Thursday, April 7, 2016

'Down with Patriarchy! Up with women pastors!' Sojourner's video about women pastors making a splash

Someone sent me a video that is making a very big hit online. The news article about it said that within 24 hours, the video had garnered 1 million views. "The video has struck a nerve" the article explained. What is this big, splashy, video?

It is from an organization called Sojourners. Sojourners has the latest news and commentary on faith, politics, and culture, their tagline says. Sojourners is a website/social media outlet/movement aiming to transform the world. That is actually their slogan, "Building a Movement to Transform the World." So this should tell you something about the organization's mission and overall focus. Their focus is not on Jesus, but what the world thinks about Jesus. Or should think about Jesus. Or should think about the world. Or something.

Anyway, they are all about "social justice" and one glaring injustice, according to Sojourners, is that there is a glass ceiling in the church and women need to break it. It is a 2000 year old trend that just needs to be smashed. Right now. Women's "sacred worth" isn't being taken seriously, because they are continually being denied opportunity to serve at the top. They should be allowed to lead, the thrust of the message goes, because it's 2016, after all.



Their video is very clever and funny. Since they focus on culture, and right now the biggest culture war is the one regarding gender and gender roles, the video is a satirical push-back on why women should not be pastors. They took the usual old excuses which had been used to deny women places of authority in the culture, and applied them to the church, and reversed the roles. So when women used to hear "Their time of the month makes them hysterical and emotional," Sojourners took that excuse and applied it to men...in the church...as a satirical look at why women have been denied opportunities to lead.

Scholer's basis is that men and women are equal despite their gender, but the Bible asserts that men and women are equal through their gender. There's a difference.
However, their video, in addition to being clever and well-done and therefore attractive to those without biblical understanding, is founded on some old work they dug up from Fuller Seminary's recently deceased Professor, Dr David Scholer. Dr Scholer was a biblical feminist. For 36 years at four seminaries he taught that women should lead, explaining that a careful reading of the gospels and letters of Paul demands full inclusion of women in church leadership. So says his In Memoriam notice.

As a side note, one can immediately see how the liberal theologians do damage to the faith. The video and its main thrust having been founded on a seminary professor's work, lends it additional credibility. "Look! A Seminary Professor thinks women should be ordained! It must be true!" Never mind that Fuller Seminary jumped the shark years ago. John MacArthur writes a short piece on Fuller's slide into ultra-liberalism, here, but as far as most people are concerned, a seminary is a seminary.

I read Scholer's paper on women leading in the church, female ordination etc, and it is very well-written and makes a great argument. An unbiblical argument to be sure, but a solid and credible argument using logic with scripture interwoven throughout, that would be difficult for the lay person to refute. If you read it, you might think, 'Hey, they make great points, maybe I ought to rethink this.' No. No you shouldn't. If you watch the video, you might say, 'This is funny and true, I like it. Maybe I ought to rethink this.' No. No you shouldn't.

And so Sojourners, wading into the culture wars over gender roles, produced "7 Reasons Men should not be Pastors."
"Can women really lead in the church?" We still hear this question in our churches, often coupled with silly, irrational, or demeaning thinking. Would we put up with the same excuses for excluding men from leadership?


7 Reasons Men Should Not Be Pastors
I mean, they could still lead worship on Father's Day ...
Posted by Sojourners on Tuesday, 5 April 2016




The video's introduction above from Sojourners is devilishly excellent. Just as satan did, the issue is phrased in the form of a question, and inverted too, just as satan did. God had told Adam "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die." (Genesis 2:16).

Yet satan reversed that command, asking the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" (Genesis 3:1) [emphasis mine]

The Sojourner query, can women really lead in the church, is phrased to insinuate doubt, form a negative, and lead the willingly deluded to the poisonous water from which they will soon drink, as the next line states. The reasons women can't lead in the church are "silly and irrational". Not biblical. A neat blame-shifting trick.

Dr Scholer's 1983 paper stated,
Modern debates over the ordination of women often miss the crucial and basic issues of the holistic concept of the ministry of the Church reflected in the New Testament. Of course, no person should be ordained or given any responsibilities of ministry within the Church because of gender or for the sake of a “point.” On the other hand, we have affirmed in the Church that no person, called and gifted by God, should be denied any role of ministry or leadership in the Church because of one’s gender. 
The phrasing here is that no one should be denied any role of ministry or leadership... Well, of course no one should be denied the opportunity to minister in the church. It's what we're all called to do. But attaching the word leadership with ministry is disingenuous, because though all are called to minister, not all are called to lead. Not even all men are called to lead. But the insinuation here is that ministry IS leadership and vice-versa.

