Peter to Wives: Put Off, Put On, Watch This

My Engage post for the week:Instead of telling first-century wives to submit because they are inferior, as many believed at the time, Peter urges them to be submissive for a very different reason—so that their husbands might find true life (1 Peter 3:1). Peter encourages these wives to be subversive (keep worshiping Christ—which hubby may not like) in a cloak of respect (submit to your husband) so as to achieve a good end. Here is his rationale:In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. And let not your adornment be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands. Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear (1 Peter 3:1–6, NAS).In Peter’s day, a wife was considered property, could not speak for herself in a court of law, and (of key significance here) was expected to worship the same god or gods as the householder.A number of Peter’s readers have husbands whom he describes as “disobedient to the word.” Doubtless, some of these wives in his readership are from households where Hecate or Apollo are worshiped, and great harm could come to these women if they spoke in a cocky way about Zeus or trash-talked Leto, false as these gods are. Even Paul when speaking of Artemis in Ephesus, was described as not blaspheming the goddess (Acts 19:37).Instead, in such a world, the wise believing wife is told she should show her fear of God by remaining quiet about her faith, while also remaining fiercely loyal to Christ (a radical idea) “without being frightened by any fear” (1 Pet. 3:6). Notice Peter does not tell wives to stop worshiping Christ and obey by worshipping their husbands' gods, which is what one would expect a good Roman family man to say. We must read between the lines to see how clever (indeed, subversive) he is in his advice to submit. It’s what he doesn’t say that makes it so interesting. He's telling wives to submit to husbands, but he's expecting these wives to keep worshiping Christ, whom the "disobedient" householder would object to her worshiping. But she is to keep quiet about it and actively seek to change his loyalty to his god with her own character.The writer of these words is not a man out to put down women; he is looking out for wives’ interests while working within existing structures and having as his first priority the advancement of the gospel that equalizes.The word translated “reverent” in this passage is not actually an adjective, but is the object of a prepositional phrase “in fear.” A wooden translation would be “as they observe your pure conduct in fear.” And the fear or respect is actually not directed toward the husband here. In Peter’s usage, such fear is always directed toward God—not in a terrified way, but in a reverent one. The point here, then, is not actually that the wives should be reverent toward their husbands, but rather that these women should live purely “in the fear of God” as part of their silent witness.Peter goes on to use the image of adornment three times within the short space of three verses to make his case. One reference is to the wives’ external signs of status (3:3). One is to their internal character (v. 4). And one is to the adornment of the past holy women of God (v. 5).Put off externals. Peter begins his argument by saying, “Let not your adornment be external” (v. 3). Many translations have added “merely external,” which suggests that these wives could have some external adornment. Other translators have rendered the text as saying, “Let not your adornment be external only.” But the modifiers “merely” and “only” are not in the original.After telling wives not to adorn themselves externally, Peter immediately specifies the sorts of external adornments he means: braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on apparel. And Peter’s readers understand he is not telling wives to be plain.To understand his meaning when it comes to braids, jewelry, and dresses, we must bear in mind that the honorable Greco-Roman wife wore the signs of her social status on her person. Many think the apostle’s earlier reference to “pure and reverent conduct” (v. 2) suggest he is concerned primarily with sexually provocative dress. But while dressing suggestively would be inappropriate, Peter appears to have more of a class than a moral concern in mind when mentioning braids, jewelry, and apparel.In the first century, every single piece of gold, diamond, and pearl was real. And wearing her external status was the opposite of what Peter envisioned for reverent wives. Usually letters like Peter’s were addressed only the people with social power—the householders. But in his epistle he directly addresses wives and slaves. (Radical! Elevating!) And the same person who elevated those with less social power by addressing them directly wanted godly wives to dress in a manner devoid of anything that would suggest superiority.Put on internals. Instead, Peter urges the wife in his audience to adorn themselves with something far more precious—something that is of great value to God—a gentle and quiet spirit. By coupling “gentle” with “quiet” Peter intensifies the virtue. And his hope is that the wife’s virtue will reveal a different value system to her husband and others in her sphere of influence.The spirit Peter envisions is not something the wife takes on and off as she would gold or apparel. Rather, it is permanent ornamentation, thus imperishable. Back in chapter 1, verse 7, he wrote that gold was “passing away”; in 1:18, he described gold and silver as “perishable.” And these references that appear only a few chapters earlier inform how he wants readers to understand his use of “imperishable” in this passage as applied to the wife’s virtue. The gentle and quiet spirit is the only kind of beauty that a woman can put on that will never be taken from her. It will not wrinkle or sag with age. Humans consider gold precious. The God who will one day pave the streets of his city with it considers something else far more precious—character.The “gentle and quiet” language has at times been mistaken both as a criticism of extroverted women, and also as a source of pride for introverts and/or husbands married to them. Yet by describing the godly woman as having a “gentle, quiet spirit,” Peter is not saying extroverted women have less godly personalities than introverted women. Nor is he saying that women with spiritual gifts that involve speaking should stop exercising these gifts and remain silent. The gentle, quiet “spirit” here is not a personality type; it’s a virtue. And “putting on” such a virtue, especially in the face of injustice, is an equal-opportunity option.The quietness Peter has in view is also not absolute silence. Rather, it is a refraining from speaking “words” the wife might think it wise to say to win her husband (3:1). Peter’s instruction in many ways takes the pressure off her to craft the most winsome argument that will lead her husband to conversion. Her silent spirit allows the Holy Spirit to do his work. This wife's hope must not be in herself, but in God.Watch this. Peter returns to the adornment image to give a rationale for this counsel about wives’ internal apparel. He writes,“For in this way [that is, internally] in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands. Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him ‘lord’ . . . (3:5–6).Once again the word “adorn” has appeared, and in this context it is a continuing action on the part of holy women. These matriarchs of the faith hoped in God—the very thing Peter wants all his readers to do. His readers can draw hope from the fact that someone ahead of them in the race has faced the same challenges and finished well.

A Question Mark Over My Head?

Last year in San Diego at the national meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS), I agreed to be interviewed about my experience as a female who belongs to a society that has only 6% women in its membership. That number even includes student members. And who knows what percentage of the female members actually attend the annual meeting. All I can say is that when I go, I felt quite conscious of my femaleness, let me tell you. (Kudos to our friends at IFL who invest in their female employees by sending them.)I asked that my remarks be connected with a pseudonym—and as a journalist I almost never make someone keep my comments off the record. Does that tell you anything?A year later, the results are in, and the report evoked a lot of conversation in Atlanta. The opinions have been quite mixed, with some insisting that anecdotal evidence/stories don't count in research. (For people who say such silly things about narrative being an illegitimate source of info, I recommend epistemological therapy with Dr. Esther Meek.)I attended ETS the week before Thanksgiving—presented two papers, moderated a marriage panel, and also went to the American Academy of Religion national meeting, because my nominee for the Arts and Religion Award—Marilynne Robinson—was selected and honored. In between all that, I had many conversations over meals and coffees and in the hallways about the research and the responses to it. Some women I know have attended once and never want to return. (The same is true of one of my dearest male Latino friends. The absence of a minority presence is deeply troubling.)Here's a link to the final report, "A Question Mark Over My Head?" which resulted from  more than thirty-five interviews with a broad spectrum of people. It's not short, but it's thorough.I'm glad to report that some of my male colleagues have been appropriately distressed by the findings and have been vocal  in their responses. I'd love to know what you think.

