History of the Headship Doctrine In Adventist Church

[Stan]

Link to "History of the Headship Doctrine" on Smashwords — in Spanish and English.

https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/433232

[aka]

Well, at least we aren't beating the dead horse with a whip of jewlery topic.

Now we've gone over into the headship side-issue.

 

The article opened my eyes to new knowledge:

 

"Many Christians in the 19th century, citing Paul’s counsels that women were to be silent in church and not

 

teach men, did not become Seventh-day Adventists because the church accepted and valued the ministry

 

of women in ways that were out of harmony with American culture and popular religion.

 

This was especially evident in the preaching, teaching and general leadership role of Ellen White, co-founder of the church. 

But over time the church’s openness to women in leadership positions waned.

 

After Ellen White died in 1915, she came to be viewed by many as unique among Adventist women, rather than as a role model.

 

In the first half of the 20th century most women leaders and evangelists were replaced by men."

 

I've been scoffing all along at this headship stuff as being a ghost from the past. I kept shaking my head thinking how hypocritical the arguments were what with Ellen being female in leadership role-model over men.  Interesting how the article made it look like women were more freely involved in church leadership roles before the 19th century.

 

Perhaps the matter of female leadership will be ironed out when San Antonio comes and the voting gets started.

[The Searcher]

I find this stange since the idea of male headship is very strong in the old testament beginning with Genesis 3 and the fall.  Genesis 3.16 declares Eve's desire will be for her husband, but Adam is to rule over it, but few consider how that desire is defined and why Adam is to rule over Eve.  Turninng to Genesis in the discussion between God and Cain, we  find  the exact same phrase used where it also declares that "sin's desire is for you."  And  Cain is also told that he is to rule over it.  

 

Sin's desire is not to be ruled but to rule; it desires to bind the object of its desires to its passions and controls.  God commands Cain that he must rule over it.  With that understanding, I would suggest that God's command to Eve is a warning.  Your desire will be to control and rule your husband according to your desires, but this he shall not do, rather, he shall be the controlling influence in the relationship.  

 

In the law given to Moses by God, God declared that a daughter or a wife could not bind herself to any vow unless her father or her husband allowed it.  Throughout the torah, the woman was to be subject to her father or her husband.  It was also the man's duty to take care of the widow and the orphan.  The  man was also to be the teacher of the family, and he was to be the head of the family.  It was also the duty of a man to raise up seed upon the death of his childless brother.  This was all commanded by God.

 

And in the New Testament, it declares a woman to be subject to the man as Christ is to the father.  She is to be subject to her husband because he is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, and we are to submit to one-another in fear of Christ.  I am being very brief here.  Children are to be subject to their parents, and men are not to provoke but are to teach their children.

 

Headship was not something that the church or the calvinists or the male chauvinist pigs made up.  The Scriptures seem to be very plan in this regard. 

 

The traditions of man are not the governing authority for our lives.  What the calvinists or any one else did or say does not affect what are the clear statements of Scriptures.  Do not use history to establish or to denigrate what the Bible clearly teaches.  God has put daughters and wifes under the authority of the father and the husband.  He made that position clear in the Old Testament, and one who changes not continues to affirm that position in the New Testament. 

 

I would suggest we tread very lightly upon this ground, God has made himself very clear as to who is head of the church and who is head of the wives and children. 

[LynnDel]

When the Bible talks about children being subject to their parents, it is speaking of that particular parent/child relationship; it is not saying that a child should be subject to other parents. When it says that a wife is subject to her husband, it is speaking of that husband/wife relationship; it is not saying that a woman is subject to all men. The verse is not addressing the individual's relationship to the church or to themission which He has called us to. If a husband believes that his wife is called of God to minister as a pastor and supports her in this calling, she is following the word of God by following both her husband's wishes and the call of God.

[Woody]

"When God specially calls your wife to the work of teaching the truth, then should you lean to her counsel and advice, and confide in her instructions. God may give you both, as possessing an equal interest iin and devotion to the work, equal qualifications to act a promient part in the most solemn work of saving souls." 1T p. 710

[8thdaypriest]

My husband IS my "head".  But NOT every male within the church.  Only my own husband.  I would NEVER think of doing something that my husband was against.  We are a team, and he is captain. 

 

You do realize that the LORD was pronouncing curses - in Genesis 3.  Right?  The ground was cursed, and brought forth thorns and thistles.  And mankind would die, and return to the earth.  AND "he shall rule over you".  THAT was a curse!  The husband was NOT meant to "rule" over his wife!!!  The husband is to "lead", to care for, to provide for, to protect. 

 

The husband was always meant to be "the head", just as God Our Father was always "head" of His Son - Christ.  The Father did NOT "rule over" Jesus.  He did not force His Son to obey. 

