Mark

Hi Cheryl,

You asked me as one of your hard questions “Do you or do you not believe that Ephesians 4:11 gives “teacher” as a gift for the body of Christ?”

The short answer is of course. However i do not think it should be separated from the gift of pastor for the reasons i have given already, the greek doesn’t allow for it. The two are so closely correlated so that when you talk about Eph 4 and say pastor, you also think teacher. Likewise you say teacher, you should also think of pastor.

And again you asked me “Secondly do you believe that “teacher” is not a gift on its own but must be amalgamated with pastor so that only pastors can be “teachers”?

I do believe that in Ephesians the two are enormously close knitted together, but i would not say only pastors can be teachers. I think a pastor is a teacher, likewise an evangelist is a teacher. This is how i believe we should understand 1 Cor 12 when it lists ‘teacher’, but neither pastor nor evangelist are listed.

I agree with this “Yet there is only one gift of “teacher”. There are not different levels of “teacher” although there may be different kinds of “teaching”.

“Yet in discussions with you, you seem to continually stress that a woman is not allowed to be a teacher because pastors are the ones who are given the responsibility of being teachers in the church. Have I misunderstood you?

Sort of! I do not believe that women are given the responsibility of oversight of the church or shepharding, and therefore they should not have the teaching responsibility of those in that position (pastors and elders).

You asked “Are women allowed to be “teachers” in the church?”

Now it is important to remember that we are discussing the bible not what ‘I’ allow or disallow. Perhaps you mean do i believe the bible teaches that women will be ‘teachers’ in the church, then i would say no. The reason being the resposibilty of the gift and its correlation to the gift of pastor which i believe the bible teaches are for the men of the church. Now i have no doubt that you will disagree with me on this but remember that the gift of ‘apostle’ was only ever given to men aswell.

You said “Related gifts that are related by function does not negate the separation of the gifts. “Pastor” is not “teacher” although a Pastor can also be a teacher. A pastor using teaching in the function of the gift just as one who prophesies uses teaching in the function of their gift. Do you agree or not?”

I disagree in the fact that i believe a pastor is a teacher aswell. The very gift of a pastor necessitates an ability to teach. The catch phrase “they are a good pastor but a bad teacher” i disagree with. Someone who shephards the flock but doesn’t teach is an elder. Someone who shephards the flock and teaches is a pastor in my opinion. Now about a prophet teaching i cant say because i have never seen this gift before, but i have no doubt it did have elements of ‘teaching’ in it as it was inspired by the spirit for the early church. Have you ever seen a prophet?

“Actually using such a term distorts the NT teachings which show that there is a common “class” of Christians. All Christians are brothers in Christ and no one can lord it over another and because leaders are to be servants, there is no such thing as “offices” which would divide the body into clergy class and laity. Christians are one class not two.”

You have a very negative attitude toward leadership it seems. But i disagree that it is unhelpful using certain terminology to explain things. What would you label elders and deacons as if you dislike the word ‘office’. I definitely agree that leaders are to be servants though. The difference i guess is that i don’t think using the word ‘office’ negates that belief. Also the reality is that we are all called to submit to our church leaders as men who will have to give an account.

“There is no apostolic “office” that was given to the 12. Rather these ones were chosen to be witnesses to the resurrection and were held accountable for the doctrinal foundation of the church”

Maybe you prefer the term ‘chosen ones’ rather than office :-). I have to say i disagree with you on this one. Yes there were 12 apostles chosen as the founding members of the church (Eph 2:20) but i would call this the ‘apostolic office’. The reason being there are other passages which call James and Barnabas ‘apostles’ but they were not ‘apostles’ in the same sense i mentioned above. For example look at 1 Cor 15:7, Gal 1:19, Acts 14:4, 14. Now all these had the gift of ‘apostle’ which means ‘one who is sent with a commision’ yet not all had the resposibilty as the founders of the church. I’d be interested to know if you believe this gift has ceased to be given?

“Really? You pointed to Ephesians 4:11 and tied it to 1 Timothy 3:1. There is no problem with people “shepherding” but there is only one gift of “pastor”.”

You have misunderstood me and i will take the blame because i now see i didn’t explain myself clearly. What i meant was not all elders are pastors. But i do believe they both have the same responsibilty of shepharding the flock.

You said “But all elders are supposed to be teaching”

Now do you mean what this seems to mean that all elders teach or are supposed to be teaching? If so i would say this is contrary to scripture. 1 Tim 3 says a qualification for an elder is that they are ‘able to teach’, but yet Paul says 2 chapters later in 5:17 that ‘elders who rule well are worthy of double honour, especially those who labour in preaching and teaching’. So the assumption is not all will teach yet they should be ‘able to teach’. See the difference? IS this why you don’t like discussing elders because of Pauls correlation between them shepharding and preaching and teaching and that he only instructs men to take this resposibilty.

I have to say that i don’t know why you dodge discussions on eldership. I know you say we are discussing gifts, but it seems silly to discuss gifts that are enormously important for the church without discussing leadership responsibilities. Is it because the two don’t mesh with your view? Are gifts a safer argument for you? Since often gifts and natural abilities are so often confused.

You said “Do you believe that God can gift women as pastors? Or do you believe that God is limited in His work of giving out His gifts? Are you willing to answer this question that has been posed to you many times or are you going to bypass it one more time?”

No i will not answer this question because im not going to pretend i am God. I will answer questions in relation to His revealed truth, but i will not sin by making myself an idol before my Lord. Please direct you questions in a way that is not leading or loaded?

You asked “If I am wrong, then do you now admit that one who prophesies is a teacher?”

No i do not think a prophet is a ‘teacher’ because Paul seperates the gifts. Like i said earlier im sure the NT prophets ‘taught’ things but it does not make them now have the gift of a ‘teacher’ necessarily. Are you now mashing prophecy and teaching after accusing me of doing it?

To my above statement you probably answered it by this

“Wrong, wrong, wrong. I have never said that teaching is the same as pastoring. Nor have I said that prophesying is the same as teaching. We have both agreed that one who prophesies will teach in the act of using their gift, but prophesying is different than teaching just as the gift of Prophet is different than the gift of Teacher. Are you really sure you understand my position?”

I guess it is easy to get confused when we keep using terms interchangeably.

You said “If “teacher” must be attached to another gift and we then define that other gift as not being available to one gender, we have in essence removed the gift of “teacher” and replace it with an amalgamated gift belonging to men alone.”

Are you agreeing with me here that only men should be pastors?

“But this is necessary to do because many men are determined that God gives males alone certain gifts and they alone are privileged with an “office” and “authority” and “kingly rights”.

Cheryl your above comment shows your definite bias and deliberate intent not to understand their position. Unless you realise this, you will never be able to dialogue unhindered. I’m sure the majority of comps aswell as egals believe that waht they say is biblical truth not about authority and kingly rights. Of course people will always be deceived by their own sin and self-righteousness but your above comment really speaks of your position. Now i do understand you better. Please try and dialogue with me without having these assumptions about me.

Finally you asked me “What do you mean by not separating them “extensively”? This isn’t clear? Do you mean that we cannot separate them at all? Do you mean that one can be a teacher but not a pastor as long as one is male, but the two must not be separated if one is talking about a woman so that a woman cannot be a teacher because she is not to be a pastor?”

What i mean is when we come to 1 Cor 12 for example and see the gift of ‘teacher’ it needs to be understood in relation to the other listings of gifts. So in Eph we both agree Paul correlates it to a pastor. So by separating them extensively i mean emphasising a ‘teacher’ as something without keeping in mind Pauls other use of the term. When we read one verse alone and emphasise something about it without looking at all relevant passages we could get in trouble. That is why so many scholars associate a ‘teacher’ with an evangelist and/or pastor. It is keeping the whole bible in view rather than mis-representing one verse.

Enough for tonight. Anyway i want to begin to write a response to question 2 for you.
Speak soon.