Meet Four AIDS Orphans You Can Help

Today is both International AIDS Day and Giving Tuesday. Why not participate in both simultaneously? You can do so by providing the funds through a gift that will help Caleb, Sammy, Faith, and/or Joel—all AIDS orphans living in Kenya—with whom we’re working.Let me just tell you about Joel.His mother died of AIDS, and his father remarried. Then his dad was killed in a land war on Mt. Elgon, where we work with a church-planting movement. Joel’s orphan status meant he had to drop out of public school, which is not free in Kenya. But someone agreed to sponsor him to continue, so he did—for a while. But then that sponsor had to stop (layoffs, divorces…stuff happens). So Joel had to drop out of school.We found another sponsor for him. And that worked for a while. But then that sponsor could not make the payments, either. So my husband and I have been covering Joel’s school expenses last year and this, because we cannot bear the thought of telling Joel he must drop out again. He is 20 years old!The other three kids whose lives have been ravaged by AIDS have also lost their sponsors, so we have been covering their educational expenses, too.Joel is a smart kid who enjoys football, farming, and looking after cattle. Caleb loves music, drama, and swimming. Faith also loves swimming, along with tennis and drama. And Sammy likes football, drama, swimming and ball games. And they all do well in school—when given the chance.For orphans to flourish, they need education. But they also need stuff like toothpaste and deodorant and regular meals that include meat. These four kids have sponsors for none of these, except Sammy, who has a sponsor for meat. Would you consider a one-time gift to help us cover their schooling? Or perhaps you can sponsor one or more of them monthly for one of the following? Or might you consider sponsoring one child for all of his or her monthly needs?• Education: $575/year or $48/month• Food: $264/year or $22/month• Hygiene: $264/year or $22/month• Meat: $204/year or $17/month1. Give by Check: Please complete and return this form with a check enclosed. The check should be made out to East-West Ministries International, and on the memo line please include "Adopt-a-Legacy Sponsorship Program" along with the child’s name. You may mail sponsorship donations to:East-West Ministries InternationalAttn: Financial Services2001 W Plano Pkwy #3000Plano, TX 750752. Give Online: You may also "Click to Give" and write in your one-time or monthly amount. Please specify the sponsorship category (name of child + education, tutoring, etc.) in the notes box and select either a one-time gift or monthly giving upon "checkout."The child-sponsorship initiative meets the needs of Kenya’s most disadvantaged populations. People hear about this work, and it opens doors to the gospel for unreached peoples as the good reputation of the work grows.For each sponsored child, our program includes mentoring and spiritual guidance from an indigenous ministry worker. Through stable sponsors, these kids will have new opportunities to grow and learn in every way. At the very least, would you please pray with us for these kids? And please help us spread the word.Thanks for your partnership with us!

You Can Help Bring Healing

Authenticity Book House (ABH) has agreed to secure translation for my friend Mary DeMuth's book, Not Marked: Finding Hope and Healing after Sexual Abuse. Their plan is to translate the book into Spanish, Mandarin, and Marathi (India).Not only does ABH pay a translator on the ground in the targeted language group, giving him or her much-needed income, but they also foresee getting the book into the hands of sexually exploited people, either for free or at a nominal cost.This all costs money, so ABH is doing a crowdfunding campaign to bring in needed funds, 100% of which go directly to the translation projects.In several of the targeted language groups, it is taboo even to speak of abuse, and prosecution is rare. Victims feel violated, alone, and dirty, not realizing that they are worthy of healing, or that someone else understands. Not Marked has brought hope to many, opening the door to genuine healing. Maybe you can help? 

Opening Today at the Dallas Museum of Art

Jackson Pollock: Blind SpotsAbstract expressionist Jackson Pollock (1912–1956) achieved fame in the late 1940s with his distinctive “drip paintings.” At the Dallas Museum of Art, "Jackson Pollock: Blind Spots" explores what came next: Pollock’s “black paintings,” a series of black enamel and oil paintings on untreated canvas created from 1951 to 1953. In its only United States showing, the exhibit includes 31 black paintings; works on paper made with enamel, ink, and watercolor; and five sculptures. The works immerse audiences in “Pollock’s complete oeuvre and shed new light on the experimentation and ingenuity that has become synonymous with his practice,” the museum explains. November 20–March 20."Jackson Pollock: Blind Spots" is only the third major U.S. museum exhibition to focus solely on the artist hailed as “the greatest painter this country has ever produced.” Experts have deemed the show a “once in a lifetime” exhibition, organized by the DMA’s Hoffman Family Senior Curator of Contemporary Art Gavin Delahunty: the largest survey of Jackson Pollock’s black paintings ever assembled. This exceptional presentation, which critics hailed as “sensational," "exhilarating," "genius," “revelatory,” and “revolutionary” on its UK premier at Tate Liverpool, will receive its sole US presentation in Dallas and include many works that have not been exhibited for more than 50 years.Jackson Pollock: Blind Spots will require a $16.00 special exhibition ticket. 

In the Near Future: Uterus Transplants

The New York Times November 13 print edition ran an article by Denise Grady that announced "Uterus Transplants May Soon Help Some Infertile Women in the U.S. Become Pregnant." The Times considered the news so big that a press release came to my in-box. It's all going down at The Cleveland Clinic, where doctors expect to become the first in the US  to transplant a uterus into a woman who lacks one—whether due to congenital factors, injury, or illness. The procedure would eliminate the need for a gestational surrogate.After giving birth to one or two children—by C-section—the woman receiving the transplanted uterus would have it removed so she can quit taking anti-rejection meds. An estimated 50,000 women in the United States might be candidates. Currently, eight have begun the screening process.The transplant team would remove the uterus, cervix, and part of the vagina from a recently deceased organ donor. (The uterus, if kept cold, can survive outside of the human body for six to eight hours.) The recipient's ovaries and fallopian tubes would be left in place, and after one year of healing, she would undergo an IVF/embryo transfer procedure.Sweden is the only place where doctors have already successfully completed uterine transplants. Nine recipients have delivered four babies. Another is due January 2016. Two failed and had to be removed—one, due to a blood clot; the other, due to infection. The Cleveland doctors plan to use deceased donors, so they won't put healthy women at risk. For a live donor, the operation takes seven to eleven hours and requires working near vital organs.Recipients must have ovaries. But because the fallopian tubes won't be connected to the transplanted uterus, a natural pregnancy will be impossible. 

Missing the Martyr: "A.D." on the Death of Stephen

The 12-part mini-series A.D.: The Bible Continues releases tomorrow on DVD. Today's guest Sarah Frase considers some of the strengths and weaknesses of the series. Sarah loves words, action figures, artists, teenagers, and Jesus. After teaching high school English and Theatre for eight years, Sarah is currently pursuing a master's in Media Arts and Worship at Dallas Theological Seminary.When a new adaptation of the Bible is dramatized either for television or film, Christians commonly evaluate it by four criteria: 1) Is the adaptation theologically or doctrinally sound? 2) Is it close to scripture, leaving room for varying interpretations? 3) Is the adaptation historically accurate in light of additional texts outside of scripture? And finally 4) Is the quality of the production (such as the writing, acting, sets, costumes, camera shots) high?As Christians we are called to be critical, not passive, consumers of media, not in the spirit of culture wars but rather in the spirit of the Bereans, who saw wisdom in testing all ideas against God’s truth.What’s interesting is that typically the above-mentioned four criteria create a spectrum on which most thinking believers fall in terms of what they value most highly:Theologically                         Scripturally                                               Historically                              High Production                  Sound                                       Accurate                                                      Accurate                                    QualityThis spectrum is not meant to imply that theological soundness and high production quality are mutually exclusive values, only to illustrate a trend that Christian consumers tend to treat them like mutually exclusive values. A Christian who typically privileges doctrinal soundness above all else won’t object if the quality of the production is poor, observing, “Well at least the theology’s right.” This is how terribly written and poorly acted productions such as “God’s Not Dead” garner viewership.On the other end of the spectrum, a Christian who privileges filmmaking techniques, a well-developed story, and acting will express great admiration for productions like Darren Aronofsky’s “Noah,” observing, “We as Christians know what correct doctrine is, so it’s not going to harm us to enjoy this as a good piece of art.”Those Christians who value scriptural or historical accuracy typically also hold these values in combination with one of the other two—either doctrine or production quality. The bad news is that somewhere in our history, Christians have bought into the lie that these four criteria are somehow mutually exclusive values—that we can expect a movie to have some of them, maybe even three of them, but never all four. Until we cease accepting this lie, all films made which are adaptations of scripture are going to fall closer to one end or the other of this spectrum—especially as Christian and secular producers continue to see Christians as a viable market for newly created content.Unfortunately, the television mini-series, “A.D. The Bible Continues,” is no exception. A sequel to the NBC mini-series “The Bible, A.D.” begins with the resurrection of Jesus and covers the events of the first ten chapters of the Book of Acts. Under some misapprehension that this text does not have enough controversial action to keep the attention of current audience, producers Roma Downey and Mark Burnett have added political conflict and intrigue plotlines, mostly centering on the power struggles between Rome, the Sanhedrin, the Zealots, and the new Church.The costumes, acting, and even dialogue are for the large part well executed, and the casting director ought to be applauded for casting early Christians, including the apostles themselves, with actors of varying ethnicities (even if they all still speak in Shakespearean as opposed to Semitic cadences). The additional plotlines don’t harm the adaptation, but they do derail it, and reveal another misconception: that you can’t wring drama out of an ancient text that a contemporary audience will connect to. This is why we need our screen writers to be good Bible expositors—so that they will see the drama already inherent in the text and how it parallels present-day conflicts the audience faces.Best MomentOne of the best moments of the series occurs in the episode, “The First Martyr,” because writers took a less-shown Semitic cultural practice and shared it with the audience. When looking on the dead body of a zealot, whom the Romans slaughtered graphically as an example, Peter begins singing a psalm of lament, and Caiaphas joins in with him. This simple moment proves powerful to the audience, because two leaders on opposite ends of the Gospel are both grieving the violence their people are experiencing. That they both know the words and the tune by heart establishes the shared culture between the Jews and Christians in a way that is illustrative and beautiful rather than preachy. And that ephemeral unity between these typically opposing figures plays right into the dramatic tension of the following moment when Peter can’t resist following the song with a call to the Gospel, and Caiaphas has him instantly arrested.Missed OpportunityUnfortunately, this same episode that gives the audience a moment of good writing, fails to repeat this feat for the main act, offering a highly disappointing adaptation of the death of Stephen, Christianity’s first martyr. Part of this is because what A.D. tapped into with their multiracial casting—the need for a more inclusive rendering of the early church—they failed to see in the actual text of the New Testament. Stephen was most likely a Hellenist, and ethnic tension played a decisive role in his trial and death. Stephen’s death is a missed opportunity to dialogue about racial tensions and racial reconciliation, chief issues that the church is wading through today.In the television series, Stephen is introduced to the audience at his baptism instead of during his appointment as a deacon. He travels with Peter’s daughter back to Jerusalem and yells out from the crowd demanding the release of Peter and John from the Sanhedrin. He witnesses the raising of Tabitha, and tries to convince Peter to take the news of this miracle to the Temple. Additionally, he initiates a confrontation with Cornelius, standing in his way as he is escorting some arrested Jewish boys, leading to his being beaten by the Roman in the street. Rather than depict the Stephen actually described in Acts, selected for his reputation of a mature and godly character, he is written as a replacement for Peter—impulsive, emotional, and quick to provoke trouble with his words.Besides inheriting the character traits Peter showed in the gospels, in A. D. Stephen might also be nicknamed “the impatient evangelist.” When Peter tries to appoint him over the camp of Christians outside of the city (the show’s only minor nod to placing Stephen in a leadership role), he insists that since he has studied Torah since he was a child, he should be in Jerusalem preaching.Later on in the same episode, when the apostles have been arrested and badly beaten for their testimony, Peter tells Stephen that they all knew from Jesus’s words that they would have to make sacrifices, and Stephen responds with adolescent delivery: “not like this.”The following day he goes to the Temple, confronts the Sanhedrin, accusing them of the unjust punishment of righteous men, calling them those who received the Law from angels but did not keep it and the descendants of their ancestors who murdered the prophets (Acts 7:51–53). Stephen also challenges them that God doesn’t dwell in a house made by human hands (vv. 48-49), and brings up Jesus’ words about the coming destruction of the temple. His claim to see Christ at the right hand of God (v. 56) is what at last provokes them to take him outside the city and stone him to death.While the establishment of Stephen’s character in the show as impulsive and confrontational, and his professed knowledge of Torah makes this final confrontation plausible for the audience, building this dramatic tension would not have been necessary if the writers had instead depicted his character and heritage as it appears in the book of Acts. If the screen writers of A.D. had also known how to exegete the Bible, they would have seen the ripe context for drama in the fact that Stephen was likely a Hellenist.The Real Stephen One of the earliest conflicts within the Church that was a test of its leadership in the complaint that the Hellenist widows were being neglected in the daily food distribution (6:1). The Hellenists were foreign Jews from places such as Cyrene, Alexandria, Cilicia, or Asia (v. 9). This means not only were they a minority group within the church, but also that they did not have the shared cultural commonalities with one another that the Jews did. As proselytes and descendants of Hebrew families who had lived outside of Israel for a generation or generations, the only thing the Hellenists had in common with each other was that they were worshipers of Yahweh and outsiders. The complaint that their widows are being treated as second-class citizens within the Church was taken so seriously by the existing leadership that an entirely new office—that of a deacon—was created just to minister to the needs of this people group and others like them. Additionally, the men appointed to this new office all had Greek names, including Stephen. This suggests that they were foreign Jews and Hellenists themselves. So not only did Church leadership demonstrate that they took the complaints of the Hellenists seriously, they further proved that these people were equal to the Jews in importance within the church by building a leadership team out of that minority.In the Book of Acts, the drama created by the marginalizing of a people group within the Church is handled in a way that is beautiful and should be a model for churches experiencing the same protests from their own congregants. Placing confidence in people by placing them in leadership speaks volumes more than just making reparations, but no changes.Stephen is one of the men in whom the confidence of the early Church was placed. He is described as “a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit” and also “full of grace and power” even performing wonders and signs among the people so that even priests came to faith in Christ (6:5–8). So not only was Stephen recognized as faithful and meant for leadership by men, but by God, as the power of his ministry showed. His presence in leadership unified the Church where it might have become divided. These factors in the story naturally compel the audience to like Stephen and to find his death devastating, since it affects the Church so greatly.In the biblical text there is also a plethora of dramatic tension already present in Stephen’s arrest and trial. It was bad enough to have Jesus and Peter, Jews from Israel, doing irrefutable signs and wonders in the sight of the people. But then Steven as a Hellenist performed them! As if this were not complex enough, the people who brought him to the Jewish leadership for judgment were local synagogue members from different nations than the Jews (6:9). The Hellenists even supplied false witnesses to slander Stephen, because they couldn’t out-argue him as a Spirit-filled apologist (vv. 10–14).Ironically, instead of taking note of his witness and considering joining the Church where they may be recognized as equals, Hellenist Jews took Stephen to the Sanhedrin, perhaps leveraging his arrest to build their credibility and unity with the Jewish religious leadership.When Stephen testified in his own defense before the Sanhedrin (Acts 7), Stephen showed a deep knowledge and understanding of Torah, which would have been a slap in the face to the Council of Jews judging him. His eloquence directly challenged and refuted any stereotyping about foreign Jews that they might have held.Moreover, Stephen’s conduct is repeatedly described in terms of constraint, such as “his face like the face of an angel” (6:15). Nothing rebukes a charge that a person is inciting conflict quite like their conducting themselves with self-control and appealing with reason. Stephen’s submissive conduct and choice arguments calmly but boldly delivered were echoed by leaders such a Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi, both of whom endured arrest and spoke out for human rights.Finally, the majority of Stephen’s address involved Moses, the bringing of the Law, David the beloved ruler, and the sacred place of the Temple itself (Acts 7). Before the most learned Jewish men in Israel, Stephen dared to discuss these subjects. Not only that, he connected them to Jesus of Nazareth (of whom they had forbidden the apostles to speak). And Stephen claimed to behold Jesus standing at God’s right hand (7:56). This claim, along with the stinging indictment of Deuteronomy 10:16 in calling them “stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears” (Acts 7:51) were even more unbearable coming from the mouth of a Hellenist. Stephen’s words provoked the leaders to protest, “Who are you to rebuke us?”Yet in all his actions, including the surrender of his spirit to God and forgiving his murderers (vv. 59–60) Stephen modeled Christ.Pseudo-StephenIn A.D., the replacement of this powerful existing biblical narrative with that of an impulsive and misguided young believer is a poor choice at best, and a downright irresponsible one at worst. Failing to tell Stephen’s story as it appears in Acts is a missed opportunity for a contemporary audience to identify with first-century believers. The grievous loss of Stephen could even be paralleled to the grievous loss the Church experienced earlier this year with the shooting of Africa-American church leaders in Charleston.In Stephen’s story we also see a beautiful model in the honoring of the Hellenists as equal church members. This serves as an example of how the Church today can hear and honor the voices of minorities and the marginalized within the Church.And this is why it is essential that writers, especially those who write for television, receive a brief education in Bible exposition. Even a rudimentary expositor of the Scriptures will have the tools to discover the drama inherit in the real human conflicts the Bible records and see how relevant they can be for viewers today.Find more  from Sarah:On FraseologyBlind Corner FictionTwitter: @SarahEFrase

