A reader of this 2008 Baylyblog article, “Helpful Presbyterion article on Romans 16:1 and woman deacons…,” wrote noting a dead link to Jimmy Agan’s article, “Deacons, Deaconesses, and Denominational Discussions: Romans 16:1 As a Test Case.” He asked if I might be able to locate Agan’s piece for him?

This started me on a search, during which I was waylaid by reading what’s been written about women deacons the past few years. Whew!

The world has been inundated by men with the terminal degree arguing this and that extremely fine distinction between “semantic meaning components” having to do with the Greek word “deacon” and its “cognates.” In other words, lots of guys are spilling tens of thousands of words about every possible aspect of the word “deacon” and its application to church office, and of course, the subtext for all of their word-spillng and scrupulously footnoted publications is the contraverted issue of whether or not churches should have and ordain women to this Biblical office.

What is humorous, but also disingenuous, is the great protestations of these men that one’s view of women exercising authority over men in the church as church officers should have no influence on the question of the “semantic meaning components” of the word “deacon” and its cognates in Scripture.

Right. So noted.

Blather.

Brothers and sisters, the reason long and involved articles with hundreds of footnotes citing other articles also having hundreds of footnotes, all written by men in possession of the terminal degree, have been a growth industry for decades, now, is that men like Pastor Tim Keller and his mass of Redeemerites have used women “officers” they referred to as “deeks” to promote women teaching and exercising authority over men within the Church.

Over several decades, I have written and written and written warnings against these men’s sexual rebellion against God’s Word promoted through their carefully chosen Trojan Horse of the promotion of women into the office of deacon. I will not repeat my arguments here. Anyone looking for the history of this conflict will find many posts opening up the principals and their rebellions under this search of Baylyblog.

There’s something additional needing to be said, though.

No one should need reminding of the influence of the Fall in the life of the Christian. We all live under it each day, and mourn it. But oftentimes we deny this influence we experience ourselves when it comes to choosing our leaders. “We’re bad but they’re good,” we tell ourselves. “We’re dumb but they’re smart.” “We’re liars but pastors and Bible scholars don’t lie.”

Wrong.

All men are liars, as the Bible tells us. Only God is good. Only God is true.

A necessary application of this wonderfully freeing truth is that none of us should ever listen to a sermon or read an article exegeting or expounding God’s Word without being noble like the Bereans who examined the preacher’s words to see if they were true.

Often Christian pastors, teachers, and writers’ words are not true. Many times the lies are intentional. Other times the lies are the product of the author and his editors having little to no self-critical capacities. Thus they give and receive a superfluity of allee-allee-in-frees from one another, leaving what they publish with obvious character failures. Here’s the example that led to the writing of this present piece.

An author published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society back in 2021 a piece titled “The Authority of Deacons in Pauline Churches.” In his piece, the man went on at spectacular length and even more spectacular citations, and then near the end he declared his own allee-allee-in-free thusly:

The second factor that can affect one’s position regarding the diaconate relates to one’s view of the role of women in the church. …But it seems to me that this is a case of the tail wagging the dog. Our view of deacons should not be governed by our view of women in ministry.

How this got past JETS’s editors is beyond me. In fact, how it got beyond the man’s own self-critical capacity is beyond me. In the writing of his article on the “authority” of deacons, this man declares no one should be “governed” by his view of “women in ministry.”

What does he mean by “women in ministry?”

Just prior to the above quote, he speaks of “complementarians who do not affirm that women can hold authoritative positions in the church.”

Now then, think it through carefully. This New Testament seminary prof scolds those  he claims are letting tails wag them and being governed concerning the proper understanding of the authority of New Testament deacons by the Apostle Paul’s command to the New Testament Church:

But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. (1Timothy 2:12-13)

Some declarations of self-righteousness and scholarly objectivity should be met with catcalls, and this one qualifies. There is not one man today arguing over the meaning of the Biblical word and office of deacon who is not governed by his commitment either to submit to, or rebel against, the New Testament command that women not teach or exercise authority over men.

In fact, let’s take it a step further: no servant of God should teach, write, or preach on the meaning of the Biblical word and office of deacon without condemning any abuse of women that places them in any position, let alone office, in the church requiring them to teach and exercise authority over men. To fail to condemn this practice that Redeemerites have endlessly promoted which, under the influence of Redeemer’s money and fame, has grown like the weed it is for decades now is as serious a violation of God’s Order of Creation as sodomite marriage.

Note the reason women are to be protected, as the Apostle Paul declares it:

For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

Then he adds a second reason:

And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. (v. 14)

Every last word written or spoken today concerning the meaning and purpose of New Testament deacons is written and spoken by a man or woman who, by what they write, is either calling for submission to or rebellion against God’s Order of Creation. There is no one whose arguments over the meaning of this Greek word “deacon” and its cognates in God’s Word are not governed by their submission or rebellion against God’s creation of Adam first, then Eve; then too, the application of that order by the Apostolic Church to government and ministry within the Church.

So when a man brags of his great honor, as he leaves your dinner table, count your spoons. When a guy having a doctorate tells you his arguments about the meaning of the New Testament word “deacon” and its cognates are independent of his commitment about women teaching and exercising authority over men, ridicule him. His self-acclamation is comedic.

Everyone in the world today is caught up in the battle over God’s Order of Creation of Adam first, then Eve. None of us, either pagan or Christian, ever rises above that battle. Least of all scholars. Least of all Evangelical scholars. Least of all scholars holding membership in the Evangelical Theological Society. Least of all scholars holding membership in the Evangelical Theological Society in a piece where they argue about what authority deacons did or didn’t have in the New Testament Church—a piece that is published in the pages of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society.

Sexual anarchy against God’s Order of Creation is the law of the world, today, and men are either with God, or against Him. There is no demilitarized zone where high-falutin scholarly objectivity presides.

The prophet Isaiah confessed:

Woe is me, for I am ruined!
Because I am a man of unclean lips,
And I live among a people of unclean lips;
For my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

(Isaiah 6:5)


Thankful for this content? Let others know:

Tags: , , , , ,