Eugene Cho

10 Reasons Why Men Should Not be Ordained for Ministry.

In light of some recent intense posts - Ultimate Fighting Jesus and Conversation with Rob Bell (re: women in ministry), this list is too funny not to share.

But the brutal fact is that the matter of gender violence isn’t all that funny either. Statistics about gender inequality via UN and UNICEF are even more discouraging.

Regardless where you sit, stand, or wrestle with the issue of women in church leadership, I thought this satirical list was worth sharing for both laughter and even reflection because that’s what good satire forces us to do.  And for what it’s worth, I’d encourage you to read some of my thoughts about why I believe  women should be included in all levels of church leadership.

Here are…

10 reasons Why Men Should Not Be Ordained For Ministry.

I’m personally very convicted about #5 – I am sorry for being such a stumbling block.  :)

How about you?

10. A man’s place is in the army.

9. The pastoral duties of men who have children might distract them from the responsibility of being a parent.

8. The physique of men indicates that they are more suited to such tasks as chopping down trees and wrestling mountain lions. It would be “unnatural” for them to do ministerial tasks.

7. Man was created before woman, obviously as a prototype. Thus, they represent an experiment rather than the crowning achievement of creation.

6. Men are too emotional to be priests or pastors. Their conduct at football and basketball games demonstrates this.

5. Some men are handsome, and this will distract women worshipers.

4. Pastors need to nurture their congregations. But this is not a traditional male role. Throughout history, women have been recognized as not only more skilled than men at nurturing, but also more fervently attracted to it. This makes them the obvious choice for ordination.

3. Men are prone to violence. No really masculine man wants to settle disputes except by fighting about them. Thus they would be poor role models as well as dangerously unstable in positions of leadership.

2. The New Testament tells us that Jesus was betrayed by a man. His lack of faith and ensuing punishment remind us of the subordinated position that all men should take.

1. Men can still be involved in church activities, even without being ordained. They can sweep sidewalks, repair the church roof, and perhaps even lead the song service on Father’s Day. By confining themselves to such traditional male roles, they can still be vitally important in the life of the church.

[original source is still unknown but apparently, this list was adapted to the current list by Dr. David M. Scholer, a former professor at Fuller Theological Seminary]

Filed under: , religion, , , , , , , ,

125 Responses

  1. [...] Westby 10 grunner… april 27, 2008, 7:20 am Arkivert under: morro …til at menn ikke bør være prester. Ingen kommentarer hittil Kommentér RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI [...]

  2. [...] Posted by Don Bryant on April 27, 2008 Ten reasons why men should not be ordained for ministry Thanks to Eugene Cho [...]

  3. [...] This post made me laugh this morning. Eugene Cho brought up an excellent point overall though, and one worth pondering. If you think the reasons why men should not preach are funny and not to be taking seriously, then what should we make of the argument about woman in ministry? As Pastors? I must admit that my own opinion on the matters has changed a few times. Just when I think I have it figured out someone tossed out a curveball to get me thinking. [...]

  4. [...] 10 reasons why men should not be ordained for ministry: Made me laugh so hard. (By no means related to the account above.) [...]

  5. Dennis says:

    Dude, you are going to get the watchdogs after you.

  6. Rebecca says:

    That’s amazing. Truly.

    If only people recognized that the list of supposed reasons that women shouldn’t be ordained is just as ridiculous.

  7. Jennifer says:

    Rebecca,

    I remember reading a list from 100 yeras ago of the reasons why women shouldnt be allowed to vote – it was basically all the same arguments used for why women shouldnt be allowed to minister

  8. Tyler says:

    wow…that is hilarious.

  9. saintlewis says:

    Hmm…it is funny, BUT if that is the reason why women are not ordained, that would indeed be sad….
    and here, I thought it was because Scripture made it clear that they weren’t to teach men?
    Silly me.

    • reformedbaptist says:

      Jesus did not say this. Paul did. I’m not so sure he was right.

      • seth c says:

        Paul wrote inspired by the Spirit. The text is clear.
        However the interpretation is not so clear.

        • Kimc says:

          The question is, which spirit was Paul inspired by? Was he the Anti-Christ?

        • Liz Kuennen says:

          For the last 200 years the majority of Christian scholars who specialize in textural criticism have believed that Paul did not write ! & 2 Timothy of Titus. The language used in those books was not the Greek that Paul used but was common approx. 150 years after Paul died. Also, the two men mentioned in 1 Timothy were also mentioned in the Acts of Paul which is known to not be written by Paul but 150 years after he died and uses the same language as these three books. If Paul did not write these books then there is nothing in Scripture that says women cannot be pastors.

          You need to be careful what you say as a woman to male pastors. I got accused of herisey for saying I thought there was a problem with 1 Timothy. It states that “women shall be saved by the bearing of children if they continue in love and good deeds.” The word used here Paul only uses for spiritual salvation. This would mean this book preaches “another gospel” than the one by grace that Paul taught and by his words the person who preaches this should be accursed.

          Women should be in leadership and if they were I believe we would have less problems with authoritarian leadership that hurt their congregation in the name of Christ.

          • tiro3 says:

            Liz K.,
            It is not necessary IMO to discredit the book of 1&2 Timothy to understand that there is no injunction against women in leadership. When we read Scripture in context instead of piecemealing portions of sentences, we can see that the reason Paul wrote that he wanted a woman to learn and at that time he was not permitting (not a forever statement) a woman or certain women to teach in an authoritarian manner, was because in chapter one certain women and men were teaching false doctrine. Thus, he didn’t want women who were being deceived (like Eve) to teach others that deception.

            Other than taking that section of Scripture out of context, there really isn’t anything else that one can use to try to forbid women from teaching, leading or ministering the gifts of the Spirit.

            • Sue G says:

              besides, he DID allow women to teach. In 1 Corinthians they may prophesy if their heads are covered. It’s pretty clear Priscilla preached. So whatever was meant, it was meant locally.

              • Mike says:

                Prophecy and Teaching are 2 distinct separate gifts, Prophecy is a content gift, the words are inerrant God and breathed. Teaching is a mechanism gift, where the person can be a persuasive orator, but the content may be tainted,

      • Paul didn’t say what people think he said, either. The text isn’t as clear as people like to say it is.

    • Denise says:

      Oh, dear, saint – then what do we do with Pricilla who taught Paul?

    • Lil says:

      Yep, silly you indeed. If women can be university professors teaching men, especialy in religion courses and seminaries, where does that leave the supposed scriptural prohibition against women teaching men? As usual, proof-texting doesn’t work. And did no one ever hear of potty-training? Granted, they aren’t men at that age, but where would they be without the moms that patiently taught them?

    • Kay says:

      Well natch! i mean you could train monkeys quicker, but is that a reason for ordaining them?! oh and which scripyures are you referring to? oh yes,that’ll be the ones the men wrote?!!

