Get E-Mail Updates

The Unique Awareness, Insight, and Wisdom of Women

As friends and I met for dinner to enjoy pictures of mutual friends' wedding, their four-year old joined in the fun. At one point I asked this child which picture was her favorite, and she quickly pointed to one saying, "This one!" When I asked why, she pointed again and uttered the name of her best friend. Her parents and I strained our eyes to have another look. We'd been focusing on the images of adults and failed to observe a little girl-her best friend-poking her head just slightly around her mother's knee. We all broke into laugher realizing we had missed something very precious to this child. It took another little girl to observe what had been invisible to us adults. It was one of those profound moments when you suddenly realize how experience shapes observation.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

This was what happened in the 1800s, as slaves began to read and interpret Scriptures. When slaves learned to read the Bible, they saw themselves in the Exodus story. Their experiences of slavery greatly informed an understanding of Scripture that is beneficial for all of us!

The same is true of women. As women entered universities in the 1800s, they began making significant theological contributions, interpreting astutely those texts that concern gender. Consider the seminal work of Katharine Bushnell (1856-1946), a medical doctor who learned Greek and Hebrew in order to understand God's message on gender. Her groundbreaking scholarship, God's Word to Women, informed by her medical work among abused women, continues to enlighten the work of egalitarians today!

Because women bring specific and different insights to Scripture, it is important to include their voices in the decisions we make as the church. A recent example makes this point clear. Invited to participate in a week's discussion on evangelism, 24 male and 3 female delegates gathered to explore key issues impacting the church, including gender. It was a woman in the group who noticed that the version of Scripture selected often rendered women invisible, interpreting words like anthropos-Greek for "people"-as "men." When it came time to review proposed speakers for a future conference, it was a woman who noticed a total absence of female speakers. It was a woman who resisted the request that a woman serve as their secretary. When the group selected articles to publish, a paper on gender-written by a woman-was declined. Who will notice? Women and those who support them. This experience highlights the challenges women encounter when working for change within the churches and organizations they serve.

If our experiences as women bring awareness, insight, and wisdom to our understanding of God's Word, and if only men are permitted to teach and interpret Scripture, we deprive the church of the insights of more than half its members! Is this a wise practice, and does it engage the contributions God intended women to make?

Consider how differently Christ behaved! Is it not interesting that our Lord (who lived in a very patriarchal society) used females as key figures in many of his parables and other teachings? Clearly, Jesus loved and valued women, and he made this clear by including their voices and experiences throughout his work. If we are followers of Jesus should we not be doing the same? And should we not be demonstrating it in our churches and Christian organizations?

Mimi Haddad

Mimi Haddad is president of Christians for Biblical Equality. Join her this July 24-26 and consider these themes more closely at CBE's 2009 conference, titled "Are Men from Mars and Women from Venus? A Biblical Response to Gender Difference."

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: WaveTossed

05-19-2009 @ 5:10pm

I don't know about your church. But my church (an Episcopal church) has a woman playing a vital and important role in our church. She is the rector.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:11am

1) We have hundreds of woman playing vital and the most important roles in the church. They are reflecting his glory, his mercy, his love and his sacrifice in their everyday lives.

THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND VITAL ROLE AND ALL ELSE IS SECONDARY.

2) I don't know what a rector is.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:20am

Absolutely, women have major roles to play in Jesus' ministry. But did any women serve as one of the 12 Apostles.

And absolutely, Jesus rocked the boat with tax collectors, prostitutes and even women.

Which even gives more credibility to the point that if Jesus wanted to really rock the boat by giving a woman a position of leadership as one of the 12 Apostles, He would have had no problem to do so. And yet he did not.

by: WaveTossed

05-20-2009 @ 10:27am

A "rector" is the lead minister of an Episcopal church. I believe that Catholics also use this term.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 8:01pm

I'd love to discuss this with someone good at ancient Hebrew and Greek. I tend to think that we misunderstand the actual meaning of the 'otherwise they might' phrase. Jesus repeatedly asks those with ears to 'use them'. So I think the meaning really is that they look but refuse to see and they hear but refuse to understand.

by: Bideshi

05-19-2009 @ 9:57pm

Read again the story of Martha and Mary. Part of Martha's problem was that Mary was sitting in the place of a disciple, not in a woman's "place". As far as Martha was concerned Jesus and Mary were 'rocking the boat'. Jesus told Martha "Mary has chosen the right thing..." the right thing being that she was sitting in the place and role of a disciple.

