Objections to Sexual Identity, Part 5

Introduction and Review of Previous Objections

0:03 This adult Sunday school class was held on September 18th, 1988 at the Trinity Baptist Church in Montville, New Jersey. Once again, it is our delight to extend a cordial invitation to any visitors among us. I saw at least one that appeared to me as a visitor on the way in. May have been here on one other occasion, but there may be others as well, and we do welcome you in Christ's name.

0:35 Now, in our adult class, we seek to have the format of a classroom and the lecture hall more than a straight preaching method of communicating the word of God, and it helps when I turn on this little thing that I'm supposed to.

0:56 And for the sake of our visitors, let me just say a word about where we have been in our study and where we propose to go in that study this morning. Under the broad subject heading of crucial issues facing the people of God, we are presently seeking to discover from the scriptures its major teaching on male and female identity, roles, and functions. And in the course of opening up the major biblical passages addressing these things, we have had occasion to see that the scripture does indeed establish

1:37 upon the broad base of certain areas of absolute equality between men and women. Nonetheless, it establishes a structure of male headship and female subordination. And that structure, articulated succinctly in 1 Corinthians 11.3, comes to expression in the family, in the church, and in the general appearance and demeanor and relationship between men and women.

2:07 Well, having examined all of that biblical teaching, we have for several weeks been dealing with major objections to this biblical teaching and their biblical refutation. Titus 1.9 and Acts 20.28 and following mandate such concern to take up objections to the healthy teaching of the word of God.

2:37 And as Paul divides the enemies of the church in Acts 20 into two categories, the wolves from without and the perverse men from within, so we have sought to consider these major objections in those two categories. And we completed our study of the objections that come from without, that is, from the unbelieving, skeptical, hostile world that claims no allegiance or submission to this book or to the Bible. And we have sought to consider these major objections in those two categories. To the God or Christ of this book.

3:10 And those major arguments are the evolutionary argument, the inferiority argument, the religious suppression argument, and the individual freedom and liberty argument. And then we touched briefly upon the pragmatic argument. Then last Lord's Day, we began to examine, or two late Lord's Days ago, or no, last Lord's Day was our first time of considering the argument against the biblical teaching which comes from within, that is, from those who claim to be evangelical Christians, who claim to believe in a supernatural Bible, a supernatural Savior, and a supernatural salvation.

Refuting the 'Temporary Authority' Argument (Part 1)

3:52 For that is perhaps the simplest definition of what an evangelical Christian is. And we noted the first one, which was this. While admitting that the teaching of the Bible clearly established, which establishes male headship and female subordination, they undermine both the original and the permanent authority of this teaching. These would admit that when we turn to the documents, particularly of the New Testament, indeed, a concept of male headship and female subordination is clearly taught.

4:34 But their assertion is that that teaching was not binding upon first century Christians and it is not binding upon twentieth century Christians either. And their rationale, as expressed in the work of Paul K. Jewett, is basically this, that those passages which assert such headship and subordination in the home, in the church, and in general appearance and bearing demeanor and relationships grow out of the remnants of rabbinical prejudice, particularly in the mind and thinking of the apostle Paul. And we dealt very quickly

5:18 with the answer to that objection by noting that this was nothing less than a blatant, arrogant rejection of biblical authority and also a very arbitrary and selective use of scripture. Someone who hated women could say, say of Galatians 3.28, a text which Paul K. Jewett and his ilk love to quote, in Christ there is neither male nor female, someone could with equal authority say, no, that reflects Paul's over-enthusiastic desire to establish the privileges of the new humanity.

5:57 And there Paul had simply lost his balance in being preoccupied with the wonders of privilege in Christ. We must reject Galatians 3.28 because there Paul is not speaking as an overly enthusiastic rabbi, but he's speaking as an overly enthusiastic Christian. Well, you see, once you start handling the word of God that way, where in the world do you stop?

