Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Women Preachers: "The Tenth Mark of a Healthy Church"

“Expositional preaching is preaching in service to the Word. It presumes a belief in the authority of Scripture---that the Bible is actually God’s Word; but it is something much more than that. A commitment to expositional preaching is a commitment to hear God’s Word---not just to affirm that it is God’s Word but to actually submit yourself to it. The Old Testament prophets and the New Testament apostles were given, not a personal commission to go and speak, but a particular message to deliver. Likewise Christian preachers today have authority to speak from God only so long as they speak His message and unfold His words” (Mark Dever, “Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, New Expanded Edition.” Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004, pages 40-41).

Recently I had the pleasure of reading Mark Dever’s “Nine Marks of a Healthy Church.” My seminary recently had a conference titled “Nine Marks,” and Dever actually came to Southeastern to be a part of the hype. His book has done remarkably well in the evangelical world and I highly recommend it to all believers. Dever’s got one of the finest books I’ve seen on the subject...

I was particularly struck by his words on expositional preaching. Dever made expositional preaching the first of 9 marks of a healthy church. In order for the church to get the other eight marks correct, Dever writes, it is important that expositional preaching be priority number one:

“The first mark of a healthy church is expositional preaching. It is not only the first mark; it is far and away the most important of them all, because if you get this one right, all the others should follow” (Dever, “Nine Marks,” 39).

But his remarks above on modern-day preachers I found to be most fascinating. Let’s read his remarks once more:

“Expositional preaching is preaching in service to the Word. It presumes a belief in the authority of Scripture---that the Bible is actually God’s Word; but it is something much more than that. A commitment to expositional preaching is a commitment to hear God’s Word---not just to affirm that it is God’s Word but to actually submit yourself to it. The Old Testament prophets and the New Testament apostles were given, not a personal commission to go and speak, but a particular message to deliver. Likewise Christian preachers today have authority to speak from God only so long as they speak His message and unfold His words” (Mark Dever, “Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, New Expanded Edition.” Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004, pages 40-41).

Today’s preachers are labeled (according to Dever) the “functional descendants” of the OT prophets and NT apostles. It seems that, like the Old Testament prophets of old (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, Ezekiel, Amos, Jonah, etc.) and the NT apostles (Matthew, John, Peter, Andrew, James, etc.), today’s preachers have been given a message by God that they are to deliver. But if today’s preachers function like an “Isaiah” or a “Peter,” then wouldn’t women also be viewed as preachers also?

Think about it: In the Old Testament, it is true that there were male prophets such as the ones above; however there were also female prophets (prophetesses) such as Miriam (Exodus 15:20), Deborah (Judges 4:4), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14, 2 Chronicles 34:22). The prophet Joel himself even went on to claim that in the last days, daughters alongside of sons would prophesy (Joel 2:28), not to mention the maidservants alongside of the menservants (Joel 2:29). In the New Testament, women are allowed to pray and prophesy before the congregations (1 Cor. 11:5). This indeed tells us that women had leadership roles before God’s people (Deborah as judge and prophetess), and women did not lose the capacity to lead God’s people even in the New Testament (as prophetesses praying and prophesying in front of male and female congregants).

We can set up the argument in the following syllogism:

Premise One: The modern-day preacher stands in the line of the OT prophets.
Premise Two: Some women (Deborah, Miriam, Huldah) were OT prophets.
Conclusion: Therefore, some women can be modern-day preachers.

It seems then, that leaving women out of the discussion of modern-day preachers has less to do with Scripture than it does tradition and personal bias. But, sadly, enough, I think this is one mark of the healthy church that Mark Dever himself forgot about.

Women are vital to the success of the church, as much as men are. When one-half of the body of Christ is being shut out of leadership positions, and the other half is more than encouraged (but fails in its work), what is supposed to be done? I applaud Mark Dever for telling the world what makes healthy churches; at the same time, however, his work is not infallible...and when women are being abandoned from leadership positions, treated as though they cannot possess the spiritual gifts needed for such positions, what good does it do to write a book on marks of healthy churches? What good does it do to tell the churches, “You need more of this and that,” while pushing the female gender aside and forgetting that, they too, make up the body of Christ?

Women preachers are indeed the “tenth mark of a healthy church.” And even if there is expositional preaching, church discipline, strong church membership, strong evangelistic programs, strong discipleship, etc., we will still have an unhealthy church---until we recognize the spiritual giftedness of women and include them amongst the godly leadership in our churches. Whatever diagnosis the church of Jesus Christ has, she has given it to herself...and only she can make it better.

