"I went to Jerusalem to become acquainted (Gk. istoria) with Cephas" - Paul's words from Galatians 1:18.

Release Your Women: Fast Growing Churches

Sojourners, a blog on faith, politics and culture, recently posted a guest article by Mimi Haddad. The article is printed below. I have two questions: What fault, if any, do you find in Mimi's biblical reasoning? Has Beth Moore been released within the Southern Baptist Convention?

___________________________________

"When we think of megachurches, very often we imagine large evangelical congregations—numbering in the thousands, located in the United States. But, do you realize that five of the 10 largest megachurches are located in South Korea? According to last year’s research by the Economist, the Yoido Full Gospel Church claims 830,000 members, and continues to grow by 3,000 members each month! Astonishing, isn’t it? But, what if I told you that this church, pastored by Dr. Cho, is also egalitarian?!

According to Why Not Women, Dr. Cho was initially unsure whether gifted women teachers should have access to the pulpit because of cultural, rather than biblical, concerns. Yet, under the encouragement of Loren Cunningham — cofounder of Youth With a Mission — Dr. Cho began to open ministry opportunities for women, including positions as ministers and cell group leaders. Several years later, Cho visited another country and was shocked at the small size of their churches. What was his recommendation? Dr. Cho said (Why Not Women, p. 69):

I told them to release their women, but they insist that’s not the problem. They ask me “What’s the key to your church?” I tell them again, “release your women…”


Friends, if, as Scripture suggests, God gives spiritual gifts to all Christians (Romans 12:6-8, 1 Corinthians 12:7 ff, and Ephesians 4:11-13) regardless of gender, education, class, or ethnicity, then one would expect to find healthy, vibrant, growing churches where the spiritual gifts are given their fullest breadth of service. And, who can but admire a leader like Dr. Cho for courageously giving women opportunities for leadership despite cultural prejudice to women leaders. And, we can only wish that all pastors might learn from Dr. Cho’s example. Let us pray for churches around the world to release women’s gifts in order that we might “all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:11-13)."

Mimi Haddad

142 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yes, release your women so that their souls may magnify the Lord.


If a woman cannot sing
the song that is within her,
something in her dies forever

What remains?
An obediant child-like shell
that contains only the memories
of a distant melody . . . .

Anonymous said...

Bless the LORD, O my soul;
And all that is within me,
bless His holy name! (Psalm 103)

Anonymous said...

How should a woman love God?

"You must love the Lord your God with all your heart,
and with all your soul,
and with all your strength,
and with all your mind."

Women must be released to obey this commandment totally.

debbiekaufman said...

Amen.

Anonymous said...

maybe I live in a world where women are released and I have no place in my box for the idea that you're talking about...and neither do the people I work with since they are released to do work since they are the main labor force...

a woman with the imb

Anonymous said...

Where do the 830,000 members of Dr. Cho’s church meet each week? Is this a church of home or cell groups? What percent of the church membership are men? 50% or something less?

“Dr. Cho began to open ministry opportunities for women, including positions as ministers and cell group leaders.”

What does “minister” in Dr. Cho’s church mean? Are women leading cell groups for women or mixed (men and women)? Can’t tell by this post.

I do not think that one of the SBC’s problem is the need to “release our women.” Overall, I think women are leading ministries within our churches in greater numbers than men.

Ann

Big Daddy Weave said...

Wade,

Dr. Cho was courageous for taking that step. But I'm not sure there is anything courageous about pastors and laymen who in theory affirm the calling of women to pastoral ministry but in practice will never call women to their churches as pastors.

In my corner of the Baptist world, we all are egalitarians. We all support women in the pulpit. But only a limited number of our churches have interviewed a female and a smaller number have hired a female as their pastor.

I know a number of females who are ordained Baptist ministers - two will be participating in my wedding. They know that by and large the pastorate is not open to them. As long as Baptists such as yourself remain "captive" to their "cultural complimentarianism," Baptist women will never truly break that doggone glass ceiling.

Anonymous said...

None, Wade. But your question sounds like you do?

WatchingHISstory said...

Of the many times I visited Bellevue, the lowest point was when Joyce Rogers stood in the pulpit and sang a worshipful song to her husband. There was hardly a dry eye in the place, naturally except mine.

I was embarrassed for God Almighty.
She was not glorifying God but a man. People who had never wept for grace were openly weeping for this beautiful old couple.

She was sealing the view that the Church world revolves around a man.

Another ocasion was a Wednesday night when Rogers was speaking a Rick Warren type message about Church growth and he stated that over 800 people had been baptized in the last year. His point being that they could do far better than that!

A lady in the congregation misunderstood him but understood personal grace began clapping enthusiastically. HE PUT UP HIS PALMS and gestured for her to stop. "You misunderstood me now listen to what I say." I was embarressed for her and knew she would go home feeling terrible.

The friend I was with at the church evening meal ask me the difference between Pentecostals and Baptist and I struggled to answer him at a casual setting such as this. When we got to the parking lot I spilled the truth to him. You witnessed a major goof-up tonight by Rogers. "That would 'never' happen in a Pentecostal worship service" (that don't meaan it has never happened) "In a worship service if a lady clapped like that the rest of the congregation would be encouraged to join her and the minister would give his point a rest." Sometimes the Holy Spirit would 'fall' and the sermon would be interrupted. Acts 10:44

Wade, I believe you are addressing the methodology of Adrian Rogers. I am just too crude to be the one to say it.

I still hold to men being elders and pastors, however.

Anonymous said...

I think I missed something...what does bellevue have to do with this post? stay on track...

WatchingHISstory said...

Wade, I am sorry to be off-track.
You don't have to post anonymously to me. I am a big boy.

Charles Page said...

Wade,
Actually I am on target even if you think I am not. The way Rogers treated women was reflected by the SBC. They got in his way.
They were subordinate to men.

Joe White... said...

Wade,

You asked, and I will take the bait... "What fault, if any, do you find in Mimi's biblical reasoning?"

That is a hard question to answer since there is not much "biblical reasoning" in the post. Most of her article, in my opinion, is based on a pragmatic appeal (hey, this works for the mega-churches... do this).

She does end her article with this biblical reference... "Let us pray for churches around the world to release women’s gifts in order that we might “all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:11-13)." The only problem with that statement is that Ephesians 4:11 says... "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;"... nothing about "women's gifts". In addition, these gifts are given freely not prayed for.

To answer your second question... "Has Beth Moore been released within the Southern Baptist Convention?"

Yes, I believe to some degree she has.

Bob Cleveland said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

"Women must be released to obey this commandment totally."

Who is holding them back? I say they are holding themselves back.

If you feel like you are being held back, then you are at fault for hanging around.

Move on and be released.

Today!

I have never understood the controversy really. There are plenty of like-minded thinkers that interpret scripture similarly to you (whoever is reading this). Join them! This is why we have Baptist, Methodists, Catholics, Mormons, Presby's, Pentacostals, etc, etc, etc...

It's elementary to me.

Now if you want a fight. If you want to change the "world" you are in to YOUR personal thinking (interpretation), then stay around and fight.

But be prepared for a battle in return. And learn to take it "like a man".

No pun intended.

Thy Peace said...

Amen.

Why Not Women? A Fresh Look at Scripture on Women in Missions, Ministry, and Leadership by Loren Cunningham and David J. Hamilton with Janice Rogers

Bob Cleveland said...

Charles, what are you after? If somebody digs up Dr. Rogers and beats him up, or maybe sprays graffiti on his tombstone, or maybe they could just bulldoze Bellevue and plant weeds there, would that finally stop you from prattling away about them?

Neither the world nor the church revolves around Adrian Rogers or Paul Williams or BBC. Apparently yours do.

Wade, when I first read this, I inferred that "releasing our women" might have similar results to those of Yoido Full Gospel Church. But I really do doubt that would be the case; women in Jamaica are fully released, and I've yet to hear of anything approaching megachurch status there.

But I also confess that Red Hills Baptist, in Kingston, is my favorite place to worship. There truly is an atmosphere of freedom there.

Tom Parker said...

Wade:

What do you mean by saying--"Has Beth Moore been released within the Southern Baptist Convention?"

I'm not following what you are saying. My thanks in advance.

My prayer is that the Women in our SBC be released, but the BF&M has been written in a way by a hand-picked group to not allow them.

To use the Bible to keep women from being released is truly sad, but those in control in the SBC had the BF&M written in a way that they will not allow women the freedom to be what God wants them to be. Jesus had a much better understanding of the way that Women could serve than they do. They just keep putting up obstacles for their service.

The CR has brought more consequences to Women in the SBC than I think most would have ever imagined.

Unless there is a revolt it will stay like it is or only get worse, but the powers to be would put this revolt down so quick it would be unbelieveable. We have seen in the past what happens when you dare cross those in power, you know yourself.

I remain hopeful.

Anonymous said...

I do find it amusing if a church won't allow a woman to teach from the pulpit for 30 minutes, yet it will allow a Beth Moore simulcast for half a day. What's more, if they allow their members to do Beth Moore studies wherein they are required to pore over Moore's teaching for over an hour every week.

But the moment a woman steps to the pulpit and opens her Bible...tsk, tsk.

My point is this: whatever the Biblical standard is, it should be applied to all gifted women. Whatever is applicable to Beth Moore is just as applicable to any one else.

Matt

Anonymous said...

ANN wrote, 'I do not think that one of the SBC’s problem is the need to “release our women'

Well, we do know that one of the SBC's problems is to release THE REAL financial records openly and transparently to the people of the SBC, so that we can find out how much has been squandered on mansions and trustee's salaries, and fancy trips and perks.
And find out how much money is left for the work of the Lord.
If any.
The Conservative Resurgence will end when the money is gone.
Then they will move on to 'greener' pastures where the sheep can provide for them.

Kate Johnson said...

The Biblical point being made was, I believe, that God grants gifts to all, not just to men. And of course, in the research I have done, nowhere does God say he only grants the gifts of evangelist, prophet, pastor etc. to men. And the Bible has examples of women pastors, evangelists and prophets. So I agree with her assessment.

To the second question, SBC will have released Beth Moore only when she is invited to speak and teach a group of men, not just women. Has that happened? If so, she has been somewhatr released. If not, she has been relegated to the place of other women, to teaching other women. No more, no less.

Of course, this will be a contentious post as it always is when the place of women is brought into the discussion. Why is that? Everyone holds dogmatically to their positions and does any REAL discussion take place? Or does it end up being stubbornness. I used to be complementarian, but always had a nagging in my gut about the issue of women preaching. Until I preached and found I was gifted in it. So I began to research more and more and my opinion has slowly changed over the years. Now, in our ministry, I am the main teacher and my husband assists me. I am truly blessed.

