Cheryl Schatz

That is a really good point, Paula.  I didn’t even realize how appropriate this post was coming right after my last post! http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/09/19/is-a-womans-voice-filthy/

To all:

The issue about two or three witnesses is very important.  It gives a very clear indication that the charge of sin is not to be taken lightly.

So why did Jesus say that his testimony by itself was not valid?

John 5:31  If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true.

Jesus appealed to Deuteronomy where the evidence of two or three witnesses was required in a Judicial matter.  Every fact is to be confirmed by two or three witnesses.  (Deut 17:6, Deut 19:15)

Paul also appealed to the same OT scriptures regarding a judicial matter (2 Cor. 13:1)  Paul himself coming to the Corinthians several times and in different ways was a fulfillment of the two or three witnesses.

Will God now change things and condemn godly Christian women without the same two or three witnesses that he has used for every other judicial matter?  God doesn’t change.  If he deemed it necessary to document and establish a matter by providing two or three witnesses and Jesus set himself under the requirement for two or three witnesses, how can we now charge women with sin whose only charge against them is that they do not kick men out of the bible studies that they are leading?

Is it really a sin for women to speak in the assembly?  Is it really a sin for women to teach correct biblical doctrine to men?  Where are the two witnesses for this “sin”?  There are no second or third witness in scripture.  This must make us pause to consider.  Two or three witnesses will establish a matter where a charge of sin is involved.

God is consistent and he gives repetition for our good.  It is for our safety that we have the second witness.  Any matter that we set forth to establish as a documented sin must follow the set pattern set out in scripture.  All sin is documented and confirmed for us by a second witness.  If we try to establish a judicial charge of sin without a second scriptural witness, we become like the cults who assume all kinds of “essential” doctrines that are found in obscure passages of scripture, with no second witness and they snip these scriptures out of the complete context of the passage.  This is the pathway to an unsafe set of doctrines and an unsafe charge of sin against Christian brothers and sisters.  Let’s practice the safe way that God has established.  Every judicial matter is to be established by two or three witnesses or it is not an established and documented judicial doctrine.

Don,

By the way, great work on this passage at http://equalitycentral.com/forum/index.php?topic=610.0

Your work in the Scripture Study area is very clear and should be noted.  Well done!

One other thing I should mention.  It is far easier to refute someone’s error, then it is to unravel the hard passages of scripture.  When I read Grudem’s material and when I hear Bruce Ware preach, I can pick out the holes in the argument very easily.

One pastor said that it would take two years to refute the exegesis in my DVD on women in ministry.  I told him that it may take someone years to present their own reasoning through the scriptures on the hard passages, but it shouldn’t take too long to refute error.

My premise regarding the scripture always having a second witness regarding universal sin would be easy to refute if there was such a refutation available.  I am not talking about God’s commands to do something but his prohibitions against doing something.  i.e. The ten commandments; the list of sins found in the New Testament that are universal sins, i.e. Galatians 5:20-21.  The deeds of the flesh are spoken against in scripture and none of the prohibitions against these deeds of the flesh are without a second witness.

This is a very important fact that we should note from the list of sins both in the OT and the NT.  The list of sins are repeated and they are warned against.  God loves us dearly and wants us not to sin against him.  He reminds us of what is sin and he warns us against the sin.  He does not leave his telling us only once because of his great mercy towards us.  God repeats himself because it is for our safety.

I want to take this opportunity to thank God for this example of his grace and mercy towards us.  I want to thank him that he has given us guidelines for testing truth and exposing error.  I praise God that he has given his word as a straight edge and it does not waiver.  God is consistent and he is trustworthy and I am so thankful that God has not made it a sin for me or any other woman to teach the truth from scripture.  God has no such “law” that would indict me of sin since those who try to prove such a universal “law” are without evidence either in the passages themselves and in the rest of the scriptures.

Don,

The premise is that there is no universal law that is not repeated in scripture.  I am not saying that God has to repeat the law to the exact same people that he said it to the first time.  What I am claiming is that every universal prohibition in scripture is never alone.  It is always with a second or third witness.

Deut 19:15 A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.

Jesus stated that his own testimony is invalid with a second witness.  John 5:31-37.  A judicial matter had to have a second witness to validate it. God’s testimony about sin is never alone.  God has provided a second witness repeating the charge of sin for every single universal sin.

