PRAYER FOR GOD'S WILL: UKRAINE

From a missionary who has worked in the country:

"THIS IS A CRUCIAL MOMENT IN UKRAINE. The SITUATION IS TENSE in Kiev, the capital, and throughout the country as the run off for President of Ukraine is about to begin. In mere hours (10 PM PST) the polls will open for people to decide between Pro-Western Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko and Pro-Moscow opposition leader Viktor Yanukovich.

Ukraine has been the freest nation in the former Soviet Union and one of the freest in Europe. There is freedom of religion as in no other nation in the region. Ukrainian missionaries have been the pioneers of many, if not most churches in Russia (even during the Soviet Union). Without getting into the important geopolitical position of Ukraine, this nation is very very important in many ways in the region.

The pastors and churches in Ukraine are fasting and praying for these elections and they ask the Body of Christ to do the same. The Prime Minister has had good relations with the Christian Churches and has Pastors as advisers, whereas the opposition leader has promised the Russian Orthodox Church that he would curb the growth of protestant movements and rein in their current liberties, bringing in similar restrictions to those that currently exist in Russia.

We had a dynamic start to the Bible Training school in the Ukraine (80 Students). Ukraine. Please pray for the students and teachers. Shortly 2 schools will start in Siberia, Russia. Last year over 200 new churches were started as a result of these training programs. "

THE SENT ONES

The term 'apostle' is a term from the Greek referring to one 'sent out' as in a messanger or representative carrying out a duty or errand. Traditionally, the church has used the term to refer to the disciples who were sent by Jesus on a mission (errand) to share the witness of the Gospel, just as he had been sent by God (Heb.3.1

Ephesians states they are a gift to the Body of Christ: "He gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers to equip the saints for the work of the ministry"(Eph. 4.11-12).

So, let us examine the story in John of Mary Magdalene, called the "Apostle to the Apostles".

In John 20.14-18 is the story.

Jesus is encountered in the garden, not as a corpse but as glorified redeemer and tells her..."go (poreuou) to my brothers (adelphous) and say (eipe) to them."....

Mary went and "announced (angellousa)...I have seen the Lord and he had said these things to her."

It becomes clear that Jesus
a) could have told them himself but instead uses a messanger and the messenger was Mary;
b) he gave clear instructions in the message to inform his absent followers of the fulfilment of his teachings;
c) Mary shares her witness (I have seen the Lord) and he said these things....

This was the role of the apostle - to be the messanger of the good news to share the message, to share their personal knowledge and witness of its truth, and to share the words ( teachings) of the one who sent them.....

For a century or more after the time of Jesus this was understood as a role of people in the church. Yet, it became narrowly defined to mean only those who had seen -w ith their own eyes - the works of Jesus and his first disiciples. Two hundred years later it is already being replaced as an active role in the new church.

Just as, over 2,000 years later, it is being narrowly defined as referring only to the male followers of Jesus.

The disciples (student learners) were, at the Great Commission, the Upper Room, and various other places transformed into apostles. They were sent people with a mission and a message.

How could Mary Magadalene be anything else than an Apostle?

MARY THE MISLABELED

Mary Magdelene has been victimized over the centuries. She has been labeled a prostitute, fallen woman, and other fanciful descriptions which reveal more about the scholars than about her.

1. Are we guilty of bearing false witness against this woman?

2. Why has it been so easy to label this woman as 'fallen' when nothing in scripture leads to that description?

What we know from scripture is that she was from a place called Magdela, she had seven demons which Jesus cast from her, and she was a faithful and constant presence in his ministry from then until she ran to inform his male followers he had risen from the dead.

1. Why do we first assume she was a young, vital, and beautiful woman? The success of the theory assuming Jesus and Mary were a couple is predicated on the assumption she was young, but on what is this based?

2. Earliest chuch writers recognized her first as 'the apostle to the apostles' yet soon she was denigraded to a fallen woman....and we have allowed her to stay there since then.

After that, events are less clear. Some sources based on early legends of the church say she became a companion to Mary the Mother, may have assisted John in writing his Gospel and may have traveled to Epheseus.

1. If she was an more mature woman there would be fewer 'stories' of her post-resurrection because she would have died.

2. The strong model of the 'wise woman' and the 'mother in Israel' from Judaism and the O.T. needs to be considered when interpreting the role of women in the nascent Christ-followers. This is something early, Greek and Roman and European scholars and clerics, may have totally missed. Women did have those roles or honors in those societies so naturally in the early formalized church these roles are minimized and controled and eventually eliminated.

I AM NOT A FEMINIST - I AM A CHRISTIAN

Every Bible scholar must face a moment where they ask themselves, 'is my bias showing?' To fail to do this risks them compromising their scholarship. Yet, history is replete with people who never asked themself the hard questions about what their own prejudices, biases, and stupid ideas were!

The patriarchal scholar reads and sees women as faint figures in the Biblical background. They are firmly placed in gendered spheres to serve, mend, pleasure, and support the life of men.

The so-called feminist scholar reads the same texts and see women being taught, commissioned, blessed, called, and valued. They tend to see the role of women may even be equal to that of the men.

When looked at in its totality the Bible supports women in strong leadership roles. From the prophets and queens of the Old Testment to the disciples and apostles of the New, women are there at work being used and guided to act by God.

Looking at the Old Testament we can see women who may have been warriors, we see women as prophets, national leaders ('Mother of Israel'), political leaders, and playing vital roles in the spiritual life of the people.

Looking at the New Testament, just in the Gospels, we can see women who where never 'put in their place', who were spoken to as equals and engaged in serious conversations, received the instruction of a disciple.

No, I am not a feminist (although some of their research has been valuable and groundbreaking) but I am a Christian. Christ, ministered and called all people, and so to be inclusive of both sexes is to be Christian.

WHAT DO WE REALLY WANT?

A list of the qualities of a pastor includes diverse traits and reveal of conflicted view of the role. The pastor should love to visit, be involved with the lives of people, be a sparkplug, make hospital and house calls, listen with sympathy and understanding, be a dynamic speaker, teacher, leader, and vision caster, work with the community, reach out to the needy, preach the word courageously, go toe-to-toe with culture, be active, attentive, and available!

Years ago there was cartoon ( I have no source) but it revealed the perfect pastor. One side of the pastor filled the demands of one segment and the other suited the demands of another segment. From eye color to the way the pastor's hair was combed there were conflicting desires.

One of the problems is that the concept of the pastor and that of leader are often in conflict. We want one person to actually be doing the work of one or more people.

Notice too that many of the traits we want in a pastor are also ones we equate with the feminine! We want relationship, we want comfort, we want attention, visits, and passive activity in isolated areas. The pastor must visit, talk, eat, listen, and care about all the details of everybody's life (from large events to smallest detail). The leader is expected to set the pace, lead, vision, motivate, drive, and push the church forward. These in the same person? Really?

"Diakonia"

I just finished a dynamic and deep book, "Diakonia: Re-intrepreting the Ancient Sources" by John N. Collins ( Oxford University Press, 2009, ISBN 978-0-19-539602-7). It is a book reflecting the authors long study of the original language, the use of the term 'diakonia' in both Biblical and non-Biblical sources. The result is challenging and filled with additional questions that I am sure researchers will rush to interact with over the coming years.

Why is this word of note? It is the word that is used to define our current understandings of the word "ministry" and it is the word that has been used to keep women forever in the outer courts of Christian ministry and leadership.

It is the word in Romans where Paul speaks of the Christian woman sent to him with letters and purpose, Phoebe.

It is a word that leaders, translators, and preachers have played a shell game with in order to keep women out of the ministry.

