“I am truly sorry my dear
That you can’t preach in here,
That there are other things you’re called to do,
Other things that God has for you.”
“Why? When this you desire?
When you feel called and full of fire?
Why when others have done and would do
And say it’s imperative for you?”
“Because my dear, the Word proclaims,
That other things should be your aim;
That you will be saved in childbearing
And in your home preparing,
The children for the world to come,
And caring for your husband some,
And instructing younger women too…
All of this He has for you.
A helpmeet for your given man
In the church a nurturing hand,
Ready to help and modest it’s true…
All of this God has for you.
Far too busy it would seem
To sinfully follow or pursue this dream;
Be content in what He’s done
Be a godly woman within your home.”
“O! I understand what the world says
And for your use in all things it begs!
But when can they ignore
What has been given from the Lord?
So worry not, I beg this day,
You’re vital to His church in every way,
Beautiful you are as He created you dear,
Yet your given path is abundantly clear.”
And true to form she walked away
Oblivious to the things I say;
This worldly woman bound in pride
Finds that her beauty has finally died.
Showing posts with label Ordination of Women. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ordination of Women. Show all posts
Monday, August 2, 2010
A Response to Women Being Ordained
The previous post was a paper I prepared for a discussion in a bible study that I attend. One of the men in the bible study asked the question to a man named Andrew Wommack of Andrew Wommack Ministries. The response was typically liberal and sought to distort what the bible says in order to achieve a preconceived end. But judge for yourselves.
"1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
Note 6 at 1 Tim. 2:11: There is a great controversy in the church today over these verses. The contention has increased with the change of women's roles in society. There isn't a simple answer, but a subtle point in this passage should defuse much of the contention.
Paul is not teaching that women in general, are to submit to men in general (Col. 3:18). Paul is speaking about a wife not taking by force, the leadership role over her husband.
That is the point of Paul specifying that women should not usurp authority over "THE man." This singles out an individual man, not mankind. It refers to a wife not being her husband's boss. Paul is saying that a wife is to let the husband take the leadership role in the church (Eph. 5:22-24). She is to let her husband speak.
The word "usurp" in this verse further strengthens this interpretation. Usurp means, "To seize and hold, . . . by force and without legal right or authority." Paul is talking against a woman lording it over her husband. We've all seen boisterous women with timid husbands. That's what Paul is speaking against.
This is similar to what Paul goes on to say about the men in the next chapter. He told Timothy not to make a man a bishop who couldn't rule his own house. Likewise, he is saying that a woman should not speak in the church if she's trying to usurp her husband's authority. If a man's home isn't in order, he shouldn't minister, and if a woman's husband isn't in agreement with her saying something, she should be quiet.
The reason for Paul's instruction about the wife keeping quiet is to keep her from usurping authority over her husband. This does not forbid women to speak in the church if their husbands are in agreement.
Paul spoke of women praying and prophesying in the church services (1 Cor. 11:5). Priscilla instructed Apollos (Acts 18:26) and Paul instructed the older women to teach the younger women (Tit. 2:3-4). It appears that Paul does not forbid women to teach under appropriate circumstances.
________________________________________________________
Our letter continues....................
The Greek word for "woman" in the verse above is 'gune'. Here is the definition of this word:
1135. gun guns, goo-nay' a woman; specially, a wife:--wife, woman.
So then, Paul was referring to a wife, not women in general. Paul is dealing with a husband and wife relationship issue here and NOT an issue with women in ministry or being quiet in general!
Paul is talking about each wife being in subjection to her own husband. However, this is NOT a subjection of being lorded over but is one of the husband loving (giving himself for) his wife even as Christ gave Himself for the church (Eph. 5:25). In other words, the husband gives first and then his wife's subjection is the spiritual/natural response, even in the same way the church (the body of Christ) responds to her Lord Jesus.
Otherwise Paul would be saying that all women (in general) are subject to all men (in general). That is clearly not the case!
Similarly, look at Paul's writings in 1 Corinthians 14:34-45:
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Again, the Greek word for woman is 'Gune' or wife as it was above in 1 Tim. 2:11 above. This makes perfect sense because Paul says specifically in verse 35 that they should ask their own husbands. So, here the word "women" is plural referring to all wives and the word "husbands" is plural referring to all husbands.
