Women in Scripture #5

Pauls seems to be the most quoted when it comes to fighting against the idea that women can have a place in ministry other than teaching other women and children. Yet it seems that Paul worked with quite a few women who served in a variety of different roles.

In Romans 16:7, Paul greets Andronicus and Junia as being "prominent among the apostles." Junia (a woman) fulfilled the Pauline criteria for apostleship. Therefore she obviously had seen the risen Christ and engaged in missionary work.

Her leadership role as an apostle are very similar to female leadership roles in ancient Judaism--such as head of synagogue or elder. She was one of several female church leaders that associated with Paul. Others include Prisca (Rom. 16:3-4), whom Acts describes as a teacher (18:26), then there is Phoebe (Rom. 16:1-2), and Euodia and Syntyche (Phil. 4:2-3). Yes the last two were involved in a conflict with each other that Paul had to address. However, can that really disqualify all of women from being in leadership roles? If we went by that criteria for men, we would no longer have any pastors at all! We fight about everything!

Back to Junia though. There has been much debate about Junia and her role among the apostles. For a long time it was read as she was one of the prominent apostles. Then somewhere along the line, a translator with this ridiculous mentality about women came along, and tried to prove that Junia was mistranslated and should have been "Junias" making it a male name. When that didn't work, some were left trying to prove that Junia was an abbreviation for a longer male name. This didn't make any sense because it didn't follow any pattern of abbreviation that we have from Greek documents (biblical or otherwise). When all these attempts failed, there was a movement to read "prominent among the apostles" to mean that she was well known by the apostles, but just because someone knows them doesn't mean they are part of the group. While it is true, a person simply being known by someone in another doesn't make that person part of a group (I have friends who are in gangs, doesn't make me a gang member), this reading is ridiculous since it was widely accepted for centuries as meaning that Junia was an apostle, and prominent among them.

We cannot allow revisionist history to do away with the fact that there were women apostles. There were women teachers. And that God is in the habit of using everyone regardless of gender to accomplish his purpose. In the Kingdom of God there is supposed to be no more distinction between Jew and Gentile, Greek or Scythe, slave or free, male or female. We have done a good job with the first three, I am just dumbfounded as to why we are struggling with the fourth.

Another Update...

Well we got back from Mexico about a little over a week ago. There was a long gap between posts because we were in Mexico for a week, and then I felt like I was going 100 mph trying to catch up on some things I needed to get done when I got back.

Overall Mexico was awesome! There was some great things that happened on that trip. There was a youth who seemed to really find his niche. A mother who shared that she went on the trip for her son, but soon realized that God had much to teach her about the value of friendship and the stories go on and on. I am really hopeful that that the lessons we learned in Mexico will be implemented now that we are back in Chilton.

We are now going through the Easter season. This is quite possibly my favorite time of year. It is a time of new beginnings. To reflect on the implications of the resurrection and what that means in our lives. We are not having any services during holy week, but next year I definitely think we will. Easter Sunday is just so much more meaningful if you have gone through the week remembering the cross and the obedience that Jesus displayed in taking all of that on himself. It is truly remarkable Lord that we serve!

After Easter, we will hit up the fundraising for youth camp and also begin making preparations for the month of June. It will be a busy one (Youth Camp, Pre-teen camp, VBS in 3 consecutive weeks!). In that time between Easter and that crazy 3 week stretch, Meredith and I will celebrate our 2 year anniversary. I can't believe it!!!

Anyway, that is a short update on what is going on with us. Hope this finds everyone well!

Happy Easter!!

Women in Scripture #4

One of the most fascinating things that I find when talking to people about the Bible is how people (men in particular) seem to elevate David and hold him up as an example that all should follow. Most likely they will quote the verse that calls David "a man after God's own heart." While there are certainly a lot of good qualities found in David, the reason that he gets this description is that he has a very repentant heart. Which we all should have. But what this also means is that David messed up...ALOT. I love studying the life of David because it gives me hope when I read his story. He messes up, God teaches him a lesson, he repents and tries to follow God to the best of his ability before inevitably messing up again. I like it because it reminds me of my spiritual journey.

Anyway, there is one particular incident that I find fascinating. The story is found in 2 Samuel 14:1-20. It is the story of the wise woman from Tekoa. Tekow is located in a Judean hill country about ten miles south of Jerusalem. In this particular story it is made clear that this woman is a village leader--in today's world it would be very similar to the role of a male elder.

