My son Joel wrote this article. I include it for your consideration.
The Presbyterian National Assembly recently agreed to allow references to the Trinity to be changed from Father, Son and Holy Spirit to less “sexist” language. There apparently has been some concern in some Presbyterian circles that the masculine reference to the Trinity promotes men as superior to women. Fox News reported that suggestions for alternative phrases were “Mother, Child, and Womb,” “Rock, Redeemer, and Friend,” and “Lover, Beloved, and Love.” It seems that soon we may be hearing some Presbyterians praying, “Our Mother who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name…”
Are we to alter what God has said based on our own politically correct worldviews? Nancy Olthoff, the Presbyterian Legislative Committee chair said that the decision doesn’t alter the church’s theological position, but merely “provides an educational resource to enhance the spiritual life of our membership.” One can clearly see in the alternatives that were suggested that the committee carefully tried to pick alternatives that corresponded well to the “Father, Son, Holy Spirit” model, so what is wrong with the change? Let me list several things:
- The decision to allow alternative designations shows a clear disregard for the belief that every word of Scripture is inspired. When Jesus was challenged to prove the resurrection in Matthew 22, He responded in verses 31-32 by quoting, “I AM the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” He then pointed out that God was not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. How could He conclude that? Because of the present tense of the verb “to be.” God said, “I AM,” not, “I was,” or, “I will be.” In other words, Jesus believed that not only was every word of Scripture inspired, but even the verb tenses were inspired. Does the Presbyterian National Assembly truly believe that every word of Scripture is inspired (2 Tim. 3:16)? If so, why the change? If not, why bother following anything the Bible says? Did God not have the alternative of choosing some feminine names/pronouns/etc.? Why did He not, if gender was such a non-issue to His character?
- The decision also throws Jesus’ humanity quite a curve ball. Surely a God with foreknowledge would understand that some women might not be able to relate to a male Savior. Why did He not come as a woman, or better yet, just as an “it” so that everyone could relate? Of course if He came as an “it,” who could relate? Hmmm…quite a problem! Why don’t we just stick with Him being a man, as the Scriptures say?
- Finally, though we could go on, the decision gives culture more credence than God. Did Paul or the other New Testament writers cater to Roman culture? If so, why did they not go soft on issues like homosexuality, other kinds of sexual sins, stealing, lying, drunkenness, and all other issues that might offend a group of people? What we see is that cultural concerns did not influence their writings then, nor would they if the inspired men were writing today.
The fact that the Presbyterian National Assembly decided this should greatly bother anyone affiliated with them. If they will take steps like this regarding the inspiration of the Scriptures, how can they be trusted with many of the other things they claim to be true? We must have Bible authority for all that we do, not just the approval of large-scale cultural movements of our time. Jesus Christ is the same “yesterday, today and forever.” Searching the Scriptures makes answering questions such as these easy and it also helps to maintain unity. Life in general, and spiritual life too, is much more simple when we all follow one standard. The Presbyterians may be unified on this teaching but it is likely that the church will divide over the issue. Churches divided over manmade issues, not Biblical issues. -Bill
On June 18, 2006 the Episcopal Church chose Katharine Jefferts Schori as the first female “chief pastor” or bishop. Let’s apply the attitude and practice of the Bereans, who “searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things” that the apostle Paul taught them were “so.” In other words, if the Bereans were able to discover that Paul taught them something other than what can be supported by the Scriptures, then they would not believe the teaching nor follow it. So what does the Bible say, if anything, about Bishop selection?
There are two passages in the Bible that provide the church with qualifications for the office referred to as bishop, elder or presbyter. Those passages are 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9. Let's look at the qualifications pertinent to the discussion.
1 Timothy 3: 1,2 reads:
“This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife…”
Titus 1: 5 – 7 reads:
“For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you-- if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God…”
Notice the wording in both passages. “If a man desires the position of a bishop…” and “If a man is blameless…” Paul used the word “man.” Could it be that Paul is using the word “man” to represent a generic “person”? That question is answered by reading further. In both passages Paul says that this man is to be “the husband of one wife.” It is apparent that Paul is not referring to “men” in general but that he has in mind a male who is married to a wife.
If it is acceptable to set aside this qualification so that a woman may be appointed, then any of the qualifications can be set aside. Are we willing to appoint as bishops those who are “quick tempered” or “unjust” or “unholy” or “violent”, all contrary to the qualifications delivered to us?
No. To approach the question in the same manner as the Bereans, whose attitude is recorded in the Scriptures as an example to all, we must search the Scriptures. In this case we find that the Scriptures show us that the Episcopal Church has not followed the revealed will of God in the appointment of Schori.
Do you have the attitude of the Bereans? Are you willing to let the Scriptures mold and shape your thinking on this subject?
A young lady was given directions to an unfamiliar part of town she had only ever visited once before. At a certain intersection she was to turn right. Several land marks were given to help her know to turn right. When she arrived at that spot she turned left because the intersection didn’t look like she thought it was supposed to. Needless to say, she was lost very soon.How important is it for us to carefully follow the scriptures? Is it necessary for us to be certain of every point? Must we be sure we follow every step just like the Bible says? Or can we select a different direction if we are unfamiliar with what God says about a particular point? The Berean people in the Apostle Paul’s day are commended by God for their daily careful search of the scriptures “to see if those things were so.” Acts 17:11. God has seen to it that their example is in the Bible for us to read about 2000 years later. We can’t afford to be uninformed or just act on our own just because we are not familiar with the scriptures. Like the Bereans we must search the scriptures daily to be certain of the things we believe.The goal of this blog is to challenge readers to search their Bible for truth. If I can accomplish that goal then I will feel my duty is done.Please check back often for more posts. I welcome your comments. I hope for this to be an open dialog.
