Made in the Image of Godde: Female

Gifted for Leadership’s most recent post is What Our Feminity Means. Here is an excerpt that sums up the entire post:

The benefits of modesty aside, femininity became a new way to behave, a role I played, a corset I wrapped around my soul and tightened down to get approval. Femininity quickly became something I did to get what I needed or wanted in life. It was something to use, not something I owned.

I don’t think this is what Godde intended when he created Woman. In Genesis 1 Godde wanted to splash more of the Trinity onto Earth. So Godde made Man and Woman to mirror Godde’s image (Gen 1:27). Femininity in its truest, original sense was one way Godde’s image appeared, and this image was not weak, catty, emotionally crazy, or inferior because Godde is none of these things. Femininity wasn’t a role Eve played to get what she needed; femininity was part of who she was. Even after Eden, as broken image bearers, we reflect God. If a child is humble, she mirrors her Godde. If a man is gentle, he mirrors his Godde. If women are feminine in the original sense, we reflect our Godde.

My main problem with this is that “feminine” and “femininity” are social and sociological constructs, not biblical or theological terms. Genesis 2:26-28 states:

Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

Godde did not make “masculine” and “feminine” in Godde’s likeness. Godde made Male and Female in God’s likeness. And what does this image and likeness look like? According to these verses it means that man and woman subdue the earth and rule it as well as being fruitful and multiplying. Both the man and woman are commanded to have a family and to have a vocation.

In Genesis 2, we find that Godde created a human being and placed the human in the Garden of Eden. Godde decided that it was not good for the human to be alone, so Godde made an ezer cenegdo for the human. After the ezer is made there is now man and woman. What exactly is an ezer? Outside of Genesis 2, it appears 20 times in the Bible*. Seventeen of those times, ezer is used to describe Godde. In each instance military imagery is used to describe God coming to help Israel against its enemies. I found Psalm 146 particularly fascinating:

1 Praise the LORD! Praise the LORD, O my soul!
2 I will praise the LORD as long as I live; I will sing praises to my God all my life long.
3 Do not put your trust in princes, in mortals, in whom there is no help.
4 When their breath departs, they return to the earth; on that very day their plans perish.
5 Happy are those whose help [ezer] is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the LORD their God,
6 who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them; who keeps faith forever;
7 who executes justice for the oppressed; who gives food to the hungry. The LORD sets the prisoners free;
8 the LORD opens the eyes of the blind. The LORD lifts up those who are bowed down; the LORD loves the righteous.
9 The LORD watches over the strangers; he upholds the orphan and the widow, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin.
10 The LORD will reign forever, your God, O Zion, for all generations. Praise the LORD!

After telling the congregation not to put their trust in human leaders, the psalmist proclaims: “Happy are those whose ezer is the Godde of Jacob, Rachel, and Leah!” (author’s paraphrase). The psalmist then goes on to describe how Godde helped Israel: Godde executed justice for the oppressed, gave food to the hungry, set prisoners free, opened the eyes of the blind, lifted up those who are bowed down, and loved the righteous. Godde watches over the strangers, upholds the orphan and widow, and brings the way of the wicked to ruin. Godde’s help is not to dominate the people, but to lift them out of poverty and hunger, to set them free from oppressors and oppressive debts (most people in prison then were in debtor’s prison: they could not pay their debts). God helped the orphans and widows: those in society who have no one else to help them and be strong for them. Godde uses Godde’s strength and power to help those that no one else will help because they are seen as weak, poor, and marginal. Again we see military imagery used to describe Godde as Israel’s ezer or helper.

Carolyn Custis James does a wonderful job of exploring the word ezer and its military connotations in her book, Lost Women of the Bible: Finding Strength & Significance through Their Stories, in the chapter on Eve. She translates ezer as “strong helper.” Woman was created in the image of God to be a helper to the man as God was a helper to Israel. But this does not make her superior to the man. That’s where the second word of the phrase comes in: cenedgo, which means standing or sitting face to face. It means equal. So the full translation of ezer cenedgo is a powerful helper equal to. Woman was created to be a powerful helper equal to the man the way God is a powerful helper to God’s people.

