This is Simplepastor's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Simplepastor's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Clarification: Lists alone are not always helpful. I find shopping lists helpful, to-do lists and lists of examples. Like Hebrews Great cloud of witnesses. It's a list of helpful examples albeit without the bullet points. I simply meant, to read the Bible simply as a list isn't enough but then I don't know anyone who does just that.
Toggle Commented Nov 14, 2012 on What can women do? at 42
Actually Dave I meant lists are not helpful, examples by their very nature are. Jesus is my example, a list of the ways could be very helpful, couldn't it? Anyway, this is in danger of going round in circles again. So until the next time, signing off.
Toggle Commented Nov 14, 2012 on What can women do? at 42
I'm not sure it answered any of the points really, but we don't seem to do a very good job of being able to understand one another do we? Sorry for my part.
Toggle Commented Nov 14, 2012 on More nonsense on what women can do at 42
Pam, thanks for the comment. I guess I feel like I spend too much time talking about it too. It's simply an attempt to try and explain a position and to try and do so in the right spirit. So as I've tried to explain to Dave, the post was an attempt to show clear, positive examples from the Bible of the many women doing great things. That was my intent & I stated it in the introduction. It was a discussion point, an attempt at buiding a bridge from my side of the river if you like. But so far, I'm just getting rocks thrown at me. So the post title was - what the Bible clearly says - because that's what I did. I picked clear examples, nothing more, no agenda, no attempt at restrictions. I agree there's lots to debate about and examples arent everything. It was just a place to start.
Toggle Commented Nov 14, 2012 on What can women do? at 42
Dave, you seem bent on misunderstanding and miscontruing everything. Is that deliberate? My response to Cat, was simply that I'm glad she saw some positives and that my attempt was positive. You should also notice that she added something I missed and I agreed with her. I'm not entirely convinced of your reading of the Syrophoenician woman but it's a story well worth discussing. As for the anything, jolly good. Now give some clear and unambiguous examples from scripture - which, for the umpteenth time, WAS ALL I WAS TRYING TO DO.
Toggle Commented Nov 14, 2012 on What can women do? at 42
Dave I agree. I don't think the Bible is any of the things you mentioned. And as said several times in several comments on your blog, I don't think the list 'decides what jobs women can do today'. I hope that's clear enough. And again repeating myself here - The list was demonstrating examples that the Bible gives to see whether they offer any helpful points of agreement or conversation. It would be slightly bizarre to say this list doesn't offer any positive examples. You think I'm implying that the list is set in stone and can't be added to. I don't, I'm simply asking whether these examples offer any points of agreement. it seems you find it hard to see any positives here even when I agree with you. That's quite sad.
Toggle Commented Nov 14, 2012 on What the Bible is not at 42
But you have to deal with what's actualy written. It's a list. So don't talk about my church, talk about the list. Is it a fair list? If not, why not? What have I missed? Is a list of examples helpful or not, if not why not? Does it offer a starting point for agreement rather than disagreement, if not why not? I could change the translation if you like from ESV and the list would be the same, so not sure what that would achieve. As for the Batman & Robin image that says more about your mind than mine. Same goes for those seeing restrictions when none is intended, given, suggested or written. The weaver/auditor comment is a total red herring unless you or Dave Faulkener imply (which I do not) that means all women can do is weave. That's a conclusion I haven't drawn so why imply it is? All I did was include an example of where women were mentioned as using a skill, it happened to be weaving. I'm sure if the tabernacle had needed more auditors then they might have been mentioned instead - instead oddly they picked weaving. It was a skill, a profession and the women were great at it. What's the problem?
