If you have completed the Imperishable Beauty study, you may wish to look over your notes from lessons 10, 13, and 15, since we examined part of today’s passage (1 Timothy 5) in those lessons.
1. Notice the section heading at the beginning of this chapter and be reminded of the purpose and audience of this epistle. Who is the individual Paul is primarily addressing? What is his position in the church? What do these instructions pertain to?
2. How does God instruct Timothy (and every pastor) to treat the older/younger men and older/younger women he shepherds? (1-2) How do these instructions, if followed, benefit and protect the pastor, the church at large, and individual church members? Give a practical example of how a pastor could treat an older man, a younger man, an older woman, and a younger woman the way this passage instructs.
What does this passage not mean? For example – what if an older man is living in open sin? Does verse 1 mean the pastor should not confront him about that? What if a pastor is single and he and a woman five years his junior desire to get married? Does verse 2b prohibit that? Is there anything else this passage does not mean? Explain your answers with applicable Scripture.
3. Examine verses 3-16. What is the two word phrase used in both verse 3 and verse 16, that “bookends” this passage? Make a list of the things that qualify a woman as “truly” a “widow”. (4-16a) Now, go back over your list and highlight the character traits and activities that a godly woman will be exemplifying or practicing, and the ungodly traits and activities she will avoid, even before she becomes a widow. How can you continue to, or begin to, exemplify or practice each of these godly traits and activities and avoid the ungodly ones?
Compare the list of personal requirements and character qualifications of those who are “truly widows” (3-16) with the list of personal requirements and character qualifications for pastors and deacons in 3:1-13. What are the similarities and differences? How does this speak to the necessity of these men and women leading by setting a godly example in their character and practices for the rest of the church, and the rest of the church following their example? Explain how the role of leading by example is a vital role of leadership women must carry out in the church. How can women and men in the church learn from a godly woman who sets a good example?
What are the examples God gives of things women should be busying themselves with (14,16) in order not to fall into sin and set a bad example (11-13,15)?
4. Note how many times Paul speaks of the family’s duty to care for their widowed family members in 3-16. What are the various responsibilities of the family that he mentions? How are godly women particularly well suited to this kind of ministry? (16) What is the role of the pastor (7,9,11) and the church (16b) in this passage?
5. In 1 Timothy 2, (lesson 3, link above) God explained the two ways women may not minister in the church. What are those two ways? In 5:3-16, God lists many ways women can and must minister in the church. Make a list of each of those ways, and give a practical example of how a woman could carry out each of those ways in the church today (ex: What might “washing the feet of the saints” look like in the church today?) while still being obedient to God’s instructions for women in chapter 2.
6. Examine verses 17-20. Explain the church’s responsibilities regarding godly elders who righteously carry out their duties (17-18) as well as the church’s responsibilities regarding elders who persist in sin (19-20). (Use your cross-references.) Compare the instructions in verses 19-20 to the current idea in some corners of evangelicalism of “touch not My anointed“. How would you refute this false teaching from verses 19-20?
7. Explain the meaning of the charge God gives in verse 21, and the gravity and weightiness it conveys to pastors. Make a mental note of this, as this kind of charge will come up again in 1&2 Timothy.
8. After the weighty charge of verse 21, do the rapid fire instructions in verses 22-25 seem like a “P.S.” (and a P.P.S., a P.P.P.S, etc.) to a letter? Explain each instruction and why it was important to Paul and to the Holy Spirit to make sure it was included.
Homework
Think about a recent, sinful, evangelical “current event” (or an incident from your own church) you’re familiar with. For example: the egalitarian movement, a pastor falling into sin and having to step down, sexual abuse in the church, pastors spiritually abusing (intimidation, anger, threats, manipulation, etc.) their church members or congregation, false doctrine in the church, etc.
How could obedience to one or more of God’s instructions to pastors and to the church (from today’s lesson or previous lessons) have partially or completely prevented this incident?
What are some of your favorite counter-arguments to egalitarian theology?
Such a great question for a plethora of reasons. One important reason is that it’s a hot topic right now that needs to be dealt with biblically in order to silence the lies and to make onlookers aware that the Bible does address this issue with the correct answer. Another reason is that, when you think through an issue via an apologetics, “point-counterpoint” framework, it really helps solidify in your mind, and give you confidence in, what the Bible has to say about the issue.
