain truth of the Bible–why not just leave and find a place that gets the Bible right?
LikeLike
Ken – I could have worded the question differently, sure. However, I have heard the words “rule over” often from the Patriarchs themselves. They use the Tim and Hebrew 13:17 passages to say they are supposed to rule over women. Why should I sugar coat their own words?
The Piper tweet: I am not a fan of his style of tweeting and his teachings. His focus on sin, wrath of God I find out of balance with what we see in scripture and the hope we as Christians have in Christ. If we are going to focus so much on sin and death and wrath, then it seems like we are making a mockery of what Christ did for us. We are essentially saying His death was not good enough. This kind of teaching holds people in the bondage of sin/death. That’s not what Christ came for. If you have time, check out A Cry for Justice’s critique of his teachings. Crippen is Reformed and even he is calling it out as false, and that’s even after discussing Piper’s unbiblical teaching on the permanence view of marriage.
LikeLike
@Julie Anne: Agreed all all points! My point was simply that once we put someone in the “penalty box,” and they become (practically) a persona non grata, the door is slammed for any meaningful discussion, understanding, etc., and all that is left is to throw rocks at them, and then, to toss a few stones at anyone who does not share our antipathy towards them. I think that patriarchy (as a modern marital strategy) is insane and twisted, that people who are deeply into the complimentarianism of the day are relationally stunted and their churches impoverished, and that any form of behaviorally-proven justification is nearly heretical, and leads to spiritual poverty and emotional death. That’s just me and my beliefs. But I do have many friends who hold to those views, and I think the best shot I have at convincing them of the truth and logic of my views is through respectful dialog.
LikeLike
I guess I’m grumpy lately, Ken.
You know that song “It’s my party and I’ll cry if I want to?”
I’ll change the lyrics: it’s my blog and I’ll grump if I want to, grump if I want to. . . .
HELP – – yes, an attitude check is obviously in order. Maybe a nap, too! 🙂
I agree with your views and most of the time I think I do okay with respectful dialog. Today, I think I need a nap. LOL
LikeLike
Who was the first sex to spread the gospel? Women. To who, women? No, to men. Who were the men. The Eleven Apostles. Did those Apostles tell the women to keep silent, that they didn’t have any authority to tell them anything? No. They were having a freaking pity party, thinking that they bet on the wrong self appointed Messiah. Jesus told those women to go tell the men. After all, Eve was formed after Adam, right? I guess Jesus can’t follow his own rules, huh?
Ed
LikeLike
Great post!! Just read this post, and as an advocate for women in leadership within the ministry of Jesus Christ, I offer this link, which is my own study related to the verses you mentioned. https://docs.google.com/a/philippiprospectministries.org/document/d/1-0WbUSqkQwGOq0sXzHb92M5lXjwWE5T8rnxarBK0S_c/edit
LikeLike
Hmmmmmm with idiots like Jerome translating the Hebrew and Greek texts into the Latin Vulgate, no wonder there are so many misogynists.
Take a look at this:
http://www.womenpriests.org/theology/barr.asp
Mod note: This was stuck in spam box, sorry, WFTT2!
LikeLike
Ken,
I have and I did—LOL. Have it occurred to you that perhaps they might listen to you simply because of you being a male, whereas, there is a knee jerk reaction when the same is being presented by a female. Making things more palatable is good to do, but not at the cost of whitewashing or minimizing the truth. This only creates an escape for those to say, oh, well, it’s not that bad—-yes, it is.
LikeLike
Reminds me of when Jimmy Carter decided to resign from the denomination he used to belong making a clear statement it was due to the mistreatment and disrespect towards women and their role in the church and the home. He not only voted with his feet but also using his public influence in stating why.
LikeLike
Ok, since my other two posts both disappeared into cyber-space, try this link instead.
http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/womenfathers.html
Mod note: I found it in the spam box and released it (not the 2nd one which was a duplicate). Sorry! Don’t know why that happens.
LikeLike
@Julie Anne:
Anyone have the vaguest idea what he meant by that “warm fuzzy tweet”?
I don’t recall any disaster in the news recently for him to shoot his mouth off about.
LikeLike
As a Cessionist, I believe all forms of spiritual authority ceased to exist when the last of the apostles died. The apostles needed the manifestations of the Holy Spirit as well as spiritual authority in order to complete the Scriptures, but when the canon completed, the necessity of spiritual authority ceased as well. Hebrews 13:17 and I Timothy 2:12 applied only to the writers’ contemporaries, not to us.