    • lili-kayy says:

      you haven’t studied scripture thoroughly if that is what you believe. Look again, and take it in context. READ the WHOLE BIBLE and not just a passage. Read about the surrounding culture and about the history of that particular place and church. You’ll find it very strange that if that passage is taken to mean all women everywhere are to al\ways keep silent and let the men teach they are in this same book encouraged to raise their voices to proclaim in many other instances. The host who was great in number sent out to proclaim the gospel is feminine in the Greek language! The woman at the well was given vital information and Christ did not appear at all perturbed that she went and shared it with the whole community. Phebe is commended for having helped the gospel. I could go on and on. Martha was told that Mary, who was doing something then illegal by ‘sitting’ at Jesus feet (which meant learning as a male disciple did) was choosing the better thing and rather than telling her to go back to her womanly duties he proclaimed to Martha that it would not be taken from her.

  10. Asad says:

    Brilliant food for thought

  11. tsfiles says:

    The same mindless liberals who do their best to smear the Catholic Church and its members at EVERY opportunity are the same two-faced frauds who suddenly care about the fact that women cannot say Mass!

    They will COMPLETELY ignore the many Christians and Catholics that are oppressed, discriminated against, and martyred day after day are the same two-faced frauds who worry about how the Church runs its own business!

    They are utterly SILENT about how Muslims treat their women, but fret about the fact that women aren’t priests!

    They say nothing about the Quran and what IT says about women, but will publically complain about how women cannot say Mass!

    This unfunny and illogical “10 reasons” list is presented by someone who clearly knows NOTHING about the history of the Catholic Church. Without the Church, the simpleton who runs this blog (and the rest of Western Civilization) might be living under VERY DIFFERENT circumstances.

    But it’s MUCH easier to post unfunny lists rather than become, say, educated about the very institution that he rips on. For Cho and his foolish readers, ignorance is very much bliss.

    ~ Sisyphus

    • IndigoGirl says:

      Hey Sisy,

      Methinks thou dost protest too much.

    • FSGinger says:

      Yeah, somebody has a guilty conscience, since this piece didn’t even mention the Roman Catholic priesthood.

      And besides, didn’t Jesus say something about the log in our own eye? Focusing on Muslims and their issues (which many Muslim women and men are already focusing on, thank you very much) would be hypocritical when we have gender issues to face in our own congregations. Jesus had a lot to say about those who try to distract from their own sins by pointing out the sins of others.

    • lilolme says:

      Man! Sisy is realllly phusy. You got issues dude!

    • Kimc says:

      You heard wrong, but besides that, we’ve been protesting how Muslims treat women for years and years. Where have you been?

    • trisha says:

      seriously, a woman defending the catholic church? the history of the catholic church is not much to be proud of and i made my exit soon after i discovered not only did they rape little boys but thier intent is to keep women down and preaching pollitics from the pulpit. at that point i say they have lost their tax expemt status and they are no different than any other big business. prosecute the rapists and at least try to have an air of fairness about the preachings of the bible which is each and every single persons on interpretation of it. i have yet to find two people who agree on what the bible says about anything.

  12. Dennis says:

    I told you to watch out for these watchdogs. They’ll bite you in the ass.

  13. g says:

    Who the heck is this is Sisyphus guy? Shouldn’t he be rolling a rock somewhere? ;)

    Great list, Pastor Eugene and definitely some food for thought. Obviously, some folks don’t understand the satire behind it is to make us think about the issues about gender roles in ministry, especially the issue of women serving in pastoral roles.

  14. beattieblog says:

    I love the last one – and the reference to Judas the male who betrayed Jesus. Helps us XY chromosomes understand women’s feelings every time Eve is brought up.

    Saint Lewis, IMHO, it would be more accurate to say that Brother Paul told a particular group of Christians in a particular time and place that it would be a bad idea to have women teach men.

  15. P.Dan says:

    This is what I heard you saying with your “innocent” post:

    10. They should just make ‘man’ mean ‘woman,’ and ‘woman’ mean ‘man.’ Everything is just language right? They don’t really mean anything.

    9. Who cares about bio-ethics, they should just let bio-engineers decide who should have children and who should not. Natural law was mean to be broken.

    8. “Ditto” with number 9

    7. When I say Eugene is a Mr. Cho is a man, what I really mean is that he is not a man, it just depends on how you look at it.

    6. We need everyone to live in a bubble capsule so that no social norms form. And then we wouldn’t be prejudiced and make generalized caricatures of people.

    5. We should just all go to church butt-naked, who cares how people dress, we should be focused on God.

    4. All human should not listen to their parents, teachers, or other figures of authority and decide for themselves whether the stars are really there, whether touching poison ivy really gives you rash, whether the world really is round… They need to figure out everything for themselves.

    3. “Ditto” with number 6.

    2. Bible teaches Abraham was willing to kill Isaac. We should all imitate God, the Father, and kill our sons for our beloved fellows.

    1. Everyone should be identical. Let’s just create a cybernetics institute that removes all distinctions in people. Make them energy efficient biologically and keep them as batteries while computers run everything like Matrix.

  16. Ric Wild says:

    Nothing like a good satirical jab to bring about new perspective. In response to the saintlewis comment implying that these 10 reasons are disconnected from scripture, I think they actually interact with scripture a lot more than you think and indulge in the same kind of argumentation that is used by those who advocate only for male ordination.

  17. elderj says:

    ahh the double edged sword of satire…

  18. amy powell says:

    as a female senior pastor in the Vineyard, i have to give u a cyber-high-five for posting this beautiful piece of savvy satire. so glad we have some advocates who actually want the Kingdom to advance through the called and gifted regardless of gender :))) peace.

  19. saintlewis says:

    beattieblog:

    Honestly, this isn’t a HUGE issue for me. Even though I disagree with having women teaching men, I have no issues with women sharing during a church service, not even being ordained, if it is for the purpose of doing ministry to other women. And, even with those beliefs, I have friends who are women pastors. It’s not an issue I would die over, for sure, but I am convinced.

    1 Timothy 2:11-15; “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.”…“I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing –if they continue if faith, love, and holiness with propriety.”

    Now, I readily admit that some passages that SEEM to be against women having leadership/speaking roles in the gathered church are easily recognized as ‘cultural’, but what is Paul’s argument that women should not “teach or have authority of a man” in this passage based on?

    First, the pre-fall created order (in other words, this is the way God made things), and secondly, on the fall of man itself. Man should have authority for he was made first, is Paul’s main point. Don’t let this reading imply that the fall of man is to blamed on the women – keep in mind, if Adam was to be the head, he is held responsible for her actions – in fact, we are not born into Eve’s sin, according to Scripture, but Adam’s. Even more troubling is this; Genesis 3:6 says, “…and she (Eve) also gave some to her husband (Adam) WHO WAS WITH HER, and he at it.” Adam stood silently by and did nothing during the whole of Eve’s temptation by the Serpent, then ate of it himself!

    Anyway, back to Timothy’s passage, the admonition seems to not apply to the teaching of simply anyone who is male, since surely a son may learn from his mother (which is implied by the Biblical command to honor one’s father and mother). I must admit, even, that oft-times I have been challenged and encouraged by women’ exhortations WITHIN the church, and I’m sure such Godly encouragement could not be condemned. So WHAT IS PAUL SAYING?

    It seems to me that this applies to official teaching roles within the church; BUT, there is evidence that some women in the Scriptures may have had some sort of leadership role within the New Testament Church…that is why some argue that the only role excluded by this passage is that of minister, or preacher, since, were a woman teaching UNDER the minister, she may be doing it under HIS authority and not her own. Teaching however, to some extent seems to be equated with Authority within the Scriptures, so I believe this to be a COMPLEX issue to tackle, and one to take very seriously.