Man and woman are created in Godde’s image to image Godde in our world. Psalm 146 gives a description of what Godde is doing in the world. Godde is not only fighting enemies and saving God’s people. Godde is also taking care of those who can’t take care of themselves. This means that both man and woman should be doing the things Godde does to image Godde to our world. This includes fighting systemic and spiritual evil, but it also includes tenderness and compassion toward those who are poor, needy, and those whom society overlooks.

I want to look at two women in the Bible; one in the Hebrew Scriptures and the other in the New Testament. First we’ll look at Deborah from the Hebrew Scriptures. We are introduced to Deborah in Judges 4. She was a prophet and judge, and she led Israel. The Israelite people came to her with problems and disputes, and she mediated Godde’s will as Moses once did. She was married, but she was a working woman. Godde called her to be a prophet and judge, and she answered. When Godde commanded Israel to go to battle with their enemy Sisera and the Canaanites, Deborah summoned the military commander Barak, and told him what Godde said. But Barak would not go into battle without Godde’s representative, Deborah. Both Barak and Deborah led Israel’s armies into battle. Here we see a man and a woman working together to fight the people’s enemies and obey Godde’s words and will. And irony of ironies is that Deborah’s husband, Lappidoth, was probably in the troops following his wife.

Deborah, Barak, and Lappidoth do not resemble or act according to the societal constructs of masculine and feminine, but they are obeying Godde and building Godde’s kingdom side by side. Leading men into a battle is not considered “feminine” in Western society, but Deborah was obeyed Godde. Godde called her to lead her people and protect them from their enemies. She was an ezer who was imaging Godde in her every word and action.

The next woman I want to look at in the New Testament is Priscilla (or Prisca). Priscilla ran a business with her husband, Aquilla. They made tents together. They worked in Corinth with Paul where they heard the Gospel and were saved (Acts 18:1-3). Later the couple would meet Apollos who had heard only of John’s baptism and not heard of Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension or the baptism of the Holy Spirit. When Priscilla and Aquilla heard him, they took him aside and “explained the Way of God to him more accurately” (v. 26). They also led a home church when Paul wrote his letter to the Romans (Romans 16:3-5). It is very odd during this time for a wife’s name to be mentioned before her husband’s, and yet four times Priscilla’s name is put before her husband’s. Many scholars believe that she was the dominant one in ministry: the teacher and pastor of the churches that met in their home.

Again we see a man and woman working side by side making a living and building Godde’s kingdom. There is no mention of what is masculine and what is feminine. They worked together as the team Godde created them to be.

I think being made male and female in the image of Godde has very little to do with modern notions of femininity and masculinity. It has everything to do with faithfully imaging Godde to our world by obeying God’s callings on our lives and working together–both men and women–to build the kingdom of Godde on earth.

*Exodus 18:4; Deuteronomy 33:7, 26, 29; Psalm 20:2; 33:20; 70:5; 89:19; 115:9-11; 121:1-2; 124:8; 146:5; and Hosea 13:9.

The New Revised Standard Version is used for biblical quotes unless otherwise noted.

The picture is Thomasz Rut’s Insuspenco.

Crossposted at Emerging Women.

Updated: Potential "Career Women of the Bible" Outline

Here is the very beginning of my potential outline for the Career Women of the Bible book proposal.

