Highland Church of Christ in Abilene, Texas, one of the largest Churches of Christ congregations in the United States, announced this month that both women and men will preach in its worship services. Previously, it prohibited women from preaching. After scripture study, the elders found “scripture supported a woman preaching in our assembly,” reports Loretta special to the Abilene Reporter News, part of the USA Today Network.
in aWomen Preaching Elsewhere in Church of Christ Settings
Fulton reports on two other Church of Christ congregations in which women preach in the same article, The Refuge Church of Christ and the Minter Lane Church of Christ.
Women preach in chapel at most Church of Christ colleges now, while a minority—including Faulkner and Freed-Hardeman— still completely prohibit women from not only preaching but also from leading singing, reading scripture, and leading prayer in their chapel services when men are present.
Churches of Christ Nearly Alone in Christianity in Prohibiting Women This Way
The vast majority of Churches of Christ completely prohibit women from speaking and leading in their worship services and from teaching men and boys over the age of 10 in Sunday School.
The Churches of Christ are nearly alone in Christianity in completely prohibiting women and girls this way. Some denominations do not ordain women as senior pastors or priests, but they generally do not completely prohibit women from reading scripture, leading singing, teaching Sunday School, and similar roles — and from preaching in some cases.
Many evangelical denominations (e.g., Assemblies of God, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Church of God, Church of the Nazarene) and nearly all mainline denominations (e.g., Methodist) ordain female pastors.
Hardly any denomination in Christianity completely bans women from speaking and serving up front like the Churches of Christ does.
It is common in Islam to completely prohibit women from speaking and leading in its worship service. But it is not uniformly done in Islam.
Growing Recognition of Long-Term Harm to Young Girls; Reports of Trauma
A recent study found that having only male congregational-leaders causes long-term harm to many of the young girls in the congregation. It reported that adult women who had only male congregational-leaders growing up had, as an effect, (1) lower self-esteem (associated with more depression and anxiety), (2) less education, (3) higher unemployment, and (4) more of an authoritarian and judgmental view of God (associated with negative psychological health), on average, than men and than women who had influential female congregational-leaders growing up.
In another recent survey, an alarmingly high percentage of women in the Churches of Christ reported symptoms of trauma.
Growing Number of Churches of Christ Changed
Like Highland Church of Christ, a growing number of Churches of Christ congregations studied scripture and changed after concluding that prohibiting women and girls in this manner is simply following a tradition of man and is contrary to God’s word. Highland made this particular determination years ago during studies and decided now is the time for implementation.
Many of the changing congregations found that Churches of Christ have given woefully insufficient attention to the great amount of scripture that asks women to speak to, teach, lead, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere. And they concluded that when the few sentences to which people point to support the tradition of completely prohibiting women from speaking (1 Cor 14:34-35 and 1 Tim 2:12) are read in context, they do not mean women are completely prohibited from speaking.
Wrestling With Sin And Some Questions
Many people have concluded it is immoral and a sin to participate in worship services in which women and young girls are prohibited from speaking, whether they are prohibited from speaking as a preacher or prohibited in any other way due to their sex.
Is it moral to participate in a worship service in which black people are prohibited from speaking, as a preacher or otherwise, because of their race?
Then how can it be moral to participate in a service in which women and young girls are prohibited from speaking, as a preacher or otherwise, because of their sex, some of them ask?
(Remember, some Christians think a few sentences in the Bible mean God commands black people not to have authority over white people—the so-called Curse of Ham, Genesis 9:20-27—just like some Christians think a few sentences in the Bible mean God commands women to be prohibited from speaking in the worship service.)
Jesus asks women and men to love (worship) God with all their heart, mind, and soul and to love (serve) their neighbor. This is the Greatest Commandment. (Mark 12:28-31)
Isn’t blocking women from worshiping God with all their heart, mind, and soul, and loving and serving their neighbor in the worship service blocking women from doing what Jesus asks? If women are blocked from leading singing, helping with communion, offering communion remarks, etc., they are blocked from worshiping with all their heart, mind, and soul and from serving their neighbor.
We are going to join in blocking women and young girls from doing what Jesus asks them to do —- joining in having women and girls instead stay silent and seated based on their sex?
And when God asks women over and over again in the Bible to speak to, lead, teach, and exercise authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere, isn’t blocking women from doing so a sin? (click on the over and over link for 20+ scripture passages)
We are going to join in blocking women and young girls from doing what God asks them to do —- joining in having women and girls instead stay silent and seated based on their sex?
Would joining in having people stay silent and seated based on their race be immoral and a sin?
If engaging in racial discrimination and joining in and participating in racial discrimination is a sin, how can you say engaging in sex discrimination and joining in and participating in sex discrimination is not a sin?
Christ’s Example
Christ is the Word, sent into the world. (John 1) And Christ asks us to follow his example. (John 13:13-16)
The first people to which the Word revealed the good news of the resurrection were women, Mary Magdalene and “the other Mary.” (John 20:16-17; Matt 28:9)
The Word revealed the resurrection to them, spoke Mary’s name, said “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father,” and told them “Do not be afraid.” (John 20:16-17; Matthew 28:10).
Christ said to them: “’Go … to my brothers and tell them, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”‘ (John 20:17) “Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee ….” (Matt 28:10)
Mary Magdalene went to the assembled disciples and spoke to and taught them: ‘I have seen the Lord!’ … she told them that he had said these things to her.” (John 20:17-18; see also Luke 24:9, 33; John 20:10, 19))
Christ thus tells women to go tell assembled men what the Word revealed to the women and what the Word wants the men to do.
But those who insist women not preach and teach to men tell women not to go tell assembled men what the Word revealed to the women and what the Word wants the men to do.
And those who dismiss this as “just” delivering or relaying a message denigrate what the message was, who the message was from, the occasion, and its importance. The arrogance of dismissing it as “just” delivering a message is incredible. The value of this simple message is incalculable. This simple message preached ought never be met by such arrogance.
And the Greek terms for preacher simply mean a herald (a messenger bringing news), messenger, announcer, proclaimer, or the like in any event. In other words, that Mary was a messenger bringing news of the gospel truth of Christ’s resurrection exactly means that she was a preacher, exactly as that term was used in the New Testament. People insisting on more are putting their modern, non-New Testament, non-Biblical definition of preacher onto the matter.
Christ told women to go preach to men. What are you doing?
Concluding Questions
So, in addition to the questions above, I will ask what example does Christ give us and are we following it?
And will we — Churches of Christ congregations — acknowledge that discriminating against women and girls this way is a sin, apologize to the women and girls in our congregations, repent, and change?
And if a congregation does not change or is not diligently working towards change in this regard, how can someone who realizes these things continue participating in good conscious, whether for their daughter or themselves or the people around them?
If you would like to be notified of other articles on the Churches of Christ and similar topics, please sign up to follow Authentic Theology by “Liking” on Facebook here: https://www.facebook.com/AuthenticTheology/
—————————————————————-
——————————
———-
Sources and Notes
For a discussion regarding scripture on this issue, see Steve Gardner, “20 Passages Asking Women to Speak, Teach, Lead, and Have Authority Over Men, In the Assembly and Elsewhere,” AuthenticTheology.com (September 3, 2018).
For a discussion regarding 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, see Steve Gardner, “Most Church of Christ Colleges No Longer Exclude Women From Leading in Worship Services: … 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 …,” AuthenticTheology.com (May 22, 2018).
For a discussion regarding 1 Timothy 2:11-15, see Steve Gardner, “Most Church of Christ Colleges No Longer Exclude Women From Leading in Worship Services: … 1 Timothy 2:12 …,” AuthenticTheology.com (May 30, 2018).
For a discussion regarding 1 Timothy 2:12, see Steve Gardner, “10 Churches of Christ Where Women Speak in the Assembly: 1 Timothy 2:12, “Teach or Usurp Authority” (Part 3),” AuthenticTheology.com (April 9, 2019).
For a discussion regarding female elders, see Steve Gardner, “10 Churches of Christ Where Women Speak in the Assembly: Female Elders (Part 2),” AuthenticTheology.com (April 3, 2019).
A list of gender-inclusive Churches of Christ is maintained by Wiley Clarkson at Where the Spirit Leads.
This complete ban finds its roots in a substantial segment of the movement’s insistence through the 1800s and early 1900s on a traditional, narrow interpretation of 1 Tim 2:12, that women are prohibited from speaking, teaching, or having authority over men anywhere in public—-in the workplace, in government, in the military, in church, in conferences, in public, anywhere. In the 20th century, the denomination narrowed it to apply just in the church, but pockets argue today it extends further.
Some are also not surprised about a negative, long-term impact of having young girls watch their moms and their female friends and themselves be barred from highly valued leadership and service solely due to their sex every Sunday for years and years. It would come as no surprise that having young girls watch their moms and their female friends and themselves be discriminated against every Sunday for years would have a negative impact on those girls. And having men and boys watch young girls be discriminated against in the church would, of course, impact how those young girls are treated in the workforce by those men and boys.
On other denominations, for example Baptist history on women preaching and ordination of women: https://religionnews.com/2019/06/27/should-southern-baptist-women-be-preachers-a-centuries-old-controversy-finds-new-life/
(Before you dismiss this with thinking the Bible tells me so, remember that only a tiny percentage of Christians think that God commands women are completely prohibited from speaking and leading in the worship service. I think around 4% of U.S. Christianity engages in this practice. I suspect that that the percentage of Christians that believe in the Curse of Ham is smaller, but is not negligible. It might approach that number. I hope it does not.)