Amen?
I will be hosting a conference to promote this view. It will be called the Strange Authority Fetish.
LikeLike
Here’s another excellent blog post worth reading:
http://coolingtwilight.com/misogyny-patriarchy-and-the-church/
LikeLike
HAHAHAHA, David!
LikeLike
David C,
When that which is perfect (Jesus) comes(returns), then the gifts will cease, but love will never cease. That is what the Bible states. THEN there will be no need for the NINE gifts…not just the two most widely mentioned in this contest of the college edumacated pretend wanna be religious experts.
I can’t stand the preaching that the gifts ceased, and were only for the first century people. Where did all that stuff begin? Such weirdness.
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
(Ed, it’s a joke.)
LikeLike
Yes, Ed. David has been heavily influenced by the JMac crowd and he was taking off from those teachings and also the recent Strange Fire conference JMac had and playing with it 🙂 It got an audible laugh from me. Hilarious!
LikeLike
David C
Ya, sorry…I didn’t see it as a joke until I re-read it after I sent my message. Oops.
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
Elders true authority over the family ? Yeah right, I’m going to trust the Doug Phillips, Scott Browns, Doug Wilson’s, Geffro Botkins, CJ MaHaneys, Bill Gothards and Chucky Oneils of the world to “rule” over my family. That will be a cold day in hell, or a church service where they don’t take up a offering.
I have a great group of elders at my church ( none are as twisted and wacked out like the idiots I listed above) but I hold them in low esteem. I certainly don’t trust them to micro-manage my life or make decisions concerning my family. They are in charge of operating the church and deciding the business of the church and that is it. On more than one occasion over the last 20 years I have had to tell them to buzz off. I’m not interested in their opinions or advice on how I operate my life. Frankly I have personally selected people I go to for advice on certain topics, business mentors etc. I consider advice from elders low quality, amateurish and unsophisticated especially in regard to business. For awhile I had this elder that constantly had all this business advice for me. He apparently heard of a few decisions I made from an employee and disagreed with my choice. Finally that stopped when he realized that I made exactly 16 times his annual income that year.
Keep your elders at arms length. It is your job , with your spouse to oversee the raising of your children. It is also your job to protect your family from church people and all the crazy flavor of the month teaching they seem to be always coming up with. That is especially true in the homeschool world. There are plenty of nitwits looking to get elected elder/leader/ so they can “be in charge ” , be important (in their own minds) or be looked up or be seen holding court front in center of all things church. Resist the temptation to hold the advice of these men over that of your own judgment, or the thoughts of your spouse. Be alert to their attempts to exert unhealthy influence over your family, instead of just teaching God’s word. When they do be quick to firmly smack them down. If that is ineffective, find another church immediately. Make it your number one priority to get the heck out of there.
They put their pants ( or panties in the case of some of these men, costumes in others) on one leg at a time just like the rest of the human race. Don’t trust them more than yourself or your spouse. In every case of abusive practices at churches THAT is where it starts. Don’t give them authority over you, they have all the authority/ responsibility they need in operating the church.
LikeLike
Ya, I’ve been meaning to watch on YouTube those Strange Fire video’s, but never got the time yet. I should have known it was a joke…I have no idea why I didn’t see the sarcasm.
________________________________
LikeLike
Ed – Here it is: http://www.tmstrangefire.org
CON and TM were in attendance. Tonya brought her “Should She Preach?” book by Tony Miano to the conference and CON posted a pic of it on Twitter. Strange Love Fest Oh, this is where Joni Eareckson preached, but they refuse to call it preaching – lol.
LikeLike
Scott – – Awesome comment. I wish I would have had it printed out and mounted 8 years ago!
LikeLike
Yea, what’s up with that, Ed? That’s not like you.
LikeLike
Another awesome blog post. This one is directed to Wilson.
http://blog.prodigalpaul.com/2012/07/20/the-gospel-coalition-sex-as-conquest-misogyny-however-unintended-2/
LikeLike
@WFTT2 The link above, for the article by Paul Burkhart, is excellent. Paul’s article was written July 19, 2012 and bears re-informing people about it. Paul references Daniel Kirk’s article, which also is a winner. These guys get it. They provide a valid biblical foundation and invite people to take a stand regarding the ‘real Gospel of Christ’. May their tribe increase!
LikeLike
Yet another good one!
http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/ask-an-egalitarian-response
LikeLike
Scott raises some very important points pertinent to all forms of authority.
