Rocks, Martin & Psalm 62

Rocks & Martin

In February 1968, the prospect of death looming large in his life, Martin Luther King, Jr took a sabbath with Ralph Abernathy in Acapulco, Mexico. Around 3 am, Abernathy awoke to find that King was not in his bed. Frightened, he went into the living area of their hotel suite and discovered that King was on the balcony in his pajamas, staring into the darkness at the ocean.

Abernathy approached King, "Martin, what are you doing out here this time of the night? What is bothering you?" With his eyes still fixed on the ocean and his ears tuned to the roar of the waves, King whispered, "You see that rock out there?" "Oh, sure I see it," Abernathy replied.  "How long to you think its been there?" King asked. "I don't know. I guess centuries and centuries. I guess God put it there."

"Well, what I am thinking about?" King said softly while Abernathy remained silent. And King began to sing, "Rock of Ages, cleft for me; let me hide myself in thee." In his hour of trial and darkness and waves crashing in on him, King could only think about trusting in God. Only God could provide him with the peace he so desperately needed. So when he saw that rock it reminded him of the powerful words of the Psalms put to music by Augustus Toplady in 1776.  Singing the song brought a little shalom in the storm. 

A basic element in the Psalms is their expression of continual, total and exclusive trust in God alone. God is the problem. But God is the solution. The element of trust dominates our text for meditation, Psalm 62. This theme is present in many others too such as Pss 4, 16, 27 and 131.  Yet for me Ps 62 stands out.  It is expresses the firm hope in God's ability to enable his faithful ones to become "more than conquerors."

God ALONE is Trustworthy (62.1-7)

Psalm 62 is easily divided into two major parts: 1) the first eight verses are the psalmists expession of trust in God and 2) verses 9-12 are the psalmist's "homily" to the gathered people of God to trust in Yahweh as well.

"My soul finds rest in God alone; my salvation 
comes from him.
He alone is my Rock and my Salvation; he is my Fortress, I will never be
shaken" (vv. 1-2)

In the midst of the turbulence of 1968, Dr. King found that the only way for him to find shalom was to imagine himself secure in the "Rock of Ages" so our psalmist does the same. God is the sources of all peace and security. These are not words that are spoken naively or rashly.  The psalmist has meditated on his well-being and realizes that all is evanescent except God. God alone is the ground of stability in his life - the Prophet of Justice learned this through real tribulation, just as the psalmist did.

Notice the metaphors the psalmist uses to talk of his God, "my Rock, my Salvation, my Fortress." All of these are images of confidence, strength and security. The ancient Hebrews, unlike the Greeks, did not talk about God in mere abstraction. They talked about God in concrete, observable and vivid ways. They also talked about God in highly personal terms. He is not someone way "out there" who may or may not know that we (and me) are around.  He is not just concerned with the corporate people of God. He is concerned with me.  He is MY rock! He is MY salvation! he is MY fortress! Therefore I shall not be moved. What Yahweh has done in the past for the whole of Israel by redeeming them from slavery he does in our own lives as members of the covenantal family.  

"How long will you assault a man? Would all of you throw him down -- this leaning wall, this tottering fence?
They fully intend to topple him from his lofty place; they take delight in lies.
With their mouths they bless, but in their hearts they curse." (vv. 3-4)

Here we finally get a window into the crises of the psalmist. It is a struggle we all face sooner or later.  People - family, friends, brothers and sisters - people are friendly to our face.  They pretend to be concerned with our well being.  They act the friend.  But they honestly would like nothing more than to see us fail! To see us stumble! And they would actively take part in our ruin! That kind of "persecution" is many times as painful as public ridicule precisely because these folks were imagined to be family or friends. Sometimes they are just simply our enemy.  The psalmist bemoans the fact that they assail him with their double tongued behavior.  They bless him verbally but curse him in their heart.  Sound familiar?? Sadly this takes place in God's Family even yet!

It is interesting to note that even though the Lord is his mighty fortress, physical and verbal attacks are nonetheless undeniable real and quite painful.  Being the Lord's servant does not makes us immune to suffering and injustice in this fallen age (cf. 2 Tim. 3.12).  We might even argue that it heightens it.  Look at Jesus, the purest of Servants of the Lord.  Did he not suffer the very things the people of God confess and lament in Psalm 62? God was His rock. God was His salvation. God was His fortress.  And he still died on that ignominious Tree for the likes of you and me.

"Find rest, O my soul, in GOD ALONE; my hope comes from him.
HE ALONE is my rock and my salvation; he is my fortress, I will not be shaken.
My salvation and my honor depend upon God; he is my mighty rock, my refuge"
(vv. 5-7)

In these verses, our psalmist engages in what we call today "self-talk." There is no denying, and the Bible does not deny, that the fallen world is tough to live in. But God is with us. Our minstrel recalls fundamental concepts for our own peace and security.  Do not put trust in ourselves or others.  Real "manliness" does not come from bulging biceps, fearlessness in the face of enemy bullets, or perseverance, nor in our intellectual capacity or imagined doctrinal precision.  This is in stark contrast of the "world" which claims that a "real man" depends on no one and nothing except himself!  Yet this psalmist (David??) declares that his hope is in God ALONE. It is  not in himself.  It is not in his mighty men. It is not even in his ability to pray or worship correctly. It is in Yahweh. Here is the key to being hidden in the Rock of Ages.

The Singer's faith in God is moving and very challenging.  Because the Lord is our salvation, we can remain steadfast in our obedience.  We will not be shaken. Yet it some how all depends upon God. He alone can provide the way out of the dreadful situations we find ourselves entrapped in. 

The word "salvation" is a multifaceted word in the Scriptures. Sometimes it means deliverance from Sin, from enemies, or even death.  All of these are dimensions of the biblical doctrine and we need to not think one is more "Spiritual" than the other.  These dimensions are all embraced by Jesus and they should be by us.  But in Ps 62 "salvation" means deliverance from the situation that has ensnared the psalmist.  It is a real crises.  This understanding of "salvation" is important to us in our contemporary situation too.  Many folks have lost a conception of what "Sin" is (including Christians), but we all know what it means to have an aimless or miserable life! We know of lives that seem to be devoid of purpose and meaning.  When Christ died on the Cross it was not merely to save us from Sin, though he did do that. According to the apostle Peter, Christ redeemed us from "the EMPTY WAY OF LIFE handed down to you from your forefathers" (1 Pt 1.18).  This is incredibly Good News. Our God is a God of salvation.  Salvation that impacts and transforms the here and now of life and not just when we die.  Our God desires the fullest of lives possible.  Our psalmist embraces these truths with gusto.  So should we.

But the psalmist stresses that a good life is from God. It is his grace.  Without God life has no meaning or purpose. We are nothing without Him.  He testifies "my honor depends on God." My stature is nothing outside of the Lord.  I might as well have never existed, for human honor and worth derive form the Creator God.

Don't Trust in Humans (62.8-12)

"Trust in him at all times, O people, pour out your hearts to him, for God is 
our refuge.
Lowborn men are but a breath [lit. 'vapor'], the highborn are but a lie; if 
weighed on a balance, they are nothing; together they are only a
breath [lit. 'vapor'].
Do not trust in extortion or take pride in stolen goods; though your riches 
increase, do not set your heart on them" (vv. 8-10)

Our psalmist now becomes the teacher of the Gathered People of God.  He addresses them rather than himself.  He exhorts us to trust in, to have faith in, God at all times for he alone is our refuge. We should "pour out our hearts to him." This is a call to prayer! A call to dependence rather than independence! When we feel assailed we seek instinctively our "refuge."

What the psalmist wants, perhaps, more than all else is not to fall into the trap of trusting in fallen humans And that includes ourselves. The description of humanity in vv 9-10 is in stark contrast to the description of God in vv 5-7.  God is permanent and unshakable, he is a Rock.  He is reliable so he is my Salvation.  He is strong as a Fortress that cannot be breached.  Yet humanity whether a poor pauper or a rich bureaucrat is a wisp, a vapor, and "a lie."  Vivid imagery captures the human dilemma here. Our teacher says if you take both the rich and the poor and put them in one pan of a balance scale and nothing in the other pan they would fly up because "nothing" would weigh more than them combined.  We cannot trust in humanity for our security and stability or our peace.  We will find no rest there.  Those who have done so have learned, as the psalmist has, that humanity will always let us down.  God will never desert us.  He is faithful.  That is the Good News of Psalm 62.

