First of all, then, I urge that in treaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings be made on behalf of all men, the kings and all who are in authority, in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, the testimony born at the proper time. And for this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle. I'm telling the truth. I'm not lying. As a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth, therefore I want the men in every place pray, lifting up holy hands without wrath and dissension. Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good as befits women making a claim to godliness. But a woman quietly received instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman, being quite deceived, fell into transgression. But women should be preserved for the bearing of children, if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint." Thus far, the reading of the Word of the Lord. Dr. Grant is correct, we do not have many heroes in this end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st century. Most of mine have been dead a long time. But there are a few who are yet with us. I had the privilege yesterday of introducing to you one of them, Dr. Morton Smith. And this morning I have the privilege of introducing to you another one, Dr. George Knight. who is an exemplar of what it means to be a godly, pious Christian scholar, a gentleman, a man of God, careful in his exegesis, always more than gracious to his opponents, but standing unflinchingly for the truth. He's speaking to us this hour on a topic that is of the utmost importance in the Church today. I can claim a John Knox. Well, I guess I was wrong because I got here quicker than I thought. I was saying two and a half years ago that in five years we would be fighting the battle in office in the Presbyterian Church in America. I said so because I do not think that we have the intestinal fortitude or integrity to stand against the cultural tidal wave. We see that the battle must be engaged two and a half years earlier, so my prophecy is only half right. But this topic, as most of you well know, that Dr. Knight will now address, indeed is of vital importance to the well-being of a continued, particularly Southern Presbyterian witness. When I'm overawed about the introduction, I certainly do not claim any of those things that he mentioned. I just come to serve you as a servant of the Word of God and seek to instruct us to be more faithful to it. My subject is the sufficiency of Scripture in the role of women in the Church. Notice that as I deal with the role of women, much to the chagrin sometimes of people in various places, I'm not going to say a great deal about what women may do in the church. All I'm going to say, all that the scripture says, or at least the main bulk of it, because the scripture itself pitches its procedure of dealing with women to dealing with objections to what women are thinking they can do. And therefore, to try to be faithful not only to what the scripture teaches, but how it teaches it. I will simply follow in the apostolic vanguard of what it says. If you want to fault it, you'll have to fault the scriptures, not me. Although I'm quite willing and desirous of affirming all that God permits, and he permits a great deal to women in our churches. The matter of the role of women in the church is a particular subset of the principle of church government and of the sufficiency of scripture for this matter. Let me begin by telling you what I think is happening in the New Testament. And perhaps it will encourage you to be a little bit bolder in your dealing with the question. Paul, the great apostle, is having to argue against churches he founded and people he brought to Jesus Christ. Because, as in other ways, as you see in Romans, they have misconstrued the implications they think they find in his teaching. They have felt that because they are redeemed in Christ, that all barriers have been removed. And perhaps like people who are arguing for women to be ordained in the broader evangelical world, they're arguing that great text of Paul in Galatians 3.28. We know that there's, in Christ, there is no distinction. We're all one in Christ. And yet the Apostle Paul says, no, you misunderstand what I'm saying about that. I'm teaching we all come to Christ. equally condemned, equally sinful. And as we embrace Jesus Christ, we become one in the one seed, and therefore one in the one body. It has soteriological significance, but it does not minimize the creation ordinances which display God's teaching, which we ought to follow. But you see this happening in his own churches. You see, therefore, that he mounts the battle and he seeks to convince them to back off from their error and turn to what he is teaching them to do. Don't feel any worse than he felt and do what he does, winsomely calling people back to what he says the scripture teaches in its creation order. I originally wrote, as I began the second sentence of this first paragraph, shall our newness in Christ, our being neither male nor female, but one in Christ, as regards our salvation, as Galatians 3.28 teaches us, mean that no longer is there male headship and leadership in the church or in the marriage, in the family, in both Corinth and Ephesus. There were those who were arguing and seeking to act in that way. 1 Corinthians 14, for example, has several groups claiming the fullness and manifestation of the Spirit as a warrant for their speaking in tongues without an interpreter and for their prophesying simultaneously. Since the other items in that chapter relate to the work of the Spirit, we may well assume that the insistence on the part of the women to be participating in the teaching of the Church relates to the same or similar appeal to the Spirit's giftedness. Who are you to tell me, they virtually are saying, when God has poured out His Spirit upon me in fullness, that I can't participate? standing up, speaking and teaching in the church. But Paul responds that God's character is one who is a God of peace and not disorder. In