Excerpted from Edwin E. Reynolds and Clinton Wahlen, “Minority
Report,” Theology of Ordination Study
Committee Report, November 2013, North American Division, Seventh-day
Adventist Church, pp. 195-197
The current divergence in views
on the subject
of women’s ordination is due in part to different
understandings of the nature of Scripture and
how it should be interpreted.
Some advocate an approach that takes into account the “trajectory” of
Scripture. And there is, in a sense, a progression in Scripture from Eden lost
to Eden restored, based on God’s plan of salvation.18 But the suggestion is made
in some Adventist circles that we should take the notion of a progression in
Scripture even farther. They urge that God can lead His people to a better
understanding only as the social and cultural conditions permit the
implementation of a higher ethic than was possible in Bible times. Thus,
according to this
view, the progression within Scripture must be extrapolated so that the
trajectory beyond and outside of Scripture can be seen. While appealing on the
surface, the problem with this approach is its reliance on an authority beyond
the pages of Scripture to determine present truth in cases where the
inspired writings are supposedly less clear. Such an approach, even though it
might broadly affirm the Bible’s inspiration, nevertheless undermines
it by
characterizing selected portions of Scripture as time- and culture-bound and,
therefore, tinged with the author’s or his community’s prejudicial views on
such topics, rather than God’s thoughts which are valid for all places and all
time. According to such a view, the Bible is not a unified, harmonious
revelation and Paul’s interpretation of Genesis, for example, is not normative
for us today.19 Most
Adventists, on the other hand, consider that there can be no fundamental
homogeneity in Scripture apart from supernatural intervention by revelation.
They understand the Holy Spirit as the divine mind behind the human penmen. He
is the One who has ensured that the entire canon of Scripture is theologically
unified, that its teachings are valid for all time (Rom 15:4), and that they
produce no conflicting opinions or opposing theological views (2 Tim 3:16-17).
Fortunately, with regard also to the question of
ordination and the role of women in the church, God has given ample guidance in
the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy to help us resolve even this seemingly
intractable issue. But in order for Scripture to serve its intended purpose,
all of what God says on this subject must be studied until we can perceive its
underlying harmony. According to Ellen White: “To understand doctrine, bring
all the scriptures together on the subject you wish to know, then let every
word have its proper influence; and if you can form your theory without a contradiction,
you cannot be in error.”20
The “Methods of Bible Study” document (MBSD) approved by the Annual
Council in Rio de Janiero, Brazil, Oct. 12, 1986, also gives important
guidance: “Human reason is subject to the Bible, not equal to or above it.”
“The Bible is its own best interpreter and when studied as a whole it
depicts a consistent, harmonious truth. . . . Although it was given to those
who lived in an ancient Near Eastern/Mediterranean context, the Bible
transcends its cultural backgrounds to serve
as God’s Word for all cultural,
racial, and situational contexts in all ages.”21 Those who are uncomfortable with
the plain reading of the Biblical text look for a meaning or trajectory that goes
outside of what Scripture explicitly teaches, but such an approach risks
reaching decisions that are not Biblical.
Regarding cultural issues, the Bible itself
provides us the key as to how to handle them. For example, while some
Evangelical Christians would classify the Sabbath as a temporary, cultural
institution,22 Genesis
2:1-3 and Exodus 20:11 show that it originated as part of God’s perfect plan
for humanity
and is therefore applicable in all cultures and for all time.
Decisions regarding the perpetuity of institutions originating after the Fall
is more difficult, especially in the case of those that seem to have been divinely
established. Although circumcision began with God’s command to Abraham, like
the presence of the temple, it was no guarantee of God’s favor without a right
covenant relationship (Jer 4:4; cf. 21:10-12; 22:5). In fact, the time would
come when God would treat the circumcised like the uncircumcised (Jer 9:25; cf.
1 Cor 7:18-19), apparently pointing to circumcision no longer serving as a sign
of the covenant. This is confirmed by the New Testament, in which the reality
symbolized by circumcision (Deut 30:6; 10:6)—a change of heart and the gift of
the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:7-11; Rom 2:28-29)—is replaced by baptism (John 3:3-8;
Col 2:11-13). In fact, baptism itself derives from a Jewish cultural form of
self-immersion in water for purification from ceremonial defilement (baptizō,
Mark 7:4; Luke 11:38). Its meaning, however, is inseparable from the form,
which transcends the meaning of circumcision in being egalitarian and symbolic of
the believer’s
being washed from sin, identification with the death and resurrection of
Jesus Christ, and acceptance of Him as Saviour (Rom 6). Furthermore, the
command is given in a universal setting (“all nations,” Matt 28:19). Therefore,
in the case of baptism, the form itself is universal and unchanging.
Slavery, on the other hand, was never instituted by
God; it is a cultural and legal institution. God redeemed Israel from slavery
and provided legal protections so that no Israelite would ever be sold into
perpetual servitude (Exod 21:2-6). No such provision for servants existed in
the New Testament church. Through Christ’s sacrifice the door of salvation is
open to everyone—rich and poor, slave and free, male and female (Gal 3:28)—and
through God’s grace we are all free moral agents. The slavery existing under
Roman law, though much milder than the racial-based slavery of eighteenth- and
nineteenth-century America,23 had to be borne by Jews and Christians alike, “but from the beginning it
was not so” (cf. Matt 19:3-8). Christians are instructed to treat slaves with
compassion as fellow-servants of Christ (1 Cor 7:22-23) because, as believers,
we are all “slaves,” with Christ as our one Master (Eph 6:5-9; Col 3:22-4:1).
In the Lord, then, no one is to remain a slave, but is considered as a sister
or a brother (Phlm 16).