So let’s start off with some basics…
If “egalitarian” is a new term for you, let’s nail down what egalitarianism is and what complementarianism is. Both have to do with the issue of women’s roles in the church and in the home.
Egalitarianism is the anti-biblical view that women can do anything men can do in the context of the church and home. Women can be pastors, elders, heads of denominations, preach whenever, wherever, and to whomever they want, and they don’t have to submit to their husbands.
Currently, there is a movement afoot to establish a third position regarding this issue. It’s often called soft complementarianism – an attempt to straddle the fence, make everybody in both camps happy, and have your cake and eat it too. There are a variety of beliefs among those who choose this label. Many would argue, for example, that a woman may not hold the office of pastor (i.e. she can’t be on staff as the pastor of a church), but it’s perfectly OK for her to guest preach the Sunday morning sermon. At least on Mother’s Day.
Let’s dispense with soft complementarianism right now. It is a position of compromise between the biblical and the anti-biblical. Compromising with sin has never been a biblical stance for God’s people to take. Ever. The Bible tells us “a little leaven leavens the whole lump.” You don’t have to consider yourself a full-blown egalitarian to infect the church with ungodliness. Just a little compromise, a little leaven, a little dab’ll do ya. And that little dab never makes the church or individual Christians more godly, more biblical, or more Christlike. It always leads to more compromise and greater ungodliness.
Furthermore, we don’t treat other sin and rebellion this way. No one would dream of saying, “I hold to a soft view of adultery. Only actual extra-marital sex is off the table. Kissing, touching, dating other people – that’s all fine.”
For those who would argue that complementarianism vs. egalitarianism is a secondary theological issue, I would argue vehemently that it should not be categorized this way. Egalitarianism is sin because it is rebellion against God’s Word. And it is extremely detrimental when high profile complementarians unhelpfully classify it as a “secondary issue”. I know all they mean when they say that is that it is not part of the ordo salutis or a linchpin doctrine of soteriology. But when Christians hear “secondary issue” what they think is, “Oh, this is an issue where both sides have genuine biblical support like pre/post/a- millennialism or credo/paedo baptism. We can just agree to disagree and both sides are biblical.” Nobody thinks that about adultery, murder, gossip, lying or any other sin, and we need to be more careful in our terminology lest we give people an opening to think that way about egalitarianism.
Rebelling against God’s commands regarding the role of women is either a sin or it is not. There is no middle ground, so so-called soft complementarianism is not a biblically legitimate position to take. If you’re a “soft complementarian,” you’re a functional egalitarian. And if you’re a Christian who’s toying with this idea, I urge and encourage you to repent, love Christ and His Word more than you love the world and its ideals, and unashamedly embrace and promote what the Bible says about the role of women.
The next foundational issue we need to explore is whom we’re addressing when we make these apologetic arguments.
There are only two kinds of people in the world: saved people and unsaved people. Which means there are only two kinds of people who hold the egalitarian view: saved people and unsaved people.
The Bible is abundantly clear that saved people have the mind of Christ. That means we think the way Jesus thinks and we view the world and the church the way Jesus views the world and the church. We deny ourselves, putting aside whatever we might want or think, and we submit, as Jesus did, to “It is written…“. Additionally, obedience (or lack thereof) to the commands of Scripture is an indicator of whether or not someone actually belongs to Him. In fact, God says if you claim to be a Christian and you habitually and unrepentantly walk in disobedience to, and rebellion of heart against, His commands, you’re a liar, and you don’t know Christ.
What this means in practical terms when dealing with any biblical issue – egalitarianism, evolution, abortion, homosexuality, etc. – is that a sizable portion of the people on the unbiblical side of the issue are unsaved. Because a saved person has the mind of Christ, she will embrace, believe, and obey God’s Word regarding these issues and come out of these unbiblical camps, and an unsaved person will continue to fight for the unbiblical position. A new or previously poorly discipled Christian may need to be taught what Scripture says about these things, and it may take some time for her to come to grips with God’s commands, but her nature is to fight her flesh to submit to God’s Word, not to make provision for her flesh to fight against God’s Word.
Why do we need to understand this crucial foundational concept in debating this issue? Because people who are unsaved regard the things of God as foolishness and they cannot accept them no matter how much you explain Scripture to them or how much sense you make. This is a spiritual issue that requires a spiritual solution – the Holy Spirit must save the person and open her eyes to the truth of His Word. Often, what the person you’re arguing with needs most is the gospel, not an argument about a theological issue. And you will need to be careful and wise to discern when your apologetics are helpful and effective with someone who truly wants to learn and accept the biblical view, and when it’s time to gather up your pearls, step out of the pigpen, and go home until the Holy Spirit does His good work in her heart.
So I guess all of the above would be my primary apologetic argument against egalitarianism: If you’re truly saved, the fruit of your new nature in Christ will be to forsake and repent of any opinions or positions you hold that conflict with Scripture and submit to, love, and obey God’s commands. If you’re not saved, your opinion doesn’t really matter when it comes to how the church is run because the church is the body of Christ – Believers – not the house of unbelief.
Another argument I’m fond of is what I call the “let’s take a stroll through the Bible” argument, because it addresses so many arguments about 1 Timothy 2:12 that it’s almost a “one size fits all” argument:
But the Bible only says one timethat women can’t preach to men!
That was just Paul, as a human, saying women can’t teach men, not God.
That passage is about wives taking authority over their husbands, not about women preaching to or exercising authority over men in the church.
That instruction only applied to the women of the Ephesian church at that particular time.
Look at the overall general pattern of male headship and leadership in Scripture. First human created? A man. The Patriarchs? As the word implies – all men. Priests, Levites, Scribes? Men. Heads of the twelve tribes of Israel? Men. Major and minor prophets? Men. All kings of Israel and Judah? Men. Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic Covenants? All established between God and men. Authors of Scripture? Men. The forerunner of Christ? John the Baptist – a man. Messiah? A man. All of the apostles? Men. All of the pastors, elders, and deacons of churches in the New Testament? Men. Founder and head of the church? Christ – a man. Leader and head of the family? Men. Now which fits better with this pattern, women preaching to, teaching, and exercising authority over men in the church, or women not preaching to, teaching, and exercising authority over men in the church?
It’s not just one verse. The entirety of Scripture backs up 1 Timothy 2:12. Which means it wasn’t just Paul’s human idea, just for the women of Ephesus, or just about wives and husbands. Male headship and leadership in God’s foundational institutions – family and church – has been God’s idea, God’s plan since the dawn of Creation (as 1 Timothy 2:13-14 clearly explains). It’s much harder for someone claiming to be a Christian to throw out the whole Bible than to sweep one verse aside.
Another argument that often needs to be made is explaining the difference between descriptive and prescriptive passages of Scripture, because one of the most common arguments egalitarians will make is, “Look at Deborah! Look at Priscilla! Look at the women at Jesus’ tomb! Look at the women Paul commends in Romans 16! They were all in some sort of leadership or teaching position, so that means women can do anything in the church that men can do!” No. No it doesn’t.
Broadly speaking, there are two main types of Scripture: descriptive and prescriptive. Descriptive passages describe something that happened: Noah built an ark. Esther became queen. Paul got shipwrecked. These passages simply tell us what happened to somebody. Prescriptive passages are commands or statements to obey. Don’t lie. Share the gospel. Forgive others.
If we wanted to know how to have a godly marriage, for example, we would look at passages like Ephesians 5:22-33, 1 Corinthians 7, and Exodus 20:14,17. These are all passages that clearly tell us what to do and what not to do in order to have a godly marriage.
What we would not do is look at David’s and Solomon’s lives and conclude that polygamy is God’s design for marriage. We would not read about Hosea and assume that God wants Christian men to marry prostitutes or adulteresses. We would not read the story of the woman at the well and think that being married five times and then shacking up with number six is OK with Jesus.
And when looking for instruction about the role of women in the church, we look to clear, prescriptive passages which tell us what to do and what not to do, not descriptive passages about various women in the Bible. Descriptive passages may support, but never trump, the clear instruction of prescriptive passages.
Some try to make the argument that it’s OK for a woman to preach or teach Scripture to men if she’s doing it “under her husband’s/pastor’s authority”. Excerpted from my article Fencing off the Forbidden Fruit Tree:
When God tells us (in context, rightly handled, correct covenant, etc., of course) not to do something and we do it anyway, that is sin, right? Only God has the authority to say what is sin and what is not. No one – not your pastor, your husband, your parents, your best friend, the Pope, nobody – has the authority to tell you that it’s OK to do something God has said is sin. That authority belongs to God alone.
Try inserting any other sin into that situation. Does your husband, pastor, etc., have the authority to tell you it’s OK to lie? Cuss? Covet? Of course not. And why would they even consider doing such a thing?
If you were to ask your husband and pastor to show you from Scripture where God says it’s OK for them to allow you to teach men, they would quickly realize that they are not basing their decision on Scripture (because there is no Scripture that allows them to do this), but on their own opinion that it’s OK.
When God says “no,” no man has the right to say, “yes.”
And there’s the “You don’t know Greek, so you don’t know what that passage really means. I do.” fallacy.
Some have tried to make the argument that 1 Timothy 2:12 is mistranslated – that “woman” and “man” should be translated as “wife” and “husband” – and that this passage isn’t prohibiting women from teaching men at all, it’s really about marriage. The short answer to that is: hogwash. If you’d like to read the longer version, check out my article The Mailbag: Potpourri (…Mistranslating 1 Tim. 2:12…) (second question).
And finally, if a Christian struggles with the biblical argument against egalitarianism, God has graciously given us a real-time, tangible, visible argument against it. Take a look at all the once doctrinally sound Christian churches and denominations that are now apostate – the ones that embrace homosexuality, New Apostolic Reformation heresy, preach morality or liberal politics instead of the gospel, etc. They all followed the same pattern. The very first step they took on the road to apostasy was “soft complementarianism”: letting women teach co-ed Sunday school classes, preach on Mother’s Day, hold committee positions that placed them in biblically improper authority over men, and so on. The next step was full blown egalitarianism: allowing women to be elders, ordaining women as pastors, placing women in unbiblical denominational leadership positions. Next came embracing homosexuality: extending church membership to unrepentant, practicing homosexuals (and now, transgender people), ordaining them, and allowing them to serve in any and every position of church and denominational leadership, including the pastorate. And the final step is abandoning the gospel and the authority and sufficiency of God’s Word altogether. It happened to the Lutherans, the Episcopalians, the Methodists, the Presbyterians, scores of non-denominational churches, and now it’s happening to Southern Baptists. Not a single church or denomination that has embraced egalitarianism has become holier, truer to God’s Word, or more spiritually healthy. They have all ended up dead eventually, and the true Christians in those churches and denominations have left to form biblical churches and denominations.
Egalitarianism is anti-biblical, harmful to men, women, and the church, and dishonoring to God. We may not be able to convince every egalitarian to repent and embrace what God’s Word says about the role of women, but it’s important to think through this issue in a biblical way, and using an apologetic framework is a great way to do that.
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 (I’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.
1. Study verses 1-5. In what ways does this passage contrast truth with falsehood? List the individual words in these verses that convey the idea of falsehood or dishonesty. List the words that convey the idea of truthfulness. Who is the origin of all falsehood and deception? Compare “deceitful spirits” and “demons” (1) with John 8:44. Who is the origin of truth? Compare the statements about truth in 2b-5 with John 14:6, 17:17.
Recalling that 1 Timothy is a letter breathed out by the Holy Spirit to a pastor about the church, explain why it is important to God, to pastors, and to the church body that the church be a place of truth rather than a place of deception, false teaching, and lies.
3. Look closely at the way false doctrine and false teaching are described in verses 1-2. Is Paul wrongly using a “harsh tone” or being “unloving” toward false teachers as some Christians might accuse him of today? (Again, Whobreathed out these Scriptures?)
4. Compare 4-5 with 2:9. Is there anything inherently sinful about braided hair, gold, pearls, or an expensive garment – these objects themselves, and/or owning/wearing them? Explain the primacy of the attitude of our hearts when it comes to these objects, marriage, and food (3). What does verse 5 mean when it says that these things are made holy “by the word of God and prayer”? How does this apply to your “relationship” with the things you own, wear, or participate in?
5. What is Paul instructing Timothy to do when he says, “If you put these things before the brothers,” (6)?
6. Examine 6-16. In chapter 3, the Holy Spirit gives a list of character qualifications for pastors – what they are to be. In 4:6-16 the Holy Spirit gives a list of instructions for pastors – what they are to __. Work your way through these verses and make a list of the things the Holy Spirit wants pastors to do. Circle or highlight any of these instructions and principles that do not apply to the laity (Christians who are not pastors). If pastors are supposed to “set the Believers an example” (12) what does that tell us about the need for us to follow the instructions in 6-16 that apply to both pastors and non-pastors? How does 2:11-15 apply to the way women are to follow these instructions? Is there any way in which the qualifications for pastors and deacons in chapter 3 should inform the way in which men follow these instructions? (For example: compare 3:2’s “able to teach” with 4:11’s “teach these things”. If a man is not “able to teach”, should he be in a teaching role in the church?)
7. What metaphor does Paul employ in 6-10 to describe training for godliness? How is spiritual training like physical training? How are they different?
8. Look closely at verse 9. We see this same phraseology four times in 1-2 Timothy. What does this statement mean, and why do you think Paul says it so often?
9. Compare the way Paul again inserts the gospel smack dab into the middle of his instructions to Timothy (10) to the way he has already done this in chapters 1, 2, and 3. How does this motif help us to see that everything we do in the church and in our own lives should revolve around and point back to the gospel?
Homework
Can you think of any churches, denominations, religions, cults, or movements today that “forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods” (3) for its leaders and/or members? Do some research, find out what is forbidden for whom, and examine the major points of the organization’s doctrine (ex: the nature of God, how people can be made right with God, etc.). Does it match up with biblical doctrine?
Here are a few of my favorite recent online finds…
“Complementarian interpretation of Scripture holds that God’s creation purpose for man and woman entails equality of individual value but also distinct roles.” Our friends over at Crossway give us 5 Myths about Complementarianism.
“You’ve heard it repeatedly on radio, podcasts, and TV. You’ve read it in various books and articles. You’ve even heard it in your pastor’s sermon. The problem: it’s a lie: 50% of all marriages end in divorce.” The Cripplegate helpfully explains why everything you know about American divorce statistics, including the divorce rate among Christians, is probably wrong in The 50% Lie.
“‘No’ to a husband’s advances is a big deal in a marriage. A godly wife can certainly say “no” but she will also be alert to the way her response might be taken by her husband. Understanding and compassion can go a long way at these moments.” CCEF explores the sensitive subject of marital intimacy in “Not tonight dear”… men rejected.
On his most recent episode of Ask Anything, Dr. Albert Mohlertackles a number of interesting questions, not the least of which is (from a Southern Baptist perspective) Should women preach the Sunday sermon in church? (8:58).
When you gaze out across the landscape of the visible church through an earthly, superficial lens, you’ve got to scratch your head and wonder, “Has evangelicalism lost its ever-lovin’ mind?”.
And the answer is to take off those inch-deep dollar store glasses, fire up the electron microscope of Scripture, look long and deep into God’s Word, and reply to yourself, “Of course it has, silly rabbit. What did you expect?”. The Bible is perfectly clear about these things and why they happen.
This year (2019), Beth Moore has caused quite the stir by hiding in plain sight the fact that she will be preaching the sermon “doing Mother’s Day” this coming Sunday, presumably at the Tomball, Texas, campus of the church she attends (founded and pastored by her son-in-law Curtis Jones1) Bayou City Fellowship:
I say “hiding in plain sight” because she has given enough of an impression here that she is preaching the sermon to test the waters and see what the reaction will be, but has worded her tweet vaguely enough that if she meets too much resistance she can still decide to back out of preaching, give a brief word of biblically appropriate Mother’s Day greeting or encouragement to the ladies at another point during the service, and come back and claim with wide-eyed innocence that that’s what she meant all along by saying she was “doing” Mother’s Day. (Someone asked Beth point blank, in a subsequent tweet if Beth’s tweet meant that she would be preaching the Sunday service and Beth did not answer her. If she’s not, why not just say so? And if she is and isn’t ashamed of it, why not just say so?)
I say “presumably” at BCF-Tomball because, even though she publicizes specific details about time and place with other speaking engagements, she has not mentioned (at least not anywhere I can find as of the time I’m writing this) the specific church she’s preaching at on Sunday, and the church hasn’t mentioned on their website that she’ll be the guest preacher. Additionally, unlike other speaking engagements Beth does, this speaking engagement is not listed on the calendar of events at her website and she hasn’t mentioned it (other than the tweet above) on social media. With all this “open secrecy” I will be surprised if the video or audio of her sermon is posted on YouTube and/or the church website.
Why all this cloak and dagger about the highest profile woman in the Southern Baptist Convention2, possibly in the entirety of evangelicalism, preaching the Mother’s Day sermon?
