The CBE Scroll

Comment by Donna M. Taylor

August 27, 2008 @ 9:07 pm

I am a 54 year old female, a Christian Jew (German heritage). However, I was cut off from my mother’s family (Jewish heritage) and raised by my father’s family. I was raised in churches which were built on belief of Jesus Christ as the Messiah and Savoir (thank God). The bible was read to me daily as well as prayer. When I was six years old, Sunday’s after church, I’d go to the pastor’s home and stand in the middle of the livingroom and repeat the sermon to some of the church memebers. I have since taught women and Sunday school adult classes. I attended a Baptist church this past Sunday and tonight where the women are not allowed to teach the congregation, nor are they allowed to teach even the women, or anyone, or be an elder. I find this oppressive, to say the least. They find women, and men who are not called according to their standards, false teachers. They use old and new testament scriptures to back this up and say any woman who teaches twists the word to do what she wants to do, not what God called her to do. They remind me of the temple rabbis and priests of the old convenent. If Jesus had not come yet, that church would consider him a false teacher or false prophet. They do not have faith in God beyond what they want to control with their law and are afraid to step beyond to say, “God’s will be done”. The pastor there is afraid of the enemy getting in through a woman (like Eve) rather than having faith in God or taking their own responsibility. God spoke through a donkey when necessary. He will use whomever he can to get the job done because his lost children matter that much to Him. People who will not allow women to speak are limiting God. Scripture says that God will even use little children.
I have seen wonderous miracles and have been trained by God for many many years. I have no other goal in life but to do His will, his perfect and complete will. I have given my life as a living sacrifice and God uses me in a mighty way. There’s nothing I want to do more than to love His children, as He has asked me to do. I have seen visions and dreamed dreams from an early age. I have seen people completely change in front of my eyes and gave up trying to understand, figure it out, or even contain the awe, when it comes to God, and just let Him do His work.
I too would like scripture to back this up but know in my heart that I will do what he calls me to do. I will not attend that church again (or, God’s will be done!) That’s my safety net!

Comment by faith

August 28, 2008 @ 10:12 pm

Donna, you hit it right on the head, it is about fear. Scripture says the law brings fear. Only the Spirit brings liberty.

on another line: there is no place in scripture that excludes women from the priesthood of believers. Excluding women from preaching the gospel and teaching the word limits her participation in that priesthood.

Comment by Don

August 29, 2008 @ 3:14 am

The non-egals make a point that it was the (male-only) priests who taught in the Mosaic covenants (these priests were also only from Aaron, had no blemishes, etc).

Now that all believers are priests in the new covenant, the teachers can have blemishes, but they still need to be male? One would not EXPECT that, as it might be Judaizing to do so, which we are not to do, so one would expect the opposite. In other words, the clear expectation is no limitations based on gender.

Comment by faith

August 29, 2008 @ 6:52 am

one of my professors in sem made an interesting point about priests in the OT. Being a priest was about the sacrificial system which had to do with a great deal of hauling animal corpses, lifting them on the altars etc. sheer physical strength was necessary. It is also interesting that in the OT, there were women prophets who spoke the word of God, taught the word of God. Huldah, Deborah, etc. Handling the word did not require physical strength.

There were also times in the OT that women were considered unclean limiting their participation at the Temple. Jesus however, redefined both the sacrificial system and the purity laws of the day lifting such barriers. Priesthood became not about the Temple because Jesus became the Temple and Jesus became the sacrifice. It’s not about power or place or institution, it’s about Jesus.

I think Comps need to be careful what they change… maybe they are easily deceived–like the Judaizers.

Comment by Don

August 29, 2008 @ 8:02 am

FWIIW, my understanding of Jesus is that he was a Torah-observant Jew, he correctly kept and correctly taught Torah. I do not see Jesus redefining anything about Torah, however, he did correctly understand things that had been misunderstood by many Jews. Just before he died, he did institute the new covenant.

The temple was still in operation with sacrifices until it was destroyed in 70. And Jews of the Way including James and Paul went there.

Comment by Amanda

August 29, 2008 @ 1:31 pm

I am a member of the churches of christ which is big in the priesthood of all believers, they don’t even ordain ministers because of this doctrine.