Authority works really well when its boundaries are well defined and enforced. People entrusted with authority in government are invaluable in maintaining social order. They function well if they enforce laws and act only within the boundaries.
Law enforcement is a great example. Police can stop me for driving recklessly for example, but they can’t and shouldn’t stop me because of a bumper sticker they personally find offensive. They are certainly entitled to their opinions of my bumper sticker just like anyone else, but they shouldn’t use their authority to express them. When they abuse their authority, society suffers.
So what are the boundaries of spiritual authority? Do any of these guys (Doug Phillips, Scott Browns, Doug Wilson’s, Geffro Botkins, CJ MaHaneys, Bill Gothards and Chucky Oneils) ever discuss the importance of defining the boundaries of spiritual authority? Despots don’t and neither do these guys.
As a side note, I find it ironic that most of these guys are rabid advocates of “limited government” as political conservatives. They decry and bemoan the government’s overreach and intrusiveness into our lives often with shrill hyperbole, but how abut the BIG CHURCH government they entrust themselves with? Boundaries? What boundaries? They are for wicked sheep bent on sinning and rebelling against God.
LikeLike
“It seems if a person believes there is no reasonable constraint on women serving in absolutely every office and position in a church that she appears to others to be gifted for, then that person is branded (by the opposing side) as sub-biblical, and secular, perhaps even theologically liberal (read, heretical). On the other hand, if a person acknowledges a reasonable, biblically defensible doctrine that applies a limitation on a woman serving in even one role or office in the church, that person is branded an ignorant, sub-biblical, most-likely-abusive, fundamentalist, patriarchal blockhead, whose probably got something he’s trying to hide–and who certainly has missed the obviously compelling, usually recent, scholarship that challenges his/her position in the matter.”
Ken, There are no “offices”. That is part of the problem with this issue of women fully functioning in the Body. The term “office” was added by the translators to fit the institutional model. These are serving functions not “offices”.
LikeLike
” Do you really expect for John Piper, or those who follow him or support him, to engage you when you describe his tweet as “warm, fuzzy”? That seems more a signal to others that Piper is considered a foe, and neither he nor those who agree with him will find much welcome on this site. Just sayin, it goes both ways…”
Actually it doesn’t. Piper types rarely allow dissenting comments for dialogue. Been doing this a long time, Ken. They are not interested in dialogue on interpretations. Even the nicest possible—seen it too many times.
We are talking of Piper who teaches that if women read scripture in the worship service it is “teaching men”. He also calls for women to “take abuse for a season”. The list of such teaching concerning women, is quite long from Piper. If that is not a “foe” of women in the Body, I do not know what is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“But I do have many friends who hold to those views, and I think the best shot I have at convincing them of the truth and logic of my views is through respectful dialog.”
Good luck. Many of the celeb pastors have elevated this cultural issue to salvic status since the Danvers Statement. They have made it part of the “Gospel” and those who disagree as disobeying God.
LikeLike
Here’s N.T. Wright’s paper on why he’s in favor of woman leadership in the church. It goes through each of the verses and takes them apart: 1 Corinthians, 1 Timothy 2, etc.
http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Women_Service_Church.htm
LikeLike
David C says, “Authority works really well when its boundaries are well defined and enforced.”
According to a book I am reading, narcissists don’t have boundaries. Neither can they usually be shown the error of their ways. Even Scripture doesn’t matter, except to the extent it can be twisted to fit the narcissist’s purposes. Narcissistic men, including “pastors,” appear to be particularly adept at twisting Scripture with a view towards the subjugation of women.
The only thing we can do if we find ourselves dealing with a narcissistic “pastor” or other person claiming spiritual authority is to set our own boundaries. Unfortunately, it may be that the only boundary abused congregants can usually enforce is to leave. There will be a good deal of pain associated with leaving, and for this reason, among others, one may be tempted to stay, often in hopes of reforming narcissistic leadership. It won’t work. The sooner one leaves, the less the pain.
LikeLike
Yeah! What Scott says yesterday at 9:02 PM!!
LikeLike
What an exiting post to wake up to. Thanks, Lydia and others. The first exposure I had to the semantic nuances in 13:17 was Wade Burleson’s sermon of a few months ago. So this is a feast for me. Can’t wait to dig in to these references. Thanks Barb, for the new posts on your site. I’m heading over there now…Oh, and of the 6 elders who excommunicated me, the two big shots are strutting retired military officers, little big shot was an air force officer, and the other 3 I am not sure. But in that church, authority rules, or as the retired Lt Col USMC said, if you don’t respect the man, you have to respect the position!