Refuting the 'Seeds of Liberation' Argument: The Slavery Parallel

6:22 Who becomes the authority to say where a statement of an apostle is a reflection of remaining sin or a revelation of the mind and will of God? And therefore I trust none of you will ever be shaken at all by that argument. But then one that is far more subtle and because it has an element of truth in it, not quite so easy to answer at certain points is the one we spent the bulk of our time considering last week and it was this. While admitting that the teaching of the New Testament establishes male headship and female subordination and that this teaching

7:06 was authoritative for the people of Israel, for first century Christians, these people say that teaching clearly taught in the scriptures of the New Testament is not binding upon twentieth century Christians. They are not disputing that someone at Corinth reading 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Corinthians 14, saints in the area of Ephesus reading 1 Timothy chapter 2, verse 1, verses 9 and following would clearly understand the concepts of male headship. Saints at Ephesus reading Ephesians 5, wives be subject to your husbands.

7:51 Yes, male headship, female subordination in the church, in the home, in general appearance, relationships, etc. Yes, that was binding upon them. However, this is what they tell us, what we are witnessing in the New Testament is that we are not God's final and complete and closed end revelation of His mind and will on this subject, but rather, we are witnessing what the Holy Spirit did to capture part of a movement away from the oppression of women that was even greater, that some say without much biblical substantiation in the Old Testament,

8:36 and was moving toward the full liberation of women. That would come in the home, in the church, in society, as Christian principles more and more work their way out in the experience of the people of God specifically, and in the world in general. And so what we are told is, yes, the passages teach what we say they teach. They were authoritative for first century Christians, but they were intended to sow the seeds of the ultimate dismantling of that whole hierarchical structure so that what we would end up with

9:20 is not a hierarchical structure of male headship and female subordination, but a truly egalitarian relationship. That is, females can perform any function that males can, any roles, vice versa, except we have not yet found a way to give men wombs so that they can bear children, breasts to nurse them, but we'll work at that until eventually we can even reverse that role. And that's not foolishness, my friends. That's a commitment that is deep and settled, and that's why there's so much pressure to make the woman's bearing of a child in her womb a matter that a woman will no longer have to have.

10:04 She can carry on her independent career while her child in its pre-life, prenatal state is developed in the sterile laboratory until the day of its full development, then she can go pick it up at her convenience and continue on with her career while she deposits it at a daycare center. Well, this is the horrible state that we're living in, and when within the Church of Christ voices are raised up aiding this horrible movement in the world, then indeed we must be alarmed at the fact that we're not concerned as the people of God. And in setting forth this idea, what is the favorite

10:47 so-called parallel institution which these people use to support their thesis? They say there's something else in the New Testament that is addressed in the New Testament documents that was peculiar to that time, but nobody would say is binding on the Church today. What is that other institution? Slavery, and then one that's used less is the concept of the king and the subject.

11:17 And so they argue, yes, the New Testament accepts the presence of slavery. It doesn't seem to dismantle it directly. The New Testament says slaves be subject to your masters. Masters doesn't say get rid of your slaves.

11:30 It says treat them with dignity, with kindness and fairness, remembering that you have a master in heaven. Now these people say, see, what happens in the New Testament is, we have captured an institution of the subordination of one human being being the property of another. And what the New Testament does, particularly in a book like Philemon, it sows such seeds by apostolic direction that will eventually dismantle the entire institution of slavery so likewise. You had a hierarchical society.

12:07 Men did the ruling, women did the ruling, women did the ruling, men did the following. And rather than be socially disruptive, the apostles very wisely sowed seeds that would eventually dismantle that framework. Well, our answer to that is, using slavery as a parallel is dirty pool because nowhere does the Bible mandate the institution of slavery. It is not rooted in the order of creation.

12:35 It is an institution that comes into the picture subsequent to the, and it is never given a justification for its perpetuation. And it is true that the New Testament sows such seeds as would in principle dismantle slavery wherever the gospel took deep roots. Now you see, there's the little element of truth in this whole scenario. There are certain things which are just treated as facts in the New Testament without any justification.

