A woman’s highest calling
Tuesday, Sep 2, 2008
The discussion of Sarah Palin on the Republican ticket heats up the debate on woman’s roles. This didn’t happen with Hillary, but since Palin is a conservative and a mother of young children, liberals and conservatives alike are having fun with this new fodder for the debate. We’re talking about it around our dinner table. My email box is full of, “So, what say you on this Palin thing?” All of the sudden, my friends are wondering about the sanity of writing in Ron Paul or Mickey Mouse.
There are plenty of comment blogs having fun analyzing the strategy of what good men and women should do with their vote. I haven’t written in to those (yet), but I did want to finally write about something I’ve been meaning to for a long time. The Palin ticket just highlighted some of my friends boasting, “A woman’s highest calling is to be a wife and mother.”
This is not what the Bible teaches.
It is right to opine that the role of a wife and mother is one’s personal calling. It is also good to note that the occupation is normative when reading the Bible as a whole. I am a wife and mother. It is what God has called me to do. However, this is not true for all women. All women should NOT aspire to be a wife and mother. Instead, all women should aspire to present their bodies a living sacrifice to the Lord. God is glorified in us when we are satisfied with His will for our lives. This is why some marry, some stay single, some have children, and some are barren. Glorify God in your present circumstance, the one you are in right now, not in a future marriage that may or may not happen.
Paul counsels the unmarried to stay that way if they can do so without sinning in I Corinthians 7. If there were a “highest calling” award, it would be for the unmarried woman who is devoted completely to the Lord’s affairs:
An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
The Body of Christ is made of many believers. The Church universal is diverse, not entirely made of Western upper class families. As women (and men, but I am not referring to them), we can do God’s will in the middle of China’s one-child communist government and in poverty that requires all members of the family to work for their food. Any other gospel that makes the widow, the abandoned, the orphan, the poor, the single, or the barren unable to attain high favor (or a high calling with God, if you will) because of their circumstance is really no good news at all. The Lord is honored by our love and obedience to His Word, not in our ambition to serve in the “highest calling” as a wife and mother one day.
In the Kingdom economy, the first is last and the last is first. The greatest is a servant, and that is why I do not truly understand the propping up of the nobility of motherhood beyond what is reasonable. Superlatives are misguided here. A single woman who works as a janitor during the night shift—and does her work as unto the Lord—- she has the highest calling. Her reward is the greatest. The one who loves the Lord with her whole heart, soul, and mind—she is the one who pleases God. This is the good news– that no matter who you are, what you’re doing, or where you’re at—that faith in God and the work of His son Jesus Christ pleases Him.
Again, since we have to make life choices and not all choices are created equal, the Apostle Paul tells the young unmarried girls to aspire to serving the Lord, not a husband. The unmarried woman is concerned about the Lord’s affairs; the married woman is concerned about worldly affairs and pleasing her husband. Trust me on this, he’s right. Being a wife and mother is a good and noble thing, but it is not the highest thing.
275 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
« Previous: Now (?!) how will I ever get him to do school?
Next: Milking goats »
Return Home
Amen.
I am reminded to teach this point to my young daughters. It may be that God will call them to singleness or that they will be unable to have children. If all they have ever heard is that the highest calling is to have children, then they could be devastated.
Comment by Chris (September 2, 2008 @ 1:18 am )
[...] Amy’s thoughts here. « Google Calendar: A Great Help for Busy [...]
Pingback by What is a Woman’s Highest Call? at A Brick in the Valley (September 2, 2008 @ 1:24 am )
Oh Amy, thank you so much for that. I was blessed by this post.
Comment by Kat (September 2, 2008 @ 2:13 am )
Bravo Amy! Thank you for speaking honestly on this difficult subject.
Comment by Maureen E (September 2, 2008 @ 2:13 am )
YES!
you hit the nail on the head with this post.
thanks,
julie
Comment by julie (September 2, 2008 @ 2:22 am )
A breath of fresh air after perusing several blogs lacking in both mercy and grace toward anyone whom God has set on a life path different, and often more difficult, than their own. Thank you for courageously writing the truth.
Comment by Barbara (September 2, 2008 @ 3:37 am )
Good post, Amy — true for men as well as women, certainly.
I posted about my site about Deborah, who I’ve noticed quite a few conservative critics of Palin forgetting all about. Deborah held two high offices in Israel — that of judge and of Prophetess. She commanded the military. And God used her to bring a few decades of peace to the nation. And through all of that? She was a wife as well.
