Here's a Question for your Pastor

Because 1 Timothy 2:8-12 is often used to make the argument that all women are barred from all preaching and teaching of men for all time, I made a few interesting and powerful observations of how the Apostle Paul speaks to and about women in I Timothy 2:8-12. Keep in mind that my observations are in no way comprehensive and I'm not listing all the observations I've made in this passage. I'm mainly making observations about Paul's mention of women in these verses.

⁸ I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; ⁹in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, ¹⁰ but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. ¹¹ Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. ¹² And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.  

My observations:

1. From the first chapter, I already know the Apostle Paul is talking to Timothy and this is the first letter he wrote to him.

2. Verse 9 uses the plural of the word gyné for women. 

3. Verse 10 uses the plural of the word gyné for women.

4. Verse 11 uses the singular of the word gyné for woman.

5. Verse 12 uses the singular of the word gyné for woman.

These observations raised questions in my mind. Why did Paul switch from talking about women, plural, to woman, singular? Is Paul talking about one particular woman and not all women?

We cannot know the exact thought of the Apostle Paul here, but we do know God is very precise in His Word and that every letter and symbol is intentional.

We cannot change the meaning from singular to plural when God has written, through Paul, a singular word. We cannot use this as a proof text that all women are to be silent in all churches for all time. Certainly, if this was an admonition for all women to be quiet in all churches for all time, Paul, himself, violated this again and again as he approved and used women in ministry as deacons, church leaders, patrons, etc.

This requires more study on the part of anyone who teaches or preaches God's Word.
Don't take my word for it, look it up for yourself. If your pastor does not make this distinction when preaching this passage, ask him why.

~Tricia

The Female Priests

If you go through the doctrinal statement of an evangelical church, you will no doubt find "the priesthood of all believers" as one of the doctrines they adhere to. This adherence is based on I Peter 2:9, which says, "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light:"

Evangelical churches embrace this verse with passion, but I'm sorry to say, it appears they only practice part of it.

Let's take a look at the priesthood. As recorded in Hebrews 9:1-7, we know that the Old Testament priests had to adhere to a very strict set of regulations when entering the tabernacle and only the high priest could enter the "holy of holies," which was behind a curtain or veil. This is a very brief summary of the workings of the tabernacle, so please read the Scriptures for the full story. There is an area in the tabernacle where only one person on the planet was allowed to enter and he had to enter in a very specific way, on a very specific date and for a very specific reason. Leviticus 16:2-34 gives a more detailed account, as do several other passages of Scripture.

For this blog post, I simply wanted to point out the fact that before the death of Jesus Christ, there was a veil separating us from God and only an appointed high priest could access the area behind the veil.

In Matthew 27, we find Jesus on the cross. Verse 50 - 52 say, "Jesus, when he had cried out again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. At that moment, the veil of the temple was torn in two, from the top to the bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split and the graves were opened and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised."

At the moment Jesus died, the veil was torn in two and rendered unnecessary. There was no longer a veil separating us from God. Emmanuel, being God with us, had destroyed the barriers. The veil is gone, hence 1 Peter 2:9 applies to all who believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We all have equal access to God; there is no longer the need for a priest.

This is where the waters get muddy in evangelical circles. While any evangelical you meet will vehemently state they surely do believe in the priesthood of all believers, they will also tell you they believe a husband is the spiritual head of the wife.

How the churches teach and practice this priesthood conflicts with their own doctrinal statements.  They are wrong in their practice. This is anti-biblical teaching. It's anti-biblical because God, Himself, states the very opposite of this. The husband is not the spiritual head of the wife; Jesus is the only head. It's vital to understand this in an age where secrets of abuse are finally being revealed and the abuse is deeply rooted in patriarchy.

We female priests have equal standing in Jesus. We have equal access to the understanding of Scripture since we have the Holy Spirit living within us as believers in Jesus. Scripture does not have a patriarchal filter. We women do not have to step aside; we are priests.

Gals, let no one - not a husband, not a father, not a pastor, not anyone - come between Jesus and you. God is talking directly to us, girls. No one stands between us. We are priests.

~Tricia

A Mother's Day Message

Some men are finally waking up to the fact that women have more to offer than coffee and casseroles and they are beginning to advocate for women in the church. It's about time. Don't get me wrong, I think men who advocate for women are great and I would never try to discourage such action.

But I recently realized King Lemuel's mother - of Proverbs 31 - needed no advocate.