In 2 Samuel 13, the story of the rape of King David's daughter (by her half brother) is told. David grieves that this has happened, but takes no steps (required by the Law) to address Absalom. In fact Absalom flees and it is not until three years later that David's general, Joab, comes up with a scheme to get Absalom and David back together (the story is much more detailed than what I am portraying, but I am trying to get to the part of the woman from Tekoa).

Joab's plan involves seeking this woman from Tekoa. She is to pretend to be a single mother of two boys, and one has murdered the other. (If you are having flashbacks of Nathan and David, you are not far off!) So she acts out this scenario and just like the scene with Nathan, David is forced into clear thinking.

Now to be fair, we can't exactly say this is a one to one comparison with Nathan. Nathan's account is appointed by God, this account happens because of Joab. And the overall wisdom is not realy clear, seeing as Absalom revolts four years later.

However, with that being said there are still things that point to the role of female leadership being accepted in Israel. As I said earlier, she is depicted as a village leader, which would be akin to the male role of elder. She is also depicted as a woman who is able to appropriate the fundamental cultural values of ancient Israel--the preservation of patriarchal lineage (14:7) and the people of God (14:13), and the king's obligation to protect the right of the orphan and widow to enjoy God's heritage (14:6).

Further, she is depicted in this account as being very well spoken indicating her experience in dealing with similar incidents in the past. This woman was a leader and no one had any problem with her reminding David of his duty as king. Perhaps this plan originated in the mind of Joab, but God was definitely present throughout this entire story using this woman.

Now this is obviously not making a case for women to be pastor's. That isn't my goal with all of this. My goal is to simply show that Scripture shows a God who uses both men and women. That God can, at any time, lift up a man or woman to lead God's people. We find here in this story that God uses a woman to remind David his obligations as king. Inevitably someone will say she was just submitting to Joab's orders. However, this is a weak argument in light of the fact that she is obviously a village leader (a village which I will go out on a limb and say includes men). So why would she all of a sudden need to submit to someone coming to her and asking for her help, doesn't make sense.

What this story shows me is that God uses who he wants, when he wants and we as people of God do not have the right to step in and tell people in what capacity they can serve. Last time I checked, that was totally God's call.

Update on our lives!

Well Spring Break is here!

Spring Break in Chilton, TX starts tomorrow (Mar. 15) and with it comes our first mission trip since being at Chilton. We have six people going and we will meet up with another church from Abilene, TX when we get to Del Rio. There will be 55 from that group and our 6 makes 61 people headed to Mexico to do construction projects around the city, a VBS for the kids (run by your church's youth), and a women's ministry which is great for some of the more mature ladies of the church who can't quite keep up with the kids at VBS and aren't really interested in doing construction for 3 straight days.

Anyway, we leave on Tuesday (Mar. 16) and return Saturday (Mar. 20). I am excited to see what God is going to teach us as we make the journey down there. I find that God teaches the most to the missionaries going when it comes to short term mission trips like the one we are taking.

The hope and the prayer is that as we are transformed by this short term mission trip, we will bring back what we have learned and use it to reach our community. The neighborhood we will be in when in Mexico, and the neighborhood here in Chilton known as "Little Mexico" are virtually the same. So the mission trip is not just so we can call ourselves an "Acts 1:8" church or any other ridiculous label, the purpose of this trip is to learn from God what we can be doing in Chilton. Sometimes, it takes getting away from the comfortable surroundings to be able to see things anew when you return.

So that is our hope and our prayer as we go to Mexico. I hope you will remember to pray for us as we are gone. This also means that there will not be another post on here for about a week. Sorry to disappoint both of my readers! :)

Women in Scripture #3

Today, I will shift the focus a little from a particular woman in Scripture, to a passage in Scripture that I believe has been used wrongly to support woman "staying in the home." The passage is Titus 2:1-9.

In this letter, Paul is giving Titus instructions on how teaching to various groups. He tells Titus to teach the older men to be temperate, self controlled, sound in faith, etc. He then goes into what older women should teach younger women (we will come back to this), and then he tells the older men to teach the younger men to be sound in their speech so that when others speak against them, they will end up shaming themselves (Jesus said something similiar--"heaping coals on their head").

Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with the advice that Paul is giving Titus. There is absolutely a place for men to teach young men, and women to teach young women. There are things that my wife can teach (and should teach) a girl in our youth group that I can't (and shouldn't) teach her. Likewise, their are issues that young boys deal with that I can relate to and speak to that my wife has no experience with. So please do not hear me say that when it comes to discipleship issues we should mix genders. We shouldn't. The problem comes when people use this verse to say "women should stay in the home" (complimentarian camp) or when people use this verse to say "see women can only teach women and children" (sexist camp).

Here is what he says about women: " teach older women to be reverent, so that they can teach younger woman to love their husband and children, to be self controlled and to be busy at home...so that no one will malign the word of God."

Now at first glance this seems like an open and shut case that women should stay at home and love their husband and children. Now I do agree that women should love their husband and children (obviously!), just as a husband should love his wife and children(mutual submission--Ephesians). And I am not saying if a woman CHOOSES to stay at home and be a "stay at home mom" that she is somehow wrong or am I telling her to go do something else. I believe that is a calling just like any other. What I am speaking against is men who use this passage to make their wives stay at home in order to "live according to Scripture."

Here are a couple of reasons off the top of my head that this reading of Scripture is invalid:

1. Culture--To read this passage and apply it the way some people have is to take the reading completely out of its cultural context. In this culture, women were not allowed to work outside of the house. In essence they had to stay at home. So Paul here is basically telling Titus to train the older women so that they train the younger women to do their housework as if doing it for the Lord. (Col. 3:23). Also, in this culture it would be completely inappropriate for women to teach men. So Paul is writing within a cultural context and telling those who have become followers of the Way to live a life that is worthy of their calling. In other words, he is telling men and women to live in a way that brings glory to God within this particular culture.

It should be noted here, that when I speak of the treatment of women I am speaking strictly in the context of the country which I live. I am not saying we take these same principles and apply them to other contexts (i.e. Islamic countries). There should be different strategies based on whatever context ministry occurs.

2. Danger in "literalness"

I find it funny that men have used this passage in its most literal sense to "prove" that women should stay in the home. If we this passage is to be interpreted literally then the way this passage ends should be used to support slavery. Afterall, Paul does not say anything about releasing slaves or that slavery is wrong. Rather he simply tells them to embrace their life situation and be the best slaves possible. It seems to me that if one were to take this passage literal, that those men using this passage to keep their wives at home should also own some slaves as well. Yet, no one seems to use this passage to defend slavery (and they shouldn't, I am not advocating slave use. I am just pointing out the intellectual inconsistency). We cannt pick and choose which verses we want to take literally and which ones we don't within a particular passage. Either Paul is writing in a cultural context and we need to take principles from what he is writing and figure out how they translate into our culture. Or we take everything literal, which would mean that the complimentarian camp would have to take the slave verses literal as well.

There are other reasons that I believe the "literal reading" of this passage is off based, but I do not have time to go into them at this point. One final disclaimer. When referring to our picking and choosing of what to take literal and what not to take literal, I am not speaking about going passage from passage. In other words, there are places in the Bible that we should take literally, and there are passages that we should read as metaphors. All should be read with their context in mind, and understood in that context before applying principles to live by for us today in a different context.

This passage is not a passage that can be used to tell women that they can't teach men, or that they need to stay at home and take care of the house while the man works. If a woman feels called to be a stay at home mom, GREAT. However, if she is being forced to stay at home because of a horrific reading of this passage in Titus that situation is defined by one term: oppression.

Women in Scripture #2--Huldah

As I study this topic of women found in our Scripture, I am astounded at the leadership roles I find in the Old Testament and how the gender of the person delivering the word from God is never an issue. They receive it as authoritative because it comes from God, not because it comes from a man or woman.

Today I want to look briefly at Huldah. Reason being, I simply find the account of Huldah fascinating. Her story can be found in 2 Kgs 22:14-20 and 2 Chr 34:11-28. I would recommend reading it when you get the chance. Basically Huldah is summoned after Josiah's servants find a document during his temple renovations.

Huldah is summoned to validate whether or not the document is authentic. Huldah is a temple prophet, which as we have discussed before functions in the same role a pastor would today. She is not the only prophet during this time, however. Jeremiah is prophesying during this time as well. In fact, Jeremiah is probably closer in distance to Josiah than Huldah (according to some commentators), yet Huldah is summoned. This should put to rest the whole "women can serve if there is no man to step up" argument.

