Resource Manager Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 The sheer extent of changes and words added to the text indicates that the literal meaning has been left far behind. This interpretation (along with other alternatives), is offered as a suggested paraphrase resting on a number of inferences, assumptions, and suggestions (pages 73-74, 76-79, emphasis added): ‘Possibilities of translation include’ ‘There are at least four possibilities’ ‘One suggestion is’ ‘It may be that’ ‘This may be’ ‘suggests’ ‘There are several possibilities’ ‘It may well be’ ‘Alternatively it could mean’ ‘Three ways of understanding his wording have been suggested’ ‘There are at least three possible interpretations’ ‘There is a third possibility’(Page 50) Firm conclusions cannot be based on unproved inferences, assumptions, and suggestions. The literal reading of the passage does not render it ‘absurd’ (to use brother Foreman’s term), and the only reason why the authors number it among their ‘problem’ verses is that the literal reading is a problem for their case concerning the role of sisters in the ecclesia. Principles of interpretation Brother Byrnes:‘8) Doctrine must be generated from the Scriptures themselves and not from a preconceived theory that we then fit verses to in an attempt to bolster the theory.’ It is notable that in the case of both verses already considered that almost every conceivable reading is suggested as plausible except the natural literal reading. Why is this? The authors have approached this passage with the idea that the treatment of women by Christ and Paul indicates that the natural reading of this passage must be wrong: ‘We conclude, therefore, that the overall evidence of Paul’s letters from approximately 48 to the early 60s AD shows no male/female distinction in duties and activities carried out by members of the ecclesias’‘There are two sets of verses, however, which seem to reverse the whole of this analysis: 1 Corinthians 14:34-36, and 1 Timothy 2:11-12. How are these verses to be understood in a way which is compatible with the rest of Paul’s teaching and practice?’‘All One – NT’, page 51The last sentence is particularly important, since it demonstrates that the authors approached these two verses with a view to making them fit their conclusions. Principles of interpretation Brother Foreman:‘Fifth. The truth in relation to any doctrine must be established by those passages which speak of it in positive and unequivocal language, and those texts belonging to the same subject but which only admit of inferential testimony, no inference should be drawn from them at variance with the truths already established by positive texts.’Brother Byrnes:‘Passages on which doctrine is based should not be incidental i.e. passages that are non-essential to the main teaching of a book or that do not constitute a teaching statement. For example, Romans, the one book of the N.T. that systematically (page 51) explains how sin and death entered the world, what sin is and how the life, sacrifice and resurrection of Christ overcome sin and death, contains only one reference to Satan at the end of 16 chapters of detailed exposition. This one incidental reference cannot be used to alter the apostle’s argument in the rest of the book by suggesting that a fallen-angel Satan had a role to play in how sin entered the world, what causes sin etc.’‘We must avoid basing doctrine on passages that only infer e.g. Thomas’ statement ‘ My Lord and my God’ to a believer in the Trinity, teaches that Jesus is part of a triune Godhead but this view of the statement is based on inference. It is not a statement on the nature of the Godhead but an outburst from a now undoubting Thomas.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resource Manager Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 The authors commonly draw inferred arguments from passages which do not speak directly to the subject, and then use these to interpret passages which do speak directly and explicitly. The following is a list of examples: ‘The manner of Jesus’ involvement with these followers shows a change in the understanding of the part women could play’ (‘All One – NT’, page 21) ‘Jesus also broke with convention in allowing women to touch him in a way which alarmed his more orthodox critics’ (‘All One – NT’, page 21) ‘In a very male-orientated society he is shown as revolutionary in his approach to women, as he was in his attitudes on many other matters’ (‘All One – NT’, page 24) ‘Baptism was the same mode of commitment for male and female believers, underlining the essential unity of the new movement in Jesus’ (‘All One – NT’, page 24) ‘If we understand what he says in accordance with the context, Paul approves of equal service by sisters and by brothers. Life and service within the ecclesia, according to Paul, are not divided up by reference to whether male or female, nor whether slave or free, nor whether Jew or Gentile. Society might still impose restrictions, and it did. But as far as life and service in the ecclesia was concerned, in Christ you are all one’ (‘All One – NT’, page 43) None of the passages referred to contain explicit teaching on the role of women in the ecclesia, as far as leadership and teaching is concerned. These are all non-explicit