    Concerning the END of the passage – “women will be saved through child-bearing” – there is NO ideal reading of this…it seems odd no matter WHAT, but my first thought is to look at other, possibly more reliable translations than the NIV and see if there are any significant differences. The NAS reads, “But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.” The RSV reads “Yet women will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.” Lastly, the KJV reads “Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue if faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” As I suspected, the Greek word for “through” can also mean “in”, which can significantly alter our reading of the passage. Paul also seems to be using the term “save” (there are MANY biblical meanings to this word) to mean “kept safe from injury”/”restore to health”/”keep from perishing”/or “preserve”. This use of the word here is also consistent with Paul’s theology, which often speaks of God preserving and protecting his people in and through calamities. So, it seems that Paul is reassuring women in his congregation that Christ is their savior, even in the dangers of childbirth. I do not believe it is an absolute promise that they will not die, but they will indeed be “saved” in the dangerous act of giving birth. I admit, it’s a complex passage, but other scholars do indeed agree with my interpretation.

    Anyway, so I don’t seem like an overwhelming male pig (which some will surely think I must be to hold such an opinion), When I was a campus minister I would often ask the men I was counseling a series of questions; 1.) Do you hope to one day marry? 2.) If so, what sort of woman are you looking for?

    The issue was this, if they thought of their future wife as a woman staying home, barefoot and pregnant, as only a homemaker, while the guy acts as the breadwinner, that’s not a Biblical concept.

    The fact is, this option wasn’t even a possibility until after the industrial revolution – till then almost ALL work was based out of one’s home, and the whole family was involved; the wife, and children were co-laborers for the business. In those days everyone HAD to work were they to survive. We see hints of this in the “Proverbs 31 woman”; “A wife of noble character who can find?…she selects wool and flax and works with eager hands…she gets up while it is still dark; she provides food for her family and portions for her servant girls…she considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard…she sets about her work vigorously; her arms are strong for the task…” READ THAT LIST! WOW! This woman is an intelligent, strong, go-getting businesswoman, stock-trader, gardener, provider, cook, real-estate agent, fashion designer, and teacher! And lastly in that passage we read, “Give her the reward she has earned, and let her works bring her praise at the City gate.” The “barefoot and pregnant” helpless homebody housewife is simply not a Scriptural mandate.

    I think the Scriptures do indeed affirm that genders serve different roles both in the church, and even more-so within relationships, but with that said, let me also make it clear that I think women are often under-utilized, and under-honored for their work, within the church. On top of that, even if in a position of lesser authority, are none-the-less of equal, if not GREATER importance than men. We have as our model God himself: Jesus is subservient to God the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both of them, but all are equally God – they have different roles in what we refer to as “salvation history”, but none are less valuable because of their individual roles.

    Differences are good, are to be enjoyed, and ultimately to be used to the glory of God, who Himself created us different. Women and men are made in a way that women can be a help-mate, making what might otherwise be impossible for man to accomplish be well within his grasp – that is what is means for two to become one. And two are stronger than one, especially when the two have different strengths, roles, and callings to ministry. That is the beauty of it all – that’s God’s picture of how the sexes were MADE to operate: not as two ‘heads’, but as ‘one body’, each fulfilling the God-ordained roles to which we’ve been called in our relationship, and our ministry.

    Hope you enjoyed the ‘essay’…

    • IndigoGirl says:

      You disagree with having women teach men? Didn’t you learn anything from your momma?

      I’m amazed that there are still neanderthals like this out there.

    • Pat Baxter says:

      Thank you for your well writtena nd thoughtful argument. I am sending it to many people and have it linked to face book.
      Well done.
      Blessings,
      Pat Baxter (Rev.Dr.

    • Jev Baldry says:

      Saint Lewis,
      Thanks for your thought through and respectful response. I am in the process of working out what is right at the moment, and don’t comfortably sit in either camp. My background is brethren, so I have always read the scriptures with a viewpoint that would agree with you, but my questions and experience of God and other scriptures (as well as now being a part of a church that embraces women in leadership) have me reworking my understanding. But I am very much only wanting to understand the truth and honour God with my position, so am thankful for both Eugene Cho’s writing and your ‘essay’ too! All your reasoning of course makes sense and is in line what I’ve read already in truly searching this issue. But it doesn’t (as neither does the books I have read with similar arguments) address some things that are still questions for me:
      - If this is the prototype – a woman not meant to lead – then why is Deborah made a judge? She was a wife, yet clearly held both spiritual and governmental authority in her day. I’ve heard a response to this being that men didn’t step up to the role and therefore God had to give it to a woman. That seems to be the implication for what happened with Barak regarding going up to battle, but doesn’t explain why she was already a judge before this. There is nothing either in the OT or NT that I can see that decries her leadership as being wrong. She of course is not the norm in Judges but if God gave her the task of judge at all I think the question still stands.
      - Second, we seem to understand scriptures are meant to be understood culturally in some ways but taken literally in others. Now that I’ve relooked at this, it makes me wonder why we don’t insist on women wearing head coverings (Paul spends much more effort on this passage than the two about women not teaching) or teaching that men worship with their hands raised (2 Tim) – again, the teachings from the traditional viewpoint seem to accept that culture has changed and we should just take Paul’s intention as the point, but Paul clearly believes this is the way things should be: ‘doesn’t the very nature of things’ make it clear this should be?’
      I’m not meaning by this to argue ‘well we don’t do this, so why do this’, but more to question on what basis do we make this judgement of not taking the word literally in other parts. We seem to accept cultural changes in some areas but not others. One thing that has struck me about the cultural argument, is that we do church very different now than the early church that branched out of synagogue men/women regulations, in which a woman seen in authority over a man would indeed have been startling to those not adapted yet to the idea of true freedom in Christ outlined in Galations. I still believe the man is he head of the wife in a marriage relationship – but I’m not sure it follows to say therefore a woman can’t share the responsibility of church leadership with as much right, as Genesis (if you were to use that argument) clearly makes responsibilities a shared responsibility between man and woman- before the fall, when he was then given authority over her. And then I have to ask myself, if this is part of the curse, didn’t Christ come to redeem us from that??
      Of course, it all comes back to what will honour God more – and we all have to ask that question. I actually have no problems submitting if that’s my role, but it doesn’t ring true in terms of what I’ve seen in women being led by the Holy Spirit to act in the Lord and also I am also wary of ‘hiding my talent’ out of fear, instead of contributing what I have to the body. (In my own case, my husband, male pastor and all but one male elders have asked me to consider eldership, so have weighed all these things up with some gravity). I have to ask myself if God is going to be more upset with me for preaching the Gospel as a female, or not preaching the gospel, if you know what I mean. In any case, I think it is sufficiently unclear enough from scripture that we should act on our conscience without demonising those who differ – either way – and for this I am very thankful for Eugene’s argument for the same.
      So.. there’s my very long response!! Happy for anyone to comment if they can resist insulting either way – . thanks.

      • Jev Baldry says:

        - sorry for sake of clarity, I believe that we are all called to submit, whichever viewpoint you hold ‘submit to each other out of reverence for Christ’. I meant that I have no problems not taking leadership if that became clear, but that seems to me to be holding back something from the church as it’s meant to be. But – like I said, I’m still unresolved on it.

    • K says:

      Such absurd hair-splitting arguments. The reality is that women can be more educated or smarter than many men. The reality is that some women are extremely talented at teaching complex subjects to adults, not just simple Bible stories in Sunday School. Women are theology professors and work as full-fledged pastors with successful ministries (particularly in countries where Christians are oppressed) even if they are not officially recognized. It’s only pathetic male insecurity that sees this as some sort of a problem.

      People these days have no clue how much women in leadership did for the church, even well before “women’s lib” got off the ground. Many women missionaries in the 1800′s bucked church authority and went out to dangerous lands to spread the gospel because it was their burden. Or the ministries of women in China today, who lead churches of thousands that keep on growing despite government oppression. In countries where people are desperate for freedom in Christ, they don’t have stupid egotistical debates about whether God thinks you’re more special and capable because you have a penis. They actually take the whole “gifts of the Spirit” thing seriously and don’t try to pigeonhole them based on artificial gender roles.

      American fundagelical Christianity is just reaping a terrible reputation for itself, and it will not survive much longer. The Biblical justification for women’s equality has been expounded upon by more experienced Christians than myself, and your beliefs have no leg to stand on. This is what happens when you try to twist reality to fit your clearly problematic view of the Bible instead of re-examining the evidence. I’m rather tired of debating with people whether women are subordinate to men – if you still believe this nonsense, the only reasons why you do are either because of 1.) some deep-seated psychological problems with women (I’m not a therapist, so I can’t help you there) or 2.) Biblical/theological illiteracy (and if you refuse to read a book or acknowledge the texts that totally contradict the assumption that women shouldn’t lead or teach, then you’re either too cowardly to question what you’ve been taught or too lazy).

    • tiro3 says:

      Not having time today to refute faulty exegesis here, but I highly recommend a friends exceptional work with these Scriptures. http://newlife.id.au/category/equality-and-gender-issues/

      FWIW the term ‘role’ is from the French word for acting in a play. the word didn’t come into existence until the 1600′s. And there is nothing in Scripture anywhere that suggests classes of people have roles to live in their entire lives by reason of their birth or flesh. Facts are that people rose from ignominy to serve the people and to serve God on a frequent basis. God did not choose people according to their flesh but according to their heart condition. He does the same today.

  20. saintlewis says:

    btw…I also thought the original post funny.

  21. beattieblog says:

    saintlewis – I think this discussion could get a little too long for Eugene’s blog – I’d be happy to take it up on my blog, yours or via email. It’s clear you have invested a fair amount of time in understanding why you believe a complimentarian view of this passage and I think your thoughtfulness on it is commendable. Here are a few brief responses.
    The complimentarian view of I Timothy you are describing ignores the larger context of what Paul is addressing – women, most likely young widows, were teaching falsely and Paul wants to stop this deception. To pull the verse out of the larger context in which it is being applied to these women and apply it as a mandate for all women is not consistent with the larger body of Paul’s and the bible’s teaching which has women on a clear trajectory towards equality and freedom. I think Paul’s reference to the order of creation must be seen within the context of the specific issue because I also don’t think you can make an argument for the subordination of women from Genesis outside of the curse. The striving and competitiveness that comes out of Genesis is a result of the curse – with Christ’s coming I believe that though the effects of the curse are clearly evident in creation, as Christians we no longer live under the curse while we await the full renewal of creation. This reflects my “kingdom theology” (sorry for the all the Christian-eze, Eugene).
    I could paraphrase Don Williams here on this but I really need to get back to my class work (though this kind of dialogue is more fun:)) so I’ll just put his words in here on the issue of subordination:

    “The arguments against finding subordination in this chapter are the following. Man is created first, not for governance or priority in function, but to establish his loneliness. “It is not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18a). His created need for woman does not imply his superiority in any way. The animals do not complete him. Without woman, he is less than fully a man. She alone completes him. Second, in his task to care for the garden, a helper fit for him does not imply subordination. In fact, as his helper, woman rescues man from his loneliness and complements him in his vocation. Next, man and woman equally share human nature. She alone is taken from him. She alone is to be united to him. Subordination must be read into the passage, it cannot be read out from it. Finally, man’s initiative in leaving and cleaving tells us nothing about his superiority to woman or her subordination. The next verse tells us that the man and woman are naked and not ashamed. In their “one flesh” they have complete union and communion: equal standing before God and each other (Genesis 2:25).”
    You can read this full paper on Genesis by Williams on his http://www.kingdomrain.net site. Hopefully this doesn’t t totally hijack what was a lighthearted blog entry, Eugene and others. Cheers.

  22. elderj says:

    and on that note, i take my exit before a full orbed feast of prooftexting and countertexting occurs

  23. chad says:

    i thought it was satire…
    it was satire, right?
    ’cause if it was, it was funny

  24. LK says:

    You are a wimp Eugene. Seriously, grow a spine and submit to the Word of God. This isn’t satire but it’s insulting.

    • cp says:

      Why is he a wimp? Why does he not have a spine? (And since when is this appropriate comment for a Christian?!) Do you understand satire? Do you understand the word of God?

    • Pam says:

      It’s much more wimpy and spineless to just post a sooky one and a half line comment with no evidence to support it. And anyway, in posting it he’s been anything but wimpy. A real wimp would be too scared to post something that could lead to criticism.

  25. saintlewis says:

    Honestly, I wasn’t trying to ‘pick sides’ – our church was trying to decide where to stand on it a few years back when it become ‘an issue’ we needed to figure out for the future of our congregation… a number of us just took to the Scriptures, grabbed a few commentaries, and various translations of the Bible… we each took a few months researching, and writing papers, then we each presented our ‘case’ of what we found, then about 50 of the church’s members (at least 6 or 7 of which were Greek and or Hebrew experts – a very ‘odd’ church, it was), and some folks from other churches who were interested, gathered to debate/discuss the issue.

    I do love Williams, as I also do the Vineyard as a whole, so I’ll check out his paper …however, at this point it would take a lot – like, some massive discovery of mis-translation from the original languages of a few important texts – to change my mind. Again, no judgement from me on those women who pursue ministry – I hope they reach folks for Christ. It just seems that we need to be consistent, and ordain Gays & Lesbians as well, as the interpretive approach that allows for one, also leads to the other.

    • Ann F-R says:

      saintlewis, your last sentence clearly evidences a faulty hermeneutic, unless you are claiming that the “gays and lesbians” are correct in their assertion that their Being is created by God as homosexual. It sounds as if you and your church were reading SWG – akin to DWI. (RSWG = reading scripture while gendered, contrary to Gal 3:28) Our bodies’ gender influences everything about our perceptions, and unless your church is far outside the norm, most or all of the Greek & Hebrew experts were men. Sanctifying gender discrimination is the human norm – whether in the church or in the bedroom. The alienation of man from woman proceeds directly from our alienation from Godself, who is imaged male & female in creation. Humans simply keep rationalizing ways to perpetuate it.

  26. beattieblog says:

    Thanks saintlewis – actually, I think it’s a big mistake to tie the two togethger. I don’t make the connection myself.

  27. Alaina says:

    Eugene, I have seen this countless places in the last week and I just love it. I also hate it because it only proves how ridiculous the reasons of why women cannot be in ministry are. I really appreciate you, a male pastor, putting this on your blog. It means lots for us, the women who are pastors, to have people like you standing up for us – even if it is in funny ways. Thanks.

  28. eugenecho says:

    well, some of you are going to have a fun time with next week’s post about women and leadership.

    yes, the double edge sword of satire. elderj: i hope you don’t have any dreams of me getting pummeled.

  29. Sarah Hammersborg says:

    Eugene, I love reading your blog. This issue gets me fired up. I’m glad that you are an advocate for women like me pursuing ministry. I hope that one day I get to sit with you at ministerial meetings, because knowing that you’ve got my back on this issue is huge.

    Something my New Testament professor always says is that scripture was written in a specific time and place to a specific situation. We need to exegete carefully to understand the context in which it was written.

    How many women are called and gifted in this world, but prohibited from living into that call?

  30. Leah says:

    thanks pe for a great post, and for your ongoing support. last week, a female student at a bible college sent me 10 questions she hoped i could help answer about women in ministry. some were about ministry, some about people’s reactions and acceptance of a woman called to the role of minister, and some about being a pastor. i wonder what a man’s reaction to the same questions would be, for comparison. how different are our experiences, really?

  31. P.Dan says:

    sometimes it’s not about who gets what privileges in ministry. yes, some do reduce this discussion into to politics. but from a Christian perspective, it is more about humbly living out the gospel of Jesus Christ. there’s a powerful verse in Ephesians chapter 5 which speaks about husbands loving their wives as Christ loved the Church. for many advocates of male headship, it’s not even about politics, but more about faithfulness to living out the gospel (even if it is politically incorrect)

    can you imagine seeing the Church complaining that it should have “equal rights” with Christ? kind of funny way to see the divine romance drama of Christ and His Bride. the issue of men and women in ministry is a sub-issue which spills over to the greater issue of proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ to a fallen word which rejects inherent meaning and purpose in this world. it’s a slippery slope which leads to destroying the Gospel story.

    maybe, politically, women should be allowed to serve in ministry. possibly even exegetically (when taking cultural context into consideration), but in the overarching drama of Scripture, it makes a mockery out of the Gospel story.

    • KC says:

      The Scriptural guidelines for MARITAL relationships in Ephesians 5 are not the same guidelines for our relationships with our brothers and sisters in Christ who share equal status as children of God.

    • Mark E. says:

      P. Dan, the passage says husbands should love their wives like Christ, it does not, however, equate husbands as being Christ. We are to follow Christ’s example and love and serve our wives sacrificially. Yes, it would be odd for anybody to try to have “equal rights” with Christ. But as I said, nowhere does it say us men ARE Christ. So a woman wanting equal rights with a man is not the same thing. From the time Jesus started his ministry onward we see women being treated more and more equally, no the other way around.

  32. [...] A very funny, tongue-in-cheek top ten list: Why Men Should Not Be Ordained for Ministry. My favorite may be #7, Man was created before woman, obviously as a prototype. Thus, they represent an experiment rather than the crowning achievement of creation. (via Eugene Cho) [...]

  33. Liz says:

    Trying to fight for the conviction to honor Christ “makes a mockery of the Gospel?”

    What? Really? Goodness gracious.

  34. P.Dan says:

    lizboo, i think u need to re-read it again in it’s full context. =)

  35. Allie says:

    This was meant to be funny. I got a huge laugh from it. Thanks for posting this.

    And Eugene, I’m with Sarah. Thanks for being such a great advocate for women in ministry. I’ve been trying to sort out vocational issues since I was 19 (I’m 26 now, and still no closer to answers), and hearing your thoughts on ministry and calling have helped me clarify my own questions. You rock!

  36. daniel so says:

    @P.Dan — So, what is the full context of what you’re saying? That saying both women and men should serve in vocational ministry makes a mockery of the Gospel story?

    This is not an issue of allowing cultural politics to dictate the Church’s approach to leadership and service. This is a question of taking Scripture — all of it — seriously. Often, the people I have heard ranting about women in church leadership simply proof-text whatever passages conveniently uphold their preconceived cultural notions of gender roles. For example, if a person genuinely thinks that a women shouldn’t teach ‘because the Bible says so’ (and they often can’t even cite particular passages) then, by the same interpretation principle, they shouldn’t allow women to speak at all. However, even the most conservative groups allow women to say “hello” in their churches — so, clearly, everyone is doing interpretive work here.

    One argument I have heard ad nauseam from certain circles is that people who believe in women and men in vocational ministry are “liberals” who “don’t believe in the Bible.” This kind of rhetoric is not helpful at all.

    Clearly, it is possible for followers of Christ who love God and take Scripture seriously to come to different conclusions on this issue. It’s not just a matter of politics. Many astute scholars have shown how there is a solid biblical basis for women and men to serve side-by-side in church leadership.

  37. [...] in Ministry Posted on May 4, 2008 by Rustin This is too good – HT: Eugene Cho & [...]

  38. Reason # 2 may be the only reason – we ain’t worthy…

  39. [...] and ministry… Well, I guess this is the serious entry in response to satire entitled – 10 reasons why men should not be ordained for ministry.  And to give you a little context, this is what I wrote in an earlier post about supporting [...]

  40. m@ says:

    #8 in itself kept me out of seminary.

  41. lotsofspice says:

    On the other hand they are totaly suited for ordination. Who better to manipulate masses of people with no guilt? They have it down to a fine art.

  42. [...] May 14, 2008 got this off laughingcow’s site, which she linked from eugene cho’s blog. [...]

  43. 10 Gründe warum Frauen nicht Lobpreis leiten sollten?…

    Je nach Denomination und Gemeinde wird das Thema Frauen in der Leiterschaft entweder heiß diskutiert, wird totgeschwiegen, halbherzig umgesetzt oder ist längst Selbstverständlichkeit. Mit der starken Bedeutung, die Lobpreisleiter mittlerweile gewonn…

  44. Minister says:

    Well worth sharing, thanks!

  45. [...] Rob Bell [re: women in ministry] and while we’re at it, I’m re-posting the infamous 10 reasons Why Men Should Not Be Ordained For Ministry,  It’s just too funny not to share again. 10. A man’s place is in the [...]

  46. [...] list was posted on several blogs this week – my favorite comment on the list was from Eugene Cho , so here is his link to the list :).  It’s worth a good laugh – and is also a serious [...]

  47. Britt says:

    Yeah, funny. For the people who think that this settles the argument that women should be pastors….the Bible doesn’t follow the same reasoning. The Lord’s ways are not our ways. Different rolse are wonderful and needed

  48. beachgirl says:

    as an ordained woman….you made me laugh. for those that take life too seriously…STOP IT! to men who are anti-women in ministry…if you don’t want women telling others about Christ then you need to step up to the plate.
    Jesus said for ALL people to and share the good news of Christ.

  49. po says:

    Mark Driscoll is not laughing….

  50. historyans says:

    Thank for posting this. It made me chuckle and sigh as well. I hope the Church takes better interest in human rights in the future.

  51. [...] This list has been wandering around the Internet for some time, posted by Christian bloggers like Eugene Cho who are questioning the church’s traditional gender restrictions.  I’m reposting it [...]

  52. Garrett S. says:

    10 is the funniest for me as my friends, who are girls, back home always make fun of the fact that there place is “in the kitchen”!

    Guilty of #6, x

  53. Jeff Holton says:

    I was just about to write a post about how I’m starting to have misgivings about my Eastern Orthodoxy because of the fact that I can’t relate to such a matriarchal expression of faith. I mean, I have to be a WOMAN to give birth to God??! Come ON!

  54. Al Doyle says:

    Eugene— my hat’s off to you for stepping out with this great satire. Now int he spirit of this blog stream I expect to hear some expert and effusive exegesis about why it’s OK or not for me as a man to have an uncovered head. ;-) — Al

  55. Mark Albright says:

    Wow! I was dumbfounded by the level of animus and stream of vituperation one tongue-in-cheek list engendered. This is a perfect example of why one may be better off meditating and studying Buddhist precepts than endlessly trying to make sense of the (endlessly cut and pasted) non sequitur that is the Christian Bible. BTW — Doesn’t that same Bible say that: “By their fruits, ye shall know them”? Catch a clue, haters!

  56. AtheistAnon says:

    The post was brilliant. Well done. And I love reading the comments, very entertaining from a bystander’s perspective. Carry on!

  57. Richard Bott says:

    As a pastor, and a male I…
    laughed my head off as I read this. It is beautiful satirical comment upon the reasons that are often given as to why women shouldn’t be ordained.

    By the way – my partner (female) – is ordained, the same as I. She’s 10x the minister I’ll ever be.

    Christ’s peace.

  58. Kim says:

    SaintLewis — Since you have studied the scriptures and come to the conclusion that women shouldn’t be in ministry, you will appreciate my alternative conclusion: If that is indeed what the scriptures say, then that is conclusive proof that Christianity is a false religion.

  59. Ty says:

    Reblogged this on A Robin Hood's Musing and commented:
    #7 & #2 are on the mark :)

  60. SynthesistChronicles says:

    Seriously awesome. Thank you for writing this. I literally laughed out loud and now my cat is looking at me weirdly.

  61. Ann F-R says:

    I really think that reason #3 should reference 1 Timothy 2:8, to emphasize the scripture & irony!

  62. Jen Walters says:

    That made me laugh out loud big time. Love it!

  63. Jessica Bell says:

    I am pretty sure David Scholer of Fuller wrote these!
    Thanks for keeping them going!
    Blessings!

  64. Eve says:

    I believe that a list like this (albeit a little more high-brow and academic) was in an appendix of Gretchen Gabelein Hull’s Equal to Serve. It was also very funny – I’d recommend taking a look at it.

  65. Hmm. Good stuff bro! Rock on. Blessings:) xoxo

  66. Women have 5 days a month when they are unclean, it is for this that men are ordained, it is better to have someone who may not be the best at nurturing than it is to have someonr unclean. hehehe

  67. tiro3 says:

    Just for your information, the original author of this was a friend of mine. She is a brilliant young Russian woman by the name of Galina Freed. She has kinda disappeared from the public eye of late, but she does have an pretty much inactive facebook page.

  68. [...] If you want to laugh even more, check out 10 reasons why men shouldn’t be ordained. [...]

  69. Leah says:

    This is so good and well said. As a female pastor with an MDiv in the Evangelical world, I really appreciate it when men stand up for women in ministry. So, thanks!

  70. WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP

    The apostle Paul has often been called a male chauvinist and given other nasty labels. He speaks in seemingly harsh and politically incorrect words regarding women in church and family:

    Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. 1 Ti. 2:11-15.

    In Ephesians 5, Paul instructs as follows:

    Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies . . . This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Eph. 5:22-28, 32.

    Today, most Christian denominations ordain female pastors and place them in positions to rule over men. The Episcopal church of America recently ordained a practicing lesbian woman to be a bishop that rules over every pastor within her region, mostly males.

    Many think that Paul’s statements did not come from God but was a personal opinion long obsolete and out of sync with modern social values. Others point to female prophets in the Bible such as Miriam and the daughters of Philip the evangelist who “had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy”. Ac. 21:8-9. However, there was no mention that any of them were “ordained” church leaders. Some claim that there was an apostle with a female-like name.

    So, did Paul make a mistake? Is he putting women down? or calling women inferior to men? or demeaning women? Was he just old-fashioned, now out of touch with the times, or worse, a male chauvinist? Was it just a personal opinion? or was Paul actually Spirit led?

    If the apostle Paul was Spirit-led, what is the reasoning behind it?

    GOD’S PLANS AND PURPOSES

    Part of the answer lies in God’s purpose in creating both the earth and Adam and Eve. It wasn’t an accident and it wasn’t on a whim. That answer is – He wanted sons and daughters perfect in the image of His Son, Jesus, – children He could share His goodness with. Ro. 8:29; Eph. 4:11-15. He even sacrificed His own Son so that we can be forgiven and cleansed of our sins and come before Him washed by the blood of Jesus – made pure, holy and acceptable in His sight.

    Secondly, God is looking for a perfect church without spot, wrinkle, blemish or any such thing, to become the bride of Christ. Eph. 5:25-27; Rev. 19:7-9; Rev. 21:2; Rev. 22:17. A perfect bride is made up of perfect saints. Those are God’s two goals and purposes for mankind. He hasn’t changed.

    HIS NATURE MUST BE OUR NATURE

    If we are to be conformed unto the image of our Lord Jesus Christ, what exactly are we to be like? What characteristics of God must we have in common with Him? The first and foremost, of course, is love. God is love. 1 Jn. 4:8, 16. Love sums up the fruit of the Spirit. Gal. 5:22-23. The other great characteristics of God are humility, submission and obedience.

    The children of the kingdom of Satan are directly opposite. Hatred, rebellion, disobedience and pride describe the character of every demon and demonized person in the kingdom of darkness. See 2 Pet. 2:10-22; Jude 10-13.

    GOD’S PLAN FOR CREATING PERFECT SONS AND DAUGHTERS

    Godliness must be taught and learned. God has given us at least three fundamental sources of learning godliness: the church, our schools and our parents. Of course, the Bible, the Holy Spirit and life’s trials, tests and chastening push us along the way and are God’s primary tools. Heb. 12:6-12.

    THE CHURCH

    It is the church’s responsibility to teach, guide and feed the sheep. The Bible tells us about God’s character and ways, and it is the Holy Spirit that teaches us spiritual things that man cannot teach. However, the church is a major vehicle used by God to interpret, lead, encourage and guide the sheep into perfection according to God’s word. That is why God gave us the five-fold ministry of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. Eph. 4:11. They are all extraordinary teachers of the word. We learn godliness from and through the church, as inspired by the Holy Ghost.

    That is why Satan strives so hard to destroy the church and its leaders. He doesn’t have to physically demolish it (although he will in the end of the world); all he has to do is distort the truths given by the first apostles and bring the lusts of the world and flesh into the church. His primary strategy is to introduce man’s (Satan’s) ways, thoughts and intentions until the church is no longer God’s church. This brings much confusion, as evidenced by the over 34,000 different Christian denominations and cults around the world (over 7,500 in America alone). Today’s church is both deceived and confused.

    OUR SCHOOLS OF LEARNING

    Another main source of godliness training is our schools, both secular and religious. They shape the character and belief system of every student, often for life. Schools mold our attitudes, goals and perceptions of the world, who we are and what we need to do in order to be a good citizen and person. They greatly influence our behavior, feelings and points of view. That is why Satan fiercely attacks our educational systems in an all-out effort to eliminate the teaching of God’s character and ways. In the last fifty years, prayers have been outlawed in schools, religion (primarily Christianity) banned from public places, our Christian heritage systematically eradicated and denied and Christianity replaced by a secular culture of evolution and humanism. When Christ-likeness is not taught in schools, ungodliness and immorality take its place, based on selfishness and the idea that man is God.

    OUR PARENTS

    As important as the church and our schools are, the most influential source of teaching godliness and spiritual perfection in Christ is our parents. From the time of birth, an individual responds to and learns from his parents. Psychologists claim that a baby’s basic personality is fully developed by the age of six, including many of his responses to people and circumstances. Knowingly or not, parents shape a child’s attitudes and points of view towards others, the world and himself at an early age. He observes his parents and family, how they interact and respond to situations, and their attitudes. He mentally stores up early experiences and records their behavior. No doubt, the family, and especially parents, have a pivotal role in developing godliness in an individual.

    Parents are God’s primary teaching tools to produce godly children for the kingdom of God. It is the parents’ responsibility to teach their children to fear God and be Christ-like. While the church and schools sometime succeed in rescuing and teaching a young person despite the failures of his parents, parents remain the strongest influence on a person’s early training in godliness.

    WHY SATAN ATTACKS FAMILIES

    That is why traditional Christian family values are being attacked so fiercely by the kingdom of darkness. Same-sex marriages, civil unions and the like are designed to destroy the family and a mother’s and father’s ability and right to bring their children up in the image of Jesus. Satan seeks to destroy families through sexual uncleanness, homosexuality, adultery, free sex, pornography, and so forth. Today, over 45% of all children born in America are born out of wedlock. Communism, an atheistic form of government, takes infants away from their natural parents and indoctrinates them with its principles and beliefs before parents can teach their children otherwise. So with most forms of ungodly governments and societies. Propaganda and brain-washing instill the character and attitudes that the government desires. Islamic jihadists, for instance, start brain-washing children at an early age to hate America and all non-Islamic people, even to kill them if necessary.

    Satan’s prime target is parents. He wants to make sure that children do not have godly parents and family to train children in accordance with God’s kingdom principles. Satan’s ultimate goal is to thwart God’s desire to have perfect sons and daughters in the image of Jesus Christ, and the bride of Christ.

    MOTHER’S ROLE

    Mothers are the first line of defense against the devil and the primary teachers of righteousness in a world of unholy, rebellious people. From the time of birth until around ten or twelve years of age, a child’s most important teacher is his mother. True, church and school help formulate a person’s character, but the primary source of learning from time of birth until the age of understanding is mothers. Churches and schools do not usually enter the picture until the child is around three or four years of age. For the first ten or twelve years, fathers too are mostly secondary. Even at that age, a mother’s influence is usually far greater than a father’s. Mothers have the first and primary role as teachers to their children.

    So, what in particular does God want mothers to teach their children? The answer is clear: humility, submission and obedience. That’s why the apostle Paul said, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husband, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.” Eph. :22-24.

    Children constantly observe how mother reacts and responds to father and male leadership. A wife cannot teach humility unless she too is humble. She cannot teach submission without a submissive attitude towards her husband, and she certainly cannot teach obedience and be disobedient and disrespectful towards her husband at the same time. That would make her a hypocrite.

    Without a wise Christ-like mother to teach humility, submission and obedience, children will learn to be like the devil’s children – arrogant, rebellious, disrespectful towards government and authority and destined for hell. Childbearing and the subsequent proper upbringing of godly children in the image of Jesus Christ are the salvation and honor of women. 1 Ti. 2:15. She has the most profound effect on her babies and infants and the privilege of bringing up her children in the fear and admonition of God. Paul’s statements have nothing to do with who is smarter – men or women, or who is better, or who earns more, or who make better leaders. It has everything to do with teaching humility, submission and obedience to the children of God.

    Husbands are also required to be humble, submissive and obedient towards Christ. They learn this from their mothers and are commanded to be humble, submissive and obedient to people in authority over them, even secular authority. 1 Pet. 2:13-15. Not just wives or women, but all of God’s sons are to be taught humility, submission and obedience.

    FATHER’S ROLE

    Today, many children are being brought up by single mothers. Without a father in the family, God’s children cannot be taught love in its fullness. Fathers are to teach love. Divorces and illegitimate children are Satan’s strategy to stunt the spiritual growth of Christians.

    That is why Malachi 4:6 speaks of turning the hearts of the fathers back to the children and the hearts of the children back to the fathers. That failing, God promises to strike the earth with a curse. Fathers cannot ignore their role in teaching their own children, especially their sons. True, mothers are given the primary position for the first years of a child’s life, but mothers cannot teach what Fathers can. If is often said that a single mother can raise a good boy, but she can never raise a good man.

    What is a father’s role as teacher? Paul is firm in this regard. Fathers must teach love, responsibility, willingness to die for wife, family and others.

    Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it, with the washing of water by the word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. Eph. 5:25-28.

    Through willingness to die for his wife, a husband expresses the highest level of love one human can have for another. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” Jn. 15:13. Is not a wife closer than a friend? So much more should a man be willing to lay down his life for his wife who is one flesh with him. Christ sanctified and cleansed the church with the washing of water by the word. By his love for his wife, a husband sanctifies and cleanses his wife to present her to himself without spot, wrinkle or any such thing – holy and without blemish. He should love his wife as he loves his own body and treat her as such. “So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies.” Jn. 15:28. Through love, the wife is cleansed and sanctified by her husband.

    How does a father teach his children love? Like mother, he teaches by example. His children observe how father treats mother and learn from it. Adam was not deceived by the serpent. He didn’t have to. He already deceived himself. He already wanted to be like God but he didn’t have the courage. When he heard the serpent beguiling Eve, Adam stood on the side and let his wife be deceived. Adam had plans of his own. He already wanted to be like God. What went through his mind at the time? Probably this: “I’ll let Eve stick her neck out and won’t stop her. If things don’t work out, I can always blame her.” Sure enough, when their sins were revealed, Adam said to God, “Don’t kill me. Kill her!” That was what Adam was really saying when he answered, “The woman, whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree and I did eat.” Gen. 3:12. First, he blamed God, then he blamed Eve. Adam played the victim. The truth is, he didn’t love Eve enough to protect her unto death. He loved only himself.

    When Moses came down the mountain with the Ten Commandments written in stone, he saw the Israelites dancing naked around a golden calf. He said to God: “Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin -; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.” Ex. 32:31-32. Moses was the only innocent one, yet he was willing to die for the people’s sins, so great was his love for his people.