The New Star Wars: Trailer Goes Viral

This trailer already has 42 million+ views. But that's nothing. One of the others has passed 75 million. What do you think? Where is Luke? 

Lean In ≠ Keep Others Down

Recently the NY Times ran an article titled "A Feminism Where Leaning In Means Leaning on Others." The author, Gary Gutting, interviewed a feminist who was critical of Sheryl Sandberg and her approach to business in her book Lean In (reviewed on this site). The interviewee was Nancy Fraser, professor of philosophy and politics at The New School. She is the author of Fortunes of Feminism: From State-Managed Capitalism to Neoliberal Crisis. Fraser said, "For me, feminism is not simply a matter of getting a smattering of individual women into positions of power and privilege within existing social hierarchies. It is rather about overcoming those hierarchies. This requires challenging the structural sources of gender domination in capitalist society—above all, the institutionalized separation of two supposedly distinct kinds of activity."First of all, this interchange provides a good example of how liberal feminists and radical feminists differ in their approaches—as different as Protestants and Roman Catholics. The liberal feminist works within the system to bring justice; the radical thinks the whole male-dominated system is corrupt and nothing short of revolution will fix this. A subset is Marxist feminism, which has as its special focus capitalism and work.Now then, I think it's unfortunate that Fraser summarizes Sandberg as trying to get more women into corner offices. The end result of her counsel may be just that. But the goal is not to make all working women CEO's and COOs. Indeed, Sandberg is in no way down on being a stay-at-home mom, nor is she oblivious to those of lower socioeconomic class.Lean In was written to the working woman. Its examples include mostly women of middle- to upper-class socioeconomic status, because that is where the author lives; but she does not call all women to have that status. The woman I know who cleans houses —Lean In's principles apply to her too. If she needs to charge more because the value of her work has gone up, she benefits from Sandberg's wise job counsel. If this woman needs a mentor to help her grow her business, she benefits from Sandberg again.The book was not just about gaining corporate power or having a certain kind of job. It was not even saying a woman has to be in the corporate world to get ahead. This is a common criticism of feminism—that it undervalues the non-corporate woman's work. But that is an unfair characterization. A stay-at-home mom needs the same principles. She needs to know how to avoid shrinking back. To learn to be unafraid of asking for something. If she needs a respite day—if she needs to do some self-care—ask for it. Plan for it. Know what she needs and not fear that doing so is unfeminine or selfish or that she is unworthy of it.Yes, Sandberg leans on others. But she also pays them for their services. And every employed person being paid benefits from the same principles, regardless of where their work falls in the food chain. Just because some have more social power in their work—that does not mean the job they hold is the ideal. As I said, Sandberg does not expect everybody to become a CEO or a COO. What she does believe is that women can do a better job of strategizing and sitting at the table—including asking for what we need to meet any jobs' demands.   

Every Meal a Eucharist

For months I've been working on the new launch of DTS Magazine, formerly Kindred Spirit. And I'm happy to say it has finally launched. You can read it by following the link. Enjoy!  

Arts Week!

Next week is Arts Week at DTS. Here's the announcement and schedule.