The story ends with Huldah declaring that the document found during the Temple renovations is authentic. Most people think that this document found is what we refer to in our Scriptures as the book of Deuteronomy. There is some debate about this, but the internal evidence seems to point to this conclusion.

So the story is basically about a WOMAN authenticating a document that is central to both Judaism and Christianity. Jesus quotes this book more than any other. So it could be said that God used a woman to start the canonization process by using her position as prophet to authenticate the writing as being from God.

Further, Huldah functions in the role of pastor more than Deborah. She takes a written text and interprets it, and then her prophetic words of judgment are based on a written text. Isn't this what pastors do every Sunday? Not the judgment part, but take a text and discern how the text applies to their congregation, and then speak prophetically from the pulpit on Sunday mornings?

Note also Josiah's reaction. It wasn't a "I can't listen to this, she is a woman" attitude. Rather he recognizes the authority with which this prophet is speaking, and quickly makes changes (tears his clothes because he realizes that they haven't been doing what is pleasing to God).

Isn't it ironic that the first person to authenticate a written text that is in our sacred literature was a woman. Yet, today they are not seen (in most churches) as having the right criteria to preach. Weird...Women are good enough to be used by God, but we have a problem with women in certain roles...

International Women's Day

I didn't even realize they had "International Women's Day." But here is a link my friend Brenda Sanders had on her facebook status. It is faces of displaced women around the world.

"Jim and Casper Go To Church"

Today's post will not be about women in Scripture. Two reasons: 1) I did not really have time to sit down and read well enough to discuss another woman or a passage about women in the church. Tuesdays are usually my busy day in which I go visit a member in the nursing home, go to lunch with some folks from the church, and then play dominoes with them the entire afternoon (hard job I know). 2) Our church has started a book club and it has been a really good thing in my opinion. I love to read and discuss, and I feel like we have read good books and had discussions on a variety of topics (i.e. The Great Divorce, The Shack, Same Kind of Different As Me, etc). The book we read for tonight was no different. The book for discussion tonight was, Jim & Casper Go To Church. In this book, Jim Henderson (Christian) and Matt Casper (atheist) travel to different churches around the country and basically critique each church.

There are some values for reading this book. First, it is always good to hear a critique from someone on the "outside." By outside I mean, a person who is a non-believer and does not attend church. It is usually their critique that is the most honest and challenging. Too often, "insiders" (people accustomed to a certain way things are done) get too comfortable in their setting and become immune to seeing the flaws of what they are involved in. In this book, it is the same way. Casper offers great insights into what most churches have become. His main gripe about the church is that too often the church does not compel anyone to "do" anything with what they heard in the service. He observed that everything was about belief and nothing else. While this is a valid critique on our faith, I think it is somewhat an unfair assessment by Casper. 2) No matter what you think about Casper's critique/observation it causes all who read to take an honest look at the church they attend and ask the question, "is what we are doing consistent with Scripture?" 3) Along the same lines it asks the question of whether or not we attend church for our own benefit (what we can get out of it), or to be equipped to serve (what we can contribute) in the Kingdom of God. I fear that the former is what is driving church membership. 4) Shows the true value of authentic friendship. These two men seem to genuinely care about each other, and that relationship grows throughout the book.

There are of course other values to this book, but I thought those were the two most important benefits.

The book also left me frustrated. In all honesty, I probably would have written a glowing report on this book had I read it in seminary. However, after being a pastor for 7 months now, I think this book is a tad bit unfair.

First, these guys are going to a church for ONE service. They are trying to critique a whole church based on what they do in worship. This is unfair because no one can adequately critique anything in one church service. As a pastor, I would fear to be critiqued after one sermon or one church service. Churches are full of people, fallen people. They are susceptible to bad days, and to base an opinion on what one church does in one service seems to me a tad unfair.

Second, there is no way to preach on everything in one sermon. Meaning, that Casper's critique about a pastor not charging someone to "do" something at the end of the service is not exactly fair. This relates to my first objection. When people gather together for worship they are bringing in a variety of different experiences from the previous week. Perhaps some have lost a loved one, some are stressed about school, etc. Anyway, there are times when a pastor's message is not going to be to "do" something. Rather, people simply need to be encouraged and reminded that God is in control, God loves them, there is hope in the name of Jesus. They do not ALWAYS need to be challenged to do something. I have preached sermons where my application was simply to rest in the fact that they are loved by the God of the Ages. Trusting that when they remember that fact, the Spirit will drive them into action in His timing. It is impossible for a pastor to cover every aspect of the Christian faith in one sermon. Now to his point, there does seem to be this emphasis on belief rather than lifestyle. In other words, believe the right things and you will go to heaven. We have missed the mark on this one. Christianity is not all about "getting into heaven." Anyway, I thought that his critique on this aspect while valid on an overall scale, was unfair to the pastor's preaching the sermons he was hearing.