LikeLike
Slightly off topic:
Much respect to Julie Anne for attempting to wade into the battle against ignorance and misogyny over at Patheos. One commenter turned the whole board into a real morass, and I’m impressed that JA tried to teach some sense and compassion to ttpog. Not sure any of us did any good, though — she(?) seems to be lost in a whole other bubble world.
Whew, what a rabbit hole… Here’s the link, for those who are interested…
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2014/02/bill-gothard-sexual-predator.html
LikeLike
jkpvarin,
While I admit I have neither the facts nor the expertise to say for sure, my guess is that whatever the presenting issues were in your case, they weren’t the real issues. Rather, I suspect that what really happened is that you threatened the need of a bunch of narcissists to feel powerful and important. That is, you threatened their delusions of omnipotence and grandeur.
I could be wrong. It might be, for example, that one or more of the people who chose to be your adversaries were sociopaths, not narcissists.
LikeLike
Serving: The lesson that JA learned is that you cannot teach common sense and compassion to KoolAid drinkers. JA needs to have this reminder said to her pretty much every day.
I know it with my head. I can say it with my words, but I still try and fight this because my heart wants to see change. I’m pathetic. Help me.
LikeLike
JA and Serving –
Is that the thread with over 600 comments?
LikeLike
” know it with my head. I can say it with my words, but I still try and fight this because my heart wants to see change. I’m pathetic. Help me.”
I have not even read the thread but know what you are talking about. It is sad, scary and quite depressing once you see the underbelly of what passes for Christianity.
I made a vow a few years ago. My comments, wherever they may be, are geared toward those who have been abused spiritually and emotionally, are making their way out or questioning. I don’t give a pass to kool aid drinkers anymore nor do I care how mean they think I am for questioning their doctrine or their guru. They can hold you hostage with it. They use people to prop up their doctrine or their guru. They don’t even know how deep they are in it.
The irony is if you do this long enough you will come across former kool aid drinkers who are now questioning, etc. The internet is changing things. The charlatans cannot hide it all as well as they used to although they are adapting to mass communication.
LikeLike
All depends on whether you’re coming into it as a Male Supremacist or not.
Amazing how proof texts can be used selectively to justify your existing attitudes with Divine Right.
LikeLike
@Julie Anne:
As a throwaway line in a Seventies SF novel put it:
“Don’t bother trying to reason with them. They’re Born Again.”
LikeLike
@GaryW:
Like the two don’t overlap all the time?
LikeLike
HUG,
The way they inflict harm on others most definitely overlaps. If I am beginning to correctly understand, however, the thing that is different is what drives them. The narcissist needs to be first but does not have the ability to empathize with others. They do not understand the effect their self-promoting actions have on others. The sociopath understands these things but doesn’t care. They have no conscience.
LikeLike
Right now I am sitting by the phone, dreading the next time it rings. My 95 year old grandmother’s time is coming to an end. She is the strongest woman I know and she never would have let someone tell her she couldn’t do something based on a twisted interpretation of scripture. Case in point – when my dad was 4 years old (late fall birthday) she put him in a private kindergarten at the church school even though this really was not done at the time. My grandpa and their pastor tried to tell her that it wasn’t needed but Grandma would not “obey their counsel” and told them that if they could spend 24 hours a day with a brilliant little boy and keep him from burning down the house then they were welcome to do so but until then he was going to kindergarten. She always told us to do what is best for our families and let God do the rest.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gary W — you are almost right on the money about the cluster B personaity disordered.
For the purpose of staying on track, focusing on spiritual abuse and the patriarchal system that oppresses, dominate, and defend, guard, and protect their need for power control, I will focus upon the Narcissist and Antisocial.
First, all the cluster B personality disorders are NPD at their core.
Second, the only empathy they possess are for themselves. When caught they play the victim. When discrediting their victim (s), they project their badness upon them, then literally mirroring, or emulating what the victim would say. A real mind game and the worse of all abuses: gas lighting.
Second, Antisocial have 2 basic modes: Sociopath and Psychopaths
Sociopaths are those who are much easier to identify simply due to their inability to contain the impulsiveness of their acting out behavior that enables them to get what they want. These are referred to as the unstable or unsophisticated Antisocial. These are those who are mostly likely to be found be convicted and either in custody or under community supervision. Not all who are incarcerated fall within this category. So please don’t think just because someone is in jail or prison, on parole or probation is of this population.