by: squeaky

05-20-2009 @ 4:24pm

I don't think you can decide who has authority in the church based on the identity of the disciples. If you do, why are you stopping at gender? You might note there were no Gentiles amongst the 12. Should that also mean that only Jews have the right to authority in the church? There also were no Pharisees amongst the 12. Should that mean that Paul shouldn't have had any authority? I don't think any of the 12 were very old or very young--does that mean that only people of a certain age can be church authorities? Should only fishermen be allowed church leadership roles? If you are going to start excluding people from leadership roles based on the character and identity of the 12, then go all the way with it. Don't just stop at gender.

by: squeaky

05-20-2009 @ 4:17pm

It may be because our world view is very different from the world view of 1st century Judaism. Jesus' actions that elevated the status of women doesn't seem that ground breaking or earth-shaking to us, in a 21st century western world where women have the same rights as men and are seen as equal (but remember, this only has happened to the degree it does today within the last 30 years). Any elevation of women's status in Jesus day was very earth-shaking.

There is a cultural context that needs to be considered before coming to the conclusion that Jesus didn't intend women to ever take on leadership roles, and we lose a lot of meaning when we try to interpret Scripture from our western mindset.

by: Bideshi

05-19-2009 @ 10:01pm

Where did you get that one from????

by: canucklehead

05-20-2009 @ 5:27pm

no Amway salesmen, neither

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 11:35pm

Several years ago, a man I knew went to Israel and got a crash course in Middle Eastern and Jewish culture. After further study, he explained all these to us with a series of lectures.

by: mazbeth

05-22-2009 @ 9:10am

to Keith Smith
you do not seem to be fully aware of the culture of that day, and the dangers...
you said;
"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?

because he would have not wanted her to be stoned/killed before the message could be passed onto others after his departure...
a woman preaching would have been, in that society as it was then...
and as they still are, metaphorically in some quarters today, even in the so-called civilised West.

useful: scroll down
http://www.churchofgoddfw.com/monthly/junia.shtml

by: Bideshi

05-22-2009 @ 8:39am

Keithsmith, you missed my point. Mary may not have been named as "one of the 12", but in this story she is accepted by Jesus as a disciple. As BlueDeacon says, it was considered uncouth - but still Jesus did it. We sometimes have to look beyond the words spoken and look at what the recorded actions say. Jesus accepted Mary in the position of a disciple. Despite Paul's words that we wrestle with, take a look at the number of women ministering in the churches that Paul establishes in Acts, and the number of women that Paul greets by name and role in his Epistles, and then you have to realise that there must be something different to what we have understood behind his words.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:11am

1) We have hundreds of woman playing vital and the most important roles in the church. They are reflecting his glory, his mercy, his love and his sacrifice in their everyday lives.

THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND VITAL ROLE AND ALL ELSE IS SECONDARY.

2) I don't know what a rector is.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:20am

Absolutely, women have major roles to play in Jesus' ministry. But did any women serve as one of the 12 Apostles.

And absolutely, Jesus rocked the boat with tax collectors, prostitutes and even women.

Which even gives more credibility to the point that if Jesus wanted to really rock the boat by giving a woman a position of leadership as one of the 12 Apostles, He would have had no problem to do so. And yet he did not.

by: WaveTossed

05-20-2009 @ 10:27am

A "rector" is the lead minister of an Episcopal church. I believe that Catholics also use this term.

by: squeaky

05-20-2009 @ 4:24pm

I don't think you can decide who has authority in the church based on the identity of the disciples. If you do, why are you stopping at gender? You might note there were no Gentiles amongst the 12. Should that also mean that only Jews have the right to authority in the church? There also were no Pharisees amongst the 12. Should that mean that Paul shouldn't have had any authority? I don't think any of the 12 were very old or very young--does that mean that only people of a certain age can be church authorities? Should only fishermen be allowed church leadership roles? If you are going to start excluding people from leadership roles based on the character and identity of the 12, then go all the way with it. Don't just stop at gender.

by: squeaky

05-20-2009 @ 4:17pm

It may be because our world view is very different from the world view of 1st century Judaism. Jesus' actions that elevated the status of women doesn't seem that ground breaking or earth-shaking to us, in a 21st century western world where women have the same rights as men and are seen as equal (but remember, this only has happened to the degree it does today within the last 30 years). Any elevation of women's status in Jesus day was very earth-shaking.

