A hot issue on the campaign trail: theology

[HappyChristian]

Ok, does the biblical admonition for women not to have authority over men extend beyond our churches and homes?

If it did, Deborah would never have been judge in Israel. God doesn't change, and He never would have allowed her to sit in the judge's place. People try to say it was only because there were no godly men, but Barak is listed as a man of faith in Heb. 11. Can't have it both ways - either the Bible is true, and Barak had faith, or there were no godly men....

[John81]

Let's not forget that a judge at that time in Israel was not a designated leader. Each judge had a specific purpose for that time, some did better than others at their task.

When it came to actual government leaders, God always appointed men, just as he did within families and the religious system.

[HappyChristian]

I think you're wrong, John. Judges most definitely were designated leaders. Else they would not have been followed. The fact remains that God put Deborah in the position of judge. And when she told Barak what to do, he did it. That's leadership. And he was commended for his faith. Hmmmm...seems God approved.

[John81]

I think you're wrong, John. Judges most definitely were designated leaders. Else they would not have been followed. The fact remains that God put Deborah in the position of judge. And when she told Barak what to do, he did it. That's leadership. And he was commended for his faith. Hmmmm...seems God approved.

Who was following Samson? Read through the book of Judges and it's clear that each judge had a task but they were not all done the same way. Some of the people wanted to make Gideon king but he refused. Gideon knew he wasn't to be their leader. His task was to lead a few men in battle for a specific purpose and he accomplished that. Deborah had other duties, as did Samson and the rest.

[HappyChristian]

I know very well what the Bible says about the judges, John. And the Bible clearly indicates that they were leaders. They may not have been the kind of leaders we think of when we say the word, but, nevertheless, they were. In Judges 4, we see that the children of Israel came to Deborah for judgment. It doesn't tell us what kind, but there is no way to honestly deny that what she did was leadership. She called Barak and told him he was to lead Israel into battle...much like the POTUS does today with his generals. We can call it whatever we want, but it's leadership. Regardless of whether we are told that anyone followed Samson or not, or if Gideon wanted to be crowned king or not.

I never said that each judge did their jobs in the same way. They were all different. But they were all (including Deborah) leaders.

Barak was considered a man of faith. He refused to go without her, though. Because he knew she had the hand of the Lord on her. He knew where the leadership was....

(BTW - I'm not advocating a woman as POTUS. I'd rather not see one in the White House, for sure. But I'd rather have a woman who believes at least a part of the constitution than a man who doesn't believe any of it.)

[John81]

The book of Judges tells us it was a time in Israel's history without leadership, where the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes. Judges were raised up to help Israel deal with her enemies but they were not raised up as leaders of Israel.

The judges were not governmental leaders.

[HappyChristian]

Again, John, I didn't say government leaders. But they were leaders. And Deborah was a military leader, because Barak wouldn't go without her. You can deny it if you like, but it's true. She was a leader in Israel. And God okayed it.

[John81]

No, Deborah wasn't a military leader. Barak wanted her along because he saw her as a symbol of God being with them. Barak would have received greater recognition had he trusted fully in God without having to have her present with him.

The point being, Deborah, nor any of the judges, have any bearing on who is or isn't to be governmental leaders. Scripture speaks to this and it's clear that men are to hold those positions.

[HappyChristian]

oh, this is so ridiculous, John. Yep, Barak would've gotten more recognition. In fact, Deborah told him so. SHE called him and told him what God said. God revealed TO A WOMAN what Barak was to do. And, like it or lump it, she was leading. That's the point. She gave the orders, he argued with the orders - regardless of the reasons - and then he went with her. With her. After she told him that God wanted him to go. Again, that's leadership (and because Barak wouldn't go without her, she was a military leader). And I'm done - there is no accuracy in saying that she wasn't a leader. God is very clear in His Word that she did lead. Whether or not she was a "governmental" leader. Our POTUS gives orders to his military generals. Just like Deborah did...I'm done because you aren't willing to admit that she was in any way a leader. And yet, when one gives judgment about something, as the Bible clearly says she did, that's leadership.

