It's been that long since I last wrote on Xanga.
Grief runs very deep and affects us in unpredictable ways.
You think you are over it, but not so.

Aug 23rd was the 30th anniversary of our arrival in Japan. That made me think: half of my life has been spent in a church in Japan and another Arkansas. That is a huge investment.
I have a secular job, aside from pastoring a small country church, with almost 7 years there.
Has that been worth it? Have I made a difference?

All I can say for certain is that I have worked in the field where the LORD has placed me.
All I can say is that I am glad I don't have to, or get to, judge those things.
All I can say is that I have been faithful to the task put before me.

The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. (Ecclesiastes 12:13 ESV)

I recently got to perform the wedding for a young couple in our church. What a delight that was!
The crying flower girl, the joyful parents, the full house of family and friends!
The sweet reminder that this year will be 42 years together for us.
"I love you" still comes naturally and joyfully to our lips.
"I love you" overwhelms me and brings genuine delight to my heart.

I have recently had occasion to examine grieving in greater detail.  One of my daughter’s friend’s parents died, a dear family friend died, and a family member of a good friend has died.  Obviously, that is a lot of grief.  How should we handle that as Christians?  How should a Christian grieve?

There are some that read their KJV Bibles in 1 Thess 4:13: “13 But I would not hae you to be ignorant, bretheren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope."  From "that ye sorrow not" they take away that Christians should never mourn; mourning and grieving are signs of a lack of faith to them.  So medicine and doctors are signs of a lack of faith to them.  I wonder, to they take vitamins, aspirin, Tylenol?  Do they put a Band Aid on a scrape or cut?

One of the keys to New Testament theology, believe it or not, is grammar, specifically Greek grammar.  Words have meaning, but no language corresponds perfectly with another.  Even English does not always correspond to English; by that I mean that over time the meaning of words morph.  The KJV is 400 years old this year, and word meanings change.  We need to understand the meaning of the original language, in this case, Koine Greek.

1 Thess 4:13 in Koine Greek reads:  13Οὐ θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων, ἵνα μὴ λυπῆσθε καθὼς καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα.

The key word in that is the word καθώς.  καθώς means: “as, like as, according as, even as.”  From this we see a comparison; the grieving of Christians is not like or in accordance with the grieving of unbelievers (ἀγνοεῖν, from which we get “agnostic”).  This does NOT say that Christians are not to grieve, while unbelievers may grieve.  What it does say is that we are not grieve as they do, i.e. without hope.  We grieve, but we have hope, hope that is spelled out in the remainder of the verses.

¹³ But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
¹⁴ For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
¹⁵ For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
¹⁶ For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
¹⁷ Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
¹⁸ Wherefore comfort one another with these words. 1 Thess. 4:113-18

In our grief, we should find comfort in the promised victorious return of Jesus.

It was a snow-stormy night ...

Or, Snow in Black and White

D.A. Carson on the Central Message of the Bible

We are so tired.  My bride has been trying to do everything she can for me, and I think she has hit the wall emotionally.  For the first time today, she cried.  I said that she has to die before me, because if I pass away first, she will never make it!

Today I had my first bowel movement since the surgery.  There are still some blood clots in my urine, and I have to watch my urine bag so it does not get over full.  Yes, these are things we have to deal with.  The facts are that I have a plastic tube inserted where God put a tube made of flesh, and the pre-surgical laxative suppository and Fleets liquid plus a liquid diet for a day before hand left me pretty empty.  But then the urinary tube makes it hard to have a bowel movement.  The tube makes my bladder sore, and my back sore, so I sit with a pillow placed JUST SO. Sometimes I feel light headed, especially after I take my pain medicine or bladder spasm medicine.  Then there’s the Cipro (no milk within 2 hours).  I am walking more normally, I am returning to normal in bodily functions, and we are dealing with the rest of it as we go. 

Thing is, I was going to help sing in the choir at church Sunday.  That may or may not be possible in the morning.  It may depend on how I feel, compared to how well I can take the ride in our car.

The doctor said that the lab report on my prostate showed exactly what they had thought before hand, early stage cancer with no cancer outside the prostate.  In a month, we’ll do another PSA test, just to make sure my PSA is zero.

