Deacons Part 2 – The husband of one wife boondoggle

When I officed in the Baptist associational office while working for Baptist General Convention of Texas, I often saw the Director of Missions studying his Bible.  He always kept the Bible on his desk and many times I would see him pouring over its words.

One time he told us of something he had just found in the Bible.  He had read a scripture and found a new truth with that passage.  My boss used to do the same thing.  Other pastors will tell you that the Bible never gets old for them, that they are always learning new things.

 But there are some passages that we refuse to find new or the real meaning.

1 Timothy 3 we find the husband of one wife passage.  This passage has harmed more women than any other passage in the Bible.   This is the one that has been used to keep women from serving as deacons and pastors and continues to do so.

1 Timothy 3 is not about being male.  It is about these two things:

  1.  Christian faith and morality in the person chosen as deacon (v 8-10)
  2. Compassion – do not burden down a man who has many wives and much responsibility already because he must be able to take care of his own family’s needs. 

Doesn’t that make more sense?  Isn’t that what the Jesus is about?  Love and compassion.

  • Why would Paul say that only men could be pastors and deacons when he obviously had many women leaders, (deacons) in the early church?
  •  Why would Paul say that only men could be deacons and pastors when Jesus Himself never used gender as a requirement for anything.
  •  Why would Paul say that only men could be deacons and pastors when Paul himself constantly told Christians that they were different, and that they were one – not separated into classifications such as Jew, Greek, slave or free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Gal 3:28)
  •  “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal 3:29)  Was the Apostle Paul only talking to the men here, or is this a promise that is also for women?

The Apostle Paul says “I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar foundation of the truth.”  1 Timothy 3:15. 

 Where does being a MALE fit into the instructions?

Advertisements

About bwebaptistwomenforequality

Shirley Taylor writes with humor and common sense, challenging the church body to reclaim equality for Christian women.
This entry was posted in Deacons, Scriptures explained and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Deacons Part 2 – The husband of one wife boondoggle

  1. Mabel Yin says:

    The same bible passages also say that the deacons/elders’ children must be well behaved. First of all, it means all deacons/elders must have > 1 child. 2ndly, all their children must be christians and well behaved. No rebels, no bad kids. I never heard that a deacon/elder will be stripped of his title if one of his children is unruly. Only 1 thing matters: males are chosen by God to be leaders and females are chosen to submit, and somehow they are equal. This teaching is sick. Like you said, the focus of the passage is not on maleness, but morality. They completely twist it to suit their male egos. Unfortunately, too many women take the same position.
    Think: if a white man says to a black man, “Only white men can be leaders, all black men are created to submit to white men. But this does not mean you and I are unequal, we just have unequal roles.” Would that fly? I hope more of them will read their bible and see new light. But first they must remove their blinders.

    Like

  2. Charis says:

    “Let the deacons be the husband of one wife” 1 Tim 3:12

    ONE exception and we err to make a rule that “husband of one wife” is a restriction upon females.
    Phoebe provides the exception.
    Quoting the old Young’s Literal Translation because I think it conveys respect for Phoebe’s church leadership more than other translations:

    “And I commend you to Phebe our sister — being a ministrant [DEACON] of the assembly that [is] in Cenchrea – that ye may receive her in the Lord, as doth become saints, and may assist her in whatever matter she may have need of you — for she also became a leader of many, and of myself.” Romans 16:1-2 YLT

    quoting Katharine Bushnell: For instance, the word for “minister, deacon,” diakonos, is used, properly, of a helper of any sort who is not a slave. It occurs 30 times in the N. T., and is almost always rendered “minister.” It is translated “servant” only 7 times and “deacon” 3 times, and “minister” 20 times. We will notice only those instances in which it may, or certainly does, refer to an ecclesiastical office, Romans 15:8; 1 Cornthians 3:5; 2 Corinthians 3:6; 6:4; 11:23; Ephesians 3:7; 6:21; Colossians 1:7, 23, 25; 4:7; 1 Thessalonians 3:2; 1 Timothy 4:6 (rendered “minister”). And Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:8, 12 (“deacon”). But in Romans 16:1, where the Apostle Paul says: “I commend unto you Phoebe our sister, who is diakonos of the church which is at Cenchrea,” referring, beyond all possibility of a doubt, to her status in the church, the A. V. translates “servant” -Bushnell

    Like

  3. A. Amos Love says:

    Shirly

    You write…
    “1 Timothy 3 we find the husband of one wife passage. This passage has *harmed more women* than any other passage in the Bible. This is the one that has been used *to keep women from serving* as deacons and pastors and continues to do so.”