                

8 comments:

  1. The Bible reveals that a woman will deliver Rev 12:5, 13 the true word John 1:1 to the world and by this exposes the lies of the devil Rev 12:9 who has deceived the whole world. Check out the bruising Gen 3:15 of Satan at http://minigoodtale.blogspot.com Satan can no longer deceive us.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Val,

    Thanks for writing.

    In regards to Revelation 12, it seems that the woman who bears the male Child is possibly a reference to Eve. At the end of the chapter, it says that Satan turned to "make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 12:17, NKJV). The reference to "the rest of her offspring" indicates that she is linked to more than just the male child. Genesis 3:15 indicates that the Seed of the woman would bruise the serpent's head, so...there it is.

    I see what you mean about the woman preaching to the world in this way. Write back regarding what you mean by this reference.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You may find this of interest:

    http://wrinkledweasel.blogspot.com/p/wavelengths-3.html

    It is about an American woman who works in the Church of England for equality.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Deidre, You present some interesting thoughts but there are a couple of verses that I suppose you’ve had to deal with: namely, 1 Timothy 2:12, "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent," and Titus 2:3-4. I don’t think it’s wise to be literalistic with the content of these verses for women do teach –other women, children and men as well in a variety of ways. John Piper makes the point... “Paul commends the teaching that Eunice and Lois gave to their son and grandson Timothy (2 Timothy 1:5; 3:14). Proverbs praises the ideal wife because "She speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue" (Proverbs 31:26). Paul endorses women prophesying in church (1 Corinthians 11:5) and says that men "learn" by such prophesying (1 Corinthians 14:31) and that the members (presumably men and women) should "teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs" (Colossians 3:16). Then, of course, there is Priscilla at Aquila's side correcting Apollos (Acts 18:26).”
    I believe the correct understanding would say that the teaching inappropriate for a woman is the teaching of men in settings or ways that dishonour the calling of men to bear the primary responsibility for teaching and leadership. This primary responsibility is to be carried by the pastors or elders. This in no way demeans or diminishes women and their value in the church. It does seem to be a matter of different roles that God has assigned to men and women in the context of the church however.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Scooter,

    You write:

    "I believe the correct understanding would say that the teaching inappropriate for a woman is the teaching of men in settings or ways that dishonour the calling of men to bear the primary responsibility for teaching and leadership. This primary responsibility is to be carried by the pastors or elders."

    How is this proven by Scripture? Where in Scripture does it say that men bear "primary responsibility" for leadership in the church? Does not the Spirit give gifts as He wills (1 Cor. 12:11)? After all, the church is given gifts by God (see Ephesians 4:11-12; Romans 12:6-8), not roles. Nowhere in Scripture are roles given with regards to the church. Rather, the Spirit gives gifts and the gifts determine one's place in the church.

    This is the one area where complementarians do not hear non-complementarians. Complementarians argue "roles" because they believe the church setup should be like the home; non-complementarians, however, argue that the church and the home do not operate the same, simply because roles are specified for the home (wives are told in numerous places to submit to their husbands, see Eph. 5) while gifts are specified for positions within the church.

    Secondly, if you notice the context, 1 Timothy 2 involves abuses within the assembly of believers (worship, doctrine). And what about context? Does not 1 Timothy 1 tell us that the problem is not the fact that women desire to teach...but that the women do not realize they are spewing heresy (1 Tim. 1:3-7)?

    I have read John Piper's work...here at my site, however, I desire an exegetical response as to how 1 Timothy 2 is telling women to remember that men bear primary responsibility for leadership. When did men ever "rule" or "lead" the church? If you look at 1 Timothy 3, those in church positions do not "rule" or "lead" the church; rather, they "serve" or "take care" of the church (see 1 Tim. 3:5). The Greek word for "take care" or "serve" is not the same as the Greek wording for "rule" or "lead."

    If the Spirit gives gifts, then where is the church given the right to dictate the Spirit giving gifts as He pleases? Explain to me how the complementarian view of "gifts given by gender" harmonizes with 1 Cor. 12:11. I anxiously await your response.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Deidre - I find it highly unlikely that God would automatically eliminate 1/2 the world solely based upon gender. Thanks for your blog!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dr. Wayman,

    Thanks so much for reading my work. I am so honored to have you respond here at the blog. You are a dear Arminian brother as well as a beloved brother in Christ. I thank God for our association and friendship.

    Please continue to read and comment at any time.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Deidre - Thanks for your kind words.

    You might find this article from a leading Pastor in our denomination encouraging: http://www.ncnnews.com/nphweb/html/ht/article.jsp?sid=10005075&id=10008395

    ReplyDelete

Comments should only be made related to the passages and issues discussed on the site. Biological arguments against women and men, name-calling, or violent religious language (or violent language in general) will not be tolerated.