Comment by Rick Beckman (September 2, 2008 @ 3:39 am )
I edited my recent post to add a link to this one. I often say, if something is true Biblically, it can’t JUST be true for American Christians, but true for the church universal. Sometimes (most times) I think we forget that.
Comment by terry, ornament of His grace (September 2, 2008 @ 6:31 am )
Great post. This issue is so divisive among people (not just women-though women tend to be the most catty about it) in the church. I appreciate you posting about it.
I’ve actually decided to vote for McCain because he chose who he did, instead of writing in Ron Paul. I think she’s tremendous.
Comment by Kim (September 2, 2008 @ 6:45 am )
My husband and I were discussing just this thing about “calling” a week or so before Palin was chosen. It is so true and so few women really understand that simply doing what they are doing “in faith” is a higher calling than trudging along and being an unhappy homemaker and mother.
Thanks for saying it more could.
Comment by Jennifer Sabin (September 2, 2008 @ 7:23 am )
I wrote out a long comment to this but realized I didn’t want to steal your post. So what I will say is this - Sarah Palin is not single, nor barren so her calling has been motherhood. Once God blesses you with children then He is telling you that this is His will for your life. I agree not everyone is called to motherhood but the majority of us are.
And honestly, I am not sure if the post is stating that Palin should or should not be running for VP. I know I am not as knowledgeable about the Bible as some but one thing I know for sure is that Deborah came into office because out of lack of men stepping up, more as a punishment to the people that a women has to lead them because of the men not doing what they needed to do. If God uses Palins disobedience for His glory so be it but don’t try to sell me a pile of dung and tell me it is beautiful. It all still stinks.
Comment by Mrs. Damian Garcia (September 2, 2008 @ 7:30 am )
YES. thank you.
Comment by amy (September 2, 2008 @ 7:48 am )
Thank you for bathing us in the Scripture. I’ve only been visiting your blog for a few months, so I haven’t been around long enough to know your views on such issues. Today I’m blessed by your writing and anew by the Word. Thank you! Taking it back to Scripture - to the Truth.
Comment by Tami (September 2, 2008 @ 7:49 am )
Good job, Amy. Following Christ wholeheartedly in the place He has called us to be is our “highest calling.” Looking forward to reading the debate…
Comment by Petersonclan (September 2, 2008 @ 8:21 am )
Thank you Mrs. Garcia - I had all the same thoughts…
Comment by Anonymous (September 2, 2008 @ 8:23 am )
Now wait just a minute.
I am just fine with you being humble, Amy, but now you’re humbling me.
I’m kidding. (Sort of.) This post is wonderful, and humbling, but that’s a good thing.
Comment by Jeana (September 2, 2008 @ 8:24 am )
Palin has certainly taken a stance about being prolife where many male politicians hedge around about there true stance. I believe many people including women have endless amounts of energy, and ability to accomplish more things in their lives then others. Palin is more than likely a woman with this energy and ability. It’s not like she is raising her own food and animals, has to sew her clothes etc. With God’s help in her life and His direction she may be able to handle job and family.Blessings.
Comment by Abiga/karen (September 2, 2008 @ 8:35 am )
I agree with everything you said– but I’m not sure how this post is germaine to the discussion of Sarah Palin being vp since she is already a mother. Just wondering.
Comment by Michelle- This Ones for the Girls (September 2, 2008 @ 8:35 am )
Thank you for this post. I’m trying not to cry as I read it. Even as a mom of three who stays at home and home schools them, I applaud any woman who is obeying the Lord–where ever He leads her. And her path, if it is from the Lord, does not have to look like mine to be right!
Comment by Hannah (September 2, 2008 @ 8:48 am )
Thank you Amy. As an infertile woman for 11 years, I was constantly fighting this idea that I was less Godly because I wasn’t a mother. God never calls us to something and then makes us unable to achieve it.
I would like to agree with Mrs. Garcia on only one point (only one): Deborah is not the strongest example to use. I think a stronger example is the Proverbs 31 woman, who trades with merchants and purchases land and while it says that she feeds and clothes her children, it also says she has servant girls to help her do those things.
My personal struggle with Sarah Palin is only one of authority - does God permit women to hold civil authority, but not clergical. I’m waffling on that one. I just don’t know.
Comment by Coralie Cowan (September 2, 2008 @ 8:53 am )
“Being a wife and mother is a good and noble thing, but it is not the highest thing.” I agree. I am a stay-at-home Mom and I love it, but I’ve always wondered what I could do to bring in more money. I wouldn’t be the head of the household, I would just be helping my husband on the bills.
