Just My Thoughts

Tonight brought up a whole lot of thoughts, some of which are connected and some of which are not. First of all, we've been talking about what the role of women in the church should be for the past seven weeks and for the most part, one point of view has been discussed. And the more we talk about the egalitarian view, the more it makes sense to me in the scholarly sense. But the more it makes sense the more I dig in my heels because the fact of the matter is that I'm not really comfortable on a practical level with women preaching. But even that practical discomfort brings up questions because I'm comfortable with Sarah and other women speakers in chapel...but chapel doesn't feel like church to me...but where you preach doesn't really matter....does it?

That's the kind of confusing thought process that I'm trying to straighten out in my head right now. And then there's the question that was brought up tonight about whether or not the role of women is essential doctrine. I'm going to say "no" on that one - that trying to call it essential doctrine speaks too much to an agenda, that if we try to call this essential doctrine we could, hypothetically, call almost anything essential doctrine. And finally there's my thoughts about the class as a whole. When I signed up for "women in the bible" I was thinking we would study the stories of biblical women and then draw interpretations from them, asking that essential question, "What is the Main Thing the passage is teaching?" Instead, we started with a very clear agenda and then looked at scripture with the lenses of that egalitarian agenda.

Where's the other side?

After this week's class I was really wanting to hear the other side to the argument that Sarah had presented. Our guest speaker shared with us her interpretations of the 1 Timothy passage and had everything laid out with the Greek translations. She had a great and developed argument for her side but my question is if her side is so strong how can there be another side of it? I understand that there are two sides to an argument always but am at a loss for what it is in this situation. I also believe that it is important to know the other side in order to defend or keep your own opinion in the first place because if you don't know about it how can you know it is wrong? So I am now very curious to hear the other side and what she would say to someone who thinks that way, opposing to her views.
Another piece that I really struggled with this week was biblical interpretations. Each time someone reads the Bible they understand it differently from the other person who reads it also. But my question is when do we doubt the scripture and when do we take it for what it says. I feel really scared when people begin to take apart the Bible and question it's authority. For me personally I believe 100% that the Bible has been divinely inspired and yes it did come through the vessel of man but God gave the words to man. I am very weery of this idea that we can just say that something in the Bible was merely interpreted wrong or no longer applicable to our lives because the Bible in itself is essentially the road map that we need to know where God wants us to go in our lives. Of course there is no exact passage telling you what to do but the Holy Spirit will speak to you through the scripture you are reading, to me this is just such an important part of my faith that it seems so worrying to me to begin to take it apart and analyze it's authoritativeness. My question I am still left with is: when do we know when to doubt the scriptures and when do we know to trust it for what it is saying? If you begin to pull it apart and take things away as not true then when does it stop? How can we so long after truly know what is supposed to be there and not, I think it is through faith that we believe God will use the Bible to speak into our lives even if it is not 100% the way he initially wanted it to be. I mean look at us we are sinners who God created to be perfect in the beginning but chose not to be yet He still uses us. That shows me that there is hope in this life for all things we just need to have faith that God will come through and help us wade through the mud to understand what is truly important to our lives today.

Dumb English

I really enjoyed hearing the word translations of our guest speaker in class as she addressed the issue of 1 Timothy. I found it extremely insightful and eye opening to understand what those English words were really meant to mean in their original language. As the author described how men were oppressing women during the time, the author also mentioned how women at times became oppressive of men in certain situations, like the Temple of Diana. It creates a sense of equality between the two genders, as if to say 'listen people, perhaps both of us aren't perfect, yet we need each other.' What I also learned that was amazing to me was the concept that what the author really meant by being quiet and submission was actually granting women a place of honor to learn. It was an honor to sit at a person's feet to learn from them, as you remained quiet. For the author to tell the receptionist of this letter to allow a woman to do that must of been a tad radical! And then, once the person, male or female, had been prepared enough in their relationship with Christ, they were allowed to go out and preach, what a great thing!

What does this mean for our Church now? I think it is obvious what this means, but my question is really why has the translation of 1 Timothy 2 been ignored by so many? When I say many, I'm really thinking of every man I have learned Scripture from. Actually, why stop at men, women also haven't taught me this. If we take Paul's words so literally all the time, some might ask even more than Jesus', why don't we know the real meaning behind these words?

