| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Innocent Forteh added connections you may know
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Innocent Forteh added connections you may know
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Innocent Forteh's new connection, and other updates from your network
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Note to a friend.
In response to his e-mail clarifying the role of the woman as defined in the bible, and other issue!
It's hardly
tenable to declare the Bible a chauvinistic book without committing some form
of intellectual fraud when the very
first pages of the Good Book, Genesis 1, which talks of God's creation, shows
how God created man and woman in His image and….yes… equal. The word
used there is in the plural form. So both man and woman are created in God's
image (I believe we all understand here that this has little or nothing to do
with God's physical)! The bible further goes to show God's assignment was given
to both (read Genesis 1: 26-28), rather than to the male only.
Genesis 1
26
Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they
(notice the plural ie Male & Female) may rule over the fish in the sea and
the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over
all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the
image of God he created them; male and female he created them.28 God blessed
them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and
subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over
every living creature that moves on the ground.”
After the fall (temptation), God declared the outcome of their disobedience
but we should not forget that this was as a result of their disobedience rather
than His created order.
Jewish culture and worldview (into which Jesus was born), had very negative
views of women, stemming not from scripture but rather from the Rabbi's Mishna
& Tosefta!
In Mark 10:2-12, Jesus‘ teaching on marriage and divorce basically, to say the least, was
radical for the Jew. Look at verse 12, where Jesus indicates a
woman could divorce her husband. The concept was shocking in Jewish
culture, where women were chattels and men could divorce them at will, but
women could never divorce a man.
Some background
As Jewish history approached the time of Christ, the Rabbis codified the oral traditions into the Mishna. Then
just to solidify the law, they further created the Tosefta, the Jerusalem
Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. These authoritative documents were written by
the Rabbis in order to ―make a fence for the Torah or the God-given law. In
this way a form of rabbinic Judaism emerged, which was increasingly
legalistic, bound by endless rules and regulations of man‘s making. You wonder why Jesus was hard on them? Amongst the edicts of these new works, women
were considered chattel, not to be
educated and men could divorce them at will, but women could never divorce a
man.
Jesus’ teaching however that a woman could divorce her husband was therefore
to say the least, extremely radical!
He was basically restating the obvious (in
Genesis 1). He equally had quite a few prominent women disciples (I'm not
talking about the 12) including the sister of Lazarus, Mary and Martha etc. His
interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well was equally unheard of.
Bottom-line, Jesus not only recognized women, He gave them a prominent place in
His ministry and did not hinder them from speaking (the society did)! Some folks
have sought to contend that because the woman was created as a "help
meet" Genesis 2, this implies a position of inferiority. Nothing could be
further from the truth. The Greek work used in that verse, Ezer,
is better translated as "deliverer" (the other usage defines God’s
role as a deliverer), showing that her role transcends that of a side-kick!
That said, I'd like us to take a look at the few verses which have drawn a lot
of ink from the camp against the bible.
1.
1 Timothy 2:11-15 (seems to be addressing a particular situation rather than
providing the standards for all women, everywhere).
2.1
Corinthians, chapters 7, 11 and 14. Describes roles.
3. Ephesians 5. Even before saying
Wives should submit themselves to their husbands, the Apostle takes out time to
declare that submission is mutual (Submit to one another out
of reverence for Christ 5v21)
These texts mainly describe roles with the first seeming to speak to a
particular woman (History has it that the church at Ephesus was kind of unruly
and Timothy was its Pastor. Because we do not have Timothy's own letter to
Paul, we really can't say with a 100% accuracy what was happening there. Some
hold that this is an eternal restriction on women to preach in the church See
this article .Paul elsewhere and as we have seen before, taught that in Christ there is
neither male nor female (Galatians 3:28). Could he be contradicting himself? Here is an
Article contending for a different interpretation. My take, different sides
of the same coin. Paul‘s Epistles are filled with instructions on how the sexes
should relate to one another. He repeatedly reminded them that in Christ “you are all children of God through faith. For all
of you who were baptized in Christ have clothed yourself with Christ. There is
neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, neither male nor female,for you are
all one in Christ.” Gal 3:26-28
In Rom 16:1 Paul says ―I commend to you Phoebe, our sister who is a
diakonos of the church.‖ Diakonos has been translated as servant, deacon and sometimes
minister. It is exactly the same word Paul uses to describe any of his male co-workers.
Let me tell a short story. An old lady had just left her
son's home to visit a daughter 2 blocks away. Thirty minutes later, the son
received a call from his friend saying his mother had been in an accident and
was being taken to the hospital in an ambulance. It appeared the accident was
mild and nothing of grave concern as she could be seen talking. After he put
down the receiver, another friend called, less than 5 minutes and explained
that his mother had been in an accident and had died instantly from the shock.
He gave his condolences and dropped the receiver. The gentleman was extremely
confused? Which of the 2 was telling the truth? He was operating on the false
premise of either/or rather than complementarity. What he didn't know at the
time was that they both were right. His mother had indeed been in an accident,
and was apparently OK. The ambulance carrying her had just left the scene when
a truck drove straight into it spilling all its occupants and killing the old
lady.
<
Same story, different perspectives. Without the
correct perspective and complete information, it's easy to Judge and proclaim a
story contradictory unless we have the full picture? Men and women are created
equal. Do men and women have the same physical make-up? Negative. This difference
is both emotional and physical. We complement each other yet are called into
different roles. Sometimes it is OK but at other times it is not. I’ll show you
two seemingly contradictory counsels, existing in the bible:
Proverbs 26: 4-5
4Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be
like him. 5Answer a fool as his
folly deserves, That he not be wise in his own eyes.
Different, no. Complimentary, Yes!
No matter how hard a man tries, he can never replace a mother and vice
versa. The Samaritan woman, we are told, brought many to repentance from their
sin by her testimony/preaching/sharing of what Jesus had told her (I believe
her city included men)! Paul worked with Priscilla (female), in the ministry in
Corinth. Peter clearly says women and men are equal (1 Peter 3:5-8), even
though his Jewish worldview did not
recognize that equality. This begs the question of the true influence of
society in shaping Church History and Practice. A lot of what has become church
Practice, putting on of trousers or not, head gear or not etc. is as a direct
result of cultural influences and the prevailing worldview rather than an
actual command from God. With increasing globalization, worldviews also clash
with the dominant one prevailing over the lesser. It is safe to say the Greco-
Roman view dominates most of western thinking today (the East is also making
rapid advances, e.g. New age, Ying-Yang etc.). How were women perceived in the
Greek culture? I wrote an article here (http://www.forteh.blogspot.com/#!http://forteh.blogspot.com/2013/10/on-jokes-about-women.html),
which you may find interesting. In summary, women were perceived as an evil. A
Roman would pray and thank his god, he were neither a woman nor a slave. In America, a lot has been done to
try and establish a greater balance in recruitment and pay, but even America (http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/24/news/economy/gender-equality/)
the great, is failing woefully to achieve results in this area ( well few see
this as an issue to complain about). In short, the perception of women as being
lesser than men is a secular or other worldview
issue rather than a Christian worldview issue. How women are treated in YOUR CONTEXT?
Men everywhere need to understand God created us equal gave us the same
resources (redemption through his son and empowerment through, Holy Spirit) and
declared both men and women heirs to Christ. Some Christian leaders take the
worldview of the culture around them on the subject of women but this doesn’t
make it right, no matter the name of the structure, "church",
Ministry or sect. When Jesus comes back the second time, there is one groom
(Him) and one bride (the Church i.e. those who like the wise virgins, have
ample oil in their lamps and are waiting expectantly for Him).The Sadducees
sought to ridicule the doctrine of the resurrection but Jesus used the
opportunity to reveal that we lose our male/female distinction/ID after the
resurrection. We are equal but our
responsibilities differ. The same is true for the home, as in church and
elsewhere. I believe this is too long
already, but will be happy to speak directly to you or your friend via, any
media of your choose.
You don't need to look too far to find them, reason why discernment and wisdom are required. If you lack any, pray for it and God will give it to you (James 1:5 If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God). That is a promise. Even Jesus said not all those that call Him Lord, Lord will get into heaven but those that do the will of his father. Just because some bitter beans found its way into your teeth doesn't mean you get to throw away the whole dish!
On Wine, Paul's teaching on acting out of love should prevail. This (1
Timothy 5:23) passage sees Paul asking Timothy to take a little due to his
stomach problems. This on the other hand calls wine a mocker (Proverbs 20:1). I
know fine Christians who take the occasional drink and know criminals exist who
never touch a drop of alcohol. Personally I made a choice not to drink. If you
must drink, then moderate is the key word. Paul says however that if your
liberality should cause a weaker person/brother or sister to sin, then you sin
(1 Corinthians 8). A true Christian is his/her brother’s keeper. The
implication is, if by practicing my liberality, someone who has less self-control
will become intoxicated, I am held responsible. What we need to remember is
that the Bible is a library of books that communicate God's mind in the context
of History. As a true Father, He communicates both sides and allows us to make
a choice out of love rather than obligation. All choice has corresponding
results and both choice and result are in the same book. It is indeed THE book
of Life and with regards to inspiration read what Paul says below:
2 Timothy 3:16-17
King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good
works.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)