For you see, the word means "servant" in some uses and therefore a reader with a preconception that women can not serve God in leadership or ministry will translate the term to mean Phoebe came as a servant, a slave, a helper.

Elsewhere,where the exact word is used in reference to men it is translated as minister, preacher, and priest.

This shell game of meaning can be found throughout commentaries, writings, sermons, and other sources over the last 1900 years.

If the sweeping work of Collins is taken with the seriousness it deserves, the word also has deep implications for the very nature of the ministry and those who act in those roles in the church.

ANTICHRIST NAMED?

Recently an email came across my desk and a friend asked for my opinion on the video linked in the mailing. A video that presented the concept that Christ had named the Anti-Christ. Leaving the decision to the viewer, the video presented a word study of a single verse in scripture. These words in the their original language, in theory, bear a resemblance to the name 'Barack Obama.'

So I reviewed the video and here are my conclusions:

"After reviewing the film, asking some scholars, and reviewing the text I would conclude the video is very interesting, challenging, and apparently logical. That is only half of the story however, since whenever one goes to the Biblical text, the first questions to be asked are not minute, arcane word meanings, but rather, 1) what is the context for this statement? and 2) how did the original speaker or audience understand this text?

That is where the video breaks down somewhat. The second point is context. The cited text (Luke 10:18), as a reference to the Antichrist, is an error.

The context of the statement (and context must always be considered in interpreting scripture) seems to refer only to the original fall of Satan (the Isaiah reference in the video) and there is nothing (no traditional prophetic clue words, etc.) that indicate this is a prophecy about the antichrist in any way.

Jesus appears to be citing something in the past - and not in the future.

Instead, Jesus chides them that instead of boasting over the power they welded as His emissaries (the demons quaked, Lord) they should instead be simply thankful of their salvation because it was HE WHO SAW the original fall of the troublemaker...in other words...'it's not you guys doing any of this but the might and the power of God."

Further, the statement that Aramaic was the earliest form of Hebrew is also in error. Most sources confirm that was a dialect related but which emerged in the northwest boundaries of the Semitic territories. It appears to have been a dialect of the Palestinian region and separate from the traditional Hebrew of scripture, especially early Hebrew. It was a common language of trade and the marketplace just as Koine Greek was the 'universal language; of Mediterranean commerce.

Children learned a more formal Hebrew for the sacred reading of the Torah in service, a more extreme version of how American children once learned a more formal language in Elizabethan English than the language they spoke daily. Moreover, the New Testament was written in Koine Greek - regardless of what language the speakers might have spoken. The common language for communication and commerce was Greek. Looking for word meanings in Hebrew (or related dialects) for insight into the Greek text is faulty logic.

Words change and shift in such evolution of language. Skakespeare's use of 'naughty' in the 1500's meant severely wicked.....now it means slightly impolite. Thus the importance of understanding how an original audience heard and understood the words."

I would also add that it is a worrying thing - this tendency to identify and label one as "The AntiChrist". A decade ago it was George Bush, before that Bill Clinton, and before that.... the list is endless. Why should we care? Should not our focus - as Christians - be on the task to be Christ like to those around us? To preach the gospel? To feed the hungry? To clothe the naked? To be the image of Christ to those around us?

One of the most thought provoking books of the last century was a small, mostly obscure work, that challenged people to really cause trouble by asking, "What would Jesus do?"

What indeed.

OUR HEARTS GO OUT: Carole Daniels

A horrific crime has taken the life of a dear saint of God, Carole Daniels. Her family and friends grieve for her passing. Her life was taken in an act of malice in the very church where she labored for the souls of men and women.

It was a simple and small pentecostal church in a poor southwest Oklahoma community of Anadarko, but it was her pastorate, where she ministered. She traveled there from Oklahoma City even when no one attended.

Our prayers join to uplift her loved ones and to aide law enforcement in bringing the perpetrator to justice. This is the time for all people of faith to band together and prayer as one.

News Story

THE CULT IS BACK!

FEMALE VS FEMINITY: THE CULT IS BACK
The recent episode with the South African runner highlights the social constructs we place on gender. It also emphasizes how we as people tend to want to 'read the book by its cover'.

What we are in our body determines if we are “male” or “female”. What we are on the outside is largely a social construct created by the prevailing cultural mores of the day. Do we wear gloves? Do we wear slacks? Do we wear makeup? Do we study hard? Do we value our looks? Do we value our minds? These are a determination of the culture in which we reside.

In the Victorian Era was one recent “cult of femininity”. This was an attempt to develop “hyper” males and “hyper” females – within a certain social class. This was something that was not seen as important for men and women in lower class, poorer, or foreign populations. The second large move was during the Edwardian Era before WWI, the famous Gibson Girl, was the poster girl for this movement.

At the close of WW2 the men came back to home and jobs. "Rosie the Riviter" was sent home. The women who’d been keeping things going in the workplace were told to go back to husband and children (even when they had neither). A new cult of hyper or “uber” femininity developed. The poster girl for this false construct was the mother from the “Leave It To Beaver” television show. In one episode, she was wearing a string of pearls while cleaning the oven!

The problem was, it was all lies. Victorian men, as a group, were no more true and good as husbands because of the super-femininity of their wives. There was still domestic abuse and rates of venereal disease were still high. The Victorian woman - and man - was living a lie.

The Gibson Girl was a lie as well, since it too was a front to the true problems in a society based on dominance and control. The fifties was also a social mask hiding the marriages built on lies, the basic dissatisfaction people felt with their lives, and the same social problems bubbled under the surface. This was the decade that birthed “Playboy” – the cult of femininity taken to its extreme because at the root of the cult is the idea that woman’s one purpose in life is to please – at any cost – a man.

This placed within the hands of men the determination of what was beauty, what was feminine and what was permissible among women. The fifties is the parent of the social unrest of the 1960’s because young people saw the injustice and hypocrisy of the relationships around them.
http://www.positivelyfeminine.org/Beautiful/beautiful.htm
http://somethinggreaterblog.wordpress.com/2007/04/09/what-is-femininity/
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Womens+Page/feminism_verses_femininity.htm
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Womens%20Page/womens_page.htm

In the present day, the message has been twisted to inform women and young girls that their tossing aside of virtues of modesty, self-worth and pride are to be valued. How much skin they show as they advertize their sexuality in the bumps and grinds that were once only seen in sleezy back strip joints, becomes the standard for feminine freedom and equality.

I don't think so.

The same off-kilter values that created the hyper-femininity have also created the hyper-sexuality of today's woman. Neither is the true essence of the creature fashioned by God and in God's own image.

Each individual is a unique being, with special purpose and value to God. Shake off the shackles of the cult of hyper-feminity and the cult of hyper sexuality to become a true woman of God! A woman's value is not determined by any man, any group, or any society. A woman's value is determined by the relationship she has with God, other people, and the face that stares back at her in the mirror each morning.


"Nothing is happy until it fulfills the purpose for which it was created by God." What was your purpose? To love and serve God. Not a man, not a family, and not a legalism.

"A man's main business is God; a woman's main business is the man." - Pastor Jack Hyles Dont be distanced from relationship with God by slanted ideas that you are a 'second class creation'. God created humans and said "It was good."

That includes you.