Most of this has to do with the authority that is resident in man as God's natural order and that most people will still receive from a man when they might not receive from a women, due to some of the ways these doctrines have been applied. It is a shame that what Paul may have meant to only be used at the time to correct a localized situation has become engrained into being something which affects women in ministry in the here and the now.
Andrew also believes that if there is no man who is willing or able to do the job, then a woman certainly should fill that position and do the work of the ministry. It's better to have a woman in a position and the work of the Lord be done rather than have an empty position.
It is the fruit that identifies the ‘root.’ There are many men who claim to be pastors but have no fruit. They are not in their gifting. And there are women who claim to be pastors and are not. But, there are both men and women who have the fruit of a true pastoral calling in their life. If people are being fed and spiritually cared for and edified by a man or a woman, then that person is a pastor. There is the fruit to prove it.
It is not our position at the Andrew Wommack Ministry that women should not minister. To the contrary, we applaud it!
The bottom line is, Paul instructed us that we each are members in particular of the body of Christ. He also told us that in Christ there is neither male nor female."
This was my response to that letter:
"Gentlemen, there are a number or errors in here that are worthy of noting.
1) 1 Tim. 2 does not stand alone and can be found just as clearly in 1 Cor. 14:34-35, which clarifies that he is speaking to all women in context and that it is shameful for them to speak in the church. The issue hasn't changed as it relates to the bible and he is at least right when he says that the issue is prevalent now because of the change in culture. This has always been the established truth of the church and only in the last century has that come into any serious question. But since when is God subject to the changing whims of man? He is immutable or He is not. We are told in Mal. 3:6, "For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." He doesn't change, it is man that changes and God does not come along for the ride. We either submit to His Word or we do not.
2) The context that Mr. Wommack is trying to give to the verses in 1 Tim. 2 is not even logical. Paul begins by speaking of the men praying (1-8); then he addresses women in general about being modest (9-10); then he instructs them to learn in silence (11-13); then he qualifies their lack of character for speaking in the churches (14); and lastly, he tells them how they will be saved (be made whole) and serve (15). Nowhere in there does this relate to the institue of marriage specifically. Then after making those qualifications he goes into detail about the qualifications for elders and deacons which are exclusively addressed to men.
3) It is misleading to represent the word "women" in vs. 9 as referring to wives only and once again uses the word out of context. Context is of vital importance in the exegetical study of the Word of God. When we forgo context we can use any one of a number of possible interpretations into English in order to fit our argument without being honest to the passage we are referring to. The definition can certainly be used in the context of a wife (for instance in Matt. 1:24). The other definition which makes more sense in relating to the passage in question here is: a woman of any age, whether a virgin, or married, or a widow. Contextually that is why we read "women" here and not "wife". He uses it out of context again in 1 Cor 14. The chapter is discussing issues and behavior in the church. In vs. 26-40 it is specifically addressing behavior in organized church services. In both passages it is intellectually dishonest to claim they are being used in the context of marital propriety versus church structure. They are not; although, there are other passages that do and should be used in support of this issue. The theme is continued about the general behavior and demeanor of a godly woman in 1 Pet. 3:3-6, "3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. 5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement." These are not disorganized themes that run contrary to each other. They are systematized themes that are in perfect harmony with each other.
I read a great quote recently which I think applies very well to instances such as these and the interpretation of this passage in particular. The quote says, "It is absolutely necessary that the person who cultivates any branch of knowledge first of all and most of all study to be modest and humble. This applies especially to the theologian. He should not think of himself more highly than he ought to think. All knowledge is dependent upon its object; it has no right to falsify or deny the phenomena which come under its observation, not even in order to satisfy a certain preconceived theory. Thus, theology is absolutely dependent upon the facts and evidences which God reveals in nature and Scripture. It must allow these to stand intact and unimpaired. If it cannot explain them, it must confess its ignorance. God's will, which expresses itself in facts, settles every argument as far as Christian theology is concerned. For, Christian theology rests in God's sovereignty." - Herman Bavinck. That must be our standard and it cannot be deviated from for any reason; even if it is to satisfy our own personal feelings on a matter.