There is a cultural context that needs to be considered before coming to the conclusion that Jesus didn't intend women to ever take on leadership roles, and we lose a lot of meaning when we try to interpret Scripture from our western mindset.

by: canucklehead

05-20-2009 @ 5:27pm

no Amway salesmen, neither

by: Bideshi

05-22-2009 @ 6:39am

Keithsmith, you missed my point. Mary may not have been named as "one of the 12", but in this story she is accepted by Jesus as a disciple. As BlueDeacon says, it was considered uncouth - but still Jesus did it. We sometimes have to look beyond the words spoken and look at what the recorded actions say. Jesus accepted Mary in the position of a disciple. Despite Paul's words that we wrestle with, take a look at the number of women ministering in the churches that Paul establishes in Acts, and the number of women that Paul greets by name and role in his Epistles, and then you have to realise that there must be something different to what we have understood behind his words.

by: mazbeth

05-22-2009 @ 7:10am

to Keith Smith
you do not seem to be fully aware of the culture of that day, and the dangers...
you said;
"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?

because he would have not wanted her to be stoned/killed before the message could be passed onto others after his departure...
a woman preaching would have been, in that society as it was then...
and as they still are, metaphorically in some quarters today, even in the so-called civilised West.

useful: scroll down
http://www.churchofgoddfw.com/monthly/junia.shtml

by: mazbeth

05-22-2009 @ 9:10am

to Keith Smith
you do not seem to be fully aware of the culture of that day, and the dangers...
you said;
"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?

because he would have not wanted her to be stoned/killed before the message could be passed onto others after his departure...
a woman preaching would have been, in that society as it was then...
and as they still are, metaphorically in some quarters today, even in the so-called civilised West.

useful: scroll down
http://www.churchofgoddfw.com/monthly/junia.shtml

by: Bideshi

05-22-2009 @ 8:39am

Keithsmith, you missed my point. Mary may not have been named as "one of the 12", but in this story she is accepted by Jesus as a disciple. As BlueDeacon says, it was considered uncouth - but still Jesus did it. We sometimes have to look beyond the words spoken and look at what the recorded actions say. Jesus accepted Mary in the position of a disciple. Despite Paul's words that we wrestle with, take a look at the number of women ministering in the churches that Paul establishes in Acts, and the number of women that Paul greets by name and role in his Epistles, and then you have to realise that there must be something different to what we have understood behind his words.

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 2:13pm

Thanks, Mimi,

When asked I've said that I do not approve of women preachers . . .

just as I do not approve of men.

Paul, on an occasion when, I believe, he was quite in tune with the Spirit; reminded us that, in Christ, we are not women or men. We are "different" parts of Christ's body and deeply in need of each other, all of us, to be whole!

by: Bideshi

05-22-2009 @ 6:39am

Keithsmith, you missed my point. Mary may not have been named as "one of the 12", but in this story she is accepted by Jesus as a disciple. As BlueDeacon says, it was considered uncouth - but still Jesus did it. We sometimes have to look beyond the words spoken and look at what the recorded actions say. Jesus accepted Mary in the position of a disciple. Despite Paul's words that we wrestle with, take a look at the number of women ministering in the churches that Paul establishes in Acts, and the number of women that Paul greets by name and role in his Epistles, and then you have to realise that there must be something different to what we have understood behind his words.

by: mazbeth

05-22-2009 @ 7:10am

to Keith Smith
you do not seem to be fully aware of the culture of that day, and the dangers...
you said;
"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?

because he would have not wanted her to be stoned/killed before the message could be passed onto others after his departure...
a woman preaching would have been, in that society as it was then...
and as they still are, metaphorically in some quarters today, even in the so-called civilised West.

useful: scroll down
http://www.churchofgoddfw.com/monthly/junia.shtml

by: keithsmith

05-18-2009 @ 2:59pm

I have coached females all my life and looked for opportunity after opportunity to give them chances. And my mindset is that women are equal in our society in everyway.

And yet this is one of those worldly views collide with Scriptures.

If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? That has always bothered me in this argument of a woman's role in the church.

by: WaveTossed

05-18-2009 @ 4:45pm

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?"

