1. My Wife is Coming With Me!

As a side bonus (a sweet one!) this year, for the first time, Stacey will be able to join me on a trip to Covenant Life Church for a conference. I'm always so blessed by the conferences put on there by the folks at Sovereign Grace Ministries, I'm eager for her to be blessed too. And having her there without the kids for a few days? I'm stoked.

2. The Travelling Fellowship

Two other couples will be joining Stacey and me on our trip: Nick & Alicia and Josh & Amy. For all four of them it'll be their first time down to an SGM conference as well, so I'm happy to bring them along. But what I'm really looking forward to about having them come is the sweet fellowship I know we'll enjoy in the car both ways and during our time at the conference. Events like this are always more meaningful when experienced in groups.

3. The Preaching & the Seminars

Will the preaching be good? I have no doubt. I look forward to hearing Thabiti Anyabwile, Craig Cabaniss, and Bob Kauflin again and Bryan Chapell and Ray Ortlund for the first time. And the seminars should be great too: Pat Sczebel, Mark Altrogge, Don Whitney, Shai Linne, Steve & Vikki Cook... It will rock!

4. Engaging in Worship of the Living God

I know, I can do this anywhere. And I do it regularly where God intends for me to do it -- in my local church, which I love. But there's always something special about gathering thousands of worship leaders together to sing in one place. This will be a special time, a focused few days of doing not much apart from corporate worship and engaging our brains in knowing God better.

5. The Theme

The Gathering. I love it. Back in 2008 I wrote Stephen Altrogge an e-mail telling him that we should have more songs and more focus in corporate worship on the church as a whole rather than just individuals. He agreed with me. I like to think that Stephen and I are really the brains behind this whole thing. Bob just stole our idea.

6. Mark Altrogge

I hope he does some ridiculous antics. I just like it when he does that.

7. I Hope I'm an Encouragement

I know that they are having this conference to encourage us, but I hope that somehow our presence at the conference will be a small encouragement to Bob Kauflin and the rest of the leaders of Sovereign Grace Ministries. It's been a rough season for them, but I want them to know we love them and appreciate them and are thankful for all their labours for the gospel. My prayer is that for these few days 'The Gathering' of all these saints from all around North America would help us to fix our eyes on the one who never changes and never fails, so that in light of his unending love for his people at the cross, all are strengthened and encouraged.

8. There Are Lots More...

There are lots more reasons, but I'll stop here. Anyone else out there going? What are you looking forward to?

Post from: Julian Freeman

Why I’m Looking Forward to WorshipGod ’11!

Related posts:

1. Why Singing Music from Sovereign Grace is Better Than Singing Hymns I also thought about titling this post: Why Stephen Altrogge...

That being said, we must immediately recognize that as wonderful as Sovereign Grace Music (and many other contemporary worship composers / leaders) are, they are not the first Christians to be cross-centred, are there are many ways in which singing hymns can be beneficial. Here are just a few reasons why we need to sing older hymns. Feel free to add your own reasons in the comments.

1. Because We Need the Clean Sea Breeze

Here I want to listen to CS Lewis. Below is something he wrote with regard to the value of reading old books. I would argue that the same principle holds true in the songs we sing as Christians, since the songs that we sing are intended to be educational and edifying (Col 3.16).

Naturally, since I myself am I writer, I do not wish the ordinary reader to read no modern books. But if he must read only the new or only the old, I would advise him to read the old…. It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones…. We all … need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books…. We may be sure that the characteristic blindness of the twentieth [and to be certain, the twenty-first] century … lies where we have never suspected it…. None of us can fully escape this blindness…. The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can be done only by reading old books.^[1]

So while we may glory in some of the advances of reformed evangelicalism in the 21st century, which is producing wonderful new worship songs, we must also be cautious. The 'characteristic blindness' of our own age is invisible to us and we will be doomed to be held captive by it unless we're able to let the centuries of Christians who have gone before us inform us.

Singing old hymns reminds us of the way that our brothers and sisters who have gone before us faithfully testified to and gloried in Jesus in their own day. Singing their hymns helps us see things a little more from their perspective, which helps open our eyes to the subtleties of the 21st century worldview that we would not otherwise be aware of.

