Mailbag

The Mailbag: Potpourri (Abuse: Grounds for divorce?… Life Groups… The women at Jesus’ tomb were NOT pastors/preachers… SBC 2026)

Welcome to another โ€œpotpourriโ€ edition of The Mailbag, where I give short(er) answers to several questions rather than a long answer to one question.

I like to take the opportunity in these potpourri editions to let new readers know about my comments/e-mail/messages policy. Iโ€™m not able to respond individually to most e-mails and messages, so here are some helpful hints for getting your questions answered more quickly. Remember, the search bar (at the very bottom of each page) can be a helpful tool!

Or maybe I answered your question already? Check out my article The Mailbag: Top 10 FAQs to see if your question has been answered and to get some helpful resources.


Is physical or sexual spousal or child abuse biblical grounds for divorce in a Christian marriage?

I hate that this question even needs to be addressed, because I wish abuse didn’t exist and no one needed this question answered.

This question was posed by a friend (who’s not in this situation, herself) on social media recently. Here’s how I answered (slightly edited):

I think this is why God only specified two objective criteria for biblical divorce – adultery and abandonment. These are much easier to measure objectively than abuse. Either someone has committed adultery or he has not. Either someone is still living in the home or he is not.

Here’s how I generally counsel Christian women in situations of spousal or child abuse (And just for the record for anyone else reading this, I’m talking about real physical or sexual abuse. “He hurt my feelings,” may be wrong or sinful, but it isn’t abuse in this context.)

  1. Anyone who lives in habitual, unrepentant sin is not a Christian, regardless of what he claims or believes himself to be (see 1 John 1:5-10, 2:3-6, 3:4-10, 5:3, Matthew 7:16-23). So, right off the bat, in cases of abuse, we’re almost certainly not dealing with a marriage in which both spouses are Christians.
  2. Step one in cases of abuse is ALWAYS to get yourself and your children to a safe place. Many abused Christian women are hesitant to do this because they are confusing or conflating getting somewhere safe with initiating a sinful divorce. That is NOT the case, and it is sad that many Christian women have to be taught that at the worst time of their lives. Getting to a safe place DOES NOT EQUAL initiating a sinful divorce. I hope everyone reading this is clear on that.
  3. The next step is to call law enforcement, report the abuse, and follow through with pressing charges, a restraining order, etc. If the abuser is in jail or prohibited from being within a certain distance of you, he has, by default, as a consequence of his own sinful behavior, abandoned you, which meets the 1 Corinthians 7:15 criterion. The government (which is to punish lawbreakers, and to which you are to submit) has taken that decision out of your hands. That is God’s grace to you.
  4. Next, assuming you’re a member of a doctrinally sound church, set up an appointment with your pastor (or a certified biblical counselor, if not) for counsel as to whether or not you should pursue a divorce. Different states have different laws, and it’s my understanding that in some states, the only way to protect yourself, your children, and your finances is via a legal divorce. Your pastor or local biblical counselor will have the resources to guide you about your specific situation.

If the husband gets genuinely saved while in jail or separated, reconciliation should be considered, as God’s preference is against divorce and for reconciliation, but that MUST be pursued with great care, much prayer, a copious amount of time and fruit-bearing, and extensive pastoral/biblical counseling. (I’ve addressed this at greater length here.)

So, all of that to say, I strongly recommend against making a blanket statement about whether or not divorce is biblically permissible in cases like abuse, on which the Bible is silent. Rather, it’s best to get to safety and work through your unique situation in the context of the local church and pastoral counsel, since that is God’s plan for us (on a case by case basis) for handling things like this.

Additional Resources:

The Mailbag: Is it all right for a Christian to get divorced?

The Mailbag: Must I reconcile with my abusive ex-husband?

From Victimhood to Victory: Biblically Helping Abused Women Heal


What are your thoughts on churches that have abandoned Bible study groups for Life Groups? Where the Life Group may or may not have a meal, then go over the sermon from Sunday morning?

In the interest of full disclosure, I lead a Life Group of women at my own church. We not only review the sermon, but also the Sunday School lesson, everyone’s personal Bible study, prayer requests and answers, evangelism, and Scripture memorization, plus any questions anyone has, or “I just need to talk,” issues. We have not “abandoned” Bible study groups, though. Our Sunday School classes are “Bible study groups,” plus I teach on a biblical topic at our monthly women’s meeting.

