The Results are in: What do people think about women in church leadership?

Thanks to all who participated in the survey on women in church leadership. You have shared some great insights and given me helpful information. While it was not my original intention, the comments were so great I felt selfish not to share them. I hope that is okay (please let me know if it isn't). Finally, please note that the purpose here is UNDERSTANDING. Therefore please be respectful and refrain from being critical of those who are also devoted to Christ, yet may disagree on this peripheral issue. Thanks :)

My full report on this topic is still forthcoming, but for now I will share the information that has been given to me. (I am short on time, but wanted to share)

These results come from 86 women, 8 men, and one who did not specify. While the sample of men was smaller, gender did not seem to create a bias in one direction or the other. Church represented include Church of Christ (1), Disciple of Christ (1), charismatic (1), protestant (1), reformed (1), Nazarene (4), Presbyterian (1), Pentecostal (4), Wesleyan (1), Anglican(1), Apostolic (1), Assemblies of God (1), none (1), Grace Brethren (2), Lutheran (3), Catholic (3), Baptist (5), Southern Baptist (1),  Methodist (5), Non-denominational (37), non-specified Christian (2), and Vineyard (18).

Please answer the following questions based on your experience at the most recent church you have attended. Have you ever heard a woman preach at a main service or gathering?

Yes: 69%    No: 31%

Have you ever observed a woman serving in a leadership role such as pastor or elder?

Yes: 67%  No:33%

Do you feel that it is acceptable or Biblical for a woman to be pastor of a church?

Yes: 74%   No: 26%

Comments:

"Not 100% sure that she should"

"Not sure"

"With her husband, yes. Not lead pastor."

"Yes!!!!!"

"But not a senior pastor"

"Acceptable AND Biblical"

"I think a church is much stronger and alive when men are in active leadership roles.

Not sure. Part of me does but I am not sure of the context of the scriptures that talk against this."

"http://carm.org/should-women-be-pastors-and-elders"

"I grew up Methodist and had a female pastor then. Our youth pastor currently serving is female."

"I haven't really researched"

"Whenever the Lord calls someone, man or woman, they need to obey His call. Some may argue women in leadership in the bible were exceptions. I think God must have wanted to make sure they were noted as leaders for a reason. If someone is strong in character and mature in faith, they should pastor if called. Also, God has a right to assign the roles of the church to whomever He wants. And if a woman powerfully and accurately preaches the Gospel, and people respond, how could He be mad about that."

Would you feel comfortable with a woman as your pastor?

Yes: 66%   No: 34%

Comments:

"I've had women pastors in the church I attended and have a woman pastor in my family. All are great women and capable of their jobs."

"Women speakers have a whine to their voice, especially preaching. Or they try to be 'manly'"

"Unsure"

"I had a woman pastor for about a year many years ago. She was nice and a good preacher, but I'm not sure a woman carries the same authority."

"Not in a larger church (1,000+) but yes for smaller churches - but I would adjust"

"I was saved under the leadership of a woman pastor in 1974."

"It's against God's word"

"I don't think I would, maybe it's the small part of me that is traditional"

"Character and effectiveness are most important."

Do you feel that women are encouraged and nurtured to pursue whatever the Lord has called them to, without limitation. If not, please explain.

Yes: 70% No: 30%

There is a lot more to this statistic. The yes's and no's to this question do not correlate with the yes's and no's on the previous questions. This question seems to have different meaning for different people. Several who answered "no" to the prior 4 questions skipped this one. Women who chose "no" to the prior questions, but  "yes" to this one seem to be content in their current roles. Women who chose "yes" to the prior questions and "yes" to this seem to feel supported. Women who chose "yes" to the prior two questions and "no" to this one likely feel a need for change are the reason for my investigation of this topic. 

Comments:

"Not in every instance or denomination"

"in vineyard, yes. in the church at large, the glass ceiling is very prevalent, especially based on interpretations of Paul's writing. women are given predefined roles in the church and ministry just bc of their gender"

"providing it is scriptural"

"I feel that too often, people use passages in the Bible to keep women at lesser roles in the church."

"I have always desired to preach/teach more then that i feel led but my church does not let women lead anything but women's and children 's ministry with the pastor completely in the loop."

"depends on church"

"I do, but I believe that whatever we are "feeling" that The Lord has called us to do has to be measured against His word. If it's in contrast with His word, we're misunderstanding.

"

"My church teaches that women shouldn't be leaders over men"

"Read the bible"

"I think they see women in lesser roles"

"I don't think that women would be effective at evangelizing to Muslims, at least not the men. Especially in places like Saudi Arabia."

"Depends on the church and support system around her

"it's still a mans world in many ways"

"Just because I'm not comfortable with it, does not mean that God will not use a woman pastor to His glory and the growth of His church somewhere."

"In my church they are, but in many others they are not."

"Sometimes"

"not everywhere. only in some churches."

"women should not be in position of authority over men"

"In some Christian circles, but not in all."

"I feel oftentimes it is predetermined by many religions that women have their roles and it is not on the pulpit."

"We do not have women priests in my church"

"I do believe that in a lot of cases they are, but, unfortunately, I have been in churches where this is not the case."

"Women are not looked to as heads of households. Biblically they fall beneath their husband but I do believe God will use any willing vessel. He made a donkey speak once."

"Traditionally certain roles are held by men and I think a lot of people still feel it just feels right to have a man In leadership"

"If it's something more non-traditional, there may be lack of support simply because the idea is inconceivable."

"In many churches, in many churches it seems to be a men' good old boy network"

"I feel most churches think men should run the show"

"Organized religion is ruled by men in all cases that I've ever seen"

Please include any other relevant thoughts, feelings, experiences, theological beliefs, etc that come to mind when you consider the topic of women in church leadership.

"I believe the Bible says that a woman is not to teach a man, however, it's not typical that a woman lead an army, but Debra did."

"I do not believe you have to attend or belong to a church. I'm against organized religion as a whole."

"Some denominations have grown into accepting women in God led positions, others have not and some may never get to that point. The woman so denied has to ask herself where she can be most useful to her God and calling. Either by staying and being denied yet faithful, or leaving to where her gifts maybe fully explored and engaged. All of this with mush true soul searching and seeking of God's guidance."