IDENTIFYING MISTAKES

In doing online research I have been baffled by some of the ‘instant expert sites.” These are webpages where anyone can provide ‘expert’ answers (i.e., opinions) on any number of questions. Several would lay claim to ‘all Pentecostal women’ wearing long skirts and long hair. (
http://pentecostzone.com/blog/view/id_6647/title_the-basics-of-why-pentecostal-girls-do-what-they/)

The truth of the matter is that this answer is wrong. Not all Pentecostal women wear long skirts or long hair. The truth of the matter is that there are many denominations that identify themselves as “Pentecostal” (in fact Wikipedia lists several: Assemblies of God (The largest Pentecostal denomination in the world, 57 million adherents worldwide; Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) over 6 million, the Church of God in Christ has a membership of 5.5 million, the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel has 5 million members, the United Pentecostal Church International has a membership of over 4 million,[35] and the International Pentecostal Holiness Church has over 3 million members. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentecostalism.

Just as it is impossible to say ‘all Baptists’ or ‘all Catholics’, Pentecostalism has its doctrinal and social nuances. It is impossible to say ‘all Pentecostals’ because no one group, person, or statement applies to all varieties of the movement.

Most of the current doctrinal divergences cluster around : the use of the name of Jesus in Baptism, the necessity of water baptism to salvation, and the role of speaking in tongues in the salvation process.
So, who does, among Pentecostals, is most likely to be seen sporting long skirts and long hair?
The United Pentecostal Church believes in modest dress by both genders, but has a list for women on their webpage at United Pentecostal Church : http://www.upci.org/doctrine/scripturesModesty.asp. They also have a different concept of the Godhead, believing in baptism only in the name of Jesus and members have been known (personal observation) to wear long dresses and long hair.

A group of Pentecostal churches known as the “Apostolic Pentecostal Churches” do claim this dress code, as expressed on a blog, The Ninety-Nine Ninety and nine, Apostolic women : http://www.ninetyandnine.com/Archives/20060828/cover.htm . (Note, the term is flexible as is seen in http://www.apostolic-movement.com/video2.php?format=; caution should be used when seeing the term ‘Apostolic’).

From the ‘Apostolic Pentecostal Directory’ (http://www.apostolic-churches.com/about.html) the doctrinal nuances are outlined: “This Apostolic Pentecostal Doctrine being the Bible standard of full salvation, which is the absolute essentiality of repentance, baptism in water by immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the initial sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance. (Acts 2:1-4, 2:37-39); We believe the Bibles teaches that the above statement to be essential and not subsequent to salvation.”

So beware the next time you read ‘all Pentecostal women’ do this or that, because the person is most likely speaking only a small handful of members of the Pentecostal movement or they are merely reflecting their own, quite limited, understanding of who is a Pentecostal.

CAN A WOMAN BE INTELLIGENT AND CHRISTIAN?

Apparently not, according to a survey of hits of Internet sites. A woman can be 'obedient','submissive', 'godly', 'faithful', 'liberated', 'sexy', and yet not 'intelligent'.

What does this say about the Christian faith? What does this say about Christian men? What does this say to daughters and grand-daughters needing guidance for maturity?

In the 21st century, why cannot a woman of faith be all of that? God created her to be intelligent (in the image of God includes mental ability), strong, and loving. She can be many things (just as a man is capable of being many things) - so why the stark absence of discussion/mention/recognition about 'intellegent Christian women?"

Did find one 2008 blog entry on the subject worth reading: http://letsbehonesthere.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/im-a-christian-woman-who-thinks-anyone-else-with-me/

Are We Workers in the Light?

In a recent conversation it became apparent that many people are basically very confused about what their presence in the world as Christians truly means. Over the last few years I have observed a disturbing increase in the number of dysfunctional churches, fallen leaders, and psychotic attacks on the church and her people. Once, the idea that someone would walk into a church and kill pastors or people would have been unthinkable. Yet, it has happened far too many times in just the last two years.

The world is an influence like dirty water....tip a paper cloth into the water and it is quickly contaminated. It is our life with Christ that prevents that total absorption into the values and motives of 'the world'. That contamination of all that is opposed to the message of the Gospel of love, hope, salvation, redemption, forgiveness, and new life.

For the spiritually minded, there is a new sense of something in the air. Too much is changing, realignments are taking place, things are moving into a predestined place to fulfil the will of God...all of these is sensed at a deep spiritual level.

Positive thought, global consciousness, and paranormal thought are replacing what was once a common belief system. One popular book asks the question in the title. All that is good is positive, affirming, and light washed and all that is evil is negative, negating, and hidden in ebony shadows where they cannot be easily seen. This simplistic duality calls to mind that in the New Testament the Church is warned of those who would masquerade as light beings and confuse people as to who was really "good."

When "Christians" can hate one another, cause others intentional harm, and make themselves the god of their life, is it any wonder that workers of evil might be confused with good?

As Jesus taught, what we do is as much a gauge as who we say we are. Our 'fruit" is proof of our light because to know right and to not do it is human. To know right and to do it despite ridicule, danger, or discomfort - that is what it means to be a Christian.

Could This Have Been in Paul's MInd?

James Frazier, writing in his classic book on the history of religion and magic, The Golden Bough (NY: Macmillan, 1951) notes that at Byblus, people were required to shave their head in annual mourning for Adonis. Women who refused had to serve as temple prostitutes. (pg. 384).

This may inform the thinking in Paul's confusing comments in 1 Corinthians 11. In Ephesus, where the many Gods were actively worshipped, something similar may have been required. In Paul's quest to balance Jewish ideals of propriety and local culture with the new faith - this may explain his comments.

Is The US No Longer A "Christian" Nation?

These recent words by the US President are not reflected in major demographic sources. According to Adherents and Pew Forum, the US has approximately 76% (159,030,000) of its population identified as "Christian." Islam comprises about 1% (1,104,000) of the population.

Of note, 'mainline' protestantism is listed as 18%, Catholics 24%, and Evengelicals at 26%. The remainder (4.5%) are Mormon, Jehovah Witness, etc.

QUIVERING CHRISTIANS

Almost everyone has seen the Duggars on cable tv - all twenty of them. It has been assumed that they are members of a movement of Christian patriarchy called "Quiverfull". This movement places emphasis on having as many children as possible - thereby defining a quiverfull - as a very, very large family. Is this Biblical? Is it sensible?

No where in scripture does the Bible identify a large family as perferred, despite the wording of the scripture cited on their website. The Bible is filled with instances of people who did not have large families, but were very clearly blessed. What of people unable to have children - is God's blessing withheld? Or, should they, as was the answer in several Old Testament scenerios, simply find a secondary wife to birth more children?

One person's 'full quiver' may be the two or three children God blesses them with in their marriage. In the normal course of life up til this century, infant mortality was high (as it still is in small or third world nations). In the 19th century, many families had 10-12 children but only 5-7 of them might actually live to adulthood.

Perhaps less emphasis should be placed on the Old Testament and more on the New Testament - where there was concern about the total community and on growing the family of the saints instead of super-sized family groups.

Is it selfish to bring more children into the world - when all around are children abandoned and alone longing for someone to bring them love and hope?

'JUNIPER TREE' EVENT: A Time of Refreshing for Ministers

REFRESH RENEW RETURN

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Come to a renewing time as the first "JUNIPER TREE" event is hosted at the
First United Methodist Church in Oklahoma City. Come enjoy an evening of non-denominational worship, fellowship, and praise designed to restore some joy to your faith life! Any Christian minister is welcome to attend.

Great uplifting contemporary music....
with a common bond of faith in Jesus Christ.

Come - instead of ministering to others - be ministered to.......Date: Thursday, May 14, 2009

Location: Hosted at First United Methodist Church, OKC
131 N.W. 4th Street, OKC, 73102
Time: 7 p.m.

