1plus1equals1

GNOSTICISM and HERESY?

2010-12-02T01:43:00.000-08:00

Every so often Christians like ourselves, who believe in Biblical equality, are accused of being gnostics or heretics, or both, by believers who are of a complementarian persuasion. These theologically loaded words are highly emotive and when used to describe us suggest that our attitude to the final authority of Scripture is unsound which, for them, means our egalitarian conclusions are Biblically untenable and therefore not worthy of examination. Even worse, it can mean that we are now open game to be rejected, ridiculed and maligned because we are thought to have departed from what is generally accepted as the orthodox tenets of the faith. Having encountered this accusation now myself on a number of occasions I thought to examine the charges in the light of 'Wikipedia' definitions of these two words.

Basically Gnostics, who were around at the time of the writing of the New Testament, viewed the Scriptures as allegorical, or mystical, containing hidden 'esoteric' meanings that were only able to be discerned by the initiated. This led to what was known as 'grades of revelation', or steps to enlightenment and deeper understanding that the uninitiated had no access to. It is believed that the Apostle Paul was addressing gnostic tendencies in his letter to the Church in Colossae with injunctions like, "Don't let anyone lead you astray with empty philosophy and high sounding nonsense that comes from human thinking and from the evil powers of this world, and not from Christ. For in Christ the fulness of God lives in a human body, and you are complete through your union with Christ. He is the Lord over every ruler and authority in the universe." (Colossians 2 verses 8-10, New Living Bible)

Heresy, on the other hand, is defined as a controversial, or novel, change to a system of beliefs, especially religious beliefs, that conflicts with established dogma. The word is of Greek origin meaning 'to choose', in this case to choose to believe something different from that which is commonly accepted. Some early Church Fathers, such as Irenaeus seemed to think that all heresies were Gnosticism at root and thus that any heretic was, in a sense, a Gnostic. When the Church and the State amalgamated heresy became a capital offence punishable by death and tragically many thousands of those who were so accused lost their lives. Perhaps due to the many modern negative connotations associated with the term 'heretic', such as the infamous Spanish Inquisition, the term is used less often today, but it has resurfaced in the debate over the ordination of women and gay priests.

Unfortunately for us these two issues are often grouped together as parallel issues which means that our arguments for the ordination of spiritually gifted women and Biblical equality, without regard to race, gender, ethnicity or class, are seen as paving the way for the acceptance of homosexuality as a legitimate, alternate lifestyle. From our perspective these are two entirely separate issues and the case for Biblical equality, within the church, is argued, almost exclusively, on the legitimate premise of the 'Priesthood of all believers,' which is neither Gnostic nor Heretical. When such accusations are levelled at us our carefully researched and Biblically sound arguments are automatically invalidated. Some go a step further in believing that as Gnostics or Heretics we deserve to be treated disparagingly as unbelieving enemies of the Gospel.

It used to be that when individuals or groups were branded with the term 'Gnostic' or 'Heretic' there was ample evidence that these people had made a serious departure from the faith, usually related to the person and work of Christ. By and large modern day believers have been free to differ on matters related to creationism (more recently), eschatology, modes of baptism and church government to name a few, as these were regarded as secondary issues. Egalitarians simply contend that their beliefs are matters to do with an alternate interpretation of disputed texts and should be open to debate. The challenge here is that egalitarian beliefs do cast an ominous shadow over the long standing traditions of patriarchy and hierarchy within the church. This is seen as a real threat to those who hold to these views/interpretations as essential doctrines.

It seems to me to be very heavy handed to label egalitarians as 'Heretics' and/or 'Gnostics.'

Freedom in the Spirit

2010-11-19T16:44:00.000-08:00

Reading this morning in 2 Corinthians 3 verses 7-18 about the Glory of the New Covenant. In this passage Paul compares and contrasts the receiving of the Old Covenant, written on Tablets of stone, with the reception of the New Covenant which is administered by the Holy Spirit. He speaks of the glory that was evident on Moses' face when he came down from the mountain, having been for so long in the very presence of God. It was a fading glory but it was still evident to the people of Israel. So much so that they could not bear to look at Moses' face, requiring him to wear a veil. Paul poses the question, "Shouldn't we expect a far greater glory when the Holy Spirit is giving life?" (verse 8) The chapter concludes with the thought that this Spirit given glory should not fade but to the contrary, "...reflect his glory even more." (verse 18)

For me there is a contrast here between the condemning letter of the law and the life giving power of the Holy Spirit, "If the Old Covenant, which brings condemnation, was glorious, how much more glorious is the New Covenant, which makes us right with God!" (verse 9) Paul goes on to say, "So if the Old Covenant, which has been set aside , was full of glory, then the New Covenant, which remains forever, has far greater glory." This leads him to state emphatically, "Since this New Covenant gives us such confidence, we can be very bold." (verse 12) As I read these verses I could not help but think again of the issue of Biblical equality and its opposite, gender hierarchy. It seems to me that gender hierarchy is somewhat like the letter of the law and has a fading glory because it, like the Old Covenant has been set aside for something far greater. It is the condemnation of the law that binds people to interpretations that espouse hierarchy rather than allowing them to experience the revelation of the Holy Spirit who gives life and freedom, because the veil is taken away. (see verse 16,17) When our eyes are opened to this truth it should release in us a "confidence and boldness" (verse 12) to proclaim this glorious message of Biblical equality unashamedly.

The metaphor of the veil is very helpful in this context because it reminds us again that the truth of Biblical equality is a revelation issue. Yes, we can have a sound Biblical argument, a correct hermeneutic and reliable interpretation but at the end of the day we need a spiritual enlightenment that grants us true freedom. Tragically Church tradition and culture has developed an 'embedded' deposit of truth regarding hierarchy that somehow continues to overshadow the liberating truth the Holy Spirit would impart in respect to gender and ethnic equality. It should be enough that Jesus, God's last Word to humanity, broke down all the barriers of class, ethnicity and gender in His earthly ministry. Jesus' attitudes and actions should be our only and final authority on this matter and Bible texts that seemingly suggest otherwise should be subordinated and interpreted by this over arching truth.

Paul concludes by saying that, "...all of us have had this veil removed so that we can be mirrors that brightly reflect the glory of the Lord." (verse 18a) In respect to Biblical equality this is sadly not so. Many in the Church universal are still blind (veiled) to this truth. Perhaps now more than ever the truth of Biblical equality needs to be boldly proclaimed by the Church to the watching world. The Church should be, as Jesus was, at the forefront in setting the captives free. Forced marriages, sexual bondage and many forms of slavery are still very much a part of the 21st century, as is widely reported. These continuing atrocities are attributed largely to the religious and cultural practises of patriarchy and hierarchy. We should be, as Jesus and the infant Christian Church were, demonstrating this truth by our words and actions. In that way the rest of verse 18 would prove to be true. "And as the Spirit of the Lord works within us, we become more and more like Him and reflect His glory even more."

My prayer, and hopefully yours is:

"Oh for such light and liberty to be 'gloriously' evident and 'mirrored' by the 21st century Church."

Frustration!

2010-11-07T01:07:00.001-07:00

We had a wonderful sermon in church this morning about the elder brother in the prodigal son story and how we can so easily slip into an 'older brother' attitude towards other people who are coming to faith or coming back to God after some time away. The preacher was pointing up the fact that we can get into the frame of mind that we almost deserve God's goodness (what a thought!)

BUT...before he preached he made an announcement about a couple who were celebrating their 60th wedding anniversay (big applause) And then.....it was spoilt by the preachers saying "I probably shouldn't repeat this but...." and then launching in to repeating a joke which the 60 years' married guy had told him. I wouldn't repeat it but it suggested that women were so hard to understand that even God found it difficult.

Why, oh why......do so many Christians find this sort of stuff funny?? It is dishonouring to men and women and most importantly dishonouring to God who made us all and loves us all. There's not a word said in the bible about funny ways that men and women may have. It's all about our character and how to be godly and holy........certainly not to make disparaging remarks about each other. We get so disappointed that these jokes continue and even more so when they preface a very serious sermon.

The Unexpected

2010-11-05T19:22:00.000-07:00

Recently my wife and I had to travel interstate to be present with family members to mourn the death and celebrate the life of my youngest step-sister who was a mere 53 years of age. This tragic event was unexpected for us all. It began with her having had a stroke and further medical examination revealing that Tricia had 2 aneurisms near her brain. The surgery was deemed successful and everyone heaved a sigh of relief. But on the third day after the operation she suffered a cardiac arrest from which she never recovered. The hospital staff kept her on life support for a time but all evidence suggested neural activity had ceased. Fortunately no family member had to be responsible to authorise the cessation of life support because she died naturally on the fifth day.

This was, and still is, an incredible shock to all members of our family, perhaps none more than her twin 22 year old boys (Ed and Tim) and her partner of 10 years (Bruce). Our family do not share the hope of our faith in Jesus. They are not godless in the sense that they acknowledge the likelihood of there being a god but they, to my knowledge, have no personal relationship with him. It is at times like this that one becomes acutely aware of the huge void that exists in terms of eternity and what really happens in the hereafter. Even though my wife and I have many years of experience in assisting people through death and dying no one invited us to offer any assistance in the funeral arrangements. That's OK, we respect that, but we did find that because of the depth of grief and heightened emotions that we were needed to "pour oil on troubled waters" on more than one occasion.

Before parenthood my sister had been somewhat of a celebrity in the literary world and for many years owned an alternative bookshop that was very popular with intellectuals, thinkers and university students. She really understood the industry and made a lot of friends through her ability to acquire the more unusual and hard to get book titles. This certainly set her apart from her working class family background, although my younger brother moved in similar circles through his music, world travel as a teacher and interest in political history. Despite Tricia's success my other sister believes that the sophisticated world was taking its toll on Tricia's life and that becoming a Mum was her opportunity to become grounded again in reality.

Necessity dictated that something needed to be done. Her parents rose to the occasion wonderfully by erecting a house in the backyard of their own home to house Tricia and her boys while she embarked on life as a single mum. The boys had the added benefit of growing up with their retired grandparents. Dad was very handy and because the boys were always by his side they learnt so much from him about life and how to create things. Their Nan constantly fussed over them (still does) and loved them to bits. So it was a fulfilling arrangement that contributed to the boys growing up feeling very much loved and accepted as part of a large, loving family which really developed their sense of personal worth and self confidence. As adults the twins are both employed in the building trade.

Eventually Tricia moved in with her long time partner and was really enjoying life garnering antiques, artworks and enjoying the wind in her hair with the occasional trip to the wine growing areas of the Barossa Valley in South Australia in their veteran MG sports car. Life was good when this tragic event suddenly overtook her. The warning signs were there in that she apparently suffered very severe headaches but bore them silently. She no doubt attributed them (the headaches) to stress or overwork because both featured in her life at that time. Anticipating the major surgery was a fearful thing in that it could be fatal. Sadly, while coming through the op well and being moved into the general ward, other complications triggered a cardiac arrest that took her young life.

It is a lesson for us all that the seeming ordinariness and permanence of life is not necessarily so and the journey can take us in an entirely different direction than that which was anticipated. In this case it is additionally sad for her 82 year old mother who has had to see her youngest child laid to rest. She repeats often that she is old and ready to die and it doesn't seem right that Tricia has preceded her. We feel her grief as we each one nurse our own. The question of eternity and the afterlife looms large. We can comfort ourselves with platitudes of being together again beyond death but it begs the question, "What have we done in life that will prepare us for separation and death?" I personally take great comfort in what the Bible has to say about this, especially in passages of Scripture like 1 Corinthians 15 verses 51-57.

Ordinary People

2010-08-19T19:38:00.000-07:00

Have just finished reading an article in the CBE publication, Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy, by Robert K. McGregor Wright, titled, "God, Metaphor and Gender." The sub-title is, "Is the God of the Bible a Male Deity?"

The writer is of Reformed theological background and has written a number of other essays as well as having published a some well researched books. I loved the way that he tackled the issue by addressing questions that are often put in this debate by those who believe that God is essentially male because of the many male gender references attributed to God throughout Scripture. Obviously this may lead one to conclude that males therefore best represent the image of God and must, as a consequence, be the only ones qualified to lead both the church and the home.

I think that he (McGregor Wright) argues his case to the contrary really well and thoroughly dispels the notion that males should enjoy this position of leadership supremacy. The whole tenor of the essay is challenging because we can be very sloppy in our understanding of the essence of God and very easily slip into idolatry in that we fashion God after our humanity.

It makes me very aware that I am just an 'ordinary person', even though a pastor and teacher, who needs the expertise of gifted individuals, like McGregor Wright who are theologically astute and can explain, in layperson's terms, these deeply theological and philosophical issues.

I, along with countless brothers and sisters in the Christian faith, am one of the many 'ordinary people' who are so dependent on the training and skills of those who have given themselves to understanding and communicating the 'knowledge' of God. This requires us to be able to discern whether a 'teacher' is truly speaking from the heart of God and is rightly dividing the Word of Truth. We can expect that the Holy Spirit will bear witness to the Truth and assist us in our discernment.

Speaking for myself, I usually decide on a learned person's credibility by their heart attitude, evidenced in a servant spirit and how they respond, or address, their theological opponents. At the end of the day, as Liz says, "We all choose our own experts".

But, we 'ordinary people' need to be wary of those who may be unscrupulous teachers who are serving their own ends or are locked into a theological stance that they will not surrender because of the threat of losing theological prestige and power. In the area of teachings on male supremacy and hierarchy there are, unfortunately, many who are not open to genuinely engaging in debate over these issues but hide behind the pretext that any who disagree with their position are ignoring the plain teaching of Scripture.

This explains why it is that, as 'ordinary people', who don't want to be thought of as, 'ignoring the plain teaching of Scripture', we are so often at the mercy of those who may 'twist', or 'abuse' Scripture by inadequate, or selective hermeneutical methodology. That too is why I am more encouraged and persuaded by those teachers who gently teach in such a way as to allow me to process my own thinking with an open Bible, under the guidance and direction of the Holy Spirit.

CBE Conference in Australia

2010-08-04T20:31:00.000-07:00

We were blessed to be able to attend the CBE conference in Melbourne, Australia in June. We chose to travel across Australia by car and caravan, catching up with relatives and friends in South Australia and Victoria along the way. All in all we were away from home for 3 months as we then travelled up the East Coast of Australia to visit one of our sons who resides with his family on the Gold Coast in Queensland. It's a week today since we actually set foot back in our house here in Warnbro, Western Australia because we visited 2 other sons and their families, one in Busselton and another in Lesmurdie WA. The Conference seems like eons ago already but it was so good to meet with likeminded people in our own country. There seems to be a conspiracy of silence here in Australia with most church people not really interested in persuing the topic. For many the issue appears to be done and dusted, perhaps because for them it was locked into Women's ordination and now that that is somewhat settled there doesn't appear to be any need to debate further. The sad reality is that it is far from over. Women are still limited in what they can do, or how far they can go, within the Church at large and the whole issue of 'headship' is not being addressed in this context at all. For a more full report on the Conference content the topic can be explored on the CBE Scroll. Just follow the link to the Scroll supplied on the homepage of this blogsite. There were many challenges over the Conference weekend, especially in the workshop sessions, but for me the last keynote address by Cheryl Catford was the icing on the cake. Her insights into what has been put forward as the 'Third Wave of Feminism' was most powerful and helpful in understanding these secular developments and their impact in proclaiming the gospel (Good News of Jesus) for the present and the future.

Abusing Scripture

2010-04-23T20:37:00.000-07:00

I have just got through reading Manfred T. Brauch's book titled, Abusing Scripture, and can thoroughly recommend it as a good read. So much so that I've passed it on to someone else already. His work is the result of 30 plus years of lecturing in a Theological Institution in the States. Each chapter deals with different aspects of how it is that we abuse Scripture and most often it comes down to misinterpretation because we have not used interpretive tools wisely or correctly. A great deal of effort is spent in considering the context and cultural relevance, to the persons to whom the original text is addressed, when carrying over the explanation or application to our situation. His point is that we are all bound to make assumptions of a text or read into that text preconceptions that are skewed by our own experiences of cultural, religious or denominational tradition. Every chapter concludes with a summary and a section on how we might improve our interpretive skills in that particular area.

What I liked most was his section dealing with Christ as God's last WORD given to humanity and that Christ's words and actions should be the at the pinnacle of decisive interpretation. Given this premise, any verses that are controversial or doctrines that are built on scant textual evidence should be examined on what Christ Himself taught or encouraged in these, or similar situations. If the situations were not specifically addressed by Jesus there would at least be a principle or precedent that would address that issue. There were a number of instances where he particularly addressed the issue of patriarchy and attitudes to women in church and home life that he believed should be more correctly interpreted by applying Christ's attitude to, and treatment of women. That the texts by other NT writers should be explained and defined by what Christ himself modelled in relationships, not on how they have been traditionally, and perhaps erroneously translated, because of cultural bias, or previous mistranslation.

He argues strongly against what he sees as circular arguments to prove the correctness of an interpretation. Examples would be where something is cited in the NT that is referenced from the OT. An interpretation is read into the OT reference that may not actually be there but is nuanced from the traditional understanding of the NT rendering. Then the NT reference is given credence by applying to it the nuanced, and now accepted traditional references from the OT. Again, this particularly applies to the creation account of male and female and how that there is no reference within the text to suggest either inequality or male superiority on the basis of primogeniture. Yet somehow male headship and rule are read into those passages.

It's a very valuable book that has as its intention to help us to alleviate abusing Scripture in the first instance and improve on our interpretive skills so that our efforts are more true to the text and the original intention of the writer, which in turn means more honouring to God. He also has worked hard at making it readable and understandable to the layperson which I believe to be an incredible asset. The book is published by IVF.

Conversation Ends

2010-04-05T03:14:00.000-07:00

It all looked very interesting but at some point I must have crossed the line because it has been some time now since I have heard from my friend John. I knew as we were corresponding that the concepts of equality and mutual submission were very challenging to him personally and his sense of masculine self worth so we'll leave him to ponder for a while longer on those thoughts.

In the meantime our daughter-in-law Julie mentioned that she was doing a teen girls study group and had suggested that the girls choose a book from a catalogue that they could discuss together. The girls chose 'Datable Rules' so Julie asked Liz and I if we had come across this book and if so, what it was like.

We had to tell her that there is currently a conversation going on on the CBE blog, the Scroll, on the issue of Christian books that are available for the dating scene and that this one came in for a good deal of criticism. She was quite taken back so we explained why it is that we felt that the book was harmful, mostly that it was very culturally and religiously biassed in favour of female submission. For example, young women were encouraged to yield to their male dating partner's God given right to lead and should always encourage him to initiate. It is suggested that to be truly feminine and honour God a young lady should practice learning how to submit so that they were then ready for marriage.

Since that conversation Julie has looked at the book herself and was quite horrified at the blatant gender stereotyping and explicit instructions (read 'rules') young women were encouraged to observe in order to be attractive dating partners. Consequently Julie would like to suggest the girls study something else.

We encouraged her to have a look on the Scroll and consider using some of the books that are given a more positive wrap so that she and the girls of the study group have a more profitable time of it.

More Conversation with a Friend

2010-03-24T18:36:00.000-07:00

John: Trev if it truly is this way and my wife wants to agree I think you might have won me over.

Trev: Rachel may be perfectly comfortable with you taking responsibility John. Her own Christian background may include that expectation, ie. that you should lovingly lead her and take a "headship" responsibility within the home. That's why I don't want to rock your boat too much if that's the way things are expected to be done and you are both happy with that. All that I'm pointing out is that is not the only way that things can or should be done in running the home. I'm suggesting that there is a more inclusive way but some women may feel insecure in that in the same way that you feel that your manhood is threatened if that were taken away from you. Other women feel totally demeaned by the thought that when they were courting their mental competence was acknowledged and celebrated but now that they are married she is expected to become a "kept" woman with nothing to contribute but her biological function as a sexual partner and bearer of children. Scripture is timeless and the picture of women throughout Scripture is one of participation. In fact in Jesus day the men conducted the religious and civil affairs and the women controlled the home. Jesus came to set men and women free to serve God together in all spheres of life, domestic, civil and religious. His ministry was entirely counter cultural, that's why the Pharisees hated Him so much.   