13:10 There's no justification of them. But when you read the book of Philemon, where Paul is writing to his friend Philemon at Laodicea, and he says, look, I've got wonderful news for you. You had a runaway slave. And this runaway slave, when he was at Rome, came under my influence.

13:28 He's been converted. Now I'm going to send him back to you. And then you remember all the things Paul said. He said, if he owes you anything, charge that to my account.

13:37 And then in a masterful stroke, he says, sort of tongue in cheek, if you're going to be such a skinflint, because he says, remember, you owe me your very life. But if you want to go ahead and settle up accounts, I'll be glad to. Then he says, receive him back. He says, as a brother, be loved in the Lord.

13:55 Receive him as a part of my very heart. Well, you see what is bound up in those concepts? Something that would eventually cause this man Philemon to look at his slave Onesimus and say, if I'm going to take those apostolic directives seriously, frankly, Onesimus, I've got to declare you a free man. And if you want to stay on as my paid house servant and come to agreement on time and wages, well, you see, the scenes were so.

The Basis of Male Headship: Creation, Fall, Redemption, General Revelation

14:23 And that's the element of truth. However, with respect to the matter of male headship and female subordination, as we have seen from the word of God, we know that these things are embedded in the very creation of man. And whenever there is given a justification for this arrangement, as we have seen in our studies, 1 Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2 in particular, we find that the order of creation is set forth as the rationale for male headship and female subordination. And the justification is constantly rooted in God's creative design

15:08 and in certain factors that were present at the fall, and certain factors embedded in the very glory of redemption. Ephesians 5, the husband-wife relationship as a hierarchy of headship and subordination, rather than something that the gospel will dismantle, is subject unto your husbands

15:36 as the relationship of loving headship, rather than redemption sowing the seeds that will dismantle. Headship and female subordination in marriage brings it to its fullest and most glorious and perfection until the consummation of marriage. Now I have to say the last second objection

16:21 to the biblical teaching that comes from within. And one of the elders seriously admonished me and said, Brother, you need to go back over those scriptures more thoroughly, have the people open their Bibles and see them with their own eyes. He said, Admonition, not because I've not prepared more material, I'm ready to take on argument number three, but that you will be well-armed to answer argument number two. All right?

16:49 Let me give you then these three things that form the basic answer to this argument that this teaching was authoritative for the first century, but that only captured a moment in the ongoing liberation of humanity in Christ. It is no longer binding upon us. Well, we answer by asking three simple questions. One of them we've already addressed.

17:18 What is the basis for the revealed order of male headship and female subordination? What is the basis for the revealed order of male headship and female subordination? And our answer is, the basis is the creation, the fall, redemption, and, fourthly, general or natural revelation. You remember how Paul appeals to that in 1 Corinthians chapter 11, doth not nature itself teach you?

17:55 So when someone would try to bring this before you, you throw the challenge to them and say, tell me, where in the Bible is the institution of slavery justified as a creation institution of God? They'll come up with zilch. Where does the Bible say that as a result of the fall, there will be an arrangement in which slavery will be a permanent part of human experience? God does say as a result of the fall that there will be this desire on the part of the woman toward her husband, and as Pastor Bob expounded the passage, I believe he carried the judgment of most of us, that desire is,

18:39 one to throw over that headship, but the husband shall nonetheless rule over the wife, Genesis 3.16. Where does the Bible say that there is a necessary consequence of the fall resulting in the permanent institution of slavery? Furthermore, where does the Bible ever liken some vital element of redemptive reality to the permanent institution of slavery?

19:08 Now it picks up, it upsurges certain images and says, as we were slaves of sin, we are now the bond slaves of Christ. Yes, it takes imagery from the existing institution, but it never elevates that institution as a divinely set forth model of a redemptive reality. So that's our first answer. What is the basis for the revealed order of male headship and female subordination, creation, fall, redemption, and general revelation?

