problem of evil

Honestly, my faith has been wavering much this year.  Who is God, how involved is He, the whole problem of evil thing has bitten me and will not let go.  The idea that Jesus has come already makes me start to wonder what the point of everything is.  We seem to just struggle and suffer down here and there is so much of it.  Perhaps I have lost my ability to count it joy having been denied the marriage I so wanted. 

I am finding the world more alluring and can even see that this could all be a trap of the enemy a’ la Screwtape, and yet…

Creation is still the foundation of my faith as I do not see a way away from the knowledge that intelligent design is the only thing that makes a modicum of sense; in fact I find creation the single most compelling reason to believe in God.

I see no benefit in such extreme suffering.  Why should my Mother be so unhappy and so deeply depressed and alone.  To what end?  I find myself thinking that her inability to let go of the past and have any happiness as bordering on cruelty.  Is the whole thing just a life lesson on the evil of sin?

I hear the arguments on love demands choice.  I sit with that.  I completely agree that love demands choice.

I know the argument for “how much evil would be acceptable?”  Would half the evil in the world be acceptable?  Well, probably not.  How much evil have we been spared and just don’t realize it. 

I think perhaps I’m just being selfish or my usual 2x4 girl attitude is out of control.

And yet, here I am.

Women Teach in Church?

I continue to struggle with the way the traditional church deals with women.  It may just be my own pride, but I struggle greatly with the way I personally have been taught over much of my life that women are “lower” than men, that we cannot teach men.  I think of a comment a friend of mine’s daughter said years ago that rings true for me… “I can’t think of another spiritual gift that is gender specific.” in discussing teaching and women. 

Just sharing something from someone I trust.  I guess I am mostly OK with the husband/wife pecking order because the entirety of teaching isn’t a dictatorship of husband over wife, but a relationship of mutual submission to one another highlighting what each gender needs most:  women need love and God tells husbands to love their wives; men need respect and God tells wives to respect their husbands.

I don't know if I just refuse to "understand" this, but God gave me a brain and it seems pointless to not use it.  That doesn't sound like God to me.

The following is taken from str.org, a truly wonderful resource that you should have bookmarked!

 Women Teach in Church?                 

Gregory Koukl

What does I Tim. 2:11-15 say about the male-female "pecking order" in the church? Greg questions the commonly held translation, shedding some light on a touchy subject. "

Churches who take what might be considered a more traditional or conservative view on 1 Timothy 2:11-15 don't allow women in leadership because of how they interpret this passage.

There is a variation on that, and that is that they will allow women in leadership if there is a man over them. For instance, we have a male pastor and a male council in our church. No women are allowed on the council, but we do have female pastors because they are under the leadership of the male head pastor and a male council. That is because the word in verse 12 which talks about a woman teaching and exercising authority over a man has the sense of usurping authority. The idea there is that if she is not usurping authority, then it is legitimate for her to teach--like teaching the youth, or even teaching from the pulpit, or running a ministry--as long as there is a man over her; but there ought not be a woman that is the head of the church, or women on the council, because then they would be in a position of ultimate authority, which this supposedly restricts.

My problem with either of those two views is that they simply do not accord with the text itself if we are to take the text strictly at face value.

"Therefore, I want the men in every place to pray lifting up holy hands without wrath or dissension. Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet."

Now, what this says is not only that a woman should not be in authority over a man such that he does the teaching, but that in the pecking order of the church, every adult male has authority over every adult female. It's like the military where every officer is in authority over even the highest enlisted man. In the case of this passage, the lowest man in the pecking order of the church is above the highest woman, such that there are no women that are in any position of authority over any man.

I don't know of any church that takes it that way, but that is just what the words say on the traditional interpretation.

They try to get around it when they say that it says not to usurp authority. It says, "I do not allow a woman to teach or usurp authority over a man." If you put a man in authority over her so she is not usurping the man's authority and then allow her to teach other men, you are still violating this verse. It doesn't say, I don't allow a woman to teach unless she has a man over her. As long as she has a man over her she can teach other men, which is the way they take it. It says, "I don't allow her to teach or usurp authority." Period.

So, neither view takes the text seriously. The text goes too far, it seems to me, than anyone is willing to take it. If a person is going to take the passage in this fashion and translate men as men and women as women, then they have to go much further than they already do if they want to be biblical.

I personally think the word "men" and "women" are mistranslated here. Here's why I think so.

First, all the men would be over all the women, and in other scriptures that we read we have occasions where women are in authority over men. Even in the Old Testament where you have a highly patriarchal society, you have women judging men. Deborah was a judge, for example. If you are identifying God's priorities, there may be a distinction between that and the church, but at least we see some pattern in the Hebrew Bible where this happened.

Sometimes you hear the explanation that there wasn't a man, so God had to raise up a woman. What a bunch of malarkey! If God does the raising up and His pattern is men over women, then He will raise up a man. That is just a weak response.

When I did my own word study on the words man and woman, I found out that the word man is aner and the word woman is gune . In the case of the word aner , which occurs something like 150 times in the New Testament, fully 40 times that it occurs, it is translated "husband." In other words, "husband" is a legitimate translation of the word depending on the context. When you look at the context, virtually every single time that it wasn't absolutely clear that the woman with the man in the context was his wife, it is almost always translated "husband" and "wife." So this really is an unusual translation, given the pattern in the rest of the New Testament.

So, I asked myself why would they break with the pattern in this passage? I think they were influenced by tradition, that's why they translated this passage man and woman and not husband and wife.

What happens if we translate it husband and wife? That strikes me as a legitimate translation. It seems that when you translate it husband and wife, everything falls into place. Let me read it in that way: "Let a wife quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness; but I don't allow a wife to teach or usurp the authority of her husband, but to remain quiet."

Is that strained? Not at all. Is that difficult? Not at all. The "quiet" there is in the context of receiving instruction. I think the point is not that she never speaks, but that she is the one who is in the position of being taught as opposed to being in the position of the teacher. The word "teach" here is not in the aorist tense. In other words, an aorist tense means a single point in time action rather than a continuous action. So, it isn't saying that a woman cannot have a moment where she can tell something to her husband, it's that the woman should not be the teacher over her husband, but that the woman is actually under the teaching authority of her husband. He is the head of the household, spiritually speaking. That's really what it amounts to.

Verses 1-8 is in one grouping, verses 9-15 is another. Verse 11 and following is directed at women in the context of their relationship with a man to whom they are supposed to be entirely submissive. That is a marriage relationship.

Finally, no other place in Scripture teaches that all women should be under the authority of all men in the church. If this passage is to be interpreted the traditional way, this makes a new and unusual pattern of submission. However, the New Testament consistently teaches that a wife should be under the authority of her husband. That fits the larger context of the New Testament much better.

There may be some problems with my understanding here, I am willing to acknowledge that. But I think that it is less problematic than the other view. Frankly, there are not too many other places in the scripture except for 1 Corinthians 7 where you have a similar kind of situation and the traditional translation there also breaks the pattern. So, I think this is as good a way as interpreting the passage as the other.

1 Timothy 2 talks about the relationship between husband and wife; it’s chapter 3 that talks about church leadership.  And it’s there that Paul is clear that men are to be in the roles of authority in the church as elders, overseers, and deacons.

 

 This is a transcript of a commentary from the radio show "Stand to Reason," with Gregory Koukl. It is made available to you at no charge through the faithful giving of those who support Stand to Reason. Reproduction permitted for non-commercial use only. ©1995 Gregory Koukl

For more information, contact Stand to Reason at 1438 East 33rd St., Signal Hill, CA 90755
(800) 2-REASON  (562) 595-7333  www.str.org

 

The OC Fair & Sales

My son goes to summer camp tomorrow and I was feeling antsy.  I have plans to go to the fair with a friend and our gaggle of offspring later in the month, but I am often frustrated by the group and trying to herd everyone through the different exhibits (when all they really want is to go on rides).  I found myself missing my Mom today (she now lives in Florida) because the fair is something we did together each year.  Just us two.  We'd look at all the exhibits and eat special things each year (gotta have Terri's Berries and the delicious bratwurst with sour kraut and mustard...and don't forget a cinamon roll when you've finished the Aisle of Products!!)  So, with my son (13) about to leave for a week, I asked if he would go with me.  He changed his plans and off we went.  I'm so glad he did.

We took the shuttle in from a parking lot down the street from South Coast Plaza - a new experience for me.  Arriving at the fair hungry, we stopped and got "normal" food - hamburger (with cheese, bacon, bbq sauce, onion ring) and a chili dog.  (Didn't realize the giant (freakishly giant really) turkey legs were just a bit further down.)  Scarfed that down and off we went.  Crafts first.  I'll be honest, the quilts just don't thrill me.  We were mezmerized by the wood turning as we joined a crowd watching one of the woodworkers strip a bowling pin of it's plastic so he could make something else out of it.  What a fascinating process.  So fun to watch!  I could have stayed till he finished!  

We finally made our way to the mecca of sales...the Aisle of Products!  Who knew there could be so many things you didn't know you need?!  Everything from magic mops to chiropractic and back to life insurance.  We walked up and down the aisles thinking about each item we couldn't do without now that we were aware of the product.  I was tempted by the juicer, the Mink Oil, the special Aloe Vera lotion that penetrates 7 layers of skin and is the same product used by hospitals to treat burn patients.  "If you buy today, I can give you enough lotion to last you two years."  My son is saying, "Mom, you need that!"  I told the salesman I'd think about it (which I am honestly, wondering if it might be a good option for my friends daughter with allergies and eczema).  Next we were drawn in by the Mink Oil which is "the closest thing to your body's own moisture available."  After washing my hand, Kathy (our salesperson) exclaimed, "Look how great your hand looks, it has fewer wrinkles.  Isn't it great?!"  My son piped up "Yes!"  When she finished her sale with all it's available options ("A good eye cream would cost you more than all these products combined.") my son added that while you got enough lotion for 2 years from the Aloe Vera people, you only got lotion.  Here you get so much more!  Good sales person, my boy!  Kathy's eyes sparkled thinking she had us.  I said no.  I really must think about it.  

Walking down another aisle, my son and I talked about selling and the different tactics these people used.  The hard sales of the sneaker cleaning people (I mean, they practically begged me to buy it), to the people who didn't push us at all.  How did they make us feel?  My son starting thinking anybody could sell him anything (which today, they could) and I explained that he has a good heart and on top of believing their claims of greatness (I mean come on, they even demonstrated how great it was!) he didn't want to disappoint them. 

I think back to the "I wants"... I do want a product like the mink oil that will be gentle and keep my skin clean and soft.  That won't need to be reapplied until 6-8 hand washings later.  It sounds so great.  The aloe lotion was so soft.  The sneaker cleaner made me feel like I was helping youth who could have been out doing something far less productive.  I really do need that tempurpedic mattress.  I mean, I could easily justify that particular expenditure!  (still waiting to discuss with the hubster!  I mean, 100 day trial, free delivery, no interest payments for three years! and the most awesomely comfortable bed you've ever sat on!)  sigh... I guess I still have the "I wants" and yet, I came home with only 2 items for my boy and a cup I can take back for refills on my next trip.  (OK, $2.50 refills, but it's 3x the size of the drink they would normally give me for $2.50).  Next trip... I want... friends with us, corn on the cob, more comfortable shoes on my feet and funnel cake.  All sounds do-able.

What do you do at the fair?

What item from there is always a pull on you?

And by the way, I wanted more lotion on my hands by the time we hit the bus for our ride back to the car... so much for ONE handwashing!  (but the baby piggies were SO CUTE and who doesn't want to pet a Llama!)