They are also staunchly conservative when it comes to women in leadership roles in the church, basically just like southern baptists.

Churches of Christ also do not have a governing body, believing that each church is autonamous, so there are a few individual churches of christ that allow women to particiapte in worship. Mine, Highland Church of Christ, in Abilene Texas, is one of the handful that do.

Comment by Kathryn

August 29, 2008 @ 1:43 pm

Great testimony, Donna. Yes, it is about fear. God has given us a spirit of power, love, and a sound mind, not fear. Jesus ministered under the old covenant. After His resurrection, a new and better covenant was in place, which is one reason why a woman could bear that great news. To me, the priesthood of all believers means, among other things, that a woman may go directly to God for her calling in life, and does not need a male go-between. Indeed, having to have a male mediator would mean that Jesus is no longer our only High Priest, as Scripture teaches that He is our sole mediator between God and man. Such a teaching is unscriptural to the core. Another reason for the all-male priesthood of the Old Testament may have been due to the fact that only the cleanest of animals was to enter the Holy of Holies since they were symbolic of the Only Way, the Only Truth, the Only life who is Jesus our Lord. A woman’s monthly “uncleanness” would have rendered her unsuitable. Christ is indeed the final sacrifice. The veil has been destroyed. Faith, you put it right: Excluding women from the preaching ministry is an attempt to limit their priesthood in ways I find unscriptural.

Comment by Hubert Edgar

August 29, 2008 @ 2:46 pm

Amanda, thanks for the info on the Churches of Christ. Very interesting.

Comment by faith

August 30, 2008 @ 8:46 am

Don, Jesus taught the torah in light of himself, and God’s mission in the earth. He spoke of himself as the Temple. He said he, himself fulfilled the law. He was the lamb slain. He made people clean. At the time, the folks did not grasp that fully nor could they without Christ’s full revelation.

Comment by leigh

August 30, 2008 @ 8:42 pm

As usual, good post and enlightening comments.

I think we’ve all heard what some of us may consider the “end run” around this, the “priesthood of all believers”, which is pretty much the same sort of argument usually used by complementarians in their understanding of certain scriptures. Many believe theirs to be the true understanding of scripture, as we do, so “end run” in the strict sense of a planned strategy does not always apply, really.

It comes down to this:
Of course women, as believers, are permitted–and encouraged–to share their experiences as a believer and/or their conversion, with the unsaved. Whether they are male or female does not, with most complementarians, come into play with sharing on a personal level. All believers are charged with the spreading of the Gospel.

So denying that God may call some women to preach in a more formal setting does not deny women their ability (“priesthood of all believers”) to fulfill their responsibility (spreading of the Gospel) to others. And so, there is no contradiction there.

Thoughts? I could use some new ones, on this. ;-)
Thank you.

Comment by Lin

August 31, 2008 @ 10:02 am

There is another aspect to this as there is no ‘laity’ in scripture. We are all ministers if we are truly saved. We have different giftings but we are all serving the body in different functions. 1 John teaches that all true believers have ‘anointing’.

One reason the Holy Priesthood is not understood very well is because we have institutionalized the church and created a Christian caste system of clergy/laity. We have ‘professional’ Christians and ‘amateur’ Christians. It really is insidious and unscriptural.

I grew up SBC and I can tell you Priesthood of believer was a very important doctrine when I was a kid, not just in my church but in the SBC. It was drilled into our heads. I know the shift away from it came in the 70′s and grieved many Baptists.

In 2000, Al Mohler tried to get PoB and Soul Competency taken out of the Baptist Faith and Message. He was unsuccessful but was able to get an ‘s’ added to the phrase: Priesthood of believers. Here is an explanation taken from this article: http://www.baptiststandard.com/2000/7_17/pages/bfm_meaning.html

“The same issue was addressed by a leading member of the revision committee during a news conference in Orlando. At that news conference, Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., explained the difference between the phrase “priesthood of the believer” as used in the 1963 statement and “priesthood of believers” as used in the 2000 statement.

___”Baptists believe in the priesthood of believers, but it is dangerous to say the priesthood of the believer,” Mohler said. “It is not just that we stand alone; it is that we stand together–and we stand together under the authority of God’s word.”