BTW, I have read Why Not Women by Cunningham and Hamilton and find it persuasive. I recommend it.

Anonymous said...

"But be prepared for a battle in return. And learn to take it "like a man".

Whoever wrote this must be a cowardly anonymous woman.
Come out from your closet.
Tell us who you are.
If you dare.

Your 'bravado' crashes with your couwardly anonymity, as so many women here bravely give their names.

Cowardly Lion

Anonymous said...

Men who have to be propped up
by subordinate women
are not serving God with strength.

They are leaning on their subjugated women for support
and cannot serve with full strength.

The women are too busy propping up the egos of these pitiful males
to be able to serve the Lord with full strength.

The thing about subjugating another is that it costs you your dignity more. It uses up a great deal of energy denying others the chance to serve God: energy better spent in other ways.

Does takes a 'real man of God' to tell a woman she is not worthy of full service?

Maybe God needs to send angels down to tell Baptist women that they are needed for His service.

These 'real men of God' aren't up to the task.

Kevin M. Crowder said...

The problem as I see it with the approach "release your women" is that this always has an unintended effect of pushing back men into an even deeper cave of inactivity in the church. I believe that "releasing the body" to express the gifts God has given them in a new and magnanimous way is indeed commensurate with the spirit of the aspirations of Ms. Haddad.

But how do we do that? We do it through the Word of God for it is the true and tested curriculum for equipping the saints "for good works."

I feel our problem a Baptists is that we are biblically illiterate. We have honorable yet emotionally laden answers to fix our people's problems, but are they biblical?

They are indeed pragmatic, which might be why I call them honorable, but the Bible is a big book. I sadly feel our people have no clue how to properly use it. They try. They mimic their pastor. He mimicked another pastor and the cycle continues. People must be encouraged to make their faith their own. They must read and study under the covering of prayer and must understand the nature of the literary, grammatical, and historical aspects of the 66 books of Scripture. They must know that chapter and verse designations are not divine and that all Scripture is God breathed and must be read and interpreted in context and in light of the whole of Scripture.

Now while it might seem like I am beating up on the congregants, many of them infact DO realize this yet are forced, in a manner of speaking, to listen to week in and week out ministers who do not prepair, do not pray, and do not even know how to spell expository, much less preach in a way that Glorifies the Breather of the breath.

I recently heard a sermon with alot of yelling, alot of cliché’s, and alot of Scripture. The congregation loved it. But they were not fed. They were momentarily "inspired" like a buck is inspired by the sound of a gunshot. But they were not fed.

Do you love me?

Feed my sheep.

I am of the opinion that Scripture would have us not segment our discipleship as much as we do, but rather train and equip families for success in the world and the church for the glory of God.

Let us release the women. Let us release the men. Let us release families, the "little churches" for the spreading of the Gospel, the building up of the body and the glory fo the Lord.


...and may all the Joyce's in the world be pleased to love their husbands and honor them in song. And may all the Adrian’s be pleased to love and carry their wives across the threshold of life.

hesonlychasingsafety said...

I'll leave my views of women in ministry aside on this post, because I don't think that's the point. Nothing against Dr. Cho and his church because I've never attended there, nor have I spoken to anyone who does. But since when does the number of people attending a church directly correlate with the church's health, ministry, effect on its community, and worship?

I'm sure there are small churches in South Korea and the US as well that are just as focused on the Gospel and making Christ's name known as this one is. I think that Dr. Cho might be confused about what is most important. It's not numbers, it's about a community of believers that lay down their lives and earnestly seek God through teaching, worship, encouragement, and action.

If God has blessed Dr. Cho's church with this, then praise God for the 3,000 members they gain a month. If not, then perhaps this is just another example of a church doing whatever it takes to get people in the door. Whatever the case, I find the notion that "releasing the women" will grow your church to be rather offensive and shallow.

If your church has "released the women" so to speak and is growing in faith and love, then praise God. But let's not forget that God has placed each of our churches in a particular context within your own community and culture and it's your church's job to find what will engage that culture and community around you - not Dr. Cho's job.

Just a thought.

Pastor Tony said...

Amen to Joe White above.

It is indicative of much that is wrong in the SBC that we start to say that the numbers of attendees has anything at all to do with the work of God.

I am fatigued at the altar of pragmatism that has been set up in the SBC. If a church is growing in numbers, then they are successful. This, in my reading of Scripture, is patently false. Numbers can be indicative of the Spirit's work, but are not always indicative of the Spirit's work.

To say that Pastor Cho is "successful" because of the numbers and that the numbers are a result of a human decision (release the women) is saying that the Holy Spirit has no place in how we "grow" churches. A very sad statement.

Anonymous said...

THE SONG WITHIN HER: biblical ?

Yes.

From the book of Judges in the Hebrew Bible comes this:

THE SONG OF DEBORAH

"Deborah stands exclusively on her own merits.
The only thing we know about her personal life is the name of her husband, Lapidot.

"She led Israel at that time," is how the Bible records it.

"She used to sit under the palm tree of Deborah ... and the Israelites would come to her for judgment" (4:4).

During Deborah's time, a century or so after the Israelite entry into Canaan, the valley in which she and her tribe lived was controlled by King Jabin of Hazor.

Deborah summoned the warrior Barak and instructed him in God's name to take ten thousand troops and confront Jabin's general, Sisera, and his army's nine hundred iron chariots, on Mount Tabor.

Barak's response to Deborah shows the high esteem in which this ancient prophetess was held:
"If you will go with me,
I will go;
if not I will not go."

AND SO, DEBORAH BECAME A WARRIOR
AT THE REQUEST OF HER GENERAL, BARAK, AND FOUGHT FOR HER PEOPLE AGAINST THEIR ENEMIES.

"Very well, I will go with you," Deborah consents, but she can't resist gibing at Barak about the sexism of their society:
"However, there will be no glory for you in the course you are taking, for then the Lord will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman" (4:8-9).



The battle takes place during the rainy season, and Sisera's chariots quickly bog down in the mud. The Israelites overwhelm Hazor's army, and inflict heavy casualties.
Sisera, fleeing on foot, escapes to the Kenite camp, where Yael, the clan leader's wife, invites him to stay.
He falls asleep in her tent, whereupon Yael lifts a mallet and drives a tent peg through his head.

The famed "Song of Deborah," in chapter 5 of the Book of Judges, exults in the breaking of the Canaanite stranglehold over much of the country:

"So may all Your enemies perish,
0 Lord," is Deborah's parting shot, though the true Jewish victory went even deeper than the destruction of Sisera and his chariots.

According to the Talmud, Rabbi Akiva, one of the greatest figures in Jewish history, was a direct descendant of Sisera, That a descendant of this great enemy of the Jews became a great Jewish rabbi and scholar represented the Jews' ultimate victory over their ancient Canaanite opponent." (reference: from Rabbi Telushkin)

DEBORAH, the warrior, lived eleven centuries before Christ.
She served God with her whole heart, her whole mind, her whole soul, her whole strength.

God did not reject her service.
She was given victory ove the enemies of the Lord.

DEBORAH, lioness of Israel,
warrior, servant of God
Biblical? YES

Well, Christian women. We have a great role model in Deborah.
Even a general would not go into battle without her. :)
L's

P.S. I almost named my daughter 'Deborah' but we already have two Debs in the family. :)

Anonymous said...

Just to clarify:

"The given name Barack is not a form of this name (Barak), but is instead related to a different Semitic root which means "BLESSING"
and is also the origin of the names Baruch (Hebrew)
and Mubarak (Arabic).

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak"

Anonymous said...

Oh dear, it just occurred to me:
the story of the powerful Deborah might not sit well with some Christians who are in the prairie dress crowd.
I actually do not know how much of the First Testament, the Hebrew Bible, is respected in the Southern Baptist religion. Is the Book of Judges considered part of the Bible by Southern Baptists?
I may have stepped on some toes here. L's

Anonymous said...

L's:

Careful. I'd hate for you to be falsely accused of teaching men something about the Bible. You may need to repent in sackcloth and ashes.

Heaven forbid.

Matt

Wanda said...

L's,

Thanks for bringing up Deborah from the book of Judges. She's one of my favorite Bible characters because of her courage and obedience to God.

Sadly, there will never be a modern-day Deborah in the SBC.

kupercaya said...

Thanks for posting this article by Mimi Haddad, Pastor Wade. I am not SB, but I do enjoy reading your blog. I am actually a member of Christians for Biblical Equality and I'm a lay-pastor at my church. (Yes, I'm a woman.)

Speaking from the egalitarian position, I dont think Mimi Haddad meant to say that you must be egalitarian in order for your church to grow, nor that the Holy Spirit would only aid your church growth if you allow women to be pastors. That kind of reasoning would be just silly. Although I think it is explicit in her article that she believes (as egalitarians do) that women in leadership positions would certainly help in the growth of healthy churches. I was actually asked to come on staff for my church b/c of the launch of a new adult ministry which needed a pastor.

Re: Beth Moore, I want to say that I believe the SBC has indeed released her - and God bless them for it! Beth Moore has certainly been an influence in my life. She's an amazingly gifted preacher. Official church leadership positions notwithstanding, I think the SBC would benefit by releasing gifted women to preach, teach and evangelize as they have throughout history.

Anonymous said...

Dear MATT,

Well, I've got the ashes in the fireplace. Do they sell sackcloth at Walmart?

I'm trying to stay out of trouble.
It ain't easy for me. :) L's

Anonymous said...

L's:

I respectfully posit that you are NOT trying to stay out of trouble.

Matt

Anonymous said...

Dear Matt,

If showing support for the use of the gifts that God has given ALL of mankind, is 'getting into trouble', then i am guilty as charged.

I do however not want to quote any scriptures that may not be accepted in another faith, as that would be disrespectful to the people that need that faith as God has given it to them.
If this sounds confusing to you and you can't understand it, I'm afraid I won't be able to explain it to you. The concept of 'respect' for people of another faith is not something shared by all. As a matter of fact, it is barely understood by many.
I know this, somewhat sadly. L's

Anonymous said...

L's:

I think I understood your tone and intent; my "accusation" was my poor attempt at dry humor.

I believe that as Southern Baptists, much could be gained if we had a passion for going every bit as far as Scripture goes, and also for not going any further than Scripture goes.

This, I think, is at the heart of Wade's crusade against neo-Landmarkism and its detrimental effects upon the IMB missions effort.

Matt

Anonymous said...

Hi, Matt

"not going any further than Scripture goes."

That rather limits the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Living Word, and the active intervention of the Father
in the lives of women.

The Song of Deborah was implanted in her by her Creator

What does a woman do with the gifts God gives her: throw them back unused, because of a man's culturally biased interpretation of a scripture?

