Anytime two religions want to debate something, I hear this verse in my mind:
'Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.' — Matthew 22:37–40
Whenever people start overcomplicating things or arguing over rules and theology, it’s so refreshing to remember that God's actual design is beautifully uncomplicated.
At first, reading the title, I assumed you were going to give us the final answer—once and for all—to this longstanding debate because I was so ready to challenge my mom with whom I tend to disagree with on this particular issue😄
But I love how you frame this Justin.
Now, I did chuckle a bit when you wrote, "when questions arise...from those outside the Church seeking to understand what Christians believe". I chuckled because in my mind I was thinking, "these folks will be seeking a long time because this is a debate that those within the church can't seem to agree on"!
Lastly, I've always understood that God's thoughts are not mine and His ways are not mine. But "issues that are straightforward to God are not straightforward to us" is such a different POV for understanding the same Scripture passage. Thank you.
Thank you so much for the feedback. I know this was probably a bit of a letdown for those looking for a clear answer.
What makes this debate so unique is that it affects not only what people believe, but how they serve in response.
I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the issue this week, and I’m further convinced the answer is not as black and white as many assume. I personally think scripture shows that God’s ideal is for men to functionally lead in certain positions of the church, much like within a marriage. However, we also live in a fallen world.
Thus, I find myself asking a practical question: if men fail to step up (which they have been), is it better for willing women to fill those roles or for them to remain unfilled?
Of course, it’s better that someone on fire for Christ serve, rather than no one. And so logically, we can see where it’s permissible to achieve the greater good where moral conflict occurs.
If this is the case, then there likely isn’t a simple answer or solution to the debate.
It’s definitely an area I am wrestling with personally, as is the rest of the Church as you pointed out 😂.
I agree with all of this, but one thing you say here that stuck out to me was, "scripture shows that God’s ideal is for men to functionally lead in certain positions of the church, much like within a marriage."—I totally agree with this statement. I think that scripture does in fact point to men to be the ones that hold leadership positions.
Where folks begin to debate is whether or not they "like" that position, and that's a different argument.
Because regardless of whether or not you like it, it is the position that the Bible "leans" toward.
I will say that I am on the fence and I actually make a 50/50 argument for both sides.🤔
"not engaging in a behavior removes the possibility of guilt in that area and assures obedience altogether." Not so. Adultery can engaged in without touching anyone. Matthew 5:27,28 means that I will be held accountable for my lustful thoughts. Why does the writer of Psalm 51 ask God to created in him a clean heart? Perhaps because God has said he can see our hearts and knows that they are full of evil (Gen 6:5).
I think there is a misunderstanding of the point being made. I can see why given the wording I chose. I have updated it to hopefully make clearer.
The point I am attempting to make is that:
Refraining from a particular behavior only removes the possibility of guilt for that specific behavior, not for all related sin.
For example, if someone chooses to entertain adulterous thoughts, that is still a conscious act of the mind, even if they never act on those thoughts physically. While it is not a physical behavior, it is still a mental one.
In this case, it’s black and white as not entertaining adulterous thoughts would guarantee obedience, in terms of if one is entertaining adulterous thoughts.
The analogy is meant to show that the women pastor debate is fundamentally different, because there is no neutral (or abstaining) position that guarantees obedience.
Good article. I like the distinction between the apologetics and theology, that seems like a good point to remember and to not get bogged down in an argument you’re not trying to make.
very insightful. i appreciated how you framed each in a light of humility and seeking for the truth, instead of one vs the other. hopefully we can have more honest and simple conversations like these, without becoming angry and harsh.
Anytime two religions want to debate something, I hear this verse in my mind:
'Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.' — Matthew 22:37–40
Whenever people start overcomplicating things or arguing over rules and theology, it’s so refreshing to remember that God's actual design is beautifully uncomplicated.
Yet, another one of your articles I have "Saved"!
At first, reading the title, I assumed you were going to give us the final answer—once and for all—to this longstanding debate because I was so ready to challenge my mom with whom I tend to disagree with on this particular issue😄
But I love how you frame this Justin.
Now, I did chuckle a bit when you wrote, "when questions arise...from those outside the Church seeking to understand what Christians believe". I chuckled because in my mind I was thinking, "these folks will be seeking a long time because this is a debate that those within the church can't seem to agree on"!
Lastly, I've always understood that God's thoughts are not mine and His ways are not mine. But "issues that are straightforward to God are not straightforward to us" is such a different POV for understanding the same Scripture passage. Thank you.
Thank you so much for the feedback. I know this was probably a bit of a letdown for those looking for a clear answer.
What makes this debate so unique is that it affects not only what people believe, but how they serve in response.
I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the issue this week, and I’m further convinced the answer is not as black and white as many assume. I personally think scripture shows that God’s ideal is for men to functionally lead in certain positions of the church, much like within a marriage. However, we also live in a fallen world.
Thus, I find myself asking a practical question: if men fail to step up (which they have been), is it better for willing women to fill those roles or for them to remain unfilled?
Of course, it’s better that someone on fire for Christ serve, rather than no one. And so logically, we can see where it’s permissible to achieve the greater good where moral conflict occurs.
If this is the case, then there likely isn’t a simple answer or solution to the debate.
It’s definitely an area I am wrestling with personally, as is the rest of the Church as you pointed out 😂.
I agree with all of this, but one thing you say here that stuck out to me was, "scripture shows that God’s ideal is for men to functionally lead in certain positions of the church, much like within a marriage."—I totally agree with this statement. I think that scripture does in fact point to men to be the ones that hold leadership positions.
Where folks begin to debate is whether or not they "like" that position, and that's a different argument.
Because regardless of whether or not you like it, it is the position that the Bible "leans" toward.
I will say that I am on the fence and I actually make a 50/50 argument for both sides.🤔
"not engaging in a behavior removes the possibility of guilt in that area and assures obedience altogether." Not so. Adultery can engaged in without touching anyone. Matthew 5:27,28 means that I will be held accountable for my lustful thoughts. Why does the writer of Psalm 51 ask God to created in him a clean heart? Perhaps because God has said he can see our hearts and knows that they are full of evil (Gen 6:5).
Hi Bruce,
I think there is a misunderstanding of the point being made. I can see why given the wording I chose. I have updated it to hopefully make clearer.
The point I am attempting to make is that:
Refraining from a particular behavior only removes the possibility of guilt for that specific behavior, not for all related sin.
For example, if someone chooses to entertain adulterous thoughts, that is still a conscious act of the mind, even if they never act on those thoughts physically. While it is not a physical behavior, it is still a mental one.
In this case, it’s black and white as not entertaining adulterous thoughts would guarantee obedience, in terms of if one is entertaining adulterous thoughts.
The analogy is meant to show that the women pastor debate is fundamentally different, because there is no neutral (or abstaining) position that guarantees obedience.
I am exceptionally good at misunderstanding. It's a gift and one that perhaps I should be less quick to open.
Hahah I get that friend. Honestly, I’m glad you chimed in, because it helped me see that I could articulate it better.
Good article. I like the distinction between the apologetics and theology, that seems like a good point to remember and to not get bogged down in an argument you’re not trying to make.
Thanks Joseph, I really appreciate it. This topic seems to be blowing up right now with the SBC stuff.
I keep seeing a lot of unhelpful edgy quips. Kind of a bummer, because it takes away from an important yet nuanced debate.
I imagine nuanced doesn’t sell very well.
Perfectly said!!!!
very insightful. i appreciated how you framed each in a light of humility and seeking for the truth, instead of one vs the other. hopefully we can have more honest and simple conversations like these, without becoming angry and harsh.
I agree!!! Thank you so much for the feedback.