Gregory Koukl's Blog, page 77
October 2, 2014
Women and Christianity
Critics of Christianity consider it a patriarchal religion that relegates women to "second class citizens" at best. This isn't the case at all. Christianity values all humans equally, and the behavior and practices of the early church demonstrate that women were valued just as highly as men. And this was in stark contrast to the treatment of women in literally any other culture and religion at that time. Though the Bible teaches complementary roles in marriage, it elevated the status of women in marriage, placing equal value on each spouse. Christianity placed new obligations on husbands for the treatment of their wives and daughters. And this played out quite clearly in the early church.
Rodney Stark offers the evidence in his book The Triumph of Christianity (p. 144-154).
Because Jesus, the twelve apostles, Paul, and the prominent leaders in the early church in Jerusalem were all men, the impression prevails that early Christianity was primarily a male affair. Not so. From earliest days women predominated.
In his Epistle to the Romans, Paul begins with personal greetings to fifteen women and eighteen men who were prominent members of the Roman congregation. If we may assume that sufficient sex bias existed so that men were more likely than women to hold positions of leadership, then this very close sex ratio suggests a Roman congregation that was very disproportionately female. Indeed, the converts of Paul “we hear most about are women,” and many of them “leading women.” Thus, the brilliant Cambridge church historian Henry Chadwick (1920-2008) noted, “Christianity seems to have been especially successful among women. It was often through the wives that it penetrated the upper classes of society in the first instance.”…
The question persists, Why? The answer consists of two parts. First,…religious movements always attract more women than men…. Far more important is the second part of the answer, which suggests that Christianity was attractive to women far beyond the usual level of gender differences. Women were especially drawn to Christianity because it offered them a life that was so greatly superior to the life they otherwise would have led….
Christian writers have long stressed that Jesus’s “attitude toward women was revolutionary…. For him the sexes were equal.”….[R]ecent objective evidence leaves no doubt that early Christian women did enjoy far greater equality with men than did their pagan and Jewish counterparts. A study of Christian burials in the catacombs under Rome, based on 3,733 cases, found that Christian women were nearly as likely as Christian men to be commemorated with lengthy inscriptions. This “near equality in the commemoration of males and females is something that is peculiar to Christians, and sets them apart from the non-Christian populations of the city.” This was true not only of adults, but also of children, as Christians lamented the loss of a daughter as much as that of a son, which was especially unusual compared with other religious groups in Rome.
Of course, there is overwhelming evidence that from earliest days, Christian women often held leadership roles in the church and enjoyed far greater security and equality in marriage….
In Romans 16:1-2 Paul introduces and commends to the Roman congregation “our sister Phoebe” who is a deaconess “of the church at Cenchreae, that you may receive her in the Lord as befits the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a helper of many and of myself as well.” Deacons were important leaders in the early church, with special responsibilities for raising and dispersing funds. Clearly, Paul saw nothing unusual in a woman filling that role. Nor was this an isolated case or limited to the first generation of Christians….
Prominent historians now agree that woman held positions of honor and authority in the early Christianity….
The superior situation of Christian women vis-à-vis their pagan sisters began at birth. The exposure of unwanted infants was “widespread” in the Roman Empire, and girls were far more likely than boys to be exposed….Even in large families, “more than one daughter was hardly ever reared.” A study based on inscriptions was able to reconstruct six hundred families and found that of these, only six had raised more than one daughter.
In keeping with their Jewish origins, Christians condemned the exposure of infants as murder. As Justin Martyr (100-165) put it, “we have been taught that it is wicked to expose even new-born children… [ for] we would then be murderers.” So, substantially more Christian (and Jewish) female infants lived….
The Christian position on divorce was defined by Jesus….This was a radical break with past customs. A survey of marriage contracts going all the way back to ancient Babylon found that they always contained a divorce clause specifying payments and divisions of property and the cause of divorce need be nothing more than a husband’s whim…. But the early church was unswerving in its commitment to the standard set by Jesus, and this soon evolved into the position that there were no grounds for remarriage following divorce. In addition, although like everyone else early Christians prized female chastity, unlike anyone else they rejected the double standard that gave men sexual license. As Henry Chadwick explained, Christians "regarded unchastity in a husband as no less serious a breach of loyalty and trust than unfaithfulness in a wife.”
