To this day, Martin Luther’s name evokes generally one of two images: a great man of God or a heretic. He stands in good company, most markedly, the Lord Himself.

Most Christians are unaware of Luther’s full history or completely ignorant of who he was. To get a glimpse into the man, we’ll go to one of the most pivotal moments of his and the church’s life. The Diet of Worms, which actually means the assembly (diet) that took place in Worms, Germany, 1521. Luther had nailed his 95 theses to the church sanctuary at Wittenberg in 1517 laying out why the church doctrine on indulgences was wrong, another pivotal moment in church history because it was at this moment that it is generally accepted as the beginning of the Reformation and the Protestant defection from the false church. From that moment, the movement began to build across Germany and beyond. Luther wrote books outlining the fallacy and error of the teachings and doctrines laid out by the false church that existed and people were listening. This was unacceptable to the heads of the church and state and Luther was summoned to Worms, Germany to explain himself.

It all came to a head at the Diet of Worms. Charles V along with several ambassadors, deputies, bishops, and princes sat in anticipation to hear Luther’s explanation in a packed room of onlookers. Dr. Johann Maier von Eck was the representative of the archbishop’s court. In the middle of the room was a pile of books, Luther’s writings. Eck asked if the books were indeed Luther’s and if he would recant what was written therein. Within his reply, Luther stated:

The books are mine. I deny none of them.

He then asked for more time to answer the question as to whether he would recant what he had written. He was allowed and the next day, he replied with well thought out answers. During his reply, he laid out the contents of the types of books he had written. He said of his work against the papacy:

The second class of my works inveighs against the papacy as against that which both by precept and example has laid waste all Christendom, body and soul…Yet the canon law provides that the laws and doctrines of the pope are contrary to the gospel and the Father’s are to be held erroneous and rejected. If therefore I should withdraw these books, I would add strength to tyranny and open windows and doors to their impiety, with which would then flourish and burgeon more freely than it ever dared before.

Dr. Eck, unimpressed and a little incensed by the response said:

Luther, you have not answered to the point. You ought not to call in question what has been decided and condemned by councils. Therefore I beg you to give a simple, unsophisticated answer without horns. Will you recant or not?

Luther understood that this was it. So, he boldly replied:

Since your Majesty and your lordships ask for a plain answer, I will give you one with either horns or teeth. Unless I am convinced by scripture or by right reason-for I trust neither in popes nor in councils, since they have often erred and contradicted themselves-unless I am thus convinced, I am bound by the texts of the Bible; my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I neither can nor will recant anything, since it is neither right nor safe to act against conscience. God help me. Amen.

There are times in our lives as God’s people where we have to make a decision. As Peter and John said in Acts 4:19:

But Peter and John answered them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.”

If we are to be true witnesses of God then we must stand for what God has said as the final authority on all things, no matter what because in the end, we stand before God alone and not man.

Bonhoeffer had to make the ultimate sacrifice with inner tranquility and resignation because of his conviction that there are five different deaths every Christian should die:

1. Death to Natural Relationships. At the time of the Third Reich’s reign, many pastors said they’d endure imprisonment and death but was not able to do so because of family ties. It is one thing for a husband or a father to be persecuted; it is quite another to see children suffer a similar fate. Hitler always used a man’s family as an inducement for absolute obedience. Bonhoeffer answered that our commitment to Christ should be so all-consuming that all natural affection must come under its authority (Matthew 10:37).

2. Death to Success. Bonhoeffer said, “Success is a veneer that covers only the emptiness of the soul.”

3. Death to the Flesh. The Christian should have no fear of suffering, for he is already dead to self.

4. Death to the Love of Money.

5. Physical death for Christ, should a person be thus called.

At Bonhoeffer’s execution, a concentration doctor wrote of what he witnessed:

“I saw Pastor Bonhoeffer … kneeling on the floor praying fervently to God. I was most deeply moved by the way this lovable man prayed, so devout and so certain that God heard his prayer. At the place of execution, he again said a short prayer and then climbed the few steps to the gallows, brave and composed. His death ensued after a few seconds. In the almost fifty years that I worked as a doctor, I have hardly ever seen a man die so entirely submissive to the will of God.”

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. (Matthew 16:24)

In this portion of the passage, we’ll be taking a look at the manner in which women are to learn in the church.

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. (1 Timothy 2:11-12)

I have heard many explanations of this scripture, one being that Paul was giving his opinion which is far from true when we look at what the argument is based on.

That Paul is exhorting women to learn was a change since Judaism and the Greek culture did not highly esteem women. Some women reacted in hostilely by attempting to take roles of leadership within the church which included the weighing of prophecies and teaching. This was all within the context of the church gathering and tended to be disruptive. Having a home church, which is the dynamic which these churches operated in, it can be easy for someone to jump up and start spouting off a whole lot of things roughshod over the teacher as if they were the ones with the God given authority. Gifting does not equal authority. Calling and character does. So this silence was that they should not teach or preach but learn in submission when the church gathers, the same submission in which they are to give to their husbands (Ephesians 5:1).