___Henderson found irony in this explanation being given in a news conference after the vote was taken. This is not the interpretation he had understood to be the Southern Baptist position in the past, he said.

___”While I am content to stand before God under the authority of Scripture, I can do so whether I’m alone or in a crowd of all 15.8 million Southern Baptists,” Henderson wrote. “While I appreciate the committee’s efforts to at least partially restore a pair of key Baptist doctrines, I am confident it is not dangerous to be a lone priest/believer in the presence of Almighty God through the power of his Holy Spirit.”

Mohler is very much into hierarchies within the Body and any independence of a believer sans the clergy is very troubling to him. Priesthood has another very important connotation for us as believers. We no longer have an earthly priest. Jesus Christ is our High Priest and each of us, as believers, have direct access.

Sorry for the novel. This doctrine is dear to me and I believe is quite lost to many. I was so glad to see you writing about it here.

Comment by Lolly

August 31, 2008 @ 1:26 pm

Thank you, Donna, for your lovely testimony. I remeber as a child growing up in a Methodist minister’s household. We were here in the South, and one day I heard my parents say, “The Methodists are getting so liberal now. They’re even ordaining women!” It was as if the idea of women preachers was the same as having barbarians pounding at the gates. They actually left the UMC for a splinter denomination because they felt the UMC had gotten too liberal. I thank God that He was able to get through to them and change their thinking over the years, so that now they are comfortable with both my husband and myself being ministers.

Lin, thanks for the info on the SBC. I find it ironic that they’re so big on hierarchy when their denomination is very loosely structured. Like the COC, Baptist churches are bascially autonomous. They don’t even have to send delegates to the conventions. Maybe this is why Mohler et. al. are so insistent on subordination and control?

Comment by Lin

August 31, 2008 @ 2:25 pm

“Lin, thanks for the info on the SBC. I find it ironic that they’re so big on hierarchy when their denomination is very loosely structured. Like the COC, Baptist churches are bascially autonomous. They don’t even have to send delegates to the conventions. Maybe this is why Mohler et. al. are so insistent on subordination and control?”

They do not want ‘laity’ delegates there. Most delegates today are pastors and staff.

This has only been since the early 80′s when certain factions gained control. The SBC I grew up in is nothing like it is today. I hardly recognize it as I left it for many years and recently came back but my family has been involved for years and have lamented the tactics used. They gained control by using ‘inerrancy of scripture’ as the rally cry. And there were some liberal seminary professors denying Virgin Birth, etc., but it was nothing like they made it out to be. We only know this in hindsight. This witch hunt ended up with many innocent people fired or ousted over secondary doctrines that did not fit with the leaders view of inerrancy. They were actually making way for their own loyal appointments to these positions. The leaders used political means and were very good at it. Since then they have consolidated power in every area and have narrowed the parameters of every secondary doctrine. Especially women. I grew up in an SBC where the women did just about everything but pastor yet many even preached! I grew up with female deacons. And they were not liberal!

When my parents attended conventions 20 years ago there were 40,000 and more delegates there. Today, they are lucky to have 7,000. It worked. Now a few control everything. Individual churches have autonomy but if you are an ambitious pastor, you don’t want to be out of the ingroup. There is a lot of recognition or money with speaking engagments, sitting on boards, etc.. In fact, the SBC cannot survive without the dollars from SBC autonomous churches. And some churches are electing not to send dollars to feed the bureaucracy anymore.

It is fast becoming a dinosaur because missions can be funded much more efficiently these days.

Comment by Lin

August 31, 2008 @ 2:26 pm

Opps, I sent too soon. I meant to add that this is what happens when we ignore the doctrine of Priesthood of Believer. We end up with a magisterium.

Comment by Christy

September 1, 2008 @ 12:12 pm

Some object to the emphasis on the Priesthood of the Believer as though it is an attack on order and authority. Without order, systems collapse into chaos. But this view distorts the true issue. God does not war against Himself. Church order and the Priesthood of the Believer are in perfect harmony when rightly understood.

In God’s Kingdom equality of persons does not negate order. The key is attitude. No one can boast, except in the Lord. Knowing who we really are leads to humility. We are to esteem others more highly than we esteem ourselves. We lead as servants; sheep leading sheep. The only head is Christ and we are all brothers and sisters.

The Church has been tainted by the world’s system of “merited hierarchy.” It is thought that elite people rule others because they are in some aspect superior to those under their control. This right to rule can be justified by biology (bloodlines and gender), wealth, and/or power. It is not uncommon for the ruling elite to think they are a superior subspecies of the human race. They think they are born to rule by divine right.

But with God there is no partiality. Paul declared that even the Jerusalem apostles were not superiors. (Gal. 2:6-9) Jesus warned the apostles earlier not to vie for power positions but to see themselves as brothers. (Matt. 23:8-10) How then did we evolve from seeing the Church as a nation of priests to an elite priesthood of leaders ruling over the common laity? The satanic world’s philosophy of merited hierarchy has definitely distorted our understanding of the Gospel’s message and how it affects human relationships.

Church leaders are to be respected, but so are those in other positions. We are each assigned giftings by God for the edification of the whole Body. God alone gets the glory as each member grows to full maturity in Christ. Wisdom does not come from position but from God alone, and He gives it freely to those who ask Him for it. Christian women were born to preach the Gospel.

Comment by tiro

September 2, 2008 @ 2:11 pm

#87281
“Mohler is very much into hierarchies within the Body and any independence of a believer sans the clergy is very troubling to him. ”

That is because it is about control to Mohler, Grudem, Ware, Patterson and their supporters. They want control. And there is a profit there somewhere, for the controllers.

Comment by Liz

September 2, 2008 @ 6:48 pm

Amazing, since Jesus was the ultimate expression of a person living on the earth
(without sin of course) and his whole attitude was one of servanthood, not putting himself in the limelight, gently encourages those who were struggling etc.

Whoever started this whole idea of authority and rankings has a lot to answer for!

Comment by Christy

September 3, 2008 @ 6:52 am

The drive to control and dominate others is a major characteristic of the fallen human nature – the delusion of seeing ourselves as little gods.

Comment by James

September 3, 2008 @ 4:27 pm

This is a vital question for Christians in the 21st century (it has been a vital question for many centuries, but the church has fumbled it repeatedly. Unfortunately, I can think of many more instances of instituted in-equality than equality in the bible.)

At http://www.thediablogue.com/ , there is significant mention of the topic of equality in the bible and the role of feminism in Christianity. I think these blogs should be linked! Take a look if you get a chance…

Comment by Hubert Edgar

September 4, 2008 @ 11:26 am

May I say that my understanding of what’s going on with The Priesthood of All Believers in greatly increased.

Leigh, your discussion is insightful about the “other side.” I like that term “end run.” I think their problem is they’re starting with what they believe and then interpreting Scripture so it will agree. Poor hermeneutics lead to poor interpretation.

Lin, Great SBC history. I’m so glad you added that last little bit. It sums it up nicely.

Christy, I have never heard church leadership stated better than “sheep leading sheep.” True humility is acknowledging both what you cannot and what you can do. We cannot and must not replace the Holy Spirit. We can use His gifts in God’s service. In fact, to be good Christians we must at least try to use those gifts. So many women have been denied the opportunity to use the gifts the Spirit has given them. The Church, the churches, and the women themselves suffer for this. Come the judgment of the belivers, those who stand in the way of God will answer to God. “Hay and stubble.” (I Cor 3:12)

You all bless me so much!

Comment by Hubert Edgar

September 4, 2008 @ 3:10 pm

I just ran into a good verse that I think applies to the kind of elitist view of church leadership we’ve been talking about here: “Thus says the LORD: ‘Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches, but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth. For in these things I delight, declares the LORD.’”

Jeremiah 9:23,24 ESV

Comment by Frank

September 4, 2008 @ 3:58 pm

Some very interesting discussion regarding the “Priesthood of Believers”–made me go and review Timothy George’s essay on this subject in the book, “The People of God: Essays on the Believer’s Church.” Basically, he argues that in the community of believers, God has so tempered the body that we are priests to each other, proclaiming God’s Word to one another, sharing in Christ’s work of mediation and intercession for the world, etc. I recommend it to you all to read; it is very helpful.

Comment by faith

September 5, 2008 @ 9:30 pm

re: order. The Spirit gifts the church as the Spirit determines–that includes who might lead and govern. order is not based on flesh but ordered by God through giftedness. those who are gifted by the Spirit and mature in the faith are able to lead and govern. there is not something intrinsic to maleness that qualifies them alone to lead and govern. It’s not in the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Comment by Jeanine S. Moss

September 6, 2008 @ 7:51 pm

I was raised in a Restoration Movement church–nondenominational,Campbell-Stone movement, “Campbellites,” etc. One of the basic tenets of our movement is the “priesthood of all believers,” which I have heard taught in our churches (learned it in Sunday School as a child)for forever. Unfortunately, another basic tenet is the exclusion of women from any leadership role where she might be perceived as “usurping the authority” of a man. What authority?? The misconception that church leadership is an authoritative “position” is difficult for many to overcome.

Comment by Liz

September 7, 2008 @ 2:08 am

Yes, Janine. We were in the same group in Australia (Churches of Christ here) and it has taken many years for women to be accepted as qualified to be ministers or elders. Many local churches still would not have women leaders and even some who have will treat women leaders differently than male leaders. There have been a couple of instances where both husband and wife were fully trained ministers who were employed jointly.but many still thought of the guy as the ‘main ‘minister
Traditions die hard and it’s so subtle that people don’t usually realise what they are saying or how they are treating women in leadership. After 30+ years in ministry I was finally accepted as a minister alongside my husband (admittedly I wasn’t college trained, but that wasn’t really the issue) and enjoyed relative freedom for our last years in full-time ministry. Little by little, change is coming.

Comment by Christy

September 7, 2008 @ 6:48 am

I find it ironic that those who hold to biblical equality are often accused of being influenced by cultural forces. Yet it is really those who hold to merited hierarchy who are being influenced by the world’s philosophy. In Christ, all worldly barriers are broken down between Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female, and rich and poor. God shows no partiality.

It is antichrist to insist on enforcing these divisions in God’s Kingdom. How often over the centuries have the rich and powerful been shown special favor to the corruption of the churches. But isn’t it God who uses the weak and foolish to confound the world’s elitists? The last shall be first and the first shall be last. So much for the occultic pyramidal caste system!

Comment by Jon Trott

September 10, 2008 @ 2:06 pm

This is a great post, and “Priesthood of the believer” seems to me to do a double number on the hierarchalist interpretation of the Word.

1. “Priesthood of the believer” as I was taught it focused primarily on the fact that there is no one between myself and Christ — no intermediary. Christ Himself is the Intermediary between me and God the Father. So… just how does a man get in there between Jesus and a female believer? Hierarchalist thinking seems to me sooner or later to put a male between Christ and every female.

2. Relationally, when defining terms, being a “priest” is contrasted to being a “prophet.” A prophet speaks from God to the people of God (and sometimes to people not of God). A priest intercedes *for* the people to God. Another way to say it is that a prophet is primarily vertically related (from God to the people) while a priest is primarily horizontally related (from the people to God). This is simplistic, but provides a sort of penciled-in picture. My point is this: as priests, women (and men) would naturally be relating to people and speaking to God on the people’s behalf. In short, I don’t see how a distinction can be made between a named “office” of priest/minister and beetween the actions that all women (along with men) are called to perform as “priests” by the Priesthood of the Believer.

I await correction for anything I’ve said in ignorance, which may be all of it for all I know.

Anyway, fascinating thread.

Comment by LMcC

September 11, 2008 @ 12:09 pm

Christy (87316): Biblical equality is the only true counter-cultural way for men and women to interact. Mutual submission and mutual accountability are completely against anything the world has to offer. Everything else is a stronger or weaker version of the world’s same old tired power plays.

Jon (87332): Hierarchalist thinking is a sure way to discourage the God-fearing daughter of a single, divorced, or widowed mother from ever getting married if she values her relationship with God. What’s the point of marrying if she’s going to lose her direct connection and has to have a human mediator? Anyone who has ever played “the gossip game” or has had a message relayed to them through a third party knows that the original message always gets messed up somehow. Worse, that message might get deliberately changed or even lost if it conflicts with the mediator/husband’s personal agenda. Not to mention she’d miss that closeness she once had with God. (Ack, who ever thought that someone could find any benefit in being a child of divorce or widowhood? Oh yeah, a widow’s kid could do that.)

Comment by Jeanine S. Moss

September 19, 2008 @ 8:58 pm

I might add to my previous comment regarding the “priesthood of all believers” that it was taught primarily in the context of anti-Catholic doctrine–I think it certainly did not enter the minds of the leadership that it might one day offer a ray of hope to women who might be gifted for leadership. You might say “slay one dragon at a time,” and at that time the dragon was Catholic doctrine. Jeanine S. Moss

Comment by Michele

December 27, 2008 @ 10:37 pm

Not only are women priests of God, we are the temple of God. Jesus Christ is our High Priest and our God. There is to be no go between, no mediator between us and God. The whole reformation movement within the church was based upon this fact; that the New Testament declares:

1. We are all (believers) priests unto God and for God.
2. We are all the temple of the Holy Spirit. He dwells in us, not in a building because the sin that separated us from him has been removed through Jesus’ sacrifice and our belief in Him.
3. God says in the Old Testement speaking of when the new would come (and it is repeated in Hebrews) that no one will have to teach His people from the greatest to the smallest to know God for we will all know Him for he will make us his dwelling.

For these reasons, and I’m sure I could state many more but this is enough, we are to have no more mediator between us and God than Jesus Christ Himself. He IS our mediator, every believer’s, between us and the Father. To place anyone else there is heresy and idolatry. To place oneself between a person and God as their mediator is to usurp a position that belongs to Christ alone and make oneself a “god” to that person. This is blasphemous. You cannot do such a thing according to scripture.

Secondly, it just makes no sense whatsoever that God would make all female believers temples of the Holy Ghost, give us power from the Spirit to proclaim the Good News of the Gospel, make us heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ Jesus, or for Christ to share his throne with us in heaven where he positionally already considers us to be in Himself, and then deny us a voice in the church. It’s beyond arrogance and ignorance. It’s beyond all logic and decency as well to declare women are “equals” in the church and have “equal value” with God and then say we have not the same rights as men. Nonsense, that is anything but equal value to declare such things.

No man, according to scripture, is to be our mediator, our superior, our leader, our master, our priest but God. “No man can have two masters…” “Call no man your teacher, for you have but one teacher and that is God…” etc.

The teaching on men being the priests of their homes is utter heresy. There is no such mandate stated in the Bible anywhere; instead mutual submission with a meaning of becoming one is taught.

We are each and every believer in covenant with God Himself through the Son. We have all the same rights, privileges and standing with God. God sees no gender and it would be ridiculous if He did. I just wish men in leadership in the church would open their eyes and be willing to see how utterly absurd and illogical such doctrines are. Unfortunately, their fleshly nature loves the superior postition they believe they hold because it makes them feel valuable and important. None of us need to be above the other, however, in order to feel valuable and important.

Anyway, the whole Bible from beginning to end is just chalked full of scriptures that fly in the face of such heresies concerning women and their roles in the church and home. I pray such pride in the church will lose, and God’s love, truth, and grace will win out very soon.

God’s equal servant,
Michele E.S.

Comment by Jeanine S. Moss

January 27, 2009 @ 12:14 pm

May I refer any of you who are interested to “Arise,” the weekly newsletter from Christians for Biblical Equality. Mimi Haddad, the President, has an excellent article using Gal. 6:15 as her theme verse.
Jeanine Moss

Comment by Jeanine S. Moss

March 25, 2009 @ 12:53 pm

I am currently reading “Taking Back God” written by a Jewish woman who explores in a comprehensive overview the experiences of women in Catholic, evangelical and mainline protestant,Muslims and observant Jews. I think it would be a good read for anyone who considers themselves a part of the surge in this country of women who embrace the word of God but are critical of male-oriented theology and liturgy. There are interesting parallels in the timelines.
Jeanine S. Moss

Comment by Mara

March 25, 2009 @ 3:47 pm

What is the name of the woman who wrote it?