3 Key Misunderstandings

This week’s class session was really intriguing. When we first began talking about women’s roles in the church I always thought of passages like 1 Timothy 2:11-12 and wondered how our society could act out anything contrary to what was stated in this passage. It seemed crystal clear where women fit within the church and arguing against it did not seem right. However our guest speaker brought a new perspective to be considered. She spoke about her “napkin theology” and how understanding this passage is simple when going about it the right way. As a Greek student she has been able to study the language and the deeper meaning behind passages like 1 Timothy 2:11-12 that give us problems as believers and as a society seeking equal rights for both men and women. She pointed out three key misunderstandings about this particular passage and revealed an alternative meaning:

1. When it says, “let them learn,” it is an imperative phrase that is giving women a right they never had before.

2. When it says women are not to have authority over men it is referring to a murderous kind of authority that had been practiced by women in the pagan temple of Diana.

3. When it says, “I do not permit women to teach,” it is referring to that specific moment and not all time.

Overall, hearing her perspective gave me a new understanding of this passage and made me consider that others like it could be saying something deeper than what I am able to understand on my own.

Questions behind questions or something like that...

It felt good to sit and absorb what Sara had to share this evening. I realized about half way through her talk that I would regret it if I didn't start taking notes, but I was so engaged with what she was saying that the thought hadn't crossed my mind up to that point :) It felt good to break down scripture into the original language, discuss the historical/social context of the passage and then interpret it from there. My dad is a pastor and he knows hebrew, greek, and latin so when he preaches, that's exactly what he does. He breaks it down into all the pieces (grammatically, contextually, etc.) and then builds the passage back up. I think that there is definitely something to be said about that process...perhaps we should do a little more of it.

That being said, it leaves those of us without hebrew, greek, and latin language knowledge in a bind. If we don't have the skills to break down every troublesome passage we come to, what are we to do? The "community" answer (it's so Fox, isn't it...also true, but so George Fox) is great but it doesn't really answer questions or solve problems. Even within a community is it probable that nobody knows Greek or Hebrew. Furthermore, there is a question of which passages need to be taken apart to be understood correctly and which don't. Again, unless you have been educated to do discern explicitly that, making those decisions seems daunting. Tonight brought up more, new questions that are difficult to unravel.

Last week in class we discussed textual criticism but the thing that stuck with me was the question Sarah left us with; "Are you following Christianity (the form) of Christ the Messiah?" This is a very cutting question. I believe that many times we loose sight of what we are living for and why we are here. Many churches enforce rules and regulations of what it looks like for people to be Christian. But is it the rules of man that we should be following and abiding by or the desire of our Savior? My hope for us would be that we wouldn't worry about the rules of the world but that we would strive to follow the path that Christ has set before us. Even though it may be difficult at times in the end it will be worth the fight that we have put forth and we will be rewarded for our hardships that we have felt throughout our lives here on earth. That for me is a hope that makes me strive to live for Christ and not for the rules that man has created for what it looks like to be a part of Christianity.

Bone in our Back

The metanarrative of the Bible involves God redeemed the people of earth, starting with the worst possible outcome sin and then leading to Jesus in the New Testament. As we learned two weeks ago, the starting block of human history when it came to men and women involved women being oppressed by God's chosen people (and everyone else, just wanted to point out the irony). This week highlighted the redemptive qualities of Jesus, coming to radically challenge the views of the people of the time. He began the process of helping to stop the oppression of women by granting women with extreme honor and responsibility. I'm specifically thinking of the time Jesus was raised from the dead and He granted the honor and responsibility of telling the world He had risen to a group of women. Before Jesus women would be used for their body, now Jesus had them be the first evangelicals. How amazing! Throughout the New Testament, stories of women washing Jesus' feet, sitting at His feet listening, following Him wherever He went, show that it is possible for women to love Jesus just as much/if not more than men. I don't mean to overemphasize women over men, more trying to show how God made human's hearts the same, not separate based on gender. And I'm a pretty strong believer in the fact that God cares about a humans heart, not their actions or capabilities, so why should I separate on my beliefs about differences in gender? (Because I do believer there are differences in gender from a psychological perspective).

On a slightly different note. We talked about dating on Monday. I know for me I am not attracted to women who sit back and wait for their prince charming to sweep them off their feet. For one, I usually don't notice them, which means they have to flaunt themselves, which then turns me off. It's a lose-lose situation for them. Second, I want a girl with a backbone. A secret that not many know is that a determining factor for me when it comes to deciding if I should pursue a relationship with a girl is if she has a backbone. I girl captivates me when she says 'no' to me, in a respectful way of course, but just knowing she can take care of her self is huge to me. I don't enjoy being with a follower, I enjoy being with a companion. Of course, there are a variety of other factors that I find attractive in girls, but just wanted to highlight this point.

In Hot Pursuit of Sleeping Beauty, but she's neither sleeping nor in her tower.

