Wed, Nov 17th - 1:55PM

Women: Honored By the Church / Women Ministers: Oppressed By the Church?

Women: Honored By the Church

Women Ministers: Oppressed By the Church?

We hear a lot these days about the oppression of Muslim women and how they are viewed by Muslim men as property and a lower form of humanity, or in some cases as sub-human or on the level of cattle.  Granted, this is, to even say the least, indeed very sad and certainly a wrong that needs to be made right at every opportunity. 

However, my concern is the views of many professed Christian men towards women?  Generally, most Christian ministries and men, hold the female gender in high esteem, although in some circles of Christianity, unfortunately there still wreaks a sexist mentality.  On a wider scale the hostility intensifies when the subject of female ministers, preachers/teachers, comes up.  It almost seems that some of those views smack of, at least, a mild derivative of the Muslim persuasion.

It has been the subject of gentle to hot debate in the Christian realm for years, ranging from one extreme to the other, and more particularly homing in on women preachers.  Now, I am basically just a common-sense guy, who believes that the God of the Bible is all-knowing, all-wise, omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, and also has, yes, get ready – common sense.  Aside from the grace of God, how else do you think the human race has survived all these centuries?  Answer:  Because God gave us common-sense.  So, my question is why do we not utilize more of it?

Therefore, I want to begin by taking a common-sense approach to the “woman question”.  Quite frankly, I don’t see why there is such fuss, confusion and commotion over the issue.  Since God is not the author of confusion, then obviously the devil is, and he uses this to get God’s people off track and biting at each other to prevent the Church from being one in the Lord (John 17:21).

Consider these verses:  “And he (Jesus) said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.. .And these signs shall follow them that believe...” (Mark 16:15,17).  Does this also apply to women?  If so, consider what Dr. Jefferson Thompson brings out in his wonderful book, Our Full Gospel Heritage.  He gives us a very common-sense approach to the subject when he states:  “T.L. and Daisy Osborn raised an interesting point.  No one would deny that women as well as men are called to fulfill the great commission that Jesus gave His disciples to win the lost and train the saints.  Who would deny that women are commanded to witness for Jesus as well as men?  If a woman can witness to one person, might she also witness to two at a time?  What if a third person walks up?  Is she allowed to continue her witness?  What if a fourth or fifth person should join the small crowd?  Would she be allowed to stand on a small box to be more clearly heard?  What should she do if more people were to express an interest in her witnessing?  Is she allowed to set up a small public address system?  Is it permitted for her to invite the lost to be saved and to pray for the sick when she is finished witnessing?  At what point must this woman cease in her witnessing and call for a man to take over?  At what point does her witnessing cross over into the forbidden area of preaching?  Also, it is gross hypocrisy to say that women are qualified to be sent to the mission field to minister to the heathen, but that women are forbidden to minister to the heathen here at home!”  Now I don’t know about you, but I think that’s a pretty good common-sense view.

I think that one of the most common-sense approaches to examining the Scriptures is a little word I like to call, “context”.   One of the most essential rules of traditional Bible study is that Scripture must be understood in view of its context.  Context not only focuses on the surrounding passages, but also the cultural and historical backgrounds, who it is that is being addressed and the reasons for being addressed.  Also, where it is possible, you must allow Scriptures that deal with a specific subject to be understood in view of, and with, other verses and passages dealing with the same matter.  Of course, this being just a brief article for our blogs and newsletters, I will try to compress as much as possible while trying not to write a book (although, that is some fuel for thought).

After reading an email from a website, that I have great respect for, but not total agreement with, regarding their “anti women preachers” stance, I should like to start by looking at some of their argument as to why women should not be involved in ministry.

As I share their email, I will interject some of my responses in bracket enclosed bold letters like so: [bold letters]  I will also use different colored text and highlighting, although that may not be apparent, depending on whether you are reading in html or plain text. 

The email begins thusly: 

We believe that you want to honor the word of God and teach His Word in truth which is why we are contacting you.  We notice that you permit women pastors and/or elders.  1 Pet. 3:15 says to give an answer to everyone for the faith that lies within you.  [Exactly what I propose to do.]  So, we are asking you to give an answer as to why you allow women pastors and elders in light of what the Bible says:

·                                 1 Tim. 2:12-13, “But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.”            1 Tim. 2:12-14 is where Paul explicitly states that he does not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet ("quiet" is hesuchia, not complete silence, but respectful quiet) – because Adam was created first. 

     And so, we begin!  In addition to what I have already mentioned regarding context, let me also bring a couple of other words to your attention, so that we can properly tackle this question.  One term that most bible or pastoral students are pretty familiar with is the word, “exegesis” which means to “take out” or extract from what is there.  Admittedly, many times things are exegeted or “taken out” that simply are not there.  However, I believe that perhaps more often we “read into” the Biblical text things that again, are simply not there.  The term for this is “eisegesis”, which means to read something “into” the text that is not there.  Too often, we read into the Word of God our own prejudices, assumptions and traditions. We in the Church are shamefully guilty of eisegesis in many areas, but none so much as our development of the doctrine of women and their role in the Church.  A sincere and truthful exegetical examination of the appropriate biblical passages in context, however, reveals a very diverse observation.