There are tons of other things that this book made me think about, and there were a lot of things that we discussed as a group. These were just initial thoughts to the book. I have more thoughts of course on the book, but I would recommend the book to anyone involved in church, or that has grown up in the church. I especially would recommend this book to anyone on a church staff. This book will make anyone think about what we call "church" and if what we do as a body lines up with Scripture.

Women in Scripture #1--the implications of what we say

As you read from my previous post, I have decided to go through the Bible and look at different women from our Scriptures. My hope is to simply start a conversation about why we have the view of women we do in the church. It seems to be very inconsistent with Scripture, and at times seems to portray God as a sexist who has relegated women to a "lesser" role of teaching women and children only. Through examining the Scriptures, I am hoping to at least take the first step in changing the way in which we view the roles of women in our churches.

Again, from the previous post, this is a passion of mine because I believe that passing on the legacy of our faith to the generation behind us is very important, and we cannot continue to pass on this legacy of oppression in the church. However, with that being said, change in church usually comes slowly. So to all the women out there who want to see change happen fast, and will pretty much do things in the church just to show men that women are capable of doing things...STOP! While change is necessary, it is also necessary to maintain the unity of the body. Tearing a church apart just to prove that women are equal to men is as unpleasing to God as the treatment some women get in our churches today. The goal should always be to maintain the unity of the body while change is occurring. With that being said, the generation of woman today (and those fighting the good fight with them) will probably feel like they are making very little headway in terms this topic. However, have hope! That the work that is being done now, will serve generations of women in the church far into the future!

Now let us turn to one of my favorite stories in Scripture, featuring one of the most prominent Judges in all of Israel's history. In Judges 4 we find a woman named Deborah. Now Deborah is one of the major judges in the story of how Israel takes the land of Canaan. Deborah is the only judge to be called a prophet (MALE or FEMALE). In this story Deborah summons Barak (leader of the Israelite army) and gives Barak orders that she has received from the Lord to go to Mount Tabor. She then gives him specific instructions. Barak refuses to go if Deborah doesn't go, and so Deborah goes with him (she doesn't fight though). Long story short, the battle is won and another woman, Jael, is given glory for the victory because it is she who kills Sisera with a tent peg through his temple. The story ends with Deborah and Barak singing a song in celebration.

Now this story is one of my favorite stories, mainly because the method of how Sisera is killed is so awesome (morbid I know). But deeper than that, when I read this story, I think of how it wouldn't even have happened had the Israelites had the same view of women we do today.

Deborah is a judge/prophetess. That in itself would be problematic for us in the church today, since the role of the prophet, and role of pastor are very similar. Deborah's job as judge is to rule according to God's law. Her job as prophetess was to hear from God and lead the people of Israel in the way that God directs. Both of which she does beautifully. And incidentally, it doesn't seem as though anybody mentioned in this story has a problem with the fact that Deborah is a female. The sons of Israel continue to come to her to rule over matters they can't settle, and Barak does not seem to have a problem with hearing God's instructions through a woman.

Now I know this story is not happening in a "church setting," but it is a story of God using Deborah as an instrument to accomplish His plans for the people of Israel. God has equipped Deborah and He used her, something I think we don't allow for in our churches today. In fact, I have even heard horror stories of young girls telling a pastor that they think they are called to pastor a church, and that pastor telling the young girl she is either wrong, or has heard wrongly from the Lord about her role in vocational ministry!

I have even heard sermons on this particular passage where the preacher has said Deborah is in a leadership role because there were no men who were willing to step up and fill that role! Now as absurd as that sounds from the reading of the story (Barak gathered 10,000 men--surely one in ten thousand would have stepped up, right?) this was a very common view of women that I would hear when I first became a Christian.

The statement would be made something like this (and this is not just pertaining to the story of Deborah, but to women in general): "God uses women in leadership roles where they would have authority over men, only when there is no man that will step up and lead."

Now the implications of this statement are horrific! In other words, females in the church are God's back-up plan, God's second choice, etc. Now if I asked someone who made a statement like the one above if the saw women as "God's back up plan, or God's second choice," a lot of them would say no , but that in a sense is what they are saying. That God in His infinite wisdom, created women, just in case there was a time in history where men didn't step up to the plate His plan could still move forward.

We need to consider the implications of what we are saying and what we are not saying. When we use language like the quote above we are in a sense telling young girls, that though God may have equipped you for great things, you can only use those giftings in certain areas, unless of course we can't find a man to do something then we will call you. Conversely, if this is something that is never talked about in our churches, and the only people young girls see at the pulpit or on staff are men, we are sending the same message by your silence. Yes a girl may never hear the words "you can't do that," but the median of never seeing women used in any other way than the status quo is still sending the same message.

May we as a church think about the implications of what we are saying or what we are not saying. May we start looking for the giftings that God has given each person (men or women) and start making that the criteria for roles people have in our churches today.

What legacy are we really leaving?

Today I preached on Acts 12:1-19. In this passage there is a phrase that is very powerful, but if read quickly can be easily missed.

We all know the story (or at least I assume we all do) of Peter being delivered from prison. James has just been killed by the sword, Peter is in prison about to suffer the same fate when an angel of the Lord intervenes and delivers Peter from the hands of Herod. The story is told in a very Greek comedic style, so if you haven't read it, go read it now!

If you do read it, pay particular attention to verse 17. The phrase "Tell James and the others." Basically Peter is recounting the story to people that were praying for his release and his final instruction is of the utmost important. "Tell James..." In this short phrase, Luke has illustrated something very important. Peter will disappear from the story, and James will now be the head of the church in Jerusalem. Luke has just made the transition from the apostles being the leaders of the church to a second generation Christian (James) taking over a leadership role.

The "passing of the torch" is very significant because as Judges 3 reminds us, we are always one generation away from turning and worshipping a different God. In other words, people have short memories, and if there is no one passing on the story of faith, then the generation following will forget all about what God has done in the past.

Reading about this passage, and teaching on it this morning caused me to ask our congregation the question, "what are we passing on to the next generation?" Not necessarily by our words (though those are important), but by our actions (decisions we make, how/if we are connected to a body of believers, etc.). Since posing that question, I have been thinking about what it is our churches have been passing on for generation after generation. While this is not meant to bash the church at all, because I think that the church has been established by God to be used in his mission, and as a witness to the rulers and principalities of the heavenly realm (Eph. 3), I do think it is ok to critique the church where there is a shortcoming or in my view a very damaging view of Scripture. With that being said, I think that the church has a terrible view when it comes to their stance on women and the roles that they can hold in the church.

For some reason, we have used the Bible to oppress women instead of liberate them and tell them that they are of equal value as men. Galatians says that "there are neither Greek or Jew, male or female..." In other words, there is no distinction between sexes in the Kingdom of God. Yet the church seems to be the last place on Earth to embrace this kind of thinking. I mean if you look in the business world, the academic world, or any other aspect of our society women are in leadership roles all over the place, yet we as a church hold them back.

We cannot continue this legacy of treating women like this in our churches. God has gifted women with wonderful talents and skills that are just waiting to be used, yet are not utilized (unless teaching children). Incidentally, women are not the only group of people our churches oppress. Single people are another big group of people that we oppress in the church, by relegating them to a different Sunday school class (sometimes in a completely different building) as if they are a different group of people all together such as college students or youth aged students, or not allowing them to have certain positions in church, etc. But that is for a different post.

The way we treat women really hits home with me, because I have an amazing wife, who has the same degrees I do, is qualified to be a pastor more than I (her giftings are compassion and mercy, she is a great counselor, I could go on). Yet she is going to school now to become a teacher in a middle school (please note, being a teacher is an admirable occupation, and my wife will be a great teacher). My point is, that she is doing this because there are very limited jobs she can get in a church setting. Now let me say that I am so pleased to be at a church where she can be Youth minister and utilize her skills that God has given her. So please don't hear this as an indictment on the church we are currently serving. My point is simply this, we have women in our churches right now who God has equipped to be wonderful instruments in His redeeming mission, but are just sitting in our pews not being utilized because they were born the wrong gender.

Now let me say this little disclaimer. I am not saying that we need to go in cavalier style and change everything all at once. What I am saying is that we need to search Scripture and start having the conversation about women and their roles in the church. Looking at examples of women that were involved in leadership positions of the church, looking at passages that talk about women in the church (yes, even those that may seem at first to say the opposite of what I am talking about), and honestly discuss if our views of women match what is said in Scripture.

So that is what I plan to do, my next blog posts will try to look at different women in Scripture, different passages dealing with women in Scripture and hopefully at least start a conversation about the message we are sending either explicitly by your speech about women, or implicitly by our complete silence on the subject and maintaining of the status quo.

In my opinion, sexism is no different from racism, and the message we are sending to the generation coming up after us needs to change. Anyone would be up in arms if someone were not allowed to be a deacon, pastor, youth minister, etc. because of they were black, asian, or hispanic. I think it is about time we started viewing this topic through that same lens.

As I said, my hope is to look at one passage every day and to really look at the women of our Scriptures and hopefully start a conversation that moves us from our oppressive attitudes towards women and we can pass on a legacy that is pleasing to God.

So I hope you enjoy!

Children: illustration of good or bad?

I have been thinking about this topic for some time now. It first originated with a conversation I had with a good friend at the BGCT convention in Houston back in November. Now, I could not tell you how we got on this topic, but nonetheless it left me with something to think about and so I decided to put my thoughts down on here and see if there were any thoughts on the subject, or if I am once again delving into things that no one else really seems to care about. :)

The topic I am referring to is the use of children in sermon illustrations. I have not been a Christian that long (coming up on 10 years in August, and really those first 3 years are what I refer to as a nominal Christian. Nominal meaning that I went to church, but Jesus had no influence on how I thought, treated others, used my money, saw the world, etc. In short, Jesus was just something I added to all the other things of my life). Anyway, with all that being said, since I have become a pastor I have really started paying attention to sermon illustrations more closely. I have always enjoyed a good sermon, in fact that is usually my favorite part of the service, and a service can be ruined for me quickly if it is a sermon I feel is unprepared or just really bad theology (i.e. using the phrase "be sober minded" as a text to tell people to abstain from alcohol). Since I have started paying attention to sermon illustrations I have noticed that ALL of illustrations using children are to point out how sinful we are. Why is this?

Now let me say this. I am not arguing against original sin, or even saying that it is a bad thing to use children as an illustration of our fallen nature. You can watch kids interact and see immediately they are selfish and self-centered at times (of course you can add other things to the list here). However, it seems to me that we fall short when using children as sermon illustrations if we only use them to illustrate the negative.

The reason this is troubling to me is that Jesus (particularly in the book of Matthew) seems to always hold them up as examples to people when answering how to enter the Kingdom of God, or when teaching them about characteristics of kingdom citizens (KoG belongs to such as these; to enter the KoG you must become like little children, etc.) If Jesus does this when it comes to children, why don't we? Where did this idea come from that we can only use children to illustrate our sinful nature?

When I look at children interact, I see far more qualities of being like Christ than I do when looking at adults. For example, in our nursery we have two little ones that are the about the same age. Now of course they have their bad days and they get moody if another takes the toy that "belongs" to them. However, 10 minutes later after having just fussed at each other, you can see them playing together as if nothing happened. In other words, they didn't keep a record of wrongs (attribute of love found in 1 Cor. 13).

Or if you were to take a group of people, with diverse socioeconomic, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds and put their children in one place, and the parents in another room. I would venture to guess that if you came back in an hour the kids would all be interacting with each other and playing games with one another and you would think that they had been friends for years! On the other hand, if you went into the room of adults, my guess would be that you would find different groups huddled up in different places and they would be marked by some kind of common bond (either socioeconomic status, cultural, or ethnic). Now some might say this is just a hypothesis, but I have seen this happen in real life. And the reason this is so is because children haven't been taught (either implicitly or explicitly) the prejudices of the world in terms of other groups of people. I believe this is what Jesus is talking about when he tells us to become like little children. To see the world through the eyes of children, to see beyond the outer appearances, and embrace those around us as if we have been friends for years.

I could go on and on about positive examples that I have seen in children. Giving a homeless person money (yes their parents gave them the money). But the excitement they exude when giving is something that I have always hoped would be in me.

All this to say, I understand why ministers use children to illustrate sin and our bent towards being self centered, etc. But I do not understand why we don't hold them up as examples the way Jesus did.

Anyway, those are my thoughts, I would love to hear your thoughts on this topic as well!