| Vivid Christianity |
|
| Teaching Christians how to live a "vivid" Christian life. | |
|
New Testament Passages Concerning Women - Part Two of Two
Introduction
In this article we'll answer these questions:
If everything at my website (VividChristianity.com), including this article, says what God wants it to say then He will confirm that for you by doing a miracle. See my home page for the details. Are Women Allowed to Be Pastors?
In Part One we saw that the weight of evidence shows that women are allowed to hold the position of an elder, bishop, overseer, leader, pastor, preacher, or teacher in church or in ministry. Now let's take a look at what the New Testament says about pastors. In the NIV (and in other translations), the word "pastor" only occurs in this verse: "It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers" (Ephesians 4:11)The word "pastors" in the above verse is translated from the Greek word poimen, which means: "1) a herdsman, especially a shepherdSo the Greek word translated as "pastor" really means "shepherd." Here's every place in the New Testament where this Greek word is used: "When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd [poimen]." (Matthew 9:36)So the Greek word poimen is always translated as "shepherd" in the NIV (and in other versions of the Bible), with the single exception of Ephesians 4:11 where it's translated as "pastors." The English word "pastor" (singular or plural) doesn't appear anywhere else in the New Testament. Throughout the New Testament we can see several different offices in the church, such as apostles, prophets, and evangelists. But if you search online for New Testament offices that are specifically for the local church, you'll find that there are only two. One is the office of a deacon, and the other is the office of an elder (also referred to as bishop, overseer, leader, and pastor, as we saw in Part One). In the following passages, notice that elders were shepherds of the church, and elders were overseers of the church, and elders directed the affairs of the church, and there were elders whose work was preaching and teaching. All of these duties that we normally associate as being a pastor's duties were in reality done by elders. To make this point more clearly, every time you see the word "elders" (or one of the other terms for this office) in the following passages, ask yourself, "Where are the pastors?" "This they did, sending their gift to the elders by Barnabas and Saul [where are the pastors?]." (Acts 11:30)These are all of the New Testament passages that use the Greek words for elder/bishop/overseer in the context of the human offices in the local church. What we've seen is that there's no specific office called "pastor" in the New Testament (also called "minister" in some denominations). Instead, it was the elders/overseers who performed the functions that we think of as being a pastor's duties. Our modern concept of a senior pastor who has the ultimate authority over a local church is a human invention and is not scriptural, which means that it's against God's will. For example, notice that Jesus is referred to as "the shepherd" and "that great Shepherd" and "the Chief Shepherd": "Then Jesus told them, "This very night you will all fall away on account of me, for it is written: 'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.'"" (Matthew 26:31)In all of the above passages, Christians are referred to as the sheep of God's flock, and Jesus referred to them as "my sheep" and said that "there shall be one flock and one shepherd." In the above passages, Jesus is referred to as "the shepherd" and "that great Shepherd" and "the Chief Shepherd." The sheep belong to Jesus because He bought them with His blood (Acts 20:17-18, 28-29, above). The above passages also tell us that elders are to feed and take care of Jesus' sheep, keeping watch over the flock as overseers, shepherding and watching over God's flock that is under their care. They should be acknowledged and honored as the leaders of the local church, directing the affairs of the local church. Some of the elders that most churches refer to as pastors should receive financial support from their church: "The elders who direct the affairs of the church [proistemi] well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For Scripture says, "Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain," and "The worker deserves his wages."" (1 Timothy 5:17-18)The Greek word proistemi in the above passage is translated as "direct the affairs of the church" in the NIV and "rule" in the KJV and NKJV, and it refers to leading, managing, and maintaining. For example, here are all of the passages in the New Testament that use this Greek word (apart from 1 Timothy 5:17-18, above): "We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead [proistemi], do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully." (Romans 12:6-8)So elders/overseers are to "lead" and "manage" and "take care of" God's flock. However, they're specifically told not to lord it over their staff or congregation: "To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder and a witness of Christ's sufferings who also will share in the glory to be revealed: Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, watching over them - not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; not lording it over [katakurieuo] those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:1-3)The Greek word katakurieuo in the above passage means "To rule over, exercise authority,...By implication, to get the mastery of, overpower, subdue" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the Old and New Testaments, Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, katakurieuo). Here are all of the passages in the New Testament that use this Greek word (apart from 1 Peter 5:1-3, above): "Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it [katakurieuo] over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant"" (Matthew 20:25-26)Again, elders/overseers are to "lead" and "manage" and "take care of" and "feed" and "be examples to" God's flock, but they're specifically told not to lord it over their staff or congregation. Elders and pastors are Jesus' sheep just like anyone else. Our modern concept of a senior pastor who has the ultimate authority over a local church is a human invention and is not scriptural, which means that it's against God's will. Instead, we see elders (plural) being appointed in each church, and we've seen that different elders had different responsibilities: "Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, committed them to the Lord, in whom they had put their trust." (Acts 14:23)So a local church should have elders (plural). There's not a shred of scriptural support for a church having elders or associate pastors or other types of pastors who report to a senior pastor that's in authority over them. Since different elders/overseers have different gifts and different roles in the local church as we've seen, and since the New Testament uses different words such as "elder" and "overseer" for the same office, there's nothing wrong with using the word "pastor" for a person who has certain roles in the local church. If one of these people is