verse 33 of that 14th chapter of 1 Corinthians. That therefore, I quote, all things must be done decently and in order. Verse 40 of the King James Version. Paul argues, in effect, that they are wrongly appealing to God and his Spirit to act as they are, because that would be contrary to who God is and how he wants us to act, at least in this period of life upon the earth. This means that tongue-speaking must be edifying, and therefore interpretative. and prophesying must be orderly and beneficial, not disorderly and unbeneficial to its hearers. And with reference to women, that the order established by God must not be overturned, as if redemption made God's creation order null and void. The sufficiency of Scripture is manifested immediately when one observes that when Paul addresses this question, he always does so by appealing to the Word of God as the standard for conduct and for resolving any questions that may have arisen. You can see how he does this. In 1 Corinthians 11, for example, Paul appeals to the creation activity of God written down for us in Genesis and summarized and re-quoted and applied in 1 Corinthians 11 verses 8 and 9. Who was created from whom? And who was created for whom? And he says it very clearly. Women were created for men, not men from women. and woman was created for a man, not a man for a woman. He takes God's creative action and says that's demonstrative of what he intends in regard to leadership and headship, both in the marriage and in church. In 1 Corinthians 14, he appeals to what the law says in verse 34. And that law, of course, is again quoting or summarizing the creation activity of God. As we see from both the 11th chapter of 1 Corinthians, where he's quoted that law, not naming it as such before, and from 1 Timothy, the 2nd chapter, where he clearly says, Adam was formed first, and then Eve. So in both cases, he says, The way God created man and women definitely shows God's intention in regard to the question of leadership and headship in marriage and in the church. And then notice how he concludes the matter in 1 Corinthians 14 by teaching as Christ's apostle and by giving in written form the Lord's command in verse 37. He asked them almost sarcastically, did you give or bring about the word of God? Or has it come to you only? And then concludes that paragraph by saying, the things that I write to you about tongue speaking, about prophesying, and most particularly about women's role in the church are the Lord's command. You must heed it, because he has given me the authority to give it to you. And then, of course, the teaching of the sufficiency of Scripture is demonstrated most significantly in 1 Timothy 2.13 and 14, which you heard read even this time this morning, where he says, Adam was first created and then Eve. Then he buttressed that appeal to the law of God by indicating the deleterious effect, the terrible effect, that took place when the roles were reversed. And Eve was deceived by the evil one. By the way, that's not Paul designating Eve that way. That's Paul quoting what Eve said to God. the Genesis account. Satan deceived me. And I fell. And it was then that she gave the apple, or whatever the fruit was, to Adam. And he took it, not being deceived, but being willfully disobedient, he participated in the sin with the one to whom he had yielded the headship. Notice then when God brings judgment upon Adam, he says in the introductory verse to that judgment, because you listen to the voice of your wife. Now don't over-exegete that passage. This is specific, not a general rule. You need to hear the voice of your wife often and to heed it many times. But when she tells you, has God spoken, you must not listen, but you must assume your headship. And that point not needed to be cited by God. God cites for our instruction. I think there was a previous speaker who said, Paul had said the scriptures were written for our instruction, isn't that right? Yesterday I think he spoke or something like that. And therefore, you need to recognize that that is also written to teach us truths in this matter. Now I realize when I come to speak about this matter, The problem is that I may assume too much. And so what I'm going to do now is assume perhaps too little. So I want to apologize to all of you who are already very much up on this subject. And I just want to give you a thumbnail sketch of the biblical teaching on this matter, to have it all laid before us so we can see the parameters of the biblical teaching, and then We'll move back into considering the passages in more detail, and as we get to the conclusion, we'll consider three alternatives, which I trust we will follow. You'll notice as I deal with this that I'm not going to cite any specific individual, and I haven't in my footnotes either. I'm not here to wage warfare on any individual or any church or session or preacher or activity. I'm here to try to appeal to the Word of God. It's efficient to teach us. Turn us back to that word, we may heed it, hear it, and follow it. Let me give you my thumbnail sketch of this whole matter. Thumbnail sketch would begin this way. In Genesis, an account you know so well, God makes in his own image, male and female, men and women, Adam and Eve. And so by creation we may say men and women, males and females, are absolutely equal. Equal as image bearers, equal as sinners, equally needing the salvation provided in Jesus Christ, which we read about in Galatians 3.28. In redemption, women and men are also equal receivers of God's great salvation. Peter puts it so tellingly in that passage, where he's writing the instruction that he's giving to the churches to whom he's writing by saying, the wife is an equal of the grace of life, a joint heir of the grace of life. There's nothing in this teaching of the Bible that is anyway saying that men are any wit superior to women in the life of the church or in the marriage. They are equal by creation, equal in redemption, equally submissive to the Lord, and needing to respond to one another as God has ordained they should respond. Now the