4) The matter of subjection or submission is indeed in the context of obedience contrary to what was written by Mr. Wommack.
In the original Greek it is one word and that word is ‘hupotasso’ which means:
1) to arrange under, to subordinate
2) to subject, put in subjection
3) to subject one’s self, obey
4) to submit to one’s control
5) to yield to one’s admonition or advice
6) to obey, be subject
As a Greek military term meaning "to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader". In non-military use, it was "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden". So, we see, it is voluntary to be sure and her doing so is more of an act of obedience to the Lord than to her husband, although the command is certainly that she is submitting to her husband. And yes, analogy of Christ over His church is also applicable. Yes, we are to love our wives as Christ loved the church and all that would entail. But it also has in mind the fact that the church submits to the authority of Christ as its head... its king.
Mr. Wommack says, "The reason for Paul's instruction about the wife keeping quiet is to keep her from usurping authority over her husband. This does not forbid women to speak in the church if their husbands are in agreement." Nowhere in scripture can he make this assertion and find support and it is quite frankly the antithesis of what the bible actually says."
"1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
Note 6 at 1 Tim. 2:11: There is a great controversy in the church today over these verses. The contention has increased with the change of women's roles in society. There isn't a simple answer, but a subtle point in this passage should defuse much of the contention.
Paul is not teaching that women in general, are to submit to men in general (Col. 3:18). Paul is speaking about a wife not taking by force, the leadership role over her husband.
That is the point of Paul specifying that women should not usurp authority over "THE man." This singles out an individual man, not mankind. It refers to a wife not being her husband's boss. Paul is saying that a wife is to let the husband take the leadership role in the church (Eph. 5:22-24). She is to let her husband speak.
The word "usurp" in this verse further strengthens this interpretation. Usurp means, "To seize and hold, . . . by force and without legal right or authority." Paul is talking against a woman lording it over her husband. We've all seen boisterous women with timid husbands. That's what Paul is speaking against.
This is similar to what Paul goes on to say about the men in the next chapter. He told Timothy not to make a man a bishop who couldn't rule his own house. Likewise, he is saying that a woman should not speak in the church if she's trying to usurp her husband's authority. If a man's home isn't in order, he shouldn't minister, and if a woman's husband isn't in agreement with her saying something, she should be quiet.
The reason for Paul's instruction about the wife keeping quiet is to keep her from usurping authority over her husband. This does not forbid women to speak in the church if their husbands are in agreement.
Paul spoke of women praying and prophesying in the church services (1 Cor. 11:5). Priscilla instructed Apollos (Acts 18:26) and Paul instructed the older women to teach the younger women (Tit. 2:3-4). It appears that Paul does not forbid women to teach under appropriate circumstances.
________________________________________________________
Our letter continues....................
The Greek word for "woman" in the verse above is 'gune'. Here is the definition of this word:
1135. gun guns, goo-nay' a woman; specially, a wife:--wife, woman.
So then, Paul was referring to a wife, not women in general. Paul is dealing with a husband and wife relationship issue here and NOT an issue with women in ministry or being quiet in general!
Paul is talking about each wife being in subjection to her own husband. However, this is NOT a subjection of being lorded over but is one of the husband loving (giving himself for) his wife even as Christ gave Himself for the church (Eph. 5:25). In other words, the husband gives first and then his wife's subjection is the spiritual/natural response, even in the same way the church (the body of Christ) responds to her Lord Jesus.
Otherwise Paul would be saying that all women (in general) are subject to all men (in general). That is clearly not the case!
Similarly, look at Paul's writings in 1 Corinthians 14:34-45:
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Again, the Greek word for woman is 'Gune' or wife as it was above in 1 Tim. 2:11 above. This makes perfect sense because Paul says specifically in verse 35 that they should ask their own husbands. So, here the word "women" is plural referring to all wives and the word "husbands" is plural referring to all husbands.