King Lemuel's identity is debated in theological circles. Some believe Lemuel is another name Solomon was known by. Others believe he was King of Massa and still others believe he was not a real person at all. While the debate over who he was goes on, I want to focus on his mother.

Proverbs 31 starts out with "The sayings of King Lemuel.....an oracle his mother taught him..."

Some versions say "a prophecy his mother taught him..."
Some versions say, "an inspired utterance his mother taught him...."

Oh, my. A woman, inspired? Oh, God, what were you thinking?

I digress.

King Lemuel's mother taught him. This is huge. These are not the oracles of his father. This is not a father/son bonding moment which all fathers need so they can teach their sons the things of God. This is not a time when a father "stepped up" and took the reigns and taught his son because only fathers can teach sons properly and men need their father to teach them.

No.

His mother taught him.

And it was powerful.

And it was enough.

And King Lemuel was not the only one whose mother was their main influence/instructor. Paul praised Timothy's mother and grandmother - by name - in 2 Timothy 1:5...."I am reminded of your sincere faith, a faith that dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice and now, I am sure, dwells in you as well."

The lie in the church is that fathers and sons have to have a deeper, better relationship than fathers and daughters. This is a lie. Sons are not more important than daughters. Fathers are not more important than mothers. Ideally, a family has both a mom and a dad, but that is not always the case, nor is it always possible.

Don't be fooled by the lies that your family will be less than what God wants it to be unless the father steps up in the way dictated by those who promote patriarchy. If you're a single mom, don't think for a minute that you aren't enough. Don't think for a minute that your son or daughter won't "turn out as good" without a father. It is God who works in them.

I recently read a blog post from the "Desiring God" (as if anyone does) blog of John Piper's group and I was shocked that the blog post actually said that women whose fathers don't step up and get involved in even "dating" their daughter's boyfriend, are leaving their daughter "emotionally and spiritually uncovered."

Huh? What is that? What does that even mean? Is not Christ enough, even for a daughter? Surely if a woman is going to be enough, by God's design, to teach a son like King Lemuel, she is enough. God is enough for a young girl even if she has a desire to get married. And He's enough if she decides not to ever marry....and it's no tragedy for her to make that decision. This article hinted at being single as a tragedy. Their teachings that women need a "spiritual and emotional covering" is akin to Sharia Law and has no business in Christian circles. God says there is no distinction between male and female in Galatians 3:28. We are all one in Christ.

I recently heard a preacher exalt the relationship between fathers and sons while minimizing the father/daughter relationship. He said dads are the ones who teach sons to be good dads, so a dad's relationship with a son is more important, more vital. That preacher needs to put his opinion back in the opinion box because that is simply not true.

To put it another way, that teaching is false. Just look at King Lemuel. Look at Timothy.

God is not limited by man's ideas of what is good and what people think things, even families, should look like. God will raise up who He wants to raise up, with or without a father.

Do not underestimate the influence of a mother in her son's life. King Lemuel was not afraid, ashamed or embarrassed to give his mother the credit for all she taught him. He did not mention his father even once.

And get this....listen carefully....not one verse in Scripture talks about a father exclusively teaching a son. Not one. Many verses talk about mothers teaching sons, but not one talks about how a father, exclusively should - or even did - teach a son.

Deuteronomy 6:7 talks about teaching God's statutes diligently to our children, but does not single out fathers and sons.

Deuteronomy 11:19 also talks about teaching our children, but, again, does not single out fathers and sons.

Proverbs 1:8 says, "My son, hear the instruction of your father and do not forsake your mother's teaching," putting the teachings of mothers and fathers on an equal plane.

Proverbs 6:20 says, "Son, keep your father's commands and forsake not the law of your mother," putting the teachings of fathers and mothers on an equal plane.

Proverbs 31:1 says, "The words of King Lemuel, the inspired words of his mother..." exalting the teachings of his mother above all else.

My husband and I reared our eight children together. He did not treat our sons any differently than he treated our daughters....and neither did I. We taught them all that they are not entitled....that no one owes them anything....that they have to earn their way....that their love for God and relationship with Him is the most important thing in their life....the list could go on. But, we taught them together. My word as their mom was (and is) still as much "law" in their lives as their dad's word. We are fortunate to have lived long enough to raise all our kids, but, had one of us died young, the other would have continued teaching the kids the things of God without missing a beat.

That is what is important......teaching the things of God.....not the things people think of God, but what the Bible actually says, without speculation and without adding to it.

Do not fall for the lie that tells you sons are more important than daughters. This lie will destroy your family and you won't see it coming.

