Breaking Down Barriers

Recently it has become more and more apparent to me that it is probably not a coincidence that there are no female pastors at my church. The more I looked at the pastoral staff, and even at the Sunday school staff, I noticed that there were no women teaching to a group that consisted of both boys and girls in the entire church! In fact, the sole woman on the pastoral staff is not referred to as the "women's pastor", she is actually called the leader of the ministry to women. There seems to be a restriction on the role that women can play within the church.

Now, I feel that I should say that I respect this point of view and the people that hold it. The fact that I do not agree with the pastoral staff at my church on this issue does not mean that I doubt their calling, capability, and leadership skills. They are all good men who have a deep passion for God, and daily seek after new ways to glorify Him. They are men of great Christian heart who are desperately seeking and working towards the Kingdom.

I have been reading Paul's letter to Philemon. I love reading this letter because I feel like I am peeking into Paul's personal e-mail account. It is a public letter that is worded very intimately. Within the body of his letter, Paul focuses his attention on the broken relationship between a master and his slave, Philemon and Onesimus (respectively). It seems that Onesimus was not a very good slave, and may have been mistreated by Philemon. So, it is believed that they had a falling out of some sort and Onesimus somehow ended up at Paul's side. After spending some time with Paul, Onesimus became a Christian. After his conversion, the role that he played as a slave is drastically changed. And in this letter Paul pleads this case to Philemon. Paul desires Philemon to hold no grudge against Onesimus, and to accept him back as a brother in the body of Christ.

Slavery does not carry the same imagery to a person based within a 1st century Graeco-Roman context that it does to us. When we think of slavery we think of American abolition, the Civil War, and racism. To a 1st century Jew or Roman, however, slavery was based more around debt than racism. If you were born into slavery it was because your father, or your father's father owed your master something. Even then, most slaves would be released either after 7 years, or when they turned 30. They were, however, still considered to be property and "less than human". Aristotle referred to slaves as "human tools", and that is the mindset concerning slavery that has continued on even up until today.

When Onesimus became a Christian his identity changed. While social position was still that of a slave, his position as a human being had radically changed. Paul says in verse 15, "Perhaps this is the reason he was separated from you for a while, so that you might have him back forever, no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother -- especially to me but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord." How shocking it is that a man who was once a slave to Philemon is now his brother. The entire relationship dynamic between a slave and his master has changed. When Onesimus joined the body of Christ he became a brother in Christ. Sure, to the world he was still a slave. But to the Church he was now an equal member within the body.

To Paul there is no distinction within the church. It does not matter that Onesimus was or even still is a slave. Now that he has joined the church he is a Christian before anything else. Within the body of Christ all barriers are broken down, and people are free from the bondage and oppression that is placed upon them by others. Paul says in Galatians 3:28, "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." To me this means that no one should be put in a box, especially if that box is based around their gender, race, or social status.

This brings me back to women and the church. It is my belief that women should be able to take any role that they are called to. Whatever restrictions were put on them by the world, by society, or even by themselves are lifted off by Jesus. The Spirit leads us all in different and wonderful ways.


What do you think of what I have said about the role of women in the church?

What is your opinion?

What do you believe the Bible says about the role of women in the church?

Richard Dawkins: Still Mean, But Not Quite As Much

Richard Dawkins is an outspoken biologist who acts as a sort of "preacher" for atheism. In his book "The God Delusion" he draws out a long argument against religion (specifically Christianity and Islam), and in favor of beliefs based purely in the realm of science.
The book was, undoubtedly, polemical. Any Christian or person who had a belief in God was considered a moron. He considered theologians to be irrational, and their "field of study" should be categorized with ancient mythological studies. The role of the Church, in Dawkins' view, is to manipulate the political system in their favor, oppress women and homosexuals, and to incite war in the name of Christ (all of which are valid and necessary critiques).
It seems that in his upcoming book, he is less concerned with Christianity and Christians as he is with the belief in evolution. He has turned from attacking the belief in God towards defending the theory of evolution. It seems that he found the task of "converting" people away from atheism too daunting, and instead is trying to find a middle ground. It's almost as if he is saying, "Look I know now that I can't get you to stop believing in God, but will you at least believe THIS?!" Which is an easier compromise. Anyways, I'm posting an article he wrote (which I guess is an excerpt from his forthcoming book) here.

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/book_extracts/article6805656.ece

How important is it to you that the creation happened in 7 days?

What do you think of Richard Dawkins and his approach to Christians, and Christianity as a whole?

"Do YOU read the Bible literally?"

The most common question that is asked of Christians today is, "Do YOU read the Bible literally". It is usually asked with an air of condescension, as if only idiots and crazy people read the Bible literally. I have been asked this question before, and in the past I have reacted with the response, "well...its complicated...". I'm never happy with that response, and neither is the person who asked. Its not a question that I believed can be answered in one sentence.

The Bible is a library that was gathered together over a thousand years. It is made up of books from different genres, written by different people in unique times, places, and situations. This is a fact. Knowing this, it should follow that we do not read every book in the same way. We should not read Matthew the same way we read Psalms, nor should we read Revelation the same way we read Romans. An affective reading of the Bible is done by exploring the context, historical setting, and intention of the writer(s). To make claims about "what the Bible says" without doing so would be doing it an injustice.

So I don't want this to be a blog where I just talk and talk. Here is how it will go down: I will introduce a topic, and you will all join in the discussion. Theology, and discussing God should not be a lecture, it should be a conversation! So join in!

How would you respond if someone asked you, "Do you read the Bible literally?"

What does "reading the Bible literally" mean to you?