Career Women of the Bible: Sisters Who Served

In Luke 10:38-42 we meet Martha and Mary who are apparently two single sisters living together; Luke makes no mention of Lazarus, their brother. When Jesus and the twelve come into their village Martha welcomes them into her home. At his point, normally sister is pitted against sister to elevate “being” with the Lord above “doing” for the Lord. This interpretation misses what Luke is doing in this narrative. As Fred Craddock points out the “radicality” of this story should not be overlooked: “Jesus is received into a woman’s home (no mention is made of a brother) and he teaches a woman” (Craddock, 152).

For the first century Jew sitting at someone’s feet did not bring to mind children sitting at the feet of adults listening to stories; sitting at someone’s feet meant higher, formal education. Jesus was known as a rabbi, a teacher; to sit at his feet meant that one was being trained as a disciple. Mary was not quietly sitting contemplating all Jesus said. She was in active training with the other disciples (Grenz, 75). This was not a usual activity for women. Martha was doing what women were supposed to do: be good homemakers.

Continue reading

Reflections from others

Jendi Reiter has a beautiful excerpt from Walt Wangerin Jr.’s reflections on his cancer that is very different from how we normally look at diseases like cancer.

This beautiful prayer is the Sunday prayer from RevGalBlogPals:

If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning. –Martin Luther King Jr., “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

Life-giving God, we give you thanks and praise for your abundant grace. With a mighty hand you parted the waters and provided a band of Israelite slaves with the gift of exodus—a way out. In the same way, O God, grant safe passage to all who need it today—passage through the turmoil of illness, grief, and despair; passage through poverty and oppression; passage, perhaps, through toils and snares of our own devising. Where chaos swirls around us like mighty waters, lead us by your Spirit. Let us find solid ground in our walk with Jesus Christ, our guide and friend. On this weekend of remembrance we give thanks for the life of Martin Luther King Jr., his prophetic witness, his courage, and his faithfulness to the gospel. May we be so prophetic, so courageous, and so faithful.

Powerful God, in the desert you smashed apart dry stones and made waters to spill out, enough for everyone. Forgive the times we do not trust you, when we demand miracles on our own timetable. You provided water in the desert, and manna sufficient for all; forgive us when we hoard and store up your abundant gifts for our own use. Give us the courage and faith to speak out for those in need of liberation and justice. Give us the words also to witness to your life-changing gospel in a thirsty world.

We thank you, resurrected God, that you rolled away the stone of the tomb, and a new creation poured forth. Justice and mercy roll down now and forever; peace and hope reign always. Help us to claim this new reality, in our lives and for this world. We pray in the name of Jesus, the risen Christ. Amen.

RevGals Friday Five: Countdown Edition

Last night my TV Boyfriend Keith Olbermann made some comments I really appreciated, and it got me thinking about what makes one person admire another. In the spirit of Keith’s show on MSNBC, welcome to the Friday Five Countdown Edition.

Please count down five living people you admire and tell us a little something about why they make your list. These could be famous people or people you know personally.

5…4…3…2…1

5. Jon Stewart, who is my TV boyfriend. He always makes me smile no matter how ridiculous the news is. My day is not complete until I’ve had my moment of zen.

4. I like Keith Olbermann as well. He’s the only reporter to call the Bush administration on their incompetence, and he was doing it before anyone else was. I also love his “Worst Person in the World.”

3. Marva Dawn for her ability to translate theology into everyday life.

2. My former boss who is intelligent, full of grace, and a joy to work for.

1. My husband who continues show me what unconditional love is and always makes me feel like the most special person on the face of the planet.

Poetry: My Lost Saint

“I love thee with a love I seemed to lose
With my lost saints.”–Elizabeth Barrett Browning

“My Lost Saint”
It is odd
Finally, admitting to myself
How I feel.
I’ve kept it hidden
In the back of my heart
For a very long time.
So many reasons
Why I shouldn’t:
Like it will never be.
But that just hasn’t
Changed these feelings.
The depth of my emotion
Reveals itself at the smallest thing:
A sarcastic remark,
Affirmation that you see
Who I really am.
I do love you.
I am in love with you,
My lost saint.

