SpoudazO Logos

Appreciation

When we lose something that was special to us, sometimes we obtain a new understanding of appreciation.  My animal friend of 10 years passed away today. There are holes in my daily routines. 

I was watching the birds that I feed daily.  They're a pretty big flock that check out the bird feeders on my porch. What do I get from feeding them?  Their singing and chirping and laughable antics bring me daily smiles. On occasion I learn something unexpected, like the fact that some bird couples have intimate supportive relationships that we would do well to emulate. They bring my day beauty.

My cats bring me beauty also.  I don't mind at all taking time in my day to feed and love them.  All animal lovers are like that.  But when it comes to relationships among fellow humans, why do so many want to be served instead of enjoying the opportunities to serve and minister to others, just enjoying the beauty of their company.

Our friends bring beauty into our lives.  I suspect if we centered on trying to nurture them and cherish them, enjoying their unique influence on our lives, everyone would be the happier.

Here's the real travesty.  Teaching men and husbands they are supposed to be leaders and bosses, takes their focus away from nurturing and enjoying those special people in their lives. And everyone looses.

I'm so glad I took the time in my life to enjoy the beauty of my little animal friend, J'aim. I wasn't his owner, or leader or boss, just his loving friend and benefactor.  Now that he is gone, I've so many wonderful memories of all the richness he brought into my days.

The Case for Subjection of women to men ....

The following is the case for subjection of women to men that I am disputing.  it is from:

biblestudyproject.org

III. "ITS ELDERSHIP IS OPEN TO MEN WHO FULFILL THE QUALIFICATIONS
FOR ELDER AS SET FORTH IN THE NEW COVENANT"

A. "THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR ELDER"

The formally ordained spiritual leaders of the local church or congregation are called its elders or presbyters, pastors or shepherds, or overseers or bishops, and they are one and the same. (Compare Acts 20:17 with 20:28; 1 Timothy 3:2 with 5:17; Titus 1 with 5 and 7; 1 Peter 5:1 with 5:2.) The common practice today is to have one pastor and a group of elders (often mistakenly called deacons) under his authority. This is not the biblical practice. A search of the Brit HaChadashah (New Testament) will reveal that all elders worked as a plurality, though they may have operated in different capacities.

Elders must minimally meet the qualifications for deacons (1 Timothy 3:8-12) as the deacons are the helpers of the elders. Above and beyond that, they must meet the qualifications laid out specifically for elders (1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9). The qualifications noted in both passages are very similar. Titus 1:5-9 reads, 5. For this cause I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed you, 6. if anyone is blameless, husband of one wife, having believing children, not accused of loose behavior, or disobedient. 7. For an overseer must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not full of passion, not given to wine, not quarrelsome, not greedy for ill gain; 8. but hospitable, a lover of good, discreet, just, holy, temperate, 9. holding fast the faithful Word according to the doctrine, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and to convict those who contradict [sound doctrine].

B. "ELDERSHIP IS OPEN TO MEN"

1. Introduction
Scripture declares that the elders in a local congregation must be men. We will first look at those scriptures, then the underlying theological principles that are cited in these and related passages, and then consider whether the way the principles were applied in the early congregations must be applied the same way today.

2. The Scriptures
1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6 each states that an elder must be the husband of one wife. In addition, 1 Timothy 3:4-5 states that he must be 4. ruling his own house well, having children in subjection with all honor. 5. (For if a man does not know to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the congregation of God?) Consistent with these scriptures, whenever the gender of an elder is indicated, and there are many such passages, it is invariably male. Nevertheless, various interpretations based on linguistic, cultural, circumstantial and, perhaps, other considerations, have arisen that allow the eldership of women. I have therefore made every effort to deal with the issue as extensively, carefully, honestly, and fairly as I could.