The Nature and Sufficiency of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

19:45 But then the second question we need to ask, and this is vital, what is the nature of Scripture? What is the nature of Scripture? And here I want you to turn to a very familiar passage, 2 Timothy 3, verses 16 and 17. Here we are told in verse 16, and notice that this is an additional thought that Paul, Paul is passing on to Timothy.

20:19 All Scripture is inspired of God and is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction, which is in righteousness. Now notice, that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work. If a servant of Christ in any age until the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ is to be completely furnished unto every good work demanded of him

21:00 in the path of a biblical ministry, what does he need? Well, according to this passage, he needs to be furnished with God-breathed Scripture. And furnished with God-breathed Scripture. He is a complete man ready unto every good work of a biblical ministry.

21:27 Now, the also harks back to verse 14 and 15. And this is vital. Paul says to Timothy, but abide in the things which you've learned and have been assured of, knowing of whom you have learned them, and that from a babe you have known the sacred rights which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. You see what he's saying, Timothy?

22:03 The first great function of Scripture is that the sacred writings plus nothing else. You don't need the tradition of the elders. You don't need the pronouncements of bishops. You don't need the decrees of popes.

22:20 You don't need the decrees of the priests. You don't need anything else. Scripture is able to make you wise unto salvation. Now, let me ask the question.

22:34 Were the Scriptures adequate simply to make men wise unto salvation in the first century? Did the Scriptures simply capture a very rudimentary and elementary doctrine of how to be saved suited to the limitations of first century life and the relative simplicity of that life compared to all the complexity of 20th century technological USA and the rest of the world? Is there anyone who would dare to claim to be an evangelical who would say the sufficiency of Scripture for the doctrine of salvation is locked into the first century?

23:18 What do you call people who say if all the Scriptures can do and if we want to know what salvation is now, we need to take some of the insights of Peter and Paul and Moses and Isaiah, but we need to add to them the modern insights of psychology and sociology and anthropology and psychiatry. What do we call such people?

23:47 Heretics? Liberals?

23:51 Isn't that what we do? We can't have our cake and eat it too because those same sacred words and writings that are the sufficient soul and adequate revelation of the way of salvation in the first century are precisely that for us in the 20th century and will be until the coming of the Lord Jesus. Heaven and earth shall pass away but my word shall never pass away. So when Paul says to Timothy all Scripture is inspired of God and is also profitable for people, teaching, teaching about what?

24:34 About life and death and work and male and female roles and relationships, functions, distinctions, profitable for teaching, profitable to reprove ungodly thinking, to correct, to instruct in the life of righteousness, the life that is fitting and conforming to the law of God that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work. Now you see, this second argument that says that all the New Testament does

25:17 is freeze an arrangement that was a temporary expedient but sows seeds for a doctrine of male and female roles and relationships that we must work out. It means then that the ultimate authority is not God but whom? Man. Now what happens when your description of the full-blown flower doesn't fit mine and mine doesn't fit the man down the street?

25:49 Then we're like it was in the days of judges. Every man does that which is right in his own eyes and there is no king in Israel. That is, no king. Jesus Christ, our great prophet, speaking through his inerrant spirit-inspired sufficient.

26:11 Now do you see that? And so this is an attack upon the very nature of scripture. Let's look at two others.

The Perpetual Authority of Christ's Word (John 17:17, Matthew 28:18-20)

26:21 John 17 and verse 17 coupled with Matthew 28, 18 to 20. Here in John 17 we have a wonderful pulling back of the veil with respect to what we call the high priestly intercessory ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ. Most expositors believe that what we have in John 17 is not only an actual record of the prayer that our Lord prayed on the eve of his betrayal, but that we have in it a pattern of the kind of intercession that he carries on at the right hand of the Father even now.

27:05 And there are very strong suggestions of this within the prayer itself. It's not something imposed upon the prayer, but there are clear suggestions of it within the prayer itself. Just one example, he says, I pray not for them only, but for those that shall believe on me through their word. Verse 20.

27:28 So you see, his prayer extends beyond the concern for those immediately within the orbit of those concerns. Now in the verse midst of that prayer then, what does our Lord pray for his own? Verse 17. Sanctify them in the truth.