©2004 Shawna Renee Bound

Epiphany

The earliest Christian celebrated Epiphany as one of the three primary holy days of the liturgical year. Deriving from the Greek word epiphaneia, meaning “appearance” or “coming,” Epiphany more so than Christmas celebrated the manifestaton of divinity on earth through Jesus Christ. The celebrations that occurred during Epiphany found their origins not only in Jesus’ birth but also his baptism and his first recorded miracle, the turning of the water into wine at the wedding feast in Cana. For Christians in the East, Epiphany remains the primary holy day in this season.

As Christianity developed, those of the West focused more specifically on the birth narratives and began to associate the celebration of the Incarnation primarliy with Christmas. Epiphany became a less celebrated holiday and focused mainly on the journey of the Magi, the wise ones, to honor the newborn Jesus. Western Christians began to observe the celebration of Jesus’ baptism on the Sunday following Epiphany.

It is not necessary to choose one meaning of Epiphany over another. The traditions of both East and West remind us that our journey does not end on Christmas Day; rather, it begins there. Often we in the West forget that Christmas in not one day but twelve. Even when Epiphany, the last day, passes, it has but prepared us for the journey through the year to come.

Jan L. Richardson, Sacred Journey: A Woman’s Book of Daily Prayer.

Renaming Career Women of the Bible

I am thinking of renaming the Career Women series. The main reason I want to is that I want to include Mary, Hannah, and the Matriarchs. Now I think being a mother (especially a stay-at-home mom) is a full-time career and then some. So I am fine leaving it with the current title.

I have also thought it would be nice to have more a inclusive and descriptive title. The one I’ve come up with that I like the most is: Biblical Women: Prophets, Evangelists, and Mothers. When I wrote my thesis its primary purpose was to show that single woman had a valid place in leadership positions in the church. Now I would like to expand out to show that women have always been single or wives, mothers, and leaders in the Bible, and that these callings are not mutually exclusive.

I would love to hear your thoughts. I would also love to hear any suggestions you have for a new title for the series. Thanks.

Thomas Jefferson's thoughts on religious freedom

Thomas Jefferson championed religious diversity and the separation of church and state. In 1777, Jefferson drafted the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom (passed 1786) guaranteeing full civil liberties to Virginians (white male ones, as was the custom of the day) regardless of religious views, “that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.” The Virginia Statute served as the foundation of the religion clauses in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

In recent years, some Religious Right partisans have attacked Jefferson and his views on church and state. They argue that Jefferson never imagined the expansive form of religious diversity in America today. Thus, Jefferson only intended religious freedom for a broad Christian spectrum (and perhaps Jews).

Jefferson anticipated such charges in his autobiography, stating that religious liberty was “meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and Gentile, the Christian and the Mohometan, the Hindoo, and the Infidel of every denomination.” Some would reply that Jefferson held such views because he was not an orthodox Christian and faced charges of being an “infidel” in his own day. But where did Jefferson get these ideas? He got them from John Locke, the English Christian political philosopher. In 1689, a century before Jefferson, Locke made a case for complete religious freedom for “Pagans, Moslems, and Jews,” as “none ought to be excluded from the civil rights of the commonwealth because of his religion.” He continued, “The Gospel commands no such thing.”

“The Gospel commands no such thing.” Locke based his argument for religious freedom (including Muslims, non-believers, and Jews) on Christian principles. His Letter Concerning Toleration begins with an elegant call to love. Christianity consists of, as Locke wrote, “charity, meekness, and good-will in general towards all mankind.” The love of Jesus Christ thus served as the starting place for his political vision of the Christian state: full civil rights for all in a religiously diverse society.

