You make me want to be a better man.
I'm presently preaching through the book of Judges on Sunday mornings at Providence Church. Consequently, I've spent more time in Judges the past few months than ever before and I've had to rethink some things.One thing that has become clear to me is a misunderstanding of the role and significance of Deborah in the book of Judges and in the Bible in general.
In Judges 4 & 5 many see Deborah as God's leader appointed over the nation, primarily because there were no men willing to step up.
But, (1) rather than validating the leadership of women, she reveals how bad things are in Israel that the menfolk are such spiritual slackers. In other words, the text is not trying to normalize women in spiritual, military, or national leadership, but is criticizing the state of affairs in Israel.
Couple Deborah's role with that of Jael in Judges 4-5 and you see a woman rallying the men to fight (Deborah) and one getting the glory for killing the enemy leader (Jael), instead of Barak (Judges 4:9).
(2) Deborah is not actually the hero of the stories; Jael is. Jael kills the enemy commander, but she does so using her skills acquired as a housewife. Why doesn't anyone want to emulate she who is "most blessed" among women? (Judges 5:24)
(3) Deborah does not see a lack of leaders and take charge. Deborah is not actually the leader, but God's spokes(wo)man to the leader (i.e., Barak). God uses her, not to lead, but to get the leader to do his job.
"Deborah does not take over when men don't lead. She inspires men to lead. There is a world of difference in those two statements."
- Bob Deffinbaugh
That being said, although Deborah doesn't seem to aspire to leadership in Israel, she is the most spiritual person around. That's why they go to her for a word from God, as His prophetess. She's pretty much the lone spiritual light shining in that darkened land.
In fact, I would submit that God raised up Deborah and Jael to shame Israel and to humiliate Israel's enemies (e.g., Sisera, the enemy commander).
"it was also an act of humiliation for the Jews, for they lived in a male-dominated society that wanted only male leadership. ... For a captain to flee from a battle was embarrassing; for him to be killed while fleeing was humiliating; but to be killed by a woman was the most disgraceful thing of all (9:54)."
- Warren Wiersbe (cf. Is 3:12)
The role of women in Scripture should not be denigrated, but rather applauded, especially the deeds of Deborah and Jael in Judges 4-5. At the same time, we shouldn't make the text say what we want, what it doesn't, in order to make a point of our own.
Click to listen to my sermon on Judges 4, "Girl Power."
Labels: Bible, gender, leadership, sermon
posted by GUNNY @ 04:27
16 comments
16 Comments:
This goes along nicely with the book we're reading now, 12 Extraordinary Women by John MacArthur.
That Johnny Mac stealing my material again?! ;-) That's good bull. Is Deborah one of the 12?
I hope y'all are enjoying the study!
You go, girl!
BTW, we all know why Johnny Mac has such great stuff. Keep feeding him, bro!
As Good as It Gets
Gunny wrote:
God uses her, not to lead, but to get the leader to do his job.
But Gunny, she did in a sense lead. The Scriptures themselves state:
Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites came to her to have their disputes decided.
She did direct Barack on what to do as revealed to her by the Lord. And even after having given directions to Barack, he refused to lead without her by his side (this really reflects the lack of male leadership). In response to Barack's unwillingness to take the helm, Deborah said, "I will go with you. But because of the way you are going about this [note her annoyance], the honor will not be yours, for the LORD will hand Sisera over to a woman." When men fail to take the helm, God will use other means to bring about His will ... and even at times to shame the men.
As you know, I'm not an advocate for female leadership particular in the church. The Scriptures are very clear of that. Clearly the times of Judges was a desperate time. Despite God's preference of male leadership, He still chose Deborah as leader and judge for Israel, would you not agree? Sometimes I can't help thinking that men (even of today) would like to label Debora as somewhat sinning in taking up that leadership or even reason that she has some how not led in her role. How so? She acted as judged and gave directions and wisdom to all who needed leadership. She was every aspect a leader and all Israel went to her for leadership. It wasn't recorded that Israel went to Barack for guidance, does it? No. They went to Deborah. She did exactly what the Lord called her to do, in such a desperate situation. So I find no wrong doing in what she has done, because she did abide with what the Lord commanded. It is not her fault that the men at that period of time failed to take the helm. I think she gave them every opportunity to rise to the occasion, as she did with Barack, but he refused to take it alone. He lacked the faith to lead alone.
Sometimes, I can't help think that conservative folks would like the story of Deborah to be erased, because it does open a can of worms of whether leadership should be exclusive to men. But yet again, the Holy Spirit found it useful to record the story of Deborah. I don't think we should shun it but understand the times and that when others (who really should be the one taking the helm) fail to take up the call, the Lord will give it to one more willing. In the case of Judges 4, the only one was a woman ....