meaning, the significance of that is that God is calling on wives to voluntarily, of course voluntarily because they're doing it immediately, but not calling on us to require them, but himself to require them to submit to the headship and loving leadership of their husband. What is called upon us as men is to lovingly, graciously, tenderly lead and guide our wives and our families in the love of the Lord, not harshly and not bitterly. And it's so easy for someone to become, when you're in authority and you see someone not in authority, seeking to skirt, circumvent, turn away, or in any way detract from your leadership. Now why is it that the apostles, both Paul and Peter, the two great towering figures, in the New Testament. Both of them almost write identical words when they discuss the question in marriage, where they ask the women to submit to the headship or leadership, kephale, the term that is used there, of their husbands. What has brought them to describe male leadership under the head of headship? Well it is, as you can see from 1 Corinthians 11, Paul's awareness and Peter's awareness that the creation activity of God is determinative of who shall be the leader in the marriage and in the church. Look with me at 1 Corinthians 11. Now don't be gun-shy about that passage. But you don't understand everything about the head covering and all of this requirement that women have their heads covered and all of that. Don't let that keep you from dealing with the beginning and the end of the passage, which speaks so clearly. Look how Paul, as he argues that question in 1 Corinthians 11, comes to applying the creation order in verses 8 and 9. Look what he says. He's talked about how man is made in the image and glory of God. Woman is the glory of man. By the way, that's not saying she's not the image of God. She's saying she reflects, inherently, throughout the whole process of the human race, the fact that she was made from a man. And therefore, she not only reflects the glory of God's creation, she reflects what God could shape from a male figure. Now he goes on to say, and here he cites then the creation order. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. Notice what he argues there. The order or priority of relationship, man created first and then woman, establishes who is created to aid or enable the other. It's that little operative word that you see in the word, neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. A little word loaded with a lot of significance. And so we ask, who has the headship or leadership in the marriage relationship? The Apostle Paul, Apostle Peter, arguing from God's creative activity, answer categorically and absolutely, God's creation activity determines who should exercise the leadership role in the marriage relationship and in the family. That's very key, very significant. And it is Paul the Apostle, writing in the New Testament, After the redeeming work of Christ, having been applied to both men and women, argues that this role relationship maintains itself because it goes back to God's creative order. Same way, of course, you know the Lord argues that if we're going to ascertain what God intended for marriage and divorce, we should see what God did in the creation. Similar kind of argument, arguing from the creation order. Now notice one other argument that Paul uses in this passage in 1 Corinthians 11. He argues that the Godhead, the relationship between the Father and the Son, the Godhead, the relationship between the Father and the Son, determines also how we should relate as men and women, particularly in the realm of marriage, but also in the realm of the Church. Notice what he says as he begins the account in verse 3. 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. Notice that he says categorically that God the Father is the leader, the head, over Christ the incarnate Son. And therefore you find in Christ's ministry him saying over and over again, I didn't come to do my own will. I didn't come to speak my own words. I came to do the will of him who sent me. And to say what he gave me to say. Now let me ask you. Did that demean Christ's sonship? Did that subtract from his full deity as the incarnate one? Was that any cause for shame or reproach? I tell you a thousand times, the answer is absolutely not. But the Godhead, the relationship between the Father and the Son, have said to us for all times, how I ask you to relate, as men and women, we also are relating. as father and son. I'm not superimposing upon either of you, males or females, some demand that we do not emulate, signify, and manifest in our relationships to one another. The creation order and God's pattern establish how we should relate to one another in the realm of marriage and the church. Paul argues it very eloquently in this passage. And then in the passages in 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2, he does the same thing. But now notice what he does. Let me ask you now to turn with me to 1 Timothy, the second chapter. 1 Timothy, the second chapter. Aha. Thank you very much, brother. In First Timothy, the second chapter, in verses 11 through following, he teaches there categorically, let's see the central piece of his teaching, that women are not to teach, nor are they to exercise authority, in the realm of the life of church and spiritual matters, are not to teach or exercise authority over men. not to teach and not to exercise authority over men in the life of the church and the realm of spiritual authority and teaching of the word. Now why does he argue that way? Well, he argues that way because of verse 13. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And notice what he's done. He's done the same thing for the life of the church as he did in the life of marriage. And when you ask him, why does he say man is the head of his wife? He says, because God's creation order. Maybe you ask him, why then should women not teach and exercise authority over men in the life of the church? He says, the same answer, because of God's creation order. And notice what happens. For the realm of marriage and the realm of the church, we have the same passage and the same argument being used. So that when you overturn this question of headship of man in the church, you are on the slippery slope of seeking to overturn headship of men in marriage. You're on the slippery slope of seeking to overturn what God has ordained and demonstrated by his creation ordinance. You know that Christianity today, as long ago, embraced the fact that women should be ordained, even though the older elder Kenneth Consor always argued that men are the heads of their wives in their marriage. And there are many times in which I argued with Ken Consoren and said, how can you affirm one and deny the other, just as the Christian Reformed Church has done, when they both are built on the same premise, same truth, the same passage, and they stand or fall together? You need to see this clearly. That passage undergirds the teaching about these two matters in marriage and the church. It's exactly the same passage. Adam was first formed, then Eve. Adam was created and then Eve was created from him, and she was created for him, to aid him in his labors and activities. Now, you need to notice some other things in this first Timothy 2 passage. You need to notice that the passage begins and ends with matters that we may not have thought were necessary to have written. In fact, if Paul hadn't written them, I would hesitate to point them out to you in this gathering. He writes, beginning by saying, a woman should learn in quietness. He affirms the fact that she should learn. But he affirms it by saying, she should be quiet in the teaching learning activity. So he goes on to say, and she should learn in full, actually the Greek word is the word for all, in all submission. So he begins by saying, when she learns, she must not assume the premise that most students assume. And what we're hearing, we can get up and articulate ourselves. In fact, we might even be able to sharpen the teacher if we can raise our hand and ask a kind of interesting question or propose some further ramifications. She may learn. She is exhorted to learn, but in full submission and in quietness. And then, in case we haven't gotten the message carefully, he ends his account by saying the same thing. I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man. She must be what? Silent. Silent? Silent. Do you get the message? The message of prohibiting the teaching by articulating it in the context of demanding silence. Now, I'm anticipating a little bit of what I'll be saying in a few minutes, but notice that this passage does not say, I do not permit a woman to be ordained. It does not say, I do not permit a woman to be a bishop or an elder. Paul does know those words. He could have used them. I don't think he thought them up when he got to the third chapter. What he wants to be prohibiting is the activity, not just the office. You can't just say now, we're going to have someone here to expound the word of God to But because we're not using ordained officers in this session, this woman is quite bright and able and she's going to come up and do that. No, we'd be directly violating the prohibition of the Apostle Paul. I do not permit a woman to teach a man in public address, in a spiritual manner. We need to hold on to this thought that he is repudiating the activity, not simply the office. Because that turning point is going to be the nub of the discussion in the life of our churches. Now, don't misunderstand me. Those who say she shouldn't be ordained are quite correct. This does have a very direct application to that realm. But it should not be said to be only prohibiting ordination and allowing everything else to be done even if the ordination is not there. Now look finally with me at 1 Corinthians chapter 14. We pick up the account again in verse 13, 33 rather, of 1 Corinthians 14. Either that account, for God is not a God of disorder, but of peace, proceeds about the prophecies or introduces a section about the women. But whatever it does, we may say that the instruction that Paul gives to the Corinthian church does not apply only to the Corinthian church. We can see that from the second part of verse 33. As in all congregations of the saints, It means in yours, mine, any congregations existing anywhere. Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, must be in submission, as the law says. I want to inquire about something they should ask their own husbands on for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. Notice again what this passage says. It doesn't permit the woman to speak. We're going to come back to that in just a moment. I think from the analogy with the Timothy passage and from evidence that we get out of 1 Corinthians 14, the speaking of view is teaching, not just oral expression. But he uses the word speaking because he wants to use a word that was common to the phenomena of the things he has been discussing in this chapter, namely communicating, whether by prophecy, tongue speaking, or women doing it. But notice how similar this passage is to the 1st Timothy passage. It uses the word silent, verse 34. It uses the word submission, again verse 34. It says they're not allowed to speak, which is the same as saying they're not allowed to teach. Here, no reference is made to men because the congregation is a mixed phenomenon of males and females, but it is precluded to her to teach or to speak there because it would be a violation of the biblical norm for the woman to be teaching and giving instruction to a man. And again, the passage cited is the law. Presumably by now, looking at 1 Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2, we know what that law is, the creation order. And then, lest someone be very erudite, or either that or naive, he says, I don't permit a woman to ask a question. I don't know, maybe you are not aware of this in your own ministries, but I'm very aware of it. If your teaching You know that sometimes you get questions that are ended with question marks, but really are questions. They're requests for