I think women need to ask the guidance of the Holy Spirit when reading the inspired scriptures,

then to pray for God's guidance, and to listen to their own consciences as informed by the Spirit.
Then the Holy Spirit can guide their decisions, in a way that fulfills the Will of God and brings them peace.
That's harder than just letting someone else tell them what to do OR not to do.
It requires them to take responsibility as a child of God. It is the Giver of Gifts who endowed them with talents to be developed and used.
And it is Him to Whom they must answer for how they used those talents,
on the Day of the Lord. L's

Charles Page said...

Bob Cleveland said: Charles, what are you after? If somebody digs up Dr. Rogers and beats him up, or maybe sprays graffiti on his tombstone, or maybe they could just bulldoze Bellevue and plant weeds there, would that finally stop you from prattling away about them?

No! I'm on a mission from God! I am His oracle and I will not stop until He tells me to stop!!!

Neither the world nor the church revolves around Adrian Rogers or Paul Williams or BBC. Apparently yours do.

Bob, Bob, Bob! Don't you know by now the world revolves around ME? ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!!! It's all about ME!!!!! Wade! Wade, Wade, Wade!!! Thank you SO MUCH for helping me get my message out! Soon the whole world will know the name Charles Page and that I am God's messenger! Hahahahahahahaha!!!

Anonymous said...

Prayers needed.

Anonymous said...

Page must have lost his job. Notice he is posting day and night.

Anonymous said...

L's:

I am in whole-hearted agreement. May I flesh out my conviction?

What is so often wrong with how we understand Scripture is that it is tainted, or narrowed, by our cultural bias. "Going as far as Scripture goes" would in many respects take us to places of discomfort, for we are all fleshly and culture-bound to varying degrees. Being Scriptural means being stretched in a lot of ways, including those you have aptly described.

"Not going farther than Scripture" also means we do not place extra-biblical strictures on the who/what/when/where/how of ministry. This is, I think, much of Wade's thrust in his dissension with IMB policies regarding private prayer language, the administration of baptism, etc. Thus my reference to his "crusade".

You are absolutely right: there is no substitute for the daily, hourly, moment-by-moment leadership of the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer. He always acts and guides in a way that is fully consistent with the Father's will, the message and redemption accomplished by Jesus, and the written word as revealed in all of Scripture. We can count on the Holy Spirit to act and guide in ways that are Biblical, for it is His word, and He is always internally consistent.

His leadership may not always be explicitly spelled out in Scripture, but it is always CONSISTENT with His will as revealed in Scripture.

The Spirit gives His gifts. May we (male and female) be found faithful in walking in Him that those gifts may bear their full fruit.

2 Tim 2:9b is widely applicable:
"...the word of God is not imprisoned." Amen. Neither by men attempting to hold it back nor men attempting to shut it out.

Matt

Anonymous said...

Generally speaking the passage concerning teaching in the letter to Timothy is dealing with a closely knit discipleship of a male. Even in realm of developmental psychology whihc some biblical conservatives don't like to reference to for some reason it has been established that in the formative years or with formative training a male needs a male to mentor. Conclusion: the problem in culture is not liberation of women but missing male mentors. Release and empower the men as well!!

John Fariss said...

Dear L's,

Southern Baptists accept the same canon that all Protestants do. Some of "us" just choose to ignore the parts of it that don't fit too well into "our" established theologies very well and find all sorts of ways to "explain it away." I used to called it "Chinese restaurant theology," recalling when you ate at a Chinese restaurant you would choose "one fromn column A, one from column B," etc. They don't do that anymore though (a lot of folks don't even understand the analogy, it has been so long, and I'm only 56), and somehow "buffet theology" just doesn't have the same ring to it.

Anyway--you hang in there, keep questioning, and keep commenting. I always enjoy reading what you say, and generally even agree with you. Blessings!

John

RRR said...

Doesn't sound like Dr. Cho's church has a woman senior pastor.

I doubt there are that many Southern Baptist churches that would have a problem with women doing the things his church is doing. Our Southern Baptist women have already been released to lead Bible studies, teach adults, lead worship and praise, work on staff, etc. Women deacons are still a stretch but those Southern Baptist churches that do have ordained women deacons are not shunned or thrown out of the association's fellowship.

I think Southern Baptists are diverse. Some interpret Scripture to say that women are not to have prominent roles. I haven't done a survey, but I doubt they are in a majority. There are some Southern Baptists more conservative thinking than others, but it's stretch to say that Dr. Cho has some revolutionary solution to church growth.

"Set our women free"?? What about the lost world?

Anonymous said...

Dear MATT and JOHN,

Thank you, both.

To MATT: Yes, even Satan quotes scripture to his own purposes, I am told. To read the Scriptures reverently, not as one worship's a 'book', but as one honors the One Who inspired the authors, that is important. And prayer, so that the Holy Spirit can guide our understanding.
I can see how people have leaned 'unto their own understanding' and it has left them bereft of guidance.
So much is quoted and yet so much is ignored.

Sometimes, I do a very ancient way of combining prayer and Scriptures: I need guidance or comfort and I ask God's help. Then, I open a closed Bible and I read where my hand falls. Sometimes, it is the most wondrous thing that, there, on that page, I find answers or comforting.
Kind of like my hands are guided, then my eyes, and then my heart.
I have never done this and gone away without some gift.

to JOHN,

Your words of encouragement are a blessing to me. 'encourage one another' is a commandment of Christian charity, I think.

I think I have tried to understand so many things, but I will never understand about the missionaries being hurt. It seemed so evil.

I just never understood. L's

Anonymous said...

L's:

"To read the Scriptures reverently, not as one worship's a 'book', but as one honors the One Who inspired the authors, that is important. And prayer, so that the Holy Spirit can guide our understanding."

Amen. Now there is a blessedly balanced view, in my opinion.

"I will never understand about the missionaries being hurt."

Are you referring to missionaries hurt in the whole IMB policy debates?

Matt

Tom Parker said...

RRR:

You said--"Our Southern Baptist women have already been released to lead Bible studies, teach adults, lead worship and praise, work on staff, etc. Women deacons are still a stretch but those Southern Baptist churches that do have ordained women deacons are not shunned or thrown out of the association's fellowship."

Are the women leading Bible studies and teaching adults only teaching to women?

Do you think the BF&M will be revised to make it clearer other than Senior Pastor which jobs in the church women can serve in?

As to the women deacon's do you think that if the BF&M is revised it will say that women can not be deacons and if they are those churches will shunned or thrown out of the association's fellowship?

One last item. You said-- "Set our women free"?? What about the lost world?" I'm not sure what you are trying to say, would you please elaborate? My thanks in advance.

Darby Livingston said...

"Has Beth Moore been released within the Southern Baptist Convention?"

No. Beth Moore has been released by Lifeway. And without giving my opinion on that either way, I do find it interesting how she has been marketed in such a clever way to bypass the whole question of women teachers in the SBC.

Tom Parker said...

Darby:

Why do you think the SBC has ignored the role that Beth Moore is playing as the role of a woman teacher?

Anonymous said...

RRR, our church and another in our area were voted out of the local association soon after they elected a woman as deacon.
Florence in KY

Anonymous said...

Hi, MATT,
it's me, L's

to your 'missionary' question: yes
I have heard the explanations.
But none of it makes sense to ME.
I thought it was a terrible thing.
I didn't understand how people could allow all that to happen.

Darby Livingston said...

Tom,

I'm by no means on an inside track to make that call. I was just giving my observation. I can guess it's because she's itinerant, and the sbc isn't a hierarchical body when it comes to sorting such things out. No one's forcing a man to sit under her teaching if they think she's "exercising authority" whatever in the world that means.

Anonymous said...

L's,

Agree completely. I don't get it either. I'd like to think I'm as passionate about being Biblical as anyone, but I just cannot comprehend the reasoning for some of the actions taken.

I get especially concerned on that issue because my wife and I are applying for missionary appointment with the IMB.

I'll stop before I find myself on a soapbox...

Matt

Tom Parker said...

Darby:

Thanks for your response. Sadly I have learned that the powers to be in the SBC do not have to be consistent in what they do nor give an explantion. They are all powerful and when they want to stop something they will. If Beth Moore ever gets in disfavor with those in control of the SBC she will be gone so fast one would never know she had even been there.

Anonymous said...

Dear MATT,
I will pray for you.
You are honored to receive God's call. My mother's cousin, of blessed memory, was a missionary for many years. His health was ruined during his many years of service (South America) and he died prematurely, after much suffering.
I don't think that good man ever gave a thought for himself.
So, Matt, you see, I get a little emotional over how missionaries should be treated.
Please, if you are accepted, remember to take care of yourself. Love, L's

Anonymous said...

L's: Thanks for your words and mostly your prayer. I covet those.

Re: Beth Moore
How is hosting a Beth Moore study any different from having a woman preach/teach a message from a pulpit (even if she doesn't hold a staff leadership position)?

No man is obligated to either one.

Matt

Anonymous said...

One of the things I am learning as I go through a time of personal revival is this:

It doesn't matter what I want or think. It doesn't matter if doing a certain thing brings in mega members or not.

It matters that we obey God's word.

Heaven help me, much as I hate to admit it, BFM2000 is correct when it comes to women not being pastors.

It does not keep women down--it frees us to fulfill the callings given us in scripture.

But I DO still oppose hiring a woman to do the job but not ordaining her so you can pay less. That is hypocrisy. Don't hire her in that case!

Linda

Anonymous said...

SBC leadership
SBC entity trustees
God
The Loyal Membership of the SBC
(male, of course)





women


Priorities on the SBC Totem Pole?

Bob Cleveland said...

Our pastor has a pretty good handle on this, I think. He supports the view of the BF&M 2000 as respects women and roles in the church, but he says if a woman is called to preach and she's in the church and has a message, she can deliver it from our pulpit. But she will do so under his authority as the Elder ... the Presbuteros .. of the congregation, a position which is limited to men.

Women can and do teach in FBC Pelham.

Anonymous said...

No. Beth Moore has been released by Lifeway. And without giving my opinion on that either way, I do find it interesting how she has been marketed in such a clever way to bypass the whole question of women teachers in the SBC.

Tue Jan 13, 03:55:00 PM 2009

I think this is correct. Without saying more, there is a reason why she has churned out books and studies so quickly. Strike while the irons are hot.

I know I will get pummeled for this but I am not impressed with Moore as a solid Bible teacher. I am one of those square pegs that does not fit many places. As an egal (because I cannot think of a neater label), I am also very conservative in doctrine. I find Moore somewhat of a fluffy, shallow teacher of the Word. But she sells well.

I would never promote a female preacher because she is a woman. I would recommend her because she is deep and preaches the full counsel of God. Not just "parts of it" and not with pragmatic gimmicks.