Need information?
Contact : Marvin Hudson at 405-275-1556Email: wesleymarvin@sbcglobal.com

LESSONS FROM CLASSICAL MYTHOLOGY

In ancient Greek mythology there was a prophet, Cassandra, doomed to have a true prophecy that would never be understood, accepted, or believed. Since mythology is often created from the things commonly understood to be truth or the understanding of their time and place, what can we learn about human nature and the process of prophecy for today?

The Bible clearly teaches that a prophet is proven true if what they prophesy comes to pass. Simple enough, you say, but is that always as simple a thing as is supposed?

What the lesson of Cassandra reveals is that there has to be a people who , in the words of Jesus, "have eyes to see" or "ears to hear". There has to be a people astute and spiritually in tune to recognize and understand the witness of the prophetic truth for the prophet to be verified.

Is it possible for a prophecy to speak the truth as impressed by the spirit of God and those hearing it not understand, accept, or believe? Can it be ....the promise is lost...because those hearing did not 'hear'?

According to Jesus, yes! Their ears are closed, their discernment nil, and their hearts hardened to the spiritual world.

(To learn more : the story of Cassandra).

THE FIRST SHALL BE LAST....

At a recent event attended by church people the words of Jesus came to me....those who would be first shall be last....and also some words from Paul's letter to the Corinthians.

I saw these people hurry to line up, grab seats and claim priviledge. Meanwhile, guests were made to wait as seats were found and while some stood because they had waited to see others served first - only one person offered one of those their seat. One group- church leaders all-raced to the table with a "1" on it , even though the seating was "open".

Issues of good manners aside, this reflects a more disturbing problem among people who confess Jesus as Lord. Jesus who made himself servant and sacrifice for all....who said if they take your coat give them your jacket too.

Something to think about when out and about, even among other Christians. What is my behavior saying to others? Do I reflect Christ's last in line leadership or am I racing to make sure others know how important I am?

DOES GOD HONOR THIS?

This is a recent email making the rounds...

"This is the simplest test. If You Love God... And, are not ashamed of all the marvelous things HE has done for you.... Send this to ten people and the person who sent it to you!

WHY IS THERE A TEST? WHY IS THE BLIND SENDING OF UNVERIFIED INFORMATION FROM STRANGERS TO STRANGERS BETTER THAN ONE-ON-ONE PERSONAL COMMUNICATION .

Now do you have the time to pass it on? Make sure that you scroll through to the end. Easy vs. Hard Why is it so hard to tell the truth but Yet so easy to tell a lie? Why are we so sleepy in church but Right when the sermon is over we suddenly wake up? Why is it so easy to delete a Godly e-mail, but yet we forward all of the nasty ones? Of all the free gifts we may receive, Prayer is the very best one.... There are no costs, but wonderful rewards... GOD BLESS! Isn't it funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world's going to hell. Isn't it funny how someone can say 'I believe in God' but still follow Satan (who, by the way, also 'believes' in God). Isn't it funny how you can send a thousand jokes through e-mail and they spread like wildfire, but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about .

THE LACK OF LOGIC AND CONNECTION TO THE MAIN MESSAGE MAY BE WHY SOME WOULD NOT FORWARD THIS. IF THE STORY IS A TRUE MIRACLE - THE NEWS WILL SPREAD. IF IT HAS TO BE EXPLAINED - THAN MAYBE IT IS NOT AS STRONG A MIRACLE OR SIGN AS SUPPOSED.

Sharing Isn't it funny how when you go to forward this message, you will not send it to many on your address list because you're not sure what they believe, or what they will think of you for sending it to them Isn't it funny how I can be more worried about what other people think of me than what God thinks of me. I pray, for everyone who sends this to 20 or their entire address book, they will be blessed by God in a way special for them.

IS A SPIRITUAL CHAIN LETTER BETTER THAN ONE ASKING FOR MONEY?

And send it back to the person who sent it, to let them know that indeed it was sent out to many more."

THE SAD FACT IS THAT OFTEN THESE TYPES OF EMAIL ARE PHISHING EXPEDITION BY UNSAVORY TYPES LOOKING FOR EMAILS THAT CAN BE HIJACKED AND USED FOR SPAMMING PURPOSES (AND OTHER UNSAVORY PURPOSES).

Mary and the Tomb

As another Dan Brown book is being turned into a move, many people are once again looking at the storyline of the DaVinci Code and its theme of Jesus and Mary Magdalene being married.

A work of fiction is a work of fiction. This is something we should never forget. It says something about the nature of the people who look at the story and assume so much that is simply not in the Biblical account. Even the extra-Biblical accounts are not clear that there was anything beyond a simple teacher-discipline relationship.

Mary was not a prostitute - that was the later addition of an an early church Pope. She had demons and that may have included some sexual misconduct...but it is never expressed. The label comes from presuppositions about the town where she lived (a sort of Vegas of Galilee well known for its women of relative virtue) and the presuppositions based on the value of women in general.

Consider these things: no age is given, no direct implication of sexual misconduct is inferred, and she is recognized as one of the most steadfast and loyal of the disciples.

It may be she was an older woman - more of aunt figure - because no one seemed to be concerned that she and the other women were following. This seems to infer that they may have been in a stage of life where they had some autonomy: wife, widow, or older woman.

What is known is that the first post-resurrection Apostle - one sent with a message -was this Mary.

All else is conjecture. She chose to serve the Risen savior....and her decision challenges each of us to do the same.

CAMELS AT THE OASIS

Jesus, in Matthew 23: 23-24, warned a certain type of person about their actions. These are words we need to remember today. All around are people who fill their time with making sure others "measure up", that others are doing right, and that others are doing what they should.

These micromanagers of others spiritual worth and life, are often guilty of not seeing their own problem, and applying their own advice to their life. They "swallow camels" and "strain at gnats" in the words of Jesus.

What are some of these "camels" that get swallowed so easily?

• The camel of intolerance: spiritual, domestic, social, relational....you name it.
• The came of control: 'my way or the highway'
• The camel of unforgivenessa: still hauling around the baggage from hurts from 50 years ago!
• The camel of greed: me first and what I want
• The camel of stasis: "not gonna change, no way" ; Hasn't changed in 50 years and is proud of it

What are some of these "gnats" that choke them up so much?

• The gnat of agreement and peace; recognizing that there are some areas we can disagree on and still be brothers and sisters in the faith
• The gnat of partnership and cooperation: the confusion of power, control and leadership
• The gnat of forgiveness: to forgive is to forget and move on, to heal, and this they cannot do
• The gnat of giving: to place others needs and desires above self, to sacrifice like Christ for others
• The gnat of love: to love is to accept, to protect, to sacrifice, and to provide for spiritually, emotionally, phsyically, and (among friends and stranges) even fiscally at times
• The gnat of response and growth: to live is to change, grow, and develop; the Christian should not be the same person or have the same faith of 50 years ago...it should be deeper, richer, broader, more gracefilled, and knowledgeable.

What did Jesus mean by all of this camels and gnats? Think about it for a moment. Camels are known for holding a lot of water, traveling a long distance, and carrying a large load. Gnats are light and fast.

We are what we consume......are we full of camels....heavy, slow moving, weighed down with a lot of "junk" or are we quick, fast moving, efficient - gnats?

