Comments for Sound Church http://www.soundchurch.org Applying the principles of the church as the pillar and ground of the truth Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:00:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 2: Should we separate? by Heidi Bright Parales, M.Div. http://www.soundchurch.org/women-in-positions-of-spiritual-leadership-part-2-should-we-separate/comment-page-1/#comment-331 Heidi Bright Parales, M.Div. Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:00:16 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=508#comment-331 Hi Scott, This posting starts out, "In our last post on this topic, we established why a woman who functions in a position of spiritual authority over men in the local church is serious sin, is a denial of male headship, is a hindrance to the gospel and cancels God’s pattern of spiritual leadership." In my posting for the previous article, scholarship has established that women can have authority over men in the church, according to the correct translation of I Tim. 2. As for male headship, here is another issue scholarship takes with the first assertion in your article. The traditional interpretation of 1 Cor. 11:3 has serious problems. 1. If this verse is reciting a chain of command, then why is God’s authority mentioned after man’s authority? 2. It says that God is the authority over Christ. This would give one a chain of command within the Godhead, making the three members of the Trinity unequal. This idea of a chain of command, known as subordinationist theology (Christ is subordinate to the Creator God) was declared a HERESY during the fourth century. 3. Paul uses the singular form for man and woman. If Paul were saying all men were the authorities over all women, then he would not have used the singular form. 4. Christ did not come to set up hierarchies and chains of command. Rather, Christ came to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many. For Paul to establish a chain of command that places half the human race in a subordinate position to the other half is to miss one of the main points of the Gospel. To understand this passage, we have to understand what the Greek word kephale, translated “head,” meant at the time Paul wrote his letter. During the first century kephale was rarely, if ever, used to indicate authority. It was not until the influence of Latin many years later that the new meaning of authority was added to the word kephale (such as the concept of the "head" of an academic department). The word kephale meant “source” long before Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) and for hundreds of years after Christ. Cyril of Alexandria defined kephale as source. Commenting on 1 Cor. 11:3, this 5th century Greek Church father wrote that Christ is the kephale of man because man was made and brought to birth through Christ. He then said man is the kephale of woman because he was her source when she was taken from his flesh. Finally, Cyril wrote that God is the source of Christ. If we translate kephale to mean source, like "headwaters" or "fountainhead," then the verse is not hierarchical but cyclical: Christ is the source of every man; the man is the source of a woman; and God is the source of Christ. Here is how it makes sense: Christ is the source of man because Christ was God’s agent in creation (John 1:3), and therefore participated in the creation of Adam. Man is the source for woman, as in Gen. 2:21-23, where God took the rib, or side, from the earth being and fashioned a female. If we drop the heretical interpretation you have proposed, then the image of God is one of three equal, loving persons, and the image of humans should reflect that equality and that love. The members of the Godhead are equal, and God made male and female in the image of God, so they also are made to be equal. The emphasis of this verse is on unity, not hierarchy. So my view is the opposite, with scholarly and biblical backing: a woman who functions in a position of spiritual authority over men in the local church is fulfilling her God-given gifts, accepts her God-given equality with males, is a proponent of the gospel and accepts God’s pattern of spiritual leadership. Background for this position, based on 6 years of research, and more information is available in my book, published by Smyth & Helwys (http://www.helwys.com/books/hidden_voices.html). Hi Scott,
This posting starts out, “In our last post on this topic, we established why a woman who functions in a position of spiritual authority over men in the local church is serious sin, is a denial of male headship, is a hindrance to the gospel and cancels God’s pattern of spiritual leadership.”
In my posting for the previous article, scholarship has established that women can have authority over men in the church, according to the correct translation of I Tim. 2.
As for male headship, here is another issue scholarship takes with the first assertion in your article.
The traditional interpretation of 1 Cor. 11:3 has serious problems.
1. If this verse is reciting a chain of command, then why is God’s authority mentioned after man’s authority?
2. It says that God is the authority over Christ. This would give one a chain of command within the Godhead, making the three members of the Trinity unequal. This idea of a chain of command, known as subordinationist theology (Christ is subordinate to the Creator God) was declared a HERESY during the fourth century.
3. Paul uses the singular form for man and woman. If Paul were saying all men were the authorities over all women, then he would not have used the singular form.
4. Christ did not come to set up hierarchies and chains of command. Rather, Christ came to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many. For Paul to establish a chain of command that places half the human race in a subordinate position to the other half is to miss one of the main points of the Gospel.
To understand this passage, we have to understand what the Greek word kephale, translated “head,” meant at the time Paul wrote his letter.
During the first century kephale was rarely, if ever, used to indicate authority. It was not until the influence of Latin many years later that the new meaning of authority was added to the word kephale (such as the concept of the “head” of an academic department). The word kephale meant “source” long before Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) and for hundreds of years after Christ.
Cyril of Alexandria defined kephale as source. Commenting on 1 Cor. 11:3, this 5th century Greek Church father wrote that Christ is the kephale of man because man was made and brought to birth through Christ. He then said man is the kephale of woman because he was her source when she was taken from his flesh. Finally, Cyril wrote that God is the source of Christ.
If we translate kephale to mean source, like “headwaters” or “fountainhead,” then the verse is not hierarchical but cyclical: Christ is the source of every man; the man is the source of a woman; and God is the source of Christ. Here is how it makes sense: Christ is the source of man because Christ was God’s agent in creation (John 1:3), and therefore participated in the creation of Adam. Man is the source for woman, as in Gen. 2:21-23, where God took the rib, or side, from the earth being and fashioned a female.
If we drop the heretical interpretation you have proposed, then the image of God is one of three equal, loving persons, and the image of humans should reflect that equality and that love. The members of the Godhead are equal, and God made male and female in the image of God, so they also are made to be equal.
The emphasis of this verse is on unity, not hierarchy.
So my view is the opposite, with scholarly and biblical backing: a woman who functions in a position of spiritual authority over men in the local church is fulfilling her God-given gifts, accepts her God-given equality with males, is a proponent of the gospel and accepts God’s pattern of spiritual leadership.
Background for this position, based on 6 years of research, and more information is available in my book, published by Smyth & Helwys (http://www.helwys.com/books/hidden_voices.html).

]]> Comment on Denver Sound Church is Life Reformed by “Life Reformed” means that the Gospel starts with Life – Sound Church http://www.soundchurch.org/denver-sound-church-is-life-reformed/comment-page-1/#comment-327 “Life Reformed” means that the Gospel starts with Life – Sound Church Fri, 03 Feb 2012 23:23:30 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=479#comment-327 [...] term “life reformed” describes Denver Sound Church. The reason this term is so important is because the Gospel itself [...] [...] term “life reformed” describes Denver Sound Church. The reason this term is so important is because the Gospel itself [...]

]]> Comment on Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 1: 4 reasons that the Bible does not allow it by Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 2: Should we separate? – Sound Church http://www.soundchurch.org/4-reasons-why-the-bible-does-not-allow-women-to-hold-positions-of-spiritual-leadership-in-the-church/comment-page-1/#comment-321 Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 2: Should we separate? – Sound Church Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:04:25 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=468#comment-321 [...] our last post on this topic, we established  why a woman who functions in a position of spiritual authority over men in the [...] [...] our last post on this topic, we established  why a woman who functions in a position of spiritual authority over men in the [...]

]]> Comment on Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 1: 4 reasons that the Bible does not allow it by Heidi Bright Parales, M.Div. http://www.soundchurch.org/4-reasons-why-the-bible-does-not-allow-women-to-hold-positions-of-spiritual-leadership-in-the-church/comment-page-1/#comment-317 Heidi Bright Parales, M.Div. Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:07:50 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=468#comment-317 Hi Joshua, You raise many points, and I want to address one; it might bring clarity to the others. There is far too much to say than can be placed in a little comment. I will only talk about 1 Tim. Paul appears to be addressing a specific problem in the congregation (1 Tim. 1:3,4,6,7,19,20; and 5:13). Apparently some false teachings were circulating among the women, and these ideas were causing problems. One of the problems involved the women in the congregation being open to unorthodox ideas (1 Tim. 3:14, 15). Here, Paul was encouraging women to learn in the way rabbinical students learned. The verse shows a radical movement toward the idea that women were full participants within the Christian community and had the intelligence to comprehend the teachings of Jesus. Without a proper education, the women could not protect themselves against heresies. Among the heresies probably were theories of origins such as Gnostic creation accounts that taught Eve was created first, and that she herself created Adam. "Authentein" usually is translated “to exercise authority." By the first century, the noun form of authentes was used by several writers to indicate an author of something. Here, the verb tense of authentein indicated possession, a description, or something specific. Applying this information, the verse would read, “I do not allow a woman to teach that she is the author of a man.” Paul connected verses 11 and 12 to verses 13 and 14 with the Greek word gar, signifying he was about to further address the issues raised in verses 11 and 12. Paul explained the creation account in Genesis to counter false Gnostic creation stories and to verify that woman was not the author of man. Paul wanted to end the spread of false doctrines by Ephesian women, so pulling the creation story into this letter DOES place the verses in cultural context. To end the spread of the myths, Paul’s solution was to provide the women with a proper Christian education, under the authority of the Scriptures, so they would eventually be able to share in ministry, which included teaching and leading. Hi Joshua,
You raise many points, and I want to address one; it might bring clarity to the others. There is far too much to say than can be placed in a little comment. I will only talk about 1 Tim.
Paul appears to be addressing a specific problem in the congregation (1 Tim. 1:3,4,6,7,19,20; and 5:13). Apparently some false teachings were circulating among the women, and these ideas were causing problems. One of the problems involved the women in the congregation being open to unorthodox ideas (1 Tim. 3:14, 15).
Here, Paul was encouraging women to learn in the way rabbinical students learned. The verse shows a radical movement toward the idea that women were full participants within the Christian community and had the intelligence to comprehend the teachings of Jesus. Without a proper education, the women could not protect themselves against heresies.
Among the heresies probably were theories of origins such as Gnostic creation accounts that taught Eve was created first, and that she herself created Adam.
“Authentein” usually is translated “to exercise authority.” By the first century, the noun form of authentes was used by several writers to indicate an author of something. Here, the verb tense of authentein indicated possession, a description, or something specific. Applying this information, the verse would read, “I do not allow a woman to teach that she is the author of a man.”
Paul connected verses 11 and 12 to verses 13 and 14 with the Greek word gar, signifying he was about to further address the issues raised in verses 11 and 12. Paul explained the creation account in Genesis to counter false Gnostic creation stories and to verify that woman was not the author of man.
Paul wanted to end the spread of false doctrines by Ephesian women, so pulling the creation story into this letter DOES place the verses in cultural context.
To end the spread of the myths, Paul’s solution was to provide the women with a proper Christian education, under the authority of the Scriptures, so they would eventually be able to share in ministry, which included teaching and leading.

]]> Comment on Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 1: 4 reasons that the Bible does not allow it by Joshua Caucutt http://www.soundchurch.org/4-reasons-why-the-bible-does-not-allow-women-to-hold-positions-of-spiritual-leadership-in-the-church/comment-page-1/#comment-316 Joshua Caucutt Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:51:06 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=468#comment-316 If I understand you correctly, you are attempting to establish that since most modern believers view the "holy kiss" as a culturally based command, therefore we might also view the prohibition against women functioning as an elder in the same light. If my understanding of your question is correct, I respond with this: If we continue reading in 1 Timothy, Paul takes support for his argument from outside his immediate cultural context: "For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but athe woman being deceived, fell into transgression." Furthermore, Paul talks about the role of women in the context of spiritual authority in the local church in 1 Corinthians 4:34,35 and even goes on to state that if a person does not subject themselves to this command, that person should not be recognized as being a messenger of God. The commands concerning women in positions of spiritual authority in the local church are far greater than their cultural context. From the beginning, God's ordained functional order, especially as it relates to the family and spiritual leadership in the church to be men over women. I would also add that if these commands concerning women are taken as merely "cultural," then there are a whole bunch of Biblical directives that become questionable on the grounds of culture. If I understand you correctly, you are attempting to establish that since most modern believers view the “holy kiss” as a culturally based command, therefore we might also view the prohibition against women functioning as an elder in the same light. If my understanding of your question is correct, I respond with this:

If we continue reading in 1 Timothy, Paul takes support for his argument from outside his immediate cultural context: “For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but athe woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” Furthermore, Paul talks about the role of women in the context of spiritual authority in the local church in 1 Corinthians 4:34,35 and even goes on to state that if a person does not subject themselves to this command, that person should not be recognized as being a messenger of God. The commands concerning women in positions of spiritual authority in the local church are far greater than their cultural context. From the beginning, God’s ordained functional order, especially as it relates to the family and spiritual leadership in the church to be men over women.

I would also add that if these commands concerning women are taken as merely “cultural,” then there are a whole bunch of Biblical directives that become questionable on the grounds of culture.

]]> Comment on Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 1: 4 reasons that the Bible does not allow it by John Finkelde http://www.soundchurch.org/4-reasons-why-the-bible-does-not-allow-women-to-hold-positions-of-spiritual-leadership-in-the-church/comment-page-1/#comment-310 John Finkelde Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:29:52 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=468#comment-310 So one question do you apply the same hermeneutic to 2 Cor 13:12 as you do to 1 Tim 2:12? So one question do you apply the same hermeneutic to 2 Cor 13:12 as you do to 1 Tim 2:12?

]]> Comment on Women in positions of spiritual leadership Part 1: 4 reasons that the Bible does not allow it by Heidi Bright Parales, M.Div. http://www.soundchurch.org/4-reasons-why-the-bible-does-not-allow-women-to-hold-positions-of-spiritual-leadership-in-the-church/comment-page-1/#comment-307 Heidi Bright Parales, M.Div. Sat, 28 Jan 2012 23:19:41 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=468#comment-307 Biblical data, actually, support women as elders and leaders of congregations. I spent 6 years researching this topic, and felt compelled to place the information in a book, published as "Hidden Voices." It treats the Bible as literally true and addresses every issue raised in this commentary. An entire chapter is devoted to 1 Timothy, another to 1 Corinthians, another to the creation accounts. Paul commends the women Phoebe, a minister, and Junia, outstanding among the apostles. He can't be commending them for their ministerial roles while condemning all women in ministry. Please take a look at this book and weigh the evidence. Thank you. Biblical data, actually, support women as elders and leaders of congregations. I spent 6 years researching this topic, and felt compelled to place the information in a book, published as “Hidden Voices.” It treats the Bible as literally true and addresses every issue raised in this commentary. An entire chapter is devoted to 1 Timothy, another to 1 Corinthians, another to the creation accounts. Paul commends the women Phoebe, a minister, and Junia, outstanding among the apostles. He can’t be commending them for their ministerial roles while condemning all women in ministry. Please take a look at this book and weigh the evidence. Thank you.

]]> Comment on One Word Way of Life by What is the true Gospel? – Sound Church http://www.soundchurch.org/one-word-way-of-life/comment-page-1/#comment-283 What is the true Gospel? – Sound Church Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:01:55 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=191#comment-283 [...] with an obligation. The obligation that we submit to Christ as Lord. He is our Boss and Master, we are His doulos or slaves. We read in Hebrews 5:9, “And being made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation [...] [...] with an obligation. The obligation that we submit to Christ as Lord. He is our Boss and Master, we are His doulos or slaves. We read in Hebrews 5:9, “And being made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation [...]

]]> Comment on John MacArthur and Beer by Richard http://www.soundchurch.org/john-macarthur-and-beer/comment-page-1/#comment-279 Richard Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:23:10 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=263#comment-279 I do not take from John MacArthur's article that he is at all calling for total abstinance from the drinking of beer or any other alcoholic beverage. The main point I believe is that if you're in a pastoral leadership position, using alcohol as an attractant for your propsed mission field, you cannot assume that everyone you come into contact with or comes under your leadership has the same strengths and weaknesses as you do. You may be able to enjoy a beer (or anything else for that matter) with no issue. However, someone, unknown to you, may have a real weakness in that area. Encouraging drinking would therefore cause them to stumble in a very bad way. A very unwise strategy to say the least. It makes the most sense in the context of being in a leadership/evangelistic missionary position, which MacArthur cleary states. The whole "held to a higher standard" concept. I find it intersting that some of the responses to MacArthur's article are just as extreme, if not more so, as they accuse MacArthur of being (a "modern day Pharisee"? Wow). I do not take from John MacArthur’s article that he is at all calling for total abstinance from the drinking of beer or any other alcoholic beverage. The main point I believe is that if you’re in a pastoral leadership position, using alcohol as an attractant for your propsed mission field, you cannot assume that everyone you come into contact with or comes under your leadership has the same strengths and weaknesses as you do. You may be able to enjoy a beer (or anything else for that matter) with no issue. However, someone, unknown to you, may have a real weakness in that area. Encouraging drinking would therefore cause them to stumble in a very bad way. A very unwise strategy to say the least. It makes the most sense in the context of being in a leadership/evangelistic missionary position, which MacArthur cleary states. The whole “held to a higher standard” concept. I find it intersting that some of the responses to MacArthur’s article are just as extreme, if not more so, as they accuse MacArthur of being (a “modern day Pharisee”? Wow).

]]> Comment on Does the Roman Catholic Church teach the true gospel? by Webshopkeeper|Witlox Internet Service http://www.soundchurch.org/does-the-roman-catholic-church-teach-the-true-gospel/comment-page-1/#comment-277 Webshopkeeper|Witlox Internet Service Sun, 25 Dec 2011 14:27:51 +0000 http://www.soundchurch.org/?p=253#comment-277 <strong>Webshopkeeper|Witlox Internet Service...</strong> [...]Does the Roman Catholic Church teach the true gospel? – Sound Church[...]... Webshopkeeper|Witlox Internet Service…

[...]Does the Roman Catholic Church teach the true gospel? – Sound Church[...]…

]]>