2. Because of the Richness of Our History

As Christians, we simply cannot afford to ignore our glorious heritage. Too often we have been told that the history of the church is nothing but shameful. The average Christian can be made to be afraid of church history because 'we were so bad in the crusades' and we somehow view the whole realm of church history as belonging to the Roman Catholics (at least until the Reformation). But when we look back, we begin to uncover the treasures of our history that will help us to glory in our God who is Lord of generation after generation throughout all ages.

Take, for example, the 'Odes of Solomon' which were written and compiled in the first three centuries AD (either in Greek or Syriac). These worshipful meditations reflect gloriously (though with all the imperfections of non-inspired poetry) on the story of the Christian faith and the love that has been shown to us in Christ.

Look at this brief meditation from Ode 27:

1. I extended my hands and hallowed my Lord,
2. For the expansion of my hands is His sign.
3. And my extension is the upright cross.
   Hallelujah.

So as early as the third century (at the latest) Christians were raising their hands in worship. But it was deliberate: They were making the sign of the cross. The cross wasn't just the thing they were singing about, they were glorying in it with their bodies as well! We need to glory in the richness of our history, never run away from it in ignorance.

3. Because the Best of Hymns Are Cross-Centred Too

21st century evangelicalism may have invented the cool terminology for being 'cross-centred' or 'gospel-centred' but the concept is thousands of years old. And that is indeed reflected in the best of hymns from all ages. Take this hymn from Bernard of Clairvaux, written in 1153, for example.

O sacred Head, now wounded, with grief and shame weighed down,
Now scornfully surrounded with thorns, Thine only crown;
How pale Thou art with anguish, with sore abuse and scorn!
How does that visage languish, which once was bright as morn!

What Thou, my Lord, hast suffered, was all for sinners’ gain;
Mine, mine was the transgression, but Thine the deadly pain.
Lo, here I fall, my Saviour! ’Tis I deserve Thy place;
Look on me with Thy favour, vouchsafe to me Thy grace.

My burden in Thy Passion, Lord, Thou hast borne for me,
For it was my transgression which brought this woe on Thee.
I cast me down before Thee, wrath were my rightful lot;
Have mercy, I implore Thee; Redeemer, spurn me not!

What language shall I borrow to thank Thee, dearest friend,
For this Thy dying sorrow, Thy pity without end?
O make me Thine forever, and should I fainting be,
Lord, let me never, never outlive my love to Thee.

My Saviour, be Thou near me when death is at my door;
Then let Thy presence cheer me, forsake me nevermore!
When soul and body languish, oh, leave me not alone,
But take away mine anguish by virtue of Thine own!

Or how about this one, from Isaac Watts, written in 1707:

When I survey the wondrous cross
On which the Prince of glory died,
My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.

Forbid it, Lord, that I should boast,
Save in the death of Christ my God:
All the vain things that charm me most,
I sacrifice them to his blood.

See, from his head, his hands, his feet,
Sorrow and love flow mingled down:
Did e'er such love and sorrow meet,
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?

His dying crimson, like a robe,
Spreads o’er His body on the tree;
Then I am dead to all the globe,
And all the globe is dead to me.

Were the whole realm of nature mine,
That were a present far too small;
Love so amazing, so divine,
Demands my soul, my life, my all.

Singing these hymns and hundreds of others like them not only points us to Christ, but unites us with brothers and sisters from past centuries, with whom we will one day worship forever.

4. Because Words Matter

There are many exceptions to this, so I say it with all the necessary qualifications in place, but I still think it's worth point out. The form of hymns often tends to better use of English. The form, metre, and length of hymnstend to increase the demand for highly-skilled writing by those with a high level of poetic ability. For that reason, hymns are often better able to encapsulate more truth through more words in better and more memorable images. Not always, but often.

Speaking personally, when I sing to my children each night when I put them to bed, it is generally hymns that I sing, and it is generally for this last reason. I want them to hear more truth in poetic images and rhymes that they will remember into adulthood--truth that I pray God will cause to sink into their hearts and cause them to love the God of the gospel that we're singing about.

--------

^[1] C.S. Lewis, from God in the Dock. As quoted in John Piper’s Brother’s, We Are Not Professionals, 69-70.

Post from: Julian Freeman

Why Singing Hymns is Better than Singing Contemporary Worship Music

Related posts:

1. Why Singing Music from Sovereign Grace is Better Than Singing Hymns I also thought about titling this post: Why Stephen Altrogge...
2. The Worship of a Sinful Woman CH Spurgeon's sermon "A Woman Which Was a Sinner" is...
3. Sing All the Verses — Part 3 This is the last installment in this series, unless I...