~Tricia

John MacArthur Disagrees with Jesus

I recently heard a sermon by John MacArthur upon the suggestion of a friend.  This was the first sermon I'd ever heard John preach. There is no gentle way to say that it will be the last sermon of his I ever listen to. Some have wanted to know my specific problems with this sermon. I'll try out outline them here. I cannot, however, be as thorough and comprehensive as I'd like to be. Time restraints are preventative to that, but I trust that anyone who wants to search these things out to see if they are true, will certainly do so on their own.

I have a problem when a preacher uses a non-contextualized talk to springboard to a general topic, then promote his own agenda.  In this referenced sermon, John MacArthur made some sweeping, generalized and harmful comments about women that have nothing to do with the passage he said he was claiming to preach, nor with the overall teachings of Scripture.

He said, "The intent of what the Word is saying here is that women need protection." (Referring to Genesis 3:15&16)
And he also said, "She has a certain vulnerability. The need for protection. The need for a leader. She needs a strengthener."
He said that Eve was deceived only when she had gone out of the protection of her husband.
And he said, "A woman has a deceive-ability when out from under the headship of a man. Rulership was intended for man."

He based these comments solely on the fact that Eve first took of the forbidden fruit in the garden as she fell to Satan's deception.

Let's look at God's Words about this. Eve was not deceived while "out from under the protection" of her husband. The Bible says Adam was with her when she partook (Genesis 2:6). Their eyes were not opened, however, till Adam ate the fruit.

The sweeping comment about women having a "certain vulnerability" and" needing protection" seems to go against what God said when He created woman. It was the man who needed assistance. God created woman because man needed help and protection. The word for "helper" is ezer and means assistant, succour and often has military connotations throughout Scripture. The word is used 21 times in the Old Testament and is used to mean strength and power. (Deut 33:26, 29) He created woman as an equal to the man. He gave them equal dominion over the earth and everything in it. (Genesis 1:28)

Any rulership husbands had over wives was a result of the fall. (Genesis 3:16) That is not an overall intent of God for only men to be rulers or leaders. God had women rulers and leaders all throughout Scripture and they ruled over men. They told men what to do. They led the men and with God's blessing and appointment to do so.

Also, because the idea of rulership was a result of the fall, Jesus conquered all that on the cross. A church-age husband is completely out of line to announce his perceived "rulership" on any level because he is commanded in Scripture to love his wife "as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her." Any abuse of this is just that - abuse - and an indication that the man has stepped out of his God-given role as sacrificial giver. (Also, Ephesians 5 calls for mutual submission between husbands and wives, eliminating the submission argument altogether. Besides, do husbands really want the kind of submission that comes from them demanding it? Submission indicates willingness by its very definition and Paul tells the Ephesians it will be mutually given in a proper marriage relationship.) John MacArthur disagrees.

Another general statement he made was, "Part of the curse is that she will desire to control men and he would have to rule over her." God did not say that. God did not say that women will desire to control men and that men, in turn would have to rule over her as though it's a reaction to that. Mr. MacArthur added his own words to God's Words here, changing the meaning of Scripture. (The Book of Revelation tells us what happens to people who add to God's Word.)

He started out saying that he was going to address the role of women in the church, but he branched out big time to include women everywhere. Clearly, women's roles in the church were very widespread in the NT church. Women led. Women taught men. Women served along side Paul, traveling with him and his missions team, were imprisoned with him, etc. Look up these women: Phoebe, Chloe, Junia, Priscilla, Anna, Lydia, Mary (who sat at Jesus' feet with the men), Eunice, Lois....and others. Priscilla went on a missions trip with Paul.  I can see why Mr. MacArthur had to avoid that.

Mr. MacArthur said that Paul was saying that a woman must embrace God's appointed role for her, which, according to John MacArthur, is motherhood. Even though he says that not all women are mothers, he also says that's God's appointed role for all women. Clearly, since men can't have babies without the intervention of modern science and misadventure, motherhood is ONE of the many roles of women. But, Mr. MacArthur's presentation doesn't really allow room for that idea. He wants to put all women in this neat, little box he's created and call it a day. This is spiritual abuse.

Toward the end, he said, "They [women] are delivered from the results of sin and are able to maintain a positive influence in society and in the church by accepting their role as a mother."

Why isn't the Christian world shouting blasphemy about this statement? Delivered from the results of sin by being a mother???? Seriously? The Mormons teach something very, very similar. Be careful, ears, what you hear.

