7/1/20

"THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW" Building To Withstand The Storms (7:24-27)

"THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

Building To Withstand The Storms (7:24-27)
INTRODUCTION 1. 1998 was quite a year for natural disasters in the state of Florida... a. There were killer tornadoes, devastating fires, destructive hurricanes b. Impacting the lives of many people 2. Such disasters proved to reveal much about contractors... a. We learned that some builders were unscrupulous b. Failing to build according to code, many homes and buildings were destroyed 3. Jesus made a parallel between storms and buildings at the end of His sermon - Mt 7:24-27 a. As He sought to encourage people to act upon His sayings b. Contrasting the difference between those who were doers and not just listeners 4. In this lesson, I wish to address the following questions... a. What do the "houses" of the wise and foolish builders represent? b. What "storms" is Jesus talking about? c. How can we "build" so as to be able to withstand the storms? [Let's begin by identifying the "houses"; I suggest that...] I. THE HOUSES REPRESENT OUR LIVES A. EACH OF US IS BUILDING A "LIFE"... 1. A life that will eventually face the vicissitudes of life 2. A life that will respond to the many ups and downs that come our way B. WE ARE BUILDING THESE "LIVES" UPON A FOUNDATION... 1. The foundation is whatever teaching, doctrine, or philosophy to which we subscribe 2. It may be a philosophy or doctrine adopted from others, or developed ourselves [We cannot escape the fact that we are "builders." The question is whether we will be wise or foolish builders. The tests that will determine are called "storms"...] II. THE STORMS ARE THINGS WHICH THREATEN OUR WELL-BEING A. THIS MAY INVOLVE LITERAL STORMS... 1. Such as tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, etc. 2. Which may take away all we own, perhaps even our loved ones 3. How we respond to such tragedies will reveal the quality of our "building" a. Will we be emotionally devastated? b. Will we be able to stand strong, willing to continue on without despair? B. IT MAY ALSO INVOLVE FIGURATIVE STORMS... 1. Such as illness, loss of loved ones, financial setbacks 2. Which may take away our health, family, possessions 3. Again, how we respond to such tragedies will reveal the quality of our "building" a. Will we be emotionally devastated? b. Will we be able to stand strong, willing to continue on without despair? C. THEN THERE IS THE FINAL "STORM" OF LIFE... 1. That of death and the final day of Judgment - cf. He 9:27; Ro 2:4-6 2. Which will be the truest test of our "building" (i.e.,character) - cf. 2Co 5:10-11 3. The Lord will describe the kind of "builder" (or servant) we have been a. E.g., "Well done, good and faithful servant..." - Mt 25:21 b. E.g., "You wicked and lazy servant..." - Mt 25:26 [The longer we live, the more "storms" we are likely to face; and there is the final "storm" that none can escape! How can we be sure to build our lives so as to withstand the storms?] III. OBEYING JESUS IS THE KEY TO WITHSTANDING THE STORMS A. BEING A "HEARER" ONLY IS NOT SUFFICIENT... 1. Such is foolishness, building on a shaky foundation that will not stand the test of storms - Mt 7:26-27 2. As James wrote, one is deceiving only themselves - Jm 1:22-24 3. Like the unscrupulous contractor, the storm will reveal the true quality of one's character 4. As Moses said, "...your sin will find you out."- Num 32:23 B. WE MUST "DO" WHAT JESUS SAYS... 1. Those who "do" what Jesus said will be those to withstand the storms - Mt 7:24-25 2. Because their lives (houses) are built upon the "rock" (a solid foundation) 3. As James went on to write, it is the doer who is blessed in what he does - Jm 1:25 C. HOW THE SAYINGS OF JESUS HELP US WITHSTAND THE STORMS... 1. His saying regarding where to lay up treasure - Mt 6:19-21 a. In which we are told to lay up treasure in heaven, not on earth b. If we heed His words, our hearts will not be distraught if earthly treasures are stolen or lost 2. His saying regarding what to seek first - Mt 6:33 a. Calling upon all to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness b. By heeding His words, we need not have anxiety for the future 3. Indeed, His sayings provide the basis for a solid foundation in which to build a life... a. That will avoid being misled by false prophets - Mt 7:15-20 b. That will stay on the straight and narrow way that leads to life - Mt 7:13-14 c. That will fulfill the Law and the Prophets - Mt 7:12 d. That will receive what good gifts God desires to give His children - Mt 7:7-11 e. That will not be judged by some inconsistent standard - Mt 7:1-6 f. Where the necessities of life are provided for - Mt 6:30-34 g. Free from materialism and anxiety - Mt 6:22-29 h. With treasure that cannot rust or be stolen - Mt 6:19-21 i. With acts of righteousness that are well-pleasing to God - Mt 6:1-18 j. With righteousness that surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees - Mt 5:20-48 CONCLUSION 1. Yes, this is a life that can truly withstand the storms! a. Whether it be the literal or figurative storms of every day life b. Or the storm of the Day of Wrath and Judgment that is yet to come 2. What kind of foundation are you building your house (life) upon? a. Heed what Jesus is saying, and your life will be solid b. Be listeners only, and your life will be as shaky as sand! Just as Jesus is the Rock-solid foundation of the church (1Co 3:11; Ep 2:20; 1Pe 2:4-6), so let Him be the Rock-solid foundation of your life!


Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker

Martin Luther Speaks on “Faith Only” and Baptism by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=958

Martin Luther Speaks on “Faith Only” and Baptism

by  Kyle Butt, M.Div.

