Expert: Spirit Sword - 10/19/2004

Question
-------------------------
Followup To
Question -
In 1Cor. 14:34, Paul teaches that women should be subordinate in worship.  Moreover, in 1Tim. 2:12, Paul teaches that a women must not have authority over a man.

These verses seem to be in conflict with Deborah's role as prophetess.  Can you explain?


Answer -
Aaron,


Thank you for your question.

This is a very gray area for me, however, both verses (1 Cor 14:34 and 1 Tim. 2:12) are referring to women in the
context of the New Testament church.   For instance, women should not be up in the pulpit preaching on Sunday morning.
Also women should not be teaching an all men's Sunday school bible study.  These should never be allowed within a church environment.     

Despite this, however, I'd make a good guess that these commands do not apply anywhere outside of the church.   For instance we are all called of God to share the gospel with other people.   When we share the gospel we are in fact preaching and teaching.   It would be pretty ridiculous to say that a female is forbidden to share the gospel with anyone who is male.   

Deborah was a leader and a prophetess in Israel during Old Testament times.  (Judges 4:4)   Her position of authority was outside of the church.  Although I don't know much about her life as a prophetess, I'm pretty sure that she was not in violation of the scriptures.   


Spirit Sword   

Thanks Spirit Sword,

Part of the reason I asked that particular question is because I'm semi-confused about the transition from the Old Testament Law to the Age of Gace through Jesus Christ.

I've been doing a lot of reading throughout the O.T., and I run across so many versus that describe God as changeless/eternal.  I understand the role of the Messiah and that Jesus came to fulfill the law, but I run across so many versus where God tells the Israelites that certain customs, practices, and sacrifices are commanded to be lasting ordinances.

Why has Jewish/Christian history been divided into these two phases- Law and Grace?  I understand that the Bible teaches that the Law is meant to convict man of his transgressions, but why a transition?  And again, what does this mean about God's changeless nature?

Thanks again,
Aaron  

Answer
Hi Aaron,


There is no transition from a period of Law to a period of Grace.   They are all one in the same.  People were saved in the Old Testament just as they were in the New Testament times.   The message of the gospel has always been consistent for those living in the O.T. as well as the N.T. and this message is the fact that we need a Savior who will pay the price for sin.     

The Old Testament points to the New Testament and the New Testament explains the Old Testament.  A lot of the Old Testament laws were shadow of things to come.  They point to eternal truths and to a time when a Messiah would come and take away sins.   (Isaiah 53)   

Once Jesus Christ came the Old Testament laws regarding animal sacrifices ceased because he came in fulfillment of these laws.  The shadows are gone because the true fulfillment of them have come.   Not only did Christ come in fulfillment of these laws, He came to fulfill the demands of the law in each one of us.   He paid the price the law demands for sin in order to redeem mankind.     

Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

Colossians 2:16-17 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

What the law could not do was make mankind perfect.  Only Jesus Christ can cleanse man to make him without blemish in the sight of God.   We no longer need to offer animal sacrifices because we now look to Christ as our one and only true sacrifice.     However, as you can see, the essence of the laws have not changed.   

Another example:  
Peter was confused because God told him to eat what was considered unclean according to Old Testament laws.   (Please read Acts 10)   Now that God has cleansed mankind (not just the nation of Israel)  through Jesus Christ, Peter is commanded to go to the Gentile nations and preach.  From this vision Peter finally understood that God is not a respector of persons and he is not to call any man unclean who has been made clean.  He understood that God was not talking about animals but about people. The symbols of clean and unclean animals are a shadow of eternal truths, it does not literally mean that there are some animals God made clean and others unclean.   During creation God saw everything He made and it was good!          

The Old Testament and the New Testament complement each other perfectly.   Together they form a cohesive whole which bind together the entire plan God has for mankind and especially those who become heirs of salvation.    In the Old Testament the way of salvation was not yet clearly manifested as it is in the New Testament.  

This question is very similar to the question "Why is the O.T. God a God of wrath and the N.T. God a God of grace?"  The answer of course is that they are not different.   God is emphasizing one facet of his characteristics in the Old Testament while emphasizing another facet in the New Testament.   

 God does not change.  (Hebrews 13:8)    His characteristics and attributes are immutable.  God has and will always be a God of justice and wrath just as He is a God of love, mercy, and grace.   The essence and eternal truths of the scripture have always remained the same just as the penalty for sin and the way of salvation have always remained the same.        
 

I hope this helps to understand more.  
If not please write back.   


Spirit Sword