    IMO – “This passage” has protected women. 😉

    Bear with me on this explanation. I appreciate the battle you’ve taken on.

    And – IMO – “This Passage” cannot keep women “from serving.”
    And cannot keep women “from feeding,” “shepherding,” God’s Sheep.

    Of course you have this opportunity to “serve” and “feed” without any
    worldly recognition, without a salary, and without a “Title.”

    Kinda like Jesus – Who humbled Himself, made Himself of NO reputation,
    and took on the form of a servant. Phil 2:7-8.

    In Mat 23:10, Jesus asks “His Disciples” NOT to be called Master/Leader.
    For you have “ONE” Master/Leader – the Christ.

    In Ezekiel 14:1-11, we are warned about “Idols” of the heart.
    And God now speaks to us according to those “Idols.”

    In my experience with having been in leadership…
    “Titles” become “Idols”
    “Pastors” become “Masters”

    So, IMO, “This passage” has protected women from these ”Titles”and “Idols”.;-)

    In Mark 10:42-43, Jesus asks “His Disciples” NOT to “Exercise Authority.”
    and those who will be great shall be your “diakonos.” Servant.

    In 1 Pet 5:3, elders, older, more mature, are taught…
    Neither as being *lords over* God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.

    Once again – In my experience with having been in leadership…
    Everyone who assumes the “Title” and “Position” of “Pastor/Leader/Deacon,”

    No matter how loving… eventually…
    No matter how humble… eventually…
    No matter how much a servant… eventually…

    Will “exercise authority” and “lord it over” God’s sheep. (Guilty as charged.)
    That’s always the beginning of “Spiritual Abuse.” 😦

    Pastor/Leaders = Exercise Authority = lord it over = abuse = always 😦

    So, IMO, “This passage” has protected women from “Execising authority” and
    “Lording it over” God’s heritage.

    Didn’t you ever wonder why NOT one person, in the NT,
    has the “Title” and “Position” of “Pastor/Leader?”

    Jesus… The only Shepherd and Bishop of my soul…

    Like

    • You make some good points. But it has harmed women in more ways than just denying them the office of deacon. It has perpetuated the damaging myth that women can not do these things – and then we add on this list all the other things that women cannot do. If this were done away with, then there would be more acceptance of women in ministry and other leadership positions. (even in the NT they apparently had leadership positions).

      Like

  4. A. Amos Love says:

    Shirly

    I guess my point is….

    Are you looking for recognition, acceptance, from “mere fallible humans?”

    Only Jesus can say – Well done thou good and faithful servant. 🙂

    Like

    • Not for recognition of service done. Because as you said, only Jesus can give us that kind of recognition. What we are looking for is recognition that the female component of human creatures are as complete as the male human creatures.

      Like

  5. A. Amos Love says:

    Shirley

    You question todays understanding of 1 Tim 3.
    “The husband of one wife boondoggle.”

    Let’s say you are correct about this one qualification. What about the others???
    Why did Paul give qualifications if not important?
    And very tough qualifications. Yes? 😉

    Do you know even one women who can meet “ALL” the qualifications? 😉

    IMO – “This Passage” protects women from assuming a position
    they do not, and cannot qualify for.

    The Bible talks about “elders/overseers” and **qualifications** for “overseers.”
    You can’t have one with out the other – Can you? 😉

    How many congregations? How many believers? How many “Pastors?”
    Take Paul’s/God’s qualifications for “Elder/Overseer” seriously today?