I think it is about 1-3% of U.S. Christianity that completely excludes women from speaking, leading, and actively serving in the worship service, the lions share of which is the Churches of Christ. Most Amish and Primitive Baptist, some conservative Mennonite, a part of Independent Fundamentalist Baptist, and Plymouth Brethren do the same as the CoC, is my understanding, but they are tiny groups. A much larger portion of the IFB comes close but generally allows women to lead singing by singing solos or in small groups up front. The only religious group of size besides Churches of Christ that *completely* excludes women from speaking and leading in the worship service that I could find is Islam, and it is not a monolithic practice for Islam — it’s cultural. My understanding is that most of the Orthodox faith traditions allow women to read scripture in their worship service, for example. If you know of anything different or any to add or take away from this list, or have any comments on it, I would appreciate hearing from you. Please contact me via the Contact page. Thank you.
See these passages for use of “preach” translated from the base word “talk” or “speak” / laleo:
Acts 14:25
Mark 2:2
Acts 13:42
Acts 8:25
Acts 11:19
Acts 16:6
Of course, “husband of one wife” in 1 Tim 3 is not a prerequisite to be a preacher (it does not require anyone to be married or to be a man, either). The items in 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 (e.g., have children) are not a check-list of requirements to be an elder, pastor, or preacher. Indeed, Paul — single, no children — encouraged people to remain single. And Jesus was single with no children. Paul notes he was “appointed a preacher and an apostle” (1 Tim 2:7).
Added 10/1: Many evangelical denominations (e.g., Assemblies of God, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Church of God, Church of the Nazarene) and nearly all mainline denominations (e.g., Methodist) ordain female pastors. See sources/notes here.
Added: Rains et al., “Oneness in Christ: A Qualitative Study of Women’s Initial Experiences Leading in Public Worship at Broadway Church of Christ,” https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/discernment/vol7/iss1/2/
Updates: 9/17 1:19 pm (clarified timing of Highland’s decision); 9/20 8:06 am (made Wrestling section more readable; added last concluding question; clean up); 9/21 10:49 pm (removed Harding from list with Freed in light of comment, but unclear whether belongs or not); 10/5 added last two paragraphs to Christ’s example section and parenthetical; 5/20, emphasizing edits.
Image by Lisa Runnells — Greyerbaby-2323 at Pixabay
Making it authorized by church leaderrship does not make it authentic, true, or permissive in God’s eyes…you can use all the human wisdom available to makind and still .not attain to the level of God’s foolishness according to the Apostle Paul…have you forgotten tjhat passage in I Corinthians…obviously, individuals who espouse false and erroneous teaching have reached such a level as in this matter…🤔🤔🤔
Amen! 2Timothy 3:16 all scripture is true to teach us right from wrong.
What gets me is the instruction of worship everyone disregard because of this times? Please history repeats itself. This is the devils world of course man’s opinion trying to justify. Women was made for man and man was made for God. Women are to not speak in church meetings.
So God discriminates? Doesn’t Romans 2:11 tell us that “God is no respector of persons”? Should God repent as well?
Hi Rodney,
Thank you for your question.
No, God does not discriminate against women.
That is part of the point.
People discriminate against women.
People have been prohibiting women and girls from speaking in the worship assembly.
That is discrimination.
They may have thought they were doing God’s will. But that does not make it not discrimination.
Thanks.
–Steve
So if Men can’t have babies but women can?
Why should Man be assigned to toil the soil while women suffer the pains of childbirth?
Would those two above construe discrimination?
Perhaps it is the role that the Lord has assigned to man and woman.
As Paul, who is an apostle of Christ Jesus has been given the Holy Spirit to write those words, and who are we to dispute with the Word of God?
1 Timothy 2:9-15
9 I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
This previous sentence – in verse 10 contains the word of “worship”, therefore Paul through the Holy Spirit is telling us how worship should be managed appropriately, and then the following verses follows that. This only applies to worship and teaching.
I do allow women to share their thoughts and answers in the Bible class as part of fellowship as we all are learning the Word of God together. However, the Lord made it clear that some certain roles aren’t for women or for men either.
Without doubt, according to Titus, the Lord made it clear that the Overseers/Elders cannot be women as it is clearly stated in Titus 1:6 – An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild or disobedient.
In Ephesians 5, God did make it clear that husband and wife are equals to each other, as they must love each other as they love themselves. Yet, there are different expectations for the husband and wife but that doesn’t diminish God’s expectations for them to love each other equally, and treat each other as one would like to be treated.
Ephesians 5:22-33
22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no-one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
As the verses above made it clear as to how God ordered such things as: Father -> Christ -> Man -> Woman yet He reminded us that we must love each other and not diminish each other.
There are many other verses in the Bible that made it clear that man and woman are equal in many ways but yet are given different roles by the Almighty Lord.
Should a preacher or elder or a brother take advantage of their position to diminish the role of women, they should repent as we all are made in the image of the Almighty Lord. On other hand, we cannot go against the Word of God.
Finally, each one of us will be judged by the Lord – Romans 3:23 – for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God…making us all the same, and God does not play favorites.
I pray that those verses would be reviewed and be mediated on again, and reconsider the instructions that God gave us are clear on how worship should be organized, and how they should be managed. We are never in a position to argue with God as He is Sovereign over ALL.
Hi Matt, Thank you for your comment.
A
You asked if it is discrimination “if Men can’t have babies but women can”?
No. Discrimination is a human choice.
It is *** people, usually older men in the role of elder *** who discriminate against women and prohibit them from speaking in the worship service and from teaching adult Sunday School.
And who discriminate against little girls by prohibiting them from speaking in the worship service and from praying in Sunday School.
Other *** people, including women and men members *** also discriminate against women and support and encourage and participate in discriminating against women and little girls by picking only men to teach class, calling on only men to pray, not calling on little girls to pray in Sunday School, saying they would not listen to a female preacher or teacher, etc.
They may think that what they are doing is ordained by God. But that does not make it not discrimination. It is still discrimination.
Most likely, they are negligent. They have given very little thought to the little girls and women they are discriminating against, but are simply going along with the discrimination b/c the good people before them and around them did it or after a 5-minute look at the scripture out of context or after a pep-talk article written by someone in the CoC to justify discriminating against women.
They have likely never studied the issue in depth with resources that addressed the other side and they have never given thought to the harm the practice does to little girls and they have never realized that the Churches of Christ are nearly alone in the Christian world in completely excluding women from speaking and leading in the worship service and that they have never studied it as a congregation with someone who is speaking from the other side, if ever.
God doesn’t discriminate. God says “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28). God asks women and men to speak, teach, lead, and have authority over men.
People discriminate. As we see.
B
Then you made an obviously erroneous argument that 1 Tim 2:9 means 1 Tim 2:12 is limited to the worship service.
First, “worship” is not something you do on Sunday morning or in a service, Matt.
Worship is *** all the time ***. It is your *** whole life ***, everywhere, all the time. Read Romans 12:1-2.
Second, 1 Tim 2:9 refers to women who “profess” to worship or who profess godliness or the like. One can “profess to worship” or “professes godliness” all over the place, everywhere, all the time.
Third, indeed, for the past 2000 years, 1 Tim 2:12 was not interpreted as you said, as applying to “worship” and teaching class. Instead, contrary to what you said, it was interpreted as applying *everywhere* in public, all the time—– just like Romans 12:1-2 and 1 Tim 2:9. This is well known. See this, for example:
https://authentictheology.com/2018/04/12/david-lipscomb-church-of-christ-foundational-leader-all-the-teaching-of-the-bible-is-against-women-speaking-in-public-it-gets-worse/
C
Then, you said “Without doubt … the Overseers/Elders cannot be women … An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild or disobedient.”
————- Although the article on which you are commenting is discussing women preaching and not elders, I’ll mention briefly without going into too much detail that you go that wrong, too.
1 Tim 3 and Titus 2 aren’t checklists to be elder. The only person who is blameless is Christ. And he didn’t have children. So, under a checklist system you propose, no one can be an elder. No one. Not Jesus, not Paul. Not your elders. No one. Ever.
Instead, it’s expressing characteristics of the type of person an elder should strive to be. It told Titus/Timothy the ** general kind of person. ** “Husband of one wife” is expressing faithfulness. He wasn’t expressing that an elder has to be all those things. No one is. And if you just treat that one thing (husband of one wife) as a “must have” and none of the other things, then you are a sexist.
Plus, regardless, right there in 1 Tim 3:11 and Titus 2:3-5, Paul mentions female deacons and elders. He uses the term for female elders right there in Titus. You can read about it more here:
https://authentictheology.com/2019/04/03/10-churches-of-christ-where-women-speak-in-the-assembly-female-elders-part-2/
D
Then you attempted to downplay that submission is a two-way street.
You claim women must submit to men.
You can always tell when folks quote Ephesians and they quote “Ephesians 5:22-something” (5:22 says “Wives, submit to your husbands …”) that they have a real problem.
It doesn’t start at Ephesians 5:22.
It starts at Ephesians 5:21.
You know what 5:21 says?
“21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”
Submission is a two-way street. Husbands are to submit to wives, wives submit to husbands. Submit to one another.
You waved at it, but attempted to diminish it.
E
The way God ordered things is mutual submission, not husband as authority over wives.
Head means source (as in “head water”) / representative of (as in head of a line of kids at school).
You try to make it into “authority over” with a modern sense of “head.”
But that is wrong.
