The discussion was regarding the instructions of God on the role of women in the Church (1 Tim 2:9-15). I, of course, stuck with the traditional understanding of Scripture, while others argued for the newest version which suggests that, after all, Paul came from a place where women were not educated and today he'd be fine with it. Fine. You decide. But here's my question. What if?
One of the most inane statements you will find in all of Scripture is when Peter was commanded by God to eat from the sheet of food God was providing. Peter's response was classic: "No, Lord." (Acts 10:14) Get it? Foolish indeed. "No, Lord." A contradiction in terms. Either He is Lord and we submit or He is not and we don't have to. Not "No, Lord." And yet ...
So back to my question. Looking again at that passage in 1 Timothy, let's ask a hypothetical question. Hypothetically let's say that you received enlightenment from, say, the Holy Spirit and you saw that the text meant exactly what it seemed to say. Let's take it to the extreme. Women should not wear braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire. The Spirit tells you, "Yes, that's exactly what I mean." Women should learn quietly with all submissiveness. "Yes," He says again, "I mean that just as it seems to say." And God does not permit a woman to teach or take authority over a man. "Yep!" He says one more time (as if the Holy Spirit would ever say, "Yep!") "I intended it just as it looks right there on the page." Okay, good. No more questions. No more examination. No more discussion about what it does or doesn't mean. Church History and modern society are irrelevant at this point. You're all clear on what it means. So ... what do you do?
If you're a woman do you stop wearing fancy hair-dos and expensive clothes and jewelry? Do you remain quiet and learn with submissiveness? Do you refuse to teach men or take authority over them? Is that your determined course of action? Or do you say, "Well, actually, it isn't too practical in today's world and, after all, we've come a long way from that and it wouldn't even be appreciated today if I did that, so I'm going to rely on the grace of God and just ignore it"? Perhaps, it's "Well, if God is like that, I don't want anything to do with Him."
If you're a man do you have the temerity to stand on that position against the world, against society, against culture, perhaps even against the women in your family and in your home? Do you choose to agree with it and consider it of value? Or do you say, "Yes, well, that's true, apparently, but, after all, is it any good to do battle over something like this? Won't it just sow division in the church? Won't it just put enmity between me and the rest? I mean, what kind of a witness would I be if I stood on what appears to be clear male chauvinism? I'm going to rely on the grace of God and just ignore it"? Perhaps, it's "Well, if God is like that, I don't want anything to do with Him."
That's the question. The question, of course, is somewhat simpler and broader. Do you conclude that what God says is true and, as such, it is that on which you should stand and act, or do you conclude that circumstances and culture are a better, safer place to stand? Do you say, "No, Lord"? What would you do?
No comments:
Post a Comment