The Bible is full of exhortations not to trust in humanity.  Paul in Romans 3.10-18 creates a collage of citations from the Hebrew Bible saying it is the gospel truth ...

"There is no one righteous, not even one there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one. Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit. The poison of vipers is on their lips. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of shalom they do not know there is no fear of God before their eyes."

Not a pretty picture of humanity painted by Paul. Humans are liars and untrustworthy.  Only God is faithful so put it all in him.  Our singing teacher reminds us that money and power are common sources of human trust for safety and security too.  But he warns that trusting in apparent might rather than in the right.

Two Things to Take to the Bank (62.11-12)

"One thing God has spoken, two things I have heard: that you, O God, are
strong and that you, O LORD are loving. 
Surely you will reward each person according to what he has done."

The psalm employs a Hebrew idiom, "One thing ... two things" which simply means "repeatedly," or "over and over and over and over." The psalmist closes his song to the church by sharing the testimony of all who have walked with God, he is Strong and he is Loving! These are two things that are certain as reality itself.  God is Strong!  God is Loving!! You can hang your life on these two truths.  You can live your life even in the darkness holding onto these fundamental truths.  They are more than "truths" they are simply reality.  "This I have heard, this I know ... "This is the basis of his faith in God delivering him from the straits he is in.  God has the power and God has the motivation to do it.

Because God has the power and the motivation to right the wrongs of this fallen world - he will do just that.  One day God will judge each man and woman.  He will measure our deeds. The very deeds of evil by you, me, everyone ... the whispers, the lies, the double-mindedness God will bring out.  This is in fact ground for praise in the psalm.  It is not the psalmist's place to exact vengence on his enemies.  God will take care of that on that Day. And he will do it perfectly.  This is why Christians look forward to the Day of Christ's appearing. All will be set right. The ones who have put their faith in his faithfulness will be rescued by the angels of God and will greet the King.  Trust in God. If we have shalom and peace in our lives we must give God control.

So I concluded these musings on this amazing text with a call to simply rest in God.  In Good times.  In Bad times.  We like Martin Luther King, Jesus, and the psalmist before them can lift our voices and sing, "Rock of Ages, cleft for me; let me hide myself in Thee!"

Read More

Barton W. Stone & the Debate Culture

I grew up in a "debating culture" or perhaps it was a "sub-culture."  If the minister did not like what was going on a mile down the road then a public challenge was issued.  At times this was done through the local paper.  I recall debates on various aspects of the Holy Spirit (indwelling to tongues), orphan homes, real wine on the table (but never what kind of bread!! but I will never forget the statement 'can we have meat and potatoes on the Lord's table?'), what version you can use and the like.   I vividly recall a debate between a Nazarene minister and a minister from the Churches of Christ about "who" was the real church.  I know I will get abused for saying this . . . but I ALMOST became a Nazarene that day purely on the basis of the spirit demonstrated that day.  It was not a pretty sight!

I must say that I am not opposed to debates on philosophical grounds.  Yet, I am very resistant to engage in them because I find them often to be places where the sinful nature is fed . . . perhaps it exposes my own weaknesses.

From my reading of the NT Paul never engaged in anything like what I have been exposed to . . . discussion is not necessarily debate.  Barton W. Stone, a man of great passion and conviction, expressed (in 1842) near the end of his life what he thought debates had done to our Movement and what they continue to do to Christianity.  This was important to Stone and shared his concerns in his advice to young preachers, near the end of his life.  Reflect on his words and see if they do not "ring" with truth:

"It is a common saying among the preachers of this day, "Old men for counsel young men for war."  This is often advanced in justification of the public debates . . .  Do they [i.e. old men] counel you to engage in such debates? . . .  I will fearlessly answer, that no old man of piety, and intelligence, will give such advice, unless in an extraordinary case. For they know by long experience that such debates tend to strife, deaden piety -- destroy the spirit of prayer -- puff up the vain mind, annihilate the tast of the marrow, and fatness of the living word, and destroy the comforts of true, heavenly religion."

In Stone's view, few men had enough Christianity rooted deep in their souls to engage in religious debates.  He observes a fact that I find to be a truism (at least in my own experience):

"Seldom do we see in the same person, a warrior and a humble devoted christian.  Rara avis in terra. Such acquire a controverial habit and temper . . .

Then Stone address the opinion that the Apostles gave us a positive example in this manner:

"I know it is said in justification of such debates that Paul disputed in the synagogue at Athens, the School of Tyrannus, with the Jews and others.  Read the verse correctly, and the force of the objection is removed -- He reasoned or dialogued with them.  This should be the constant practice of every faithful minister of Christ.  Would to God, it were the practice of all our young preachers, to reason out of the scriptures on the important things of the gospel!

"But 'young men of war.' What war? not against flesh and blood, . . . but against the powers of sin and hell, with spiritual weapons afforded to us from above -- not against men, but against their sins . . ."

(Barton W. Stone, "To Young Preachers," Christian Messenger 12 [August 1842], pp. 316-317).

I may be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but I think Brother Stone was on to something here.  I agree that debates tend to strife, deaden piety -- destroy the spirit of prayer -- puff up the vain mind. How many debates do we see on the necessity of prayer? What could be closer to the Christian walk. I have had challenges to public debate and when I asked the challenger to pray with me they refused.  Do they appeal to the carnal nature: lust for victory, the thrill of defeating the foe . . . Just my opinion.  But we can "reason" together like saints and people filled with the Fruit of the Spirit and the the spirit of war.

Shalom,

Bobby Valentine

Read More

Prayer in the Apcrypha 1: Tobit and Sarah Cry in the Dark Night

 “The prayer of the humble pierces the clouds, and it will not rest until it reaches its goal; it will not desist until the Most High responds and does justice for the righteous and executes judgment” (Sirach 35.21, NRSV)

Jesus, the son of Mary, was born to a faithful Jewish family.  The Gospel of Luke opens a window into the kind of piety that Jesus was immersed in as he grew in “wisdom and in years, and in divine and human favor” (2.52). The vignette of the young Jesus in the temple is something that is presented as typical not extraordinary for his Jewish family (2.41). Jesus would continue as an adult to participate in the pilgrimages to Jerusalem to worship the God of his ancestors (John 5-12). The Gospels are peppered with prayer from the lips of Jesus. 

But it was not just Jesus and his family that were devoted to prayer.  The Jewish people were serious about prayer. When the disciples asked Jesus, “Lord, teach us to pray” (Lk 11.1) they are not implying they were not, or that Jews were not, people of devoted prayer. In fact we often gravely distort, not only Jesus’ mission & message, but the entire NT when we take him and the NT church out of their Jewish context. Caricatures of Judaism’s faith and practice as legalistic, formalistic, harsh, etc, etc. has been a cottage industry among Western Christians for far to long [1]. Even though the evidence is blaring like neon lights in our face we still sometimes turn Jesus not only into a gentile but a European gentile! Thus it is important to remind ourselves of his immersion in Jewish faith and practice. But what was that “faith and practice?” We will look at a few select prayers in the Apocrypha (or Middle Testament) to learn of the “heart and soul” of the prayers Jesus heard and possibly even prayed himself. In the process we will be edified and come closer to the Lord who remains among his people leading us in prayer and singing praises to our Abba (cf. Heb 2.12f).