This an excerpt from Diana Butler Bass’ article Jefferson’s Koran and the New Congress. The whole article is well worth the read. She really shows how the Religious Right has really skewed what one of the founding fathers thought about freedom of religion and the reason for the separation of church and state.

RevGals Friday Five: Birthday Redux

1. “It’s my party and I’ll [blank] if I want to…”
Favorite way to celebrate your birthday (dinner with family? party with friends? a day in solitude?)

I like going out with friends–doesn’t matter what we’re doing, although eating is normally involved.

2. “You say it’s your birthday… it’s my birthday too, yeah…”
Do you share your birthday with someone famous?

Robert Frost! Woot!

3. “Lordy Lordy look who’s forty…”
Milestone birthdays:
a) just like any other birthday–they’re just numbers, people.
b) a good opportunity to look back/take stock
c) enjoy the black balloons–I’ll be hiding under a pile of coats until the day is over
d) some combination of the above, or something else entirely.

I want the black balloons, black roses, the whole nine yards. And I will be Mrs. Death in her black mourning veil and whitest-white make-up (PeaceBang would probably be horrified).

4. “Happy birthday, dear… Customer…”
Have you ever been sung to in a restaurant? Fun or cringe-worthy?

Nope, and I’m thinking I would be cringing.

5. “Take my birthday–please”
Tell me one advantage and one disadvantage about your particular birthday (e.g. birthday in the summer–never had to go to school; birthday near Christmas–the dreaded joint presents)
EDITED TO ADD: This could also simply be something you like/dislike about your birthday (e.g. I like sharing a birthday with my best friend, etc.).

I always had to go to school or work! When I was a kid my birthday fell on Easter, and I just knew I was going to get robbed of birthday presents or my Easter basket. I didn’t think I could celebrate both on the same day. But Mom and the Easter Bunny proved me wrong.

If anyone watches Ace of Cakes on The Food Network, this cake is from their website: Charm City Cakes. If I’m ever in Baltimore I’m ordering a cake eight weeks before and picking it up.

Career Women of the Bible: The Samaritan Woman

In John’s Gospel the woman at the well is the first person Jesus openly reveals himself as Messiah. The pious Jewish leader, Nicodemus, did not hear the words that Jesus tells this foreign woman when she states her belief in the coming Messiah: “I am he, the one who is speaking to you” (John 4:26). This is also the longest private conservation Jesus had with anyone on record.

Verse 4 says that Jesus “had to go through Samaria.” The edei (had to) makes it clear that this is a divine appointment; it was not geographically necessary for Jesus to go through Samaria, and Jewish travelers normally traveled around Samaria. Jesus and his disciples entered a Samaritan village, and the disciples went to buy food while Jesus sat by well because he was tired. A woman from the village came for water. Jesus then did something that was a cultural taboo: he spoke to a woman in public, and not just a woman, but a Samaritan woman. She was twice an outcast in Jewish thought. Jesus asked her for a drink of water. She was understandably shocked: a Jewish man was speaking to her, a Samaritan woman? He also should not have wanted to share a vessel with her for drinking water since it would be considered unclean. She was right to be confused.

The conversation then turned to a discussion of living water versus the water in the well. At this point many commentators say that the woman did not have the ability to engage Jesus in serious theological conversation; because she was a woman she did not have the intelligence to keep up with the conversation (O’Day, 384). That is why she was confused about this living water Jesus offered. But the woman was no more confused over living water than Nicodemus was over being born again in the previous chapter. The woman was not confused because she was a woman, just as Nicodemus was not confused simply because he was a man. Both of them were confused because Jesus was introducing them to new spiritual truths. Whereas Nicodemus never quite gets what Jesus was telling him in John 3, the woman did come to understand who Jesus was and what he was telling her.

Although the woman still wasn’t sure what this living water was, she wanted it. When Jesus told her to go get her husband we find out that this woman has had five husbands, and was now living with a man who was not her husband. Many commentators have jumped to the conclusion that she was an immoral woman who had been divorced five times (ibid). There are at least two other reasons why this woman has had five husbands (John 4 never says she was divorced).

If five men had divorced her, the reason could be is because she was barren. They married, found out she couldn’t have children, and divorced her to marry more fertile women. She could also be trapped by the Levirate marriage law. Her five husbands could have been brothers she was supposed to produce an heir for. Either the family ran out of sons or the next son could have refused to marry her. That she was living with a man now could have been the less of two evils: her only other choice after husband number five died or divorced her could have been prostitution. Regardless of why the woman had had five husbands, the implication is still she is a woman who cannot keep a man.

After Jesus told the woman about her life, she knew that he was a prophet. Again many commentators downplay the woman’s theological ability by saying her next question concerning the proper place of worship is a ploy to draw attention away from her supposed immoral life (ibid). What they don’t acknowledge is the woman asked what is probably the most pressing theological question of the Samaritans in the first century: where is the proper place of worship?

The Samaritans were descended from the Judean people who had not been deported in the exile and the other peoples who were imported to the region. They continued to worship Yahweh. Alexander the Great allowed the Samaritans to build a temple on Mt. Gerizim, which became a point of contention when the Jews returned and rebuilt the temple in Jerusalem. Tensions continued to degrade until the temple on Mt. Gerizim was destroyed by the Jews in 128 B.C. (The Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 726-7). Both groups believed that they were worshiping Yahweh, and both believed that they had the right place to worship Yahweh. The woman had met a prophet–someone who knew what had happened in her life, and one she was sure could answer the most pressing theological question of her heart and of the time.

Jesus did not accuse her of changing the subject; he answered her question. It did not matter where one worshiped God–it was how God was worshiped. There would no longer be limitations of geography in worshiping God for God is spirit, and he will be worshiped in spirit and truth. The woman stated her belief in the coming Messiah who would reveal all things to them. Jesus then revealed something to this unnamed, foreign woman that he did not reveal to Nicodemus, “I am he, the one who is speaking to you” (John 4:26). The Samaritan woman was the first person that Jesus revealed himself as Messiah to in the Gospel of John, and this is the first “I amâ” statement in the gospel as well (Cunningham and Hamilton, 122).

Why did Jesus reveal himself to this woman and not to Nicodemus? The woman was not expecting a political Messiah. The Samaritans were looking for the ta’eb or “restorer” (Sloyan, 54). The Samaritans were not looking for a political Messiah from the line of David; they were looking for a prophet like Moses who would restore the observance of the law of Moses as it should be (ibid). Jesus could reveal himself as Messiah to her without worrying about political misunderstandings that would have arisen in Judah.

The disciples returned with food scratching their heads and wondering why Jesus is speaking to a foreign woman in public. Then the woman went to her people and said, “Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! He cannot be the Messiah, can he?” (v. 28). She became the first evangelist in the gospel of John. She went and told her people about Jesus and brought them to him, so they could see and hear for themselves. Jesus never approached people “randomly or casually but as possible bearers of witness to him to whole populations” (ibid). A foreign, single woman who had had five husbands, and was now living with a man was the one Jesus chose to bring a town in Samaria to him so that they could say, “We have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the Savior of the world” (v. 42).

Sources

Shawna Renee Bound, Your Daughters Shall Prophesy: A Biblical Theology of Single Women in Ministry, unpublished thesis, (© by Shawna Renee Bound 2002), “Women in the Gospels.”

Loren Cunningham and David Joel Hamilton, Why Not Women? A Fresh Look at Scripture on Women in Mission, Ministry, and Leadership (Seattle: YWAM Publishing, 2000).

Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992).

Gail R. O’Day, “John,” Women’s Bible Commentary, exp. ed., eds. Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998).

Gerard Sloyan, John, (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988).

What is a prophet?

