Cheryl Schatz

Here are Mark’s answers that he posted over at the other post and I will be answering his “answers” on this post as the other one is already well over 400 comments long. My answer will likely come in pieces as I deal with each one of Mark’s 10 comments.

I want to just respond back to the 10 questions Cheryl asked me to answer.
1. I have said all along that men and women teach each other in various ways. So for example if a woman prays or prophecies (in the spiritual gift of the NT) sense then of course she will ‘teach’ a man something. However the office of elder should only be held by men. That was my point.
2. So as to not beat a dead horse about whether Eve was kicked out i will not comment extensively about it since the rest of you are engaging in that debate.
3. Acts 20 show the responsibility of Elders. They are overseers, they have to keep watch and gurad against false teachers by knowing proper doctrine. 1 Tim 3 is interesting because all the ‘qualifications’ for a elder except for one are personal characteristics. The one exception is that they be ‘able to teach’- a very important responsibility. Now someone said that the masculine pronouns mean nothing because the bible uses them to refer generically. I totally agree that the bible does such a thing. Interesting though, why isn’t femine pronouns used for generic humanity- is this a hint of the resposibilty of men. Now in relation to how this fits 1 Tim 3 lets look closer. We know it can’t mean generic me and women who can be elders because of the various qualifications. For example they are to have ‘one wife’. To add to this by verse 11 we are introduced the ‘the women likewise’ which is a clear indication that the verse above are to relate ONLY to men. It is most definitely not generic. Cheryl, i meant 1 Tim 5:17 not 5:7. I apologise for the error.
4. Cheryl, i would encourage you to look at the way that ‘presbyter’ and episcopos are used interchangeably in the NT because you said this
“Eph. 4:11 does not mention elders. An overseer is something that someone “strives” for. A “pastor” is a spiritual gift given to whomever the Lord wills.”

In Acts 20 Paul addresses elders (v. 17) and bishops (v.28) and they are obviously the same group of men. Peter writes to ‘presbyters’ urging them to ‘fulfill the office of bishops’ (1 Peter 5:1-2). Titus 1:5, 7 refers to elders and bishops interchangeably. Now since elders are to oversee (bishop) and shepherd the flock (pastor) it is easy to see that pastors are elders who’s primary responsibility is to teach. They are the same thing, only the Catholic church adopted a wrong interpretation to give rise to the papacy. Surely you don’t agree with them?
5. No i don’t think single men are excluded from the pastoral office. If this is your strongest argument to support women pastors it is weak. The majority of men were married in Paul’s day, so it isn’t a surprise to see him addressing the majority situation. We know it is not a sin more a single man, because we have the example of Paul himself.
6. It is no surprise that if one dismisses the passages restricting the roles of women in the church, then of course there is nothing to stop them. However i think the texts are pretty clear and do give ‘witness’ to women not teaching. (now i think my numbers are muddled up…hope you can follow)
7. Now Eve is a sinner. Paul explains that as a sinner we are dead(eph 2:1) spiritually and physically. Therefore we are in rebellion to God, because death is the punishment for sin. Paul also explains that none seek God, none can understand God and that all have turned away (Rom 3:10ff). Now Cheryl, is Eve included in this? If so how can you continually claim that Eve is not a threat as a sinner and is able to obey God as a sinner without the help of the Spirit. She couldn’t even obey him as sinless, yet you hold that she can as a sinner when we know that sin is complete rebellion to God. Do you hold to Pelagianism which taught that it was possible to obey God without the help of the Spirit?
8. You seem to be implying that sin done in ‘ignorance’ is not as bad as rebellious sin. And i know you use 1 Tim 1:13 as your proof text. However Paul identifies himself as the ‘worst’ of sinners in verse 15. Therefore according to your definition of sin, and if you are going to be consistent then since Paul is the ‘worst’ and he was deceived, wouldn’t that make Eve’s sin worse than Adam’s since her’s was deception. So is sin done in deception worse or not? Your argument falls to pieces here because Paul as a deceived sinner calls himself the worst. I think you have a wrong understanding of sin.
9. Gen 1-3 shows male headship in the following ways. Adam is made first. Eve is made from Adam and for Adam. Adam names his wife. Adam is addressed first. The curse because of Adam affects all of creation. Adam bears the primary resposibilty for the fall. Paul uses Gen to prove male headship in two of his argument (1 Cor 11, 1 Tim 2).
Now you said “Does God really ignore the heart and judge all sin alike?”

My response is absolutely! “No one is righteous, not one”. “the wages of sin is death”. The human heart is utterly corrupt- how can you not see this in scripture. “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. None of us deserve anything from God except punishment- this is the gospel. But thanks be to God that he would sacrifice His Son to redeem his lost people. Are people essentially good or have a good heart in your view? The only reason we can do anything to give glory to God is because he enables us to do it through the Spirit.
10. I believe that i will be held accountable for my leadership or lack of as a husband and a father, in the same way that leaders of the church will be held accountable for the way they lead the church. Cheryl, do you think you will be held accountable for what you are teaching people about this issue?
a. Also you said “And no, Adam does not name her until sin enters the world. God names her “woman” first (Genesis 2:22) and Adam merely confirms that she is his uniquely own flesh and bone hence the God-term of “woman”.”
Really Cheryl? Where is it recorded that God call her ‘woman’ and not Adam. You say 2:22 but its not there. It says God made a woman not that God called her woman. When Adam speaks in verse 23 he names her ‘woman’ “she shall be called woman”. So Adam’s naming is pre-fall not as a result of his sinful nature to dominate her. In fact he gives her a glorious honouring name after the fall. There is no indication that her naming is due to sinful domination.
“Give me just one verse that says that a husband has leadership over his wife.”
Simply Eph 5:22-23. Again you dismiss these type of passages because of the debate on ‘head’ but honestly how is the husband the source of his wife. Why is headship and submission related back to Christ and the church if it is only about ‘sourceness”. Makes absolutely no sense

Finally regarding Hosea 6:7. You said that God calls Adam’s sin treacherous, but have failed to show 1 verse which explicitly has God saying ‘Adam’s sin was treacherous. The prophecy is targeted at Israel not Adam, so to emphasise Adam as the primary interest is wrong. A comparision is simply made to the covenant breaking of both Adam and Israel.