Women In Ministry & Sexism Within The Christian Church

There is so much misinformation on the internet and in many Christian circles  that it can choke 10 to 15 Clydesdales in one setting. Some of those teachings are centered around spiritual gifts, tongues and women in the ministry. There are Christians, who say that they believe and study the word of the Lord diligently with an intelligent and open disposition who are convinced that gifts, tongues and women in the ministry do not exist under any context within the modern church. 

Now, for a fact, there are some complex issues at hand, and I certainly don't mean to minimize the arguments or belittle them that have differing opinions and views on certain issues. After all a person is free to believe what they wish at the end of the day. However, the sad part is that some of the least learned on the issues are the primary ones willing to render the most mis-information. Now, it could be that the problem centers around a person's desire to be faithful to scripture and to not make a mistake. But being faithful without any understanding or knowledge or spiritual advice is just plain old scriptural negligence!

Romans 10:1-4 ~ "1-Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. 2-For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3-For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. 4-For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth."

When Paul was speaking of those who thought that the righteousness of God could be found by observance of the law and along side the acceptance of Jesus, he accounted that they, his Jewish brethren, certainly had a zeal for God, and seemingly wanted to do right by God, but really didn't have the knowledge of God that it takes to be successful. Where most miss it is that the "knowledge" to which Paul was referencing did not begin in books or systems of educational acumen. The "knowledge" to which Paul was referencing was about the person of Jesus and involved specifically knowing who God was in Christ Jesus, and further knowing Jesus in the fellowship of his suffering and the power of his resurrection.

Phil 3:10 ~ That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; 

"Knowing Christ" is the only thing that causes one to submit to what Christ has established as opposed to what one "thinks" that is acceptable based ones misunderstanding or misinterpretations of scripture or the misinterpretations of others. This is from where the problem seems to stem...those who "think" they have been enlightened by some system of men's enlightenment, who begin to share what what they believe  even promoting misinterpretations devoid of any sense of what Christ actually did. Then, a scripture or two, twisted to ungodly proportions, are often worse than a loaded double barrel sawed off shotgun at close range...just used to create a much larger mess!

I would like to focus on one of those areas where men and the doctrines of men have created such a mess:

Women In The Ministry

One such topic that has been filled with much confusion for ages is the topic of women in the ministry. My church The Church Of God In Christ, has basically refused to undertake the issue and make a formal statement accepting the ordination and public recognition of women as pastors and leaders. Now there are many reasons that a person cannot and will not accept a woman in the ministry. For some it's a matter of personal preference, for others it's a matter of what they have been taught over the years. What I would like to point to in this writing is those who restrict what God is doing in the life of women in the ministry by simply declaring that God hasn't called women to preach, teach or to leadership under any circumstance within the church. For them (and they don't like the comparison) the church is simply a glorified boys or men's only club whereby sexism and "glass ceilings" are scripturally justified based on a selctive and non-contextual use of scripture. In these circles, women are told primarily that they should just be happy that they are saved and sit down and be quiet...,"cause the BIBLE told you so!"...The problem is that the bible has said many things and taking those things out of the context of which they are intended ceates a mess, restrictions and ultimately another gospel that WAS NOT instituted nor ordained by God in any manner.

Here are the two scriptures primarily in question as it pertains to women in ministry:

 1 Tim 2:11-15 ~ . 11-Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12-But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13-For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14-And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15-Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.  

1 Cor. 14:34 ~ 34-Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35-And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

The part that has been used to make a whole and complete doctrine to the church universal is 1 Tim. 2:12a as highlighted above. Now, the story goes like this: 

Women's Ministry New Covenant Christian Ctr. NC.

