Discussion abounds as to whether Christians are being "inconsistent" while giving support to a woman for a high public office while not allowing women to serve as leaders (pastors, officers) in the church.
Of the various answers I've read, Al Mohler's is perhaps the best so far, but even he stops short suggesting the Scripture addressess the church but does not speak to civil office (which to a large degree is true).
Can an answer be given to this question from Scripture? I say Yes. My answer follows:
A seminary professor (RTS) once put it this way,
1. In the HOME, God has established men as the head.
2. In the CHURCH, God has established men as the leaders.
3. In the WORSHIP of the church (which is central to all we do, & an example to other areas of life) God has established men as the leaders.
I would add to this:
4. While God does not specifically speak to other areas of life, these examples certainly set precedent.
5. At the same time, as with Deborah, while the precedent remains, it does not prohibit a woman's service in leadership especially if called upon because the situation merits it (for example, if men will not step up to serve, etc.)
This being said, given the current political situation and as with any election, Christians must decide who to vote for not just on this one issue but on a variety of issues.
With all these factors combined, while there will certainly come assaults of "inconsistency" no matter what Christians do, the Scripture provides justification for Christians to make correct judgments, as we uphold both the dignity of both men and women, the difference in roles, as well as the fact that the merits of each circumstance must be judged individually.
Note:
1. This justification is independent of the current election and not subject to the charge of inconsistency.
2. Christians should avoid the unbiblical position which denies role distinctions between men and women.
3. Bad fruit can result from false justification and it's communication as well as from bad decisions themselves. Likewise good fruit results from both good decisions and the communication of sound justification.
Of the various answers I've read, Al Mohler's is perhaps the best so far, but even he stops short suggesting the Scripture addressess the church but does not speak to civil office (which to a large degree is true).
Can an answer be given to this question from Scripture? I say Yes. My answer follows:
A seminary professor (RTS) once put it this way,
1. In the HOME, God has established men as the head.
2. In the CHURCH, God has established men as the leaders.
3. In the WORSHIP of the church (which is central to all we do, & an example to other areas of life) God has established men as the leaders.
I would add to this:
4. While God does not specifically speak to other areas of life, these examples certainly set precedent.
5. At the same time, as with Deborah, while the precedent remains, it does not prohibit a woman's service in leadership especially if called upon because the situation merits it (for example, if men will not step up to serve, etc.)
This being said, given the current political situation and as with any election, Christians must decide who to vote for not just on this one issue but on a variety of issues.
With all these factors combined, while there will certainly come assaults of "inconsistency" no matter what Christians do, the Scripture provides justification for Christians to make correct judgments, as we uphold both the dignity of both men and women, the difference in roles, as well as the fact that the merits of each circumstance must be judged individually.
Note:
1. This justification is independent of the current election and not subject to the charge of inconsistency.
2. Christians should avoid the unbiblical position which denies role distinctions between men and women.
3. Bad fruit can result from false justification and it's communication as well as from bad decisions themselves. Likewise good fruit results from both good decisions and the communication of sound justification.
Sword,
ReplyDelete1) The last thing we should be concerned with is the opinions of atheists or other such critics.
2) IMO there is no biblical reason to exclude women from political leadership.
3) Even if there were a biblical reason for excluding women, I would still reject the choice of voting for a party that is pursuing ungodly polices and vote for a godly woman! This would be right.
"I would still reject the choice of voting for a party that is pursuing ungodly polices ... and vote for a godly woman!"
ReplyDeleteResponse: This is certainly an option consistent with my statement "Christians must decide who to vote for not just on this one issue but on a variety of issues."