John: When we muck up God forgives us everytime and sometimes for me any way he will take care of even the repercussions but not always. Especially if I want to start going up my own track.

Trev: Isn't God good John in that He does fix up, even our pig-headed blunders.    

John: To me it seemed simple. Were my wife wants to pray it through we do so. We are looking for an answer from the Lord especially me because if it goes wrong as head of the home I have to fix it.

Trev: Now we are getting to where the rubber hits the road, "as head of the home I have to fix it." I know that this is a very popular teaching, but how sound is it biblically? Where in Scripture will you find the expression, 'head of the home?' It's just not there. Yes, in Ephesian 5:23 it says that the husband is the "head of the wife!", but what does that mean? Most thinking commentators these days believe that it is not about authority but about nurture and the verses that follow in Ephesians seem to bear that out because they talk about husbands loving their wives sacrificially and caring for them in the same way that Christ cares for the Church. That was radical in that culture because wives were considered to be a chattel, a possession and were treated like children by their men. Women had very few rights and couldn't exist in that culture without the protection of a man. Paul is urging Christian men to go beyond simply doing their duty of care to their wives but actually loving and considering them above and beyond the norm. From their position of cultural male dominance they could love and nurture their wives in a way that spoke volumes to the world around them.

Ongoing conversation

2010-03-18T18:39:00.000-07:00

John: If after a lot of disagreement and putting it before God etc. etc. a decision cannot be made but one must be or the consequences, let say it is financial, who should make it? Lets say the guy says, "Hey I am easy, you make it." Then let’s say it is a wrong decision. Who takes responsibility for the wrong decision. Let’s say the woman. What then?

Trevor: All that I'm suggesting here John is that both marriage partners discuss and pray about the issues before God and both come to consensus about what is the right path and both take responsibility (and blame) if it turns out to have been an unwise decision. Where an issue arises that affects one marriage partner more than the other, the one who is most affected should have the larger portion of input. If there appears to be a stalemate the couple continue to wait on God until they can agree about a direction to take. In Liz and my case we don't consider buying anything or spending any money on ourselves without consulting the other person, apart from buying gifts for each other. Then we love to retain the element of surprise as an expression of our devotion to one another.   

John: What is taking responsibility mean, fixing up the muck up? So then the wife goes off to work to fix it and pay for it.

Trevor: If both made the decision to do something, it doesn't have to have been financial, it may have been something to do with a child's discipline or welfare and it appears to go wrong, then both take responsibility and both seek, before God, for ways to put it right. Let's face it John, in some instances women are better trained and more financially savvy than men. In these cases surely the woman needs to be given more input in family budget planning. Some women are employed as corporate CEO's, or financial managers, should they turn a blind eye to financial matters at home because that is considered to be solely the husband's responsibility? The Proverbs 31 woman was obviously an astute person with a sound business acumen for which she is highly praised. In our own case Liz previously worked in the banking sector and I felt that it was a good thing for her personal well-being to manage our finances in the midst of the the tedium of childrearing.    

2010-03-17T19:11:00.000-07:00

There has now been some ongoing conversation on this topic. I will post excerpts of it here in stages as my reply got a bit long for one post.

Trevor: Thanks for keeping on coming back on this one. I know that it's very difficult for you to take on board the way of looking at things that I'm suggesting and in some respects I'm reluctant to continue rocking your boat, knowing that you are doing good in your marriage with what you have learned about how marriage should work with the whole headship thing. I'll answer what you've written, in a different colour, between the lines of your own comments.

John: There is something that my soul as a man is finding the approach you are suggesting really robbing me of my man hood. I am continuing to hold it up to the Lord.

Trevor: John you are not the first man to have felt or said that in respect to what I am proposing. Many men have expressed that to go this way seems to rob them of their significance. For me personally it's a matter of security. I ask myself the question, "Am I threatened by the opinions of a woman?" or, "Do I have to have the last word to keep women in their (subordinate) place?"   

John: If you have discovered a greater truth and I am sure it is right I will adopt it. But I am having a lot of trouble with the concept. Women just do not look right in khaki and blokes can not feed babies. We are different.

Trevor: There is no question John that we (men and women) are biologically different. The issue here is that society constructs what is accepted as masculinity and femininity. Our job is to unravel what is a biblical and God ordained (or designed) picture from that which has been stereotypically cast as masculine or feminine from the world, or host culture's point of view. It disturbs me that God is blamed for behavioural gender differences and expectations that I don't believe He designed or intended at all. Much of the discussion in this area is not taken from Scripture but from family tradition or accepted norms within society at large. A lot has been written lately that is in the public domain, like "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus," to point up the impossible communication differences between men and women. These concepts are embraced without question by the Church to back up why men should lead and women should follow. Never mind the fact that the guy who wrote the book is Buddhist by religious persuasion. All I am saying is that we should search Scripture to see if God highlights these apparent differences. I don't believe that you will find anything to back up that notion. There is no pink and blue theological position even hinted at in the Scriptures. We share a common humanity and are different only in our biological function.    

Paul Washer Sermon

2010-03-14T19:16:00.000-07:00

Managed to track down a 'U tube' audio of the "What it takes to be a man" message. Pleased to hear that it had such an impact for you personally John. The message was in 6x10 minute segments and took a bit of getting through but I got the gist of it. While I can appreciate the guy's sincerity, passion and belief that this is what the Bible teaches I did find it very American, with constant references to manliness and his love for hunting etc. He is right on the money about the Western mindset of dating and of how unbiblical and harmful it can be in the development of responsible relationships. Where I strongly disagree with him though is on the issue of men being designed to lead women, to be the sole provider and protector. His premise that until a man is willing to lead and provide for a woman he should not be considering dating a women leaves men with the notion that they are destined to lead and women are simply to follow their lead.

Granted, for some men, possibly yourself included, this seems to give a real purpose for the male role within the marriage, and, a lot of what he has to say in that respect is very admirable. But I still hold to the view that "in Christ" men and women are equals which means that each shares the responsibility of leading, discipling and parenting children. Both should be respected and listened to by one another firstly and then by the children as they are nurtured within the home. Both have opinions to bring to the table as together they seek to have a home that glorifies the Lord. The danger of this teaching, which I have to admit is very popular, is that a woman can be relegated to the pretty, empty headed and spiritually deficient little thing whose only job in life is to take care of her man by always being there for him and making sure that both she and the home is a place that is attractive to her husband so that he is not tempted to stray.