Before surgery, people would ask me how I felt.  Thing was, if I had no diagnosis I would not have known that I had cancer; I was symptom free.  If I had waited until there were symptoms, it may have been too late.  I may need hormones, because the prostate generates most of a man’s testosterone; we’ll see.

My surgery was done with the Da Vinci robotic computer assisted surgical system.  I had 6 incisions! One through my belly button, one just an inch above the belly button, two on my right side and two on my left side, one of which had the drainage tube in it until the day after surgery.  Apparently this system can be used for several kinds of surgery, not just prostate cancer.  You can see that at www.davincisurgery.com My doctor said that my prostate had been somewhat enlarged, which probably contributed to my needing to get up in the night to pee; maybe now that will go away too!  No driving until the Foley catheter comes out on the 23rd; and no sex for at least six weeks.  We can do that. Then there are two possible side effects, ED and incontinence in 25% of men with the surgery; but again my doctor thinks nothing of the sort in my case because of my general good health and relative youth 58.

Why am I being so out front with this?  Guys, get your PSA tested annually if you are over 40; if you are 30’ish get your PSA tested to establish a base line for later comparison.  It could save your life.

Walking the Cancer Path

As I am writing, I am sitting up in my hospital bed, hiccupping.  That makes my stomach hurt, but Brenda, my RN, has also just give me my next round of pain meds; so with the meds, I may not be coherent.  I have an active IV, an inactive IV, an oxygen tube, a Foley catheter, and a drain tube.

Surgery was yesterday morning, and my doctor is pleased with the whole thing. The cancer does not appear to have escaped my prostate, but the lab will dissect it to see for sure.

I don’t remember anything after leaving my prep room, but the recovery nurse told my bride that I had a hard time in recovery because of bladder spasms.  She had a difficult time getting the pain controlled, and I was literally coming up off the bed in pain.  I, however, have no memory of that, Praise the LORD.

This morning I went from ice chips to a liquid diet, and in a few minutes Brenda will remove my drain tube from my right side.  Later on I will have solid food for the first time.

I should be able to go home tomorrow, if things continue to improve, and I have every reason to expect to continue improving.

About two years ago, I discovered Ancestry.com and I began filling out the information I remembered.  It did not take long to run through my limited knowledge of family history.  My father had become interested in his genealogy in his later years and I had (have) the notes he collected over time by talking to his living relatives.

The great thing about Ancestry.com is that they have hints that you can follow for more information on that person in your geneology.  But that is also the hook, they won't show you  the hints unless you subscribe to the site, and thus they make money.

Because of all this, I found more information on my family than I could possibly use, and some misinformation too.

I knew that my father, Noel, died of cancer of the pancreas, and that his father, Norman, had died of cancer of the liver.  As I recalled these things, I then recalled that Dad had had some melanomas removed from his forearms, and that one of them had come back and the surgery had to be repeated.  Dad had also had a tumor removed from his lower right lip when I was in the third grade, he had smoked in his youth and those cigarettes had been roll-your-own Bull Durham brand tobacco, thus no filters; Dad figured that the lip tumor was connected to the cigarettes.

As I did research, I also found out that my great-grandfather, George, had died of stomach cancer in the late 1800's.  Thus all my male progenitors died of cancer as far back as I can trace my lineage.  Later I found out that Dad's sister had died of lung cancer in 1997, though she was a non-smoker.

Mom died with Alzhiemer's, but her mother (not her step mother) had died of cervical cancer!  Before that Mom's family died in Holland, and I do not have access to those records.

So as far as I can trace it out, I have direct links to cancer on both sides of my family.

Does your linage include medical information such as heart conditions, asthma, etc?

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

So, I have Cancer

Unless you want to, there is no reason for you to walk this path with me.  If you are going to quit reading now and you are a man over age 40, let me just say that you should have your PSA tested at least each year; if you are a woman, have your man get his PSA tested.  If you are a man between 35 and 40, get your PSA tested to establish a baseline of data for comparisons later. 

OKAY, for those who don’t want to walk this path with me, now is the time to quit reading this blog.  There may be too many details for you; I am holding nothing back here.

Last September it was time to get my prescriptions renewed, but I needed a new prescription for them so I went for my twice a year checkup.  They always draw blood for a liver function test because I take statins for my cholesterol, and it’s the liver that metabolizes statins like Crestor and Lipitor (I had hepatitis 28 years ago).  On a whim I asked the phlebotomist to add a PSA test to the screen of tests they were doing this time around.  About a week later the doctor’s office called me to schedule a visit with the urologist because my PSA numbers were elevated.

PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) is an indicator for possible prostate cancer, but is not diagnostic; several things can make the PSA elevated, including recent sexual activity.  For a man my age (58) the PSA should have been about a 2, mine was 4.6, double what it should have been.  The urologist checked me with a DRE (Digital Rectal Examination, isn’t it neat how everything has an acronym/ euphemism?), sticking his gloved and lubricated (KY Jelly) fingers where the sun never shines, twisting and poking as hard as he could in order to feel as much of my prostate as he could reach.  When the DRE was complete, he gave me a box of tissues to clean myself off with, said that he would give me some privacy (after a DRE!), and told me he would meet me in his office in a few minutes. 

He said that my prostate was somewhat enlarged, and he wanted to do a new PSA test anyway, so his phlebotomist drew some blood just for that test.  About a week later, his office called to say that my PSA was still elevated at 4.1, and that the doctor would like to do an ultrasound, could I come in for that at 10:00 on Oct the 6^th? 

I bought a bottle of Fleets to clean out my colon as instructed, and my wife and I checked into a motel in town for the night before the “ultrasound.”  At 09:00 I administered the Fleets to myself, and took care of that business just before going to the doctor’s office.

In the exam room, the nurse told me to take off all my clothes from the waist down, and to sit on the table, and to put this flimsy faux paper blanket over me, and she would be right back.  Well, the paper blanket was a ruse: it was not to keep me warm in the chilled doctor’s office, and it was not for my modesty or hers, because when she came back in, she told me to lie on the table.  Then she said to scoot my butt down to the lower right hand table corner, and to lie on my left side with my butt in the corner of the table, and to draw my knees into a full fetal position.  Then she lifted the blanket to see if my bare butt was properly positioned in the corner.  Perfect!  Then the doctor came in.

The probe they used was slightly larger than the diameter of my thumb; feature something the size of a broom handle, if you will.  This probe had the ultra sound system in the tip, with the biopsy equipment inside of it.  I was thinking that the ultrasound was something to tell them if they needed to do a biopsy, but no, it’s the guidance system for the needle biopsy.  The doctor inserted the probe, twisted it around into position so he could see which part of the prostate he was on for the sample.  I thought I was getting an ultrasound; I did not know I was getting the needle biopsy!

Another thing they did not tell me was that this test was going to really hurt, and hurt bad.  I am not talking “discomfort,” but genuine pain.  I was given no pain medication, no analgesic, not even Valium to take the edge off, nothing.

Imagine a grid, three wide and four high, then imagine that grid overlaid on an internal organ the size of a walnut, below the bladder (which is full, “for a better image on the ultrasound”) and resting on the rectum.  “This is going to sting just a bit,” and ZAP, the biopsy needle is shot into the prostate through the wall of the rectum, removing a tissue sample with it.  He took twelve samples, but I could only count the first six.  He twisted and pushed that broom handle inside me to reposition the probe for each fresh sample.  I think he missed one position for the probe: inserted fully, and turned sideways.  When he was done, he came and took my hand and said, “I had to kind beat you up pretty good there, but it’s over for now.”  For now!?!  I was a quivering bowl of Jell-o laying there on the table when the nurse gave me a shot of antibiotics in my right hip, and replaced the faux paper blanket over my nakedness.  This is how much my needle biopsy hurt: I will never consent to have another one.

“You should get up now Mr. Mills,” she said.  I was barely conscious.  I leaned up on my left elbow.  “Are you feeling dizzy or something?” she asked.  I said “I just don’t want to pass out cold.”  When I stood up to put my clothes on, there was blood on the pad they had put under me.  I went into a bathroom to pee, but could not, even though my bladder was tight; it was over two hours before I could successfully void.  As I walked out of the treatment area into the waiting room, I held out the car keys to my bride.  I could barely shuffle to the elevator.

