|
![Questions and Answers about Women's Ordination by [Martin Hanna, Cindy Tutsch]](eerreerr.jpg) |
Women's Ordination
Purchase this book by Drs. Martin Hanna and
Cindy Tutch from ABC or Amazon online now |
 |
 |
|
Dr. Martin F. Hanna
Theologian
Andrews Theological Seminary, Berrien
Springs, Michigan |
Barrington H. Brennen
Pastor, Counseling Psychologist
Co-president of CFR
|
|
|
|
The following quotations about women in leadership are compiled
or written by Dr.
Martin Hanna, Bahamian theology professor at Andrews Theological
Seminary, Andrews University, Berrien
Springs, Michigan and presented by Barrington H. Brennen,
retired pastor
and counseling psychologist. There are also a few
quotations from Barrington Brennen and others. Note also
related links and documents in the column on the right.
|
Voted Question on
Women's Ordination for 2015 |
|
On October 14, 2014, The Annual Conference
delegates voted to approve language crafted
by The General Conference and Division
Officers (GCDO), that will now go to
delegates at the 2015 General Conference
Session in San Antonio, Texas. The language
from GCDO came in the form of a question,
posted below.
________________
"After your prayerful study on ordination
from the Bible, the writings of Ellen G.
White, and the reports of the study
commissions, and;
After your careful consideration of what is
best for the Church and the fulfillment of
its mission,
Is it acceptable for division
executive committees, as they may deem
it appropriate in their territories, to make
provision for the ordination of women to the
gospel ministry? Yes or No
________________
The General Conference Session will on on
July 2 to 11, 2014, San Antonio, Texas
See Website
|
|
Added
May 25, 2015
From
Dr. Hanna
quoting Ellen White
Ellen White: "I have wondered why our people, those who are
not ordained ministers, but who have a connection with God,
who understand the Scriptures, do not open the Word to
others. If they would engage in this work, great blessing
would come to their own souls. God wants His people to work.
TO EVERY MAN--AND THAT MEANS EVERY WOMAN, also--He has given
His work, and this work each one is to perform according to
his several ability." (The General Conference Bulletin, Apr.
22, 1901.) (Daughters of God, p. 134).
Added
September 2, 2014
From
Dr. Hanna
What kind of female ministries may be supported by tithe?
Manuscript Releases, 1:263.
“Make no mistake in neglecting to correct the error of
giving MINISTERS less than they should receive. . . . The
TITHE should go to those who labor in word and doctrine, be
they men or WOMEN.”
Daughters of God, p. 256.
"I . . . will show you how I regard the TITHE money being
used for other purposes. This is the Lord’s special revenue
fund . . . . I have had special instruction from the Lord that
the TITHE is for a special purpose, consecrated to God to
sustain those who MINISTER in the SACRED WORK AS THE LORD'S
CHOSEN . . . . There is to be special labor given to awaken
the people of God who believe the truth, to give a faithful
TITHE to the Lord, and MINISTERS should be encouraged and
sustained by that TITHE."
Counsels on Stewardship, p. 102.
"One reasons that the TITHE may be applied to school
purposes. Still others reason that canvassers and
colporteurs should be supported from the TITHE. But a
great mistake is made when the TITHE is drawn from the
object for which it is to be used—the support of THE
MINISTERS."
Special Testimonies for
Ministers and Workers—No. 10, p. 18.
"The light which the Lord
has given me on this subject, is that the means in the
treasury for the support of the MINISTERS in the
different fields is not to be used for any other
purpose. If an honest TITHE were paid, and the money
coming into the treasury were carefully guarded, the
MINISTERS would receive a just wage."
Added
August 10, 2014
From
Dr. Hanna
Sited from
Christ Triumphant, p. 146.
"Those placed IN POSITIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY should be MEN AND
WOMEN who fear God, who realize that they are humans only, not
God. They should be people WHO WILL RULE under God and for Him.
Will they give expression to the will of God for His people? Do
they allow selfishness to tarnish word and action? Do they,
after obtaining the confidence of the people as LEADERS of
wisdom who fear God and keep His commandments, belittle the
exalted position that the people of God should occupy in these
days of peril?"—Manuscript 163, 1902.
By
Dr.
Martin Hanna
"God
has ordained female pastors from eternity past. That part is not
a problem for God. The problem is with us, with the church. We are
slow in binding and loosing on earth what God has already bound
and loosed in heaven (Mat 16:19; 18:18)."
From
Martin Hanna
Testimonies for the Church Volume 6, p. 322.
"It is the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit of God that prepares
workers, both men and women, to become pastors to the flock of
God."
Added
July 15, 2014
From
Dr. Hanna
Sighted in Adventist Review in1860:
Here
is what a Adventist pioneer had to say about women in ministry
in the Review and Herald in 1860.
"We are informed on the authority of divine revelation that male
and female are one in Christ Jesus; that in the relation in
which they both stand to him, the distinction is as completely
broken down as between Jew and Gentile, bond and free. Thus
revelation has made known the important truth, and reason will
bear testimony to the same thing. The mind of the female is
certainly susceptible
of all those sensibilities, affections and improvements which
constitute the christian character. In a state of renovation we
must admit it has equal access to the fountain of light and
life. And experience has proved that many females have possessed
the natural qualifications for speaking in public, the range of
thought, the faculty of communicating their ideas in appropriate
language, the sympathy with suffering humanity, a deep and
lively sense of gratitude to God, and of the beauty of holiness,
a zeal for the honor of God, and the happiness of his rational
creatures - all these are found among the female part of the
human family, as frequently and as eminently as among the men.
Then let no stumbling-block be thrown in their way, but let them
fill the place that God calls them to fill, let them not be
bound down to silence by church rules, but let their tongues
speak forth the praises of God, and let them point sinners to
the Lamb of God, and grieve not the holy Spirit by silence in
the congregation." S. C. WELCOME. (February 23, 1860 UrSe, ARSH
110)
Added
January 30, 2014
Author
Unknown:
"Many
Seventh-day Adventists who love Jesus and the 3 Angels’ Messages
with all their being believe this: To ordain or to not ordain
women is an opinion, an interpretation. Theologically
conservative Adventist scholars on both sides of the issue find
biblical support for their views. It is not an integral
doctrine, like the Sabbath, the mortality of the soul, creation,
or the sanctuary. It is not part of our fundamental beliefs.
