Role of Women in the Church: Final Thoughts

The dilemma, stated in earlier posts, is very complicated and many scholars, pastors, and laymen will disagree as to the solution or whether there even needs to be one. What I asked was:

• How can we know what things in the Bible are accommodated but wrong (women and slaves but to different degrees) and which things are always right? and;
• By what standard do we judge whether an issue being addressed is temporary or permanent? and;
• How do know when to differentiate between the two in an objective manner compared to a subjective approach to the Bible (I like this doctrine but not that one)?

It would be very easy to simply say that the Bible is always clear and we simply need to obey it. As I said earlier:

Initially, what concerns me is one of the comments/endorsements related to one of these books – the assumption that all is now “settled definitively” (the debate is over) and to not accept that position is equated with not bowing our hearts to the authority of scripture.

Role of Women in the Church: Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth

Wayne Grudem’s latest opus is quite an extensive work providing “an analysis of more than 100 disputed questions”. The book starts out with two chapters laying out “a Biblical vision of manhood and womanhood”. The next ten chapters are devoted to rebutting “Evangelical Feminist” claims around this issue.

The use of this term “Evangelical Feminist” bothers me since it lumps everyone who is not complementarian into only one category. There is a world of difference between many “Egalitarians” and “Evangelical Feminists”. At the end of the main portion of the book, Grudem asks the question – “Is Evangelical Feminism the new path to Liberalism? Some disturbing warning signs.” I am not convinced that it is helpful to taint out Bible believing Egalitarian brothers and sisters in this manner.

He provides an analysis in chapter nine on how to determine which moral commands are culturally relative. While this issue is very important to my thinking, I did not feel that his analysis even comes close to settling that matter.

I applaud the effort to provide an extensive analysis of the issues. What resonates through each of the chapters is the sense that “now the matter is settled” and the opposition has no legs to stand on.

I think that it is harmful to the body of Christ if this is made into a “litmus test” for Orthodoxy.

Role of Women in the Church: Interim Thoughts

In an earlier post, I noted that Stackhouse was saying that Paul was providing instruction to the church on how to survive and thrive in a patriarchal culture that he thinks will not last long recognizing that in due course gender will not be an issue – Paul was not forbidding women from leadership forever in every circumstance but is instead temporarily accommodating himself to the global reality of patriarchy – “fundamentally evil as patriarchy was and is”.

I am defending egalitarianism by granting the complementarians almost everything that they claim and then replying that gender distinctions are a result of sin in fallen human society, not divinely ordered human relations. Thus, such distinctions are practiced in the church only as a kind of desperate expedient, an accommodation to our hard hearts that is to be done away with when the time is ripe. I then argue that this time has come.

To prove his point that this is the case, he discusses the church and slavery. The early church expected Christ to return at any moment, so it made sense to accommodate this evil in light of the fact that Christ would return soon and do away with these distinctions. When over the centuries Christ did not return, the church concluded that the Bible’s teaching about the dignity of all people entailed the abolition of slavery.

Here is my dilemma:

1. How can we know what things in the Bible are accommodated but wrong (women and slaves but to different degrees) and which things are always right? and;
2. By what standard do we judge whether an issue being addressed is temporary or permanent? and;
3. How do know when to differentiate between the two in an objective manner compared to a subjective approach to the Bible (I like this doctrine but not that one)?

At this point, the exegesis favors the complementarian position and the first century understanding of Ephesian culture and patriarchal society favors the egalitarian position.

Thoughts? More to come…

Role of Women in the Church: “Women in the Church”

This book by Thomas Schreiner and Andreas Kosttenberger was quite extensive and contained a lot of exegetical arguments. The subtitle tells you a lot about the emphasis of the book – “An Analysis and Application of 1 Timothy 2:9-15.”

In the introduction, the author states:

As the present volume makes clear, all the various elements affecting the interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 combine suggest that it is not God’s will for women to teach or have authority over men int he church, so that the offices of pastor-teacher as well as elder ought to be reserved for men. These elements are the first century background, the meaning of authentein and the Greek syntax of 1 Timothy 2:12, the interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 in its proper context, and the proper principles of interpretation.

The book starts by tracing the situation in Ephesus in the First Century. The conclusion is that the “Pauline Ephesus” was not a center of egalitarianism and does not fit the model put forth by evangelical feminists.

What follows next is a detailed exegetical and word study of the 1 Timothy passage and the word “authentein”. Given their understanding of the text, one can only arrive at the complementarian position. The text is to be understood universally and permanent and not a temporary situation. I must admit that their exegesis was very thorough and without any background in this area it would be hard not to agree.

Role of Women in the Church – “Finally Feminist”

The first book that I want to discuss in this series is John Stackhouse’s “Finally Feminist”.

The subtitle of this book is the key to understanding the author’s viewpoint – “A Pragmatic Christian Understanding of Gender; Why Both Sides are Wrong and Right”. Meaning that he is not intending a deep or thorough exegetical argument to prove his position.

The book starts off by asking a very basic question – “Aren’t we done with gender? Haven’t a;; the relevant issues been raised, all the texts scrutinized, all the alternatives arrayed?…It seems abundantly evident that there are very good reasons to hold to either side of the debate. So is there anything left to say?”

There is more to say and I appreciated his balanced approach (though his thesis is not new) to this topic as well as his respect for people on both sides of the debate.

I agreed with his theological task of not trying to “figure it all out” so that we could say “this is the final word on the issue”. Instead, dwelling on the Bible, with the help of the Holy Spirit and the church, to make the best decision about what Scripture means; and then to respond to it with obedience and gratitude.

Role of Women in the Church – Early Thoughts

At this point, I have read the 4 books previously listed (link) plus “Women in the Church’s Ministry: A Test Case for Biblical Hermeneutics” by R. T. France.

I must admit that both sides of the argument provide very in-depth reasons for their positions and some of the books are very strong on Biblical exegesis (though one could say a bit overboard). I do not believe that the issue is as “cut and dry” as some claim and both positions require a thorough understanding of 1st century Ephesus and a solid hermeneutical approach.

There is much that I respect from all of these authors and will certainly write about my interactions, thoughts, and thinking with each side.

Initially, what concerns me is one of the comments/endorsements related to one of these books – the assumption that all is now “settled definitively” (the debate is over) and to not accept that position is equated with not bowing our hearts to the authority of scripture.

While some may believe that this author is right in his interpretation of scripture on this issue, we must acknowledge that he is not infallible.

This seems to make light of the other authors and their position. This type of comment seems arrogant given that we live in an age of partial knowledge and will not know fully until Christ returns.

These issues are very complex and I do not believe that we can simply consider the matter settled definitively given the difficulty in interpreting 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 11 & 14.

As a Reformed Calvinist, I certainly believe that the matter is settled definitively on the doctrine of election. Why is it that my Arminian friends don’t seem to accept that position?

I hope that I do not believe that they are not bowing their hearts to the authority of scripture by believing differently.

More to come…

Role of Women in the Church (Part 1) – Updated

I am currently reading a number of books to think through the issues of “the role(s) of women in the church”. I am working through the Complementarian and Egalitarian positions to think through this issue in more depth. Just reading some of the recommendations for each book outlines how important each viewpoint is and how it contributes to our worldview as a whole.

Anyone want to weigh in?

So, the books that I am reading are:

John Stackhouse – Finally Feminist (a remarkably balanced book)
Wayne Grudem – Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth (700+ pages)
Thomas Schreiner – Women in the Church (a thorough exegetical analysis of 1 Timothy 2)
William Webb – Slaves, Women and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis (similar in scope to Stackhouse)

Updated – Ben Witherington Blog Article