Cheryl Schatz

As far as I can see there is still no apology to Dr. Daniel Wallace regarding the misrepresentation of his view.

here is the original:

Never Apologize for God’s Truth
Tools: Print E-mailPermalink
Jeff Robinson
October 28, 2008
A few months back, I heard a well-known minister say of the doctrine of predestination, “Sometimes, I wish this doctrine were not in the Bible because it causes so much controversy.” I was taken back a bit by the lack of theological courage in this statement and was immediately reminded of some wise words of advice a retired Southern Baptist pastor gave me several years ago when I first began in ministry: “Never, ever, for any reason, apologize for the Word of God. Preach it-all of it-with tenderness and courage.”

I was similarly taken aback a couple of weeks back when I read the words of an evangelical minister/scholar whom I admire greatly, words he penned as a response to an inquirer about his commitment to biblical complementarianism. The inquirer asked Dr. Dan Wallace, professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, about some of the pragmatic issues surrounding the roles of women in the church, issues such as female missionaries, female evangelists, female soloists, and the like. Wallace responded by admitting that he could never embrace egalitarianism because it is clearly unbiblical; the text just does not support egalitarian claims, he told the inquirer. To read key passages such as 1 Timothy 2:11-15, he wrote, “…is to do some exegetical gymnastics in which one twists and turns the text to conform it to their views…I am unwilling to twist the scripture into something that it does or does not say.” Wallace continued to affirm the church’s historic position on women in the ministry with a fulsome response. He did, however, make a major-and in my mind regrettable-capitulation in the area of a courageous statement of biblical truth with what he said in parts of the the letter, including this statement in the opening paragraph:

“I must confess: attitudinally, I am egalitarian. I find what scripture says on these matters very difficult to swallow at times…”

In the concluding paragraphs, he continues to speak of his uneasiness at the complementarian position:

“In attitude, I am egalitarian. And I have pushed the boundaries of complementarianism for a long time…I have endorsed women for all sorts of ministries, including ministries that I would be uncomfortable with them doing. But since they are ministering in churches that are egalitarian, I would rather have these women ministering there than some others who may not be as well trained, as godly, as devoted to the scriptures and to Christ…I have problems with the complementarian position. I am sometimes embarrassed to be a complementarian. It would be a whole lot easier if I weren’t! But I can’t go against my conscience. And my conscience tells me that after all the exegetical dust has settled, to deny some sort of normative principle to 1 Timothy 2:12 is probably a misunderstanding of this text.”

I have great respect for Dr. Wallace and even appreciate much about the letter, including his desire to be gracious in debating theological matters. However, I cannot follow him in his halting manner over what he admits to be the very clear teaching of the Word of God. Should we not delight in all the truths of the Word of God? Should we not see the truth of God’s complementary creation of men and women a thing of inscrutable beauty that causes us to fall on our sinful faces and cry out with the great apostle, “Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and how inscrutable His ways!”

Our hearts and minds are fallen, and because of this reality, there are many issues at which we see through a glass darkly. But when God’s Word is clear to us-as it is in most places-we must rejoice and proclaim it and not shrink back from it because it risks stampeding the sacred cows of contemporary culture. Paul anticipated that an “open statement of the truth” (2 Corinthians 4:2) would repel many (1 Corinthians 1:18, 2:14). Accordingly, let us apply to God’s Word as it relates to gender roles, the admonition which the courageous preacher C.H. Spurgeon employed to speak of the sublimity of the mysterious and often controversial doctrine of election: “Do not be afraid to dwell upon this high doctrine…When your mind is most heavy and depressed, you will find it to be a bottle of riches cordial. Those who doubt the doctrines of grace, or who cast them into the shade, miss the richest clusters of Eschol; they lose the wines on the lees well refined, the fat things full of marrow. There is no balm in Gilead comparable to it.” And don’t apologize for the Word of God.

Following Don’s advice I was able to find the cached version of the CBMW blog dated October 28, 2008.  In the new version of this blog article, the only thing that I can find that has been changed is this comment:

Wallace responded by admitting that he could never embrace egalitarianism because it is clearly unbiblical; the text just does not support egalitarian claims, he told the inquirer.

I will see if I can paste in the old version.

