I’ve heard this statistic more than once: 80% of proclaimed Christians were saved a young age. Whether or not this is correct, it is safe to say that many believers are saved in their youth. The evangelical community typically looks to pastors, evangelists, youth group leaders, etc. to bring people to Christ, and although these are all much needed roles within the church, we all too often overlook the importance of a mother’s influence. With Mother’s Day weekend at hand, I think it might be worthwhile to address an important question that arises in light of the above statistic.
If most believers come to Christ at a young age, why is a Titus 2 ministry treated with such scorn? Egalitarians have often scoffed at the idea of “limiting” a women’s ministry to only women and children. Yet, this statistic implies that a ministry to children is perhaps the most important of all ministries. The church needs to praise the mothers that pour truth into their children from a young age, not diminish the significance of motherhood. In her book, “The True Woman,” Susan Hunt writes of a Puritan mother, Mary Fish, who raised her children in the Lord. Mary’s son, Benjamin, praised his mother:
She was a heroic woman and encountered with firmness the trials and terrors of the American Revolution in which my father was largely concerned…In her widowhood, after my father’s death in 1790, she struggled on in embarrassed circumstances and gave my brother and myself a public education, forming our minds at home to purity and piety. Whatever I have of good in me I owe under God mainly to her. (Hunt 47)
All too often, the church neglects the high calling of motherhood for “better” positions such as pastor and elder. I find it very interesting that unlike pastoral positions, the role of “homemaker” is rarely envied. Yet, if we consider the implications of how many Christians are saved at a young age, we will see how tragic this is. The mindset of the church must be radically transformed. Until we see the ministry of a mother who thrives as a homemaker as completely equal to a man who thrives as a pastor, we will continue in this rut of church secularization. I am forever thankful to be blessed by a mother who viewed the souls of her children as the highest priority, and like Benjamin Fish, I proclaim, “Whatever I have of good in me I owe under God mainly to her.” Let us praise such women instead of diminishing their labors. Happy Mother’s Day!
By: Zach Tarter
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I happen to be married to the woman Zach is talking about. It is a blessing to see our children rise up and call her blest!
She's my mom, too! And I consider it a tremendous blessing to be one of her children. Her prayers, faithful teaching of the Gospel, and loving care pointed me towards Christ.
Thank you, Momma!
Zach,
I agree with you that caring for and ministring to children is a high calling, and that the role of homemakers has been maligned here in the United States (and in other parts of the world) in recent years. Caring for children is very important and the people who take this on full time deserve a lot of respect. However, it makes absolutly no sense to me why women should not hold leadership positions (pastors and elders) in churches. All people, regardless of their sex, have specific gifts and abilities. While it could be argued that caring for children comes most naturally to women (in general), this is by no means true in all cases. In some cases, men are better care givers than women, and in some cases, women are better leaders than men.
My feeling is that Paul's writings on gender issues (and other issues) are more influenced by his personal opinions and cultural biases than the will of God. That view changes how one views the authority of scripture, but it is a valid argument that complementarians are unwilling to consider - mainly because they believe that anything less that complete Biblical inerrancy is un-Christian. I don't discount Paul's writings, but I read them (and the rest of the Bible) with an understanding that it is limited to some degree by the prespectives of its human authors.
Anonymous,
Thank you for responding. I appreciate your input, but fear that a large fallacy exists within your reasoning.
You stated, “it makes absolutly no sense to me why women should not hold leadership positions (pastors and elders) in churches,” and “My feeling is that Paul’s writings on gender issues (and other issues) are more influenced by his personal opinions and cultural biases than the will of God.”
To put it simply, both of your arguments are not based on any authority except what you feel is God’s will. You believe that Paul’s writings are “influenced by his personal opinions and cultural biases,” but how are you so sure that yours aren’t? I do not mean to come across as rude, but you are stating that your beliefs about God’s will are free of personal opinions and cultural biases while Paul’s are sometimes bound by his opinions and cultural biases. In other words, you are placing your feelings about God’s will above what Bible says is God’s will. We are not to look for God’s will in the words or person of Paul or any other biblical author, but we ought to trust that God used clay pots to create His Word in the Bible, where we find God’s will for all men. Thus, when Jesus quoted Deut. 8:3, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God,” He was making a proclamation of the Bible as God’s Word. Throughout the gospels, Jesus used the OT as God’s Word, so how much more should we accept it as truth?