That appears to be why you didn’t quote Ephesians 5:21. Since husbands are to submit to women, per Ephesians 5:21, it hurts your argument that husbands must be “the authority over” women.
F
You can see that “head” means … source / first representative of … most easily by looking at 1 Cor 11.
“Head” (kephalē in Greek) means a sense of (a) source (as in headwater) and (b) first representative of (non-hierarchical) (as in head of a line of kids at school).
It doesn’t mean a sense of (c) authority over (as in head of a company) or (d) a physical head (as in the head on your body).
Here are several reasons:
#1) You can see in the rest of 1 Cor 11:1-17—- the context — that Paul is talking about(a) source and (b) representation (the glory of, dishonor, etc.) the whole time, not authority.
Here’s the text with an (a) or (b) after each time talking about source/rep below; some are both:
“5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head (b) — … 7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God (b); but woman is the glory of man (b). 8 For man did not come from woman (a), but woman from man (a); 9 neither was man created (a) for woman, but woman for man (a). 10 It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels. [v. 10 is a mystery and translated 30 different ways. Notice that Paul uses the actual word for authority here, indicating that if he meant authority in v. 3, he could have used the word for authority, not head.] 11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. (b) 12 For as woman came from man (a), so also man is born of woman (a). But everything comes from God. (a) …”
So the text is emphasizing source and representation.
#2) Paul uses the normal word for hierarchical authority in 1 Cor 11:10, just 7 verses later (exousian). If he meant such authority in verse 3, he could have easily used that word. Instead, he used kephale, indicating he meant something different. Verses 10-12 are unclear but may very well mean that a woman is to have hierarchical authority over her own self; it’s just that she’s not independent of man like man isn’t independent of woman.
#3) God is not “the authority over” Christ. Christ is God (see John 1). So, “authority over” can’t be the meaning.
God is “the source of” / “representative of” Christ, as God is one God existing in three persons, the Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and Christ came to us, to Earth, from God. “Source of” / “representative of” also fits the rest of the 11:3 (man is the source of woman (Eve coming from Adam’s side here; Adam created in “our” likeness here) and the rest of chapter 11.
#4) Interpreting v. 3 to mean man must have authority over women is inconsistent with Ephesians 5:21 (“Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”) However, the interpretation of (a) and/or (b) above is consistent with the instruction to “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”
#5) The order of pairings in verse 3 also suggests it is not authority/hierierchical.
G
You say God makes us “all the same, and God does not play favorites” but then you want to demand that women sit down, be absolutely silent, and not teach you anything.
God doesn’t play favorites.
That’s why God asked women over and over and over again to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere. Here are 20+ verses that do so. https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
Of all the words that appear in 1 Corinithians 11, it seems that “head” should be the least controversial. True, “head” is used in two senses in this chapter, but both of those uses are commonly used. One use refers to the literal physical head; the other refers to leadership or authority. The same uses are true of the Greek word kephale.
There was no controversy about its meaning in this passage until feminists, and now it seems “Scholars”, began rewriting the text and attaching entirely new meanings to words. Greek lexicons consistently define kephale in 1 Cor. 11 as “authority,” “superior rank,” or “preeminence.” It was so understood by the “church fathers” for centuries. The “enlightened” now insist that the lexicons and “church fathers” have been wrong and that kephale really means “source,” as in “headwater that is the source of a river.” “Superior rank,” they tell us, is only true of the English word.
Isn’t it strange that Greek scholars would be so influenced by an English word that they would let it override their Greek scholarship! Even stranger is how the “church fathers” were so heavily influenced by an English word before there was such an English word. In all Greek literature feminists have managed to find only two instances where kephale might possibly have the meaning “source.”
One writer examined 2,339 occurrences of kephale in Greek literature and failed to find a single instance where the word meant “source,” including the two uses relied on by feminists. Another writer, himself a feminist, chided his female colleagues for attempting to build a doctrine in such a suspect manner. When commentators today attempt to justify the definition “source,” you should very carefully read any of his or her writings. Their credibility is suspect.
Clearly the passage teaches that Christ has authority over man, man over woman, and God over Christ. I emphasize again that this authority does not necessarily imply the superiority of one party and the inferiority of the other. Even though God has authority over Christ (see 15:24 28), Christ is not inferior to God the Father. In a similar manner, “the authority of man over woman does not imply the inferiority of woman or the superiority of men. On the contrary, just as Christ in his essence is equal to God the Father, so woman in her being and worth is equal to man.
The feminists make one final attempt to justify their doctrine by arguing that Paul is really discussing husbands and wives here and that the passage only applies to wives. This attempt takes a hard fall in verse 12 where Paul states that man has his birth through the woman (NASB). What sense does it make to say that husband has his birth through the wife? The foolishness of such a position appears with just a cursory examination.
I suggest brothers and sisters begin back at the beginning of God’s word, to regain their bearings on the design and purpose of the heiarchy initiated by God, repeated by Jesus and further instructed by Paul.
Of course, putting this genie back into the bottle, regardless of how egregious, requires admission of overstepping God’s commands and instructions. Is it too late?
Hi Gary,
Thank you for your comment but most of your assertions are false and/or ignore relevant material contradicting what you say.
I appreciate that many leaders in our denomination and others who want to uphold the tradition of men of silencing women will provide such assertions and will not provide other relevant material information that contradicts their position. So I’m not blaming you for this. But I am pointing it out to you. What you do with it is what matters.
A
First, it is clear you didn’t bother to read the discussion already in the comments of this article, as much of what you say has already been addressed.
B
Second, it’s obvious that kephale in 1 Cor 11:3 does not mean what you claim — it does not mean “authority.”
1 Cor 11:3 says “But I want you to realize that the head [kephale] of every man is Christ, and the head [kephale] of the woman is man and the head [kephale] of Christ is God.”
Notice it says “the head [kephale] of Christ is God.”
You claim this means “the authority over Christ is God.”
God is ** not ** “the authority over” Christ.
Christ *is* God (see John 1). God *is* Christ. To assert God is the authority over Christ is heretical.
God and Christ are one in the same. They are not one having authority over the other.
You can see this plainly in John 1. See, e.g., verse 1: “… the Word was God.” And verse 18: “… the one and only Son, who is himself God ….”
So, “authority” can’t be the meaning of kephale in 1 Cor 11:3.
C
Third, you totally and completely ignore the context of 1 Cor 11:3, a sure sign you have mishandled the Word.
1
Before leaving John 1, I will note for you the following regarding the nature of Christ as *source* of man and the *source* of all things, as well as Christ as *representative* of God (e.g., light, making known) and God as the *source* of Christ (e.g., coming from, relationship):
John 1: “2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness ….
9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, … 12 … to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. …
… grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.”
2
The context of the passage in which 1 Cor 11:3 resides is a theme of *source* and *representative*.
****** “Head” (kephalē in Greek), viewed in context there, means a sense of (a) source (as in headwater, like beginning of or origin of) and (b) first representative of (non-hierarchical) (as in head of a line of kids at school).
It doesn’t mean a sense of (c) authority over (as in head of a company) or (d) a physical head (as in the head on your body).
Here are several reasons:
#1) You can see in the rest of 1 Cor 11:1-17—- the context — that Paul is using a metaphorical word play on “head” (kephale) to talk about (a) source and (b) representation (the glory of, dishonor, etc.) the whole time, not authority.
Here’s parts of the text with an (a) or (b) after each time talking about in the sense of (a) source or (b) representation below (some are both, I just mark one):
“….. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head (b) — … 7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God (b); but woman is the glory of man (b). 8 For man did not come from woman (a), but woman from man (a); 9 neither was man created (a) for woman, but woman for man (a). 10 It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels. [v. 10 is translated 30 different ways. See below for comment on it.] 11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man (b), nor is man independent of woman. (b) 12 For as woman came from man (a), so also man is born of woman (a). But everything comes from God. (a) …”
So the text is emphasizing source and representation. That’s the context you ignored. The passage is about source and representation.
#2) Paul uses the normal word for authority in 1 Cor 11:10, just 7 verses later (exousian). If he meant authority in verse 3, he would have used that word. Instead, he used kephale, indicating he meant something different.
Verses 10 is unclear but likely means that a woman is to have authority over her own self (her own physical head); it’s just that she’s not independent of man, just like man is not independent of woman.
Notice that Paul seems to use head in v.10 in the literal sense, meaning authority over her own head, her own self.
#3) “Source” / “representative” fits the rest of v. 3.
God is “the source of” / “representative of” Christ, as God is one God existing in three persons, the Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and Christ came to us, to Earth, from God.
“Source of” / “representative of” also fits the rest of the 11:3. Man is the source of woman (Eve coming from Adam’s side here).
Christ is present at the beginning (see John 1). Adam is created in “our” likeness in Genesis (i.e., including Christ’s).
Thus Christ is the source of man.
#4) Interpreting v. 3 to mean man has authority over women is inconsistent with other parts of the Bible.
“Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Ephesians 5:21
As to sexual relations, a husband ‘does not have authority’ over his body—his wife has authority over him. 1 Cor 7:4.
Deborah had authority over many men. Judges 4-5.
Jesus told Mary to tell the disciples what the Word wanted them to do. John 20:16-17; Matt 28:9-10.
Female prophets speak for God to men and women.
There are many instances in which women have authority over men, given by God, in the Bible. See https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
Your interpretation that of v. 3 to mean that man must have authority over women is inconsistent with these and other parts of the Bible.
But the interpretation of v.3 in which kephale/ head means the sense of source / representation is consistent with the rest of the Bible, including John 1, the instruction to “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ,” etc.