equal time. And then some. Paul knows that very well. And so he says, don't let skirt this matter. by saying, no, she's not speaking, she's only asking a question. Let her direct her request to her husband. Because if you didn't do that, you'd be doing the disgraceful, shameful deed of allowing a woman to speak in the church. And so we see from these three key passages of these great truths, God by his creation order, establish the relationship that should obtain between men and women in regards to leadership and following. He based it in marriage on the creation order and on the modeling of the relationship between the father and the son. He teaches the same phenomenon to the Apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 2 and in 1 Corinthians 14, that women should not publicly address and teach men and exercise authority over them, because Adam was first created and then Eve. And he also says that women should not speak, that is, arise from their place in the church and teach the church, because that would be disgraceful. Also based upon the creation order. Now let's move on from there and return to the paper and deal with some of the objections. What is it that Paul forbids to women because of the creation activity of God? But first let us see what he does not forbid. He does not forbid women to pray or prophesy. As you can see from the first Corinthians 11 passages. Both verse 5 and verses 13 through 16. Compare the commendatory note made about the daughters who prophesy in Acts 21, 8-9. Nor does the Bible forbid women to be active outside the house in business. to advance the welfare of our husband, children, and community. You better read Proverbs 31, 10 through 31 and think about every implication of all that is said there. Nor does he forbid women to teach women and children, but rather commends older women to teach the younger women, in Titus 2, 3 through 5. What he does forbid, that women would teach or exercise authority over men, church and spiritual matters, 1 Timothy 2.12. He, led by the Spirit, that is the Apostle Paul, underlines this prohibition by giving it in terms of activity rather than terms of office, that is in terms of teaching and exercising authority, rather than in prohibiting her from being a bishop or an elder, which of course is also applied. He also underlines the seriousness of the matter by giving this teaching in the context of approving women learning, but at the same time prohibiting her from seeking to enter into the teaching which she is receiving by saying at the beginning of the section that she is to learn in quietness and full submission, ending the prohibition by saying she must be silent in the First Timothy passage. We should not be surprised to find the same words used in First Corinthians. where they're not allowed to speak but must be in submission, as the law says. When Paul uses the word speak in 1 Corinthians 14, he is returning to a particular item among a list of items given in verse 26. most of which he gives further instruction about in verses 27 to 35. You need to turn to 1 Corinthians 14, and you need to look at that verse 26. Now, there are variant texts in verse 26 that have a slightly different order. Let's don't let that ruffle us right now or bother us. I'm reading from the New International Version, so I have a slightly different textual base behind it. Let me just read what we find in that verse. You may notice that one item is turned with the other in the version you may have. Here he says in verse 26 these matters. What shall we then say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. All these must be done for the strengthening of the Church. I want to submit to you that, except for the first item, for which Paul finds he has no need to give them instruction, he instructs them about all the other items in verse 26. And he begins with the last named item, or the latter items, and begins to deal with them as he proceeds in verses 27 and following. Let me give you an example. Verse 27 you read, Verse 27, you read, if anyone speaks the tongue... So what you saw him dealing with in terse statements in verse 26, he now expands on in verses 27 and following. Then he says, two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what was said. If a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. You can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. Spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. And notice what he mentions there in the midst of the passage in verse 30. He talks about a revelation. What is the revelation? It is a matter given to the prophet. And what is the word that proceeds in the account in verse 26? It is a revelation. See that? All right, now look at what he's doing next. In verse 33b and following, as in all the congregation of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak. What speaking is he talking about? He's already allowed women to pray and prophesy. And I believe in the public assemblies as well, when all the people are praying, not in the official prayer led by the pastor alone. What is he talking about? Well, look at what he says in the preceding account. He talks about a word of instruction. On the New American Standard Version, he talks about a teaching. That's what he's returning to. teaching about which he said he would give instruction. And he prohibits that teaching or speaking to be done. And so we have a triangle of relationships that demonstrate what he's saying here. The account is parallel to 1 Timothy 2, which says, I do not permit a woman to teach. The account is explained by its immediate context by talking about a teaching, both of them saying that the speaking of you here as women publicly teaching the church or men. And so it is that the Apostle Paul here talks about prohibiting that kind of speaking, that public speaking which is teaching, in this context. So we see within the context of the verse the meaning and significance of the word is given by the term teaching in verse 26, which is also the word used in 1 Timothy 2.12. Thus, although the Apostle allows