MAH

SCU PLANS NEW COURSE ON STORYTELLING

The Academic Council of Southwestern Christian University in Bethany, Oklahoma recently approved adding an elective on Christian Storytelling. This exciting elective will look at the traditional art of oral storytelling, its role and uses in history (including the Bible), and its potential to communicate values and themes to a post modern society - across careers and vocations. It will stress the use of storytelling in communication, family entertainment, education, healing arts, business, and as dynamic ministry tool. Students will hear and interview guest professional storytellers and prepare to perform their own stories in public. SCU is an accredited educational institution in the state of Oklahoma and the course will be for college credit. Financial aid (State and Federal) may be available to assist with tuition costs for potential students meeting requirements.
Target date for the class will be Spring 2010.
For info contact: Marilyn A. Hudson, 405-789-7661 x3451 or email: marilyn.hudson@swcu.edu

The Hornet and the Bee

God sent Hornets into the land….
In three O.T. passages there are references to strange ‘hornets’ sent into the land to prepare the way for the Children of Moses to proceed into their promised land. It is assumed that anything ranging from a plague of hornets to a military tactic was used. There is, however, another possibility. The Hornets might have been guerrilla warriors sent into disable and terrify the populace. Since there is mention of clean food and water maybe they used some form of artifice to convince the population that leprosy or some other problem had emerged and they must flee.

Now, fast forward to the Judges where a woman known as “Deborah” sat at the tree of judgment serving as prophet and judge of the people. Why did she become a Judge? How was she a leader, aside from her role as a prophet? Her name has been interpreted as “Bee”….and the root words, according to some sources, for Bee and Hornet appear to be related. It has been suggested that such a group of women warriors did exist as an honor guard before the wilderness tabernacle. Did they also serve in other ways as well? Had she achieved her place of respect and honor because she had been a small Hornet…a bee…a woman warrior used to helping drive the occupants from the land?

When Deborah called the soldier to her from his mountain home...his readiness to come and his eagerness for her to come with him....make incredible and sudden sense. She had been a warrior, she knew the way of the soldier and the tactics employed, and had great experience in battle. Coupled with her prophetic skills, this experienced warrior woman would have been greatly respected, honored, and followed. No wonder she rose to the position of a Judge in the land...and no wonder the land had peace for forty years.....

Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth

The minister of God must show he or she is adept at the holy scriptures. They know the "Book" as the witness of God through the ages. The have learned it front to back in mind and soul. They apply it to their life...they may stumble...they may make mistakes (just as anyone can) ...but they raise to their knees and seek the face and forgiveness of God.

To not do so opens the door to abuse, ridicule, and hardship for others in the faith. This is rightly so. When a minister provides fodder to websites dedicated to detroying the the Gospel or destroying the work of God it is a shame.

Mistakes in the Message. The Bible verses listed on this explaination of blessings to be garnered from celebrating passover with offerings cause large questions to arise :http://www.stevemunsey.org/index.php?p=passovermore

Should Christians Keep the Rituals of Passover?

Some dispute the day selected for observing the Passover as a Christian. They ask are you observing the Exodus event or the New Testament event in your Passover schedule. Others challenge why a Christian would keep a ritual firmly part of another – although related - faith tradition?

Although rooted in Judaism, the religion of Jesus and his followers – Christians -are named for the very difference that sets them apart from their kin within Judaism. We honor, respect, and pray for all our cousins in Judaism that God bless and keep them. The faithful child of the Jewish faith has a special place in the heart of God. Christians, however, accept that Jesus is the Messiah so long promised and that he came to take away the sin of the world.

John the Baptist pointed to Jesus and declared, “Look! the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” The Gospels note that Jesus died at the time of Passover, and they associate the Last Supper with the Passover meal itself.

Peter uses the language of Passover in 1 Pet 1:18f, when he says that we (Christians and those willing to accept Jesus) were redeemed ‘with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.’ Paul in 1 Cor 5:7, supports that when he writes that -‘Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.’

The O.T. Passover became an annual sacrifice. Christians believe that Christ’s sacrifice is once for all people who believe. Heb 7:27, ‘Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices repeatedly. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.’

These crucial theological differences meant that the Christian view and classic Judaism could not co-exist. So, like many other reforming, renewing, or revolutionary movements, these new Christians left the Jewish synagogue to form their own “house churches”.

Early Christians had the choice to remain a small splinter sub-group of Judaism (like the earlier Essenes) and this was debated hotly in a conference in Jerusalem. The Christians – through the witness of converts from the Gentiles, dreams by Peter, and the success of mission outreach to the far flung corners of the Roman Empire – agreed to expand their fellowship to the non-Jew. As the ministry of people such as Paul exploded among the Gentiles, as the new faith was threatened by false teachers, people trying to bring the converts back into Judaism, and other issues assaulted the growing Christians, inevitable changes continued.

So, should Christians continue the Jewish observance of the Passover? As a teaching tool, as a means of illustrating the stories of the scriptures, and as a means of encouraging reflection and worship the observance is appropriate for Christians.

As valuable as it is to remember the ancient story, to thank God for His miracles and grace, and to recognize the actions of Christ with his closest followers, it is even more crucial that we remember that as Christians it is the action of the Crux fixation and the Sabbath morning that bring meaning to the Christian faith. Christians are, more than anything else, Resurrection People.

OUR PRAYERS GO OUT....

Once the idea of a gunman walking into a church and opening fire was impossible to contemplate. The idea was unfeasible. Yet, today one more such incident joins the growing number of such episodes over the last five years. Our prayers go out to the church, the families, and the communities effected by these tragedies and especially the most recent event in Illinois.

NEW LIFE COACHING PROGRAM LAUNCHED

"Oklahoma City, a place known for its wind-swept plains, red dirt and horrendous tornadoes, now has a new distinction. It is home to one of the fewer than fifty universities in the nation that offers an accredited, graduate level degree in Life Coaching. Southwestern Christian University Graduate School began offering a Master's Degree in Life Coaching in the spring of 2008. Since its inception, the program has seen over 70 people who have either attended a coaching class or gone through a certification module.

The degree is a two year modular program that is regionally accredited, and is composed of thirty-six credit hours. The students also receive their coaching certification through Lifeforming Leadership Coaching as part of their degree requirements.

John Chasteen Sr., the assistant dean of the graduate school, is the director of SCU's Life Coaching program. Chasteen says his passion for coaching stems from several "divine connections" that God initiated in his life over the past several years. He shares, "I somehow intuitively knew that God was leading me into the arena of life coaching and immediately began to take steps to prepare myself to become a leader in the industry." Chasteen is a certified life coach and trainer with Lifeforming Leadership Coaching.

Chasteen believes that leaders world-wide are embracing this ancient/modern principle of life coaching. He deems that a silent undercurrent of preparation is now evolving that will release an army of coaches into the body of Christ worldwide. He also shares that many organizations including businesses, churches, and denominations are scrambling to catch up with the coaching wave and that the relevancy of coaching, reaches from the board room to the break room.

Coach John also shares his fervor for the life coaching movement through a monthly column with Ministry Today called Hey Coach John. He also has a popular blog with numerous resources and personal articles on the topic; it can be accessed at www.heycoachjohn.com.

Need more information on life coaching? You may contact the Southwestern Christian University Graduate School, or Coach John, at 405-789-7661 ext, 3447. His email address is: john.chasteen@swcu.edu.

SCU also offers certification training for those interested in coaching, but do not need the college degree side of the program.

Who Was the First Woman Apostle?

In the O.T. God walked in the garden with his creations fashioned in his image. Sin separated the relationship and the intimacy of the garden. Not until Christ, walking once more with the humans, is the way to restore that original intimacy made more visible. Jesus proclaimed in his opening salvo announcing his ministry that he was a fulfillment of the prophet Isaiah's words and was preaching hope to the hopeless, powerless, and outcast.

This perfectly expressed the state of woman in the N.T. To the Greeks she was often sub-human, to the Romans a necessary evil, and to the Jew a means to an end (the path of the eventual Messiah). She was a commodity to be bought, sold, used, ignored, and discarded. She could testify in court, often could do not business, and faced daily the limitations of being a woman in a "man's world".