I will be the first to admit that men, as a general rule, do not step up to the plate and take responsibility within the home and in that respect messages like this are very timely to motivate men. My concern is that as admirable and passionate as this sounds it is still culturally rather than biblically motivated. These ideas of family are dated and probably belong in the post war, 1950's American family TV show era. True Biblical injunctions on the other hand are timeless and supra cultural in that they transcend all cultural, ethnic and class settings. Big words and ideas John but what they mean is this; Christ came to fully redeem both men and women from the effects of the curse. Life and work doesn't have to be difficult and a hard slog as Paul Washer suggests. We are meant to be "in Christ" (as men and women), that is walking in the spirit, operating from a position of "rest" and total reliance on Him. Both genders are to cultivate the fruit of the Spirit and display "considering one another, provoking one another to love and good deeds" kind of atmosphere within the home. This can only happen when couples are prepared to be mutually submissive to one another.

So....preparing couples for marriage should include the kind of teaching that doesn't condemn us to grit our teeth and live out the effects of the curse but should entice and excite us to live in the "new way", the way of the Spirit, that sets us free and allows both men and women to be all that God wants them to be. The only thing that isn't easy about this is that we each must give up the rights to our own life and allow Jesus to call the tune. If we are both doing that then it is a win win situation because each of us is willing to submit to the will of God for our family and for each other. In that sense we can break free of cultural expectations, which exist even in the church, and carve out our own destiny under the guidance of God and His Word. When married couples have the same Christ centred expectations of their relationship, marriage and Kingdom living there is nothing that will create a need for one to have leadership responsibility over the other.

Without Blemish

2010-03-11T17:45:00.000-08:00

The Pastor of the Church that Liz and I attend thought to tackle the book of Leviticus for his next ministry series and encouraged the congregation to read it along with him. It was an offer that I was very happy to take up. While reading in chapter 21 of the holiness required of the priests I was struck by the words, (verse 16, GNB) The Lord commanded Moses to say to Aaron, "None of your descendants who has any physical defect may present the food offering to me. This applies for all time to come." The verses that follow spell out the extent of the physical defects that apply.

So often I was reminded, when in ministry myself, of the need for the Lord's servants to be pure. Usually it was related to marital purity and fidelity, particularly in respect to divorce and remarriage. My ministry colleagues were very committed to the notion that divorce, for any reason, automatically disqualified one from ministry. It's interesting to note that it was citing passages like this that encouraged such a rigid view. Perhaps verse 7, which reads, "A priest shall not marry a woman who has been a prostitute or a woman who is not a virgin or who is divorced; he is holy." was the motivation behind such strict interpretations.

In the NT, where we are all described as priests of the Living God (1 Peter 2:9, Revelation 1:6), service for Christ is described as totally inclusive, in that there is meant to be no restriction on the basis of gender, ethnicity or class. Even so, some continue to hold to priestly purity passages like the above to restrict some, namely women, from ministry opportunities within the Body of Christ. If one were to fully follow that paradigm, not only would all women be disallowed but males who had either divorced and remarried, or had married a divorcee, or a woman who was no longer a virgin, or, get this, had any physical defect, would be disbarred! That last requirement alone would rule out a lot of people who currently serve the Lord in the churches of today's world, let alone the others.

Clearly these kinds of restrictions applied to a particular time in Israel's history where the priestly class were representatives and mediators of God to the people and were required to mirror God's holiness. This is no longer the case. There is only one mediator between God and humanity, that is the man, Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5), which frees us all to minister God's grace to one another. Thankfully, we live in the age of grace and these kinds of restrictions for Christian service do not apply. That is not to say that now that we belong to Christ we do not seek to be holy (1 Timothy 1:9) but that our previous life experience, assigned gender, ethnicity, class, or even physical disabilities, do not disqualify us from serving Jesus. His grace is sufficient and His strength is made perfect in our weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9,10).

What River?

2010-02-27T22:04:00.000-08:00

Yesterday I wrote a little about our time at the CBE conference in St Louis, Missouri and I left a question mark for the second of the two famous rivers there. Forgot to edit that and put in the name of the river before posting. Silly me! Even more silly is the fact that the second river was the Missouri River. But I thought that it would be nice too to include a picture, from our gallery of that fabulous arch. When we arrived at the hotel various people said, "Are you going to go and see the arch?" Nothing could have prepared us for actually seeing it. It is 'ginormous'. Yes, I know, I invented that word just for the occasion. Didn't think to carefully about placement did I? The arch pics are obvious the other two are the outside of the Frontenac Hotel and Foyer. The stately building with the dome roof is the old Judiciary Building in St Louis, now a museum.

We never learn

2010-02-27T01:00:00.000-08:00

Once again it has been so long since we last posted that we forgot the password, or perhaps it drops off after a time for security reasons? Anyway, the important thing is that we are back on board now. Since the last post we have been able to attend another CBE conference in the US, at St Louis, Missouri. It was everything that we anticipated and more. We also caught up with some CBE friends in San Diego which was a real bonus because our other American friends were now living in SD too. It was interesting to travel on the train down from Los Angeles and return. It gave us a bit more of an insight into seeing ordinary Americans because most of our previous experience in the US was in airports or hotels. Our hosts in SD took us to their Vineyard church and showed us around their city and beaches. It was interesting to learn that the State of California has a higher population than all of Australia and that their operating budget exceeds the Whole of Australia by far.

When in St Louis we had some free time on the Saturday morning and were able to catch a train from Frontenac into the city. The attraction there was the arch and the museum underneath. The arch is something else, an engineering feat par excellence. It towers 630 feet above the city, framing the old courthouse and is surrounded by beautiful parklands. The museum celebrates the opening of the Western frontier because St Louis sits on the junction of the Mississippi and ? Rivers and is the gateway to the West. I (Trevor) found it all to be quite fascinating. I was hoping to go up to the top of the arch but the queues were so long and we only had limited time before needing to get back for the afternoon sessions of the conference.

It was so good to catch up with people that we had met at the conference in Orlando, Florida in 2003, mostly staff people. We met lots of other people and made many friends. Catching up with some folks who blog on the CBE Scroll was special too. So good to be able to put a face to a name. We enjoyed immensely the plenary sessions. All of the speakers were sensational. The electives gave a wide range of choices and even though Liz and I attended different ones we couldn't possibly take in them all. We left an Australian winter to attend the conference so it was quite a contrast to be sitting by the pool in the hotel after having spent time in the freezing cold Grampian Mountains of Victoria, Australia as we journeyed across the country.

The wonderful thing is that the conference this year is in Melbourne, Australia. The theme is "Better Together" and while it is closer to home for us here in Oz it is still a long way from where we live in Western Australia. We will be driving across again because after the conference we will make our way up to Queensland to catch up with our oldest son and his family.

"The Shack"

2009-05-07T04:22:00.000-07:00

Would you believe that we have only just read this life-changing book? Mind you....we have read excerpts, reviews, the story of the writer and his own blog so felt we understood what it was all about. But there's nothing like reading it in its entirity which I (Liz) haven't taken the time to do just yet. Trevor read it over one day and was very impressed - not only for the obvious help which this book would be to people who have unanswered questions about God and his interest in our lives, but for the clear statements about women and men.

Without one bible quotation, there is so much 'doctrine' spread through the chapters and the issue of equality is well demonstrated and explained. Maybe this wasn't the author's intention (maybe it was one of the reasons for writing the story) but it comes across loud and clear that God and his ways are not always as we have been taught or even as we perceive with our limited vision. The whole character of God shows up beautifully, and without a shred of piousness or 'churchiness' we are embraced by God's love and concern for each individual.

If there are still people like us who haven't got around to checking out the story (fiction) in 'The Shack', maybe this is a timely reminder that it is worth the effort.

The Story of our Lives

2009-05-02T05:04:00.000-07:00

This appears to be the story of our lives. Always apologising for the fact that we are not writing any new posts on our own blog site. It could be that we are so preoccupied with the CBE blog site, the Scroll, that we haven't given any quality time to this one. Liz keeps on reminding me that we don't have to be writing about equality on here either, even though that is our passion. We could be writing about all manner of things, like what we do in our leisure time. Just last week we did a whole lot of canoeing up a lazy river, but we don't have the pictures to prove it! Why, because we were not game to carry a camera in that watery world. Or, we could write about how we love to spend time down at our pristine beach, 800 metres from our front door! And yes, we do have a picture of that. The reason being that I'm experimenting with uploading photos from the 6,000 or so that we have on our computer. What I haven't figured out yet is how to place them on the page so that the layout looks a little better than is shown on this preview. Now that we've got a bit of a handle on how to publish photos to our blog we can talk about other things that we do in retirement, like snorkelling, bushwalking and looking after our grandchildren so that their parents can have some personal time. That means more photos of those very significant things. We may even experiment with a video clip! All that is to come.

Billabong

2008-04-28T03:08:00.000-07:00

What a great name for an Aussie Church. Liz and I went there last Sunday to meet up with some old friends. One couple that we've known for quite some time and another friend who has made this her church home. It's quite a unique church plant, sponsored by the Uniting Church of Australia. We absolutely loved being there. Moreso because the service emphasis was on women serving Christ. For that reason almost all of the service participants for the day were women, including the speaker. A humorous video clip was shown at the beginning of a woman singing, very rapidly, the 250 words that a Mum is likely to say in a day. Words that may be repeated everyday!!! The title of the Encounter message was, 'Mere Women'. A seasoned female Pastor and missionary gave the talk and questions were invited from the congregation. People participated in a quite lively way. Also a chinese person from mainland China shared how she found Christ while a student here in Australia and how she is received in the workplace as both a 'boss' over men and a Christian. That was very refreshing and inspiring. God is so good, reaching into the life of this person so schooled in communism. The children, once they returned from their specialised class time joined in the worship and seemed to be right up with what was going on, even in the sharing of communion. Perhaps the whole atmosphere was enhanced by the fact that the service took place in a big white marquee (ten) on land that includes a genuine billabong, and a sheep to boot! All in all it was a great experience and Christ honouring conversation continued at the 'cuppa' time afterwards. Will certainly be returning there as time permits.

2008-04-23T07:36:00.001-07:00

"Women's Meetings"

2008-04-23T07:26:00.000-07:00

One of my pet annoyances in church life is the syndrome of having special meetings just for women.

Is it because women are seen as having special needs and so need unique programs ?
Or is it to give women a place to share openly about their lives and spiritual growth ?

Of course there is the real need for women who have young children at home and can't go out at night to regular home groups to have opportunity for fellowship and learning more from the bible in study groups. I'm thinking even more about the sort of meetings which make women out to be a 'special case' - a class of people who have to be encouraged all the time as what their particular role is in life and how God has created them for a particular role in life.

Even the groups which major on health, beauty, personal development etc. all leave me with the feeling that somehow women need special 'handling' over and above other Christians (namely men) I know there are some women out there who feel affirmed with all this attention, but I have always felt demeaned by such separatist gatherings and just want to be know as a 'Christian'.

I'm interested to read if others feel this way, because I suspect there are heaps of women

No end of trouble

2008-04-16T00:26:00.000-07:00

You may have wondered why we hadn't posted on here for a while. Well, there's a very good reason, which may seem, to the rest of you out in the blogosphere a bit dumb. We couldn't remember our password so couldn't get in!!! I know, I know, all we needed to do was to scrap the old password and begin a new account with a revised password. So, we've done that and are back on air. In the meantime we have had a lot of activity over on the CBE blogsite, The Scroll (see link) and since we have been made administrators we have even more reason to be spending a lot more time there. But even so, we do want to regularly check in here, not just with equality stuff, even though that is our passion, but ordinary stuff as well. Like, what we've been up to of late and stuff that we are getting out of the Word that might bless others as well. We really miss, since no longer being in paid ministry (due to retirement), the almost daily involvement of sharing with others from God's Word and being a part of their growth in Christ. Admitted we can still do that through this medium and with our immediate family, including 8 grandchildren, but it's not the same as the church community and the interaction and ministry opportunities that go along with church life. We are really enjoying retirement, don't get me (Trevor) wrong but now that we've had it a bit easier we are both chafing at the bit to share current insights into God's word. For Liz there's also the music component. She's really missing worship leading and playing for a congregation. We have a piano and music at home but it's not the same as inspiring others to sing and worship God in the Sunday celebrations or Home Group times. Attending is not the same as leading. We don't want to be pew warmers!

Where have we been?

2008-02-15T02:11:00.000-08:00

We just need to get something back on here because it has been sooooo long. I guess that one of the reasons is that we've been posting and commenting so much on the Scroll for the last few months that we've not given ourselves time to post on our very own blogsite. Besides, I guess we are thinking, "Well, who's going to notice anyway?" But, that's not the point is it! We are as committed to biblical equality as ever and circumstances only dictate that it is even more of a necessity. Our difficulty at the moment is finding a church that is as fully committed to equality as we are. Some appear to be but on closer examination may have given some freedoms for women to be involved in certain aspects of ministry but, are still a closed book when it comes to who is the boss in the home. The whole headship thing. That's the sticking point. Many churches are keen to tell us how far they have come and what concessions they are prepared to make, but balk at the headship in the home question. Anyway, it's not as if we are not finding enough to do and churches to visit in the meantime. Thankfully God knows.