There is room for persons who believe in Women's Ordination, and
there is room for those who do not believe in it. Both are good
Adventists.
Like the teaching on the human nature of Christ, this issue is
not a matter of core doctrine. The Holy Spirit has not yet
brought consensus about it, even as we have not found consensus
on the nature of Christ. We have said there is room in our
church for both views. We should similarly see this issue of
ordination not as a point worthy of church division, but a
matter of personal opinion. The church should not legislate
unilaterally on this.
I therefore think that the heart of Jesus is broken at this
hallway Q & A: “Rigid all- or- none legislation on this topic
would split the church. Do you think it is worth that price?” A:
“Yes, it is part of the shaking. God will have a pure church.”
To me, this view does not portray the attitude of our
Jesus—redemptive, unifying, Shepherd of all His people. I am
grieved to the core. If you are a Seventh-day Adventist, please
join me in fasting and prayer for the future of our church.”
Added
January 29, 2014
Barrington
Brennen:
Some argue that since Jesus only selected males as the twelve
disciples and there were no women as priests in the Old
Testament, then they conclude that not selecting women for
ministry is a teaching of Jesus. Well, Jesus only selected Jews
to be disciple and mostly carpenters. That would mean, based on
their argument, that Haitian, Jamaicans, and Nigerians, etc.,
are out of the picture also. Why did they have female disciples
later on and female deacons, if selecting only males was to be
the way to go? Think about that. What was Jesus' lesson or
teaching through his selection process? Was it gender
exclusivity or was it quality of personhood?
Added
August 16, 2013
Dr.
Martin Hanna:
"Some suppose that there is a unilateral hierarchy in the
Trinity since the Son submits to the Father. However, the Bible
describes a mutual submission between the father and the Son.
In order to accomplish salvation from sin, “He [the Father] has
put (hupotasso, submitted) all things under His [Christ’s] feet”
(1 Cor 15:27). In turn, Christ submits authority “when He
delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to
all rule and all authority and power” (15:24). The Father’s
submission of authority to Christ does not undermine the
Father’s authority since “when all things are made subject (hupotasso)
to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject (hupotasso) to
Him who put (hupotasso) all things under Him, that God may be
all in all” (15:28).
This mutual submission within the Trinity is a model for mutual
submission in marriage. 1 Cor 7:4. "The wife hath not power of
her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband
hath not power of his own body, but the wife."
Added
August 14, 2013
Dr.
Martin Hanna:
"Women's
ordination is the recognition of God's call to ministry. The
only biblical reason to deny a woman this ordination is if one
concludes that God has not called her to ministry. Any other
reason boils down to an unbiblical "masculinism" that is as bad
as an unbiblical "feminism."
“The experience thus gained [in the
canvasing work will be of the greatest value to those who are
fitting themselves for the ministry. It is the accompaniment of
the Holy Spirit of God that prepares workers, both men and
women, to become pastors to the flock of God.” (Testimonies for
the Church, 6:322).
“Someday Christians will be as
embarrassed by the church’s biblical defense of patriarchal
hierarchicalism as it is now of the nineteenth century biblical
defense of slavery.”
—Stanley N. Gundry
Added
April 18, 2013
Dr. Martin Hanna: A
video prepared by the North American Division
Added
December 5, 2012
Ellen
White: Pastoral
Ministry, p. 255. "As a people who claim to have advanced
light, we are to devise ways and means by which to bring forth a
corps of educated WORKMEN for the various departments of the
work of God. We need a well-disciplined, cultivated class of
young MEN AND WOMEN in our sanitariums, in the medical
missionary work, in the offices of publication, in the
conferences of different states, and in the field at large. We
need young men and women who have a high intellectual culture,
in order that they may do the best work for the Lord. We have
done something toward reaching this standard, but still we are
far behind where we should be."—Counsels to Parents, Teachers,
and Students, 42
Fundamentals of Christian
Education, p. 488. "Young men and young women who should be
engaged in the ministry, in Bible work, and in the canvassing
work, should not be bound down to mechanical employment."
Gospel Workers 1915, p. 452
"Injustice has sometimes been done to women who labor just as
devotedly as their husbands, and who are recognized by God as
being necessary to the work of the ministry."
Daughters of God, p. 102.
"I attended the morning ministers’ meeting. The blessing of the
Lord came upon me, and I spoke in the demonstration of the
Spirit of God and with power. There are those who are working
out a great circle. The Lord has given Christ to the world for
ministry. Merely to preach the Word is not ministry. The Lord
desires His ministering servants to occupy a place worthy of the
highest consideration. In the mind of God, the ministry of men
and women existed before the world was created. He determined
that His ministers should have a perfect exemplification of
Himself and His purposes.
Added
November 21, 2012
Sakae
Kubo March 1976: "Paul had already laid down the basis
for an equality between man and woman as he had laid down
between Jew and Gentile and between master and slave. But as
long as a Christian lives in a culturally-conditioned world, he
must take into cognizance the existing structures of society and
the effect of his behavior and practice upon the church spoke to
Jew and Gentile, slave and master, man and woman. Even though
the social structures may be opposed to the equality of these
pairs, the Christian yeast when truly alive begins to work. The
consciousness of men is awakened slowly but surely, now on this
issue now on that, and the moment becomes ripe for the church to
seize the initiative in establishing and exercising equality on
all spheres."
Ellen
White:
Added
October 28, 2012
Dr. Martin Hanna:
Interestingly, those who
are opposed to women being ordained have to acknowledge that "unordained"
women are referred to by Ellen White as "pastors of the flock of
God" (Testimonies, 6:322). So, from their perspective also, it
is true that White herself used the term pastor to refer to
unordained women. From my perspective, if they are qualified to
be unofficial (unordained) pastors, then there is no reason why
they cannot be on a track to become official (ordained) pastors.
Dr. Martin Hanna:
Manuscript Releases,
21:156. “Let us OPEN MIND and heart to receive the bright
beams of the Sun of Righteousness, and then we can but impart
that which we have received. May the Lord bless and strengthen
you to labor, for women workers are needed so much. There is a
large field for women workers whose hearts are imbued with the
Spirit of God.”—Letter 96a, 1899.