3. The Underlying Theological Principles
The underlying principles that are given for the headship of the man in the home and the congregation are the same, and are all theological, meaning that they must apply in all homes and congregations everywhere throughout the Church Age. One's cultural orientation and circumstance must always bow to theological principles. This will become clearer as we proceed; and as we proceed, we will be careful to separate the theological principles from the manner in which they were applied to eldership in the early congregations, and how they are to be applied today. It must also be stated that, although other applications of the principles will be noted, the issue of men and/or women in eldership is the only application that we will pin to the ground in this study.

The key principle is that of subjection. The Greek words used are hupotage and hupotasso. According to Strong's Concordance, hupotage means:subordination. According to Young's Analytical Concordance, it means: subjection, submission. Hupotage appears in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 in the context of the need for women to refrain from teaching men, to refrain from exercising authority over them, and to maintain silence in the congregation. According to Strong, hupotasso means: be under obedience... be in subjection to, submit self unto. According to Young, it means: ... put in subjection unto, put under.... It is used in 1 Corinthians 14:34 in the context of the requirement of silence for women in the congregation. It is also used in Ephesians 5:22, Colossians 3:18, Titus 2:5 and 1 Peter 3:1, all in the context of the need for wives to submit to their husbands' leadership in the marriage. The principle of the subjection of women to the men in the local congregation may also be found in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, which deals with the requirement of women, perhaps only married women (mbs 106, p. 42. See endnotes), to wear a headcovering in honor of male headship. The passages dealing directly with congregational eldership are consistent with these, and must logically be viewed as relevant to the general requirement of the subjection of the women to the men.

The specific fundamental underlying theological reasons that are given for the necessity of the subjection of the woman to the man are these, which I have listed in a logical order:
1. 1 Corinthians 11:8: For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. 
2. 1 Timothy 2:13: For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
3. 1 Corinthians 11:9: Nor was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man.
4. 1 Timothy 2:14: And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
5. Ephesians 5:23: For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Messiah is the head of the church, and He is the Savior of the body. 
6. . 1 Corinthians 11:3: ...the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Messiah is God. Three levels of headship are mentioned here: God is the head of Messiah, Messiah is the head of the man, and the man is the head of the woman. The apostle's implication is that the principle of headship of the man over the woman begins with God the Father and cascades down the chain from God the Father to Messiah to the man to the woman. 
7. 1 Corinthians 11:7: For a man... is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of the man.
 
Six of the seven passages appear in the context of the subjection of women to men in the local congregation. The exception is Ephesians 5:23, which speaks of the subjection of wives to husbands; but even here Paul uses the relationship to illustrate the relationship of the universal body of Christ, the bride, to her heavenly Groom, the Chief Shepherd (Pastor) of the church (1 Peter 5:4). Paul explained, I speak concerning Christ and His church (Ephesians 5:32). In the context of the issue at hand, one must note that God ordained that our Chief Pastor, Yeshua HaMashiach (Jesus the Messiah) be born male, not female. 

4. How May the Theological Principles Be Applied Today?
In view of the timeless theological principles cited by Paul, one must conclude that the women are to be in subjection to the men in all congregations. That being the case, is it possible in any culture or circumstance for a woman to be in subjection to the men if she is an elder over them with the authority to sit on the decision making counsel and to exhort, admonish and discipline them? How can it be? It is a logical impossibility. An elder must be the husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6), a man (1 Timothy 3:5); and although Ephesians 5:21 exhorts both husband and wife to submit [hupotasso] to one another in love, the very next verse makes it plain that the primary way that a wife is to love her husband is to be in subjection [hupotasso] to his leadership.

All things considered, this writer cannot help but conclude that, in order to preserve the requirement for the subjection of women to men in the church or congregation throughout the Church Age no matter what the culture or circumstance, men must be in the positions of spiritual headship over the women, and no woman may be in spiritual headship over a man.

5. Pastors' Wives as Pastors and Women Assistant Pastors
Some say that, if a man is a pastor, and his wife is in subjection to him, then the requirement for subjection has been met and she can therefore be a pastor. But this is not logical. She is still a pastor, and the men in the congregation would still need to be in subjection to her and, as we have seen, this must not be allowed. The principle applies to women as assistant pastors, as well. An assistant pastor is still a pastor.