A final note on Deborah. I don't think Deborah aspired to be a leader. As I noted above, she wasn't at all pleased by Barack's response after she passed the orders given by the Lord to Barack. I think she very much wanted the men to take on the leadership. But as it stood, none was willing. I think we can all praise Deborah for her courage of taking on the difficult task of judge and leader of Israel at that time. I'm sure it wasn't what she wanted, but the Lord had apparently chose her. Who can then argue against God?
Now having said that, it doesn't mean that I don't believe that the leadership in the church and family should fall on men exclusively ... when there clearly is a godly man present. But in such a scenario where there is no godly man present, then the next godly person would need to step in ... which would be a godly woman in this case (since there is no godly man present). Would you have found fault if a godly woman baptized new believers because there were no godly man present to carry out the baptism? Case in point, missionary Lottie Moon ....
Good thoughts, questions, Jade, with much of which I do not disagree.
Some quick hits for now and I hope/plan to come back ...
1. I do not think Deborah did anything wrong or sinful, far from it. The same would be true with Jael.
2. Deborah doesn't become a prophetess after Barak scoffs at his responsibility. Her role or position does not change. In other words, she doesn't say, "Fine, then I'll do it. Give me a sword."
I think that's the impression people have, or at least the type of parallel they try to bring into contemporary life. (e.g., No man was willing to be the pastor, so Suzy Q quit being the children's director and become the pastor.)
Deborah is the spiritual adviser to the people, but doesn't lead Israel ... in the manner all the others in Judges do. In other words, God raises up those leaders to lead God's people into battle to throw off the oppression of the evildoers. In Judges 4-5, that person is Barak, not Deborah.
Again, this is why the whole of Judges is helpful. Taking those two chapters on their own, one could miss that.
You will also note that Barak, not Deborah, is listed in Hebrews 11 for book of Judges era (i.e., "Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah" in 11:32).
True, in a very real sense, Deborah is a leader, especially if you dub leadership as influence.
But, what you don't have in Judges is the following leaders:
"Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah (because Barak wouldn't man up), Gideon, etc. Instead, you have Barak in the list, with Deborah as God's messenger (i.e., angel) to him, much as Gideon gets a messenger (i.e., angel) to exhort him unto the task to which God called him.
(N.B. You have no elaboration on calling with the preceding leaders (i.e., Othniel, Ehud, and Shamgar). So, we don't know if they also had a prophet or angel enlist them of if they just got fed up or whatnot.
Jade wrote: "In response to Barack's unwillingness to take the helm, Deborah said, "I will go with you. But because of the way you are going about this [note her annoyance], the honor will not be yours, for the LORD will hand Sisera over to a woman." When men fail to take the helm, God will use other means to bring about His will ... and even at times to shame the men."
Well, yes and no. The woman of whom Deborah speaks in 4:9 is not Deborah, but rather Jael. Jael gets the honor and glory of killing Sisera (4:21-22; 5:24), but that didn't make Jael the leader of the army.
In short, my main contention is/was that Deborah's situation is not a good one to use if a person wants a biblical precedent for a woman becoming a pastor or elder or Sunday school teacher of men etc. because there's no man willing (or qualified) to do so.
I realize it's hard to make such a point without going into many related Deborah issues, but that's what I was saying.
It would take me a while to make the case, but I don't think Deborah is a judge, Barak was. I think she was God's prophet(ess).
You referenced Deborah "leading" in Judges 4:4, but I differ with that translation (NIV?). The ESV, NKJV, HCSB & NASB say she "was judging." That's somewhat confusing because she doesn't really do what the other "judges" do, which isn't give spiritual advice but rather serve as "warlords" or "tribal leaders" (which is how many commentaries translate instead).
I think 4:5 helps understand exactly what she was doing, which is give legal decisions or advice. In other words, I think she's telling people what God would have them do, either interpreting the Law for them or informing them of it or settling disputes among them.
To use an Excalibur reference, the leader of the knights (e.g., King Arthur) leads the people in battle (cf. Great Man theory), while his adviser (e.g., Merlin) tells him when to go and all that good stuff.
Does that make sense? My actual sermons on Judges 4 & 5 may be of help as well to delineate further what I am and am not trying to say.
Jade wrote: "I'm sure it wasn't what she wanted, but the Lord had apparently chose her. Who can then argue against God?"
Clearly, God chose Deborah to be His mouthpiece (i..e, prophet who speaks to the people on God's behalf). I would not disagree with that, but I never meant to convey that I would feel otherwise.
The question is not whether or not God called Deborah, but, for me at least, the question has to do with the exact task to which she was called.
Now, if one wanted to make the case that Deborah was God's prophet because the men he asked to be His prophets declined, that's a different story. However, we'd have to speculate as to that being the case.
In my mind, we have a bit of an "apples to oranges" comparison going on.
"In response to Barack's unwillingness to take the helm, Deborah said..."
Why does this have to be about Obama?! ;)
Rev wrote:
Why does this have to be about Obama?! ;)
Hahaha ... maybe because that's all you see in the news these days! Hahaha... or maybe it's a freudian slip?! :ob
Sorry for the misspell! It should have been Barak! :ob
It's bad enough we're talkin' "religion," then gender slooge. Oh yeah, we went there. But, then Jade's gotta get all political up in this piece by bringing Barack into this! ;-)
Jade, I realized I forgot to respond to this particular bit: "Would you have found fault if a godly woman baptized new believers because there were no godly man present to carry out the baptism? Case in point, missionary Lottie Moon ...."
1. I never found fault with Deborah or Jael ... at least I didn't intend to.
2. Are you contending that baptism is only to be performed by a male (i.e., not necessarily a particular office)?
I don't think I'll ever be forgiven for having brought the President into this slooge! Nor would the President ... :ob
Gunny wrote:
2. Deborah doesn't become a prophetess after Barak scoffs at his responsibility. Her role or position does not change. In other words, she doesn't say, "Fine, then I'll do it. Give me a sword."
I think that's the impression people have, or at least the type of parallel they try to bring into contemporary life. (e.g., No man was willing to be the pastor, so Suzy Q quit being the children's director and become the pastor.)
Well, that's not at all the impression I had. And of course she'd never say, "Fine, then I'll do it. Give me the sword", after all the explicit command given to Deborah was that it was to be a command given to Barak. She was merely a messenger. But you've got to frankly admit her disappointment to Barak's response.
Gunny wrote:
Deborah is the spiritual adviser to the people, but doesn't lead Israel ... in the manner all the others in Judges do. In other words, God raises up those leaders to lead God's people into battle to throw off the oppression of the evildoers. In Judges 4-5, that person is Barak, not Deborah.
Gunny, I don't agree with this assessment. Being a leader is not merely to exclusively lead the fight, but also to give wise counsel and direct the people. I've explicitly quoted to you from Scripture that indicated that Deborah indeed led. I don't know why this is even being questioned. Is it really appalling to see a woman lead? Again, it was an unusual time ...
Here's an example --- the case when Moses commanded Joshua to fight against the Amalek, who acted as leader? Moses or Joshua? Moses. Joshua fought under his command and direction. I don't see Deborah's role any differently. Now it's not to say that Deborah is a "rock star" like Moses ... I mean it was known that the Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend. I don't think many had that status as Moses. But still like Moses, Deborah was used as a mouthpiece for God. I don't see how the absence of Deborah in Hebrews 11 proves that she wasn't a leader. Hebrews 11 merely speaks of the men who acted in faith ...
The fact that Barak wouldn't even go to battle without her, reveals his dependency on Deborah to lead. He needed her presence there for his assurance. Even if she didn't go running up with a sword along side of him, just her presence there at the battle field was enough for him. Now does this reflect badly on Barak. Yeah, I would think so. This is why the victory was given to another woman....
I'll comment on the rest a little later ....
Gunny wrote:
True, in a very real sense, Deborah is a leader, especially if you dub leadership as influence.
But Gunny, she wasn't merely an influence. She actually directed and gave counsel. It wasn't like how a wife can be an influence to her husband. No, she was proactively and explicitly directing Israel on the things of God. She was a magistrate, handing down legal decisions. This is nothing short of a leader.
Gunny wrote:
1. I never found fault with Deborah or Jael ... at least I didn't intend to.
No, I know you didn't intend to. But to deny that Deborah led, seems like you're trying to find "proof" that she didn't violate the ordered headship. As a result, I think you're muddling the facts and stripping her of what she really was. I think we need to assess the situation that this was a very unusual time. This simply was not normative ... and leave it at that.
Gunny wrote:
2. Are you contending that baptism is only to be performed by a male (i.e., not necessarily a particular office)?
At least that is the impression that I'm given among reformed baptists that baptism should never be performed by someone who is not an appointed minster. Now a minster is a leadership position, no? And generally, that's not occupied by a woman. I know that you don't necessarily hold to the 1689, but article 28.2 of this confession in relation to baptism and the Lord's supper states:
These holy appointments are to be administered by those only who are qualified and thereunto called, according to the commission of Christ.
The "qualified" is assumed to be the Pastor or appointed leader, no?
As you know the issue of Lottie Moon (in what she did) is contentious even among Southern baptists today .... I'm not saying that I necessarily agree with the statement above because I don't know if I can find hard proof evidence of this requirement in Scriptures....
I'm with Galyon. Didn't know the Prez was so biblical.
Lance wrote:
I'm with Galyon. Didn't know the Prez was so biblical.
Ugh! I will never be "left off the hook" on this! Note to self: always check your spelling of "Barak"! :ob
Post a Comment
<< Home