    Jesus Christ was the only innocent one, yet He died on the cross to pay the price for the sins of the world. That’s how much He loved us. A father teaches his children by the love he has for his wife. Even as Christ died for us, husbands must love their wives and be willing to die for them. If fathers are irresponsible, laid back, selfish and bossy, how can the children learn godly love? Instead of the family being the training ground for God’s children, it becomes the training ground for the kingdom of darkness and the children of the devil. When fathers or husbands take responsibility and show great love to their wives, the wives feel loved, secure and happy and will pass this on to their offspring.

    Once again, we are not talking about male chauvinism or who is smarter or more spiritual. We are talking about the process by which we as parents must bring into being perfect sons and daughters in the image of Jesus.

    JEZEBEL AND AHAB

    The spirit of Jezebel leads women to usurp the role and authority of men. God hates that spirit and will bring severe punishments against those who surrender to that ugly spirit. In Revelation 2:20-23, the Lord says,

    Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am He which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

    The apostle Paul feared that Jezebel would come into the churches to teach the ways of the kingdom of darkness instead of humility, submission and obedience. That is why he was careful not to allow women to teach men and to keep silence. If the women lead the men in church, what would the children see? Would it not bring confusion? To be consistent, women in church must submit to the men in church. Keeping silence is one of the most difficult thing to do for many women and men too. It is but one way of stepping aside and letting the men lead and by so doing, serve as examples.

    Jezebel teaches and seduces God’s people to follow the ways of Satan instead of God. That is what the words “to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication and to eat things sacrificed to idols,” mean. Jezebel women are men haters, emasculators, usurpers of authority and self-promoting. They want to be the boss in everything. True, the spirit of Jezebel can be in men too, but the vast majority of “Jezebel” people are women. That is why the above passages refer to a woman.

    God promises to destroy Jezebel and her followers. Fornicating and committing adultery refers to worshipping other gods and goddesses or following a religion that is not of God. Living according to Satan’s principles is fornication and adultery. God will kill her children with death. Who are her children? First, it is her natural children that were taught by her to ignore God’s principles of humility, submission and obedience and to live according to the ways of the world. Second, it refers to Christians that follow her principles of aggressive authority by women over men and usurpation of the power, position and authority given to men by God Himself – her spiritual children. Mothers that are influenced by the Jezebel spirit produce aggressive, smart, men-hating and bossy daughters in her image and wimpy, laid back, lazy, crybaby, un-ambitious, and unspiritual sons in the image of their Ahab fathers.

    Of course there can be abuses by both sides. It is hard for a wife to submit to her husband if he is a jerk and it is hard for a husband to love a wife who emasculates him and teaches the children who is the boss in the family by having little respect for the husband. The children end up being confused. Nevertheless, God’s lines of authority and responsibility are clear. Think about it.

    • Ann F-R says:

      Do you imagine that most, if not all of us, haven’t read extensively or heard this traditional male-self-centered interpretation of scripture, Richard?

      Do you imagine that we are ignorant of Scripture, haven’t sought God and diligently studied the Word? Thank you for your concern, if so.

      However, from my POV & many others wiser and more highly educated, you’ve gravely & completely misread Paul and the witness of scripture, for the sake of a hierarchical agenda which misrepresents women made in God’s image, where men rule over one another, and over women & children, too. It seems you imagine that you’ve come to this post to straighten everyone out, correct the incorrigible, and rule by disputation (1 Tim. 2:8) so that we all act and think as you do. Doing such misrepresents Godself and Jesus who came to serve, rather than be served. In case you are unfamiliar the Greek, you began a quote with Eph. 5:22, which doesn’t have any verb (to submit, to be subject to), at all. The verb is carried from 5:21, which reads, Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.

      May we all be joined in Christ to love and serve ALL others, just as God in Christ did us. The one who is last, not first does not establish ranks.(Matt. 9:33-37) Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.

  71. [...] Verdict: Original source unknown (let’s know if you are sure). This was finally posted by a pastor but original source is presently unknown to us. We however  suggest the person must have been a [...]

  72. Mik Pazula says:

    1. Let’s not throw out what are called the Pastoral Epistles as pseudo-pauline.
    2. Let’s read any epistle, looking for the occasion that caused the letter to be written
    3. 1Tim was written in response to false leaders in the Ephesian congregation spreading their message through the house church system. The carriers of the message in this context were the young widows, who ran from house to house gossiping. The gossip was not about what the neighbor did yesterday, it was the false teaching of the elders. Paul even names them at the end of 1Tim 1.
    4. In that context, Paul says, I do not allow a woman to teach. He wants to stop the false teaching about prohibiting certain foods and marriage.

    If you do not allow for the context to guide your reading of the text then all single, childless woman cannot be saved. It is wrong to say one difficult verse must be taken literally and the other one must be explained. They both must be explained and the guiding principle is the original situation.

  73. [...] Considering the vote in Synod tonight, sharing this list seems somehow appropriate…  [...]

  74. [...] See on Scoop.it – Church and ReligionConsidering the vote in Synod tonight, sharing this list seems somehow appropriate…See on eugenecho.com [...]

  75. [...] 3. 10 Reasons Why Men Should Not Be Ordained for Ministry. Do you like satire? Yes?! Then this article is for you! I love the sassy take on an age-old argument! [...]

  76. lili-kayy says:

    This post encouraged me greatly. I’ve also read the comments for and against it. It saddens me that so many “logical” people out there are still making arguments for hierarchy as God’s order of things. I’ve studied a lot myself, and still don’t claim to have a complete or perfect understanding, so I’m not going to add to the already long lists of arguments one way or the other. I just want to tell you that as a young kid God called me to PREACH and I faced so much hurt and opposition and well meaning ‘teaching’ about what I was supposed to embody as a human who was created female rather than male. God knew what I was fellas. And he still called and equipped me. My biggest struggle used to be believing that he did. Now it’s forgiving those who still insist it isn’t biblical. This satire is actually very close to almost every reason that has been thrown at me as to why, as a woman, I was not supposed to hold such a position in the church. And it sure feels good to smile as the opposite ‘logic’ is shown to refute such arguments. But oh the sadness when I see the ongoing fight between minds that ought to be one in love and worship. Humility is not the call of one or the other, and neither is love. We, as a body, are all called to love one another and submit to one another. Thank God I’ve been given a husband who does not operate under the belief of headship. He and I are a working team. We are not perfect, but rather than being two opposing heads as some argue we must be we are simply one flesh under one Head…Christ is our head, and we his body. If we differ, we don’t expect one to back down based on gender, we discuss and pray about it. Ask the Lords guidance and make way for one another. Ask forgiveness when we’ve offended, and rejoice for the other rather than lift ourselves over one another. Praise God for my husband who is worth more to me than gold.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

stuff, connect, info

My Instagram

Grateful. Enjoying a moment with my earthly father and my Heavenly Father. Road trip continued.
Mountains are awesome. Road trip. Epic clouds. Oceans. 
#pugetsound Seattle. Summers. Speechless. Dang. Mount Rainier is showing off today. #NorthwestIsBest

my tweets

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 928 other followers