27:48 Thy word is truth.

27:54 And he does not qualify and say thy word is truth for first century Christians. Waiting for the further unfolding of the flower of its principles and then that word will be something other than what it was No, thy word is truth. And it is truth to the end of the age. And when it asserts that the husband is the head of the wife, that the man is the head of the woman, and that this arrangement is rooted in the creative design and is established in the very pattern of redemption and even presses

28:38 in upon us from general revelation and has been as certain elements fixed as part of God's own pronouncement in conjunction with the fall, we dare to assert that that word will sanctify us in those categories of truth even on summation.

29:01 That brings us then to the language of Matthew 28.

29:06 When our Lord gave what we commonly call the Great Commission in Matthew as recorded by Matthew, you'll remember he prefaced the commission by pointing to his own unique, supreme, unrivaled, universal authority. Verse 18. And Jesus came and spoke unto them saying, All authority has been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Before you listen to what I say, look at who I am.

29:48 I am the one to whom there has been given supreme unrivaled authority in every realm, heaven and on earth. Therefore, what I say comes from one who has plenary authority in heaven and on earth. Now, within that perspective, verse 19, go ye therefore, or perhaps better translated, going therefore, and here is the main verb, make disciples of all the nations and then there follow these participles, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son of the Holy Spirit,

30:33 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you. Now notice, and lo, I am with you always even unto the end or the consummation of the age. So the commission that our Lord gives envisions the work of his church right down to the consummation. That's the second coming.

31:04 And he says throughout that entire period, just as surely as the goal of the church is to make disciples and then to incorporate those disciples into visible communities of disciples who, enter the door of that community by open confession of identification with the one true and living God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and then that community is to be under the regulative power of everything Christ commanded unto the end of the age. He doesn't say teaching them whatsoever I have commanded you until the

31:48 church takes the principles of what I have commanded and goes beyond them in their application and flowering into full blown Christian discipleship. He envisions his word given directly by him and in the light of 1 Corinthians 1437 given through his special messengers the apostles as binding upon the church unto the consummation of the age. He is not simply giving seeds that are authoritative for the first century only to be worked out into that

32:32 which will be the final word of God in that last century of Christians living before the return of the Lord Jesus. So you see this second objection that comes from within the pale of those who call themselves evangelicals is an attack upon the sufficiency and the perpetual authority of the word of God. And you and I must be well grounded not only in the basis for the revealed order which is creation for redemption and general revelation but in the very nature of scripture it is God

33:17 breathed permanently binding fully sufficient revelation of the will of God to the consummation of the age. You see that? All right then the third part of our answer is this what is the true nature of cultural adaptation? What is the true nature of cultural adaptation?

Distinguishing Essentials from Cultural Circumstantials

33:48 You see there's a lot of Mickey Mouse argumentation that goes on. I read from Professor Brunt's article last week who in spite of his earned Ph.D. obviously is not a clear thinker but in this matter of cultural adaptation people say all right first century documents tell Christians greet one another with a holy kiss five times four times greet one another with a holy kiss Peter says greet one another with a kiss of love.

34:28 Now if I stood up here afterward and watched you a lot of you would be greeting one another sticking out a hand squeezing the shoulder a few of you would embrace one another and I'd call you all back and say when are you going to start obeying the Bible? Can't you read your Bible? You can read your Bible. You know what it says.

34:46 I'm doing it. Some of the more intelligent among you would say wait a minute pastor don't bind my conscience to a mere cultural expression of a fundamental principle.

34:59 I am keeping the principle clothed in a specific cultural expression of that principle. Now what is the true nature then of this cultural adaptation of principles? You see this is what these people try to do. They say look this matter of male headship and female subordination that was a cultural thing.

35:23 So just as we are free to have a good conscience though we don't go around smooching one another every Lord's day so we can have a free conscience if you wives don't submit to your husbands you husbands don't take loving leadership you can have an egalitarian marriage. She calls the shots first and third week of the month you call them the second and fourth week. It's up for grabs. If she can make more money than you then you stay home and do the domestic.