Another question for you: If Jesus only wanted men to carry on His message, then why did He appear first to a women (Mary Magdalene) when He arose from the dead?

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 5:00pm

And why did Jesus, before he was crucified, call the Syro-Phonecian woman a dog; but after his resurection tell his followers that they would be empowered by the Spirit to be witnesses not only to Jerusalem and Judaea but also to Samaria and rhe ends of the earth?

by: squeaky

05-18-2009 @ 6:13pm

I don't really know the answer to that question, but here's a thought. I have been told that women and children usually weren't counted. For example, only the men were numbered during "Feeding of the 5000". Had women and children been counted, likely the number was several thousand more than 5000.

LIkewise, I wonder if it is possible there were women who Jesus would have considered His disciples, but yet were not counted for the same reasons. We know from Scripture that several women are spoken of a lot, some of whom were spoken of more than most of the 12. Therefore--is it Jesus who didn't consider them disciples, or was it the Gospel writers who simply didn't count them?

by: BlueDeacon

05-18-2009 @ 7:06pm

Because His disciples already were rabbinical students due to the custom of that day. Girls didn't get any formal education; meanwhile, they had studied the Scriptures for years (a prerequisite to study with a rabbi), so it would have been impractical for Him to do so. In fact, when Mary sat at His feet it still was considered uncouth.

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 2:13pm

Thanks, Mimi,

When asked I've said that I do not approve of women preachers . . .

just as I do not approve of men.

Paul, on an occasion when, I believe, he was quite in tune with the Spirit; reminded us that, in Christ, we are not women or men. We are "different" parts of Christ's body and deeply in need of each other, all of us, to be whole!

by: keithsmith

05-18-2009 @ 2:59pm

I have coached females all my life and looked for opportunity after opportunity to give them chances. And my mindset is that women are equal in our society in everyway.

And yet this is one of those worldly views collide with Scriptures.

If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? That has always bothered me in this argument of a woman's role in the church.

by: WaveTossed

05-18-2009 @ 4:45pm

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?"

Another question for you: If Jesus only wanted men to carry on His message, then why did He appear first to a women (Mary Magdalene) when He arose from the dead?

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 5:00pm

And why did Jesus, before he was crucified, call the Syro-Phonecian woman a dog; but after his resurection tell his followers that they would be empowered by the Spirit to be witnesses not only to Jerusalem and Judaea but also to Samaria and rhe ends of the earth?

by: squeaky

05-18-2009 @ 6:13pm

I don't really know the answer to that question, but here's a thought. I have been told that women and children usually weren't counted. For example, only the men were numbered during "Feeding of the 5000". Had women and children been counted, likely the number was several thousand more than 5000.

LIkewise, I wonder if it is possible there were women who Jesus would have considered His disciples, but yet were not counted for the same reasons. We know from Scripture that several women are spoken of a lot, some of whom were spoken of more than most of the 12. Therefore--is it Jesus who didn't consider them disciples, or was it the Gospel writers who simply didn't count them?

by: BlueDeacon

05-18-2009 @ 7:06pm

Because His disciples already were rabbinical students due to the custom of that day. Girls didn't get any formal education; meanwhile, they had studied the Scriptures for years (a prerequisite to study with a rabbi), so it would have been impractical for Him to do so. In fact, when Mary sat at His feet it still was considered uncouth.

by: mopsuestia

05-19-2009 @ 12:17am

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? Jesus never shied from making a choice/action/decision that would show society where they was wrong, so if they were wrong with their view of woman in the church, why wouldn't he have chosen a woman among the 12?"

We might want to look at the kind of apostleship to which Jesus called his followers. There is something radical in Jesus calling men in a patriarchal society to a ministry of service--one of humility and sacrifice. Had he called women to be servants for others, there would have been nothing counter-cultural in that, for they already were servants. Perhaps he was calling men to a particular type of servant-leadership which is lost when such leadership becomes about power-over others and the silencing of women's voices and perspective.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:26am

Please don't miscontrue the point I am raising for discussion.

Women had a vital role to play in Jesus' ministry and the early Church.

If your last sentence was accurate, then I think the whole Gospel could be called into question if the writers were able to pick and choose what they wanted to say and not guided by the Holy Spirit on what to say.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:29am

Are you sure? I thought they were fisherman and the like.