Last Week in Dallas: Some Writers and Some Art

Last week, I got to spend two evenings in the presence of great artists and one afternoon touring the art at AT&T (aka incorrectly called “Cowboys”) Stadium.On Tuesday night, the Dallas Museum of Art (DMA) featured two distinguished writers for their Arts and Letters Live series—novelist Joyce Carol Oates and two-term Poet Laureate of the USA, Natasha Trethewey. Providing them with witty introductions that came with shameless plugs for The Southwest Review was Dr. Willard Spiegelman, the SMU professor who, for years, has edited it. Lest the audience didn’t know (I confess I didn’t) he informed everyone that The Southwest Review is the third-longest-running literary review in the US.Tretheway did a masterful job with an original poem commissioned by the DMA, something inspired by her work of choice from the museum’s collection. Later, she read a poem in which she told of twice visiting Monticello, home of Thomas Jefferson—once as a girl and later as an adult. The first time, everyone acted as if slavery were some normal thing everyone did without realizing it was wrong (never mind that John Adams opposed the practice along with many others Jefferson knew well). By the time of the poet’s second visit to the great Palladian-esque plantation, everyone knew Jefferson had fathered a child with Sally Hemings, one of the third president’s slaves, so the guides mentioned it as if were some normal thing. I had a similarly shocking set of visits to Monticello, so her description left me gripping my chair.Oates read from her most recent work, a memoir titled The Lost Landscape. My favorite of her selections was from her chapter titled “Happy Chicken 1942–1944,” narrated by the Oates family’s Rhode Island Red, a fun point-of-view choice that, oddly, worked. Happy Chicken enjoyed an esteemed position as the JCO's pet—until he went away (we all know where). Another chapter left us all cracking up as she describe all the jobs she held as a kid—including fake-gem-jewelry-involving-glue that only her family members bought (we all know why).After the readings, the audience had a chance to ask a few questions. During this time Tretheway said how The Diary of Anne Frank had affected her and Oates said how Alice in Wonderland had influenced her. Tretheway told how memorizing the Gettysburg Address—the first thing she learned by heart—made her realize that what we write can also be “in the service of truth and justice and righteousness.” Oates told of memorizing Bible verses to get to go to camp, which she said turned out to be somewhat of a punishment. (It was the last time she had any interest in the Bible.)Tretheway also said she agreed with the observation that the impulse to write often comes from a sense of being an outsider or an observer. Eudora Welty, she reminded us, learned dialogue by sitting under the piano and listening to living-room conversations.On Thursday night, some members of my department and a couple of students gathered at a restaurant in the newly developed Trinity Groves area to share a meal with Jeremy Begbie from Duke Divinity, whose forte is theology and the arts. I could hardly wait to pick his brain. But sadly, my GPS failed to figure out the “newly developed” part of the location, and I arrived 45 minutes late after circling around Dallas, hopelessly lost in rush hour. Once I had a seat, the noise drowned out all but what people said directly to me.An inch of redemption came when I drove to AT&T Stadium the next afternoon for a private tour of its art: I perfectly handled two turns that would have otherwise left me lost on some of the same streets with whom I'd become BFFs the previous night.My friend Amanda, who used to be my guide in Manhattan, has relocated to Dallas and works as an event planner at the stadium. As it turns out, Mrs. Jones, the missus of the owner of the place, has decent taste. She insists they keep the stadium spotless (even the floors and escalator grips) and that they maintain an art collection worth seeing. Amanda's secret to getting the most out of it: everywhere you go, look up.Of course we took the obligatory selfie on the 50-year-line. But even more fun was that Amanda took me to some normally off-limits locker rooms. Guests can take guided or self-guided tours of the art. And of course there’s the gift shop at the end. And let me tell ya, that thing is totally a cultural experience of a different kind.  

Mars Hill Audio

It's not that other Mars Hill. This one is more like a Christian NPR. Ken Myers, the host, actually used to be on NPR. And he's offering some free messages about culture. Love Mars Hill Audio's stuff—enough to pay a subscription fee. Check out these free resources.

• What is culture?
• What is distinctive about modern culture?
• What is the Church’s interest in culture?

Calvin Festival 2016

The Calvin Festival of Faith and Writing, which I consider the best thing since Icarus got wings, happens every other year. This April the Festival rolls around again. And Calvin just announced some of their speakers. These include poet Christian Wiman, whom I have talked about here  in the past, as well as Sarah Bessey, also reviewed on his site. Upon reading the 2016 lineup of speakers, one of my well-read friends asked me, "omGGG! Do you know how gigantic of a deal Zadie Smith is???" (I didn't.) There's also Nadia Bolz-Weber, author of Pastrix: The Cranky, Beautiful Faith of a Sinner & Saint. You can listen now to her NPR interview titled "Lutheran Minister Preaches a Gospel of Love to Junkies, Drag Queens, and Outsiders." And returning is poet Scott Cairns, whom I talked about in the past. Love. The Festival features so many more. Check it out. 

Eleven Christians in Syria Crucified, Beheaded

Here's some news you might have missed... Pray for our brothers and sisters in Syria. (ANS—October 5, 2015)  At several steps on their path to death by beheading and crucifixion last month, eleven indigenous Christian workers near Aleppo, Syria had the option to leave the area and live. The 12-year-old son of a ministry team leader also could have spared his life by denying Christ.The indigenous missionaries were not required to stay at their ministry base in a village near Aleppo, Syria; rather, the ministry director who trained them had entreated them to leave. As the Islamic State (ISIS), other rebel groups and Syrian government forces turned Aleppo into a war zone of carnage and destruction, ISIS took over several outlying villages. The Syrian ministry workers in those villages chose to stay in order to provide aid in the name of Christ to survivors.“I asked them to leave, but I gave them the freedom to choose,” said the ministry director, his voice tremulous as he recalled their horrific deaths. “As their leader, I should have insisted that they leave.”They stayed because they believed they were called to share Christ with those caught in the crossfire, he said.“Every time we talked to them,” the director said, “they were always saying, 'We want to stay here—this is what God has told us to do. This is what we want to do.' They just wanted to stay and share the gospel.”Those who chose to stay could have scattered and hid in other areas, as their surviving family members did. On a visit to the surviving relatives in hiding, the ministry director learned of the cruel executions.The relatives said ISIS militants on Aug. 7 captured the Christian workers in a village whose name is withheld for security reasons. On Aug. 28, the militants asked if they had renounced Islam for Christianity. When the Christians said that they had, the rebels asked if they wanted to return to Islam. The Christians said they would never renounce Christ.The 41-year-old team leader, his young son and two ministry members in their 20s were questioned at one village site where ISIS militants had summoned a crowd. The team leader presided over nine house churches he had helped to establish. His son was two months away from his 13th birthday.“All were badly brutalized and then crucified,” the ministry leader said. “They were left on their crosses for two days. No one was allowed to remove them.”Prelates survey the damage in Aleppo Christian AidThe martyrs died beside signs the ISIS militants had put up identifying them as “infidels.”Eight other ministry team members, including two women, were taken to another site in the village that day (Aug. 28) and were asked the same questions before a crowd. The women, ages 29 and 33, tried to tell the ISIS militants they were only sharing the peace and love of Christ and asked what they had done wrong to deserve the abuse. The Islamic extremists then publicly raped the women, who continued to pray during the ordeal, leading the ISIS militants to beat them all the more furiously.As the two women and the six men knelt before they were beheaded, they were all praying.“Villagers said some were praying in the name of Jesus, others said some were praying the Lord's prayer, and others said some of them lifted their heads to commend their spirits to Jesus,” the ministry director said. “One of the women looked up and seemed to be almost smiling as she said, ‘Jesus!’”After they were beheaded, their bodies were hung on crosses, the ministry director said, his voice breaking. He had trained all of the workers for their evangelistic ministry, and he had baptized the team leader and some of the others.Hundreds of former Muslims in Syrian villages are in danger of being captured and killed by ISIS, which is fighting to establish a caliphate in which apostasy is punishable by death. The underground church in the region has mushroomed since June 2014, when ISIS began terrorizing those who do not swear allegiance to its caliphate, both non-Muslims and Muslims. Consequently, the potential for large-scale executions has grown along with the gains in ISIS-controlled territory.The ministry assisted by Christian Aid Mission is providing resources and trying to find ways to evacuate these families by other routes.Many of the ministry's teams also remain in Syria. Christian Aid Mission assists those who do not or cannot leave with the means to survive and operate their outreaches.Even those who leave, however, may encounter ISIS militants and other criminals in refugee camps, said the leader of another ministry that Christian Aid Mission assists. He spoke of a Muslim from northern Syria who, like all men in areas that ISIS takes over, was coerced into joining the caliphate or being killed.Recruited into ISIS, he fled the country after his brother was killed in the fighting. Disillusioned with ISIS but still adhering to Islam and its teaching that Christians and Jews are unclean “pigs,” he went to Amman, Jordan, as he had learned that relatives there were receiving aid from Christians.The Muslim, whose name is withheld for security reasons, went to a Christian meeting with the intention of killing the aid workers gathered there. Something kept him from following through on his plan, though, and that night he saw Jesus in a dream, the ministry director said.“The next day he came back and said, 'I came to kill you, but last night I saw Jesus, and I want to know what are you teaching – who is this One who held me up from killing you?'“ the director said. “He received Christ with tears, and today he's actually helping in the church, helping out other people. We're praying for lots of such Sauls to change to Pauls.”The sorrow of the ministry team leader who lost eleven workers and one of their children last month has been deep, but he takes heart that their faithfulness could help change the hearts of persecutors.“They kept on praying loudly and sharing Jesus until their last breath,” he said. “They did this in front of the villagers as a testimony for others.”He asked for prayer for surviving family members and for himself.“These things have been very hard on me,” he said. “What wrong did those people do to deserve to die? What is happening is more and more people are being saved. The ministry is growing and growing – in the past we used to pray to have one person from a Muslim background come to the Lord. Now there are so many we can barely handle all the work among them.”Source:  Christian Aid Mission (www.christianaid.org), courtesy of ASSIST News Service (www.assistnews.net) 

