Thoughts from Byrd Concerning Listening

 Was lurking over at The Wartburg Watch and found a tweet leading to Aimee Byrd's December 4th post on Why Complementarians Can't Listen.

It's a good read. It makes reference to the grain of wheat that has to die and be buried in order to produce fruit and that Complementarianism won't allow that because Men are the boss and don't have to die to their arrogance and sense of superiority. So this makes listening to their subordinate women unnecessary or impossible.

The Bible is full of such parables and references pointing out that hierarchy between believers is not to be part of the Kingdom of God.

One of my favorite ones is concerning the rich being like camel going through the eye of a needle. This is, of course, in reference to a gate in the city wall called the needle. A man could walk through it, from what I'm told. But a camel would have to have all it's packs taken off its back and have to crawl on it's knees to get through.

Most understand this as a rich man can't take his riches in to heaven, which is true. But I wonder how many understand that this also includes entitled men who think they should be the boss of others. You can't take your entitlement and desire to be the boss into the Kingdom of Heaven.

Sure, men have made many religious structures where they get to be the boss of others and stamp "God approves of this message/dynamic" on it and call it gospel. But they really aren't representing the Kingdom of God. Nor are they truly being leaders in God's Kingdom. They are just playing at the game of "who gets to be the boss of whom" and thinking they are doing church right, when it is so wrong. Jesus said that it was not to be like this among His followers. He said that this is what the gentiles seek after.

So, I agree with Aimee. Complementarians can't listen to women. Because their very structure props up false hierarchies and gives entitled men free reign to abuse and lord over God's sheep.

Viewing Uterus Control through Anthropology

I'll tell you what.

The quote on No Longer Quivering by Vaugh Ohlman has opened a can of worms with me. It is very hard to sit by and watch that much blatant ignorance and misguided self-righteousness on parade go by without pointing out how stupid it is.

Tell you what, Vaugh. You can either be a Christian or a Patriarch on a vendetta to defend your fleshly, cultural privilege. You can't be both. You can't do both. They cannot peacefully coexist.

The only place the New Testament talks about control is in Galatians where it mentions self-control as a fruit of the Spirit. No where in the Gospels or Epistles does it mention that you should have control over another person. And Jesus specifically commands that you not seek to control others in Matthew 23:8-10 and Luke 22:25-27. Look those scriptures up, Vaugh, because you apparently are quite unfamiliar with the words of Jesus, the One you claim to follow and represent as a Christian.

Now on to the Anthropology lesson you so desperately need. (Hope you learned from your history lesson in the last post.)

The Womb of Woman: Gateway of Life, Guardian of Culture
(A lesson in which Vaugh should realize that what he promotes is a worldly view rather than Christian)

Learn you lessons, Vaugh. This way you won't look like such a bitter, vindictive old cuss. And if you are a really good student, you might actually be able to 'do' Christianity the way Jesus taught rather than the way taught by violent men who have forcefully entered and seize the kingdom for themselves. (Matthew 11:12)

Results of Driscoll's Conquest

The Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence and violent men take it by force. (taken from Matthew 11:12)

I've wanted to use this phrase in reference to Mark Driscoll for a long time but have not had a real good opportunity.

Well, the perfect opportunity has come up.
Wenatchee the Hatchet has a piece about Driscoll and everyone he has run over and thrown away in his conquest of the Kingdom of Heaven.

some context for "a call for reconciliation", "there's a pile of dead bodies behind the Mars Hill bus"

May Mark Driscoll realize someday, hopefully sooner rather than later for his own sake, that those who live by the sword, die by the sword.

God Speaking Tenderly?

There is no present-tense expression in any age of the Church this side of Christ's Second Coming in which unreserved adoration and praise for God's people is given. Jesus is the Groom who rebukes and cajoles His bride for Her continual failures and worldliness thus it is unsurprising that a man like Driscoll, in rejecting Song of Songs, can never ultimately have a vision of Christ's people that can exult in Her. It is only in Song of Songs where a husband and wife are shown speaking to each other with unbridled affection. It is only in Song of Songs where there is any "now" to the beauty of a marriage filled with mutual affection and by extension the marital metaphor for God and His people that Driscoll feels compelled to reject.

Thus a pastor like Driscoll only knows how to speak to the betrothed Bride as someone who isn't worthy of the Groom. She'd better clean up, get her act together and stop being so bad because her sins are bad enough that Jesus had to die for them... but it's not quite clear that Driscoll knows how to articulate the depth of the Bridegroom's love for the waiting Bride. Driscoll could preach for years on Hosea and mention the promise God makes to speak tenderly and winsomely to the wayward Bride. But where could we turn in the scriptures to see HOW God might speak in such a winsome and tender way to such a Bride.