Throughout the gospels one woman is found following Jesus with great dedication, she is at the cross, and she is at the tomb. The definition of the term 'apostle' is one sent with a mission. So Mary Magdalene, when Jesus told her to "go and tell"...became the first apostle.

So, by the time that Paul in Romans is calling Junia an apostle....it is not a new thing....but it has, apparently over the centuries, become the forgotten thing.

"NOT WITH BRAIDED HAIR"

One of the misconceptions made over the centuries in Biblical interpretation has been in the reading of 1 Timonthy 2.8-10: "I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands with out anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness - with good works." A similar verse is found in 1 Peter 3:1-4.

So what did these verses mean? They have been interpreted to demand long hair, lack of ornaments or jewlery, unfashionable clothes, and no makeup for women. Is this what it meant however to its initial audience? That is the question that must always be asked of Biblical texts.

If these texts were written at the end of the 1st century (and some do dispute that date), than what was going on then in the larger Roman society? It was the dominant culture of the times. The Flavian period in Roman history is notable for the appearance of complicated and outlandish hairstyles that incorrporated long, long coils of hair, often twisted with pearls and other ornaments. The front was pushed high up like a tiara and was worn by the "fashionables" of society. Compare it to the hair styles of the French Court of Marie Antoinette. It required servants, time, money, and an emphasis on self.

So when the writer of the book talks about a woman not braiding her hair he did not mean just braiding the hair - good women had done that for centuries. What was inferred - and no doubt well understood by the audience - was the Christ-like woman will have better things to do than follow the crazy fashions based on status and ego. Instead of sitting for hours using resources of staff and time to sport an incredible hair do - she will use her time to do good works, spread the gospel, and minister kindness to her world.

Additional reading/viewing:

http://www.vroma.org/~bmcmanus/flavian.html

P.S. - It is interesting to note that some of the groups who have so mandated strict adherence to these rules of holiness ignore 1 Tim.2.8 " ...men should pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or quarreling..." Kind of makes you go "hmmmm"?

WHERE DID THE GLORY GO?

One of the cultural matters of the New Testament that lingers on to be defined as spiritual imperative is the issue of 1 Corinthians 11..."But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given her for a covering..." As I discuss in depth in "Those Pesky Verses of Paul" it becomes clear that Paul is not giving a mandate for women to "be covered". One example of why this is true is that it states the hair is a covering...but if it were a covering why is it inferior? Women, just like men are subject to health issues that rob them of their hair. If God demanded such coverings and the Bible is true her hair "was given for a covering" why does it thin and fall out? If the Bible is true, and hair falls out and thins, it becomes clear that something else is meant by the section in 1 Cor. 11. It becomes clear when Paul sums up the whole discussion by indicating that they have no such mandatory veiling customs in any of the Christian fellowships. This verse 16 cannot be talking about being "contentious" because the entire book is written because the church at Corinth was exactly that. The section deals with an issue of women prophesying and praying with heads "uncovered" and whether this was appropriate or if they should continue the Jewish custom of wearing a headcovering in public. The emphasis is on the freedom in Christ and the mutual responsibility of Christians to other Christians.

[Image copyright mah/used with permission]

POWER

"You do not lead by hitting people over the head - that's assault, not leadership." - Dwight D. Eisenhower (20th century)

"Authority without wisdom is like a heavy axe without an edge, fitter to bruise than polish." - Anne Bradstreet. (17th century)

Learning At The Gate: Deacon, Deacon Who Is A Deacon?

“Man has responsibility, not power.” Elie Wiesel

The term Deacon comes from the Greek term DIAKONOS. The term means “one who serves” and it is the term from which the concept of minister is derived. A minister is defined literally as “one who serves”.

The term is used of Christ in Romans 15.8 and of the followers of Christ in teaching, preaching, and working to support the goals of Christ in 1 Cor. 3.5 and Romans 16.1-2.

The qualifications for deacons, drawn from 1 Timothy 3:8-13 ,”Deacons, likewise, must be….’
Male deacons are to be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much (polio) wine, not greedy for dishonest gain, hold their faith with a clear conscience and they should be tested and if blameless, they may serve…

Female deacons (1 Tim. 3.11) “Women likewise” must be dignified, not slanders, sober-minded, and faithful in all things. (The word can be translated either ‘wives” or “women” and the decision which to use often reflects the biases of the translator and not the clear intent of the text.)

All deacons – male and female – are to be in a stable, committed marriage and with a family life commending well their character and faith. They are role models of actions and faith (1 Tim. 3.13).

Learning At The Gate: Let The Elders Among You...

The term elders comes from the Greek word, PRESBUTEROS. Wisdom, stability, experience, and teaching are found among the aged. Younger people are to honor and learn from them. Out of this aged, experienced pool of individuals come those who would oversee the Christian community. In Luke 22.66, an assembly of the aged was PRESBUTERION and this is found in Acts 22.5 and 1 Tim. 4.14.

Learning At The Gate: Overseeing the Needs of the Church

The terms “bishop” and “overseer” are often used interchangeably. The word for bishop is EPISKOPOS. This term is used to refer to one who “oversees” or manages an organization or group. It is called an office or work that people might choose within the church in 1 Timothy 3.1f and 1 Peter 5.2 Qualifications for the role of “Bishop” or “Overseer” from 1 Tim. 3.1-7 : “If anyone (gr. ‘tis’) aspires to the office of overseer (espicopes), they desire a noble task..” These individuals are to be above reproach, have one spouse, be sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money, their home must reflect management with dignity keeping children submissive (hypotage), not a recent convert to avoid pride, have a good reputation.

From Titus 1.6 this person is to be: above reproach, husband of one wife, children are believers, must not be arrogant, must not be quick-tempered, not a drunkard, not violent, not greedy for gain, must be hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, disciplined, holds to their faith, able to teach sound doctrine, and able to rebuke others who contradict the sound doctrine.

Learning at the Gate: He Leads Me Beside Still Waters

Based in the 23 Psalm and the words of Christ (“I Am the Good Shepherd” and his command to Peter to “feed my sheep”) the Pastor/Shepherd – Greek POIMEN – is one who cares for the flock, feeds the flock, and protects the flock. In Acts 20 and 1 Peter 5 is indication this role may have been seen by some as a task of the elder/bishop corp.

'Sacred books for Men! Storybooks for Women!"

In the 1983 film Yentl, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yentl) a bookseller with his cart cries that line as he maneuvers through crowded and muddy streets in Eastern Europe at the turn of the 20th century. I was reminded of this as I explored a popular level Christian book source. Theology and, the more intellectual tomes, were clearly marketed to men: colors, images, expressions, and symbols were tilted toward a male perception. Curious, I ran a search for “women” looking for the type and scope of resources that search might find. The results were illuminating. Fictional romance, beauty, and friendship were the first results.

The Rambling Prophet blog (http://ramblingprophet.blogspot.com/2007/01/where-are-christian-intellectuals.html) addresses the tendency for evangelicals to be viewed as under-achievers and to view themselves in that light. One comment on his entry asked ‘where are the intellectual Christian women?’ Where indeed.

Where are the Dorothy Sayers? Mildred Bangs Wynkoops? Elizabeth Achtimeirs? The Catherine Booths? Julia Smith? The Anna Maria van Schurmans? So many others…

They may, however, be like the four women theologians of Union Seminary (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/burke/archives/awts/exhibit.html), present but invisible and unacceptable. Women who worked, studied, and never achieved the recognition or respect their work no doubt merited.