One popular belief in many protestant denominations is the idea that God supplies salvation to each and every person based solely on the faith of that person, apart from any action taken by that individual. This idea, often called sola fide, says, that a person is saved by faith alone. Any number of quotations demonstrating this doctrine can be cited. In a debate with Thomas Warren in 1953, L.S. Ballard affirmed the position that “the alien sinner is saved the very moment he/she believes that Jesus Christ is the son of God” (Warren and Ballard, 1953). This particular belief is commonly worded like this: “People are saved through Christ alone, by grace alone, through faith alone.”

According to the modern-day advocates of “faith alone” salvation, water baptism cannot be a requisite to salvation, because it is something “more than” faith. While space limitations prevent a thorough investigation of the biblical doctrine of baptism (see Lyons, 2003), it is interesting to note how far the “faith alone” doctrine has drifted from its original form.

The idea of being saved by faith alone is often attributed to Martin Luther. Indeed, he and the other reformers challenged the Catholic Church that sold indulgences and offered a “works-based” type of salvation. Martin Luther often taught that salvation was based on faith alone, and not received based upon a person’s meritorious works. Martin Luther did not, however, take faith alone to mean that mere mental assent to Christ’s deity was sufficient to obtain salvation. In fact, Luther’s idea of faith alone does not conform to the modern-day idea that baptism cannot be required for salvation.

While it is understood that the opinions of men are in no way authoritative when it comes to God’s plan for salvation, it is nonetheless interesting to note that Martin Luther believed wholeheartedly in the necessity of baptism as a requisite for salvation. In his Large Catechism, Luther wrote:

[I] affirm that Baptism is no human trifle, but that it was established by God Himself. Moreover, He earnestly and solemnly commanded that we must be baptized or we shall not be saved. No one is to think that it is an optional matter like putting on a red coat. It is of greatest importance that we hold Baptism in high esteem as something splendid and glorious. The reason why we are striving and battling so strenuously for this view of Baptism is that the world nowadays is full of sects that loudly proclaim that Baptism is merely an external form and that external forms are useless.... Although Baptism is indeed performed by human hands, yet it is truly God’s own action (1978, pp. 98-99).

From Luther’s comments about baptism, it is obvious that he viewed water baptism as essential for salvation. Many of the protestant denominations that attribute their ideas about “faith only” to Martin Luther have not been taught that Luther’s concept of faith alone was not in opposition to works of God (like baptism and repentance), but in opposition to meritorious works by which a person believes that he or she “earns” salvation.

What, then, would Martin Luther say to those today who teach that “faith alone” excludes baptism? Listen to his words pertaining to this teaching:

But our know-it-alls, the new spirit people, claim that faith alone saves and that human works and outward forms contribute nothing to this. We answer: It is of course true that nothing in us does it except faith, as we shall hear later. But these blind leaders of the blind refuse to see that faith must have something in which it believes, that is, something it clings to, something on which to plant its feet and into which to sink its roots. Thus faith clings to the water and believes Baptism to be something in which there is pure salvation and life, not through the water, as I have emphasized often enough, but because God’s name is joined to it.... If follows from this that whoever rejects Baptism rejects God’s word, faith, and the Christ who directs us to Baptism and binds us to it (1978, pp. 101-102).

Martin Luther was a man. He made many mistakes and believed things about the Bible that were not true. It should be noted, however, that the “faith only” doctrine attributed so often to him has been misrepresented on a grand scale. Martin Luther’s words are unambiguous and clear. His “faith only” doctrine did not exclude baptism as necessary for salvation. Could it be the case that those who loudly tout the “faith only” mantra have not thoroughly investigated the works of the man to whom the doctrine is so often attributed?

The Bible does teach that those who are being saved are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9). It does not, however, teach that a person is saved “by faith alone” without any further acts of obedience. Even Martin Luther recognized that water baptism is not a meritorious work that earns a person salvation. On the other hand, it is an obedient act required by God in order for people to obtain salvation.

REFERENCES

Luther, Martin (1978), Luther’s Large Catechism, (Saint Louis, MO: Concordia).

Lyons, Eric (2003), “The Bible’s Teaching on Baptism: Contradictory or Complimentary,” [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/617.

Warren, Thomas B. and L.S. Ballard (1953), The Warren-Ballard Debate, (Moore, OK: National Christian Press).

Marriage Defined by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=4365

Marriage Defined

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

As legislators are fighting over the legitimacy of same-sex marriages, activist judges are claiming constitutional sanction in their redefining of marriage, and the rank and file citizens of these United States are embroiled in a polarizing culture war, it is nevertheless unthinkable that the President of these United States has announced his approval of homosexuality. If God exists and the Bible is His revealed Word, then America is facing imminent peril. The evaporation of Christian principles from American civilization will lead to the extinction of civility, freedom, and morality.

In the midst of such depressing circumstances, the spiritually minded may find refreshment in the words of bygone U.S. Supreme Courts. For example, in the 1885 case of Murphy v. Ramsey that addressed the legitimacy of polygamy, the high court declared:

For certainly no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary in the founding of a free, self-governing commonwealth, fit to take rank as one of the coordinate States of the Union, than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement (1885, emp. added).

Observe that the high Court insisted that the stability of a nation and its proper progress rely on the home composed of one man for one woman for life—the precise declaration of God Himself (Genesis 2:24). For most of American history, courts have had no trouble recognizing and reaffirming the idea of the family and the historic definition of marriage. Such thinking was in complete agreement with and based upon the Bible (Genesis 2:24).

In another U.S. Supreme Court case, Reynolds v. United States, after conceding the constitutional right to freedom of religion, the high court nevertheless repudiated polygamy as a punishable offense against society and reaffirmed the foundational importance of monogamy: “Marriage, while from its very nature a sacred obligation, is nevertheless, in most civilized nations, a civil contract, and usually regulated by law. Upon it society may be said to be built” (1879, emp. added). Those legal sentiments reflected the views of the vast majority of Americans for the first 180+ years of American history. Departure from that social norm—one man and one woman—results in the destabilization of society.

