Bingo! When we left the fellowship, we were part of 20+ years, we did it with as much integrity as possible, because our adult children were still part. We were the victims of spiritual abuse, which included dismissal of our concerns, gaslighting, and eventually wicked lies being told about us, and even a lawsuit threatened against us for making degrading comments about leaders online. We absolutely did not make any comments on social media. Evidence was fabricated to support their case and even shown to our children when they asked questions of the leaders. The guilty party did this because they knew people loved us and would ask questions. They cared zero about our souls and the souls of our children.
Two of our adult children were still part of that fellowship. A man who knew us and have been part of that church for as long as we had, approached my adult son after we left and said something like ‘ wow, it must be pretty difficult for you to have to face the fact that your parents are now going to hell’. Instead of reaching out to us with curiosity and questions, most people simply ignored us or sent us the message, “We are praying for you.” That made us sick and angry. Because we know what they were praying for. That we would repent so that we wouldn’t lose our salvation.
Yes, THIS is the fruit of the culture of bad theology. Sad, infuriating, and humbling because we recognize our past part in it. But, so thankful that all of our adult children support and respect us, and they are now seeing the fruit of our current healthy spiritual path. I often pray that many more in the ICOC will wake up and be willing to experience the temporary suffering of leaving the system because the freedom beyond that suffering is well worth it.
Well said. The best thing to do is leave to be able to see clearly, and find a healthy fellowship of believers with a God focused theology, not patternism. It has brought me so much joy and renewed love for God and scripture.
Carolyn, I’m glad to hear that you and Terry also left. You probably don’t remember us, but we were in a region in Boston that you guys led for a short time.
I remember your name but can't put your face to it. I'm sorry for anything stupid we did. 😔 We were young and immature and brain washed as so many were. The best thing was getting out of the ministry though the process was very difficult. Moving to Salt Lake City and seeing the functioning of the Mormon church and their control over members was eye opening the similarities. We then moved to Athens, GA to be with grandkids in 2020 during covid and the blessing in being distanced from influence of ICOC thinking was wonderful. I could share more details, but suffice it to say lots of study and digging deep has changed my views on how I read and obey scripture...with a theological hermeneutic instead of patternism and we worship with a church of Christ in Sandy Springs GA where the leadership reflect this. They have a woman assistant preacher and are in the middle of possibly having women elders (which, after studying it out I see there is nothing scriptural that prohibits this). They are focused on loving/serving the community and in doings so are regularly baptizing people. Terry had a stroke 3 years ago and it is 1.5 hours away so unfortunately we remain part of the online community. In person I meet with sisters from Athens for various things including a once a month spiritual book/bible study at my house. The peace and joy after moving on is immense.
Hi! I am actually in Idaho. Know full well the LDS church and it's grip. Many members are completely clueless about the leadership and things about the higher beliefs. It's kinda of crazy but it gives you insight into some of the stuff we are dealing with in the ICOC.
In all honesty, I don’t personally have any negative memories of you and your husband. ☺️
We moved to Wisconsin in 2001 and left the local ICOC church three years ago. One book I read was by John Mark Hicks on patternism. That was enlightening and validating. In ICOC, we always claimed that we were trying to restore the church of the first century. That was certainly bad theology. But we were young and idealistic, right?! Anyway, glad you guys found your way and wish you and your husband well!
stuff like this boils my blood. I would love to come meet this man that spoke to your child. Put on my Master Sergeant Bill face and voice and have a conversation with him. Discuss the Bible with him a while lol. I apparently have a 'presence' when I want to. But I keep this "Hulk" under wraps ;-D.
Oh William, I appreciate it!😂 believe me, my husband, and I had to work through all of those feelings, emotions, and temptations. The Lord was our counselor! He did not let us down!
What’s sad, is that this particular individual is just a very stark example of the result of conditioning that happens from the culture. At least he had enough guts to say it out loud. I could handle that better than the passive aggressive texts in messages of “we are praying for you.” 😫
We had the similar deal. We were among the first to be converted here, then the first converts to date and get married. We were part of many things leadership wise and I even briefly was in position to lead the church. I was basically forced out of everything because I promoted change. The stakeholders considered me dangerous. So many lies told about me. We left silently and how we were treated afterwards confirmed everything we knew to be true about the church's "love". There are a small number that still stay in touch with us because they know us to be authentic and still look to us for advice. So many others left after we did. I have found a group that is preaching everything that I was. That is making genuine effort towards community, and while still a work in progress, we are in unity. I am broken now physically and don't even have the energy or voice to preach so I can't do much. But I provide much advice to the leadership group and lend a hand where I can.
I respect your willingness to take that exile journey. Believe me, I know what it feels like. It’s not for the faint of heart. But when you want to live in integrity and not in an illusion, that’s the only path. And God is so incredibly faithful to his promises, right!?
I once asked a respected counselor who came to speak to our congregation, “How can we help our kids who were raised in this toxic system?” His reply helped me out the door: “Oh, I don’t think kids have been affected.”
I think it is hard to let go of a theology, a system, a belief, etc when you (we) have invested so much of our heart and lives. But yes, that rock certainly obscures the effects on the people around us
I have been part of the restoration movement for 45 years. Baptized in the main line Church, one year in the Christian church in Wisconsin, and ICOC since 1988. Rebaptized. When I zoom out I am grateful God had his hand on me through it all. Even in college when I grew disillusioned and walked away from the church for a few years God was merciful. I am saddened by the silence and the lack of curiosity so many of our leaders. They believe in certainty and if you are an outlier, you will certainly not fit in. I have not yet formally withdrawn my membership, but I cannot seem to find a reason to stay. I love many of the people here especially the women in my small group who have been so gracious to me these past 5 months. I stopped attending Sundays January 4th. I am not leaving my faith, but embracing relationships in a community of believers that are committed to the ways of Jesus. I believe that is my lens. I do plan to speak to leaders about this. My adult son who is also a disciple told me I need to use my voice.
I hear you. In many churches, if you stopped attending on Sunday, you would be removed from membership. But your church is considered one of the healthier churches. It is sad that so many feel they need to leave in order to follow Jesus.
These comments are all wonderful. I appreciate everyone’s heart posture to want to learn and understand, and most of all to love. The very opposite of the ICOC - who acts all knowing, all righteous, and all too easily judges. Since leaving the ICOC, we have found a wonderful church and BEMA group that represents the former, and are glad to have left the toxic latter.
I am not disagreeing at all, but I would say narcissistic abusers are the root - abusers who saw they could bend the Bible to say what they wanted to say to gain spiritual power over others. For ICOC it comes back to the famous living room. There were 30 people there who had already repented, came from a denomination that required baptism so they had likely already been baptized, they had already given up or were ready to give up anything in their pursuit of Christ, they already knew the Bible; and yet, a narcissistic abuser said that wasn’t enough. They weren’t good enough yet. They were still only “would-be” disciples. And thus began his coordinated effort to manipulate the scriptures, having a very-full living room of eager followers/obeyers.
I agree! After we left and felt like we were in the twilight zone, cause we couldn’t believe that people who caimed to be followers of Jesus and “leaders” in the church could actually do what they were doing, I came across the book by Chuck DeGroot called When Narcissism Comes to Church. That shed light on our entire experience.
"the way we practice our faith still supports that belief."
nailed it right there. I like to keep things simple. It helps when teaching people. I find the simplest illustrations from the examples they tell me, that shows it was all about performance over relationships. Doing instead of being. Performance breeds comparison, comparison breeds competition. Then we get the shaming, blaming, control, etc. We're on the Winning Team, you are on the losing team. If you quit, you are a quitter and a loser. Because we can't turn on our team, that would be disloyal (if you are thinking in terms of performance and not relationships).
We are to BE like Christ, not perform Christianity. There is a difference. One you can't fake nor put on a mask for. It is from the inside out. Once you get it, it is easy to spot in others. Either you love and have faith, or you aren't there yet. Those that aren't are driving things into the ground demanding they know The Way.
So glad to hear you bringing up how we misunderstood hell/eternity to grave consequences. I confess it was a root cause of many mistakes for me. It meant "pressure in the name of salvation" was a higher good (then we turned around and extolled free will as a loving excuse for annihilation at genocidic levels). It meant control. It meant fear. It meant exclusion. It meant elitist feelings. It stifled the Spirit, needing meetings and evangelist attention to consider simple decisions' effects on forever, too afraid to delegate out. It means limited progressive revelation. It means we gave more to the church than to places actually bringing sholom and taking care of real needs. It means looking at people with humility, curiosity, and honor, instead of like they need something from me. Make no mistake, my life and my community are far, far better now adhering to more Jewish understandings of eternity. What does that mean? For example, their word olom, for age-lasting, where we get eternity from, is from the root word for alam, meaning concealed, as in, a hidden, undefined amount of time. Like Jonah spending forever in the whale...for 3 days. That's how they view the purifying metaphorical brimstone: Undefined time until the good process is complete and God's will to save all is undefeated: 1 Corinthians 3:13-15 NASB
"each one’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each one’s work. [14] If anyone’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. [15] If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet only so as through fire." So in Revelation, death is destroyed with the Spirit still calling out with the gates open. Because folks weren't destroyed, they were having "unto the age of correction" (Matt25) until they learn to quench their thirst from the Creator, not the created. Best news ever!
