I think Evening's caution and suggestion is very wise. Therefore, I would like to ask that all those who participate in this thread give scriptures by which they have made their assessments. Let scripture support your words. This will go a long way to making this a profitable discussion, and not an unprofitable one where things turn into a "he thinks she thinks" mud sling. Let your words "be proven by scripture", as a great man once said.

Yikes! Scary topic! Men have died in these types of discussions, even when using the Scriptures! Tread carefully all that walk this path, for here be dragons! Seriously, be considerate even when expounding Biblical truths.

(Luke, how did I have 'roles' spelled before?)

Ok, yes, be sure to check everything in the Bible.

This topic has been moved to the Theology section since it stems entirely from God's Word and His original design.

Wow, all that disclaimer stuff makes this topic a little scary but here it goes.
From Ephesians 5 : 22 "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything."

I feel the the desire for this a lot in my own life. Now, I a hugely headstrong person at times and I like to do what I want. If there's a need for someone to step up I'm there. I've taken positions of leadership because they needed to be filled. All that being said, most people see me as such and for the most part I'm okay with that but in the end I don't really care if I get published or become a veterinarian. I'm holding out for the job God has designed all women for. I'm still not the kind to go looking for attention or flirting or anything because I don't want Ephesians to be something I regret. If a guy steps up to the plate, sure take my role of leadership, I'd rather be a follower.

I hope that was helpful to the discussion...

Wow... You're right, a lot of that was scary to read; I didn't know this discussion could get out of hand... it sounded rather tame by the heading!

But I liked you what you wrote, Riniel. I would prefer to follow generally, but if I'm needed to take the lead I can. I'll just make a small comment, and see how it goes.

I think when talking about the roles of men and women, it's important to look at the basic Biblical fundamentals. Most of them are found in Genesis.
Men and women were BOTH created in God's image, a key point to remember.
Now one thing that needs to be pointed out here is that the Hebrew word translated "helper" does not necessarily carry the connotations of a subordinate the way that it does for modern English speakers. In fact, almost every other occurrence of that particular Hebrew word in the Old Testament is in reference to God being a helper, and God is certainly nobody's subordinate. So the fact that God made women to be men's helpers does not mean that they are naturally inferior to us. One could even argue that the fact that God chose to shape Eve out of one of Adam's ribs could indicate that he intended for her to work side-by-side with Adam. Granted that's a bit of a stretch, there's no way to prove that. Anyways, another key point of the beginning of the verse, is that God created men and women to be with one another.
This is part of God's announcement after the Fall. We could argue for the next 50 years over exactly what this verse means, but I think there's a pretty simple interpretation that suffices. I think it not very far-fetched to say that when God first created man and woman his design had a certain balance in their interaction with one another. We see this balance in male and female animal relations, it's not much of leap to assume that God's original plan for humans had a similar balance. Based on this deduction, a satisfactory interpretation of this verse is that there was a balance in man and woman's relationship and as a consequence of sin, that balance was disturbed and has been off ever since.

Here I would like to take a side-note that it is not anti-Biblical view to say that God designed men for different functions than women. It's harder to pin this on a chapter verse, but Genesis chapter 1 tells us that before man, God made all other living creatures on Earth. Throughout the animal kingdom there examples of differences in physique and roles males and females of a species. Many male birds are brightly colored to attract mates as well as to distract predators from the duller-plumed females. Female wolves tend the children while the males hunt for mothers and cubs (extreme simplification of wolf social behavior). Male penguins hold the eggs on their feet while the females hunt after laying the eggs. If God shows such initiative in the animal world, it makes sense that likewise men and women would be built different for different functions, as indeed scientists are discovering more and more. There are fundamental differences in the ways men and women are composed physically and psychologically and I think that it's Biblical to accept that these differences are there.

Finally one NT passage on the subject.
Like Riniel mentioned earlier, Ephesians 5:22 says "Wives submit to your husbands as to the Lord." But verse 28 says "In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who love his wife, loves himself." If husbands love their wives as much as themselves, then there is not true dominion because they'll treat their wives with the same love and respect that they have for themselves. Balance.
So the love of Christ working in our hearts transforming us restores the harmony in the man-woman relationship that the Fall disturbed.

So quick summary, God made man and woman both in His image and woman (while designing them differently) and placed them in a partnership together. Sin and the Fall disrupted the original balance of this relationship and the world has been dealing with this consequence ever since. But as in all matters, Salvation through Jesus Christ makes us new creatures, opening our hearts to the transforming power of his Spirit (Romans 12:1-2) and allowing Him working through us to restore that balance if we let Him. There are several other verses on this subject, particularly in the New Testament, these are the key points to remember when thinking about men and women's different roles.

In Christ,
Jordan

This is not to say that women are not made in God's image, but that a Godly man is more a representation of God, while a Godly woman is a better symbol or representation of humanity. (So the relationship between a Godly husband and a Godly wife is somewhat like the relationship between Christ and His Bride, the Church.)



Notice that in Genesis, the Spirit of Life is breathed in Adam by God. But God does not breath the breath of life into Eve, it already abides in the flesh she was taken from. In that sense, while Adam came directly from God's will, Eve came from God's will through Adam's flesh.



In other words, woman was created to fulfill the need of man. Of course, man has duties to woman. But, God's role for woman is to fulfill man's need. Of course, this necessitates that man must be a wise, caring, and loving leader. That is the significance of the word "helper."



In other words, the roles of man and woman are earthly things. This why we are told elsewhere that in Christ there is no Jew or Greek, Male or Female. These are distinctions made by our flesh. As long as we are in the flesh, we cannot deny that our DNA makes some lighter skinned or darker haired, some female, or some male, and that these things do have an effect on our lives. But in Christ these things will pass away.

That is why I don't believe that we will be male or female in our Glorified Bodies (although we will remember our own lives, of course). But that's a rabbit trail.

As for the pronouncement that Woman shall desire Man and Man will rule over Woman, I cannot say anything for sure. I'm not a Hebrew expert but I have been told by hearsay that the verse is actually comparing to the two halves. In other words, "Your desire shall be for your husband, BUT he will rule over you."

Which would mean that her desire is to RULE over her husband, but the husband shall RULE over the wife. I will note that the word translated a rule means "dominion" and is therefore probably referring to the tendency of many men to be overbearing and dominant over their wives, a gross exaggeration of "leading" someone.

What Ephesians 5:28 is saying, in my poor opinion, is actually that a man ought to treat his wife with the same respect, dignity, gentleness, and care that he takes for his own body, because she too is a house of the Lord. And a man who truly loves himself is careful to avoid sin and pollution. So, just as he carefully leads his body in the spiritual sense, he will carefully lead his wife spiritually.

All this does imply balance. But it also says that the source of balance is rooted in the leadership of the husband.

I would finally like to note Paul's command (from the Lord, not speaking as a man) that women not speak (by which he means teach or lead, I believe) in the Church. Women cannot be spiritual leaders of men because Eve originated sin by leading Adam astray. (because if Adam had refused sin would have not entered mankind)

Nether the less, we must remember that Adam sinned knowingly. He did not lead Eve astray, but he did fail to lead her. God's charge for men to lead their wives is a duty which Adam failed. So, while the relationship between man and woman was originally a blessing from God to both man and woman, now it has become a duty, because of our sin. But those who are in Christ may learn to experience it as a blessing again.

Notice that I don't say woman can't lead, own or work in a business, play sports, or have fun. I'm only talking about their relationship with their husbands.

I happen to believe that some woman would make just as good Presidents or CEOs as some men. Generally, though women aren't in a position to lead. Women who are married, for example, ought to obey their husband. This is fine for a CEO but would be difficult for a President dealing with weighty and sometimes secret issues.

So, men are generally better leaders. There have been woman who were better that most men. Most men could do a party job, but probably only because of what is expected of men. Women are just now realizing some things which they can do and still be Godly women. So they may not be as practiced. Just leadership is passed down from father to son, it must be passed from mother to daughter.

I agree with nearly every point you have made. Very well done, Neil! It must have taken some time for you to write all that down.

The one thing that I'm of a slightly different opinion of, was your mention that women should not speak/lead in Church. Speaking only out of my knowledge, I know of a few women who have been a wonderful witness of the Lord in the Church. (Joyce Meyer, for example) Also, a Church in my town has been led by a very Spirit-filled woman for the past few months, and she preaches straight from God's Word in a very strong way.

I do not have any scriptures to back up that woman should lead in the world of the Church, but I was going to ask if you would mind terribly to expand a little on that point?

1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

I don't think women should teach in the church. Personally I would not go to a church where they allowed women to preach as I believe it goes against what the bible teaches.

I wondered if I could share this site with you Bush,

http://www.forgottenword.org/meyers.html

Unfortunately alot of what Joyce teaches, as in Jesus going to hell to pay for our sins and she is not a sinner etc, is unbiblical which is why I would never listen to her teachings. Sorry for this off topic note, and I hope you're not offended with me saying this Bush!

Good points, everybody. I'm mostly just watching this topic, so I won't be posting much if anything.

Hm, I was not aware those were her thoughts on Salvation. However, my view of that verse is in reference to the home. It's not right for the wife to be the spiritual leader in her own home, that position goes to her husband. Joyce Meyer may have different views on Salvation, but she has many other good teachings to share, and she once pointed out that although she is preaching to many people, she is still under the authority of her husband, and she does not usurp it when she speaks to the people. She speaks in accordance to what her husband desires, and when she steps down off the pulpit, she is still under his rule.

I don't know. I don't have a firm view in that aspect, it's something I'd like to discuss further with my Mum. However it was just a thought I wondered if you'd be interested to hear. I might talk about it with my Mum and comment back here later on.

(You didn't offend me, Elanor. )

This is a very interesting topic I've wondered about from time to time. I don't have much to say right now, but I'll be keeping an eye on it.

One thing I will say is this: I think women preaching in Church is wrong. I hope I don't offend anyone in saying that. But if the Bible says it's wrong, it's wrong. As far as I know the Bible doesn't give any exceptions.

Another thing: Women in battle. What are your thoughts on this?

I'm inclined to disagree. One of the judges of Israel, (can't remember her name...) was a woman. The judges job was to lead and teach the people so that they did not stray from the path.

I don't think the bible has anything to say about women in battle (correct me if I'm wrong), so I'm inclined to not be sexist and say yes. There is nothing wrong with that.

Let me remind you guys to use scripture. Give us a verse to support your views.

I don't plan on really getting involved in this one, but I did want to mention that the bible does have things to say about women in battle.

Jdg 4:21 Then Jael Heber's wife took a nail of the tent, and took an hammer in her hand,and went softly unto him, and smote the nail into his temples, and fastened it into the ground: for he was fast asleep and weary. So he died.

Jdg 5:24 Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent.

Jael got involved in a 'battle' and she was blessed

Jdg 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.

Jdg 4:10 And Barak called Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh; and he went up with ten thousand men at his feet: and Deborah went up with him.

Deborah is another woman who was a judge and went to battle in the bible.

If anyone thinks I've misinterpreted these scriptures please tell me! I didn't show my Dad before I posted these as he's out at work! I usually check with him that I'm not taking anything out of context!

I hold a very different view on the deborah account. Deborah is the woman everyone brings up when this discussion comes up, but if you look at the context, the biblical customs, and the fact that Deborah was a judge for a reason, you come up with some very different conclusions.

Mmm sounds interesting Val! Will you share more about it?

Let me think about it. I have lots, including scripture, to back me up. I don't believe in entering a debate that you can't clearly and articulately defend. However, I have seen this conversation turn very ugly before. So at this point I'm going to just lead conversation and make you guys think. I'll see where I'm led in regards to posting in this thread.

Ok that's fine! It gives me something interesting to study with the family though! So I'll look into it. I'm not one to argue for the sake of arguing and I won't get ugly about anything I promise. If it gets ugly I shall probably back out of the thread hehe. I completely respect you not wanting to say anything.

Okay. Disclaimer- These are my thoughts. Different denominations of Christianity may feel differently. So, please don't take anything the wrong way. We don't want to start a debate here. (All verses copyright KJV Bible.)

* chuckles * The KJV isn't copyrighted. It is public domain. (Except for in England, sort of, but that is a bit more complicated, and doesn't affect quotes anyways.)

Don't worry, if things get ugly because HWers can't be respectful towards one another, we will shut this down. And I didn't figure you would get ugly. If I feel it is profitable for me to step in, I will. Otherwise, I will leave my comments for individuals who want to know. I don't have any qualms talking about it, I just know it is more profitable in a pm discussion, than it is here in the open, typically. This is one of those discussions that divides lots of people. It doesn't me, but I've seen it happen to lots of people. So we shall see.

Thanks for the verses, Elly.

By the way, Elanor, I think talking with your family is very wise. Let me know in PM what your family thought. And if you would like, I'd be happy to talk to you through PM. You'll just have to be patient till I get to a computer My thumbs hurt after typing all of this. Can you tell I don't play many video games? I love my Wii

Y'all know what I mean.

I'll post my thoughts and the Scripture I have to back me up in a while, but I don't have much time right now, so I would just like to say that I have enjoyed reading everyone's views and am glad that people have sought God so much in this difficult matter. So thank you all!

I would say that, basically, Deborah taught men as if she were equal with them, judging them has nothing to do with spiritual authority, and neither does battle. We don't know if she had a husband but certainly she would be in submission to him, or else God would not have allowed her to be a judge.

As far as battle goes, there is no direct scriptural address, but I believe that taking scripture as a whole leads away from the idea of woman in battle.

That doesn't prevent a woman from leading. The word "lead" doesn't imply that she was physically in front of the army, only that she commanded it.

* pops in *

The idea that all ranks, soldiers, officers, and princes of OT Israel were chosen from the men (twenty years old and upward) might be a clue.

Just a thought.

* pops out *

I've been watching this, and I've loved reading everyone's opinions. My opinions aren't any different than those already put forward, though, so I'll just stay on the sidelines for now.

Should I start a thread on putting girl characters in battle?

This has been a very intriguing subject, and I have had a good discussion with my Mum on the topic. If it's ok, I'd like to share what we uncovered. (With Scripture references this time! )

The matter in question was "Should women be allowed to teach/preach in the Church?" These are the conclusions I came to... (beware, these are my exact findings written down as I see them in my head. If they are a little addled, that's my mind for you!)

There are some remarkable women teachers and preachers in the world today, and for the sake of this write up, I will use Gloria Copeland as an example. The Bible tells us:



So we can tell if someone is walking in the Lord's ways and are fulfilling the will of God by their fruits. Through Gloria Copeland's ministry, hundreds of people have been healed from various hideous diseases and sicknesses. Her teachings have revealed the power of the Lord's healing Word to many people, and they have been miraculously healed. If the Bible meant that women should not preach, then I'm sure the Lord would not be working so powerfully through this woman.



I believe if we can see God at work through someone, and are impacting lives powerfully, we should not judge them for their gender, age, colour, etc. (I hope that wasn't offensive)

But I think this article really clinches it for me, and it really brings to light what Paul meant when he said "Women shouldn't teach". I'd really love to hear your thoughts on this.

http://urbanchristianz.blogspot.com/200 ... ch-in.html

You seem to have some misconceptions. I find it strange that you should quote a woman such a G. Copeland. Have you ever examined what she and her husband teach about Christ's work on the cross. If you do you would be very shocked - I hope - to find that they teach that He went to Hell to suffer there and that His work on the cross was not enough to save us. Paul said that if any man or angel preach any other gospel than what he received let him be accursed.

Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Regarding women preachers, this is not man judging gender, colour or anything else. We are handling what God says here. He says in His word clearly that Paul taught that a woman should not teach a man or take spiritual authority over a man.

1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Is this gender unequality? Definitely not. The woman was deceived not the man in Genesis 3.

1Ti 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

This means that, as in Corinthians 11, (you need to read most of the chapter really I won't copy and paste it all here!) a woman should be covered, she needs protection. There are reasons why a woman should not teach and I do not have time at present to go into it all. Regarding judging the Lord's anointed you are misinerpreting this passage. The Lord's anointed were the King's and priests of the Old Testament. In the New Testament every believer is anointed of the Lord.

2Co 1:21 Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;

We are told to judge and test all things. Hold fast to that which is good. John tells us to test the spirits to see if they are from God. If we do not test doctrines and spirits, Satan then has a free hand to deceive us. Jude 1:3 tells us to 'earnestly contend for the faith that was once delivered to the saints.'

Regarding Joyce Meyer and G Copeland - it doesn't matter what amazing things they have done - what matters is, do they speak according to God's word. 'To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Isaiah 8:20.' The book of Revelations tells us that a deceiver will even be able to bring down fire from heaven to lead peole astray.


I hope I don't offend anyone here with what I've put. I know I've posted a lot and I'll take a break from it now and let other people have their say! May I say Bush that I love you soo much, you're such a nice, Godly woman and nothing I say here is meant to offend you in the least! I'd be most upset if it did and would love you to just say so!

Not at all, Elanor. I appreciate you being so honest with me, and in return, I feel that I should be honest with you.

My Mum and I have recently been exploring that just said matter, of whether or not, Jesus actually went to hell after his death on the cross. We have even come across some rather astounding articles online and some very very intriguing verses in the Bible. May I just point out, that this is very, -very- new for us still, and we haven't made up our minds one way or the other, but since you mentioned what you did about Joyce Meyer in your previous post, it caused me to stop and think.

Here are the articles, and here are the verses that we have found that actually seem (I'll say seem because I'm still unsure of where I stand) to back their belief in that area. I'll say -yet again!- we are still searching, so what we have uncovered I am sharing purely out of our findings, not what we have believed in our hearts yet.



This seems to imply that Jesus indeed visit hell, as oftentimes in the Bible, hell is referred to as a pit.



I myself believe hell is where the demons and the devil reside, and that this place is in the fiery center of the earth, so this seems to back that fact too. Please note! This is not referring to Jesus' burial, because Jesus was -not- buried. He was placed in a tomb, not the earth, therefore this cannot be what this verse is referring to.



If Jesus holds the keys, the actual keys to Hades, then how did he get them?

Here are the websites:
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~lakolbe ... C323A.html
http://www.heaven.net.nz/answers/answer17.htm
_________________________________________________________

Back on topic, I don't believe God would use such a faith-filled, God fearing, Spirit empowered person if it went against the Bible's teaching. They also preach straight from the Word. Everything I have ever heard from them has been strictly Scripture, so hearing what you say about their thoughts on Jesus descending to hell after His death, made me pause to actually go back and double check the Bible. After all, if you don't test it, you can't know if there is any truth in it.

Remember, we as Christians are all saved if we accept the gift of salvation, study God's Word daily, and feed our faith. However we aren't going to know everything there is to know. And we are going to believe some things that we may find out at the end of time were a deception. I like to be open to other Christian's views, because this allows me to, as you quoted, 'test all things, and hold fast to what is good' or in this case, right.

This is the joy of all being Christians, and being able to discuss openly and plainly. Isn't it marvelous, that we can have so many different ways and views on what the Bible teaches us? The Word really is a mystery, and there is no way anyone on earth can unravel all it's secrets. So I very much enjoy hearing everyone else's viewpoints on different aspects as it expands my knowledge and gives me a better understanding of the Word. I hope this post does the same for all of you who read it.

Good discussions girls. Thank you for having the maturity to remain respectful towards each other's differing points of view.

No worries, Airi. Actually, I'm finding it kinda funny that the guys have cleared out!

I would be leery of anyone who claims to perform miracles. Many such people, including Benny Hinn, have been found to be fakes. Careful investigation is important.

Examine the Bible. Occasionally woman leaders will be found.

NEVER will you find a woman teaching, preaching, leading, and healing, as Jesus and his Apostles did. In fact, only the Apostles and Jesus really ever fully embody those things.

So when I hear of woman claiming to do all those things, especially on a large scale level, I am very cautious to accept them.

I'm afraid you've misunderstood several Bible verses. Your quotes from Ezekiel, for example, are incomplete.



Ezekiel 26 is actually a prophecy against the city of Tyre.



So these verses are actually a curse dooming the city of Tyre to an eternity in Hell! It's not about Jesus at all.

Similarly, Ezekiel 31 is actually a curse against the current Pharaoh!



Again, it's not about Jesus at all.

Finally, the verse in Matthew 12.



It is highly unlikely that Jesus would offer a visit to Hell as a sign, since no living person would be able to witness it. Instead, the verse is referring to Christ's three days inside the Tomb. Buried in the earth, as it were.

Christ wouldn't have to descend into Hell to have it's keys. Remember, Christ created hell. He damned Satan to hell long ago, indicating that He was in full control of it. Notice that God never actually gives hell to Satan, it is always referred to as a punishment for Satan, his Demons, and the unbelievers. Satan has a kingdom, but it in the hearts of the sinful, not in hell. Even hell has always belonged to our God.

It's interesting to me that the female preachers, such as Joyce Meyer and Copeland, are generally in agreement on this issue, even though it clearly contradicts the Bible.

If you really believe Copeland is spiritually empowered, then read about investigations of her healings.

I expect that you will find no evidence supporting her healings. So called "faith healers" tend to take advantage of both the placebo effect and faked healings in a combination that makes them hard to disprove.

I bet that if you watch a video of her healings, she will select random people from the crowd (perhaps claiming to be following God's leading), draw names from a bucket or something of that nature, or used a similar concept.

These methods allow deceivers to control who comes forward, allowing them to set up fake healings.

Never do these healers have people simply form a line. Never do they go to remote villages and travel from home to home, sealing cleft palates and healing the crippled.

Investigate where she lives, what size her home is, and how much money she spends.

Finally, read about any failed healings attempted on her part. I bet you'll find that she claims that the other person didn't have enough faith.



Notice that the beggar shows no sign of faith. The miracle was worked by the faith of the healers, not the healed.

The only reason Jesus uses the phrase, "Your faith has made you well," is when he also says that he has forgiven the person who was healed. You will find many circumstances where he does not credit people's faith after healing them.

So, to sum it all up, I believe that a careful investigation will reveal all the woman teachers or healers (and faith healers in general) to teach things contrary to the scripture, to live opulent lives using money from their healings or teachings (even Joyce Meyer does!), and to use excuses when their teachings or healings are disproved.

Ok...

With everything everyone has said here, you've shaken my foundations... quite greatly.

I really have no comeback... but right now I'm searching for the absolute truth in these aspects...

It's hard having something you believe in, or at least, the things you believe to right, true, and honest shown up like that... it's kind of painful for a time, and slightly depressing, which is how I'm feeling right now.

Note that I am most certainly not offended. That is different. I just... need some time to search the Scriptures and pray about these things... because right now I have no idea and I'm feeling kind of blind.

I would really appreciate your prayers right now, that my Mum and I will have our eyes opened to the absolute truth, and that we would recognize it when we see it.

Bush, read Proverbs 31. That's the character description I strive for.

Thank you, Riniel. Me too.

Lots of interesting thoughts...

I do too! I memorized that (Proverbs 31:10-31) a couple of years ago!

I'm sorry if I was harsh. Not only are these issues important to me, but I've recently encountered some similar (but different) "deceivers".

Not that I don't believe anything I've said. But I probably could have been nicer.

If you have a copy of a Systematic Theology, or something similar, I would suggest reading through the sections about the process of Salvation. I always find that topic to refresh and encouraging when something church related bothers me.

I vouch for Systematic Theology. It is a wonderful resource.

Alright, fellow Holy Worlders, here enters my thoughts on the roles of women and men. I stayed silence for a period of time because this subject tends to set me slightly on edge. I am pleased to say that I have witnessed nothing but gracefulness and honor in the words spoken here. Thus, I beg your same allowance as I seek to speak what I believe to be words of truth in this area.

First off, I want to touch on the subject of leadership. It is true that men are granted the honor of leadership and are called to take up positions of leadership for God’s glory. During the recent years, I have seen a growing amount of women in leadership positions that should be positions held by man. The pulpit is only one of those areas. But, I dare say that leadership is not a position granted to one simply because he is male; leadership is an earned and respected position. Women climb to leadership because men no longer know the true meaning of leadership and women step in to fill the position. It is true that some men would claim to be hurt by the appearance of women in leadership, but that is no excuse for them to sit back on their heels and do nothing. The existence of women in leadership carries as much hurt to those women as it does to the men. In many of the cases I have been a witness to, I find the men give up. If men truly and honestly embraced the role of leadership and accepted its burdens on their shoulders, there would be no need for women to take up the pulpit or fulfill the position of an elder or teach men in foreign countries. Our society has lost its true form and the passiveness of men has done little to discourage the strong-headed women. (Please note that both are to blame; not just men.)

And at the risk of stepping on people’s toes here, who can truly say that women cannot preach to men when men cannot fulfill the requirements of a preacher and an elder according to the Bible (1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9, 1 Timothy 5:17). If men are to be elders and preachers (which I agree with), then it is the church’s duty to select elders according to Biblical standards and not human standards. We cannot chose one part of his teaching and ignore the other. If we don’t want to follow God’s word in selecting our church leaders, who’s to say that selecting a woman elder is any different than selecting an unqualified man elder. My point here is not to offend, but to make you think. I have seen so many people discuss this topic with absolute horror if a woman is placed in these leadership positions. Well then. . . men, do something about it. Go by Biblical standards and make yourself available to fulfill the position.

The position of motherhood and wifehood used to be treated with the utmost importance; men honored and actively supported the women whom they married. A woman being married under the leadership of men today is seen as distasteful and derogatory. While culture and the curse of the fall definitely have something to do with it, I also see the super conservative and super liberal Christian teachings lead to this mess. One side claims women to be nothing but pawns in a man’s hip pocket; the man determines what happens, silence is a key unless she is speaking to her husband, and the men hold all influence over others while women can only influence their husband. Yet, the liberal side claims that women are equal to men and can lead them wherever they feel. Both sides are wrong. One side dishonors women, and the other dishonors men.

Furthermore, take a look at Proverbs 31. A woman is basically called to possess the skills of every career category available for men. She is to be a confidante for men, able to make clothing, able to provide food for her family, able to handle money, finances and business transactions, tireless in her work, provides for those less fortunate than her, clothed in dignity, able to speak wisdom to others and to be a true helper to her husband, does not succumb to idleness, and she will be called blessed. How then can we say that motherhood and wifehood is not a career? That it is not worth women’s time? It is so worth our time, women. It is so worth our dedication. We are to support the men in this world, and we too often forsake that path. The duties of motherhood and wifehood are so much more than any career you can dream of and in the end, will mean the world to the man you are married to and will enrich your world like no other. Proverbs 31 not only tells us what a good wife is like, but tells us who we can be if we truly embrace God’s vision of marriage and of women and men. Just as Jordan said, women can go and seek a career if they want; but, I want to say this: if you are a woman and you have a husband or children, they should be your first priority always and the other should not diminish your dedication to them.

Even the strongest feminists will admit that the man who truly leads (honors women, respects them, and still seeks to lead) is attractive. We women were not only gifted to men as helpers, but we also want to be that helper to the core. Yet, we cannot be a true helper to men unless we feel safe under his rule and under his roof. And let me say this: men do not make me feel safe, at all. I am not around male characters that desire to be godly or that desire to honor and protect me as a true man should. My first encounter with such men was through the Rebelution. Yes, it awakened my hope, but not all people are as lucky as me. Women want to be loved, it is said, but I think that feeling goes so much deeper. It is not only love they are looking for; they are looking for men who will be there, who will shelter, who will honor, who will comfort, who will carry a burden when they no longer can; men, they are looking for leaders.

P.S. Jordan. . . Deborah was married. Judges 4:4.

Well, many of you know that I discuss lots of the Holy World conversations with my parents. This is a type of checks and balance system for me. By reading to them what I post or write on multiple discussions, this allows them to be a part of my Holy Worlds life as well as being a sounding board so that they can call me on anything that I may have misrepresented. After discussing this subject with my parents, and telling them I decided not to post my thoughts on Deborah here in the thread, they encouraged me to reevaluate this decision.

My parents have raised me to know what I believe and why. They’ve called me to search the scriptures and research positions and opinions. Their line of thinking has always been, “If you don’t make these beliefs, thoughts, views, and opinions your own, then you won’t be able to withstand the trials to come.” So they have trained me to channel everything through my biblical world view. This includes passages of the Bible. While it may sound funny for me to say I channel the Bible through my biblical worldview, it makes sense. I have very strong beliefs and convictions concerning biblical womanhood, based off of what I have found in the Bible. So I read a story like Deborah and may come up with a very different perspective on her story than other young ladies.

I made the statement that I didn’t want to discuss my Deborah position in the thread (although I would through PM) because it is often unprofitable and I didn’t want to stir the pot. My parents told me this was a wrong position on my part. It is good for us as Christians to discuss opposing positions in the spirit of “iron sharpening iron”. They reminded me that we can often get tunnel vision due to our own presuppositions. This happens to all of us. We are humans. The Lord not only uses the scriptures to lift these blinders, but He also uses the words of other Christians to help us see beyond these blinders caused by our own biases. I have them too, so when I make these statements, I am speaking to us all.

My position of refraining from this discussion was, in essence, a coward's approach to the situation, for reasons of my own. The discussion itself is not unprofitable. My parents pointed out that as Christians, we should discuss things in a Christ like manner with Christ like traits. Humbly, graciously, and with a teachable spirit. This means when someone presents an opposing view we should not take things personally (let me commend Elanor and Aussie again for their display of this earlier in the thread). We should see it as a desire to profitably discourse something and hone our understanding and beliefs.

My parents reminded me that what could be unprofitable is the way that we handle the views presented by others. If we degrade another person’s position, we have not acted Christ like. If a person takes another believer's views as a personal attack and responds out of anger, retaliating in bitterness, that is what is unprofitable. If you do retaliate in bitterness and anger, this is also a sign of an unteachable spirit.

So my parents wanted to challenge not only myself, but all of you, to hold these thoughts in our minds. And not only as I set out to show a differing view on the subject of Deborah, but also in the conversation that will continue after this post.

As a side note, this Deborah discussion is very on topic. What you believe about Deborah’s story influences your view of a biblical perspective on women’s roles. Let’s all remember that we are created in the image of God and should be treated as such. Discussions, even from opposing positions, are profitable to hone our beliefs. Christ challenged us to be like the Bereans who said, “What you say makes sense, but we need to go to the scriptures and weigh your arguments against the whole of God’s word” (paraphrased).

So my parents wanted me to speak from Scripture, and not ranting emotions, about this subject. They encouraged me to present what I have learned and then allow the Holy Spirit to work as He sees fit. The goal of discussions like this one (the role of men and women) is to know God more, to become closer and more intimate with Him, and glorify Him in our every action, word, and deed. That is the motivation behind my post.

So I now venture forth with my thoughts on Deborah. I believe that Deborah’s story is not contrary to the other pictures of biblical womanhood presented elsewhere in the scriptures, but merely serves to enlarge our understanding of the beauty and power of a godly woman. Like a multifaceted diamond, Deborah adds another dimension to how women can serve Christ within the context of their womanhood. Women are not men. They were designed to reflect the image of Christ differently, but no less powerfully.

My desire is to be an instrument of the Lord, a humble image bearer in this discussion as I present to you what I have seen in my studies concerning this amazing woman. I’m not here to say that I am right. I’m merely trying to act in obedience. All I ask is that you honestly look at what I am saying and that you weigh my words against scripture. If in doing so you hold to a different position, or have a concern for my own spiritual growth and wellbeing, I welcome and encourage you to bring the scriptures as your advocate in support of your position. I would love to discuss the merits or deficits in my views with anyone seriously desiring to seek after, understand, and apply God’s truth to their lives.

So, what are the common views of Deborah? One view I have heard from many young ladies before is this:

Another common view of Deborah is as follows:


I’d believe both of these thought processes are very inconsistent with the biblical account of Deborah, as well as what the rest of the bible says about women. Deborah is a woman that many perceive in such a way that clashes with the traditional view of the biblical woman. Yet the bible doesn’t contradict itself. So why would the Lord raise up a woman who went against everything He speaks of throughout scripture? I’d like to posit that this remarkable woman in fact does not go against what the bible teaches about women. Here is why…

First off, I think in order to understand Deborah, we have to understand true, biblical leadership. If we look at what the bible says about the “heads and leaders” either in the church or the family, we find that leadership demands responsibility, humility, and a servant's heart. The bible shows us that a leader is not a dictator, but a servant to the people they are leading. This view gave me a good look into the character of Deborah when I first set out in my journey to understand this woman’s character. Her position should cause her to have humility as a leader, because a leader who is puffed up and would stoop to taunting those around him or her is not worthy of respect. It immediately canceled out the self righteous attitude that many people give to her. It also made me question something else. Why would the Lord make a woman a judge over Israel, if she was going to command all the glory for herself? Wouldn’t He instead choose a woman who was submissive to His will? A woman who would give Him the glory?

These thoughts quickly led me into another thought process. In the Bible women are put under the headship of Christ, their fathers, their husbands, and widows are placed under the headship of the elders. Men are put under the headship of Christ. The Bible explicitly states that the man has headship over the woman(1 Corinthians 11:3), and that this headship is not based on cultural factors, or even the fall; rather, it is based on the created order established by God Himself.

So where did Deborah fall into this? After all, isn’t she the woman running the show? After looking at 1 Corinthians in its entirety, I found that the critical key to a woman's role as a prophetess in the early church was her obvious submission to the male leadership in the church. A woman was to use her gifts in the context of the order established by the leaders of the church - just like anyone else's gifts. So I looked at the biblical account of Deborah and tried to decide who it was that the Lord had put in authority over Deborah? What I found was two men. Her husband (4:4), and Barak.

First, let’s bring up Deborah’s husband, her primary form of headship. The Bible doesn’t give us fluff. It mentions every detail for a purpose. There is no mention of Deborah’s hair color, because it isn’t a needed piece of information. The fact that the Lord included a reference to Deborah’s husband tells us this was an important bit of information, and pertinent to the story. I feel the Lord intended for us to know that Deborah was under the headship of her husband.

The next form of headship that Deborah falls under is Barak. Now why would I say that Barak was in leadership over Deborah? Many people view her as his leader. However, the Bible never gives us this indication. Deborah was the spokesperson for God. Just as the prophet Nathan was not in command of King David, the leader of Israel, neither is Deborah the leader of the Lord’s chosen military commander. Deborah’s husband would also fall under the headship of Barak, due to the fact that he was the chosen military leader of God’s people.

This is where our discussion must branch off. We have to first understand where Deborah falls into the roles of headship, ultimate accountability, and authority. God has granted these responsibilities to men in both the home, church, and government. Women can, and so many times are, used greatly by God, but it was always under the headship of male authority in the church and home. My reasons behind this thought have nothing to do with any notion of male superiority or female inferiority. Christ created men and women equally; however, He designated very specific roles to each of them. These roles have to do with God's ordained order. Jesus Himself was under the headship and authority of His Father (John 5:19) without being inferior in any way (John 1:1;10:30).

So, with this established, I began to looked at the key male participant in this story. Barak. This man gets a bad wrap by many of us. The common thoughts concerning Barak were that he was a cowardly pansy man hiding behind the skirts of the insurmountable force known as Deborah. Yet the Bible doesn’t give us this picture. The Bible says

This is in reference to Barak and his men going up against the vast armies of Sisera. Barak and all who went with him showed real courage and trust in God to go out against Sisera and his army. They had essentially no weapons to fight with against a technologically advanced army. 900 chariots of iron was an impressive and sophisticated arsenal during this time in Israel’s history. The armies of Israel, under the direction of Barak and Deborah, were at a great disadvantage. This took courage on the part of Barak. Barak did deserve credit. Deborah came as the voice of the Lord; God had Barak fight the battle. I don’t think we can discount this man as a wimp, or a coward. I think his fault lay in not trusting the Lord, but instead seeing Deborah as a good luck charm, insuring God’s presence with the army. He put his faith in a woman of God, rather than trusting in God Himself. This is why the honor went to a woman, not Barak.

Also, people look at Barak’s question to Deborah “If you will go with me, then I will go; but if you will not go with me, I will not go!" as a sign of her leadership. However, I don’t see how we can come up with that, based off of this verse. We have to remember the whole story. Deborah was the voice of God to the people. Therefore, the way that Barak would seek the voice of the Lord would be to direct a question to Deborah. Barak was seeking God’s direction by approaching His representative. In essence he was asking for God’s presence and blessing. Although the narrative tells us that Barak’s heart was not fully relying upon God. God looks at the heart, and not the action. Mary asked “How can this be” when the angel came and told her of the child within. Her heart was one of obedience and trust. Her question was one of wonder, not unbelief. Similarly, Zachariah asked the same question “How can this be” When the angel told him of his coming son. However, his heart was one of unbelief, and thus the Lord punished him for the heart’s response, and not the question.
Barak’s punishment was that he would not be the one to personally defeat Sisera, the commander of Jabin's army. Instead, a woman would. Now, Deborah is the woman many people attribute this victory to. However, the story goes on to show us that this prophecy will be fulfilled unexpectedly later on in the chapter by another woman. One yet again serving in her role of womanhood.



God promised (Judges 4:9) that Sisera would be sold into the hands of a woman. This woman God chose to honor was in fact a simple homemaker. She was the wife of a Kenite, doubtless a mother with many household responsibilities. Although Deborah was a mighty woman of God who followed faithfully after Him and was a mighty tool in His hand, she was not the woman of honor that day.

I believe Deborah was a humble woman, which is why I respect her. Not because she went out and showed Barak up. Not because she was a leader over Israel, but because she understood the role the Lord asked her to play, and she did so with humility and grace. She shows us a fuller picture of being a servant of the Lord, and also of being a woman ministering where she is placed without losing the character traits God desires in women.


P.S. No, for those of you wondering, I did not type all of that out with my thumbs I asked my Mommy for her computer

Are you going to write a sequel about Jael?


That's good.

I write a post that long, and after you peal your bleary tired eyes away from it, you are looking for a sequel?!? There is something wrong with you, Jonathan. *shakes head*

My eyes are not remotely tired, and it is not my fault that you are such a good writer. But lest I get too off topic, yes, I would be happy to read a post of yours about Jael and her implications for the Roles of Men and Women, if you happen to have the time and desire to write one.

Ok, I am back. And this is going to be long.

Like Airianna, I have discussed this point excessively with my Mum. And after studying the Word, praying, and much thinking, (plus more studying!) I have come to share my findings. I loved what you wrote about how sharing and discussing with other Christians expands our views on the Word Airianna, and I hope this post can follow on with that.

Firstly, I will address the previous stated view of whether or not Jesus went to hell. After my study, I now believe he did not go to hell. The verse that clinched it for me:



The three words that hold so much meaning: It is finished. Now if Jesus’ soul was going to hell after he died on the cross, why on earth would he say ‘It is finished’? That would be a lie, something Jesus would never do.
My other thoughts also ran along these lines: (I could expand further, but I will just use Scripture references to keep this post shorter)

I believe hell is a vault, where, before the end times, a messenger from heaven will open it to unleash the vault of demonic beings into earth to torment the unsaved before the last day. (Revelation 9:1-5)

I believe when we die, we sleep. Our soul neither goes to heaven nor hell. (Ephesians 5:14, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18)

So what purpose would Jesus have for descending to the vault? Because if when we die, our souls sleep, Jesus would not have needed to pay the price in hell for us because we aren’t even there. His dying on the cross, and his soul going to hell is two payments for the one need. It didn’t add up for me. His death at the cross was full: Both his body and soul perished for our own bodies and souls. This is what I have now come to believe.

Regarding Deborah, I agree entirely with Airianna’s post. Deborah was acting under the submission of husband, Barak, and ultimately the will of God.

Elanor, you said that you do not listen to the teaching of Gloria Copeland or Joyce Meyer because they believe Jesus’ went to hell. Please let me share my views now.

Not everyone is going to have the same views as us. Even some men who have a ministry do not share my point of view on some Scripture. However, I do not believe that we should entirely shun their teachings.





These two verses are the root of my view. Because not everyone who preaches, men or women, are going to have everything right according to our viewpoint, God instructs us to test all things, to sift things, and hold fast to what is good. My Mum listens to some of Gloria Copeland’s and Joyce Meyer’s teachings on healing. My Mum has done a lot of study of their teachings against God’s Word, and we have found their teaching –so far!- to be true to Scripture. However, in regard to their views on Jesus going to hell, we sift that piece of information out, as we do not agree with it, and therefore would not seek their teaching on Salvation.

Just as you like one singer/songwriting artist but do not like all of their songs, the same should go for preachers and teachers. Quoting a friend, “Church should not be a sit down and eat, but a smorgasbord; you take, consider, study, and view the things that apply to the truth you’ve been enlightened with –so far!- and leave the rest.”

As for whether or not Women should teach, I’m still uncertain. I found this piece of information from a Christian blog highly intriguing:



I still haven’t decided one way or the other yet. But by reading Airi’s post about how Deborah taught and preached under the authority of her husband and elder, (As Joyce Meyer and Gloria Copeland do) it doesn’t seem entirely wrong for women to preach, by Biblical standard. Also, consider this verse I found:



It does say daughters! Anyway, that’s where I stand: For the moment! Please tell me what you think.