"My degree is in youth ministry and recreation and i graduated from vineyard leadership institute. As i was applying for youth ministry jobs i was qualified for, i couldn't believe the number of letters i received stating, "we are only accepting applications from qualified men". "Thanks but no thanks". It's really quite sad that there is so much biblical illiteracy in the church itself."

"I am thankful that our Pastor's wife also teaches us. It helps empower women and shows us that, we too, have an important role in the ministry and marketplace, not just at home."

"Women can do what they want to do and work for with God's help. If things don't work out God has something better for you!"

"Women in church leadership roles have been a part of my life for so long I haven't really thought about it being any other way for quite a while."

"I think of myself as an un-liberated women in a male dominated world. and I think most churches personify this. I have my own biased against a woman being the lead pastor, mostly because of the mentality of our world. Women can't win. We treat each other poorly, If you dress nicely your a rich bitch showing off, if you wear a short skirt your a slut, if you dress modestly, your a prude...... i think men can't follow a woman because they see women as sex objects. I would be curious to read your study when your done, I hope it gets published. good luck"

"We have one woman pastor at church, which is quite unusual and I love it. She has a totally different insight into subjects than our male pastors. One of her gifts, though, is also a drawback - she is so in tune with her emotions that sometimes her emotions get the better of her and she has a hard time getting through the sermon without choking up. It can be very distracting at times."

"I think if God guides them to a leadership position then that is the position they should take. Women have very sensitive spirits and I feel like they can relate in a totally different way than a man. That being said, I also think the prejuduce of a woman being in that role may hinder some people from listening or paying attn to a woman."

"I believe (as a female worship leader and former youth leader) that in many leadership roles, The Lord calls Men to fill those roles (just as the gospel was first preached to the Jew and then to the Gentile), but when they don't step up to the plate, He will call a woman to do the work. In many churches, without women in leadership roles, there would be no one there to do the work. However, although I could be comfortable with a woman in many leadership roles, I would never be comfortable with a female pastor, because I believe the Bible is clear on this matter, and if you don't obey Him, why would I want you to lead me?"

"People take out of context verses in corinthians and use it as an argument against women in a church"

"I know that there were OT and NT prophetesses. So I can't understand why in my church there is this teaching that women can't be Sunday school teachers in classes with men in them and can't be pastors."

"I have mixed emotions on this and feel someone like Joyce Myers is definitely called to preach I just don't know in regards to the bible saying women cannot be pastors."

"I feel there is a movement where woman are stepping up and wanting more of God's heart!"

"The strongest woman I know is our senior pastor's wife, a pastor and preacher herself, a worship leader, women's ministry leader, co-church planter, children's ministry leader, and helped pastor one of the largest youth groups in Australia years ago. I am proud to call her one of my best friends, and learn something from her wise and beautiful heart every time I have the opportunity to speak with her."

"The man or husband is the head of the household and that carries over to church leadership"

"Great topic...never really prayed about this."

"With all of the obstacles that women face as far as becoming leaders in all areas of society, I think it is more likely that a woman who achieves a leadership role in a church does so because of a calling."

"I love Joyce Meyer. I watch her more than any other TV preacher."

"I believe that Junia is a Biblical example supporting women in ministry leadership rolls, including the roll of pastor."

"I believe women need to be involved in the leadership of the church. Wisdom is not limited by gender. It has been my experience, however, that most women pastors are from very liberal denominations. I haven't really seen any in conservative or holiness denominations. I also believe that churches that have a majority of men in active leadership positions have a healthier congregation. Men are more reluctant as a whole to publicly declare a need for a Savior, and when you have more women than men in leadership at any particular church, you will have less men, especially those in the 20-40 age range attending. They need to see strong men in authority in the church, not ashamed of serving Jesus. We all need to see more of that, actually."

"May those whom He calls, be equipped and come forward with lots of blessings and guidance. Amen."

"Having served in leadership positions in churches I found that I was not treated well by the men in leadership."

"I see no difference as to the gender of the pastor. If god calls a person to ministry they should obedient to that call."

"God doesn't call the equipped, he equips the called. ...... "Your sons and daughters will prophesy"......... I have heard many female preachers/leaders and they are great, and anointed by God himself......"

"They Should Not BE In Leadership Roles."

"There are plenty of female pastors at my church, and most of them are downright amazing. I can't understand why any church would restrict people like them from leading based on the fact that they don't have a Y chromosome."

"Although the Word shows many more men in leadership roles, God does give us women in leadership roles, both old and new testaments. I believe he has called us all to serve."

"I have always been taught that if we (meaning men or women) don't worship God then the rocks will cry out! If God can accept rocks crying out to him then he must expect that men & women both will step up & take on the roles of the calling he has mandated for them!"

"I think women were essential in Jesus' ministry. The Bible is actually pretty revolutionary when it comes to women's rights. There are many instances where women are referenced and credited with things that were crazy revolutionary."

"I believe we have all been called to do everything God has called us to be, which includes preaching, teaching, evangelizing, leading. My anointing isn't any different than the anointing a man has. I do believe, whether a man or a woman, we should be under some form of covering."

"If there is not leadership, we stumble. I don't care their gender as long as I feel they are being lead by God."

"We need strong leaders and we need to train them, support them, love them and hold them accountable regardless of gender."

"People are people and God loves us all."

"I think women are very compassionate and should be encouraged to be in leadership roles."

For now, I will share this article from Christine Caine, who shares encouraging advice on this topic.

Christian Vocation: Not a Destination, but a Journey

         Christian vocation is not about what you do, but who you are; it's not a destination, but a journey. It is more than a job, or even a career. Cornelius Plantinga Jr. states that “A Christian's main vocation is to become a prime citizen of the kingdom of God” and defines a “prime citizen” as one who “passionately yearns for the kingdom.” (p.108, Plantinga, 2002) He further describes a prime citizen as one who deeply loves God and the things of God, relishes God's Word, and rejoices in Christ; someone who hungers and works for justice, fights cruelty, wants to “enroll in God's project as if it were her own.” (p.108) This means that a “prime citizen” of the kingdom serves, is not one who simply serves out of obligation, but someone who seeks God's heart and serves out of an internal desire to see God's will done on earth. Plantinga states that if one has been elected to follow Jesus, he or she has been elected to serve in the kingdom of God. What does this look like and how can we practically seek to uncover the details of our own vocation? To expand upon these ideas, I will review the roots of vocation, consider the Christian perspective of vocation, and share my experience in discerning my own vocation.