The sin of adultery is universal.  It is repeated in Exodus 20:14, Deut 5:18 and numerous other places.

Drunkenness is a universal sin.  It is identified in Duet 21:20, Galatians 5:21, 1 Cor. 5:11 and ! Cor 6:10.

There is no prohibition given universally for all of time that is not repeated.  A universal prohibition that is forbidden for all is a “law’ of God.

Jesus submitted himself to the requirement for two or three witnesses for a judicial matter.  Every judicial matter is established with two or three witnesses.  God has followed his own requirements by providing a second or third witness for every single universal prohibition.

If the “sin” of a woman teaching the bible to men is a universal prohibition, it does not follow the pattern of every other universal prohibition.  There is no second witness to this supposed “law”.  It is a unique “law” that has not been proven as a God-given universal law.

See my other articles here:

http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2006/11/29/does-god-have-one-unique-law-part-one/

http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2006/12/07/does-god-have-one-unique-law-part-two/

http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2006/12/09/does-god-have-one-unique-law-part-three/

1.  It is a fact there there is no universal law given that is not repeated.

2.  It has not been established that the “sin” of a woman teaching the bible to men is a universal law or that it is a punishable “sin”.

3.  If it is a “law” that all godly women are forbidden to teach doctrine to men, then this “law” is unlike any of God’s other laws.

4.  If there is no other universal prohibition that is not repeated in scripture, so we see God offering a minimum of a second witness, and since Jesus himself subjected his own testimony to the requirement of two or three witnesses, we must either say that there is one unique “law” that does not need to be an established judicial matter or we can accept the fact that repetition is for our safety and God has provided the repetition for us so that we can be assured of knowing what is sin and what is against God’s law.

5.  Repetition is for our safety (Philippians 3:1) and a charge of sin from a “law” that has not been established judicially is not safe.

Lastly, if I am wrong, then it should not take much to prove me wrong from my own source of authority – God’s word.  If there is even one judicial universal prohibition that is not repeated in scripture, then I am wrong.  I submit my case to the evidence of scripture.  Every single universal prohibition follows the exact same pattern.  Every one of them is repeated in scripture.  Every one of them has a second witness.  God has not given all of us a charge of sin without the safety of repetition so that we can know and understand what is sin without question and without excuse.

I ask, where is the second witness that women are not allowed to teach the bible to men?

Where is the second witness that women are to be silenced in the church?

There is no second witness to either of these “laws”.  This is not safe, it is not God’s pattern and it does not follow the judicial system requiring a charge of sin to have a second or third witness.  Since Jesus followed this pattern just as his Father followed the pattern with every other sin, I rest my case.

Frank,

I should add that I appreciate your affirmation of my ministry.  Thank you!

Frank,

Welcome!

The issue of the subordination of Christ is certainly a serious issue today in the church and has so infected the seminaries that many have just accepted this teaching as if it is the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity instead of a modern day distortion of the full Deity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit – equal in power, authority, honor and glory and every right to their nature as God.

By mid October our new DVD called “The Trinity Eternity Past to Eternity Future, Explaining Truth & Exposing Error” will be ready for sale and this DVD has two sections dedicated to exposing this error.  We decided that the exposing of this error should concentrate on our own measure for truth – God’s word.  We believe that it is important to soundly refute the subordination doctrine by the scriptures and show where the error lies and how the scripture presents the truth in context.  I will be announcing on this blog when the DVD is finally ready for distribution.  There are audio clips in the DVD which document the teaching of those who believe in a hierarchy in the Trinity and then scripture is appealed to that refutes their teaching.

I had a quick look at your pages on the Trinity.  Keep up the good work!

There is a huge difference between a law and a command. I think Paula has hit the nail on the head regarding the difference.

I don’t have much time right now to comment more. I have been traveling today and right now I am catching up in a hotel room. The challenge that I have given is not regarding individual commands from God towards individuals or even a nation.

The challenge I made was regarding a judicial matter that requires two or three witnesses.  It is for a law of God.  My point is that every law – the prohibitions that are universally applicable and have consequences, do not ever appear in scripture only once.  If there is a “law” that silences women, or if there is a “law” that forbids women to teach men, then this “law” should have a second or third witness.  I was asking if anyone could name even one “law” that was a universal prohibition that was not repeated in scripture.  I have never seen such a “law”.