35:48 You be the keeper at home. Even though the Bible says that the older women train the younger women to be keepers at home that's cultural. You see we need to understand when those kinds of arguments come before

36:05 this matter of cultural adaptation and in the true use of this principle yes we are free to alter what we would call the circumstantials but not the essence of the biblical directive. The circumstantials and the essence are different. Let me illustrate. Is modesty a universal essential Christian responsibility for men and for women?

36:40 Would everyone agree that modesty anyone here who would disagree that modesty is an essential is of the essence of a biblical directive? Anyone disagree? No. Now what is modesty in our culture?

36:59 What is modesty in the Balim Valley in West Irian? I'll never forget a missionary who spent his life among very primitive people in that very area telling me how men who went out in the field to work clad in nothing but a gourd covering their private parts with a little string if that gourd would even crack as much as you could see blushing through their dark skin they would run blushing into the woods until they could find a replacement because they felt horribly immodest modesty in various cultures means that a woman is thoroughly covered from

37:44 the waist down but not from the waist up modesty in certain cultures means that a woman is covered from here to here and all of her head in her face and all she has is a little slit for her eyeballs to help her to see where she's going and to bear an ankle in certain cultures is to be considered a brazen woman and I see some smiles of people who come from cultures where they know that that's true I soon found out when I went to Pakistan that courtesy that's an essential Christian grace in honor of preferring one another as you would that others do unto you even so do ye also unto them that's the

38:28 essence of courtesy well I soon learned that a courteous Christian man is something he'll never do there in Pakistan I went to sit down in a crowded train and as I sat down I started to do what I always do pick up my right leg and cross it over my left so that the bottom of my foot was exposed and the missionary whispered in my ear said don't you show the bottom of your foot in the Muslim context I said I'll take your word brother explain and most of you know I'm left-handed I'm one of those 10% freaks who's left-handed and when I want to shock people they say everything with the left hand I say yep

39:19 naturally when on that same train a Muslim man saw that we had no lunch box with us offered us a sandwich I started to reach across with my left hand and the missionary slapped my left hand I said I'm in real bad trouble and I soon found out that modesty and courtesy in that culture you never touch food with your left hand because the left hand is what a man uses for personal hygiene and therefore it is an insult to the now why am I saying these things to underscore you see that the essence of the duty of courtesy and considerateness is always upon every child of God

40:03 but the circumstances circumstantials will vary from culture to culture and age to age but it is never right to be boorish and insensitive and to negate the essence of the duty of Christian courtesy now in the same way when the scripture says greet one another with a holy kiss it was taking a circumstantial of an ordinary Middle Eastern or not even Middle Eastern but apparently throughout the entire part of the world to which the epistles came at that time the greeting even as now as you've seen us greet some of our

40:48 Pakistani friends men in grace men and men do not embrace women but they bow before them respectfully if they are younger women you're an older man you may touch them upon the forehead as an indication of warm greeting but those things you see are circumstantials of the essence which is when you see one another warmly greet one another in a manner that expresses genuine face-to-face communion and unfeigned and pure Christian love and those circumstantials will change from culture to culture in Pakistan it's shake the right hand embrace over the left shoulder right shoulder

41:32 left shoulder and back to the final shake of the hands with men with women it's the modest bowing this way in other cultures there are other ways there are certain cultures where if as a man you did not greet another man with an embrace you would be considered either his enemy or someone who had ought against him the circumstantials do change and the gospel does not come and make radical disruptive intrusions upon the mere circumstantials of a culture now it will change those things in the culture that are aggravated and universal

42:17 expressions of sin Paul said the Cretans are always liars slow bellies they had a national sin of being dishonest gluttons lazy he said this testimony is true well that wasn't a circumstantial cultural thing that was an aggravated expression of the patterns of sin in the culture and the essence of biblical morality would alter that dominant quote cultural manifestation so we're not talking about letting the gospel and its moral demands be altered to circumstantials but circumstantials pertain to these matters that are non-moral in their essence

