Meeting with my Pastors I

Posting this as an update to last weeks issues I was having with the associate pastor of the church that I attend.

Friday, Sept 23
Thinking I was going to be meeting with both the head pastor and associate pastor I spoke with my wife on my lunch break, letting her know what was going on and why. This was at the recommendation of another blogger whom I consulted with, so as to avoid her being able to say that I “sprang things on her” later. She was somewhat receptive, but politely informed me she would be continuing on at the church if I decided that our family would not longer attend. I politely informed her that there would be consequences for her disobedience and disrespect if she chose to go that route. Overall no one got angry, which I was grateful for. I tried to make it clear to her that this course of action (speaking with the pastors about the issue) was not for any other reason to ensure that my family was receiving sound teaching, and that I was not going in trying to prove a point, but in hopes that the truth of scripture would be brought forth in all of us.

Unfortunately the head pastor was unavailable that evening and we had to reschedule for the next day, which again had to be rescheduled because of his work schedule.

I finally met with them both last night (Monday, Sept 26th). Now let me start off by saying that the entire meeting ended with all three of us agreeing to continue in some prayer for understanding, but overall it was pretty much what you would expect to come out of a discussion regarding scripture, with everyone trying to talk over everyone else. I did my best to try and give my point and allow the others to talk, but the associate pastor kept trying to speak over me AND the head pastor, and at one point things kind of devolved (which you will see later).

I don’t quite know what format to use while writing all this out, so as to keep it from becoming a giant mess, so I will try to stick to the three main points of contention I brought before them. 1) Women being silent in the church, 2)Women teaching in the church and 3)Wives submission to her husband:


I started off by informing both pastors that the message delivered the previous two Sundays we were in attendance were not only scripturally unsound but quite possibly dangerous, in that the associate pastor was giving the ladies of the church a foothold in which to be rebellious and feel justified. I indicated that I felt that he was wrong for giving the women a platform in which to teach the rest of the congregation, but that through misunderstanding, none of the ladies really “taught” anything, but shared both a scripture and what that particular scripture meant to them or how it applied to their lives at the moment.

I was able to confirm that this whole mess started after my wife had shared with the associate pastors wife the previous issue she and I had in which I told her I did not want her meeting with a counselor from our doctors office who’s qualifications include being “a licensed minister with a bachelors in psychology”. Seeing these as red flags I suggested she meet with some of the older ladies of the church to help her with her issues. My concern with the pastor and his wife was that neither one of them suggested that my wife be obedient to her husband, but rather they said they would pray that we would “reach an understanding” over the matter. Also the associate pastor seemed to indicate that both he and his wife thought there was a discrepancy in “where we both were spiritually” (referring to my wife and I). To me this was equipping her for rebellion.


Regarding women being silent in the church.

In all honesty this was not one of my points of contention, but I will mention it because both the head pastor (whom I will refer to as L) and the associate pastor (whom I will refer to as B) kept coming back to this.

I was up front in telling both B and L that I had no problem with them allowing the ladies of the church a time to come up and share scripture with the congregation. The women were under the authority of B and were not given authority themselves. As to whether or not the ladies should be silent at all times I indicated that it wasn’t my church and if the pastors allowed the ladies to talk before and after service that was there call, as we all were silent during the lesson anyhow. I indicated that I didn’t fully know what capacity “let your women keep silent” entailed, whether it mean they aren’t allowed to speak at all within the church walls or if it was referencing a different capacity such as teaching. I indicated I would continue in prayer for understanding regarding these verses, but as the pastors of the church they would be accountable for that, and not me.

B argued that the verses calling for the women to be silent needed to be considered for their cultural relevance and that the women in the church of Corinth had a problem with shouting questions across the room to their husbands (as the men and women sat on separate sides of the church). Because of this Paul, in his dealing with the other issues present in the church of Corinth, also laid down some rules to keep the women from disrupting the teaching. Therefore the instruction for women to keep silent was only directed toward the THAT church, and not all churches.

(Now, I have never cared much for this defense as it requires us to believe that women are so dense and vapid that, in the middle of an organized lesson they would stand up and shout questions across a room to their husbands. It’s difficult to believe it would happen in our modern age, much less in an age when people believe women were treated as second class citizens and oppressed by misogynistic men. Not only that, but if we discount something because of its ‘cultural relevance’ we cant discount ANYTHING because of cultural relevance)

He also argued that if we wanted to forget about the cultural aspect of the verses then I was already in direct violation for shaving my beard and sitting next to my wife in the church instead of her being on the other side of the room, and also kept telling me that if I wanted to hold the women to being silent in the church then I was in direct violation of the scripture by sitting on the stage and performing worship with my wife. This made no sense as the prohibitions and scripture had nothing to do with the old Testament law but with the authority structure of a functioning church.

Take note that this was AFTER I had already indicated that I had no issue with the women talking in the church, sharing in the church or otherwise not being silent except during the actual service, in which all were silent.

Again, note that throughout our entire conversation both B and L continued to return to the point of women being silent in the church AFTER I had already ceded the point.

Regarding women teaching in the church

My argument was that the bible expressly prohibits women from being given the authoritative position of teacher (preacher, pastor, etc.) even temporarily, as, by its very nature, being a teacher is a position of authority. For example, in the past both pastors have allowed the wife of another pastor to come up and teach the congregation. I argued that this was not allowed within the structure of the church, but may be permissible outside of the church, such as at a church function or at a home bible study, etc. The bible not only prohibits this but also gives the reasoning why this prohibition is in place:

1 Timothy 2:
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

The reasoning here is twofold. First its order of creation. I like the way my study bible puts it in that it is very similar to the concept of the first born. The first born son receives more esteem than his siblings, not because he is better or superior, but because of his birthright. Secondly its because the woman (Eve) was deceived and is under the authority of man.