 So, as we look at this passage, let’s include verse 11 with verses 12 & 13.  The passage reads: 1 Tim. 2:11-13 “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. [12] But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. [13] For Adam was first formed, then Eve.” One basic position is the phrase [usurp authority] is the Greek: authenteo or authentein, meaning to have power over. The only place this word is found in the New Testament is here.  The stance some take is that women should not dictate to men, but exercise their rights to teach, prophesy (or preach), pray, and do other things under the authority of men (1 Cor. 14:34-35).  I only concur with that to a limited degree.  If the apostle is giving a complete decree or statute for church order here, why would he not use the normal word for authority, exousia, which he and all other New Testament writers use? Why does he use a word that neither he, nor any other New Testament writer ever uses, which is a word that refers to someone who claims to be the author or originator of something. Obviously, Paul is addressing a unique situation that exists in Ephesus. If he had been establishing a universal rule for church order in this passage, he would have used the normal New Testament word for authority.

 Then, there is the phrase [in silence]. It was the custom at this time and in this location for men to speak up in public assemblies to ask questions and even interrupt the speaker when they did not understand, but this liberty was not granted to women.  So, the context and history come into play.  Many consider 1 Tim. 2:11-12 to be the Bible’s clearest statement against women functioning in leadership.  I agree, that when taken out of context, this sounds quite clear in its restriction of women. However, let us consider a few other simple exegetical facts.

To begin with, 1st Timothy was written to an individual, not to a church. We should expect, therefore, that the things written in the letter are related to the situation of the individual, which would be Timothy, to whom it was written. I.e., it is a “personal” letter.  Now, that being the case, chapter 1, verse 3 clearly states the reason for this letter to Timothy is not to lay down a universal system of church order. It is to encourage and instruct him as he deals with a false teaching that is circulating among the Christians in Ephesus where he is located.  Again, in context, these were Judaizing teachers who were constantly seeking to bring Christians back under the law of Moses (1 Tim. 1:3-4,6-7).

Therefore, study in context requires rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15). Paul clearly was not issuing general or complete edicts for all churches of every time and place. He is addressing distinctive matters related to Timothy and the church in Ephesus. 

As far as verse 13 goes, in the order of creation on the sixth day, God formed man to rule over the world He had made. After forming man from the dust of the ground, He took a part of the man’s side (sela˓, Heb.) and made for him a helper (˓ezer, Heb.) corresponding to him (kenegdo, Heb.), a “counterpart,” one who would complete him (cf. Gen. 2:18, 21–23). The function or role of the woman is further illustrated in the order of creation.

Then, taken with verse 14, which clearly states that Eve was deceived by the serpent, yet Adam was not deceived, God straightforwardly directed Adam to resist the forbidden fruit, giving to the man the responsibility of spiritual leadership. Eve was aware of God’s command through her husband, who was the God-assigned leader and protector (Gen. 2:15–17). The woman’s susceptibility to deception is better explained by her secondhand knowledge of God’s limitation than by any suggestion that her intellectual faculties were inferior to the man’s. Quite the contrary, both man and woman are made in the image of God and in essence stand before Him on equal footing (Gen. 1:27; 5:2; Matt. 19:4; Gal. 3:28; 1 Pet. 3:7). 

Additionally, Paul may have been addressing a particular woman in Ephesus.  Notice the fact that there is a change from the plural to the singular and then back to the plural in this passage. In 2:9-10, Paul refers to “women” in the plural. However, when he comes to the restrictive admonition of verses 11-12, he changes to the singular and refers to “a woman.” Afterwards, in vs. 15, he returns again to the plural. This may indicate that, Paul had a particular woman in mind who was primarily responsible for spreading the false teaching in Ephesus. Either way, Paul, in this passage, is obviously addressing a unique, local situation in the city of Ephesus.

Let us also remember that at the time Paul sent this letter, Timothy was the pastor of the church at Ephesus.  Anyone who knows anything about the history of Ephesus knows that is was the headquarters of the cult of Diana, recognized as the Mother Goddess, portrayed with many breasts. Bear in mind that many who were being saved in Ephesus were coming into the church from a pagan spir­itual background of matriarchal, militant feminism. Some sources tell us that the word translated "women" here could also be translated "wives." If this is the case, rather than outlining qualifications for ministry, Paul would be dealing primarily with order in the mar­riage, countering the invasive influence of the matriarchal spiritual climate in Ephesus. So, Paul could very well be saying, "I do not allow a wife to TEACH that she is to be in spiritual authority over her husband, or to actually usurp the authority that belongs to him." So long as she is not preaching that she should be in spiritual authority over her husband, there are no scriptural prohibitions to stop Christ-following women from proclaiming any valid biblical doctrine or truth!