When people of influence make sweeping comments, even on the heels of a disclaimer to the contrary, they are setting women up for abuse, pure and simple. What if a young Christian woman listened to this as a new babe in Christ? It would shape her thinking and it would cause her to stop thinking for herself and fall prey to men whom she perceives as "godly" and cases such as what ABWE, Bill Gothard and others allowed will continue to happen.

Women, do not be afraid to be strong in doctrine and stand up against this type of teaching. You don't have to make a scene when you stand up for it, all you have to do is stop listening to it. Stop reading it. Stop going to a church that teaches this nonsense. Blog about it if you have a blog.

A godly woman fears the Lord (Proverbs 31), not man. Jesus praised Mary for learning at his feet (as the men did in those days) and told her sister, Martha, that Mary had chosen that which could not be taken from her. (Luke 10:38-42)

Like Mary, all we as women have the opportunity to choose what cannot be taken away from us. The underlying tone of John MacArthur's sermon is one of abuse and an attempt to keep women out of sight. I know pastors who take his words to their pulpits and abuse their congregations with this very teaching. It's abusive to the women for obvious reasons, but it's also abusive to the men because such pastors are not strengthening their men in doctrine, they are filling their heads with lies, often turning them into bullies. It's so subtle that unless you've been exposed to it and its devastating effect, you might not realize the full implications it has. People like John MacArthur will answer to God for what they have done, but, in the meantime, we don't have to sit and take it....from anyone.

~Tricia

Priscilla Power

In Acts 18, we read the story of Priscilla and Aquila's encounter with Apollos.

Before we look at that encounter, I want to look more closely at Priscilla. Married to Aquila, she was from Italy. (Acts 18:2) She had recently (at the time of the writing of Acts) come to Corinth with her husband due to persecution; Claudius had commanded that all Jews depart from Rome. Acts 16:19 tells us that Priscilla and Aquila had a church in their house. Paul stayed with them in their home because he had the same occupation; they were tent makers.

This brief glimpse into the Priscilla's life speaks volumes about this amazing woman. She was not a silent bystander while her husband did everything. She was not in the background simply cheering him on, praising him for what he was doing. She was hands-on. The Scripture says "they" were tent makers. She was a tent maker. She had suffered the same persecution as her husband. She was right in the thick of that church in her house. She and her husband traveled on a missions trip with Paul, first to Syria, then to Ephesus (Acts 18:18).

While in Ephesus, Paul left them there and went to various places. While in Ephesus, Priscilla and Aquila met Apollos, an eloquent man who spoke mightily in the Scriptures. Verse 25 says he was "instructed in the way of the Lord," was "fervent in spirit," spoke "diligently the things of the Lord," but that "he only knew the baptism of John." His information was incomplete, yet he "spoke boldly in the synagogue." Guess who was there and heard him? Priscilla and Aquila. As soon as they heard him, they pulled him aside and they "expounded" (explained) the Scriptures "more perfectly" (accurately) to him.

Priscilla and Aquila did this, together. The Scripture gives no indication whatsoever that Aquila did all the talking while Priscilla silently listened. They explained the Scripture to Apollos. They gave him the full, accurate story. They.

God treats men and women as equals.

I met a traveling evangelist once. I spoke to him, introduced myself and shook his hand. He did not look me in the eye one time. I was very frustrated about that and said, "Is there something wrong?"

His reply shocked me. He said, "I don't look women in the eye, and generally don't talk to them. My wife can't always travel with me, so looking at and talking to women can be a problem."

This man has a problem all right. If he can't so much as look at a woman and talk to a woman, his problem is severe and he is not qualified to be an evangelist or in any spiritual leadership position. Imagine! How would he take it if Priscilla confronted him? Would he listen? Apollos listened, took her and her husband's advice and went on to "convince the Jews, and publicly, that Jesus was Christ."

Priscilla was not afraid to be grounded in Scripture. She was not afraid to talk to anyone about doctrine and straighten them out if she needed to. Priscilla was  not a silent bystander who only listened while her husband did the work of the ministry. She was in the thick of it, boldly serving, speaking out about incomplete doctrine and serving and traveling right along with the men.

And God approved.

Ladies, don't let anyone ever minimize your role in the church, in the influence of those around you (male and female) and treat you like you are not allowed to be spoken to or listened to. That is spiritual abuse and you can rise up and demand it stop. Do not allow yourself to be minimized. You have a voice for Jesus Christ and you have every right, and even obligation, to use it.

~Tricia