Added
October 20, 2012
Dr. Martin Hanna:
Was Ellen White
regarded as an ordained minister? "Ellen White’s name was
among those voted to receive papers of the ordained ministers,
although her ordination was not by the laying on of hands by
men. The conference session closed on November 27 [1887]." Ellen
G. White: Volume 3—The Lonely Years: 1876-1891, By Arthur L.
White, Page 377.
Dr. Martin Hanna:
From the autumn council
of the GC: 2012: "Finley gleaned more principles. “When an issue
threatens church unity, don’t judge too quickly or harshly,” he
said. “Discover the facts. Listen to another’s point of view.
The Holy Spirit may be speaking to you through your brother or
sister. Honest people can have differences of opinion. Consensus
often comes through discussion and dialogue. It is through this
process of dialog, discussion, and sharing that we become the
body of Christ in the fullest sense.”
"All means which, according to sound judgment, will advance the
cause of truth, and are not forbidden by plain scripture
declarations, should be employed." [James White, Review and
Herald, April 26, 1860]
Why
does Paul instruct some men and women to be silent in church in
1 Corinthians 14?
Spiritual gifts are to be exercised in an orderly way by “all”
(men and women) “so that all may learn” (1 Cor 14:31).
This orderly way of speaking involves periods of silence. “If
anyone [man or woman] speaks in a tongue, . . . but if there is
no interpreter, let him [or her] keep silent (sigao)”
(14:27-28).
“Let . . . prophets [men and women] speak . . . . but if
anything is revealed to another . . . let the first keep silent
(sigao)” (14:29-30).
This kind of orderly speech involves self-control or (as Paul
put it) self-subjection. “The spirits of the prophets are
subject [to order (hupotasso)] to the prophets” (14:32).
In the same way, Paul refers to the silence of women that, like
the silence of men, is to be a temporary silence for the purpose
of submitting to order. The same Greek word is used for the
silence of men and women. And the same Greek word is used for
the self-control or self-subjection of men and women.
“Let your women keep silent (sigao) in the churches, for they
are not permitted to speak [out of order]; but they are to be
submissive [to order (hupertasso)], as the law also says. And if
they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at
home; for it is shameful for women to speak [out of order] in
church. . . . Let everything be done decently and in order”
(14:34-35, 40).
Since Paul describes women as “praying and prophesying” in
church (in 1 Corinthians 11:5), it must be disorderly speech
that he is silencing (in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35).
Added
October 5, 2012
Chuck
Pierce: "Male and female roles and relationships are so
clearly defined in the first couple of chapters of Genesis.
Truly, whatever seeks to demean, enslave or dominate women is
contrary to God's original plan and purpose for humankind. Man
and woman are created equal in all aspects. They are one in
Jesus Christ.
Man and woman, who are made in God's image and likeness, share a
unique position and relationship in God's created order. God
gave two commands to the first couple: Be fruitful and rule over
the earth (see Gen. 1:28). These commands were given to both the
man and the woman. And yet, as Jim Davis and Donna Johnson tell
us in Redefining the Role of Women in the Church, "there has
been a persistent tendency . . . to apply the command to
procreate to woman, but to exclude her from the command to
exercise dominion, or rule, over the earth."
Somehow Satan has managed to deal devastating blows to
male-female relationships in the Church. Rather than
collaboration in unity and harmony to accomplish God's purposes,
we have instead had separation and domination. Many of God's
people have indulged in evil practices, including adultery,
divorce, polygamy, abuse, unfaithfulness and the breaking of
covenant.
I repeat, Satan hates women with great wrath. One way you can
always determine the level of the antichrist spirit and his
operation is how you see women being treated in a region.
Similarly, how you see women being treated in the Church
displays the level of the freedom of God in that region. The two
are in direct correlation with each other.
Felicity
Dale: “The body of Christ in the Western world is
hemiplegic. (Hemiplegia is a medical term used to describe
paralysis of one side of the body such as occurs after a
stroke.) If you look at any gathering of leaders in a Christian
context, including that of simple church, the majority of them
are male. Women are conspicuous by their absence. Half the body
of Christ is, for the most part, not functioning.”
Wendy
Francisco: Eve was created as a "help." The Hebrew
word for "help" is "ezer." Let's just debunk the myths
surrounding this word quickly. Everywhere else in the Old
Testament that it is used, "ezer" describes the coming help of
God, or, in a few cases, an army. In short, there is no hint of
hierarchy in it. “The Lord blessed male and female and
gave them both dominion. It was when we fell that death,
sickness, and male dominance entered the world. . . . The reason
doctrines of hierarchy still exist is that what God predicted is
still in the hearts of fallen people even after they find
God--they seek to control or be controlled. But, in Jesus, these
things are redeemed.”
Tim
Bulkeley: When God is described as “being” a father or
the rock (masculine) of our salvation (Ps 95:1) always only some
aspects of rocks and of fathers are in view in any place. Just
as is the case also when God is described as like a mother, or
indeed as “being” the rock (feminine) of Israel (Gen 49:24).7
I am however convinced that to call God father in ways which are
significantly different
from the ways one refers to “him” as mother is idolatry. Such
talk (whether indulged in by Achtemeier, a biblical scholar, or
Cooper, a philosophical theologian) makes God a member of one
class of beings (male or masculine) and not a member of another
(female or feminine). Such a partial8 god . . . is not the God
of Scripture.
Phyllis
A. Bird: “Bone of My Bone and Flesh of My Flesh.” Theology
Today 50:4 (Jan 1993): 533. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17), which
is widely regarded as the one Old Testament text having
universal applicability and continuing validity under the New
Covenant is formulated in second person masculine singular
forms. The masculine gender concealed in the genderless and
numberless English "you"/"your"
may have generic function-and intention-in this passage, but a
narrower audience is revealed by the final prohibition: "You
shall not covet your neighbor's ... wife" (v. 17). The rest of
the neighbor's possessions also point to a male householder as
the addressee, as do the other prohibitions, which are concerned
to safeguard the life, marriage, property, and honor of a free
adult male (slaves are also outside the circle of those
addressed here). We may be right in viewing this as a statement
of universal principles and extending them, with appropriate
modifications, to every individual, but they retain the
androcentric stamp of the patriarchal society and circle in
which they were formulated.
Added September
22, 2012
Dr. Martin Hanna:
Why Did Paul Prohibit Some Women From Teaching With Authority?