Prayer in the Apocrypha: Tobit & Sarah

Prayer in the Apocrypha covers every conceivable area of life from war, travel, food,

procreation, to safety, and much more [2]. I have dealt with Tobit rather broadly previously (Here: Tobit: Triumph of Faith in Adversity) and in relation to Jewish worship previously (Here: The Worship of God; Insight from the Apocrypha) so I am not going rehash that material. I offer this brief structural outline of the book for contextual purposes

I. Shame and Depression of Tobit and Sarah (ch's 1-3)

II. Raphael Sent by Grace to Journey with Tobias incognito  (ch's 4-6)

III. Deliverance of Sarah and her Marriage to tobias (ch's 7-10)

IV.  Raphael escorts the newly weds back and Delievers Tobit (ch's 11-12)

V. Tobit's Prayer of thanksgiving and Testament to Tobias (ch's 13-14

The book of Tobit is rich in prayer.  Indeed prayer is one of the most pervasive themes.  The prayers of Tobit and Sarah make up the bulk of chapter three. The prayer on the night of the wedding of Tobias and Sarah in chapter 8 and the prayer of praise by Tobit in chapter 13 are profound. 

Setting the Scene

Tobit, along with his wife Anna and son Tobias, are among the faithful Israelites that are hauled off with the rest of Israel by the Assyrians to Exile after the collapse of Samaria in 722 B.C. Unlike his fellows, he had journeyed to Jerusalem to worship the one true God according to the covenant of Moses. He delighted in temple worship (we easily hear him singing joyfully the Songs of Ascent). In Exile worship at the temple is no longer possible, so he finds other ways of being faithful to Yahweh.  He gave his food to the hungry and poor, clothed the naked and buried the dead (2.17).  Leaving the bodies exposed was an intended insult by the Assyrians, but Tobit in acts of “civil disobedience” buried them earning the wrath of the overlords. Tobit went into hiding but after the death of the tyrant he returns.  He resumes his ways of helping the poor by telling his Tobias (sounding much like a parable of Jesus btw) to go out and find any poor person he can find so he/she can enjoy the provisions of Pentecost too. He would not eat till the poor come sit and dine at his table. Tobias, however, finds a dead Israelite to whom Tobit immediately goes to bury.  Sleeping outside because of his ritual uncleaness Tobit becomes the victim of bird droppings in his eyes and looses his sight. Four years later his wife, Anna, is having to earn food for the family.  She brings home a goat that had been given her for her wages. The blind, and humiliated, Tobit lashes out (wrongfully) at his wife.  True to any genuine relationship, she, stung by his accusation, shouts “Now I see what you are really like! … Where is all that concern of yours for others?” (2.14, TEV). [3]. Crushed by his suffering, in Exile, blinded while doing kingdom work, alienated from his wife, and now even unable to do works for Yahweh he prays that God would take his life.

Meanwhile, Sarah's life is even worse (!) than Tobit’s.  She is the only child of Raguel, a Jew exiled to Ecbatana in Media (cf 2 Kings 17.5-6) hundreds of miles away. She is attacked by her father’s maid because she had been married seven times but “the worst of demons” Asmodeus (3.8, NJB) had killed each bridegroom before they could consummate the marriage.  We learn later in the story that each of these were killed in the bridal chamber itself (6.14). The maid accuses Sarah of actually murdering her own husbands bringing dishonor to her and her family. Now she believes that there is no hope and intends to commit suicide (3.10). But she realizes that doing so would further dishonor her father so she also prays that the Lord take her life or to do as he pleases.

The Prayers: Ad Dominum cum tribularer

The narrator brilliantly, and inspiringly, conveys how the lives of Tobit and Sarah are parallel and that the Lord, even though far from the “holy land,” cares and knows about what is happening to both. Both cry out to the Lord in the midst of their troubles. Quotations come from John Kohlenberger III’s The Parallel Apocrypha with Greek, KJV, Douay, Know, TEV, NRSV, NAB and NJB in parallel columns.  I follow the more literal NRSV here. Tobit prayed

“Then with much grief and anguish of heart I wept, and with groaning began to pray:

‘You are righteous, O Lord,

and all your deeds are just;

all your ways are mercy and truth;

you judge the world.

And now, O Lord, remember me

and look favorably upon me.

Do not punish me for my sins

and for my unwitting offenses

and those of my ancestors committed before you.

They sinned against you,

and disobeyed your commandments.

So you gave us over to plunder, exile, and death,

to become the talk, the byword, and an object of reproach

among all the nations among whom you have

dispersed us.

And now your judgments are true

in exacting penalty from me for my sins.

For we have not kept your commandments

and have not walked in accordance with truth before you.

So now deal with me as you will;

and command my spirit to be taken from me,

so that I may be released from the face of the earth

and become dust.

For it is better for me to die than to live,

because I have had to listen to understand insults,

and great is the sorrow within me.

Command, O Lord, that I be released from this distress;

release me to go to the eternal home,

and do not, O Lord, turn your face away from me.

For it is better for me to die

than to see so much distress in my life

and to listen to insults.” (Tobit 3.1-6, NRSV)

And Sarah prayed …

“At that same time, with hands outstretched toward the window, she prayed and said,

‘Blessed are you, merciful god!

Blessed is your name forever;

let all your works praise you forever.

And now, Lord, I turn my face to you,

and raise my eyes toward you.

Command that I be released from the earth

and not listen to such reproaches any more.

You know, O Master, that I am innocent

of any defilement with a man,

and that I have not disgrace my name

or the name of my father in the land of my exile.

I am my father’s only child {uses monogenes here just as in Jn 3.16}

he has no child to be his heir;

and he has no close relative or other kindred

for whom I should keep myself as wife.

Already seven husbands of mine have died.

Why should I still live?

But if it is not pleasing to you, O Lord, to take my life,

hear me in my disgrace” (Tobit 3.11-15, NRSV)

Praying Out on the Limb

Not only can I, but I do, identify with both Tobit and Sarah.  Twice in my life I have felt the world simply crashing in on me.  The first time was being fired for teaching that racism is absolute sin before God almighty – and this before Christmas! I thought I was going to get a pay raise but instead got two days to “get your books out of the office.” Did I ever feel wronged and confused. The other was when I was divorced by my wife of 17 years - left on a Sunday morning!! (No joke!) Oh how I felt like less than zero.

Many of us, just as Tobit had literally gone above and beyond the “letter of the law” in trying to show he was on the Lord’s side only to have a bird literally poop in his eyes.  In his “eyes” he was shamed, of no count. Less than Zero. And now he has wrongfully accused his wife. Shame upon shame! Sarah whose problem was not being barren like the ancient Matriarch, rather it was that her husbands keep dying before they can even have sexual intercourse.  She is the talk of the town and the maid voices what the whole town thinks – she is really murdering her men! Her father is shamed because of her and he has no heir because of her!  She, like Tobit, see no light at the end of the tunnel.  They are out on a limb that has just been cut off.

In the Scriptures that Jesus drank from childhood he encountered numerous prayers from the Pit. I believe the Gospels make it clear that Tobit is one story he knew.  At any rate the Psalms are littered with lamentations where the people are overwhelmed by the “odds.” “In my trouble I cried to the Lord, and he heard me. Lord, deliver my soul from liars and from deceitful people” (Ps 120). “Out of the depths I have cried to you, Lord” Lord, hear my voice.” (Ps 130).  Space does not allow quoting Psalm 88 in full but clearly Tobit and Sarah would feel at home in that psalm. When was the last time you took the time to read the book of Lamentations?

Other prayers in Scripture even reveal a desire for death.  Job clearly hates the day he was born and desires to be set free from his misery (Job 3).  Jonah twice tells Yahweh he would rather be dead than live in a world where he lets scum off like he did the Assyrians (Jonah 4).  But Jonah’s death wish is motivated out of anger at God.  Tobit’s and Sarah’s is motivated by anguish at the present and no hope for the future [4]. With such prayers being replayed in his head (like Ps 22), Jesus himself, like Tobit, released his spirit, to die (Tob 3.6)

Tobit’s prayer has three parts. First it has a doxology (3.2).  Second is Tobit’s recognition of his own sin and his identification with the failures of the entire people of God. He neither blames them nor denies his sharing in their guilt (3.3-5). Third his fervent petition to be released from his shame and blindness.

Sarah’s prayer is presented as just as important to God (and the narrative) as Tobit’s. She is in different circumstances but the same turmoil.  God cares for both men and women. He listens to both. He responds to both. He is Sovereign over all the world even the Assyrian Empire to bring about his will in the lives of his people.

Unlike Tobit, Sarah has no qualms about asserting her innocence before the Lord. She has been faithful and remains even a virgin despite being in an alien land where her virtue could easily have been compromised by slavers. She lives with the horrid memory of being wed only to literally watch seven husbands destroyed by Asmodeus. But who knew the truth but her?

Wrapping Up

Tobit and Sarah’s prayers reveal faith in a God who is not only powerful but who is merciful and full of truth (or “grace and truth” in NJB in 3.2 much like in John). They believe that God is the only one who can address their problem. Tobit seems to only see death as the only option but Sarah leaves open the door for “your will to be done” [5]. Both reveal an unshakable faith that God is to be praised regardless of the circumstances and that his justice is flawless even in their less than favorable circumstances.

Finally the author of Tobit reminds us that even though those seeking God’s favor are far from the Temple that “at that very moment, the prayers of both of them were heard in the glorious presence of God” (3.16). God sent his angel Raphael not to take the lives of Tobit and Sarah but to deliver him from his blindness so he could “see the glory of the Lord” and to save Sarah from her shame and set her free from the tormenting demon.  The rest of the story is God fulfilling the prayer of two very different people separated by many miles, with very different problems and yet God mysteriously linked them together.

Stories and prayers like these showed Jesus and the early church that God was every present and mysteriously and deeply involved in the world. Faith in him is the victory. These prayers are powerful and show us the kind of prayer Jesus and his followers heard and prayed ...

The Art Work ...

Tobit, like much of the Apocrypha, was treated as canonical Scripture by artists.  There are stunning works of art on themes from the Middle Testament.  The sculpture at the top is by Giovanni Baratta (1670-1747).  The illuminated page is the title page of Tobit in the Gutenberg Bible. And the tapestry is by Neri di Bicci dating to 1471. 

Notes

1] The sad sordid tale of Christian anti-Semitism is chronicled ad nauseum by Dan Cohn-Sherbok, The Crucified Jew: Twenty Centuries of Christian Anti-Semitism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1992).

2] See Norman B. Johnson’s, Prayer in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature, 1948), 7-37. Johnson’s work is both valuable and frustrating. He arranges his brief study topically with little attention to the context in which the prayers occur. His study is also tainted with a not so subtle condescending attitude toward Second Temple Judaism that colors more than one of his interpretations. Nevertheless with that said it is still a good entre into the field of prayer in the Apocrypha.

3] Amy-Jill Levine, a wonderful Jewish scholar has called attention to the domestic relations   between Tobit and Anna in a very insightful article, “Tobit: Teaching Jews How to Live in the Diaspora,” Bible Review 8.4 (August 1992), 42-51, 64.  Where I disagree with her, is her conclusion that the Book of Tobit is concerned with keeping in Anna and Sarah “in their place.”  I really think this is a major imposition upon the text.

4] See the oh so brief discussion in Cary A Moore,Tobit, Introduction and Commentary (New York: Doubleday 1996), 139-140.

5] David deSilva correctly, in my judgment, sees Sarah’s prayer as a “model” for praying, as James will direct, “according to God’s will.” See Introducing the Apocrypha: Message, Context, and Significance (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic 2002), 78.

Read More

First Timothy 2.8-15 & the Silencing of Women in Worship

"A learned Christian woman may expound the scriptures and urge obedience to them, to one hundred men and women at one time, as well as to one hundred, one at a time, ... and no more violate a scriptural command in one instance than the other." (Silena Holman in the Gospel Advocate, 1888)

In the past I have offered various thoughts on the theme of women in the Bible and relating that to our world today.  One text I've not addressed, and have come to believe is misused frequently is 1 Timothy 2.8-15.  I offer this study as preliminary thought even as though I have dug into it for many years. I believe that the exegesis of any text must be guided by its historical and literary context as well as its flow in the canonical story of God.  These are my presuppositions: I do not believe that whatever it is that Paul is saying in 1 Tim 2 is correcting, or contradicting, what he has said and done by example in other places. Not only that, but what he says must cohere with the whole sweep of the Story of Redemption.  I maintain that that numerous other texts are just as "plain" and "clear" as this one and just as authoritative.  So with these caveats in mind see if we can come with in "understanding distance" of the text (the phrase is Alexander Campbell's).

Approaching the Subject - What are We afraid of?

The advancement of social equality for women in the last century and half has often brought great anxiety among many western men - including God-fearing, Bible loving, conservative Christian men. In the last one hundred years women have achieved remarkable advances in education, employment, athletic, and scientific endeavors.  We have learned that women are just as smart as men and work just as hard as men. They can drive tanks, fly planes and go into space and serve as presidents of universities, CEOs of corporations, and presidents of nations.

Most of the women involved in the nineteenth century women's movement [1] were first involved in the Abolition Movement and the Temperance Movement as dedicated Christians pursuing their agendas on explicit biblical principles. Silena Holman is a shinning example within Churches of Christ of a dedicated female follower of Christ seeking biblical justice.  She is quoted at the head of this essay [2]. Many conscientious, God-fearing, men believed Scripture forbade women work outside the home, the right to vote, and in some cases simply to be educated as a man might be.

Today the situation is both radically different and strangely the same.  Men who fear women, caricature the women's movement, or see females as sexual playgrounds remain. Without saying he falls into any of those areas, Roy Deaver is an example of one who seems to greatly misunderstand the issues involved in the wider movement  Deaver cites eight reasons why Churches of Christ must shore up its approach to women in the church.  Each of the eight is negative:

1) because feminist's are working "feverishly" to break down all gender distinctions
2) because of his opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment
3) because of his opposition to government funded day care
4) because of his opposition to bring civil rights to homosexuals
5) because of his opposition to abortion
6) because feminists are trying to destroy capitalism and its patriarchal concepts
7) because of their efforts to reform marriage
8) because of his opposition to disarmament, guaranteed annual income, etc

According to Brother Deaver the "goals of feminists and the Communists are exactly the same." [3]

LaGard Smith, another very popular writer, has shared his views on the matter of women in the church. In his book What Most Women Want (I have been privileged to hear Brother Smith lecture on the matter several times as well) he argues, like Deaver, that feminism is the cultural engine pushing the church into female ordination, deaconesses, and more participation in worship.  Smith's charges are even wider than Deaver's, laying the charge of paganism and New Ageism at the feet of those who believe that Scripture authorizes a broader view of women's role than previously held in the late 20th & early 21st century Churches of Christ [4].

In my view, these two brothers illustrate how difficult it is for us to come to the Bible  afresh, especially the polarizing "role of woman."  But we have to try to be fair to the entire canon and we must hear Paul as they would in the first century. These brothers are adamant - and so am I - about the priority of Scripture and listening to it [5]. But I believe they are as glued to a cultural worldview as anyone else. I believe their interpretation of Scripture is "plainly" culturally driven. They both fear something.  That something is, in their opinion, manifested in the women's movement. It must be opposed.

I am not a radical feminist by any means, nor do I believe that one has to be to know that women have been denigrated and that feminist thinkers have raised profound questions for us to reflect upon in the light of God's redemptive intent for creation. Thus I celebrate any and all moves that demonstrate my wife and my daughters are fully human, and as much imagers of God as any man. 

Both of these beloved soldiers of the cross (and I have great respect for both), and many other men, appeal to 1 Timothy 2.8-15 as sort of the basic passage for limiting what women are allowed to do in worship (or in work).  The Kroeger's have noted that "many evangelicals view all biblical passages about the role of and ministry of women through the lens of 1 Tim. 2:12. It becomes the key verse, the one on which all others turn" [6]. My goal is to understand the meaning of Paul's word's in their original context and ask what that means for us in our own setting today. 

The Archeology of the Ancient Text: Historical & Literary Contexts

As a missionary, Paul, entered the capital of Roman Asia, Ephesus, he could not have missed one of the largest structures in the Hellenistic world. The magnificent temple to the Goddess Artemis - one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. It had columns towering to six stories and was four times the size of the Parthenon in Athens, measuring about 377 by 235 ft [7]. Artemis was the center of life in Ephesus and this is demonstrated by the fact that the city stopped work and devoted itself to the the cult for a whole month each year [8].

Ancient historian, Gregory Sterling, notes that women in the Greco-Roman world were generally devalued and restricted to home. In the area of religion, however, women tended to achieve their greatest degree of "freedom." He says that religion was the one state-sanctioned sphere where women were allowed to take leading public roles throughout the period" [9]. This freedom was especially true in the Cult of Artemis in Ephesus that was dominated by women.

The church that Timothy was put in charge of lived and breathed the atmosphere of that great pagan temple and its goddess. Just as the church in Corinth was affected by its surroundings, and churches in the South imbibed its environment, so the Ephesian church could not escape the toxins of the flamboyant and uninhibited worship of Artemis. The worship of Artemis was dominated by virgins dedicated to the goddess and castrated males. Kenneth Baily wonders, "what possibility would any male religious leadership have had for a sense of dignity and self-respect? What kind of female attitudes would have prevailed in such a city ... Castration being the ultimate violence against the male, would not anti-male sexism in various forms have been inevitable" [10].

These few historical stones dug up already shed considerable light on both the depiction of Timothy in the epistle and the relation of 2.8-15 to the rest of the letter.  For example such a hostile environment could explain why Paul has to urge Timothy to stay at his post (1.3) and to "fight the good fight" (1.18 & 6.12) and to not let anyone look down upon him (4.12). Timothy, as we read the letter itself, seems to be a man just hanging on simply hoping Paul would return (3.14-15 & 4.13).  Timothy is urged to resist false teaching and ungodly behavior within the congregation (1.3-7, 19-20; 4.1-3, 7, 11-13; 5.20-22; 6.3-5, 20-21). This heavy emphasis, in such a small letter, reveals a church situation that is quite serious since some have already shipwrecked their faith (1.19) while others have missed the mark (6.21).  Timothy's position seems to be in double jeopardy since the false teachers themselves seem to be among the elders of the church itself [11]. It is clear from any reading of the text as a whole that Paul has deep concerns for his younger padawan learner (for the Star Wars people) in this unfriendly urban pagan center of the Roman Empire.

The concern of Paul for Timothy helps explain the "all business" [12] nature of the letter to his son in the faith.  It even lacks the usual greeting (but it does have charin, in 1.12 which perhaps functions as a thanksgiving but that is not certain [13]) and the typical Pauline concluding "greeting." It is clear from the content of 1.3-7 that Paul is seriously concerned with Timothy's handling of the false teachers and their gangrenous teaching. However the unhealthy teachers are finding a receptive field among some ignorant (of the basic truths of the faith??) women who go from house church to house church spreading misinformation (5.13) [14]. 

Paul's Correctives in 2.8-15

The wider concerns of the letter surface within this section of First Timothy especially in regard to certain women and the teaching being done. The larger unit of thought, 2.1-15, deals with appropriate decorum within the assembly.  It is generally recognized that Paul's admonitions in this paragraph (vv. 8-15) are within instructions regarding the worship in the Gathering, especially prayer [15]. Everett Ferguson has argued convincingly that the Pauline phrase en panti topo in 2.8 is a technical designation to refer to the assembly of worship or place of prayer. In Christian usage the phrase becomes a short hand way of referring to the Lord's Table [16].

Paul's initial instructions, at first glance, seemed aimed at the male population of the Ephesian church. He tells them not quarrel or dispute; rather they are to offer up their hands in prayer to God in unity and without anger or disputing (v.8). This instruction anticipates Paul's concern elsewhere in the letter about un-Christian attitudes prevailing in the house churches, especially among the false teachers (cf. 6.3-5).

But it is a less than careful reading to assume that Paul is speaking about only of men praying [17],  for Paul assumes that women will be, or are presently, praying in the assembly of the Ephesian church. Consider Paul's use of hosautos in v.9. The word is usually translated “likewise” or “in a similar manner” and is commonly used to refer to an idea which is already in the context of the passage.  In other words, it can refer, in its usual form, to an idea already mentioned previously which is to be repeated in what follows.  As France has commented, "the reference to women's dress and demeanor is not changing to a new subject, but turning from how men should pray to how women for their part are to pray" [18]. Paul simply assumes the privilege of prayer to both men and women in the assembly just as he did at Corinth (1 Cor 11.4-5).  This is a good and possible way to understand the Greek, for v.9 has no verb.  F. F. Bruce has also suggested this line of reasoning in his Answers to Questions that when hosautos has its full force the text can read: when men pray, the hands they lift up should be holy hands:  When women pray, their attitude and demeanor should be chaste. He cites Chrysostom's Homily on Timothy as support that women were praying in Ephesus and this understanding of the verse. 

Paul's concern over female decorum in v.9 suits the context we have described in ancient Ephesus. Keener points out that beauty was packaged in antiquity just as it is today [19]. These women addressed by Paul are clearly from the elite wealthy class whose appearance is grounded in their domineering attitudes we expect from the Cult of Artemis[20]. Alvera Mickelsen sees the connection between Paul's concern with clothing and jewelry and Artemis.  She writes:

"In Ephesus with its huge temple to the goddess Artemis were hundreds of sacred priestesses who probably also served as sacred prostitutes. There were also hundreds of hetaerae, the most educated of Greek women who were the extramarital sexual partners of upper-class Greek men. Possibly some of these women had been converted and were wearing their suggestive and expensive clothing to church. Since hetaerae were often respected teachers of men in Greece (many are named in Greek literature), they would be more likely to become teachers after they became part of the church." [21]

These women, instead of being ostentatious (uppity! in a bad way) should adorn themselves with good works as they enter prayer ... that are fitting for all servants of Christ.

Moving into verse 11 Paul uses the first imperative of this paragraph, manthaneto. Paul does not merely tell women to be quiet but commands them to learn! It was not a conclusion that women would naturally become learners in the first century as Sterling reminds us that women were routinely left out of the education process [22]. Paul, however, wants the female disciples at Ephesus to be learners and students (it should be recalled that in 2 Tim 2.2, Timothy himself became a learner in order to be a teacher!). She is not to be arrogant but "silent" (NRSV). Hesuchia does not mean, as we are sometimes told in church, the absence of verbal communication or that ladies cannot contribute to the learning (or do announcements!).  Rather, Paul is emphasizing the attitude of the learner - remember the historical setting - she should have a spirit of learning [23].  These freshly converted women are not to come in and assume control, but rather they are commanded to become students (disciples) and learners first.The recent Kingdom New Testament captures quite well Paul's aim here: "They [women] must study undisturbed, in full submission to God (1 Tim 2.11).

Paul's oft quoted statement in v.12, "I permit not a woman ..." probably does not mean what the KJV says at all. Paul uses a present indicative verb epitrepo which many scholars render "I am not allowing ..."[24]  This rendering shows the concern Paul has for the historical and social reality of the Ephesian church in the shadow of Artemis. Paul uses a rare Greek verb (used only here in the entire New Testament), authentein, to describe what the women are not to be doing. Lots of ink has been spread on this word. Paul's typical word for "authority" is proistemi, which he uses several times in the letter (3.4-5, 12 & 5.17) or exousia. These other words are readily available to Paul but he did not use either in reference to these women or this situation.

As noted already, there has been considerable controversy over the actual meaning of the rare word authenteo in 1 Tim 2. The Kroeger's have argued at length against the background of the mystery religions and early Gnosticism that the term meant actual or representational murder [25]. This view could make sense in the context of the life of the church. But Carroll Osburn has challenged some of the Kroeger's thesis, suggesting that the while the term does sometimes mean "murder" it more often in Koine Greek has the connotation to "domineer."[26]  It cannot legitimately be argued that Paul is simply restricting women from exercising authority.  The word is a violent word and is used in violent contexts whether we understand it to be "murder" in some sense or gross "domination." Again Paul does not use this word in any other place nor does any other NT writer. It is an extraordinary word called for by extraordinary circumstances. Paul is rejecting unhealthy assertiveness on the part of certain women that would be incompatible with men too (cf. Eph 5.21 & 1 Cor 11.11-12).  France has suggested translating the verse as "I do not allow these ignorant women to batter the men. They are to stop shouting and calm down." [27]

Paul emphasizes that these women are to keep a quiet and peaceful demeanor (the idea of not fighting or arguing is pronounced in the Pastorals).  His use of hesuchia at the end of v.12 does not mean the woman cannot speak ... as we have seen, they are praying.  But rather they are to assume a humble and peaceful demeanor.  This is the third time, in fact, that Paul has used this term in this section of 1 Timothy.  Why is it that when we read at the beginning of the present chapter that we are to pray for kings "so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life" (2.2) that no one assumes Paul is commanding the disciples to a life of silence!? But it is the exact same term in both vv 11 and 12! The word does not forbid speaking and in fact has little if anything to do with it.

What is Going on?  Creation or Fall? 

In this section, I am far more tentative than in my previous exposition. This is where I am as of today.  It is assumed by many writers, such as Deaver and Smith, that Paul, since he mentions Eve, grounds his teaching in "creation" or God's original design [28]. I am not convinced of this.  R. T. France has suggested that Paul is not working with a creation principle at all but a "fall principle" [29]. Paul does not have Genesis 1 in mind but the unit of Genesis 2 and 3 in these verses. Paul seems to be illustrating from this well known text what happened when another misinformed woman made a dreadful decision by listening to a "false teacher" resulting in drastic consequences.  Eve was created as Adam's complement or completer (not his handmaiden).  See my What did God Say? Gen 2.1b & Man's 'Helper' But she acted in ignorance (not a put down of her) and listened to the Serpent [30]. So in some way the Ephesian women are asserting their independence in the face of men and being deceived by false teachers. As France put it "in such a situation they must be denied the right to teach" [31]. The issue is a heart problem not a gender problem.

Paul's illustration from the Fall narrative can arguably be used to show the occasional nature of his instruction to the Ephesian church rather than some universal principle. In Romans 5.12ff Paul argues the exact opposite as he does here on the origin of Sin within creation. In that context it is Adam, not Eve, who is the progenitor of sin and death in the world.  Adam was chosen precisely because he was a man in that context and thus representative of all who went into sin - males and females [32].

Paul's Correction and the Story of Redemption

Richard Lints notes that it "is easy enough to affirm that any given passage of Scripture means what it says. But it can be a good deal more difficult to determine exactly what a text is saying" [33]. Scripture is not as simplistic as it is sometimes affirmed to be. Our present text and context bristles with questions and we sweep them under the rug hiding difficulties because they are not burning issues with us.  Lints is correct but one way to help understand texts is within the canonical horizon that each text in as part of the Story of Redemption.  I will try to be brief, but 1 Timothy does not exist by itself but as part of the canon.  It is clear that whatever correction that Paul makes, it does not restrict women from praying in the assembly of the church. They are doing that both here and in 1 Corinthians 11.4-5. Nor does this passage, even within the context of the Ephesian church, prohibit women deacons. It is clear from 3.11 that Paul refers to a group of women in the same category as male deacons[34].See my Voices on Female Deacons in the Stone-Campbell Movement.

It is clear that a number of women in the history of redemption have been called by the Lord God to have functional authority over his people.  Miriam (Micah 6.4) was equal with Moses and Aaron.  Deborah was a judge and a prophet over "all Israel" (Judges 4.4) and the author of Scripture (Judges 5).  Here authority is clearly over both male and female Israelites [35]. Huldah exercised great authority in the days of Josiah by the Lord's direction.  When Hilkiah was instructed to "inquire of the Lord" one wonders why he and Shaphan did not seek out the prophet Jeremiah instead of this woman prophet (2 Kings 22.14-20 & 2 Chronicles 34.22-33).  Indeed Huldah is credited with being the catalyst for Josiah's reform and the first person to declare a writing to be Scripture. See my Huldah Who? The Forgotten Ministry of a Female Prophet. Esther wrote with "full authority" from God to direct the worship of Israel at Purim (Esther 9.29, 32). There are many more portions of the canonical horizon of 1 Timothy 2.12 that is simply dismissed without a second thought by many restorationists.  I do not feel at ease in Zion following that pattern if disregard for the Scripture.

In the New Testament there is manifold evidence from Paul's own writings that women were hardly silent and unseen. Phoebe was a deacon and patron of the church in the Corinthian suburb known as Cenchrea (Romans 16.1-2, NRSV, TNIV, etc). Paul identifies no less than ten women in Romans 16, designating many with the same terminology as he does men, that of "co-workers." He even calls one woman, Junia, an apostle (Romans 16.7). That Paul could call a woman an apostle has startled so many men that in the medieval period they even contrived to make this woman into a man.  There is no evidence in any Greek manuscript or version for the supposed masculine (Junias) prior to the thirteenth century A.D. [36]. Women were praying and prophesying in the church of Corinth (1 Cor 11.4-5, as well as Ephesus).  This New Testament evidence, of which more could be added, should provide some clues to interpreting 1 Timothy 2.12 but it is usually disregarded as "postscript theology" [37] or denigrated  as "non-didactic" evidence ... or just plain ignored all together.

The Ancient Text and Us

I believe that most uses of 1 Timothy 2 are illegitimate wresting of Scripture.  Failures in both exegesis and hermeneutical approach mar typical use of the text. It is not a trump card against female participation in the assembly of the church. It is clear that Paul does not want women (or men!) to domineer other Christians. Paul's chastisement of the Corinthians for their table etiquette reveals that fallen social stratification of the world has no place in the kingdom of God. He does want them to learn (ironically the Hebrews Preacher wants his hearers to learn too so they could be teachers! He does not suggest that only women should be) he does want their life to be representative of the "quiet and peaceful life" he urges for all Christians in (again using the same term) in v.2.

But in our current applications of this text we are so inconsistent.  Churches of Christ frequently say that Paul does not let women teach men, lead singing, wait on the table, pray or even make announcements. And praying is explicitly stated by the apostle Paul as something women were and can do in the assembly.  On the other hand "we" have no difficulty in letting women write authoritative books and articles, write the songs we sing, teach men in colleges, teach in Sunday schools (as long as they are unbaptized!) and even evangelize in a non-Western context [38]. So we are either inconsistent at best or deceptive at worst with the text. Deaver may be a case in point when he writes,

"The divine restriction - in force in the Old Testament times and in force in the New Testament times - simply that the woman is not at any time, in any place, in any way, or in any circumstance to place herself (or allow herself to be placed in a position which would necessarily (inherently) involve her having dominion over a man."

This is so because, according to Deaver, by God's design women are in "subordination or subjection" to men. I do not see how Deaver's words not only forbid a woman from being a deacon, teacher, song leader but also a police officer, principal in a public school or allow women to be anything other than a housewife!![39]  I cannot disagree more strongly with Deaver! The ministry of women in the Bible - I've already mentioned them by name - was real.  They really did lead God's people. That is the simplest and most straightforward reading of Deborah, Esther, Huldah and others. Why is it legitimate hermeneutical procedure to act as if these texts in the inspired word are simply not there?

It seems to me a legitimate application of Paul's correction in Ephesus recognizes is particularity ... that is it squares with its context(s).  Fee notes the remarkable similarity between the instructions to women in 2.8-15 and 5.11-15.

"Rather than displaying the 'good works' of the older widows, which includes child rearing (5.10), they have apparently 'given themselves to pleasure' (v.6) have grown wanton against Christ in their desire to remarry (v.12 apparently outside the faith). Furthermore, they have become busybodies, going from house church to house church talking foolishness and speaking things they should not (v.13; the false teachings? cf. the description of the false teachers in 1.6-7). As such they have already gone astray after Satan (v.15). Paul's solution here is for them to remarry (vis-a-vis the false teachers; cf. 4.3) and bear children, so as not to give the enemy cause to reproach the gospel. The concern and solution in 2:9-15 are nearly identical." [40]

It is clear, given the situation in Ephesus, that Paul is dealing with a major problem in that congregation and deals with it in an appropriate pastoral manner. It is clear, to me anyway at this time, that Paul is not making a general rule but dealing with the specific church issue that was rooted in the shadows of Artemis ... a situation that seems to be getting the best of Timothy.  Nor is it apparent that Paul is appealing to a creational value but instead illustrates what happens when men and women do not live together in a mutually supportive relationship.

In the final analysis, it is no more valid to use 1 Timothy 2.8-15 to teach the subjection of women any more than to use 1 Timothy 6.1 to teach the validity of slavery in our world.  Any hermeneutic that legitimates chattel slavery is wrong but there were plenty that have done so in the past.

First Timothy 2 prohibits the ungodly domineering - even chauvinistic - attitudes that run roughshod over other people.  It excludes certain unlearned (about the basics of the faith) women from being teachers and commands them to be learners. Paul has the same directives for men too.

These are my thoughts ... as of now. I do not claim any infallibility for them.  

Notes:

1] See Rebecca Merrill Groothuis' Women Caught in the Conflict: The Culture War between Traditionalism and Feminism (Baker 1994) for an excellent historical overview of the roots of the Women's Movement in Scripture.  See also Anna M. Speicher, The Religious World of Antislavery Women: Spirituality in the Lives of Five Abolitionist Lecturers (Syracuse University Press 2000) and Julie Roy Jeffrey The Great Silent Army of Abolitionism: Ordinary Women in the Antislavery Movement (University of North Carolina Press 1998).

2] See C. Leonard Allen, "Silena Moore Holman (1850-1915), Voice of the 'New Woman' among Churches of Christ," Discipliana 56 (1996): 3-11

3] Roy Deaver, The Role of Women (Biblical Notes, n.d.), p. 3

4] F. LaGard Smith, What Most Women Want (Harvest House 1992), pp. 123-136.

5] Many who oppose a wider role of women's roles within the church charge carte blanch that those who differ with them as rejecting the authority of Scripture.  R. T. France notes "both sides find it hard to accept that the opposing conclusions might in fact have been honestly reached by people of equal integrity and equal commitment to the authority of Scipture." Women in the Church's Ministry: A Test Case for Biblical Interpretation (Eerdmans 1995), p. 11.

6] Richard C. Kroeger & Catherine C. Kroeger, I Suffer Not a Woman: Rethinking 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient Evidence (Baker 1992), p. 12.

7] John McRay, Archaeology and the New Testament (Baker 1991), p. 256.

8] Richard E. Oster, "The Ephesian Artemis as an Opponent of Early Christianity," Jahrbuch fur Antike und Christentum 19 (Aschendorff 1976), 24-44.  Professor Oster has greatly expanded this research in a more comprehensive essay, "Ephesus as a Religious Center under the Principate, I. Paganism before Constantine," Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt, II. 18.3 Ed. H. Temporini and W. Haasa (de Gryter 1990): 1661-1728

9] Gregory E. Sterling, "Women in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds (323 BCE-138 CE)," in Ed. Carroll D. Osburn, Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity, vol 1 (College Press 1995), p. 85.

10] Bailey quoted in R. T. France, Women in the Church's Ministry, pp. 58-59

11] This makes sense in light of Paul's prophecy in Acts 20.25-32. See also Gordon D. Fee's defense of this position in his commentary, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus (Hendrickson 1988), 7ff.

12] Gordon Fee, Gospel & Spirit: Issues in New Testament Hermeneutics (Hendrickson 1991), p.56

13] Thomas C. Greer, Jr. "Admonitions to Women in 1 Tim. 2:8-15," in Ed. Carroll D. Osburn, Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity vol 1, p. 283.

14] The NIV & NRSV read "gossips" for pluaroi but it more than likely has the meaning of "nonsense" or "foolishness" here. The widows seem to be involved in unlearned discourse which was received from the false teachers.

15] Craig S. Keener, Paul, Wives & Women: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul (Hendrickson 1992), 102-103.

16] Everett Ferguson, "Topos in 1 Timothy 2.8," Restoration Quarterly 33 (1991), 65-73.

17] As do Ferguson, ibid, p. 73 and Deaver, Role of Women, p. 17.

18] France, Women's Ministry in the NT, p. 62. See also Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, p. 103 and Greer, Admonitions to Women in 1 Tim. 2:8-15," p. 290.

19] Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, p. 104

20] Alan Padgett, "Wealthy Women at Ephesus: 1 Timothy 2:8-15 in Social Context," Interpretation 41 (1987): 19-31. Padgett also demonstrates that Paul mirrors many of the moralists of his day in his critique.

21] Quoted in Stanley J. Grenz, Women in the Church: A Biblical Theology of Women in the Ministry (IVP 1995), p. 126.

22] Sterling, Women in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds," pp. 55-57

23] Murry J. Harris, "Quiet, Rest, Silence, Sound, Voice, Noise," New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Ed. Colin Brown (Zondervan 1978), Vol 3, p.111-112. LaGard Smith in What Most Women Want recognizes this term is not the same as in 1 Cor 14.34 but then states they essentially mean the same anyway. He says "it has a similar meaning--to hold one's peace." He then states quietness in this context "is an attitude regarding one's relative position in a hierarchy of spiritual authority" (pp. 251-252). It seems to me that Smith has simply assumed his conclusion for neither "quietness" means what he says nor does the context refer to recognizing one's place in a "hierarchy" of authority." If anything Paul is attacking an attitude of hierarchy.

24] See Gordon Fee, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, p. 72.  Greer suggests the same rendering, "Admonitions to Women in 1 Tim 2:8-15," p. 292

25] Kroeger's I Suffer Not a Woman, pp. 185-188. Catherine Kroeger's view has evolved from understanding the term with an erotic connotation to the view just mentioned.

26] Carroll Osburn, "Authenteo (1 Timothy 2:12)," Restoration Quarterly 25 (1982): 1-12.

27] France, Women in the Church's Ministry, p. 66.

28] Deaver, Role of Women, p. 17-18 and Smith, What Most Women Want, pp. 253-254.

29] France, Women in the Church's Ministry, p. 67

30] See also the analysis of Genesis 1-3 by Rick Marrs, "In the Beginning: Male and Female in Gen 1-3," in Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity vol 2 (College Press 1995), 1-36.

31] ibid, 68

32] Gordon Fee, Gospel & Spirit, pp. 61-62.

33] Richard Lints, The Fabric of Theology: A Prolegomenon to Evangelical Theology (Eerdmans 1993), p. 295.

34] Barry Blackburn, among many others, has demonstrated that "The Identity of the Women in 1 Tim 3.11" was female deacons, cf Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity, vol 1, pp. 303-319

35] Deborah (and Huldah) is clearly a thorn in the flesh for authors like LaGard Smith. As he reads it, Deborah was uncomfortable with her role and was actually in a covert operation to renew male leadership, in his words, "in the story of Deborah, the message is clear: Great shame attached itself to the men of Israel for failing to assume their responsibility as leaders and protectors," What Most Women Want, p. 116. I confess to having missed that clear message in the Deborah narrative. The shame, if present in the story, is no greater than any other portion of Judges. One gets a better appreciation of the ministry of Deborah in Charme Robarts, "Deborah: Judge, Prophetess, Military Leader, and Mother in Israel," in Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity, vol 2, pp. 69-86

36] Peter Lampe, "The Roman Christians of Romans 16," in The Romans Debate, revised edition. Edited by Karl P. Donfried (Hendrickson 1991), pp.216-230.

37] LaGard Smith, What Most Women Want, pp. 211-219

38] Robert Rowland has exposed our inconsistency in Churches of Christ.  Velma West could teach men New Testament Greek at Harding Graduate School of Religion just as long as she never told them what it meant!! An impossibility in my view.  I Permit Not a Woman ... To be Remain Shackled (Lighthouse 1991).

