Bible Difficulties (92 page)

The answer to this question is found in the verses preceding, that is, 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10, which speak of the coming of the "lawless one" (i.e., Antichrist) "with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of truth so as to be saved" (NASB). In other words, God turns over to the baneful influence of Satan, the Prince of Lies, those who have of their own free will chosen not to listen to the truth but who by preference cleave to error. God furnishes no guarantee that He will disabuse sinners of error if they really prefer error to the truth. There is no reason why He should.

As for the prophets of Ahab who falsely predicted victory for him if he should attempt the recapture of Ramoth-gilead from the Syrians, he fell into this same category. He did not want to know the truth of God; he hated and opposed God's moral law wherever it went counter to his own will. Therefore he could expect no guidance from God in the matter of besieging Ramoth-gilead. Ahab's time had run out. His confiscation of the vineyard of Naboth on the basis of a trumped-up charge for which Naboth was stoned to death was a crime for which he had to pay. Therefore the decision of God and His angels in heavenly conference--as Micaiah plainly told Ahab in the presence of Jehoshaphat--

was to send a lying spirit to incline the whole pack of court prophets to give Ahab the same encouragement to march into a battle that would cost him his life (1 Kings 22:18-23).

The faith in a lie that God permitted or even encouraged in each of these cases simply represented the outworking of the moral law. If men refuse the true God, they will have to make do with a false idol of their own devising. If they reject the truth, they must be content to feed on falsehood.

419

1 Timothy

Does 1 Timothy 2:12 forbid the ordination of women?

1 Timothy 2:11-12 lays down this principle: "Let a women learn in silence [
hesychia
]

with all submission [
hypotage
]; I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over [
authentein
] a man, but to be in silence [or `quietness'--
hesychia
]." The reason for the distinction between men and women in the matter of leadership in the church and in the home is then grounded on the relationship between man and women established at the very beginning (vv. 13-14): "For Adam was created first, afterwards [
eita
] Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, having been quite deceived [
exapatetheisa
]

became involved in transgression. But she shall be saved [
sothesetai
from
sozein
, which here implies that woman is saved or redeemed from the disadvantage or reproach of having been the first to succumb to the wiles of Satan's temptation at the Fall] through childbearing, if they [i.e., child-bearing women--or even all women, as potential child-bearers] abide in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety [
sophrosyne
, which implies `moderation,' `good judgment,' `self-control,' `chastity,' or `self-restraint']."

(
Sothesetai
must not be taken out of context as meaning that a child-bearing woman is saved by her good work of bringing a new life into the world; for her it is just as true as it for a man, that salvation from sin and death is bestowed only by grace through faith, as Eph. 2:8-9 clearly teaches.)

Here we have a very clear principle of subordination of woman to man in the structure of the church as an organized body and in the family as a team in a household. God intends that the responsibility of leadership devolve on man rather than woman in both cases. Yet both man and woman are equally precious and worthy before God (Gal. 3:27-28), and the assigned level of responsibility does not give to men any special advantage or any inherently higher status before God than is granted to women.

The following teachings emerge from this passage:

1. There is a distinction between what is permitted for men and what is permitted for women. By implication, since women are expressly forbidden to teach men (i.e., fellow believers in the congregation who are men) in an authoritative way (
didaskein
and
authentein
seem to be intended as a combined concept and describe the function of the teaching elder or minister of the gospel, who instructs and exhorts a congregation from the pulpit), that which is not permitted to women is permitted to men. It seems to this writer that this dictum cannot be reworked so as to make it mean that women are granted the same privilege and status as men. (Some of those who attempt to do so are in danger of violating the rights of language and reducing Scripture to a plastic medium that can be interpreted to mean anything the interpreter may choose. Willful manipulation of the plain sense of Scripture must be regarded as tantamount to a denial of the objective authority of Scripture.)

420

2. On the other hand, this verse does not prohibit women from teaching individual men on a personal basis (as Priscilla--along with her husband Aquila--taught Apollos the way of God more accurately [Acts 18:26]. Nor does it forbid women to "prophesy" in a respectful and submissive manner (symbolized by keeping a covering over their heads in church meetings [1 Cor. 11:5-6]) and to address fellow believers--male and female--to their "edification, exhortation, and comfort" (1 Cor. 14:3 so defines "prophecy").

Indeed, there is a wide scope of opportunity afforded to women who have such a gift; all four daughters of Philip the evangelist were likewise endowed with the
charisma
of prophecy (Acts 21:9). Undoubtedly they spearheaded the Christian outreach to women who could not be contacted in public meeting places but could be evangelized in their homes--along with the younger children, no doubt. An apostolic pattern for Bible study and prayer groups in the home was set by Lydia at Philippi, who was Paul's first European convert. Not only at the "laundromat" by the river but also in her own home she promoted evangelism with all who would consent to enter her house (Acts 16:14,40).

And she made the most of Paul's presence in it (along with Silas and his other team members) to introduce her guests to Jesus. Such examples as these show clearly enough that the Lord uses gifted and godly women in the winning of souls and even in the instruction of young and old (males as well as females) in following the way of the Lord.

This furnishes ample warrant for that noble army of female missionaries (both the married and the unmarried) whom God has so mightily used in the spread of the gospel in pioneer mission fields all over the world.