Well, obviously NOT in Song of Songs as Driscoll expounds it because in it he sees only wifely stripteases and holy blowjobs. Driscoll's understanding of how a pastor should speak to the Bride is as a Hosea or an Elijah telling Israel she's a whore or an apostle telling the Corinthians they should be ashamed of themselves. In other words, at the risk of stretching the metaphors a bit, Driscoll is fine with the Hosea who says God "will" speak tenderly to His people but can't accept that Song of Songs could be where God DOES speak tenderly to the Bride of His people.
--WTH last three paragraphs from WTH on Driscoll's SOS part 4a
http://frombitterwaterstosweet.blogspot.com/2011/10/wth-on-driscolls-sos-part-4a.html

I hear a lot of reasons why people are falling away from the church. The Wartburg Watch has a post on why young people are turning away. Certain sectors of Christianity are worried about men not going to church and are blaming women and the feminization of Church and society.

But I have noted that many women are falling away because God has been presented in a, never-satisfied, hard-hearted, male-favoring light. God has been presented as a grumpy patriarch with no tenderness and little to no concern over the things that might concern women. God has been presented as one who is only concerned about women preforming their role of wife and mother and not even wanting to speak to women except through their husbands, fathers, and in some cases, even their sons.

I know women who are falling away from the church because of this presentation of God. Preachers and patriarchs in these circles are far more concerned with keeping control over their women and making sure their women are meeting the human standards that are set up than with the need of the woman for tenderness.

I know for myself, learning of this tenderness of God that exists but not mentioned much has greatly enhanced my relationship with God and has healed the hurt places. I had found it other place in the Bible.

Zephaniah 3:17“The LORD your God is in your midst, A victorious warrior. He will exult over you with joy, He will be quiet in His love, He will rejoice over you with shouts of joy.

Luke 13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!

Matthew11:28 “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS.

They are like hidden treasures where God expresses joy over us, or desire to gather us to Him or refers to Himself as gentle and humble. But even in these places, they are short at best, and as in the Luke 13 passage, it is mixed with sorrow over their sin.

But in Song of Solomon, it is concentrated, mutual adoration, a place where tenderness abounds.
It's not, "I love you, but you fall short, are sinful, etc." It is just, "I love you, no buts!"
No buts, no shaming, no pointing to flaws.

Actually, a couple of places in the Songs the bride points to her own flaws but the Bridegroom is right there to build her up and hold her close.

I Heard It Said Once

I met a fellow on line on an egalitarian board who was there to set all those wayward egals straight concerning what the Bible truly said.

He tried to be patient. He also had a heart for the abused, both male and female. And because of that sincere heart, I really couldn't completely dismiss him.

However, his solution for what ailed the world and Christian marriages was following the 'biblical' example of Patriarchy.

He was so sold on the idea that patriarchy was the biblical solution, the divine healing structure that he couldn't see that it was patriarchy that was causing so much of the trouble to begin with.He said something that I found to be absolutely stunning. It was something that he believed from the bottom of his heart.

He told me, "If you reject Patriarchy, you reject your heavenly Father."

Has anyone else ever heard this one? Does this man's claim hold up when compared to the words of Jesus?

Let's take a look.
Matthew 23:8 But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ.

I don't know about you folks. But it seems pretty clear from the above passage that Jesus was not concerned about maintaining Patriarchy or any hierarchy structure for that matter. So it appears that Jesus Himself is rejecting Patriarchy. And if Jesus rejects Patriarchy, then I believe it is safe to say that rejecting Patriarchy is not equivalent to rejecting our Heavenly Father.

You Have Heard It Said Today

There are many cliches concerning "Christian" marriage flying around. They are modern day sayings that supposedly support the hierarchy of Compism or Patriarchy.

Let's look at one today:

"Someone has to be in charge."

I'm sure most of "you have heard it said": "Someone has to be charge."

It is an incredibly common phrase. It is also incredibly false when held up against the words of Jesus in red.

Let's look at those words.

Matthew 20:25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. 26 It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant,

Mark10:42 Calling them to Himself, Jesus *said to them, “You know that those who are recognized as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them; and their great men exercise authority over them. 43 But it is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant;

Luke 22:24 And there arose also a dispute among them as to which one of them was regarded to be greatest. 25 And He said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who have authority over them are called ‘Benefactors.’ 26 But it is not this way with you, but the one who is the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like the servant.

These words of Jesus are mentioned in three out of four of the Gospels and meets the need of a matter being established by two or three witnesses.
[Matthew 18:16 BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED.]