No wonder in 1848, the Supreme Court of South Carolina articulated the sentiment of the Founders and early Americans regarding what will happen if Christian morality is abandoned:

What constitutes the standard of good morals? Is it not Christianity? There certainly is none other. Say that cannot be appealed to and...what would be good morals? The day of moral virtue in which we live would, in an instant, if that standard were abolished, lapse into the dark and murky night of pagan immorality (City Council of Charleston..., emp. added).

Practitioners of unscriptural divorce, homosexuality, and other sinister behaviors are slowly but surely eroding and dissolving the moral foundations of American civilization—what the Court called “the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization.” Will America awaken from this spiritual stupor? Will Christians rise up and react in time? The time has come for those who still retain their moral sensibilities to recognize that we are in a full-scale, unmistakable war—a culture war—a spiritual war of seismic proportions against the governmental authorities and cultural forces that now are openly hostile toward God, Christ, and the Bible. May we take heart and commit ourselves to this critical struggle, as we consider the words of God through Paul:

Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand (Ephesians 6:10-13, emp. added).

REFERENCES

City Council of Charleston v. Benjamin (1848), 2 Strob. L. 508 (S.C. 1848).

Murphy v. Ramsey (1885), 114 U.S. 15; 5 S. Ct. 747; 29 L. Ed. 47; 1885 U.S. LEXIS 1732.

Reynolds v. United States (1879), 98 U.S. 145; 25 L. Ed. 244; 1878 U.S. LEXIS 1374; 8 Otto 145.

Male and Female Roles: Gender in the Bible by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=5007

Male and Female Roles: Gender in the Bible

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

In little more than half a century, American culture has experienced a massive restructuring of values and reorientation of moral and spiritual standards. One facet of this multifaceted effacement and erosion of biblical values has been dramatically altered gender roles. The feminist agenda has penetrated the American social landscape. Indeed, the onset of the feminist movement in the turbulent 1960s sparked a significant adjustment of societal norms resulting in the transformation of virtually every sphere of American culture—from the home and the church to the business world and beyond. Women now routinely serve in historically male capacities, including the military, politics, sports, and a host of community services including fire, police, ambulance, etc.

Make no mistake, a number of changes with regard to gender have emerged that may be deemed beneficial and positive. Nevertheless, the overall impact on American civilization has been negative, and the erosion of femininity has ushered in a host of evils that are hastening America’s moral implosion (e.g., abortion and homosexuality). Concomitant with the effort to eradicate gender differentiation has been the degradation of masculinity and the restructuring of the family unit (the fundamental building block of humanity—Genesis 1:27; 2:24). As womanhood has been devalued and her function altered, the rest of society has suffered dramatically. After all, women inevitably exert a profound influence on culture and society—for good or ill. Virtuous femininity is the glue that holds human civilization together. In the words of American poet William Ross Wallace’s immortal poem, “The Hand That Rocks the Cradle, Rules the World” (1865). Sadly for America, feminism has overturned the rocker, thrown the baby out with the bathwater, punched Dad in the face, and stomped away from the house in a huff.

the bible still has the correct perspective

Amid this polarization that plagues American civilization in general, and Christendom in particular, one chasm continues to widen between those who wish to conform to Bible protocol and those who wish to modernize, update, and adapt Scripture to a changing society. The cry of those who are pressing the feminist agenda is that the church in the past has restricted women in roles of leadership and worship simply because of culture and flawed hermeneutical principles. They say we are the product of a male-dominated society and have consequently misconstrued the contextual meaning of the relevant biblical passages.

The underlying catalyst for this social turmoil, and resulting gender confusion, has been the rejection of the Bible as the authentic Word of the divine Being Who created the Universe and humans. Even among those who continue to profess their allegiance to Christianity, large numbers have capitulated to political correctness and abandoned the traditional, i.e., biblical, depiction of gender roles as defined by the Creator. In their quest to maintain relevance among the shifting sands of secular culture, they have imbibed the spirit of the age, been infected by humanistic philosophy, and consequently have compromised the clear teaching of Scripture on the role of women (cf. “Gender Inclusive…,” 2013; “Believe It…,” 2006; Pauls, 2013; “The Role of…,” 2006; Stirman, 2010).

As attitudes soften and biblical conviction weakens, Scripture is being reinterpreted to allow for expanded roles for women in worship. If one who studies the biblical text concludes that women are not to be restricted in worship, he is hailed as engaging in “fresh scholarly exegesis.” But the one who studies the text and concludes that God intended for women to be subordinate to male leadership in worship is guilty of prejudice and being unduly influenced by “Church tradition” or “cultural baggage.” How is it that the former’s religious practice and interpretation of Scripture is somehow curiously exempt from imbibing the spirit of an age in which feminist ideology has permeated virtually every segment of American society?

Nevertheless, Bible teaching on this subject is not that difficult to ascertain. Recent attempts to redefine gender roles fall flat, not only before a sensible assessment of relevant Bible passages on the subject, but in the face of the 2,000 year history of Christianity which has, for the most part, demonstrated a generally accurate grasp of the basic parameters of God’s will on this matter. Such has certainly been true in America where the Founders and 18th century men and women embraced the Christian worldview, and believed that “family integrity was indispensable for the public safety and happiness” (West, 1997, p. 85).