This is within the order and structure of the church (ie: the gathering of the congregation) and not at other functions or gatherings of believers. The bible indicates that women and daughters will prophecy and at least one instance indicates a man with several daughters, all of whom prophesied (Acts 21:8-9), but note that it says they were at the mans house, and not in the church.

I also indicated that I was unsure as to whether or not the scripture strictly prohibited women from teaching others scripture outside of the church, as it indicates “I do not permit a woman to teach” and certain things lead me to believe that this could be a restriction on women teaching scripture at all, but I am still in prayer on that. I noted that the instructions for older women to teach the younger women in Titus do not convey anything that appears to require scripture be taught in the capacity of a pastor to his congregation

Titus 2:
the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things—
that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.

None of these items (love your husband, love your children, be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to your husband) seemingly require anything beyond the sharing of scripture, not necessarily the teaching of scripture in the way a pastor would teach scripture (I may not be making myself clear here, so I may revisit this and see if I can make more sense).

B’s argument is that we should be willing to hear the word of God preached regardless of who is speaking, and that the Pharisees are an example of those who didn’t listen to the word of God (Jesus) because they concentrated on WHO was speaking and not what was being said. He asked me if I thought that the woman they allow to teach was filled with the Holy Spirit during her lesson and, if she was in direct violation of God and being disobedient, if she was not allowed to be a teacher, how could that be. If the God will not bless that which is sin then how can she be filled with the spirit if she is in sin?  He indicated that not being able to receive teaching from a woman in the church was a sign of spiritual immaturity. He also indicated that the one teaching was under the authority of the pastor and didn’t, technically, have authority over the church or the men.

He also kept talking about how Jesus, upon his resurrection, appeared to Mary first, and that if she had “kept silent” as instructed then no one would have been told about His return. I don’t quite understand what the point of that was other than, as I said, he kept returning to the point of women being silent in the church.

The head pastor, L, asked me several times if I knew how many women pastors were out there, to which I replied “Many, but that doesn’t make it right”. He also indicated that his mother in law was a pastor and proceeded to tell me that his wife had often blessed him with “teachings” by sharing scripture with him and encouraging him with the word, which is not in the context of what my contention was. He argued that the Word indicates that the spirit was poured out on ALL flesh, and not just men. Women as well as men could receive gifts of the spirit, which included teaching, to which I agreed, but referred again back to the proper use and context of the spiritual gifts we have been given.

Regarding a wife’s submission to her husband

Now this was really my biggest issue with what B had said during his teaching the week before ‘ladies night’. During his message he said of men not willing to accept wisdom or teaching from women, “don’t be surprised when your wife becomes more spiritually mature than you do, and don’t be surprised when she does if she doesn’t submit”. I have made it fairly clear on my blog that my wife and I are having issues with her submitting as the bible calls wives to submit (“in everything”). These words from B, specifically, I took as being dangerous for the congregation as it easily gives women ammunition to be rebellious and claim they are justified because their husbands aren’t “spiritually mature enough”. Not only that but he specifically pinpointed and denigrated men who fail to listen to their wives as being in danger of spiritual death rather than just lacking wisdom. Personally I think a man would be wise to get his wife’s opinion in some cases, but not all, as women don’t always make much sense, but that is up to the man to know his wife and understand where her input my be useful. At worst he might be lacking wisdom not to get her insight, but there is nothing that indicates he SHOULD be consulting his wife, and certainly nothing that puts his spirit or salvation in jeopardy if he doesn’t.

My argument was that there are no qualifiers in the bible for a woman’s submission towards her husband, nor are there any qualifiers for a mans love of his wife. Both are commanded to do so by God. Who, in B’s world, would be the arbiter of who was the one more spiritually mature in a marriage? A pastor? A deacon? A panel of judges? No, the arbiter is the Bible itself, and the bible says there are no qualifiers. In fact it states that EVEN IF THE HUSBAND IS NOT A BELIEVER, a wife who is a believer should submit to his authority in EVERYTHING in silence. Why? Because the bible says that her silent submission is her witness to her unsaved husband!

B’s argument was that if men don’t step up to be the spiritual leader in their households then the women have every right to step up instead. If she has to take it upon herself to teach her kids the bible and about Jesus then she should. However, he said that his words about women not submitting was only in the spiritual sense, and not in the physical. Her husband is still “head of the household” and she must submit to him in physical things, but if he has no spiritual life how can she submit to him spiritually?

This is where things got heated, as L asked me a question regarding his wife and her ex-husband (I don’t know the situation with that, if he be dead or not, so I wont get into that here). The question was this:

Her  ex-husband did not go to church nor did he want to, but L’s wife at the time took their two boys to church anyhow. So, he told me, she would get up on Sunday morning and tell the boys “get up and get ready to go”, and would then go to her husband and tell HIM “get up  and get ready because you are going to church”. Was she in the wrong for doing what she did?

My answer to him was that she was wrong by taking authority over her husband and demanding he get up and get ready to be taken to church because she inverted the authority structure of her marriage. By issuing her husband a command she was in the wrong. He did not forbid her from taking their sons to church, nor did he forbid her from going herself, but her attitude likely repulsed him and made him RESENT going to church, rather than drawing him toward God. She would have been better of going in silence, as the bible says THAT is her witness toward her unsaved husband, not her vocal demands.

L then proceeded to ask what she should have done if he told HER to stop going to church or taking their sons to which I replied that she should have been obedient and stopped. Though going to church is good, not going does not take her from Gods hand and that she can still maintain her walk with the Lord while being obedient to her husband.

From there things went off the rail as L got mad. He asked me who would be responsible if his wife had backslidden and died, going to hell, to which I replied it would have been her own responsibility, as no one else is responsible for our not backsliding but ourselves. I indicated that far more powerful men than his wife’s ex-husband have threatened believers with death and made open worship and communion with God illegal, yet those, such as Daniel, maintained their faith and were commended for it. From there L shut down and was ready to leave.

Overall their argument was that where the man is deficient the woman has the right and responsibility to lead, but only speaking in the spiritual sense (though the bible makes no determination and says women should submit to their husbands in everything). B asserted that everything in the bible was in reference to the spiritual, not the physical (I believe those were his exact words).

The night ended with them saying that I was concentrating on the word silence, even though I had told them, again, that my issue was not with women being silent in the church, but with women teaching and with their teaching on authority.

I very much took issue with B’s statement that he feels like there was  some type of catalyst that has lead me down a road of thinking women are lower than men or that perhaps I have fallen in with some chauvinists who have swayed my thinking. This despite the fact that I showed them scripture that indicates that God esteems men over women, and the reasons WHY He does so, while still maintaining that we are equal recipients of His grace and His kingdom. Though I did find and have been researching through the manosphere for the past couple of years I have made sure to test everything against scripture, as not even the manosphere supersedes the word of God. The bible along with other supporting evidence, has show that much of what the Christian manosphere says is true, but I wasn’t about to talk red pill stuff with them for fear their heads would explode with anger.

We agreed to continue in prayer and discuss a little more, but overall I think that being out of the discussion has given me plenty of time to think clearly.


When I got home that evening I spoke again with my wife. She asked some questions but overall indicated that she still isn’t on board with my interpretation of the scripture and that she does not and will not believe the same way I do. She thinks women, under the authority of the pastor, can stand before the congregation and teach, which I do not believe is true and is prohibited. I don’t know if I believe women can teach at all, even to other women or children in the same capacity that a pastor teaches, but I am still unsure on that and am in prayer on it. Recent information I have been looking over leaves me on the razor edge of that debate, as I see plenty of reasons why women should NOT teach at all. Unlike some I know I believe science and data affirms Gods creation and design, and data on the actions and mindset of women as a whole make be believe God wanted them nowhere near teaching scripture in the capacity that a pastor does to ANYONE. But, I am not interested in being right, but in adhering to the truth, so I will remain in prayer over that.

There is more that I can speak of and in more detail, but this is the gist of it. If you want to ask any questions about the conversation I will answer them in the comments to the best of my ability, as there was a lot going on and I may not remember everything that was said. I kind of wish I had recorded the whole conversation now so I could reference it later, but the arguments I listed were the ones that stuck out the most.

Until next time, I guess.

Advertisements

Author: SnapperTrx

Just a guy on the internet.

36 thoughts on “Meeting with my Pastors I”

  1. He also kept talking about how Jesus, upon his resurrection, appeared to Mary first, and that if she had “kept silent” as instructed then no one would have been told about His return. I don’t quite understand what the point of that was other than, as I said, he kept returning to the point of women being silent in the church.

    A common “point” of egalitarians but when examined is ignorant. Women are not prohibited from evangelism.

    This does not have to do with Church authority or teaching.

    B’s argument was that if men don’t step up to be the spiritual leader in their households then the women have every right to step up instead. If she has to take it upon herself to teach her kids the bible and about Jesus then she should. However, he said that his words about women not submitting was only in the spiritual sense, and not in the physical. Her husband is still “head of the household” and she must submit to him in physical things, but if he has no spiritual life how can she submit to him spiritually?

    Ugh. 1 Peter 3 specifically tells women what to do when ungodly, and it’s not stuff like this.

    I would’ve kept going back to 1 Peter 3: “So you’re saying you know more than God-inspired Scripture written by Peter, the apostle of Jesus, about how wives should act with ungodly husbands?”

    Basically, they’re arguing a weird form of “progressivism” in the church. We know what the Bible “actually says” now because we are more enlightened than previous generations of Christians. Even the Christians who write the Scriptures and Jesus Himself.

    ——–

    I could go more in depth into a lot of the things they said, but it’s not really worth the time unless you want me to do it.

    All I really got from reading this interaction is that they don’t agree with a plain reading of the Bible and try to twist it as much as possible to allow women to teach and have authority positions AND lead in the home if the husband is not a believer (which is obviously against 1 Peter 3).

    If they think they are spiritually “right” in this situation, it should show from their actions or “fruit.” They should be encouraging wives with unbelieving husbands to show the fruits of the SPIRIT as that is what GODLY LIVING looks like. It’s easy to see that 1 Peter 3 encourages fruit of the Spirit: obedience to authority, chaste and respectful behavior, gentle and quiet spirit. How is fighting and opposing the husband’s leadership in the home at all godly living? All it brings is ungodly conflict which you see above with your wife.

    Overall, they don’t seem to be open to any change at all, and it’s likely that they will continue on the current trajectory. It’s pretty clear from what they have been saying themselves: ‘the spirit has left the church.’ I’d very readily consider leaving at this point.

    1. Well the argument was that the Lord would want a mans wife to witness to him by speaking up, but the scripture clearly states that her witness is through her silence. That, however, doesn’t jive with modern cultural thinking that trains women to be loud and proud and independent. I mean, I would think that, as pastors, they would at minimum cede points that were blatantly clear in the scripture, but B’s argument was that 1 Peter 3 was referring to submission in the spirit, and that a man with no spiritual walk has nothing to submit to, which makes no sense.

      1. @ SnapperTrx

        I mean really it all comes down to this.

        1. Do you Trust the plain reading of Scriptures as a Christian?

        2. Or do you Trust the pastor’s “interpretation” of the Scriptures, which agrees with culture?

        Heck, you don’t even have to use the progressivism and apostle arguments.