Most of this has to do with the authority that is resident in man as God's natural order and that most people will still receive from a man when they might not receive from a women, due to some of the ways these doctrines have been applied. It is a shame that what Paul may have meant to only be used at the time to correct a localized situation has become engrained into being something which affects women in ministry in the here and the now.
Andrew also believes that if there is no man who is willing or able to do the job, then a woman certainly should fill that position and do the work of the ministry. It's better to have a woman in a position and the work of the Lord be done rather than have an empty position.
It is the fruit that identifies the ‘root.’ There are many men who claim to be pastors but have no fruit. They are not in their gifting. And there are women who claim to be pastors and are not. But, there are both men and women who have the fruit of a true pastoral calling in their life. If people are being fed and spiritually cared for and edified by a man or a woman, then that person is a pastor. There is the fruit to prove it.
It is not our position at the Andrew Wommack Ministry that women should not minister. To the contrary, we applaud it!
The bottom line is, Paul instructed us that we each are members in particular of the body of Christ. He also told us that in Christ there is neither male nor female."
This was my response to that letter:
"Gentlemen, there are a number or errors in here that are worthy of noting.
1) 1 Tim. 2 does not stand alone and can be found just as clearly in 1 Cor. 14:34-35, which clarifies that he is speaking to all women in context and that it is shameful for them to speak in the church. The issue hasn't changed as it relates to the bible and he is at least right when he says that the issue is prevalent now because of the change in culture. This has always been the established truth of the church and only in the last century has that come into any serious question. But since when is God subject to the changing whims of man? He is immutable or He is not. We are told in Mal. 3:6, "For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." He doesn't change, it is man that changes and God does not come along for the ride. We either submit to His Word or we do not.
2) The context that Mr. Wommack is trying to give to the verses in 1 Tim. 2 is not even logical. Paul begins by speaking of the men praying (1-8); then he addresses women in general about being modest (9-10); then he instructs them to learn in silence (11-13); then he qualifies their lack of character for speaking in the churches (14); and lastly, he tells them how they will be saved (be made whole) and serve (15). Nowhere in there does this relate to the institue of marriage specifically. Then after making those qualifications he goes into detail about the qualifications for elders and deacons which are exclusively addressed to men.
3) It is misleading to represent the word "women" in vs. 9 as referring to wives only and once again uses the word out of context. Context is of vital importance in the exegetical study of the Word of God. When we forgo context we can use any one of a number of possible interpretations into English in order to fit our argument without being honest to the passage we are referring to. The definition can certainly be used in the context of a wife (for instance in Matt. 1:24). The other definition which makes more sense in relating to the passage in question here is: a woman of any age, whether a virgin, or married, or a widow. Contextually that is why we read "women" here and not "wife". He uses it out of context again in 1 Cor 14. The chapter is discussing issues and behavior in the church. In vs. 26-40 it is specifically addressing behavior in organized church services. In both passages it is intellectually dishonest to claim they are being used in the context of marital propriety versus church structure. They are not; although, there are other passages that do and should be used in support of this issue. The theme is continued about the general behavior and demeanor of a godly woman in 1 Pet. 3:3-6, "3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. 5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement." These are not disorganized themes that run contrary to each other. They are systematized themes that are in perfect harmony with each other.
I read a great quote recently which I think applies very well to instances such as these and the interpretation of this passage in particular. The quote says, "It is absolutely necessary that the person who cultivates any branch of knowledge first of all and most of all study to be modest and humble. This applies especially to the theologian. He should not think of himself more highly than he ought to think. All knowledge is dependent upon its object; it has no right to falsify or deny the phenomena which come under its observation, not even in order to satisfy a certain preconceived theory. Thus, theology is absolutely dependent upon the facts and evidences which God reveals in nature and Scripture. It must allow these to stand intact and unimpaired. If it cannot explain them, it must confess its ignorance. God's will, which expresses itself in facts, settles every argument as far as Christian theology is concerned. For, Christian theology rests in God's sovereignty." - Herman Bavinck. That must be our standard and it cannot be deviated from for any reason; even if it is to satisfy our own personal feelings on a matter.