In case you haven't noticed yet, both the title and that first sentence are said with tongue firmly planted in cheek. But I will say, however, that I do agree with those statements, in a qualified sense. Let me try to defend that by way of example and comparison.

First, here is a classic hymn by Cowper--some have even suggested this is the greatest hymn of all-time!

God moves in a mysterious way
His wonders to perform;
He plants His footsteps in the sea
And rides upon the storm.

Deep in unfathomable mines
Of never failing skill
He treasures up His bright designs
And works His sovereign will.

Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take;
The clouds ye so much dread
Are big with mercy and shall break
In blessings on your head.

Judge not the Lord by feeble sense,
But trust Him for His grace;
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.

His purposes will ripen fast,
Unfolding every hour;
The bud may have a bitter taste,
But sweet will be the flower.

Blind unbelief is sure to err
And scan His work in vain;
God is His own interpreter,
And He will make it plain.

I love this hymn. Especially in the context of Cowper's life. It's ministered to me huge at a number of points in my life.

That being said, I think the song could be improved. The reality is that the Bible tells us over and over (in narrative, in poetry, in apocalypse, everywhere!) that God moves in mysterious ways. But in Scripture, this always points us to the greatest mystery: the cross & resurrection of Jesus. The hymn never takes us there.

The 'vindication' of God's wisdom and trustworthiness in the midst of what appears to be defeat is the cross. There should be another verse drawing us to the reality of God's mysterious workings, as shown in the cross, the climax of all God's revelation.

Now compare Cowper's classic to a modern song by Sovereign Grace Music on the same theme, by Stephen Altrogge: (© 2002 Sovereign Grace Praise [BMI])

Who can comprehend
Your holy ways O Lord?
Your glorious power without end
From which the stars were born
How could we ever understand
The moving of Your hand?
How could we ever come to grasp
The One who never began?

Oh, what a glorious mystery You are
Oh, what a glorious mystery You are
Though we only see in part
You’ve completely won our hearts
Oh, what a glorious mystery You are

Who can comprehend
Your gracious mercy Lord
Great loving kindness that would send
A Saviour to be born?
Why would you, Jesus, die for us
Who cursed Your perfect name?
Why would You come to reconcile
Those who caused Your shame?

There are many similarities: both songs focus on the mysterious nature of God's character and God's works. Both songs glory in God's sovereignty over all things.

But there are differences too. Frankly, I don't think Altrogge could match Cowper's poetic ability. Cowper's turns of phrase and gripping metaphors are breath-taking and illuminating. But here's why I'd rather sing Stephen's song: He glories in the climax of Scripture and points us to the ultimate reason why we can trust a God who seems mysterious; he points us to the cross.

And which is more important? Where will a Christian find true comfort and solace in the midst of suffering or guilt or distraction or despair? In poetic imagery or in simply being reminded of God's love for him displayed in the death of Jesus?

The reason why I continue to love Bob Kauflin, the Altrogges, and all the folks at Sovereign Grace Music is not because they are the best lyricists or musicians of all time. It is because they faithfully, time-after-time, give us song-after-song that points us to the revelation of God in the cross. And that's what God loves! And that's what Christians need.

All that to say, I am super-fantastically excited for the release of Risen coming up in a few days. If I'm certain of anything, it is this: Every song will make much of what God has done for us in Jesus.

And what could possibly be better to sing about?

Post from: Julian Freeman

Why Singing Music from Sovereign Grace is Better Than Singing Hymns

Related posts:

1. Why Singing Hymns is Better than Singing Contemporary Worship Music Okay, it is time to re-establish some equilibrium in the...
2. Why I’m Looking Forward to WorshipGod ’11! I'm about 24 hours away from setting off on the...

These are tough questions, indeed, and this is a topic that deserves far more thought than I'll give it today. But in my own meditation this afternoon I've realized this:

Because God is righteous judge, who is altogether just, it is never wrong for us to long for justice.

Our problem, however, is that we don't know what justice is.

Sure, we think we do. But the reality is that what we think of when we think of justice generally has more to do with what assuages our sense of 'wrongness' than it does with what establishes God's 'rightness'.

The downfall of simply thinking in imprecatory categories for those who work evil is that we're all workers of evil. All of us have sinned and deserve God's judgement. Any good in us is only because of the image of God impressed on us and the grace of God worked in our hearts. Any sense of justice we have is only present because God has given it to us. How then can we boast about our righteousness and another's evil and long for them to be judged when we too deserve to be judged?