An even stranger form of "logic" may be found today. In many churches, particularly charismatic churches, when a man becomes a pastor, his wife is automatically crowned pastor as well, and functions as one! Not only is she is not a man, but neither is she scrutinized as closely as her husband as to character, background, strategy and capability. Where in the Word is such a practice to be found?! It is an absurdity and an insult to the Word of God, treating it not with reverence, but frivolity.

6. An Afterword
Love must reign in the local congregation, but it will reign in proportion to the degree to which its leaders and members honor the guidelines of Scripture. As a wife must lovingly submit to her husband's leadership in the marriage, so must women lovingly submit to exclusive male eldership in the congregation. Those who would force the issue of female eldership face a wall of biblical evidence that resists them. Those pastors who would force the issue to prevent a mass exodus from their congregations, or for any other reason, have their priorities wrong. All who would force the issue are not trusting the Lord, will do spiritual damage to themselves and all others affected, and will need to answer to the Lord. In regard to the judgment of the saints at the Judgment Seat of Messiah, Paul warned, I have laid a foundation, and another builds upon it. But let every man take heed how he builds upon it (1 Corinthians 3:10).

For What Purpose Were Women Created?

This is written in response to some dialogue with a fellow Christian who believes that women are created to be subjugated to men. The original teaching is from:  biblestudyproject.org

The Author wrote: “The specific fundamental underlying theological reasons that are given for the necessity of the subjection of the woman to the man are “
And  .....  “Six of the seven passages appear in the context of the subjection of women to men in the local congregation.”

Since the key principal stated here, is that all women are to be in subjection to all men, that is the first point I will address.   Stated simply, I do not believe that women were created to be in subjection to men.

Note:  it is not clear yet, whether the author is meaning women are only in subjection to men in an assembly of Christians or generally in all Christian activities and relationships (everywhere in everything) in addition to specifically in marriage.

My First Responses.....

A. All humans were created for the pleasure of our Creator. God made us male and female for companionship. Gen. 1:26-27, Gen. 2:18. Ha-adam (the human) means humanity, not a male human. The first human represents all humanity. God names both the man and the woman “human”. Gen. 5:1-2.  



B. There is no ‘headship’ in the creation of humanity. Humans were given dominion/guardianship together over the earth and its creatures, not over each other. Gen. 1:28. Together humanity as a whole, including both men and women, is to exercise guardianship type dominion over the care of the earth (beginning with the garden) and over all the creatures of the earth. That is actually the first mandate given to humanity.


C. The claim that 1 Tim. 2:13 is a statement of headship is neither anywhere in 1 Tim. or in Genesis.


D. There is a reason (which can be discussed later) why Paul is making the statement that “For Adam was first formed, then Eve.” but it had nothing to do with any perceived headship or authority of men over women. 


E. In 1 Tim. 2 Paul is not discussing male authority over women and God did not mention anything about giving men authority over women in Genesis. 


F. There was a reason that God made the genders separately, but it was not about establishing male authority over women. It was about helping the male understand that it was not good to be alone. Gen. 2:18 After the man understood that he was alone and it was not good, then God proceeded to form the woman from the very substance of the man.


a. “I will make him a helper comparable to him”

ezer – fr. azar – help, succour…. Used about 20 times in the OT primarily about God and military aid. It is not a word of a person who is under someone else’s authority, but of one who gives strong aid to another who is in need. The English word ‘helper’ does not do justice to the Hebrew because the English sense is one who is an assistant of another. And that is NOT the case with ezer.

Ex. 18:4 And the other was named Eliezer, for he said, "The God of my father was my help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh.