#5) The order of pairings in 1 Cor 11:3 also suggests it is not authority/ hierierchical. If Paul had meant “authority,” he would have most naturally put it in order of God-Christ, Christ-man, man-woman. Instead the order is in order of appearance in flesh on Earth, as in their source/representation on Earth: Christ-man, man-woman, God-Christ.
Christ created Adam on Earth, then Eve, then Christ born.
D
You say “Greek lexicons consistently define kephale in 1 Cor. 11 as “authority,” “superior rank,” or “preeminence.””
What you say is false.
Indeed, the Liddel, Scott & Jones lexicon, one of the respected lexicons of Ancient Greek, “does not give “authority” or “leader” as meanings of kephalē. It does, however, give “source”, “origin” and “starting point” as possible meanings ….” See, e.g., https://margmowczko.com/lsj-definitions-of-kephale/>
E
You say, as to kephale meaning “authority”—- ” It was so understood by the “church fathers” for centuries.”
What you say is false.
For example:
“Athanasius (296-373), bishop of Alexandria, quoted from the First Creed of Sirmium which states,
For the Son is the Head, namely the beginning of all: and God is the Head, namely the beginning of Christ . . .
John Chrysostom (c. 349 – 407) was adamant that “head” doesn’t mean “leader” in 1 Corinthians 11:3. He said that if we take “head” with the sense of governing, the passage won’t make sense and it will lead to false ideas about Jesus Christ, which is his primary concern. (Homily 26 on First Corinthians)
Cyril (376-444), Archbishop of Alexandria, in De Recta Fide ad Pulcheriam et Eudociam wrote:
… [Adam] became first head, which is source, … Since Christ was named the second Adam, he has been placed as head, which is source, of those who through Him have been formed anew …. Therefore he himself our source, which is head, has appeared as a human being. … Because head means source, he establishes the truth for those who are wavering in their mind that man is the head of woman, for she was taken out of him. Therefore as God according to his nature, the one Christ and Son and Lord has as his head the heavenly Father, having himself become our head because he is of the same stock according to the flesh.
(See Patrologia Graeca 76, pp.1336-1420.)”
See https://margmowczko.com/kephale-and-male-headship-in-pauls-letters/
F
You say “In all Greek literature feminists have managed to find only two instances where kephale might possibly have the meaning “source.””
What you say is false.
See above.
G
God, throughout the Bible, asks women to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men. Here are 20+ passages in which God does so. https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
Jesus, the Word, asks women to go, tell assembled men what the Word revealed to the women and what the Word wants the men to do. See, e.g., John 20:16-17; Matthew 28:9-10
It is a direct contradiction to what God asks of women to demand that women and girls do the opposite of what God asks of them, demanding that women and girls be silent and subservient to men. You have bought into a twisting and misconstruing of a handful of sentences, like 1 Cor 11:3, in trying to uphold a tradition of man. Please stop. Thank you.
Excellent article. Having grown up in the churches of Christ (just north of Abilene) and having spent more than 30 years preaching in the denomination I want to say thank you Steve the article and thank you Highland Church for your courage. I left the denomination 18 years ago . . . and immediately found a fellowship where women not only taught and preached but were central to the teaching and is currently fed by a great senior pastor who is a great woman of faith.
Thank you Terry. And thank you very much for serving all those years!
So Sreve, shall I now address you as Yaweh? El Shaddai? Culture is now moving into these roles and not God’s Word. Indeed, if in 100 years it goes back being women should not, there is sure to be another Steve around to promote it. God’s Word has not changed, so why has the church?
As I urged you when I went into Macedonia—remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine,nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith. – 1 Timothy
Too bad you just joined the world.
Where can we access their “study” that led them to this point?
Hi Matt,
Thank you for your question.
I wrote articles in March and April of this year that includes links to materials related to 20 Churches of Christ that studied the issue and stopped prohibiting women from speaking in their worship assembly. Highland’s study material is not among them but an article discusses their process from long ago is linked. You might find the study material from some of the other churches helpful.
Here are links to the two articles:
https://authentictheology.com/2019/03/26/10-churches-of-christ-where-women-speak-in-the-assembly-list-and-links-part-1/
https://authentictheology.com/2019/04/24/another-10-churches-of-christ-where-women-speak-in-the-assembly-their-reasons-a-quiz/
Thanks, Steve
You may contact Highland Church of Christ and speak to one of our ministry staff or Elders. I’m sure they’d be happy to supply you with any number of materials used in this years-long process.
Steve – Here is a summary of that study at Highland. It’s a LONG time ago; and there is so much I’d word differently now. Mike http://mattdabbs.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2014/05/WomenGiftsandBody-of-Christ-MCope.mp3
Hi Mike,
Thanks much. I look forward to this. Thank you for your work.
I am a woman with the gifts of administration, speaking, and singing. My three daughters are in their twenties and are strong leaders in their faith. One is a leader in her campus ministry on a secular campus, one uses her gift of theater in Christian skits and is a camp counselor, and one uses her gift of music to serve in church worship and as a godly teacher to her orchestra students in public school. We find PLENTY of ways to use our gifts for God’s glory.
It does not bother me to let godly men lead our worship one hour every Sunday. I WANT their leadership. God wants their leadership. I feel like this argument about women’s roles sounds a lot like the disciples arguing about who is the greatest. And Jesus replied “Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last and the servant of all.” Doesn’t being “silent and seated” reflect the kind of humility Jesus spoke of? Why is it so important for us to be up front? Each of us needs to examine our own motives in these discussions. God’s glory should always be our goal, not our own.
To women who have the gift of speaking or leadership, I would encourage you to ask God to show you how to use your gifts for HIS glory. When I did, I suddenly got a call from Connecticut asking me to speak at a state-wide ladies day retreat and it was an amazing experience. I don’t know ANYONE in Connecticut, so it was completely God. And now I am preparing to speak at another Ladies’ retreat about trusting in God. Let’s trust him to show us where to use our gifts instead of worrying about our “rights”. As Casting Crowns sings “I don’t want to leave a legacy. I don’t care if they remember ME. Only Jesus.”
Thank you for your comment. I’m glad you and your daughters are gifted and find plenty of ways to use your gifts for God’s glory.
But this is not about you.
This is supposed to be about others. Not yourself.
That you find ways does not make it OK to completely ban women from speaking in the worship service. It is sex discrimination, contrary to God’s word, a sin, and immoral. It causes harm to many young girls and women to do so. You may not mind it, but that does not excuse prohibiting others.
What you had to say was completely disjointed and completely contradictory.
A
On the one hand, you say “To women who have the gift of speaking or leadership, I would encourage you to ask God to show you how to use your gifts for HIS glory.”
So those women ask God and God says: Use your gifts for my glory by preaching, leading singing, and reading scripture in the worship service.
And God says to those women: Here in the Bible I have given examples of women speaking to, teaching, leading, and having authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere.
But you say to those women: No, sit down and be silent.
B
On the one hand, you say “Jesus replied “Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last and the servant of all.””
And these women say: OK, I would like to be the servant of all by leading singing for all this Sunday.
But you say to those women: No, sit down and be silent.
C
On the one hand you say, “It does not bother me to let godly men lead our worship one hour every Sunday. I WANT their leadership.”
Then you say “Each of us needs to examine our own motives in these discussions. God’s glory should always be our goal, not our own.”
D
The point is that it is great that you have found other ways to serve. That does not justify your blocking other women from serving in the worship service, in Sunday School, or other ways.
And the point is that all of these ways are serving. Leading prayer is serving. Leading singing is serving. Preaching is serving. It is hard work. Stop trying to impliedly criticize other women for wanting to serve that way. It takes courage to stand up in front of people and speak. You and others ought to be supportive of anyone who is willing to do that. Instead, folks try to make it out like they are seeking glory for themselves (“Each of us needs to examine our own motives ….”). It is mean and hurtful to accuse women who wish to serve God in the worship service of seeking glory for themselves or of having self motives or having other motives. No one should pull sisters in Christ down that way. We should be supporting them with all we have. Thank you.
https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
For those interested in an able defense of the traditional view by a top RM scholar, see “Women in the Church: Biblical and Historical Perspectives” (2015), Everett Ferguson (PhD, Harvard). Ferguson was a long time professor at ACU. Now on sale on Kindle for $3.
A long forward to the book by Ron Highfield (PhD, Rice University. Professor of Religion, Pepperdine University) ends with the following:
“I highly recommend Ferguson’s Women in the Church to elders and preachers, to men and women, and to anyone interested listening to Scripture on this subject or any other. I recommend it because it asserts the wisdom of the Creator and affirms the goodness of the created order. It betrays no insecurity about the authority of the New Testament or feelings of embarrassment for its teaching about the appropriate roles of men and women in the assembly and governing order of the church. It humbly acknowledges the wisdom of God in making “male and female,” and it upholds the created goodness of both men and women in their likenesses and distinctions from each other. Finally, I applaud Ferguson’s exhortation to resist thoughtless assimilation and accommodation to a culture in rebellion against the Creator and his insistence that church listen first and foremost to the Scriptures for guidance about how to order the church’s life. I pray that the church will heed Ferguson’s exhortation.”
Hi Keith, Thank you for your comment. Sorry for the delay.
Four things about your comment:
*** One: “Defense” of the practice of prohibiting women and girls from speaking in the worship service is a disturbing thing.
That is how we are where we are. The practice is a tradition of man. The vast majority of people in the CoC do it, not because they have done some deep analysis about why it is right, but because the good people around them and that came before them do it and did it, and so they do it, too. They mimic the practice. From time to time the preacher spends a few minutes giving some talking points about why he thinks what they are doing is the right thing to do. That’s it.