Ultimately, we must all beg mercy from God--yes, for the evil we've committed, but also because we don't know what his justice established would really look like. Who could have guessed that he would use a cross to show his righteousness (Rom 3.21-26)? Who could have guessed that the innocent being slaughtered for the guilty would accomplish perfect justice (2 Cor 5.21; 1 John 2.2)?

Can I pray that someone would be damned?

It seems that the better question would be, 'How can I pray for God's justice to be shown?' If David prayed for God's justice, if Jesus came to accomplish God's justice, and if God was so determined to show his justice that he crushed his Son, then I should be concerned with seeing it accomplished too. But I need to pray with humility. The cross, like nothing before, shows me that I understand very little of the vastness and comprehensiveness and complexity of God's judgement--and his passion for showing mercy even in the midst of judgement. That's a vastness, comprehensiveness, and complexity that I don't get.

So we must be cautious. Pray for justice, yes, we must! But presuming to know what that justice looks like is a far bigger step. For now I'll pray that God would cause his name to be revered as holy (Matt 6.9) however he sees fit, whether in the damnation or salvation of a particular sinner, I cannot know.

Post from: Julian Freeman

A Thought on Imprecatory Psalms

Related posts:

1. Bob Kauflin on David Powlison on the Imprecatory Psalms Bob Kauflin (lead worshiper at Covenant Life Church) has posted...
2. Thoughts on Reading the Psalms Here are just a few things that I find helpful...
3. A Friday Meditation on the Psalms In keeping with our current theme, I wanted to post...

And behold, a woman of the city, who was a sinner, when she learned that he was reclining at table in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster flask of ointment, and standing behind him at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears and wiped them with the hair of her head and kissed his feet and anointed them with the ointment.

Recently, at GFC, Paul preached on the incident of Mary's anointing of Jesus with the expensive perfume. Spurgeon argues vehemently that these are two separate incidents. I completely agree. He comments:

But it ought not to astonish you that there were two persons whose intense affection thus displayed itself; the astonishment should rather be that there were not two hundred who did so.

Amen. 

What both these incidents have in common is that they are oth lavish and extravagant displays of love for Christ, devotion to Christ, and affection for Christ. They are both displays of worship, in public, which are extremely personal and emotion-filled. Those are all things that are challenging for me!

Could it be that this 'sinful woman' from Luke 7 has much to teach me about worship? Absolutely! Here's more from Spurgeon:

The woman's service showed her love in that it was fervent. There was so much affection in it--nothing conventional; no following chilly propriety, no hesitating enquiry for precedents. Why did she kiss his feet? Was it not a superfluity? What was the good of it? Did it not look sentimental, affected, sensuous, indelicate? Little did she care how it looked; she knew what she meant. She could not do otherwise. Her whole soul went out in love, she acted naturally as her heart dictated, and, brethren, she acted well. O for more of this guileless piety, which hurls decorum and regulation to the winds.

Her act of worship was passionate, affectionate, non-conventional, not hindered by propriety (slang for man-fearing). It was superfluous--which was exactly the point.

She didn't look noble or dignified... and she knew it. But she didn't care. She opened herself to the charge of being sentimental, senduous, indelicate, and all sorts of other things. People would question her motives and the genuineness of her worship. But she didn't care.

Her worship was genuine. Her love for Jesus demanded response, and she gave it. O for love and worship like this! How I wish I was more like that 'sinner' of a woman!

Post from: Julian Freeman

The Worship of a Sinful Woman

Related posts:

1. Why Singing Hymns is Better than Singing Contemporary Worship Music Okay, it is time to re-establish some equilibrium in the...

This time, however, it wasn't because of the words that we were singing but because of the people who were singing them. All around me I could hear the voices of the saints of Grace Fellowship Church--and they were praising God for his glorious, condescending love that he shows in the gospel.

Our preaching pastor has been away on sabbatical for the past 10 weeks or so, and so much of the pastoral ministry has fallen to me. It has been my absolute delight to see how the saints at GFC have opened up their ears and their lives to me over this summer. Each of them has been a blessing to me as I've watched them struggle, grow, deepen in their love for Christ, wrestle with hard texts, live through difficult family situations, try to discern God's will for their lives, endure pain, and much more.

As we sang, I heard their voices and was reminded of the myriads of things going on in each of their lives, and all the potential reasons that each of them would have to doubt God and his goodness. But by his grace, each of them stood and sang as a testimony of their ongoing faith and trust in Christ to sustain them through all seasons of this life.

His grace is truly amazing, and their singing through the seasons of their lives showed me that on Wednesday night. Even thinking about it now brings to mind a verse from one of my favourite psalms (although I'm still trying to find a psalm that's not one of my favourites...):

Preserve me, O God, for in you I take refuge.
I say to the Lord, “You are my Lord; I have no good apart from you.”
As for the saints in the land, they are the excellent ones, in whom is all my delight.

Post from: Julian Freeman

Joy in Saints

No related posts.

I’m so thankful for technology because it gives us new ways to carry out our old traditions. Recently, when I was at a conference in the States with my friend Tim, I purchased the Bible read by Max McLean on MP3 CDs that I can listen to my car.

My habit lately has been to listen to a single book of the Bible, listening carefully for major themes for connecting thoughts. When the book is over, I hit rewind and hear it read again. I do this several times to get my head around the whole flow of thought int he book.

It never ceases to amaze me that no matter how many times we go back over the same text of God’s inspired word, the Spirit reveals more and more of God’s truth to us through the words on the page. Because of my calling and my stage of life I have found it particularly important to study the pastoral epistles again. I love how in so few pages God has packed so much wisdom for all generations of his church’s undershepherds.

If you have never taken the opportunity to hear God’s word read aloud, then let me encourage you to do so. I think it will amaze you, as it has amazed me, to see how thoughts are related from paragraph to paragraph in a way that you cannot understand simply by reading quietly in your head (also, you don't have to worry about the visual false divisions of chapter and verse).

If you do not have anyone to read the word of God aloud to you then let me suggest simply reading the word on your own out loud to yourself. On the T4G blog, Mark Dever recently confirmed what I had previously been suspicious of, namely, that Ambrose was the first figure in history of whom it is said that he read silently to himself. So before the end of the fourth century it was clearly the practice of our forefathers to read whatever they were reading aloud. If the Bible was written in order to be read aloud, then why not give it a shot?

If you are not convinced by my arguments here, then let me dare you to give it a shot. Go to the ESV web site and spend some time listening to the streaming audio that is available for free. If you don’t benefit from it, then don’t worry about it. But, if you are like me, and you do find benefit in it, then go out and buy yourself the Bible on CD. The more ways we find to make the Bible come to life for us--so that God the Father can reveal Jesus Christ to us through God the Spirit as he speaks through the words on the page--the better!

Post from: Julian Freeman

Hearing God’s Word

Related posts:

1. Delight and the Word of God Warning: If you look down at the text below, you...
2. When Christians Hear the Word Sometimes I think I brag about the work that God...
3. Gleanings on the Spirit from Acts I don't know if you're anything like me, but if...

Conclusion

It has been the intent of this series to present several of the exegetical arguments for the complementarian position. Admittedly, some arguments are more persuasive than others, but we have been firmly founded in the God-breathed texts from the Old and New Testaments throughout.

We have not claimed to have all answers for all questions, nor have we come close to providing exhaustive definitions, arguments and proofs, so as to close the case—that was not the intent. What was desired has been accomplished, however, and the Scriptures have been allowed to interpret themselves in order to present the reader with a broad view of how God inspired his writers to structure the husband-wife relationship.

Since this has been a presentation of the classical interpretation and the plain reading of all of the passages mentioned, a personal plea to the reader must be made:

Do not allow yourself to be swayed away from the doctrine of Paul, Peter, and the historic Christian church by any showy argument.

If there is any temptation to move to a novel egalitarian position, scrutinize motives in agonizing detail: Why do you desire to depart from the biblical teaching?

Examine arguments carefully: Are they logical? Are they consistent with the style and intent of arguments of biblical writers? Are the criteria used biblical in nature?

And most importantly: Make sure your position is derived from Holy Writ and nowhere else. No other text is God-breathed, and no writer since John has been inspired. We may be absolutely sure that God’s will (at least at one point) was for wives to submit to husbands. We may not in any sense whatever be certain that it was ever or ever will be God’s desire for a husband-wife relationship to exist without headship and submission.

Seriously consider: Where does the burden of proof lie? The argument must not be framed in a way so as to make complementarians the ones who must give an explanation why we believe what we do, since what we believe is plainly revealed in Scriptures. The burden of proof clearly lies on egalitarians.