1. Introduction

2. In the Beginning
Does It Really Mean “Helpmate”?

The Fall and Women

2. Ministers
The 12th Century, B.C.E. Woman: Deborah

Standing Between Life and Death: Miriam

Standing Between Life and Death: Zipporah and Huldah

The Apostle to the Apostles: Mary Magdalene

Apostles and Prophets

Teachers, Elders, and Coworkers

3. Mothers and More
Sarah
Hagar
Rebekah
Rachel and Leah
Hannah

4. Just a Housewife?
Standing Between God and the People: Jael

Abigail
The Proverbs 31 Woman
Sisters in Service: Mary and Martha

The Samaritan Woman

5. Off to Work
Rahab
Ruth
Esther
Priscilla and Lydia

The women who don’t have links, I have not written on yet. I also realize the articles I have written need a lot of rewriting. For those who just found the site, Career Women of the Bible started out as my thesis in seminary. I’ve started to rewrite it, but it still is very scholary and has some ways to go before it has the narrative and story-like quality that I want the finished book to have.

This is just a start, but I think it is a good one. Any advice or opinions? Who did I leave out? Why do you think they should be included? Please let me know. Thanks.

Evangelicals, Israel, and Palestine: A Different View

This is a letter that 34 evangelical leaders sent to President Bush regarding Israel and Palestine. It of the evangelical leaders who signed were Ron Sider, Ray Bakke, Tony Campolo, Leighton Ford, and Luci Shaw. This letter was also published in The New York Times.

July 27, 2007

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We write as evangelical Christian leaders in the United States to thank you for your efforts (including the major address on July 16) to reinvigorate the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to achieve a lasting peace in the region. We affirm your clear call for a two-state solution. We urge that your administration not grow weary in the time it has left in office to utilize the vast influence of America to demonstrate creative, consistent and determined U.S. leadership to create a new future for Israelis and Palestinians. We pray to that end, Mr. President.

We also write to correct a serious misperception among some people including some U.S. policymakers that all American evangelicals are opposed to a two-state solution and creation of a new Palestinian state that includes the vast majority of the West Bank. Nothing could be further from the truth. We, who sign this letter, represent large numbers of evangelicals throughout the U.S. who support justice for both Israelis and Palestinians. We hope this support will embolden you and your administration to proceed confidently and forthrightly in negotiations with both sides in the region.

As evangelical Christians, we embrace the biblical promise to Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you.” (Genesis 12:3). And precisely as evangelical Christians committed to the full teaching of the Scriptures, we know that blessing and loving people (including Jews and the present State of Israel) does not mean withholding criticism when it is warranted. Genuine love and genuine blessing means acting in ways that promote the genuine and long-term well being of our neighbors. Perhaps the best way we can bless Israel is to encourage her to remember, as she deals with her neighbor Palestinians, the profound teaching on justice that the Hebrew prophets proclaimed so forcefully as an inestimably precious gift to the whole world.

Historical honesty compels us to recognize that both Israelis and Palestinians have legitimate rights stretching back for millennia to the lands of Israel/Palestine. Both Israelis and Palestinians have committed violence and injustice against each other. The only way to bring the tragic cycle of violence to an end is for Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate a just, lasting agreement that guarantees both sides viable, independent, secure states. To achieve that goal, both sides must give up some of their competing, incompatible claims. Israelis and Palestinians must both accept each other’s right to exist. And to achieve that goal, the U.S. must provide robust leadership within the Quartet to reconstitute the Middle East roadmap, whose full implementation would guarantee the security of the State of Israel and the viability of a Palestinian State.

We affirm the new role of former Prime Minister Tony Blair and pray that the conference you plan for this fall will be a success.

Mr. President, we renew our prayers and support for your leadership to help bring peace to Jerusalem, and justice and peace for all the people in the Holy Land.

Finally, we would request to meet with you to personally convey our support and discuss other ways in which we may help your administration on this crucial issue.

You can view all the leaders who signed the letter here. You can also add your name to a list of signatures being collected if President Bush does meet with these leaders.

I would also like to point you to two responses to this letter. The first is from an Arab-American Christian: Deanne Murshed: Evangelicals and Israel. The second is from a Palestinian Christian: Daoud Kuttab: Good News for Palenstinian Christians.