39] Deaver, Role of Women, p. 18

40] Gordon Fee, Gospel & Spirit, pp. 57-58

Read More

Christmas is Made for BOOKS!! A 2012 Reader's List

"Give me a man or woman who has read a thousand books and you give me an interesting companion. Give me a man or woman who has read perhaps three and you give me a dangerous enemy indeed." - Anne Rice

"We read to know we are not alone" - C. S. Lewis

"Books are to be called for and supplied on the assumption that the process of reading is not a half-sleep; but in the highest sense an exercise, a gymnastic struggle; that the reader is to do something for himself." - Walt Whitman

 "Once you learn to read, you will be forever free." - Frederick Douglass

I am frequently asked about books and reading material. This year's Christmas list of the top ten books to get and read consists of works I have read this past year and have recommended to various people. My list will be eclectic this year with a few old numbers and current hits.  Each, and all, of these books are worthy of your attention and will bless your walk with the Lord as we seek first the kingdom of God and its righteousness.

The book Christmas tree is in my office. It includes Homer, Taylor Branch, Martin Heidegger, Robert Burnham, Ernst Troeltsch,Walter Brueggemann, Dava Sobel, A. A. Milne, Alexander Campbell, Peter Gay, Gregory of Nyssa, W. F. Albright and a few others who would never be associated except in my book tree.  :-) 

1) Randolph Richards & Brandon O'Brien, Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible. This is probably the best work on biblical interpretation on a popular level of the year. Not just another book on theoretical foundations or why parables are not epistles.  This work introduces non-scholars to the "hidden" cultural assumptions in Scripture that shape its meaning is profound ways. The chapter on collectivism (communalism) vs "individualism" alone is worth the price of the book.  This emphasis in Scripture is completely missed by most American Evangelicals and radically distorts our vision the Christian faith.  While not a flawless work the authors have done a marvelous job of bringing Western, modern, post-Enlightenment believers to breath the air of the Eastern, ancient, pre-Scientific of the Bible. This work opens our eyes as Westerners to the world of biblical people and shows us how to "enter in." The prose are lively and the illustrations are clear and contemporary and make for a great read. Bible reading is at its most fundamental level a profoundly cross-cultural experience. We cannot but be more informed Bible readers by digesting this book.

2) Harriet Beecher Stowe, Uncle Tom's Cabin ed & annotated by Henry Louis Gates & Hollis Robbins. I first read Stowe in the late 1990s, revisited a couple years ago and have just finished it again as part of a larger project. In the last few years there has been some discussion whether it should be the quintessential American novel. If you have never actually read this classic (classics are "classic" but often not read) perhaps you should find out the reason why it was in fact the best selling book of the 19th century after the Bible and why - unlike the Da Vinci Code - it actually changed the world.You may be amazed that old Uncle Tom is nothing like the stereotyped "Uncle Tom" you have heard ... I will be posting a blog on Uncle Tom's Cabin and its use of Scripture in the next day or two.

3) Bernard of Clairvaux, On Loving God  Truly one of the great little books in the world. Small in size but St. Bernard is a feast for the mind and the heart. Each page, even paragraphs, have the potential of leading to hours of reflection. This is a book that must be eaten.

4) Mirsolav Volf, Allah: A Christian Response . Volf is one of the premier theological thinkers of the present age. He is Conservative and Evangelical and interested in taking the Christian faith into the public square. This is an incredibly important book which is surprisingly easy to read. Volf seeks a position that can foster the common good of peace in the world and yet honor the true differences between Islam and Christianity. He does argue, and I believe convincingly, that Christians and Muslims do in fact worship the same God - that is if monotheism is true.  This does not erase serious differences between the two in fact Volf does not mash us all together in one big happy family. However we can live peacefully ... from a Christian point of view ... in a pluralistic world. You will be challenged, you will think deeply, you will argue with Volf I promise you, but if you listen I believe you will be enriched and blessed for having read this stimulating book.

5) Sara Gaston Barton, A Woman Called: Piecing together the Ministry Puzzle Where do you come down on women preaching? It really does not matter to be blessed by this work.  Anyone who has, in their soul, felt that God has led them to a vocation in life will be enriched.  Barton takes us on a wonderful journey, though uniquely her own it is also one that I have shared as a minister of the word. This is one of the most recent books I've read and I confess I could not put it down. I had the whole book read in a single night. I, of course, made annotations to affirm my "amens," occasional "hmmmmmm" and even one or two "I'm not so sure."   The book sort of lures you into the narrative and takes the rarefied air of exegesis and theology and places it within the incarnation of a single woman wanting to serve God with all her heart ... and mind.  Suddenly we see that exegesis and theology actually have real life implications. It is a wonderful and even loving book. This is a book you should read though.

6) Edward J. Robinson, I Was Under a Heavy Burden: The Life of Annie C. Tuggle. My friend Edward Robinson continues to do a yeoman's task of resurrecting the history of African-American Churches of Christ.  This small biography, however, combines excavation in black history and women disciples of Christ. Here is the story of tragedy and triumph, of struggle against racism and sexism, of finding security in the Lord in the face of abusive marriage and divorce. While engaged in the struggle in her own life Tuggle sought to be a blessing to all around her.  She is one of the unsung heroes of the Churches of Christ.  If you want to be motivated by a cross-bearer then this is a book you should read.

7) Thomas Chatterton Williams, Losing My Cool: How a Father's Love and 15,000 Books Beat Hip-Hop Culture  Williams is a "young" secular writer engaging in a work of "cultural criticism" while at the same time bearing witness to the power of the influence of a father in the lives of sons or daughters. I have personally given out eight copies of this book to different people.  If only we could learn to engage in the kind of reflection Williams has done with the additional lens of the kingdom of God.  This is a wonderful book and I pray it bears much fruit.

8) N. T. Wright, Scripture and the Authority of God  Wright needs no introduction to most of the readers of this blog, he is (IMHO) simply the foremost NT theologian of the present era. But Wright has never been content to remain within the ivory towers of academia rather he believes scholarship must serve faith.  And we find that in this book.  A revision of his earlier work The Last Word this title includes two new chapters and applications. Outstanding work that holds much promise for our use of the Bible in our fellowship.

9) Richard Stearns, The Hole in Our Gospel: What Does God Expect of Us? The Answer that Changed My Life and Just Might Change the World. Richard Stearns is one of my heroes. He was successful by worldly standards (i.e. wealthy). Yet he found himself struggling with how his faith actually made any difference in the real world ... honestly it does not make any real world difference for some believers. Now the president of World Vision he challenges us to see the real "hole" in our gospel of comfort, gospel of success, gospel of "me," and embrace the massive amount of biblical teaching on changing the world and addressing poverty.  Easy to read but one of those books that will demand a response as you engage it. 

10) Alister McGrath, Mere Apologetics: How to Help Seekers and Skeptics Find Faith. McGrath has been, over the last 10-15 years, one of my favorite authors. He is a man with not one but two PhDs.  One is in microbiology and the other in theology.  I had been reading McGrath for years and profiting from his historical and theological studies before I knew that he was actually a former atheist.  This work is now one of a number McGrath has authored on the subject of apologetics.  In this one he looks at our cultural situation and helps understand that apologetics and evangelism are not necessarily the same thing. One valuable aspect of Mere Apologetics is the recognition we live in a postmodern world. This work sees itself in line with C. S. Lewis' classic Mere Christianity and it is evident that McGrath has absorbed much of Lewis's legacy.  This is a good book and I believe you will be blessed through wrestling with it.

Bonus Books.  For me, one of the most fascinating books I read this year likely will never become a best seller.  That book is Larry Hurtado's The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins. This book is not simply about textual criticism though it clearly has relevance for that.  Rather Hurtado suggests that early Christian mss are witnesses to a Christian culture and that culture sheds light on the nature and history of early Christianity that is overlooked and even outright neglected by both NT scholars and church historians.  What do the texts themselves tell us about the people who made them and read them? Why did Christians adopt the codex so early and so universally? Do the texts testify that early Christianity was an integrated community ... that is one that was in contact with itself in various parts of the world.  The surprising answer to that is yes!  A wonderful chapter is on the phenomena of the nomina sacra in early Christian texts.  This book is a unique window into the world of Christianity in the second and third centuries and probably even the first.  I loved it.

Don't forget my own books if you are looking for a stocking stuffer :-).  Kingdom Come: Embracing the Spiritual Legacy of David Lipscomb and James A. Harding and also A Gathered People: Revisioning the Assembly as Sacred Encounter.

Tolle Lege,
Bobby Valentine

Read More