Psychopaths are by far the more dangerous, however, do not minimize the Narcissist of Sociopath, for they two can be just as murderous to another physically or otherwise. Psychopath are the more dangerous, by and large. They are the one that lead double and triple lifestyles. They are able to have jobs with great responsibility. They seek these positions and they obtain them by hunting, seducing, and exploiting whomever to achieve these ends. They must always have a target, a victim. They are the most difficult to identify, unless you have already been a victim of one yourself. They fool even the clinicians, the courts, and others who are suppose to protect the public against such wickedness.
Other than this, you are spot on, Gary.
LikeLike
lydia@4:39: You wrote, “Ken, There are no “offices”. That is part of the problem with this issue of women fully functioning in the Body. The term “office” was added by the translators to fit the institutional model. These are serving functions not “offices”.”
I’m not sure of your point, and did not refer to any bible translations in my comments, either, but I do hope you’ve found a place where you are able to fully put your gifts and skills to work in ministry!
LikeLike
One additional comment:
Psychopaths are the stable and sophisticated Anti Social type. Meaning they can lay back as they accumulate what they need to feed into and maintain the false image (or public image) while acting out their need to hurt, control, and dominate others. This type is often referenced as being Dr. Jekyll /Mr. Hyde. Those who follow after them have great difficulty in accepting the truth of who they really are when a victim comes forth to get help. This is usually due to the stark contrast between the Psychopath/Narcissist ability calmly turn the table and make an already severely traumatized victim appear to be delusional and out of their mind. The Psychopath enjoys this immensely, as they sit back and watch everyone dance to what they believe they have orchestrated and now is able to walk away leaving a long line of fatalities behind him. Those that he has convinced are called proxies. Unknowingly, they re-victimized the victim, thinking they are standing up for a person who deserves to be protected from such vile and wild accusations. Things only get sticky for them when too many come forward to bear witness against them.
LikeLike
Oh, they have the ability to empathize and they know the difference between right and wrong. Due the lack of developed empathy, they simply do not care. They can be extremely apologetic and stay under the radar, however for the Narcissist and Sociopaths, it higly unlikely they will sustain those changes for more than a couple of weeks. The Psychopath will add to this another approach. That is, a full on campaign to bury the victim, while escalating those behaviors that would cancel out any suspicion of those acts committed. For instance, if they are a misogynist (which most likely they are), they will be quite vocal about being considerate and respectful towards women.
LikeLike
They are expert in twisting words and rewriting history to reinforce the wall of defense around the little kingdom they have managed to build. Beware, because whatever anyone is saying, they will use the same words, the same phrases, while mirroring the emotions of the listener, to make them think they are on the same level or of the same mindset. In truth, they have this whole other game plan going on and that is to break the spirit in order to rob the soul of others for their own narcissistic agendas. That is: power, control, attention, and adoration. If you don’t go along, they will make your life a living hell.
LikeLike
Bridget, it’s the link in Serving’s comment. Last I checked it was around 350 comments.
LikeLike
uriahisaliveandwell,
First thought: You confirm my resolve to never again become involved in a church or other organization with strong, top down leadership.
Second thought: You confirm my belief that discussions of theology, as much as I enjoy them, are really pointless when it comes to questions of spiritual abuse, except maybe to show victims that they have been lied to. The perps either can’t see truth or else they could care less.
Third thought: Once I make it home this evening, if I make it home, I may never leave the house again. Ever.
LikeLike
Gary W,
We have to know who the enemy is and how it pans out in the real world while understanding what healthy and safe relationships. We have reworked the way we trust people, that is to be able to develop healthy boundaries and not project our own goodness and vulnerabillities upon others. We also have to understand tha trust is not freely given, it is earned. Two Books: Changes that Heals, Safe Relationship (Henry Cloud and or John Townsend.). Above all, heed the warnings we are given by and do not blindly follow anyone just because they say they are a Chritian.
LikeLike
Sorry—-“heed the warnings and admonitions give by those who wrote the N.T. and trust yourself in knowing that you too have the Holy Spirit and are totally capable of understanding scripture without getting bogged down with theological arguments that only served to distract from addressing what is really going on in the church.
LikeLike
Gary W, are you the Gary whose humor I have so much enjoyed in past posts?
LikeLike
uriahisaliveandwell,
Anything posted here by Gary W would be me. There is somebody who occasionally posts as Gary, without a middle initial, but I don’t recall having heard from him for awhile. Either way, I will accept whatever narcissistic supplies I can get, including expressions of appreciation. Thanks.