Male Headship as an Essential, Not a Circumstantial

43:01 and so when it says if a woman is to be enrolled as a widow she must be a proven saint how would a woman prove that she was a true saint and a servant of God and of his people Paul says if she has washed the saint's feet that is if she has a pattern of doing the task that the common servant does out of love to her brothers and sisters then she has shown the marks of having a servant's heart now that's a circumstantial we would say in our day if she has gladly entertained and washed the dishes and the dirty sheets of her house guests that would be the circumstantial

43:46 but the essence is a proven saint servant's heart you see that so as you follow that matter through you don't need to be an expert and have a Ph.D. in 99% of the cases where something is a mere circumstantial you can recognize it where something is of the essence now is it merely circumstantial when it says wives be subject unto your husbands or is that the very essence of a hierarchical relationship as the church is subject unto Christ now is that different in any culture no

44:30 so let the wives be to their husbands in everything in every culture in every age until the coming again of our Lord Jesus Christ I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man parenthesis that is in a culture where women are considered ignorant no no there's nothing cultural there's nothing he says for the man was first created for the woman was first in the transgression you see the rationale dealing with the essence of women's silence as an authoritative teacher and ruler of the church is embedded in creation and the fall these are not circumstantial this is of the essence

Refuting the 'Reinterpretation of Kephale (Head)' Argument

45:14 of the relationship now I don't want to beat the things in at the edges but do you think you have a hold on it are there questions that are arising in your minds that grow out of this you see the principle clearly alright then in the time remaining let me take up the third and final major objection that comes from within now let me use the board again and this one is quite prevalent though I doubt many of you will encounter it because you don't move in the circles or read the

45:59 literature in which you would encounter it but some of you may have and may yet and therefore we'd like to immunize you this is the position that I'll state it verbally let me put it visually before you these people would tell us that when we look at the new testament documents and we extract from them a doctrine of male headship and female subordination had we been living in the first century and instructed such

46:34 we misunderstood the meaning of the words it would have been a misunderstanding of Paul's intention for women to have read first Corinthians 11 and men to have read it the husband is the head of the man is the head of the woman as Christ is the head of the man and God is the head of Christ to build into that language or extract from it any concept of hierarchy of male headship female subordination as a Christian sitting in the church at Corinth the first day an elder read that letter that was to misunderstand the meaning of these pivotal passages and when you turn to first Timothy 2 and it said I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the

47:19 man but to be in silence if you understood by that that Paul was closing the door to women being the authoritative teachers and rulers in the church closing the door of church office you would have misunderstood what he said then and down here in the 20th century if you take the documents and extract that meaning you are wrong so in essence here is the argument or objection there is a rejection or rejecting the obvious and historical internal interpretation of the passages teaching male headship and female subordination this is a

48:04 rejection of the obvious and the historical interpretation these people say yes it seems quite evident for the first couple of centuries people understood this concept as we are now expounding it but they were wrong in understanding it that way and then he went into the the dark ages when the bible was little considered but then when the bible broke out from under the rubble of ecclesiastical traditions and all of the rest of the reformation from the 16th century down to the 20th century the prevailing understanding of these passages is exactly what we have

48:49 expounded and seen together in our studies these people say no you all have the been wrong and the reason you've been wrong is you have not had the insights of modern and for example a long come two seminary teachers a man and a woman and they begin writing articles to show that the greek word head hydro water on the head cephalic the word head used in first corinthians 11 used in ephesians 5 they come along and with

49:33 the semblance of scholarship say you see you've assumed the word head meant authority over it means source of it has nothing to do with authority over it has to do with source of and if you only understood that then the whole texture and fabric of this concept of headship subordination disintegrates before our marvelous new understanding of the word kephale now this is so crucial in the arguments of some that in the second edition of his excellent book the role relationship of men and women the new testament teaching george knight has

