SO good, Amber! I love how clearly you point out how Jesus respected the selfhood of each and every person he met. It occurs to me, there's a powerful word used in the Gospels when a person's self is forced to submit to another self: Possession. And when Jesus encounters a person who is possessed, he frees them by casting that demon out! I'd never thought about that before, but seems like there might be something there related to what you're writing on. What do you think?
I especially applaud how you land with the importance of privileging Jesus over Paul, Peter, etc. That, I know for myself, was one of the shifts that changed my entire life--in a Christlike way! And, I have a hunch I'm not alone.
Your ending quote from Howard Thurman is so rich, deep, and beautiful. I could meditate on that for days and days and not come to the end of it! Thank you, Amber!
I know some think privileging the words of Jesus over other NT writings is the same as disregarding scripture for more culturally palatable views (picking and choosing). How blind and ironic! What is more culturally consistent than the powerful keeping power at the expense of others? What is more “worldly” from a global lens than males oppressing and controlling women? The critic who loves their three passages that appear to demote women under men fails to realize a poignant point about selling out to culture. Those writings were appeasing the culture of their time in order to slow down the subversive and revolutionary views of Jesus against culture - among many things, the equality of women. Jesus threw open the doors to a kingdom that undermined the power-class in all social models. The epistles were slow-stepping kingdom progress like leaven in the dough in first century localities. The pastoral solution to advancing the kingdom beyond taboo was finessing a dose of progress with a dose of cultural appeasement. However, the intention was to advance the kingdom (progress) not cement oppression. It’s not that Paul was wrong, but that our failure (2,000 freaking years later) to water the seeds of progress from bud to bloom has been wrong. We seem to “understand” this when the adults finally force change. For example, the Church dare not be literal any longer about slavery (although this theological change was conveniently adapted after being forced on southern churches through law). Unfortunately, history continues via stubbornness by employing the same exact exegesis and hermeneutics that allowed preachers to say with confident avarice, “slaves obey your masters.” These same processes just substitute “slave” and “master” with other terms. Like history, these models will continue even while limping and wheezing until they stop resonating with enough people to prop up men. Personally, I don’t want to be on the wrong side of scripture and/or history with these important issues of our day.
SO good, Amber! I love how clearly you point out how Jesus respected the selfhood of each and every person he met. It occurs to me, there's a powerful word used in the Gospels when a person's self is forced to submit to another self: Possession. And when Jesus encounters a person who is possessed, he frees them by casting that demon out! I'd never thought about that before, but seems like there might be something there related to what you're writing on. What do you think?
I especially applaud how you land with the importance of privileging Jesus over Paul, Peter, etc. That, I know for myself, was one of the shifts that changed my entire life--in a Christlike way! And, I have a hunch I'm not alone.
Your ending quote from Howard Thurman is so rich, deep, and beautiful. I could meditate on that for days and days and not come to the end of it! Thank you, Amber!
I know some think privileging the words of Jesus over other NT writings is the same as disregarding scripture for more culturally palatable views (picking and choosing). How blind and ironic! What is more culturally consistent than the powerful keeping power at the expense of others? What is more “worldly” from a global lens than males oppressing and controlling women? The critic who loves their three passages that appear to demote women under men fails to realize a poignant point about selling out to culture. Those writings were appeasing the culture of their time in order to slow down the subversive and revolutionary views of Jesus against culture - among many things, the equality of women. Jesus threw open the doors to a kingdom that undermined the power-class in all social models. The epistles were slow-stepping kingdom progress like leaven in the dough in first century localities. The pastoral solution to advancing the kingdom beyond taboo was finessing a dose of progress with a dose of cultural appeasement. However, the intention was to advance the kingdom (progress) not cement oppression. It’s not that Paul was wrong, but that our failure (2,000 freaking years later) to water the seeds of progress from bud to bloom has been wrong. We seem to “understand” this when the adults finally force change. For example, the Church dare not be literal any longer about slavery (although this theological change was conveniently adapted after being forced on southern churches through law). Unfortunately, history continues via stubbornness by employing the same exact exegesis and hermeneutics that allowed preachers to say with confident avarice, “slaves obey your masters.” These same processes just substitute “slave” and “master” with other terms. Like history, these models will continue even while limping and wheezing until they stop resonating with enough people to prop up men. Personally, I don’t want to be on the wrong side of scripture and/or history with these important issues of our day.