I am glad that my bride was there to drive me home after the biopsy, because there was no possible way I could have driven myself home afterwards.  I guess that if I had come alone, I would have had to call a cab to drive me to a hotel for the rest of the day, sleep over, and drive home the next day.  But my bride was wholly unsympathetic, telling me I had a low tolerance for pain; and how bad could it really have been?  I never knew the road home had so many bumps and potholes in it.  I stayed home to recover the day after the biopsy.  In fairness to her, she did not know; until, that is, she made contacts through her nurse friends who had contact with an oncology nurse who said the needle biopsy is one of the more painful procedures and she could not believe that it was done sans analgesic.  I spent the entire next day recovering from the effects of the “test.”  Two days later, I began passing blood in my bowl movements, it felt like diarrhea as the blood passed, thickly turning the water in the toilet bowl deep crimson.  That lasted for three days and scared me so bad that I called the doctor’s office to inform them of it, but they did not seem concerned.

A week later I called the doctor’s office to find out the results, but the receptionist said that the doctor was not available, but would call me back.  I could hear the concern in her voice; she knew something she was not telling me.  Later that day my urologist called to say that one of the samples taken did have a “microscopic amount of cancer cells in it,” and that another one had pre-cancerous lesions, not cancer yet, but they would become cancerous.  Well, of course the amount of cancerous cells is microscopic; a microscope is what has to be used to look at the tissue at the cellular level to find or eliminate the diagnosis of cancer!  He meant that there was a small amount of cells in one sample which were cancerous.  Having a little bit of cancer is like being a little bit pregnant: it’s only going to blossom.  The doctor asked me to come in for an office consultation on Oct 22^nd, so he could talk to me about my diagnosis and to answer questions I may have.

Did I mention that Oct 16^th was our 39^th wedding anniversary?  We've been married for 39 blessed years.  I hope we have 39 more blessed years together!

Oct 22^nd was a bright and cool day.  My bride and I went together to the doctor’s office, she waited while I went in with the doctor; she had told me that I am in charge of my health and my decisions about treatment will rule.  After talking to the doctor for what seemed to me to be forever, I asked him to have her come in so she could ask questions of her own that I might not think to ask.  The doctor gave us a book, “One Hundred Questions and Answers about Prostate Cancer.”

Given my age (58), a PSA score of 4.6, a Gleason Score of 6, and prostate cancer stage of T-1, 95-97% of men in my situation survive ten years or more after treatment.

There are several possible options for treatment:

1. Watchful waiting; that is, do nothing, but monitor the PSA and retest with a needle biopsy when necessary.  In men that are 10-15 years older than me, that can be a viable option: they are more likely to die of anything other than prostate cancer!
2. Cryo-freezing: Insert needles into the cancerous parts of the prostate and freeze the cancer cells so that they die.  Again with the needles!  And it would have to be repeated when new cancer cells were found; again with more needles where the sun don’t shine.
3. Seed therapy: plant (again with the needles) radioactive pellets into the prostate where the cancer cells are located. And again with the needles!  And it would have to be repeated when new cancer cells were found; again and again with more needles where the sun don’t ever shine.
4. Radiation therapy: irradiate the prostate for 5 days a week for 7 weeks, resulting in killing the prostate without removing it, with the accompanying radiation sickness.
5. Traditional surgery: cut me open like the famous Caesarian Section for delivering babies.  Basically cut from the navel to the base of the penis, and use pries and clamps to hold the incision open for the removal of the prostate and the examination of the lymph nodes.  Time in the Operating Room is less, but recovery takes 8 weeks.
6. Laparoscopic surgery: make five or six holes in the abdomen, and enter using computers and robotic controls to see and remove the prostate, and examine the lymph nodes.  This means longer in the OR, but recovery is significantly shorter.

Side effects:  There are two main side effects that may (or may not) happen with removal of the prostate, these are the same for each of the five active treatments.

1. ED:  There are two bundles of nerves and blood vessels that run alongside the prostate.  These supply the feeling and blood supply which make an erection possible.  The surgeon may or may not be able to save these, 25% of men do suffer ED as a side effect of the surgery.  It may be possible to save one of the bundles, if not both; in which case Viagra may help.
2. Incontinence: The urethra runs from the man’s bladder through the prostate, to the penis for urination.  In about 25% of the men who have the prostate removed, there is a problem with incontinence afterward.  Almost in a subcategory of this, because the urethra inside the prostate must be removed with the prostate, the patient must have a Foley catheter for ten days to two weeks after the surgery.  A major problem with Foley catheters is that they have a tendency to contribute to urinary tract infections (UTI, more acronyms/ euphemisms).  You can see “Foley catheter” for yourself in Wikipedia, complete with color illustrations.   If the cancer is near the sphincter valve of the bladder, that must be removed as well and that patient WILL have incontinence and must keep a catheter installed all the time.

Of course, if either of these conditions happens to a particular patient (me), that patient is not effected 25% of the time, or has 75% of his function; for that patient, the side effect is 100%.  These side effects are the same for all of the treatments except “Watchful Waiting.”

October 29 I called my doctor to tell him we have decided on the Laparoscopic surgery.  The next day I called back to the office to ask about it, and was told that the receptionist had put my file on his desk and that she will put a gentle reminder with it because he is not in the office today.  Hmm.

So we received an appointment with the surgeon on Nov 22^nd in Little Rock.  The package his office sent me today said to be sure to bring the CT scan DVD with me.  Hmm, I have not had a CT scan done, I must check with my doctor’s office about that in the morning. 

I will post more when I know more!

In Christ,

Yesterday, Sunday, September 26, 2010, I preached from Hebrews 11:7 about Noah.

"7 By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith." - Hbr 11:7 NASB

In the sermon I dealt with the foreshortened version of the story of Noah by skipping some of the verses of the lengthy story of Noah as found in Genesis 6.  In the process I deal with the various appearances of Noah in the New Testament, and how 1 Peter 3 used the Noah narrative, and how Jesus used it in Matthew 24 saying:

"38 "For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be." - Mat 24:38-39 NASB

From Ezekiel I showed how that "even though Noah, Daniel and Job were in its midst, as I live," declares the Lord GOD, "they could not deliver either their son or their daughter. They would deliver only themselves by their righteousness."" - Eze 14:20 NASB  Noah could only save himself, if he could save anyone (which he could not do).

What I did not address, or even mention, was Genesis 9:

"20 Then Noah began farming and planted a vineyard. 21 He drank of the wine and became drunk, and uncovered himself inside his tent." - Gen 9:20-21 NASB

Noah, God's man for his age,

Noah the preacher,

righteous Noah, got drunk! 

Not only that, but in his drunken state he laid about in his tent naked

and his nakedness was exposed to his sons! 

This drunken state was not incidental, Noah had to take specific actions to achieve the state of drunkenness: he had to plant a vineyard, harvest the grapes, press them out, ferment the juice, bottle it (or rather skin it, putting it into wineskins), and drink to the point of inebriation.  He could have prevented the state of drunkenness at any of several points, but he did not do so. Be very careful Christian, for even the best of us can be taken in sinful behavior.

A little over a year ago I replied to a conversation about the place of tradition in the Christian church.

I see that the question has been resurrected in my Xanga community, so (forgive me) I am reposting my article from last year.

Sola Scriptura or Scripture + Tradition?

Of the 16 occurrences of “tradition” or “traditions” in the NASB Bible, all but three of them are negative in tone or meaning.  The three that are positive point to the tradition received from the Apostles by word of mouth (orally) or in writing (Scripture).  Just in case you are interested, here are those verses. If not, please skip below them to read the rest of this posting.

Isa 29:13 NASB - "Then the Lord said, "Because this people draw near with their words And honor Me with their lip service, But they remove their hearts far from Me, And their reverence for Me consists of tradition learned {by rote,}"

Mat 15:2 NASB - ""Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.""