In our last class, we talked about men being the pursuers and women being responders. I am split about this. In society, women are taught this very thing, to wait for our knight in shining armor. All I've seen of girls trying to pursue guys instead of the other way around (I have had experiences with it) and it doesn't end well. I still have that problem. They find it annoying. And I'm not even dressing in a manner to seduce them, just trying too hard to pursue them.

But sometimes we girls just want our voices heard. God thinks we are worth pursuing, why can't guys? I know I come off annoying, but can't I pursue instead of just sitting idle-by and waiting? But, as EVERYONE tells me, you stop looking for it, you find it. To me that is hard. I'm not trying to annoy boys but I just am so split. I may like being lazy, but I am still full of energy too, and sitting by for a man might just kill me. But no! society says, "You're just bothering him. Sit in your tower and wait." I'm impatient. I know I should gain backbone and be ok with being single, but I've had low self-esteem pretty much my whole life. Knowing someone loves me for all I am is so great.

Isn't there guys who would love a girl despite the fact she doesn't see much in herself? God can do it why can't they? Human. Still in my tower, but I might find my own way out in time. Take that Prince Charming, you'll have to chase me down, because I'm worth it, and I won't keep waiting.

Understand the Old Testament

This weeks meeting really got me thinking about how I view the Bible. Specifically I wondered at the way I understand the Old Testament. Last week I asked the question, “why would God command the Israelites to kill tons of people and why would He create sexist laws? “ I came to the conclusion that sometimes God does things that we do not understand. I also mentioned that because of the fall, man had to rule over himself and in order for this to work God created a hierarchy. In class, Sarah gave another perspective that opened my eyes to a new way for reading the Old Testament. She talked about reading these passages in context. The Old Testament was written hundreds of years after the time that the events tool place by people who were not present at the time. Sarah noted that you have to look at the culture behind the writing. Some were big exaggerators; most were very family oriented with little regard to the self. She told us that the way these different cultures viewed God could have been a determining factor in the way they wrote about historical accounts in the Old Testament. Sarah ended by asserting that she believes scripture is authoritative but that there is a lot more to it than simply reading it at surface value. I really appreciated her understanding and I think it has began to change and shape the way that I think about the law and commands God made in the Old Testament as well as many of the writings of Paul about different laws in the Church.

paradox

The most fascinating information we went over tonight, for me, was the role of women in the New Testament. I wish we hadn't have had to go over it so quickly. I love to compare what life was like then and what it's like now - about what Western culture was like compared to what African or Far Eastern culture was like at the same time. You can see, especially in the evangelical christian subculture, remnants of Greek, Roman, and Hebrew culture. For example, like Greek women, some public spheres are unavailable to women (perhaps this is disappearing slowly). Like Hebrew women, women today are in largely in charge of tending both male and female children. The bottom line is paradoxical: women have come so far socially (think, a woman ran for president of the United States, arguably the most powerful position in the world) and yet they have hardly come anywhere at all. It seems to be purely a matter of interpretation.

Something has been burning in the back of my mind since week one or two of class. You mentioned that this issue of women in the bible - the roles they were intended to have - define the type of relationship we have with Jesus. I have never felt before that my relationship with Jesus is defined by how I see the role of women being. As issues and scripture are discussed in class each week, that thought keeps resurfacing. Does how I feel about women in the bible define the type of relationship I have with Jesus? I don't know the answer and that bothers me.

This last class reinforced many of the questions I had already begun to formulate. Throughout our time together we looked up passages speaking of women’s roles in the Bible and the ways that Biblical men treated women. Men were worth more than women. Women were often treated like slaves and they had very little voice about anything in their lives. When God spoke the law to His people many of the things that were said appeared to be very demeaning to women. My immediate question was why, if God created men and women to be equal, did the laws He gave to instruct the people speak down to women? This went along with my other question about why God would command the Israelites to go and kill an entire people group taking all of their possessions. In both instances God commanded something that seems unjust. I asked Sarah what she thought and she said that it is possible that the people who wrote the Bible could have been writing it out of their own lenses and understanding. However, I did not feel contented. I would like to believe that God had the power to communicate through the people the exact message He wanted in the exact way he wanted. My understanding is that after the fall, man had to rule over himself. In order for this to work God established a hierarchy among men and women. When he spoke to them after the fall he was speaking to their situation; to the hierarchy he created because of the fall.