I have the exact same attitude toward male preachers. In fact, because of sheer numbers, there have been many more bad male preachers in history. :o)

Lydia

Anonymous said...

"Our pastor has a pretty good handle on this, I think. He supports the view of the BF&M 2000 as respects women and roles in the church, but he says if a woman is called to preach and she's in the church and has a message, she can deliver it from our pulpit. But she will do so under his authority as the Elder ... the Presbuteros .. of the congregation, a position which is limited to men."

Bob, Under whose authority does he preach? (wink)

WatchingHISstory said...

Bob

My point was Joyce played a subordinate role before her husband that set a bad example for women. It supported the view that a woman's place is adoring her "man."

Dr Rogers humiliatewd that lady on that Wed night. That does not destroy Dr Rogers nor Bellevue as you imply. I am pointing out that he represents a theology and methods that are not biblical. Now what is wrong with that?

Bob, you dissapoint me. You just want me to shut-up. You know full well that I am in opposition to Rogers theology and methodology.

Unlike many who are after Steve Gaines and his wife; Paige Patterson and his wife are resorting to character assassination. It exceeds constructive criticism. ex: It is suggested on NBBCOF that Steve Gaines tighten the belt at the neck! Christa Brown has a monster on her blog site to represent Paige Patterson. these characterizations are uncalled for.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous/WINK

Under the Authority given by Christ as a Shepherd of His Flock and the authority as the Elder.

(WINK WINK)

Anonymous said...

O let us ALL from bondage flee,
Let my people go,
And let us ALL in Christ be free,
Let my people go.

Anonymous said...

"Under the Authority given by Christ as a Shepherd of His Flock and the authority as the Elder.

(WINK WINK)"

So women are not under the authority of Christ as Shepherd of His flock?

They have an earthly priest?

(blink blink)

Lydia

Anonymous said...

THE STORY OF ANNE HUTCHINSON

“She offered her own version of the . . . Covenant of Grace:
each person’s actions to be guided by his or her own conscience
and inner morality;
each person to communicate directly with God,
without need of outside supervision.” [Selma Williams, Divine Rebel: The Life of Anne Marbury Hutchinson (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1981), 121]

And not only were women brought into her circle, but the “Hutchinsonians,”
as they were called,
included many men as well.
The women, “as by an Eve,” railed a colonial minister, “catch their husbands also.”
For such heresy, Anne was brought to trial, convicted, and banished from the Bay Colony. [John Winthrop, Winthrop’s Journal: History of New England, 1630-1649, 2 vols., ed. James K. Hosmer (New York: Scribner, 1908), 1:240]

In the decades following Anne Hutchinson’s banishment, there would be other women who would test the tolerance of the officials of the Bay Colony.

Bob Cleveland said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

THE STORY OF ANNE ASKEW,
PREACHER, PROTESTANT MARTYR

The story is told that Anne Askew spent her last hours in writing a strong denial of a report which had been passed around that she had recanted, denied the faith. She concluded her account of what really happened with this prayer: "O Lord, I have more enemies now than there be hairs on my head. Yet, Lord, let them never overcome me with vain words but fight thou, Lord, in my stead: for on Thee cast I my care." Time and time again while she was being beaten and tortured and put on the rack, the authorities of her day tried to persuade her to renounce and deny her faith in the Lord but she never gave in. Her reply and answer to their threats was that she would rather die than deny her faith. And that’s exactly what it came down to.

On the day of her execution, this dear, godly woman had to be carried in a chair to the stake to be burned because she was unable to walk any longer, due to the fact that she had been tortured so much. When they brought her to the stake, she was fastened to it by a chain in order to hold up her body. It has been recorded that there was such a large gathering of people assembled to watch the burning of Anne Askew that they had to literally push the crowd back far enough in order to make room to burn her at the stake.

At the last moment, a written pardon from the king was offered to her upon the condition that she would recant. Her reply was that she had not come to the stake to deny her Lord and Master. Therefore gunpowder was poured all over her body and then the fire was ordered to be put under her. Her crime was the denial of the mass. One of the last things she wrote she said: "So this is the heresy that I hold and for it must suffer death." As one writer wrote: "She kept the faith to her God, enduring shame and agony with meek unshaken constancy. O none but Christ, none but Christ could have made the weakness of a delicate woman so strong, the feebleness of a mortal creature so triumphant."

On that day in 1546, Anne Askew ended her long trial of agonies as she entered the flames of fire as a blessed sacrifice unto God, leaving us an incredible example to follow: that with every last breath God gives us, we should offer our bodies as a sacrifice unto God for His honor and glory.

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." (Romans 12:1-2)

As a child of God, you belong to the Lord; your body is the temple of God for the Holy Spirit indwells EVERY believer. It is our privilege, our opportunity, our duty to glorify and magnify the Lord Jesus Christ in and through our body as "instruments of righteousness unto God."

Anonymous said...

Some women must speak for God regardless of the consequences . .

Do they have a choice?
Or are they following a Voice that they cannot ignore?
When their lives are endangered and their lives are ended because of their faith, chances are that
THEY COULD NOT IGNORE HIS CALL.

Anonymous said...

THE MOST POWERFUL FORM
OF PREACHING: SONG

From ALL that dwell below the skies,

let the Creator's praise arise;

let the Redeemer's name be sung,

through every land by every tongue.

2.
Eternal are thy mercies, Lord;

eternal truth attends thy word.

Thy praise shall sound from shore to shore,

till suns shall rise and set no more.

3.
Your lofty themes, ye mortals, bring,

in songs of praise divinely sing;

the great salvation loud proclaim,

and shout for joy the Savior's name.

4.
In every land begin the song;

to every land the strains belong;

in cheerful sounds ALL voices raise,

and fill the world with loudest praise.

Anonymous said...

This is what the baptism formula of Gal 3,27f. says:


NO MORE DISTINCTIONS . . . .

ALL OF YOU ARE ONE IN CHRIST JESUS


"All baptized in Christ, you have all clothed yourselves in Christ, and there are no more distinctions between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female, but all of you are one in Christ Jesus."

COMMENT: this is either true
or it is not true

What is the answer?

Christa Brown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Native Arkansan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
New BBC Open Forum said...

Christa Brown wrote:

"I do not have a monster on my blogsite to represent Paige Patterson."

And I did not suggest Steve Gaines tighten the belt at the neck. When someone made a joking reference to such, I immediately stated that was NOT the intent. If you're going to quote someone at least get it right.

Sorry to interrupt your discussion, but I wanted to set the record straight. Please continue.

davidbmclaughlin.com said...

...but he says if a woman is called to preach and she's in the church and has a message, she can deliver it from our pulpit. But she will do so under his authority as the Elder ...

My problemn with this is there is no biblical basis for the concept.

Wade,
You have had lots of these kinds of posts. Have you become an egalitarian? Are you still complementarian? are you reconsidering?

Just curious.

dm

Anonymous said...

My problemn with this is there is no biblical basis for the concept.

You're correct. I think this is the key:

"...but he says if a woman is called to preach... "

It's the he that's saying it, not the He.

DAJ

Anonymous said...

Wade,
I don't know if would site Dr. Cho at all in this. IT is noted that his biblical philosophy follows along the line of the word of faith teachers.
Somewhere West of Enid

Anonymous said...

SOJOURNER !

SOJOURNER TRUTH'S SPEECH
"Aren't I A Woman ? "


The leaders of the movement trembled on seeing a tall, gaunt black woman in a gray dress and white turban, surmounted with an uncouth sunbonnet, march deliberately into the church, walk with the air of a queen up the aisle, and take her seat upon the pulpit steps.
The second day the work waxed warm. Methodist, Baptist, Episcopal, Presbyterian, and Universalist minister came in to hear and discuss the resolutions presented. One claimed superior rights and privileges for man, on the ground of "superior intellect"; another, because of the "manhood of Christ; if God had desired the equality of woman, He would have given some token of His will through the birth, life, and death of the Saviour." Another gave us a theological view of the "sin of our first mother."


There were very few women in those days who dared to "speak in meeting"; and the sneerers among the pews, were hugely enjoying the discomfiture as they supposed, of the "strong-minded." Some of the tender-skinned friends were on the point of losing dignity, and the atmosphere betokened a storm.

When, slowly from her seat in the corner rose Sojourner Truth, who, till now, had scarcely lifted her head.

"Don't let her speak!" gasped half a dozen in my ear.

She moved slowly and solemnly to the front, laid her old bonnet at her feet, and turned her great speaking eyes to me. There was a hissing sound of disapprobation above and below.

I rose and announced, "Sojourner Truth," and begged the audience to keep silence for a few moments.

The tumult subsided at once, and every eye was fixed on this almost Amazon form, which stood nearly six feet high, head erect, and eyes piercing the upper air like one in a dream.

At her first word there was a profound hush. She spoke in deep tones, which, though not loud, reached every ear in the house, and away through the throng at the doors and windows.

It is impossible to transfer it to paper, or convey any adequate idea of the effect it produced upon the audience. Those only can appreciate it who saw her powerful form, her whole-souled, earnest gesture, and listened to her strong and truthful tones.



SOJOURNER SPEAKS:

She came forward to the platform and addressing the President said with great simplicity:

"May I say a few words?"

Receiving an affirmative answer, she proceeded:


“ I want to say a few words about this matter. I am a woman's rights. I have as much muscle as any man, and can do as much work as any man. I have plowed and reaped and husked and chopped and mowed, and can any man do more than that?

I have heard much about the sexes being equal. I can carry as much as any man, and can eat as much too, if I can get it.
I am as strong as any man that is now.
As for intellect, all I can say is, if a woman have a pint, and a man a quart -- why can't she have her little pint full? You need not be afraid to give us our rights for fear we will take too much, -- for we can't take more than our pint'll hold.

The poor mens seems to be all in confusion, and don't know what to do.

Why children, if you have woman's rights, give it to her and you will feel better.

You will have your own rights, and they won't be so much trouble.

I can't read, but I can hear.

I have heard the bible and have learned that Eve caused man to sin. Well, if woman upset the world, do give her a chance to set it right side up again.

The Lady has spoken about Jesus, how he never spurned woman from him, and she was right.

When Lazarus died, Mary and Martha came to him with faith and love and besought him to raise their brother. And Jesus wept and Lazarus came forth.

And how came Jesus into the world? Through God who created him and the woman who bore him.
Man, where was your part?

But the women are coming up, blessed be God, and a few of the men are coming up with them.
But man is in a tight place,
the poor slave is on him,
woman is coming on him,
he is surely between a hawk and a buzzard. Old Sojourner finished speakin' now."