Further Reading:
Anna Maria van Schurman: Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated and Other Writings from Her Intellectual Circle. Edited and Translated by Joyce L. Irwin (174 pages, 6 x 9 © 1998 Series: The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe . Cloth $45.00
ISBN: 9780226849980 Published November 1998 ; Paper $20.00 ;ISBN: 9780226849997 Published November 1998 ) http://www.press.uchicago.edu/presssite/metadata.epl?mode=synopsis&bookkey=42720

"One Flesh"?

So what is the solution to issues of male and female tension? Who is in control? How should the two sexes interact and how does the Bible indicate that men and women in marriage are to relate to one another?

ONE FLESH. A mystery hidden within a mystery that has been under explored and under appreciated as a revelation about the nature of relationship between humanity and God, Christ and His Church, and between husbands and wives.

In the beginning, God was in essence ONE FLESH, the God of Creator-Redeemer-Comforter called variously the Trinity or the Godhead or the PARENT-CHILD. This ONE FLESH GOD said "let us make humans in our image : male and female...." They were created and then immediately the Bible says "for this reason."...a man shall leave his family and cling to his woman...a woman will move from the allegiance of her birth family to this new unit....they shall be "ONE FLESH". The one flesh was the standard - the concept of the reuniting of separates that were unique in and of themselves but whose completeness was best realized in a reunion of the halves to make a new whole.

In the New Testament, Jesus reaffirms the importance of this marital relationship by repeating that they shall be "ONE FLESH". Why? Because that ideal, that concept, was fundamental to His own relationship to "GOD" and the relationship he wanted to have with his "BRIDE" - the followers who would become the Church.

Paul indicates this with his own repeated imagery of the "Body" with its parts all working in coordinated harmony. He indicates it with his discussion of husbands and wives. He indicates this with his imagery of the 'ev Christos' of Galatians 3.27-29. There he paints the picture of moving from one sphere of existence into a new, totally different sphere. In that new spehere is where the believer merges, integrates, blends, disappears into, becoming the new creation of Jesus Christ. All a consistent imagery reflecting that same ONE FLESH revealed since the creation account.

-- [from Those Pesky Verses of Paul by Marilyn A. Hudson, used by permission]

The Women Apostles

Mary Magdelene was the first female apostle and in Romans Paul identitfies another in Junia. An excellent article discusses this spiritual or actual "kinswoman" of Paul ,<article>. It will be noted that many of the same arguments used to claim "prophetess" was merely the wife of a prophet or otherwise somehow less than a "real" prophet, are used in this argument as well. An apostle was defined as one who had seen the Lord and received a commission or was sent out on a special task. In the garden, Mary was sent by the Lord to tell the others of what she had seen. Since Jesus had included women in his teachings and had intentionally included women in his ministry, it should not be surprising that he did so. Nor, should it be surprising that women would be deacons and apostles and bishops in the new church.

"Elders" Were Not Just Men

As has been shown from the O.T. examples, there were "elders" and "wise women" in just the same manner as male elders and leaders. Indeed, in the New Testament the term used as "elder" merely means "older people" and the same term or its relative is used when referring to both old men and old women. In Acts 2.17 when Peter quotes the prophet Joel, "your old men shall dream dreams..." it is "your presbuteros shall dream....". There is no formal "office" suggested in many of these texts as well..

Research Question: Are the "offices" divinely ordained?

A researcher has suggested that the issue of women not being in leadership is the difference between "gifts" which are given to all believers and "offices" that are specifically set aside for men (Bishop, Deacon, Elder, etc.). If that true, however, and can it be proven from scripture and history? An intriguing question indeed.

Who Sinned First?

There are many Biblical chestnuts pulled out to limit woman’s participation in the Christian Church. Women cannot be in leadership, cannot preach, cannot teach, and cannot speak because of such verses as 1 Timothy 2:14 (King James Version):”And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression”.
The message is clear that Eve sinned and therefore she should not act in any of those roles mentioned or utilize any gifts for the corporate body. Adam in this verse is an innocent.

Timothy I & II are commonly attributed to Paul and it is suggested the books were written about 60 C.E. – some thirty years after the death of Jesus. This statement, however, appears to contradict other statements by Paul found in Romans (dated to the 50’s C.E.).[1]

Let’s review the account of the sin in Genesis 3. The Tempter in the guise of the serpent came to the woman. Why the woman? This section falls directly after the second creation account explaining her origins and after how they are now to be ‘one flesh’ She had been told the rule…but apparently not taught its significance yet. The couple eats of the fruit, move from a state of innocence to one of awareness, and hide from God. When God locates them, he asks by what means they came to lose their state ignorance and innocence. The man then says, “The woman you gave me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” A strong argument of ignorance can be made for the woman but for the man is a conscious decision to both do that which he knew to be wrong and then to try to avoid his own responsibility.

In God’s eyes, the HUMAN was both male and female crafted in the image of God. Only later, through rabbinic commentaries, philosophers, and other writings will Adam be shown in the same light as in 1 Timothy. Indeed, some writings show Adam as an “angel” who remained untainted despite Eve’s fall.[2]

Romans 5.12-21, carries a discussion of sin and the need and means of repentance. In verse 12 Paul writes “by one man sin entered into the world” and v.17 ‘by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace…” and v. 19 “for as one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.” In 1 Corinthians 15: 21-2 Paul clearly writes “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of them that slept. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” The word used is quite often the more generic Greek term, meaning humans or humankind. It is thus clear, that Paul’s understanding in Romans was that by the first human (seen as one flesh and thus gender was unimportant?) sin entered into the world

Why then would Paul say something so diametrically opposed to his early statements? Why would he switch the blame to Eve in such a manner? Paul refers to Eve in 2 Corinthians 11:3 but clearly says by his great subtlety the serpent “beguiled” Eve and he was fearful that the Christians at Corinth might be equally deceived. To be “beguiled” is to deceive, to give false impressions, or to present oneself as something different. The word is found elsewhere in reference to someone being deceived by riches, by false teachers, etc.

Looking at the section in 1 Timothy in context it is apparent something else may be at work. The verses preceding it . Chapter 2 begins with a call to prayer for the blessings of kings that all may live “quiet and peaceable life”.

In verse 8, the writer calls for all men to “lift up holy hands, without wrath and doubting”. Then the writer plunges into verses 9-15 dealing with the conduct of women “professing godliness”. Issues of hair and appearance are in verse 9 “modest apparel”, “not with braided hair” or “gold, or pearls, or costly array”. These were not normally a part of the grooming of women at that time. Indeed, if 1st Corinthians 11 actually teaches, as some suggest, that Paul demands women be veiled – why this directive at all? Why does not the apostle simply say to the women “wear a veil”?

So - when did women braid their hair with gold and pearls?

It is known that in the late 1st century and into the early part of the 2nd century the Roman Flavian dynasty (see images at http://www.vroma.org/~bmcmanus/flavian.html) set a trend with a flamboyant hairstyles on aristocratic women. They were so elaborate and strange that the satirist Juvenal even wrote about them.

The section just following this, verses 11-14, contradict Pauline statements in 1 Corinthians 11 and elsewhere. Rather than women being forbidden to speak, teach, or be active in other ways, Paul accepts as a norm in 1 Corinthians 11 that women will preach and pray (the prophecy refers to communication, or speech, of a divine imperative). Why does Paul contradict himself?

Finally, verse15 is a confusing and troubling verse that has vexed scholars for centuries. It infers that women are saved, not through faith in the salvation work of Jesus Christ, but through having children. This directly conflicts with Peter’s statements in Acts 4:12 that “neither is there salvation in any other…” Childbirth, clearly is not a means to salvation.