So when it is called into question, folks don’t ask themselves if they are doing the right thing.
Instead, they do as you have suggested. They defend themselves. This is pride and group-think in operation. It is a tragedy.
*** Two: You say the CoC is engaged in the “traditional” view. That is not right if you are referring to scripture.
The Churches of Christ is practicing a modern innovation, a practice based on a relatively new, recent interpretation, one that was modified and influenced by culture.
The Churches of Christ and some others as recently as the late 1800s and early 1900s interpreted scripture to exclude women from teaching men and from having authority over men **** virtually anywhere and everywhere and in any context **** That is: in public, in the workplace, in government, in church, anywhere except in some home settings, in private. That interpretation was based on the idea that women were inferior and that they must not do anything except raise children. It was a patriarchical society for centuries.
David Lipscomb, Churches of Christ foundational leader, said in the late 1800s and early 1900s, for example:
+ “It is wrong for a woman to become a leader or public teacher of men in any place or on any occasion.”
+ “[A]ll public teaching and speaking on any subject at any place puts woman out of place, out of her God-given work.”
+ Women’s “unfitness to lead and teach arises from her strong emotional nature causing her to be easily deceived and to be ready to run after anything or body that might strike her fancy against reason and facts.”
It became clear at some point that the culture could not support the concepts that women are inferior and must be limited to raising children —- it was clear that that was just wrong — culture could not support the continued interpretation of scripture to exclude women that way.
But Churches of Christ kept excluding women at church while eventually mostly stopping using scripture to exclude them in the workplace and government.
The basis for the interpretation disappeared and most of its application (to workplace, government, public, etc.) disappeared, but its application to one place (church) held on. The CoC conformed to culture, but could keep the practice up as a tradition in the church, so it did so, and it used scripture to justify it.
The current Church of Christ interpretation (excluding in the assembly and Sunday School only) is thus not the traditional scriptural interpretation. It is not the same as the way scripture has been interpreted for 2000 years. Or even 100 years ago.
It is the traditional tradition of man over the past century or so.
So, it is ironic when folks talk about “culture” influencing practices.
It is really church culture that causes folks to “defend” what they are doing instead of considering if they are doing the right thing.
And it is conforming to culture that produced the CoC’s current practice / interpretation in the first place. It is not the centuries old interpretation.
You can read more about this here: https://authentictheology.com/2018/04/12/david-lipscomb-church-of-christ-foundational-leader-all-the-teaching-of-the-bible-is-against-women-speaking-in-public-it-gets-worse/
And here: https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/eq/2000-2_151.pdf
And here: https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/eq/2000-3_195.pdf
*** Three: I’ve read Dr. Ferguson’s book. I encourage anyone to get it. It is indeed the best defense of the current Church of Christ practice. But it is not effective. I encourage you to get it and then compare it to anything I’ve written here and to the opening chapters of https://www.amazon.com/Two-Views-Women-Ministry-Counterpoints/dp/031025437X/.
Dr. Ferguson’s analysis is a bit of a muddle. Among other things, Ferguson leaves 1 Cor 14:26 out of his analysis of context; says “in every place” does not mean “in every place” but just means one very specific place (ironic that he insists “in every place” means something very specific when the surrounding text does not suggest it, but insists “teach or authority” means something very broad when the surrounding text—1 Tim 1:1-8 and 1 Tim 2:12 itself—-suggests it means something very specific); does not recognize that women speak to, teach, and have authority over men in the assembly according to Ephesians 5:18-20 and Colossians 3:16; and it goes on and on. In short, it is a “defense,” a one-sided set of talking points to justify the CoC practice, but side steps and ignores the scriptural problems with the practice. And completely ignores the 20+ passages in which God asks women over and over and over again to speak to, teach, lead, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere:
https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
*** Four: Let me recommend a book to you. Instead of reading one that takes just one side, read one that has top-notch scholars arguing both sides and interacting with one another. That’s where you learn things. This one is really good— top-notch people, clear writing:
https://www.amazon.com/Two-Views-Women-Ministry-Counterpoints/dp/031025437X/
I would find this article comical if it weren’t so serious to so many souls. Since you want to twist scripture, maybe think of this differently. God has been speaking to and through men since the very beginning. Jesus came to show that God uses the “lowliest” to see God glorified in example after example. If your twisting of the scripture were true why would Jesus Himself not have come as a female since obviously in that society the female was considered lower than the man? Why didn’t He choose female apostles, at least one in your theology? After His death, you heretically try to teach that the women who observed the Lord came and taught the disciples. Since when is passing on eyewitness testimony equal to preaching? There has been no serious division on this subject for nearly two thousand years but all of the sudden y’all know better? You are no different than those who say Baptism is not essential to salvation, or those that introduced/invented the sinners prayer. You have an agenda outside of what is God’s will. God has asked men to lead since the beginning, for good or for bad, God has His plan and I for one am glad to know that the Lord’s church is one of the singular hold outs in this area. Standing alone is what Christ’s church has always done, we are like paratroopers, we are supposed to be surrounded by the enemy. Among the enemy of God is where we do our work and you have aligned with the enemy because you want us to conform to the world. And your comparison to Islam, while simple a cheap shot only proves your contempt for those who hold to the faith of our fathers. However, since you consider yourself a scholar, you know full well that much of Islamic teaching was drawn from the Bible, mainly the OT and it was definitely patriarchal. Women are so very important and we as men are to treat them with utmost love and respect and that is exactly what we practice in our families. We respect them by preaching truth and by allowing them to serve in the God honoring roles that God Himself appointed for them. We respect women by taking up our cross and leading the way we were instructed and by defending the faith from heretical worldly teaching. While exegesis is fine when it agrees with the plainly worded text it is not fine when we try to insert our own beliefs between the plainly spoken text. God made the living Word simple enough for simple people to understand and deep enough that we can only plumb the depths when accompanied by the Holy Spirit. But what He absolutely didn’t do was make it so complicated that only through some deep scholarly exegesis that it could be fully understood.
Hi William, Thank you for your comment.
Your description of scripture is far off, though.
You said “God has been speaking to and through men since the very beginning.”
God has also been speaking to and through women since the very beginning. They were made in God’s image and given dominion just as man. See Genesis 1.
That you weren’t listening does not mean God wasn’t speaking. This is like when God said to Abraham, “Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, …”’ (Genesis 21:12-13) But you haven’t been listening.
God had Deborah, his prophet, lead all of Israel. (Judges 4-5)
God had Huldah, his prophet, teach assembled men about scripture and God’s message. (2 Kings 22:11-20)
God had Abigal speak to and teach David about God’s will. (1 Samuel 25:14-35)
God spoke to and through other female prophets, like Miriam (Exodus 15:20) and Noadiah (Neh 6:14).
You ask “why would Jesus Himself not have come as a female since obviously in that society the female was considered lower than the man?” You realize he was *born* of a female, right? God could have chosen to appear in any number of ways, but chose to be born of a virgin woman *without a male involved*. So, Jesus was a male, but he was born of a woman. We have no idea of his exact chromosomal make-up, so who knows. A woman was a the center of it, a most holy place, giving birth to the savior of the world.
You ask “Why didn’t He choose female apostles, at least one in your theology?”
There were female apostles (see Romans 16:7). We don’t know why they weren’t among the first 12. It may be b/c some guy on Facebook would say “women can’t be in leadership b/c they were among the original 12 and when they were in leadership, the leadership betrayed Jesus.”
More likely, it was b/c the 12 camped and lived with Jesus for 3+ yrs and women could not do that in that society. We don’t know.
But all 12 were Jewish. By your reasoning, since there were no non-Jewish first 12 apostles you would have to argue only Jewish people can be preachers.
You ask “Since when is passing on eyewitness testimony equal to preaching?” There you try to minimize the resurrection, that Jesus is the Word incarnate, and that Christ chose Mary to first to bear the good news. Do you deny that telling assembled people what the Word reveals to you and what the Word wants them to do is preaching?! Those women were told by Christ to go and tell the assembled men what the Word revealed to them—the good news about Christ’s resurrection and more—and what the Word wants them to know and do.
And Jesus chose women as leaders. Jesus chose …
+ a woman as the first preacher of his identity as the Messiah. (John 4:1-42)
+ women as the first preachers of the good news of his resurrection. (John 20:16-19; Matt 28:9-10)
+ women as prophets. (Luke 2:36-38; Acts 21:8-9; Acts 2:17-18).
+ women who put their freedom and lives at risk for the gospel. (Romans 16:3-7)
+ women who established churches in their homes (Col. 4:15; Acts 12:12, 17:1-9
+ women as elders and deacons in the church (presybytidas, Titus 2:3-5; 1 Tim 3:11; Romans 16:1-2)
+ women as disciples. (e.g., Acts 9:36; Luke 8:1-3)
+ women to speak, pray, and prophesy in the church (1 Cor 11:5)
+ women to admonish men in the church (Col 3:16)
+ women to teach men (1 Cor 14:26; Matt 28:19; 1 Peter 4:10-11; Titus 2:3; Acts 18:24-26; Acts 2:17-18; Col 3:16)
+ women who stood at the cross when nearly all the men had scattered …. it goes on and on and on ….
You say “There has been no serious division on this subject for nearly two thousand years but all of the sudden y’all know better?” Give me a break. No Protestant says this except when they are trying to get their way. Everyone knows the Catholic church had a top-down grip on all doctrine from centuries. Relatively quickly after the Reformation and after the scripture got into the hands of the people, women began speaking and began being ordained.