History of Woman Suffrage, 2nd ed. Vol.1. Rochester, NY: Charles Mann, 1889., edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage


COMMENT: 1889 was the year.
Not much changes, I guess.
Women 'still comin' up'
Some men 'still comin with them'

Maybe that is the lesson: when some part of the human race 'comes upward', we all do.

Maybe that is the lesson we learn from Sojourner Truth, whose strength and wisdom comes at us again, through time, as though she were speaking to us as we are today. We should listen, I think.

L's

Morris Brooks said...

Let's go ahead and take Mimi's attack on male headship and leadership to its logical conclusion...Husbands have you released your wives? Really, have you?

Anonymous said...

mr. morris, sounds like you feel attacked? don't think you speak for anyone but yourself.

Anonymous said...

I don't agree with all of Bro. Cho's theology--and NOT necessarily in regard to women in the church, apparently--but, as I remember the history of the congregation he serves as senior pastor: Cho was concerned for the evangelization of his city and the growth of his church; he took the idea of implementing cell groups to the leading men in his congregation and their response was something like, "You should take an extended vacation"--the Korean equivalent of "Is your personal resume up-to-date?" Cho then took the idea of cell groups to the women of the congregation; they caught the vision for evangelistic cell groups, and the rest is history up to this point--with some aspects unique to Christianity as it's practiced in Korea. It sounds like a thing deserving of non-critical assessment, and probably some application by other churches.

Regarding Beth Moore: she teaches at least as well/accurately as most Baptist preachers, and better than many. I wouldn't attend her church if she served one as senior pastor, but I'd consider it a privilege to serve with her if she were a vocational minister of a church working in another capacity.

Just my take.


David

Jeff said...

Growth doesn't mean it is right, and it doesn't mean it is wrong. So to say this is the reason for growth is wrong.

The standard is the Bible. Now we may differ on what the Bible tells us about the role of women. Thats ok with me.

I am not sure we need more megachurches, but we need are people who are passionate about Christ.

Lin said...

"...but he says if a woman is called to preach and she's in the church and has a message, she can deliver it from our pulpit. But she will do so under his authority as the Elder ... "

"My problemn with this is there is no biblical basis for the concept."

Right, David. Just as there is no 'pulpit' in scripture. I have seen the above idea taken to some amusing extremes. One church thought it ok to hear a woman preach on tape but not in person. I guess tape does not carry authority?

I have also seen a woman introduced as giving a 'testimony' in a certain comp church that was really a sermon but ok because it was called a testimony.

This is much like having 'women directors' instead of women ministers.

It is funny how legalistic it all really becomes. The point is that the person has no authority. It is the Word that has the authority. Now, if we would all just see ourselves as lowly instruments/vessels
instead of the authority/peon structure so many love, the Body would be in much better shape.

Anonymous said...

Search the Bible.

You will find something to support both points of view.

Question is: cultural influences on the speakers?
Situational factors: the noisy conversations of some women among the 'baby' Christians Paul was writing to.
Male bias of some of the writers.

But then, there are all those verses that reflect another way.
Maybe a 'better' way.

People pick and choose what they want in the Bible: to emphasize.

Is that human nature at work? Yes
That's how we are.

But we can look at the scriptures through 'new eyes' when we realize from Christ's example, this, in the words of Sojourner Truth:

"The Lady has spoken about Jesus, how he never spurned woman from him, and she was right."

He never spurned woman from Him. . . .

So what can the Church learn from Him? Once again, going back to the Words and Actions of Jesus Christ in the Bible provide for us a solid place to stand: on any issue.

But like He said to His followers

Will ye also go away?"-John 6:67

“Many have forsaken Christ, and have walked no more with Him; but what reason have YOU to make a change? Has there been any reason for it in the past? Has not Jesus proved Himself all-sufficient? He appeals to you this morning-"Have I been a wilderness unto you?" When your soul has simply trusted Jesus, have you ever been confounded? Have you not up till now found your Lord to be a compassionate and generous friend to you, and has not simple faith in Him given you all the peace your spirit could desire? Can you so much as dream of a better friend than He has been to you? Then change not the old and tried for new and false. As for the present, can that compel you to leave Christ? When we are hard beset with this world, or with the severer trials within the Church, we find it a most blessed thing to pillow our head upon the bosom of our Saviour. This is the joy we have to-day that we are saved in Him; and if this joy be satisfying, wherefore should we think of changing? Who barters gold for dross? We will not forswear the sun till we find a better light, nor leave our Lord until a brighter lover shall appear; and, since this can never be, we will hold Him with a grasp immortal, and bind His name as a seal upon our arm. As for the future, can you suggest anything which can arise that shall render it necessary for you to mutiny, or desert the old flag to serve under another captain? We think not. If life be long-He changes not. If we are poor, what better than to have Christ who can make us rich? When we are sick, what more do we want than Jesus to make our bed in our sickness? When we die, is it not written that "neither death, nor life, nor things present, nor things to come, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord!" We say with Peter, "Lord, to whom shall we go?" from SPURGEON’S DEVOTIONALS

COMMENT: return to Him, to His Words, and His example.

Sojourner TRUTH:
“"The Lady has spoken about Jesus, how he never spurned woman from him, and she was right."

He never spurned woman from Him. .
Then, what other captain can we follow, to learn how to treat the women of the Church?

“LORD, TO WHOM SHALL WE GO?’

Anonymous said...

"BE A FOLLOWER OF JESUS"

Several days before Sojourner Truth died, a reporter came from the Grand Rapids Eagle to interview her.

"Her face was drawn and emaciated and she was apparently suffering great pain. Her eyes were very bright and mind alert although it was difficult for her to talk."

Her last words to her interviewer were,

"Be a follower of Jesus."

Anonymous said...

I am a human being.
I have a right to speak for Jesus.
No man can take that away from me.
Unless I allow him to do it.
I am a human being.

I will speak.
For Jesus.
I will speak.

I am a human being. Like you.

Anonymous said...

I am growing weary of the "catholic posts" as much as others have grown weary of anonymouos posts.

They all sound so nice and comfy, but if they are read there is a lot of non-biblical "feel-good stuff" tucked in there.

"The Lady has spoken about Jesus, how he never spurned woman from him, and she was right."

Well, except for Lot's wife. She was turned to a pillar of salt.

But that's it. No more.

Well, Ezekiel's wife. She had a bad day.

But that's it. Only those two.

Well, except for...

You get my point.

If you don't think that is fair because that is in the O.T., then you still have a little problem with a woman named Sapphira. God didn't "spurn" her either. But instead He killed her on the spot because she lied about how much money she gave to the church.

But other than that, no one else.

Well, there is...

Anonymous said...

Maybe Catholics don't believe that Jesus is God???

Dunno.

Anonymous said...

"If you don't think that is fair because that is in the O.T., then you still have a little problem with a woman named Sapphira. God didn't "spurn" her either. But instead He killed her on the spot because she lied about how much money she gave to the church. "

Sapphira was just being a submissive wife...going along with her husbands final say about the money. (just kidding)

Sapphira is a great example of why husbands are not the "authority" of the wife. He may just not be a godly man, ya know, even if he is in church.

Anonymous said...

"The Lady has spoken about Jesus, how he never spurned woman from him, and she was right."

This is an excerpt from a speech given by freed slave woman.
Sojourner Truth's comment about the 'Lady' refers to one of the speakers at a meeting for women's suffrage.

So, sorry, no ammo here.
Just a speaker at a meeting. :)

P.S. It's not those "Catholics" that have a problem with the Holy Trinity. No ammo there either.

Anonymous said...

"I am growing weary of the "catholic posts" as much as others have grown weary of anonymouos posts."

Then, don't post anonymously.
Setting a bad example, are you?

Anonymous said...

1 Timothy 2:11-12 proclaims, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” In the church, God assigns different roles to men and women. This is a result of the way mankind was created (1 Timothy 2:13) and the way in which sin entered the world (2 Timothy 2:14). God, through the Apostle Paul’s writing, restricts women from serving in roles of spiritual teaching authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors, which definitely includes preaching to, teaching, and having spiritual authority over men.

There are many "objections" to this view of women in ministry / women pastors. A common one is that Paul restricts women from teaching because in the first century, women were typically uneducated. However, 1 Timothy 2:11-14 nowhere mentions educational status. If education was a qualification for ministry, the majority of Jesus' disciples likely would not have been qualified. A second common objection is that Paul only restricted the Ephesian women from teaching (1 Timothy was written to Timothy, who was the pastor of the church in Ephesus). The city of Ephesus was known for its temple to Artemis, a false Greek / Roman goddess. Women were the authority in the worship of Artemis. However, the book of 1 Timothy nowhere mentions Artemis, nor does Paul mention Artemis worship as a reason for the restrictions in 1 Timothy 2:11-12.

A third common objection is that Paul is only referring to husbands and wives, not men and women in general. The Greek words in 1 Timothy 2:11-14 could refer to husbands and wives. However, the basic meaning of the words are men and women. Further, the same Greek words are used in verses 8-10. Are only husbands to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger and disputing (verse 8)? Are only wives to dress modestly, have good deeds, and worship God (verses 9-10)? Of course not. Verses 8-10 clearly refer to men and women in general, not only husbands and wives. There is nothing in the context that would indicate a switch to husbands and wives in verses 11-14.

Yet another frequent objection to this interpretation of women pastors / preachers is in relation to Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, Priscilla, Phoebe, etc. - women who held positions of leadership in the Bible. This objection fails to note some significant factors. In relation to Deborah, she was the only female judge amongst 13 male judges. In relation to Huldah, she was the only female prophet amongst dozens of male prophets mentioned in the Bible. Miriam's only connection to leadership was due to her being the sister of Moses and Aaron. The two most prominent women in the times of the Kings were Athaliah and Jezebel - hardly examples of godly female leadership.

In the Book of Acts, chapter 18, Priscilla and Aquila are presented as faithful ministers for Christ. Priscilla's name is mentioned first, likely indicating that she was more "prominent" in ministry than her husband. However, Priscilla is nowhere described as participating in a ministry activity that is in contradiction to 1 Timothy 2:11-14. Priscilla and Aquila brought Apollos into their home and they both discipled him, explaining the Word of God to him more accurately (Acts 18:26).

In Romans 16:1, even if Phoebe is considered a "deaconess" instead of a "servant" - that does not indicate that Phoebe was a teacher in the church. "Able to teach" is given as a qualification for elders, but not deacons (1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9). Elders / bishops / deacons are described as "husband of one wife," "a man whose children believe," and "men worthy of respect." In addition, in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:6-9, masculine pronouns are used exclusively to refer to elders / bishops / deacons.