According to the Apostle Peter, “Paul
. . . has written . . . some things hard to understand which
unlearned and unstable people twist to their own destruction as
they do also the rest of the Scriptures” (2 Pet 3:15-16). One of
those “hard” statements reads as follows: “I do not permit a
woman to teach nor to have authority over a man” (1 Tim 2:12).
However, when we read Paul’s statement in context it is evident
that he does not prohibit a woman from exercising teaching
authority simply because she is a woman. Rather he is concerned
to prohibit teaching by those women (and men) who are “unlearned
and unstable” (2 Pet 3:16). Support for this understanding of
Paul’s “hard” statement may be summarized in five points.
First, Paul encouraged women to teach
and to have authority, even over men. To the Corinthians he
writes: “The wife does not have authority over her own body, but
the husband does. And likewise, the husband does not have
authority over his own body, but the wife does” (1 Cor 7:4).
Paul also encourages Corinthian women to “covet the best gifts”
(1 Cor 12:31) which include the gift of “teachers” (12:28). One
of Paul’s female co-workers, Pricilla (with her husband), taught
a man named Apollos (Acts 18:26). To Titus, Paul writes: help
“the older men . . . [and] the older women likewise, that they
be . . . teachers of good things” (Tit 2:1-3).
Second, Paul shows what he meant by
his “hard” statement by using the Greek word—authentein—to
indicate a misuse of teaching authority. This is reflected in
the translation: “NOT . . . to teach, NOR to usurp authority” (1
Tim 2:12, KJV). The words “not . . . nor” highlight the
prohibited teaching as including an abuse of authority. Similar
wording (“neither . . . nor”) describes false teachers who were
“understanding NEITHR what they say, NOR the things which they
affirm” (1:7). Notice that “what they say” includes “what they
affirm;” just as Paul’s prohibition of teaching includes a
prohibition of usurping authority.
Third, this abuse of authority results
from being spiritually unlearned. This is clarified by
interpreting Paul’s “hard” statement in light of its immediately
preceding context as follows. “Let a woman learn . . . . But I
do not permit a woman [who is unlearned] to teach or to have
authority over a man” (1 Tim 2:11-12). In addition, in the
context immediately following his statement, Paul illustrates
the danger of unlearned teaching authority by presenting the
history of Eve’s deception. He writes: “I do not permit a woman
[who is unlearned] to teach or to have authority over a man. For
[a woman should learn that] Adam was formed first, then Eve. And
Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into
transgression” (2:12-14).
Fourth, neither the creation order,
nor deception, nor transgression disqualifies a woman from
authentic teaching authority if she learns in the school of
Christ. Paul writes: “I do not permit a woman [who is unlearned]
to teach or to have authority over a man. . . . Nevertheless she
will be saved in [the] childbearing [the birth of Christ] if
they continue [learning] in faith, love, and holiness, with
self-control” (1 Tim 2:12, 15). A similar statement of the
wholistic creation-salvation order is presented in Paul’s letter
to the Corinthians. On the one hand, “man is not from woman, but
woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for
the man. For this reason, a woman ought to have authority . . .
. Nevertheless, [on the other hand] neither is man independent
of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. For as
woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but
all things are from God” (1 Cor 11:8-11).
Fifth, Paul’s personal testimony about
his own salvation by Christ softens his “hard” statement about
women and teaching authority. Paul himself had experienced
salvation from false teaching. He testifies: “I thank Christ
Jesus our Lord . . . [for] putting me into the ministry,
although I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an
insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly
[like Eve] in unbelief. . . . Christ Jesus came . . . to save
sinners, of whom I am chief. . . . I obtained mercy . . . as a
pattern to those who are going to believe” (1 Tim 1:12-16). If
Jesus saved Paul from his unlearned ignorance and made him a
teacher of the gospel, Jesus can also save other unlearned men
and women such as those mentioned in the letter to Timothy.
Added September
18, 2012
Thomas
C. Oden: Biblical Subordination: Thomas
C. Oden (2002): 128. “There are three kinds of subordination or
subjection, only one of which is Christian. (1) A subjection
which is coerced, such as rape or slavery. (2) A subjection
which is socially constructed, economically determined, or based
on class oppression. (3) A voluntary subjection of ourselves to
others out of love and reverence to Christ, who became servant
unto death for our sakes. Only the last is biblical.”
Klyne
R. Snodgrass: Is The Gospel Only Spiritual? Is It
Also Social? Klyne R. Snodgrass (1986): 178-179. “One
cannot speak of Galatians 3:28 as if it merely pertains to
salvation. The verse points to something new established by
Christ for each category, and each statement reacts against the
old valuations. Gentiles, slaves, and women are granted access
and standing in Christ on the same footing and with the same
valuation, privileges and responsibilities as Jewish and free
men. Whereas circumcision was a mark of separation, baptism
expresses the new unity of these persons in Christ.”
“Some
traditionalists grant that Galatians 3:28 speaks of newness in
the male and female relationships, but they view these words as
descriptive of the eschaton: this is what life will be like
after Christ’s return. They say, however, that we still live in
the old age, the age of sin, and therefore the words of 3:28
cannot be implemented on a practical level. This will not do:
Christians are still residents of the old age, but they are
people for whom the new age has dawned. Our task is to actualize
the new age in the midst of the old. We cannot allow ourselves
to be ruled by sin and the old age, but only by Christ and the
presence of the new age.”
Added September
17, 2012
Dr.
Martin Hanna:
Please accept my apologies for any lack of Christian courtesy I
may have manifested in my discussions of women in ministry.
Sarah Sumner
(2007): 250-251. “My primary conviction has been to attempt to
draw attention, not to the matter of order (as complementarians
tend to do) and not to the matter of justice (as egalitarians
tend to do), but rather to the matter of integrity.”
“I
believe it grieves the Spirit of God for us, as evangelicals, to
be divided in the way that we are on the issue of women in
ministry. No doubt, for us the debate is good (‘As iron sharpens
iron, so one man sharpens another’ Proverbs 27:17 NIV). But for
us to equivocate, that is to say one thing and yet do another .
. . is unacceptable. For example, it is an act of equivocation
when we say that the Golden Rule should be applied to every
Christian comprehensively, yet fail to behave as though loving
people as ourselves is relevant to the way that the discussion
about women in ministry is played out. Far too many Christians
who are involved in this debate stand at odds with one another,
strained relationally, too distant to gather in fellowship, and
too guarded to unravel the grave misunderstandings that are
caused by conflicting points of view.”