And as far as disciples, he had more than just the 12. He sent 72 out in pairs.

Your point helps make my point though. When did Jesus disagree with the customs of the day but followed them because he was not going to rock the boat.

Jesus had no problem rocking the boat when he wanted to rock the boat.

If he chose not to rock the boat with a female disciple/apostle, what does that say?

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:43am

As I mentioned before, women had a big part of Jesus' ministry and the early church.

And today, they have a vital and important role in the Church.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:54am

Because God's promise to Abraham was for all nations.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 10:54am

'Servant leadership', a concept which we still are not too good at. For we still are attempting to figure out how to correctly assign 'power over others'.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 11:17am

Indeed!! As you note, even the patriarchs were told that they were to be a 'light to the nations.' My point was to ponder why Jesus would use 'dog', conventional (to his culture) exclusive type language, at one point when all nations were to be included. Sometimes Jesus seemed to puzzle, and offend, religious folks of his day and, when we look close, he even puzzles his followers today.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 11:44am

We discussed this in another thread about parables (especially seed of the sower) in which Jesus was questioned on why he taught in parables and he responded by saying "otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them."

Jesus can be very puzzling at times.

But I hold the view that we only get to see part of the picture. When we get to Heaven, we will see His view and then understand.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 11:46am

I agree, the early church had that same problem. So, in essence we are not much different than those walked with Jesus in regards to this.

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 12:08pm

It's likely that they had turned to fishing only after they were turned down by other rabbis. The tradition of that day was that you went to a rabbi to study under him, generally around the age of 14; Peter was probably around 18. (In this, Jesus also turned convention on its head by calling them.) What probably happened was that the Twelve were thinking, "Here's the 'super-rabbi,' with teaching we haven't heard before, and he's inviting me? Heck, yeah!"

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 12:51pm

The 12 didn't become the 12 till later in Jesus' ministry. He had 72 disciples that he sent out in pairs in Luke 10. The 72 had power to heal the sick and demons submitted to them.

And puzzling, there were some that he told them NOT TO HEAL THE SICK if they did not welcome him.

Again, an incident that Jesus' ministry was not 100% inclusive.

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 4:38pm

The 12 didn't become the 12 till later in Jesus' ministry.

That's not necessarily the case, as parts of the Gospels, especially Matthew's account, are not sequential.

by: mopsuestia

05-19-2009 @ 12:17am

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? Jesus never shied from making a choice/action/decision that would show society where they was wrong, so if they were wrong with their view of woman in the church, why wouldn't he have chosen a woman among the 12?"

We might want to look at the kind of apostleship to which Jesus called his followers. There is something radical in Jesus calling men in a patriarchal society to a ministry of service--one of humility and sacrifice. Had he called women to be servants for others, there would have been nothing counter-cultural in that, for they already were servants. Perhaps he was calling men to a particular type of servant-leadership which is lost when such leadership becomes about power-over others and the silencing of women's voices and perspective.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 2:13pm

Thanks, Mimi,

When asked I've said that I do not approve of women preachers . . .

just as I do not approve of men.

Paul, on an occasion when, I believe, he was quite in tune with the Spirit; reminded us that, in Christ, we are not women or men. We are "different" parts of Christ's body and deeply in need of each other, all of us, to be whole!

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 2:13pm

Thanks, Mimi,

When asked I've said that I do not approve of women preachers . . .

just as I do not approve of men.

Paul, on an occasion when, I believe, he was quite in tune with the Spirit; reminded us that, in Christ, we are not women or men. We are "different" parts of Christ's body and deeply in need of each other, all of us, to be whole!

by: keithsmith

05-18-2009 @ 2:59pm

I have coached females all my life and looked for opportunity after opportunity to give them chances. And my mindset is that women are equal in our society in everyway.

And yet this is one of those worldly views collide with Scriptures.

If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? That has always bothered me in this argument of a woman's role in the church.

by: keithsmith

05-18-2009 @ 2:59pm

I have coached females all my life and looked for opportunity after opportunity to give them chances. And my mindset is that women are equal in our society in everyway.

And yet this is one of those worldly views collide with Scriptures.

If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? That has always bothered me in this argument of a woman's role in the church.

by: WaveTossed

05-18-2009 @ 4:45pm

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?"

Another question for you: If Jesus only wanted men to carry on His message, then why did He appear first to a women (Mary Magdalene) when He arose from the dead?

by: WaveTossed

05-18-2009 @ 4:45pm

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles?"

Another question for you: If Jesus only wanted men to carry on His message, then why did He appear first to a women (Mary Magdalene) when He arose from the dead?

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 5:00pm

And why did Jesus, before he was crucified, call the Syro-Phonecian woman a dog; but after his resurection tell his followers that they would be empowered by the Spirit to be witnesses not only to Jerusalem and Judaea but also to Samaria and rhe ends of the earth?

by: teller

05-18-2009 @ 5:00pm

And why did Jesus, before he was crucified, call the Syro-Phonecian woman a dog; but after his resurection tell his followers that they would be empowered by the Spirit to be witnesses not only to Jerusalem and Judaea but also to Samaria and rhe ends of the earth?

by: squeaky

05-18-2009 @ 6:13pm

I don't really know the answer to that question, but here's a thought. I have been told that women and children usually weren't counted. For example, only the men were numbered during "Feeding of the 5000". Had women and children been counted, likely the number was several thousand more than 5000.

LIkewise, I wonder if it is possible there were women who Jesus would have considered His disciples, but yet were not counted for the same reasons. We know from Scripture that several women are spoken of a lot, some of whom were spoken of more than most of the 12. Therefore--is it Jesus who didn't consider them disciples, or was it the Gospel writers who simply didn't count them?

by: squeaky

05-18-2009 @ 6:13pm

I don't really know the answer to that question, but here's a thought. I have been told that women and children usually weren't counted. For example, only the men were numbered during "Feeding of the 5000". Had women and children been counted, likely the number was several thousand more than 5000.

LIkewise, I wonder if it is possible there were women who Jesus would have considered His disciples, but yet were not counted for the same reasons. We know from Scripture that several women are spoken of a lot, some of whom were spoken of more than most of the 12. Therefore--is it Jesus who didn't consider them disciples, or was it the Gospel writers who simply didn't count them?

by: BlueDeacon

05-18-2009 @ 7:06pm

Because His disciples already were rabbinical students due to the custom of that day. Girls didn't get any formal education; meanwhile, they had studied the Scriptures for years (a prerequisite to study with a rabbi), so it would have been impractical for Him to do so. In fact, when Mary sat at His feet it still was considered uncouth.

by: BlueDeacon

05-18-2009 @ 7:06pm

Because His disciples already were rabbinical students due to the custom of that day. Girls didn't get any formal education; meanwhile, they had studied the Scriptures for years (a prerequisite to study with a rabbi), so it would have been impractical for Him to do so. In fact, when Mary sat at His feet it still was considered uncouth.

by: mopsuestia

05-19-2009 @ 12:17am

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? Jesus never shied from making a choice/action/decision that would show society where they was wrong, so if they were wrong with their view of woman in the church, why wouldn't he have chosen a woman among the 12?"

We might want to look at the kind of apostleship to which Jesus called his followers. There is something radical in Jesus calling men in a patriarchal society to a ministry of service--one of humility and sacrifice. Had he called women to be servants for others, there would have been nothing counter-cultural in that, for they already were servants. Perhaps he was calling men to a particular type of servant-leadership which is lost when such leadership becomes about power-over others and the silencing of women's voices and perspective.

by: mopsuestia

05-19-2009 @ 12:17am

"If Jesus wanted to send a message to a patriachial society, why would he had not chosen a woman as one of the 12 apostles? Jesus never shied from making a choice/action/decision that would show society where they was wrong, so if they were wrong with their view of woman in the church, why wouldn't he have chosen a woman among the 12?"

We might want to look at the kind of apostleship to which Jesus called his followers. There is something radical in Jesus calling men in a patriarchal society to a ministry of service--one of humility and sacrifice. Had he called women to be servants for others, there would have been nothing counter-cultural in that, for they already were servants. Perhaps he was calling men to a particular type of servant-leadership which is lost when such leadership becomes about power-over others and the silencing of women's voices and perspective.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:26am

Please don't miscontrue the point I am raising for discussion.

Women had a vital role to play in Jesus' ministry and the early Church.

If your last sentence was accurate, then I think the whole Gospel could be called into question if the writers were able to pick and choose what they wanted to say and not guided by the Holy Spirit on what to say.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:26am

Please don't miscontrue the point I am raising for discussion.