The structure of 1 Timothy 2:11-14 makes the "reason" perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with "for" and gives the "cause" of what Paul stated in verses 11-12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men? Because - "Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived." That is the reason. God created Adam first and then created Eve to be a "helper" for Adam. This order of Creation has universal application to humanity in the family (Ephesians 5:22-33) and the church. The fact that Eve was deceived is also given as a reason for women not serving as pastors or having spiritual authority over men. This leads some to believe that women should not teach because they are more easily deceived. That concept is debatable...but if women are more easily deceived, why should they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? That is not what the text says. Women are not to teach or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. As a result, God has given men the primary teaching authority in the church.

Women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching and helps. Much of the ministry of the church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted to public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only to having spiritual teaching authority over men. The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians chapter 12). Women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), and to proclaim the Gospel to the lost (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).

God has ordained that only men are to serve in positions of spiritual teaching authority in the church. This is not because men are necessarily better teachers, or because women are inferior or less intelligent (which is not the case). It is simply the way God designed the church to function. Men are to set the example in spiritual leadership – in their lives and through their words. Women are to take a less authoritative role. Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3-5). The Bible also does not restrict women from teaching children. The only activity women are restricted from is teaching or having spiritual authority over men. This logically would include women serving as pastors / preachers. This does not make women less important, by any means, but rather gives them a ministry focus more in agreement with how God has gifted them.

Anonymous said...

Beth Moore is one of the darlings of many Christian women, and many churches use her books and materials for “Bible Study.” Christian book stores have shelves full of her stuff. But is she someone we should be listening to and promoting?

About three years ago I reviewed a 10-session DVD series by Moore titled, “Believing God.” What I saw in that series was enough for me to alert my pastor to pull if from our library shelf. In that DVD series I found Moore to lack understanding of basic hermeneutical principles as she either had no clue what a passage said or else twisted the Scripture to suit her needs. Moore very often claimed direct revelation from God and discussed much about her personal conversations with Him. (I found that to be very disconcerting.) Some of her teachings were very similar to the heresy promoted by the Word of Faith crowd, which is downright scary! Beth employed a lot of pop-psychology ideas, including the whole “self esteem” model. Additionally, Moore promoted the very unbiblical model of spiritual warfare promoted by the likes of Neil Anderson and “deliverance” ministries. She also teaches the unbiblical nonsense of generational bondage promoted so much by the spiritual warfare guys and the ever-popular, but aberrational, Bill Gothard. Her whole bearing on that DVD series projected arrogance and self-importance because she has personal contact with God on a day-to-day basis as He tells her how special she is to him. Session 6 was right out of a Frank Perretti novel with the wild spiritual warfare ideas she was promoting, and how the devil is afraid of us - that we are his “worst nightmare.” (I have written a thorough review of this series if anyone cares to see it.)

Personal Freedom Outreach (an outstanding apologetics ministry) has done two feature articles on Beth Moore and problems with her teachings. It seems that what I discovered in the DVD series is the standard fare for Moore. Pop-psychology and the self-esteem card is played regularly. Poor hermeneutics is the norm for Moore as she has no sound exegesis of Scripture. One of PFO’s articles said, “Perhaps Moore could best be described in terms of Eliphaz the Temanite, the eldest and wisest of Job’s three friends. Not every single thing Eliphaz told Job was wrong, but his cumulative philosophy was skewed.”

Many of the teachers that Moore promotes are known to be problematic themselves. Therefore, it is no surprise that one who gets her teachings from the likes of Henry Blackaby, Brennan Manning, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, et al, and who associates herself with mystics and the heretical Word of Faith crowd on a regular basis, will have problems properly dividing the Word of God.

Good teachings can’t justify poor hermeneutics - Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses have some good teachings! Since we do not allow the cults to get away with misuse of Scripture, should we allow Beth Moore to get away with it - should we be giving her a pass? Moore’s revelations from God give her authority over the average teacher because she is talking directly to God and God has told her all this stuff, and He is personally teaching her. Therefore, you can trust everything she says and follow it to the letter. I find this to be very dangerous. Would this be something we’d not question if a pastor was making these statements?

Anonymous said...

Dietrich Bonhoeffer?
Beth Moore gets some of her teachings from the like of Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

Well, no wonder so many Christians think she's wonderful.

Amazing, what some complain about.

Anonymous said...

Beth Moore is a very popular woman speaker. Yet, there are some in evangelical churches who are concerned about her improper use of God's Word.

She does quite a bit of allegorizing and spiritualizing. She doesn't seem to interpret the scriptures using the literal, grammatical, historical method. Her writings and conferences sometimes reveal a bent toward mysticism and a psychological approach to sin issues.

Here is one quote from her web site concerning the “silent assembly”- “God recently took me into seclusion for a week and placed these instructions before me…I feel I have never been given a more serious assignment for a single night gathering in my ministry.. He [God] instructed me to listen carefully as I have ever listened and He would tell me the Scriptures and the sequence to place on the screens…Our deepest desire here is that God would grace us with His presence.”

Another concern is that Beth Moore does teach men in church settings and ministries. The teaching of men, by a woman, in a ministry of the church, is prohibited in God's Word,
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man..." [1 Timothy 2:12]

The following is a description of Beth Moore's Sunday School class that she teaches every Sunday morning at her home church--it was copied from the Houston's First Baptist Church web page:

"Beth Moore has been a Sunday School teacher at Houston's First Baptist Church since 1984. She began teaching an aerobics class/bible study combo to a small group of fortunate women. Now her class, minus aerobic activity, includes men and women, at all walks and stages of their lives."
[Note: this webpage has been removed after a number of complaints had been sent concerning Beth Moore's teaching of men. Currently it says that it "is being revised."]

--------------------------------------

Beth Moore's response on 4/11/05 concerning her teaching of men:

"Thank you for your inquiry about my stand on women teaching men. As you may know, the ministry to which God has called me is geared to women. My conference and weekly Bible Studies are entirely focused upon women. The only exception to an entirely female audience is my Sunday School class. Men continue to come and sit in the back. We never sought them but did not know how to deal with them. Would Christ have thrown them out? I just didn’t know. I handed the problem over to my pastor and under his authority, he said to allow anyone to come who chooses. I have wrestled with this and the Lord finally said to me, “I tell you what, Beth, you worry about what I tell you to say, and I’ll worry about who listens.” My ministry is to women. That’s where my heart is. I make no bones about it. But what if men come and sit down? Do we stop and throw them out? I really don’t know. I just placed myself under the authority of my husband, my pastor, and my God. Your servant, Beth Moore

Anonymous said...

Sounds like Beth Moore hasn't release Beth Moore. :)

Darby Livingston said...

The question isn't the quality of work. The question is whether it will sell. One can be forgiven for lack of substance as long as it keeps the giant cross lit up. I'll put it this way: I've seen some incredible insight from humble people on blogs that will never have their every single thought and every single opinion about the Bible expanded into 300 pages of fluff every six months. I don't mean this meanly at all. I just think Christians should keep their eyes open.

Anonymous said...

If it's sinful for a woman like Beth Moore to teach a Women's Sunday School class: and men choose to come in and sit in the back and listen:

then, if these men are converted to the Lord, does that make Beth Moore a heretic?

MESSAGE OR MESSENGER
which is the important one?

some quibble so much about this issue that they forget Who gave the messenger her gifts . . . .

Beth Moore is a little more
than the Baptist World can handle.
Her influence goes far beyond the Baptist World:

far beyond what can be 'controlled' and 'confined' in the hopes of 'biblical' purity.

Maybe they should muzzle her entirely, if they can't keep men from coming in to the back of her Sunday School class to listen.

That might upset God.
Or some fundamentalists, or someone.

Anonymous said...

Spiritual Authority? men?
give me a break.

try the Holy Spirit, instead.
you know,
'spiritual' as in 'Spirit'

If anyone thinks the 'leadership' of men is consistently superior:
all you have to do is look at PP.

Anonymous said...

Some of you might like to sign this. You know who you are. {rolls eyes}

Anonymous said...

Sorry. I don't read anything that is not signed. :)

Anonymous said...

Wade,

Weren't you going to get a review from someone who attended this "True Woman Conference"?

Here is one review.

DAJ

Doug said...

Thank you, Wade, for printing this article. "He who has an ear, let him hear..."

Anonymous said...

"Sorry. I don't read anything that is not signed. :)"

Oh, for cryin' out loud. Here is the thing Anon 6:30 posted. Does this make it all better now?

David A. Johnson

Anonymous said...

It appears that anyone, male or female, can sign.

If you see biblical womanhood as a gift from God, and agree with the True Woman Manifesto, sign it by filling out the form below. We are believing God for 100,000 people like you to join this movement!

I'll pass, thanks.

DAJ

Darby Livingston said...

I am so thankful for that link. One of Piper's best messages is on that site. :) Thanks again, and I do pray that all would listen to it.

Anonymous said...

WHAT WAS THE CULTURAL STATUS
OF WOMEN IN THE TIME OF CHRIST?

How may it have influenced Biblical scribes?

Jewish Rabbis in the first century were encouraged not to teach or even to speak with women. Jewish wisdom literature tells us that "he that talks much with womankind brings evil upon himself and neglects the study of the Law and at the last will inherit Gehenna [hell]."[3] One reason for the avoidance of women was the belief that they could lead men astray: "From garments cometh a moth and from a woman the iniquities of a man" (Ecclus. 42:13). Indeed, men were often viewed as intrinsically better than women, for "better is the iniquity of a man than a woman doing a good turn" (Ecclus. 42:14).[4]

In view of this low status of women, it is not surprising that they enjoyed few legal rights in Jewish society. Women were not even allowed to give evidence in a court of law. Moreover, according to the rabbinic school that followed Rabbi Hillel, a man could legally divorce his wife if she burned his dinner.

It was in this oppressive context that Christianity was born. Many people -- both men and women -- have hailed Jesus as a feminist because of His elevation of women in a male-chauvinist society. Moreover, Paul's statement in Galatians 3:28 -- "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (NIV) -- has been called "the Magna Carta of humanity."[5] Because of the Christian's standing in Christ, it is argued, the subordination of women that was (allegedly) caused by the Fall (Gen. 3) has been replaced with total equality of the sexes in Christ. Any apparent biblical teaching of the need for female submission today is based on misinterpretations by male scholars.

NOTE: Judaism has gone past the ancient prejudices against women in many ways: including reformed Judaism's current use of women as rabbis.

Christianity has lagged behind Judaism in many cases, not all.

Anonymous said...

"THE MAGNA CARTA OF HUMANITY"

Moreover, Paul's statement in Galatians 3:28 -- "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (NIV) -- has been called "the Magna Carta of humanity."[5] Because of the Christian's standing in Christ, it is argued, the subordination of women that was (allegedly) caused by the Fall (Gen. 3) has been replaced with total equality of the sexes in Christ. Any apparent biblical teaching of the need for female submission today is based on misinterpretations by male scholars.

Sure.
Male scholars 'misinterpretations'?
OR . . . .
How about chauvinist male scholars
purposeful twisting of scriptures by quoting what suits their prejudice and ignoring what exposes their motives.

I think the latter is more the case.

Anonymous said...

"Why should women not teach or have authority over men? Because - "Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived." That is the reason. God created Adam first and then created Eve to be a "helper" for Adam. This order of Creation has universal application to humanity in the family (Ephesians 5:22-33) and the church. The fact that Eve was deceived is also given as a reason for women not serving as pastors or having spiritual authority over men. This leads some to believe that women should not teach because they are more easily deceived. That concept is debatable...but if women are more easily deceived, why should they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? That is not what the text says. Women are not to teach or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. As a result, God has given men the primary teaching authority in the church."

Wow, a universal prohibition (not even in the OT) because of one verse. There are so many problems with this view I hardly know where to begin.

However, unless one is a devotee of Kostenburger or Grudem, one knows that authenteo is simply not completely known what it means... exactly. There is just not enough evidence to interpret it to prohibit all women for all time from teaching anyone. There is evidence that Chrysotem (sp) wrote that a husband is NOT to authenteo his wife. So, it is a real bad thing. Something even men should not do. There is other evidence in secular Greek that it meant dominate or murder or to kill. There is much more on this such such as a huge debate over teaching being positive or negative, etc.

The other problem is that Paul shifts in this particular passage to the singular 'woman'.

There just simply is not enough evidence to make this passage a universal rule in the church age.

I think Satan is delighted that we try to keep over half of all Christians from proclaiming the Word to anyone regardless of gender.

Men should especially guard against wanting this authority over others. A focus on being in command or authority over others simply because of gender is not scriptural. It is how the world works and is carnal. I am afraid it is a huge trap for many these days.

Lydia

Anonymous said...

GOD IGNORES THE BIBLE AND TELLS ABRAHAM TO LISTEN TO SARAH. (so, now what do we do?)


“Sarah saw the son who Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham playing. She said to Abraham, ‘Cast out that slave woman and her son, for the son of that slave shall not share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.’”(Gen. 21:9-10) Abraham is none too thrilled. Ishmael, who Sarah can not even bring herself to name, is his son, whom he loves. But God is clear in his direction to Abraham: “Do not be distressed over the boy or your slave; whatever Sarah tells you, do as she says (sh’ma b’kolah), for it is through Isaac that offspring shall be continued for you. As for the son of the slave woman, I will make a nation of him, too, for he is your seed.” (Gen. 21:12-13)



"whatever Sarah tells you, do as she says "
GOD

Anonymous said...

the "PULPIT"

if this is the 'stumbling block',
get rid of it.

Anonymous said...

Piper is out of tune with much of the Bible.

He is in love with his OWN doctrines. They include a male chauvinism that Christ never had.

Thy Peace said...

Here is one manifesto I like. This is a counterpoint to True Woman Manifesto.

You Like Manifestos?
This post is in response to “The True Woman Manifesto“, a male supremacy-endorsing document meant to be signed by Christian women as, I suppose, some sort of defiant reaction against people like me who believe that the very concept of supremacy between one believer and another is exactly what Jesus came to abolish. Enjoy.

Anonymous said...

I am so thankful for that link. One of Piper's best messages is on that site. :) Thanks again, and I do pray that all would listen to it.

Wed Jan 14, 07:08:00 PM 2009

Take out all the superlatives, emotional drivel, adverbs and adjectives...what is left sounds quite scary. Perhaps the gals waved their white hankies when he spoke as they were instructed.

greg.w.h said...

DAJ wrote:

Here is one review.

I'll engage where you're going with that, David. I read a good part of the review. It represents a reactionary stance against a, well, reactionary stance. In that sense, it is conservative from the perspective of modern feminism.

It highlighted a passage from Kassian's The Feminist Mistake that I think deserves the highlighting that site gave it:

Feminism begins with a deconstruction of a Judeo-Christian view of womanhood (the right to name self); progressed to the deconstruction of manhood, gender relationships, family/societal structures, and a Judeo-Christian worldview (the right to name the world); and concluded with the concept of a metaphysical pluralism, self-deification, and the rejection of the Judeo-Christian deity (the right to name God).

That narrative is awful neat and tidy. Which means it probably is oversimplified in some regards. But that oversimplification is actually dangerously misleading. The patriarchy movement overwrites the Bible with its own view of the biblical roles of men and women. At the simplest level those description of roles reverberates with us because they get ONE FACT right: women can have babies and men can't.

I'm not a feminist in any sense of the word. You could ask my wife and she would confirm that fact. She'll tell you that I lead the household with a very firm hand. But she also knows WHY I do that, and it has to do not with biblical roles but with a very simple assumption: I'm older, have been around the block so to speak more times than she has, and I can articulate very clearly the basis for any leadership I impose on our household. And I also follow through to a great extent in fulfilling the part that I'm very, very good at.

I was seven years into my career when we got married and already had both supervisory and management responsibilities on my resume. I had handled my own finances including doing my own taxes (after working as a bookkeeper at the end of high school for a summer) and running my own side businesses.

But none of that is an argument from the Bible. The Bible makes the argument that the man is the head of the woman just as Jesus is the head of the church. Whether you focus on the word head as meaning structural authority or source, there are two sides to the analogy: one side based on love and the other side based on a voluntary acceptance of authority DUE to a deep expression of love.

I think that a feminist movement that rejects the authority side of that analogy or an authoritarian movement that misrepresents or overlooks the voluntary nature of the relationship between the bride and Christ or the wife and the husband are both wrong. And I think the biblical record thoroughly and completely substantiates that conclusion without any room for disagreement.

Most conservative Christians when pressed on the issue--instead of being whipped up by red meat, pablum statements--agree with my reading (which is, of course, not original with me). Those that don't have an agenda that is not good for Christians, not good for churches, and not good for families.

Can God be sovereign and free will be protected post-salvation? Absolutely. When we agree with God and voluntarily follow his will--freed from sin by the blood of Jesus Christ--it is our new nature providing us guidance...a new creature established in Christ Jesus. When we disagree with God and voluntarily game the system and impose unreasonable expectations in a God-ordained, voluntary position of authority, it is our sin nature seeking our indulgence and our self-interest.

Now the question becomes: is modern feminism essentially anti-biblical? To the extent that it aligns with biblical patterns its truth is God's truth. To the extent that it asks for us to reject biblical patterns, it is at a minimum unintentionally anti-biblical. It's calls for equality for women are in agreement with the Bible. It's insistence on other terms for "equality" seem at least at times to be in disagreement.

A specific example is the biblical passage where the employer pays the same wages to ALL employees based on what they agreed to when they were employed even if some only worked a part of a day. That is in direct disagreement with the view that a woman is mistreated if they receive different pay than men. But, of course, the point of the parable isn't PAY, it's acceptance of the employer's sovereignty. But it has a voluntary element to it that cannot be ignored. I think feminism would be more on track by insisting that women stand up for themselves and demand comparable pay and not accept anything they feel is below the market rate that is paid for men. You kind of have to factor in things like risk/reward, flexible schedule, and even voluntary time off for women to be closer to their families than the men voluntarily choose to be in my opinion. But even there the biblical pattern would downplay the value of men's voluntary "workaholism" because its results are not eternal...and perhaps might even support the feminist viewpoint.

My point is that Christians too often oversimplify the situation in an attempt to use the Bible as a dependable stick to beat up people they disagree with. (And if you have read Wade's blog in the past, you'll know I have the background to very clearly make that comment about our pastoral and missionary leadership.) Sometimes we do that with good intention. Sometimes we don't know WHY we're insisting on a legalistic, anti-Christ framework for imposing our interpretation of the Bible on others...but we do it anyway.

I don't agree with feminism, but for those who are feminists, the ideology represents a breath of fresh air from what they believe is a systematic pattern of male repression. Can't we agree that our faith does not lead us to war with flesh and blood but to realize we war with powers and principalities? That women feel oppressed and seek relief from oppression is an age-old fact. Perhaps there are central truths in that fact that are more important for us to address than whether or not feminism is biblical or anti-biblical?

That leads us specifically to women serving as elders or pastors. I personally find the Bible's message on the subject sufficiently clear that I believe there is room for the interpretation that women ought not be in those roles. And that's the position I've mostly followed when I've been in positions of leadership in churches. But I recognize that there is room for an opposite interpretation that does no violence to the central themes of our faith. And I have had VERY close friends who were women pastors.

And God led our family to one church where a woman not only was an associate pastor but the teacher of the Sunday School class that he led Jen and myself to join. I have to admit that there were times I really wondered what God had in mind. But we developed a great relationship with her and we saw great things happen in that class through the power of the Holy Spirit using her as a leader.

If there is a central fact in our faith, it is that God tolerates imperfection--in fact down right sinfulness--in order to complete, or perfect, the work he has started in us. None of us is currently perfect. Yet all of us who are in Christ are being perfected. And there is room for us to emphasize our own shared view of how God has led us to understand Scripture in our own families and local ekklesias while acknowledging that God might even use a view that is the opposite of ours in another ekklesia (local or national) to accomplish his purpose through THOSE people.

That is not a call to tolerate rebellion or disorder. But it is a call to love those that he loves even when we don't understand HOW he loves THEM...for the simple reason that none of us can explain WHY he loves US, either. He just does.

Greg Harvey

Anonymous said...

THE 'CAGE OF SILENCE'
IS NOT 'OF GOD'


If men wish to deprive women of the pulpit,

then, perhaps men should give it up themselves for a time

until they understand what it feels like to be kept from that irrisistable call from their Creator

then, and only then, can they see the harm they have done to
their fellow human being

this pain, once understood, will free men from the slavery of having to keep women locked into silence.

Thy Peace said...

Here are some good posts/observations by Cindy Kunsman about the True Woman Conference:

Real World Distractions, CBMW, True Woman and Womanhood, the FIC , Neoconfederates....

True Women and Making a Manifesto Manifest

I Just Love That Kevin Johnson! More on the True Woman Conference

True Woman Gives Birth

Surviving a Conference Part I: Making Memories

Prerequisite I for Surviving a Conference: Understanding Christianity, Hypnosis and Anticipation

Prerequisite II for Surviving a Conference: Understanding Basic States of Consciousness

Surviving a Conference Part II: Examples of Building Anticipation

Surviving a Conference Part III: Slipping into Alpha States

Surviving a Conference Part IV: Social Factors

Surviving a Conference Part V: Practical Tips for Resisting Influence

Describing Methods of Manipulation

Anonymous said...

If anyone thinks the 'leadership' of men is consistently superior:
all you have to do is look at AR.

Anonymous said...

If anyone thinks the 'leadership' of men is consistently superior:
all you have to do is look at WB.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, THY PEACE,

here is one of the comments from an attendee of one session:

"Nancy warned us that we may face a difficult battle when we returned to "reality". Never in a million years would I have imagined that my husband would turn on me after I got home. He actually paid for me to attend as a gift. He told me that he knew I would either return as an "Angel" or not from this experience. Well, I guess since I did not measure up to his expectations, I have failed the test. Please pray for us, I am experiencing
some abuse, which I had thought we were past. Joni
Tada's talk is especially relevant for me now. Thank you
Jesus!
posted by Darcie
on Sunday, October 12, 2008
at 4:06 pm "


COMMENT: isn't there another way than this, for the love of Almighty God ! Please pray for Darcy's safety and rescue from hell. She certainly cannot deserve this treatment from such a monster.

I hate what this 'submission' thing does to both the husbands and the wives. It is Satanic.

Darby Livingston said...

"I hate what this 'submission' thing does to both the husbands and the wives. It is Satanic."

I agree. The egalitarian method of equally sharing the forbidden fruit was far less Satanic.

Thy Peace said...

true woman - NOW IS THE TIME: A Historic Day

-----------------------------------------

SUZANNE'S BOOKSHELF: True Woman Manifesto

Anonymous said...

A LIGHT SHONE IN THE DARKNESS
AND THE DARKNESS QUENCHED IT NOT

All that negative energy used to
subjugate and oppress.

And for what?

So some pitiful excuse of a male
can lord it over some woman.

And this is Biblical?

All that negative energy:
men pushing women into silence and submission
women trying to tolerate their situation of deprivation and spiritual abuse (or worse)

So much energy locked in battle with maintaining someone's archaic interpretation of SOME verses written at a time when the culture was pretty grim for women in all areas of life:
but then, there came an exception.
Christ brought some light into that darkness, some hope.

Maybe it is true that
when one part of the human race rises upward,
the whole human race rises
with them.

It must be true.

Because when some suffer,
and are oppressed, then it affects the spirits of the oppressor, the 'uninvolved', and those who try to make things right, but get little support. The misery drags all downward together.



And still today,
like that time so long ago
when Sojourner Truth lived
and spoke from a pulpit:

"But the women are coming up, blessed be God,
and a few of the men
are coming up with them. "

Yes, blessed be God.

We will rise together
and go towards the Light.

Anonymous said...

BE NOT AFRAID OF A WOMAN'S VOICE


Here on the pulse of this new day
You may have the grace to look up and out
And into your sister's eyes,
Into your brother's face, your country
And say simply
Very simply
With hope
Good morning.

Maya Angelou

Anonymous said...

MARY ABIGAIL DODGE (1868)

"The Mohammedan and the Mormon doctrines are that women have no life in the next world except through their husbands,"
she notes here. "The Christian doctrine is that they have none in this."

COMMENT: Well, I guess old Mary Abigail had had it when she wrote this. I wonder if she was a Baptist? Whew! Attitude.

Wonder what she'd say TODAY ?

Darby Livingston said...

"BE NOT AFRAID OF A WOMAN'S VOICE"

I agree.

"We know from the very first book of the Bible that 'intimacy through subordination' is not only possible, but it is God's plan for us - modeled after the intimacy that exists in the Godhead. So for me, as a Christian woman, submitting to my husband is not an option; it is obediently following God's plan for order in marriage, a plan that has existed from the beginning."

Barbara Hughes

And the woman I quote is a Christian, though maybe just not down for the right struggle.

Thy Peace said...

Gender in Heaven by Cindy Kunsman

Sue said...

I believe there is one simple piece of information on which a woman's life turns. "Give a child what they want, and they will ask for more and more." Otherwise put, "if a woman submits to any selfish desire on the part of her husband, she reinforces his behaviour."

The only way to reduce this is if mutual submission is expected. If a man has an abusive or selfish tendency, any submission to this carries the risk of creating a monster.

It would be helpful if this information was included in marriage books as it is in parenting books.

Looking back on my post, I see again my protest against the traditional vow to obey.

My parents were very traditional, my father a busnessman and elder, my mother was a SAHM of 8. She was highly respected by all and much loved by my father. They were a team who functioned as complementary equals in a relationship of mutual respect. I thank them for this legacy.

Sue said...

I wsa refering to the post from my blog linked to higher up. Yes, I agree with what I wrote except that I don't know whether my parents had a traditional wedding ceremony or not, it was during WWII. Perhaps only a civil ceremony. But she died many years ago, and my father mourns her still.

I do not believe that the intimacy they shared owed a drop to subordination.

777denny said...

I have a question for you. It is about Yeshua HaMashiach.
What do you think about my new blog entry?

http://777denny.wordpress.com/

Thank you,
777denny

Anonymous said...

Subordination: 'keeping order'
in a marriage?

Please.

Women are not children, to be treated so.
If they have to obey the orders of their husbands, they are not free and dignified human beings, either.

If a husband has to have
a docile, subordinate wife
in order to have a peaceful home,
then where is the place of Christ in that home?

It isn't the loss of a woman's dignity that creates an orderly Christian home.

What creates an 'orderly' Christian home is the Presence of the Lord in the lives of all who live there. The greatest among them is a servant to all, and this is done because there is love in that home: for each other and for the Lord.

Subordination? No.
Caring, Serving, Mutual Love? Yes.

Legalistic, Cultural substitution of 'subordination'
IS NOT SUBSTITUTE
for the caring, honorable, dignified, sharing, compassionate relationship of a Christian Home,
where EVERYONE is important to EVERYONE else and neither spouse
must live with less dignity than the other 'in order to keep the peace'.

Let Christ bring the peace into your home. And honor your wife, as yourself.

and the two shall be one flesh . . .

ONE

Anonymous said...

I refuse to ask the SBC to release me. They cannot release me, because they have never owned me. There is not but One that owns me and He and I do not need a man to fill in as a "buffer".

The very notion that the men of the SBC, in their piety and arrogance, are in charge of women's souls is abhorrant to me and dare I say my Lord also.

I can and will, however release them and serve my Lord and Savior to the best of my ability, as he directs me to do so.

I'll also pray for the mis-guided men in the SBC who believe that they have a God-given right/responsibility to keep all us females "in-line."

I'll also pray for the dear ladies who feel themselves subjected and spiritually and emotionally abused by these men. I pray that they gain courage and strength to break their bondage and find the freedom to serve their Lord and Savior the way their spirit leads them.

Anonymous said...

Healthy family dynamics exist in a home where the roles of the members exhibit respectful behaviors towards each other and there is some flexibility for situational and personality differences.

A woman's intuition is usually more highly developed and can offer a female wisdom in the decision-making processes of the relationship.

Men DO see things differently than woman, so they also bring that to the kitchen table to contribute to the decision-making process.

But there are intuitive men and there are practically-minded women, so stereotypes don't always
exist.

There is a time and place where children may listen, and speak, and be heard with patient respect as they, also, must learn from their parents how a family can best make decisions.

The quality of family life improves where the members of that family feel valued, respected, important, and loved.

The misery of a home where there is no MUTUAL respect must be terrible for all except the idiot at the top, who creates that hell for his family. It is blasphemy to run a home like this and say it is 'biblical' because the children will come to hate religion.

Most families work things out.
If the 'rules' are too rigid and too mean-spirited, excuse me,
ritually-bound by cultural male chauvinism, then it is much more difficult to solve real problems.

That leads to a lot of pain.
It's always the children who suffer most in this kind of a disfunctional environment.

Thy Peace said...

Off Topic:

Please check out Google's Blogs of Note. They post a new blog for recognition for every day of the week. You come across very unusual and interesting blogs. So far none of them are religious or Christian.

BLOGS OF NOTE
Interesting and noteworthy Blogger-powered blogs, compiled by the Blogger Team.

Anonymous said...

kow-towing to the 'authority' of any man sounds like idolatry to me.

self respect demands that we treat others as we would like to be treated;
AND self-respect demands that we insist that others treat us with dignity

A person's loss of self-respect
is not demanded by God.
Not by God.

Anonymous said...

Dear THY PEACE

I just saw the film
"Manual For Life"
on the coffee messiah blog

Wonderful.
I can identify with that
'they were terrified'
and 'you will burn'

Strange what people do to themselves and their children and each other because they 'are terrified' of all the things that are different and special and wonderful.

the 'I love you.' to the boys'
bullying parents was perfect.

Lovely film. Learned a lot that I had 'forgotten' somewhere long ago.

Thanks for 'off topic' gift. :) L's

Anonymous said...

"Piper is out of tune with much of the Bible."

With this ridiculous statement and all the catholic quotes, you are losing readers of this blog.

WatchingHISstory said...

Adrian rogers was out of tune with much of the Bible.

He was in love with his OWN doctrines. They include a male chauvinism that Christ never had.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous (WatchingHISstory) said...

If anyone thinks the 'leadership' of men is consistently superior:
all you have to do is look at AR.

Wed Jan 14, 08:43:00 PM 2009


WatchingHISstory said...

Adrian rogers was out of tune with much of the Bible.

He was in love with his OWN doctrines. They include a male chauvinism that Christ never had.

Thu Jan 15, 09:11:00 AM 2009


One down, one to go.


Anonymous (WatchingHISstory) said...

If anyone thinks the 'leadership' of men is consistently superior:
all you have to do is look at WB.

Wed Jan 14, 08:44:00 PM 2009


Now, tell us about WB!

Jesse said...

Who determines which scripture is "cultural" and no longer applies to us today and who decides which scripture is "supracultural" and applies to all cultures in all places and at all times?

Jesse

Anonymous said...

Jesse: learn what 'culture' factors are

study the ancient cultures of biblical times: Roman, Judaic, Greek,

you are familiar with our own culture

then, you are going to be able to do some of the evaluating on your own

Another idea, when you're stumped:
pray. The Holy Spirit is your guide. He did the 'inspiring' when the scriptures were written,
and he can help the reader 'decode' some of the confusion about culture. :)

Anonymous said...

What makes up a 'culture'?


A group of people who have a commonality or shared values in attitudes, customs, beliefs, ethics, and value systems

ATTITUDES: about freedom/slavery
authority
ethics
law
roles in society
ways of communicating
hierarchies socially

RELIGION(S)
PHILOSOPHIES
LAWS / CRIME / PUNISHMENT
ETHICAL OUTLOOK ON WHAT IS RIGHT
CUSTOMS AND TRADITIONS
VALUES: materialistic / spiritual
ROLES IN SOCIETY: men, women, owners, workers, clergy, authority figures, etc.