Cindy,

Thank you for that information!  I won’t be able to listen online myself as I will be traveling during that time, but good to know that they will make it available.

RDA, Thank you for your thoughts, and welcome to WIM!

Since the conflict has been public from the beginning, and not from my doing, and the conflict is in the public record, I believe it is an honorable thing to publicly bring this to a close. It is also worthwhile to advise that any ongoing dispute will not be responded to and the reasons why I am taking this position is important so that there is a valid reason for not wanting the debate to carry on, here on my blog. That is the only thing that is in my control.

Blessings,
Cheryl

Don,

Descriptions of happenings do not need to be repeated. They are merely events and do not fall into universal laws or judicial matters that need to be validated.  What you have given isn’t a “law”.  Can you find a universal law that is only found once in the scripture?  I have never found even one.  If the “law” of women not teaching the bible to men is such a law, it is a unique law unlike every other law.

So is there any “thou shalt not” or any universal prohibition no matter how stated that is not repeated?  I give this challenge to anyone reading this.  Find such a “law” given only once and I will be properly refuted regarding my assertion that every law must have a second witness.

Don,

I have never seen any law that wasn’t repeated.  I have given a challenge for anyone to give me a universal law that has no second witness.  No one yet has given me such a law to this point and I think it has been about two years since I first gave the challenge.  If you know of one universal law given only one time in scripture, I would be very interested.  Every hierarchist given this challenge has been stumped to this point.

Paul made it clear that repetition is for our safety.  I agree with Paul.

Paula,

You are right in that the way the passage is written, it is not indicative of a new “law” being written but a “law” that is being referenced.  There is no other reference to this “law” but this particular passage.

Don,

You said:  “2. It only takes one statement for a law to be a law.  Some things are written many times in Scripture, some only once; they are all true.”

While God’s stating the law would be law if it is only said once coming from his mouth, however there is no “law” in scripture that is there once that is not repeated.  This is a curious thing.  If every law is repeated and since scripture says that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter shall be established, we can understand why a repetition of the law is so important.  Jesus said that his own testimony alone would not prove a judicial matter without a second or third witness.  If Jesus needed a second witness to establish that he was the Son of God, and every “law” has at least a second witness, with most laws having many more witnesses then this, then how could a “law” demanding the silence of all women in the congregation be established without the required second or third witness?

The fact that this “law” was not repeated by Paul or any other apostle,  the fact that this “law” was not used to scripture indict any woman of sin, and the fact that this “law” is the only law of God that doesn’t have any Old Testament roots, makes it highly suspect.  It doesn’t fit as a New Testament law nor is it listed in the Old Testament.  The only reasonable conclusion that we can come up with, is that it is indeed an oral law of the Jews.  The fact that Paul never appealed to an oral law of the Jews in proving his case before gives great weight to the fact that Paul is once again quoting from the letter written to him by the Corinthians, and then in verse 36 promptly refuting their claim.

I will write more on the next piece of evidence that should be a red flag to us that these are not Paul’s words directly, but a quote from the Corinthians.  I have some ministry/business matters to attend to so will be away from the office for awhile.

Don,

Good point that the NT manuscripts did not have punctuation and all caps.  Also it is important to note that Paul cannot contradict himself.

Thanks Lin!  This project was a major work for me.  Lots of stress and lots of distractions but by God’s grace, I made my goal.  And my husband says I did a really good job.  He is the really picky one so that is praise that I do not take lightly.

So we need to ask ourselves this question – what would constitute a new law for the church?

1.  Would a “new” law contradict what the apostles (and Paul) taught elsewhere?

2.  Would a “new” law be alone and never repeated?

Excellent comments Paula, Don and gengwall!  These are right on the mark.

So what would you say to someone who states that the “law” that Paul is quoting is not an OT law, but one that has just been presented by Paul.  So in essence, Paul is saying that the law is now set forth that women are to keep silent in the churches.  Thoughts?  By the way, I have heard this explanation before so it is out there.  How do you deal with it?

tiro,

The 2 DVD set will be available here http://mmoutreach.org/order_macgregor_video.htm or on amazon.com as soon as we have it back from the duplicators.