                      
            Vocation comes from the Latin “voca” which means “voice calling” or simply, “calling.” (Sherman) Previous to Martin Luther, “vocation” was used in a limited to refer specifically to those who were “called” to join the clergy; Thomas Aquinas and other theologians had the view that work is useful only to provide necessities, which elevated those living a monastic life as recipients of a higher calling (drawing his conclusion from Luke 10:28-32, the story of Mary and Martha). (Setran, 2011) Luther is credited with restoring this term to be used in a less narrow way; Luther stated “every occupation has its own honor before God, as well as its own requirements and duties.” (pp. 395-396, Kleinhans, 2005) According to Luther, the “secular” world belongs to God as well and “all human work becomes a means to participate in God's creating and sustaining activity on earth.” (p.396, Kleinhans, 2005) Taking this a step further, Luther asserts that vocation refers is much more than a line of work, but encompasses a wide variety of “stations” throughout a person's life. (Schultze, 2005)

          First of all, let's consider the limited and elusive understanding of vocation or calling that many hold today. In today's world, the term “vocation” or “calling” has once again become a term that is often limited to a religious profession; “calling” is often considered to mean a call to a religious occupation and “vocation” is equated to a paid occupation. (Setran, 2011) Problems arise in both cases. Both understandings can undermine a person's understanding of what the Lord is calling him or her to do. First, when a calling to a religious occupation is seen as more Holy than an occupation in the marketplace, then it is often assumed that the “spiritual” work is the responsibility of those with religious occupations; as a result “laity are spectators, critics, and receivers of pastoral care, free to go about their business because the pastor is taking care of the business of the kingdom.” (p. 348, Setran, 2011) This is not Biblical. Ephesians 4:11-12 says “Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service” - this means that the job of “religious” professionals is to give the “non-religious” professionals the tools they need to serve effectively in God's kingdom. (NIV) In his article, “Getting a Life: Vocational Discernment in the Post-Christian World, David Setran points out that this, sadly, is often counter-cultural in the American church. (2011) Secondly, when “vocation” is compartmentalized to be solely a paid occupation, which is often related to other dualistic views such as “secular and sacred, facts and values, public and private, matter and spirit, work and leisure.” (p. 347, Setran, 2011) The result can be to adopt Aquinas's practical view of work, viewing it as separate from spiritual matters; this view seemingly eliminates the concept of serving the Lord in the workplace.

            A biblical view of vocation and eliminates this compartmentalized thinking. First of all, a secular career needn't be any less scared than a religious career; to serve God well in a secular arena is better than serving God poorly in a religious position. According to puritan Joseph Hall, “The honest service that we doe in an honest calling, though it be but to plow, or digge, if done in obedience, and conscience of God's Commandment, is crowned with an ample reward; whereas the best workes for their kinde (preaching, praying, offering Evangelical sacrifices) if without respect to God's injunction and glory are loaded with curses." (p.121, Plantinga, 2002) Secondly, on top of eliminating this distinction, it is important to view Christian vocation as much more than just an occupation. Luther creates a comprehensive view, stating that one “should be guided in all his works by this thought and contemplate this one thing alone, that he may serve and benefit others in all that he does, considering nothing except the need and the advantage of his neighbor." (p.348, Kleinhans, 2005) Christian philosopher Lee Hardy explains that “work may be one thing that I am called to do, but it is not the only thing that I am called to do.” (Sherman) Plantinga takes a similar view and gets more specific: “To follow their main vocation of serving the kingdom of God, Christians pursue a wonderful array of sub-vocations. They sing, pray and hand each other the body and blood of Christ. They rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep. They fight against evil, but also fly kites and bake bread...” and so on, “This isn't a job that appears on any government list of occupations, but it is a calling of God, and it is surely a contribution to the kingdom of God.” (p. 114, Plantinga, 2002)

         Building upon this concept, a Christian vocation encompasses not only what a person is called to do, but also, who a person is called to be. Vocation includes the broad calling that is shared by all Christian's, which is to be “caring followers of Jesus Christ who faithfully love God, neighbor, and self;” each Christian is also called to specific “stations,” which are the various job's, situations, and relationships held throughout a lifetime. (Schultze, 2005) Setran categorizes this concept of “vocation” and “stations” in saying that “Primary calling represents the straightforward call to God himself, to a recognition that our lives belong to him alone....Christians are first of all called to repentance (Acts 2:38-39), called to be saints (1 Corinthians 1:2), and called out of darkness (1 Pet 2:9) and into the church (Col 3:15) in order to serve God and humanity. This is a Christian's primary vocation;” to differentiate from this concept of “primary calling,” Setran also discussed “secondary calling,” which it simply refers to the unique expressions of this shared primary calling in each individual life (aka “stations”). (p.348, 2011) Luther reminds us of the scripture, “apart from me, you can do nothing” and emphasizes that we are not baptized into any specific role, but to Jesus Christ. (p. 349, Kleinhans, 2005) Quentin Schultze emphasized the importance of relationship with God over specific accomplishment as well, stating that a “prime citizen” is one who “rightly realizes that occupational callings emerge out of a faithful relationship with God, not just a message from God.” (p. 13, 2005) Determining the individual stations that one is called to is a complex matter as well, which we will discuss next; one example, of how God is honored through us serving Him in the station of our family is that “if they work right, families become a microcosm of the kingdom of God, incubating us in faith, hope, and love and schooling us in patience.” (p.113, Plantinga, 2002)

              Now that we have looked at what is included in a Christian vocation or calling (the terms will be used interchangeably going forward), it is necessary to address the “big question”....“what is God's calling for my life??” During Luther's time, many of these roles and relationships were “given rather than chosen,” but his focus was that one did not need to change roles or occupations in order to service God.” (p. 399, Kleinhans, 2005) Life is different today; we have many choices and most of us will change jobs, or even fields, multiple times throughout a lifetime. According to Setran, “our post-Christian culture has multiplied options and deified choice, threatening vocational commitment and contentment while blinding emerging adults to the already present action of God in the world” and that for young adults today the “vocational decision-making has become for many a decade-long process of both exhilarating freedom and agonizing discernment.” (p. 346, 2011) This problem can partially addressed by adopting the understanding of vocation described above, yet it is still necessary to consider how one can discern the specific stations that he or she is called to in the present as well as in the future.

               First, how does God reveal this information to us? Schultze and Plantinga both stress the importance of being connected with a local church. Plantinga states that “of all the ways we can express our citizenship in the kingdom of God, none is more obvious than becoming an active member of our local church.” (p. 108, Plantinga, 2002) Schultze explains further that Christians are “best equipped to discern our strengths and weaknesses and learn about opportunities to serve in a community of believers;” he also offers the reassurance that “in spite of our confusion about callings, God claims us for service long before we are aware of it” and emphasizes the importance of serving God even before we have “perfect knowledge of God's plan for us.” (pp. 13-14)

            Secondly, what are the needs of the kingdom? According to Frederick Buechner, “The place God calls you to is the place where deep gladness and the word's deep hunger meet.” (p116, Plantinga, 2002) Plantinga suggest considering questions such as: “Where in the kingdom does God want me to work? Where are the needs great? Where are the workers few? Where are the temptations manageable? With whom would I work?...What will my career do for the 'least of these'?” in order to “strive first for the kingdom.” (pp. 116-117) These questions focus not on one's personal desires, but the needs of the kingdom. To go where the need is great and the workers are few means the workload would be overwhelming without reliance upon the Lord; to answer this call, in the words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, means “When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.” (p. 116, Plantinga, 2002) To answer such call, Plantinga advises that one must enter the kingdom as a child, which means “Jesus most surely meant that before we ever have anything to give...we must become good receivers;” He states that dependence is what binds us to each other and to the Lord. (p.117, Plantinga, 2002)

             Third, it is importance to recognize that calling is not a destination, but a journey. It is not hit-or miss. This is good news because it takes the pressure off that we might accidentally “get it wrong”. For some, calling may be made clear in a single defining moment, such as Mary's encounter with the angel or Paul's encounter with Jesus; for others it is revealed more gradually in a less defined way. (Schultze, 2005) Neither is better or worse. Shultze says the flexibility is essential and “God's callings have always been incredibly diverse and often rather ambiguous even in hindsight.” This does not present a problem, however, if we remember the primary call is to be a follower of Jesus. Schultze offers wisdom to living in this ambiguity, stating that “We learn, listen, and follow the leading of the Spirit” and continually reply “Here I am” to declare our readiness to serve however He wishes. (p. 15, 2005)

            Finally, I will share my personal experience with seeking to uncover my own calling. Personally, I am encouraged by and in agreement with the information shared above, because it has been consistent with my experience. I have been following Jesus for about 14 years and am still seeking to uncover the details of his plan for my life. For many years, I was constantly tempted to “impatiently want to forge ahead to an unclear destination instead of taking the time to learn to be faithful.” (Schultze, 2005) God broke me of this habit by letting me experience the results of my own plans and by drawing me into closer relationship with Him. This meant years of pain and turmoil that seemed to be more than I could bear, but I am thankful because it is a lesson I will not forget. He has also taught me the value of dependence on Him. I have often tried to figure out solutions to my problems or plans for my future, only to discover more questions than answers; at those times, He gently reminds me to quit trying to figure it out myself and to place my trust in Him instead. In this way, He leads my one step at a time. I believe He does not show me the big picture because I would feel pressured to figure it out myself. As stated above, my primary calling is to Christ, anything additional that He calls me to do flows from that relationship.

         To get more specific, His call has been surprisingly different that what I have told Him it is. About a year after I became a Christian, felt the Lord prompting me to stand up in response to serve in “full-time five-fold ministry.” Shortly after, I went on a missions trip where I got a glimpse of what I feel is what God has for me in His kingdom. I again responded to a call to “Go anywhere, do anything for the sake of the Gospel.” I expected to return to the mission field, but got married and found myself in a position where even the mention of an interest in missions brought hostility. I had feared that I had “messed up” God's call for my life, but I still prayed and cried and begged God to let me go. Years passed, my marriage became more hostile, and I prayed to God for even the opportunity to serve at church. I experienced a lot of frustration with closed doors and I assumed that God was calling me to seek to “win” my husband back to right-relationship with the Lord by responding to his hostility and despair with hope and love and point him to repentance. In the end, my marriage failed, but God's call for my life didn't. He is calling me to new things and I am simply following Him.

             In conclusion, Christian vocation, thankfully, is a call to relationship and service to Christ and is not a destination, but a journey. It is comprehensive enough to encompass every area of our lives. A call to a title or job alone can be shallow and is not enough to withstand the pressure, discomfort, and hardship that one is likely to face over the course of a lifetime. A call to Christ, however, goes deep and is irrevocable. Fulfilling a call to an occupation rests one's own abilities, a call to serve Christ rests only on faithfulness. It provides the flexibility required to withstand a lifetime. He uses the good and the bad. When Christian vocation is understood as a call to Christ, it properly places the failures that we experience at the feet of Jesus and successes are solely tied to our obedience to Christ; therefore, successful service to the Lord is attainable to anyone regardless of background, class, or ability. It is not about climbing a ladder or perfecting skills, but listening for the direction of a Savior and King. Christian vocation is about who's you are. It is a call to a relationship and an ever-unfolding adventure.

Kleinhans, Kathryn. (2005) The Work of a Christian: Vocation in Lutheran Perspective. Work & World: Volume 25 Number 4.

Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. (2002) Engaging God’s World. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company

Setran, David P. (2011)“Getting a Life:” Vocational Discernment in the Post-Christian World. Christian Education Journal: Series 3, Volume 8, Number 2.

Sherman, Steven B, PhD. A Biblical Model of Work. Retrieved from Regent University: Making of the Christian Mind - Week 7 online course content, Oct, 2013.

Shultze, Quinten. (2005) “Here I am”. Baker Books. Retrieved from Regent University: Making of the Christian Mind - Week 7 online course content, Oct, 2013.

Miracles: Philosophically Problematic or Biblically Necessary?

In America, even Christians have been affected by a naturalistic worldview, where the supernatural realm is treated as less “real” than the natural realm. (Nathan & Wilson, 2009) The first response when something miraculous happens can be to look for a natural explanation and only concede that is “must be a miracle” when no other explanation is found. Some philosophers believe that miracles are philosophically problematic, stating that “They are either impossible, or if possible, they can not be rationally believed.” (p. 308, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) This paper will examine possible objections and discuss why a belief in miracles does not present a philosophical problem and can be held by a responsible, reasonable person. First, the concept of “miracle” must be defined, then possible objections will be considered, and finally a case will be made for a belief in miracles.

First, it is necessary to define what is meant by “miracle.” Although any event that defies significant odds or defies natural laws and scientific explanation is often called a miracle, the formal definition used for this discussion will be “an even occurring in the context of legitimate religious expectation that is so contrary to the course of nature that the casual activity of God is the best explanation for its occurrence.” (p. 309, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Examples of this include things such as someone who receives prayer and recovers sight or is healed from a fatal condition, the parting of the Red Sea in the Old Testament, or most importantly, Jesus’s resurrection from the dead. (Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Events are not considered a miracle if a natural explanation is more probable. Also “if it does not draw attention to God, it is not a miracle.” (p.309, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) As a final note, this definition does rely on an existence of God; while not discussed here, several solid arguments for God's existence can be found in Chapter 6 of Cowan and Speigel's The Love of Wisdom. (2009)

The first objection is that of Baruch Spinoza, who stated “miracles are impossible because they constitute violations of the laws of nature.” (p. 310, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) His argument comes from his naturalistic viewpoint that the laws of nature are immutable and constitute the highest truth. (Cowan & Speigel, 2009) This view could pose a significant challenge to the belief in the existence of miracles, if in fact, the laws of nature were in fact ultimate, invariable truth. However, most naturalists consider the scientific laws of nature to be “observed regularities,” but not sufficient to rule out the existence of an omnipotent being. (p. 310, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Also, this objection fails to provide an alternate explanation for the seemingly miraculous events that do occur. It elevates natural laws the highest truth, while failing to provide an explanation for seemingly miraculous events when they do happen. His objection that “miracles would require the immutable laws to be mutable,” would seem self-defeating as it would to also be saying “if events that defy the laws of nature exist, natural laws are not immutable.” (p. 310, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) The existence of these seemingly miraculous events will be discussed later.

         David Hume offers a second objection that “one could never have enough evidence to justify believing that one occurred.” (p. 311, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) His belief is that “since a wise person always believes what is more probable, he will always refuse to believe that a miracle has occurred.” ( p. 311, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Hume is correct in his assessment that most people do not experience miracles on a regular basis; therefore, on a given day, it is more probable to expect that no miracle will occur. It would also seem reasonable to infer that Hume has never experienced a miracle; based on his experience, the probability of a miracle occurring is close to 0%. It may be a bit of a stretch, but it could also seem reasonable to expect that Hume has not made considerable effort to consider the evidence with an open mind. Christian author, C.S. Lewis stated “We know the experience against [miracles] to be uniform only if we know that all reports of them are false. And we know all the reports are false only if we know already that miracles have never occurred. In fact, we are arguing in a circle.” (p.311, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Put simply, miracles either occur or they don't; if a miracle has ever occurred, then miracles exist. There is good evidence to believe that miracles have occurred: “First, that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies of a coming Messiah and that his miracles were confirmation that in him the Messiah had arrived, was regarded by first- and second century apologists as the strongest argument for Christianity. Second, if one cares to look, there are many well-evidenced present-day accounts of events that appear to merit being called miracles. It is irresponsible to ignore both the witness of the early Church and contemporary accounts of miracles.” (p. 267, Larmer, 2011) It seems that Hume has been trapped in what Rich Nathan describes as the “Two rules of all paradigms: 1.We do not see what we ‘know’ should not be there. 2. If we do see, we constantly try to fit what we see into existing assumptions (we see what we want to see or at least what we think we should see).” (p.73, 2009) So, it seems that Hume’s argument may not be as strong as he would hope.

Additionally, the objection is offered that “we should not believe it to be a miracle because science may someday be able to give a natural explanation for it.” (p. 312, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Again, it is necessary to consider the facts. The definition of “miracle” used here is “within the context of religious expectation,” so the context is important. Was the person praying or receiving prayer for the miracle to happen? Was the person desperately in need on help and crying out to God? If so, then we avoid making the “God-of-the- gaps” fallacy (simply using supernatural intervention as an explanation for whatever we can’t explain) and conclude that the best explanation is that “God did it.” (p.312, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) If miracles were limited to only to restoration of a physical body, then one could possibly argue that there could be a psychological element that has not been discovered yet; however, other type of miracles occur, such as the resurrection of Christ. Also, entire books have been written on the subject of Christian healing, such as John Wimber’s book Power Healing and eye witness and personal accounts of God’s miraculous provision and healings provided in Rolland and Heidi Baker’s Always Enough. (Wimber & Springer, 2009; Baker & Baker, 2003) Such accounts and explanations do not seem to exist outside of the context of religious expectation. John Wimber explains that “Christian signs and wonders are beyond rationality, but they serve a rational purpose: to authenticate the gospel…It is a relationship that can be described and understood.” (p.156, Wimber, 2009) Does it make sense to reject an explanation that is readily available in favor of the possibility of a future (yet currently non-existent) explanation?

To add to Wimber’s explanation, according to a Christian worldview, Jesus set an example of expecting the miraculous. Howard Marshall explains that “Jesus does something unusual, generally by performing healings of various human disorders…the stories of Jesus have him healing and restoring people simply by uttering or saying a command that has an instantaneous effect.” (p.62, 2004) According to Australian archeologist Clifford Wilson, “Those [archeologists] who know he facts now recognize that the New Testament must be accepted must be accepted as a remarkably accurate source book;” meaning that archeological findings have strongly supported the accounts of the New Testament. (p. 107, Strobel, 1998) With this in mind, Jesus also sets the example for other types of miracles such as the multiplication of 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish to feed 5,000 people. (Matthew 14, NIV) Therefore, it does not appear that the belief in miracles is irresponsibly held as an explanation simply because no other viable explanation exists; the Bible, which is strongly supported by evidence, provides a foundation for a belief in miracles.