various individuals to participate in the worship service, even doing so from where they are sitting or standing, he does not permit a woman to speak or teach, not even when she says she is only asking a question. Verse 35. Paul understands how easily asking a question can carry over to teaching. Thus Paul's prohibition, both 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 14, that women are not to teach and exercise authority over men over the entire church. This, however, does not rule out that women, as well as men, can and should share the gospel and witness to others on a one-to-one basis. There, for example, Priscilla McCullough, who invited Apollos into their house and explained to him the way of God more adequately, Acts 18.26. need to recognize that the subject form indicated by the verb is plural, not singular. So then their hospitality, whatever each one may have done when we gather, we don't know that, and their hospitality of inviting that person over, they together explain the word of God more clearly to Apollos. Although it would be quite incorrect save that, and I quote a common saying now, a woman can do anything that a non-ordained man can do. You may have heard that somewhere yourself. Paul's words in 1 Timothy 2.12 and 1 Corinthians 14.34-35 deny that very assertion by saying that a woman cannot do what a man can do. She can nevertheless share her faith and is called on to do that as everyone else is. We recognize that Paul prohibits the public teaching of women, but quite allows to them to share the gospel and to privately communicate with Apollos or her husband or any other person like that. There would be an act to follow the culture of our day and to regard it more important than the teaching of the Apostle, we gave up the prohibition by which Paul has spoken in these matters. Now, there are at least three less than scriptural positions that have been developed out of this data in recent days. Here, let me deal briefly with those in the conclusion. says that Paul is wrong in the passages we have cited, and that his old Jewish mindset is showing in them. He's just wrong. We can't listen to him, we can't heed him. In fact, when we do a commentary on 1 Corinthians 14, we'll just say, these verses are so irregular, and there's no textual evidence for them being out, we'll just say Paul didn't write them. Destroy the evidence. because it's so bad that we can't. Often we say, well, here's a chance, here's a situation where Paul, the communicator of the word, is writing his statement rather than what he has seen more widely in Galatians 3.28. But this directly denies the sufficiency of scripture as well as its inspiration and authority. How can we come down to that position? even if the name given to it originally was Paul King Jewett. Impossible. A second group asserts that the teaching is purely and simply cultural, applying only to the first century in the Greco-Roman situation. They further their argument by saying that other words of Paul, for example, Galatians 3.28, show his more basic teaching that there is no difference between men and women in any way at all. Both the first and second groups run up against Paul asserting that his words are the commandment of God in 1 Corinthians 14.37. The way God made man and woman determined the headship and leadership function. 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Timothy 2. That will not suffice. The second position is sometimes further supported by the claim that if women can prophesy, 1 Corinthians 11.5 and Acts 21.9, they certainly should be able to preach and teach as well. In fact, prophecy is the only special kind of preaching and teaching which applies the word forcefully to our hearts and lives. And that's the way it's commonly used today, not the way it's used in the Bible, but it's the understanding we sometimes have when we say that person is teaching us speaking prophetically. And so they say if a woman can prophesy, which is a higher rank gift than teaching, according to Paul's own words in 1 Corinthians 12, 28. Surely if she can do the greater, she ought to be able to do the next in line. Come on. Just because Paul denies that to her, doesn't mean anything. We should logically argue this matter. Well, let's deal with that a little bit. What is even more significant is that the Apostle Paul says that that women cannot speak or teach in the congregation but must be silent several chapters later in 1 Corinthians 14 as well as in 1 Timothy 2. This distinction of Paul must be understood or else his teaching will appear to be contradictory. She can prophesy but not teach or speak. What's happening here? If we are subject to scripture and regarded as it is sufficient for our life in the church, this distinction of Paul should be adequate whether or not we can explain why one is permitted and the other not, or give the grounds for the distinction. We may have to say, we don't know why he'll allow one, but he won't allow the other, but that's what he does, and be content with it. I have suggested and have tried to propose a solution to this matter. I suggest that the first activity prophesying is the direct giving of the revelation of God. God says, speak these words and the prophet goes and says, thus says the Lord. And apparently this conveyance of the revelation does not give authority to the person conveying it. So we can say that the person or thing should then be chosen as an ordained officer. I'm not applying this to women, but I'm just trying to introduce at this moment a little humor among us. How many of you would have nominated Balaam's ass as the giver of God's prophecy to be a replacement of one of the officers in your church or anyone else's. Well, it did evoke the humor at least. No, that didn't equip him. And yet, it's very clear, as we read in the Numbers account, verse 28, that God had revealed his message through the donkey or ass up there. Therefore, the one conveying the revelation is not seeking to provide his own or her own instruction to those receiving it, nor is that person exercising any of his or her own authority in giving it. But the one teaching does exercise the authority of explaining what a previously given revelation means. I've been trying to do that the whole time I've been up here. Here's the revelation. It's not given through me, it's given to me. And I've been saying, here's what it says, listen to it, hear it, let me instruct you in it. And I've been trying to do the best I can to exercise my authority and my gifts in saying that to you. I'm trying to apply it to your heart and mind. Since scripture is sufficient, we must be content with the apostle's distinction, not to seek to remove his specific prohibition by another of his statements, which would then put his teaching that we are dealing with now in conflict with it. A third way has been proposed to handle the prohibition of the apostle is to say that his prohibition is intended only to exclude women from the ordained offices of teaching and ruling elders. This application, without the word only, is surely an appropriate application because the place in which teaching and exercising authority come to the highest expression of the Church are in those ordained offices. But to restrict the application, and it is an application, Teaching is in what she may or may not do, is not in what she may or may not be. I repeat, is what she may or may not do, is not in what she may or may not be. All of that follows, of course. But to restrict the application of this realm, or to say that Paul only means this delimited application, is to fail to deal with the language that Paul uses. and the context in which these prohibitions are expressed. The apostle does not say that the woman must not be ordained an officer, as he could well have expressed himself. What he does say is put in terms of the activities that women may not be engaged in over men, that is teaching or exercising authority, not just in terms of an office to be held. Can you imagine you going home, for example, and your family and saying, now, hon, I'm the head of the house, but you can make all the decisions, you can tell me everything that we should do as a family, you can pay all the bills, you can do everything else, but remember, I'm the head. What kind of vacuous, empty, loving leadership would you have? But you could argue, I have the office, she doesn't. But is that what it means in marriage? Does it mean to carry on the duties and responsibilities of a loving husband? What he does say is not put in terms of the activities, and what he does say is put in terms of the activities that women may not be engaged in over men, teaching or exercising authority. Paul makes his point even more vividly when he says, and I pointed this out to you already in the beginning and ending, being silent and being submissive, and he does the same thing in the 1 Corinthians passage. It is because of the implications of saying the passage in 1 Corinthians 14, in this most natural light, tongue speakers may not speak in tongues unless there's an interpreter. Prophets may not insist on keeping their rank or prophesy simultaneously. They must give way to the one who has then immediately received the revelation. For God is a God of order and a God of peace, not a God of disorder. And women must not appeal, as these other two groups have done, the fact that the Holy Spirit, they claim, is working in them to get up and speak, teach, or ask questions in the life of the Church. It's part of that very natural understanding of this passage. Other ways of exegeting the passage have been proposed. Now, I know the person that originally proposed that in our circles. It's Jim Hurley. a friend of mine, who wrote his doctoral dissertation in Cambridge and took that stance there. Jim and I often, when we get together, will debate when we're doing other things or when we're doing nothing but just facing one another and debating. He said to me, and I quote this off the record now because he didn't know I'd be quoted again, the reason he came to that understanding is because if you don't come to the understanding he's proposing, that women should not judge prophets, you would prohibit, absolutely and categorically, women from teaching or speaking in the church." He said, that's exactly right. Well, he said, I don't want to do that, and therefore I'm going to propose this other interpretation. That will not appear in your books, but I'm letting you hear it in this gathering here. It's because of that perspective that this novel presentation has been taken. But I want to tell you that this interpretation is a novelty. You will not find it if you search through the historic commentaries written before his view became widespread. It is a novelty. And it does not warrant being accepted. Why does it not warrant being accepted? Well, on the one hand, it's because the 1 Corinthians 14 passage and the 1 Timothy passage are so closely identified that you'd presume that if they're so closely identified, they're dealing with the same subject matter. Paul says, I don't permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. Paul in 1 Corinthians says, I don't permit a woman to speak to the church. Paul in 1 Timothy says, I demand that she be silent. 1 Corinthians 14 says she must be silent. Paul says in 1 Timothy she must be submissive. 