When Paul states he does not permit a woman to teach, he does not appeal to his opinion (more on this later). The Greek word for permit is epitrepo which means to commit, give leave, or entrust which is a better way to translate it.

By this, is Paul excluding all teaching by women? Absolutely not. In writing to Titus, he encourages older women to teach the younger women (Titus 2:3-4). Timothy, the pastor Paul was writing to here, was taught by his grandmother and mother which Paul commends (2 Timothy1:5). Apollos was instructed by Aquila and Priscilla, a married couple, in the way of the Christian faith (Acts 18:25-26). The woman is a co-teacher with her husband in the household when it comes to children. So all teaching is not excluded.

Also, it’s important to note that Paul is speaking by apostolic authority in that he was writing scripture. There is no part in the scriptures that we arbitrarily throw out certain sections that we feel are not valid unless the scripture has made it invalid (i.e. ceremonial law). If so, all scripture is then open to relativistic interpretation which would only invite confusion into the whole argument. You cannot appeal to the authority and inspiration of the word of God piecemeal. It’s all or nothing.

This can also be seen in the statement “usurp authority over man.” Within the context of the church, it means to have a position of authority over a man. Any kind of leadership in the church is a position of rank and authority and women are specifically excluded from that position.

If that’s the case, then on what grounds does Paul make this assertion? Is it by apostolic authority alone or does he appeal to another authority? We’ll cover this in our next part in the series.

In olden days, men of faith were said to “walk in the fear of God” and to “serve the Lord with fear.” However intimate their communion with God, however bold their prayers, at the base of their religious life was the conception of God as awesome and dreadful.  This idea of God transcendent runs through the whole Bible and gives color and tone to the character of the saints. This fear of God was more than a natural apprehension of danger; it was a non-rational dread, an acute feeling of personal insufficiency in the presence of God Almighty.

Wherever God appeared to men in Bible times the results were the same-and overwhelming sense of terror and dismay, a wrenching sensation of sinfulness and guilt. When God spoke, Abraham stretched himself upon the ground to listen. When Moses saw the Lord in the burning bush, he hid his face in fear to look upon God. Isaiah’s vision of God wrung from him the cry, “Woe is me!” Daniel’s encounter with God was probably the most dreadful and wonderful of all.

Conversely, the self-assurance of modern Christians, the basic levity present in so many of our religious gatherings, the shocking disrespect shown for the Person of God, are evidence enough of deep blindness of heart. Many call themselves by the name of Christ, talk much about God, and pray to Him sometimes, but evidently do not know who He is. “The fear of the Lord is a fountain of life,” but this healing fear is today hardly found among Christian men [and women]“

Though we are privileged to be the children of the Most High, we must never forget that He is the Most High God of the universe and that He deserves the reverence and respect that’s due Him and Him alone.

Likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness–with good works (1 Timothy 2:9-10 ESV).

A key word here is “likewise”. It implies that just as men have their roles and proper conduct in the church assembly, so do the women. This is such a blessing if we understand the times. Women were often treated as second class citizens. In Jewish gatherings, they were not even allowed in the congregation of the men of the synagogue but were separated by an outer court. Yet in the context of the Christian church, they are a part of the body public with the men. It’s a silent statement of the reality that they are co-heirs with Christ like any man (1 Peter 3:7).

The part of Paul’s address we’ll hone in on today has to do  with how women should present themselves in the church. This is important for three reasons.

One is that the adornment of flashy apparel and plaited hair (more likely adorned with some kind of jewelry like gold and pearls) was a sign of loose morals. Prostitutes wore similar clothing. It would be the equivalent today of having bright makeup, large jewelry, and revealing clothing like mini-skirts and blouses where the cleavage looks like it’s screaming to escape.  The assembly of the church is not a fashion show. This is not about impressing others but presenting ourselves to God.

Secondly, dressing in that way was suggestive that the women were independent of their husbands which false teachers propagandized.

Thirdly, it was and still is a stumbling block to the men of the congregation, something that we as Christians should be cognizant of with others whether they be of the opposite sex  or not (Romans 14:13). I believe there is an inference here that men should accordingly do the same with women. Though the context here is within the church, the inference extends outside of the church as well.

Women are then encouraged to have self-control, a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:23) by clothing themselves respectably. It’s not suggesting that women wear a burlap bag (which also draws its own attention) but that their apparel should be one that doesn’t draw attention to herself with gaudy jewelry and clothes and if any beauty is seen it is the godliness of her character and conduct as a woman and child of the living God.

In part three, we’ll look at the manner in which the women are to learn in the church assembly.

In my introduction to this series titled Unqualified Church Leaders, I touched on those individuals who were disqualified as elders, bishops, pastors, and general leaders in the church. One of the categories were women.

Before I begin, I feel it’s imperative to state that by no means is this a referendum against women in some way. I can almost feel the daggers boring through me as I write this. But this is not about gender superiority or inferiority because in Christ, we all equal (Galatians 3:28). It’s also not about our egos or feelings. It’s about what the word of God says and endeavoring to be obedient to it. That being the case, we will simply be looking at the scriptures and letting the chips fall where they may.