Second, it infers that the so called sin of Eve (v. 14) becomes an “unpardonable sin” from which womankind is never to find redemption. Compare this to Paul’s statement in Romans 3:24-25 “ Being justified freely by his grace through faith in his propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past…”

All this would suggest that the section in question may be a later addition to the letter or the letter may be a letter written by someone using the authority of Paul’s name (a common practice in the time). If not, there is a troubling contradiction of Paul’s writings and theology. Given the fact that a later time is suggested by the reference to the ornate hair styles, there is contradictory theology present in v. 15, and the fact that in the very next chapter (I Tim. 3) is a discussion of “offices” in the church, it is probable that the book was written later.

So, who sinned first? If one believes to be deceived is a sin then the text is that Eve sinned first. If one believes that that to be deceived is an act of ignorance and that to intentionally do that which is understood to be wrong, than Adam clearly sinned first. Yet, the emphasis is not one or the other. Both were seen to have sinned, both received punishments, and both had to be redeemed.

[1] New Interpreter’s Study Bible (NIB). Abingdon, 2003.[2] R. C.J. “Adam.” Harper’s Bible Dictionary. Harper & Row, 1985.

WARTS AND ALL

Are you perfect? Not me. I have two options, I can take myself very seriously or I can learn to laugh at myself. In our faith or religious convictions do sometimes take ourselves (or our forebears) a little too serious? They were not perfect - no matter how wonderful they were. We should beware placing anyone on a pedestal...it invites calamity and disappointment. They are human and they will prove it. Glossing over their foibles, mistakes, or outright sins is not more noble or Christian. Recognize in their humanity your own. See in their own faults and failures the potential in yourself to be less than you can be. The result will be less judgement, more understanding, and a lot less disappointment. Learn to see the truth, accept the good, reject the bad, and laugh at the warts.

A WOMAN'S VOICE

With age, come many observations how little things ever seem to change. In the early 1970's and 1980's there was great discussion about the evils of "feminism" and how it would destroy the world and the church. People would make fun of business women donning their 'business suits' (so often shapeless copies of male apparel) so they could be taken seriously around the office. In the '80-'90s came a rediscovery of color for women in the office and a sense it was okay for a woman to look like a woman and still be taken seriously in the workplace.

Strangely, there was less discussion about the evils of "prejudice" or "male oppression" in those early days . Less awareness or concern of their impact on that same society of world and religion. I note that even in religious groups that have tacitly accepted formally women as leaders, pastors, and in other roles in their ranks, there is lingering attitudes that go unchecked.

One I noticed many years ago and am troubled to see it still around. It is measuring a woman's ability to preach by the way men preach. For a woman to be expected to preach in just the same manner as a man will be to deny her value as a uniquely crafted being reflecting the image of God. Some basic factors will remain: the need for a good hermeneutic, the need to follow the rules of a good communication, and the need for a firm theological foundation. Yet, delivery, viewpoints, and conclusions may be different because a woman will approach the topic from a different worldview, a different set of experiences, and a different set of values.

That is what is needed - that variety of viewpoint that minds and hearts to come together in unity.

What is the result of all this imbalance of the genders? One extreme is hyper-femininity i.e., (June Cleaver cleaning the oven in pearls, the hyper-modest) and hyper-masculinity (Hugh Hefner, the man-cave, and girls-gone-wild). One extreme is a woman having to mimic a man in order to be seriously accepted and respected (the man-suits). Women for centuries have seen the Gospel through the lens of a male preacher and have had to accept that as the norm. The result is myopic, blinkered, and out of kilter faith.

The goal instead should be the embracing of the variety of voices and views found when both genders share their spiritual insights. Man and Woman are like children on two sides of their Heavenly parent - both see God but from a slightly different perspective. It is only when they are joined that a more total picture of God emerges...

Anna - Role Model for Women Prophets

When the infant Jesus was brought to the Temple to fulfill the obligations of the Mosaic law, he was acknowledged by two prophets. One was an old man who came to the Temple. The other was an old widow who lived at the Temple.

Anna is role model for any woman of God. She lived at the Temple and devoted her self to a life of prayer and fasting. She constantly sought the face of God. Her prophecy would have been given to any and to all who came to the Temple fulfilling the numerous rituals of the Jewish faith. How many words of encouragement did she share? How many warnings did she give? How many tiny fires of hope did she fan to stronger life? How many small griefs and fleeting joys did she witness over the years? How many nights did she cry out to God on behalf of some soul in distress, on behalf of some national threat, or on behalf of some person's deep grief?

Are we living at the Temple? Are we giving our self constantly to a life of intercession? Are we listening for the voice of God? Are we bearing one another's burdens, loving each other as Christ commanded, or strengthening up the feeble hands all around us?

Look to Anna, the prophet, who lived at the place where God and Creation commune.

Understanding Jezebel

"Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh; any such person is the deceiver and the Antichrist. Be on your guard..anyone who does not abide in the teachings of Christ, but goes beyond it, does not have God. Do not...welcome anyone who comes to you and does not bring this teaching; for to welcome is to participate in the evil deeds of such a person." 2 John 1:7-10

In the O.T., she was the Priestess-Queen from Tyre married to Israel’s King Ahab. As a daughter of a foreign king, no doubt trained from birth, she could be described as being politically forceful and astute, she exercised a real position of authority (based on her use of the a royal seal and her hosting the false prophets at her own table), and being committed to, and actively engaged in, her pagan faith. As a religious leader (priestess) in this pagan religion, she actively promoted it, threatened the prophets of God, played host to the priests of the pagan faith, led the worship in this pagan faith, and actively persecuted the prophets of God. (Brenner, Athalya. The Israelite Woman. JST, 1985).

The next instance of the name, crops up in Revelation 2, where it is symbolically to represent a false leader in the church at Thyatira. The characteristics of this false leader are claiming prophetic authority to teach “fornication” and “to eat meat sacrificed to idols.” The person represented by the term Jezebel (it may be a man or a woman) has emerged from a church filled with good works (love, faith, service, and patience endurance, and obvious growth in discipleship).

Several ideas of interpretation exist concerning the book of Revelation. One is that the messages of the book are directed more to the time period and not to future events. If that is the case, it is known that several strands of Gnosticism and Montanism (an ecstatic philosophy of personal revelation and prophesy) were at work in the communities around Thyatira. It is also interesting to note that the terms “fornication” and “meats offered to idols” are in Acts 15:22-29 where the Jerusalem Council asked that of all the new Gentile believers they only follow those “essentials”.

So it seems most logical that the “Jezebel” of Revelation was a person who was promoting a “different Gospel” (based on one of the philosophies mentioned) and was tolerated by the otherwise worthy church. The mention of the terms “fornication” and “meats offered to idols” would seem to indicate the issue was doctrinal. The person, the “Jezebel” (male or female), was preaching a false doctrine and being tolerated. Perhaps, even as Ezekiel was frightened off by the first Jezebel (in 1 Kings 17), this Jezebel was frightening off or intimidating people (even true prophets) by their attitude of hyper-religiousness via these new revelations or special knowledge. The “orthodox” was being overtaken by the Gnostic and its hyper-mysticism and special knowledge teaching or the Montanist super-revelation and emphasis on the supernatural.

Instead of being some ‘demon” or “spirit”, as some teach, the Revelation Jezebel would seem to suggest that the church had forgotten the teachings of Jesus that a tree is known by its fruit, of Peter that the believer must test the teaching of the false teachers and prophets, and the reminder that “all scripture” is given for “instruction”. There is no need for secret teachings, mysterious rites of initiation, or “new revelation” and to allow such teachings , as John states, "does not have God."