Thanks for asking!  I will post this again once we are ready to provide the product.

We expect the duplicated copies will be received by mid October.  It does take awhile to get the masters to the duplicator and back so that they disks can be packaged.  So middle of October is the expected time line for right now.

I just put up a new picture of the cover.  I had one word wrong on the cover.  All fixed now and caught before it went into production.

I offered to give Bruce Ware a copy but he wasn’t interested.  I think it was his “God have mercy on your soul” comment from his previous email that made him not interested.  He does know that his views are being refuted in the DVD.  I haven’t offered it to Burk.  He isn’t a big part of the DVD except for his views on Philippians 2, on his teaching that Jesus was not equal with the Father and that the Son did not go after equality but went after incarnation instead.

Thanks guys!  I do value that sense of freedom that God still allows us to proclaim his word!

Don, Lorri has written the blurb on the back cover, if that is what you are looking for.  It says:

The term “The Trinity”, the word used to describe the Triune God of the Bible, has been with us since the earliest days of the Church.  Within the nature of the one true God, we can identify three Persons: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.  The three Persons are the one God.  This is a difficult concept for our finite minds, endeavoring to understand the infinite God.

Much error has arisen from earliest times, usually dealing with the dual nature of Jesus Christ.  He is fully God, yet for a short period of time, fully man.  Also, some describe the Holy Spirit as just an energy force.  In our day, once again we find some teachers questioning the concept of the Trinity, especially concerning Jesus’ authority.  What is the truth?

Lorri MacGregor has three decades of experience teaching on this vital subject.  She shares her journey out of a Trinity-denying religion, into her search through the Bible for the real truth about God.  Using the Bible alone, you can follow with her to see the Scripture’s revealing of the Triune God.

Cheryl Schatz, an apologist and teacher, answers some of the modern criticisms concerning Jesus Christ.  Hear the voices of the teachers who have deviated from the faith to present Jesus as a lesser authority than the Father.  Then hear Cheryl’s clear response from the scriptures, setting matters straight.

MM Outreach Inc is honored to present this critical Bible teaching on the nature of the one, true God, the Trinity.

2 DVDs in three parts 43, 48, 51 min each.  Perfect for classroom viewing.

The DVDs are broken up into three parts.  Lorri’s is DVD #1 and it follows the story of her own journey into truth.  DVD #2 is two parts and is my teaching on eternity past and eternity future, dealing with the key points that hierarchists use to “prove” that Jesus has a lesser authority than the Father before the incarnation and into eternity future.  I use audio clips of Bruce Ware and Dennis Burk that give the view of a hierarchy in the Trinity and then I use the Bible to show where they have missed the clear scriptures in context that refute their view.

I hope this helps!

Don,

I should add that there definitely was submission in the Trinity during the incarnation.  No doubt about that at all.   Even Jesus gave testimony that the Father would submit to his will if he had willed not to go to the cross.

When Jesus was in the garden getting ready to be arrested and one of his disciples cut off the ear of the slave of the high priest, Jesus said:

Matt 26:52, 53 “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels?”

Jesus made it clear that if it was Jesus’ will to be saved and not sacrificed, that his appeal to the Father would be heard and the Father would “at once” give him angelic protection.  So we can see from this testimony that the Father would immediately submit to the Son’s will.  Yet the Son desired to do what the Father had prepared for him. It was his desire that the scriptures should be fulfilled by his sacrificial death.

In the incarnation, you can get all kinds of submission (Jesus’ example of submitting to the Father is great!) and this is where the examples are.  In eternity past and eternity future, the submission outside the incarnation doesn’t appear to have anything to base the submission on.  In eternity past we do not have one person of the Godhead having a different will than the other two.  In that sense there can be no basis for submission since they are completely together as one with one united will and united works.

Don’t you wish that humans could live that? Well, I believe we will be able to live in unity this way in eternity. Praise God!

I hope this makes it a little clearer.