Ultimately, I understand why it doesn’t make sense to you that women shouldn’t be pastors or elders. Until one accepts the Bible as being the whole council of God, these controversial verses won’t make sense. I do not know you, but I would like to encourage you as a brother to submit yourself beneath the Bible instead of placing your feelings above it.
Zach
Zack,
You said: "To put it simply, both of your arguments are not based on any authority except what you feel is God’s will. You believe that Paul’s writings are “influenced by his personal opinions and cultural biases,” but how are you so sure that yours aren’t?"
Zach, I am absolutely confident that everything I think, feel, say, write and believe is influenced by my upbringing, the culture I grew up in, the world I live in, the language I speak, and the religion I have faith in. Moreover, the rules and guidelines I use to discern truth are heavily influenced by my culture, the society I live in, my faith, science, my experiences, etc... Therefore, everything that I think, feel, and believe - my whole frame of reference - is influenced by the time and place in which I live. It would be foolish for me, or anyone else, to think otherwise.
Learning about history, even from the lenses of the 21st century, helps us to understand how people throughout history understood the world (and God) differently than many people do today.
Zack, I cannot say with any degree of certainty how much of God's will is reflected in Paul's writings. This is a faith question, and it is open to debate. However, Paul's writings are the product of the world Paul lived in. His writings are influenced by the lenses of his personality, his faith experiences, his cultural biases, and his language. His understanding of God was surely influenced by all of these factors, just as my understanding of God is based on the English NIV Bible, the Christians (and non-Christians) I have known, books I have read, experiences I have had, speakers I have listened to, prayers I have prayed, etc... Our concept of God is influenced heavily on the cultural, societal, and personal lenses that we use to interpret reality with. The methods that complementarians and egalitarians use to defend their positions, and the rules they use for interpreting the Bible, are all influenced by the world we live in. If you study the belief in Biblical inerrancy throughout church history, this should be apparent.
I do not mean to say that God cannot work through all of this to reveal truth to us, or to Biblical authors like Paul. In fact, I couldn’t really be a Christian if I didn’t believe that God was somehow involved in our lives. However, I do not believe that every word in the Bible is God’s inerrant word.
You state: “We are not to look for God’s will in the words or person of Paul or any other biblical author, but we ought to trust that God used clay pots to create His Word in the Bible, where we find God’s will for all men.” Just because Paul said that he was writing on God’s behalf doesn’t mean that God agreed with him. I’m being sarcastic, but I would urge you to at least consider the other side of the argument. Go to the U of M and take a class on Biblical literature and/or history. Listen to how non-Christians read the Bible, with the faith aspect completely removed. You don’t have to agree with them, but at least listen to the other side. You can’t find the truth unless you are willing to seek out all the facts – even the one that they don’t teach you at NWC.
Anonymous,
Thank you again for responding. In your response, you wrote, “Paul's writings are the product of the world Paul lived in. His writings are influenced by the lenses of his personality, his faith experiences, his cultural biases, and his language. His understanding of God was surely influenced by all of these factors.”
There is one very important factor that I believe is continually missing in your argument. The Bible makes it clear that Paul’s understanding was influenced by all the factors mentioned above, but this was before the Lord struck him blind on the Damascus Road. We see Paul in Acts 8:1 consenting to the murder of Stephen, yet in Acts 9 Paul is preaching the name of Christ! This did not happen because of the surrounding “lenses of his personality, his faith experiences, his cultural biases, and his language.” Rather, he was radically transformed internally by the power of Jesus Christ. Thus, Paul no longer had the same personality, faith experiences, and cultural biases as he did before Christ. This is why Paul could write, “Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know we know Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new” (2 Corinthians 5:16, 17). Paul is emphasizing the point that once one is in Christ, we do not and should not view Christ as non-Christians do. As believers, we are no longer view God through the lenses of culture and personal biases. Rather, we ought to view our culture and God in light of the work that Christ has done in us.