Finally, Hume presents a seemingly contradictory argument that if miracles do exist and are used to support all religions, then they “cancel each other out.” (p. 313, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Cowan & Speigel refute this argument by pointing out that evidence of miracles related to religions besides Christianity is “weak or non-existent.” (p.313, 2009) Also, evidence for the central miracle claim of Christianity, Jesus’s resurrection, is very strong; in fact many early Christians came to believe for this very reason. (p. 314, Cowan & Speigel, 2009; Larmer, 2011) In his book, The Next Christendom, Philip Jenkins describes the growth of Christianity in the non-western world. He states “From the earliest days of European missions, the promise of healing was at the heart of Christian successes…Today, rising African churches stand or fall by the success of their healing.” (p.145, Jenkins, 2007) For the church to have success in healing, means that healings occur; for the church to grow as a result of Christian healing means that it offers something more than people are experiencing in their native religion. Effectively, the healing ministries provide validation for people to reject their former beliefs in favor of Christianity. Therefore, it appears that the miracles to do not “cancel each other out” as Hume suggests.

Now that the objections to a belief in miracles have been discussed, it is important to consider the evidence for why a belief in miracles is not only not problematic, but why a belief in miracles is essential to a Christian worldview. While many Christians do pray for and experience miracles, in America “evangelical Christians have been taught to interpret the world naturalistically.” (p.68, Nathan & Wilson, 2009) The American worldview has also been affected by rationalism, which “ seeks a rational explanation for all experience, making reason the chief guide of all matters in life” and by secularism, which makes the assumption that “we live in a material universe closed off from divine intervention, in which truth is arrived at only through empirical means and rational thought.” (p.134-135, Wimber& Springer, 2009) This means that often as a result of culture, Christians are taught to give more credence to things that can be logically explained or scientifically proven. This can be problematic: “In practical terms, the belief in spiritual powers has the most direct impact in terms of healing through spiritual means”(p.145, Jenkins, 2009) or as Vineyard pastor and theologian Derek Morphew explained in a Vineyard Leadership Institute lecture, “to the extent we have Kingdom expectation, we can enter the Kingdom.” (By “Kingdom,” Morphew was referring to God intervening, including events such as healings or people being set free from internal oppression.) This means that belief or “religious expectation” has a casual relationship with the results experienced in terms of supernatural intervention (events that occur in contrast to natural laws or natural expectation).

In contrast to evangelical American Christianity, “the majority of the people of the world, in fact, not only believe in the supernatural, but experience it. “ (p. 57, McNutt, 2009) In contrast to the typical mainline American church, “The power of the Holy Spirit to heal and deliver is being seen not only in Africa. In China, the number of Christians is growing exponentially, largely in churches that attract people by signs and wonders demonstrated on a regular basis. As in the early church, ordinary people interpret the Bible literally and have no intellectual problem casting out evil spirits and asking Jesus to heal the sick. (p.15, McNutt, 2009) If such healings are happening on a “regular basis,” at what point are they no longer considered merely and “exception” to the rules? Wouldn’t it be philosophically problematic to believe that different rules apply to people in China and Africa than people here in the U.S.? Or, would it be more logical to consider the explanation that the occurrence of events that defy natural laws (miracles) are directly related to the expectation that such events will occur (religious expectation)? If the two are related, then what is the explanation for the relationship? Christian theology provides a thoughtful explanation for the purpose of miracles; Normal Geisler provides the explanation that “From a human vantage point a miracle, then, is an unusual event (“wonder”) that conveys and confirms an unusual message (“sign”) by means of unusual power…from a divine vantage point a miracle is an act of God….that attracts the attention of the people of God (“wonder”) to the Word of God (by a “sign”). (pp. 308-309, Cowan & Speigel, 2009) Miracles exist to point people to God.

          In conclusion, it is my opinion that miracles are not philosophically problematic, but a necessary part of a Christian worldview. If we desire to see miracles, then we must seek faith to see the Lord intervene in “out of the ordinary” ways. For me, this means spending time with the Lord, spending time learning about and objectively considering teachings of people who experience miracles today, and being obedient to the Lord by praying for those who are sick or in crisis. We must renew our minds through scripture and time spent with the Lord and other believers with a Biblical worldview; “faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.” (Romans 10:17 NASB) To deny that miracles exist would be to deny the both Jesus’s works and His resurrection; if we deny the resurrection of Christ, we deny our salvation. To deny that miracles exist today, means not only to deny the works of Jesus that occur today, but also means adding restrictions that were never included in scripture. Furthermore, if the intervention of the Holy Spirit on natural order (miracle) is dependent upon religious expectation (faith), then actively choosing to believe or promote a theology that teaches that miracles do not exist today quenches the work of the Holy Spirit, which is sin. (1 Thessalonians 5:19) Therefore, as Christians, it is necessary to consider both evidence and scripture as we seek guidance from the Holy Spirit to ensure we hold a Biblical view of miracles. There is sufficient evidence to claim that a belief in miracles is rational and responsible and not at all problematic.

Resources:

Baker, Rolland & Heidi. (2003) Always Enough. Grand Rapids: Chosen Books. (Kindle Edition)

Cowan, Steven B. & Spiegel, James S. (2009). The Love of Wisdom. Nashville: B&H Publishing Group.

Jenkins, Philip. (2007) The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity. New York: Oxford University Press

Larmer, R. (2011). Miracles, Divine Agency, and the Laws of Nature. Toronto Journal Of Theology, 27(2), 267-290. doi:10.3138/tjt.27.2.267

MacNutt, Francis. (2009) Deliverance from Evil Spirits: A Practical Manual. Grand Rapids: Chosen Publishers

Marshall, I. Howard. (2004). New Testament Theology. Downer's Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Morphew, Derek Ph.D. and Robbins, Steve Ph.D. (Oct 2 &3, 2010) Healing 1: Physical Afflictions. Vineyard Leadership Institute Lecture

Nathan, Rich and Wilson, Ken. (2009) Empowered Evangelicals: Bringing Together the Best of the Evangelical and Charismatic Worlds. Boise: Ampelon Publishing

Strobel, Lee. (1998) The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House.

