Posted in Christian Witness, Communication, Theology

How Christians Witness; Or at Least They Should

Having discussed the reason for why Christians witness, I want to now turn our attention to the “How” or the “What” of Christian witnessing. In other words, is there a right way to witness to the world at large, or is it pretty much a “Do as you feel what’s right” game? Does our method really matter, as long as we are sharing Jesus?

When I was about ten years old my mom instructed me in the art of dish-washing. She laid out the plan very thoughtfully, explaining in detail how I was to wash the dishes in our home. That is, when it was my turn to do them. Given the mindset of our youth today, I imagine such instruction and enforced responsibility seems way too harsh and demanding for a child of ten. Heck, I know kids who complain about doing dishes and all they have to do is load the dishwasher (LOL). Anyway, as a child I learned a valuable lesson, and I do not regret having been told to do it.

Now imagine for a moment that after hearing the painstaking instruction my mom had given me, that I decided then and there I would wash the dishes my way. I accepted the fact that I had to wash them, but I disregarded the manner in which I was instructed to do them. What do you suppose my mother’s response would have been? It is at this point that the modern rebel would reply, “Why does it matter how I did them, as long as I did them?” Well, if you have no respect for those over you (authoritatively), then I suppose it doesn’t matter. But, the real question is “Was I honoring my mom if I ignored her instructions and did what I was told to do in the fashion that I found acceptable?”

The answer is a definite “NO!” Regardless, of my accomplishments, I dishonored my mother by rejecting her authority over me. A rebellious child says to their parent, “I’ll do it my way.” To silence any opposition, I will merely point you to Genesis 4 with the objective case we are provided in Cain and Abel. Theologians can debate the intricacies in this passage until they are blue in the face, but the simple lesson to be learned here is that both brothers were instructed in how to offer sacrifices to the Lord God (an act of worship). Although, only one succeeded in doing what he had been instructed to do. Cain, like Abel, had received instruction on how (what) was appropriate to offer to (for) God, but only Abel acted in faith (cf. Heb 11.4; 12.4 compare with 1John 3.11-12; Jude 1.11). True faith is recognizable[1] by only one thing “obedience” (see James 2.17).

Just as my mom was my head as a child in her home, so too is Christ Jesus the head of His Church. As the head he alone exercises the authority to determine what it is we should and should not do. Now the question I have raised is “How should we witness for Christ?” OR put another way, “What is the right method for being Christ’s witness?”

Remember when I speak of offering a Christian witness, I am not merely speaking about evangelism (i.e. sharing the good news), but within this word (witness) I include apologetics (i.e. defending/giving an answer for the Christian faith). Evangelism and Apologetics are two sides of the same coin. One cannot do the one without at some point including the other.[2] Therefore, as Christians we should naturally ask, “What is the method that the head of the House—i.e. Jesus—expects his followers to use in witnessing?”

Often 1Peter 3:15 is cited as a supporting text of Christian apologetics. The verse reads, “but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to given an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and respect” (NASB 95’). Believer’s tend to hone in on “always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you…[about] the hope that is in you…,” but in so doing they miss the most important part of this command. What is it? What’s the most important part? It is “sanctifying Christ as Lord in your hearts…” the Christian cannot hope to have a sound answer nor be an effective witness for their faith unless Christ is recognized as supreme.[3]

A person can have the best of intentions, the most thoroughly thought out argument, and irrefutable evidences to back up their claims for the Christian faith, but without building that argument on the solid Word of Christ, the effort is for naught. A comparable example would be for a builder to have the best tools/materials, the best workers and the best architect and engineers on the planet, but if he ignores the blueprint that was given…if he refuses to build upon the correct foundation, the project is a lost cause. Oh, it may seem to stand for a while. The building may appear to be a success, but in the end (whether it be by rains or winds) the building will not last.

In the wilderness, Jesus faced off against the greatest adversary creation has known. He was challenged to win the argument by an appeal apart from God’s Word. How did the Lord respond? “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God’” (Matt 4.4; ESV). Commenting on the passage quoted above (Matt 4.4), Jason Lisle writes, “Not only did Jesus respond with a Bible-first approach, but the very Scripture He quoted indicates a Bible-first approach—that we should live [witness] by the Word of God.”[4]

Mankind was created to be God’s image bearer. Christians are being reformed into the proper image for which the original creation intended—the image of Christ, the exact imprint of the image of God. Therefore, our approach to witnessing if it is to truly be Christ honoring, must reflect His methodology. Our witnessing must not be after a fashion that ignores His instruction, intending to do the work we were created for some other way.

How should Christians witness? Beginning and ending with Scripture. This does not mean that I need to quote a verse of Scripture at the beginning and the end of my dialogue. Nor am I insinuating that quoting biblical verses is always the best policy. More than likely an unbeliever may not even know the reference we are giving.

What I am seeking to communicate is this, our words needs to be salted with Christ’s Word. We may not quote directly from the Bible, but our speech should be guided by biblical precepts and wisdom (cf. Acts 17.15-34). Our interpretation of evidences, our critique of assumptions, biases and traditions should be seen by the light of God’s Word, and defined and communicated in like fashion to our audiences; whether they are one or many. To use the words of a very apt witness of biblical Christianity, “What we lead people with is what we lead them to.”

ENDNOTES:

[1] Not “acquired,” for we cannot earn our salvation. Salvation is a gift of grace, not a result of the work we do. Cf. Rom 3.28; 4.5; Eph 2.5, 8-9.

[2] This statement is not insinuating that every dialogue with an unbeliever will cover all topics involved. Time constraints affect us all, and so there will be times when such witnessing opportunities will be cut short. The only point being made is that to share ones faith (either verbally or by a living witness) naturally leads to questions, or to question another’s faith leads to the sharing of the gospel. The two go hand-in-hand.

[3] Regarding this statement, Kenneth D. Boa and Robert M. Bowman write, “Almost certainly, then, Peter is telling us to conduct our defense of the faith with an attitude of holy fear or reverence toward Christ, whom we honor as Lord (3:15). We do so by striving to be faithful to Christ both in what we say and in how we live (verse 16).” Kenneth D. Boa and Robert M. Bowman, Faith Has Its Reasons: Integrative Approaches to Defending the Christian Faith, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 13-14.

[4] Jason Lisle, The Ultimate Proof of Creation: Resolving the Origins Debate (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2009), 163.

Posted in Christian Witness, Salvation, Theology

Why Christians Witness

What is a Christian witness? Or better yet, what does it mean to be a Christian witness? Christian witnessing is expressed in two forms: positive and negative. They are, if you will, opposite sides of the same coin.

Often the positive form is stressed, which is commonly known as evangelism. Evangelism in its most basic sense is sharing good-news—i.e. the gospel. The negative aspect of witnessing entails the defense of the entire Christian worldview (faith-based-system), known as apologetics. How one defines these two terms (evangelism and apologetics; gospel and defense) is determined by their level of understanding.

For example, some limit the gospel to the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth—the Christ—his life, death, and resurrection. Thus, this type of person tends to focus the gospel on the New Testament canon, in particular the gospels and a few other key note texts. When the subject of apologetics is discussed, some think that this means offering a defense of key Christian doctrines (e.g. Resurrection, virgin birth, existence of evil in the world, etc.). Neither position is entirely wrong, but they are not entirely right either. However, that is not the topic that I wish to address today.

What I would like to look at for a moment (if you have the time?) is “why Christians witness?” Again, depending who you ask answers will vary. From a biblical perspective why do Christians witness? Well, as I have been saying already, how you answer that question will depend upon your perspective.

Let’s take Matthew 28:18-20a, this is the normal go-to passage when speaking on bearing witness to the truth. Jesus says…

  • “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (ESV).[1]

Seems pretty clear, does it not? Would you agree that Jesus is saying, on the grounds of His Sovereign authority, that He is sending His disciples into the world to bear witness to the truth, to baptize those who identify in His saving work (in the name of the Triune God I might add), instructing them to live according to the word of Christ?[2] Notice that this does not really tell us “why” Christians are to witness, other than the fact that Jesus commands it. Which, by the way, is really all the reason we need. But, there is more to the reason why.

“Well,” you say, “We witness to the people in our lives because they are sinners, they are lost and they are going to hell. We give them the gospel because they are in need and if nothing is done they will go to hell!” Fair enough. That is certainly true.

People, whether they realize it or not, are in desperate need of a Savior. No thoughtful Christian should ever deny this truth. However, that really does not get at the underlying reason why we bear witness to the truth.

We get a little closer to the truth when we look at something else Jesus said during his earthly ministry:

  • “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you” (John 20.21).

This statement by the Lord does not appear to bear the weight of an imperative (command); but rather, is a declarative statement (declaring a fact). Again, we are left facing an undeniable question: “What does this mean?” Not, what do I think this means, but what is the Lord actually saying.

Obviously, Jesus is telling them that the same mission the Father sent him on is the same mission that he is sending them on. Okay, what did Jesus’ mission look like? The overall context of John’s gospel lays this out for us.  Jesus came to bear witness to the truth (cf. John 8.31-32; 18.37). He came to represent the invisible God to creation (cf. John 1.18).[3] How did Jesus do this? By reflecting the mind of God in his thinking and actions. Jesus spoke what the Father told him (John 8.26; 12.49; 14.10) and he imitated his Father’s actions, claiming it was impossible to do otherwise (cf. John 5.19; 8.28). In so doing, Jesus identifies his work, the very work he was sent into the world to do, was primarily about glorifying the Father.

  • “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you…I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed” (John 17.1b, 4-5).

Weighing these words of Christ, what is the reason we witness? Think about Jesus statement in John 20;21 “As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you” and consider the following. Our witness to the world, to the people we come in contact with, to the very people God causes to cross our paths, is driven by what purpose? Ultimately, why do Christians witness? To glorify God. That’s our primary directive.

Well-meaning Christians will often say, “We witness because we love the lost.” In response, I ask “why do you love the lost?” What stirs the heart of believers if not the love of Christ (of God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit) first and foremost?! If we witness for any other reason other than the reason to which Christ Jesus witnessed to the world, we are doing it for the wrong reason. While our intentions might be laudable in human terms, they miss the thrust of why Jesus is sending us into the world.

In the beginning, the Triune God created us in His image, to bear His likeness to the world (cf. Gen 1.1, 26-28). True, at that point in history witnessing was not a primary directive. Why, would it be? Fallenness brought by sin were not, as of yet, in the picture.  Even then the manner of godly dominion to be expressed to the rest of creation was to be done in a fashion that glorified God in all things.

Am I then saying that we should not be concerned about people going to hell? If you’ve came to that conclusion after reading what I have written…do me a favor, read it again. That’s not what I am saying at all. My only point in writing this is to highlight a fact often missed or glazed over: We witness for the glory of God, not of Man. We witness because we love God the Creator, our love of fellow Man ought to flow from that not the other way around.

ENDNOTES:

[1] Various parallel passages, or passages that share the same message are found in Mark 16.15-16, Luke 24.47-48, and Acts 1.8.

[2] Cf. Rom 10.17.

[3] The temptation here is to assume that Jesus only demonstrated the truth of the invisible God to humanity, but his acts were put on display for the angelic host as well (both the elect and non-elect; good and demonic); e.g. Luke 2.13-15; 1Pet 1.12; Matt 4.3-11; Mark 1.21-26. Moreover, creation is given a glimpse of how the Triune God, which until this time had been veiled in mystery, worked in creation; e.g. Mark 1.10; Matt 3.15-17; John 3.34; 14.16-17; 15.26; 16.13-15.

Posted in Christian Living, Christian Witness, Communication

Pleasing the Seeker or Pleasing the Lord: Is it O.K. to Make the Gospel a little less Offensive?

Seekers are welcome! Come on in and enjoy a wonderful time at “Be your Best-friend Church.” This is a place where the love of Jesus exudes from every orifice in the building. An atmosphere that says, “We accept you as you are, and we will do our best to cater to your enjoyment!” This caricature may be a bit over the top, and it may smack in the face of some of my Christian friends, but it nonetheless raises an interesting question. Which approach is the right approach to approaching someone with the gospel?

There is a very popular belief present in the minds of many Christians that the best method of reaching the lost is…well…just loving them. If we show them the love of Jesus, if we do our best to remove every possible offense, if we are extra careful not to step on their toes, then odds are we have a really good chance of convincing them of the truth. This sounds strangely similar to the approach that some noted apologists use in defending the faith. Rather than contend for the whole system of faith on which the Christian worldview stands, “…an approach that emphasizes the minimal, best-established facts…”[1] is adopted. That way, all the really sticky situations that arise from what the Bible says on various matters contained within its pages can be avoided to another time; hopefully, after this individual has weighed the evidence and decided for themselves what is right, true and agrees with their own assumptions.

 What is wrong with the seeker sensitive model? What’s wrong with making the Christian faith as easy as possible, removing all the quirks that confuse and offend people? Well, in order to answer that question we ought to look to Scripture.

In Acts 9 we are given a wonderful example of how offensive the gospel is in the object lesson provided by the soon-to-be apostle Paul. At this point in the biblical narrative he is better known as the devout student of Pharisee-ism, Saul of Tarsus. Already in his life he has heard some pretty staunch and thorough defenses of the gospel of Jesus Christ. He stood approvingly over the murderous stoning of Stephen (cf. Acts 7), and in the chapter we are briefly looking at today he is seen, “still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9.1). Saul is so angry and offended by the message of these people (soon to be called Christians; cf. Acts 11.26) that he requests letters from the high priest “so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem” (Acts 9.2). Just so you know this “binding” was not for a marriage proposal or anything else festive, these people were going to be essentially handcuffed until they were found guilty, recanted or were stoned.

Now as Saul was on the road to Damascus he was confronted by the Lord. Saul was about to be knocked off his proverbial high horse (he was literally knocked to the ground; Acts 9.4) and called into question for attacking the people of God. To attack a follower of Christ is equivalent to attacking the one who purchased them, saved them and raised them up. Just as David realized touching the Lord’s anointed was a no-no (1Sam 24.6; 26.9), so too was Saul about to learn the same lesson.  Jesus identifies the persecution that Saul is delivering to the followers of the Way as persecution against the Lord Himself (Acts 9.4, 5).

With a bit of imagination, a person might relate Jesus’ confrontation on the road to Damascus with a brawny brawler from Philadelphia: “Hey you knocked [them] down, why don’t you try knocking me down!” (Rocky V). If such humor doesn’t sit right with you, please ignore and continue to the conclusion.

Here’s my point, Jesus did not approach Saul of Tarsus in a seeker sensitive way. He confronted the man who thought that he saw the truth (i.e. Saul) and let him know that he was really blind to it. As the experience he was about to have for the next three days revealed to him (Acts 9.8-9).  A loving approach is the truthful approach, and sometimes that tends to sting. Besides, God’s Word does not ever insinuate that human beings by their own initiative really seek God. That is a false premise.

In fact, God declares very clearly quite the opposite: “The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none that does good, not even one” (Psa 14.2-3). In fact, Paul (who we’ve just met as Saul) believed and testified the very same thing (after the Lord changed his heart, of course) in Romans 3:10-11. Paul understood that “In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him [God]; all his thoughts are, ‘There is no God’” (Psa 10.4); for, “the mind that is set in the flesh [i.e. natural/fallen man] is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom 8.7-8).

Teaching such things is not popular and is highly offensive.

In the United States the unfortunate reality is that we treat local churches like department stores. If we do not like what we find in one, we go to the next to see if what they offer pleases us more. Why, because we do not like to get our toes stepped on. We want the powder puff gospel, not the hard-hitting truth.

Study the gospels and see if that is how Jesus shared the truth. He didn’t just hit the “minimal facts,” nor did he make appeals to creaturely “comforts,” often times his teaching was hard and offensive, as the truth normally is. The result? Many of his own disciples left him (John 6.66). But the point that we dare not miss is he didn’t soften his approach or try to make it more pleasing to his hearers. He revealed to his audience what had been revealed through the mouth of the prophets, the very word that He had given them to speak in the past.

We too should follow that model set before us. We should never shy away from the truth, no matter how offensive or unbelievable our hearers might find it. Yes, it may appear that many will not listen to what you have to say and reject it offhand, but one of the greatest persecutors of early Christianity was eventually knocked down and when he got up, he was a changed man. Who do you suppose brought about that change? If you answer anyone other than God, you miss the point, and you will probably enjoy the seeker friendly movement, the “church” where all your perceived desires and needs are met. Such thinking, however, is not reflective of the God of Scripture.

ENDNOTES:

[1] Gary Habermas, “The Resurrection Appearance of Jesus,” in In Defense of Miracles: A Comprehensive Case for God’s Action in History, R. Douglas Geivett and Gary R. Habermas, eds (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 262. Mike Licona, William Lane Craig and others share this approach. Andy Stanley, son of Charles Stanley, has adopted a similar methodology where all the “questionable” aspects of the biblical worldview—particularly what is addressed in the Old Testament—have been set aside as either unintelligible or unimportant; rather, a focus is placed on the resurrection of Christ as the premiere doctrine of orthodoxy.

Posted in Christian Living, Christian Witness, Racism, Worldview Analysis

Equal Opportunities: What does “All men are created equal” really mean in this World

All men are created equal…

That’s what the Declaration of Independence says, but what does it mean? We often hear of equal rights for all people today, equal rights for: women, children, people of color, etc. Equal in what way? To make things fair competition is eliminated. Here are various examples. The reader is encouraged to do their own research if they are interested in “fact checking” the following situations.

Employment: When you apply for a job a company is ordered to consider all applicants “fairly,” because of an enforced governmental standard equal opportunity employment. The result? Companies due to fear of looking biased, will often go with a minority over and above other individuals regardless of qualifications.

College/University: When enrollment gets a little tight at certain institutions of higher education those who are considered less privileged are chosen over others. Even if the person rejected has a higher G.P.A. and better SAT or ACT scores. Other factors not related to education are what’s chosen.

Athletics: Sports have likewise sought to even the playing field. This has happened in a variety of ways. For example, the elimination of keeping score in order to determine a winner in little league or children’s soccer games is a telltale sign of enforcing equality on all by eliminating competition. Or suppose a girl wants to play a boy sport, in the name of equality, the boy’s team is pressured into accepting a girl as a teammate. This same tomfoolery is demonstrated when a transgender boy wants to compete in a girls event, and the dominates.

Some believe such movements reveal the progressive, more civilized, nature of modern thought. Those who disagree (and some do rather strongly) are quickly shouted down or ignored in the arena of ideas. Or worse they are falsely labeled and maligned in the public eye.

The conviction of our nation’s founders was that all people are created equal in the eyes of their Creator. Men and women, black and white (or whatever shade you might be) are all equal in terms of the created order. Our equality stems not from what we do, but from what we are as image bearers:  “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”[1] Notice the qualifications that were noted by our forefathers, which reveal some of the necessary elements of being created equal.[2]

First, people are granted Life by their Creator and in this fashion we all share equality. We have nothing to brag about, as our birthing into this world is ultimately tied to God’s creative act. Second, people are essentially free in so far as they have been granted in this life. This point needs further explanation, and so will be discussed in more detail below. The third and final point is related to the “pursuit of Happiness.” We are equal in the ability to pursue happiness, but that is not the same thing as we all are granted happiness.

Life is difficult and often times seemingly unfair. Though all life is a gift, the circumstances that we are born into are not always the same as others around us. Depending on where we find ourselves in history (i.e. time/status), as well as location (i.e. culture/society), has a lot to do with the type of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness we may have access to.

All though we are born on equal footing as image bearers, we do not all share the same abilities, talents, wealth, status, good looks, strength, weaknesses, etc. The point being is that our equality as human beings stems from God as our Creator, not our various stations in life. Some people are more privileged than others. We may not like that fact of life, and we may begrudge it, but hate it as we may, very little may be done about it.

Take for example intellectual giants like Albert Einstein. He (and there are others like him) are provided greater advantages than those of lesser intellects. Or say for instance an individual like Michael Jordan who as a child was not the greatest basketball player, but through hard work and perseverance honed his God-given talent to be one of the NBA’s greatest players. Is it fair that Einstein or Jordan was granted such abilities? Is it right that other children across this nation do not have the same advantages/privileges that men like these did? Many children have similar aspirations, but lack the necessary gifts to be a brilliant scientist or All-Star NBA player. Let’s face the facts; some of us are not even good enough to be bench warmers in either field

Go down through the list and look at the people that you look up to who have great wealth, looks, and talents, and realize that you will probably never attain to the station that they have in life. Your right to pursue such things, does not equate ascending to the level that many human heroes have obtained.

Now consider something, is that fair? Is that right? Are you willing to live with what you have been given and accept the limitations that have been placed on you? The Bible tells us that human beings are created equal—male and female; and yet, there are vast distinctions between the sexes that will never be overcome.

By nature men are physically stronger than women. Take the strongest man in the world and pit him against the strongest woman in the world, and you know what you will find? The man will be noticeably stronger than the woman.

Women tend to be more emotionally connected and nurturing when it comes to raising children. Take the most emotionally connected and nurturing father in the world and pit him against the best that womankind has to offer and you know what you will find? The woman will be noticeably more emotionally connected and nurturing than the father.

Think on this for a moment, in either scenario does this make the man or woman better than the other? No. All it reveals is that men and women are different. They have been equipped to handle different roles in life; and yet, they share equality before God.

There are things that women will always do better than men, just as there will always be things that men do better than women. In the same way, some people can act others cannot; some people are great speakers others are not; some people acquire much wealth others do not. Equality is not something that people can engender or government can force by putting it into law.

Unfortunately, we find this cultural attitude infecting the Christian community. People both inside and outside the church, want to flail around and complain about one individual or one particular group of people as having some preconceived privilege over another. However, what they need to do is stop it!

In the Southern Baptist Convention there is an ongoing debate about women being preachers. The fact of the matter is that Christ is Lord of the Church. Neither He nor His apostles after Him authorized women to have such positions of authority within the Church (see 1Tim 2.12-14).[3] The argument is levied against those that uphold what the Scriptures teach as being backwards or chauvinistic—claiming an equalitarian approach is what is needed. But God determines who can and will be ministers in His assembly. The Lord does this not only with drawing a dividing line between men and women, but also between men who are qualified and those who are not (cf. 1Tim 3.1-7; Tit 1.5-9).

There is a similar argument stirring in the Church here in America about the issue of people of color. The belief is that there should be more black men in the pulpits, and there are far too many white church’s with white elders. Okay, what’s the overall population percentage of white versus black? Something like, 60 to 20 with the majority being white. Which is the correct way to handle this scenario? Are we to follow the governmental standard of “equal opportunity employment,” where minorities are sometimes chosen not because of superior qualifications, but cultural/societal peer pressure?

Again, we must ask, “Who is Lord of the Church?” Well you say, “Jesus wasn’t no white man!” True enough, but he wasn’t black either. Jesus was a Hebrew, but He died for people of all ethnicities. In fact, He died to erase the foolish distinctions that we human beings so love to hold! If there are qualified black men (qualified by God’s standard, not man’s) that desire to pursue the position of elder (overseer) in a local church, and then after having those qualifications verified by their perspective congregation and whatever ordained body they are required to go through (depends upon the denomination), then he should pastor the said church. It should not matter if the church is predominately white or black or Asian or Hispanic.

However, the same standard should be applied across the board. Meaning if there is a black church where a white man desires to obtain this ministerial position, and he too meets all the qualifications biblically speaking, then the color of his skin should not determine his eligibility to serve. Again, this applies regardless of the ethnic heritage the individual may possess. All that true matters is whether or not his heritage is found in Christ Jesus.

Equality does not mean making every one a member of the collective whole, where a person is not distinguished by the specific way in which their Creator has gracious gifted them. In this sense, people are not all equal. We are all different, and we are so because God has determined it to be this way. The world hates this truth and therefore seeks to rebel against it. Evidences of this rebellion are all around us, and they are found in the most insignificant ways. There are many others, but time constrains me from speaking further on this issue.

ENDNOTES:

[1] Declaration of Independence, https://www.constitution.org/us_doi.pdf. Emphasis added.

[2] It should be noted that this was not always clearly developed in their lives. Unfortunately, these men were likewise affected by their cultural climate,  and made similar errors that we too are prone to make.

[3] Notice that Paul’s argument is founded upon creation and the role (responsibility) that God gave the man versus the woman. They are both equal, but have different roles to fill. Adam had been given the responsibility to be the guardian of God’s Word, even though he failed. Christ, the last Adam, redeems the true station of which men were to fill. This, however, does not say that women have no place teaching in other roles. Women are apt teachers when it comes to other women and children (e.g. Tit 2.3-4; 1Tim 5.14; Prov 14.1; 31.27-29). There is even an example when a woman (along with her husband) helped correct a very talented preacher of the gospel in New Testament times (see Act 18.24-26).