Humor aside, I must say that, however relevant the topic, looking at all these psycho/social pathologies is a bit sobering. If my beginnings of understanding are correct, and if, for example, I were to have serious narcissistic issues myself, I wouldn’t be able to see them.
“Changes that Heal” is now on my impossibly long Amazon shopping list of books. I don’t find a book called “Safe Relationships.” Is it possible you are referring to Cloud’s “Safe People: How to Find Relationships That Are Good for You and Avoid Those That Aren’t?” Thanks for the suggestions. The book I’m reading right now is “Why is it Always About You?” by Hotchkiss and Masterson.
LikeLike
What does the Bible say about women, JA? The same thing is says about men, but you already knew that. 😉
We should all follow the example of Christ. All that gender leadership nonsense is a distraction from the path Scripture tells us to take.
LikeLike
“I’m not sure of your point, and did not refer to any bible translations in my comments, either, but I do hope you’ve found a place where you are able to fully put your gifts and skills to work in ministry!”
Ken, Sorry for not being clear. it was because you used the word “office” several times for what are functions in the Body. The word “office” is not in the Greek but added by translators. That is one of the roots of the problem.
LikeLike
I have done a lot of reading on narcissist and sociopaths over the years and CindyK has been a huge resource to me on that issue. It is a dark world they live in. They are rarely changed. I know women who have prayed 20 years because that is what they were told to do with either no change or it got worse. Get out.
Another great book for those who think they might be married to a narcissist or sociopath:
http://www.amazon.com/Promise-Despise-Abuse-Marriage-Narcissistic/dp/0615406564
LikeLike
uriahisaliveandwell – – Gary W. is not the same Gary that you and I know who posts at CCA. I hope he comes around some more. I’ve missed his witty humor. (Not to say Gary W. cannot be witty, because he sure can!)
LikeLike
Mandy,
I’m so sorry to hear you’re going through this now, especially when you’re trying to plan one of the happiest events in your life. I’m sure that an amazing woman like your grandmother has been a source of inspiration and encouragement through all your struggles and hardships. The prospect of losing her must be incredibly painful for you.
I pray that God will give you and your loved ones comfort in the midst of your sadness. And I pray for Him to be at your grandmother’s side, and give her courage for her journey home.
LikeLike
@Julie Anne
Oh, it’s ballooned since then. And the explosion of comments is due in large part to ttpog. I’m sure Libby Anne would be grateful for the traffic, if only there were more of an actual conversation going on.
@Lydia
Complicating matters is the fact that, in one comment, ttpog mentions being sexually molested when she(?) was in public school. I imagine she’s found some level of comfort and hope for vindication in God, but for some reason comes across as demeaning and insulting towards women who’ve suffered similar things. It’s infuriating.
It’s like ttpog has no idea how her words sound to everyone else. LIke she has no clue how much her comments would remind others of the teachings of Gothard, Philips and Wilson, with their scripture-twisting and victim-blaming.
LikeLike
Serving: So that is why she defends homeschooling at all costs. She’s done a 180. The reality is there is abuse in all schooling scenarios.
LikeLike
I discovered a new website called: Men and Women in the Church by Deidre Richardson. Deidre has many well thought out articles. One that resonated with me is: Women Preachers: “The Tenth Mark of a Healthy Church.”
Deidre strongly suggests that Mark Dever’s book: ‘9 Marks of a Healthy Church’ is missing one major component: “Women preachers are indeed the “tenth mark of a healthy church.” And even if there is expositional preaching, church discipline, strong church membership, strong evangelistic programs, strong discipleship, etc., we will still have an unhealthy church—until we recognize the spiritual giftedness of women and include them amongst the godly leadership in our churches.”
Fully agree with this thought! For a long while, one of the key measures of a healthy church for me is how a church answers this question: How does your church treat women?? If there is no room for women in mutual ministry in the Body of Christ then it is going to be a discouraging time for people at this church. How churches treat women is critical. If they get this right, then they may get other things right. If not, then there likely are other problems waiting in the wings. Better to leave early and avoid disappointment!
Link: http://womeninthechurch-junia.blogspot.ca/2011/02/women-preachers-tenth-mark-of-healthy.html#comment-form
LikeLike
“It’s like ttpog has no idea how her words sound to everyone else. LIke she has no clue how much her comments would remind others of the teachings of Gothard, Philips and Wilson, with their scripture-twisting and victim-blaming.”