Wimber, John and Spinger, Kevin. (2009) Power Evangelism. Ventura, CA: Regal Pubishers

Wimber, John and Springer, Kevin. (1987) Power Healing. New York: Harper Collins

Divorce for Abuse?

Throughout history, women around the world have been beaten in their own homes. Some cultures condone this, while other women remain in these situations because they feel they have no other options or must preserve their marriage. In addition, women may experience an emotionally destructive marriage, where she verbally torn down and lives in constant fear of her husband’s next “blow up.” Some Christian leaders are often uncertain how to approach abusive relationships, while others may take a strong stance without proper understanding. The subject of divorce for abuse is complex and Christian leaders often disagree on this subject; however, it must be addressed for the sake of both spouses, their children, and the reputation of the church at large. Without intervention, many suffer in silence and the sin can never be brought to the light for restoration and healing. If the Church does not address this topic then abused spouses will remain in secret bondage, abusive spouses will not be called to repentance, children will suffer and learn unhealthy relationship skills, and the reputation of the church will be damaged as those outside the Church see us live in denial about the sin in our midst. To find solid answers on when and divorce is acceptable, it is necessary to review the biblical history of divorce and consider the implications on the situations many face today.

To understand how to handle these complex questions responsibly, it is important to understand the history of marriage and divorce in the Bible that begins in the Old Testament. Since women were especially vulnerable, the Lord built in provision to provide for widows. In Old Testament Jewish culture, men were permitted to have multiple wives and women had limited options to work outside the home. Women were not afforded the same rights that men were and were considered to be similar to property. Culturally, women were dependent upon the men in their lives to provide. A single woman would have faced extreme hardship, which would have been compounded if she were left alone with young children; if the man left, starvation would be a reality for the remaining family. For this reason, the Lord made provisions for widows. If a man died, the man’s brother was required to offer to marry the widow who was left behind.

Throughout the Bible, God’s people are called to care for widows; the Lord has also prioritized provision for women who have lost their husbands. The Lord makes provision for women whose husbands have passed away, but what happens if he leaves? Abandonment was another real problem that women of the Old Testament endured and the Lord also created provisions to protect these women. It was common for a husband to leave his home for extended periods of time for hunting or trading. What happened if he chose not to return? Left alone, the woman was subject to hardship and starvation. Her husband was not known to be dead, so she was not treated as a widow. In some cases, the woman could return to her father’s home or enlist her older boys to work to provide for the family, but this was not always a possibility. If the woman sought to remarry, most men would not be willing to marry her since this meant providing for a woman and her children, whom the original husband could reclaim at any time. Just as the Lord created provision for widows, He also gave provisions for women whose husbands kicked them out or abandoned them. If the husband no longer desired to be married to his wife, he was to give her a certificate of divorce which ended the marriage. The divorce certificate stated that she was free to marry any man she wished, which meant that she could remarry and not have to worry that her original husband could never come back to claim her. Since she was free to remarry, she could seek a new husband instead of facing the hardship of being a single woman in a patriarchal society.

While there are not a lot of specific examples of divorce Bible, further insight can be gained by reviewing the Lord’s instructions for how to treat a wife, who used to be a slave, who was no longer cared for. Although modern Christians do not face this specific scenario, the broader concept still applies. Exodus 21:10-11 states: “If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.” This scripture relates to a free man who marries his slave. This verse protects the former slave from mistreatment after she is taken as a wife.If the husband did not continue to keep his vows to this wife, she was considered redeemed and gained the rights of a free woman. Although we no longer accept polygamy or own slaves, the same principles would apply today; this example can be referenced as case law. This means that if the Lord would allow this provision for a slave, He would also have the same concern for free women (who were afforded more rights than slaves, not fewer). The Lord has the same compassion on all his people and would allow for any wife whose husband continually did not keep his vows to be released from her obligation to remain in such circumstances.

The understanding gained from the Old Testament is that divorce exists to prevent injustice. In his book, Divorce and Remarriage in the Church: Biblical Solutions for Pastoral Realities, Brewer includes additional insight into the context of marriage and divorce in the Old Testament and I recommend reading it; He digs into what was included in the original marriage vows and how one spouse could break the covenant of marriage by not upholding his or her vows. Divorce was permitted in order to protect wives from starvation and hardship when their husbands withdrew from providing for them. The certificate of divorce allowed a woman to remarry without fear of the original husband trying to take her back. Divorce was permitted for wives who used to be slaves, when their husbands no longer valued them enough to care for them. Since free women had more rights than slave women, one can conclude that free women could receive a divorce instead of being forced to remain in detrimental circumstances. While divorce was given only as a concession to address problems resulting from our sinful nature, it appears that the Lord allowed for divorce to free people from harmful marriages.

Next, it is important to look at the insight that the New Testament provides on marriage and divorce. Jesus upheld the teachings of the Old Testament, but called His followers to a higher standard. In Matthew 9:19, Jesus said “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Does this mean he rejected the provisions established in the Old Testament? No. It is commonly acknowledged that the Pharisees who were questioning him were asking about the debated 'any cause' divorce that had become popular among some of the Jews. The 'any cause' divorce was promoted by one of the prominent rabbis and allowed men to divorce their wives without providing a reason. The Pharisees were attempting to trap Jesus by making Him take sides on this highly controversial issue. Jesus was speaking against baseless divorce, but would not have abandoned the Father's compassion for those who were suffering harm by remaining in the marriage. Jesus was speaking to an audience that was well versed in the Law and who would have understood that abuse was unacceptable to the Lord.