1 Corinthians 14 says she must be submissive. On and on the parallels go. We know what 1 Timothy 2 says. She must not engage in public teaching of man. And we ought to know by this parallel. that the historic understanding of 1 Corinthians 14 should be understood that way too. Take for example the question that is being asked in 1 Corinthians 14. It goes like this. I'm reading to you the citation from verse 35 of 1 Corinthians 14. If they, that is the women in view, want to inquire about something, Now notice what is happening here. At this point the something is the Greek indefinite neuter pronoun, ti, tau, iota, or ti if you please, transliterated into English. And that word, as you can see from looking at any lexicon, means anything or something. Now think of the two contexts. She should ask her husband at home about anything or something, or she should ask her husband at home about something dealing with judging the prophets, about anything or something. Which one fits best, besides the rest of the passage itself? Such a general and undefined anything or something fits in with a general church gathering, but hardly with a proposal about judging prophets. But those who restrict Paul's teaching and exercise of authority to ordination have coined as a maxim the saying that, quote, a woman can do anything an unordained man can do, or an unordained man may do. But this is not what the Apostle Paul says or permits. He says, for example, although men unordained may arise in the Corinthian church and speak or ask questions, women may not. It doesn't seem to me that a woman unordained can do anything that a man who is unordained can do. Furthermore, men, even unordained, may teach men and women, but Paul explicitly forbids women to teach men. That doesn't sound like women may do anything that an unordained man can do. But some of this group would say that a woman could lead the worship and speak if there were no ordained men available and she were the most gifted of the others because a woman may do anything an unordained man can do. Is that correct? In direct violation of the teaching of the Apostle Paul? But the Ephesians are smart too. They could write back to Paul, Paul, you've misunderstood. Why are you admonishing us not to have women teach? The session has already agreed that she can do this. What are you doing, Paul, disrupting the authority of the session? Come on. He's giving his apostolic authority and teaching what he says. Others of this group would say that women can teach men the Bible in Sunday school or elsewhere, with or without a male cohort, because these activities are not necessarily those of an ordained man. The trouble with these views is that the passage under a view, 1 Timothy 2, 1 Corinthians 14, prohibited women from teaching men and the church, not just from being ordained. Thus they are allowing exactly what Paul has forbidden, That is, a woman to teach a man in the church. Further, those holding this latter view do not take into consideration the demand for silence and submission in both passages. Teaching a man, even in Sunday school, cannot be done if silence is enjoined and submission is required. You have to deal not only with, I don't permit a woman to teach, you have to deal with the two-fold silences, before and after, and the submission, full submission, that is requested. Why are we arguing so vigorously? Because the Apostle Paul did. Because he believed that God's creation order was being jettisoned and overturned. Since we believe and confess that the scripture is sufficient for us, We had best let its explicit language capture our hearts and minds, unpack us from the squeezing power of this world and its culture, and bring us to submit every one of our thoughts and activities to the sovereign power of the Lord himself as he has spoken to us in his word. Recently, some appeal has been made to 1 Peter 4, 10-11, as perhaps better than any other passage to provide an overall perspective to the question of women's roles in the Church. The passage reads as following. I hope you'd look at it yourself in your own Bibles. Each one should use whatever gift he receives to serve others, faithfully administering God's grace in its various forms. If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power forever and ever. Amen. The argument proceeds in this way. Peter is addressing all the church and each individual in it. Compare that each one, in verse 10, and therefore the masculine tis rendered by anyone, in verse 11, and followed by he, is a gender inclusive form. Therefore, to both men and women, God has given either a speaking gift or a serving gift, and they should exercise these gifts as Peter has indicated. This understanding is certainly a very plausible one, but it must be understood in conformity with the biblical teaching elsewhere about what God through Paul has prohibited to women. That is to teach men the scripture, and to speak, teach, and speak in the church. Yes, even to ask questions there. Thus letting scripture interpret scripture, we are permitted to say that women should use this gift in teaching other women, as Paul says they should do in Titus 3, 4 and following, and also children. But this passage cannot be used to overturn the clear prohibitions of Paul and say that women may teach men as long as as it is not in preaching, or as long as they are not ordained. This would be to let this passage, with its inferences and indirect implications, overturn clear and specific passages elsewhere. Yes, that passage may be generic. It may say each one has speaking or serving gifts. But the way the woman is to exercise her speaking has clearly been indicated elsewhere. Having briefly looked at alternative views of the matter, we need to turn again to the statement of the matter in the scriptures, and in doing so to remember that it is our sole and sufficient guide in this realm. We have seen that it is the question of maleness and femaleness that is the determining factor that governs and controls the Apostle Paul's statements on the matter. He does not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, as we saw in 1 Timothy 2.12. It is women that he forbids to speak, that is, teach by rising and speaking in the church gatherings, in 1 Corinthians 14, 33-35. And all this is presented by Paul in the backdrop and determination manifested in God's creating man first and woman from man, 1 Timothy 2, 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Corinthians 11. Prohibition, in essence, is that a woman shall not teach or exercise authority over a man in the life of the Church. Since Scripture is our only infallible rule of faith and practice, that is, our sufficiency for faith and life, and especially the matters of the Church, we had best follow its teachings Manifest our belief by our practices. Seek to be in conformity to what the scriptures teach.