That is my fault for not copying it.  I won’t let that happen again.  I usually document everything and this one I didn’t copy.

Apparently the post has been modified, but I can’t see where.  I guess I will have to look harder because the charges against Dr. Wallace appear to be the same.

If someone can figure out what has changed, let me know.

I have the privilege of being in contact with Dr. Wallace.  This man’s humble attitude is truly refreshing and his unwillingness to divide over secondary issues of faith is very commendable.  He wrote on the Parchment and Pen blog that his complementarian view comes from the way that he sees the Trinity.  While he has been unsatisfied with the way that the equality of authority of both the Father and Jesus has been presented in other venues from egalitarians, I am trusting that he will see a fully scriptural approach in our new DVD set which he has graciously agreed to watch.

From what I have read from Dr. Wallace, I have great respect for him and his attitude towards other Christians who do not agree with him because I believe it fully reflects the biblical mandate to love one another.  I wish others showed this kind of love and respect.

Don,

As usual your observations are excellent and a very important point regarding the reason for writing the instructions to Titus.

Don,

Not sure why one verse got to the end of your post, but I thought you wanted it there.  I corralled it and got it to move up.

Don,

I fixed your comment to reflect the last lines as 1 Timothy 1:6.

I just rewatched DVD 2 teaching 1 on eternity past.  This is jam packed and I think it only possible to  comprehend in multiple viewings.  Whew!

So many people have told me that I am “deep” but I think it is more that I “jam pack” my teachings with so much info that it does take multiple viewings to catch everything.   The good thing is that it is all from the scriptures and it can be checked out by those willing to “test all things” because they want to “hold fast to what is good”.

I agree with you regarding your assessment of Ware’s teaching.  I was extremely disappointed in his book on the Trinity and in his sermons where he basically ignores the Old Testament revelation of God and focuses almost exclusively on the incarnation.  This creates a very distorted view of God who is God from eternity past.  It falls right in line with what the cults do to the Son of God who lower his authority by focusing solely on his humility as the human Son.

Thanks for the comments!  I look forward to any further comments you have once you have been able to unpack all the “jam packed” information.

tee hee!

Don,

If it weren’t for the part where they tested “college” students, I would have said that the extra bacteria came from all those “poopy diapers” that women handle.

Good one, Don.  Now I am thinking that this is why young boys say girls have “cooties”.

I am now going to wash my hands, if you please.

Michael,

Genesis chapter 1 shows that God created man and then breathed into him.  As Don points out “man” refers to both male and female so we should be able to understand that God created both the man and the woman in the same direct way.  The only difference was the material that he used to create them from.  The man was created from the dirt and the woman was created from the side part of the man.  The dirt isn’t what made man in the image of God, neither is the side the part that made the woman the image of God.  Both were created directly.

Being created from the dirt did not make the male inferior neither did being created from man (in his image) and in the image of God would have made the woman superior.  No, they were created equally in God’s image and woman does not have a derivative image of God.  Chapter 1 nails that for us.

This appears to be one of the first men in the early church who took it upon himself to have authority over other Christians including name-calling of one of the Lord’s apostles.  Shameful.

3 John 1:9  I wrote something to the church; but Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not accept what we say.
3 John 1:10  For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does, unjustly accusing us with wicked words; and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brethren, either, and he forbids those who desire to do so and puts them out of the church.

Ryan,

Ha…too many mom’s out there.  😉

Glad there are other moms out there (and dads) willing to step in when I was missing.

Even with Paul as an apostle of Jesus Christ, his authority still would have to stand to be tested by the word of God.  Paula rightly said:

The authority and power is all in the words inspired by God, not the vessels appointed to pass on the words.

My internet connection was down and then I was away for most of today.  Wow a lot of comments have come in since I was last on line.  Great questions and comments.

Ryan wrote:

There are are few more instances where there seems to be authority given to a leader to act, even forcefully:  2 Cor 13:10, 2 Cor 10:6,10.  2 Cor 10:6 is particularly intriguing.  At any rate, we know that the authority given to Paul was for building up the church and not tearing it down, but nevertheless, it seems that he has been given authority to “punish” those who continue to refuse to listen.
How would you understand this in light of the discussion of this and your previous posts?

What authority is Paul talking about in 2 Cor. 13:10?