According to Jesus, whose credentials we established last week as the final word on all things, the saying that someone has to be in charge in a marriage is completely false. And in fact, whoever wants to be the boss or the leader, he (or she) must make themselves the servant. And Jesus did not mean servant leader, another off-the-wall-crazy-double-speak saying that is liberally thrown around. Jesus meant servant, as in SERVANT. Servant leader does not fit in this equation in any conceivable way without some major twisting and manipulating by people who don't want to obey Matthew 20:25-26, Mark 10:42-43, and Luke 22:24-26.
There are no loop-holes in these words in red, no matter how men want to read Peter and Paul

"You Have Heard It Said"

As we mentioned before, men have said all kinds of things about Jesus that simply weren't true.
People have also spoken things as divine truth that fell short of God's version of the truth.

In Matthew Chapter Five starting in verse twenty-one to the end of the chapter, Jesus starts dealing with what people say. Jesus lists six common sayings or understandings of correct behavior before God and then exposes how they fall short of how God really thinks.

If you have time, you can read the entire section, but for this post I thought we'd look at one in particular and show how history repeats itself.

One of the sayings is about divorce, which back then, only men could really do. And apparently it was very easy and a form of punishment when she didn't "obey" or "please" him as he thought fit.

Matthew 5:31 “It was said, ‘WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE’; 32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

So if the wife burnt the biscuits one too many times because the baby was colicky, it was no big deal for the husband to send her away with no support.

And Neo-Patriarchy is following in this sinful practice and calling it God's will.

The following is to a link speaking about the Neo-Patriarch's way to deal with rebellious wives, wives who won't obey their husbands.
What they have to say falls under the category of, "You have heard it said." Just remember that Jesus said, only unchastity is grounds for a husband to divorce his wife. If she doesn't obey him or prop him up as the master/king of the house, this is not grounds for divorce, no matter how much Neo-Patriarchs want to make it all about who is the boss. Jesus makes it clear, Brian M. Schwertly does not, in any imaginable way, speak on behalf of God. He speaks on behalf of Patriarchs everywhere.
http://equalitycentral.com/forum/index.php?topic=1271.0

Houses of Sand

Matthew 7:24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock. 26 Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell—and great was its fall.”

The problem with the doctrines and structures of men is that they are built on sand and not rock.

I've told that to a man before indicating that the words of Paul were not the foundation or pattern for marriage and family and he pointed out to me that the words of the apostles and the prophets were the foundation of the church, and I believe there is a scripture to back that up.

HOWEVER, looking at these verses in Matthew seven more closely, I see that the words of Jesus are even DEEPER than the foundation of the apostles and the prophets. They are the bedrock that the foundation is built on.

And men who teach false doctrine are guilty of building their doctrinal houses on sand, or their false view of Jesus. Perhaps they are applying the words of Peter or Paul as the foundation, but still their foundation is built on sand.

You have to START with an understanding of who Jesus is and what He expects. You CANNOT assume you know and start building with the Epistles of Peter and Paul. Even their words, the very words of the apostles, are worthless without the bedrock of knowing Jesus.

Ignoring the words of Jesus to obey a warped understanding of Paul is not the Gospel. It is picking and choosing words from a book on which to build a religion devoid of God or any understanding of Him.

This is why you make sure you put first things first and listen to the Voice of the Shepherd first and foremost before the voices of the under shepherds.

"Who Do Men Say That I Am?"

Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” 14 So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” 20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.

Peter was being kind here. Some men called Jesus a drunkard and a glutton. Others said He had a demon.

Anyway, the main point here is that men say a lot of things about Jesus that simply aren't true. There have always been such men. There will always be such men. What that means to you and me is that we cannot just take any teacher's word for it concerning Jesus Christ.

Peter did not take other people's view of Jesus to heart. Peter walked with Jesus and learned who He was through first hand experience. Even then, when Peter gave the right answer, Jesus pointed out that this knowledge of who He was is not attainable through flesh and blood teachers without the Father giving a revelation of Who He is.

Too many teachers raise themselves up as authorities on who God is but they are speaking out of their own limited hearts and understanding and they muddy up the waters of true understanding.

Everyone who would ever want to lay hold of Jesus Christ needs to spend time away from organized religion.

Time with Him in the prayer closest and with the Gospel words written in red, away from the clamoring noise of teachers promoting their own, controlling religion is not a bad idea. But it also must be done with caution and humility, lest we fall into the same trap as controlling teachers.

Immanuel, God With Us, Part 2

After picking on Zacharias yesterday, I thought I'd balance things out a bit and talk about Joseph. Let's look at Matthew Chapter One again.

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. 19 And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away secretly. 20 But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” 22 Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: 23 “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which translated means, “GOD WITH US.” 24 And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, 25 but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.

Notice in verse 19 that Joseph is called a righteous man. Notice, also, that he is not a vindictive man but rather merciful. When his betrothed is found to be with child, no doubt his heart was broken. But he did not lash out in self-righteous indignation. Instead, he chose to put away Mary quietly to avoid bringing more attention and shame to her than what she would already face.

Notice, also, that once he had the dream, he obeyed, took her as his wife, and became her partner in the face of the shame and whispers that undoubtedly followed them wherever they went.

Yes, Joseph certainly was a righteous man. He also had many other good qualities and was well suited to be the surrogate father of our Lord when He was a child, which in included mercy and empathy.

Immanuel, God With Us

No, it's not Christmas. But sometimes it's good to look at these scriptures without all the cultural and seasonal traditions attached to them.

Matthew 1:20 But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” 22 Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: 23 “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which translated means, “GOD WITH US.” 24 And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife,

You know, when God decides to come to earth, it is no small matter. An awful lot of preparation is needed in order to make room for the Infinite in a finite world.

Before the Infinite was conceived, a way also had to be made for His forerunner, John the Baptist. So an old priest serving in the Jewish Temple in the Holy of Holies was visited by the angel Gabriel and told that his aged wife would conceive. Instead of believing, he doubted and was struck dumb. But his wife, Elizabeth, conceived nonetheless. [Luke 5:5-25]

Later Gabriel went to visit Mary to tell her what was to come and she received it with joy saying, “Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; may it be done to me according to your word.” [Luke 1:38]

Why all this review of Scripture? Because we need to see how God prepared the people involved with this greatest miracle of all -- Immanuel, God With Us.

If God really walked on the earth, then the words He spoke while He was with us are of the utmost importance. Understanding those words and perceiving the Heart that those words came from will help us gain a better grasp of who He is.

In some Bibles, the words of the Infinite are written in red. I desired to get to those words but became aware of the importance of the preparation that happened even before God walked among us. I began to see the orientation that occurred before the Infinite was born among the finite.

Mary, when she went to visit her cousin Elizabeth, the Holy Spirit came upon her and she spoke what is referred to as the Magnificat. [Luke 1:46-55]


Now, remember, Elizabeth's husband was struck dumb. And the child in Elizabeth's womb was the one who would "MAKE READY THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT. ‘EVERY RAVINE WILL BE FILLED, AND EVERY MOUNTAIN AND HILL WILL BE BROUGHT LOW; THE CROOKED WILL BECOME STRAIGHT, AND THE ROUGH ROADS SMOOTH;" [Luke 3:4&5]

So we have two pregnant women, one was an unmarried teen and the other one was far past the childbearing years, greeting each other in Luke chapter one. There was only one patriarch present. Zacharias also happened to be High Priest that year. But apparently the voice of a patriarch was not needed for that greeting or for the three months that Mary stayed with Elizabeth.

Pay attention to one of the things Mary said in her Magnificat:

Luke 1:51 “He has done mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who were proud in the thoughts of their heart. 52 “He has brought down rulers from their thrones, And has exalted those who were humble. 53 “HE HAS FILLED THE HUNGRY WITH GOOD THINGS; And sent away the rich empty-handed.

Already God is working to orient people to His heart concerning things. Already He is bringing down the mountains, like patriarchs and priests, and raising up the less important in society, like unmarried pregnant teens and barren women.

But don't worry about the dumb patriarch. He got to learn in quiet submission to his wife and he gained a whole lot of good, Holy Spirit theology from a couple women for three months. At John's birth he had the opportunity to come into agreement with his wife and submit to God on the name of his son, which he did. Then his tongue was loosed.

Luke 1:59 And it happened that on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to call him Zacharias, after his father. 60 But his mother answered and said, “No indeed; but he shall be called John.” 61 And they said to her, “There is no one among your relatives who is called by that name.” 62 And they made signs to his father, as to what he wanted him called. 63 And he asked for a tablet and wrote as follows, “His name is John.” And they were all astonished. 64 And at once his mouth was opened and his tongue loosed, and he began to speak in praise of God.

After his voice was silenced and his heart was humbled God gave him the gift of prophecy and he prophesied in verses 67-79. He had the privilege of having his prophecy recorded in the same chapter as Mary's prophecy.

But none of this happened until after he was made silent and had to listen to two obscure women in his house go on and on for three months about the miracles of God and His love and mercy upon the lowly.

Perhaps I'm picking on Zacharias just a bit. But I believe that Zacharias was deeply blessed and moved by the experience. I also believe that he and Elizabeth were excellent parents to John, to help prepare him to prepare the way for the Lord.