        Agreeing with the “culture” on anything as a Christian is bad news. They hate everything God calls blessed. Salt and light are not salt and light intermixed with the culture.

      2. I understand what you are getting at and, yes, I do trust the plain reading of MOST scripture. I mean, some scripture can be open to some interpretation, such as parables or those written in poetic form, but much of it is pretty easy to understand if we don’t muck it up with all kinds of other doctrine or loopholes. I think in my situation its a case of wanting to be sure I am going the right direction, but also willingly taking that leap into a place where I know I will be called a kook, a legalist and someone who is “not in touch with the true spirit of the word of God”. Also, if this is the truth then I MUST teach it to my children or I lead them down a wrong path. I know I SHOULD just walk forward and not look back, but it’s a steep cost. I know the Lord requires it of me, and that this, likely, is the point of no return. I either stick to what the word of God says or not. I pray for the courage to move forward.

        “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!”

  2. L is compromised and you shoved him onto a landmind in his own life you didn’t even know he had.

    B is a young-ish fool.

    They, like all modern “Christians”, have put many things before the Lord. And it’s just showing through.

    I’m honestly don’t have much in the way of suggestions. Other than “for something I’m not even arguing, you seem obsessed with Women being Silent in church. Either you know your wrong on this topic & deflecting, or your projecting about something. You might want to deal with that. As it seems like you’re both hung up on the topic, and it’s not the point of this discussion!”

    1. Yes. I thought it odd that they kept coming back to that point, despite the fact that I told them I didn’t care about that, and that the issue was not really a point of contention for me.

      I had told myself, before arriving, that I would do my best to keep the ‘wives’ to a general meaning of, and I knew that if anyone brought their specific wife into the conversation that it would crush the conversation. I really should have deflected his question into something else instead of answering, but my answer was truthful and in line with scripture, so it sounds like your right.

      I don’t think there is much to suggest, really. I mean, as I said I have had some time to think about those things that kind of threw me for a loop because I was searching for a response and I believe DS is right in that it may just be best to leave.

      I have to admit, though, some of what they said makes me consider my position, but I think its mostly pre-programmed guilt for not making everyone equal and holding a view of scripture that, in our modern culture, just doesn’t line up with cultures beliefs. I need to cut myself off of that, though.

  3. For some reason I can’t reply to the previous comment chain I started.

    Consider this.

    Culture, as it currently stands, is about tearing down men. Fathers are the butt of jokes. Husbands are punching bags.

    If someone was actually “spiritually immature” it would be a good idea to instruct them with kindness, gentleness, and humility. You know, the fruits of the Spirit. Instead of them approaching the situation with grace including the situations of unbelieving husbands, you’re getting it shoved down your throat. 1 Corinthians 8: If someone is really spiritually immature, why are they trying to do things to cause that person to stumble more?

    Bullying someone into having the “right” opinion is a tactic of feminism and the leftists.

    I was able to confirm that this whole mess started after my wife had shared with the associate pastors wife the previous issue she and I had in which I told her I did not want her meeting with a counselor from our doctors office who’s qualifications include being “a licensed minister with a bachelors in psychology”. Seeing these as red flags I suggested she meet with some of the older ladies of the church to help her with her issues. My concern with the pastor and his wife was that neither one of them suggested that my wife be obedient to her husband, but rather they said they would pray that we would “reach an understanding” over the matter. Also the associate pastor seemed to indicate that both he and his wife thought there was a discrepancy in “where we both were spiritually” (referring to my wife and I). To me this was equipping her for rebellion.

    This situation is not really being aimed at lifting women up in the ministry. It’s about YOU. They’re tearing down men under the guise of uplifting women. You even said after he gave the message last Sunday that the pastor texted you “are you alright.”

    I think the agenda is pretty clear. I think it’s pretty obvious that the “fruits” are rotten.

    1. Yeah, it seemed kind of obvious that he was fishing for a response.

      B: Wht the word (asking about someone else doing worship instead of my wife and I, since it was our night.)

      S: Yeah, she’s good with it.. She’s feeling a little sick this week, so it’s actually a good thing.

      B: Man church was really good sunday night I was super encouraged the women did a great job. Hope we can (be) that good.

      B: Hay u ok bro

      S: What do you mean?

      B: U usually hang out and talk with us after church and lately you haven’t been.

      This was after, the previous Sunday, we stuck around for a good 45 minutes talking to everyone about different things, so he either wasn’t paying attention or he was intentionally trying to goad me into a response.

      I mean, to me the fact that they didn’t direct my wife to be obedient is enough to cause me to walk away. Any church that is going to sow discord in a household or put into a wife’s mind that she and her husband have a ‘spiritual discrepancy’ that can only be fixed by her husband giving in to her demands is just wrong. Particularly since these people know what my wife and I have been through the past few years. I just don’t need that in my marriage now or ever. Unfortunately its already there and, as I said, my wife is totally NOT on board with anything I have told her. Well I wont say totally not, I mean, we see eye to eye on a couple of issues, but her beliefs cling to a whole bunch of caveats and “what if’s”.

      Yeah, things are starting to look rotten, and it looks like even if I leave they wont be entirely gone, as I still feel my wife will decide to attend despite my disapproval. I can’t change that, but I am the one who will have to deal with the fallout.

      1. @ Snapper

        I mean, to me the fact that they didn’t direct my wife to be obedient is enough to cause me to walk away.

        Ding ding ding.

        Another way pastors put “qualifications” on submission and lead wives astray.

        Yeah, things are starting to look rotten, and it looks like even if I leave they wont be entirely gone, as I still feel my wife will decide to attend despite my disapproval. I can’t change that, but I am the one who will have to deal with the fallout.

        My prayers brother.

        Keep seeking God in Scripture, prayer, and fasting. If you’re not being filled up with righteousness, it’s easy to become bitter and jaded.

  4. If cultural significance can invalidate a section of the Bible then the entirety of ALL the Epistles should be deleted, not just select portions. None of us are first-century Christians living around the Mediterranean. More than that, if what was wrong then is okay today then the very example of Christ’s own life is unreliable.

    They are secretly arguing that they need not submit to God. In order to justify that without actually announcing they’re bigger than Jesus, they created a proxy claim that wives can dictate terms to their husbands “under certain conditions”. That is what’s going on under the surface. Remember marriage was intended from the beginning to serve as a microcosm of Christ & humanity… this choice of proxy is intentionally symbolic.

    Therefore, for your next meeting don’t focus on the proxy target of female rebellion against husbands. Focus on the pastors’ rebellion against God. Suggested tactic: ask them if they’re Catholic when they try to qualify verses. If they’re Protestants then they believe in the Bible as written, which they obviously don’t since they claim “cultural significance” and such. Catching them on this hypocrisy switches the debate’s focus to the pastors’ misuse of Scripture, plus “so, are you Catholic?” is not an argument they will be expecting.

    (Note, I’m not debating the merits of Prot vs Cat here. I’m saying if a Protestant leader rejects what the Bible says because reasons then he’s not really a Protestant… a useful maneuver in rhetoric.)

    Do not feel conflicted about verbally shivving a Church elder. Most pastors these days treat Christianity with academic detachment; their consciences will sleep until emotions run hot. Besides, you already tried nice, it didn’t work and your point is more important than just you. This is Original Sin! Eve took charge, Adam followed her lead instead of asserting his own. That’s another rhetorical punch.

    “I very much took issue with B’s statement that he feels like there was some type of catalyst that has lead me down a road of thinking women are lower than men or that perhaps I have fallen in with some chauvinists who have swayed my thinking.”

    Strawman argument. He tried to change the discussion to a mythical third party instead of Scripture. Rebut it by literally thumping the Bible. (A good prop to have in your hands.)

    “He also kept talking about how Jesus, upon his resurrection, appeared to Mary first, and that if she had “kept silent” as instructed then no one would have been told about His return. I don’t quite understand what the point of that was other than, as I said, he kept returning to the point of women being silent in the church.”

    Again, strawman. You meant silent as in ‘subject to authority’, he pretended silent as in ‘no talking’. FWIW, nobody believed Mary anyway because women were not considered reliable witnesses in those days.

    They are not debating in good faith.

  5. A few thoughts:

    1. If a layperson who has never gone to seminary knows more about the Bible in its direct reading and from the collective sharing of other men in the Man’s Sphere, what caused these clergymen — who have spent hours learning Hebrew and Greek, and studying the very Scripture we read — to turn into heretics? What are they feeding them in seminaries?

    2. As I have mentioned in response to your comments at Dalrock’s, the pastor said the exact thing when I discussed the very three points you raised in your own discussion, i.e., culture. Again, I cannot fathom how, on God’s good earth, cities (Ephesus, Colossae and Corinth) separated by hundreds of miles share the same culture during those times. Do they study history and culture in seminaries?

    3. I am from Asia, Southeast Asia to be exact. I am attending a baptist church. The pastor graduated from a baptist seminary. Our cultures are different but funny enough both our pastors share the same view about the culture in the Near East during Paul’s time.

    4. I have not returned to any discussions with the pastor since our heated argument. We just either didn’t have the time to meet or we decided to bury it for the time being. I’ve played nice (referencing the comment thread here) like you. I am not sure I have it within me to engage in another round of discussion when the opportunity comes. But what Deep Strength and GunnerQ have shared encouraged me. My family’s spiritual well-being comes first. The hard part is practising and doing whatever I should for that aim.

    5. My wife’s settled in this church. The services are conducted in our mother tongue (which ironically I am not extremely fluent in) but I do it out of love for my wife (she is fluent in this language) and my desire that this church and its fellowship can help her grow. The discomfort I have with its spiritual position vis-a-vis wife’s submission and female leadership didn’t come to the fore until much later. My head tells me that I should start checking out other churches which may have a position on the aforementioned issues closer to Scripture but my hearts tells me that my wife’s settled in this church and pulling her out of it would likely strain our marriage and relationship (she is very adverse to change).

    Have and will continue to pray for you, brother.

      1. One would have thought that seminaries, being the bastions of the Bible and Biblical principles, would have been extremely protective and watchful of the attacks of the evil one. To have generations of pastors holding strong to progressivism in their interpretation of Scripture pass through the gates of seminaries as graduates is damning on Christianity.

        Feminism in the churches today may well be God’s judgement on us having dropped the ball on holding fast to His Word and perverting it.

    1. Honestly I don’t know much about either pastors formal training. I know the associate pastor did go through some courses and certification, but to what capacity I am not sure. The head pastor has been the pastor of the church since we started attending (about 10 years ago, on and off), and since the church used to be Church of God affiliation I assume he has formal training as well. I really don’t know who or what would cause these guys to look at the scripture and twist it in such a way. I can only assume that its teachers who, like many other Christian men, cant bring themselves to see that the bible clearly shows that God holds men in higher esteem than women – that there are differences in the ways God views us. It doesn’t mean men are better than women or any less sinful, but men have a place and a role that women DO NOT. In our modern age it doesn’t compute to them. Since childhood they have been trained that men and women should all be equal, and that, for some reason, not being equal is considered sinful or wrong.

      In my office I talk to an old school Christian guy who came to the US from Iran back in the 80s. I explained the situation to him and he was dumbfounded. He said that, back in the day, the Christian ladies in Iran would never have even thought about becoming pastors or teachers – they were content to be what they were and didn’t seek to have equal status to men. “What is culture” he asks me, “So there is passage of time, but what about mankind has changed that the word of God needs to be updated? Man still has the same heart, it doesn’t matter if we have better technology or are ‘enlightened'”. He’s a smart guy, engineer, and loves the Lord. He cannot wrap his mind around why any pastor would give a woman the pastors platform to teach the congregation and think they are scripturally justified.

      @ chokingonredpills

      I understand your concerns about your wife. Though we found this church through mutual friends, my wife has really settled in here. When I talked with her about us possibly leaving she asked me why I would do that knowing that she has built up friendships and comfort there. Simple answer: To protect her and our children. Friendship means nothing when it comes to what they are learning about the word of God. As a man I will be held accountable for my response regarding this situation. I know that I can stand before God and, no matter what my wife or the pastors do, I can say I did what I was supposed to – I saw bad doctrine and I moved my family away from it so as to protect them and ensure they hear the right word of God. If my wife chooses to be disobedient or the pastors choose to continue in their bad doctrine, I can stand justified, and they must answer for their own actions.

  6. SJW always lie…. ie pastor B will deflect and attack without end. Pastor L has married a divorced woman? Unless her ex is dead or wasn’t a believer and left her, he is participating in adultery.

    You will never, and I mean ever win a war of words with a sjw. Pastors fall ino this crowd by nature and they will manipulate any verse to fit their frame or narrative. They are taught multiple applications and interpretations for each verse.

    You need to stop evangelizing the pastor and work on your kids and wife. God has made you steward of them and they are your first mission.

    Start with meaning of Love and that God is love and then move onto how a loving god would kill innocents and why he would rebuke those he loves.

    1 John states that if we sin we are not part of Him. And then goes on to say that if we say we do not sin, we make Him a liar. How can this be? Eph 5, 1 pe 3:1-6, titus 2. Drill these in her head along with 1 cor 11:1-16.

    Ask her why God put those vs in the bible. Why did God place respect husbands before husbands love your wife.

    1. See here is where things get confusing for me. I have known these guys for the better part of 10-15 years and my mind just cannot accept that they are sjw’s. I know some sjw’s and these two guys don’t act anything like that. They have not twisted any other IMPORTANT scripture. I mean, I have had issue with both pastors preaching that touching even a drink of alcohol is sin, but that’s a moot point. Both of them are ex-alcoholics, so for them it is sin, for me, no. I have an alcoholic beverage maybe once, twice a month, but to me its like drinking a soda, something for an occasion and not every day. I wouldn’t categorize them as sjw’s. I think they are just men who have been taught the same gunk that a lot of other Christian men have been taught – that a mans walk with God is measured by his relationship with his wife.

      I actually read a book on this a few years ago. Completely messed me up, talking about how wives are a husbands spiritual compass and, when things were good and well with your wife then you know things are well and good between you and God. It sounded right and it fit the problems I was having in my own life with my walk and my wife at the time. Well, things didn’t add up. I was doing everything I thought I was supposed to do but it was having the opposite effect. To boot, my wife was jacked up in the head herself – so what’s a guy to do when his compass is just as screwed up as he is? I burned that book so that no one else would ever get a hold of it, but how many other men have read it, or something like it, and believe? Scripture gets twisted to make it sound like everything is right and it makes us guys feel good so long as everything is on the up and up. We have no reason to question it. So long as neither one of the pastors have to deal with the issues I had to deal with, its working for them, so for them it seems right.

      I know I cannot change their minds, and that further discussion is futile. I either have to wait until something happens that pulls them from the matrix or just let them live their lives the way they are – still plugged in and oblivious.

  7. “He also argued that if we wanted to forget about the cultural aspect of the verses then I was already in direct violation for shaving my beard and sitting next to my wife in the church instead of her being on the other side of the room,….”

    I’m confused by this. If you remove culture from the argument, then you have Paul’s direct statement on the question of women being silent, but nothing on men’s beards or where to sit in the assembly which I would interpret to mean these are acceptable.

    Generally, the liberal argument is that Paul’s statement that women are to be silent was only affirming the culture, but culture has changed, so women should be able to teach today. Following that same argument, your lack of beard and sitting with your wife would be acceptable, too.

    Note: Actually, I’m not sure about the cultural attitude toward beards in the Corinthian church. As far as I can find, the Romans and Greeks were primarily beardless at this time. Was this church only former Jews? Even if so, did these former Jews still have beards even though it was culturally unusual?

    ““don’t be surprised when your wife becomes more spiritually mature than you do, and don’t be surprised when she does if she doesn’t submit””

    This is the most disturbing part of your post. A women who becomes more spiritually mature should become even more aware of the biblical teaching regarding the submission of wives to husbands. She should be more humble which would enable her to better submit to her husband.

    On the contrary, failure of a wife to submit to her husband on the basis of her supposed spiritual maturity shows sinful pride in her status as well as a denial of the scripture.

    Switching to an important topic, you need to consider the financial aspect of the situation if you should leave this church but your wife continues to attend there. Do you wish to support that church financially? If not, which I think would be my position, how do you accomplish that? I rather expect that your wife will want to continue giving to them. Perhaps you need to create a new account that only you can access, and transfer a budgeted amount to another account for her to use for her needs. I think you would also want to remove any credit cards from her personal use. In short, if she insists on remaining there, I think you should create boundaries on the use of your family’s finances.

  8. Women should never teach in church, that is give advice or instruction.
    If they have a PhD or otherwise are very learned they might teach a class.
    You can be “Spiritually mature”, but that doesn’t give you any grace to teach.

    I’m of two minds regarding the unbelieving spouse, but I can give the simple rule: Obeying the Husband is a command of Christ so the Wife is obeying Christ first, the husband second. If the husband commands “disobey Christ”, then either the specific commandment he doesn’t like or the commandment to obey the husband have equal weight – which one should she disobey, or to put it more simply, if you don’t believe in this just order your wife to rebel and you have a perfect marriage since she is obeying your command perfectly.

    One thing missing is in earlier times (or rural places today) the wife had the run of the house and had to take care of a large number of blessings – children. “Will be saved through childbearing” is scripture too. (1 Tim 2:15 – splodeyhead! – both pastors and husbands). Combine that with a near absolute prohibition on Divorce (and remarriage afterward) – yes, quite hard – you realize that marriage is a cross to be taken up daily. It will have its joys, grace, and glories, but fallen spouses in a fallen world will suffer.

    But perhaps there is something to learn from Caesar – what happens when someone from the gallery wants to talk in a Court during a trial? What if a defendant doesn’t want a lawyer, but insists on not following rules? Contempt of Court. Or if at a wedding someone started singing or otherwise disrupting a solemn moment. God has ordained some things for order. He can make exceptions, but they are as rare as miracles.

  9. B has texted me and referred me to 1 John 2:27, indicating that the Greek word for teach is the same as used in 1 Timothy 2:12, but I don’t see it.

    Strongs G1321 Didasko: To teach; to hold discourse with others in order to instruct them, deliver didactic discourses

    Didactic: intended to teach, particularly in having moral instruction as an ulterior motive

    It seems to me that didasko refers to a specific type of teaching with regards to morals or morality and is not a general term. Anyone have i put on that? I’m no expert on studying the Greek beyond looking at Strongs.

    1. B has texted me and referred me to 1 John 2:27, indicating that the Greek word for teach is the same as used in 1 Timothy 2:12, but I don’t see it.

      They’re grasping for straws here. It doesn’t contradict 1 Tim 2.

      1 John 2:26 These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you. 27 As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, [i]you abide in Him.

      John is literally writing to a group of Gentile believers who don’t have teachers and have false teachers appearing. John states when that’s the case, the Holy Spirit can guide Christians.

      1. The actual conversation:

        B: 1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, he shall abide in him.

        B: (continued) In this scripture the Greek word is the same as it is in 1st tim 3:12 it say it is a word used very broadly. I sought council about it from 3 other pastors about this and they said the same thing that I said. U have to remember the women weren’t even allowed in the temple at that time. So when it was all new to them. Hope this help bud. The pastor I have spoken to have been studying the word for about 30 years. It was mostly cultural.

        S: I don’t know the word you are referring to.

        B: Teach

        S: 1 Tim 3:12 doesn’t contain the word teach, it’s referencing to deacons.

        B: Sorry 2:12 where it talks about women teaching

        S: Strongs G1321: Didasko. to teach, to hold discourse with others in order to instruct them, deliver didactic discourses

        Didactic: intended to teach, particularly in having moral instruction as an ulterior motive.

        Didactic teaching is a specific type of teaching and is not general in nature. Its not a general term, it specifies teaching with moral intent.

        ——————————–

        After this he did not reply. Now that I look at it I don’t know what this other pastors reference to 1 John was concerning. I mean, who cares about the word teach, that’s not the issue. Maybe the word ‘man’ in the King James, but I looked that word up in Strongs also and the Greek word IS a general term, meaning ‘a man’, ‘anyone’, ‘a person’, which would seem to indicate that, yes, the verse was saying that the Holy Spirit would be a teacher so we really would have no need of a physical teacher.

        Personally I just don’t think I am going to continue the conversation. I think, at this point, I just have much different beliefs than the church does. I believe you can read the majority of scripture as black and white, straight forward, it-means-what-it-says. Apparently I am the minority in this. Also he is still using the ‘culture’ as a qualifier, which I just cannot handle. It seems so bass-ackwards for scripture. I mean, the prohibitions on women teaching are for GODS CHURCH, that’s why they are included in the bible! They are guidelines for His church FOR ALL TIME, otherwise why include them?

      2. @ Snapper

        Yeah, that only makes it worse.

        He didn’t even look at both passages text to confirm. He just “heard” something and thought it would be a good argument for women teaching in Church when it’s referring to the Holy Spirit teaching the Truth to believers when there are false teachers.

  10. @infowarrior1

    The PCA is infected too. I had a pastor tell me he had “neither the time nor the inclination to study the Bible” on a particular matter concerning feminism. He did however make an idle threat. So hostile were they to the patriarchal teachings of Paul that an elder with him told me that God had called me to celibacy, which was shocking to hear as I have been married 35 years. When I asked how God had revealed to him this special insight, his answer was unconscionable. He found that 1 Cor 7 made provision for a husband to be a lifelong celibate. When I informed him that the necessary circumstances listed were by mutual agreement, for a specific length, and to focus on prayer and fasting, and that Paul specifically forbade defrauding a spouse he just shrugged it off and said that if I really was a christian I would agree with my wife to never again have sex and learn to fast, that way I would love my wife like Christ loves the church.

    The PCA is no haven from feminism, In fact it hostile to patriarchy. It is infected with the Tim Kellers telling men to submit to their wives and often teaches that wives are more in-tune with the Holy Spirit.

    Not the OPC or the URC nor the RPCNA are safe. Hate to say it, but if you fancy yourself a reformed Sola Scriptura Christian, you have few choices that are not dominated by feminist compromises and white knigths

  11. I have to agree with jonadab.

    You have no idea who any of us are who are out her advising you, however you are not in a unique place. Many of us have gone through thi or similar. Pastors are like court room judges. They are suppose to be for truth and justice/ righteousness, but confronted about possibly being wrong they will lie and manipulate the code of law (bible in this case) until you bend and suffer.

    Absolutely no denomination is immune

  12. i am so very sorry.

    though, sadly, i am not surprised. my ex-fil is a retired pastor. being married into a pastor’s family was shocking, and not in a good way.

    as has been alluded to, it will be the individual church, rather than the denomination, that you will want to vet. there is one local church that i really love many things about it … but there are two big things that cannot be overlooked for our family: 1. the pastor preaches waaay toooo long – i have a sped kid who cannot sit that long, and my husband ends up snoring! (although, i have met the pastor personally, and while i do not agree with the denominational stances on some things, i agree with him and his leadership). and 2. the church has multi-generational families and is very closed off to outsiders. they know this but do nothing to change it.

    anyway … may God continue to lead you and strengthen you and empower you to do whatever He calls you to do, for it is only Him you must answer to, as you well know. many have said over the years, “I could *never* do what you do!” and the reality is that God equips us to do what He calls us to do, not what He calls someone else to do. so He will equip you … doesn’t mean it won’t be painful or costly, though, as you also well know.

    – – – – –

    question for you men:

    Do you think that men like these pastors draw women in to do their ‘jobs’ as described in scripture as a way to slough off their responsibility? It seems to me that men would not want women to take over their responsibility as a man, but that’s what this looks like to me. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

  13. Ame,

    I am not sure what jobs you are speaking of. I am assuming you mean teaching? Women’s study? There is clear scripture for that. Look at Empathilogical’s Lift, and Dalrocks pastors try to AMOG.

    Pastors are generally beta or lower. Getting that type of attention in a generation of christianity steeped in feminism or female imperative, they think they are going in the right direction. The unfortunate reality is that they become sjw and Gammas and add or omitt scripture defiling the Word of God.

    It’s not passing on responsibility. They know wives control the husbands in congregation and christianity as a whole. Pedalstalizing women in their church, they believe they can make it grow and get more money. Sad truth is that it is really the pastors frame and belief, not something they are doing consciously. That is why snapper is talking to a couple of brick walls.

  14. So the head pastor is married to another’s ex-wife (she being a believer before she divorced). Is L also divorced? What you have told me of B does not fit with the Biblical model for an elder, either.

    This is beyond these two being wrong on a single issue. You and your family need a godly pastor and church. Go find one.

    I strongly recommend you find a church with an apostolic succession: Anglican (ACNA) or Lutheran (AALC). Then vet them: Compare them to the word of God. This is an opportunity for you to ask hard questions and (hopefully) get good answers. Talk with the pastors/priests. Tell them your situation and see what they say.

    Stay away from non-denominational churches. They are like fair-weather friends who, because they are lonely, play at being family. Once the friendship is over (and this will happen from time to time): You’ve then lost the family, too.

    1. I don’t know the situation with pastor L’s wife, he may, in fact, be dead. They have never mentioned him in the present tense, always in a past tense, so I am not quite sure. As for B, well, I understand what you are saying about him, but I don’t quite know what to make of it. He had a rough past, sure, and he made a lot of mistakes but this keeps coming to mind:

      “1 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, 3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.

      4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

      B has made the effort to reach out to the children with whom he previously had little or no contact both to make amends and to try to bring them to Christ. His own household is in order and the mothers of his previous children are either long gone or have no interest in making amends themselves. He is not embroiled in any type of controversy and his life is radically different than it was previously. I don’t know if this disqualifies him from being a pastor or not, and at the moment that is not my concern.

      That being said, I believe I am going to leave this church. My beliefs over the past couple of years have radically changed. I can read the word and see many scriptures that support God esteeming men over women. Not to say that men are any better, but there is an obvious authority structure and ample scripture supports it. Because of this I don’t think I can support a church that actively works on equalizing men and women either within their own structure or the structure of the marriage. To do so invites disaster for some, while others may have to wait until judgement day to be held accountable for what they teach and what they do. I cannot have my sons growing up with that. They need to know that they have been given and authority AND a responsibility that they will held accountable to someday. The current beliefs of most American churches do not equip them for that!

      Also the issues I have with my own marriage make it dangerous for my wife and I to be in an environment where the rebellion of a wife is seen as justified, which is blatantly against scripture in any way! When the bible says submit in ‘everything’, ‘everything’ is all encompassing, it makes no room for qualifiers. Though my wife may continue to be rebellious I know that I can stand before God and proclaim that I did what was required of me. I attempted to “wash her in the water of the word” and lead her down a right path. Her rebellion is of her own doing, and I will not be held accountable for that.

      As for B and L, well, I will not be held accountable for their teaching either. I bring them a picture of a fish and a bunch of other pictures of fishes to prove it and they tell me if I hold it just right and squint one eye the fish is actually a bear. The scripture seems pretty cut and dry – no, it IS cut and dry. I cannot accept that Gods directions for the church are bound by culture any more than I can accept that the church itself was bound by culture.

      I will speak to B and L again and make them aware that my family will be leaving. I don’t seen confrontation, but I will make it known that our core beliefs no longer sync. They believe in a church that can thrive if you invert or mix the roles of men and women; I believe that the order should remain the same if we truly want to see the spirit of God move. Its not just beneficial for the church, but its adhering to the word of God, which we are called to do if we love Him.

  15. i’ve thought on this some … i only know of one pastor/preacher who i think would be open to something like this, but, then again, he’s one who probably wouldn’t need it.

    there’s huge ego riding on those who call themselves pastor/preacher. they hate to be wrong. i honestly cannot imagine the conversation having gone any better 😦

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