4) The matter of subjection or submission is indeed in the context of obedience contrary to what was written by Mr. Wommack.
In the original Greek it is one word and that word is ‘hupotasso’ which means:
1) to arrange under, to subordinate
2) to subject, put in subjection
3) to subject one’s self, obey
4) to submit to one’s control
5) to yield to one’s admonition or advice
6) to obey, be subject
As a Greek military term meaning "to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader". In non-military use, it was "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden". So, we see, it is voluntary to be sure and her doing so is more of an act of obedience to the Lord than to her husband, although the command is certainly that she is submitting to her husband. And yes, analogy of Christ over His church is also applicable. Yes, we are to love our wives as Christ loved the church and all that would entail. But it also has in mind the fact that the church submits to the authority of Christ as its head... its king.
Mr. Wommack says, "The reason for Paul's instruction about the wife keeping quiet is to keep her from usurping authority over her husband. This does not forbid women to speak in the church if their husbands are in agreement." Nowhere in scripture can he make this assertion and find support and it is quite frankly the antithesis of what the bible actually says."
Biblically, Are Women Allowed to Be Ordained in the Church?
Ordination:
First, we need to take a serious look at the places in the bible where it discusses being ordained to office in the church. 1 Tim. 3: 1-13; Tit. 1:5-9; Acts 6:1-7. In all of these cases there are many qualifications that are given that one must possess in order to be ordained into church office and any of them can be a disqualifier. But one thing is clear in all is that the qualifications are directed to men, not women, but men exclusively. Acts 6:3, “Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men…” 1 Tim. 3:1-13, “1 This is a faithful saying: if a man desires to be a bishop, he desires a good work…. 2 The husband of one wife… 4 who rules his own house well, having his children in submission… 5 for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God… 6 he fall… 7 he must have a good testimony… lest he fall into reproach… 11 their wives must be reverent… 12 the husbands of one wife…” Tit. 1:5-9, “6 if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife…9 holding fast the faithful word he has been taught, that he may be able…” So that there is no doubt about the fact that the issue of being ordained to church office is clearly set aside for men, for not even in one single instance does it refer to women or present itself in an ambiguous manner so that it might be up for debate.
Issues with Definitions:
There are undoubtedly those that have rewritten some passages to fit with their desire to ordain women. An example would be in 1 Tim. 3:8. Some have re-written it to say that, “Likewise the women must be…” rather than “Likewise the deacons must be…” The original word was ‘diakonos’ which means “a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use; a minister or a servant; to run errands.” So that it becomes unclear how they can translate that into women. Furthermore, if it did say women we would have quite a contradiction with 1 Tim. 3:12 in discussing their wives. That, of course, unless it is to be believed that here the bible further contradicts itself and where it has banned homosexuality prior will now ok it. But as far as accuracy in translation and comparative study, the KJV, NKJV, 1599 GB, Amplified, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV all agree that it is translated as deacons and not women. The only ones that seemed to take any exception at all with it were The Message (which changes it to servants but still keeps in the spirit of diakonos), The NLT which adds people in to the verse to make it more sexually ambiguous, and The Good News translation which calls them church helpers (once again not contrary to the word in question). That said, even where it doesn't stand opposed to the definition one has to ask why the last three versions mentioned would not just accurately translate the word as Deacons? Out of 25 versions of the bible I went to in study of this it seems highly unlikely that the actual translation would be women.
Prophetesses:
Then there are those that would cite the use of the prophetesses in the OT. While they were rare there were indeed women in that position. But why? In Isa. 3:12 the Lord speaks to the people on this matter and He says, “As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” The fact that women have been placed over them is an indictment, a judgment, of God upon them; not an endorsement that this is they way it should be. In Jud 4:8-9 Deborah rebukes Barak for not taking the lead and for his spineless character and lack of trust in what God had told him to do. She tells him he will have no glory, “for the LORD shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” She does what he was intended to do but it is once again an indictment against the character of the men that it is so.