What You Can Learn This Semester

Monday is the first day students can sign up for spring semester classes at DTS. Here's what I'm slated to teach:MW302 – Writing for Publication — How do you get your idea to a broader audience? With the help of Jed, my trusty teaching assistant, I'll show you. More than half of those with zero publishing experience usually get published before the semester even ends. This class fills fast, so hurry to register. Limited to 12 people.MW905 – Worship Arts in the Church — Brave the cold traveling to Grand Rapids in January for three days. Attend the Calvin Symposium on Worship, which focuses on integrating the arts into Christian worship. Complete reading, writing, and community assignments (e.g., share a house, discuss theology and the arts). Experience beauty. And boom. Three hours closer to graduation.MW905 – Calvin Festival: Writing & Writers — Travel to Grand Rapids in April for three days. Attend the biennial Calvin Festival of Faith and Writing conference. Meet top-tier authors—think winners of Pulitzers and National Book Awards—who write winsomely about faith. (Not necessarily Christian faith.) Complete reading, writing, and community assignments like sharing a house, reading a book in common, and discussing. And voila—three hours’ credit. This year's speakers include Christian Wiman (My Bright Abyss; listen to him here on NPR.)I'm also co-teaching a course with Dr. Gary Barnes on Sexual Ethics.If you're not a student at DTS, contact Admissions through the web site. 

Do Males "Image" God More Than Females Do?

Do male humans “image” God more than female humans image God?Both male and female were created in the image of God. Recall Genesis 1: “Then God said, ‘Let Us make adam in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule . . . God created adam in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (vv. 26–27).The image of God is male and female. One sex does not “image” God more than the other. And, in fact, male and female are interdependent. I once had a student who wept with joy when she learned this. She was single and thought she could image God only through association with a husband.We need each other. God made male and female to rule together, to multiply together, to use our gifts together, to build up the body of Christ together. How can we do a better job of building partnerships, celebrating his image in male and female?Why does 1 Corinthians 11 say a man is the glory of God, and a wife is the glory of man? Why is the wife not also the glory of God?  Let’s look at the verse: “A man [or husband] ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but [a] woman [or wife] is the glory of man [or of a husband]” (v. 7).First, note that is it only the “glory of God” here that is in question, not the “image of God.”Second, it’s important to see that the words “man” and “woman” here could just as easily be translated “husband” and “wife.” The Greek does not have such specific words to differentiate as does English, so only context tells which way to go.Translations differ here. But I suspect Paul intended man/wife. Here’s why….Based on what we know about hair being used as a covering (v. 15) in the first century, it’s likely that some wives were inadvertently shaming their husbands by wearing their hair down in public, probably as an expression of spiritual freedom. Perhaps this is the origin of the expression “let your hair down.” Wearing hair down for a woman, to the best of our knowledge, communicated that she was single.Similarly, some men (not just husbands) were probably shaming Christ by wearing their hair long and in a certain way—in girly looking ringlets—as an expression of freedom. Again, they were probably letting their hair down as an expression of freedom.Now, it was not a shame for a man to have any long hair per se. Think of Samson. Or John the Baptist. Or anyone keeping a Nazarite vow. But a certain kind of long hair was considered “unnatural” or shameful.Thus, one action (hers) suggested she was unmarried and available—like taking off a wedding ring; the other action (his) suggested he was trolling for boys.In what they were communicating with their heads, one shamed her head (her husband) while the other shamed his head (Christ).The result of the wife’s behavior, then, was that she was bringing un-glory to her husband. So she was bringing shame on the very person she was “made for.” And the man was bringing un-glory to Christ, when the glory of a man is supposed to be not a boy but a woman—the sex through which he came into the world.Assuming this is the case—and there is good evidence to understand Paul in this way—the apostle tells the wives in question that they ought to have authority on their own heads…not that they are to wear signs of authority (head coverings were not signs of authority), nor that they are to have signs of submission (head coverings were not signs of submission), but that the females ought to have or possess authority (in every other NT usage, this is what the construction “have authority” means) when it comes to what they are doing with their heads.And then immediately, lest these wives get a wrong attitude with all this authority, the apostle reminds them, “Nevertheless [contrastive], in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God” (vv. 11–12). Nice balancing act. There it is again: we need each other.All this to say, God made woman in his image. In this context Paul is talking about glory and shame. Some men were shaming Christ; some wives were shaming their husbands. And both should have been bringing glory to the very ones they were shaming. Thus, the play on words with “head.”Certainly females, like males, were made to glorify God and reflect the glory of God. Paul is simply doing plays on words by highlighting whom the wives and men are shaming in first-century Corinth.Is ruling for men only?  God created both male and female to rule (Gen. 1:26). He also made both to multiply. The idea that ruling is for men and multiplying is for women goes against what the text says. Male and female image God. We rule. We fill the earth. Together.Elsewhere, in 1 Timothy 5:14, wives are told to rule their households. Here is how some translations render the word:NAS: keep houseKJV: guide the houseASV: rule the householdINT:  manage the houseWarren Wiersbe reminds readers in his Ephesians through Revelation commentary that the word sometimes translated here as “keep,” or “guide” or “manage,” literally means “rule.” In fact, in the Greek, “oikodespotin” has the word “despot” in it.  Elsewhere “despotis” is translated as "authority," "master," and "owner." It is translated “master” of slaves in Titus 2:9, 1 Timothy 6:1, and 1 Peter 2:18. And the word is translated “lord” in Luke 2:29, Acts 4:24, and Revelation 6:10. One commentator notes, “It is interesting that the NASB translates the male context of the word as ‘head of the house,’ but the female context as ‘housekeeper.’” We all bring biases to the text, and translators are no exception.All rule of a home does not fall on the husband/father. Nor to the woman/wife. Women and men are co-rulers under God.Is submission only a “wife” word?All creatures—male and female—are called to live in submission to our Creator. In this sense, we were all “made” for submission. Not only are we to submit to God, but all believers are to submit ourselves to each other (Eph. 5:21), following the example of Christ, who came to serve, not to be served (Mark 10:45; Phil 2:7). Submission is not a solely “woman” word. Or a “wife” word. Submission is for humans.