This is part of a phenomena one sees a lot. We all do it to certain degrees. One has a horrible thing done to them and one of the ways they cope is going to the “other side” because it seems safer or more “correct”. I cannot tell you how much I see this with those who come out of fundamentalistic type groups. Some become athiests. Some become leftists thinking government is the answer, not the church. Actually both have a tendancy to be tyrants and take away “choice” and individual responsibility. :o)
A very horrible thing happened in public school so homeschool is the answer for all. When in fact, homeschool is most likely a good choice for her.
I am ok with choices until someone starts telling me how right it is for everyone else and if you don’t think my way you are not a real Christian or you want kids to starve or homosexuals to burn at the stake. Then my hackles go up. Because it is not about “sides”. It is about truth, choices and our responsibility.
LikeLike
There are some excellent articles about Women in ministry at Fuller Seminary’s site:
http://www.fuller.edu/womeninministry/
LikeLike
Isn’t submission an essence of Christianity?
Jesus said the Father was greater (in authority) than He was, and I do only what the father tells me.
In Philippians it says that Jesus did not consider equality with God as something to be grasped, but humbled himself to the point of death even to death on a cross.
So Jesus being EQUAL with God took the role of a servant.
Shouldn’t all Christians have the same attitude as Christ?
And Sarah was commended as a woman of faith calling Abraham her master as example for woman who profess faith.
Jesus is in submission to the Father, husbands are to be in submission to Christ and women are to be in submission to husbands.
This is a voluntary system (Jesus was not forced) and when people truly love each other things work well.
So wouldn’t it make sense that woman being EQUAL (in salvation, fruit, etc.) with men have a different role in the household of God just as the their is a divine order in the Godhead?
We are all EQUAL in the household of God but we have different roles, different gifts, different ways of using the gifts, but we all have the same access through Christ to salvation, prayer, fruit of the spirit, and growing in grace.
According to the bible men have the role of leadership in the church, but what leader or husband would not want the advise of wise women and what wise loving husband would not want to make decisions with their wife especially if she is wise in word and deed, but I pity the man or church who knows their role and has women attempting to usurp authority or are pugnacious.
Their is a divine order in the Godhead, the family and the church.
That being said –
The bible says the greatest will be the servant of all, if these men lording over others are true believers they will be the least when the Lord returns.
These church elders who are lording over others rather than being an example should be corrected and if they ignore correction should be marked and avoided because the bible tells us to submit to one another.
And any person who thinks they are being treated unfairly should be able to speak up and be heard.
LikeLike
Q wrote; “According to the bible men have the role of leadership in the church”
And that’s where we disagree about what the Bible says, Q.
LikeLike
Right – and servanthood is a posture of humility. There are many patriarchal men who don’t work like that. They want an authoritarian position to rule over and essentially subdue a woman. They want to owner her emotionally, physically, and spiritually.
I will forever be grateful to Wade Burleson who turned the light on for me that it was by Sarah’s faith that she conceived, not by Abraham’s faith.
LikeLike
Q
“Their is a divine order in the Godhead,”
With all due respect….
HaHaHaHaHaHa – HehHehHehHehHeh
LikeLike
Hi Julie Anne,
I agree, Sarah also believed God, what a wonder family we are in.
LikeLike
I realize this is an emotional topic…because of abuses and other issues but believe the bible is clear.
Tim, by leadership, I believe the leaders of the church are suppose to be elders which are men and there should be a plurality and not a one man show.
LikeLike
Understood, Q. I think the Bible does not prohibit women elders, pastors, etc., so they should be in leadership positions just as men.
For what it’s worth, I once held a comp position. Over the decades I’ve been a Christian I’ve come to see that the Bible does not support complementarianism.
LikeLike
Tim, the problem with labels like Complementarianism is that there is too many variations and the people using them usually think if you do not fit one you are the other, kind of black and white thinking.
I think studying to understand the bible is better, it is telling us all the same thing, it may have more than one application but it is not subjective.
LikeLike
Divine order in the Godhead? Does that correspond to hierarchy in the Godhead? And it makes everything all orderly and nicely organized as was explained to me by someone. Where does scripture claim this?
LikeLike
Jesus told His Disciples to go and baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is the divine order if you can accept it.
Think about it..Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
LikeLike
“I think studying to understand the bible is better, it is telling us all the same thing, it may have more than one application but it is not subjective.”
Makes one wonder why there are so many denominations. So which one has the exact interpretation that God wants us all to have? Which translation is the most exacting?