Dr.
Martin Hanna:
Christ has “sole” authority that belongs only to
Christ. He also has more authority than other family and church
leaders. Does this mean that family and church leaders have
“sole” authority that belongs only to them? Do family and church
leaders have more authority that those who follow?
Benjamin
Merkle
(2003): 160-161. “The church should be led by a plurality of
elders/overseers. In every case that the term ‘elders’ is used
in the New Testament it is found in the plural (except in 1 Tim
5:19). . . . The New Testament church was governed by a group of
qualified leaders and not by one individual. The local church
should not be structured in such a way that one leader has sole
authority in the church. He model of Scripture is that a group
of qualified leaders are needed which provides accountability,
balance, and the sharing of responsibilities.” “Finally, the
elders/overseers should be viewed as equal in status.”
Dr.
Martin Hanna:
What
is the essence of Christian headship? Is it unilateral veto
decisions to overrule the improper decisions of others? is it
self-sacrificing love that persuades others to reconsider their
decisions? Due to the sinful hardness of our hearts as husbands
and wives, sometimes unity is impossible without the unilateral
submission of one to the other. However, unilateral rulership is
not the essence of a husband’s role; and unilateral submission
is not the essence of a wife’s role.
The
essence of the unique roles of husbands and wives are to be
defined in the context of mutual submission to one another under
Christ. The husband is not head of his wife because of his veto
decisions to reverse the decisions of his wife. If this were the
case then the wife could never veto the decisions of her husband
even when they would compromise her relationship with Christ.
Neither is the husband required to exercise unilateral veto
power in every other case where conscience is not involved. Even
in these cases, sometimes the husband will surrender to his
wife’s will and sometimes the wife will surrender to the
husband’s will. They should negotiate as equals concerning when
he or she will yield. Only when such negotiations break down due
to the hardness of our hearts would a unilateral veto decision
be considered.
Such an
exercise of a unilateral veto decision is not the essence of
Christian headship. Headship is just as much present in a choice
to submit to the decision of one’s partner (even when one
concludes that the decision is not best). The use of the veto to
unilaterally counteract the decision of our partner is the time
when we groan most under the burden of the curse of sin and its
consequences. Such decisions by husbands and wives should become
less and less frequent in Christian marriages. Does the allowing
for veto decisions on the part of husbands and wives destroy the
unique sense in which the husband is the head of the wife? I do
not think so. The husband is head of the wife as Christ is head
of the church. And it was the essence of Christ’s
self-sacrificing headship to surrender to the sinful decisions
of His church which put Him to death on Calvary. Christ loves
his church in spite of her unilateral veto decision and romances
her back to Himself through His unilateral veto decision of
self-sacrificing love.
Was
phoebe a deacon (servant) only in the sense that all Christians
are servants? or was phoebe one who held an office of
service—the office of a deacon?
Benjamin
Merkle
(2003): 106. “It appears that Phoebe held the ‘office’ of
deacon. That she is given the masculine title of diakonos and is
described as the diakonos of the church at Cenchrea has caused
the majority of scholars to affirm that Phoebe was indeed a
deacon.”
Dr.
Martin Hanna:
Does
The Chronological Creation Order Mean That Some Ministries In
The Christian Church Belong Only To Men And Not To Women?
Henri
Blocher (2007): 246. “The consequence is inescapable, even
for the most conservative, rigid, ‘wooden’ if you like,
interpretation of the Scriptures: there is no biblical reason to
bar women from the preaching role, which is ‘prophetic.’”
Henri Blocher (2007): 247. “Focusing on an order . . . makes it
possible to distinguish between ordinary and extraordinary, both
of them allowable. After he had established an order that
pleases him—an order that remains flexible, with a limited
import—God remains perfectly free to raise extraordinary
ministries! Why should we forbid an extraordinary ministry of
teaching and leadership conferred upon a woman? . . . . The
distinction, regarding man and woman, embodies respect for the
wise and beneficial order God has chosen, but not as a code of
law.”
Henri Blocher (2007): 245. “It is most significant that Paul
himself should relativize the import of what he has just said in
1 Corinthians 11:[8-12—“ 8 For man is not from woman, but woman
from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the
man. . . . 11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman,
nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. 12 For as woman came
from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things
are from God].
Added September
14, 2012
R.
T. France:
Women and
Hermeneutics (Bible study methods). “[The issue of the
ordination of women] has raised fundamental questions of
hermeneutical method which have . . . tended to be ignored. . .
. [This] has clouded discussion to the extent that those taking
different sides hardly hear what the other is saying, while
totally opposite conclusions are drawn from the same Bible, and
each side is convinced that they alone have ‘got it right’. Too
easily this polarization of views degenerates into mutual
suspicion, and into accusations on the one side of unthinking
fundamentalism and on the other of having surrendered the
authority of Scripture under the pressure of the all-conquering
liberal agenda of society and those in the church who prefer
conformity to confrontation. What both sides find hard to accept
is that the opposing conclusions might in fact have been
honestly reached by people of equal integrity and equal
commitment to the authority of Scripture, who are divided not by
incompatible theological starting-points, but by differing
perceptions of the nature of the hermeneutical enterprise, of
the fundamental question of how we get from an authoritative
ancient text to the responsible application of biblical
principles in the modern world.”
Barrington
H. Brennen: Meaning
of Virtuous. Note that it is only in the King James Version
of the Bible that the word "virtuous" is used in Proverbs to
describe women. In fact some translations say "Who can find a
good wife?" A better word, as used in more accurate modern
translations, is the word "noble." The word "virtuous" gives us
the idea that the passage may be dealing mostly with the sexual
behavior of women. This is not so. When we examine the passage
we can understand why the word noble is used. The word noble
forces us to think about women differently. The Hebrew word "Hayil"
translated "noble" in Proverbs 31:10 has various shades of
meaning. They are "capability," "skill," "substance," "valor."
In fact, it is usually used to describe military might in the
Old Testament (Exodus 14:4, 9, 28; Numbers 31:14; 2 Samuels 8:9;
Isaiah 10:14; Micah 4:13). Interestingly, another common usage
of the Hebrew word "Hayil" is "force" and "strength." It is
usually used to describe the strength of mind and body of an
individual. We see this in Ruth 3:11 when Boaz speaks to Ruth.