Pat Robertson has made another “prophecy.” I put prophecy in quotations because what he considers prophecy is not biblical prophecy. Biblical prophecy is not a straight prediction/fulfillment event. That could be a part of biblical prophecy, but that was never its main thrust. The prophets’ calling was to call the people back into a right relatioship with God. It was to remind them of their covenant promise to God: that Yahweh alone would be their God, and they would be his people. They called the people to fulfill their covenant obligations: to worship God alone, love each other, and take care of the widow, orphan, the opressed, and the alien (see Leviticus 19:9-18, 33-34; Deuteronomy 24:17-22).

When judgment was proclaimed, it was in the hopes that the judgment would not come. Judgment was preached so that God’s people would repent of their sin, turn back to God, and obey him. They were not predetermined events set in stone. The predictions could be changed because God wanted the people restored to him. He waited for them to make their decision before he acted.

That strongly demonstrates that the primary category for prophetic literature should not be “prediction of the future.” A prophet was given insight (inspiration) into how God works in the world and what God’s people need to do to respond faithfully. That prophetic word to the people was itself part of the “response” to God’s self-revelation. However, the prophet then translated that understanding about God into the historical arena in which he lived, using the circumstances, language, metaphors, cultural allusions, poetry, nearly anything available to communicate that message (including some rather unusual actions, such as walking around naked and barefoot for 3 years, as in Isaiah 20:1-4) (Bratcher, “Prophecy and Prediction”).

The historical elements the prophet used were the vehicle of the message: not the message itself. The message did not focus on catastrophies and disasters—the message was always about God and the people’s response to him. The message was always God’s desire for the people to be faithful to him as he was to them.

The prophets spoke about God; that is, they spoke theology, cast in the circumstances of historical event. They read history in light of God’s covenant with his people, and then translated the message about God back into the historical context in which the people were living. . . (ibid).

This is first place where Robertson’s prophecy is not biblical. His prophecies are always much more concerned with disaster and God punishing sinners than with calling God’s people to be faithful. In this latest prophecy he said that the second half of 2007 would be a time of mass killings.

“The Lord didn’t say nuclear, but I do believe it’ll be something like that – that’ll be a mass killing, possibly millions of people, major cities injured,” Robertson said.

“There will be some very serious terrorist attacks,” he said. “The evil people will come after this country, and there’s a possibility – not a possibility, a definite certainty – that chaos is going to rule.” Robertson did not say where the attacks would occur (Vegh).

He never said what the message was: he only predicted disaster.

Another place where Robertson’s theology is wrong is that he always predicts disaster for the entire United States, thinking that the entire country is in a covenant with God. When Jesus set up the church, the people of God ceased being a nation or country. The people of God is now the church universal.

That is not to say that the prophets didn’t hold the pagan nations around Israel and Judah responsible: they did. But they held the pagan nations to a different standard for different reasons: the nations were condemned for acts of atrocity that they knew through being human were wrong. Israel and Judah were condemned for forsaking their God and not being loyal to their covenant with him. The nations were condemed for different reasons than Israel and Judah (see Amos 1:3—2:16).

For Robertson’s prophecy to approach being biblical, he needs to tell us why God is judging this way. He also needs to tell us who God is angry with. Is he angry with nonbelievers for doing things they know are wrong? Is he angry at the church for not living faithfully and obeying him? And the judgment has be a place where repentance can happen. Judgment is never given as the last word. God wants the judgment to lead to repentance and restored relationship with him.

All Robertson’s prophecy contains is judgment. There is no message. There is no call to repentance. There is no grace. Therefore, Robertson’s message is not prophetic nor biblical.

Sources

“Pat Robertson Predicts ‘Mass Killing'” at MSNBC.com.

Dr. Dennis Bratcher, “Prophecy and Prediction” and “Criteria of a True Prophet” at The Voice.

Stephen G. Vegh, “Robertson says God told him of ‘mass killing’ in U. S. in 2007” in The Virginian-Pilot.