Women had a vital role to play in Jesus' ministry and the early Church.

If your last sentence was accurate, then I think the whole Gospel could be called into question if the writers were able to pick and choose what they wanted to say and not guided by the Holy Spirit on what to say.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:29am

Are you sure? I thought they were fisherman and the like.

And as far as disciples, he had more than just the 12. He sent 72 out in pairs.

Your point helps make my point though. When did Jesus disagree with the customs of the day but followed them because he was not going to rock the boat.

Jesus had no problem rocking the boat when he wanted to rock the boat.

If he chose not to rock the boat with a female disciple/apostle, what does that say?

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:29am

Are you sure? I thought they were fisherman and the like.

And as far as disciples, he had more than just the 12. He sent 72 out in pairs.

Your point helps make my point though. When did Jesus disagree with the customs of the day but followed them because he was not going to rock the boat.

Jesus had no problem rocking the boat when he wanted to rock the boat.

If he chose not to rock the boat with a female disciple/apostle, what does that say?

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:43am

As I mentioned before, women had a big part of Jesus' ministry and the early church.

And today, they have a vital and important role in the Church.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:43am

As I mentioned before, women had a big part of Jesus' ministry and the early church.

And today, they have a vital and important role in the Church.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:54am

Because God's promise to Abraham was for all nations.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 10:54am

Because God's promise to Abraham was for all nations.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 10:54am

'Servant leadership', a concept which we still are not too good at. For we still are attempting to figure out how to correctly assign 'power over others'.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 10:54am

'Servant leadership', a concept which we still are not too good at. For we still are attempting to figure out how to correctly assign 'power over others'.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 11:17am

Indeed!! As you note, even the patriarchs were told that they were to be a 'light to the nations.' My point was to ponder why Jesus would use 'dog', conventional (to his culture) exclusive type language, at one point when all nations were to be included. Sometimes Jesus seemed to puzzle, and offend, religious folks of his day and, when we look close, he even puzzles his followers today.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 11:17am

Indeed!! As you note, even the patriarchs were told that they were to be a 'light to the nations.' My point was to ponder why Jesus would use 'dog', conventional (to his culture) exclusive type language, at one point when all nations were to be included. Sometimes Jesus seemed to puzzle, and offend, religious folks of his day and, when we look close, he even puzzles his followers today.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 11:44am

We discussed this in another thread about parables (especially seed of the sower) in which Jesus was questioned on why he taught in parables and he responded by saying "otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them."

Jesus can be very puzzling at times.

But I hold the view that we only get to see part of the picture. When we get to Heaven, we will see His view and then understand.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 11:44am

We discussed this in another thread about parables (especially seed of the sower) in which Jesus was questioned on why he taught in parables and he responded by saying "otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them."

Jesus can be very puzzling at times.

But I hold the view that we only get to see part of the picture. When we get to Heaven, we will see His view and then understand.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 11:46am

I agree, the early church had that same problem. So, in essence we are not much different than those walked with Jesus in regards to this.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 11:46am

I agree, the early church had that same problem. So, in essence we are not much different than those walked with Jesus in regards to this.

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 12:08pm

It's likely that they had turned to fishing only after they were turned down by other rabbis. The tradition of that day was that you went to a rabbi to study under him, generally around the age of 14; Peter was probably around 18. (In this, Jesus also turned convention on its head by calling them.) What probably happened was that the Twelve were thinking, "Here's the 'super-rabbi,' with teaching we haven't heard before, and he's inviting me? Heck, yeah!"

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 12:08pm

It's likely that they had turned to fishing only after they were turned down by other rabbis. The tradition of that day was that you went to a rabbi to study under him, generally around the age of 14; Peter was probably around 18. (In this, Jesus also turned convention on its head by calling them.) What probably happened was that the Twelve were thinking, "Here's the 'super-rabbi,' with teaching we haven't heard before, and he's inviting me? Heck, yeah!"

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 12:51pm

The 12 didn't become the 12 till later in Jesus' ministry. He had 72 disciples that he sent out in pairs in Luke 10. The 72 had power to heal the sick and demons submitted to them.

And puzzling, there were some that he told them NOT TO HEAL THE SICK if they did not welcome him.