He says "I know you are of noble character." (NIV) A clear
interpretation would be "I know you are one of strength in mind
and body." What a beautiful way to describe a woman. Even the
Greek equivalent "Aret’," as found in Philippians 3:11, gives
one the idea of "force" and "strength." This passage lists the
things that help to build mind and body. "Whatever is true,
noble, right, admirable . . . . if there be any virtue, and if
there be any praise, think on these things." (KJV) A clear
interpretation of the passage would be " . . . . if there is
anything to strengthen mind and body, think on these things."
Imagine beginning the passage in Proverbs, traditionally called
"The virtuous Wife," by using the more accurate words mentioned
in the previous paragraph. Then it would read: "Who can find a
woman of strength in mind and body?" or "Who can find a woman of
skill?", or "Who can find a woman of substance and capability?"
These interpretations certainly place a new light on the
passage. It helps us to think of women not as sexual property,
as the word "virtuous" tends to denote, but as persons of great
mental and physical ability
Barrington
H. Brennen: Husband Love Your Wives.
When Paul states in Ephesians 5:23 and 25: "For the husband is
the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church," and
"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the Church and
gave himself for her . . ." he is actually empowering women in
that context. Women in Ephesians had no "substance" as the noble
women in Proverbs 31. Only the men had the power and voice in
the home, church, community, and government. Therefore, Paul
needed men to review their concept of womanhood and treat them
differently. He challenged men to uplift women socially,
morally, and legally . The men had to be the "head of the home,"
because their women where mere female "slaves" restricted by the
laws of the land. Thus, Paul is saying to these "heads of
homes:" "If you treat your women the way you know Christ treats
the people of God, then you will be empowering them and
elevating them to the position I once gave them at creation—your
equal partner. This is the true meaning of love." You must
understand that Paul was really challenging the law of the land.
However, instead of directly discussing the law itself, he
skillfully appeals to men, with a proper understanding of their
relationship with Jesus, to make a difference through their
treatment of women in their homes. The Greek philosopher,
Aristotle’s teachings, which strongly influenced the Greek
society and all of the Western world, stated that "to be born a
woman is a divine punishment, for a woman is halfway between a
man and an animal." This is exactly what the men Paul was
speaking to in Ephesians believed. Men, perhaps we should
rethink the reasons why we are insisting that we be "head of the
home" especially when our women now have equal opportunity.
Barrington
H. Brennen:
Where did the idea come from that females are inferior to males
and not capable or designed to lead. This has developed over
the millenniums the idea that women are no more than sexual
property. No where in history you can find a school of thought
or any institution developed to teach that men are sexual
property or inferior to women. However, every effort has been
made these past 6000 years to teach us that women are to be
servants and in reality inferior to men. Where did it all begin?
I want to go back before the first Bahamian. Let us go to the
ancient world. Let us look at the county where the western world
gathered its wisdom and philosophy, Athens. Athens was named
after the lovely goddess of wisdom. However it is ironic that a
system of philosophy that maintained that females are in all
ways inferior to males should originate in a city named after a
female who embodied wisdom! Yet here in the capital of ancient
Greece, in the brilliant minds of her philosophers and teachers,
lies the source of the Western world’s formalized conviction
that women are inferior to men. First it was Socrates (470-399
BC) who immortalized the Athenian disdain toward women. He was
the first to refer to women as the weaker sex. He taught that:
"Being born a woman is a divine punishment, since a woman is
halfway between a man and an animal" (Bristow) (Plato, Timaeus,
Baltimore: Penguin, 1965)
Socrates’ star pupil was Plato and Plato’s most distinguished
disciple was Aristotle (384-322). Aristotle, when observing a
single bee was certain that the single bee leading the swarm of
bees was a male. Therefore he called the leader bee the King
Bee. It was not until centuries later it was discovered that the
leader bee was female. Then the name was changed to Queen Bee.
You see it was Aristotle who taught that "The courage of a man
is shown in commanding, of a woman in obeying." (Bristow) He
also taught that: "The difference between a husband and wife is
like that of a man’s soul and his body. The man is to his wife
as a soul to the physical body, meant to command and guide arms
and legs with wisdom and intelligence." (Bristow) In the ancient
Greek world, women could not own property. In fact they were
only as valuable as property. They could not sue or be sued.
They did not appear in public with their husbands. A man’s
property included:
his house, his garden, his wife
Added September
13, 2012
Linda
Belleville: Women Leaders and the Church. “When we
move from women’s roles in Israel to those in early
Christianity, the playing field expands greatly.” (47).
“The New Testament knows no other definition [of ministry] than
the ‘work of service’ (Eph. 4:12 AT).” (69).
“This is not to rule out formal leadership roles, but it is
important to understand the proper role of the leader. Paul says
that Christ gave leaders to the church, not to govern it or
exercise authority over it, but ‘to prepare God’s people for the
work of service . . . “ (Eph. 4:12 AT). The leader's role was to
equip the church for ministry . . . . Only in this way can the
church reach God’s intended goal . . . . Without this definition
of ministry, there can be no real understanding of the church
and the role of women within it.” (69).
Why Does Paul Allow Women to Speak in One Church and Command
Them to Be Silent in Another Church?
Thomas C. Greer:
“Paul does not speak in universal (or non-specific) language,
but addresses the men concerning the problems he has heard in
their regard and the women about the difficulties he has heard
concerning them. It is unwise to argue that because Paul said
something to men in this context it could never be applied to
women if they became involved in similar situations. The
opposite is also true. Things said to women in 1 Tim. may, in
other situations, be said to men. Paul addresses each situation
as he knows it.”
“For instance, when writing to a group of newly converted
Gentiles in Galatia who had become infatuated with the Law of
Moses, Paul says, ‘For freedom Christ has made you free.’ Paul
says almost nothing positive about the law in the entire letter
and he utilized every rhetorical device possible to dissuade
them from subjecting themselves to the Law of Moses. However,
when writings to a group of (mostly) Gentile Christians in
Corinth who had become infatuated with freedom, he writes,
‘Wives, be in submission to your own husbands as the law says.’
This kind of thing does not occur in Paul’s letters because he
cannot remember how he thinks Gentile Christians should view the
law, but because different situations called for different
responses.”
“If we find ourselves in a similar situation in which women of a
particular congregation are being influenced too greatly by
false teachers and/or are doing their teaching in a domineering
manner, those women should not be permitted to teach. However,
it is also implied in 1 Tim. that no man teaching false doctrine
or influenced by false teachers should be allowed to teach
either.”