I spent my entire 20s and early 30s wrapped up in a CoC-then-ICoC church and they slowly drained me of my humanity. In the beginning, it was great but as soon as Chuck Lucas then, especially, Kip McKean spread their influence all hell (pun intended?) broke loose and we questioned our baptisms, ourselves, everything but our sanity because there was no such thing as insanity, right? Mental illness/anxiety, as implied, was dismissed.
I have one small bone to pick, however: Jesus did say that broad is the road that leads to destruction, narrow is the gate to heaven. If he didn't mean, by destruction, hell I don't know what he meant. Churches should be more understanding but also should stand against questionable cultural trends, not bend to every trend out there.
Doug Jacoby hits on a possible meaning in some of his books. Specifucally, he notes the fire can be eternal, but the person experiences a second death. Eternal life only exists for followers of Jesus, those who do not follow him are extinguished with varying degrees of punishment. All this aligns with many often overlooked and unexplained scriptures. This is my synopsis of my reading his material on it which I find compelling in accuracy.
Yes, many have explained all this better than I can. Douglas has written about the afterlife for decades now. He started questioning our understanding of hell well before most of us even thought about it.
The concept of hell as it's taught today has only been around for a few hundred years, so it couldn't have been what Jesus meant. Also, the mentions of fire or burning in the bible refer to refinement, not torture. People who use the threat of eternal hellfire are using it as a form of control, not a true biblical meaning.
I'm Catholic so I believe in purgatory. Actually, I read a book by a Protestant preacher who decided that everyone is going to heaven. While I don't agree, his argument is compelling but he also provided an explanation by way of a purgatory because obviously not everyone is eligible for heaven when they die, but if there's a purification process afterward... Most Protestants have no "use" for purgatory since it isn't mentioned directly in the Bible but there are some interesting passages pointing in that direction.
The more I study the concept of hell, the more I tend to believe in something in line with purgatory. I don't know much about the concept but it does seem in line with what I've been reading!
I am pasting something from a document because I can't attach the file here:
C.S. Lewis, the author of Mere Christianity and The Chronicles of Narnia, was not Catholic but he did believe in the existence of purgatory. He knew dying does not change our sinful hearts, so God must do something to us after death in order to make us fit to spend eternal life with him. Lewis said, “Our souls demand Purgatory, don’t they?"
1 John 5:17 says, “All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.” The Church accordingly refers to mortal sins as our freely chosen, gravely evil acts that destroy God’s love in our hearts. These sins forfeit our hope of eternal life with God unless we ask God to forgive them through the sacrament of reconciliation (confession).
Unlike mortal sins, venial sins hurt the soul but do not kill God’s grace within it. These are sins that people commit in their day-to-day life that do not completely separate them from God but do hurt their relationship with him. Catholics don’t have to confess these sins to a priest (but they can if they wish), and the Eucharist also cleanses us of these sins. But what happens to people who don’t seek the sacraments and die in an unclean state of venial sin?
Since these people died in a state of grace and friendship with God, there is no possibility they will go to hell. But Revelation 21:27 says that nothing unclean will be in heaven. It logically follows, therefore, that these saved souls will be purged of their sins prior to spending eternity with God. According to the Catechism, “The Church gives the name purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned” (CCC 1031).
Purgatory is not an alternative to heaven and hell nor is it a “second chance” to choose God. All souls that go to purgatory belong to people who died in God’s friendship. Purgatory isn’t a place as much as it is a state of existence after death, where we will be purified from sin. C.S. Lewis understood that because God loves us so much he won’t let us stay attached to any kind of sin, including minor ones, for all eternity.
It is natural for humans to want to make up for the wrong they have done, but no amount of work on our part can make up for the wrong caused by our sins against an infinitely holy God. (Only Christ’s sacrifice can do that.) We can, however, make up for the temporal or earthly consequences of our sins.
Here’s a way to understand the difference.
If my five-year-old son recklessly breaks a neighbor’s window, I will pay for the window because he cannot. If my son is sorry for what he did then I will forgive him, but I will also ask him to perform extra chores to make up for his bad behavior. This satisfies his conscience’s desire to make amends and also helps him learn a valuable lesson.
We might think discipline is the opposite of love, but if you’ve ever been around a spoiled child you see that the lack of discipline can make a person angry, frustrated, selfish, and just plain miserable. Since God is our loving father, he also graciously corrects us, or as the Bible says, “The Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.” (Heb. 12:6)
If Christ’s sacrifice is perfect and infinitely atones for sin, then why is purgatory even necessary? It’s necessary because Christ’s perfect sacrifice must be applied to each individual in different ways.
Those who reject Christ’s offer of salvation, for example, won’t have the saving effects of Christ’s sacrifice applied to them. Believers who are attached to sin in this life will have the effects of Christ’s sacrifice applied to them after death in purgatory.
Theologians like Pope Benedict XVI have even speculated that the cleansing fire of purgatory is none other than Christ himself. He writes:
Some recent theologians are of the opinion that the fire which both burns and saves is Christ himself, the Judge and Savior. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgment. Before his gaze all falsehood melts away. This encounter with him, as it burns us, transforms and frees us, allows us to become truly ourselves.
Purgatory doesn’t take away from Christ’s work, but rather it is Christ’s work. It is not something the Church created in order to force people to work their way into heaven. Purgatory is instead something God created so that the grace his Son obtained for us on the cross could make us “holy and blameless and irreproachable before him” (Col. 1:22-23), free from the pain and penalty of sin, and ready to enter into eternal glory with Christ our Lord.
I thought that Gehenna was his analogy for hell. What relieves me in all this, however, is that we aren't the judges of anyone but ourselves. We can leave to God the difficult task of judging. The ICoC made snap judgments about everyone, of course, including strangers outside its control. This still doesn't mean that I'll be anywhere near a Pride parade, though. I still assess cultural trends because we are to be in, but not of, the world.
About that narrow road… Regardless of what is meant by destruction, I think the road is narrow because we can’t bring our works along with us. The narrow gate/narrow road is Jesus alone. If we start relying on anything else (our good works, our decisions, our study series, our theology, the “correctness” of our human institutions and rules), we’ve left the narrow road. It’s too narrow to bring all of that stuff along with us as assurance. Jesus says, “I never knew you,” to people who relied on their works. He calls them lawbreakers because they could not uphold the law they chose to rely on. We are all incapable of upholding the law, so we are all lawbreakers unless we trust Jesus alone to fulfill the law on our behalf. In my experience, the ICOC has this all wrong, leading them to adopt a works-based theology that has deceived and damaged everybody it has touched, whether they realize it or not. Those who are deceived by it become carriers, and the bad theology keeps spreading. Much like Jesus said, they travel over land and sea to make one convert, and when he becomes one, they make him twice as much a child of hell.
The narrow road is Jesus as model of loving God and neighbor. We WILL be judged by our lives (I Cor. 3:12-15), plus James's warning that faith without works is dead. However, whether we read this or that book because a spiritual leader ordered us to or brought this or that many people to church in order to impress everyone...well, that's legalism and pride, respectively.
The verse immediately preceding the passage you quoted talks about the foundation… Jesus Christ. He absolutely is our model for living, but we are not saved by living according to that model. If we were, He would not have needed to sacrifice Himself. Works are the natural result of faith in the salvation He purchased. A lack of works is evidence of a lack of faith, but works are not always proof of faith. If our works come out of a desire to be saved, they will burn up. If they are a result of our faith in Christ alone, they will be proven genuine.
Is it possible to separate desire for salvation from faith in Christ? What was Christ's purpose here on earth except to save us? Faith alone is insufficient but we aren't saved by works either. Our deeds confirm our salvation but we can lose our salvation. Gotta go to an eye appointment but will return later.
This might open up another can of worms, but I no longer believe we can lose our salvation, because it isn’t based on anything we do, other than accepting it. We either truly accept it or we don’t. Not accepting it, but hoping for salvation anyway, looks like anxiously jumping through hoops trying to “stay saved” for the rest of your life. No thanks. Thirty years was more than enough of that nonsense, and it took a toll on my heath. Accepting it looks like a trusting peace that is also attractive to others, and a heart that is transformed to want to be like Him, which leads us to imitate Him the best we can. The transformation is supernatural, not forced. The yoke is easy. We make it hard. We don’t have to work ourselves into heaven.
Yes, faith and works go together. But we are justified through faith, apart from works.
I have been a part of the church of Christ, Crossroads then ICOC. I spent my formative years thinking anyone outside the Church of Christ was lost. I spent my college years thinking that anyone outside Crossroads was lost and my 20’s, 30’s, 40’s thinking anyone outside of the ICOC was lost. I spent my 50’s confused and messed up about all of this. My early sixties as well. Now at 66 I have come to see that Jesus did come to judge. He could have but he did not. That will be left till the end. I refuse to judge anyone anymore. I can only share the life God has given me not a perfect doctrine nor perfect person. 50+ years of fussing and fighting. Baptized then rebaptized because I did not have the perfect understanding. What I believe needs to happen is quit fussing and get to know the life that Jesus promised to us. Understand when I really get it that Jesus is the only way to receive life and I see the Holy Spirit working in my life, not just beliefs, then share that life with others. I left because even as leaders we never changed. Same old sins confessed over and over. No power to change. My life has changed now that I understand how much Jesus loved me not trying to check every box of discipleship. The more I focus on Jesus the more he changes me. I don’t need to brag about how I have done this or that. Jesus never did. I had to ask myself do I have the water of never thirsting that Jesus promised. Does the Holy Spirit direct my life or do I direct my life. I came to the point of desperately needing Jesus’s water. Once understanding that I don’t need to feel that I need your approval. I spent years of needing approval. If Jesus approves me that is enough. This frees me to respect others and obey God from the heart and not the law. I will spend the rest of my life seeking God and changing. The foundation is accepting that God sought me out, found me and is helping me make it to heaven. Now I am able to happily share my cup of water to other thirsty friends I meet but understand that if they respond, God opened the door, not me. I am an unworthy servant who is deeply loved by my father.