October 1, 2014
Gordon College Will Lose Accreditation over Behavioral Standards
Gordon College has been given 18 months to recant. If they do not change the standards for sexual behavior in their “life and conduct statement” (which prohibit “sexual relations outside of marriage” and “homosexual practice”), they will lose their accreditation*:
The higher education commission of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges met last week and "considered whether Gordon College's traditional inclusion of 'homosexual practice' as a forbidden activity" runs afoul of the commission's standards for accreditation, according to a joint statement from NEASC and Gordon College.
The commission asked Gordon College to submit a report next September. The report should describe the process by which the college has approached its review of the policy “to ensure that the College’s policies and procedures are non-discriminatory,” the statement said….
In its joint statement, NEASC and Gordon College called the review process a “period of discernment” that will take place over the next 12 to 18 months…. [The president of NEASC’s higher education commission] said the long time frame that Gordon College has been allowed for the review is appropriate considering that Gordon College's policy is "deeply embedded in the culture of the college" and such things "don't change overnight."
How reasonable of the commission to give Gordon College 18 months to come to terms with overturning the thousands-of-years-old Christian view of acceptable sexual behavior.
This 18-month reprieve is nothing but theater, of course. Gordon College will not convince the commission their standards are “non-discriminatory.” Gordon College will explain the difference between behavior and identity, between a person with same-sex attractions who agrees with the biblical standards and one who doesn’t, and the difference between banning a person because of his sexual orientation and banning particular behaviors among all students that go against the biblical view. And then the commission will reject it.
How do I know this? Because this is what happened earlier this year when Gordon College publicly argued for the “right of faith-based institutions to set and adhere to standards which derive from our shared framework of faith.” That controversy ended with the termination of their city contract to maintain Salem’s historical Old Town Hall and their student teachers being removed from public schools. Here’s what the college said then:
In our statement of faith and conduct we affirm God’s creation of marriage, first described in Genesis, as the intended lifelong one-flesh union of one man and one woman. Along with this positive affirmation of marriage as a male-female union, there are clear prohibitions in the Scriptures against sexual relations between persons of the same sex.
It is important to note that the Gordon statement of faith and conduct does not reference same-sex orientation—that is, the state of being a person who experiences same-sex attraction—but rather, specifically, homosexual acts. The Gordon community is expected to refrain from any sexual intercourse—heterosexual or homosexual; premarital or extramarital—outside of the marriage covenant. There is currently much debate among Christians about the nature and causes of homosexuality, and about a faithful Christian response to same-sex attractions, but we acknowledge that we are all sinners in need of grace, all called to redeemed humanity in Christ.
We recognize that students at Gordon who identify as LGBTQ or experience same-sex attraction have often felt marginalized and alone, and recognize the pressing need for a safe campus environment for all students.
That wasn’t enough then, and it certainly won’t be enough now. But it should be.
Setting standards for sexual behavior is not the same as discrimination against people because of their sexual orientation—it’s not discrimination against single people because of their heterosexual orientation, and it’s not discrimination against gay people because of their homosexual orientation.
Consider this: I can think of three names off the top of my head right now of people who have same-sex attractions (and are open about it) who support the boundaries Christianity sets around sexuality and write for esteemed and popular conservative evangelical Christian ministries and/or whose books I recommend: Nick Roen, Sam Allberry, and Wesley Hill. No one is interested in kicking them out of anything because of their same-sex attractions, because that is not the issue. The issue is whether or not they subscribe to and live by the biblical view of sexuality, not their sexual orientation. There is a relevant distinction between the two.