You say “You have an agenda outside of what is God’s will.” No.
God asks, in scripture, over and over and over again for women to speak, teach, lead, and have authority over men.
There are only 3-4 sentences to which people point to demand women not speak. And it takes about 15 minutes of reading them in context, instead of just reading them by themselves out of context, to understand that they don’t mean women should be completely barred from speaking. Only about 4% of Christianity completely bars women from speaking and leading in the worship service like the Churches of Christ do. They have studied this and figured it out.
Blocking women from what God asks is a sin.
And it harms young girls and women.
You said “And your comparison to Islam, while simple a cheap shot only proves your contempt for those who hold to the faith of our fathers.”
No, I don’t have any contempt for the people. Lots of good people do this. The vast majority of them have never really given the issue much thought. I did this and hadn’t given it much thought for years, too.
You said “But what He absolutely didn’t do was make it so complicated that only through some deep scholarly exegesis that it could be fully understood.”
Agreed. It is really straightforward.
1. God asks women over and over and over and over again in the Bible to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere.
These passages are skipped over and ignored by Churches of Christ folks all the time. They are not skipped over by others.
Here are 20+ passages, for example: https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/ .
2. There are only 2-3 sentences people point to to claim women should not speak in the assembly. That’s it. 2-3.
They are 1 Cor 14:34-35 and 1 Tim 2:12.
3. If you read those 2-3 sentences out of context (that is, just read those sentences and nothing or little around them), then it sounds like women shouldn’t speak.
4. But if you just read those out of context, you realize they can’t mean what you just read.
a. What?! “Women should remain silent in the churches”??? But women sing, so that can’t be right.
b. What?! If women “want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home”??? But they ask questions in Sunday School and in the hall, so that can’t be right.
c What?! “It is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church”??? How can that be?
d What?! “I do not permit a woman to teach”?! But women teach kids classes, and they teach high school during the week, and they teach by singing, and they teach just by living, so how can that be?
5. So you know something’s up. There must be something more to this. You know you have to do some more work to figure this out.
6. So what most people do is just do what the people who came before them did and keep passing it down. Unfortunately, the Churches of Christ have been passing down a super-restrictive practice
7. When you go and look at the scripture, though, you can see that it does not require women not to speak.
8. 1 Cor 14:34-35 says “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” (1 Cor 14:34-35)
9. When you study the scripture around it, you discover it means this: Married women are not to speak disruptive questions in the assembly; instead they are supposed to ask those to their husbands at home. To do otherwise causes a disgrace.
10. You can read about this here, it takes about 10 minutes: https://authentictheology.com/2018/05/22/part-3-most-church-of-christ-colleges-no-longer-exclude-women-from-leading-in-worship-services-does-it-contradict-1-cor-1434-35-women-should-remain-silent/
11. 1 Tim 2:12 says this: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.” (1 Tim 2:12)
12. When you study this scripture around it, you discover it means this: I do not permit a woman to teach uninformed, false, authoritative doctrine in a domineering way that creates conflict with a man; instead, any teaching, etc., must be peaceful.
13. Also, by reading 1 Tim, you can see that 1 Tim 2:12 is in a letter that is providing a set of instructions for the particular time and culture to which it was directed — lifting up holy hands, women are not to wear pearls or gold, widows must have washed the feet of the people, slaves should respect their masters, etc.— so you can see this is among them.
14. You can read about it here, it takes about 10 minutes: https://authentictheology.com/2019/04/09/10-churches-of-christ-where-women-speak-in-the-assembly-1-timothy-212-teach-or-usurp-authority-part-3/
15. So, it is straightforward to see that God asks women to speak. It is a sin to block them from doing so. That should be easy to understand.
Hello: I am a professor at Harding. I’m female, and I’ve presented multiple times in chapel over the years. I’ve been part of a panel, presented with another professor, participated in a group presentation, and been the primary speaker for the day. My husband and I also presented as a couple to the Bible major’s chapel. My presentations have included scripture and spiritual issues. I thought you’d want to know that.
Hi Professor Klein,
Thank you for your message.
I had understood that women would occasionally speak their personal or family testimony or on a special topic, such as stress and anxiety, as part of a chapel program, normally after a devotional period. But I think you may be saying that you’ve done more. If so, that is encouraging news!
I’m unclear on whether your last sentence refers to the main chapel or the Bible major’s chapel and whether you are referring to what you yourself said or whether “your presentations” refers to your and your husbands’ presentations together.
To clarify, does Harding allow women to read scripture and present on spiritual issues in the main chapel? Does it allow women to lead singing in the main chapel? Same questions for the Bible major chapel. Could you clarify and expand? Can female students read scripture, lead singing, etc.?
Again, thank you, and I look forward to hearing back!
Best regards, Steve
When I was at Harding from 93-97, the best lesson (homily) ever given in chapel came from Dean Schultz of the School of Nursing. However, she could only speak after the “devotional” had ended with a prayer and some male Bible major had given a three minute talk on something from the Epistle.
That said, I hope the talks improved and people who live in the real world and manage to keep the faith are finally permitted to speak. Though no one could prove there was a blacklist of male speakers, we all knew who was probably on it.
Thank you Mark
Steve, what do you do with 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2?
Hi Thomas,
Thank you for your question.
Please take a look at the bottom part of my answer to William’s question above — the part numbered 1-15 above. I think that will help. Just let me know if it doesn’t or if you have any other questions.
Thanks much, Steve
What a great discussion. May God be glorified in men seeking the truth and the will of God for their families and communities. This discussion hopefully will lead to a conclusion which the Lord will be glorified by. Anybody that takes one Bible verse and tries to deny other parts of the Bible should be aware of their negligence. We should all be more concerned with getting people to repent of their wrongdoings which are clearly pointed out in Scripture and not so much on who is showing them to us. God is much more concerned with lying, stealing, cheating, fraud, embezzlement, adultery, slave traders, drunkards and sexual sins of all types. If you’ve overcome all of these awful things and are sending people to hell for telling people about God I believe you are being misdirected.
Furthermore as men we should stand firm in our positions in Christ to be leaders of our Churches of all kinds and do our part to lead others to the saving power of Jesus Christ. If women are led by God to speak truth through the Holy Spirit, who is denying who.
Sincerely in Christ,
Vince Admire
While I have several problems with this article, the main one that jumps out to me is:
Why in the world did you include the statement “In another recent survey, an alarmingly high percentage of women in the Churches of Christ reported symptoms of trauma.”??
Did you even read the article you linked to? That article also has plenty of problems there, but it very clearly states:
“The number of years spent in Churches of Christ also seems to have a connection to the presence and severity of self-reported trauma symptoms. The more years the respondents spent in Churches of Christ, the less likely they were to report symptoms. The reverse was true as well, respondents who have spent fewer years in Churches of Christ reported more severe symptoms.”
I understand that you were trying to make an (illogical) jump there to support your argument of harm caused (which I also don’t agree with), but when properly read and not just highlighted for shock value, completely undermines that argument!
Hi Kokomokola,
Thank you for your comment.
A
It seems obvious that requiring young girls sit and watch their moms and grandmothers and their female friends and themselves be discriminated against every single Sunday for years and years and years would be harmful to many of those young girls.
And it seems obvious that sending the message to those young girls every single Sunday for years and years that God does not want them to speak or lead when Christians are together would be harmful to many of those girls.
And it seems obvious that teaching young boys and men that God wants them to discriminate against girls and women in the church would carry over into how those boys and men treat girls and women in the workplace and in society, thus harming many of those girls outside the church, too.
Why a study would be necessary to prove this to someone, I am not sure.
B
Respectfully, you should read the linked article you referenced closer.
You seem to have read too much into the “less likely” and “more likely.” That just means the percentage went down some. That doesn’t tell you the that it remained disturbingly high. And it doesn’t tell you it didn’t go down all that much. And it doesn’t tell you why it went down—it could be because those women left and went somewhere else to heal, for example.
If you look at the numbers, you can see that the percentage reporting moderate to extremely severe symptoms is shockingly high all the way through 70+ years spent in the Churches of Christ.
If you look at the “Number of years …” graph in the article, you can see that 51.5% of women who responded who had spent 70+ years in the Churches of Christ reported moderate to extremely severe symptoms of trauma. This is compared to 78% in the 0-10 year mark and 65% at the 21-30 year mark. It stays high throughout, dipping down in the 60-70 year mark, then back up in the 70+. It’s hard to say if the 0-10 and 60-70 are anomalies in the data (high and low), as the rest seem close to the same or averaged out.
One suspects that some number of women who experience such symptoms would leave the denomination before they reach the 11 year mark, leave eventually, etc., meaning that the percentage of women who remained who had experienced such symptoms would necessarily go down. Recognize, though, the author of that second-cited study explains that this is just the beginning of research and analysis on the trauma analysis.
C
These are not for “shock value,” as you said.
They are for the value of getting people to focus on these are real human beings we are talking about. These are little girls we are talking about. These are young ladies we are talking about. These are wives and mothers we are talking about.
These are daughters and granddaughters we are talking about. Precious images of God.
Like I said, one does not need a study or a survey to know that doing this to young girls and women is wrong.