Timely post and very spirit-driven for several reasons: your recent interview with this person referenced, and how I've been struggling with leaders on the subject of Mental Health, and my re-reading this morning of Matt 16. May I offer a simple landing spot for us to keep zeroing in on this "spiritual lobotomy", the yeast of the Pharisees and Teachers. Enlightened further: "Jesus must go and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and teachers of the law." Yes, you know the dogma. It's so so easy for us in discipling 1-another (lording over) and discipling the "lost" that unless "you" repent you too will perish. The dogma continues, "and if it's worldly sorrow and not godly sorrow, then it's even worse." However, when what we use to "measure" will also be "measured" against us (i.e. Luke 6 from Jesus), aka "when the shoe is on the other foot" then that's the hypocrisy and Pharisee Pride that is so toxic that it drives people away from Faith and the disciples to more suffering - blind leaders. The telltale sign is the mirror we place in front of them, and to point out their faults, especially more so with extreme James 3 accountability at the highest level of teacher/leader, which you aptly and factually referenced suicide, "the tongue is fire...life and death." Are leaders/teachers mourning their tragic end at the hands of spiritual abuse and bad theology? How do they react to the food in their teeth? Now is their chance to show how to genuinely follow Jesus and to repent wholeheartedly. Plus, we are all simply asking, "do they?!" What are we witnessing from these leaders/teachers, elders, chief priests, etc? I arrive at the same result you have arrived. And its over years and years of countless discussions. Who holds them accountable for their faults and errors in Jesus? Yes, Nadine, let's keep describing in full color this "yeast." Because our leader, Jesus, did it thousands of years ago, let us not let his death be in vain. Keep on. Continue to put a definition to the yeast. Let's continue to speak up and fight for those who can't fight for themselves bcos the deck is stacked. Define the Yeast. This yeast that lobotomizes Jesus in their minds. Be well! I support you wholeheartedly and wholeheartedly! Much Love in Jesus!
Thank you, Nadine, for this courageous post. You put the right words on what so many of us have experienced from the inside: systems that enslave instead of setting free, and that stifle the Spirit under human precepts. Jesus already called this out: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions” (Mark 7:8).
You’re right to point to the theology itself. A false image of God always produces control: leaders who govern through fear — often unconscious, but very real — reveal that they don’t trust the power of God. “Having a form of godliness but denying its power” (2 Timothy 3:5).
And how sad it is when one generation refuses to listen to the one that follows! Imagine parents who would never let themselves be transformed by their children — what a narrow, impoverished relationship! No one is born with all knowledge, and God intended it that way. From Genesis to the Pentecost of Acts 2, and still today, He works through each new generation to reveal Himself little by little — through every human discovery: physics, astronomy, biology, medicine, neuroscience, psychology, sociology, history, archaeology, linguistics, and of course spiritual knowledge. All of this so we may grasp ever more fully “how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ,” a love that surpasses knowledge (Ephesians 3:18-19). This revelation is infinite — no system can contain it, freeze it, or claim a monopoly on it.
The whole world is showing us right now where silence leads: how many victims — of abuse, of injustice of every kind — suffered years longer because those who knew stayed silent to protect a reputation, an institution, a comfort? To stay silent in the face of evil is already to lend it a hand. Scripture says nothing less: “Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them… everything exposed by the light becomes visible” (Ephesians 5:11-13). The Church should be the first to turn on the light — never the last.
So may those who remain silent ponder the word spoken to Esther: “If you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise from another place” (Esther 4:14). No one can stand against the sovereignty of God. But what a lost privilege not to have taken part! Thank you for choosing to speak.
And thank you to all who have the courage to call out injustice — not to wage war, but simply to take a stand, just as Jesus did. Yes, He gives us His peace — “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives” (John 14:27) — a deep, spiritual peace that nothing can take away. But He never promised a peace that accommodates injustice. He said, “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!” (Luke 12:49), and “Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division” (Luke 12:51). His peace dwells in the heart; His fire calls us to stand. May we carry both 🙏🏼🕊️
I left the church you are describing 15+ years ago ~ and it wasn’t because my faith was weak. I left because my faith was strong and my convictions ran deep.
I was absolutely horrified by the lack of leadership and the irresponsible shepherding.
As I left, I was described by those who were happy to see me go as, “angry, hateful, bitter and unforgiving.”
I am saddened by the continued hurt dished out by that fellowship. And I know it isn’t JUST that fellowship. I see it is a systemic problem that is turning many people away from what they perceive as Christianity. All while Jesus and his teachings are being ignored 😢
You’re much nicer about this subject than I am. This denomination and the generation that leads it is FIRED. DISQUALIFIED. Stripped of authority. Leadership revoked. Trust withdrawn. Worthiness removed.
They are left to be only those escaping the flames.
Let another generation who is not plagued with their Swiss cheese theology and selective convictions take their place of leadership.
I think you are onto something here. Bad theology absolutely contributes to bad behavior. However, eternal hell and that most will not be saved are biblically defensible. In my opinion accurate and historic Christian positions. However, the stance of a personal right to "judge" that many in the ICOC took on is not a necessary fruit of that theology; its a particular one.
And, I would gently push back on the idea that not preaching makes anyone a "second class" citizen. Preaching is not a privilege; its a heavy responsbility. If we stretch that sort of logic to another example we would see it doesn't work. One could hardly consider all of mankind second class "citizens" on account of the fact that we aren't allowed into the control room of the universe this logic would suggest we could rightly think that. Jesus after all is fully man yet hes the only man allowed to assume the role of Pantokrator. Or, of course, under the OT we would have to conclude that God intentionally made women second class citizens because only men could serve as priests. As far as I'm concerned thats a non-sequitur. Different does not mean unequal.
The issue is not so much whether women preach or not. It is whether that is an option. The problem with our theology is that it is not even an option based on gender. That is demeaning. Trust me. I am a woman. I have had to sit through zillions of mediocre sermons delivered by less-than-competent preachers, while the audience included many women who could have done a better job, myself included. The fact that other women or I would never be allowed to speak makes us feel like second-class citizens in the church. I am a university lecturer by training. It is humiliating.
The issue is as always what is true. If, it is the case, that God has baked into reality a necessity of male headship in the church then there is nothing at all humiliating about it. Whether one feels humiliated is besides the point.
Please, I would ask you not to tell women what is humiliating for them or not. That is for the women to say. The case for male headship is very weak when you study it out properly. and historically. I am probably not going to convince you. It sounds like you and I read the Bible differently.
I didn't say anything about your internal experience but about the fitness of it to reality. Do you disagree that a person's internal state is besides the point when it comes to the truth? If you do, then we obviously have a much deeper difference than how we read the Bible.
Or maybe men have baked into a book the necessity of their power and control, and used this book for thousands of years to hold onto said power and control
I think that is quite the charge to levy against the Christian church. This would entail (it seems to me) men and women of vastly different cultures, times, places, and personalities all ending up at this same position. Yet, many of the same men who taught these things gave their entire lives to the poor, to prayer, to service, to sacrifice.
As for me, I don’t see any particular reason the church would reserve these roles to men for millennia unless they had reason from apostolic tradition and scripture.
After all, the church has always lifted up saintly women like Mary of Egypt, St macrina, Judith, Esther, Rahab, etc. So why be so exclusionary on this singular issue?
The church herself is a woman, a bride, and teacher of wayward souls. Women and men alike have an integral and irreplaceable part of this great teaching ministry. The shepherd of Hermas has a great account of this ancient Christian teaching.
Female deacons have come and gone (in official capacity) but the eldership as far as I can tell has been a particular constant in Christian history as a male only role.
Leadership, in my experience is most often a lonely and difficult burden. I don’t suppose I would like to hold onto it. If I thought I could just pass it off to the nearest qualified woman and retire as a hermit I probably would.
Some would describe this as historically pervasive patriarchy. Christianity has been a dominant world religion for more than a millennium. As in a powerful social force that is able to be used to reinforce the absolute power of men. Fortunately, many men and women have come to understand, and been able to practice, that men and women are equally able to teach, preach, lead, love, and serve. We are so fortunate to have been born in a time where women have access to education, and other means of empowerment such as being able to own property, have a bank account, and vote :) I will admit, the Bible has many wonderful passages that lift up women. It also has many passages that have been used by the institutions of Christianity to restrict all of the above from women for hundreds of years. I wonder how many more prominent women of Christian history there would be if Christian women had been allowed to use their gifts in leadership roles!
So now that we’ve built a better world for women (and yet there is much more work to do), the context in which we interpret scripture has changed, and I’d argue for the better. We are so much better off when women have equal voices at the table
Maybe leadership would be less lonely if it wasn’t a boys club
It is a very cynical and proud stance to summarize Christianity as a “social force to reinforce the power of men.”