Therefore, just as having a sexual behavior standard for people with opposite-sex attractions is not an act of discrimination against heterosexual people, so having the same standard for people with same-sex attractions is not an act of discrimination against homosexual people. But the commission won’t see this because our culture is no longer capable of making a distinction between “sexual identity” and behavior.
Richard John Neuhaus’s thoughts on how “Identity Is Trumps” in our society give some insight into why behavioral standards will be tolerated less and less. He explains that when behavior is identity, “what we will do is what we must do”:
Here disagreement is an intolerable personal affront. It is construed as a denial of others, of their experience of who they are. It is a blasphemous assault on that most high god, “My Identity.” …
[T]heir demand is only for “acceptance,” leaving no doubt that acceptance means assent to what they know (as nobody else can know!) is essential to being true to their authentic selves. Not to assent is not to disagree; it is to deny their humanity….
Whatever the issue, the new orthodoxy will not give an inch, demanding acceptance and inclusiveness, which means rejection and exclusion of whatever or whomever questions their identity, meaning their right to believe, speak, and act as they will, for what they will do is what they must do if they are to be who they most truly are.
If Stand to Reason still has tax-exempt status in five years, I will be very, very surprised.
___________________
*From the U.S. Department of Education: “Accreditation is the recognition that an institution maintains standards requisite for its graduates to gain admission to other reputable institutions of higher learning or to achieve credentials for professional practice. The goal of accreditation is to ensure that education provided by institutions of higher education meets acceptable levels of quality.”
September 30, 2014
Links Mentioned on the 9/30/14 Show
The following are links that were either mentioned on this week's show or inspired by it, as posted live on the @STRtweets Twitter feed:
Ratio Christi
CrossExamined Instructor Academy
reTHINK Apologetics Conference
Clear Thinking Christianity – Tim Barnett's website
Insanity and Spiritual Songs in the Soul of a Saint – Mini-biography of William Cowper (a hymn writer and poet who suffered from severe depression) by John Piper
Accreditation board gives Gordon College a year to review policy on homosexuality – Boston Business Journal
Gordon College Will Lose Accreditation over Behavioral Standards by Amy Hall
Listen to today's show or download any archived show for free. (Find links from past shows here.)
To follow the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00–7:00 p.m. PT), use the hashtag #STRtalk.
Challenge: Use the Leftover Embryos for Research
This week’s challenge is about embryonic stem cell research:
I think abortion is wrong, and it saddens me to think that hundreds of thousands of leftover embryos are going to be discarded by IVF clinics or just kept frozen. Wouldn’t it be a more meaningful life for them (and better for society) to be used for scientific research that could benefit millions of people who suffer from diseases and disabilities rather than be wasted in death or an endless frozen state?
What would you say to a friend who challenged you with this? Do you have an answer? Tell us in the comments below, then we’ll hear Alan’s response on Thursday.
September 29, 2014
On an Old Earth View, How Are Neanderthals Accounted For?
Greg explains how neanderthals are accounted for and the difference between neanderthal and human souls.
September 27, 2014
Only One Thing Will Keep You Going
If you haven’t yet started thinking about how you’re going to deal with suffering and persecution (big or small), now is the time to do so. May God grant that the worst that will ever happen to you is that you encounter some angry comments on your Facebook page, but you may face more, and even little discouragements have a way of adding up. How will you deal with them?
I’ve been asking this question for a while now—reading books about people who have suffered, asking questions of people who face opposition, trying to understand how they continue to press on. And overall, the answer comes back to one thing: Those who know and love Jesus well, those who think He’s worth any price, persevere. I don’t think there’s anything else strong enough to keep us going—not a love for the truth, not a love for the lost, not a desire to make a difference, but only Jesus Himself.
If you want to persevere, that’s where your focus needs to be. Seek with all your might to know Jesus, trust Him, and depend on His power in your life and in the world.
Last night, in front of the White House, there was a prayer vigil for Saeed Abedini, a former Muslim turned Christian pastor from Iran (now also an American citizen) who has been imprisoned in Iran since 2012. This is an excerpt from a letter he wrote to his daughter on her 8th birthday:
I know that you question why you have prayed so many times for my return and yet I am not home yet. Now there is a big WHY In your mind you are asking: WHY Jesus isn’t answering your prayers and the prayers of all of the people around the world praying for my release and for me to be home with you and our family.
The answer to the WHY is WHO. WHO is control? LORD JESUS CHRIST is in control.
I desire for you to learn important lessons during these trying times. Lessons that you carry now and for the rest of your life. The answer to the WHY is WHO. The confusion of “WHY has all of this happened?” and “WHY your prayers are not answered yet” is resolved with understanding WHO is in control…LORD JESUS CHRIST, our GOD!
God is in control of the whole world and everything that is happening in it is for His good purpose, for His glory, and will be worked out for our good (Romans 8:28). Jesus allows me to be kept here for His glory. He is doing something inside each of us and also outside in the world. People die and suffer for their Christian faith all over the world and some may wonder why? But you should know the answer of WHY is WHO. It is for Jesus. He is worth the price. And He has a plan to be glorified through our lives.
It’s time now to learn the lesson Pastor Saeed wants his daughter to learn, and you can start here:
James Gray on Mastering the Bible (Yeah, I know I keep bringing this one up, but there’s a good reason for it!)
How Our Suffering Glorifies God
Be a Parable of God’s Grace
If God Is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil
September 26, 2014
Brett Kunkle on Youth Ministry
The reTHINK Conference for students starts tonight, so what better to post today than a video of Brett explaining his approach to youth ministry on the One Minute Apologist?
Brett discusses this in more detail in Bulletproof: Fortifying Young Minds with the Truth. And if you haven’t already found it, we have a page for parents on our website (teaching resources and curriculum ideas) and one for students (articles and videos that make a case for Christianity and respond to objections).
September 25, 2014
God's Clockmaker
Richard of Wallingford lived in the early 14th century. He was orphaned and went to live with the monks at St. Albans Abbey in Hertfordshire, England. The abbot must have noticed his good mind because he sent Richard to study at Oxford. Richard devoted himself to theology, math, and astronomy. He became abbot of St. Albans and was known for being strict and kind.
He was the first to introduce modern trigonometry to England in the papers that he wrote. Richard of Wallingford's signature achievement is the clock he built, which was the most advanced at that time. It showed the position of the sun, moon, stars, and tides.
Richard used the latest technology of his time and the most advanced astronomical knowledge, solving both practical and technological problems to design his clock. Some have suggested that it could be used as a planetarium by disconnecting the main drive. His escapement design is thought to be similar to a sketch found in Da Vinci's notebooks, but no where else. You can read more about the function of the clock here. Sadly, Richard wasn't able to complete his clock. He died of leprosy at the age of 44. It was completed 20 years after his death, but was destroyed during Henry VIII's reformation and dissolution of the abbey. His plans were discovered in the 1960s and replicas have been built.
Richard also invented an astronomical calculation device he called a equatorium that was able to predict eclipses.
September 24, 2014
"What Students Are Asking" Live Online Event
We're hosting our third annual reTHINK Student Apologetics Conference this coming Friday and Saturday. Not only do we hope to provide some solid answers to students' most pressing questions, we also hope to carve out some safe space for students to even ask those questions. Because we have the truth, Christians don't have to be afraid of any question or objection. Indeed, every objection to the truth will be flawed by its very nature. So we will welcome students' questions at reTHINK. However, in a short day-and-a-half conference we just won't have time to answer them all. That's why we've extended the Q & A beyond reTHINK.
On Thursday, October 2nd, from 6:30 to 7:30 p.m. (PT), we will continue to answer students' questions at our "What Students Are Asking" live online event. We'll take the most-asked questions from the reTHINK Conference and explore them a bit more. And we'll give those students who attended the conference a chance to interact with us and even ask more of their questions. You're invited as well (you can watch the event from the blog, YouTube, or Google+—see here for all the details), so grab your students and join us next Thursday.