A Woman’s Role in the Church:
Then we come to the specific dictates of scripture in dealing with women in the church. 1 Cor. 14:34-35; 1 Tim. 2:9-9-15; 1 Tim. 5:2; Tit. 2:3-4; 1 Pet. 3:4. The command in 1 Cor. 14, 1 Tim. 2, and 1 Pet 3 is that they are to be silent in the churches with the specific verses saying exactly that. “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” “But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.” So that once again this is not an ambiguous topic that the bible is unclear about. They are not to be ordained, they are not to preach, and they are not to pray on behalf of the church in organized services.
But what are they to do? Are they allowed to teach anyone at all? Of course they are and it spells that out too in 1 Tim. 2:15 (raising their children to the Lord); 1 Tim. 5:2 (teaching the younger women); Tit. 2:3-4 (teaching the younger women to behave properly and to act appropriately to their husbands and children). So that they have a function in the church as well but that function does not reach church office in any way.
A Woman’s Role in the Home:
Lastly, there is the ever present issue of a woman’s command to be submissive to her husband. Eph. 5:22-24; Col. 3:18; 1 Pet. 3:1, 5. The words used here are “submit” and “subjection”. In the original Greek it is one word and that word is ‘hupotasso’ which means:
1) to arrange under, to subordinate
2) to subject, put in subjection
3) to subject one’s self, obey
4) to submit to one’s control
5) to yield to one’s admonition or advice
6) to obey, be subject
++++
This is a Greek military term meaning "to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader". In non-military use, it was "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden".
It is apparent that this is a literal and voluntary submitting of the wife under the authority of her husband. In 1 Cor. 11:7-10 this idea is continued with man being the head of woman. But, since the bible is explicitly clear on this matter how can the husband be head of the wife in the home and the wife be head of the husband in the church? It creates a spiritual paradigm. For the two are not in unity with each other and thus problems will undoubtedly arise.
Conclusion:
All this said, it is clear that there is no biblical merit for ordaining women in the church and that to do so is actually a direct violation of the roles God has set up for men and women and their functions in the church. They are equally important to the vitality of the church and the home but they are different in application and purpose. We harm the growth and maturity of the home and the church when we buck God’s commands and try to use men and women for what they were not intended to be. As a result, doctrine goes to the wayside; the home is a mess; men become effeminate; women become ever more masculine in their personalities. Both become the antithesis of what they are to be biblically and the church suffers because we refuse to be obedient to the commands of God. This is not about women’s liberation and equality, it is not even about ability, it is about what God has prescribed in His word to be executed by man. Are we going to be obedient to that word or pay the price of disobedience at the hands of God? I leave you with Ecc. 12:13 which is my default verse anytime I am inclined to choose my own path against the obvious teaching of the word of God. It says, “Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.” Amen!
First, we need to take a serious look at the places in the bible where it discusses being ordained to office in the church. 1 Tim. 3: 1-13; Tit. 1:5-9; Acts 6:1-7. In all of these cases there are many qualifications that are given that one must possess in order to be ordained into church office and any of them can be a disqualifier. But one thing is clear in all is that the qualifications are directed to men, not women, but men exclusively. Acts 6:3, “Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men…” 1 Tim. 3:1-13, “1 This is a faithful saying: if a man desires to be a bishop, he desires a good work…. 2 The husband of one wife… 4 who rules his own house well, having his children in submission… 5 for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God… 6 he fall… 7 he must have a good testimony… lest he fall into reproach… 11 their wives must be reverent… 12 the husbands of one wife…” Tit. 1:5-9, “6 if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife…9 holding fast the faithful word he has been taught, that he may be able…” So that there is no doubt about the fact that the issue of being ordained to church office is clearly set aside for men, for not even in one single instance does it refer to women or present itself in an ambiguous manner so that it might be up for debate.