This last class reinforced many of the questions I had already begun to formulate. Throughout our time together we looked up passages speaking of women’s roles in the Bible and the ways that Biblical men treated women. Men were worth more than women. Women were often treated like slaves and they had very little voice about anything in their lives. When God spoke the law to His people many of the things that were said appeared to be very demeaning to women. My immediate question was why, if God created men and women to be equal, did the laws He gave to instruct the people speak down to women? This went along with my other question about why God would command the Israelites to go and kill an entire people group taking all of their possessions. In both instances God commanded something that seems unjust. I asked Sarah what she thought and she said that it is possible that the people who wrote the Bible could have been writing it out of their own lenses and understanding. However, I did not feel contented. I would like to believe that God had the power to communicate through the people the exact message He wanted in the exact way he wanted. My understanding is that after the fall, man had to rule over himself. In order for this to work God established a hierarchy among men and women. When he spoke to them after the fall he was speaking to their situation; to the hierarchy he created because of the fall.

Conditions

I am completly amazed with the conditions of women in the Old Testament. Having read the stories more than once I am sad with how common they have become to me. It is hard for me to realize that these were real people who really had to live through these hard times and struggle through these things. It only opened my eyes wider to listen to the list of horrible things done to women during these times. They were not even their own property, they could not make decisions for themsleves or for their children. Everything was left up to the man of the house who could do as he pleased with all his posessions including his wife,children,money,animals, and property. It amazes me that people can be clumped into a catagory filled with things like money, animals, and property possesions. It makes me think that they had no value at all to their husbands. This is such a different concept than what we see in our culture today. Women have rights and are able to make their own decisions everyday many times over. Men listen to the voices of their wives and consider their opinions when making decisions as well. Most decisions are made as a partnership the husband and his wife unlike the Old Testament times when the husband was making all the decisions based his beliefs alone.
After realizing that these struggles were made by real people I then think of those few women mentioned in the bible that stood up to the cultural powers of the time. They went against all the norms and mores in order to do what they needed to for themselves, their families and their people. I often ask myself the question that if I had been in their posisition would I have been strong enough to stand up tall in a world full of male dominance? Would I have enough faith that God would bring me through what he had planned for me in my life? These are questions I will never be able to answer, but it makes me see the blessings that are present in my life everyday. That I am able to have a voice and able to recieve an education things that weren't allowed for women who lived a hundred years ago. I am so thankful to have the privedleges I do today and that I am free to speak the truth in love to all those around me.

Old Testament

Honestly I've thought for a long part of my life I have wanted to be a girl. Let me explain. Walk in to downtown Seattle's H&M store and look at the store map. There you will see 4 floors full of clothing options women could choose. On that map you will also see one floor that lists men's clothing, which is also shared with little boys clothes. Men get about 5/8th of a floor to shop through. Women get 4 floors. I've been quite jealous of that my whole life, leading to my desire to be a girl. Besides that, they also get to watch 'chick flicks' whenever they want, drink nonfat lattes without being looked at oddly by the barista and are free to spend a day in a craft store without being made fun of.
As you might have noticed however, those are all material activities that don't penetrate the heart life any better than a dollar store steak knife. Learning how women were oppressed throughout history was an interesting as well as depressing experience. I use the word interesting to point out that the time in human history was when God (as from what I can tell reading in Scripture) was so close to humanity that He at times would literally talk to them (I could have my understanding of Scripture wrong, but I'm referring to times when God would meet the Founding Fathers and Scripture says they had conversations). But during that time, women were oppressed. God's creation wasn't fully loving one another. How that must of broke God's heart, yet God didn't punish the men, why I don't know.
Perhaps because it stems back to the Fall and the lengthy process of redemption that humanity had to go through. Whatever God's reasoning, there were still sights of love throughout the Old Testament, which was encouraging to learn. I'm still left pondering why certain women were treated with a bit more respect than others (why for instance does Esther elevate to a respected Queen status in Scripture, but little mention of other Queens?). Reading through Luke I noticed so many times when Jesus referred to loving women and respecting them as people, as equals.
I can't wait until we can start applying what we have learned throughout the Old Testament and Scripture into our modern day life. There are so many questions that I am curious about what Jesus would say about our culture now and what each of us would say.

Women in the OT

If you looked at the many things about women we did, you might think oh wow! Terrible! Sarah was right, I'm glad I live in this day and age where women get more respect and are more than property. But what I wonder was did God really want us to be property back then? But then again if it was such a big deal to God, maybe the laws would be different?

Another thing we talked about is the standout women who fought for their rights. Pretty much all of them used their "feminine charm" and bodies to do so. While it was awesome they had the courage to do that, I feel that the methods were not that great. True they had courage, but does it always have to be beauty that speaks to people or can it not be heart? I do admire Abigail, because she just had a heart for the Lord. She was probably the only one (possibly) besides Vashti who didn't use her body or sex to show great favor in God's eyes, and to be an standout.

Are we still property? I feel like society makes us either feel like or not feel like property. I see both in the media. But will we ever fully get rights? I hope we reflect more on this soon!

Bunch of Pillows

Continuing to discuss the Creation stories in Genesis, we again explore what really happen when Sin entered the world. I can't help but imagine how God intended the world to be before Sin came into existence. This mindset is what guides my thinking as we discuss women, men, and God. 
God created humans so that He could have a relationship with it. During this perfect time of creation, God took His creation and ripped a rib out of it to create another creation, a creation that could share a relationship with His first creation. I'm fairly convinced that God created all of this so relationships could happen. From what I can gather, God knew that in order to have a perfect relationship His first creation needed a second creation to be in relationship with. Great, so now we have God and his two creations, which were made to all have a perfect relationship with each other. Perfect.
Then Sin started, which led to blaming and role creation. It made humanity aware of nakedness (not a good thing I might add. Spend a few days at a nude beach and, once you get comfortable, you will understand how amazing it feels to be physically naked and unashamed with others) and caused them to literally hide from God. I learned from a small age that hiding from God isn't good, partly because it's impossible (I still try however, I just don't go to a full extent as I did when I was little. No more getting all the pillows in the house, putting them in a pile, then burying myself in them, hoping the goose filled fabric would hide me from The Almighty). 
Then this whole idea of gender roles entered human thought. On this topic I can't even really write about. I can't deny that men and women are made different. It's scientifically and common sense-ly proven that men and women are different. I don't think though that God intended this to be a bad thing however, I think it was suppose to be an amazing, divine concept of a perfect relationship. The Created just messed it up. 
Now I'm left with the question of what should we do with these gender differences? Maybe God didn't want it to be like this, but there is a lot God didn't want that happened because of Sin. That doesn't mean we just give up though, that's not what God has done. Instead we have strived to be in perfect relation with our Creator again, yet we continue to fail, but continue to strive. If we are striving for perfect relationship, what then are we to do with the difference in gender? Ignore or point out? Work with or set strict guidelines? I don't know.

Challenges.

Each week in class we have had great discussions but I believe that this weeks session was the best. Everyone was involved and participated by sharing their own opinions on how to interpret Genesis chapter three. My mind is always running after class and it compels me to begin deep conversations with my friends and people I look up to in order to find out what I truly believe myself. I am so thankful that we are recieving the privedlege to be challenged in this way in order to figure out where we stand on controversial subjects such as women in the church.

I find it very interesting still that from the same book can come so many different views. That two people can read the same passage and feel that it means different things. This comes from the lenses that we wear when reading the passages but who's to say that the lens you are wearing is the correct lens to be worn? How can someone say to another that their lens is better than the other persons who believes they interpreted something completely different? This is my present struggle; how can there be so much argument over this topic along with so many others when it would only take a new pair of glasses to understand another persons view and where they are coming from. I believe it is important to understand the other side of the conversation before telling someone they are wrong in what they believe, so my goal is to put down my own glasses the rest of this semsester in order to be open to the views of others in this class.

Complimentarian Vs. Egalitarian

In class on Monday we compared the Complimentarian and Egalitarian views of Genesis 3. It seemed that the Complimentarian view was portrayed as the wrong way to asses the meaning of this passage and the Egalitarian view as the right way. I’m not sure I am completely ready to look at it this way. I think it depends on your definition of the two ways of analyzing this passage and in what light they are expressed. Arguments made for the Complementarian view are, the serpent went to Eve because she was weaker, God addresses Adam and not Eve in questioning, and Adam blames Eve possibly as a result of having a different nature. The Egalitarian view points out that Adam does not lead when he has the opportunity, Adam does not try to assume ownership of Eve, and they both had the same rule to not eat the forbidden fruit. My main problem with the Egalitarian argument is that “Adam does not lead when he has the opportunity,” which therefore means that he is obviously not the leader in the relationship and that Adam and Eve embody the same roles equally. I think it is possible that Adam’s lack of leadership was an aspect of the fall. We can all agree that he did not stand up for what he knew was right. I feel that just because Adam did not assume the leadership role in this example does not mean that it was not his responsibility. If the dynamic between man and woman was that he was supposed to be the leader in the relationship (not in an oppressive “I am better than you” way, but in a difference in the roles of men and women) then by Adam not assuming that position, humanity fell. This is exactly what happened. Eve sinned by taking the fruit that she knew was forbidden by God and Adam sinned by not leading his wife out of temptation but by taking part in this act against God with her.