Why
Were The Original Apostles All Jewish Men?
Paul
Jewett: “Since the witness of the apostles was to begin in
Jerusalem and Judea, since they came with the message ‘to the
Jew first’ and then ‘also to the Greek’ (Acts 1:8; Rom. 1:16),
is it to be wondered at that our Lord chose men who, like
himself, were Jews? But if no one would reason that because
Jesus and the original disciples were all Jews, therefore the
Christian ministry should be Jewish . . . , why reason from the
fact that they were all men to the conclusion that it should be
male . . . ?” (59).
Male
and Female in God's Image. Paul Jewett: “There
is only a ‘personal’ distinction in God (Trinity), not a
‘sexual’ one, then the creation of humankind in the divine image
as male and female can hardly mean that God is male and not
female. . . . [I]f God is a fellowship of persons [Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit], and the human creature a fellowship of persons
[male and female], then humanity is like God as man and woman
rather than as man in distinction from woman.” (36).
Paul
Jewett: The Ordination of Women.
“God must give his enabling Spirit to those on whom hands are
laid in ordination if they are to have the inner spiritual
strength to serve him effectively as ministers of the church.
Therefore, to argue from the nature of ordination that women
cannot hold the ministerial office implies that they are
incapable of receiving that divinely given spiritual endowment
symbolized by the laying on of hands in ordination.” (18)
Are
Christian Relationships Hierarchical?
Dr.
Carrie Miles.
“As New
Testament scholar Gordon Fee wrote about . . . Galatians 3:28
(“There is no Jew nor Gen tile; no slave nor free; no male and
female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus”): “Such a
revolutionary statement was not intended to abolish the
structures [of Roman society], which were held in place by Roman
law. Rather, it was in tended forever to do away with the
significance attached to such structural differences, which
pitted one group of human beings against another.” This passage
in Ephesians performs exactly the same function. The admonition
to “submit to one another out of respect for Christ” was
intended to destroy hierarchy and privilege and bring about the
unity of the entire Christian community.”
Why Is The Husband Referred To As The Head? Why Is The Husband
Told To Show Love? Why Is The Wife Told To Show Respect?
Dr. Carrie Miles.
Readers of this passage [Ephesians 5] often ask why husbands
are enjoined to “love,” while wives must“ respect,” a word which
seems to assume male superiority. Further, why did Paul
designate the husband and not the wife as head?
In a
patriarchal culture, a woman . . . might well think less
respectfully of a man who began treating his household in the
ways that Paul described. . . . [Even] A Christian man . . .
would have a difficult time following Paul’s instructions if his
wife withdrew her respect for him. Paul asked husbands to
sacrifice everything they had been raised to expect in a macho .
. . culture that valued status, public praise, competition,
winning, and position above all else. The sacrifice they are
asked to make explains why he placed the husband, not the wife,
parallel with Christ in the head/body metaphor. . . .
Although
the church should delight to serve Christ, Jesus’s ministry made
it clear that he came, first and foremost, “not to be served,
but to serve” (Mark 10:45). Paul here encourages Christians to
relinquish their claims to hierarchical status out of their
respect for Christ who, as Paul wrote elsewhere, “though he was
in the form of God, counted not equality with God a thing to be
seized (or stolen), but emptied himself, taking on the form of a
slave” (Phil. 2:6).
Gary
Johnson: On The Need For Female Warriors For Christ.
Growing up in the Arkansas Delta, hunting, fishing, football and
fighting were as natural to me as breathing. And if Christianity
were a natural fight--and whippin’ the devil as easy as chasing
down some little fella with a pitchfork and pointy tail who
likes dressing in red suits--well then, you could just stick me
and my buddies on the frontline, and we’d take care of it all.
But this is not a natural fight. Ours is a spiritual battle, a
to-the-death struggle “against principalities, against powers,
against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against
spiritual wickedness in high places.”10 And in this battle the
baddest warrior on the line often weighs no more 100 pounds,
dresses in high heels and gets her hair done every Thursday!
The
testosterone-driven Gospel of today is very appealing to the
carnal, fleshly nature of mankind. But it is an unscriptural
Gospel in many ways, and one that would have benched legendary
Christian soldiers such as Corrie Ten Boom and Mother Theresa
simply because they were women. Men, we may have been taught
growing up, “you never hit girls,” but this is not a principle
the devil abides by. He launches as many vicious attacks against
our daughters, our wives and our sisters as he does against us.
And if we’ve insisted they live out some fairy tale existence--
forever in the tower awaiting their knight in shining
armor--they’re gonna get slaughtered. These women of God have to
arm themselves with the breastplate of righteousness, the helmet
of salvation, the shield of faith and take up the sword of the
Spirit as they wade into the battle beside us.
Yes, the
family is under attack. And yes, restoration is critical. But
the desire of pro-family advocates to turn back the clock 60
years to Father Knows Best and Ozzy and Harriet is not the
answer. We need to go back alright . . . but we have to go back
6,000 years not 60! Back to the Garden of Eden, back before the
fall of mankind--it is here that we discover the perfect will of
God for Christian marriage: equality, respect and mutual
submission.
Dr. Martin Hanna: To Be
Head Like Christ: Ephesians 1:9-10—“For he (God) has made known to us in all
wisdom and insight the mystery of his will, according to his
purpose which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness
of time, to unite [head up— anakephalaio] all things in him,
things in heaven and things on earth. (RSV).
Colossians 1:17-18—“He is before all things, and in him all
things hold together, and he is the head of the body, the
church.”
Col.
2:19—“the head, from whom the whole body, supported and held
together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to
grow.”
Ephesians 4:15—“We will in all things grow up into him who is
the head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and
held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds
itself up in love, as each part does its work.”
Ephesians 1:22—“And God placed (subjected) all things
under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for
the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills
everything in every way.”
Col.
2:9-10—“For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in
bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is
the head (kephale) over every rule (arche) and authority.”
Added September
7, 2012
Dr.
Martin Hanna: Is "the husband of one wife" always more
qualified for ministry than "the wife of one husband."
For Paul, the “ordination of elders” is part of “setting things
in order” in the church (Tit 1:5). As a result, the gendered
language Paul uses (referring to men and/or women) is clarified
by his use of gendered language in his first letter to the
Corinthians. Over and over in the same context [where he
discusses what he “ordains” (7:17) as “God ordained” (9:14)],
Paul uses gendered language to make the same points about women
that he makes about men.
For example, 1 Cor 7:1-2—“it is good for a man not to touch a
woman. Nevertheless because of sexual immorality, let each man
have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.”
7:13-14—“the woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he
is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. For the
unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the
unbelieving wife is sanctified by the
husband.” 7:16—“For how do you know, O wife, whether you will
save your husband? Or how do you know, O man, whether you will
save your wife?”
This inclusive use of gendered language (to make the same points
about men and women), suggests the need for a careful
consideration of how Paul uses gendered language in his teaching
on “ordination of elders” (Tit 1:5). The expectation that a man
who is a deacon is to be “a husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:12)
seems representative of the expectation that a woman is to be
“wife of one husband” (5:9). This is how Phoebe was qualified to
be a female deacon (Rom 16:1). Therefore, the expectation that
the male elder/bishop should be “a husband of one wife” (Tit
1:6-7) seems representative of the qualifications for the female
elder (1 Tim 5:2) who should then be “a wife of one husband”
(5:9).
Added September
6, 2012
Man Power
and Woman Power.
Walter C. Kaiser: “Our Hebrew
word ‘ēzer is a combination of two older Hebrew/Canaanite roots,
one . . . meaning ‘to rescue, to save,’ and the other . . .
meaning ‘to be strong,’. . . . Therefore, I believe it is best
to translate Genesis 2:18 as ‘I will make [the woman] a power
[or strength] corresponding to the man.’” “The proof for this
rendering seems to be indicate
d in 1 Corinthians 11:10, where Paul argued, ‘For this reason, a
woman ought to have power [or authority] on her head.’
Everywhere Paul uses the Greek word exousia in 1 Corinthians it
means “authority,” or “power.” Moreover, never is it used in the
passive sense, but only in the active sense (1 Cor. 7:37; 8:9;
9:4, 5). But in one of the weirdest twists in translation
history, this one word was rendered ‘a veil, a symbol of
authority’ on her head!! . . . the substitution of ‘veil’ for
‘power’ goes all the way back to the Gnostic Alexandrian teacher
known as Valentinus, who founded a sect named after himself . .
. . His native tongue was Coptic, and, in Coptic, the word for
‘power’ and the word for ‘veil’ bore a close resemblance.”
Walter C. Kaiser, “Correcting Caricatures: The Biblical Teaching
on Women,” Priscilla Papers 9:2 (Spring 2005): 5-6.
Dr.
Martin Hanna: Must
Christian Leaders By Married Men? The biblical
interpretation involved with this question is challenging. But
the perspective presented by Craig L. Blomberg deserves careful
consideration.
He writes: “1 Tim. 3:12 (cf. Tit. 1:6)-It is generally
recognized today that ‘husband [man] of one wife [woman]’ means
something like ‘currently faithful to one's spouse, if
married.’”
Some “object to rendering this term [aner] that often means male
(vs. female) or husband (vs. wife) with gender-inclusive
language. But in fact, one well-attested meaning of the word is
as a synonym for anthropos [which often means human person]. In
James, probably every use of aner [James 1:8, 12, 20, 23; 2:2;
3:2] falls into this category. . . . almost all clearly refer to
men and women alike . . . . [Notice] Luke's use of aner in
translating introductory addresses to crowds of mixed gender in
Acts . . . (e.g., Acts 1:16; 2:14, 22, 29; 3:12, etc.). . . . In
short, each usage of aner must be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis, in context . . . .”
“Today's New International Version: The Untold Story of a Good
Translation.” By Craig L. Blomberg, Distinguished Professor of
New Testament, Denver Seminary.
By Rebecca Merrill Groothuis:
“There is no biblical warrant for the doctrine that men have a
spiritual authority denied to women, which gives men the right
and the responsibility to make the final determination of what
God’s Word means and what God’s will is for the women who are
under their authority. To add to the priesthood of all believers
and the high priesthood of Christ another priesthood—a
priesthood of Christian manhood—is to presume upon the unique mediatorial ministry of Christ by having men supplement or
imitate the priestly ministry that is rightly Christ's alone. It
also detracts from the priestly ministry of all believers by
curtailing the opportunity of female believers to represent
Christ to others, to minister in the church, and to hear from
and obey God’s Word and will . . . .”
Miroslav Volf:
“Men and women . . . . image God in their common humanity.
Hence we ought to resist every construction of the relations
between God and femininity or God and masculinity that
privileges one gender, say by claiming that men on account of
their maleness represent God more adequately than women, or by
saying that women, being by nature more relational, are closer
to the divine as the power of connectedness and love . . . .
[Women and men] need to open themselves for one another and give
themselves to one another, yet without loss of the self or
domination of the other.”
Women AND
Men are the Image of God. Faith Martin: “First of all,
ha adam means ‘humanity’ in Hebrew (literally ‘the human’); it
is a mistake to translate it (in Gen 1. to 2:22) as man in the
male sense. Moreover, it is clearly a collective noun (in Gen. 1
to 2:22), as can be seen in the plural ‘let them be masters.’
This Hebrew word, ha adam, is the word ‘man’ in our English
translations of Gene
sis.”
“Secondly, if we go back in the history of the English language,
we find that the English word man originally meant ‘human being’
without any weighting toward the male sex. The shift has been
gradual, but it is only in this century that the English word
man has come to mean primarilly ‘a male human’. So unless God
was speaking twentieth century English, Ortlund’s assertion
cannot be true.”
“Finally, both Genesis 1L26-31 and 5:1 give woman a specific and
explicit right to the name ‘man’ in an ontological sense: So God
created man in his own image, in the image of God created he
him; male and female created he them. When God created man, he
made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and
female; at the time they were created, he blessed them and
called them ‘man.’” Faith Martin, Review of
Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Feb 27, 1993.
Ellen G. White:
“It is the accompaniment of the
Holy Spirit of God that prepares workers, both men and women, to
become pastors to the flock of God.” (Testimonies, 6:322). “It
is not always men who are best adapted to the successful
management of a church.” (Pastoral Ministry, 36).
Adventist Biblical Research
Institute: (1976). If
God has called a woman, and her ministry is fruitful, why should
the church withhold its standard act of recognition
[ordination]?"