Q, That passage says “Anyone” who desires….The Greek ’tis” means anyone. Then there are some conditions. Only one wife. Why? If they must have a wife then that would mean Jesus or Paul could not be elders. So is that what it is communicating? They must be married and have children, too? See the problem when you start trying to woodenly interpret? Women in the 1st Century were not allowed 2 husbands. :o) That has been a very badly interpreted and misunderstood passage. That passage could just have easily been inspired to say a man/male who desires….but it does not. Also “wives” could be translated “women” but was not. Translators make word choices and it behooves us to do our homework on something that is so limiting to one group.
The other problem is that we know Junia (a female) was an “apostle” (small a) which means “sent one”. Sent for what? To plant churches? Teach? Preach?
Granted, there were few women doing such things then but there was NO prohibition to women teaching, leading and preaching/prophesying to men in the OT. We know Deborah was a judge, led a battle and was a prophetess. Why would God want NEW limitations for women in the New Covenant? The big A Apostles were mapped to the 12 Tribes for a reason. Why would Christ appear to the women first and tell them to go and tell the “good news” when there were Apostles not too far away?. Their position in that culture meant their “witness” carried little weight.
The biggest problem is we make these things too official when they aren’t. It was quite informal. Even “elder” was quite informal. I once read about an archeological dig in Ephesus where they found a typical home that had been remodeled to hold about 60 people. The archeologists think it was a house church because of how it was done to accommodate a meeting type place during that time. We tend to forget we read the NT through Western Eyes and we see a term like pastor/elder in an institutional way. When it was more of a function and there might be several people, say, “pastoring”. And we forget that we want folks to mature and move beyond us so “pastoring” was very temporal. Elders were simply the more mature or senior. The first church in Europe was started in a woman’s home. Lydia. Wonder what they did when Paul moved on? Find a man to be the elder?
Christianity was quite scandalous at the time because of how it included women. Try reading the first paragraph of Luke 8. Joanna leaving her husband to gallivant around the region with Jesus? Some would think that scandalous today just as the Pharisees did back then! Never mind the single women in that group. :o)
If we are going to study the bible we need to read it as the audience it was written to would have understood it and pray for wisdom which might lead us to do some digging on stuff we question. A great place to start is to read the Roman/Greek Household codes. The pater familias.of that time where only wealthy women had any freedom. It is quite illuminating in understanding the backdrop of some of these passages and how liberating Christianity was for the average women. But one thing I cannot understand is how we can believe women now are limited in certain gifts when they were NOT prohibited the same type of gifts in the OT. That makes no sense to me at all. We are FULL heirs. Not partial heirs.
LikeLike
“Jesus is in submission to the Father”
Jesus WAS in submission to the Father while He was in His earthly body. He was and still IS God, and equal. The whole Godhead is equal. You will have to give an account for trying to make Jesus “less than”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Lydia, that is how I see it as well.
LikeLike
“Jesus told His Disciples to go and baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is the divine order if you can accept it.
Think about it..Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”
Q, You are describing ESS. Eternal Subordination of the Son. It is making the rounds big time in certain circles. It is not divine “order” but divine relationship.
The Godhead is RELATIONAL. LOVE. It is not a pecking order. If it is, who does the Holy Spirit report to? There is an obscure verse that helps us understand what being the “Son” meant in that time and to the Jews of that day. If one had a transaction with the fathers son, it was like doing business with the father.
Check out John 5
.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
Calling Himself the “Son” WAS equating himself as equal with the Father. That was how they thought back then.
ESS, if thought through causes HUGE problems. First of all, you cannot map a pecking order in the Godhead to our human relationships. Big huge mistake. Would that make the pastor God? The husband Jesus? The wife the Holy Spirit?
I accept the Divine LOVE of the Godhead which is monolithic even as a Trinity. They do not have separate wills in a pecking order and we cannot take the few years of the Incarnation and apply it to eternity past and future. For example, Which person of the Trinity was “Lord of Hosts” in the OT?
What you are describing as a Trinity pecking order brings us very close to Jehovah Witness with three gods. (Believe me, this made the rounds at SBTS and caused major havoc. Bruce Ware even wrote a book promoting it)
The Lord our God is ONE. That was the Hebrew Creed. How He manifests Himself is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Or, Jesus was not really God in the Flesh or perhaps a lesser god? Seriously, ESS is a dangerous road.
LikeLike
Thanks Marsha. You know, hearing for years our gifts were limited, I decided to do some real serious digging into all of it. I do not think God is pleased when we do not develop gifts He has given us as full heirs. It is for His Glory. Not ours. It is about serving. Not leading, really. There is no glamour, fame or wealth in “real” service.
LikeLike