    Look at just the first one.
    1 Tim 3:2 – An “Elder/Overseer“ **must be** blameless…

    That “must be” is the same Greek word as
    …You “must be” born again. John 3:7 KJV.
    Seems to be a small word but very important.

    It’s Strongs #1163, die. – It is necessary (as binding).
    Thayers – necessity established by the counsel and decree of God.

    An “Elder/Overseer“ **must be** – Hmmm? Very important or…?

    **Blameless** How important is this word?

    Webster’s – Without fault; innocent; guiltless; not meriting censure.
    Synonyms – faultless, guiltless, innocent, irreproachable, spotless, unblemished.
    Computer – Thayers – Blameless – that cannot be reprehended,
    (cannot be, rebukable, reprovable, cannot find fault)
    not open to censure, irreproachable.

    Strongs #423 – anepileptos – inculpable, blameless, unrebukeable.

    How many women, who honestly examine themselves,
    seriously considering these qualifications,
    can see themselves as **blameless,** without fault,
    and thus qualify to be an “Elder/Overseer?” A “Pastor/Reverend?”

    And if you can see yourself as **blameless;**
    Is that pride? And no longer without fault?

    The Bible talks about “Elders/Overseers.“
    And **qualifications** for “Elders/Overseers.“
    Can’t have one without the other – Can you? 🙂

    And this is only one of many “very tough qualifications.” Yes? 😉

    IMO – This is one of the reasons “**Today’s” “Pastor/Leader”
    suffers so much from “Burnout,” Depression,” “Addictions.”

    When you believe the lie, you start to die…

    They know they can’t live up to this “Law,” this list of “Overseer” qualifications.
    They try, they pray, they fast, they preach against it, But they fall short.
    Their kids fall short. The guilt… shame… no one to talk to… the heart hardens…

    When you live the lie, you slowly die… day by day…

    When you realise you don’t qualify, remove yourself, and the healing begins. 🙂

    T.R.U.S.T. – True Rest Under Salvations Tests 😉

    Like

    • I am not sure I followed all of that. But this is my answer about women meeting all the qualifications. Neither women nor men will be as good as they should be. All will fall down on any one of these at times. I will expect men and women to do the best they can to live as Christians and servants in the church. Remember what Jesus said “My yoke is easy and my burden is light.” Jesus is saying that he is not making a bunch of laws and by-laws and burdensome liabilities to people. Certainly he is not giving one gender a better route of access to Him than he is giving the other one.

      Like

  6. Kristen says:

    How very kind of the men to “protect” us in this manner, by taking all the burden of this power to themselves! Yech. I get the point you’re trying to make, A. Amos– that really, none of us should desire to be an “overseer” and none of us, ultimately, is qualified– but the fact remains that there were overseers at the time Paul wrote to Timothy, and that “husband of one wife” was a gender-inclusive masculine term, which is completely forgotten today. Paul didn’t say, “no one is to be an overseer.” He said, “overseers are to be like this” (as far as is possible for a human being).

    The imperialistic Europeans once had a belief they called “the white man’s burden.” They said that leadership over the “inferior” races was a burden that the white man had been called to bear, freeing the ruled-over races of the difficulties of leadership and authority. How very noble of those Europeans! (Yech again.)

    This idea that leadership is a heavy burden that we women are being spared, is like that “white man’s burden” doctrine. The nobility of it makes us poor women gag.

    Like

  7. Mabel Yin says:

    Amos: by your reasoning, you should advocate that no male should be elders, pastors, etc. since no males are “blameless”. When you single out women to be disqualified and then insist that you are qualified to be “leader”, aren’t you guilty of gender bias? When you think of women, do you automatically think of someone that needs protection? They are weaker, less capable, and when they are called to lead (women are called to lead same as men are called to lead), they are guilty of pride? Have you ever told the male gender that they should NOT be pastors, elders, etc.? If you have not, why not? according to your own logic, leadership eventually leads to sin. Would you campaign to remove all men from leadership titles? I agree that we should work without titles, 100%. No-one should serve just to get recognition, but as long as we have this system, and women are shut out from the system, it is wrong on the part of men who shut them out, worse when they pretend to be benevolent while doing so. Let me ask you, what specific functions that a pastor/elder perform should be sinful for women to perform? explaining the word of God? discipling new believers? compassion ministry? visitation? evangelism? vision casting? organizing events big and small? which of these functions should be off limit to women? If men function in these ministries with title, and women function in these ministries w/out titles, it is a titles game, pure and simple. Good news: most churches do value women’s in-put. Bad news: they play the titles game. Read the story of Debra, the Judge. GOD CALLED HER TO BE THE NATION’S LEADER. Go must have made a mistake.

    Like

    • A. Amos Love says:

      Mabel Yin

      You write…
      “Amos: by your reasoning, you should advocate that no male should be elders, pastors, etc. since no males are “blameless”. “

      Yes Mabel, that’s correct – Exactly – Bingo – you hit the nail on the head. 🙂

      BUT, it’s not my reasoning. It’s the qualifications that Paul gave. Yes? 😉

      You write…
      “Have you ever told the male gender that they should NOT be pastors, elders, etc.? If you have not, why not? according to your own logic, leadership eventually leads to sin.”

      Yes I tell the male gender all the time. If you don’t meet the qualifications,
      remove yourself, and be an examle to the flock.

      And it’s not my “logic.” It’s my experience… with Pastors/Leaders
      and having been in leadership… Those who assume these “titles” and “Position”
      will eventually “Exercise Authority” and “lord it over” God’s people.

      Like

  8. A. Amos Love says:

    Kristin

    You write…
    “Paul didn’t say, “no one is to be an overseer.” He said, “overseers are to be like this” (as far as is possible for a human being).”

    NO he didn’t – Paul said – An overseer *must be* Blameless.

    If it’s not *must be* blameless – which other qualifications can we “overlook?”

    Didn’t Paul also leave us a way out “if” we can’t find someone who qualifies.

    In Titus 1:5, Paul tells Titus, to ordain elders in every city.

    But in verse 6 Paul leaves a way out (?) saying,

    6 – “If” any “be blameless.”

    This is a very large, little, word: “IF.”
    This “IF” is found many times in scripture. Yes?

    In verse 7 he explains why he leaves an opening.

    7 – For a bishop “must be blameless.”

    And I just never met one “leader/pastor/elder/overseer,” male or female,
    as nice and as humble as one might be, no matter how much a “servant”
    who could live up to that one qualification, “Must Be” blameless…
    Never mind all the other qualifications.

    Paul didn’t say “they” can grow into being blameless/above reproach.
    To be ordained bishop/overseer “they” must “be” blameless/above reproach.

    Titus 1:6 **If** any be blameless…
    Titus 1:7 For a bishop *must be* blameless…

    Who do you know who is “ blameless/above reproach,” without fault?

    I came pretty close for awhile. Being above reproach and humble at the same time.
    I came so close “my elders” even gave me a medal for being humble.

    Then, only one week later, they took it away from me when I wore it. 😉

    NO – IMO – If someone “thinks” of themself as “blameless/above reproach”
    they are no longer humble but prideful and thus disqualify themselves.

    Only God, and sometimes me, know the hidden motives of my heart.

    Only God, and sometimes me, know “the idols” of my heart. Ezek 14:1-7

    Why isn’t “Servant of Christ” good enough? 🙂

    Like

  9. Mabel Yin says:

    Amos Love: I don’t think anyone is here to argue FOR a title. Our point is: men and women should be able to serve as God gifted them. No-one should be treated unequally on account of their gender. Afterall, God made men and women In His Image. GOd is a spirit, and is not ontologically male, like some believe. Many never look at the bible’s requirement on anything except its mis-interpreted prohibition on women’s service (based on the English translation of it). If a man serves, he is an elder, a deacon, a pastor, etc. If a woman serves, she is, well, she just serves. I hope you can allow both men and women to be your idea of “Servants of God”.
    Since you are earnest about humility, I think you will be open minded to learn. This article may be a good starting point.
    http://www.abc-dakotas.org/pdf/Biblical%20Basis%20For%20Equal%20Partnership.pdf

    Like

  10. Kristen says:

    Amos, I don’t think “blameless” means what you think it means, or Paul would have just stopped there. I don’t have time to look up the word in a Greek lexicon right now, but it definitely needs to be done. If Paul had meant, “no one should aspire to be a leader/elder,” he would have said so.]

    That said, I don’t think Paul did advocate the kind of Christian leadership we have today, with one person claiming to represent Christ (as in those branches with priests), or one or two leaders standing up front and directing the church service. Nor do I agree with the clergy-laity dichotomy.

    But — insofar as leadership and titles are a thing men claim, and rebuke women for “ambition” or whatever if they desire them– phooey. Jesus said those at the best places at the table were to let go of them, not hold them against all comers and rebuke those in the lower seats for “ambition” or “pride”!

    Like

  11. Mabel Yin says:

    Amos Love: I agree with Kristen. “Blameless” is not what you define it to be. I am sure Paul didn’t have perfection in mind, or he should not even mention it since no-one is God. Only God is sinless. DO you believe that women can serve in ALL ministries?
    I will repeat again a link here for you:
    http://www.abc-dakotas.org/pdf/Biblical%20Basis%20For%20Equal%20Partnership.pdf

    Like

  12. A. Amos Love says:

    Kristin – Mabel

    Yes – I believe women are capable to serve in all area’s. 😉

    IMO – Our differences arise because I’m speaking about the Church of God
    Where Jesus is the only head of the body, (the ekklesia, the calledout one’s)

    And your frame of reference seems to be the church of man.
    The 501 (c) 3, non-profit, tax deductible, Religious Corporation.
    Which has “Titles” and “Positions” NOT found in the Bible. 🙂

    And you don’t think Paul really meant *must be* “Blameless.”

    Well – Here are two more qualifications for elder/overseer
    that seem tougher then “must be” blameless. 🙂

    And God asks us to do many things that we can’t do.
    Qualifying for elder/overseer is only one. 😉 Next post.

    Why would someone want a position they don’t qualify for? Hmmm?

    Titus 1:6-8
    **If any be blameless,** the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For **a bishop “must be” blameless,** as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, *just,* ** holy,** temperate;

    Just
    Strongs #1342 dikaios — KJV – righteous 41, just 33, right 5, meet 2; 81
    1 – Innocent, holy (absolutely or relatively):– just, meet, right(-eous).

    Thayers –
    1) righteous, observing divine laws, keeping the commands of God
    2) innocent, faultless, guiltless
    3) used of him whose way of thinking, feeling, and acting is wholly conformed
    to the will of God, and who therefore needs no rectification in the heart or life.

    Holy
    Strongs #3741 hosios {KJV – holy 4, Holy One 2, mercies 1, shall be 1; 8
    1 – intrinsic or divine character, hallowed (pious, sacred, sure):– holy.

    Thayers
    1) undefiled by sin, free from wickedness,
    religiously observing every moral obligation, pure holy, pious.

    “Must be” blameless, just and holy are three very tough qualifications. Yes? 😉

    If a leader, an “elder/overeer,” doesn’t meet “ALL” the qualifications…
    Will they remove themselves and become a good example to the flock? 😉

    If they don’t remove themselves…
    Now what do we do? 😦

    Jesus… I’ve returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of my soul… 🙂

    Like

  13. A. Amos Love says:

    Shirly – Kristin – Mabel

    Here’s a maybe. What if Paul’s tough qualifications *is a test8 of someone’s “integrity?”

    It seems God has NO problem testing and proving His children. Yes? 😉
    Asking them to do things that they can’t fulfill.
    God’s ways are NOT our ways, are they?

    1 – We have the Ten Commandments.

    How well did the Israelites do with obeying just Ten?
    How are you doing with the Ten?

    I don’t seem to be able to “fulfill those requirements.”

    2 – Then there’s The Greatest Commandment in the NT.

    How are you doing with loving God with all your heart, soul and mind?
    How are you doing with loving your neighbor?
    How are you doing with loving yourself?

    I don’t seem to be able to “fulfill those requirements.”

    3 – Jesus said “fear not”and “worry not.”

    I don’t seem to be able to “fulfill those requirements.”
    How’s that been working for you?

    4 – How about Pro 3:5-7 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In “ALL” thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.

    Do you always “Trust in the Lord?”
    Do you acknowledge Jesus in “ALL” your ways?
    Have you “departed from evil?”
    I don’t seem to be able to “fulfill those requirements.”
    How’s that been working for you?

    5 – How about – Pray without ceasing? 1The 5:17

    Nope… not this one either…

    6 – How about – Go… make disciples…
    How many “Disciples of Christ” have you made? Hmmm?
    Not converts, or confessions of faith, or repenters of sin,
    Not someone who joined “your church,” or became “your disciple.”
    BUT, a living, breathing, “Disciple of Christ.”

    I haven’t been able to make any **True** “Disciples of Christ.”
    How about you? How are you with “fulfilling this command?”

    7 – Then we have Luke 6:27, But I say unto you which hear,
    **Love your enemies,** do good to them which hate you.

    This one is certainly a challenge. I don’t do so good with this one.
    How about you? How are you with “fulfilling this command?”

    And the list goes on, and on, and…

    So one possibility for Paul’s “Qualifications” is; **it’s a test** of someone’s “Integrity.”
    If they don’t meet the “Qualifications” will they humble themselves? Will they admit they don’t meet the “Qualifications?” and will they remove themself from the “Position?”

    And realize the highest calling is to be a “Servant of Christ?”

    Like

    • I think you are reading far too much into it. Paul was writing down his thoughts on what the ideal candidate for a deacon would be. We all should strive for those things whether we are a deacon or a pew sitter. I don’t think there are any hidden meanings, or tests, or anything like that. We make the Bible far too complicated with all our imaginations. The Bible was written for and to simple folk and new in Christ folks.

      Like

  14. Lydia says:

    I tend to agree with Amos about blameless.. One reason is that Timothy should have known what the qualifications were since he traveled with Pau and planted churches. If elders were appt in every church as a position then he would not have needed to write Timothy with qualifications. Tim would have known them quite well.

    Blameless does not mean sinless. Elders are people who have obviously gone through sanctification. They are spiritual servants.They would be obvious. But there were other considerations even for those who were Born Again that could cause problems in the Body. More than one wife…unruly children of several wives, etc. So some might be spiritually qualified but their pre Christian baggage would make it harder for them.

    Paul actually implies he, himself, as blameless in Acts 20. He had NO blood on his hands because he told them the full gospel and what he sufferred for the Gospel. Then he goes on to say that wolves FROM AMONG THOSE THE ELDERS HE WAS ADDRESSING would rise up in the Body.

    This is serious stuff. And we see the outcome today because we do not understand what it means to be Born Again…New Creatures. Blameless…not sinless. When we are being sanctified and are truly saved we are not blamed for our past sins and we are growing in Holiness which means we want to sin less and less. We are not sinless just blameless. We live for Christ.

    It is not to desire leadership…but to die to self for Christ and as someone more spiritually mature discipling others. 1 Tim 2 says “If anyone” and the Greek is “tis” which means anyone…both genders included.

    Like

  15. Lydia says:

    Plhil 2: We are told to be blameless so it cannot mean to be sinless

    Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.
    14 Do all things without complaining and disputing, 15 that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, 16 holding fast the word of life, so that I may rejoice in the day of Christ that I have not run in vain or labored in vain.

    But Amos is right. In our present institutionalized churches, where we love our systems, few are blameless.