Relevant Bible Passages

A detailed study of the relevant biblical texts in one article is impossible. However, God’s Word is essentially simple on any significant subject in the Bible [NOTE: For useful discussions see Hicks and Morton, 1978; Piper and Grudem, 1991; Cottrell, 1992; Highers, 1991; Laws, 1994; Warren, 1975; Miller, 1994; Miller, 1996.] In fact, it is the more recently emerging “scholars” with their intellectual complexities and imported seminary bias that have contributed to the confusion over this subject (e.g., Osburn, 1993). Carroll Osburn summarized his discussion of 1 Timothy 2 in the words—“Put simply, any female who has sufficient and accurate information may teach that information in a gentle spirit to whomever in whatever situation they may be” (1994, p. 115). Is such a cavalier attitude to be allowed to so easily dismiss the historical and biblical distinction between the sexes? The reader is invited to give consideration to the following brief summary of New Testament teaching on the subject of the role of women in leadership in worship and the church.

1 Corinthians

Chapters 11 and 14 of First Corinthians constitute a context dealing with disorders in the worship assembly. The entire pericope of 11:2-14:40 concerns the worship assembly, i.e., “when you come together” (cf. 11:17,18,20,33; 14:23-26). Paul articulated the transcultural principle for all people throughout history in 11:3—“But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.” “Head” clearly refers not to “source” but to “authority” (see Grudem, 1985, pp. 38-59). Therefore, God intends for women to be subordinate to men. [NOTE: The equality of male and female in Galatians 3:28 pertains to salvation status, not role.] Corinthian women were obviously removing their veils and stepping forward in the assembly to lead with their Spirit-imparted, miraculous capabilities, i.e., prophecy (12:10; 14:31) and prayer (14:14-15). Such activity was a direct violation of the subordination principle, articulated by Paul in chapter 14. In chapter 11, he focused on the propriety of females removing the cultural symbol of submission.

The women were removing their veils because they understood that to stand and exercise a spiritual gift in the assembly was an authoritative act of leadership. They recognized that to wear a symbol of submission to authority (the veil) while simultaneously conducting oneself in an authoritative fashion (to lead in worship) was self-contradictory. Paul’s insistence that women keep their veils on during the worship assembly amounted to an implicit directive to refrain from leading in the assembly—a directive stated explicitly in 14:34. The allusions to Creation law (11:7-9; cf. 14:34) underscore the fact that Paul saw the restrictions on women as rooted in the created ordernot culture. Also, Paul made clear that such restrictions applied equally to all churches of Christ (11:16).

Later in the same context (in chapter 14), Paul addresses further the confusion over spiritual gifts and returns specifically to the participation of women in the exercise of those gifts in the assembly. He again emphasizes the universal practice of churches of Christ: “as in all churches of the saints” (14:33). [NOTE: Grammatically, “as in all churches of the saints” links with “let your women keep silence.” Cf. the ASV, RSV, NIV, NEB, NAB, etc.] The women who possessed miraculous gifts were not to exercise them in the mixed worship assembly of the church. To do so was disgraceful—“a shame” (14:35). To insist upon doing so was equivalent to (1) presuming to be the authors of God’s Word, and (2) assuming that God’s standards do not apply to everyone (14:36).

Granted, 1 Corinthians chapters 11 and 14 address a unique situation. After all, spiritual gifts are no longer available to the church (1 Corinthians 13:8-11; see Miller, 2003a), and veils, in Western society, are no longer a cultural symbol of female submission (see Miller, 2003b; cf. Moore, 1998). Nevertheless, both passages demonstrate the clear application of the transcultural principle (female subordination in worship) to a specific cultural circumstance. The underlying submission principle remains intact as an inbuilt constituent element of the created order.

1 Timothy 2: The Central Scripture

I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control (1 Timothy 2:8-15).

The premier passage in the New Testament that treats the role of women in worship is 1 Timothy 2:8-15. The remote context of the book is proper behavior in the life of the church (1 Timothy 3:15). The immediate context of chapter two is worship, specifically prayer (1 Timothy 2:1,8). The context does not limit the worship to the church assembly, but includes the general life of the church.

In this passage, Paul affirms that adult males (andras) are to lead prayers anywhere people meet for worship. “Lifting up holy hands” is a figure of speech, metonymy, in which a posture of prayer is put in place of prayer itself. Their prayers are to usher forth from holy lives. On the other hand, women are admonished to focus on appropriate apparel and a submissive attitude. Notice the contrast framed in the passage: Men need to be holy, spiritual leaders in worship while women need to be modest and unassuming. “Silence” and “subjection” in this passage relate specifically to the exercise of spiritual authority over adult males in the church. “Usurp” (KJV) is not in the original text. Authentein should be translated “to have (or exercise) authority” (NKJV, ESV, NIV, RSV, NASB). Thus Paul instructed women not to teach nor in any other way to have authority over men in worship.

Why? Why would an inspired apostle place such limitations on Christian women? Was his concern prompted by the culture of that day? Was Paul merely accommodating an unenlightened, hostile environment, stalling for time and keeping prejudice to a minimum, until he could teach them the Gospel? Absolutely not. The Holy Spirit gives the reason for the limitations, and that reason transcends all culture and all locales. Paul states that women are not to exercise spiritual authority over men because Adam was created before Eve. Here we are given the heart and core of God’s will concerning how men and women are to function and interrelate. But what does the chronological priority of Adam have to do with the interrelationship of male and female?

Grounded in Creation—Not Culture

Paul is saying that God’s original design for the human race entailed the creation of the male first as an indication of his responsibility to be the spiritual leader of the home. He was created to function as the head or leader in the home and in the church. That is his functional purpose. Woman, on the other hand, was specifically designed and created for the purpose of being a subordinate—though not inferior—assistant. God could have created the woman first, but He did not. He could have created both male and female simultaneously,but He did not. His action was intended to convey His will with regard to gender as it relates to the interrelationship of man and woman.

This feature of Creation explains why God gave spiritual teaching to Adam before Eve was created, implying that Adam had the created responsibility to teach his wife (Genesis 2:15-17). It explains why the female is twice stated to have been created to be “an help meet for him,” i.e., a helper suitable for the man (Genesis 2:18,20, emp. added). This explains why the Genesis text clearly indicates that in a unique sense, the woman was created for the man—not vice versa. It explains why God brought the woman “to the man” (Genesis 2:22), again, as if she was made “for him”—not vice versa. Adam confirmed this understanding by stating “the woman whom You gave to be with me” (Genesis 3:12, emp. added). It explains why Paul argued in the Corinthian letter on the basis of this very distinction: “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man” (1 Corinthians 11:9, emp. added). It further clarifies the implied authority of the man over the women in his act of naming the woman (Genesis 2:23; 3:20). The Jews understood this divinely designed order, evidenced by the practice of primogeniture—the firstborn male. God’s creation of the man first was specifically intended to communicate the authority/submission arrangement of the human race (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:8).

Observe that Paul next elaborates on this principle in 1 Timothy 2:14 by noting an example of what can happen when men and women tamper with God’s original intentions. When Eve took the spiritual initiative above her husband, and Adam failed to take the lead and exercise spiritual authority over his wife, Satan was able to wreak havoc on the home and cause the introduction of sin into the world (Genesis 3). When Paul said the woman was deceived, he was not suggesting that women are more gullible than men. Rather, when men or women fail to confine themselves to their created function, but instead tamper with and act in violation of divinely intended roles, spiritual vulnerability to sin naturally follows.

God’s appraisal of the matter was seen when He confronted the pair. He spoke first to the head of the home—the man (Genesis 3:9). His subsequent declaration to Eve reaffirmed the fact that she was not to yield to the inclination to take the lead in spiritual matters. Rather, she was to submit to the rule of her husband (Genesis 3:16; cf. 4:4). When God said to Adam, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife...” (Genesis 3:17), He was calling attention to the fact that Adam had failed to exercise spiritual leadership, thereby circumventing the divine arrangement of male-female relations.

Paul concludes his instructions by noting how women may be preserved from falling into the same trap of assuming unauthorized authority: “She will be saved in childbearing” (1 Timothy 2:15). “Childbearing” is the figure of speech known as synecdoche in which a part stands for the whole. Thus, Paul was referring to the whole of female responsibility. Women may avoid taking to themselves illicit functions by concentrating on the functions assigned to them by God, undertaken with faith, love, and holiness in sobriety (i.e., self-control).

Some argue that this text applies to husbands and wives rather than to men and women in general. However, the context of 1 Timothy is not the home, but the church (1 Timothy 3:15). Likewise, the use of the plural with the absence of the article in 2:9 and 2:11 suggests women in general. Nothing in the context would cause one to conclude that Paul was referring only to husbands and wives. Besides, would Paul restrict wives from leadership roles in the church—but then permit single women to lead?

Deaconesses

Those who advocate expanded roles for women in the church appeal to the alleged existence of deaconesses in the New Testament. Only two passages even hint of such an office: Romans 16:1-2 and 1 Timothy 3:11. In Romans 16:1, the term translated “servant” in the KJV is the Greek word diakonos, an indeclinable term meaning “one who serves or ministers.” It is of common gender (i.e., may refer to men or women) and occurs in the following verses: Matthew 20:26; 22:13; 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:43; John 2:5,9; 12:26; Romans 13:4; 15:8; 1 Corinthians 3:5; 16:1; 2 Corinthians 3:6; 6:4; 11:15,23; Galatians 2:17; Ephesians 3:7; 6:21; Philippians 1:1; Colossians 1:7,23,25; 4:7; 1 Thessalonians 3:2; 1 Timothy 3:8,12; 4:6.

The term is used in the New Testament in two senses. First, it is used as a technical term for a formal office in the church to which one may be appointed by meeting certain qualifications. Second, it is used as a non-technical term for the informal activity of serving or attending to. Additional words in the New Testament that have both a technical and non-technical meaning include “apostle,” “elder,” and “shepherd.” To be rational in one’s analysis of a matter, one must draw only those conclusions that are warranted by the evidence. In the matter of deaconesses, one should only conclude that a deaconess is being referred to when the context plainly shows the office is under consideration.

In Romans 13:4, the civil government is said to be God’s deacon. In Romans 15:8, Christ is said to be a deacon of the Jews. In 2 Corinthians 3:6 and 6:4, Paul is said to be a deacon of the New Covenant and a deacon of God. Apollos is listed with Paul as a deacon in 1 Corinthians 3:5. Obviously, these are all non-technical uses of the term referring to the service or assistance being rendered.

Nothing in the context of Romans 16:1 warrants the conclusion that Paul was describing Phoebe as an official appointee—a deaconess. “Our sister” designates her church membership and “servant” specifies the special efforts she extended to the church in Cenchrea where she was an active, caring member. Being a “servant of the church” no more implies a formal appointee than does the expression in Colossians 1:25 where Paul is said to be the church’s servant.

Some have insisted that the term in Romans 16:2 translated “help” implies a technical usage. It is true that prostatis can mean a helper in the sense of presiding with authority. But this word carries the same inbuilt obscurity that diakonos does in that it has a formal and informal sense. But since the verse explicitly states that Phoebe was a “helper” to Paul, the non-technical usage must be in view. She would not have exercised authority over Paul. Even his fellow apostles did not do that since he exercised high authority direct from the Lord (1 Corinthians 14:37-38; Galatians 1:6-12; 2 Thessalonians 3:14). Only Christ wielded authority over Paul.

Romans 16:2 actually employs a play on words. Paul told the Corinthians to “help” (paristemi) Phoebe since she has been a “help” (prostatis) to many, including Paul himself. While the masculine noun prostates can mean “leader,” the actual feminine noun prostatis means “protectress, patroness, helper” (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 718). Paul was saying, “Help Phoebe as she has helped others and me.” She had been a concerned, generous, hospitable, dedicated contributor to the Lord’s work. Paul was paying her a tremendous tribute and expressing publicly the honor due her. But he was not acknowledging her as an office holder in the church.

The second passage that some have appealed to in order to find sanction for deaconesses in the church is 1 Timothy 3:11. In the midst of a listing of the qualifications of deacons, Paul referred to women. What women? Was Paul referring to the wives of the church officers, or was he referring to female appointees, i.e., deaconesses? Once again, the underlying Greek term is of no help in answering this question since gunaikas (from gune) also has both a technical and non-technical sense. It can mean a “wife” or simply a “female” or “woman.” It is used both ways in 1 Timothy: “female” in 2:9-12,14 and “wife” in 3:2,12; 5:9.

Five contextual observations, however, provide assistance in ascertaining the meaning of the passage. First, a woman cannot be “the husband of one wife” (3:12). Second, in a discussion of male deacons from 3:8-13, it would be unusual to switch in the middle to female deacons for one verse without some clarification. Third, referring to the wives of church officers would be appropriate since family conduct is a qualifying concern (3:2,4-5,12). Fourth, “likewise” (3:11) could simply mean that wives are to have similar virtues as the deacons without implying they share the same office (cf. 1 Timothy 5:25; Titus 2:3). Fifth, lack of the possessive genitive with gunaikas (“of deacons”) or “their” does not rule out wives of deacons since neither is used in other cases where men/women are being described as wives/husbands (Colossians 3:18-19; Ephesians 5:22-25; 1 Corinthians 7:2-4,11,14,33; Matthew 18:25; Mark 10:2).

Insufficient textual evidence exists to warrant the conclusion that the office of deaconess is referred to in the New Testament. Outside the New Testament, Pliny, Governor of Bythynia, wrote a letter to Emperor Trajan about A.D. 110 referring in Latin to two ministrae (female ministers). This term has the same ambiguity within it that diakonos has. He could have been referring to official appointees, or he just as easily could have been referring simply to servants. In any case, a passing reference by an uninformed non-Christian is hardly trustworthy evidence. Christian historical sources from this same period do not refer to the existence of female appointees even though they do discuss church organization (Lewis, 1988, p. 108).

Not until the late third century in the Syrian Didascalia do we find reference to deaconesses. Their work consisted of assisting at the baptism of women, going into homes of heathens where believing women lived, and visiting the sick (ministering to them and bathing them). A full-blown church order of deaconesses does not appear until the fourth/fifth centuries. Again, their responsibilities consisted of keeping the doors, aiding in female baptisms, and doing other work with women (Lewis, pp. 108-109). Those within the church today who are pressing for deaconesses and expanded roles for women would hardly be content with such tasks.

Even if women were deacons in the New Testament church, they would not have functioned in any sort of leadership or authority position over men. They were not to be appointed as elders. If Acts 6:1-5 refers to the appointment of deacons (the verb form is used) in the Jerusalem church (Woods, 1986, p. 199), they were all males and their specific task entailed distribution of physical assistance to widows.

The evidence is simply lacking. The existence of a female deaconate within the New Testament cannot be demonstrated. Those who insist upon establishing such an office do so without the authority of the Scriptures behind them.

unequal or inferior?

A final word needs to be said concerning the fact that both men and women must remember that Bible teaching on difference in role in no way implies a difference in worth, value, or ability. Galatians 3:28 (“neither male nor female”), 1 Timothy 2:15 (“she shall be saved”), and 1 Peter 3:7 (“heirs together of the grace of life”) all show that males and females are equals as far as their person and salvation status is concerned. Women are often superior to men in talent, intellect, and ability. Women are not inferior to men anymore than Christ is inferior to God, citizens are inferior to the President, or church members are inferior to elders. The role of women in the church is not a matter of control, power, or oppression. It is a matter of submission on the part of all human beings to the will of God (Ephesians 5:21). It is a matter of willingness on the part of God’s creatures, male and female, to subordinate themselves to the divine arrangement regarding the sexes. The biblical differentiation is purely a matter of function, assigned tasks, and sphere of responsibility. The question for us is: “How willing am I to fit myself into God’s arrangement?”

Conclusion

The role of gender, like most of the values of Western civilization, is in the throes of confusion and redefinition. Those who resist unbiblical redefinitions are considered tradition-bound, narrow-minded, chauvinistic misogynists, as if they cannot hold honest, unbiased, studied convictions on such matters; as if the Bible has been misunderstood all these years. If the Bible authorized it, no man should have any personal aversion to women having complete access to leadership roles in the church. Indeed, many talented, godly women possess abilities and talents that would enable them to surpass many of the male worship leaders functioning in the church today.

Those who reject the divine inspiration of the Bible will remain unaffected by and disinterested in the teaching of the Bible regarding gender. However, the Bible stands as an unalterable, eternal declaration of God’s will on the matter. By those words we will be judged (John 12:48). For those who respect the Bible as the Word of God, Bible teaching is fatal to the notion of female leadership in the church and home. May we all bow humbly and submissively before the God of Heaven.

References

Arndt, William F. and F. Wilbur Gingrich (1957), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press).

“Believe It Or Not” (2006), Christianity: Then and Now, ed. John Waddey, 5[11], July, http://www.christianity-then-and-now.com/PDF/CTN%20July%2006.pdf.

Cottrell, Jack (1992), Feminism and the Bible (Joplin, MO: College Press).

“Gender Inclusive and Egalitarian Churches in the Church of Christ Heritage” (2013), http://www.wherethespiritleads.org/gender_inclusive_churches.htm.

Grudem, Wayne (1985), “Does kephale (‘head’) Mean ‘Source’ or ‘Authority over’ in Greek Literature? A Survey of 2,336 Examples,” Trinity Journal, 6 NS, 38-59.

Hicks, John, and Bruce Morton (1978), Woman’s Role in the Church (Shreveport, LA: Lambert Book House).

Highers, Alan, ed., (1991), “Role of Women in the Church,” The Spiritual Sword, 22[2], January.

Laws, Jim, ed. (1994), Women To The Glory of God (Memphis, TN: Getwell Church of Christ).

Lewis, Jack (1988), Exegesis of Difficult Passages (Searcy, AR: Resource Publications).

Miller, Dave (1994), “An Exegesis of 1 Tim. 2:11-15 (Part 1) & (Part 2),” The Restorer, 14[3]:12-16 & 14[4]:9-14, March & April.

Miller, Dave (1996), “Feminist Attitudes Toward the Bible,” The Spiritual Sword, 27[2]:3-6, January.

Miller, Dave (2003a), “Modern-Day Miracles, Tongue-Speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation,” http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1399.

Miller, Dave (2003b), “Veils, Footwashing, and the Holy Kiss,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1275&topic=379.

Moore, Kevin (1998), We Have No Such Custom (Wanganui, NZ: Kevin Moore).

Osburn, Carroll, ed. (1993), Essays On Women in Earliest Christianity (Joplin, MO: College Press).

Osburn, Carroll (1994), Women in the Church (Abilene, TX: Restoration Perspectives).

Pauls, Dale (2013), “Good news!: Naomi Walters Named Minister in Residence at Stamford Church of Christ,” Reflections on Announcement, July 7, http://gal328.org/category/good-news/.

Piper, John and Wayne Grudem, eds. (1991), Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books).

“The Role of Women in the Church” (2006), Cole Mill Road Church of Christ, http://www.colemillroad.org/.

Stirman, Sarah (2010), “Women in the Church: Moving Toward Equality,” Abilene Report-News, February 25, http://www.reporternews.com/news/2010/feb/25/women-in-the-church-moving-toward-equality/

Wallace, William Ross (1865), “The Hand That Rocks The Cradle Is The Hand That Rules The World,” Poets’ Corner, http://www.theotherpages.org/poems/wallace1.html.

Warren, Thomas, ed. (1975), “Woman—In the View of God,” The Spiritual Sword, 6[4], July.

West, Thomas (1997), Vindicating the Founders (New York: Rowman & Littlefield).

Woods, Guy N. (1986), Questions and Answers: Volume Two (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate).

SOCIAL DRINKING? BY STEVE FINNELL


http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/social-drinking-by-steve-finnell-is.html

SOCIAL DRINKING?   BY STEVE FINNELL


Is social drinking acceptable for Christians? Judgement and motor performance are negatively affected when involved in moderate drinking of alcohol. Impairment starts with the the first drink of alcohol. People drink because of the intoxicating effects. Remove the alcohol and social drinking would be reduced to coffee, tea, lemonade, sodas, and milk shakes. No one drinks alcohol because it tastes good.

Drunkenness is always preceded by social drinking.

Proverbs 20:1 Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, And whoever is intoxicated by it is not wise.

Does social drinking lead to wisdom?

Proverbs 21:17 He who loves pleasure will become a poor man; He who loves wine and oil will not become rich.

Is wine drinking the gateway to prosperity?

Proverbs 23:20 Do not be with heavy drinkers of wine, or with gluttonous eaters of meat;

Does social drinking lend itself to a poor choice of friends?

Proverbs 23:31-35 Do not look on the wine when it is red, When it sparkles in the cup, When it goes down smoothly; 32 At the last it bites like a serpent And stings like a viper. 33 Your eyes will see strange things And you mind will utter perverse things.......

Is social drinking harmless? No Christian honestly believes that social drinking is harmless.

Romans 14:21 It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles.

Who does not know of a Christian who has stumbled because of drinking alcohol? Wine drinking is not a good example to be setting for fellow Christians.

1 Corinthians 6:10 not thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Show me a social drinker who says they never get drunk  occasionally and I will show you someone who has a problem with telling the truth.


A thief who seals infrequently is still a thief.
A murderer who kills infrequently is till a murderer.
A drunkard who get drunk only on special occasions is still a drunkard.

JESUS APPROVED OF SOCIAL DRINKING. DID HE REALLY??????

The Christians who like to feel good about their social drinking like to use the wedding feast at Cana as their proof-text to justify their alcohol consummation. (John 2:1-12)
If Jesus was turning water into intoxicating wine for those who where drunk or trying to get drunk, then, Jesus would have been guilty of sin. JESUS WAS NOT A SINNER.

Christians who drink socially need to reevaluate there motives for their alcohol consumption.

If social drinking is acceptable to God, then beer and wine should be served at all church functions where coffee and soft drinks are served.------ I THINK NOT. 

(Scripture from : NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE)

My soul waits for the Lord by Roy Davison

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/wait.html

My soul waits for the Lord

"I wait for the Lord, my soul waits, and in His word I do hope. My soul waits for the Lord more than those who watch for the morning -- Yes, more than those who watch for the morning" (Psalm 130:5, 6).

What does it mean to wait for the Lord?

To wait means to be alert to something expected or anticipated. To wait for a bus means that we have decided not to walk, but to use public transportation. We must wait, because the bus has not yet arrived. We wait patiently because we have looked at the timetable and believe that the bus will come. We also know that when the bus does arrive, we must be waiting at the right stop.