Mat 15:3 NASB - "And He answered and said to them, "Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?"

Mat 15:6 NASB - "he is not to honor his father or his mother.' And {by this} you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition."

Mar 7:3 NASB - "(For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, {thus} observing the traditions of the elders;"

Mar 7:5 NASB - "The Pharisees and the scribes asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?""

Mar 7:8 NASB - ""Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.""

Mar 7:9 NASB - "He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition."

Mar 7:13 NASB - "{thus} invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.""

1Cr 11:2 NASB - "Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you."

Gal 1:14 NASB - "and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions."

Col 2:8 NASB - "See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ."

2Th 2:15 NASB - "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word {of mouth} or by letter from us."

2Th 3:6 NASB - "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us."

What tradition did Paul advocate?  That which he passed on to the churches verbally in person, or in his absence in writing?  Sadly, we have very little of Paul’s oral “tradition,” but we have a great deal of his written tradition: most of the NT epistles.  Paul summarized that tradition in this: 1 Cor 15:1-5 NASB - Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

In 1 Cor 11, Paul also says that he received the instruction for the Lord’s Supper (Communion, Eucharist, whatever your tradition calls it), from the Lord Jesus; but even the details for that are sparse enough to accommodate most forms observed by the church catholic (small “c” on purpose).

The problem with tradition comes in the changing of times.  For instance, once upon a time an American woman would never allow her ankles to show below her dress; now, even 'Christian' women think nothing of flashing their cleavage about to anyone willing to look (contra 1 Tim 2:9 NASB - "Likewise, {I want} women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, … ,").  Among Roman Catholics it has been in my lifetime (Vatican II, 1962 - 1965) that the tradition of the Latin Mass was replaced with the vernacular mass, among other things.  Then, the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Assumption of Mary became elevated from long held informal tradition to official Church dogma by a Papal Bull.  This doctrine was dogmatically and infallibly defined by Pope Pius XII on November 1, 1950, in his Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus.   I have also heard some Roman Catholics argue that we would not even have a canon of Scripture if it were not for the bishops of the Church getting together to hash out the content of the canon, thus the Scriptures as we know them would not exist if not for the work of the traditions of the church.  I also have heard that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the blood of Jesus which washes away the sins of the world flows through the fingers of Mary; can anyone verify that for me?

In my own denomination (SBC) the tradition of not ordaining women is being challenged; partly by liberal feminism (boo - hiss) and partly because the teaching of Paul in the NT, especially 1 Tim 2:12  "But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet," is not in line with the practices described in the NT, especially Acts 21:9 where the four daughters of Philip the evangelist are described as "prophetesses," προφητεύουσαι.  This "Philip the Evangelist" was the deacon that had lead the Ethiopian eunuch to the Lord and baptized him along the Gaza road, (BTW, without specific authority from any church, but following the instructions of Jesus in Matt. 28:18-20).  By the time Paul wrote Romans, the office of ‘Deacon’ was an established office of the church; Paul described Phoebe with that title in Romans 16:2, διάκονον.  We Baptists must be careful to not allow liberal readings and exegesis of the Bible to infiltrate through this argument into the hermeneutics we practice, even though that would make it easier to make the case for ordaining women.  There is work yet to be done in the exegesis of the passages, and we must be careful not to practice eisegesis, in support of traditions either new or old.

The elder’s tradition was condemned by Jesus because it negated God’s Law; God condemned the traditions of Isaiah’s time because the tradition had become rote, and the rote tradition had become traditional ritual; and, Paul condemned the traditions of men because they negated the Gospel he had received from Jesus and had passed on to the churches.  So we see the problem with tradition as a source of authority.

In matters of faith, the only reliable remaining source of authority in the faith once received is Scripture, thus Sola Scriptura.  Tradition, as we have seen, is subject to change.  Scripture does not change.  We need to compare Scripture with Scripture, and be informed by the best and the brightest scholars and holy men of God from the Scriptures.   In this we need to be like the noble Bereans: Acts 17:10-11 - "The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily {to see} whether these things were so."  Why did the "noble-minded" Bereans not consult with the traditions of either men or the church?  They took their authority from the Scriptures!