the main preacher or teacher, and receives their income from the church, and is essentially the public face of the church, then there's nothing wrong with referring to that person as "senior pastor." The important point from all of the above passages is that there should be no difference in authority between the elders in a church. The senior pastor should be no different authority-wise than the other elders in their church because everyone who is referred to as a pastor is really an elder according to all of the scriptural evidence. As we saw, senior pastors should receive financial support from their church, and sometimes other churches will offer to hire pastors away from their current churches. Pastors might accept these job offers based on a number of factors, such as a higher income for their families, better opportunities for ministry, a better environment and better schools for their kids, being closer to other family members, feeling called to make the move, etc. There's nothing wrong with them accepting other job offers and leaving their current church because they need to take care of their families and grow in their careers just like anyone else. Ideally, they would listen for God's guidance on the decisions they make, as all Christians should be doing (see my article called How to Discern God's Guidance). In the following passage, Jesus said that there is one flock and one shepherd, and He said that there are "hired hands" who tend the sheep but don't own the sheep: [Jesus is speaking:] "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me - just as the Father knows me and I know the Father - and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd." (John 10:11-16)These "hired hands" who tend the sheep are the pastors who are paid by their church. Jesus gave an example of a hired hand leaving the sheep when a wolf comes, but we've seen that there are plenty of other reasons why pastors might leave their current churches. Leaving a congregation for other opportunities isn't wrong (in fact, it's often an important part of a pastor's personal growth), but it demonstrates that a human cannot care as much about the flock as the Chief Shepherd does. Jesus' point was that He owns the flock, and that He is the Shepherd, so He's the One in charge. Pastors are the hired hands who serve the Chief Shepherd in a local church, they're not meant to be in authority over everyone else in the local church. Again, all elders, overseers, and pastors are part of the Chief Shepherd's flock just like the rest of the congregation. In Part One we saw that the weight of evidence shows that women are allowed to be elders. Therefore, women are allowed to be pastors because we've seen that all pastors are actually elders. For example, it's possible that a woman named Priscilla was this type of elder. Here are all of the references to her (and her husband Aquila): "There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them, and because he was a tentmaker as they were, he stayed and worked with them." (Acts 18:2-3)Considering the male-oriented societies of the first century, it's interesting that when Priscilla and Aquila are mentioned, Priscilla's name is usually mentioned first. In fact, Paul gives her prominence over her husband in most of the times he mentioned them in the above passages. This implies that Priscilla was more prominent in some way than her husband was, as these commentaries suggest: "Notice that the name of Priscilla precedes that of her husband. So Act 18:2. Probably she was the more prominent of the two in christian activity." (Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, Romans 16:3, emphasis added)Priscilla and Aquila held church meetings in their home (Romans 16:3-5, 1 Corinthians 16:19, above), and the way in which Priscilla and Aquila are highly regarded in the above passages makes it likely that they were elders in the church that met in their home. Since Priscilla's name is usually mentioned before her husband's name, apparently she held a more prominent or active position as an elder or teacher than her husband did. To summarize, the weight of evidence shows that women are allowed to be pastors, other than our unscriptural modern concept of a senior pastor who holds the ultimate authority over a local church. Are Women Allowed to Be Apostles?
Here are all of the people in the New Testament who possibly had an apostolic ministry: "These are the names of the twelve apostles [apostolos]: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him." (Matthew 10:2-4)Matthew 10:2-4 (above) describes the original 12 apostles, and Hebrews 3:1 (above) says that Jesus was an apostle. Any other apostles in the above passages were appointed to that position by God after Jesus died and was resurrected. In 1 Corinthians 4:6-9 (above), Paul might have been saying that Apollos was a fellow apostle, but it's not completely clear if that's what he meant. In 2 Corinthians 8:22-23 YLT (above) and Galatians 1:18-19 NKJV (above), it's possible that Titus and James (the Lord's brother) are being referred to as apostles. Paul referred to Epaphroditus as an apostolos (Philippians 2:25, above), which is the Greek word for "apostle," but it's likely that Paul was using that Greek word in the sense of "messenger" (for example, see Philippians 4:18). In Romans 16:7 (above), if the person named "Junias" was a woman (as many people believe), and if she was an apostle, then she's the only female apostle mentioned in the New Testament. Some ancient manuscripts of the Bible have "Junia" in this verse, and other ancient manuscripts have "Junias," so there are differences of opinion about whether this person's name should have a masculine or a feminine ending. Some people say that Andronicus and Junia must have been husband and wife based on the fact that their names are paired together in Romans 16:7 (above), which would mean that Junia was a woman. However, notice what Paul wrote a few verses later: "Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord." (Romans 16:12)Tryphena and Tryphosa were both women, and their names are paired together in the above verse. Therefore, we can't say that Andronicus and Junia were husband and wife just because their names are paired together. In addition, the phrase "outstanding among the apostles" in Romans 16:7 (above) might mean that Andronicus and Junias were highly esteemed by the apostles instead of being apostles themselves. For example, here are some things that Bible commentaries say about this verse: "Rom 16:7 - Andronicus and Junias (Andronicou kai Iounian). The first is a Greek name found even in the imperial household. The second name can be either masculine or feminine." (Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament, Romans 16:7, emphasis added)So Bible scholars are not sure whether Junias (or Junia) was a man or a woman, and Bible scholars are not sure whether Andronicus and Junias (or Junia) were considered to be apostles or whether they were highly regarded by the apostles. Perhaps Andronicus and Junia were husband and wife, and perhaps they were apostles, but we can't say for certain one way or the other because the Bible does not give us that information. In John 20:11-18, the resurrected Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene and sent her to tell the disciples that He was about to ascend to His Father. The word "apostle" essentially means "a person who is sent" as we'll see in a moment, so people sometimes refer to Mary Magdalene as "the apostle to the apostles." However, the Bible never refers to her as an apostolos ("apostle"). The Greek word for "apostle" (apostolos) means: "one sent, apostle, ambassador...it designates the office as instituted by Christ to witness of Him before the world...It also designates the authority which those called to this office possess...However, the denomination seems from the very beginning to have been applied, in a much wider sense, to all who ministered as colleagues of the Twelve and bore witness of Christ" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the Old and New Testaments, Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, apostolos).Based on the definition of the Greek word for "apostle," plus the fact that we see people in the New Testament who became apostles after the cross (in the above passages), there's no reason to assume that apostles were limited to the first century. The New Testament never says that apostles were only for the first century, so it's unscriptural and inaccurate to refer to the first century as "the apostolic age" as many people do. In fact, Ephesians 4:11-13 specifically says that apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers are needed "until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature." This level of unity, knowledge, and maturity has never been achieved in the body of Christ (see my article called Cheat Sheet #21), so apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers are still needed even to this day, and God places them into the body of Christ when and where and how He wants them (1 Corinthians 12:18). Some people believe that Paul specifically said that he was the last apostle, so they claim that there will never be any more apostles: "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God." (1 Corinthians 15:3-9 NKJV)Paul was originally a Jewish Pharisee named Saul who persecuted Christians (Acts 26:1-20), but he received salvation when Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:3-9, 22:6-11, 26:12-20) and from then on he was usually referred to by his Roman name of Paul (Acts 13:9). In the above passage, Paul said that he was the "last of all" to see Jesus, which doesn't mean that Paul was the very last person to see Jesus because shortly after Jesus appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus He then appeared to a disciple named Ananias (Acts 9:10-21). It also doesn't mean that Paul was the very last apostle to see Jesus because decades later Jesus appeared to the apostle John in visions that he recorded in the book of Revelation (see my article called Who Wrote the New Testament?). So all we can say is that at the time when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians 15:3-9 (above), he was the last apostle at that point to have seen Jesus after His resurrection. When he said that he was "one born out of due time" (1 Corinthians 15:8 NKJV) or "one abnormally born" (1 Corinthians 15:8 NIV), Bible commentaries tend to say it means that Paul never traveled with Jesus before the cross as the original twelve apostles did, so Paul didn't feel worthy to be an apostle (see the last sentence in the above passage). But Paul never said that he was the very last apostle ever, and the Bible never says that he was the very last apostle ever. In fact, the book of Revelation was written in AD 95-96, almost 30 years after Paul died (see my article called Who Wrote the New Testament?), and in Revelation 2:2, Jesus commended a church for testing certain people who were claiming to be apostles and finding them to be false. This indicates that at the end of the first century it was still important to test people who claimed to be new apostles. Therefore, we can't be dogmatic that Paul (or anyone else) was the last apostle because Revelation 2:2 tells us that there can be new apostles who need to be tested. Another wrong assumption that some people make concerns the death of the apostle James: "It was about this time that King Herod arrested some who belonged to the church, intending to persecute them. He had James, the brother of John, put to death with the sword." (Acts 12:1-2)Bible commentaries say that James, the brother of John, was the first of the twelve apostles to die after the cross, and some people argue that he was never replaced as one of the Twelve and therefore the office of apostle was never meant to continue beyond the first century. However, this is a false argument that extrapolates beyond what the New Testament actually says. Recall that before the cross, Jesus selected twelve men and designated them as apostles (Luke 6:12-13), and one of those men was Judas Iscariot who betrayed Jesus (Matthew 26:47-48) and then hung himself (Matthew 27:3-5). After Jesus died and was resurrected and went up to heaven, the apostle Peter said that someone must be chosen to take Judas' place as one of the Twelve, and it must be someone who had traveled with Jesus during His life and was a witness of His resurrection. (Judas killed himself before the cross so he was never a witness of Jesus' resurrection.) A man named Matthias was chosen by lot to become part of the Twelve (Acts 1:1-26). The argument that some people make is that Matthias replaced Judas as one of the Twelve, yet after the apostle James died (Acts 12:1-2, above) no one replaced him as one of the Twelve, which (according to this argument) proves that apostles were never meant to continue beyond the first century. The error in this argument is that the twelve apostles who lived with Jesus and were witnesses of His resurrection always had been and always will be a specific group, separate from all other apostles such as Paul. Notice that they're referred to as "the Twelve," indicating that they were a specific group: "Now Jesus was going up to Jerusalem. On the way, he took the Twelve aside and said to them" (Matthew 20:17)The twelve apostles who traveled with Jesus before the cross and were witnesses of His resurrection were not just twelve people out of the total number of apostles that we see in the New Testament, but instead they were always a specific group that was separate from all other apostles. In the above passages they're referred to as "the Twelve," and Revelation 21:9-14 (above) says that their names will be memorialized for all eternity as "the twelve apostles of the Lamb." The reason why no one replaced the apostle James or any of the other members of the Twelve after they died is because the Twelve were a group of twelve specific men, not a group of twelve that needed replacements when a member died. Judas Iscariot was replaced as one of the Twelve because he never fulfilled the requirement of being a witness of Jesus' resurrection. So the fact that no one replaced James as one of the Twelve does not in any way mean that apostles were never meant to continue beyond the first century. Some people argue that the office of an apostle has passed away since the New Testament never instructs churches to ordain apostles, but this argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny because we never see any apostles being ordained by churches or human leaders in the New Testament. Acts 13:1-4 (below) is the only passage that comes anywhere close to an "ordination" of apostles: "Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off. The two of them, sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia and sailed from there to Cyprus." (Acts 13:1-4)In Acts 13:1-4 (above), Barnabas and Saul are described as being two of the prophets and/or teachers in the church at Antioch (Saul was also known as Paul - Acts 13:9). That passage goes on to say that the Holy Spirit told the group (presumably through one of the prophets) to set apart Barnabas and Saul/Paul for the work that they must do. The other men laid hands on Barnabas and Saul/Paul and sent them off. In the last verse of that passage we're specifically told that Barnabas and Saul/Paul were sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, and in Galatians 1:1 (above) Paul specifically said that he was not sent as an apostle from men or by men but by God. For example, in this series we've seen lists of requirements that must be met before people can be appointed for positions of leadership and service in church and ministry (deacons, elders, bishops, overseers, leaders, and pastors). But there are no lists of requirements in the New Testament that must be met before people can be appointed or ordained as apostles because churches and human leaders do not appoint or ordain apostles. Only God can appoint apostles. Barnabas and Paul were not ordained as apostles by men; they were sent out as apostles by God (Acts 13:1-4, 14:3-4, 14, above). If God chooses to appoint people as apostles today, how will we recognize them? These passages appear to be the only New Testament descriptions of the distinguishing characteristics of apostles: "In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) and said, "Brothers and sisters, the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. He was one of our number and shared in our ministry." (With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) "For," said Peter, "it is written in the Book of Psalms: 'May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it,' and, 'May another take his place of leadership.' Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection." So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. Then they prayed, "Lord, you know everyone's heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs." Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles." (Acts 1:15-26)In Acts 1:15-26 (above), two men were nominated to take the place of Judas Iscariot (who had betrayed Jesus and killed himself), and then Peter or someone cast lots to allow the Lord to show them which man would take Judas' place as one of the Twelve. Once again we can see that apostles are neither chosen nor ordained by people; they are chosen by God. Peter said that "one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection," which indicates that only someone who had seen Jesus alive after the cross could become the final member of the Twelve. Perhaps this means that all apostles must be people who have seen Jesus alive after the cross, or perhaps that requirement only applied to the Twelve since they were considered to be a special group as we saw. We can't be dogmatic that no one is an apostle unless they've seen Jesus because the New Testament never says that's a requirement for all apostles. In 1 Corinthians 9:1-2 (above), the apostle Paul said, "Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?" Many people assume that his meaning was essentially, "I'm an apostle, partly because I've met the requirement of seeing Jesus," but that's not actually what he said. That's just an assumption that people are making. If Paul's intended meaning was, "Not only am I an apostle, but in addition I have also seen Jesus," the words that he used are a very good way of conveying that meaning. Again, we can't be dogmatic that no one is an apostle unless they've seen Jesus because the New Testament never says that's a requirement for all apostles. In 2 Corinthians 12:11-14 (above), Paul said that he had demonstrated the marks of a true apostle, including signs, wonders, and miracles. This tells us that signs, wonders, and miracles are the mark of an apostle, but there's nothing in the context of that passage, and nothing anywhere else in the New Testament, that tells us what kinds of signs, wonders, and miracles enable us to recognize that someone is an apostle. For example, Stephen and Philip were not apostles (Acts 6:2-5), yet they performed signs and wonders and miracles. In addition, various Christians will be given the spiritual gifts of miracles and healings and so on, and we're specifically told to eagerly desire the greater gifts. Plus, we're told that false messiahs and false prophets will perform great signs and wonders: "Now Stephen, a man full of God's grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people." (Acts 6:8)Since Paul and Barnabas and others were sent out as apostles by God after the cross, and since the New Testament never says that apostles were only for the first century, this means that God could send out people as apostles even today. For example, there's not a single passage that cancels or overturns these passages: "And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues." (1 Corinthians 12:28)But if the Lord chooses to appoint people as apostles today, how can they prove that they are apostles or that they've seen the Lord (if that's even a requirement)? Will anyone believe them? They will be able to perform signs and wonders and miracles, but that's also true of all of the non-apostles in the above passages. So how can we discern which people (if any) are truly apostles today? It's an interesting question without a clear scriptural answer. However, if God wants it known that someone today is an apostle, then He will confirm it somehow in a miraculous way (for example, see my home page). Another issue concerns the work of an apostle. Consider that if I make a list of every infirmity that was healed throughout the New Testament and then I say that those are the only infirmities that can be healed today based on the scriptural evidence, probably no one would believe that claim (and rightly so). That claim comes from faulty reasoning. Similarly, we could make a list of everything that apostles did throughout the New Testament and then claim that those are the only things that apostles are meant to do today based on the scriptural evidence. This claim is just as wrong as the other claim because it comes from the same faulty reasoning. God is the One who chooses what an apostle is sent to do, and all throughout the Bible we see God doing things that people didn't expect. He still does things that we wouldn't have expected and in ways that we wouldn't have expected. We've seen that the Bible doesn't forbid women from being deacons and elders, and in the same way, the Bible doesn't forbid women from being apostles. If a woman is truly an apostle then she was appointed to that position by God. Are Women Allowed to Be Prophets or Evangelists?
In this series we've seen lists of requirements that must be met before people can be appointed for positions of leadership and service in church and ministry (deacons, elders, bishops, overseers, leaders, and pastors), so we know that not everyone is qualified for those positions. However, there are no lists of requirements that must be met before people can be appointed as prophets or evangelists, which means that prophets and evangelists are not appointed by human decisions. For example, this quote from a New Testament Greek dictionary describes the meaning of the Greek word for "prophet": "A prophet, a foreteller of future events, also an interpreter...Generally of persons acting by divine influence as prophets and ambassadors of God under the new dispensation, equivalent to a teacher sent from God...Specifically of those who possessed the prophetic gift or charisma imparted by the Holy Spirit...Prophets were a class of instructors or preachers who were next in rank to the Apostles and before the teachers (1Co 12:28)...The idea of speaking from an immediate revelation seems here to be fundamental, as relating either to future events or to the mind of the Spirit in general...Two things are combined to make the prophet: an insight granted by God into the divine secrets or mysteries, and a communication to others of these secrets...They were messengers or communicators. Such prophets were not ordained in local churches" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the Old and New Testaments, Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, prophetes)This quote from a New Testament Greek dictionary describes the meaning of the Greek word for "evangelist": "An evangelist, a preacher of the gospel. He was often not located in any particular place but traveled as a missionary to preach the gospel and establish churches...Apparently those who acted as missionaries to the Gentiles and to those who never heard the gospel were called evangelists. An evangelist knew the gospel narrative thoroughly and was capable of explaining it, as Philip the evangelist did to the eunuch...The term was later used to indicate the writers of the life of Christ, such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John." (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the Old and New Testaments, Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, euaggelistes)In Greek dictionaries (such as the quotes above) and Bible commentaries we can see that there are no requirements that must be met before people can be appointed as prophets or evangelists because prophets and evangelists are not appointed by humans. The following passages contain the most representative descriptions that I could find of Christian prophets or Christians prophesying (the other passages are 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, 14:21-25, Ephesians 3:2-6, Revelation 10:7-11, 11:3-12, 16-18, 16:5-6, 18:18-21, 22:6-10), and we can see that prophets are never said to be appointed by humans: "Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: "Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. These people are not drunk, as you suppose. It's only nine in the morning! No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 'In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.'"" (Acts 2:14-18)When we try to see the full picture in the New Testament concerning Christian prophets and Christians prophesying, it's clear that women are allowed to prophesy and that women are never excluded from being prophets. Also, notice that nowhere does the New Testament ever say that prophets or prophesying were only meant for the first century (concerning 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, see Objection #5 in chapter 2 of the free PDF of my book called Divine Healing Absolutely Is for Today). As we saw earlier, apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers are still needed even to this day, and God places them into the body of Christ when and where and how He wants them (1 Corinthians 12:18). Concerning evangelists, these are all of the New Testament passages that specifically describe evangelists, and we can see that they're never said to be appointed by humans: "Leaving the next day, we reached Caesarea and stayed at the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven." (Acts 21:8) The passages in this section make it clear that women are never excluded from being prophets or evangelists. If a woman is truly a prophet or an evangelist then she was appointed to that position by God. What Is "Headship"?
Now let's look at the order of "headship" that God has established: "Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3)Notice that God the Father is the head of Christ the Son. This doesn't mean that Jesus is inferior to the Father (because they're both God - see my article called Cheat Sheet #31), but there's an order in the roles and relationships between them. The above verse also says that Christ is the head of man, and then it says that "the head of the woman is man." Every occurrence of the word "man" in the above verse comes from the Greek word aner, which can mean "man" or "husband" (see Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary, for example). The word "woman" in the above verse comes from the Greek word gune, which can mean "woman" or "wife" as we saw in Part One. So in 1 Corinthians 11:3 (above), the Greek text essentially says, "the head of gune is aner," and most versions of the Bible have translated this as some variation of, "the head of woman is man." But does this mean that all men are the heads over all women? For example, does a man have the right to claim headship over another man's wife? If not, then what does this verse mean? Notice how this verse is translated in a literal version of the Bible: "and I wish you to know that of every man the head is the Christ, and the head of a woman is the husband, and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3 YLT)As we'll see, the Bible does not say that all men are the "head" of all women, but instead it says that the husband is the "head" of the wife. Some people argue that the word "head" does not refer to authority, but rather it refers to the "source" of something (and therefore "headship" does not require a wife to submit in any way to her husband). However, the New Testament strongly refutes that argument because the following passages demonstrate that wives are told to submit to the headship of their husbands (in the next section we'll look closely at what "submission" means and what it does not mean):
To summarize, there's a pattern in the New Testament in which wives are instructed to be in proper submission to their husbands, and husbands are commanded to treat their wives with the utmost love, honor, consideration, gentleness, and respect. In the next section we'll look more closely at what "submission" means. Again, men and women are not inferior to each other, but God has established an order in the roles and relationships between a husband and wife, just as there's an order in the roles and relationships between God the Father and God the Son, and between Christ and the Church (the body of Christ). What Does "Submission" Mean?
