Other Books at Freedom's Ring

Introduction

After nearly fifty years of preaching, teaching, serving as an administrator in Christian colleges and universities, and serving as an elder in one of Oklahoma's largest congregations, I have had to admit that I have been guilty of using traditional and terribly inconsistent arguments to justify my positions and the church's positions on the roles women could play in the life of the church.

On a trip to the Republic of China in the early '80s, I found long term missionaries being confronted by newcomers for allowing wives and daughters to pray at their tables or in family devotionals. The newcomers also demanded that English-speaking missionaries dismiss or silence female translators in classes and in the assemblies.

I spent most of one night in a Holiday Inn at Kaohsiung, in Southern Taiwan, studying this issue with two concerned missionaries. The next day, I had a long train ride back to Taipei alone. I wrestled with the woman's role all that day. I wrestled with it back across the Pacific on my long flight home. I knew something was wrong with our traditional arguments, and I knew I must find out what it was.

After returning to the States, I made an intense year-long study of this issue. I concluded that many of my long-held arguments were specious and inconsistent with clear Biblical teachings and records.

I decided that I would pursue an independent route of study, freeing myself of the emotional, traditional and intellectual attachments which had, in the past, skewed my arguments and allowed me to follow the path of security, safety, least resistance, and even intellectual dishonesty.

In 1985 I taught a course titled, "Old Truths Re-Examined," in a large adult class at the Quail Springs Church of Christ, in Oklahoma City, where I have served as an elder for eighteen years. The first six weeks dealt with the woman's role in the church. I was shocked at how inconsistent I, as well as the church, had been in what we taught and what we actually practiced. This class studied my new positions and arguments with some of the emotional and traditional barriers expected. Most class members accepted the force of the logic and scriptural arguments, but found it hard to overcome years of conditioning.

Later, the subject was taught to the college class, then to the elders, staff, and adult teachers. Finally, it was taught in the combined Sunday morning adult classes in the auditorium, numbering about 700.

The fact that I taught these classes does not suggest that there was unanimity of thought in the eldership and membership on this subject. Some could not overcome the natural responses brought on by years of traditional practices. Others could not accept either of my theses. No one has challenged my arguments, except two ladies who came to teach me that women could not teach men.

I later received a letter from a lady in Texas who, after listening to my tapes, not only taught me that I was wrong, but asked that I leave the church, since I did not teach "Church of Christ" doctrine.

After these studies, I have discussed the subject with some of our most distinguished scholars and church leaders. Preachers, elders, and Bible professors weighed my positions.

I then recorded all my arguments and had them reviewed by a number of well-known men in our brotherhood. Some could not agree with my conclusions or arguments. None, however, was able to reconcile what we traditionally claim the Bible teaches and what we actually practice in our churches, missions, homes and institutions of higher education. Moreover, the fact that our accepted hermeneutic was violated consistently in its application of related scriptures did not bother some. But, maintaining brotherhood-approved and safe traditions seemed paramount in most arguments. I did drop a couple of my original arguments, due to their critiques.

In my search for truth on this subject, I found that we do not practice what we claim the Bible teaches with any consistency and, most shocking, I concluded that the Bible does not really teach what we claim it does. These are the two theses of this book.

It is only through selective reading of the Bible that we are able to keep women out of the public life and ministries of the church.

Nothing could indicate how little we know about the subject and how poorly we practice what we think we know than positions taken by the eldership of one congregation and passed out as a guideline and a policy for the church to follow.

It is typical of the thinking and actions of many churches and church leaders. It is, in fact, a creedal statement of the elders and has nothing, whatsoever, to do with Biblical truth.

Part of the creedal statement is as follows:

The policy of the (BLANK) Congregation, as approved by the elders, is that in formal, officially scheduled and congregationally sponsored classes and worship services, women can teach all ages and pray in the presence of both boys and girls who are less than 14 years of age, but it would not be expedient, and is not acceptable conduct at the (BLANK) Avenue Church of Christ for the women of this congregation to lead in prayer in the presence of, or teach males 14 years or older, especially if those males are baptized believers. This policy includes the understanding that it is not scriptural for a woman to preach or teach during formal worship. This policy does not extend to informal, unofficial, and unscheduled situations where the elders have no objections to women leading in prayer in the presence of men or teaching men, as long as none present are offended.