Therefore, to claim that Paul universally forbade all women to teach is not in line with a contextual study of the Word.  Besides, if you are going to extensively forbid a woman to teach, then to keep from being hypocritical about it, you must forbid them to stop teaching children, particularly little boys, because at some point, they will become men, who may, God forbid (sarcastically), share what they learned at the feet of a female teacher!  Furthermore, some of the greatest preachers to ever grace the pulpit were taught as children by wonderful, godly women!

Paul wrote three personal letters at this time as he was nearing the end of his life; two to Timothy who was in Ephesus and one to Titus who was on the island of Crete, which we will look at next. These letters contain instructions and requests, some of which are obviously related to the recipient of the letter and cannot be applied to all Christians everywhere. For example, in 2 Timothy 4:9-15, Paul exhorts Timothy to come quickly to him and bring a coat he left in Troas along with the books he left there.

Next:

·        Titus 1:5-6, “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might set in order what remains, and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, 6 namely, if any man be above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion.”  In Titus 1:5-6 it says that the elder must be “the husband of one wife.”  The Greek is literally “man of one woman."  This same phrase is used of the Bishop in 1 Tim. 3:2 and the Deacon in 1 Tim. 3:12.  Remember, Paul is speaking of church officers, not servants (diakonos) in homes (Rom. 16:1,27).  So, the pastor/elder is to be a man of one woman.

To be fair, why do we focus on this one item that is underlined, “the husband of one wife,” and seemingly forget about the rest of this verse which also states that a leader should have “…children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion?”  The KJV puts it as, “…having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.” The NLT says, “his children must be believers who don’t have a reputation for being wild or rebellious.”  GW renders it, “…have children who are believers. His children shouldn't be known for having wild lifestyles or being rebellious.”  Really now, if taken at face value, wouldn’t at least two thirds, if not possibly more, of  male pastors and leaders today have to go ahead and resign based upon the last part of this verse?  I do not know of any pastors who have resigned their position because they had a child or some children who were lost.  It has been said of Billy Sunday, that great evangelist from around the turn of the last century, that “he won untold thousands to the Lord, yet lost his own children.”  Again, it comes down to “rightly dividing the Word of truth.”

Crete is one of the largest islands in the Mediterranean.  According to Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, this Epistle indicates that Paul and Titus had worked there together. When Paul went away he left Titus to organize the churches that he had established himself. The fact is that, again Paul was writing a personal letter to Titus and the meaning of the injunction is, that Titus should appoint, out of the number of elderly men who were of approved Christian reputation, certain ones to be overseers of the churches in the several cities, which denotes that there was probably a limited number of men that Titus had available to pull from.  Again, most of the religion of Crete was goddess-based, like that of Ephesus, so again, the cultural difficulties come into play and Paul was trying to use wisdom in certain appointments concerning the Christian Church because of this.  It is also possible that there were not any women available to assign to beginning duties to these new church plants.  And note, again according to Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, “the eldership was not a distinct church office”, as in the case here at Crete.

Then there is the consideration that although Paul used the phrase “husband of one wife”, that he was laying down a basic principle that was understood to apply to male or female.  In other words, he could just as easily have written, “the wife of one husband”, or a “person of one spouse”.  The main emphasis was that a man was to be faithful to his wife; therefore, you could also say that a wife was to remain faithful to her husband, or that any married person must be faithful to their spouse.

Even in our culture we many times use the word “he” when we are referring to male or female, depending upon the context and subject matter of the statement we are making.

Can a woman ever be saved, since Jesus said in John 14:6:  “I am the way, the truth, and the life: NO MAN cometh unto the Father, but by me.” Or how about Matthew 16:24:  “Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” So, are we to think that only men can follow Jesus? Or here is a good one for women:  Matthew 18:7 – “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!”  So, does this mean that women aren’t included also in this warning?  In other words, females can be an offense and not have to worry about it because Jesus only said “woe to that man”!  That ought to put women on “shoutin’ ground”!

Oh, here’s a good one:  In Matthew 19:23-24, “Jesus said unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. [24] And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” So, I guess this principle doesn’t apply to rich women, huh?

And you might like this one:  Matthew 24:4 – “And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.” Yeah, but don’t worry about a woman deceiving you, right.  Delilah doesn’t count because she was Old Testament!

Then what about Matthew 24:23: “Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.” However, if a woman says it, you may consider it.

Are women excluded from the meaning of Mark 8:36-37, “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? [37] Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul”, simply because the word “man” and “his” are used in the verse?

Well, I could go on and on, but these should suffice to make my point. Of course, we know that is taking these verses out of context, don’t we?  Now, you may say “Now Pastor Mike, you are just being silly now.”  Maybe, but no sillier than others who distort and take scriptures and Kingdom principles out of context when it comes to women in ministry.  So, you can see just how silly human reasoning and gender prejudice can get. 

(To be continued next posting)

Pastor Mike

Comment (0)