The idea of a wife submitting to her husband tends to be seen as a bad thing, as if the wife must be a "doormat" under the tyranny of her husband. However, this is a wrong understanding of submission. Apart from a wife being in submission to her husband, here is every passage where the Greek words for submission are used in the context of humans (including Jesus) submitting to someone else: "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing." (Romans 13:1-6)In the above passages we're told that Jesus will be subject to the Father, and earlier we saw that the head of Christ is God (1 Corinthians 11:3). Since Jesus never did anything wrong or bad during His life on earth, and since Jesus lived His whole life in submission to the Father, then there's nothing wrong or bad about submission itself. In addition, God never commands us to do anything evil or bad, and in some of the above passages we're told to be in submission to God. So when we have a proper understanding, we can see that submission itself is not meant to be a bad thing. In the above passages we're also told that the spirits of prophets are subject to the prophets' control, and that younger people should submit themselves to their elders, and we're told to submit ourselves to every human authority, and we're told to submit to one another. Submitting to another person essentially means voluntarily yielding to them in some way, which often involves putting aside our pride. At work we yield to our boss's instructions or decisions, and in life we yield to governmental authorities. In virtually all areas of life, there's a leader of some kind "above us" who has decision-making authority. This doesn't make them better than us, but it means that we are meant to yield to their authority even if we're unable to respect the person holding that authority. In situations where we can't bring ourselves to yield to their decisions or instructions, or if it would be harmful to do so, then we should seek the Lord's guidance about it (for help with that, see my article called How to Discern God's Guidance) because the Bible doesn't provide guidelines to cover every specific scenario that we might encounter. However, Christian leaders need to understand that they will be held accountable (Hebrews 13:17, above), and Christian teachers need to understand that they will be judged more strictly than others (James 3:1). When we put all of the evidence together to see the full picture, it clearly shows that God has given the decision-making authority in a marriage to the husband due to Eve's original sin. The husband and wife should be a team, working together for the same goal of having a happy, thriving marriage, and the husband is essentially the team leader. This doesn't give him the right to boss her around or treat her badly, but it means that he's the one who will be held accountable as the team leader. The wife will be held accountable for her own decisions and actions, but the husband is doubly accountable. First for his own decisions and actions, and second for his decisions and actions as the team leader. His bad decisions as team leader will count against him when we all stand before the judgment seat of Christ, but the wife will be commended for properly submitting to those decisions. This does not mean that a wife must submit to abuse or harm or danger from her husband. What we've seen is that not only are wives told to respect and submit to their husbands, but husbands are told to love and respect their wives. It's a two-way thing of mutual respect and seeking to honor God. Abuse of any kind should never happen, but if it does then it should not be tolerated. Keep in mind that we're all imperfect, which means that husbands might not always be someone that their wives can respect, and wives might not always submit perfectly. But as husbands and wives, their goal should be to honor the Lord in the way that they treat each other: "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church - for we are members of his body...However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband." (Ephesians 5:21-33)To help clarify this point, here are things that Bible commentaries say concerning the above passage: "Just as Christ is not inferior to the Father, but is the second person in the Trinity, so wives are equal to their own husbands. Yet in a marriage relationship, a husband and wife have different roles. to the Lord: A wife's voluntary submission arises out of her own submission to Christ." (Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary, Ephesians 5:22-24)Leaders are all imperfect, but it's proper to pay due honor and respect to the office that they hold. In a similar way, all husbands are human, and all husbands will make mistakes. But if the wife properly submits herself to the husband's role as the head of the family (even if she can't quite respect the man himself) then this honors God and He's likely to bless her obedience. However, keep in mind that grudging submission, or mocking submission, or any kind of submission with a bad attitude, demonstrates a heart that's filled with pride and rebellion. Therefore, this is not proper submission and we shouldn't expect God to bless it. Ideally, a husband and wife will act as a team because they're "one flesh," and the husband is the team leader who is held accountable to God. For example, even though Eve was the one who was initially deceived and ate the forbidden fruit, the sins of the human race came through Adam. Both of them sinned, but Adam (the husband) was the one who was held accountable: "And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner." (1 Timothy 2:14)So Adam and Eve both sinned, and in fact Eve sinned first, but Adam (the husband and father) is the one who was held accountable for sin entering the world. Since Adam (the husband and father) was held accountable for sin, and since all husbands and fathers are held accountable, this indicates that sin is passed down to every person through the father. Wives and mothers are never held accountable for any sins but their own, from Eve all the way down to today. For instance, we see "sins of the fathers" (not "sins of the parents" as the gender-neutral 2011 NIV says) being passed down to the children for several generations (e.g., Exodus 20:5 NKJV, Exodus 34:6-7 NKJV, Numbers 14:18 NKJV, Deuteronomy 5:9 NKJV, 1 Kings 16:11-13 NKJV, 2 Kings 9:6-9 NKJV, 2 Kings 10:10-11 NKJV, Lamentations 5:7 NKJV, Matthew 23:32 NKJV), but we never see any "sins of the mothers" being passed down to the children. Sin is not passed down through the mother. Jesus did not inherit sin when He was born as a human baby because He had a human mother but He did not have a human father. This is one reason why the virgin birth was necessary (for the other fascinating reason why the virgin birth was necessary, see my article called Covenants, Dispensations, and the Ten Commandments - Part One). It's worth repeating that husbands might be tempted to think of their wives' submission as being a blessing, as if the husband gets to be the boss in the marriage. It's not a blessing. It's one of the evils with which the human race was cursed because of sin: "No matter how hard people try to do away with male dominion, agonizing labor, painful childbearing, and death, these evils will continue because sin is present. They are fruits of sin." (The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, Genesis 3:14-19) Are Women Allowed to Teach?
In Part One we saw that the weight of evidence shows that women are allowed to hold the position of an elder, bishop, overseer, leader, pastor, preacher, or teacher in church or in ministry. Now let's take a look at what the New Testament says about women teaching: "A woman [gune] should learn in quietness and full submission [hupotage]. I do not permit a woman [gune] to teach or to have authority over a man [aner]; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman [gune] who was deceived and became a sinner." (1 Timothy 2:11-14)In verse 11 above, Paul spoke about "a woman" (or "a wife") learning in quietness and submission, which is exactly what he said about married women in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 as we saw in Part One. Once again, the word "woman" here comes from the Greek word gune, which can mean "wife" or "woman," and the word "man" here comes from the Greek word aner, which can mean "husband" or "man." The word for "submission" comes from the same Greek word that we've seen throughout this series concerning a wife submitting to her husband. Since the same Greek words are being used in the same context that we saw earlier (concerning a wife submitting to her husband and learning in quietness during the church service), this indicates that Paul was once again speaking of husbands and wives in the above passage. This is further confirmed by the fact that Paul placed these comments in the context of Adam and his wife Eve. In many Bible translations, Paul said that he did not permit a "woman" to teach (or to teach a man, depending on the Bible version) (verse 12, above). If we only look on the surface then we might be tempted to say that women must never teach in church or in ministry, but that would contradict other New Testament passages such as the following: "Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately." (Acts 18:24-26)In Acts 18:24-26 (above), Priscilla (a woman) was involved in teaching Apollos (a man). As we saw earlier, the apostle Paul most often mentioned her name before her husband's name, giving her prominence. In 2 Timothy 2:24 (above), Paul said that a servant of the Lord must be able to teach, and he didn't qualify this statement by restricting it only to men. In Titus 2:3-5 (above), Paul specifically said that older women should teach and train younger women, and some Bible commentaries (e.g., Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary) say that this refers to a special ministry within the church. So when Paul said in 1 Timothy 2:12 (above) that he didn't permit "women" to teach, he was not saying that women can never teach. Otherwise he would have been contradicting himself. If you search online you'll find that virtually all pastors and Bible teachers say that the Great Commission (which Jesus gave to the entire Church body just before He ascended up to heaven) applies to every Christian, even today. This is Matthew's version of the Great Commission: "Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you."" (Matthew 28:18-20)In the above passage, Jesus told the entire Church body to go and make disciples, to baptize them, and to teach them. The Great Commission (above) applies to every Christian, which means that men and women have been commissioned to do all of those things. Therefore, women are allowed to teach. The Greek word for "teach" in 1 Timothy 2:12 (above) means "Teach, instruct by word of mouth" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the Old and New Testaments, Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, didasko). Notice that when someone speaks a word of prophecy from God, then that person is "instructing by word of mouth," and recall that earlier we saw a definition of the Greek word for prophet which said that "Prophets were a class of instructors or preachers who were next in rank to the Apostles." With that in mind, here are some scriptural examples concerning women prophesying: "In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams." (Acts 2:17)Again, prophesying involves "instructing by word of mouth" based on what the prophet or prophetess has heard from God, which means that the above passages involve women teaching Christian truths to other people (including to men). Here are some more examples of women teaching Christian truths to men: "The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."" (Matthew 28:5-7)In the above passages, an angel first told the truth of the Resurrection to women (not to men), and he commanded the women to impart this knowledge and information to the apostles. In fact, we also see that Jesus Himself first appeared to women (not to men) after His resurrection, and He commanded them to impart some knowledge and information to the apostles. So the very first people to teach the truth of the Resurrection were women, and the first people to whom the women taught this truth were men (the apostles). Notice that if it's wrong or sinful for women to teach spiritual truths to men, then Jesus would not have told women to teach men about His resurrection. In addition, the words of Jesus' mother are recorded in Scripture for the purpose of teaching men and women about the goodness of God: "And Mary said: "My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done great things for me - holy is his name. His mercy extends to those who fear him, from generation to generation. He has performed mighty deeds with his arm; he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts. He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble. He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty. He has helped his servant Israel, remembering to be merciful to Abraham and his descendants forever, even as he said to our fathers."" (Luke 1:46-55)The point of all of this is that women were allowed (and even commanded) to teach Christian truths in the New Testament, including teaching these truths to men. So what did Paul mean when he said that he didn't permit a "woman" to teach (1 Timothy 2:12, above)? Here are some things that a Greek dictionary says about that passage: "1 Tim. 2:12 should not be interpreted as a prohibition by Paul for any woman to teach, but only for a wife when that teaching may be construed by those who hear her to think that she is dominant in her relationship with her husband...Paul is anxious to make very clear here that no woman through her teaching should give the impression that she is the boss and lording it over her husband. If any such impression is given at any time, then she should keep quiet (hesuchia [2271], be undisturbed and not disturbing others. The word hesuchia is the ant. of tarache [5016], disturbance). The word does not mean silence" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the Old and New Testaments, Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, gune, emphasis added)Once again we can see that Paul was concerned about the relationship between a husband and a wife, and about proper orderliness in the church and in the home. Paul was not saying that women can never teach Christian truths because that would contradict all of the passages we examined above. In addition, when Paul said that a "woman" or a "wife" (gune in the Greek) must not have authority over a "man" or a "husband" (aner in the Greek), the context indicates that he was referring to a wife not "lording it over" or "domineering" her husband (and a husband should not "lord it over" or "domineer" his wife, based on the passages we examined earlier). The Greek word for "authority" in 1 Timothy 2:12 (above) means: "dominate: - usurp authority over" (Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary, authenteo)Therefore, Paul's statement here is consistent with his other discussions of husbands and wives that we've already examined, and Paul reinforced this statement by placing it in the context of the very first husband and wife (1 Timothy 2:13-14, above). So 1 Timothy 2:12 (above) does not mean that women can never be in authority over men (such as a woman being in charge over a ministry in a church). Once again we see that many of Paul's comments concerning women are not intended to be commands to all women, but instead they're referring to the husband's and wife's behavior with each other in the home as well as in church. In 1 Timothy 2:12 (above), Paul also said that the wife must be "silent." As the Greek dictionary quoted above points out, the Greek word used in verse 12 does not actually mean "silence," but instead it means "not disturbing others." According to Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary, the noun form of that word is hesuchia ("stillness, that is, desistance from bustle or language: - quietness, silence"), and the adjective form is hesuchios ("keeping one's seat (sedentary), that is, (by implication) still (undisturbed, undisturbing): - peaceable, quiet"). Apart from 1 Timothy 2:11-12, here are all of the other occurrences of these two Greek words in the New Testament: "When they heard him speak to them in Aramaic, they became very quiet [hesuchia]." (Acts 22:2)Notice that these Greek words actually refer to being peaceful and settled down and not disturbing others, so Paul was not commanding women to be completely silent in church. Again, many of Paul's comments concerning women are not intended to be commands to all women, but instead they're referring to the husband's and wife's behavior with each other in church and in the home. "There Is neither Male nor Female"
Some people use Galatians 3:28 to claim that there are no distinctions between men and women, and therefore there are no distinctions between men's and women's roles in the church and in the home: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28)Based on this verse, people sometimes claim that all distinctions between men and women have been erased, and therefore wives do not need to submit to their husbands. However, notice that if Paul was teaching in Galatians 3:28 (above) that all distinctions between males and females have been erased, then he was also teaching in that passage that all distinctions between slave and free have been erased. Yet Paul specifically taught that the distinctions between slave and free within the body of Christ were not erased: "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free. And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him." (Ephesians 6:5-9)As abhorrent as slavery is, it was a reality in Paul's time. Paul clearly said that there continued to be differences in roles and relationships between slaves and masters in the body of Christ, and therefore Paul was not teaching in Galatians 3:28 (above) that all distinctions between slave and free have been abolished. This means that Paul was not teaching that all distinctions between men and women have been abolished. When we look at Galatians 3:28 in its proper context, we can see what Paul was saying: "But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Galatians 3:22-29)In Galatians 3:28 (above), Paul was saying that men and women all receive justification in exactly the same way (by having proper faith in Jesus - see my article called How to Receive Salvation), and that men and women who belong to Christ become heirs according to the promise made to Abraham. There's no difference in the way that men and women receive salvation, just as there's no difference in the way that Jews and Greeks, and slave and free, receive salvation. This passage says nothing at all about the proper roles and relationships between men and women in the church and in the home, so it does not teach that wives do not need to submit to their husbands. Conclusion
Many of the New Testament instructions concerning husbands' and wives' roles, or concerning women in general, can be difficult for us to understand, and they need to be prayerfully and sensitively handled in the church and in the home. But we should keep in mind that God is not looking for our approval of His commands, or whether we "like" His commands. He expects our obedience. If we seek to honestly understand and apply God's Word to our lives, honoring His ways above our own ways or our own desires, then He will greatly bless us for it. Back to Part One. For the glory of the Lord Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God, who came in the flesh, was delivered over to death for our sins, and was raised to life for our justification. Dave Root home page and email: https://www.vividchristianity.com "Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Corinthians 12:3) "Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist - denying the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also." (1 John 2:22-23) "If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God." (1 John 4:15) "Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world." (1 John 4:1-3) "And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love. I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." (2 John 1:6-7) "He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification." (Romans 4:25) |
| Modification History |
|
| All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (R). NIV (R). Copyright (C) 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved. (Emphasis added.) |