I have a couple of questions that I would like to propose. The first one being in regards to your response to the qualifications of being an elder or deacon. 1 Timothy 3:2 says, “a bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife…”, and then in Titus 1:6 when speaking about elders, “if any one be blameless, the husband of one wife…”, these scriptures give us a mandatory qualification for deacons/bishops and elders. That being that they are to be “the husband of one wife”. Your response to this was that this does not mean a man who is married to a woman, but rather someone who is faithful in marriage. My question to you is this, do you support gay marriage? This question comes up because if for this instance we are neglecting the gender specificity of husband and wife, then every other time they are mentioned we are to neglect them as well. So when we read Ephesians 5:31, “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.” from your argument husband doesn’t have to mean a man and the word wife doesn’t mean woman. The word father doesn’t mean a man and the word mother doesn’t mean woman. It would just mean for two people to leave their gender neutral caregivers to cling to their gender neutral mate.There are multiple scriptures condemning homosexuality in the bible, some examples are: Gen 19:1-29, Romans 1:26,27, 1 Cor 6:9-11, 1 Tim 1:8-11.With all of this being said you either support gay marriage to make your argument consistent which we see is condemned, or you are creating a contradiction in scripture to fit your ideas in an attempt to “wrest” the scriptures (2 Peter 3:16).
The second question I would like to ask is that in one of your supporting articles a scripture used as a proof text was 2 Kings 22:14-20. The major question that comes up is why are we going to the Old Testament on a doctrinal issue? Romans 15:4 states, “For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.”, and 1 Cor 10:11 tells us, “now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come”. These two passages tell us that the Old Testament was written for our learning and not for doctrinal issues. If we do begin to look back at the Old Testament for doctrine then we must begin to use sacrifices and the whole nine yards because that is the prescribed way to worship during those times.
My third question deals with the idea that all we do is worship. Where does the Bible say this? The passages referenced is Col 3:17 “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.” and 1 Cor 10:31 “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God”. These passages are taken out of context. These passages are not saying that everything we do is worship, but rather that everything we do or say is done in a Christian manner. This is not calling everything we do worship. The Bible does tell us what God has to say on the matter of worship. The Bible tells us that we are to meet on the first day of the week to worship: Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 16:2. We are also told what is considered worship: Praying (1 Cor 14:14,15, 1 Th 5:17), Singing (1 Cor 14:14,15, Eph 5:19, Col 3:16), Lord’s Supper (Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 11:17-34), Giving (1 Cor 16:2, 2 Cor 8,9, Phil 4:17,18), and teaching and preaching (Acts 20:7, Col 4:16, Col 3:16). We also learn that God does not take worship lightly. Leviticus 10:1,2 tells us that Nadab and Abihu offered up profane fire which God commanded not. Then the fire consumed them and they died. From this we learn that there is a right way and a wrong way to worship.
My last question deals with the idea you proposed that “head” does not mean authority. If this is the case, does Christ not have authority over the church? Eph 5:23 uses a simile to compare husbands and wives to the church and Christ. Just as Christ is the head of the church so is the husband is the head of the wife. Eph 1:22 tells us that Christ is the head of all things to the church. So are you saying Christ has no authority?
Hi Chris, Thank you for your questions.
1
On your first one: No, it would not be a contradiction to oppose gay marriage and support female elders.
You said “these scriptures give us a mandatory qualification for deacons/bishops and elders.” No, that is incorrect. Those aren’t a check-list of qualifications for elders in 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1. In other words “husband of one wife” is not required. If a person had to meet each of those as a check-list of requirements, there would be no elders. No human being meets all of those. Not Paul, not Jesus, not any of your elders, not any of your deacons. For example, which of your elders and deacons are “above reproach” / “blameless”? None of them. Only Jesus is.
If you treated 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 as a literal check-list of mandatory requirements, then you would bar Jesus from being an overseer of your congregation. And you would bar a man with all the attributes of Jesus from being an overseer of your congregation.
The sum total of the attributes in 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 express the *** kind of person *** an elder should strive to be. In other words, it isn’t that the elder has to meet requirement 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, etc….. No one does. You look at all those together to see the *** kind of person *** an elder should strive to be (e.g., faithful).
You can’t treat “husband of one wife” as a must have without treating them all as a must have without being a sexist.
Another way to know that “husband of one wife” is not a literal check-list requirement is that it is listed for deacons, too, and in Romans 16:1-2 a female deacon is identified by name, Phoebe, and it is generally recognized now that 1 Tim 3:11 just as likely refers to female deacons.
So, no, it would not be a contradiction and you don’t have to change those words around at all. (There’s more on female elders here — https://authentictheology.com/2019/04/09/10-churches-of-christ-where-women-speak-in-the-assembly-1-timothy-212-teach-or-usurp-authority-part-3/)
2
On your second question:
Of course we look to the Old Testament for any issue. 1 Tim 3:16-17— “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
We just have to make sure we handle the word properly. For example, of course we would not “begin to use sacrifices and the whole nine yards,” as you claim, as know the reason for the sacrifices has been been accomplished through our savior.
The point with 2 Kings 22:11-20 is that it is yet one more example in the Bible in which God asks women to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere. In that instance, God asks Huldah to have authority over men and teach assembled men about scripture and God’s message.
That there are many examples of this ought to send a big red flag up when someone claims there are these two sentences that prohibit women from speaking to, leading, teaching, and having authority over men. God asks women over and over and over again to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere. When you spend a little time looking at the couple of sentences people claim mean otherwise, it is pretty easy to see that they don’t mean that women are not to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men, in an assembly or elsewhere.
3
On your third one: Yes, worship is not just something you do on Sunday morning or in a service. Worship is all the time, your whole life, everywhere, all the time.
Read Romans 12:1: “Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship.”
Then go on, read Romans 12:2 – 21: “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will. 3 For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the faith God has distributed to each of you. 4 For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, 5 so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. 6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your[a] faith; 7 if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; 8 if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead,[b] do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully. 9 Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. 10 Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves. 11 Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12 Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13 Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality. 14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.[c] Do not be conceited. 17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d] says the Lord. 20 On the contrary: “If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”[e] 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
Your assessment of the scriptures you quoted seemed quite circumscribed. An argument that Paul’s exhortation in Col 3:17 that “whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him” is Paul merely saying to do and say things in a Christian manner ignores the verse right before in which Paul tells them to “Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts.”!! He tells them to sing! To let it dwell richly with you! Through psalms! Through hymns! With gratitude! In your hearts! And to give thanks to God! And do it all in the name of Lord Jesus!
This is worship! It’s merely saying act like a Christian.
Same with the other scriptural assessments there (“whatever you do”!). All those things you referred to can constitute worship. You can worship by praying. You can worship by giving. You can worship by …. But those aren’t the only ways to worship. And you don’t just do it in a service. Or on a particular day. Or at a particular time. We worship with our very being! All the time! (or we should ….)
4
On your fourth one: You asked “does Christ not have authority over the church?” Of course Christ has authority over the church.
Just because kephale / head is used in the sense of source (as in headwater) / representative of (as in head of a line) in a particular sentence does not mean Christ is not the authority over the church.
The sentence does not need to say Christ is the authority over the church for us to know that Christ has authority over the church.
It is pretty easy to tell that kephale / head does not mean “authority over” by looking at 1 Cor 11:3.
1 Cor 11:3 says “But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man and the head of Christ is God.”
Notice it says “the head of Christ is God.”
If you said “head of” means “authority over,” that means “the authority over Christ is God.”
God is not “the authority over” Christ. Christ *is* God (see John 1). So, “authority over” can’t be the meaning.
God, is, however the source of Christ — think Trinity and think the birth of Christ via Mary. And Christ is representative of God.
Of course, Christ is the source of man (Christ was there in the beginning, let us make man in our image …), and the source of Eve was Adam. And man represents Christ (image of) and woman represents man (bone of my bone …). So it all fits.
Words have semantic ranges and the meaning of kephale there seems to be a sense of source / representative.
(and if you look at the rest of 1 Cor 11, you can see it is all about source and representation; the only time it is about authority is when a different word is used – further indicating that kephale doesn’t mean authority, as if Paul meant authority he probably would have used the same word).
Thanks again for your questions.
I grieve the way so many here have spoken about my congregation. We have spent YEARS in prayer, conversation, and study. Our congregation is chock full of theologians, academicians, ministers, and teachers. If you have questions about why or how we have made certain decisions for our congregation, please come visit us.
“You say “Greek lexicons consistently define kephale in 1 Cor. 11 as “authority,” “superior rank,” or “preeminence.””
What you say is false.”
I did not say “superior rank” or “preeminence”. Now who is misquoting whom? Biblical authority is “submissive” to the order God established from the beginning. Christ is submissive to God, even now. Are God, Christ and the Holy Spirit equal? Absolutely, Did they have a coin flip on which one would be born of a virgin and be crucified? Hardly. Phillippians 2:1-11 is the most beautiful description of the order designed by God.
Being one and equal appears to be being misued. Does Christ know when He will return? So not identical after all in the order of things, eh? When Jesus prayed, sweatdrops of blood, for this cup to pass from Him was He having a conversation with Himself? Are Christians instructed to pray in/through Jesus name, or would praying through/to the Holy Spirit suffice?
I am amazed at how the basics of God’s beautiful design and order for submission have been cast off for populist modernism. If women, with no other witnesses, running to tell a group of men what they had been told to say is your proof text then it explains how far adrift your theology has come. I love you and pray that you return to God’s design.
The 12 Apostles could have resolved modernisms plight by self-removal and asking Jesus to recruit a female in their place. I guarantee you people would be demanding it to be done in straying churches today.
I might add you cited Romans 16:7 as an example of a women Apostle. Andromicus and Junia were of course Kinsmen in Christ – as Paul stated they had become Christians before his conversion.
How that in any way can be stretched to claim Aposteship appears to be the order of the day for reaching the conclusions sought.
A final word on your statement that we are always in worship. When writers wrote “When the Saints gather together” or “When you are assembled (or in the assembly) or “Do not forsake the assembling..” a clear distinction has been made for order. This cannot be set aside claiming we worship 24/7.
Hi Gary, Thank you for your reply.
1
Your original comment set out assertions that are false and/or ignore relevant material contradicting what you say.
I took the time to set out 7 major points — A, B, C, … G — showing what you had to say is false and/or ignores relevant material contradicting what you say.
Your reply ignored virtually all of those points.
2
I noted that I don’t blame you for not knowing this information, as leaders in our denomination and others who want to uphold the tradition of men of silencing women will provide such assertions and will not provide other relevant material information that contradicts their position.
But, even though I don’t blame you, I noted that what matters is this, once you know about what I pointed out, what you do with it is what matters.
3
What you did with it was this:
(a)
You ignored 6 of the 7 points altogether.
(b)
You skipped all the way to Point D, skipping over A – C, to have something to say.
And skipped E, F, and G, too.
(c)
And then what you said about D is downright bizarre and clearly misses the point.
In your original comment, you said “Greek lexicons consistently define kephale in 1 Cor. 11 as “authority,” “superior rank,” or “preeminence.”
In response, I said: “You say “Greek lexicons consistently define kephale in 1 Cor. 11 as “authority,” “superior rank,” or “preeminence.” What you say is false. Indeed, the Liddel, Scott & Jones lexicon, one of the respected lexicons of Ancient Greek, “does not give “authority” or “leader” as meanings of kephalē. It does, however, give “source”, “origin” and “starting point” as possible meanings ….”
Thus, I showed that Greek lexicons do not consistently define kephale in 1 Cor. 11 as “authority,” “superior rank,” or “preeminence,” as you claimed.
In reply, bizarrely, you assert that you “did not say “superior rank” or “preeminence”. Now who is misquoting whom?”
It is right there in black and white, Gary, that you did.
(d)
You claimed, contrary to scripture, contrary to centuries of church doctrine, heretically, that “Christ is submissive to God, even now.”
That was addressed in B, but you ignored it.
Christ *is* God (see John 1). God *is* Christ. To assert God is the authority over Christ is heretical.
God and Christ are one in the same. God and Christ are not one having authority over the other.
You can see this plainly in John 1. See, e.g., verse 1: “… the Word was God.” And verse 18: “… the one and only Son, who is himself God ….”
(e)
You cite Philippians 2:1-11, but you didn’t quote it. Here it is:
“Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.”
What you have missed, in a major way, are these three things: (1) Christ is God. (2) Christ “made himself” and “humbled himself ….” Christ decided to become human. Christ decided to go to the cross. Christ decided to become obedient to death …. Christ decided …. Christ had the freedom to decide and to make decisions about his own self. (3) v. 5 says “in your relationships with one another”: Any voluntary service or submissiveness is a two-way street. Indeed, Philippians 2:1-11 reflects what Ephesians 5:21 says, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” I pointed this out in my response. But you ignored it.
(f)
You skipped nearly everything I said, but I’ll answer your questions.
(i) You asked “Being one and equal appears to be being misued. Does Christ know when He will return? So not identical after all in the order of things, eh? When Jesus prayed, sweatdrops of blood, for this cup to pass from Him was He having a conversation with Himself?”
No one says men and women are identical. Individual men and individual women can choose to submit and serve one another. This is obvious. And this can be in different ways at different times. They can decide. And yes, when Jesus prayed, he was not only having a conversation with the Father but also with himself.
(ii) You asked “Are Christians instructed to pray in/through Jesus name, or would praying through/to the Holy Spirit suffice?
Even ultra-conservative Churches of Christ scholars recognize that . See, e.g., https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1102-is-the-holy-spirit-worthy-of-worship (“But Professor Cottrell, whom I respect though not always agreeing with him, then says: “there are no biblical examples or precedents for addressing the Holy Spirit directly in praise or prayer.” With due respect, we believe the evidence introduced above demonstrates otherwise. Besides, if one cannot directly praise the Holy Spirit — either in song or prayer — how is such worship to be rendered?”).
(iii) You said you are “amazed at how the basics of God’s beautiful design and order for submission have been cast off for populist modernism. If women, with no other witnesses, running to tell a group of men what they had been told to say is your proof text then it explains how far adrift your theology has come.”
Oh, what a different world it would if everyone ran to tell others what the Word revealed to them!
Yet, you demand that women not tell men what the Word reveals to them!
Jesus, the Word, asks women to go, tell assembled men what the Word revealed to the women and what the Word wants the men to do. See, e.g., John 20:16-17; Matthew 28:9-10
It is a direct contradiction to what God asks of women to demand that women and girls do the opposite of what God asks of them, demanding that women and girls be silent and subservient to men.
You have bought into a twisting and misconstruing of a handful of sentences, like 1 Cor 11:3, in trying to uphold a tradition of man. Please stop. Thank you.
(iv) You said “The 12 Apostles could have resolved modernisms plight by self-removal and asking Jesus to recruit a female in their place.”
As to why none of the first 12 apostles were women, why the 12 were all men:
There were female apostles (see Romans 16:7). We don’t know why they weren’t among the first 12. It may be because some guy on Facebook would say “women can’t be in leadership b/c they were among the original 12 and when they were in leadership, the leadership betrayed Jesus.”
More likely, it was b/c the 12 camped and lived with Jesus for 3+ yrs and women could not do that in that society.
But all 12 were Jewish. By arguing that b/c they were all male that women can’t be preachers, you would also have to argue that non-Jews can’t be preachers, either.
And Apostles did indeed resolve it, through their writings. You just ignore it.
For example, Paul wrote: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28)
And Paul and other apostles wrote other passages that resolve it. I pointed out 20+ passages in which God asks women to lead, speak to, teach, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere. But you ignored the scripture and the Apostles. https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/
(v) You complain about Romans 16:7, but Paul calls her an apostle, same as the men, so I call her apostle, same as the men.
(vi) You say “A final word on your statement that we are always in worship. When writers wrote “When the Saints gather together” or “When you are assembled (or in the assembly) or “Do not forsake the assembling..” a clear distinction has been made for order. This cannot be set aside claiming we worship 24/7.”
You’ve made an incoherent statement. Assembly and worship are two different words and concepts. Yes, we can and should worship when we assemble, but we can and should worship when we don’t assemble. We are to worship 24/7. Worship does not mean women and little girls must not be heard from. Order does not mean women and little girls must not be heard from. Just the opposite! Look at the 20+ passages set out above.
4
I would love to hear your response to A, B, C, D, E, F, and G and the above, 1-3 and their sub-parts.
5
Like I said, Gary, the question is what do you do with this, once you know it.
You appear to be going down the road of being heretical and being unscriptural and ignoring scripture and …. And doing such things and similar things —– **** all in the name of defending the tradition of discriminating against women and girls. ****
The bottom line: God asks women over and over and over again to speak to, lead, teach, and have authority over men, in an assembly and elsewhere. Here are 20+ passages that do so. https://authentictheology.com/2018/09/03/20-scripture-passages-telling-women-to-speak-teach-lead-and-have-authority-over-men-in-the-assembly-and-elsewhere/ The 2-3 sentences used to argue that women must not speak, preach, etc., in the assembly do not mean that. And your interpretation of kephale is obviously off. You can’t defend even the basics of that.
I urge you, respectfully, to rethink your support for such discrimination against girls and women in the church. It hurts them and the body of Christ.
Good evening all. I know you will probably respond with some comment that will justify your position. I realize that you may also respond how I am not enlightened enough to grasp the in depth study that you have done.
With that being said, I will just return to the fact that we will ALL be faced with our decisions here on earth on Judgement day. God is the creator and judge. Our worship is for Him and Him alone. So many times our pride tries to make things equal and fair. However we are to be different from the world and be transformed by the renewing of our minds (Rom 12:2). This means we will also think differently from the worldly norms and logic.
So feel free to discredit my comments, discuss with long discourse how your knowledge is more evolved, and do whatever you need to do. I know I may not change a heart set on itself.
This statement is for those who is on the fence. Trust in God. Trust in his word. God does not require degree held individuals to translate scripture. All have the opportunity to know the truth. God has given it to all but we must set aside our worldly opinions and justifications and let God show us through his word what we are suppose to do.
I will probably never be on this page again and may not see any response but my prayer is that all will not rely on human logic or knowledge but read God’s word.
Thanks Jim. Part of the point is that God’s word indicates that discrimination against girls and women is a sin, just like discrimination against black people is a sin.
Just because a person believes that their discrimination is blessed by God does not make it not a sin, not discrimination, or not harmful to the people discriminated against.
As to contra-logic and the like you cite, you can see that God’s word indicates that sex and race discrimination is a sin. It was human logic and human secular culture for centuries and centuries that women and girls are to be discriminated against, and discrimination against girls and women continues to be the human, secular way, the way of power and might. The contra-way, the Christian way, is not discriminating against girls and women.
And if you listen, you can hear the Holy Spirit tell you that it is not right to discriminate against little girls or their moms. The force of love cries loudly against insisting that girls and women sit and be silent while you speak.
And, if you listen, you can hear the Holy Spirit say that causing little girls to watch themselves, their female friends, and their moms be discriminated against Sunday after Sunday after Sunday harms those little girls. That’s not love.