Because Eve was deceived and Adam sinned by following the woman he was in the role of relinquishing his power and leadership authority. The woman's subjection to the man was a part of the curse (Gen. 3:16)  Therefore, Christ dies to establish the order of things, displaying himself as the bridegroom (male figure) of the church (female figure) setting it in order establishing it as the MAN being the head of the woman and ultimately as the spiritual head and authority within the church.  Therefore, because Eve was deceived and Adam was out of his place, the proper place for the MAN after restoration is to be the one to instruct the woman and the woman should not try to instruct or lead the man in any way as it pertains to spirituality or instruction of the Lord. And by the way, men and women are only ONE and EQUALS as it pertain to issues of receiving the benefits salvation, but she (a woman) should NEVER attempt to lead a man spiritually in any way because God does not consider the woman qualified or equal in so doing.  

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Certainly there is some truth to the statement in general. Eve was deceived as Paul notes and Adam was out of place found in disobedience to God. Christ has certainly come to restore all things and set things in order and establish the role of men and women in the home and within society. However, this, when used improperly, is about the most SEXIST admonition ever encountered because if it is not applied with the idea that submission within marriage is FIRST to God and secondly to one another, (Ephes. 5:21) then one will miss the whole point of what Christ actually commands. Secondly, it's the creation of a whole and complete doctrine built upon a context which was not intended for a universal doctrine to be created. unfortunately, there is some obscurity and an incomplete understanding of what Paul was saying and referring to. I'll get to that in a minute. 

Selective Literalism

Now most people who recite that "there are no women pastors or spiritual leaders" refer to 1 Tim 2:12a as stated above. The question is, why do they do so while skipping over the rest of the scripture? Why are they so reluctant to literally interpret the rest of the scripture even adjoined to the one they hold? It seems that they drop in on the verse and select what they wish, make a literal application of it, and bind that on the church universal under some brand of theology, belief and interpretive system. However the question is why would someone who is handling scripture with all sincerity and forthrightness as they claim, select a certain part or portion of scripture and overlook other parts right in the same verse or group of verses? 

It could be because of what the other verses contain and what they are unwilling to really let others know that they either believe or have been persuaded into believing. Here's what we find about the rest of what is stated in those two scriptures. According to those same verses, if we take them literally as the portion of verse has been taken literally, in the church women should:

1- learn in silence"(1 Tim. 2:11),

2- "be in silence" (1 Tim. 2:11) (1 Cor. 14:34) 

3- "be under obedience"(1 Cor. 14:34) [no mention of to whom if she is not married]

4- don't even SPEAK in church (1Cor. 14:34)
5- learn from their "husbands at home" (1 Cor. 14:34)

Now, have you heard these things normally associated with preaching against women in the ministry? One normally doesn't hear these parts of the scripture (as if you can't read it right in front of you) when women pastors or leaders are being taught and preached against. Why is it that none of these supposed "teachers" and "biblical believers" render an open and faithful and true interpretation of scripture by including these elements in their missives?  There is a reason: 

Houston We Have A Problem!

No wonder they that hold that the scripture does not support women in ministry are selective when it comes to these scriptures. Under their interpretation, when carried out as THEY set the standard for it to be carried out, as I have said these scriptures basically tell women to shut up and sit down (isn't that PIMP language?) Further, these scriptures give no recourse for single women to 'learn" anything except they come under "obedience", and we should all wonder to whom??? To Christ or to men? SAlthough it seems that Paul's admonition does not include single women, we should ask are single women that unruly that they have to be told to come under obedience to Christ? Personally, I don't want the single women of our church coming under obedience to me outside of the context of the church and church order. That means more responsibility and trouble and I have ENOUGH already!!! (I'm being facetious-LOL...but I'm telling the truth!)

Quite interestingly, however, none of this addresses the further problem of v. 15 of 2nd Timothy which says the following: 

6- If she has a baby, she will be "saved" "in childbearing" on the condition that she continue in charity, holiness and sobriety (1 Tim. 2:15)

WHAT?

So does this mean that a women can be saved "without repentance" if they just have a baby and continue in holiness afterward. Since saved married women aren't the only ones having children, does this pertain to spiritual or physical salvation? Last, a lot of unsaved women have babies everyday and make no commitments to Christ and they still live, so certainly, I would reason that this must be talking to married woman. I don't see a single woman or one unmarried that should receive this benefit of being "saved" when they would have fornicated or sinned to become pregnant to begin with, but one never knows....Aie, Yie, Yie!!!