Again, an incident that Jesus' ministry was not 100% inclusive.

by: keithsmith

05-19-2009 @ 12:51pm

The 12 didn't become the 12 till later in Jesus' ministry. He had 72 disciples that he sent out in pairs in Luke 10. The 72 had power to heal the sick and demons submitted to them.

And puzzling, there were some that he told them NOT TO HEAL THE SICK if they did not welcome him.

Again, an incident that Jesus' ministry was not 100% inclusive.

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 4:38pm

The 12 didn't become the 12 till later in Jesus' ministry.

That's not necessarily the case, as parts of the Gospels, especially Matthew's account, are not sequential.

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 4:38pm

The 12 didn't become the 12 till later in Jesus' ministry.

That's not necessarily the case, as parts of the Gospels, especially Matthew's account, are not sequential.

by: WaveTossed

05-19-2009 @ 5:10pm

I don't know about your church. But my church (an Episcopal church) has a woman playing a vital and important role in our church. She is the rector.

by: WaveTossed

05-19-2009 @ 5:10pm

I don't know about your church. But my church (an Episcopal church) has a woman playing a vital and important role in our church. She is the rector.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 8:01pm

I'd love to discuss this with someone good at ancient Hebrew and Greek. I tend to think that we misunderstand the actual meaning of the 'otherwise they might' phrase. Jesus repeatedly asks those with ears to 'use them'. So I think the meaning really is that they look but refuse to see and they hear but refuse to understand.

by: teller

05-19-2009 @ 8:01pm

I'd love to discuss this with someone good at ancient Hebrew and Greek. I tend to think that we misunderstand the actual meaning of the 'otherwise they might' phrase. Jesus repeatedly asks those with ears to 'use them'. So I think the meaning really is that they look but refuse to see and they hear but refuse to understand.

by: Bideshi

05-19-2009 @ 9:57pm

Read again the story of Martha and Mary. Part of Martha's problem was that Mary was sitting in the place of a disciple, not in a woman's "place". As far as Martha was concerned Jesus and Mary were 'rocking the boat'. Jesus told Martha "Mary has chosen the right thing..." the right thing being that she was sitting in the place and role of a disciple.

by: Bideshi

05-19-2009 @ 9:57pm

Read again the story of Martha and Mary. Part of Martha's problem was that Mary was sitting in the place of a disciple, not in a woman's "place". As far as Martha was concerned Jesus and Mary were 'rocking the boat'. Jesus told Martha "Mary has chosen the right thing..." the right thing being that she was sitting in the place and role of a disciple.

by: Bideshi

05-19-2009 @ 10:01pm

Where did you get that one from????

by: Bideshi

05-19-2009 @ 10:01pm

Where did you get that one from????

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 11:35pm

Several years ago, a man I knew went to Israel and got a crash course in Middle Eastern and Jewish culture. After further study, he explained all these to us with a series of lectures.

by: BlueDeacon

05-19-2009 @ 11:35pm

Several years ago, a man I knew went to Israel and got a crash course in Middle Eastern and Jewish culture. After further study, he explained all these to us with a series of lectures.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:11am

1) We have hundreds of woman playing vital and the most important roles in the church. They are reflecting his glory, his mercy, his love and his sacrifice in their everyday lives.

THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND VITAL ROLE AND ALL ELSE IS SECONDARY.

2) I don't know what a rector is.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:11am

1) We have hundreds of woman playing vital and the most important roles in the church. They are reflecting his glory, his mercy, his love and his sacrifice in their everyday lives.

THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND VITAL ROLE AND ALL ELSE IS SECONDARY.

2) I don't know what a rector is.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:20am

Absolutely, women have major roles to play in Jesus' ministry. But did any women serve as one of the 12 Apostles.

And absolutely, Jesus rocked the boat with tax collectors, prostitutes and even women.

Which even gives more credibility to the point that if Jesus wanted to really rock the boat by giving a woman a position of leadership as one of the 12 Apostles, He would have had no problem to do so. And yet he did not.

by: keithsmith

05-20-2009 @ 10:20am

Absolutely, women have major roles to play in Jesus' ministry. But did any women serve as one of the 12 Apostles.

And absolutely, Jesus rocked the boat with tax collectors, prostitutes and even women.

Which even gives more credibility to the point that if Jesus wanted to really rock the boat by giving a woman a position of leadership as one of the 12 Apostles, He would have had no problem to do so. And yet he did not.