Let’s first take a look at one of our texts which is 1 Timothy 2:8-15.  For purposes of this series, we’ll be using the KJV and the NKJV versions of the Bible.

General Introduction

In verses 8 through 10, we see the beginning of general conduct that is expected from both men and women.

I desire therefore that men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting; in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness with good works.

We start here because this is where the role of the men and women in the church in this passage actually begins.

The first is that men pray everywhere. It is a call for men to lead public prayer in the congregation of the saints of the church. The specific word for men here is not in the general sense for the Greek an?r (an’ ayr) which means male.

This is not to say that women shouldn’t pray which would contradict scripture (1 Thessolonians 5:17) but in the sense where there is a gathered group of saints who join together in prayer to God in the official assembly of the church, the men should lead the prayer. This is in line with what will be said later for men to be leading in the church. In addition, this is to be be done everywhere, or more accurately translated, “in every place” where the saints of God meet for worship.

How is this prayer to be offered? First, it is by lifting up holy hands, an expression to God that the praying man’s life is open before God and that there is not sin that covers it. He is to be blameless in this respect in order to have his prayers answered (Psalm 24:4, 66:18).

Second, it is to be done without wrath. You can’t have something against a brother or sister in the Lord and expect our prayers to be answered. That bitterness should be dealt with and the problem resolved to the best of our ability before we bring prayer to the Lord (Matthew 5:23-24).

Third, it should be without doubting or more accurately translated, disputing. It should be done without murmurings against other believers. It should be offered in faith, free from the hindrances of disputes and dissensions.

Praying in the assembly of the church for any reason (specifically here it’s referring to prayer for everyone in verses 1-7) is a privilege, not a performance and we should approach it as such, humbly, knowing that it’s by the gift of Jesus Christ that we’re able to approach the Lord in this manner at all.

So, as this is the way men should conduct themselves in public worship in the church, how then therefore should women? That begins in verse 9 and we’ll look at that in part two of The Pastorless Church.

On February 26, 1968, he gave up, praying  for it all  to end. He felt that before dusk, he’d be dead. On that very day, his base was attacked. Stegalls heard a rocket coming towards him and he counted down the moments to live. Three. two, one…

At that precise moment, a friend shoved him into a grease pit. He waited for the rocket to detonate but no explosion came. The rocket fuse was defective.

Jim found himself kneeling in that pit for five hours. Wracked with fear, he finally took out the Gideon New Testament and read through 18 chapters of the book of Matthew.

“When I read Matthew 18:19-20,” he recalled, “I somehow knew things would be alright.”

A while after he returned home he visited his wife’s grandmother, Mrs. Harris. She recounted a night that she had awakened gripped in terror. She felt that Jim was in trouble in Vietnam and began praying for the Lord to have mercy on his life. Unable to kneel because of bad arthritis, she simply lay prone on the floor while praying and reading her Bible through the night.

Right before the sun rose, she read Matthew 18:19-20:

Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

She got on the phone and called her Sunday school teacher who came over and claimed God’s promise until they were assured of the peace of God through the Holy Spirit.

Concluding her story, she opened her Bible where she had written in the margin at that passage. It was a name and a date.

Jim. February 26th, 1968.

Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; (Ephesians 6:18)

In my upcoming book Stop Bringing People to Church, I touch on God’s holiness:

The word holy is a term that means “separate from.” Another way to look at it is He is “other than” everything else in existence. He is so far separate from everything that the angels in heaven reiterate this over and over. There is none like Him neither will there ever be. God is the epitome and personification of holiness. This separation also includes sin. There is no sin in Him and therefore He’s the personification of everything that is good. Without God, we would not only cease to exist, but even if it were possible, there would be nothing good in the world.

As God is separate from everything in existence to where He can’t be tainted by it and is far different from it, His people, when they reflect this same separateness from the world glorify Him.

In his book The Knowledge of the Holy, A.W. Tozer explains the utter awesomeness of God’s holiness:

Neither the writer nor the reader of these words is qualified to appreciate the holiness of God. Quite literally a new channel must be cut through the desert of our minds to allow the sweet waters of truth that will heal our great sickness to flow in. We cannot grasp the true meaning of the divine holiness by thinking of someone or something very pure and then raising the concept to the highest degree we are capable of. God’s holiness is not simply the best we know infinitely bettered. We know nothing like the divine holiness. It stands apart, unique, unapproachable, incomprehensible and unattainable. The natural man is blind to it. He may fear God’s power and admire His wisdom, but His holiness He cannot even imagine.

It is this that the Christian is called to in every facet of our lives.

But like as he who called you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all manner of living. (1 Peter 1:15)

That means in thought, worldview, and actions. We are not trying to get the world to like us. We’re representing what God expects, accepts, and who He is. This is not a popularity contest. This is a divine mandate to which everyone who calls themselves a Christian is obligated to uphold for the express purpose of glorifying God and being a witness to and against the world.  By this a watching world will get a glimpse into the infinite holiness of the Almighty God. What an awesome privilege and responsibility.