The Christian church is the bride of Christ made radiant by washing with his word. She has never been perfect; the wheat has always grown with the tares. But, this stance goes too far. It dishonours her and the men and women filled with the Holy Spirit who have led her for all those millennia.
As for me I think it would be a grave sin to deviate from Gods word. And, worse still to take my responsibilities and thrust them on someone else. In the end we are born free and rational and must choose to understand the Lords teachings and keep them.
Macarius of Optina once said two things I hold dear to my heart. I believe both were written to the Princess of Russia though I may be forgetting.
“We live at a time when much freedom is given to the expression of thought, but little care is taken that thoughts should be founded on truth”
“Do not juggle with the words of Scripture, stretching them to mean what you want them to. Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?”
Your argument is that these ideas are biblically defensible. Sure. A lot of things are biblically defensible. That brings up big questions. Seeing as there are many different ways to interpret scripture, is your particular theology healthy? (This is rhetorical, no one can answer that for you)
Aside from that, there are plenty of women who could qualify to hold the heavy responsibility of preaching and teaching. The point is that they’re not allowed to.
Thanks for replying. I think my reply above still holds. I'll just repeat it because I'm not sure you would be notified otherwise:
"The issue is as always what is true. If, it is the case, that God has baked into reality a necessity of male headship in the church then there is nothing at all humiliating about it. Whether one feels humiliated is besides the point. "
Actually, I would like to add a couple things:
1. If God forbade women from being priests, which he did, why did he do so? (Exodus 29:9)
2. If Jesus could have chosen women among the twelve, and by pure logic I don't see why not, why did he not do so?
It is conceivable in both of these cases that some woman, in some place, felt humliated by this exclusion. Should Jesus have done otherwise to prevent that feeling?
On the issue of health it is apparent to everyone that a surgeon only helps insofar as he cuts out what is truly unhealthy tissue. So, the question is once again about the shape of reality as revealed by God. The apostle Paul rightly points this out when he says:
"So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts."
The key issue here is their internal ignorance, caused by idolatry, which is manifested most strongly in things like celebrating unnatural relations between men and women. In the end this idolatry is what makes them unhealthy in their spirits not God's rejection of their idolatry. In fact, God only wishes them health and wellbeing.
I suspect Pauls reflections on this and elsewhere (IE Romans 1) are strongly influenced by the Wisdom of Solomon. The author of that text wisely puts it this way in Wisdom 17:
"Nothing was shining through to them
except a dreadful, self-kindled fire,
and in terror they deemed the things that they saw
to be worse than that unseen appearance.
7 The delusions of their magic art lay humbled,
and their boasted wisdom was scornfully rebuked.
8 For those who promised to drive off the fears and disorders of a sick soul
Grayson, your viewpoint makes sense coming from someone who believes that the Bible is without error. I don’t hold that view. That is a fundamental difference. I believe much was left out about women apostles (and what is written about them as largely minimized). And my theology is not only shaped by the Bible, but my and other’s life experiences, the spirit within me, and who i’ve come to know God to be. I personally believe that the church has idolized the Bible above God. Excuse my passion, but God is more than scripture; he is the internal struggles of the marginalized, he is in nature and mental health, he is in everything. I recognize that my beliefs don’t typically fit into religious structure. But this is just giving you some of where I’m coming from.
“Whether one feels humiliated is beside the point” - I beg to differ, and I would argue that Jesus teachings do not line up with such an uncompassionate perspective.
That is a fundamental difference between us; thanks for making that clear. I am aware that God is more than scripture. But surely you would agree God cannot violate what he has spoken and God spoke through the "apostles and prophets." For that reason without a doubt Gods word is inviolable. Jesus himself often rebuked people for violating the scriptures to their great humiliation. As he said to his opponents:
"You do not know the scriptures nor the power of God."
What would have been "left out" about women apostles? How do you know that?
As an aside the "twelve" are a distinct class even within the apostles and have a unique authority to define faith and morals for the church.
Briefly I will defend this by reference to Acts 1 where the position of one of the "twelve" is reserved only for a male apostle.
21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
Can you tell me more about why you would believe the Scripture has error? I won't quibble about historical things but on all things regarding doctrine and morals where does scripture go wrong?
And, if you don't mind me asking, how is it that we can know anything about Jesus with any certainty apart from the revelation of the gospels? How do we know apart from scripture what Jesus taught? How can we be certain about anything Jesus said or did if the Scriptures can be in error?
We are getting into the weeds here and I may be done after this comment since, as Nadine said, there’s no convincing that’s going to happen here.
I’m not a biblical scholar but the role of the apostles to lay the groundwork of Christianity at that point in history, doesn’t reasonably equate in my mind with the role of women in churches today.
Even if there are different levels of apostles, Mary Magdalen’s role has been significantly minimized historically. She was given the task of instructing the disciples on Jesus’s resurrection.
There is plenty mention of female leaders even by Paul (I can think of a deacon, apostle, house church leader) and a well-founded theory that Paul was speaking within a specific church context when he told women to be silent.
Yes, I am uncertain about a lot. Uncertainty is my name these days. But I do find a lot of truth in what Jesus taught. I would argue, though, that EVEN if you do rely only on the Bible for your theology, there is enough basis in scripture for an egalitarian worldview.
I'm fine with being done after this. You can respond if you'd like. Thanks for responding to my questions. I hope its clear I am striving for gentleness and respect. I hope that can color what I say next for you. I'll respond to each in turn.
Regarding Mary Magdalene:
She was a witness of the resurrection. Therefore, she told the apostles what she saw. That's hardly the same as teaching them or assuming the role of authority in the community. These women have historically been honored in the church as the "Myhhrbearers" without any conflation of gendered roles.
I think the most crucial question I can ask is:
Why would Mary Magdalene's role impact the church today and not the role of the Twelve? It seems completely arbitrary to do this without explanation. And that's not what I was doing instead I was pointing out that God has confined offices to men in the past with no apparent concern over the internal state of women about his decision.
Regarding the other women you mentioned:
Paul does mention Junia as an apostle, because like Mary Magdalene, she had witnessed the resurrection and was thus a valuable witness of those events. Paul provides this description of an apostle in 1 Corinthians:
"Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?"
And,
"Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all... he appeared also to me."
The office of Apostle is itself a historically bounded office. If you witnessed Christ's resurrection you were an apostle.
I think it is reasonable to infer from this view that no modern Christian is an apostle. My point regarding the Twelve was simply that someone's internal experience of humilation is not proof of anything regarding God's plan or expectations.
Regarding Phoebe:
She very well may have been a deaconess. I don't think she was given that in Acts 6 the very first deacons are instructed to be chosen from among men. However, I don't think it unreasonable to conclude that women could be deacons.
Regarding Prisca and Aquila:
Nothing about the statement "the church which meets in their home" implies that Prisca is the leader of that group. The primary requirement to host people in your home was wealth and generosity. It was not a role akin to an Elder or overseer. Paul's gratitude about that means very little to this discussion. As for Aquila and Prisca instructing Apollos. He was not yet baptized, therefore for all his faith, he had much to learn. There is absolutely nothing wrong with any woman instructing any man about the faith who is presently outside of the faith. Especially since they pulled him aside privately.
Nothing in my view necessitates not praising women for their faith or listening to them on matters of faith. I am happy to do both. I understand Paul's prohibition in 1 Timothy 2 to concern authoritative teaching within the assembled church rather than every possible instance of theological instruction.
At the end of the day if subjective internal states and personal experience are the arbiters of right and wrong then anything can be justified. One says this and another that.
A man feels humiliated by a woman teaching him therefore she must stop. The woman feels humiliated by the man therefore he must cease.
This is not the Biblical view nor does it come from the Spirit of God. I'll leave you with the words of the teacher.
11 The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. 12 Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.
Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.
Grayson, you have much to learn. The culture and generation Jesus came into was certainly not ready for women to lead. So, do you think God would’ve tried to force it down our throats? And still, obviously, men are not ready for women to lead. Our egos are too big. Our bodies are too pushy.
Would you accept the claim that women only want this role because of ego? I'm all for diagnosing and examining the movements of our own hearts. I won't claim to be particularly humble. But man as a gender has too much ego? If they do, why should I think women do not?
Bingo! When we left the fellowship, we were part of 20+ years, we did it with as much integrity as possible, because our adult children were still part. We were the victims of spiritual abuse, which included dismissal of our concerns, gaslighting, and eventually wicked lies being told about us, and even a lawsuit threatened against us for making degrading comments about leaders online. We absolutely did not make any comments on social media. Evidence was fabricated to support their case and even shown to our children when they asked questions of the leaders. The guilty party did this because they knew people loved us and would ask questions. They cared zero about our souls and the souls of our children.
Two of our adult children were still part of that fellowship. A man who knew us and have been part of that church for as long as we had, approached my adult son after we left and said something like ‘ wow, it must be pretty difficult for you to have to face the fact that your parents are now going to hell’. Instead of reaching out to us with curiosity and questions, most people simply ignored us or sent us the message, “We are praying for you.” That made us sick and angry. Because we know what they were praying for. That we would repent so that we wouldn’t lose our salvation.
Yes, THIS is the fruit of the culture of bad theology. Sad, infuriating, and humbling because we recognize our past part in it. But, so thankful that all of our adult children support and respect us, and they are now seeing the fruit of our current healthy spiritual path. I often pray that many more in the ICOC will wake up and be willing to experience the temporary suffering of leaving the system because the freedom beyond that suffering is well worth it.
I am so sorry for what you went through, and those comments to your son!!! Disgraceful.
Well said. The best thing to do is leave to be able to see clearly, and find a healthy fellowship of believers with a God focused theology, not patternism. It has brought me so much joy and renewed love for God and scripture.
We have been facilitating a wonderful house church since March.😁
Carolyn, I’m glad to hear that you and Terry also left. You probably don’t remember us, but we were in a region in Boston that you guys led for a short time.
I remember your name but can't put your face to it. I'm sorry for anything stupid we did. 😔 We were young and immature and brain washed as so many were. The best thing was getting out of the ministry though the process was very difficult. Moving to Salt Lake City and seeing the functioning of the Mormon church and their control over members was eye opening the similarities. We then moved to Athens, GA to be with grandkids in 2020 during covid and the blessing in being distanced from influence of ICOC thinking was wonderful. I could share more details, but suffice it to say lots of study and digging deep has changed my views on how I read and obey scripture...with a theological hermeneutic instead of patternism and we worship with a church of Christ in Sandy Springs GA where the leadership reflect this. They have a woman assistant preacher and are in the middle of possibly having women elders (which, after studying it out I see there is nothing scriptural that prohibits this). They are focused on loving/serving the community and in doings so are regularly baptizing people. Terry had a stroke 3 years ago and it is 1.5 hours away so unfortunately we remain part of the online community. In person I meet with sisters from Athens for various things including a once a month spiritual book/bible study at my house. The peace and joy after moving on is immense.
Hi! I am actually in Idaho. Know full well the LDS church and it's grip. Many members are completely clueless about the leadership and things about the higher beliefs. It's kinda of crazy but it gives you insight into some of the stuff we are dealing with in the ICOC.
In all honesty, I don’t personally have any negative memories of you and your husband. ☺️
We moved to Wisconsin in 2001 and left the local ICOC church three years ago. One book I read was by John Mark Hicks on patternism. That was enlightening and validating. In ICOC, we always claimed that we were trying to restore the church of the first century. That was certainly bad theology. But we were young and idealistic, right?! Anyway, glad you guys found your way and wish you and your husband well!
That book changed everything for me. So eye opening!
stuff like this boils my blood. I would love to come meet this man that spoke to your child. Put on my Master Sergeant Bill face and voice and have a conversation with him. Discuss the Bible with him a while lol. I apparently have a 'presence' when I want to. But I keep this "Hulk" under wraps ;-D.
Oh William, I appreciate it!😂 believe me, my husband, and I had to work through all of those feelings, emotions, and temptations. The Lord was our counselor! He did not let us down!
What’s sad, is that this particular individual is just a very stark example of the result of conditioning that happens from the culture. At least he had enough guts to say it out loud. I could handle that better than the passive aggressive texts in messages of “we are praying for you.” 😫
We had the similar deal. We were among the first to be converted here, then the first converts to date and get married. We were part of many things leadership wise and I even briefly was in position to lead the church. I was basically forced out of everything because I promoted change. The stakeholders considered me dangerous. So many lies told about me. We left silently and how we were treated afterwards confirmed everything we knew to be true about the church's "love". There are a small number that still stay in touch with us because they know us to be authentic and still look to us for advice. So many others left after we did. I have found a group that is preaching everything that I was. That is making genuine effort towards community, and while still a work in progress, we are in unity. I am broken now physically and don't even have the energy or voice to preach so I can't do much. But I provide much advice to the leadership group and lend a hand where I can.
I respect your willingness to take that exile journey. Believe me, I know what it feels like. It’s not for the faint of heart. But when you want to live in integrity and not in an illusion, that’s the only path. And God is so incredibly faithful to his promises, right!?
I once asked a respected counselor who came to speak to our congregation, “How can we help our kids who were raised in this toxic system?” His reply helped me out the door: “Oh, I don’t think kids have been affected.”
Do these people live under a rock?
I think it is hard to let go of a theology, a system, a belief, etc when you (we) have invested so much of our heart and lives. But yes, that rock certainly obscures the effects on the people around us
The least people can do is be curious. Not knowing the youth have been affected, as a counselor, is outrageous.
My maiden name is Hulbert. I wonder if we are related. 😄
I married a Hulbert. We met you 100 years or so ago, and I think we figured out there’s no relation. Still, if you go far enough back….
Oh yes, that sounds familiar now! 😁
I have been part of the restoration movement for 45 years. Baptized in the main line Church, one year in the Christian church in Wisconsin, and ICOC since 1988. Rebaptized. When I zoom out I am grateful God had his hand on me through it all. Even in college when I grew disillusioned and walked away from the church for a few years God was merciful. I am saddened by the silence and the lack of curiosity so many of our leaders. They believe in certainty and if you are an outlier, you will certainly not fit in. I have not yet formally withdrawn my membership, but I cannot seem to find a reason to stay. I love many of the people here especially the women in my small group who have been so gracious to me these past 5 months. I stopped attending Sundays January 4th. I am not leaving my faith, but embracing relationships in a community of believers that are committed to the ways of Jesus. I believe that is my lens. I do plan to speak to leaders about this. My adult son who is also a disciple told me I need to use my voice.
I hear you. In many churches, if you stopped attending on Sunday, you would be removed from membership. But your church is considered one of the healthier churches. It is sad that so many feel they need to leave in order to follow Jesus.
These comments are all wonderful. I appreciate everyone’s heart posture to want to learn and understand, and most of all to love. The very opposite of the ICOC - who acts all knowing, all righteous, and all too easily judges. Since leaving the ICOC, we have found a wonderful church and BEMA group that represents the former, and are glad to have left the toxic latter.
I just started to listen to Bema all over again. The first season has been revised, so it feels somewhat new.
I’m not sure how much they’ve revised. Maybe through season 1.
I am not disagreeing at all, but I would say narcissistic abusers are the root - abusers who saw they could bend the Bible to say what they wanted to say to gain spiritual power over others. For ICOC it comes back to the famous living room. There were 30 people there who had already repented, came from a denomination that required baptism so they had likely already been baptized, they had already given up or were ready to give up anything in their pursuit of Christ, they already knew the Bible; and yet, a narcissistic abuser said that wasn’t enough. They weren’t good enough yet. They were still only “would-be” disciples. And thus began his coordinated effort to manipulate the scriptures, having a very-full living room of eager followers/obeyers.
I agree! After we left and felt like we were in the twilight zone, cause we couldn’t believe that people who caimed to be followers of Jesus and “leaders” in the church could actually do what they were doing, I came across the book by Chuck DeGroot called When Narcissism Comes to Church. That shed light on our entire experience.
Yes, that too!
"the way we practice our faith still supports that belief."
nailed it right there. I like to keep things simple. It helps when teaching people. I find the simplest illustrations from the examples they tell me, that shows it was all about performance over relationships. Doing instead of being. Performance breeds comparison, comparison breeds competition. Then we get the shaming, blaming, control, etc. We're on the Winning Team, you are on the losing team. If you quit, you are a quitter and a loser. Because we can't turn on our team, that would be disloyal (if you are thinking in terms of performance and not relationships).
We are to BE like Christ, not perform Christianity. There is a difference. One you can't fake nor put on a mask for. It is from the inside out. Once you get it, it is easy to spot in others. Either you love and have faith, or you aren't there yet. Those that aren't are driving things into the ground demanding they know The Way.
Yes! I think this too.. The difference between “performing Christ” and “embodying Christ”. Totally different…
So glad to hear you bringing up how we misunderstood hell/eternity to grave consequences. I confess it was a root cause of many mistakes for me. It meant "pressure in the name of salvation" was a higher good (then we turned around and extolled free will as a loving excuse for annihilation at genocidic levels). It meant control. It meant fear. It meant exclusion. It meant elitist feelings. It stifled the Spirit, needing meetings and evangelist attention to consider simple decisions' effects on forever, too afraid to delegate out. It means limited progressive revelation. It means we gave more to the church than to places actually bringing sholom and taking care of real needs. It means looking at people with humility, curiosity, and honor, instead of like they need something from me. Make no mistake, my life and my community are far, far better now adhering to more Jewish understandings of eternity. What does that mean? For example, their word olom, for age-lasting, where we get eternity from, is from the root word for alam, meaning concealed, as in, a hidden, undefined amount of time. Like Jonah spending forever in the whale...for 3 days. That's how they view the purifying metaphorical brimstone: Undefined time until the good process is complete and God's will to save all is undefeated: 1 Corinthians 3:13-15 NASB
"each one’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each one’s work. [14] If anyone’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. [15] If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet only so as through fire." So in Revelation, death is destroyed with the Spirit still calling out with the gates open. Because folks weren't destroyed, they were having "unto the age of correction" (Matt25) until they learn to quench their thirst from the Creator, not the created. Best news ever!
Yes… I too am seeing things through this lense… 💝
I spent my entire 20s and early 30s wrapped up in a CoC-then-ICoC church and they slowly drained me of my humanity. In the beginning, it was great but as soon as Chuck Lucas then, especially, Kip McKean spread their influence all hell (pun intended?) broke loose and we questioned our baptisms, ourselves, everything but our sanity because there was no such thing as insanity, right? Mental illness/anxiety, as implied, was dismissed.
I have one small bone to pick, however: Jesus did say that broad is the road that leads to destruction, narrow is the gate to heaven. If he didn't mean, by destruction, hell I don't know what he meant. Churches should be more understanding but also should stand against questionable cultural trends, not bend to every trend out there.
Great question. What did Jesus mean by “destruction”? Was it eternal damnation or simply the consequences of their own bad judgment?
Doug Jacoby hits on a possible meaning in some of his books. Specifucally, he notes the fire can be eternal, but the person experiences a second death. Eternal life only exists for followers of Jesus, those who do not follow him are extinguished with varying degrees of punishment. All this aligns with many often overlooked and unexplained scriptures. This is my synopsis of my reading his material on it which I find compelling in accuracy.
Yes, many have explained all this better than I can. Douglas has written about the afterlife for decades now. He started questioning our understanding of hell well before most of us even thought about it.
In my opinion, hell because he contrasted it with heaven. We Catholics have purgatory, however, as a buffer.
The concept of hell as it's taught today has only been around for a few hundred years, so it couldn't have been what Jesus meant. Also, the mentions of fire or burning in the bible refer to refinement, not torture. People who use the threat of eternal hellfire are using it as a form of control, not a true biblical meaning.
I'm Catholic so I believe in purgatory. Actually, I read a book by a Protestant preacher who decided that everyone is going to heaven. While I don't agree, his argument is compelling but he also provided an explanation by way of a purgatory because obviously not everyone is eligible for heaven when they die, but if there's a purification process afterward... Most Protestants have no "use" for purgatory since it isn't mentioned directly in the Bible but there are some interesting passages pointing in that direction.
The more I study the concept of hell, the more I tend to believe in something in line with purgatory. I don't know much about the concept but it does seem in line with what I've been reading!
I am pasting something from a document because I can't attach the file here:
C.S. Lewis, the author of Mere Christianity and The Chronicles of Narnia, was not Catholic but he did believe in the existence of purgatory. He knew dying does not change our sinful hearts, so God must do something to us after death in order to make us fit to spend eternal life with him. Lewis said, “Our souls demand Purgatory, don’t they?"
1 John 5:17 says, “All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.” The Church accordingly refers to mortal sins as our freely chosen, gravely evil acts that destroy God’s love in our hearts. These sins forfeit our hope of eternal life with God unless we ask God to forgive them through the sacrament of reconciliation (confession).
Unlike mortal sins, venial sins hurt the soul but do not kill God’s grace within it. These are sins that people commit in their day-to-day life that do not completely separate them from God but do hurt their relationship with him. Catholics don’t have to confess these sins to a priest (but they can if they wish), and the Eucharist also cleanses us of these sins. But what happens to people who don’t seek the sacraments and die in an unclean state of venial sin?
Since these people died in a state of grace and friendship with God, there is no possibility they will go to hell. But Revelation 21:27 says that nothing unclean will be in heaven. It logically follows, therefore, that these saved souls will be purged of their sins prior to spending eternity with God. According to the Catechism, “The Church gives the name purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned” (CCC 1031).
Purgatory is not an alternative to heaven and hell nor is it a “second chance” to choose God. All souls that go to purgatory belong to people who died in God’s friendship. Purgatory isn’t a place as much as it is a state of existence after death, where we will be purified from sin. C.S. Lewis understood that because God loves us so much he won’t let us stay attached to any kind of sin, including minor ones, for all eternity.
It is natural for humans to want to make up for the wrong they have done, but no amount of work on our part can make up for the wrong caused by our sins against an infinitely holy God. (Only Christ’s sacrifice can do that.) We can, however, make up for the temporal or earthly consequences of our sins.
Here’s a way to understand the difference.
If my five-year-old son recklessly breaks a neighbor’s window, I will pay for the window because he cannot. If my son is sorry for what he did then I will forgive him, but I will also ask him to perform extra chores to make up for his bad behavior. This satisfies his conscience’s desire to make amends and also helps him learn a valuable lesson.
We might think discipline is the opposite of love, but if you’ve ever been around a spoiled child you see that the lack of discipline can make a person angry, frustrated, selfish, and just plain miserable. Since God is our loving father, he also graciously corrects us, or as the Bible says, “The Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.” (Heb. 12:6)
If Christ’s sacrifice is perfect and infinitely atones for sin, then why is purgatory even necessary? It’s necessary because Christ’s perfect sacrifice must be applied to each individual in different ways.
Those who reject Christ’s offer of salvation, for example, won’t have the saving effects of Christ’s sacrifice applied to them. Believers who are attached to sin in this life will have the effects of Christ’s sacrifice applied to them after death in purgatory.
Theologians like Pope Benedict XVI have even speculated that the cleansing fire of purgatory is none other than Christ himself. He writes:
Some recent theologians are of the opinion that the fire which both burns and saves is Christ himself, the Judge and Savior. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgment. Before his gaze all falsehood melts away. This encounter with him, as it burns us, transforms and frees us, allows us to become truly ourselves.
Purgatory doesn’t take away from Christ’s work, but rather it is Christ’s work. It is not something the Church created in order to force people to work their way into heaven. Purgatory is instead something God created so that the grace his Son obtained for us on the cross could make us “holy and blameless and irreproachable before him” (Col. 1:22-23), free from the pain and penalty of sin, and ready to enter into eternal glory with Christ our Lord.
Jesus talked about Gehenna, which was not eternal torment of being burned in flames forever.
I thought that Gehenna was his analogy for hell. What relieves me in all this, however, is that we aren't the judges of anyone but ourselves. We can leave to God the difficult task of judging. The ICoC made snap judgments about everyone, of course, including strangers outside its control. This still doesn't mean that I'll be anywhere near a Pride parade, though. I still assess cultural trends because we are to be in, but not of, the world.
About that narrow road… Regardless of what is meant by destruction, I think the road is narrow because we can’t bring our works along with us. The narrow gate/narrow road is Jesus alone. If we start relying on anything else (our good works, our decisions, our study series, our theology, the “correctness” of our human institutions and rules), we’ve left the narrow road. It’s too narrow to bring all of that stuff along with us as assurance. Jesus says, “I never knew you,” to people who relied on their works. He calls them lawbreakers because they could not uphold the law they chose to rely on. We are all incapable of upholding the law, so we are all lawbreakers unless we trust Jesus alone to fulfill the law on our behalf. In my experience, the ICOC has this all wrong, leading them to adopt a works-based theology that has deceived and damaged everybody it has touched, whether they realize it or not. Those who are deceived by it become carriers, and the bad theology keeps spreading. Much like Jesus said, they travel over land and sea to make one convert, and when he becomes one, they make him twice as much a child of hell.
The narrow road is just Jesus.
The narrow road is Jesus as model of loving God and neighbor. We WILL be judged by our lives (I Cor. 3:12-15), plus James's warning that faith without works is dead. However, whether we read this or that book because a spiritual leader ordered us to or brought this or that many people to church in order to impress everyone...well, that's legalism and pride, respectively.
The verse immediately preceding the passage you quoted talks about the foundation… Jesus Christ. He absolutely is our model for living, but we are not saved by living according to that model. If we were, He would not have needed to sacrifice Himself. Works are the natural result of faith in the salvation He purchased. A lack of works is evidence of a lack of faith, but works are not always proof of faith. If our works come out of a desire to be saved, they will burn up. If they are a result of our faith in Christ alone, they will be proven genuine.
Is it possible to separate desire for salvation from faith in Christ? What was Christ's purpose here on earth except to save us? Faith alone is insufficient but we aren't saved by works either. Our deeds confirm our salvation but we can lose our salvation. Gotta go to an eye appointment but will return later.
This might open up another can of worms, but I no longer believe we can lose our salvation, because it isn’t based on anything we do, other than accepting it. We either truly accept it or we don’t. Not accepting it, but hoping for salvation anyway, looks like anxiously jumping through hoops trying to “stay saved” for the rest of your life. No thanks. Thirty years was more than enough of that nonsense, and it took a toll on my heath. Accepting it looks like a trusting peace that is also attractive to others, and a heart that is transformed to want to be like Him, which leads us to imitate Him the best we can. The transformation is supernatural, not forced. The yoke is easy. We make it hard. We don’t have to work ourselves into heaven.
Yes, faith and works go together. But we are justified through faith, apart from works.
Rom. 3:28
Rom.5:1
Gal. 2:16
Eph. 2:8-9
I disagree because if one can't lose one's salvation, as apparently the Baptists believe, why bother obeying God? We are called to obedience. Period.
I have been a part of the church of Christ, Crossroads then ICOC. I spent my formative years thinking anyone outside the Church of Christ was lost. I spent my college years thinking that anyone outside Crossroads was lost and my 20’s, 30’s, 40’s thinking anyone outside of the ICOC was lost. I spent my 50’s confused and messed up about all of this. My early sixties as well. Now at 66 I have come to see that Jesus did come to judge. He could have but he did not. That will be left till the end. I refuse to judge anyone anymore. I can only share the life God has given me not a perfect doctrine nor perfect person. 50+ years of fussing and fighting. Baptized then rebaptized because I did not have the perfect understanding. What I believe needs to happen is quit fussing and get to know the life that Jesus promised to us. Understand when I really get it that Jesus is the only way to receive life and I see the Holy Spirit working in my life, not just beliefs, then share that life with others. I left because even as leaders we never changed. Same old sins confessed over and over. No power to change. My life has changed now that I understand how much Jesus loved me not trying to check every box of discipleship. The more I focus on Jesus the more he changes me. I don’t need to brag about how I have done this or that. Jesus never did. I had to ask myself do I have the water of never thirsting that Jesus promised. Does the Holy Spirit direct my life or do I direct my life. I came to the point of desperately needing Jesus’s water. Once understanding that I don’t need to feel that I need your approval. I spent years of needing approval. If Jesus approves me that is enough. This frees me to respect others and obey God from the heart and not the law. I will spend the rest of my life seeking God and changing. The foundation is accepting that God sought me out, found me and is helping me make it to heaven. Now I am able to happily share my cup of water to other thirsty friends I meet but understand that if they respond, God opened the door, not me. I am an unworthy servant who is deeply loved by my father.
Thank you so much for sharing this. I think you meant to write that Jesus did not come to judge.
Timely post and very spirit-driven for several reasons: your recent interview with this person referenced, and how I've been struggling with leaders on the subject of Mental Health, and my re-reading this morning of Matt 16. May I offer a simple landing spot for us to keep zeroing in on this "spiritual lobotomy", the yeast of the Pharisees and Teachers. Enlightened further: "Jesus must go and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and teachers of the law." Yes, you know the dogma. It's so so easy for us in discipling 1-another (lording over) and discipling the "lost" that unless "you" repent you too will perish. The dogma continues, "and if it's worldly sorrow and not godly sorrow, then it's even worse." However, when what we use to "measure" will also be "measured" against us (i.e. Luke 6 from Jesus), aka "when the shoe is on the other foot" then that's the hypocrisy and Pharisee Pride that is so toxic that it drives people away from Faith and the disciples to more suffering - blind leaders. The telltale sign is the mirror we place in front of them, and to point out their faults, especially more so with extreme James 3 accountability at the highest level of teacher/leader, which you aptly and factually referenced suicide, "the tongue is fire...life and death." Are leaders/teachers mourning their tragic end at the hands of spiritual abuse and bad theology? How do they react to the food in their teeth? Now is their chance to show how to genuinely follow Jesus and to repent wholeheartedly. Plus, we are all simply asking, "do they?!" What are we witnessing from these leaders/teachers, elders, chief priests, etc? I arrive at the same result you have arrived. And its over years and years of countless discussions. Who holds them accountable for their faults and errors in Jesus? Yes, Nadine, let's keep describing in full color this "yeast." Because our leader, Jesus, did it thousands of years ago, let us not let his death be in vain. Keep on. Continue to put a definition to the yeast. Let's continue to speak up and fight for those who can't fight for themselves bcos the deck is stacked. Define the Yeast. This yeast that lobotomizes Jesus in their minds. Be well! I support you wholeheartedly and wholeheartedly! Much Love in Jesus!
Thank you, Nadine, for this courageous post. You put the right words on what so many of us have experienced from the inside: systems that enslave instead of setting free, and that stifle the Spirit under human precepts. Jesus already called this out: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions” (Mark 7:8).
You’re right to point to the theology itself. A false image of God always produces control: leaders who govern through fear — often unconscious, but very real — reveal that they don’t trust the power of God. “Having a form of godliness but denying its power” (2 Timothy 3:5).
And how sad it is when one generation refuses to listen to the one that follows! Imagine parents who would never let themselves be transformed by their children — what a narrow, impoverished relationship! No one is born with all knowledge, and God intended it that way. From Genesis to the Pentecost of Acts 2, and still today, He works through each new generation to reveal Himself little by little — through every human discovery: physics, astronomy, biology, medicine, neuroscience, psychology, sociology, history, archaeology, linguistics, and of course spiritual knowledge. All of this so we may grasp ever more fully “how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ,” a love that surpasses knowledge (Ephesians 3:18-19). This revelation is infinite — no system can contain it, freeze it, or claim a monopoly on it.
The whole world is showing us right now where silence leads: how many victims — of abuse, of injustice of every kind — suffered years longer because those who knew stayed silent to protect a reputation, an institution, a comfort? To stay silent in the face of evil is already to lend it a hand. Scripture says nothing less: “Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them… everything exposed by the light becomes visible” (Ephesians 5:11-13). The Church should be the first to turn on the light — never the last.
So may those who remain silent ponder the word spoken to Esther: “If you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise from another place” (Esther 4:14). No one can stand against the sovereignty of God. But what a lost privilege not to have taken part! Thank you for choosing to speak.
And thank you to all who have the courage to call out injustice — not to wage war, but simply to take a stand, just as Jesus did. Yes, He gives us His peace — “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives” (John 14:27) — a deep, spiritual peace that nothing can take away. But He never promised a peace that accommodates injustice. He said, “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!” (Luke 12:49), and “Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division” (Luke 12:51). His peace dwells in the heart; His fire calls us to stand. May we carry both 🙏🏼🕊️
You are spot on.
I left the church you are describing 15+ years ago ~ and it wasn’t because my faith was weak. I left because my faith was strong and my convictions ran deep.
I was absolutely horrified by the lack of leadership and the irresponsible shepherding.
As I left, I was described by those who were happy to see me go as, “angry, hateful, bitter and unforgiving.”
I am saddened by the continued hurt dished out by that fellowship. And I know it isn’t JUST that fellowship. I see it is a systemic problem that is turning many people away from what they perceive as Christianity. All while Jesus and his teachings are being ignored 😢
You’re much nicer about this subject than I am. This denomination and the generation that leads it is FIRED. DISQUALIFIED. Stripped of authority. Leadership revoked. Trust withdrawn. Worthiness removed.
They are left to be only those escaping the flames.
Let another generation who is not plagued with their Swiss cheese theology and selective convictions take their place of leadership.
I have my moments, haha! Last week, I was so angry that I had to retreat and pray.
I think you are onto something here. Bad theology absolutely contributes to bad behavior. However, eternal hell and that most will not be saved are biblically defensible. In my opinion accurate and historic Christian positions. However, the stance of a personal right to "judge" that many in the ICOC took on is not a necessary fruit of that theology; its a particular one.
And, I would gently push back on the idea that not preaching makes anyone a "second class" citizen. Preaching is not a privilege; its a heavy responsbility. If we stretch that sort of logic to another example we would see it doesn't work. One could hardly consider all of mankind second class "citizens" on account of the fact that we aren't allowed into the control room of the universe this logic would suggest we could rightly think that. Jesus after all is fully man yet hes the only man allowed to assume the role of Pantokrator. Or, of course, under the OT we would have to conclude that God intentionally made women second class citizens because only men could serve as priests. As far as I'm concerned thats a non-sequitur. Different does not mean unequal.
The issue is not so much whether women preach or not. It is whether that is an option. The problem with our theology is that it is not even an option based on gender. That is demeaning. Trust me. I am a woman. I have had to sit through zillions of mediocre sermons delivered by less-than-competent preachers, while the audience included many women who could have done a better job, myself included. The fact that other women or I would never be allowed to speak makes us feel like second-class citizens in the church. I am a university lecturer by training. It is humiliating.
The issue is as always what is true. If, it is the case, that God has baked into reality a necessity of male headship in the church then there is nothing at all humiliating about it. Whether one feels humiliated is besides the point.
Please, I would ask you not to tell women what is humiliating for them or not. That is for the women to say. The case for male headship is very weak when you study it out properly. and historically. I am probably not going to convince you. It sounds like you and I read the Bible differently.
I didn't say anything about your internal experience but about the fitness of it to reality. Do you disagree that a person's internal state is besides the point when it comes to the truth? If you do, then we obviously have a much deeper difference than how we read the Bible.
Or maybe men have baked into a book the necessity of their power and control, and used this book for thousands of years to hold onto said power and control
Casey nice to hear from you.
I think that is quite the charge to levy against the Christian church. This would entail (it seems to me) men and women of vastly different cultures, times, places, and personalities all ending up at this same position. Yet, many of the same men who taught these things gave their entire lives to the poor, to prayer, to service, to sacrifice.
As for me, I don’t see any particular reason the church would reserve these roles to men for millennia unless they had reason from apostolic tradition and scripture.
After all, the church has always lifted up saintly women like Mary of Egypt, St macrina, Judith, Esther, Rahab, etc. So why be so exclusionary on this singular issue?
The church herself is a woman, a bride, and teacher of wayward souls. Women and men alike have an integral and irreplaceable part of this great teaching ministry. The shepherd of Hermas has a great account of this ancient Christian teaching.
Female deacons have come and gone (in official capacity) but the eldership as far as I can tell has been a particular constant in Christian history as a male only role.
Leadership, in my experience is most often a lonely and difficult burden. I don’t suppose I would like to hold onto it. If I thought I could just pass it off to the nearest qualified woman and retire as a hermit I probably would.
Thanks for engaging
Hey Grayson! I thought I’d join the dialogue :)
Some would describe this as historically pervasive patriarchy. Christianity has been a dominant world religion for more than a millennium. As in a powerful social force that is able to be used to reinforce the absolute power of men. Fortunately, many men and women have come to understand, and been able to practice, that men and women are equally able to teach, preach, lead, love, and serve. We are so fortunate to have been born in a time where women have access to education, and other means of empowerment such as being able to own property, have a bank account, and vote :) I will admit, the Bible has many wonderful passages that lift up women. It also has many passages that have been used by the institutions of Christianity to restrict all of the above from women for hundreds of years. I wonder how many more prominent women of Christian history there would be if Christian women had been allowed to use their gifts in leadership roles!
So now that we’ve built a better world for women (and yet there is much more work to do), the context in which we interpret scripture has changed, and I’d argue for the better. We are so much better off when women have equal voices at the table
Maybe leadership would be less lonely if it wasn’t a boys club
It is a very cynical and proud stance to summarize Christianity as a “social force to reinforce the power of men.”
The Christian church is the bride of Christ made radiant by washing with his word. She has never been perfect; the wheat has always grown with the tares. But, this stance goes too far. It dishonours her and the men and women filled with the Holy Spirit who have led her for all those millennia.
As for me I think it would be a grave sin to deviate from Gods word. And, worse still to take my responsibilities and thrust them on someone else. In the end we are born free and rational and must choose to understand the Lords teachings and keep them.
Macarius of Optina once said two things I hold dear to my heart. I believe both were written to the Princess of Russia though I may be forgetting.
“We live at a time when much freedom is given to the expression of thought, but little care is taken that thoughts should be founded on truth”
“Do not juggle with the words of Scripture, stretching them to mean what you want them to. Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?”
Much blessings to you Casey.
Your argument is that these ideas are biblically defensible. Sure. A lot of things are biblically defensible. That brings up big questions. Seeing as there are many different ways to interpret scripture, is your particular theology healthy? (This is rhetorical, no one can answer that for you)
Aside from that, there are plenty of women who could qualify to hold the heavy responsibility of preaching and teaching. The point is that they’re not allowed to.
Thanks for replying. I think my reply above still holds. I'll just repeat it because I'm not sure you would be notified otherwise:
"The issue is as always what is true. If, it is the case, that God has baked into reality a necessity of male headship in the church then there is nothing at all humiliating about it. Whether one feels humiliated is besides the point. "
Actually, I would like to add a couple things:
1. If God forbade women from being priests, which he did, why did he do so? (Exodus 29:9)
2. If Jesus could have chosen women among the twelve, and by pure logic I don't see why not, why did he not do so?
It is conceivable in both of these cases that some woman, in some place, felt humliated by this exclusion. Should Jesus have done otherwise to prevent that feeling?
On the issue of health it is apparent to everyone that a surgeon only helps insofar as he cuts out what is truly unhealthy tissue. So, the question is once again about the shape of reality as revealed by God. The apostle Paul rightly points this out when he says:
"So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts."
The key issue here is their internal ignorance, caused by idolatry, which is manifested most strongly in things like celebrating unnatural relations between men and women. In the end this idolatry is what makes them unhealthy in their spirits not God's rejection of their idolatry. In fact, God only wishes them health and wellbeing.
I suspect Pauls reflections on this and elsewhere (IE Romans 1) are strongly influenced by the Wisdom of Solomon. The author of that text wisely puts it this way in Wisdom 17:
"Nothing was shining through to them
except a dreadful, self-kindled fire,
and in terror they deemed the things that they saw
to be worse than that unseen appearance.
7 The delusions of their magic art lay humbled,
and their boasted wisdom was scornfully rebuked.
8 For those who promised to drive off the fears and disorders of a sick soul
were sick themselves with ridiculous fear."
Grayson, your viewpoint makes sense coming from someone who believes that the Bible is without error. I don’t hold that view. That is a fundamental difference. I believe much was left out about women apostles (and what is written about them as largely minimized). And my theology is not only shaped by the Bible, but my and other’s life experiences, the spirit within me, and who i’ve come to know God to be. I personally believe that the church has idolized the Bible above God. Excuse my passion, but God is more than scripture; he is the internal struggles of the marginalized, he is in nature and mental health, he is in everything. I recognize that my beliefs don’t typically fit into religious structure. But this is just giving you some of where I’m coming from.
“Whether one feels humiliated is beside the point” - I beg to differ, and I would argue that Jesus teachings do not line up with such an uncompassionate perspective.
Thank you.
That is a fundamental difference between us; thanks for making that clear. I am aware that God is more than scripture. But surely you would agree God cannot violate what he has spoken and God spoke through the "apostles and prophets." For that reason without a doubt Gods word is inviolable. Jesus himself often rebuked people for violating the scriptures to their great humiliation. As he said to his opponents:
"You do not know the scriptures nor the power of God."
What would have been "left out" about women apostles? How do you know that?
As an aside the "twelve" are a distinct class even within the apostles and have a unique authority to define faith and morals for the church.
Briefly I will defend this by reference to Acts 1 where the position of one of the "twelve" is reserved only for a male apostle.
21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
Can you tell me more about why you would believe the Scripture has error? I won't quibble about historical things but on all things regarding doctrine and morals where does scripture go wrong?
And, if you don't mind me asking, how is it that we can know anything about Jesus with any certainty apart from the revelation of the gospels? How do we know apart from scripture what Jesus taught? How can we be certain about anything Jesus said or did if the Scriptures can be in error?
We are getting into the weeds here and I may be done after this comment since, as Nadine said, there’s no convincing that’s going to happen here.
I’m not a biblical scholar but the role of the apostles to lay the groundwork of Christianity at that point in history, doesn’t reasonably equate in my mind with the role of women in churches today.
Even if there are different levels of apostles, Mary Magdalen’s role has been significantly minimized historically. She was given the task of instructing the disciples on Jesus’s resurrection.
There is plenty mention of female leaders even by Paul (I can think of a deacon, apostle, house church leader) and a well-founded theory that Paul was speaking within a specific church context when he told women to be silent.
Yes, I am uncertain about a lot. Uncertainty is my name these days. But I do find a lot of truth in what Jesus taught. I would argue, though, that EVEN if you do rely only on the Bible for your theology, there is enough basis in scripture for an egalitarian worldview.
I'm fine with being done after this. You can respond if you'd like. Thanks for responding to my questions. I hope its clear I am striving for gentleness and respect. I hope that can color what I say next for you. I'll respond to each in turn.
Regarding Mary Magdalene:
She was a witness of the resurrection. Therefore, she told the apostles what she saw. That's hardly the same as teaching them or assuming the role of authority in the community. These women have historically been honored in the church as the "Myhhrbearers" without any conflation of gendered roles.
I think the most crucial question I can ask is:
Why would Mary Magdalene's role impact the church today and not the role of the Twelve? It seems completely arbitrary to do this without explanation. And that's not what I was doing instead I was pointing out that God has confined offices to men in the past with no apparent concern over the internal state of women about his decision.
Regarding the other women you mentioned:
Paul does mention Junia as an apostle, because like Mary Magdalene, she had witnessed the resurrection and was thus a valuable witness of those events. Paul provides this description of an apostle in 1 Corinthians:
"Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?"
And,
"Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all... he appeared also to me."
The office of Apostle is itself a historically bounded office. If you witnessed Christ's resurrection you were an apostle.
I think it is reasonable to infer from this view that no modern Christian is an apostle. My point regarding the Twelve was simply that someone's internal experience of humilation is not proof of anything regarding God's plan or expectations.
Regarding Phoebe:
She very well may have been a deaconess. I don't think she was given that in Acts 6 the very first deacons are instructed to be chosen from among men. However, I don't think it unreasonable to conclude that women could be deacons.
Regarding Prisca and Aquila:
Nothing about the statement "the church which meets in their home" implies that Prisca is the leader of that group. The primary requirement to host people in your home was wealth and generosity. It was not a role akin to an Elder or overseer. Paul's gratitude about that means very little to this discussion. As for Aquila and Prisca instructing Apollos. He was not yet baptized, therefore for all his faith, he had much to learn. There is absolutely nothing wrong with any woman instructing any man about the faith who is presently outside of the faith. Especially since they pulled him aside privately.
Nothing in my view necessitates not praising women for their faith or listening to them on matters of faith. I am happy to do both. I understand Paul's prohibition in 1 Timothy 2 to concern authoritative teaching within the assembled church rather than every possible instance of theological instruction.
At the end of the day if subjective internal states and personal experience are the arbiters of right and wrong then anything can be justified. One says this and another that.
A man feels humiliated by a woman teaching him therefore she must stop. The woman feels humiliated by the man therefore he must cease.
This is not the Biblical view nor does it come from the Spirit of God. I'll leave you with the words of the teacher.
11 The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. 12 Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.
Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.
13 Now all has been heard;
here is the conclusion of the matter:
Fear God and keep his commandments,
for this is the duty of all mankind.
14 For God will bring every deed into judgment,
including every hidden thing,
whether it is good or evil.
Grayson, you have much to learn. The culture and generation Jesus came into was certainly not ready for women to lead. So, do you think God would’ve tried to force it down our throats? And still, obviously, men are not ready for women to lead. Our egos are too big. Our bodies are too pushy.
Thanks Tim.
Would you accept the claim that women only want this role because of ego? I'm all for diagnosing and examining the movements of our own hearts. I won't claim to be particularly humble. But man as a gender has too much ego? If they do, why should I think women do not?