The Bible has explicitly talked about women leaders and preachers in the Bible!
There is more support for women preachers in the Bible than against it. In fact, those against it are simple declarations which are descriptive of the culture and not prescriptive. The passages supporting egalitarianism are explicit by example. Let us apply to the divine writ what we normally observe, ACTION speaks louder than WORDS!
Phoebe, if we are hermeneutically honest using common sense and context, could well be THE senior pastor or incoming senior pastor of the church in the book of Romans (Romans 16:1). Whether this is true or not, she is the carrier of the original epistle to the Romans and most probably Paul's "trusted" person who would expound the meaning to the whole Roman church. Jewish customs, Eastern customs, even Gentile customs dictate that any correspondence or communication to an organized assembly should acknowledge the leader of such assembly. Well, Phoebe, a WOMAN was singled out as THE leader. No male in leadership was recognized EVEN when there were several male names in Romans 16. The Greek word for "deacon", DIAKONON, is the same exact Greek word used for male deacons especially used for Christ in Romans 15:8. There was no other word used for female "servants" in those times but EXPLICITLY hints at the equality of roles in the early church.
In Romans 16:7, Junia, a woman, was especially acknowledged by Paul as an apostle who preceded him. There are Bible translations that force to translate the name JUNIAN into Junias to force this name to be male (mainly perhaps due to the recognized "apostleship") but they have been refuted by New Testament scholars. In fact, these details were accepted and UNQUESTIONED in the first century church.
According to NT Wright, a New Testament scholar and foremost authority on the life and writings of Paul, despite the fact that Christ chose 12 male apostles, everyone abandoned him except John during his crucifixion but more notably, the women disciples were the FIRST to witness his resurrection. Since Apostles, with a capital "A", are known to be those who have seen Jesus live, die and resurrect, the women who supported Christ during his earthly ministry were the first Apostles and the Apostles to the 12 Apostles!!!
Chloe, in 1 Corinthians 1:11, is decidedly the leader here! She is definitely a WOMAN. But Paul mentioned Crispus, Gaius and who knows other men in the group AND they were not referred to in anyway as leaders. So those who say women can lead only when there are no men got their info from the distorter of Scripture or his henchmen, but NOT the Bible.
Further down to 1 Corinthians 11:5, women routinely prophesied to the whole church when gathered together for worship and fellowship. The lesson here is we follow or do as the Spirit leads, not what our "Book of Discipline" or local doctrine dictates. The prophets main role was RARELY declaring future things. Their main role was preaching, i.e., declaring the word of the Lord.
Prisca, or Priscilla was clearly the leader and the more noted person in the tandem of Priscilla and Aquila. I would assume that Priscilla was more educated or more intelligent over Aquila. WHAT ELSE COULD BE THE REASON. This teaches us that he or SHE who has the gift or talent or more intelligent LEADS regardless of how many men are in the church.
During the Old Testament period, the people of God had mostly the Torah. People studied informally in families, teams, oral traditions and the office of priest was simply to offer sacrifices according to the Levitical laws but there were very few avenues to preach the word in an organized assembly where you had a speaker. That is EXCEPT the "office" of prophet, which decidedly was more a calling than an office. The only preachers during those days were the prophets, the teachers of the law were mostly the heads of families. So in Old Testament times PREACHER = PROPHET. Well, lo and behold, there were women who were called prophetesses! True they were a minority but we cannot deny their existence and their acceptance by the people of God.
One of the earliest prophets in Scripture is a woman, Miriam, the sister of Moses. How can one be a prophet and not preach (declare the words of the Lord)??? What does prophecy mean other than declare and expound the words of God to the people.
Deborah (Judges 4:4), before she became Israel's judge was called a prophetess! Again, same question. How can one be called a prophet unless he/she performs the Biblical role of prophet (to speak for or in behalf of God? Are you listening??? Huldah was a prophetess (2 Chronicles 22:14; 34:22). Isaiah 8:3 mentions an unnamed prophetess, definitely female regardless.
The prophet Joel wrote in Joel 2:28: “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions.
Anna in Luke 2:36 was a prophetess singled out to see the Savior before she died. Simeon was there too but he was not even called a prophet. It is quite explicit in verse 38, that Anna spoke of the Savior "to all who were waiting for the redemption of Israel. If that is not preaching...what is??? If that is not preaching, if that is not declaring the word of God, if that is not explaining the word of God, if that is not expounding the word of God, for God's sake, WHAT IS????
In the book of the Acts of the Apostles, women already prophesied. First Peter quoted from Joel in Acts 2:16-18: "16 But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel: 17 “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; 18 even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy.
And this was literally fulfilled further in the same book in Acts 21:8-9: "8 On the next day we departed and came to Caesarea, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him. 9 He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied. "
Conclusion: Complementarianism is NOT biblical. Egalitarianism CLEARLY is!!!
[addendum] Note: The following insight comes from NT Wright. BTW, NT Wright studies the New Testament using the original Greek (not the translated English) version. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSZPyZFWQI0
The gospel narrative of Mary and Martha in Luke 10:38-42 implies or even demonstrates how "feudal" or medieval and un-gospel-like the complementarian view is. Martha represents complementarians who insist that women have a specific role in the assembly and that is serving behind the scenes in subservience to the men (Note that Lazarus was their brother and Martha could have pointed to him for help). Jesus speaks for the egalitarians by declaring to Martha that "...one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her.” (Note that Mary was the ONLY female listener on record at the feet of Jesus). the social and cultural custom during that day and up to the present day in the Middle East, Turkey and other places, women are not allowed to cross the "male space" nor do men cross the "female space" but in this story, Christ was actually putting his approval stamp on crossing those man-made boundaries.
When Paul mentioned the people Jesus visited AFTER the resurrection, he mentioned ONLY MEN. However, ALL FOUR gospels record that the FIRST to witness the resurrection WERE WOMEN. Hmmm, is Paul contradicting Christ and the gospels? or was the culture just simply and decidedly MALE CHAUVINISTIC? Your choice, complementarians!
Since Satan will be doubly busy in the end times being THE Master of Scripture distortion, what we need today is unbiased, HONEST Hermeneutics so as not to mislead, intentionally or unintentionally, the people of God into the mold of division and judgmentalism. We should depart from glorifying isolated word or phrase studies and be more strict with the usage of context: the author's intention, grammar, the language nuances, the culture, social norms, history.
What God emphasizes, he "shouts", what is minor to him, he "whispers". Hermeneutically, applying our "common sense" principle where the SHOUTS of God interpret the w-h-i-s-p-e-r-s of God, The preponderance of verses above are the shouts of God, and 1 Timothy 2 (even including 1 Corinthians 14:34-35) is a mere whisper.
"In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity".
No comments:
Post a Comment