 

The male is physically stronger than the female.  That strength - when used in protection, and provision, is wonderful.  But when used to dominate, to "rule" by force - is terrible.  The world has seen how the strength of the male has been used to "rule over" females.  For most of history they were used as beasts of burden, and were seen only as breeders.  It truly was a curse upon womankind.  

 

The culture surrounding the churches within the Roman empire is very important.  Young girls would be married at 10 or 12, because men wanted to be sure that any offspring were their own.  These girls would then be kept within the home, or a small area within the home - guarded to ensure their purity.  They did not go out in public.  Servants did that.  When converts came into the churches from that culture, they would then allow their wives to attend church.  They would sit up in a balcony (usually) separated from the men.  What do women naturally do when they get with other women.  They talk.  That is how women bond with other women.  But all the chatter/whispering would distract from the service.  So Paul said they should be quiet.  And as far as the "have authority over a man" statement - we MUST remember the culture, and remember that Paul was trying to get a church going.  If women were given authority within the church - in THAT culture - it would have caused Roman men to reject the message.  THAT was what Paul wished to avoid. 

 

The four daughters of Phillip "prophesied".  To prophesy mean to speak for another - for God.  Nothing says that they only prophesied before other women. 

Deborah judged Israel - including the men!!

Huldah was a prophetess.  Even Hilkiah the priest listened to HER.

 

NKJ  2 Kings 22:14 So Hilkiah the priest, Ahikam, Achbor, Shaphan, and Asaiah went to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe. (She dwelt in Jerusalem in the Second Quarter.) And they spoke with her. (2Ki 22:14 NKJ)

 

Grief guys!  A women is subject ONLY to her own husband - not to every other male in her sphere.  The headship is about the family relationship. 

 

Ever read Proverbs 31.  The good wife "buys a field" and then "plants a vineyard" (probably directing male servants).  She sells the clothes and rugs that she manufactured - probably to at least some male buyers. 

 

In the world, a woman may be be an attorney or may be appointed a judge, or may teach biochemistry, or may get a PhD and counsel couples or individuals.  When she steps across the threshold of the "church", suddenly she may only teach other women or 12 yr olds and younger, or play the piano/organ, or cook food for potluck, or provide flowers or decorate. 

 

Some 34 years ago, I would teach Bible studies in our home.  My husband is the one who encouraged me, telling me that I had a gift for teaching.  When I began writing studies, he is the one who wanted to put them up on a website.  He is the webmaster.  I just write the studies. 

 

I truly pity any woman whose husband "rules over her".  My husband would wash my feet, and has - many times. 

 

Respectfully,

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint

[Woody]

God is our Head.

[aka]

Rachael Cory wrote:

"Grief guys!  A women is subject ONLY to her own husband - not to every other male in her sphere. 

The headship is about the family relationship.

" My husband IS my "head".  But NOT every male within the church.  Only my own husband.  I would NEVER think of doing something that my husband was against.  We are a team, and he is captain."

 

That is spot on! When church male members come to me with a shopping-list of commands for tasks that need to get done, there is an attitude that they display. It's an expectancy in service from me of "no pay-no praise" policy.  All gets going on a human ruling over another level. We women have been conditioned not to say no, right? So we live our church community existance as servants serving but often just serving not the Lord God but one who has taken the role of being the 'lord god' in our religious community. 

 

"The husband is to "lead", to care for, to provide for, to protect."

Blessed indeed are we women who have partners that provide for us and protect us in the many ways we need to be protected.

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

In the coming Kingdom of Messiah, there will be no marriage.  Ergo - no husbands as heads of wives. 

 

Jesus said, "The first shall be last, and the last first".  I wonder how that will look in the Kingdom. 

 

Every person raised in the first resurrection will be a priest of God and of Christ (Rev. 20:6).  Which means that those who lived as women during this age will also be priests in the coming Kingdom of Messiah. 

 

I disagree with most Hebrew Roots teachers who believe that the exclusive Levite/Aaronic priesthood will continue during the Kingdom of Messiah on earth.  The ancient Tabernacle with it's priesthood was a prophecy of the LORD's work for our redemption, and a prophecy of the coming Messianic Kingdom.  An exclusive Levite/Aaronic priesthood was NOT the LORD's ideal.  The LORD spoke to ALL of Israel saying "You will be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exo 19:6).  That was a prophecy.  The LORD's word will be fulfilled. 

Only when most of Israel rebelled and worshiped the golden calf idol, thus breaking covenant, did the LORD appoint the tribe of Levi.  That exclusive Levite priesthood was a "plan B", and  would eventually be replaced by the priesthood of redeemed Israel. 

 

Respectfully,

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint