The CBE Scroll

2nd Timothy 2:2

(NIV)

And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.

(TNIV)

And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others.

Does the word “anthropos” translated as “men” in the NIV refer only to men? The TNIV translates it as “people.”

Reference: Online Greek Interlinear, 2 Timothy 2:2

(click to enlarge)

The interlinear Greek also translates it as “people.” But note that the English translation on the right translates the word “anthropos” as “men” rather than as people.

So should Bible translators be translating it as “men” or as “people.” What do you say?

The Pikes Peak Chapter in Colorado has begun a discussion about what the “ideal” church would look like. It was unanimously felt that we have done, over these many years, the foundational reading and know why we are egalitarians. Perhaps we are a bit tired of reading solely on the egalitarian/feminist theme, and perhaps we are ready to branch out a bit in other directions.

So…if we could create the exact church/church experience we want as egalitarian Christian women, what would that look like? Our suggested reading list includes Pagan Christianity, by Frank Viola and Life Together: The Classic Exploration of Faith in Community by Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

We asked ourselves the following questions.

1. What should this church look like?
2. How would we deal with the problems engendered in trying to live in Christian community
with one another?
3. What did Christ mean when He spoke of “unity?”
4. What things are good about the patriarchal church, and could be kept?
5. What should be tossed?
6. Does a church have to mirror the secular culture in order to survive?
7. Where do politics fit into the egalitarian church?
8. Do we have a leader/pastor, or are we totally non-hierarchical?
9. What sort of “service” would you envision? How would it be run?
10. And, the biggest question of all, I think, is: are we looking to invent a “church” or a
community ? How would we put our ideals into concrete?

Here is our list so far. As each item was added to the list, we were challenged to accurately define it. The challenge quickly became huge in scope, and clearly would take much more time than we had, so we are just making a list for now. The fight about precise definitions is for another time, and will resume with referees and reference books.

1. Golden Rule
2. Widows & Orphans
3. Community
a. Support, helping
b. Children need to be important
4. Egalitarian
5. Quaker model: silent meditation
6. Accountability
7. Trinitarian
8. Non-subordination
9. Communion
10. Opportunity for confession to one or two other persons
11. Spiritual direction/support

We would value everyone’s comments and suggestions for this amazing church.

So often those of us who would consider it legitimate to interpret Scripture with due consideration being given to the historical culture and context, especially in the issues relating to Biblical equality, are accused of not being true to the literal text. By posing such questions of the text we are said to be resorting to logic or reason to bolster our argument and this is seen as an unacceptable principle of interpretation. It is interesting to note that in John 7:24 Jesus says, “Think this through and you will see that I am right,” which meant, to the Pharisees and the crowd in this context, using their own powers of deductive reasoning. This is as it reads in the New Living Translation, while the KJV expresses it this way, “Judge not according to sight, but judge with righteous judgment.” Apparently the verb form of this word ‘judge’ suggests, separate out, select, choose, determine and, armed with this insight and knowledge, one is now equipped to pass judgment. (W.E. Vine - Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words)

In the passage under consideration Jesus is accused of having broken the Sabbath Law (John 7:16-24) and He attempts to reason with His accusers that His having made a man well on the Sabbath was a ‘righteous’ thing to do, thus superseding the Law in this instance. Along the way Jesus points out that the religious leaders are serving themselves in their application of Mosaic Law and in fact are ultimately determined to find an excuse to kill Him (vs. 19). The crowd too becomes incensed by this accusation directed at the Pharisees and declare Jesus to be demon possessed! Despite their rash outburst Jesus resorts to logic and reasonableness (vs. 21-23), asking his detractors to make a judgment on the basis of the ‘rightness’ of His argument.

He, Jesus, sets one law against another. The Sabbath Law, which is attributed to Moses’ era, as opposed to the rite of circumcision, which He points out (vs. 32) predates Moses, because it is a command given to Abraham. Jesus argues that if the ‘correct’ time to circumcise a male child happened to fall on the Sabbath it would be performed on the Sabbath so as not to defy the edicts of circumcision. By inference He suggests that this too is ‘work’ and therefore should not be done. But, as it is deemed a ‘righteous’ act it is therefore considered, on such occasions, not to be a violation of Sabbath Law. What Jesus would have the religious leaders and the crowd deduce from this is that His having made a man well, even though He did it on the Sabbath, was also a ‘righteous’ act and must also be seen as not violating Sabbath Law.

This passage of Scripture affirms for me two things:

1) It is perfectly acceptable to use my powers of reason and deduction when interpreting unclear passages of the Bible by investigating all of the available scriptural, traditional, historical and cultural evidence to support my growing conviction. Even to the weightier matters of the (apparently contradicting) law! Obviously, in the case cited above, Jesus’ full knowledge of the Law (see John 7:15) and the Mind behind its intent assists greatly in His attempts to help His detractors see reason and the ‘rightness’ of His argument.

2) When it comes to the matter of choosing which path to follow in respect to women and full Biblical equality I will always fall on the side of Jesus. His treatment of women, in a secular and religious culture that was unquestionably male dominated, demonstrates to me comprehensively God’s overarching attitude to women (see also John 14:8-11, 23-24). Therefore I cannot accept that God ever intended the sanctioning of male authority over women, or a hierarchy of any kind based on gender preference or creation order.

As in the case of Jesus setting one right act, ‘keeping the Sabbath’, over another right act, ‘doing good on the Sabbath’, the good won out. It seems to me that it is good to honour redeemed women fully, recognising their intrinsic value, equality and giftedness to share with men all the responsibilities of both the church and the home. Men should not be able to lead simply because they are men, they must demonstrate a calling and giftedness. On the other hand, women who are obviously gifted should not be denied opportunity to express and use their gifts in ministry, or the home, because of their gender. People are chosen by God to serve Him on the basis of their heart motivation and Spiritual giftedness, not by sexual preference. I do not see gender distinction in the teaching or actions of Jesus therefore I cannot see it in the heart or mind of God.

In accepting Biblical equality and mutual submission I believe with all my heart that I am following Jesus’ admonition in John 7:24, “To think this through and see that I (Jesus) am right.” (NLT) I would also encourage others, who have arrived at a similar conclusion not to be ashamed or denigrated because we are attempting to follow in the footsteps of the Master.

One of my most trying journeys during college has been learning to give others grace: to forgive my roommate, to be patient with other white people’s ethnic journeys, to stop calling myself “an evangelical that doesn’t like other evangelicals.” One of the areas I still struggle with is in giving grace to women and men that don’t see eye-to-eye with me on gender issues.

Every year our UNC InterVarsity chapter holds two events called Ladies’ Night and Men’s Night. Each involves one gender performing comical skits and serving food to the other, as a way to show them appreciation and honor. While attending Ladies’ Night and working on Men’s Night are great fun for most women in our chapter, for me, they are bittersweet. At some point every year, I always wonder why we do them in the first place.

It doesn’t seem to matter that the past two years the men have sponsored significant gender justice events about relationship violence or sex trafficking around the same time as Ladies’ Night. When I go to Ladies’ Night I can’t help but feel frustrated that most of the men in the chapter don’t know much about sexism, despite their genuine desire to honor women. The skits and desserts are a good time, of course, but are these people actually committed to the issues I care about as a woman? Beyond cosponsoring one sex trafficking movie?

Quick as I am to judge, reflecting on grace has brought me an interesting realization this year: “giving grace” to others isn’t just about forgiving or bearing with one another, not simply about avoiding rash reactions or sticking in a relationship. Grace literally means “gift,” and many times I think I’m giving someone the gift of my forgiveness and patience. But what’s really crucial? Is it my ability to give something that’s lacked? Or my ability to receive? Why is it that I think I am above receiving the gift of Ladies’ Night from these men that genuinely love the women in our community?

I’m coming to think that perhaps my issue isn’t “giving grace” after all. Perhaps it’s a problem of willingness to receive grace, a gift—to accept love when it doesn’t feel like the demonstration of love I want. While true reconciliation will necessitate men’s understanding more of what is meaningful to me as a woman and their action to correct ongoing gender injustice, part of reconciliation is my job too.

The Lord is showing me that humbly accepting whatever good gift I am offered by men is essential if intergender unity is to ever be achieved in the Body of Christ. After all, God accepts love and worship from imperfect humans. Who I am to reject the creativity, excitement, and goodwill of these men? Of course, grace is difficult, whether I’m giving or receiving, but over time I am being taught to say of both, “I will with God’s help.”

I was shocked. I remembered the old Bryan*, the Bryan that put on the brakes during a discussion of Large Group speakers at our Coordinating Team planning retreat. “Why is it suddenly illegal to bring in white men?” he asked, frustrated. As Multi-Ethnicity Team Leader on our exec, I was pushing hard for more female and ethnic minority speakers during our weekly InterVarsity chapter meetings. Some of the other C-Team members were fairly supportive; Bryan was making it an uphill battle.

How did that same Bryan end up sitting next to me on a flight home to North Carolina, rattling on excitedly about speaker Brenda Salter-McNeill and other highlights of Urbana 06? I had noticed how carefully InterVarsity had crafted its triennial missions conference, putting women in the pulpit and using the gender-accurate TNIV, among other things. Nevertheless, I hadn’t imagined its potential effect on Bryan’s support for women in ministry. But he could not deny the voice of the Holy Spirit through these female speakers—who was he to silence God?

As I prepare to graduate, I realize the stark contrast between InterVarsity and much of the evangelical world—my female friends and I will no longer find widespread acceptance as leaders. However, regardless of our personal beliefs, when women are suddenly barred from such roles, we might actually miss them. Women like me have had invaluable experience leading in mission on campus, and men like Bryan have served alongside women, being blessed by their leadership.

Across a fairly wide spectrum of parachurch organizations, opportunities abound for the reconsideration of limiting views of women. Women lead in many mainstream evangelical ministries, large and small, and God’s work through them is not unnoticed. Christianity Today features articles by authors like Lauren Winner, and Joan Mussa and Julie Regnier serve as Senior Vice Presidents for World Vision. Women even teach future pastors at Fuller, Gordon-Conwell, and Trinity, three of the largest non-denominational evangelical seminaries. A female student leader from Campus Crusade organized UNC’s 24/7 Prayer week this year, and countless other local ministries depend on the time, vision, skills, and prayers of women who love Jesus. While varying in their official positions on women in ministry, each of these more missionally driven organizations senses a practical need for women’s participation.

Yes, it may seem contradictory at first: despite affirming women in their specific ministries, many parachurch organizations like InterVarsity remain silent about female deacons, elders, and pastors/priests in the local church. (Some organizations would say they oppose it, in fact!) I myself used to feel abandoned by this silence, but now I celebrate it. While I question the validity of this sharp church/parachurch distinction and would appreciate InterVarsity’s eventual allegiance to CBE’s egalitarian cause, I have begun to rejoice in the quietly strategic—even inadvertent—role of other parachurch organizations in advancing gender reconciliation and justice.

Especially among university students and other young adults, the parachurch, with its focused yet flexible structures, is often uniquely suited to interact with diverse constituencies otherwise lacking exposure to women in ministry. Indeed, perhaps one of the most significant things we can do to support gender equality is to remain invested in the parachurch organizations that are already informally, sometimes accidentally, changing minds and hearts about women. Regardless of what is or isn’t said about the issue, the mere presence of women in leadership transforms lives. By donating to humanitarian organizations, encouraging college-bound high schoolers to join a campus ministry, volunteering at a local level, or simply connecting others to a female author who has mentored us from a distance, we may be doing more than we realize to advance women’s ministry. Of course, I look forward to finding clearer allies to CBE’s mission. But I’m excited to see the Lord is already at work, sometimes in the places I least expect.