Paul provides additional instruction on how to approach divorce among Christians; He provides practical instructions for a few of the situations that the new believers faced. He provides instructions for situations where a believer has left, as well as when the non-believer leaves. He says, “To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.” (1 Corinthians 7:10- 11, NIV) In this statement, he acknowledges that it is possible that a wife could leave and not return. Although he says a wife “must not separate from her husband,” he provides instructions for her in the event that she does separate. He does not say that she is sinful if she does not return, only that she may not remarry (remarriage after divorce is a separate issue and deserves its own explanation, but is also in-depth and therefore not covered here. However, divorce solely for the sake of remarriage was never permitted). He was providing general instructions on what to do in less-than-perfect circumstances. Then Paul adds, “To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” (1 Corinthians 7:12-16) Here, Paul acknowledges that sometimes divorce is unavoidable. Marriage takes two people. While divorce is bad, some situations are worse. Paul points to reconciliation and peace. If possible, he says reconcile; if reconciliation is not possible, the second best thing is to live separately in peace. Some people encourage the abused spouse to continue to even submit to domestic violence in order to “win” the abuser to Christ; In his book, “When the Vow Breaks: A Survival and recovery Guide for Christians Facing Divorce,” Joseph Warren Kniskern, urges that “this is bad advice in this situation and a misapplication of Scripture! No Scripture approves of a spouse being violent or family members enduring it” (Kniskern, 1993, p. 106). Paul was also clear about his expectation for believers to love and submit to one another; conflicts between two believers would have been resolved by submitting to one another, or the church authorities, if needed. Divorce is only necessary as a result of disobedience to the Lord, by one or both spouses.

It is vital to clearly communicate that, as Brewer explains, while divorce is always a result of sin, the divorce itself is not the sin; the breaking of the vows that causes the divorce is sin (Brewer, 2003). It is important to understand the biblical marriage and divorce the way the original reader did, so that the spouse who has been sinned against can be freed from undue guilt and condemnation. One example of this was a woman I met, who had recently moved to the US from China and was staying in shelter for homeless women. Her husband was a drug dealer and physically abused her. She was staying at the shelter, while he lived in their home with another woman. This woman had a divorce hearing, yet experienced much guilt and many doubts since she was the one who had filed the divorce papers. She felt it was unsafe to return home and that she was not wanted there, but felt that she was the one responsible for the divorce. She cared very much about what the Bible said, yet it was causing her great distress. Divorce seemed to be the only logical solution, but she walked through it with the unnecessary burden of guilt. She did not cause the divorce; by requesting divorce, she was only seeking to be free of the unjust situation. It is important to make this distinction.

Although many of spouses remain in those harmful circumstances, simply because do not have the tools to get free, Church leaders should not be hasty to encourage divorce every time spouse feels they have been mistreated by the other. Every marriage is unique and many can be saved. In their book, “Boundaries in Marriage,” Dr. Henry Cloud and Dr. John Townsend provide resources to help protect one spouse from continuing to be harmed by the negative behaviors of the other. They do not advocate for divorce, in most instances, but do say it is sometimes necessary to “take a strong stance; separate, not participate in the behavioral patterns against which they are setting boundaries; demand righteousness before participating in the relationship again.” (Cloud & Townsend, 1999, p. 251) Their expectation is that if the other person is not willing to make the required changes, they will leave. In that case, the divorce will still happen, but the spouse who was suffering the abuse will know that he or she did everything possible. Through this process, sin is confronted and the abusive spouse is given an opportunity to change. In some situations, the abusive spouse will see the fault in the abusive behavior and repent. Although the process of setting boundaries is hard, both spouses stand to benefit and the marriage could be saved. Restoration keeps a family together; when successful, the couple can experience the reconciliation Paul spoke about. If the marriage can not be saved, the abused spouse will walk away better equipped to avoid experiencing similar mistreatment in future relationships. While divorce is permissible for abuse, it is not required; sometimes redemption occurs when the abused spouse chooses to remain in the marriage. Every situation is unique and the Lord’s guidance is essential.

Regardless of whether or not the marriage continues, those seeking help with a difficult or abusive marriage will benefit from being surrounded by strong community who can support, strengthen, and guide them. Both paths (setting boundaries and going through a separation or divorce) are difficult to walk; it is essential for the abused spouse to be surrounded by a community who will pray and remind him or her who she or she is to the Lord. It is also important not to judge or pressure him or her; these situations are complicated and only the Lord knows all the details. If the abusive partner is willing to partake in Christian community, sinful behavior should be confronted in ongoing relationships that provide accountability and support. Both spouses should be lead to forgive. The question, “to divorce or not to divorce?” is rarely black and white. Being in community can help to avoid hasty decisions that will lead to regret.

Whenever possible, it is best to for Christians to seek His restoration and reconciliation in relationships. Sometimes, despite great efforts and intentions, ending a marriage is the only way to put an end to continued abuse. The Bible does allow for divorce in these circumstances, yet it should be the last option, whenever possible. Divorce is messy, costly, painful, and it tears a family in half. The Church should come along-side people in abusive marriages and articulate that the Word of God brings freedom and not condemnation. A spouse who is truly experiencing ongoing abuse is free to stay or free to leave, although should be encouraged to seek restoration whenever possible; he or she should be supported in seeking the Lord's guidance. A spouse who is separated from and abusive marriage should be encouraged to seek reconciliation if the abusive spouse is willing to repent, but should not be forced to remain in limbo forever; if reconciliation is not a reasonable option, then divorce may need to be considered. If there is physical abuse or impending violence, urgent action must be taken to get the abused spouse to safety, whenever possible. A spouse who has already divorced from an abusive marriage and suffers from guilt should be supported in understanding the Lord's grace and freedom. The men and women in abusive marriages need to know God's intentions for marriage. They are likely to be too they are worn-down, stretched-thin, and exhausted to seek in-depth answers themselves and need support. Hasty answers will likely lead to regret, but those willing to walk with through these situations Lord will experience His faithfulness and grow in faith.

Resources:

Cloud, Dr. Henry and Townsend, Dr. John. Boundaries in Marriage. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House.

Instone-Brewer, David. Divorce and Remarriage in the Church: Biblical Solutions for Pastoral Realities. Downer's Grove: IVP Books. 2003

Kniskern, Joseph Warren. When the Vow Breaks: A Survival Guide for Christians Facing Divorce. Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers. 1993