A Day Helping Refugees

Today I'm happy to have guest blogger Jessica Stephenson, a DTS grad who works with refugees in the Midwest. Opening my Mouth (and Growing Hoarse) “Open your mouth for the mute,for the rights of all the unfortunate.Open your mouth, judge righteously,And defend the rights of the afflicted and needy.” (Proverbs 31:8–9)Aamina (all names have been changed) squinted at a piece of paper in front of her. On the paper my supervisor had scribbled Aamina’s name and address. Aamina, my supervisor (we'll call her May), and I were all sitting in the room around the telephone. Aamina, an illiterate refugee who arrived to the United States this spring, had applied for medical insurance, but her application had been delayed. Aamina needs medical insurance. She has a few health problems such as high blood pressure for which she needs medication and health care. We assisted Aamina in calling to inquire about the status of her application.The voice of a woman was on speakerphone. An interpreter was also on the line, and the conversation ebbed between English and Somali. The lady on the phone would not allow me or May to help speak on Aamina’s behalf.“I need you to spell your name for me.”Aamina stared at the paper that May had pushed in front of her, but she could not do it.“I need you to tell me your address.”Aamina stared at the paper again and explained that she could not read her address.“You should be able to tell me your name and address. If you cannot tell me your name and address, then I cannot help you,” said the voice on the other line.And that was that. I grunted, buried my hands in my face, and stomped the ground a bit with my feet. Once again, one of the voices of a refugee living in the United States had been muted.Oh, lady on the phone, I wish that you would bear with me patiently for a moment as I explain. Not everyone has had an opportunity to be educated as you have. Not everyone has had an opportunity to live in safety and to have the luxury to learn to read and write. Some people have been on the run for their lives, such as my 50-year-old friend Aamina.Oh, lady on the phone, I would like you to imagine the following for a moment: What if you had to move to Algeria tomorrow, to a brand new city that you had never heard of before. And what if I were only to give you your new address in the Arabic language and script, a language that you have never studied. Oh, lady on the phone, can you please read me your address? And if you cannot, I am so sorry, but I cannot help you. Click.Aamina is brand new to the United States, and the fact that she does not yet know English is not by fault of her own. In fact, this 50-year-old is braver than most. She has come to the Midwest to begin again, and although she is no longer a youth, she has started regularly attending ESL classes. This lady who used to write her “X” as a signature has now learned to write “A-A-M-I-N-A.” She is brave and courageous. She is finding her voice oh so slowly. Can you please have the compassion and empathy to bear with her and help her as she learns?This story of Aamina is only the beginning. Will you please bear with me as I continue? Will you take the time to understand as I give you a glimpse into the daily struggles that I am encountering on the job, as I learn the tiniest portion of what it means to open my mouth for the mute in the Midwestern US?The town where I work is troubled by a scarcity of housing. When I prepared to move here, I myself went through a list of a dozen complexes that all told me they would have to put me on the waiting list. But there is one landlord in the city who has an extensive list of vacancies. And that one landlord has refused to work with my organization in renting to our new arrival refugees, even though we have explained that we will pay the security deposit and the first month’s rent and will help the refugees to get jobs within a few weeks of arriving to the United States.So, what do I do when, for example, I have a family of six Burmese refugees slated to arrive to the United States in September after living 27 years in a refugee camp in Thailand? I needed housing for this family, and I needed it immediately! Praise God, May and I were able to find a man named Juan, a landlord with just a few different rental properties, who was willing to work with us in providing a place for this family.And I rejoiced in this little victory!The Ama family of six arrived on a weekend, and on the following Monday I took them to the administrative center in my town in order to help them put the water, electricity, sewage, and trash utilities in their name. And then, I heard the apology that I am getting rather used to hearing, “I’m so sorry, m’am, but we require two forms of identification in order to be able to open an account with us.”So, I give my spiel. “I understand, but these are legally admitted refugees. They have just arrived to the United States, and they only have one form of identification. They will get their other form of identification within 90 days, but they cannot wait that long to have running water and electricity. They need it today.”“Well, I’m really sorry. I am truly sympathetic, but…”“May I please speak with your supervisor?”And then the supervisor decided to allow the Ama family to open up a utility account.And I rejoiced in this little victory!But then, I needed to help the Ama family set up a gas account because the gas company is a separate entity. I knew trouble was coming, but I plunged in anyway.“I’m so sorry, m’am, but we require two forms of identification in order to be able to open an account with us.”So, I give my spiel all over again: “I understand, but these are legally admitted refugees. They have just arrived to the United States, and they only have one form of identification. They will get their other form of identification within 90 days, but they cannot wait that long to have a gas account. They need it today.”“Well, I’m really sorry. I am truly sympathetic, but…”“May I please speak with your supervisor?”This time the supervisor wasn’t ready to give me a final answer, but suggested that I fax them a letter explaining the situation. So, I faxed the letter to the gas company, and then I chatted with the Ama family for a bit.“Well, the good news is that you now have water, electricity, trash, and sewage services. The bad news is that I haven’t been able to get the gas turned on for you yet. This means that you may not be able to use your stove since it is a gas stove.”The woman in the Ama family looks at me and asks, “So how will we be able to cook?”That night I didn’t sleep well. I tossed and turned in my bed, and I thought about the Ama family and how something as simple as finding livable housing was turning out to be so difficult. It is hard and sometimes unpleasant opening my mouth for those who cannot speak for themselves. I felt the pressure weighing down upon me.In the morning I got a call from the gas company. It was the supervisor. She said that she had decided to allow us to open up a gas account for the Ama family. They would come sometime the following morning to the house to turn the gas on.And I rejoiced in this little victory!Each month, our little office of three staff will receive about thirty refugees arriving from refugee camps to the Midwest. So, imagine this little saga that I have detailed for you above multiplied about five times over this month.I am opening my mouth for these people, but I am just one voice among the 30,000 residents of the town where I work. We need more mouths—more mouths speaking for the disempowered and the mute, more mouths speaking for the afflicted and the needy coming to this country with little more than a small bag apiece.There is a disconnect. There is a disconnect somewhere between the federal government who has admitted these refugees to the United States and the local organizations (employers, landlords, utility companies, banks, etc.) who have made it nearly impossible for these newly arrived refugees to get up on their feet. These organizations apologize profusely that they cannot offer services because these newly arrived refugees do not fit nicely into their existing frameworks, policies, and guidelines.But these are legally admitted refugees.If these legally admitted refugees do not fit into the existing local frameworks, then it is these local frameworks that need to adapt and change.This is my voice. But sometimes it gets lost in the noise, and I find myself growing hoarse, worried sick about these people whose burdens I cannot carry on my own.But the Lord reminded me this week as I read and meditated upon Scripture, “But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary of doing good,” (1 Thess. 3:13). And “May the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the steadfastness of Christ,” (1 Thess. 3:5). And “'Now behold, I have made you today as a fortified city and as a pillar of iron and as walls of bronze against the whole land… They will fight against you, but they will not overcome you, for I am with you to deliver you,’ declares the LORD,” (Jer 1:18–19).And I am reminded through the Holy Spirit of that truth which I cannot afford to forget—that I am not alone and that there is a God who cares about justice even more than I do.

