I'm sitting here at the kitchen table this morning typing tonight's outline for class. Having spent the last couple of days organizing passages in which Jesus interacts with women, I am struck by so many contrasts. I am amazed at the plan of God as it unfolds through centuries of history in the pages of scripture. I've immersed myself in Greek words and sentence structure, parallel passages and historical records.
But this morning I am crying. I'm glad no one is here. Sometimes the "head knowledge" becomes so dry and burdensome (Is it a sin to say that? :) I just read three accounts of Jesus interacting with some marginalized and powerless women and God's mercy just washed all over me. Jesus was so kind to the "sinful" woman who anointed him out of love, while everyone around him had nothing but spite for her. Then, I read Mark's account of the woman with the issue of blood (which made her unclean and therefore "untouchable") who dared to touch Jesus' garment in a desperate attempt to be whole. I love the gentle way that God Made Flesh responded to her as she trembled in fear before him. He called her "daughter." Mine. Loved. Accepted. "Go in peace." And then there's the poor widow from Nain who had lost her only son. Who would care for her in her old age? She was truly all alone. Luke tells us that Jesus saw her mourning and "his heart went out to her." His exchange with her is so compassionate. "Don't cry," he said. No wonder every one's response was "God has come to help his people."
Sometimes in the midst of study I miss out on the truly amazing Jesus. Not today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You said it well early on in the study-primarily this is a heart issue and how it plays out in "real life" church may not change quickly but at least people (especially leaders) can't make their lame cases claiming to have studied this. Personally my hope is that our leaders would allow a little girl to read the scriptures in a public assembly one day soon and it would be interesting to poll this church and see how many that would be a test of fellowship for.
ReplyDeleteHere's a thought to ponder: We have traditionally taken the position that a woman should not read scripture in the gathered church because doing so would be exercising authority over the men in the congregation. This is based on 1 Timothy 2 and the concept of female submission. If MEN are in view as possessing that authority, would it not equally violate that interpretation for a young BOY to read scripture, since children are also commanded to be in subjection to parents? Any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI never did figure how reading/sharing scripture was an exercise of authority. Is it not for the edification of the church? And what is the difference between a woman reading to the congregation and reading in a Bible class? We do the latter all the time and the purpose is the same as far as I can tell, but we're very careful about "assembly" vs "class" reading in the cofC. We bypass women who are qualified to do these acts of public service in favor of children-male children- because we see serving as an exercise of authority. This confuses me. I've been in services where the women took an active part in the worship- reading, serving, etc., and it was all done "decently and in good order." (There. Did I hit all the key words?)
ReplyDeleteSo what constitutes an exercise of "authority" in the church? I don't consider reading from the Bible as an act of authority, but rather a service performed for the congregation. I really don't care who does it, either, but I do prefer they know how to pronounce the words.
Yes. What is the definition of "authority" as used in Paul's Letters? Greek roots? how it is used?
ReplyDeleteI am wondering our use of that word means something different than it is intended.
Case in point: an "authority" in FL wild life vs. the Governor of FL. An authority of wild life writes a book on that subject. Is that an exercise of authority? The Governor calls in the National Guards, an exercise of authority. Are those the same?
On the issue of worship, have we (generally refering to human as in Catholics, Episcopalian, Methodists, Baptists, etc.) become so sophisticated in the implementation of worship services... that we kinda get lost in it?
As I read Acts, I saw things were so simple: Believers (no distinction of sex) gathered every day, probably in homes like our life groups. I picture kids running around. I saw huge sense of urgency. Breaking of bread. Prayers. Apostle's teaching. Fellowship. They shared everything.
After those magical moments, I think we invented pews, parking lots, and a whole bunch of other things like traditions.
Great thoughts! Both of you mentioned the concept of authority. That figures heavily into our interpretation of 1 Timothy 2, where most of this comes from. We'll deal with that in class in a couple of weeks, but you might find it interesting to investigate on your own what actions Paul ever associated with the concept of authority, and to whom was it directed?
ReplyDeleteNhiem, your last words are intriguing "After those magical moments, I think we invented pews, parking lots, and a whole bunch of other things like traditions." That relates to a comment Joel made "And what is the difference between a woman reading to the congregation and reading in a Bible class? We do the latter all the time and the purpose is the same as far as I can tell, but we're very careful about 'assembly' vs 'class'" It seems to me that the formalization of the worship assembly has given birth to some notions not found in the New Testament. I think you all just gave me today's post..... Thanks!
Wow, Cary. That's 4 o'clock in the morning.
ReplyDeleteI just want to be clear that I'm not knocking formal assemblies, by us or any other denominations.
We should realize that they are the things WE created, and that we should not be enslaved/trapped by that which we have created.
We need to keep focused on Jesus.
Nhiem, I could not "Amen" your last statement loudly enough!
ReplyDelete