The Gospel from Iraq

I’ve started an online urban ministry course. Part of the assignment I am working on was to listen to a presentation Ray Bakke gave to the Christian Community Development Conference. He had a really good interpretation of the books of the Bible from Iran and Iraq. The books of the Bible written in Iran are Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. The books written in Iraq are Jonah and Daniel. He called these books the Gospel from Iran and Iraq. Then he took the theology he developed to apply it to ministry in the city today. Below is my summary of what he called the Gospel from Iraq. If you have time, go listen to the whole thing. It is very thoughtful and very good.

The Gospel from Iraq begins in Israel with Jonah. God commands Jonah to go to Ninevah and “cry out against it; for their wickedness has come up before me.” Jonah does not want to go and for good reason. Ninevah is the capital of Assyria, and Assyria is the ancient world’s Nazis and terrorists. They are brutal and show no mercy. They have been attacking Israel and killing its people for years. God has just told Jonah to go to his worst enemy and “cry out against it; for their wickedness has come up before me.”

Jonah does the exact opposite: he jumps on a ship and heads in the opposite direction. But God sent a storm that threaten to break up the ship. The sailors on board were praying to their gods when they find Jonah asleep. The wake him up and tell him to start praying to his god. They cast lots to see who was causing the calamity. The lot fell to Jonah, and he tells them that he worships Yahweh, the God of the heavens, land, and sea, and he confessed that he was running from what his God wanted him to do. The description of Jonah’s God frightens the sailors, and he tells them to throw him overboard. The sailors try to row back to land, but they can’t make it.

(more…)

Career Women of the Bible: Church Overseers, Ministers, and Patrons

"The Breaking of Bread" in the Catacomb of St. Priscilla/Dorothy Irvin

In the last two articles we have been looking at women who ministered in leadership positions in the New Testament (Apostles and Prophets and Teachers, Elders, and Coworkers). We saw women minister as prophets, apostles, teachers, elders, and coworkers. Now we will look at the last three leadership roles: church overseer, minister, and patron.

Church Overseer

Church overseers were what we traditionally think of as a pastor, and they were normally the person or people who opened their homes for believers to meet for hearing God’s word and worship. Women who were overseers include Priscilla, Phoebe, Euodia, Syntyche, and possibly John Mark’s mother, Chloe, Lydia, and Nympha (Spencer, 108). The church overseer I would like to focus on is the “Elect Lady” of 2 John.

(more…)

Sermon: Lost and Restoration

This was a Lenten sermon I preached two or three years ago. St. Patrick is a big part of the sermon, so I thought it would be good to post it today.

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!

“Loss and Restoration”
Ruth 1

A fleet of 50 longboats weaved its way toward the shore, where a young Roman Brit and his family walked. His name was Patrick, the 16-year-old son of a civil magistrate and tax collector. He had heard stories of Irish raiders who captured slaves and took them “to the ends of the world,” and as he studied the longboats, he no doubt began imagining the worst.

With no Roman army to protect them (Roman legions had long since deserted Britain to protect Rome from barbarian invasions), Patrick and his town were unprepared for attack. The Irish warriors, wearing helmets and armed with spears, descended on the pebbled beach. The braying war horns struck terror into Patrick’s heart, and he started to run toward town.

The warriors quickly demolished the village, and as Patrick darted among burning houses and screaming women, he was caught. The barbarians dragged him aboard a boat bound for the east coast of Ireland.

Patrick was sold to a cruel warrior chief, whose opponents’ heads sat atop sharp poles around his palisade in Northern Ireland. While Patrick minded his master’s pigs in the nearby hills, he lived like an animal himself, enduring long bouts of hunger and thirst. Worst of all, he was isolated from other human beings for months at a time. Far from home, he clung to the religion he had ignored as a teenager. Even though his grandfather had been a priest, and his father a town councilor, Patrick “knew not the true God.” But forced to tend his master’s sheep in Ireland, he spent his bondage mainly in prayer.

After six years of slavery Patrick escaped to the European continent. Many scholars believe Patrick then spent a period training for ministry on an island off the south of France. But his autobiographical Confession includes a huge gap after his escape from Ireland. When it picks up again “after a few years,” he is back in Britain with his family. It was there that Patrick received his call to evangelize Ireland—a vision like the apostle Paul’s at Troas, when a Macedonian man pleaded, “Help us!”

“I had a vision in my dreams of a man who seemed to come from Ireland,” Patrick wrote. “His name was Victoricius, and he carried countless letters, one of which he handed over to me. I read aloud where it began: ‘The Voice of the Irish.’ And as I began to read these words, I seemed to hear the voice of the same men who lived beside the forest of Foclut …and they cried out as with one voice, ‘We appeal to you, holy servant boy, to come and walk among us.’ I was deeply moved in heart and I could read no further, so I awoke.”

Despite his reputation, Patrick wasn’t really the first to bring Christianity to Ireland. Pope Celestine I sent a bishop named Palladius to the island in 431 (about the time Patrick was captured as a slave). Some scholars believe that Palladius and Patrick are one and the same individual, but most believe Palladius was unsuccessful (possibly martyred), and Patrick was sent in his place. In any event, paganism was still dominant when Patrick arrived on the other side of the Irish Sea. “I dwell among gentiles,” he wrote, “in the midst of pagan barbarians, worshipers of idols, and of unclean things.”

Patrick was in his mid-40s when he returned to Ireland. Palladius had not been very successful in his mission, and the returning former slave replaced him. Intimately familiar with the Irish clan system (his former master, Milchu, had been a chieftain), Patrick’s strategy was to convert chiefs or kings first, who would then convert their clans through their influence. Reportedly, Milchu was one of his earliest converts.

Predictably, Patrick faced the most opposition from the druids, who practiced magic, were skilled in secular learning (especially law and history) and advised Irish kings. Biographies of the saint are replete with stories of druids who “wished to kill holy Patrick.” “Daily I expect murder, fraud or captivity,” Patrick wrote, “but I fear none of these things because of the promises of heaven. I have cast myself into the hands of God almighty who rules everywhere.”

Indeed, Patrick almost delighted in taking risks for the gospel. “I must take this decision disregarding risks involved and make known the gifts of God and his everlasting consolation. Neither must we fear any such risk in faithfully preaching God’s name boldly in every place, so that even after my death, a spiritual legacy may be left for my brethren and my children.”

Patrick continued to concentrate the bulk of his missionary efforts on the country’s one hundred or so tribal kings. As kings converted, they gave their sons to Patrick in an old Irish custom for educating and “fostering” (Patrick, for his part, held up his end by distributing gifts to these kings). Eventually, the sons and daughters of the Irish were persuaded to become priests, monks, and nuns.

From kingdom to kingdom (Ireland did not yet have towns), Patrick worked much the same way. Once he converted a number of pagans, he built a church. One of his new disciples would be ordained as a deacon, priest, or bishop, and left in charge. If the chieftain had been gracious enough to grant a site for a monastery as well as a church, it was built too and functioned as a missionary station.

Though he was not solely responsible for converting the island, Patrick was quite successful. He made missionary journeys all over Ireland, and it soon became known as one of Europe’s Christian centers.

Patrick was not the first or the last to be taken to a place he did not want to go. Neither was he the first to go to a place he might not be well received. In our passage today we are going to meet two women—one women was taken to a foreign country by her husband during famine. The other woman chose to leave her country for one where she might not ever be accepted. Ruth and Naomi both knew what it was like to live in a foreign land. They also knew what is like to lose or leave behind everything one has known.

Ruth 1:1-21
This story starts in perilous times—“In the days when the judges ruled.” Like England and Ireland in Patrick’s day was dangerous, so was Israel of Ruth and Naomi’s day. In fact Judges has just ended with a cycle of stories that has graphically shown how far Israel had gone in their disobedience, rebellion, and adultery. Judges has just ended with a story of horrible abuse, murder, the tribes of Israel nearly wiping out the tribe of Benjamin, then the final acts of kidnapping and forced marriage. The narrator of Judges final evaluation of the entire book in 21:25 is “In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes.” “In those day when the judges ruled.” In those days this story takes place.

The story starts off with the information that there is a famine in Israel, so a man, Elimelech, his wife, Naomi, and their two sons went to Moab where the famine did not reach. Then Elimelech died. Naomi was a widow, but she still had her two sons; she was still a mother. Her sons married then there was hope for grandchildren. But after ten years of marriage there were no children, and then the sons died. For all intents and purposes Naomi lost everything that gave her identity in her world—she was no longer a wife or mother, and she had no grandchildren. Like Patrick she had been taken to a foreign land and lost everything she held dear: her family. Just as Patrick, being a slave in Ireland became essentially a non-person, so did Naomi. She had no one to provide for her, protect her, or care for her in old age.

In verse 6 we find that Naomi has discovered that the “LORD had considered his people and given them food.” She decides to return to her homeland, and her daughters-in-law go with her. Before they get far into the journey, Naomi tells them to return to their own mothers’ homes. There is no reason for them to go with her: she cannot give them the secure future they will need. She is old. Even if she were married and could have more children immediately, it would be years before they could marry Ruth and Orpah and provide homes for them. Naomi does not want her daughters in law to suffer the same fate she has.

Orpah obeys her mother-in-law and returns to her own mother’s house. But Ruth stays. Ruth makes the same decision that Patrick made when he decided to return to Ireland to preach the good news–she decides to leave everything she has known and follow Naomi back to her homeland. Ruth will not abandon Naomi: she will go with Naomi. Naomi’s people will become Ruth’s people and Naomi’s God will take the place of Ruth’s gods. Ruth will leave her home, her religion, and her land to insure that Naomi is taken care of and provided for. Later in Ruth her actions toward Naomi will be called “loyalty.” Loyalty translates the Hebrew word chesed—the word that is used to describe the covenant love and loyalty between God and God’s people. This Gentile woman, a Moabite, will be commended for showing covenant love toward Naomi, an Israelite.

Ruth and Naomi return to Bethlehem where Naomi describes what has happened to her life in verses 20-21. She left as a wife and mother—she left as a person who had security and stability. She now returns a widow and childless, which in her society means no identity as a person. Like many of us do when we suffer loss and hard times in life Naomi blames God. But through the rest of the book God is going to be working through Ruth, Boaz, and Naomi herself to restore what Naomi has lost and to create a home for Ruth who left hers.

Like Naomi, Ruth, and Patrick all of us go through times of loss and times when we must leave parts of our lives behind. Sometimes the losses are huge, like Naomi’s—husband, children, and home. Sometimes the losses are jobs, health, or friends. Sometimes our losses aren’t big, but they are significant to us. Then there are times like Ruth when we will leave behind parts of our lives. All of us know missionaries who have literally left everything they have known to follow God’s call on their lives. I have also known people who have left very well-paying jobs because they could not do their job and keep their Christian ethics. And just as there are little things we lose, there are also little things we leave. They may not look like much to anyone else, but to us they were a significant part of our lives.

We’re in the season of Lent. It’s the time the church traditionally dwells on the themes of loss and leaving behind the world. There are those who do give up something for Lent. But whether we do that or not, we are all called upon to look at our lives in the light of the grace that God has given us. Because we have received a salvation we could not earn and did not deserve, we look at how our lives reflect what God has done in our lives. Are we living in the joy of our salvation? Are we obeying God? Are we doing everything we can to make room in our lives for God? Are we sharing God’s love with others? And as we reflect on our lives in the light of this grace, we may be called on to lose something dear to us. We might be called to leave behind something we thought we could never live without.

But as we live in times of loss and leaving parts of our life behind, we need to remember that Ruth does not end with the return to Bethlehem and all that Naomi has lost, and all that Ruth has left behind. Ruth goes to the fields to gather grain for Naomi and herself. The town notices and talks about this Gentile woman’s loyalty to an Israelite widow and her hard work to provide food for her. When called upon to take care of his family, Boaz goes above and beyond the law and duty to marry Ruth and provide a home for both Ruth and Naomi. And Ruth ends with the joyous celebration over the birth of her and Boaz’s first son. Naomi’s loss is restored, and what Ruth has left behind has been replaced. God has provided.

As we go through Lent our losses and what we leave behind is not the end of the story. Because the ending of Lent is not Good Friday—it’s Sunday—the day of the resurrection. Good Friday reminds us that there is no resurrection apart from death, but Good Friday is not the end of our story. There is resurrection and restoration. Because of that hope when God calls us to leave we can go; when we have losses, we can look forward toward restoration. As Ruth, Naomi, and Patrick found out: God can bring incredible redemption out of loss and leaving. God used Patrick to bring the gospel to a whole land and save it. Ruth and Naomi would go on, to not only be great grandmothers of Israel’s greatest king–but Ruth would be a great grandmother to the very Messiah who came to restore all of us to God.

The Jesus Family Tomb?

I’m sure most of you have heard about the special the Discovery Channel will have on a tomb found that could be the tomb of Jesus and his family. Ben Witherington has a series of posts on why this probably isn’t the tomb of Jesus and his family. He starts his critique of the special with this:

First of all, I have worked with Simcha [Jacobovici, one of the producers]. He is a practicing Jew, indeed he is an orthodox Jew so far as I can tell. He was the producer of the Discovery Channel special on the James ossuary which I was involved with. He is a good film maker, and he knows a good sensational story when he sees one. This is such a story. Unfortunately it is a story full of holes, conjectures, and problems. It will make good TV and involves a bad critical reading of history. Basically this is old news with a new interpretation. We have known about this tomb since it was discovered in 1980. There are all sorts of reasons to see this as much ado about nothing much.

Ben goes on to list those reasons in The Jesus Tomb? “Titanic” Talpoit Tomb Theory Sunk from the Start.

He has also posted two other posts as more evidence has come to him: Problems Multiply for Jesus Tomb Theory and The Smoking Gun—Tenth Talpoit Ossuary Proved to Be Blank.

The picture is from The Discovery Channel.

Ten Questions about the Bible

Jendi Reiter wanted to know what my answers to these questions are. So here we go.

1. State briefly what you believe about the Bible. I believe the Bible is the people of God’s theological confession of faith. This is how God came to us, started a relationship, and continues that relationship.

2. How is the Bible inspired? I believe in the plenary inspiration of Scripture, which means I believe the Bible contains all truth necessary for faith and Christian living.

3. So is the book of Judges inspired, or only the Gospels? Yes, I believe the book of Judges is inspired. Most of it is a manual on how not to live, and the danger of everyone doing what is right in their own eyes.

4. How is the Bible authoritative? The Bible is authoritative in all things pertaining to faith and salvation. I don’t believe the cultural institutions of the day are authoritative today (like patriarchy and stoning someone for working on the Sabbath). That was the culture God had to work with and should not be taken as authoritative or inspired.

5. Is the Bible a human book? It is both a human and divine book. I don’t believe God zapped people and dictated through them. I believe God revealed God’s self to the people, and inspired them to write what they experienced. I believe it’s the faith community’s confession of faith in this God, and how this God has a relationship with us throughout history. It is both divine and human.

6. Are there aspects of the Bible that are not divine? As I said in 4, there are cultural things that are not divine. That is what God had to work with.

7. Why do you call the Bible a conversation? Because both God and people talk and have a relationship throughout the Bible. It’s not a one-sided monologue, but a diverse conversation with many different points of view.

8. What do you believe about canonization? These are the writings that have led people to a better understanding of God through time and many different communities. The community said these are the writings that are sacred and show us God and the way to live.

9. Do you reject the inspiration of some books? I don’t believe the Apocrypha is inspired.

10. Anything else you want to say? Nope, I think this covers it.

The picture is from The Book of the Kells. I found this picture at the University of British Columbia Library.

The God of Human Worth

In a recent article on God’s Politics, Diane Butler Bass wrote this:

As we recited the baptism liturgy, I was struck by the final promise. The minister asks, “Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?” The parents (or the candidates in the case of adult baptism) respond, “I will, with God’s help.”

Christian tradition connects justice and peace with the practice of respecting the dignity of every person. The idea that every creature is dignified, related to God, formed in love, and connected to the whole of the universe forms the center point of Christian theology and ethics. Respect for each person in the web of creation supports the work of justice and peacemaking. Without a profound spirituality of human dignity, practices of justice and peacemaking may slide into the realm of power politics. The baptism liturgy strongly implies that without respect for human dignity, there exists no motive to strive for God’s justice and peace.

Reading this I realize how short we fall short of this particularly in the evangelical tradition. So much of the time we look at people as “us” and “them.” And until “they” join “us” they are somehow less than human, and God does not love them as much as God loves us. We may never say it that bluntly, but that is how we live and act. But the Bible teaches that God made every human being in God’s image, and for that reason alone every person is worthy of respect and dignity.

This is most clearly seen in the book of Jonah where God sends the Jew Jonah to the pagan Assyrians (the Nazis of the ancient world) and tells him “Go at once to Nineveh, that great city, and cry out against it; for their wickedness has come up before me” (1:1). Jonah does not want to go and preach at Ninevah because “I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, and ready to relent from punishing” (4:2). He tried to run away to Tarshish, but a storm and a big fish brought him back, and he went to Ninevah. He proclaimed that God would destroy the city in three days. And Ninevah repents; God does not destroy the city. Jonah’s response to God’s saving work is “O LORD! Is not this what I said while I was still in my own country? That is why I fled to Tarshish at the beginning; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, and ready to relent from punishing” (v. 2).

The tale of Jonah is one of the Bible’s literary gems. Marked by symmetry, balance, word-play, irony, and surprise, the book purports to teach Jonah (and all readers) about the problem of gracious acceptance for one’s own people (“Deliverance is from the LORD,” Jonah says in 2:9) while churlishly resenting similar treatment for others (see 4:1-5) (The New Interpreter’s Study Bible, 1297).

What do we do with this God who insists on loving people who do not acknowledge this God, let alone serving God? What do we do with a God who insists we take care of the marginalized: the homeless, drug addicts, whores in order to be like God (remember who Jesus hung out with)? What do we do with this God who loves our enemies and insists that we do the same? These are the questions Jonah asks us, and like Jonah we are left to contend with the God who loves and reaches out to all human beings, no matter how corrupted or sinful we are.

The Christian Bible, tradition, and liturgy all proclaim that everyone is made in the image of God and worthy respect and dignity. Do our lives and words reflect what we claim to believe?

The Fall and Women

In Does It Really Mean Helpmate? we saw that God created man and woman to be equals in every way. In Genesis 1 both male and female were given the mandates to procreate and to have dominion over the earth. The human had been placed in the garden to tend it and guard it, and one assumes the male and female continued to do what the human was created to do, and they fulfill the mandates given in chapter 1 together and as equals. There we saw that complementarians try to subordinate woman under man because man was created first, and she was created to be an ezer cenedgo, a word that is normally mistranslated “helpmate” instead of its literal meaning: a power equal to.

Another tactic complementarians use is that women’s subordination is due to the Fall. When God said that a woman’s desire would be for her husband, and he would rule over, God meant it for all time. It doesn’t matter that the rest of curse is not meant for all time: we have made farming easier through machinery, we have diminished labor pains with drugs, and we normally don’t actively look for snakes to mutilate. Complentarians seem to think that the only part of the Fall that is for all time is the a man ruling over his wife.

(more…)