Issues with Definitions:
There are undoubtedly those that have rewritten some passages to fit with their desire to ordain women. An example would be in 1 Tim. 3:8. Some have re-written it to say that, “Likewise the women must be…” rather than “Likewise the deacons must be…” The original word was ‘diakonos’ which means “a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use; a minister or a servant; to run errands.” So that it becomes unclear how they can translate that into women. Furthermore, if it did say women we would have quite a contradiction with 1 Tim. 3:12 in discussing their wives. That, of course, unless it is to be believed that here the bible further contradicts itself and where it has banned homosexuality prior will now ok it. But as far as accuracy in translation and comparative study, the KJV, NKJV, 1599 GB, Amplified, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV all agree that it is translated as deacons and not women. The only ones that seemed to take any exception at all with it were The Message (which changes it to servants but still keeps in the spirit of diakonos), The NLT which adds people in to the verse to make it more sexually ambiguous, and The Good News translation which calls them church helpers (once again not contrary to the word in question). That said, even where it doesn't stand opposed to the definition one has to ask why the last three versions mentioned would not just accurately translate the word as Deacons? Out of 25 versions of the bible I went to in study of this it seems highly unlikely that the actual translation would be women.
Prophetesses:
Then there are those that would cite the use of the prophetesses in the OT. While they were rare there were indeed women in that position. But why? In Isa. 3:12 the Lord speaks to the people on this matter and He says, “As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” The fact that women have been placed over them is an indictment, a judgment, of God upon them; not an endorsement that this is they way it should be. In Jud 4:8-9 Deborah rebukes Barak for not taking the lead and for his spineless character and lack of trust in what God had told him to do. She tells him he will have no glory, “for the LORD shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” She does what he was intended to do but it is once again an indictment against the character of the men that it is so.
A Woman’s Role in the Church:
Then we come to the specific dictates of scripture in dealing with women in the church. 1 Cor. 14:34-35; 1 Tim. 2:9-9-15; 1 Tim. 5:2; Tit. 2:3-4; 1 Pet. 3:4. The command in 1 Cor. 14, 1 Tim. 2, and 1 Pet 3 is that they are to be silent in the churches with the specific verses saying exactly that. “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” “But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.” So that once again this is not an ambiguous topic that the bible is unclear about. They are not to be ordained, they are not to preach, and they are not to pray on behalf of the church in organized services.
But what are they to do? Are they allowed to teach anyone at all? Of course they are and it spells that out too in 1 Tim. 2:15 (raising their children to the Lord); 1 Tim. 5:2 (teaching the younger women); Tit. 2:3-4 (teaching the younger women to behave properly and to act appropriately to their husbands and children). So that they have a function in the church as well but that function does not reach church office in any way.
A Woman’s Role in the Home:
Lastly, there is the ever present issue of a woman’s command to be submissive to her husband. Eph. 5:22-24; Col. 3:18; 1 Pet. 3:1, 5. The words used here are “submit” and “subjection”. In the original Greek it is one word and that word is ‘hupotasso’ which means:
1) to arrange under, to subordinate
2) to subject, put in subjection
3) to subject one’s self, obey
4) to submit to one’s control
5) to yield to one’s admonition or advice
6) to obey, be subject
++++
This is a Greek military term meaning "to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader". In non-military use, it was "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden".
It is apparent that this is a literal and voluntary submitting of the wife under the authority of her husband. In 1 Cor. 11:7-10 this idea is continued with man being the head of woman. But, since the bible is explicitly clear on this matter how can the husband be head of the wife in the home and the wife be head of the husband in the church? It creates a spiritual paradigm. For the two are not in unity with each other and thus problems will undoubtedly arise.
Conclusion:
All this said, it is clear that there is no biblical merit for ordaining women in the church and that to do so is actually a direct violation of the roles God has set up for men and women and their functions in the church. They are equally important to the vitality of the church and the home but they are different in application and purpose. We harm the growth and maturity of the home and the church when we buck God’s commands and try to use men and women for what they were not intended to be. As a result, doctrine goes to the wayside; the home is a mess; men become effeminate; women become ever more masculine in their personalities. Both become the antithesis of what they are to be biblically and the church suffers because we refuse to be obedient to the commands of God. This is not about women’s liberation and equality, it is not even about ability, it is about what God has prescribed in His word to be executed by man. Are we going to be obedient to that word or pay the price of disobedience at the hands of God? I leave you with Ecc. 12:13 which is my default verse anytime I am inclined to choose my own path against the obvious teaching of the word of God. It says, “Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.” Amen!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)