For those swayed by the "cultural exceptions" type arguments, let me ask you this: Just for a moment, put yourself in Paul's place, wanting to lay down clear and binding regulations for the male-female relationship for all Christians everywhere... how would you present it? Would you refer to the creation order and why we were each created? Would you refer to the relationship of man and woman prior to the fall? He did. Would you refer to the undoing of the curse in redeemed Christian relationships? So did he. Would you refer to the inner workings of our Triune God? That was Paul's approach. So now, let me ask you, what could Paul have referred to that would convince you that this commands are binding for all time? There is nothing left! You've rejected every God-breathed reason that has been given.

If we complementarians are wrong, it is because we have attempted to stick too closely to the revealed will of God. If egalitarians are wrong, it is out of desire to abrogate the commands of God in order to appeal to a feminist and pluralistic culture. Clearly, unless there is absolutely not one a single doubt anywhere in your mind that an egalitarian interpretation of Scripture is correct, it only makes sense to remain a complementarian with Paul, Peter and the 2000 years of church history that has followed them. May we all be able to stand before the judgment throne of God one day and be cleared of any charge of adding to or subtracting from all the words of his divine self-revelation.

Post from: Julian Freeman

All-Male Eldership, Part 6: Concluding Thoughts

Related posts:

1. All-Male Eldership, Part 1: The Foundations Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...
2. All-Male Eldership, Part 3: More on Ephesians 5-6 Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...
3. All-Male Eldership, Part 4: The NT Rationale Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...

The Trinity

Perhaps one of the more sobering truths about the egalitarian-complementarian debate is the reality that more is at stake than just the interpretation of a few words or a few verses. Rather, our whole vision of God is altered by how we view the nature of authority relationships. This is so because authority relationships plainly exist within both the immanent Trinity and the economic functioning of the Trinity.

As it has been noted, the husband is given authority over the wife in 1 Cor. 11:3 because “the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” Since the word kephalē has never been acknowledged as meaning anything other than “one in authority over another,” we must plainly see that this verse is teaching not only that men are to submit to Christ and that wives are to submit to husbands, but that the example for these requirements to submit is the relationship of Christ submitting to his Father. This example is important because it clearly shows that there can at the same time exist 1) equality in a relationship, and 2) an authority structure within a relationship.

Within the Trinitarian relationship, the Father “gave” his Son (Jn. 3:16) and “sent” the Son (Jn. 3:17, 34; 4:34; 8:42; Gal. 4:4; etc.). The Father predestined us to be conformed to the image of his Son (Rom. 8:29; cf. 1 Pet. 1:2) and “chose us in the Son” before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4). The Son is obedient to the commands of the Father (Jn. 12:49; Phil. 2:5-10) and confessed that he had come to “do the will” of the Father who “sent him” (Jn. 4:34; 6:38). God the Father created the world “through” his Son (Jn. 1:3; Heb. 1:2; 1 Cor. 8:6). These relationships are never reversed. The Son never initiates of his own will, never directs the Father, never creates through the Father, never sends the Father. The Father never speaks the words that the Son gives him to speak. The Son sits at the right hand of the Father (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 1:3, 13; 1 Pet. 3:22; etc.). The Father never sits at the right hand of the Son.

These relationships are proven to be eternal (ie. they exist in the immanent Trinity and are not limited to the economic functioning of the Trinity while Christ was on earth) for several reasons. It is easily seen that the Father created the world through the Son (see above). Even before the creation of the world, however, the Father chose his elect in Christ to be reconciled to him through Christ (Eph. 1:4-5). Furthermore, passages such as Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 make it plain that it was the predetermined and definite plan of God the Father that Christ would come and suffer for the sins of his people (interpretation affirmed by NT preaching; Acts 2:23). Moreover, it is plainly visible in John 17, at the end of Christ’s earthly ministry that he viewed both his words and his own followers as those which God the Father had given him. After the defeat of death, at the consummation of all things, Christ remains under the authority of God the Father who has always held all authority (1 Cor. 15:26-28).