2 Cor. 13:10   For this reason I am writing these things while absent, so that when present I need not use severity, in accordance with the authority which the Lord gave me for building up and not for tearing down.

The authority for building up, as Paul claimed, is found in the gift from God.  Ephesians 4:11-13

Eph 4:11  And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,
Eph 4:12  for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;
Eph 4:13  until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.

Each person who has a gift has the authority to use that gift for the service of the body of Christ:

1Pe 4:10  As each one has received a special gift, employ it in serving one another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.
1Pe 4:11  Whoever speaks, is to do so as one who is speaking the utterances of God; whoever serves is to do so as one who is serving by the strength which God supplies; so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belongs the glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

An apostle of Jesus Christ is a gift given to set up the foundation of the church.  Paul said that his authority was to build the church.  The church was to judge Christians who are practicing sin and those who are unrepentant they are to send out of the church.  Yet the church was not following the call to judge other believers living in sin.

1Co 5:1  It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife.
1Co 5:2  You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst.

While Paul taught the church how to judge those who were unrepentant sinners,  and the church did follow the example set by Paul by sending a man out of the church who was living with his Father’s wife, others were not being disciplined and the practiced sin was allowed to remain in the church:

2Co 12:21  I am afraid that when I come again my God may humiliate me before you, and I may mourn over many of those who have sinned in the past and not repented of the impurity, immorality and sensuality which they have practiced.

Paul’s authority was to build up the church but in doing so the sin must be purged for the church to remain pure and free from defilement.  As a foundational apostle Paul needed to discipline a church that failed to discipline its own sinning members.  Even with Paul’s authority to discipline given to him by Jesus himself, Paul appealed to the church to make righteous judgments and to deal with unrepentant sinners in their midst.  The discipline was to be done by the church and not by one leader inside that church.

Even Jesus in Matthew 18 said that if a person who has offended you will not listen to you or listen to you and another witness, you are to take it to the church to have the person disciplined.  Jesus did not say to take it to the pastor or to one of the elders.  It is the church who has been set up as the method of authority to purge the sinner from our midst.  The fact that Paul fought so hard not to have to exercise his apostolic authority to get rid of sin in the midst of the congregation shows that the pattern is set that the church does the discipline.

Paul’s place as an apostle of Jesus Christ set up to build the pure foundation of the church is an example of a spiritual father disciplining his spiritual children.  It is not an example of an office of authority over the believer and no such position of foundational apostle or spiritual father was continued after the apostles died.

No “authority” in the body of Christ can take away a person’s gift given by Jesus himself and no rule is set up to have an “authority” to make decisions for the believers.  We are to grow together in wisdom and in truth with each part ministering as they are gifted.  None of us is allowed to say that another part of the body is not needed, nor has any of the body been given authority over another part of the body.  This is foreign to the text.

Thanks for the kind words Lin!

Greg,

Sadly, there are those who will use whatever means they can to silence a voice that they find too persuasive because it threatens their security blanket.  At this time there is nothing that can silence me.  I have been stalked, my ministry partners have been badgered and so has my pastor.  Those who cannot refute the message will try to tar and feather the messenger.  It is the only thing they have left when all else has failed.  But these actions actually expose people for who they really are and so there is no point at all in trying to stop them from attacking.  At the same time Jesus promised a reward for those who are unfairly attacked because of him and he said that we are to be joyful that great is our reward in heaven for patiently enduring.  My pastor preached on this today and I must agree that we are called to experience persecution and to patiently endure it for the sake of Jesus Christ and his gospel.

I am so grateful to God that he protects and strengthens the messenger so that no attack, no threat and no amount of tar and feathers will make me silent with the message that God has given me.  God gives courage to speak and I am only one little stone that is crying out.

Don,

“This little light of mine, I’m gonna let it shine.” must be the song you are singing.

This made me smile!  God does have a sense of humor, I am very convinced of this.

Paula,

There is no doubt that every version has its problems even if minor problems.

By interpretation I mean putting into the text what we think the writer means not what is actually said.  This is where all the extra words come into play i.e. “a symbol of” added to the text.

When I wrote this I was referring to extra wording that was put into the text that is not what the writer meant by the passage.  This is why I think it is a good idea to have a bible that places these additional words into italics.  I tend to read without the added words and I do not find it hinders the meaning from coming out but does help to remove unwarranted additions.  Extra words are not bad in themselves if they are not adding or taking away from God’s intended meaning.  Extra meaning is bad.

Because languages render ideas differently, sometimes there may be a need for extra words in English.  However extra meaning is always bad no matter what language we are talking about.  Extra words that import an additional meaning hold us captive to a man’s idea.  Changing of words to make a female into a male is manipulating the text to man’s tradition and just as Jesus said, these things invalidate the word of God.  If we truly love the word of God we will want to note where tradition has changed his inspired word and we will not pay attention to that tradition.

Lin,

Excellent series!  Thanks for posting that link on my blog.  The amount of detail that you brought out is worthy of people reading the entire series.

The reason why I was surprised that Hebrews 13:17 had not yet been brought up on my blog is not because of those who regularly visit this blog, but because this blog is now getting a large amount of hits that are coming from search engines plus other blogs and I assumed that my post was going to be controversial to the point that someone would bring up that verse.

For some reason those who are now finding their way onto my blog have tripled since August.  This is especially of interest to me because of what happened to me in August with someone very intent on making sure that people stay away and not read what I have to write on the issue of women in ministry.  What some meant for harm has been turned around by God to bring a blessing so that the message is getting out using this little insignificant blog.

Perhaps I should clarify.  By interpretation I mean putting into the text what we think the writer means not what is actually said.  This is where all the extra words come into play i.e. “a symbol of” added to the text.  This is what has driven me to the original languages because added words can change the entire meaning of the passage.

Pinklight,

What is also interesting is that the email I received where Hebrews 13:17 was quoted had “authority” in italics which shows that it isn’t in the original so it should have been obvious that authority is not in the text.

I put this one text in the category of 1 Cor. 11 where the words “a symbol of” is added to “authority” to change the meaning of the woman’s authority to that of the woman being under a man’s authority.  I would just rather the translators translated the puzzling verses just the way they are instead of putting their own interpretation into the text.  I go to commentaries when I want interpretation and I go to the biblical text when I want translation.  There is a difference.

davidbmc,

Good catch!  I corrected the error.  I don’t believe that Paul wrote Hebrews.  I think I have been dealing with 1 Timothy 2 for so long I have Paul on my mind.  I do love Paul, but Hebrews isn’t one of his works.  Go ahead and nitpick me all you want!

Lin,

This is indeed a perilous and unprecedented time.  It is not unthinkable that the church may end up going underground and back into house churches.  I would hope that we would not take “pulpits” into the homes to recreate the excesses that have gone on for a very long time, with many who crave power.

Rex Ray, Don, Paula, Cindy,

I do pray that the church will repent of what it has done to exalt the messenger.

The authority is in the message not the messenger.  Once we really “get it” the Holy Spirit will revolutionize the Church.  There is so much work to be done for Christ.  We need to occupy until Christ comes and that involves all of us.

Excellent comments, everyone!

Thanks, Michael.  We will be praying for you as you do your evangelistic work!

Jennifer,

“Cheryl, God has used women many times when men might not listen:”

This says to me that God does not limit himself to only using people and resources that are easily accepted.  That means that man cannot limit God or force him to do as man pleases.  Praise God for that.

The blind ones will never see, they want authority more than servanthood, but the wise will listen.

My prayer is that God will help me to find the wise and to walk away from those who will not listen.  My persistence has been good and bad.  It is bad when persistence keeps me knocking on a door that has slammed shut in my face when there are open doors that I am not seeing because of my persistent knock.

Don,

You are a wise man.  I believe that God has used your method to teach many that it is possible to have our speech seasoned with salt so that we can be gentle and not angry with those who are in opposition.  This is the safe environment that those who have an open heart need so that they can let down the external barriers and have the opportunity to change their mind without fear of ridicule or contempt.

Don,

That was quite profound.  I had not thought of it that way before.  Do I have a filter?  I was not aware of it, but I must have to a certain extent so there are voices all around and one must shut out the “many” to listen to the “one”.  I would like to trust the Lord that I am not shutting out any part of his voice spoken through any one of his servants no matter who they are.