texts, yet they are represented as the control texts by which other texts are to be interpreted. It is noteworthy that pro-feminist Biblical professor Kenneth Sparks (see also appendix C) makes the same point: ‘The context of these biblical texts reveals that, in the game of proof-text poker, the traditionalists have a far stronger hand than the (page 52) egalitarians. Whereas the traditionalist verses speak very directly and specifically to the issue at hand ("wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as to the Lord"), the egalitarian texts seem strained to the breaking point.’4 Principles of interpretation Brother Foreman:‘Sixth. No doctrine should be predicated upon mere inference, neither upon one isolated text of Scripture. Any true doctrine will be found interspersed throughout the whole Bible.’Brother Byrnes:‘A doctrine must be established on the basis of a clear, consistent thread of teaching throughout the Old and New Testaments e.g. the oneness of God is taught clearly in the O.T. and confirmed unmistakably in the N.T. by Christ and the apostles.’ As seen in the previous point, the authors’ arguments are based on inference. From the positive treatment of women by Christ, they infer that he would have had no objection to the appointment of women to the same leadership and speaking roles as men, despite the fact that he never did and nor did the apostles.The following is from ‘All One – OT’ (bold emphasis added): ‘Leadership by women was the exception rather than the rule’, page 135 ‘Leadership by women is less common than leadership by men’, page 137 ‘In general, the judges were men’, page 139 ‘Male leadership was often the outcome of society, and was approved by God for that time’, page 145)_______ 4 Kenton L Sparks, ‘God’s Word In Human Words’ (Baker Academic:2008), page 343 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resource Manager Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 It is very clear from this that the authors of “All One” are well aware that their case is not ‘interspersed throughout the whole Bible’. Once again it is noteworthy that this is acknowledged by the pro-feminist commentator Kenneth Sparks: ‘Thoughtful egalitarians will admit what every complementarian is quick to point out: that the Bible contains numerous texts that are patriarchal in orientation.’(Page 53) ‘The biblical evidence in support of the traditional viewpoint spans the canon from the creation to the General Epistles, and the resulting perspective is remarkably consistent.’ ‘Moreover, we have seen already that many biblical texts either assert or imply male headship in the home and church, even in the New Testament.’ ‘So, while Belleville is technically correct to say that "this is the lone New Testament reference to Adam’s seniority", good theology requires that this text be read in light of the many other biblical texts that highlight male authority in the home and church.’ ‘A considerable mass of convincing exegetical, theological, and historical evidence supports this traditional reading, as is admitted even by egalitarians like William Webb. Webb can admit this because, unlike Belleville, he feels no compulsion to make 1 Timothy say something that it clearly does not say.’ 5Principles of interpretation Brother Byrnes:‘We must avoid taking the specific teaching of a single verse or section of Scripture and making a generalisation from it e.g. in 1 Cor 15:42, 52 Paul says the dead shall be raised incorruptible which suggests that we emerge from the grave immortal. However, we have to take into account other Scriptures that qualify this from the immediate context of the chapter and the wider context of the whole Bible.’‘A consistent thread of teaching cannot be overruled by a single passage that appears to be contrary to it. For example, we do not allow the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, (which on the face of it suggests that we are conscious and immortal after death), to overthrow the entire Bible’s teaching to the contrary. The parable is not a didactic statement on the death-state, rather it is a vehicle for teaching the Pharisees a lesson based on their own erroneous beliefs about life after death.’ Readers of “All One” will note that they quote, cite, and allude to one single verse more than any other, Galatians 3:28. In fact it is a cornerstone of their entire case, such that they included a quote from it in the title of each of their papers (‘All One – OT’ and ‘All One – NT’): ‘If we understand what he says in accordance with the context, Paul approves of equal service by sisters and by brothers. Life and service (page 54) within the ecclesia, according to Paul, are not divided up by reference to whether male or female, nor whether slave or free, nor whether Jew or Gentile. Society might still impose restrictions, and it did. But as far as life and service in the ecclesia was concerned, in Christ you are all one.’