God is one and all parts of the Trinity remain equal in holiness, worth, beauty, etc., yet there is clearly presented within the Trinity an authority structure relationship. All this has yet said nothing about the Holy Spirit who is portrayed as being under the authority of both Father and Son, yet is himself in authority over neither of the others. We must allow this picture to form our understanding of value and authority in a culture that views being in authority as great and being under authority as horrible. The picture of submission within Scripture itself shows that submission to a rightful authority is a beautiful, noble, even wonderful task because it models the Trinity itself. Thus the husband is seen as a picture of Christ (because he is an authority over his wife, as Christ is authority over man) and the woman is seen as a picture of Christ (because Christ is under the authority of the Father and gladly submits to his will). Both positions in the relationship are godly and God-glorifying.

Post from: Julian Freeman

All-Male Eldership, Part 5: Headship and the Trinity

Related posts:

1. All-Male Eldership, Part 4: The NT Rationale Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...
2. All-Male Eldership, Part 2: Two Common Objections Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...
3. All-Male Eldership, Part 3: More on Ephesians 5-6 Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...

Apostolic Proof Texts

When providing the basis for his statements with regard to the male-female authority relationship, the writer of the God-inspired text almost always appeals to an eternal principle, outside the realm of sin and never once does he appeal to the secular culture of his day.[i]

In 1 Cor. 11 Paul makes it clear that “the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God” (v 3). The Greek kephalē (“head”) has always referred—without exception—to one who has authority over the other. While many egalitarians have attempted to make kephalē mean “source”, this meaning is absolutely without precedent and cannot even be verified as a legitimate possible meaning for the word (and that is without even dealing with the context which clearly shows that an authority in relationship is within the purview). [See this article, originally published in JETS, for more.] Paul’s point is clear: Inasmuch as the relationship of Christ to God, or man to Christ cannot be altered by time or culture, so it is clear that the relationship between husband and wife cannot be altered by time or culture.

In Eph. 5 Paul draws the parallel of husband and wife to Christ and the church. In no uncertain terms, he states this repeatedly. “For the husband is the head (kephalē) of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its saviour” (v 23). So Christ is the head of the church and the church (his bride) is his body. Thus the command in v 28, “Husbands should love their wives as their own bodies,” because Christ’s bride is his body. “Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands” (v 24). Again, the wife is to submit to the husband every bit as much and in every way as the church submits to Christ (hence, Christ is the Lord of the church, vis-à-vis the command in v 22 to submit to the husband “as to the Lord”). Continuing on, the apostle draws out in great detail how the husband is to love his wife sacrificially “as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (v 25). As if it were not enough in this instance to refer to the relationship of Christ and the church, Paul relates the marriage of Christians (after the redemptive work of Christ) to the marriage of Adam and Eve before the fall and quotes Gen. 2:24! He, by inference, is saying that by maintaining this order, the Christian marriage will uphold God’s plan for marriage as it was before the entering of sin into the world as well as modelling Christ’s relationship to his church to a sinful world.

In 1 Tim. 2:13-14 Paul refers to creation (before the fall) as the reason why the women in the family of God are to be characterized by good works and a quiet and submissive spirit (vv 10-12). As noted above, the creation order is significant to Paul, the inspired OT commentator, who says “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (v 13).

This reasoning is true even beyond the scope of Paul’s writing. Peter, too, when he commands the continual observance of the authority relationship between husband and wife (1 Pet. 3:1-7) cites God’s desires, and the approved tradition and pattern of holy women. Women are exhorted to let their “adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious” (v 4). Indeed it is precious, because it is what Eve was created to be! This is the reversal of the effects of the fall whereby the woman’s desire is against her husband, to usurp his authority. In the tradition of the “holy women who hoped in God” (v 5), the NT wife is to submit to her husband. The husband is to honour his wife and live with her in an understanding way (not rule over her harshly, as in the curse), but he is to remember that she is a fellow heir with him of the grace of life.

Thus it can be seen that the repeated pattern of the NT authors was to not rely on the realities of their own sinful, transitory and shifting culture for the pattern of a God-honouring husband-wife relationship, but to refer back to either an eternal relationship which cannot change (viz., Christ and the church, Christ and God, man and Christ) or else to refer to God’s original creation before the effects of sin (viz., creation order, purpose in creation), or both. Never did an apostle base his argument for the authority relationship of husband and wife on culture—not even once.

Post from: Julian Freeman

All-Male Eldership, Part 4: The NT Rationale

Related posts:

1. All-Male Eldership, Part 5: Headship and the Trinity Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...
2. All-Male Eldership, Part 6: Concluding Thoughts Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...
3. All-Male Eldership, Part 2: Two Common Objections Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,...