If your pastor is preaching the Word, and your group is reviewing, discussing, and applying the sermon, is that not Bible study?

I don’t ask that to be sassy or snarky at all, I’m asking because there are a variety of different factors at play here:

Is the pastor actually carrying out his 2 Timothy 4:1-2 mandate to “preach the Word” or are these groups discussing a sermon made up of illustrations, self help tips, and personal anecdotes from the pastor’s life?

When you say the church has “abandoned Bible study groups,” are you including Sunday School in that, or are you only talking about Bible study groups outside of Sunday School and the worship service?

Sunday School and Bible study groups are a relatively recent invention. The church survived and thrived without them for centuries.

What was the pastor’s motivation for replacing Bible study groups with sermon discussion groups?

I think this should probably be evaluated on a case by case basis. There are some situations in which it could be perfectly fine and other situations in which it could signal a theological or ecclesiological problem.


How can you say women can’t be pastors or preach to men? What about Mary and the women at Jesus’ tomb who went and preached to the disciples? What about the Great Commission? We’re all supposed to preach the gospel!

It seems like every time I say something on social media about God’s prohibition against women “pastoring,” preaching, teaching the Bible to, or exercising authority over men in the gathering of the church body, several people pop off with some version of one or both of these unbiblical arguments. The short answer is…

  • You’re conflating evangelism with pastoring and preaching. Evangelism is sharing the gospel with lost people outside the church, which all Christians are commanded to do. Pastoring and preaching is biblical instruction to saved people inside the church, which God has restricted to biblically qualified men. Evangelism and pastoring/preaching are two completely different, separate things. We have to keep our biblical categories straight.
  • Neither Mary, nor any of the other women at the tomb, were preaching or pastoring in the church. The church did not even exist at the time of Jesus’ resurrection. What these women did could barely even be compared to evangelism. All they did -in a private gathering of friends, not the church- was a) give eyewitness testimony to what they had seen at the tomb, and b) pass along a message from Jesus of where He wanted the disciples to meet Him.
  • The account of the women at Jesus’ tomb is a DEscriptive passage (narrative; it simply tells us what happened), not a PREscriptive passage (commands/instructions for Christians to follow). Descriptive passages may support, but never override prescriptive passages.
  • God does not contradict Himself or instruct people to sin.ย 

    God clearly tells us in 1 Timothy 2:11-3:7 (a prescriptive passage), that women are not to pastor, preach, teach the Bible to, or exercise authority over men in the gathering of the Body. If the gospel accounts of the women at the tomb mean that women can do those things in the gathering of the Body, then God has contradicted Himself, is a liar, and has ceased to be God.

    Furthermore, in light of God’s clear command in 1 Timothy, if what these women did was the same as pastoring or preaching to men, then God had the angel at the tomb instruct the women to sin by “preaching to men”.

For the longer answer…

Additional Resources:

Rock Your Role: Oh No She Di-int! Priscilla Didnโ€™t Preach, Deborah Didnโ€™t Dominate, and Esther Wasnโ€™t an Egalitarian

Women Preaching the Gospel? at A Word Fitly Spoken

Rock Your Role: Jill in the Pulpit? (1 Timothy 2:11-12)

The Mailbag: Counter Arguments to Egalitarianism

Sinners and False Teachers: The Women Who โ€œPastorโ€ and Preach

Rock Your Role articles


What are the issues I should be aware of at the Southern Baptist Convention this year?

Michelle, will I see you at the Convention?

This year’s annual meeting will take place June 8-9 in Orlando, Florida. Although I’d love to be there, unless someone walks up to me and hands me plane tickets and hotel reservations within the next two weeks, it’s just not in our family budget for me to attend.

If you’ll be attending as a messenger, I would encourage you to go to the Center for Baptist Leadership website and drown yourself in their articles and “Countdown to Orlando” podcast episodes so you’ll be up to speed on all the latest issues and details.

Two major things I would offer some direction on:

Vote for Willy Rice for president. He is the conservative candidate and our best shot at steering the ship back to biblical waters.

Vote FOR Dr. Albert Mohler’s “Truth and Unity” amendment to the constitution and FOR the suspension of standing rule 6 so the amendment can be debated and considered this year.

There will be numerous ancillary events going on before and during the Convention. One of these is the annual Pastors’ Conference, which any registered messenger or guest may attend.

There will also be a number of women’s (and other) events.

As I write this, there seems to be no information publicly available regarding who will be speaking at the Pastorsโ€™ Wives & Women in Ministry Conference (Monday, June 8). Call me paranoid, but it’s less than two weeks until this event, and I find this lack of information suspect, especially since I’ve run into this same brick wall over the past few years when searching for speaker information about this and other women’s events at the Convention. This event is purported to be part of the aforementioned Pastors’ Conference, but I don’t see it mentioned anywhere on the Pastors’ Conference website. (If any of my readers know who will be speaking, please let me know. Please note the exact title, date, and time of this event as there are several different events this one might be confused with. This is not the Women’s Expo or the Ministers’ Wives Luncheon {see below}, or the aforementioned Pastors’ Conference.)

The SBC Ministersโ€™ Wives Luncheon (Tuesday, June 9) will be headlined by Amy Hannon, an Arkansas pastor’s wife who has created her own hospitality brand (think: Martha Stewart or Joanna Gaines). I’ve never heard of her before, but after poking around for a few minutes, I’m hoping she might be doctrinally sound. She has a very small digital footprint, I found no obvious connections with false teachers, and I appreciated that a couple of times on her website, regarding speaking engagements, she says she speaks “to women”. If you’re familiar with Amy, let me know if she’s the real deal!

You will probably find the Annual Meeting website and app to be helpful both prior to and at the Convention.

Remember, the resolutions committee can change resolutions any way they like – even to mean the opposite of what the person who wrote and submitted the resolution intended it to mean. So read resolutions carefully before voting, and make sure you understand all other motions, proposals, etc., before voting.

Have fun, but if you’re there as a messenger, please do the duty your church sent you to do and be in the room and vote when votes are taken.


If you have a question about: a Bible passage, an aspect of theology, a current issue in Christianity, or how to biblically handle a family, life, or church situation, comment below (Iโ€™ll hold all questions in queue {unpublished} for a future edition of The Mailbag) or send me an e-mail or private message. If your question is chosen for publication, your anonymity will be protected.

Complementarianism, Movies, Southern Baptist/SBC

Movie Time: Battle for the Minds

Originally published May 21, 2019

Ladies- have you read my Mailbag article, Counter Arguments to Egalitarianism? If not, I would encourage you to read it before watching today’s movie. And if you’re new to the complementarian vs. egalitarian kerfuffle, I would encourage you to read, not only that article, but all of the articles in the “Additional Resources” section of that article as well.

Why?

Because today’sย movie, Battle for the Minds, approaches the issue from the egalitarian perspective, and you need to be sure you’re firmly grounded in the biblical perspective so that “no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”

Also, today’s movie is kind of like a homework assignment. How would you apply the complementarian apologetics you learned in the Mailbag article as well as your knowledge of Scripture to the egalitarian arguments and pronouncements being made in this movie?

Battle for the Minds was released on PBS in 1997. It presents the egalitarian viewpoint on the stage of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s transition from theological liberalism to biblical theological conservatism under the then-new leadership of Dr. Albert Mohler, and delves into a bit of the Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention around that time as well. (As an aside, I am not familiar with any of the people in the film presented as being on the egalitarian side except for Anne Graham Lotz. I’m only familiar with a few of those on the complementarian side: Albert Mohler, David Miller, and Paige Patterson.)

If you are Southern Baptist, I strongly encourage you to watch and carefully consider these events from our history in light of the battle we are now facing in the SBC concerning the role of women in the church and in the Convention. Because what Nancy Ammerman says at the 37:04 mark is correct. Since all SBC churches are autonomous, many Southern Baptists only concern themselves with their own churches and don’t trouble themselves to worry about what’s going on at the national level. But when you do this, you fail to take into consideration that what’s going on at the national level trickles down to your local church in the form of what’s being taught to your next pastor or staff member at our seminaries; the authors, musicians, and other content creators being sold (and not being sold) at LifeWay; the theology in the Sunday School and VBS curriculum your church uses, etc. It also affects the theology and ecclesiology our IMB and NAMB missionaries and church planters use and teach. And finally, the leadership and issues at the national level are the face the Southern Baptist Convention presents to the world.

But even if you’re not Southern Baptist, you will probably still find this movie informative to the way your own church or denomination is responding to the issue of the biblical role of women in the church.

A couple of things to be on the lookout for, and give consideration to, as you watch Battle for the Minds:

โ€ขNotice the amount of Scripture presented in the movie. Is any Scripture presented that backs up the egalitarian view? Is egalitarianism vs. complementarianism presented as a biblical and spiritual issue or an “our position vs. their position” issue?

โ€ขNote the sex of each person on the egalitarian side and the sex of each person on the complementarian side. Are any complementarian women presented? Do you think there were absolutely no women on the complementarian side of the issue when these events were transpiring? Do you see how the exclusion of complementarian women in this film gives the subtle illusion that a) all women are egalitarian, and b) the reason men are complementarian is because they’re sexist and trying to protect their power and position – the same argument people like Beth Moore are attempting to make today?* Do you think it was sexist to exclude women from the complementarian side?

*(Screenshot 1, 2)

Complementarianism, Movies

Movie Tuesday: Battle for the Minds

Ladies- did you read yesterday’s Mailbag article, Counter Arguments to Egalitarianism? If not, I would encourage you to read it before watching today’s movie. And if you’re new to the complementarian vs. egalitarian kerfuffle, I would encourage you to read, not only that article, but all of the articles in the “Additional Resources” section of that article as well.

Why?

Because today’s Movie Tuesday movie, Battle for the Minds, approaches the issue from the egalitarian perspective, and you need to be sure you’re firmly grounded in the biblical perspective so that “no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”

Also, today’s movie is kind of like a homework assignment. How would you apply the complementarian apologetics you learned in yesterday’s article as well as your knowledge of Scripture to the egalitarian arguments and pronouncements being made in this movie?

Battle for the Minds was released on PBS in 1997. It presents the egalitarian viewpoint on the stage of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s transition from theological liberalism to biblical theological conservatism under the then-new leadership of Dr. Albert Mohler, and delves into a bit of the Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention around that time as well. (As an aside, I am not familiar with any of the people in the film presented as being on the egalitarian side except for Ann Graham Lotz. I’m only familiar with a few of those on the complementarian side: Albert Mohler, David Miller, and Paige Patterson.)

If you are Southern Baptist, I strongly encourage you to watch and carefully consider these events from our history in light of the battle we are now facing in the SBC concerning the role of women in the church and in the Convention. Because what Nancy Ammerman says at the 37:04 mark is correct. Since all SBC churches are autonomous, many Southern Baptists only concern themselves with their own churches and don’t trouble themselves to worry about what’s going on at the national level. But when you do this, you fail to take into consideration that what’s going on at the national level trickles down to your local church in the form of what’s being taught to your next pastor or staff member at our seminaries; the authors, musicians, and other content creators being sold (and not being sold) at LifeWay; the theology in the Sunday School and VBS curriculum your church uses, etc. It also affects the theology and ecclesiology our IMB and NAMB missionaries and church planters use and teach. And finally, the leadership and issues at the national level are the face the Southern Baptist Convention presents to the world.

But even if you’re not Southern Baptist, you will probably still find this movie informative to the way your own church or denomination is responding to the issue of the biblical role of women in the church.

A couple of things to be on the lookout for, and give consideration to, as you watch Battle for the Minds:

โ€ขNotice the amount of Scripture presented in the movie. Is any Scripture presented that backs up the egalitarian view? Is egalitarianism vs. complementarianism presented as a biblical and spiritual issue or an “our position vs. their position” issue?

โ€ขNote the sex of each person on the egalitarian side and the sex of each person on the complementarian side. Are any complementarian women presented? Do you think there were absolutely no women on the complementarian side of the issue when these events were transpiring? Do you see how the exclusion of complementarian women in this film gives the subtle illusion that a) all women are egalitarian, and b) the reason men are complementarian is because they’re sexist and trying to protect their power and position – the same argument people like Beth Moore are attempting to make today?* Do you think it was sexist to exclude women from the complementarian side?

*(Screenshot 1, 2)