Is God More Male Than Female? Why Was Messiah a Male?

Is God more male than female?Of course not. Nor is he more female than male. God is spirit (John 4:24), so God has no sex. Father and Son are metaphors, not sexual identities.The early church never depicted the Father as a male human. But later...well...consider the Sistine Chapel’s “The Creation of Adam.” Michelangelo painted the Father as an old man with white hair and a long beard. But in earlier centuries, it was considered heretical to portray the Father in human form at all. Only Jesus could be depicted in art, because he did indeed come in human flesh. Matt Milliner, assistant professor of art history at Wheaton College spoke about this at Gordon College in 2013 in his presentation, ”Visual Heresy: Imaging God the Father in the History of Art.”In earlier Christian art, the Father’s presence might be depicted by gold that covers the entire interior of the ceiling (e.g., St. Mark’s Basilica in Venice), or by an empty throne or a hand. People thus thought of God the Father as spirit—invisible—rather than as male.About the time we began depicting the Father as a male human, we removed the Virgin Mary from our art. Many Protestants think Mary appeared all over pre-Protestant art because Roman Catholics worshiped Mary. But that is inaccurate. Pictures of the Madonna and Child were pre-literate (think “flannelgraph”) ways of representing the incarnation. This is why often the face of Christ in Madonna-and-Child images is not the face of a newborn, but of a more mature male. And often Mary was and is depicted as gesturing toward her Son, pointing to her redeemer.Mary had to be physically larger because she was an adult woman when the Spirit overshadowed her. But bigger is not necessarily meant to represent “preeminent.”All this is to say that we tend to imagine God as we have seen him in visual art. So once the Protestant church lost the Mary-and Jesus visual reminders of the incarnation, and we also incorporated male human images of the Father, we ended up imagining God as more male than female.Something similar happened when our knowledge of women in Church history disappeared. The Church in pre-Protestant times also set aside days for remembering the holy men and women from ages past. We still know and even celebrate a few of these…St. Valentine’s Day on February 14; St. Patrick’s Day on March 17; the feast of Stephen on which Good King Wenceslas looked out on December 26…. But in the past, people knew about Felicity and Perpetua and Catherine of Siena and Catherine of Alexandra and many other holy women, whom they remembered every year on their “days.” With the loss of these annual reminders, as Protestants emphasized that all Christians are “saints,” we lost even more of the female images in the Church.In Scripture, God is depicted as both male and female. Through metaphor and simile we get ideas about what the invisible God is like. “He” is a pronoun of personhood, not of sex identification—which is why we do not refer to God as “it,” even though he is spirit and not male human.In the pages of the Word, then, we see “him” depicted as a weaning mother (Ps. 131:2); as a woman looking for a lost coin (Luke 15:8ff); and as one who gives birth from above (John 3:3). Even as early as Genesis 1:2, we have the reference to the Spirit “hovering” over creation in Genesis 1:2—metaphorical language that calls to mind a mother bird incubating and nurturing her creation. In Exodus, God speaks of bearing his children on eagles’ wings (19:4). In Isaiah, he hovers like a bird on a nest (31:5). And both Matthew and Luke record Jesus telling Jerusalem he wanted to gather the city to himself like a mother hen.Why did the Messiah have to be a man?The text does not say. But think about it…. The Scriptures tell us Jesus was conceived by virgin birth through the power of the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18). So genetically, he had a human mother but not a human father. If the offspring of the divine/human union had been a female, the redeemer of all humanity would have been a female with only a human mother. Where would that have left men? Unrepresented! The virgin birth that resulted in a male Messiah involves the perfect participation of male and female in the redemption of all males and females. All humanity. Brilliant!

"No Greater Love" to Premiere at Boston Film Festival

 

No Greater Love World Premiere

31st Boston Film Festival

New England Aquarium (IMAX)

September 19, 2015 at 6:00 PM—Red Carpet Start Time

The documentary, No Greater Love, will premiere at Boston Film Festival 2015 at 6:30pm on the 19th of September, 2015. No Greater Love is a feature-length documentary film that tells the story of Chaplain (Capt.) Justin Roberts’s deployment to Afghanistan in 2010–2011 with the legendary “No Slack” Battalion, 101st Airborne Division. Justin was one of my Media Arts students at DTS, and from the first time I met him, I could see he had a gift for storytelling. One of his earliest films—produced with classmates in my Advanced Creative Writing course— was about how to write fiction. They amused themselves by including a close-up of my contraception book. . . . But I digress.U.S. Army chaplains do not carry weapons. Instead, Roberts went to combat with his guys carrying a camera so he could document hardships that the paratroopers endured. The 800-man battalion came home with more than 200 purple hearts (awarded for injuries sustained in combat) and suffered 18 casualties.Upon return, Roberts and his associates embarked on a journey around the U.S. to speak with the soldiers, and rally the unit together to heal old wounds. The first film they did was "The Hornet's Nest." Now this. . . .“I can’t make sense of everything that’s gone on in this war," Roberts said. "But I understood America so much more on the mountaintops of Afghanistan—what we stand for. People coming from all types of backgrounds, and all types of races and religions, and all of these different individuals coming together as brothers and sisters—I witnessed that, I saw that. I wish we could have that here somehow, and I don’t know how. But I understood America on those mountaintops. I was proud. I was honored.”Roberts’s combat footage is layered with honest, gritty, heartfelt interviews with the soldiers of “No Slack,” and the families of the fallen. This footage was shot in combat in Kunar Province, Afghanistan 2010–2011."No Greater Love" is directed by an active duty soldier, and it is told by the men he served with in their own words— what it’s was like to serve in Afghanistan, and what it’s like returning to civilian life after serving in combat. "This film is about what we fought for" said “No Slack” Infantryman and "No Greater Love" Production Assistant Sgt. Bob Evans.DTS is sending me to Boston for the premier. Another dear former student who just started a job at a church in Boston is hosting me for the weekend. Please say a prayer for Justin. A lot of what motivates this project is his heart to help people returning from war with both visible and invisible wounds.(At the end of the video, you will see a link to pre-order, which is broken. I'm not aware of a way to pre-order at this time.)