Elizabeth,

It is true that a recognized church and a non-profit organization operate under the same charitable rules.  For one to say that their “ministry” isn’t “in” a church so they can teach men and take an authority over men against the will of these men is obviously a view that is suspect.  Also for those who follow CBMW who say that God created women to be helpers and not leaders of men, one would have to understand that a “ministry” inside or outside the church when one is teaching spiritual matters and taking authority over men, would not be allowed.  It is an arm of the church.  A church is not defined by how many elders one has or whether there is a set pattern of worship.  A church is a gathering of two or more believers who have come to serve one another with their spiritual gifts.  Churches met in homes in the NT time.  The Church does not have walls.  It has people.

Jimmie,

I agree with you that it seems very odd for a woman in ministry teaching men in a non profit organization and having authority over men in this organization on the discussion board would be fighting so passionately against women in ministry outside of her little in-house kingdom.

I listened to Lee Grady give a speech once where he talked about this same kind of situation.  He had preached on women’s ability to serve in the church using their gifts for the benefit of men.  He was preaching a message of freedom from the scriptures, but his message had an opposite reaction with many of the women.  They were cold and angry at him preaching such a message.  He said that the women were more against him than the men were.  Why is this?  If I remember his words right, he came to understand hat the women were offended because the thought of freeing women to do what they were forbidden to do because of their own personal circumstances, caused them to feel jealous.  And the men were fearful of having some “special” rights taken away from them.  So his understanding of the strong reaction is that it is a combination of fear and jealousy.

I am seeing this fear come to life in what has been written about me.  Why would someone be so afraid of my bible teaching that I have become enemy number one to the church?  Why is a particular person so afraid to admit that they have watched my DVD series?  I don’t have answers to these questions but I do tend to agree with Lee Grady.  Men who are godly men and have a confidence in their calling and gifting by God do not need to fear Christian women.  Those who refuse to look at the evidence or who have looked at the evidence but are afraid to admit they have looked, and who hide in their own little corner content to slander and tell half-truth lies are not real men.  Real men stick up for their sisters in Christ.  Real men are willing to humble themselves and serve a sister in Christ and they will open doors for her to serve instead of shutting doors in her face.  Real men live for Jesus instead of living to protect their own name.

I thank God that there are many real men in the Church.  I have met many of them here on this blog.

Don,

Yes, you are right in that submit and obey are not synonyms.  Obedience can be chosen as an extreme end of submission if one desires to do this.  However the term obey implies a command is given.  The term “command” is one that implies rightful authority to demand an action.  The one refusing to obey then is liable for punishment.  This is the exact situation with a parent and a child.  The parent has rightful authority that demands the child to obey.  The child can choose to obey or choose not to obey.  Choosing not to obey brings punishment.

In the situation of a wife and a husband, the wife’s submission is voluntary of her own free will.  Her husband is not told to command his wife to submit nor is he told to discipline her if she refuses to submit.

Submission can lead to obedience, certainly.  But we must always be aware because of the way that hierarchists distort submission that we articulate the difference.  Command and obey go together.  Also sacrifice and submission go together.   The reason the difference is so important is that command and obey are opposites while sacrifice and submission are on the same level field as equals.

Clive,

Very good thoughts about authority.  Welcome to this blog and I hope you find the community here to be respectful and non-authoritative.  We are all truly brothers and sisters in Christ and as such we can learn from each other without anyone pulling rank.  That is the way the New Testament believers saw church and the way it should be today as well.

gengwall,

You are right in that submit does not mean obey.  When one redefines Paul by substituting one meaning for another, the distortions that result make the bible contradict itself.

Don,

Yes I do think that one will is like one God.  There are three who share the one will just as three are the one God.  So just as there are three persons you could say there are three wills but the wills are exactly the same.  In essence it is one will.  There is never a time when one person has a will that is in opposition to the others.  That means that one person would never have to submit his will to another because they are in opposition.  Could there be other reasons for submission?  Sure, I suppose but not for a difference in will.

Yes, the Spirit of Christ is the same Spirit as the Spirit of God.

While we can say that there is mutual submission in the Trinity it is a bit of a moot point since there is one will.  For example the Holy Spirit does not submit his will to the Father since there is no reason to submit.  They both have the exact same will.  Submission can be in relationship but again how does all of that work when they all share the exact same will?  There cannot be one will submitting to another will.  The submission that was shown in their relationship became known to us when the Word of God became flesh.  It was when humanity was added to his identify as God that there could now be a will (a human will that was added) that would be willing to submit.