It is written in the name of expediency, but is contrary to what their entire statement says about the Bible's teaching on women. These elders admitted in this policy statement that women did scripturally pray and prophesy in the presence of men. They state that in all likelihood Priscilla was the chief speaker in the teaching of Apollos. It would have been better to both teach and practice what they believe the Bible teaches than to have written a creed to keep from doing what they claimed the Bible allowed. Preaching on giving, missions, reconciliation, baptism, marriage and divorce, or immorality might not seem to be expedient, due to the fact that some stubborn members might object. But wise and honorable men would both teach and find ways to practice what God requires and allows his people to do.

This eldership went beyond what most elderships and preachers believe and allow. Many would make the cut at age 12 or at baptism, without one Biblical verse or sentence of scripture to support such a doctrine. Most would not allow women to pray or teach in Bible classes or devotionals, whether formal or informal.

This church's use of formal worship and informal, unscheduled, unofficial situations, should be noted. One would have to conclude that God, in His word, makes a distinction between various worship situations. In other words, at a prayer meeting at the church on Wednesday night, women can't teach men and boys or lead them in prayer if they are 14 years of age. But, on Friday night, at an unofficial gathering of the elders, deacons, preachers and their wives, women would be allowed to both teach and pray, according to this policy. On Friday night, women could do what the church has decreed could not be done at official meetings on Sunday and Wednesday.

This church is to be commended for accepting some truth about what God will allow. But, we would conclude that this church, in the name of expediency, refuses to follow what they believe the Bible teaches. These elders' policy becomes the standard and establishes a tradition (law) contrary to what they believe the Bible teaches.

Why would they allow a few objectors (instead of the Bible) to establish the policy? And, instead of shackling those who wish to follow the Bible, why not set a policy which teaches their concept of truth to those who do not understand it and allow women to participate in "official" worship services, classes and prayer meetings? Expediency cannot be a substitute for truth. Paul would have none of it in dealing with Peter and others who were law keepers in Galatians 2.

Is it less offensive and less expedient to impose an unbiblical rule on those who wish to exercise their freedom to scripturally participate, than to impose one on the objectors to freedoms which the elders state the Bible allows?

It would seem much wiser and fairer, not to mention more scriptural, to teach the objectors and demand that they line up with what the Bible teaches, than to prohibit others who wish to follow what the Bible teaches in these matters. Why must the pace of growth and scriptural reform be set by those least informed?

Some would appeal to the rule of expediency (in Romans 14) regarding offending weaker and younger Christians. The truth usually is that weaker and younger Christians are not the ones who object to scriptural change. It is the older, long-time member who usually objects to accepting and practicing new-found truth.

This issue is not simple and is a long way from being settled. However, objecting to studying, learning and then practicing what God's word teaches and allows is not the way of truth or righteousness.

This book will deal frankly and openly with the inconsistencies in the teachings and practices of the church. It will also deal with and shed new light for most people on what the Bible really says about women's role in God's kingdom.

The Biblical interpretation and application will apply to the Churches of Christ, Southern Baptist, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Lutheran, Missouri Synod, and others who yet shackle their women. These are the last bastions of male supremacy in the Christian world. Truth will eventually rip the bars away and beat the walls down around these churches, like it has hundreds of others.

Contrary to what many church leaders and women in the Christian world believe about Paul being a male chauvinist, this book will reveal him as a promoter of women's right to participate in the public life of the church.

A doctrine on women has been built on three short passages in I Corinthians 11 and 14 and I Timothy 2. From this doctrine, a variety of traditions have been established. Then, using these varying traditions as scriptural mandates, the leaders of the churches have developed a smorgasbord of practices which attempt to explain away other clear Bible teachings and Bible history. At the same time, both logic and consistency have been skewed and warped to accommodate the misinterpretation of scripture and to attempt to be consistent on flawed Biblical understanding.

Nothing is more basic to our understanding of this subject or any other than the way we have been trained to feel about church authority and the authorities who believe they have a right to do the thinking for the church.

Therefore, before we address the theses of this book, Chapter One will deal with this very real mine field.