    Like

  16. A. Amos Love says:

    Lydia

    Much agreement when you write… “In our present institutionalized churches,
    where we love our systems, few are blameless.” 😦

    Where I live in “The body of Christ” this gender issue – “Comp. or Egal”- does NOT exist. Roles do not exist. “Disciples of Christ” DO NOT exercise, or assume authority over another “Disciple of Christ.”(Mark 10:42) In Christ we are “ONE.” “The Church” is “the body” of Christ. NOT a building, an organization, an institution or a corporation. Keeping to “The Traditions of men” is not the point. Who passes the collection plate? Who preaches from the pulpit? Who can be a leader? 😦

    Where I live in “The body of Christ” it’s about – Who knows Jesus? Who is Hearing “His Voice?” Who has a living Christ within? Who has the Spirit of God dwelling in them? Who has been taught by God? Who has a revelation from God? Who is exhibiting “the Fruit of the Spirit?” Who is moving in the “Gifts of the Spirit?” 😉

    This is what’s important. ALL can “hear from God.” ALL can “teach.”
    ALL can, and are expected to, participate. Male and female are “ONE ” in Christ.

    1Cor 14:26
    How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, **every one of you**
    hath a psalm, **hath a doctrine,** hath a tongue, **hath a revelation,**
    hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

    It’s NOT about “Who” does the teaching,
    But, “Who” has a revelation from God, male or female.

    It’s about recognizing and discerning the Spirit that dwells within the person.
    The Spirit of God? Or, the Spirit of the world? Or, …. 1 Cor 2:12

    1Cor 3:16
    … ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

    If it’s the same “Spirit of God” dwelling in ALL – does gender matter? 😉

    In, Jesus, He is the head of the body, (the ekklesia, the called out ones)
    “the Church.” We are ALL ”ONE” body. We are ALL “ONE” in Christ.

    Gal 3:28
    There is neither Jew nor Greek,
    there is neither bond nor free,
    there is neither male nor female:
    for ye are all “ONE” in Christ Jesus.

    Does this verse say, Male and Female are equal?
    Or, Does this verse say, – In Christ **Male and Female do not exist?**

    for ye are all “ONE” in Christ Jesus.
    there is neither Complementarinism nor Egalitarianism,
    there is neither Calvinism nor Arminianism,
    there is neither Catholic nor Protestant,
    there is neither leaders nor followers,
    there is neither clergy nor laity,
    there is neither shepherds nor sheep,
    and the list goes on… This stuff does NOT exist in Christ.

    Jesus said, “All” are taught by God.

    John 6:45
    It is written in the prophets, And they shall be “ALL” taught of God.

    I’m Blest… Because I’ve left the Institutional church where man is in control.

    And… I’ve returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of my soul… Jesus

    Like

  17. Michelle says:

    A. Amos Love, I continue to fight for the recognition of women and men as equally human, and to fight the squelching of the expression of the Holy Spirit when it resides in female bodies.
    At the same time, during my efforts, I have come to recognize that priests/pastors/ministers have power over me only within a human-made *organization* (should I choose to recognize it, which typically I do not). There is not such a thing as a human being having authority over me in a spiritual sense.

    Like

  18. A. Amos Love says:

    Michelle

    You write… “There is not such a thing as a human being having authority over me in a spiritual sense.” Yes – I have come to recognize that also. IMO – Jesus is the only authority over me. 😉

    ALL humans, who taught they were “God Ordained Authority,” have disappointed and fallen short. The benefit of the “Spiritual Abuse” was – These self-proclaimed authorities drove me to Jesus. 🙂

    I’m also in agreement when you write… “and to fight the squelching of the expression of the Holy Spirit when it resides in female bodies.”

    I would just add… And the squelching of the expression of the Holy Spirit when it resides in “male” bodies.”

    I have seen much squelching of the Holy Spirit, both male and female
    by those who seek after – power – profit – prestige – honor – glory – recognition.
    ALL those things that come with today’s “Titles” and “Positions.”
    ALL those things that are highly esteemed among men…BUT…
    are an abomination in the sight of God.

    Be blessed in your search for truth… Jesus…

    Like

  19. Michelle says:

    Agreed about the Holy Spirit in male bodies.

    Thank you.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s