HOLD THE PHONE!!!

What am I saying??? I am saying that people that hold to this literalistic and fundamentalist view of scripture, that there are no women in ministry, do so inspite of the fact that other scripture exists that overturn or at the very least challenge their argument. They are highly selective in what they want to accept and what they want to reject and all of that has NOTHING TO DO with God or an honest and above board exegesis of scripture. 

The Mistakes & Errors:

There are many mistakes that can be pointed out when assessing this flaw and error in scriptural interpretation. I'll name and discuss a few of them:

Section I:

Cultural Traditions, Who Was Speaking?

First, we don't have enough information about 1 Tim. 2:11-15 to make a case that Paul was speaking against women in ministry and leadership within the church universal. What we do know is that the culture of Judaism lent itself to the understanding that women should be subdued, while that of the world, or society in which the church was developing, lent itself to the understanding that women were outspoken, verbal, alluring and sometimes overbearing. The church culture, in which the scripture was written, needed instruction specifically delivered as to how one was supposed to proceed in their salvation after it had been received. However, as we will discover, a whole case can't be made off of "partial" knowledge regarding the culture and further contextualization. 

No different than today, those that had experienced life in the world, apart from Christ, knew only what the world taught and had no point of reference other than what was delivered to them within the context of New Testament holiness and righteousness. This is partly why most commentaries offer very little concrete information to begin to decipher the context in which the scripture was delivered. The key to understanding Paul's admonitions is remembering that these were Jewish communities in which the early church was thriving and growing. 

We DO have a clear context of what was happening in the Corinthian church however, and assume that much of the same was happening in the are which Timothy would be an overseer. In Corinth, both the style of the church and the culture in which the church existed had an implication on this scripture. As stated, the culture was such that women were outspoken, verbal and sometimes aggressive in making their questions known within the congregation. This was partially due to the style and seating arrangements of the church. The men generally sat closer to the front of the congregation and women separately and in the back. In general it was not apropos, for women to pose questions of voice their challenge to spiritual practices openly or in the public arena. In addition single women were generally NOT unaccompanied within in public settings where there were married men. This sheds light on why Paul does not mention single women specifically within his admonitions. Paul's words were a matter of cultural conformity and acceptability specific to that setting.  

When Jewish Tradition Is Made Christian Law

It cannot be questioned that the original setting of the church was deeply rooted within the setting and tradition of the Jewish Synagogue. Paul was certainly a Jew, according to his own testimony one that was highly zealous of Jewish traditions before he met Christ.

Galations 1:13-14~ 13-For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14-And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

Dr. John P Mier in his book, "A Marginal Jew"  points out on more than one occasion that Paul's epistles often have a strong Jewish and Pharisaic overtone. In fact at this juncture, and also 1 Cor. 11, Paul's Pharisaic Judaism seeps out more strongly than at other times. This is the key to understanding what Paul was referencing when he spoke about women learning in subjection and in silence and not usurping authority over men. As it pertains to women learning in silence and subjection, Clarke's Bible Commentary states the following regarding Paul's admonition to women in the verses:

"This was a Jewish ordinance; women were not permitted to teach in the assemblies, or even to ask questions. The rabbins taught that "a woman should know nothing but the use of her distaff." And the sayings of Rabbi Eliezer, as delivered, Bammidbar Rabba, sec. 9, fol. 204, are both worthy of remark and of execration; they are these: ישרפו דברי תורה ואל ימסרו לנשים yisrephu dibrey torah veal yimsaru lenashim, "Let the words of the law be burned, rather than that they should be delivered to women." This was their condition till the time of the Gospel, when, according to the prediction of Joel, the Spirit of God was to be poured out on the women as well as the men, that they might prophesy, i.e. teach."