[Seth Doty]

oh, this is so ridiculous, John. Yep, Barak would've gotten more recognition. In fact, Deborah told him so. SHE called him and told him what God said. God revealed TO A WOMAN what Barak was to do. And, like it or lump it, she was leading. That's the point. She gave the orders, he argued with the orders - regardless of the reasons - and then he went with her. With her. After she told him that God wanted him to go. Again, that's leadership (and because Barak wouldn't go without her, she was a military leader). And I'm done - there is no accuracy in saying that she wasn't a leader. God is very clear in His Word that she did lead. Whether or not she was a "governmental" leader. Our POTUS gives orders to his military generals. Just like Deborah did...I'm done because you aren't willing to admit that she was in any way a leader. And yet, when one gives judgment about something, as the Bible clearly says she did, that's leadership.

Consider what Deborah herself says in the song of Deborah and Barak.


"Judges 5:7-9 The inhabitants of the villages ceased, they ceased in Israel, until that I Deborah arose, that I arose a mother in Israel. They chose new gods; then was war in the gates: was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel? My heart is toward the governors of Israel, that offered themselves willingly among the people. Bless ye the LORD."

She calls herself a "mother" in Israel. A mother is not, or at least should not, be a leader. She is or should be a guide to her children and an adviser/helper to her husband. The father should be the one leader of the family under God with his authority delegated to the wife/mother when necessary. While some might consider that quibbling over terms it is a genuine difference. I can say that I have known a few women that were decent leaders(and many more that tried and were terrible), but I cannot say I ever respected any of them. I treated them all with respect because that is the right thing to do, but I didn't really feel any because I strongly felt something wasn't right with that picture. It is pretty much impossible in my opinion to be a good leader and a good Christian lady after the general pattern we see in 1st Peter 3, 1st Timothy 5 etc. at the same time. A leader must be forceful at times in ways a lady should not be in any situation that is not an emergency. A lady can be a guide and still be a proper lady though. For example there are a few women who's opinions and views on biblical matters I value considerably more than that of most men, and that is both because they, like Abigail of the OT, are women of good understanding, and because they are able to be good guides without being forceful leaders. Those are the sort of ladies I genuinely respect as opposed to simply treating them in a courteous manner because it is the right thing to do.

As far as women in secular leadership/government positions I will tolerate it to a point, if push came to shove I would rather have a good woman than a bad man in charge, but even so I do not like that arrangement very much and cannot help but feel that it is doing things in a way God did not intend. Edited September 7, 2011 by Seth-Doty

[JerryNumbers]

Seth, To me its really not about what a woman is capable of doing and or not doing, there is no doubt some women are much smarted than some men. And it seems you feel the same way.

What its all about to me is being in the position God intends for the male and or female to be in. I feel that the Bible sets completely different rolls in this life for the male and the female.

No person, male or female can do better than being in the position God has for them, no matter how unimportant or important their position is.

On another thought, my wife has worked at the elementary school lunch room for several years, when she started they had a male principle, the children behaved. He left to go to another school. Them they made a woman principle, children behaving was soon a thing of the past. This woman had to retire because of disability, another woman was put in this position. The behavior of the children suffered once again. This woman got cancer and died. Them they put a man back into this position, the children now behave and there is hardly even a problem. Linda says now, "Its enjoyable and even fun when the children comes through the lunch line."

Yet we have both male and females that will not take up the cross God has for them and carry it, they chose to carry a different cross.

This remained me of a poem I have, author is unknown.

My Work

If I should fail to do the work,
Which God designed for me,
In all the world there's not a soul,
To do my job, you see.

Some may accomplish what I could not,
And gather much fame and wealth,
But no other creature which God has made,
Can do my work but myself.

So, however humble my task may be,
And how much tempter to quit,
I'll remember each day as I press along,
That nobody else can do it.



If we are not in the positron God has for us, them there is no one to do the job that God ordained us to do.

[rancher824]

Consider what Deborah herself says in the song of Deborah and Barak.


"Judges 5:7-9 The inhabitants of the villages ceased, they ceased in Israel, until that I Deborah arose, that I arose a mother in Israel. They chose new gods; then was war in the gates: was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel? My heart is toward the governors of Israel, that offered themselves willingly among the people. Bless ye the LORD."

She calls herself a "mother" in Israel. A mother is not, or at least should not, be a leader. She is or should be a guide to her children and an adviser/helper to her husband. The father should be the one leader of the family under God with his authority delegated to the wife/mother when necessary. While some might consider that quibbling over terms it is a genuine difference. I can say that I have known a few women that were decent leaders(and many more that tried and were terrible), but I cannot say I ever respected any of them. I treated them all with respect because that is the right thing to do, but I didn't really feel any because I strongly felt something wasn't right with that picture. It is pretty much impossible in my opinion to be a good leader and a good Christian lady after the general pattern we see in 1st Peter 3, 1st Timothy 5 etc. at the same time. A leader must be forceful at times in ways a lady should not be in any situation that is not an emergency. A lady can be a guide and still be a proper lady though. For example there are a few women who's opinions and views on biblical matters I value considerably more than that of most men, and that is both because they, like Abigail of the OT, are women of good understanding, and because they are able to be good guides without being forceful leaders. Those are the sort of ladies I genuinely respect as opposed to simply treating them in a courteous manner because it is the right thing to do.

As far as women in secular leadership/government positions I will tolerate it to a point, if push came to shove I would rather have a good woman than a bad man in charge, but even so I do not like that arrangement very much and cannot help but feel that it is doing things in a way God did not intend.

I would have to disagree about a mother not being a leader. A Godly mother is a leader that leads her children to Godliness. Consider these 2 passages from the Proverbs.

Pro_1:8 My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:
Pro_6:20 My son, keep thy father's commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother:

Now who makes a law except a leader. The proverb does not say the law of thy father that thy mother enforcess!! It says the Law of thy mother!!!! Edited September 12, 2011 by rancher824

[Seth Doty]

I would have to disagree about a mother not being a leader. A Godly mother is a leader that leads her children to Godliness. Consider these 2 passages from the Proverbs.



Now who makes a law except a leader. The proverb does not say the law of thy father that thy mother enforcess!! It says the Law of thy mother!!!!

I considered those verses before I posted but I think contextually "the law of thy mother" is not referring to a law specifically made by the mother, but rather Gods law which the mother follows. The reason I think that is because there are entirely different words used when talking about the fathers "commandment"/ "instruction" and the "law of thy mother". In the place where it says keep thy fathers "commandment" it is translated from the word " mitsvah" which means command, law, statute, etc. "instruction" in the other verse is translated from "muwcar" which means chastisement, both literal and verbal. In forsake not the "law" of thy mother on the other hand the word for "law" is "towrah" or torah. Now torah is a word generally used for Gods law rather than mans law. Given that it is an entirely different word and one associated more with Gods law than mans law I tend to assume that is what it is talking about.

If the meaning was not meant to be different I would think that the passage would tie "father and mother" together such as the passages that speak of honoring your father and mother. I also think the following verses, proverbs 6:21-23 are pretty clearly speaking of Gods laws rather than laws created by the mother herself.

Now obviously if your mother makes a law you should do your best to keep it, that would fall under the "honoring" category, but overall I think it is the father who should make the vast majority of the rules. When a mother rather than the father ends up creating most of the family "laws" a whole lot of the time it leads to problems and disrespect, particularly when sons rather than daughters are involved.

Now with that said I am not exactly 200% sure that my position on those verses is correct and yours is mistaken, there might be room for disagreement, but considering both how those scriptures are laid out and how I have seen things work out when the mom is the main "legislator" I would tend to be pretty comfortable with my position on what those scriptures are saying. Edited September 12, 2011 by Seth-Doty

[rancher824]

I considered those verses before I posted but I think contextually "the law of thy mother" is not referring to a law specifically made by the mother, but rather Gods law which the mother follows. The reason I think that is because there are entirely different words used when talking about the fathers "commandment"/ "instruction" and the "law of thy mother". In the place where it says keep thy fathers "commandment" it is translated from the word " mitsvah" which means command, law, statute, etc. "instruction" in the other verse is translated from "muwcar" which means chastisement, both literal and verbal. In forsake not the "law" of thy mother on the other hand the word for "law" is "towrah" or torah. Now torah is a word generally used for Gods law rather than mans law. Given that it is an entirely different word and one associated more with Gods law than mans law I tend to assume that is what it is talking about.

If the meaning was not meant to be different I would think that the passage would tie "father and mother" together such as the passages that speak of honoring your father and mother.

Now obviously if your mother makes a law you should do your best to keep it, that would fall under the "honoring" category, but overall I think it is the father who should make the vast majority of the rules. When a mother rather than the father ends up creating most of the family "laws" a whole lot of the time it leads to problems and disrespect, particularly when sons rather than daughters are involved.

Now with that said I am not exactly 200% sure that my position on those verses is correct and yours is mistaken, there might be room for disagreement, but considering both how those scriptures are laid out and how I have seen things work out when the mom is the main "legislator" I would tend to be pretty comfortable with my position on what those scriptures are saying.

But would you say Moses was a leader? He was only taking the children of Israel where God told him to and giving them the laws God gave him. The same would be true of any other Godly leader. Even the "laws we make" as fathers should be based on our study and understanding of God's law. For if they ever contridict God's law, they are a law that needs thrown out. Deborah was a judge. In this I find it interesting what the 1828 Websters says (no I am not trying to make it inspired) about the definition of the word judge.

5. In the history of Israel, a chief magistrate, with civil and military powers. The Israelites were governed by judges more than three hundred years, and the history of their transactions is called the book of Judges.

[rancher824]

From Barnes notes (Presbiterian rom the 1800s) introduction to the book of Judges says

The Book of Judges, like the other historical books of the Old Testament, takes its name from the subject to which it chiefly relates, namely, the exploits of those JUDGES who ruled Israel in the times between the death of Joshua and the rise of Samuel. The rule of the Judges Rth_1:1 in this limited sense was a distinct dispensation, distinct from the leadership of Moses and Joshua, distinct from the more regular supremacy of Eli, the High Priest, and from the prophetic dispensation inaugurated by Samuel 1Sa_3:19-21; Act_3:24.

Note "ruled Israel".
From John Gill (early 1700s baptist though calvinistic)

The title of this book in the Hebrew copies is Sepher Shophetim, the Book of Judges; but the Syriac and Arabic interpreters call it,

"the Book of the Judges of the Children of Israel;''

and the Septuagint only Judges; so called, not because it was written by them, though some think it was compiled out of annals and diaries kept by them; but it seems to be the work of one person only: the true reason of its name is, because it treats of the judges of Israel, gives an account of their lives and actions, and especially such as concerned their office; which office was different from that of kings, and seems only to have been occasional, and chiefly lay in delivering the people out of the hands of their enemies, when oppressed, distressed, or carried captive by them; in protecting them in the enjoyment of their country, rights, and liberties; in leading out their armies against their enemies when needful; and in settling differences, judging law suits, and administering justice. The government of the nation, during their time, was a theocracy.

Note :delivering, protecting, leading, settling, judging and administering.
If we had a women today wanting an office (call it leadership or not) that fit the definition of Judges from the book of Judges, we would have a lot of IFB men throwing fits she is not qualified because she is a women.