Toggle Commented Nov 13, 2012 on More nonsense on what women can do at 42
Interestingly, I agree with almost all of what you say Dave and I think I made almost all the same points in my post. I don't think I mentioned hierarchy once, did I? Wide variety of tasks in OT: check Teaching women: check Women as givers: check Women hosting churches in their homes: check women as evangelists: added as a comment which I agree with so, check And then I stopped there because the point of the post was listing clear examples in the Bible of women doing things. So Pam, I fail to see how this is putting limits on anything. If you do a similar exercise - look in scripture for clear positive examples of women doing things then I'd be surprised if the two lists weren't very much alike. A restriction would be if I said, and now women today can only do what the Bible says - so just weavers, midwives and shepherdesses please. I haven't said any such thing. The whole intent and tone of my post wasn't limits but examples. Instead you talk of limits where I haven't. So I'm glad Dave has attempted a more positive engagement. He extended the scope of his response beyong what I was doing in my post. At the end of the day I agree with most but not quite all of what Dave has written.
Toggle Commented Nov 13, 2012 on What can women do? at 42
I agree with your point about helper - but the text still refers to women as helping men (whether you like it or not) and I dealt with the question helping to do what. No hierarchy is implied there, at least not by me. I can't see hierarchy in what I have written, so please point out where you see it. The same goes for restrictions, I can't see where I've used any of the examples as restrictions or limits. Lastly I would say, I don't think I made any arguments. I simply listed examples of women in the Bible and what they were doing. A couple of comments added some more I missed. So again I wasn't making an argument which I said quite clearly at the start.
Toggle Commented Nov 13, 2012 on More nonsense on what women can do at 42
Well in this thread, it's just you and me slugging it out. Every now and then on my blog I'll stick my neck out and venture into this territory and if any women comment on it, I'll do them the courtesy of a reply. And if I'm on a comments thread and someone directs a comment to me, I'll do my best to reply to them there too, not that I always check back - sometimes life just moves you on. I gather you've had some contact with my friend Adam Voke. Hope it was a positive engagement.
That's just being obtuse Dave. In over a decade of church leadership serving alongside many gifted women, 'inherently disabling' is not something anyone would have said about our church, the way it was led, or the contributions made by the men and women involved in leadership. But then I think you knew that was what I meant in the first place.
"Where have I said that Newfrontiers should not exist? Where have I said that people should not be free to attend the Church they want?" I have absolutely no idea, where was I suggesting that you did? "Arguing against a position does not mean I think people who hold it should be lined up and shot." When it comes to Newfrontiers, you could have fooled me ;) I agree with you that it needs care, all leadership structures do. Male leadership is no exception to that. My own experience is that it hasn't been 'inherently disabling' and often quite the opposite but an argument from experience is not enough to sway either side, is it?
Off you go escalating things again - I ask a question based on how your position appears to me - and for my trouble, it gets called 'perverse'. If you want to know why these conversations get frustrating; that's a good example. If you genuinely want people from the other side of the fence to you on this issue, engaging with you and at least trying to listen then that language just doesn't help. So let me try again, if you're happy, as you say that you 'have no problem with a couple deciding that they wish to follow a male headship model in their marriage (although yes I would stress that this needs to be a free and informed decision by them both)' Then why wouldn't that same principle apply to a church? People are free to attend or not as their conscience allows and a 'male elders or vicars for that matter' position is after all hardly a secret. If that position was consistent then although you disagree with the position that Newfrontiers and others hold, you shouldn't have a problem with it? No?
I didn't say anything about 'attack' Dave, simply that I thought you'd not done him justice in what you wrote. No need to escalate it. I'll be interested to read your ongoing explanation of how you read the Bible, especially how your position would be 'non-modernist', because it certainly comes across that you think, 'there is a right answer that should be authoritative for all' - at the very least on the issue of gender roles.
Especially this one ( where you'll see Andrew doesn't argue for a detail, verse approach as he says the question is, " The crucial question is the last one: do we have a worked through hermeneutic that undergirds the decisions we make about how to apply the scriptures? Do we have a clear view of the narrative shape of the Bible, and why it is that we follow certain biblical commands and not others?"
Hi Dave Glad you're engaging positively. I think however you're not really doing justice to Andrew Wilson. Have a read of this and the rest of the series to properly engage with his thinking on the Bible. You'll see his hermeneutic is not quite what you say it is.
Simplepastor is now following The Typepad Team
Sep 8, 2012