Secondly, the video posits the old canard that gender distinction is a bad thing. There are two distinct genders (though it seems not for long) and because they are distinct this is bad. It is the feminist and liberal theologian's duty to equalize the two genders into mutually indistinguishable humans with interchangeable roles.

Scholer's basis is that men and women are equal despite their gender, but the Bible asserts that men and women are equal through their gender. There's a difference.

The Bible shows that first, man needed woman. The need is real and it exists because men and women complement each other. After man had named and examined all the animals there was no mate suitable for him. He was still alone. It is not good for man to be alone, and so God made woman.

However hard the feminists try, man will always have been made first (1 Timothy 2:13), and man began a relationship with God first and man received his instructions and duties first. Women are cursed with feminism (Genesis 3:16). It is a curse, instilled in us is a desire to rule over our husbands, to want to usurp the natural order of things. At the root, what feminists are attempting to do is reverse the order of creation. Yet they also cannot reverse the fact that God gave man dominion over the earth and a command to work the garden and keep it. It is man who has authority. (Genesis 1:26). He has been given this authority in the home and in the church.

This is not to say that man-woman-children-animals is a top-down hierarchy where women have no say, no worth, and no work to do. In Christianity, submission is a mutual submission, a joyful following of each other and of Jesus. (Ephesians 5:22-33). Each gender has their own role, created exactly for them by an omniscient God who knows what is best.

Women should thank God that "patriarchy is alive and well in the church" as I read in one of the video's comments. The Head of the Church is a Man-God who has a Father to whom even He submits. Of course, they satirically and they THINK cleverly puncture the excuses for excluding women from leadership in a precious video they're so proud of, but avoid the one excuse that truly excludes women from leadership- Father God's prohibition.

The Ultimate Patriarchy is real, and thank God for that. Jesus came to earth as a God-Man, not a goddess, not a god-woman, and not a hermaphrodite. Jesus is a Man, under whom all authority in the universe rests. God Himself, though He is a spirit, is referred to as Father.

So the video is worldly clever, but the Bible says "Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!" (Isaiah 5:21). Ladies, don't be swayed by a clever video promoting a coyly precious false doctrine. See the resources below which explain from the Bible in a true and not a twisted way as Scholer did, why women's roles are prescribed, defined, and permanent. Even in 2016.

Resources:

Should women be pastors and elders?
In a social climate of complete equality in all things, the Biblical teaching of only allowing men to be pastors and elders is not popular. Many feminist organizations denounce this position as antiquated and chauvinistic. In addition, many Christian churches have adopted the "politically correct" social standard and have allowed women pastors and elders in the church. But the question remains, is this Biblical? The Bible's answer to this question is, "No, women are not to be pastors and elders." Many may not like that answer, but it is, I believe, an accurate representation of the Biblical standard. First of all, women are under-appreciated and under-utilized in the church. There are many gifted women who might very well do a better job at preaching and teaching than many men. However, it isn't gifting that is the issue. It is God's order and calling. What does the Bible say?

Response to Dr John Jefferson Davis' advocacy for female ordination
One of reasons for male-only ordained leadership is the indisputable fact that Jesus Christ appointed only males to the office of apostle. The importance of this observation is often dismissed as being demanded by the social conventions of Jesus' time, which supposedly left our Lord with no other possible approach.  The idea is suggested that if Jesus were to start the church today, He would of course include women as apostles.  But a little reflection on this will give us pause.
Can a woman be a pastor or a preacher?
There is perhaps no more hotly debated issue in the church today than the issue of women serving as pastors/preachers. As a result, it is very important to not see this issue as men versus women. There are women who believe women should not serve as pastors and that the Bible places restrictions on the ministry of women, and there are men who believe women can serve as preachers and that there are no restrictions on women in ministry. This is not an issue of chauvinism or discrimination. It is an issue of biblical interpretation.
Women pastors - what does the Bible say?
The only way to have a productive dialogue on the women pastors issue is to discuss it biblically. Yes, undeniably, there are men whose views on the issue are clouded by chauvinism. At the same time, there are men and women on both sides of the discussion. So, it should never be assumed that one holds a particular view due to latent chauvinism. The issue should be decided based on what the Bible teaches, not on who can make the strongest ad hominem attack.

13 comments :

  1. Basically its the same sin as Eve committed. She wanted the ONE THING that God withheld. Women have such a wide variety of ways to serve God, but He reserves leadership positions for men. Like Eve, we want the ONE THING that He withholds.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm glad you took this on. Especially since it is a hot item right now. Two key statements:
    "Their focus is not on Jesus, but what the world thinks about Jesus."
    "...attractive to those without biblical understanding..."

    Yep. I was a hard core feminist before I was saved, and even held onto it for awhile out of biblical ignorance as a new believer. But as the Lord changed me, I began to understand and agree with Him about how he has structured genders and their roles. Thank the Lord!!

    Jennifer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your testimony Jennifer. The Lord is gracious to take us out from our false notions and into His light!

      Delete
  3. Why wasn't there a reference to 1 Timothy 2:12; 1 Timothy 3, Titus 1. I think a prohibition of women having authority over men, being the husband of one wife, and leading a household well, are certainly pertinent to this issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for those additional scriptures, Wayne. Yes they certainly are pertinent. Those references are explored more fully in the three links I posted.

      Delete
  4. I have a question for you: Are women, generally speaking, called to submit to men as a wife to a husband?

    Also, can you expand a bit more about "Women are cursed with feminism"? “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”
    ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1:27‬ ‭ESV‬‬

    Are not women created in the image of God? Our roles may be different but aren't we equal to men in the eye of God? Don't we see throughout the bible how much God treasures women and affirms them? (Hagar, Rahab, Leah, etc.) I don't consider myself cursed. For one, I am called to be a helper, a description of the Holy Spirit. (Genesis 2:18, John 14:26) the same Hebrew word used in many of the instance when God is called our helper is translated the same as Genesis 2;18. (Hebrews 13:6) Doesn't Peter 3:3 call women to be gentle in sprit? Isn't gentleness a fruit of the Spirit? Feminism is a blessing. It is what makes me capable to raise my children, serve my husband and use my administrative gifting in the church in the way God commands, in gentleness, quietness, and meekness. Women are created in the image of God. Both genders were cursed when sin entered the world (men must be providers and women child bearers) but to say that because I am a female I am cursed is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Manuela,

      No, women are not to submit to every man, just to their husbands. 'wives submit to your own husbands' (1 Pet. 3:1).

      In the essay I said that God cursed women with feminism. I did not say He cursed women.

      No feminism is not a blessing, it is a curse. The verse I'd posted attached to my statement (did you read it?) is this one-

      To the woman he said,

      “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
      in pain you shall bring forth children.
      Your desire shall be for your husband,
      and he shall rule over you.”

      John MacArthur explains the verse. When God punished woman for disobeying Him, he multiplied her pain in the two main areas of her life: bearing children (and not just in labor) and with her husband.

      "In her sin Eve took the lead. She acted independently. She spurned her husband's authority. She was going to go out on her own and call her own shot, as it were, act on her own behalf. She took the lead, she led the man into sin, usurping his role, acting independently of him in the temptation, overturning the divine order. She should have submitted to him, sought his counsel, let him be the leader. By taking control she lost it permanently, just as by seeking the delight of the forbidden fruit, she lost delight. She wanted to take the lead and she lost it for good. And the legacy of this is conflict with her husband. That's what's being expressed at the end of the verse."--end JMac--

      Women have instilled in us by virtue of the punishment of God, an innate desire to lead, to usurp, to be in conflict over leadership with the husband. This innate desire to lead extends to the church.

      We have to rely on God's Holy Spirit to be the meek creatures, submissive and remaining within the realms God intended us to be. Feminism is a worldly philosophy that ignites this innate curse for leadership and usurpation, to draw women out and make them rebellious.

      Hope this answers your question.

      Delete
  5. “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband WHO WAS WITH HER and he ate.”
    ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:6‬ ‭ESV‬‬

    “And the Lord God commanded THE MAN saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.””
    ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2:16-17‬ ‭ESV‬‬

    Eve may have been deceived but Adam was in full rebellion against God. It is so clear. Adam got the command and he did not exert the authority God had given him over his wife. It is Adam who brought sin into the world. (Romans 5:12) He sinned fully knowing God's command. The enemy got to Adam through Eve.

    Another question: how does womanhood differ from feminism? Wasn't Eve a helper before the curse of sin? Wasn't she already able to bear children? (Genesis 3:16 does not suggest she wasn't able to do before the curse) Also, doesn't Genesis 3:16 (your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.) mean that now the man will have to fight for his authority? We can see endless examples of that in our culture. We can even see in history (and current time) the abuses of men over women in trying to subdue them in ungodly fashion?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Manuela,

      You're right, it was ultimately Adam who sinned. I'm not diminishing his part in the original fall. However since the post was about women, I am focusing on Eve, so as not to diminish her part in it, either.

      You asked how does Feminism differ from regular womanhood? I'd mentioned in reply to your other comment that being a woman, femininity, and Feminism are different things. Here is GotQuestions defining Feminism from a Christian perspective:

      -----begin GotQuestions

      First, we should define feminism, since the term can have different meanings for different people. Basically, feminism is a philosophy that advocates equal rights for women and men—socially, politically, economically, and in other ways. Early feminists fought for and won suffrage for women. Today’s feminism goes further than demanding equal treatment of men and women, however. Modern feminists fight for language equality (saying “chairperson” instead of “chairman,” even if the person in question is male) and gender equality (redefining femininity and masculinity). The more radical feminists actively seek to overthrow any vestige of male dominance in society, to the point of opposing the biblical roles of husbands and wives, defending abortion on demand, and promoting lesbianism. Radical feminists deny there is any difference between men and women, teaching that any perceived differences between the sexes are due solely to social conditioning.

      Modern feminism is a counterfeit solution to the real issue of the inequality of women in a sinful society. Feminism arrogates to itself the right to demand respect and equality in every aspect of life. Feminism is based in arrogance, and it is the opposite of the call to the born-again believer to be a servant. The modern, militant feminists call women to rise up and rebel against the order that God has given to mankind. That brand of feminism seeks to impose humanistic values in direct opposition to the Word of God. Feminism was originally a positive movement, focused on giving women the basic rights God intends for every human being to have. Tragically, feminism now focuses on destroying all distinctions in the roles of men and women.
      http://www.gotquestions.org/feminism-Christian-feminist.html
      ----end GotQuestions

      Ultimately, Feminism is about stridently rebelling, and Christian womanhood is about joyfully submitting. They couldn't be more opposite.

      Delete
  6. I forgot to add:

    I would say that as a woman I am feminine. It's a quality of mine. As a feminine person, I am not muscular, I am soft (perhaps a little too soft!). I think that feminist movement have turned it into a sexual term. Being a female is being feminine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Manuela, I'm glad your'e feminine, AKA womanly. But being feminine is not the same as adopting the philosophy of Feminism. Feminism is an -ism, like communism or capitalism. It is a trend of thought or a humanly developed philosophy one believes in and promotes. More on that in a moment in answering your other question.

      Delete
  7. My question is this: Where does their authority come from? Themselves? If it’s not the word of God then feminists have no right to call it Christianity. If they mean that they are personally happy about the advance of feminism, then they are free to hold that view. But, I can only assume that they have renounced Christianity as well. They are not in a position to simply rewrite the Bible and rewrite all of church history. But they are moving on without Jesus and without Christianity. Feminism rejects all under the banner of “I know better than Jesus, the Bible, and all of church history

    the Bible clearly an unambiguously says women are not to be preachers.- 1 Timothy 2:12 As Jim McClarty states in his article “on women preaching”--“And, by the way, what God will these women be preaching if they have begun their ministry with a direct contradiction of His word? Ultimately, they will be preaching a God of their own imagination, because they have already discounted the God of the Bible.” http://salvationbygrace.org/current-qa/more-on-women-preaching/

    Deuteronomy 47-48 "Because you did not serve the LORD your God with joy and a glad heart, for the abundance of all things; therefore you shall serve your enemies whom the LORD will send against you, in hunger, in thirst, in nakedness, and in the lack of all things; and He will put an iron yoke on your neck until He has destroyed you.

    ReplyDelete