From
cbeinternational.org
“Again we see that ezer refers to someone who has the power to help. Then why do some insist that woman’s being an ezer to man means that women should be subordinate to men, and women’s judgment restricted to issues involving child rearing and house keeping. If anything the Biblical evidence supports her full participation in partnership with men, to carry out God’s commandments to humanity. Woman being made not only in God’s image, but also an ezer made in God’s image, is to be a powerful ally and partner for the man.”

b. Kenegdo – comparable, corresponding to, equal to, matching. Kenegdo modifies the strength and power of the word ezer, so that the woman is a help that is not superior but equal to, matching , fit for, meet for, etc. the man.

G. Quote from What Paul Really Said About Women by John Bristow: (pages 58-60 of the hardcover edition)
"In 1 Cor 11:9  , Paul reminded his readers that woman was created because man needs woman. The Authorized (King James) Version misses the force of the words in Greek. It reads simply, 'Neither was the man created for the woman, but woman for the man.' Many modern translations render Paul's words more accurately: 'Neither was the man created for the sake of the woman, but the woman for the sake of the man.' What Paul was unmistakably stating is that men need women. . . Paul was reminding his Jewish readers that before God said said that Eve's desire should be for her husband, Adam already needed Eve. And Paul was reminding his Gentile readers that the Stoic disdain for women is unrealistic and unnatural. . . Paul added in 1 Cor 11: 'Nevertheless, neither woman without man nor man without woman in the Lord.' Each needs the other. Paul was writing this in the context of discussing public worship. His words opposed the pagan practice of excluding women in worship and the synagogue practice of relegating women to a side chamber. . .

H. After the fall sin comes into their relationship. As a result of this sin God curses the serpent (3:14) and the earth upon which he is cursed to crawl (3:17). Adam and Eve’s punishment had already been established: spiritual death. To the man and the woman God explains what life will now be like. Some Christians misinterpret God’s words as prescriptive. But that is not the case, rather God is describing the future.

a. To the woman who acknowledged her error in being deceived, God gives the first promise of rescuing. Between her seed and the seed of the serpent there will be enmity. He also explains that her toil/grief and conception will be increased. There is no explanation why, just the warning that it will happen.

b." And to your husband will be your desire (teshuqua – basically turning towards, desire, longing) and he will rule/dominate (mashal – harsh rule, have dominion) you". This is God speaking to the woman warning her that there will be a negative change in her relationship with her husband. When she turns toward him (perhaps a comparison to her turning away from God and putting a longing that should be for God upon her husband) his response will be to dominate. Some say this is an indication that her longing/desire is bad and others say it is from innocence, and others that it is an inordinate (out of balance) desire for the husband to provide something he cannot. We do not know for certain.

c. Richard Hess, fr. Discovering Biblical Equality pg. 92 ……… “Rather, Genesis 3:16-17 is best understood as a description of the new order of things, of how life will be lived as the result of the Fall, rather than how it should be lived. It is not a command for one sex to rule over the other any more than Genesis 3:17-19 is a command for all Israelite men to be farmers or a prohibition of the use of weed-killer. These are not God's decisions on how things must be, such that violation of them would be sin.”



There is more that can be said on the creation of man and woman, humanity, but I will let that suffice for now.

In closing, here is a quote from a free online article: Man and Woman at Creation: A Critique of Complementarian Interpretation

http://www.cbeinternational.org/new/free_articles/ManandWomanatCreation.pdf 

“In Genesis 1 and 2 we discover God’s perfect, pre-fall intentions for the world and all its creatures, including God’s intentions for human identity and human purpose. When we know what something is (identity) and what it is mean to do (purpose or calling), we have the basis for knowing our proper expectations of, and obligations toward, that ‘something’. Thus, only when we have grasped the created purpose and identity of humanity as male and female are we able to make faithful judgments about the many normative questions facing us today. What do the creation texts reveal? And what light do they shed on whether or not a universal, fixed exclusion of women from (some) leadership reflects God perfect intentions for womanhood?”


I believe that man and woman, as equal partners in humanity, were meant to complement one another in mutuality to achieve common goals; and in marriage to complement one another in their differences so as to live as if they were one.