In John 12:2, it says that "Martha served."  One must wonder why Martha was back to 'serving' after having been 'rebuked' by Jesus to be more like Mary by learning instead of being busy with housework (Luke 10).  Jesus' rebuke was radical for that time and culture because women were not given the privilege of learning from Rabbis -- in fact, they were not even believed to have the capacity to think and make good decisions.  But by telling Martha and all the other disciples that Mary had chosen the better thing (learning from Jesus instead of what was believed to be 'women's work'), He was bringing women to their rightful standing -- right beside the men.  Martha was freed to exercise the mind that God had given her, but did she embrace that?  In John 11, it seems like Martha attained a new level of understanding with her profound declaration, "I believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God, who was to come into the world."  She certainly was a forerunner in the faith.  So why did she go back to 'serving'?

I recently read some commentary on the book of John, which gave some richer insight.  The Greek verb used to describe Martha's act of 'serving' is diakonein.  Diakonein is the word from which we derive "diaconate" and "deacon".  In "Women of the Gospel of John," Pastor Jones points out that by the time John's gospel was written, this word had become a liturgical term of ministry in Christian communities.  Martha was a symbol of hospitality and service required of those who follow Christ.  Just as clearly, she was recognized as fulfilling the role of minister.  (pp. 43-44)

S.S. Schneider (Written so May Believe: Encountering Jesus in the Fourth Gospel, 107) also attests further that by the time John's Gospel was written at the end of the first century the term diakonos, "servant", had become the title of a recognized ministerial office in some Christian communities (see Phil 1:1, 1 Tim 3:8, 13, Rom 16:1), and waiting on table a function conferred by the laying on of hands (Acts 6:1-6).

So when listening ears of that time and culture heard that Martha "diakonein", they were thinking, "She was ministering; she was pastoring."  They weren't thinking, "She was waitressing."  So it looks like she embraced the radical freedom which Christ gave her to learn, serve and minister, after all!

I woke up this morning with a new rendition of an old and familiar Bible verse, "Don't let anyone look down on you because you are a woman, but set an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity."  (from 1 Tim 4:12)  Now, I don't normally advocate editing the Bible, but the message felt like a specific word from the Lord to me this morning. 

The verse actually says, "Don't let anyone look down on you because you are young..."  When I was in high school, this verse struck a special chord in me.  Although these instructions were from Paul to Timothy, who was a young pastor, I felt like the truth applied to me as well.  I knew that because I was young (and very young looking), there might be a little dismissal of me as a servant of the gospel and ambassador for Christ.  Somehow, this seemed even more relevant in the hierarchical Asian context, where the elders are given the highest regard.  But as a new believer, I knew that I had something to contribute to the Kingdom of God.  I knew that God had just as much pleasure using me to minister to those around me as the oldest person in the Kingdom, even if I was a teenager who had only come to know Christ within the last few weeks/months.  Unlike at large companies where seniority is king, the kingdom of God isn't about how long you have been a member but how much you are obedient to Christ. 

And I was determined to be obedient.  When Christ told me to share the gospel with my long-time friends at school, I sat them down and shared with them the Bridge illustration (which I initially learned from my pastor).  When Christ told me to meet up with other girls in my youth group to pray for their walks with God, I went -- even though it still scared me silly to pray out loud.  When Christ told me to start a Bible study, I sent out 'invitations' -- even though I had never been in a Bible study before.  If Christ had told me to walk a thousand miles, I would've done it.  And though I was young, inexperienced and lacked training, I was making a positive impact on the Kingdom, and He was pleased with me. 

It doesn't matter if you are young, God wants to use you.  Be obedient to Him, and set an example to other believers in your speech, conduct, love, faith and purity.  That was my motto.

This morning, God reminded me that the same thing applies to me as a woman.  Even though I have a very clear, Biblical understanding of God's equal estimation of men and women, the stunning realization that half of the believers in America believe that women have less value and should not take on certain roles has shaken me to the core.  For far too long, I have let others "look down on me" because I am a woman.  I let it stop me from being obedient to Christ.  God's message to me this morning was the same as when I was a youth.  Just don't let others look down on me, don't let them dismiss me or presume things about me, and don't let them go on believing in the untruths that women can't or shouldn't do certain things if God has called them to do them.  But how to achieve this is not through debate or argument.  The answer is simply to be obedient and, in that way, demonstrate to other believers that God can and does use women mightily for His Kingdom.  "Set an example," He says, "through speech, conduct, love, faith and purity."  "Yes, Lord," I say.

Did you know there was a man in biblical times who took his wife's family name?  In the verse Nehemiah 7:63, a man is mentioned named Barzillai, who had married a woman who was a descendant of Barzillai of Gilead and had taken her family name (which is why he was called Barzillai).  (Read it in the New Living Translation).  He changed his name to hers!  When my friend Corrie first mentioned this, I thought she was kidding.  Isn't it practically biblical for a woman to take her husband's name when she gets married?  The answer, surprisingly, is no!!  It's western tradition, but it's not biblical. 

When we first got married, Sam and I really wrestled with the name change (I even blogged about it).  We wanted to be able to represent the uniqueness and individuality which God gave to us both while also representing the oneness.  But how would we do this?  How could we represent both of our identities, both of our ethnicities and both of our backgrounds?  He didn't want me to give up my name.  I didn't want him to give up his name.  But practically speaking, it seemed much better to have the same last name. 

We brainstormed all kinds of options -- a lot of which were given to us from those who commented on my blog entry about the name change.  We could both take one's name as a middle and the other as a last.  We could choose an entirely new name.  Or we could hyphenate.  The ideas were endless.  The two of us had become one.  We were creating a new family together, so it made sense that we were also making a name that would represent "us". 

Most people (Christians, mainly) don't really think twice about having the woman change her name.  And if Sam was a lesser man, he might set his manhood on a need to brand me with his name.  However, his determination in our having an "inclusive name" (he coined that phrase) despite the challenges and difficulties of changing his name (with the California legal system) and whatever flak he may incur from traditionalists has augmented my admiration of him as a man.  Through this journey, I have learned that he is unflappable in his purpose when he is certain about a course of action, he is confident in who he is as one who answers only to God and not anyone else, and he is secure in his manhood.  He has made me adore him even more so than ever, and I am so proud to share a name with him.

This past week, he and I both officially changed our name.  We both added the other's surname to our own to make an inclusive name (someone else would call it 'hyphenated'), and we couldn't be happier about it!

Here's Sam's entry about it.

I had another encounter this weekend with someone who asked me whether or not it was driving me crazy that I didn't know the gender of our baby.  My answer?  No, not at all.  I think most first-time parents are driven to find out, mainly, to have one aspect about parenting not-as-much of a mystery so that they can at least plan for and 'control' for that much of this crazy new venture of parenthood.  That really was how I felt when we were preparing to be foster parents this time last year.  I wanted to know whether we would have a boy or girl just so I could get the clothes all ready.  But the reality is that other than clothes, there's really nothing else that we need to prepare for gender-wise.  It would be financial suicide (for poor people like us especially) to buy gender-specific carseats, strollers, bedding, and room decor, because if we ever had a #2 who was a different gender, we'd have to purchase everything anew -- and that's just not good stewardship of God's money to us.

Aside from all this, I think it's fun having gender be a mystery.  All those moments when Sam says to the baby, "Are you a boy or a girl?" would be lost otherwise.  It's fun to wait with expectation and wonderment:  What's our baby going to look like?  What's his/her name going to be?  Is it a boy or girl?  It's like when Sam is going to give me a gift, I hate it when I spoil the surprise by accidentally discovering that something is coming.  I'd rather be totally surprised when he hands me the gift.  It's more fun that way.  In the same way, I just want this gift to be a full realization all at once.  (Plus, the surprise factor will be more incentive during labor.)

And for us, it really doesn't matter whether we have a boy or girl.  We're not driven by any traditional desires of having a boy carry on the family name.  We believe there are better ways to be "immortal", and that comes through passing on a good, godly legacy.  We want to focus on teaching Christlike values and having our child 'carry on' our greater traits and characteristics - and discard all our weak ones.  Plus, both a boy and girl can carry on the family name if they so choose.  Neither have to drop or change it when they marry if they don't want to.

So boy or girl, we will love either equally the same.  We believe that there isn't a broad generalization nor stereotype that must be prescribed to a boy because he's a boy or a girl because she's a girl.  We'll just let our child be who s/he is and not force gender roles or stereotypes on our child.  We will give our child every chance and opportunity to do anything s/he wishes.  If our little girl wants to play with cars, then I say so be it.  If our little boy wants to play at 'cooking', then so be it!  We'll encourage our little girl to play with blocks and legos, be active, do sports, etc.  We will rein in our little boy just as we would our little girl if he's being too rambunctious, and we will not let any undiscipline slide with a flippant "boys will be boys."  No, a boy will not get excused from the kitchen or house chores simply because he's a boy.  He will have the same kinds of responsibilities, love and nurture as a girl would in our household. 

So then it doesn't matter to us - whether boy or girl.  Either will be our dear little gift from our Heavenly Father, whom we will lavish with the love and affection that we learned from Him.  Boy or girl, can't wait to meet our little one!

If God has called and gifted you and affirmed you in that calling/gifting, then you need to answer that call.  And God calls and gifts people, without partiality or prejudice - whether you're a man or a woman, single or married, rich or poor, whatever your background, whatever your ethnicity - to serve Him in every capacity that is needed in order to bring glory to His Name - whether to be pastors, teachers, helpers, singers, writers, artists, or admin.... 

I had always thought this was true and operated on this truth... until I was silenced by older men in my life, whom I respected.  Up until that point, I thought God wanted to use me to teach others what He had taught me ("Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good." 1 Cor 12:7).  But I felt balked by warnings and admonishments that perhaps my teaching was a sin, and it caused me a lot of anguish.  "Really, Lord?  Am I sinning?"  I wanted to do what was right, not simply what I felt was right.  And what can you do when it seems that everyone around you believes that only men should have authority - in the church and in the home?  "Men need to lead", "men need to initiate", "men need to be submitted to" -- "don't you see, it's right there in the Bible?"  I looked, and sure enough, it was right there with the plain reading of the text.   But why was it that what I was reading and what I felt and experienced with God were different?  I felt so much dissonance, but I didn't know why.  I thought that perhaps I was just a second rate rebel.

Over time, I began to acquire the ideology that was handed down to me.  For the longest time, whenever I heard that a church had a woman pastor, I thought self-rigtheously, "Liberals!"  Even though, hypocritically, I wondered why limitations were put on who I could teach.  And for a long time, I kept thinking, "Well, it's not like I want to teach men anyway; I only want to teach women."  On the 'home front', Ellisabeth Elliot and Joshua Harris had taken over my youth group by storm during my high school days.  And so, during college and beyond, they became like a standard before me in a battle against what I thought was a worldly way of 'dating.'  Yes, "women should be silent and wait; men should initiate and pursue."  I agreed with these tenets so much that I preached it like it was gospel.  Up until about two years ago, I was quite devoted to all of these ideals (see my previous xanga entries).  I perpetuated these myths -- and now feel much deep contrition.  But that's just the way it was.  I was a full-fledged, practicing complementarian.

I was a practicing complementarian, even though deep in my heart, I felt like I was walking through a dark mire of angst.  Good thing though that God gives lightning bolts in the midst of the darkness, so that you can see - even if just for a split second.  That's what I felt a few years ago when I visited Epicentre.  Pastors John and Evelyn Lo prayed prophetic words over me - without even knowing me or anything that I had ever been through - just as I was again wrestling with the 'can women teach' question.  John affirmed that I was a fire starter and that God wants to use me to move others.  He has placed things on my heart that are bubbling and bursting to get out.  And he said that there are elders who say to me 'no', but the answer is not to sit back, no, the answer is intimacy with Jesus.  How did John know that there were elders telling me 'no'?  There was no way except by the Spirit.  And through them, the Spirit was affirming me, telling me not to sit back.  I needed to seek and follow Jesus.

The next flash of lightning came last fall as a small group of friends sat around a dining table at Pastor Dora Wang's house.  That night she illumined the Word of God to all of us, and we walked away changed.  At least, I did.  You mean God didn't want women to be silent after all?  My suspicions all along have been correct?  I felt my heart in my lungs as I saw that I was at the beginning of something big. 

That was when the real journey began.  I started reading and studying and researching and talking to others and tried my best to piece together these snatches of truth that I was seeing.  And then I stumbled onto the CBE website and found the scholarly articles available there.  As I read, I found that the interpretations I had been making and the conclusions I had been drawing had been made and found before.  With a thrill, I realized that if I had come to the same conclusions as these wise, learned, spiritual academicians, then perhaps it was because the Spirit was revealing Truth to me.  I thought I was alone in all this, but it turned out that I was not.  There, I found resources for all the questions I had regarding Bible passages written by female and male theologians, pastors and professors, which helped to affirm again and again that God values His children equally.  Male and female, He created them both in His image, and He calls and gifts both male and female to be a witness of His glory.

The last bits of dark clouds of dissonance and angst dispersed completely at the CBE conference.  I am now left without any doubts.  Sam and I have walked away from the conference knowing that we stand before God, equal as we are, as partners with a desire to bring this truth to others.  I know that some people argue that this is a 'side issue' and that we need to focus on more important things --like the gospel.  But that's the thing.  This is the gospel.  It's the whole gospel message.  We're missing the whole gospel message if we're not preaching about how Christ's resurrection means a new life for all - freedom from human discriminations of race, class and gender, equality before God, having an inheritance that surpasses all things, an inheritance that is for all people, because God has no favoritism.  The power of the gospel is that it breaks down all walls and all barriers.  If we miss this message of freedom, redemption and equality, then we have missed the power of the gospel.  Seriously, what is the gospel if it does not have the power to break down human-made barriers? 

So here I am, Mary Ann.  I believe in the power of the gospel, and I believe in Biblical equality.

On the second day of the Christians for Biblical Equality conference, I went to a workshop led by the President of CBE, Mimi Haddad, Ph.D. (I feel like saying here, "of course, Ph.D." because I think every single person at CBE was so incredibly educated!)  Mimi is so brilliant and charming, and I just loved interacting with her.  Here is a summary of what she taught us - abridged.

"Ontology, Gender, and Women's Authority in the Church:  Noticing the Particulars"

Ontological assumptions have functional consequences.

Women’s primary function in Greek culture was bearing and rearing children.  There was a pre-eminence of males.  Women were not valued.

The Early Christians lived very differently however.
-    they rescued girl babies abandoned by the romans (the Christians were valuing girls!)
-    women served as house church leaders, as prophets, deacons, apostles, preachers, and teachers
-    women participated in agape meals, baptism
-    Gal 3:28 – all one in Jesus.  This was a very radical statement for 1st century ears.

However, this didn't last long.  The culture was too valued. The Early church fathers began to adopt patriarchy from the surrounding culture.  They began to absorb the culture of the environment and read that into the Bible.  There are many examples of church fathers saying that they believed women were a deformity, deffective and the misbegotten.  [Many examples cited here.  Please ask me if you want the extensive notes.]

And yet, during this time (347-1380 AD), there were many women who did not function according to the assumptions made from their ontology.  They were brilliant, and they did incredible things with lasting impact.  Examples:  Paula, Maerina the Younger, Deacon Apollonia of the church in Alexandria, Empress Theodora, Hildegard von Bingen, Catherine of Siena, etc.   [Ask me if you want a summary of what incredibles each did.]

Even as all this was going on, Christian men continued to believe women were no good (these are my words, not Dr. Haddad's).  For example, Thomas Aquinas said that the souls of women were inferior to the souls of men.  [Appalling, isn't it?!]
 
Even so, the reformation was advanced by many women: Jeanne D’Albret, Lady Jane Grey, Anne Askew, Catherine Parr, Katherine Von Bora.  And between 1808-1930, women greatly shaped the great missionary movements as they also insisted upon the equality of women.  (Jessie Penn-Lewis, Amanda Smith, Katherine Bushnell, Catherine Booth, Sojourner Truth to name a few.)  Women missionaries outnumbered men missionaries by a ratio of 2:1.  [still true today, isn't it?]

These missionaries demonstrated that just because you challenge the assumptions of the traditions does not make you a heretic.

Because of women’s efforts, the face of the church was changing.

However, women’s contribution got retracted after all this because of a secular movement of modernism (she referred to it as the fundamentalist-modernist controversy).  People began to become highly critical of accepting the Scriptures.  "Reason" was the master.  And through reason, they began to explain away the miracles of the Bible.  (i.e. "it wasn't a miracle, it was actually as a result of..." something more scientific)

As a result, the church began to fear the use of too much reason. They decided that there should be no more Greek or Hebrew.  You've just gotta preach the Word, only.  Just read the words in the Bible, stick to the 'plain reading' of the Bible.  Don’t interpret, because if you interpret anything, then you might become a liberal and lose a vibrant Christian faith.

So what happened when they stopped reading and interpreting the Bible contextually?  They read words like "I do not permit a woman to teach..." and that settled it for them.  No one challenged the (complementarian) conclusions that were being made.

People in a fallen condition like having control and power over other people.  Gordon Fee & AJ Gordon remind us that every time you read the Bible you need to say, "I am a fallen person and I like to have more than my fair share of the strawberries."  We need to read the Word with the community of believers.  Believers will help us keep on track, because there’s always a temptation to read the Word through the eyes of self-interest. [selah]

Conclusion
Our dignity rests on our position in Christ.  We ought not assess men on their position in Christ (i.e. believing them to be redeemed, gifted and free to serve God in whatever way He calls) while continuing to assess women based on the fall (i.e. continuing to label women as those who sinned and need to be ruled over; aren't women redeemed also?).  We need to interpret the Bible consistently.  We can’t put the new wine of the gospel into the old wine of domination.

Gal 3:28-29, "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.  If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." 

Some people argue that Gal 3:28 just means that salvation is for all and has nothing to do with one's service in the church, but if God views us as heirs to the promise, then we inherit all God has, and this changes the way we function. How can you say that Gal 3:28 is only about salvation and has no impact on who you are and what you do in Christ?  “Our Christology directs and informs our ecclesiology.”  Who we are directs what we do in the church. 

The last plenary session of the Christians for Biblical Equality conference was awesome!!  The preaching was done by Jeanne Porter, Ph.D.  I found myself saying amen! aloud.  I think you had to be there.  However, here is some of the notes that I took...

"New Wineskins for New Wine: 
The Work for Gender Justice in the 21^st Century"

Matthew 9:14-17
The question we need to ask as we contemplate this passage: What
do the new wineskins look like for the 21^st century? 

Jesus was doing radical stuff and yet John’s disciples approached
him to ask about fasting.  This is irony,
since He has been doing all kinds of miracles, including feeding
thousands.  In this dialogue, we see that
Jesus refused to engage into this conversation. 
He knew that John’s disciples weren’t just asking about fasting but were
challenging His nontraditional approaches. 
They were asking, “How dare you do things differently than we do?” 

Jesus responded by shifting the conversation to the broader
issue of the Kingdom by talking about the wedding banquet.  It was a time for worship and celebration and
not a time for mourning.  It was as if he
was saying to them that the gospel message of the Kingdom is like new wine with
such fermentation that the old structures that you are holding onto, your old
mindsets, and your old ways, and your old rules and your old paradigms can’t
hold what I’m bringing in. 

Their old wineskins served a purpose but it could not
contain the power of the gospel and all the abundant blessings that Jesus was
bringing in.   

At that time, new wine was poured into new wineskins to
complete the fermentation process. 
During the fermentation process, the new skins could stretch to contain
the wine without bursting.  Once the wineskin
had been used, however, it became an old wineskin and had no more capacity for
stretching.  Fermentation of grape juice
will still happen if put in an old wineskin, but because it is now old
wineskin, it will inevitably pop its seams and all the wine would burst. 

New wine in old wineskin when burst will hurt both the wine
and wineskin.  What we are referring to
in this analogy -- the people on the move following God and the old church structures.  The structures have not changed enough to
contain the movement of God at this time.  You may have been committed to working within
the church to make changes toward gender justice, but there’s a limitation, a
glass ceiling (and for some of us, a stained-glass ceiling) for moving into a
higher position of influence even if God has given you a greater vision.  The old structure of the church is
institutionalized, hierarchical.  And
unless you have a husband or a father who supports you, you might not have a
chance of fully fulfilling this greater vision.

Perhaps it is time to put this new wine in new wineskin.

Some examples of new wineskins in the last few years…

Emmaus Community, Chicago
A post-modern, emergent church that meets in a café and
followers of Jesus can sip their cappuccino while singing their love of
Jesus.  A man and woman started this
church. She left her old church because they would not allow her to serve in
this capacity.  When it started looking
and acting like a traditional church, the leaders got nervous.  When they had so many people that they needed
a building and were going to get pews, the leaders got nervous.  The fear was that it would not reach out to
the post-modern generation.

CARE
CARE is an organization that sends care packages to help
with poverty – all over the world.  They
are now making ads that have a picture of a woman from a developing country and
say, “She has the power to change her world. You have the power to help
her.”  CARE is now focusing on empowering
women.  They know if they want to have
lasting impact on a community, they need to empower women.  As the familiar saying goes, “If you educate
a man, you educate an individual.  If you
educate a woman, you educate the entire community.”  They are zeroing in on the cause and needs of
women.

The Nat’l Consortium for Black Women in Ministry
A place where black women in ministry could have support,
band together to mentor the next generation – health, education and poverty as
it affects black women.  They created the
“decency initiative,” where they organized women and men to mount public
pressure on the music industry to adopt a universal respect for all people, especially
the women of color.  Hip hop and rap
music has affected an entire generation of women, taking away their value and
their dignity with the constant use of the N-word, the H-word, and the B-word
in their songs, etc.

These are examples of new wineskins, agents of change.

Five things we can take away from this paradigm shift that
we are seeing:

1. Shifted
   from church focus to Kingdom focus. 
   The move of God is bigger than the four walls of the church.  Go out and be placed strategically in
   every arena of society (to bring His Kingdom to gender, race and
   class).  When the church loses its
   voice in these arenas, then men and women of God need to stand up.  Sometimes old wineskin gets so old, not
   only can it not change society but it ends up colluding with the society.   When the church loses its prophetic
   voice, it ends up colluding with the culture.  (e.g. a church (I missed the
   name/location of it) that participated in the slave trade; they colluded
   with the oppression)
2. Inclusion
   is at the heart of what these women do. 
   Must keep the models inclusive. 
   Create the ferment, the tension. 
   
3. Expand
   the definition of what it means to be a leader.  These women are leaders, trained and successful
   in their own right who saw a need to take it to another level.  They are change-makers.  Change your words, change the world.  They are changing the meaning of this
   word.
4. Everyday
   transformation.  These women didn’t
   just write about it; they worked on everyday leadership.  They went out and did it.
5. Each
   had a heart of legacy leadership.  They
   invested in raising up the next generation of leadership, transformers,
   agents of change.  Yesterday’s
   agents of change can become today’s status quo.  We can become too comfortable with the
   changes that we made and want stick to them and resist any further change.  We don’t want that.  We need to equip the next generation.

God is always the God of change.  He says, “Behold I do a new thing!”  Can we see it?  

The traditional structures of the church cannot hold this
new elixir of God’s empowerment to women and men.  We need to follow him and create new wineskins.

Here's a short video clip of the message (the text is in the third paragraph):

Well, it's the end of the second day of the Christians for Biblical Equality conference, and I have more thoughts and feelings going through me than I am able to sift out.  Reflections, I fear, must come later, after we return from the conference.  For now, I offer to you the first thing I heard this morning - a talk by Deborah Gill about reconciliation.  Dr. Gill has been a professor of New Testament, Greek and Homiletics for 20 years and is currently the National Director of Christian Education and Commissioner of Discipleship for the Assemblies of God.  She's one of the coolest ladies I've met at this conference, and I absolutely adore her!!  Her message struck home to my heart for this journey of seeking Biblical Equality.  More on this later.  For now, here is her message (abridged, believe it or not!)...

"Seeking Justice and
Loving Mercy" by Deborah Gill, Ph.D.

There were many disagreements that occurred among the NT
leaders, but God’s desire is for unity of his followers (John 17:20-21). 

Disagreements within the church happen all the time.  How do we reconcile with those who disagree
with us? 

Case Study:  Meat
Offered to Idols (1 Cor 8:1-13, Rom 14)

Side A argued for eating meat based on their knowledge that
there’s only one true God; idols are not gods, so there was nothing wrong with eating
the meat.  They were “strong” in the
conscience.  Their knowledge gave them
freedom.  These were the Intellectuals.

Side B argued against eating idol meat under any
circumstance.  Their belief gave them a
lack of freedom; they were known to have the “weak” conscience.  Eating meat would’ve defiled Side B’s
consciences.  These were the Conservatives.

They were “strong” and “weak.”  The Apostle Paul treated both sides with
respect.  He didn’t call Side B, “the
Idiots,” and he didn’t call Side A, “the liberals”.   

The Intellectuals and the Conservatives were a part of the
same church.  Both sides were believers,
both precious to God, both worth being cherished by brothers and sisters.  However, in negative interaction, both groups
had hurt each other, causing the other to stumble, even. 

Both sides have a darkside. 
Intellectuals can be arrogant and self-confident.  Conservatives can be judgmental and
self-righteous.  Intellectuals have the
tendency to put down the other for their lack of understanding.  Conservatives have the tendency to put down
the other for their lack of righteousness. 
The intellectuals might indict the conservatives of error.  The conservatives might indict the
intellectuals of sin.  The intellectuals
are prone to despise the other.  The
conservatives are prone to condemn the other. 

These “sides” destroy the unity that Christ intended.

Presuppositions
At the bottom of every argument is a presupposition.  Neither of the sets of presuppositions are
better or worse.  They both have their
own inherent strengths and are prone to their own weaknesses respectively.  Each position is committed to something
positive.  They are in pursuit of good
goals.  However, there’s a dark side and
a bias to every presupposition.

Paradigms

Intellectuals…
Value: Discovery and change
Goals: Pursue enlightenment, progress and freedom
Role: Seekers, inquirers, enlightened ones
Style: Curious and forward looking
Susceptibilities:  Permissiveness,
imprudence, liberality, pride

Problem:  They are intellectual
but not thoughtful.

Conservatives…
Value:  Tradition and
security
Goals: Preserve the past, perpetuate the status quo
Role:  Guardians,
defenders, protectors
Style: Caution, fear the future
Susceptibilities: Being narrow minded, inflexible,
exclusive, judgmental

Problem:  They are righteous
but not just.

We need to recognize that we all have presuppositions.  We need to respect others’ presuppositions
even if we are aware of their tendencies and failings.  We need to be aware of the subjectiveness of
our own presuppositions.

And we need to remember that there is a bigger battle behind
the issues -- FAITH. 

The enemy wants us to get distracted by these little wars
with each other.  He tempts us to crave
winning our war at any cost and to use the ways of the world to do the work of
God.  It’s a losing game as we seek to
devour our opponents.

We need to take the higher road.  Jesus calls us to love our enemies. How much
more so do we need to love our Christian brothers and sisters with whom we
disagree!  Knowledge puffs up, but love
builds up.  Food does not bring us near
to God.  We’re no worse if we eat or
don’t eat.

Intellectuals’ knowledge needs to be tempered with love.  Need to listen to the conservatives and what
contributions they bring to the table. 
Repent of arrogance.  Instead of
despising, must respect the conservatives as a sincere brother or sister in
Christ.   

Conservative’s conservatism must be tempered with love.  Need to listen and learn what the
intellectuals have to offer. They need to accept the intellectuals as genuine
members of the community, must resist putting down the intellectuals.  Instead of rejecting them as heretics, must
accept them as true brothers and sisters in Christ.  Must stop condemning.  Must Accept.

Reconciliation is the timeless call of God.  2 Cor 5:17-21 - God has given us the ministry
of reconciliation!

Life
Application:  Christ-like response

Non-negotiable principles

1.  Cognitive-attitudinal principle:  Christ’s
example is humility (Phil 2)
Just because others disagree doesn’t mean they are bad or
deficient in their morals.  Refrain from
putting down the other party – even in our hearts – whether despising or
condemning.  It’s not that either position
is ‘always’ right.  Just because we are
more comfortable or we’re the majority doesn’t make us right nor does it affirm
its veracity.  Just because they have more
power/might, doesn’t mean they are right either.  Need to be sensitive to the other party.

2.  Theological-ideological principle:  God’s
call is Unity.  (John 17)
Making peace is a timeless call.  Make the circle of love and inclusiveness
bigger.

3.  Behavioral Principle:  God’s
way is through love.
It’s not whether you win or lose but how you play the
game.  Knowing is not enough, it’s living
the life that counts. Preserving relationships and protecting people is more
important than guarding your position and leaping forward.

This is an invitation to:
Stop making room for the devil: admit, apologize, forgive,
refuse (to let it happen again).

Grant greater grace: 
Draw a larger circle.  (The
greater the difference, the greater the grace required.)  Give them the benefit of the doubt.  Don’t attack them as enemies.  Treat them as family.  Do not speak harshly.  Mercy is not giving others what they deserve.
Grace is giving them what they don’t deserve. 
So you think they don’t deserve grace, give it to them.  Draw the circle of inclusion larger than
you’re comfortable with.  Build a bridge.
Treat them as insiders not outsiders.

Watch your words, guard your tongue, mind your mouth.  Refuse to call others names.  Speak charitably with the other party when they
are absent and when they are present. 
Pray to ask for wisdom and strength and blessing for each other.

GENDER AND JUSTICE
In our quest to seek justice and love mercy, we need to
remember the second half of that verse in Micah – walk humbly.

In love and unity, may we lift Jesus up.  May we glorify him and not the devil.  (We glorify the devil when we choose to live in
dissension.)

Friday, August 10, 2007

Tonight's plenary session at the Christians for Biblical Equality conference in Denver, Colorado, was led by Roger Olson.  Dr. Olson is a professor of theology at a seminary in Waco, Texas. 

I've polished my choppy notes from tonight - filling in the blanks and adding, with relish, some of  my own commentary!  Here it is below.

"Beyond Equality to Interdependence:  Women and Men in Community" by Roger Olson, Ph.D.

There are two major camps over gender roles & equality:
Complementarians who say that men and women are equal but
are to have different roles.  However,
this wording feels like a semantics subterfuge, because, according to them, women are to
be subordinate.
Egalitarians who believe that men & women are equal in
home, church and society.  They believe
in Biblical equality.

The Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (proponents
of complementarian thought) also claim equality – and yet, they still call for
submission.  This is their weakness.  In their quest for
equality, egalitarians often end up minimizing role distinction.  This is their weakness.

We need to move beyond the debate of equality and roles, and
instead, focus on interdependence.  We
need to understand our need for each other – so that we can respect and honor
each other and each other’s rights.   Equality is a matter of justice.  Interdependence is a matter of virtue.  As Christians, we want to seek virtue.

Sibling solidarity is one way of seeking interdependence.  Thinking of each other as brothers and
sisters rather than mothers, fathers… helps to have a society that is more
equal, not patriarchal or hierarchal.  This
would be a culture where the strong uses their strength to empower the weak,
rather than just for themselves. 

If you focus on interdependence, then equality won’t be far
behind.  Recognizing your relationship to
each other as brothers and sisters will lead to equality.  We need each other.  No superiority with that understanding.

Adam was not good alone.  In the creation account, we can see God’s
design for interdependence. This interdependence calls for mutual
submission.  Neither man nor woman is
fully the image of God without each other. 
Being in God’s image requires relating (engaging and working) with the
opposite sex.

If the women have the truth, men should bow and submit to
that.  Just as if men have the truth,
women should bow and submit to that.  Truth
is authority, not office or role.  Women
have ways of knowing truth that will add to male ways of knowing truth and vice
versa. 

It’s not about women being superior to men.  It’s not about men being superior to women.

If men have all the power and authority (as the
complementarians suggest), how could that mean equality?  What if we said that blacks and whites are
equal but only whites should have authority, blacks should not, and blacks
should submit to the white authority?  How
quickly we would all stand up in protest and exclaim, “No!  That’s not equality!”  Sadly, this incongruity is not as clear when
it comes to men’s and women’s roles.  In
complementarian thinking, men have the authority, and women must submit.  The truth is, even the best intentioned husband
will never treat his wife with the same kind of respect or see her as having
the same kind of dignity as long as she is supposed to submit to him but he
does not need to submit to her. 

Such protest gets the label of “liberal” feminism.  However, feminism suggests that masculinity
is corrupted and women are superior – but this is not biblical equality.  This is not what we are talking about.  We are talking about full equality for men
and women because both are made in the image of God.  The two don’t have to be in competition to each
other.  Men need women, women need
men.  Does that make me liberal?  It shouldn’t.

If men can only hold leadership roles, there is a lack of
interdependence. 

There’s a need to recognize the unique
giftedness of women and men… not one over the other.  Deep down, men fear feeling obsolete and being redundant.  In a church full of women who lead, there
also needs to be encouragement of the men in their unique giftedness. 

Men and women are
different and that somehow needs to be incorporated in egalitarian thinking
about equality. 

If all the leadership is too similar to one another, it is
the result of hidden bias rather than the Holy Spirit’s leading, i.e. if the
deacon board is full of educated, wealthy, older white males, then we need to
pray to seek the Lord for His heart.  

Our one year wedding anniversary is in three more days.  As an anniversary gift, God worked it out for us so that we could go to Colorado for the Christians for Biblical Equality Conference.  We left early this morning, and the midafternoon found us on a bench at the airport waiting for our hotel shuttle.  Another couple sat beside us, and after awhile, we began to suspect that perhaps they were waiting to go to the same hotel. 

   "Are you going to the CBE conference?"  Sam asked the gentleman. 
   "Yes..." 
   And so began an unexpected friendship...

He introduced himself as Carey Moore, his wife as Pam.  As unassuming as can be, he claimed that he worked part-time as a librarian, and his wife was an author and speaker.  Hrm.  Librarian, interesting.  Author, even more interesting.  I asked what kind of books she wrote. 

   He said, "She was a companion for Corrie ten Boom.  Have you heard of her?"
   Have I heard of her?!  I thought.  And trying to hide my ohmigosh, how-cool-is-that, i-can't-believe-it shock and awe, I replied simply, "Uh...yes." 
   "She wrote a book about her time with Corrie ten Boom." 
   He then gave us their personal card.  I looked down and it said, "Wm. Carey & Pam Rosewell Moore."
   I asked, "What does the Wm. stand for?"
   "William."  Haha!  He was named after William Carey, the great missionary of India!  =)

When we at last arrived in our hotel room, I plugged in my laptop and went to their website.  (www.moorelifelessons.net)  After reading their biographies, I was floored by all the things God has privileged them to do.  We decided to knock on their room and offered to get them dinner, because we knew they wouldn't be able to nor desire to walk all that distance to get to the restaurants and because we wanted an excuse to get to know them more.

Well, during dinner, we found out many things.  Carey is not just a librarian.  As intriguing as being a librarian is to me, what is even more exciting is that he was an editor for many years for Revell, Word Publishing, Harvest Publishing, Decision magazine (Billy Graham), and Wycliffe Bible Translators!  And aside from her books about Corrie ten Boom, Pam also wrote some other books... and get this, she worked for Brother Andrew (God's Smuggler) for awhile too!!  (and they shared all this with such humility, i was amazed.)

We felt such a connection with them as we talked about everything -- from the way God planned our love stories, to talking about missions and Wycliffe and Navigators (Carey was also a Navigator!), to talking about how God's ideal is for men and women to be equal, to be treated equally... and how God calls and gifts people, both men and women, and how all God's people should be encouraged to embrace the gifts that He has given them - regardless of race, class or GENDER.  This, of course, is a taste of what the rest of this conference will be about...

It was such a beautiful time with them.  And this is just the beginning.  Can't wait to see what else the Lord has in store for us here...