When Paul wrote to Timothy, “I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man,” he was not guided by cultural biases or personal opinions because his whole way of thinking had been transformed by Christ, and he was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, he even gives the reason for his proclamation when appeals to the creation order in the following verses. He writes, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve.” John MacArthur explains, “A woman’s subordinate role did not result after the Fall as a cultural, chauvinistic corruption of God’s perfect design; rather, God established her role as part of His original creation. God made woman after man to be his suitable helper (Gen. 2:18).” Paul wrote what he did because it was so from the beginning, not because he was influenced by culture.
Ultimately, no one is free from all cultural influences and personal biases. Yet, Christ transcends cultural influences to reveal who He truly is and does so through His Word (the Bible). I cannot prove the veracity of the Bible as God’s Word any more than you can prove that it is not His Word. But I can testify as Paul that I am a new creation who views the world radically differently because Christ died and rose again on my behalf. We must see the world in light of the truth, not see truth in light of the world.
Zach
Zach,
I agree that Paul's encounter with God on the Damascus Road was a pivotal point in his life - one that altered his faith and changed the course of his life. I also agree that when someone genuinely gives their life over to Christ, they do change to some degree - their outlook on life may change, their faith would change, their worldview would change, and their attitude towards themselves, their society, their culture, and reality itself would change to some degree.
These changes, however, do not take away the schemata - or the building blocks - of a person's mental development which influences their understanding of everything they encounter.
Just because someone is born again does not mean that the old person or flesh dies away. This may be a good spiritual metaphor, but it does not speak to our physical or psychological elements. Born again Christians continue to struggle with addictions, they continue to harbor political and cultural biases, they still have opinions of gender roles, they still know that if they want to live a healthy life, they have to have food, water, clothing, and shelter.
You state that "As believers, we are no longer view God through the lenses of culture and personal biases. Rather, we ought to view our culture and God in light of the work that Christ has done in us." Any way you look at it, it is fundamentally impossible to divorce yourself from your mental schemata. Your upbringing, your personality, your culture, etc... all influence how you understand God, and how you interpret his involvement in your life. They are the building blocks of your mental awareness. Be careful about crossing spiritual metaphors with psychology.
Lastly, regarding your references to the book of Genesis - some read this book literally, and believe everything happened just as it is described in the text - such as the earth being created in 7 days, woman being created out of man, etc... Others read Genesis as poetic or metaphoric - with the main point being that one God created the world, as opposed to many gods. Therefore, the argument about women being subordinate to men - based on the creation story -doesn't work for those who do not read all this literally.
Anonymous,
Thank you again for responding. This will have to be the last response on this topic. Although I believe this is a valuable discussion in regard to gender issues, I fear our dialogue is exhausting the same issue. Simply stated, we (those who have created this blog) believe that the Scriptures alone are God's Word, and you disagree. If you would still like to discuss this topic, feel free to email me at zbtarter@yahoo.com. Thanks again for honestly sharing your opinion.
Before this discussion is halted, however, I would like to point out an observation from this ongoing dialogue: At the crux of the gender debate is this issue of Biblical authority. The whole of Scripture is clear and consistent in its portrayal of gender roles. Therefore, whenever one accepts the Bible as God’s inerrant Word, they must accept gender complementarity as well. Much more could be said here, so please keep reading our blog to gain insight into how the Scripture tells us to live as men and women.
Zach
Some wonderful points. The importance of evangelizing the next generation can not be over-rated. Investing in children is not a dead end for the less talented or weak or poor leaders among us. It is a high calling indeed but I will believe that the male leadership in some churches actually agrees with that statement when they start encouraging people to serve the children based on something other than the gender of the adult. If both men and women were encouraged to serve the children and if both men and women were encouraged to serve the church in other ways, then it might be easier to believe that the real reason a pastor encourages a given person into children's ministry is the genuine nobility of this kingdom mission.
This blog has fizzeled (sp) out, why aren't you posting anymore, good stuff here keep it up
Post a Comment