‘All One – NT’, page 43As may be seen above, this is a text that says nothing about the role of women in the ecclesia. To refer to this even as a non-explicit statement concerning the role of women in the ecclesia is unreasonable. Yet the authors claim that the verse is saying that ‘Life and service within the ecclesia, according to Paul, are not divided up by reference to whether male or female, nor whether slave or free, nor whether Jew or Gentile’ (something Paul never says), and generalise from this that there are no gender distinctions to be made between roles in the ecclesia. _______ 5 Kenton L Sparks, ‘God’s Word In Human Words’ (Baker Academic:2008), pages 339, 344, 349 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resource Manager Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Principles of interpretation Brother Byrnes:‘To establish a doctrine we must argue from the rule to the exception and not from the exception to the rule. The rule establishes the doctrine and the exception proves the rule e.g. Christ’s resurrection to immortality is the exception which proves the rule that, apart from Divine intervention at the return of Christ on behalf of the faithful, human beings die and remain that way.’ The authors recognise many such cases but then draw conclusions which argue against the principle. ‘Leadership by women was the exception rather than the rule’, page 135 ‘Leadership by women is less common than leadership by men’, page 137 ‘In general, the judges were men’, page 139 ‘Male leadership was often the outcome of society, and was approved by God for that time’, page 145) ‘All One – OT’ (bold emphasis added) ‘We suggest reasons why sisters were not explicitly included in aspects of leadership, but we also show ways in which there is good reason to think that some leadership was practised by women: e.g. Priscilla (1 Corinthians 16:19), Nympha (Colossians 4:15)’ (page 20) (page 55) ‘We do not claim that women were appointed to all the same positions of leadership and teaching as the men – but there is enough evidence that they did teach and did appear to exercise some authority’ (page 27) ‘That does not mean that every brother does every job, nor every sister every job’ (page 47) ‘All One – NT’ (bold emphasis added) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resource Manager Posted June 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2010 Principles of interpretation Brother Byrnes:‘Arguments from silence are invalid except when there are strong reasons to expectthat ordinarily the silence would be broken.’ In the case of the New Testament, the authors make an argument from silence regarding the appointment of elders and overseers. They argue that since there is no New Testament mention of elders and overseers in Corinth or Rome, this is evidence that not all ecclesias were run the same way, and that not every ecclesia had elders and overseers (emphasis added): ‘It is not clear what kind of leadership existed when ecclesias were first started. There is no New Testament mention of elders or overseers in Corinth or Rome.’ ‘All One – NT’, page 85 Claiming that no New Testament mention of elders or overseers in Corinth or Rome’ is evidence that not all ecclesias were run in the same way constitutes an argument from silence. The fact is that there is abundant evidence for only one ecclesial model in the New Testament, and that is the model which involves male elders and overseers. The argument that this is how the apostolic ecclesias were typically organised has considerable support in the form of negative and positive evidence. There is negative evidence since there is no evidence to the contrary, and there is positive evidence that this was standard practice: Acts 11:30 “They did so, sending their financial aid to the elders [of ‘the brothers living in Judea’] by Barnabas and Saul.” Acts 14:23 “When they had appointed elders for them in the various churches, with prayer and fasting, they entrusted them to the protection of the Lord in whom they had believed.” Acts 15:4 “When they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all the things God had done with them.”6 “Both the apostles and the elders met together to deliberate about this matter.”23 “They sent this letter with them: From the apostles and elders, your brothers, to the Gentile brothers and sisters in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, greetings!” Acts 20:17 From Miletus he sent a message to Ephesus, telling the elders of the church to come to him. 1 Timothy 3:1 “This saying is trustworthy: “If someone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a good work. “ 1 Timothy 5:17 Elders who provide effective leadership must be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard in speaking and teaching. Titus 1:7 For the overseer must be blameless as one entrusted with God’s work, not arrogant, not prone to anger, not a drunkard, not violent, not greedy for gain. James 5:14 Is anyone among you ill? He should summon the elders of the church, and they should pray for him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. 1 Peter 5:1 So as your fellow elder and a witness of Christ’s sufferings and as one who shares in the glory that will be revealed, I urge the elders among you: 2 John 1:1 From the elder, to an elect lady and her children, whom I love in truth (and not I alone, but also all those who know the truth),There is no support for the claim that the ecclesias were organised in any other way, or that women were appointed to the positions of elder or overseer. The Sister\'s Role - booklet1.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts