Saturday, June 06, 2009

Mark Driscoll: Women Can Teach Men

According to an article written by Denny Burk and James M. Hamilton Jr. of "The Council On Biblical Manhood and Womanhood" *:


Driscoll's droll interpretation of 1 Tim 2:12-14 is precisely what makes his ap­plication of the text so surprising. Mars Hill Church endorses gifted (but ap­parently "gullible" and "easily deceived") women to lead and to teach men so long as such women are not ordained as pas­tor/elder. Driscoll explains, "The teach­ing here likely also refers to preaching and teaching as done by the elders, as every other time teaching is spoken of in the remainder of the letter it is in refer­ence to the teaching of an elder (1 Tim 4:11, 5:7, 6:2)."34 According to Driscoll,

At Mars Hill we seek to en­courage women to use the abilities that God has given them to their fullest extent in anything from teaching a class to leading a community group, overseeing a ministry, leading as a deacon, speak­ing in church, leading wor­ship, serving communion, entering into full-time paid ministry as a member of the staff, and receiving formal theological education-or basically every opportunity in our church but the office of elder/pastor.35 Mark Driscoll, "Church Leadership," 47.

It is the opinion of the present writers that not only is Driscoll mistaken in his interpretation of 1 Tim 2:12, but also his application of it to the ministries of his church is a non-sequitur. Why would one allow a person from the "gullible" and "easier to deceive" sex to lead and to teach God's people? How could such a person possibly be qualified to teach and to lead when they are so easily brought under the spell of error? We are not ready to concede Driscoll's interpreta­tion of Paul on this point.36 Yet even if we were to grant his interpretation, we believe that his praxis is hardly a legiti­mate implication of his exegesis.

Some reformed theologians pur­sue a similar line in introducing a dis­tinction between the "special" teaching office and the "general" teaching office.37 With this distinction made, women are allowed to teach men. The problem with this among those who practice it is that Paul does not prohibit women from taking up a teaching office over men. Rather, he simply prohibits women from teaching men.

End quote.

I suppose the command for not cussing or making course jokes is as hard for Driscoll to understand as a pastor, as is the command for women to not teach men. And just how is he biblical? And why is Piper, who supposedly sees this as wrong, continue to endorse this man?

Are God's commands optional to obey? What happened to the Lordship of the Lord and the Sovereignty of God and the desire to obey HIM?

*I haven't looked over the whole site so I would just caution readers to read with discernment

1 comment:

Denise said...

To the critics of this blog and particularly this article:

Gal 4:16 Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth?

What part of the command that women are NOT to teach men don't people understand?

Titus 2: 11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Why is standing for God's Truth considered "divisive" and "bitter"?

Harsh words are indeed for those who excuse false teachers when they know what the Bible says yet continue to live in rebellion.

Truth isn't fuzzy nor is it subjective. Its knowable and we are commanded to KNOW the Truth.

Unity is based on God's truth, as is agape. They cannot be separated from Truth.

1Co 5:6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?

I dare say that you wouldn't care to be in a church where church discipline is carried out either, even though 1Cor. 5 and Matt. 18 its commanded. That would, of course, be too harsh ("1Co 5:5 you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord."

Instead of judging me for being judgmental (where is your love for me, eh?), how about getting upset with the false teachers?

How about those of you who are upset with the strong stand I take, look at the strong stand Jesus took with those who would call themselves teachers of Scripture, yet not obey nor proclaim what HE said?

You should consider that Jesus Christ Himself was not only dogmatic--He was harsh with the religious leaders of His day because they rejected Truth and embraced error. Consider the whole Sermon on the Mount in Matt. 5-7.

Jesus did not "agree to disagree" folks.

Why do you?

Luk 6:46 "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I tell you?