Now, if this was originally a Jewish ordinance, we should keep in mind that the silence of women had nothing to do with Jesus or the restoration of things as it pertained to the work of Christ on the cross, but rather spoke to a cultural mandate that made perfect sense within the culture in which the word was primarily being delivered. So this instruction has just as much of a cultural mandate and a need to be interpreted within that context as anything else. 

Now some literalists and traditionalists balk at this because they have never considered the culturally commensurable teachings of the Pauline epistles in this regard. Or have they? Strangely enough those teachings are not veiled, and neither does Paul attempt to turn his teachings into teachings, instructions or commands of the Lord. For example in 1 Cor. 11, when Paul was teaching how both women and men should present themselves in the service of Christ. Paul appeals first to personal witness and judgement and then to nature or the natural order of things (ontology). He concludes his teaching with the following verses:

1 Cor. 11:13-16 ~13-Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? 14-Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15-But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 16-But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God

  

In other words, if someone DID NOT wish to follow this teaching either in all or in part, they had liberty because the command was only a culturally commensurate command or instruction. Paul's words were based on a cultural understanding and teaching of what was acceptable, not a rule from heaven whereby all churches and believers were and would be bound. Paul does this elsewhere when speaking of certain things as it pertains to the church and instructions for living. For example, regarding marriage, and marital issues he says the following to the Corinthian church:

1 Cor. 7:7-12 ~ 7-For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. 8-I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. 9-But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.10-And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11-But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.12-But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away."

Please note Paul speaking as "I" and then distinguishing the Lord's teachings as being "of the Lord". Paul often  speaks out of culture and out of experience while yet distinguishing the difference between his command and the command of God. The interesting thing is that when we look at 1 Timothy 2:12a we find the same thing. The verse says:

"12-But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."

  

Building on the understanding that some of Paul's teaching were teachings commensurate with culture and specific to the setting in which they were taught, it becomes more easy to understand the complete admonition. This was not a teaching toward church practice or ethic for the church universal nor was it a command of God toward the Christian church in general. This was a teaching geared toward the practice of the early church within the Judeo/Christian setting from which they were emerging. 

When we study through the issue four things begin to emerge 

1. The church was receiving individuals who had no prior experience within the context of any church and needed to be taught order that was acceptable to the culture of that day and 
2. The church mimicked many of the basic structure and order of the Jewish synagogue from which it had come. 
3. Jewish traditions were still acceptable in Paul's time. These traditions frowned upon women engaging men in public discourse especially over religious issues. 
4. Paul's teaching regarding the issue was a teaching based on the cultural setting in which the church was growing and was more specific to the problems which were being encountered as the church grew in the Jewish setting in which it was a part. 

The superimposition of a Jewish standard of conduct or the injection of Jewish traditions upon Western cultural values or norms (which are not sin) is certainly more than the writer of the text would impose. The general statement and purpose would ring true in every culture. There should be a submission and a restoration to the order of God as Paul indicates and clarifies and expounds in Ephes. 5:21-33. However, a rigid application causing women to basically take a back seat simply because they are women, is certainly much more than the intent of scripture, is a SEXIST notion, and is not a God ordained process by which men and women practice and exercise their faith  and communion with one another within the Christian church.     

Section II:

What Women Were Called To Do


A second mistake is that there is usually no reference given to how Jesus viewed and commissioned women for service in the early church or within the Jewish society from which the church emerged. 

First, it is interesting is that women followed Jesus in ministry that were unattached to any male counterparts. As Dr. John P Meier suggests in his landmark work,  "A Marginal Jew" these actions were not in accord with Jewish customs of the day. Women in public without a male counterpart were generally thought upon as being shameful. Jesus had both male and female followers which followed him publically and which were not his "disciples", but who were yet with him and tended to his ministry. Based on extant cultural values and norms, this was an embarrassing fact. In fact this is one of the criterion (embarassment) that helps prove that the gospels were true narratives. 

For Jesus to not only allow women followers, but to also treat these women with respect as he did, was instructive of exactly what Jesus thought about gender traditions of the day. Jesus also allowed women to be on the inside or inner working of his ministry as well as commissioning them to relay messages on his behalf. 

Go Tell The Men!

In each gospel narrative, the women are first at the tomb on the morning of Jesus resurrection. In each case, the women are delivered a message to tell to the men who were hiding out.  Here are scriptures for the examination of these facts: 

Matthew 25:5- 7~ 5-And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6-He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7-And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

Mark 16:1-8 ~ 1-And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. 2-And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. 3-And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? 4-And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great. 5-And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. 6-And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. 7-But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you. 8-And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

Luke 24:5-10 ~ 5-And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead? 6-He is not here, is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, 7-Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. 8-And they remembered his words, 9-And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. 10-It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles

John 20:1-3 ~1-The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. 2-Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him. 3-Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.

and

John 20:11-18 ~ 11-But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre, 12-And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. 13-And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him. 14-And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. 15-Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. 16-Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master. 17-Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. 18-Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.

In each gospel the undisputed fact is that women were commissioned to tell the "good news" of the resurrection of Jesus and that commission was to and towards men without oversight of another man other than Jesus himself. This message was delivered to a group or body of people who were constituents of what was otherwise called the church, and, in this case, specifically those who would become known as church leaders. The men took the leadership role as specified and demonstrated throughout the narrative of Acts and we would expect as much based on the culture in which the church was developing. However it is clear that women WERE NOT excluded from the matter of spreading or delivering the message of Jesus in any way, shape or form and that they were given charge to lead all people into this reality INCLUDING men.

Why Weren't Women Called To Be Disciples?

First, Christ only called 12 to be his disciples and none of them were women and one of them, he accords,  was a devil. (John 6:70) If one were building a case on this fact, supposing that because Jesus did not call a woman to be a disciple it is proof that there are to be no women leaders, then it could be as well said that Jesus would call a "devil" before he called a woman and a devil can be a disciple or leader. not only would that be rank heresy, it would also be yet another incorrect, error filled, SEXIST notion and something said to oppress women even further. Yet, many proponents of "men only" ministry claim just that. The point I am making is that gender of those who Jesus called has no bearing on the issue. The calling of Jesus to discipleship was according to purpose not gender. 

Why then did not Jesus call women into discipleship? Primarily for the reasons outlined and noted earlier. The calling of women to discipleship would have overshadowed the message and the intent of Jesus in the culture. Jesus called 12 men and look how debated his purpose is. If he had openly called women, could you imagine the confusion???

With that said, we should not presuppose that Jesus did NOT call or use women in the service of the Lord. As referenced above he certainly did use women to do his bidding within the Kingdom. Dr. John Meier in "A Marginal Jew"  successfully argues that  a possible reason we do not see women "referred to as disciples", if even from a distance, was because there was no name for a female disciple or follower within the context of the extant language of the day. Meier argues that women are never referred to as "disciples" because the word "disciple" was a masculine noun--that is, the word implied that the "disciple" was male. A woman could not be termed a "disciple" simply because no word existed in the the Hebrew or Aramaic languages for "female disciple." Nevertheless, Meier concludes,

"Whatever the problems of vocabulary, the most probable conclusion is that Jesus viewed and treated these women as disciples." ~ Dr. John P. Meier "A Marginal Jew" 

Dr. Meier goes on to note that the gospel writers ALL gave women an unheard of platform and recognition in their narratives by pointing out that Jesus did not distance himself from women or the commissioning of women for service. 

Paul also did not distance himself from women that served the Lord in leadership and ministry capacities within the early church.  In fact in his narratives Paul mentions some 23 women that function in ministerial capacities in the First Century church. His admonitions to to the church at Rome to receive Pheobe who served as a Deconess at the church at Cenchrea, and  to "help those women which laboured" with both He and Clement in the gospel, (Phil. 4:3) cannot go without note. In addition the ministry of Aquila along with his wife Priscilla, who had a church in their house( 1 Cor. 16:19) , was widely known and a definite benefit to both Paul and Apollos (Acts 18:26). The question is how can a woman labor in the gospel, in silence as the critic and ultra-fundamentalist requires? The notion is just plainly ridiculous if not simply impossible one and further displays a misinterpretation of Paul's intent.  

Section III
Men and Women Are One In Christ Jesus 

Galations 3:28 ~ 28-There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29-And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

This particular verse should be a clear injunction on the fact that God does not use individuals according to sexism or sexual class. However what we have in the mind of many that teach and preach against women in the ministry is a qualified statement...a statement that God only considers that men and women are equal in matters of salvation, NOT in matters of God's calling. The implications of this sort of teaching is disturbing.

For the critics, God can call a donkey, a sinner and even a devil, as referenced above, but can NOT call a woman to service without the supervision of a man...This is a PREPOSTEROUS notion and NOT what the bible teaches.

This is a horrible view and is not be supported biblically, even though some use the bible to justify some of the most egregious atrocities this is yet another equally as dangerous that should be relegated to the garbage heap of history.  

We should note, that YES, men and women do have different roles within the context of life and family matters. That is NOT the issue, but many critics lump them together as if they are one in the same. We should note that there must be submission to one another and to the truth of the word of God in order to advance the church and society in general. However to take it further to say that because the roles are different that it automatically creates a hierarchical structure with God and in service to HIM, whereby the man is anointed and appointed and whereby the woman is simply a "tag along" or a "pawn" piece who is only equal in BED and in giving money, is just flat out insulting and has nothing to do with standing for the truth against the culture. It is better called ignorance and darkness and is certainly not rooted within the light of scripture, nor the liberation of men and women.

Final Note:

If the critic is convinced that women should not "teach nor usurp authority" (1 Tim. 2:12a) and that the verse means that their role will NEVER allow them into ministry that teaches or instructs men in righteousness...then the critic should go all the way and adopt each of the other principles mentioned also. Keep women in abject SILENCE within the church. There is no reason to not tell them all to be quiet and sit down in church! There is no reason to allow a woman to say anything in church at all according to the literalistic view used to support this teaching as has been pointed out here. 

Can you imagine a church without a woman's voice? Can you imagine a choir without a height defying soprano or crisp alto? Can you imagine prayer where a woman's voice is not heard publicly or openly? Can you imagine the financial condition of a church where a woman is told that her money means more than her voice and that she has no voice without a man present but that she should GIVE as much money as she would like, man or no man?

In addition, what is one supposed to do with what Peter preached in Acts 2: 17-18 and what was Prophesied by Joel in Joel 2:28:

Acts 2:17-18 ~ "17-And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: 18-And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:"

Now what does the world "prophesy" in these verses mean to those teachers who discriminate against woman? Does it mean that the women would only be "prophesying" to other women? What would it mean something other than it means in other verses in the NT where we see men prophesying? 

As I have stated previously, the OBVIOUS answer is that men have decontextualized these scriptures and made a whole case off of a partial and culturally relevant instruction given to address a specific situation and custom at that time. This is a misuse and misinterpretation of scripture plain and simple! Some even go so far as to teach that a man is not a "real" man if he is pastored by a woman. Then others note that there seems to be a large amount of lesbian and bi-sexual women who pastor. Well, just in case they didn't know, there appears to be a large amount of homosexual and bisexual men in the pastorate too and if a person does not know who they are, they will not know whether they are led by a man or a woman. 

Men believe that God is sovereign, EXCEPT when it comes to him using Women in ministry...At that time God must be subject to their understandings (or misunderstandings). I was told that what I espouse is a "social gospel"...Not only is that laughable, but if the liberation of ALL men and women is a social gospel...that's news to me...sounds just like what Jesus came to do.

Luke 4:18-19 ~ 18-The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, 19-To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

That sounds like TRUTH to me.


Blessed!