Because she knows it’s unbiblical. Because weknow it’s unbiblical. And it doesn’t take an electron microscope to see it. It’s right there, in black and white, jumping off the pages of Scripture:
I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 1 Timothy 2:12
It couldn’t be more clear. And for pastors who ought to know better to either fall prey to or intentionally perpetuate the serpentine seduction of “Did God really say you can’t preach?”, using Mother’s Day as an excuse to induce a woman to sin by having her deliver the sermon is a slap in the face – to God, to the church, and to women.
Using Mother’s Day as an excuse to induce a woman to sin by having her deliver the sermon is a slap in the face – to God, to the church, and to women.
What do his actions say to God? “I don’t like Your way and I won’t submit to it. I don’t trust that Your way is right regardless of what the world says. I’ll do what’s right in my own eyes.” It’s the lesson his church learns from his actions as well.
But why is inviting a woman to preach an affront to Christian women? Take a stroll down to verse 15 of 1 Timothy 2:
Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
Not only does the pastor who invites a woman to preach adulterate the role God has set aside specifically for men, he also denigrates one of the good and holy roles God has specifically and intentionally set aside for women: the role of literal, and spiritual, mother.
Eve shattered God’s perfect, unique design for women by allowing herself to be seduced into rebellion. But are we daughters of Eve forever doomed to bear the shame and guilt of her sin, never to have a role in building the Kingdom? Pariahs, to be shunned and shut out of God’s plan? No, praise God! Through the cross, the good works Christ has ordained for Christian women to do – including mothering our own children and being spiritual mothers to our daughters in the faith – redeem the prestige of women. Mothering, in every sense in which God intended it, raises the role of women back to its rightful place in God’s plan.
And we don’t need men – especially men who are supposed to be rightly leading God’s people – to come along and entice us to mess that all up again.
But that’s exactly what’s happening.
When a pastor invites a woman to sin by taking over the pulpit, he drags her and the women of his church right back to post-Fall Eden. He trashes the rank and repute of our God-given high and holy role of mother and implicitly says Being a woman isn’t good enough. You have to steal the role of men to be valued and esteemed.
When a pastor invites a woman to sin by taking over the pulpit, he implicitly says, “Being a woman isn’t good enough. You have to steal the role of men to be valued and esteemed.”
We don’t need to be second rate imitations of men in order to “count”. We need to be first rate, full throttle, take it to the limit women of God. God loves us and values us so much more than to give men a special and amazing role and leave us without an equally special and amazing, yet totally distinct, role. The God who spoke the universe into existence and planned out an unparalleled purpose for every single plant, animal, bacterium, and every other atom of the cosmos, did not leave the queen of His creation roleless. He did not bring us into being only to toddle along after the Hairy Ones trying to copy their every move. How unloving of God, and devaluing to women, would that be? Why would you want to act like a man when God blessed you with the gift of being a woman?
If, by God’s good Providence, you’ve “stumbled across” this article and you’re a woman who has been invited to preach, I plead with you: don’t buy the lie. Say no. Your Savior has a whole treasure chest of good works for you to do as a woman. You are worth infinitely more to Him as the woman He created you to be than you are to the world, or a worldly church, as a cheap knock-off of a man.
The practice of denigrating women, devaluing our God-given role, disobeying God, and darkening the understanding of the church by inviting women to sinfully take the pulpit must stop in the house of God.
Let us be the mothers our own children need, raising up a godly seed unto the Lord. Let us be the spiritual mothers longed for by younger women in the faith, daughters orphaned by Christian women who have abandoned them to take on the role of men. The practice of denigrating women, devaluing our God-given role, disobeying God, and darkening the understanding of the church by inviting women to sinfully take the pulpit must stop in the house of God and be replaced by strong godly women, unafraid and unashamed to flourish in the precious role our Lord has blessed us with.
Especially on Mother’s Day.
Updates to this article:
1Curtis Jones (Beth Moore’s son-in-law) resigned his pastorate at BCF in July 2020.
Read 1 Timothy 5
“Complementarian interpretation of Scripture holds that God’s creation purpose for man and woman entails equality of individual value but also distinct roles.” Our friends over at Crossway give us 
How about a free book? Here’s the PDF of 
“You’ve heard it repeatedly on radio, podcasts, and TV. You’ve read it in various books and articles. You’ve even heard it in your pastor’s sermon. The problem: it’s a lie: 50% of all marriages end in divorce.” 
‘No’ to a husband’s advances is a big deal in a marriage. A godly wife can certainly say “no” but she will also be alert to the way her response might be taken by her husband. Understanding and compassion can go a long way at these moments.” 