50:18 two appendices not physically but in his book and in appendix number one let me read to you what it is does kephale head mean source or authority over in greek literature a survey of two thousand three hundred and thirty six examples by wayne grudem and in this appendix he deals with the teaching of the modern authors and cites them letha scans only nancy hardesty margaret how and other so called evangelical feminist scholars then he gives what they use as supporting sources then what

51:03 he does and this is a masterful treatment he takes the full gamut and then he mickelson and the mickelson duo is one are one of the major proponents of this he takes evidence from greek lexicons and then a survey of two thousand three hundred and thirty six examples from ancient greek literature they are tabulated from the eighth century named by author all the way back to the first century and then the meaning is tabulated the number of instances percentage of instances etc and then the conclusion is in all of those instances under source

51:48 or origin person or thing from which something is derived or obtained zero zero zero not once in any of those two thousand three hundred and thirty six usages in ancient greek documents from philosophers to historians to poets does it ever mean that and he said now if you want to take the time to complete the study and do the other i think seventeen hundred references available go ahead dear people to me this is one of the greatest tragedies that articles with this kind of species scholarship are printed in major christian periodicals and beguile the hearts of the innocent again

Reaffirming Ephesians 5 Against Misinterpretation

52:37 ephesians chapter five i know this isn't pleasant but it's necessary ephesians chapter five and most of you if you have a bible that has paragraphs either visually or marked by something to indicate the beginning of a paragraph most of your bibles begin a new paragraph with verse twenty two and rightly so because in the syntax of the original you have in verse eighteen be not drunk with wine , but be being filled with the spirit and then you have five participles which

53:21 describe the channels by which a spirit filled life will be manifested speaking singing making melody giving thanks verse twenty one subjecting yourselves one to another in the fear of christ then verse twenty two begins another subject and a peculiar application of this generic mutual submission he's now going to introduce three categories of specific submission wives to husbands chapter six in verse one children to parents verse five of chapter six servants to masters you see the structure it's as

54:06 clear on the nose on my face no as clear on the nose on jimmy durante's face but they come along and say but aha here's the real key to understanding ephesians five it's to look at verse twenty one as the dominant and regulated concept submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of christ now wives submit to their husbands by in some way or another recognizing that they have something in some way or another that's called headship but husbands submit to their wives by loving them and serving them because it

54:51 says submit one to another now he wouldn't contradict in the next paragraph what he established in verse twenty one would he if he says mutual submission among all would he come back and then say but wives you are to be subject to your husbands but husbands are not to be subject to their wives wouldn't that contradict what he established in verse twenty one now paul wouldn't contradict himself that way and then they try to structure and force the entire obvious meaning of verses twenty two to thirty three by a forced application of verse twenty one over the whole passage you say pastor you can't be serious i'm very conscious of the ninth commandment

55:36 when i represent even error i am not bearing false witness this is done so much so that betty elliott at one of the conferences of the so called christian feminists said i'd like you to re re restructure and rewrite ephesians chapter five according to your theology as christ is subject unto the church so let the husbands be to their wives in everything they got upset with her then she said well if what you're saying is right then you ought to rewrite the passage you see it they take first timothy two well my time's gone and i said we're going to make conscience of it we'll have

56:20 to finish up god willing next week it's not pleasant but dear people to be forearmed is to be warned and then i would ask you to contemplate how would you answer these objections what are the solid basic biblical responses to these objections and i hope many of you will have some helpful input let's pray together our father again we confess that we take no delight in refuting gainsayers and yet we know that this is the task you have laid upon the shepherds and elders of your church and we know that it is also the responsibility of every

57:05 believer to be ready to give a reason of the hope that is in him we pray that you will arm this congregation against every single attack of the devil against the preciousness of the truth of your word concerning the assigned roles and functions of men and women lord when we look at the horrible fruits of the disintegration of biblical norms in the church and in society we long that you will restore the beauty of your own order in the church and even in the world hear then our cry and bless us in our meditation upon these things we ask in Jesus name

57:50 amen