3. Nevertheless, it remains a clear mandate in God's Word that in an established church situation women workers, no matter how gifted and talented, are not to have ecclesiastical authority over men. Women are to be helpers in the work of the church, but they are not to have the authority of ordained ministers or pastors in the leadership of the work in the local church. 1 Timothy 2:12 clearly precludes this, and Christ's example of calling twelve male apostles and sending out seventy others to evangelize the cities of Palestine furnishes a clear and authoritative pattern along this line. This must be observed, even though it is also true that Christ first appeared to Mary Magdalene and her two companions right after His resurrection, before He appeared to any of the men. This distinction must be maintained even though it is true that Paul made very large use of helpers like Lydia (Acts 16), Phoebe (Rom. 16:1-2), Euodia and Syntyche (Phil. 4:2-3), and spoke of their sterling service in terms of highest praise and appreciation. (Some have construed the term
prostatis
applied to Phoebe in Rom. 16:2 as equivalent to "one who presides over an assembly." But no such meaning is demonstrable for New Testament times; rather, it means "helper," "assistant," or "patroness," "protector." Not even the masculine form
prostates
ever means "president" in New Testament usage but only "defender," "guardian," "helper" [cf. Arndt and Gingrich,
Greek-English Lexicon
, p.

726].)

4. In this paragraph a clear correlation is made between woman's subordination in the matter of church order and her subordination to her husband in the home. Even though the wife may be far more gifted and advanced in matters of Scripture teaching and in godliness of life and purpose, nevertheless she has been assigned by God to a subordinate 421

position under the authority of her husband. The husband is invested with the responsibility of ultimate decision in matters of the home (even though he cannot ever usurp the unique authority of Christ in matters of his wife's faith or her personal relationship to God). His authority must be respected at all times, except that he may not set aside the supreme authority of God Himself when he wishes his wife to commit sin or throw off her allegiance to Christ. This last proviso is clearly implied In Ephesians 5:22-24; "Wives, be subject to your own husbands as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church....But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be their own husbands in everything."

While it is true that v.21 says, "Be subject to one another in the fear of Christ," this may not be so construed as to negate the teaching of vv. 22-24, which spell out the subordinate role of wife to husband. At the same time, v.22 does suggest that there are very important areas in which the husband is to subject himself to his wife, receiving her as a precious treasure from Christ, for which he shall be held strictly accountable. Among these areas--

apart from the obvious commitment to marital fidelity--would be phases of the operation of the household in which he recognizes that her competence is greater than his own, or in which he sees that her involvement is even greater than his own.

It should be pointed out, moreover, that the demand Ephesians 5:25-33 makes on the husband is far greater than that which it makes on the wife. She is to "be subject"

(
hypotassesthai
is used of being assigned to a specific post in an army or team, subject to the chain of command by which the whole unit is governed) to her husband, and she is to

"reverence" him (
phobeisthai
, lit., "fear"). But the husband is commanded to love her

"just as Christ also loved the church [not because it was worthy of Him, satisfied His needs, or appreciated Him enough--but even if it was far from perfect and needed much patience to put up with] and gave Himself up for her" (NASB). That is a far heavier assignment than that of the wife, and no man should ever cite this chapter by way of admonition or rebuke to his wife until he has first made sure to fulfill his own role as it is there set forth. He is to love her as Christ loves His church!

If, then, the subordinate position of woman to man in the economy of the home and the church precludes the ordination of women--as it most certainly does--what can be said of female elders or female deacons? Some have suggested that the reference to
presbyteras
(feminine plural accusative) in 1 Timothy 5:2 points to a woman elder, inasmuch as the masculine form
presbyter
is regularly used for an "elder" in the ecclesiastical sense. But this interpretation cannot be maintained in such a passage as this, which clearly refers to all fellow church members, including older men, older women, younger men, and younger women; the matter at issue is the respectful or brotherly attitude Timothy is to maintain toward each of these groups. This has nothing to do with church officers. The same observation applies to the "widows" (
kherai
) who are spoken of in vv. 3-6. These

"widows" are unlikely to have had any status as governors of the church. It is simply a matter of what kind of widows are to be put on the relief roll of the church, not all and sundry, but only those who are at least sixty years old, have lived with the same husband until widowhood, have led a life of good works, are avoiding offense in their present conduct, and have no children or grandchildren to support them.

422

The same applies to the passage in Titus 2, which discusses the role to be played by the young and the old of both sections. The
presbytidas
(feminine plural accusative) referred to in v.3 can hardly be women elders in the ecclesiastical sense, for they are surveyed along with young women (
neas
) and young men (
neoterous
--masculine plural accusative) as to virtues they should especially cultivate and vices they are especially to avoid. There is therefore no real ground for regarding either
presbyterai
or
presbytidas
as women elders.

In the case of deacons, however, there is a good case that can be made out for deaconesses at least, whether or not they were put on the same level as male deacons. It seems quite clear in Romans 16:1 that Paul regarded Phoebe as a
diakonos
: "I commend you to Phoebe our sister, being a servant [or `deacon'--
diakonon
] of the church in Cenchrea, that you may receive her in the Lord, in a manner worthy of saints, and may assist her in whatever matter she has need of." Arndt and Gingrich (
Greek-English
Lexicon
, p. 184) unhesitatingly classify this occurrence as a genuine instance (the only clear one in the New Testament) of a female deacon. Others are cited in Hermas's
Vision
(2.4.3) and
Similitude
(9.26.2) (second century A.D.).

The ecclesiastical term for deaconess (
diakonissa
) never occurs in the New Testament, and so this single reference to
diakonor
in the feminine is unique in the Greek Scripture.

This would indicate that so far as the apostolic church was concerned, a woman deacon was very exceptional, even though allowable. The original seven deacons referred to in Acts 6:5-6 were certainly all men; and they were set apart for their holy office by prayer and the laying on of hands, after they had been elected by the congregation. There is no way of being sure whether Phoebe was thus formally ordained in the same fashion by the Cencherean church; but if Paul was using the term ecclesiastically (rather than in the general sense of "servant"), she very likely was.