As the above examples illustrate, indications exist
within Scripture itself to guide us as to whether
and when an institution is
to be discontinued. The relevant historical-cultural contexts are vital to
consider when studying the Bible. As the MBSD states, “In connection with the
study of the Biblical text, explore the historical and cultural factors. Archaeology,
anthropology, and history may contribute to understanding the meaning of the
text.”24 However,
it is one thing to study the historical-cultural backgrounds to enlighten our
understanding of the setting in which the text was written; it is another thing
altogether to suggest that the text was culturally conditioned and that,
therefore, a trajectory beyond the text must be constructed for our current,
more enlightened, age.25
If the latter were true, it would mean that the Bible does not set forth
universal principles but only that which was perceived by the inspired writers
to be valid for the local situation at the time or, even worse, reflects
then-current prejudices and misunderstandings.
In that case its relevance for other times and
places would be muted, perhaps not even reflecting divine truth or principles.
This is an important distinction to keep in mind when studying ordination in
Scripture. What evidence does the Bible provide that the counsels it gives are
culturally conditioned or of timeless value? How would one discern the
difference?
These are crucial questions and, once again, the
Scriptures themselves help us answer them. First, the merely descriptive must
be distinguished from the normative, or else we would be practicing many of the
sins of our forefathers, including idolatry, polygamy, slavery, and even
murder. Jesus clearly indicates what constitutes normative behavior when He
prayed, “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt 6:10; Luke 11:2).
Practices that reach back to Eden or extend to the new world constitute God’s
will for all time. Without question there is a progression in Scripture whereby
God is working to restore human beings into the image of God, but this should
not be used to invalidate principles grounded in creation such as the equality
of male and female, whose roles, however, are not completely identical.
Interpreters should be extremely cautious in concluding that certain passages
in Scripture pertain only to a given time or place. In fact, there would appear
to be no secure basis to reach such conclusions without clear Scriptural
indicators because, through divine foresight, the Bible’s horizon extends
beyond that of the human author to accomplish God’s purposes until the end of
time (Isa 55:11).
Edwin E. Reynolds, Ph.D.
Clinton Wahlen, Ph.D.
Edwin E. Reynolds, Ph.D.
Edwin Reynolds is a professor of New Testament and biblical languages and is the School of Religion
graduate program coordinator at Southern Adventist University. He holds a doctoral degree in New
Testament from the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary. Reynolds was the editor of the
Guide for Research Writing: AIIAS Theological Seminary, 2d ed. (Silang, Cavite, Philippines: AIIAS
Publications, 2002) and Asia Adventist Seminary Studies, and is a former editor of and regular con-
tributor to the Journal of the Adventist Theological Society.
Clinton Wahlen, Ph.D.
Clinton Wahlen is an associate director of the Biblical Research Institute. He holds a Ph.D. degree in
New Testament from Cambridge University, U.K., and has authored Jesus and the Impurity of Spirits in
the Synoptic Gospels (Mohr Siebeck, 2004) and James (Adult Bible Study Guide, forthcoming). He has
also published academic articles in journals such as New Testament Studies and Biblical Interpretation,
and written for biblical dictionaries published by InterVarsity Press.
Endnotes
18 Cf. Ellen G. White, Selected Messages,
book 1, 19: “The illuminated soul sees a spiritual unity, one grand golden
thread running through the whole, but it requires patience, thought, and prayer
to trace out the precious golden thread.”
19 Paul’s statements citing Genesis 2 and 3 as a
Scriptural basis for his arguments are minimized—even though they speak
directly to church matters (1 Tim 2; 1 Cor 11)—because supposedly they apply
only to Ephesus or Corinth, while a single Pauline verse is elevated to
supracanonical status (Gal 3:28). Genesis 2-3 is also reinterpreted and pitted
against Paul’s interpretation of the same, which goes against the principles of
sola Scriptura and tota Scriptura as well as Christ’s injunction
that “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35). See the discussion (pp. 16-18
below) on 1 Timothy 2:13-15 and 1 Corinthians 11:3, 7-9.
20 Ellen G. White (quoting approvingly of William
Miller’s hermeneutic), “Notes of Travel,” RH, Nov. 25, 1884, par. 24.
21 “Methods of Bible Study Committee
(GCC-A)—Report,” Adventist Review, January 22, 1987, 18; online:
http://docs.adventistarchives.org/ docs/RH/RH19870122-V164-04__B.pdf#view=fit;
accessed 31 May 2013. Notably, the NAD Theology of Ordination Study Committee
was unable to agree on acceptance of the Preamble of the MBSD, though the body
of the document was accepted.
22 E.g., William Webb, Slaves, Women, and
Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis (Downers Grove,
Ill.: InterVarsity, 2001), 126-27 (favoring women’s ordination, considering the
Sabbath cultural); Wayne Grudem, “Review Article: Should We Move Beyond the New
Testament to a Better Ethic?” JETS 47/2 (June 2004): 299-346 here 327 n.
20 (opposing women’s ordination, denying the Sabbath a normative status in
Eden).
23 Bondservants had strict protections under Roman
law: they could earn their freedom, hold private property, and often occupied
very responsible positions as lawyers, shopkeepers, and even financial managers
working with huge sums of money as the parable of the talents shows (Matt
25:14-30).
24 “Methods of Bible Study,” 19.
25 For a recent critique of Webb, who advocates
such a trajectory hermeneutic, see Benjamin Reaoch, Women, Slaves and the
Gender Debate: A Complementarian Response to the Redemptive-Movement
Hermeneutic (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishers,
2012).
No comments:
Post a Comment