Sometimes we become impatient. We think, "That bus is not coming!" So we leave the bus stop and start walking. Suddenly the bus zooms by. It does not stop, of course, because there is no bus stop there. Through impatience, we missed our chance.

To wait for the Lord means to continually look to Him for assistance and salvation, to be satisfied that God will work everything out.

If you were lost in a forest at night, you would be waiting, even longing for the morning light. Our souls should be waiting and longing for the help that only God can give.

"I wait for the Lord, my soul waits, and in His word I do hope. My soul waits for the Lord more than those who watch for the morning -- Yes, more than those who watch for the morning" (Psalm 130:5, 6).

"I will lift up my eyes to the hills -- From whence comes my help? My help comes from the Lord, who made heaven and earth" (Psalm 121:1, 2).

"For since the beginning of the world men have not heard nor perceived by the ear, nor has the eye seen any God besides You, Who acts for the one who waits for Him" (Isaiah 64:4).

We wait for God continually: "To You, O Lord, I lift up my soul. O my God, I trust in You; let me not be ashamed; let not my enemies triumph over me. Indeed, let no one who waits on You be ashamed; let those be ashamed who deal treacherously without cause. Show me Your ways, O Lord; teach me Your paths. Lead me in Your truth and teach me, for You are the God of my salvation; on You I wait all the day" (Psalm 25:1-5).

We have courage to face the difficulties of live because we look to God for the help He has promised: "I would have lost heart, unless I had believed that I would see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living. Wait on the Lord; be of good courage, and He shall strengthen your heart; wait, I say, on the Lord!" (Psalm 27:13, 14).

"Our soul waits for the Lord; He is our help and our shield. For our heart shall rejoice in Him, because we have trusted in His holy name. Let Your mercy, O Lord, be upon us, just as we hope in You" (Psalm 33:20-22).

Because we wait on God for justice and judgment, we do not allow ourselves to become excessively agitated about evil people: "Rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for Him; do not fret because of him who prospers in his way, because of the man who brings wicked schemes to pass. Cease from anger, and forsake wrath; do not fret -- it only causes harm. For evildoers shall be cut off; but those who wait on the Lord, they shall inherit the earth" (Psalm 37:7-9).

"Do not say, 'I will recompense evil'; wait for the Lord, and He will save you" (Proverbs 20:22).

"Wait on the Lord, and keep His way, and He shall exalt you to inherit the land; when the wicked are cut off, you shall see it" (Psalm 37:34).

Even in the greatest of difficulties, we may wait for God's help: "I waited patiently for the Lord; and He inclined to me, and heard my cry. He also brought me up out of a horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my steps" (Psalm 40:1, 2).

Here David is probably speaking of difficulties resulting from sin. For our salvation we wait for God. Who else can help us? "My soul, wait silently for God alone, for my expectation is from Him. He only is my rock and my salvation; He is my defense; I shall not be moved" (Psalm 62:5,6).

We wait on God for salvation from death: "He will swallow up death forever, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces; the rebuke of His people He will take away from all the earth; for the Lord has spoken. And it will be said in that day: 'Behold, this is our God; we have waited for Him, and He will save us. This is the Lord; we have waited for Him; we will be glad and rejoice in His salvation" (Isaiah 25:8, 9).

If we are not waiting for God, then He is waiting for us! He is waiting for use to repent so we can wait for Him: "Therefore the Lord will wait, that He may be gracious to you; and therefore He will be exalted, that He may have mercy on you. For the Lord is a God of justice; blessed are all those who wait for Him" (Isaiah 30:18).

Do not keep God waiting! If you are not yet a Christian, repent, turn to God, believe in His Son Jesus Christ, whom God sent as Savior. Confess your faith and be baptized into His body, the church, that your sins can be forgiven. If you are a Christian who does not sufficiently wait for the Lord, and that applies to us all, look to Him for sustenance and salvation from day to day and forever.

"He gives power to the weak, and to those who have no might He increases strength. Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall, but those who wait on the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint" (Isaiah 40:29-31).

Let us wait for the Lord.

Roy Davison

The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers.
Permission for reference use has been granted.

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Putting out the fire by Gary Rose



Sometimes the greatest truths are found in cartoons. Innocent little drawings that may intended for children, but can apply to adults as well. And when little piglet speaks, Poo Bear listens – and so should we.

Even the most spiritual among us fail to control their tongue from time to time. From personal experience I can tell you that even with the very best of intentions, discussing another person can very easily morph from a talk about their well being to gossip or perhaps something even worse. As a matter of practicality, Christians need to be very careful what they say and the book of James is one of the best commentary on this subject that I know. The apostle says…


James 3 ( World English Bible )

1 Let not many of you be teachers, my brothers, knowing that we will receive heavier judgment.

2 For in many things we all stumble. If anyone doesn’t stumble in word, the same is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body also.

3 Indeed, we put bits into the horses’ mouths so that they may obey us, and we guide their whole body.

4 Behold, * the ships also, though they are so big and are driven by fierce winds, are yet guided by a very small rudder, wherever the pilot desires.

5 So the tongue is also a little member, and boasts great things. See how a small fire can spread to a large forest!

6 And the tongue is a fire. The world of iniquity among our members is the tongue, which defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature, and is set on fire by Gehenna. *

7 For every kind of animal, bird, creeping thing, and thing in the sea, is tamed, and has been tamed by mankind.

8 But nobody can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.

9 With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who are made in the image of God.

10 Out of the same mouth comes blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so.


Christians: introspection is good, practical religion is very good and perfection is to be like Christ. After all, isn’t that the goal of everyone who becomes a follower of our savior? To control the tongue is difficult and may seem impossible at times, but make every effort to do so, you will be glad you did!