Would the men please speak up!

2007-10-15T07:28:00.000-07:00

In conversation with someone today, I heard of two Christian husbands who were intimidated by the expectancies put on them by the proponents of the belief that men should lead in all things, be the 'head of the home' etc. I'm sure that not all men have the huge egos which they are said to have and not all men enjoy having power over other people. If there are men reading this who would be relieved if they were told that God didn't expect these things of them, please speak up and let us encourage you to be who God has made you to be and enjoy being truly yourself in Christ.

LONG TIME NO WRITE

2007-10-06T04:15:00.000-07:00

I can't believe it's been so long since either of us wrote something on this blog. Our excuse is that we have been busy writing and reading the hundreds of excellent posts on the CBE blog "The Scroll". If you haven't gone there yet, check it out!

I have decided to write on here at least once a week just in case someone drops by and wants to correspond after reading something a bit more up to date. We find ourselves discussing equality all the time and thinking of new reasons why it is so logical, appealing and biblical.

One thought which occured to me this week was the one of being a servant to each other in marriage and within the church family life. A servant does what the other person requires or would like, not what the servant feels is best for the one being served. So, how is that many use the term 'servant leader' and talk about 'having the last word' in times of disagreement etc.
If we are really serving one another we will do as Jesus said and "Do to others what we would like done to us"

1plus1equals1: 1plus1equals1

2006-12-11T06:30:00.000-08:00

1plus1equals1: 1plus1equals1: "BlogThis"

CHANGING THE MINDSET

It is very evident that the cultural mindset over sucha long time isdeeper than many first imagined and so it is no wonder that it keeps resurfacing in the most unlikely places. It occurs to me that something that has taken hundreds of years to become entrenchend will not go away just by careful exegesis and teaching.
Attitudes will change in the same way they developed - very slowly and with repeated statements and demonstrated truth. We need to find ways of "speaking the truth in love" to those who have differing beliefs about gender issues and use opportunities as they occur to encourage a better way to speak and act in the company of women and men.
For myself, I know that I foten don't take issues with thigns which are said for two reasons. Either it seems as if I am defending myself or I don't want to spoil the great fellowship we have with friends by pointing out something they've said which perpetuates the stereotypes. Perhaps we need to move away from personal hurt and see it as a slight on the very character of God - then we may feel more freedom to confront people who unwittingly make distinction between women and men followers of Jesus. However we do it, it will probably be a long process which will bear fruit later.

One example of an opportunity I had to "Australianise" a series of parenting books which have been written from a complementarian perspective. While doing this I was able to change words such as "man's nature" to "human nature" and include the word "parents" instead of the continual reference to "mum" (read mom) as though mothers were always the primary care-givers. I probably won't be around to see what difference this will make to the thousands who will read this material, but hopefully it will permeate their thinking and have a lasting result. Some of us will have to be content with "picking out the stones" to prepare the ground for the good seed of biblical truth to take root.

Choosing a Marriage Partner

2006-11-16T17:51:00.000-08:00

Attending another marriage ceremony on the weekend and hearing someone's casual comments about a Christian school program designed to prepare young people for marriage, that was hierarchy based, stirred the following thoughts.

Suppose a prospective husband, serious about Christian commitment, were choosing a partner and he was committed to the hierarchical model, would he be on the lookout for:

a) A gentile, very soft and feminine woman who would readily expect and accept his male leadership? or ... would he
b) Not be too concerned until after the marriage and then gradually dominate the wife into submission? or ...
c) Have a loving partnership and mutual consideration in courtship, then switch to hierarchy once married?

It would seem to me that one or all of the above would be the desired options or outcomes that a person schooled in that particular line of thinking would be encouraged to adopt.

Whereas, on the other hand, if the prospective husband was equally as serious about Christian commitment but had a more egalitarian approach he could be coming at it from an entirely different direction. He would be on the lookout for:

a) A woman committed to the same passion for Christ as himself, regardless of temperament.
b) A woman at ease with her femininity but not afraid to voice an opinion in mixed company.
c) A woman so secure in Christ that she does not need a man to make her life decisions for her.

In this situation you would expect the prospective husband to not be threatened by a capable and gifted woman but rather to be excited about the prospect of a lively partnership where each would submit to the other to discover God's will together.

It bears thinking about.

1plus1equals1

2006-11-16T01:40:00.000-08:00

1plus1equals1

Would really love to hear from people out there who are interested in knowing more about what real equality looks like. It can be just a word. Perhaps you have someone telling you that you are equal but you know that person doesn't understand and perhaps demonstrates a misunderstanding of how others may feel.

We would encourage anyone who has questions on this issue to contact us and learn what the issues are at stake and how we can address them.

We're back home

2006-10-29T00:20:00.000-07:00

Have returned from a 3 months holiday in the Australian outback. Drove 13.000 kms and apart from 8 nights in a house or motel slept in a tent all the way. Wonderful way to experience the outdoors and enjoy seeing the amazing scenery of the "Top End" of Australia.
Seems that there is more interest in equality from those outside the church than within the ranks. It makes good sense to most people that we should share everything and treat each other fairly. It almost seems to be a non-issue in the churches here even though many people (particularly women) are oppressed and marginalised. We would love to be able to teach on the subject of true biblical equality but we don't have churches queuing up for our time and experience.
Part of the problem seems to be with women who don't like to cause problems and berate themselves for feeling hard done by.
I think it begins with little girls pre-school age who need to be affirmed that they are loved for who they and and that they can be anything they desire if they're willing to try. Much of the conversation with female children is regarding needing a boyfriend and being pretty is seen as the most important criteria for success.
Another issue is to teach children that it is more important to be obedient to God than people and that whatever people think of us is nowhere near as important as God's opinion. Most people (boys inc.) seem to grow up trying to please or impress others so are in the market for the false teching of sexual sterotypes in their early years of life.
Maybe someone has experience with teaching young children their instrinsic vale regardless of their gender ?

Good points on the comments

2006-05-30T21:33:00.000-07:00

Hi everyone. Sorry you haven't read anything for some time. I know that for a blog to be effective it should be used constantly, so we will try to remedy that. We may be going on an extended driving trip from the endof July so if that comes about, we'lllet you know when we'll be back on line.

Just read some of the comments and want to encourage you to follow them up. There are some excellent points made there about creation and God's original intention. This seems one of the crucial issues and since not a lot is recorded in Genesis about this, we can conclude that much of what is written in books and articles which promote heirarchy is assumed. If we just look at the verses it suggests that God made people in his image and he made two kinds - women and men. Obviously, if it was 2 men or 2 women, then there would be no more people to populate the earth! Also - the words of God after Eve and Adam sinned were recorded as bad things which would be a result of their disobedience, not just a variant on God's original intention.

Sometimes huge issues which divide the Christian church can be reasoned quite simply but when we do that, opponents say we are using human reasoning and not the Word of God. Let's face it - "we all choose our own experts" - and usually those experts which 'back up our pre-conceived ideas'. I'll admit to that!

One factor which concerns me is how different views paint a picture of God's character of love, justice, compassion etc. God has to be fair in all things or not God at all and there are many places where we are told to not show partiality to others because of their financial or physical state. If we approach the bible from the position of God being good and having human's best interests at all times, then we see things in a different light.

That's all for now - would love to read more from our readers.......Liz

Recent reading

2006-04-06T12:54:00.000-07:00

We've just received our CBE Priscilla Papers and I've read the lead article by MaryKate Morse, titled GenderWars: Biology Offers Insights to a Biblical Problem. This would have to be one of the best distilled articles that I have read on this subject. It comes hard on the heals of my reading at Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen's work, My Brother's Keeper: What the Social Sciences Do (and don't) Tell Us About Masculinity. (Can't wait to get hold of her book, Gender and Grace.)
It's the first time that I've looked seriously at the biology issue. Generally I'd leave that up to the experts in that field. But this article by MaryKate Morse is so compelling, and yet simply put, in it's argument that I cannot but be moved by its content and want to share it all around. I've thought of a whole bunch of people that I'd like to send it to. Not as an, "I told you so," deal, but in a genuine desire to inform others (yes, some are antagonists) of the value of the level of argument in this article.
Her opening lines tell the story, and I quote: "Men and women struggle to understand each other and to thrive together as God intended. God's design of an Edinic relationship where male and female together nurture and steward the earth rarely seems to happen. Women often suffer worldwide from assumptions that they have less status and purposefulness than their brothers. Men often suffer from being alone at the top and alone in the struggle of life's battlefields. Children can suffer the consequences of the ongoing acrimony between parents. Gender wars are destructive." In that section alone there are four very worthwhile Endnotes to reinforce her line of argument up to that point.
It's worth stating the reasoning behind her offering and again I quote: "The problem is Theological, not secular. It began in the Garden, not in the 21st Century... Surprisingly, deciding between the interpretations depends not only on one's underlying theological views, but also on one'sbiological assumptions about the nature of gender... And, as we will see, a synthesis of recent biological discoveries on the essence of femaleness and maleness provides an opportunity to understand more clearly God's intention in Genesis 1-2 and the impact of the fall in Genesis 3. This leads to suggestions for ameliorating the division between males and females that move beyond certain polarizing hierarchicalist and egalitarian views."
It is a great shame that it is so difficult to get people who fall into either of these camps to dialog on the issues. From my experience there is much more tension from the Traditionalist area and one is dismissed as a heritic for even suggesting that certain passages could be interpreted differenty. That's sad because most egalitarian christians have a very high view of scripture. This article by MaryKate could go a long way toward healing that rift. If only people would read it!
The article in its entirety is from Priscilla Papers, Volume 20, Number 1, Winter 2006. I tried to get the link so that I could post it here and you could look it up on the net but at the time of writing my computer could not locate the server.

It's been a while

2006-03-31T06:41:00.000-08:00

My excuse for not getting on with blogging has been that we've had house guests for the last 10 days. Knowing that they were coming meant that we had other things to do in preparation, so no blogs. That doesn't mean that I didn't take time to read other peoples, or do other things on the net, like spend some time checking out the ECA debate forum. Hardly came near the computer while our visitors were actually here though. Too busy talking and showing them around the beauty spots of our seaside abode. It will still take a while to get into the swing of things, but do it we must.
Liz and I are running an 18 week parenting course that's a buzz. Our youngest son and his wife initiated it and we are sharing with 4 other really keen couples. That's keeping us out of mischief too. We just love the way the course stimulates positive and encouraging conversation and the resulting care for each other. As grandparents we are really ready for this. It's great!!!

Time to get down to business

2006-02-27T05:20:00.000-08:00

Now for a brief insight as to why it is that Liz and I are so committed to Biblical equality. As mentioned in our personal profile, we've been in christian ministry for 35+ years and for all of that time were committed to mutuality in the way that we did marriage. For many years it did not impact on our ministry method, except that it will have been obvious to some that I regarded Liz as my best friend and closest ministry confidant. This eventually caused difficulties in a multiple eldership situation where other elders felt that Liz should not be privy to these 'leadership' matters. They felt that Liz was a defacto elder. We didn't really know how to handle it then because we were unfamiliar with the body of literature that was available to address such issues. Whenever we prepared people for marriage we encouraged them to embrace a more mutually submissive style as we felt that it was far more glorifying to God and the best way to serve one another out of reverence for Christ. Because we served in a conservative church environment it was soon obvious that some folks disagreed with our ministry style and objections were raised. I (Trevor) tried to embrace the accepted, traditional, position but found it very uncomfortable and impossible to teach with any conviction. We mostly kept our theological misgivings to ourselves and I avoided any teaching on the sensitive, often disputed passages. Not so long ago a returned missionary couple told us that there were good books written on this subject and we ought to get ourselves informed. So, this we did, which ultimately led to our being aware of an entire worldwide ministry devoted to this issue. I'm speaking of Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE). For us this was like manna from heaven. At last we could identify with other, well informed Christians on this matter of equality and we were not compromising our faith in any way whatsoever. What a wonderful relief this was, and is. Since then we've become even more involved with that organisation and taken advantage of the many book titles and gotten to know some of the authors on a more personal level. For us it is not just a matter of women being equally as gifted as men in their ability to serve in the church. It is that, but more than that, it is equality in the home. Men and women, husbands and wives, can and should direct the home and raise the children together. We believe that this is the reason for much of the spouse abuse that continues to occur in traditional, heirarchical marriages. Traditionalists, or complimentarians, as they are now known argue that you cannot have two heads of a home, someone has to be in charge. We agree, someone does! It would be far better that that person be Christ. If each defers to the other in reverence for Christ, no one person necessarily gets their own way but together they seek to discover what God would have them do as a family. There are all sorts of practical possiblities here that we can share in subsequent posts. Sufficient to say that the above is the principle involved and the Biblical basis for it would be Ephesians 5:21, ...'Submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.'

The journey has begun

2006-02-21T23:58:00.000-08:00

Not quite sure where this will take us and how exactly we are to link up with like-minded people but I'm sure that we'll learn as we go along. Counless thousands of others have been and are on this road sooo, hang on, here we go.

Making a start

2006-02-21T23:35:00.000-08:00

This whole blogging thing is new to us. Kind of an electronic adventure that's about to begin. We are doing this in the hope of meeting new, but like minded people and sharing ideas and experiences of our christian journey in respect to Biblical equality.