When people started talking about Palin saying she needed to be at home with her kids, not Vice President, (Lord willing), I started thinking like Mrs. Damian Garcia, who said in a previous post that Deborah in the Bible took that stand because the men weren’t doing their job. I know I have been told by various preachers that a woman shouldn’t be president, preachers, but you see women preachers, senators, governors, etc. If God is using them in that field, then let them do their job. She will take care of her kids, too. Lots of times, especially in these days, you can see where men are not doing their jobs like they should, so the women have to take over or help out. Maybe a woman in the White House is what we need for our country to get back on the right track.
Comment by Cassie (September 2, 2008 @ 9:05 am )
VERY well said, Amy. I, too, have been troubled by those who are saying that being a mother is a woman’s highest calling. (And you KNOW how much I esteem motherhood!)
Comment by Holly (September 2, 2008 @ 9:10 am )
It seems as though the superlative phrase “the highest calling” has come about in response to our culture encouraging women to seek out careers and their independence. These women then seem to find their family’s as hindrances instead of priority. This is very sad to me, however I think we as conservatives have once again knocked things off balance to say a woman can never have a career or remain single. Thanks for bringing this out. As a young woman seeking God’s will, having not chosen a career (nor am I a wife), its important for me to be reminded as I make decisions, to do ALL for the glory of God–I can’t go wrong!
Comment by Kaylene (September 2, 2008 @ 9:23 am )
I agree whole-heartedly even though I have been guilty of this lind of thinking in the past. However, I think Palin has already been called to do the job of raising her children and being a help-meet to her husband. From what I understand, her husband quit his job to stay home with the children. While I can’t think of a scripture that specifically says not to do this, I can see how this would be hard for a woman to be the VP of the United States and then ’submit to her husband.’ With the latest news that her 17yo daughter is pg it doesn’t sound like things are going all that smoothly at home. If things were ‘going to pot’at home for a male leader wouldn’t that make someone at least question his ability to lead a nation? Why, then, wouldn’t we question it for a woman? She could be one of the greatest leaders this nation has known and yet if her family falls apart should it be worth it to her? I haven’t read anything that says Palin feels this is her calling from God so if someone has a link to that I would be interested in reading it.
Comment by Amanda (September 2, 2008 @ 9:27 am )
I think it’s funny that other people think they know what Palin’s calling is.
But back to the point — great post.
Comment by Nichole (September 2, 2008 @ 9:40 am )
Very interesting, Amy. I’ve also been thinking that the Lord may be using Sarah Palin to draw attention to the holocaust, not just of unborn babies, but particularly those with Down’s Syndrome. We are exterminating over 80% of these children. I am an aide on a special needs school bus and I can tell you that these are the easiest people in the world to love. Sometimes I wonder if they’re not the “normal” ones and there’s something wrong with the rest of us. I mean, it’s like declaring war on ladybugs or koala bears. These are precious children of God and we are just filling the dumpsters with them. I can’t say whether it’s God’s will whether Mrs. Palin stays home with her kids or not, but I know that it definitely is His will that we save these babies and if her being in the spotlight will facilitate that, how can that not be His will?
Comment by Barbara (September 2, 2008 @ 9:42 am )
Finally! Someone in the reformed camp that isn’t taking verses and “callings” out of context. You are always so well thought out Amy and I so appreciate your willingness to take on extremely controversial subjects.
Comment by Michelle (September 2, 2008 @ 10:00 am )
But Barbara, isn’t this sweet little Downs Syndrome boy going to need his mama while she’s on the campaign trail or helping to run the country? how much time will she have for him, i’m all for woman stepping imnto these roles but i was just wondering….spoken by a mom of 5 special needs kids and 1 spec needs grandson.
Comment by Marie Wettlaufer (September 2, 2008 @ 10:01 am )
Some good points Amy. I do think Motherhood is a high calling in the context of our culture, but so is Fatherhood. These may not be the highest callings in the Bible so to speak but they are certainly high callings within our particular period in time and the particular battles we are facing. If we were at war with an enemy and in particular need of men willing to fly bombers, then volunteering to be a bomber pilot would be a high calling. We could make the mistake of forgetting to recognize that the fellow putting gas in the bomber is ultimately helping to win the same battle.
Signed,
Still a Ron Paul Man
P.S. Ron Paul MN thing will be streamed live on C-SPAN today
Comment by Ethan (September 2, 2008 @ 10:02 am )
Amen.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 2, 2008 @ 10:11 am )
I agree with you Amy … great thoughts! I still have a problem with any woman having authority over a man. Also, since she IS a wife/MOTHER, I’m not certain running for VP is necessarily the best idea. However, since the Lord Himself is not running, I will be voting for McCain/Palin.
Comment by Theresa (September 2, 2008 @ 10:11 am )
Just to clear up what I wrote…
Yes. I agree. The question that creates the divide is, can a woman be a mother and….? The only one who can answer that for Palin is Palin. Remember, she doesn’t do laundry, cook meals, scrub floors, check homework, and on and on.
On the subject of the pregnancy, it is nothing but arrogance to assume the reason your own children haven’t been found in sin is because of your own good parenting. It is grace. It is the work of the Lord that keeps us all from stumbling.
I am not doing either. She stands before God on her own. I do not think it’s my business to speculate on whether or not she can run the country and submit to her husband at home. It’s pure speculation for people to say so. I believe and affirm God’s created order. When people meet my husband and I and get to know our personalities, they can possibly assume that I wear the pants in the family. This is so far from the truth. Sarah Palin is a public figure and therefore is subject to public scrutiny, but I got out of the business of telling people what was pleasing to God and “in His will.” I suppose I’m a radical that way. David danced before the Lord naked, and we’d all surely blog that He wasn’t in God’s will.
My only thoughts on Palin are this: I’m not sure Palin’s “goodness” outweighs McCains “badness.” McCain picks the supreme court judges, not Palin. McCain can use her to secure the evangelical vote–and you know we evangelicals love a good cause–and then dump her in a corner with a dunce hat. You know I’m a cynic.
Those are my only thoughts I haven’t seen yaked about yet.
I’m not doing that. My point still stands that a woman should be happy in the calling that is hers. I’m not telling you who to vote for. I still haven’t decided myself.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 2, 2008 @ 10:14 am )
From what I understand, her husband quit his job to stay home with the children. While I can’t think of a scripture that specifically says not to do this, I can see how this would be hard for a woman to be the VP of the United States and then ’submit to her husband.’
Comment by Becky (September 2, 2008 @ 10:17 am )
Amy, as usual your writing is refreshing, full of grace, a mirror in which we can examine ourselves. You are so in tune to the Holy Spirit. Thank you for this post.
Comment by Caroline (September 2, 2008 @ 10:20 am )
Sorry Amy! I completely screwed up the block quote feature on my post (#32). I meant to put a block quote around the first paragraph (from comment #24) and instead put it around my own comment! I’m new to this (as if you can’t tell!).
Comment by Becky (September 2, 2008 @ 10:21 am )
I do not feel it is arrogance to look at someone’s home-life when deciding their leadership abilities. But as someone who was an unwed mother at the age of 17 myself, I know that the state of my life and my siblings was certainly a reflection of our home-life. I don’t think we would be called arrogant for looking at a man’s family life. I certainly question McCain on his past infedility and current marriage to his mistress. Truthfully, I would have a hard time voting for McCain even if Ron Paul were his running mate (although he wouldn’t be caught dead running as his VP). I’ll be writing Ron Paul’s name in, btw.
Comment by Amanda (September 2, 2008 @ 10:24 am )
I will admit that while my heart leaped for joy when I read of Palin’s strong pro-life message, it also sank as I thought of all the “motherhood moments” she would miss. I treasure those moments and I could not take on such a demanding job as VP and still fulfill my calling to motherhood.
But maybe SHE can. And while it would make for some interesting dynamics, I don’t know why she couldn’t submit to her husband within marriage and still be VP.
As for comment #24, I also used to think that a teenage pregnancy meant the parents must have done something wrong. Now I’m convinced it’s not that simple. God have mercy on all of us!
Comment by Amy Flanegan (September 2, 2008 @ 10:26 am )
I agree with this in the home and church sphere but not in the civil sphere. The context of our headship instructions are home and church.
I have authority over my property manager. He is a man. An older man. I tell him what to do and he does it. I am his boss. He receives a paycheck from me. I get on his case and hound him to do stuff that he drags his feet in doing. There is an definite order there. I am in charge and he does what I tell him.
Now I am out of God’s will? I do not believe so. Speaking of, I need to call that guy when I get done here.
To be consistent, a women should never hire a male carpet cleaner to fluff her upholstery.
Hey, thanks for keeping it fun here, ya’ll.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 2, 2008 @ 10:28 am )
Thank you. What is good for one is not good for all. And not all are mothers. Thank you for expressing your feelings with scripture.
Comment by Angela (September 2, 2008 @ 10:30 am )
I agree. It was relevant with Bill Clinton and it is relevant now. It is the speculation that I disagree with. “She can’t possibly submit to her husband while running the country….” etc.
I said earlier that I don’t know who I’m voting for. My blathering about the point above was just to keep discussion on track.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 2, 2008 @ 10:34 am )
I agree, Michelle. I’m in the “Reformed camp,” but I almost can’t read some of the blogs of those who are. The harsh language that is spewed (trust me, that is an appropriate word–just read some of them) is enough to make me want to shower after I read them.
I’m not sure that I’ll vote for McCain (he has never been a fave of mine), but I won’t vote for Obama, for sure, so it’s not that I’m panting because Palin is his running mate. That’s a far crym though, from teeing off on them in a public forum that is supposedly Christian.
Amy, your voice of reason is why I love ya so!
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 2, 2008 @ 10:34 am )
Thank you. What a trap that is to fall into. My kids are still really little, yet when they mess up I look at myself and think what am I not doing right? And when they do good, I look at myself and say I’m doing pretty good! But that only burdens me with things that belong to the Lord. I can only do my best to ‘train him up in the way he should go’ and neither curse nor brag on the outcome.
Comment by Lucy (September 2, 2008 @ 10:34 am )
Good point, Ethan.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 2, 2008 @ 10:37 am )
Amy,
I went back to read the comments that I missed and I found that you said the same thing that I began to write in my earlier comment, but deleted for the sake of brevity (I know, big surprise).
If your kids grow up to love Jesus and serve Him, praise God–alone–and give Him ALL the glory and credit. You are a sinful parents raising sinful children, so there’s no telling what could happen!
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 2, 2008 @ 10:42 am )
Amy,
Thank you for this. You have no idea how encouraging this is to me.
Blessings,
~Amy
http://amyiswalkinginthespirit.blogspot.com
Comment by Amy in Surprise (September 2, 2008 @ 10:55 am )
I avoid graceless blogs like the plague.
But yours, Amy, is always grace-filled. Thank you for shining light on God’s truth — and for pouring grace on the gray areas. Mrs. Palin doesn’t need to answer to anyone but God about what she (and her family) have chosen to do.
Comment by Kelly @ Love Well (September 2, 2008 @ 11:04 am )
I cannot speak to where God has called anyone except me. I am a mom, we got pregnant very early on in our marriage. Over that short time I realized that the man I courted was not the man I married. While I have chosen to remain married, I have also chosen not to have more children in this marriage.
I am self-employed and have more freedom to include my, now 17 year old, daughter in the business world. My life isn’t as balanced as I would like it to be, but I truly believe that I am called to this work.
I do not even Ms Palin the task of being balancing all of the hats she is choosing to wear, but I cannot say that I know she shouldn’t be running for VP.
I have often wondered if anyone who is willing to be transparent and down to earth could be elected these days. I guess I will know in November.
Comment by Jan (September 2, 2008 @ 11:06 am )
Well said, Amy. I discussed this topic of “highest calling” on my blog as well last evening. I’m glad to find myself in good company.
Great point about not hiring a man to clean the carpets! LOL!
Comment by sallie @ a quiet simple life (September 2, 2008 @ 11:11 am )
[...] A Woman’s Highest Calling [...]
Pingback by A Quiet Simple Life » Blog Archive » More on a woman’s highest calling (September 2, 2008 @ 11:33 am )
I’m stoked that so many people know exactly God’s will for Sarah Palin! Could they come to my house and tell me what God’s will is for me, too? ‘Cuz there are days, really, when I’m like: dude, I need some major clarity?
It would be fantastic to be 100% certain about everything.
Oh, wait. Then I wouldn’t need faith. Or grace.
Nevermind.
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 2, 2008 @ 12:02 pm )
Bwwahahahaha!! Good one, Elizabeth! (uh, I think I’m maybe having one of those days this morning!)
~Brea
Comment by Brea in Texas (September 2, 2008 @ 12:14 pm )
Comment 35 said, “I certainly question McCain on his past infedility [sic] and current marriage to his mistress.”
Tragic and true enough–and the exact same thing is tragic and true of David and the mother of the King whose Proverbs we look to for wisdom every day.
What I appreciate most here, Amy, is the same thing I always appreciate about your writings–humility. Who are we to say what God is doing with Palin?
Now…if she starts setting up golden calves or Asherah poles, then we’ll have a different discussion.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 2, 2008 @ 12:36 pm )
Thank you for this post. As a barren wife, I often feel like a second-class member of the church (even though I know that no one intends that). I understand that the rhetoric of “motherhood as highest calling” comes out of a good desire to counter the messages of our culture that devalue motherhood, but as you point out, I think we conservative American Christians often go too far to the other extreme. There’s got to be a way for the church to support and encourage mothers in their difficult work without belittling women whom the Lord has place in different circumstances. It’s refreshing to hear someone who is a stay-at-home wife and mother recognizing these things and speaking up.
Comment by andrea_jennine (September 2, 2008 @ 12:43 pm )
Amen Amy - to your post and to your comment. I agree with you
As a young mom with just one 18-month old, I have a lot to learn about parenting, but I hope I will remember when my child (and future children) are grown that whatever good is there is there but by the grace of God.
And you are radical, which is why I hang around your blog.
Comment by shannon (September 2, 2008 @ 1:06 pm )
Amen!
Comment by Marian (September 2, 2008 @ 1:12 pm )
Amen and thank you!
(from a mom of 7)
Comment by Laurel (September 2, 2008 @ 1:19 pm )
I, too, have been disappointed by many (other) writers whom I usually respect, who have joined in the judgemental, arrogant and venomous words against Palin and her family - missing the forest for the trees by staring at a few verses while ignoring many others.
I am with you fundamentally, but I think I disagree with your word choice in the original post.
Prov 31:29 “Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all,” appears to teach that wife and mother ARE the most noble (ie “highest calling”)- but not the ONLY noble things.
A king or pastor are worthy of higher honor; use the phrases you want, but these to are “higher callings,” and not all of us are called to them. MOST are not called to them. Yet this does not make me any less in God’s will if my calling is to be an obedient single street sweeper. Nobility is about raising someone else up, not about putting others below ourselves.
As Jesus said in Luke, “To whom much is given, much will be required.” If you are blessed to have a ‘higher calling’ it is because God gave it to you, not that you earned it. God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.
To finish Proverbs 31, it should be noticed that v. 30 says “a woman [not just wife, not just mother] who fears the LORD is to be praised.” I, too, have strong feelings and convictions about biblical roles, but we - men like me included - should follow v. 31 and “Give her the reward she has earned,” instead of unwaranted judgement and condemnation.
PS- Not like he needs it, but I’ll vouch for Greg’s “real man, real husband” credentials…
Comment by Eric Peterson (September 2, 2008 @ 1:48 pm )
Yes. Yes. Yes! Thanks so much for writing this post!!!
Comment by Pam (September 2, 2008 @ 2:03 pm )
[...] looking forward to hearing Amy Scott’s thoughts on the subject. She finally weighs in with “A woman’s highest calling.” The Palin ticket just highlighted some of my friends boasting, “A woman’s highest calling is to [...]
Pingback by Thoughts On Palin « And I Will Lift My Hands (September 2, 2008 @ 2:04 pm )
Thank you Amy. You have a way of making me think about the issues at hand and usually you point me back to Christ and the Word.
I’m still struggling with the fact that her children will be without her for most of the day or for many, many days if she is travelling. This sincerely makes me sad. But as many (in other posts) have noted they are used to that because she has always worked outside the home. Just something I am working through in my own mind.
Comment by Janet (September 2, 2008 @ 2:59 pm )
Good points!
I was surprised and shocked last Friday about the pick of Palin.I think the biggest thought was she was going to be the Hillary of the Republican party.After reading about and even the part about her daughter I can say she won’t be -very different. Just think we could have our first woman presdient if McCain wins and something happens while he is president.
Comment by Tammy (September 2, 2008 @ 3:22 pm )
I agree Amy. As mothers we are working ourselves out of a job but not out of God’s best, God’s highest for us as his daughters.
It seems obvious to me that is God who has raised up Palin for a time such as this. Compare her with Hillary who made it her life’s ambition to be president and is now sitting on the bench. Palin was a PTA mom. She started locally (small) just trying to do the right things. Who knew her? Who saw her? Who cared?
God. If His hand is in this, His plan is perfect for her and her kids.
Jenifer
Comment by Jenifer (September 2, 2008 @ 4:04 pm )
Oh, Amy, I do SO agree with what you said up there. My sis is a single woman and she has been able to do things I would never be able to do as a wife and mother -like spend months on end doing volunteer nursing in a clinic in Africa and such. She meets so many needs and honors God just where she is!
However, Palin is not a single woman with no children and I can’t help but notice that she has several family members that need her right now as she launches off into a 2 month campaign trail while her family is being dragged (with much embarrasement on Bristol’s part, I’m sure) into the spotlight. I am all for women serving God in whatever way He asks us to, but I honestly do believe that if we are mothers with young children at home, we need to be VERY careful and prayerful about what we add to our plates. The VPresidency of the US seems to be a little much given the circumstances…with a new baby herself, and new grandbaby to a young daughter who will need the instruction of an older woman…I’m just not seeing the godly wisdom in any of it.
I already blogged about it so I won’t go into all my thoughts here, but I do appreciate and agree with what you said up there.
BTW, congrats on your new place. It looks dreamy:).
Comment by tonya (September 2, 2008 @ 4:12 pm )
I do agree with most of your thought on this matter Amy, but I strongly agree with both Mrs. Garcia and Tonya (comment 63). In addition she also seems to not just be pushing good things like gun rights and pro-life rights, but also a staunch feminist agenda. I won’t bore you with the details in case you aren’t interested, but if you are just do a search for some of her quotes and you will find that she most likely has a dog eared copy of “The Feminine Mystique” as she sounds much like the author.
Comment by Candace (September 2, 2008 @ 4:32 pm )
It all makes me think of jr high and how everyone was supposed to be the same. Dare to be different and everyone puts you down. Dare to be beautiful, smart, or anything special and everyone’s jealousy causes them to hate you.
If she isn’t vp, she’s not going to suddenly be a stay home mom. And who says her kids are suffering now? I think if I only had 5 kids and didn’t homeschool them that I would have time to do more outside the home. Probably not vp, but that’s really not my thing.
Do we have a presidential candidate to consider, along with a vp, who is perfect and has perfect children? I’m not finding anyone that fits that bill, but let’s look at who could do the job best AND is willing to do it.
Great post, Amy!
Comment by Melissa (September 2, 2008 @ 4:37 pm )
I haven’t come out in support or against Palin, so I’m not sure what there is to disagree with me regarding Palin about–except if you’re judging me for not being judgmental enough.
I am usually a hot head, forgive me, but I’m learning to think through a matter before blathering about it, especially if I were to publicly “take down” a fellow believer. I’m not saying “off with her head!” nor that I’m pulling the lever. She’s my kind of girl, errors or not.
Eric, I’m thinking about what you said. My gut reaction is that the author is praising Mrs. P31 for her virtue, not her occupation itself. (Tell Carri I forgot to give her the onions! Argh.) I will consider it some more though.
And note to all, sorry for my grammatical errors in the post. I wrote it at midnight. What that says about my other errors at other times, well, I have no comment.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 2, 2008 @ 4:45 pm )
I absolutely disagree with Palin taking on this position with our government. Never mind her lack of international experience or her “excellent voting record” (not so excellent when you consider Alaska’s population). She has a four-month old child with Down’s Syndrome. Try as I might, I cannot possibly justify being supportive of her as McCain’s running mate. Plus, she’s under investigation by her state for her involvement in the firing of a state trooper. Is this a woman that you can see as president someday? That baby needs her, not a 17-year old pregnant girl to hold him and raise him. And that girl needs her mother, too. It would be one thing if Palin were their grandmother. But she’s their mother. Her milk is still coming in, for crying outloud. It’s one thing to go back to work with a young baby when you’re an accountant or teacher. But when you’re vice president of the United States? With Iraq and a failing economy, and numerous other concerns? I certainly admire her strength, but I question her reasons for accepting this opportunity.
Comment by CB (September 2, 2008 @ 4:52 pm )
It’s my understanding that the places we are to be subject to men are in the home and the church. I think I read Elisabeth Eliot on this. That said, I also read Karen Hughes’ book about how demanding the presidency is and because of her experience, I plan to pray daily and passionately for Sarah, Todd, Track, Bristol, Levi, Piper, Willow, and Trig.
I don’t know them, but I do want to help them bear their burdens in the only way I can.
Comment by Sonatamom (September 2, 2008 @ 5:07 pm )
Such good words, Amy.
They brought to mind the account of Mary and Martha (neither of whom are described in Scripture as either wives or mothers)…
We get so off track when we put anything else in that “highest” place, when we forget that Jesus Himself should be our ONE THING no matter who or where we are in life.
Comment by emily (September 2, 2008 @ 5:24 pm )
Sonatamom,
Not to “men”, but to your husband, who in turn should be subject to the elders of your church. However, assume you are elected President of the United States, and you are about to sign a bill which outlaws homeschooling. Your husband prohibits you from signing the bill because he insists that your children be homeschooled. Quite frankly you have never liked the idea but have always submitted to his will. What do you do? How do you explain your decision to your husband, your electorate? A single woman with no children could face the same situation with the elders in her church. The home/church/civil realm breaks down very quickly if you think about it.
Comment by Ethan (September 2, 2008 @ 5:59 pm )
thank you for this post:)
Comment by Rachel (September 2, 2008 @ 6:02 pm )
Palin’s family might just become an outstanding national example on how a family should handle the tragedy of teen pregnancy, it happens every day (does not make it right of course), with love and grace. (pro-life lived out, as well)God turns things around and can use anything for betterment. and Yes. who says that women need to aspire to only one “high calling” and who says that one high calling is motherhood? thank you for lifting condemnation. We are called to do whatever has been placed before us,whatever we have before us to do, to our best, as unto Christ.
Comment by Rachel (September 2, 2008 @ 6:09 pm )
“Trust me on this, he’s right. Being a wife and mother is a good and noble thing, but it is not the highest thing.”
True enough. But motherhood is a calling which can’t be ignored and worthy of respect just like the Vice Presidency. Sarah Palin risks disrespecting both. I wrote a bit about that on my blog, but to summarize my point;
As mothers, we want to know that our leaders are confidently watching the world, so that we can peacefully rock our babies baby to sleep.
The old saying goes, the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, but do we want the hand that rules the world to be rocking the crade in the middle of the night?
Comment by Spunky (September 2, 2008 @ 6:14 pm )
On this post you wrote:
Aw, yeah, baby.
[Said in my most coolest of voices].
Well said.
When we start telling men who have kids that they can’t do anything but be a Dadddy, then I’ll listen to the folks who say women with kids can’t do anything but be a Mommy.
Or, what, do we think motherhood is more important than fatherhood? Why is it okay for Dad’s to be Vice President but not Moms? Why the different standards? I thought we were supposed to be supportive of fathers. But it sounds to me like we don’t think that fatherhood matter all that much.
And if we’re going to bring the Bible into the game, then how about bringing all of it. I don’t recall a lot of talking going on in Proverbs 31 about how this amazing woman mothered her children, other than the fact that the kids seemed proud of her.
The passage, on the whole, spends very little time talking about her mothering skills and rather a whoooole lot of time talking about things this gifted woman accomplishes (all NOT things the family needs because it’s on the brink of starvation, but rather things that she was just working hard at accomplishing).
And what’s up with Jesus. He forgot to read some of the Biblical Family blogs, I guess. I mean, He had married women making up part of His band of disciples. They left their husbands and homes unattended while travelling around with Christ, and He didn’t send them home or seem very concerned about their non keeper-at-home status. (Either the Word Himself forgot His written Word, or perhaps we’ve misinterpreted some of those words…).
Shameful admission: Forget writing in Mickey Mouse. I mean, after reading all the posts on the internet loudly horrified about the audacity of a woman running for VP, I confess to being ready to write in Hillary Clinton for President. *grump, grump, grump*
Bottom line:
Let’s let Sarah Palin and her family decide whether or not God’s called her to run for VP or not, and keep our noses busy with the business of our own homes.
Good grief.
Your opinionated and annoyed friend who’s doing her best to try for gentleness,
Molly
Comment by Molly (September 2, 2008 @ 6:40 pm )
I believe that as Christians, our highest calling is to follow Jesus. I do believe that if a woman *is* a wife and mother, then serving in that capacity is her highest (earthly) calling. In other words, once she is in those roles, all other roles that she may be required (or may choose) to fulfill must be subservient to the calling of being wife and mother. Nothing else matters more than that. To my way of thinking, that does not mean she can never be anything else, it just means those two endeavors must not suffer for her other interests or pursuits.
I do not agree that women should never be in authority over a man…I don’t see how that is Biblical. We are instructed on the order of the home and the order of the church. Before I went a little crazy and bought a big yard, I used to have a yardman take care of my lawn. I gave him very detailed instructions each time he showed up to work. I was, for all intents and purposes, his boss.
Now, having said that…I *do* have issues with the Palin VP choice. If Palin were now older, all her children grown (or nearly so) and capable, then having her as a VP choice would be a little more palatable to me. (Although I frankly have all sorts of issues with her policies.) However, with very young children who need her, and now a young, unmarried daughter who will need the time and attention of her mother as she faces pregnancy herself, I just can’t see how this is OK. Her husband and family need to come first. That can’t be easy to accomplish when you’re second in command of the free world! Can she do this job, and mother her children, at the same time? Can she joyfully submit to and love her husband when she has one of the most demanding jobs in the entire world?
I just don’t know. And if she weren’t being tauted by Christians as “one of us” then I wouldn’t be so apt to think so deeply about this. But if her “faith and family” are going to be a selling point (and let’s be honest…they are, and evangelicals are buying it wholesale) then when we study her as a possible VP, it’s natural we would study her faith and family.
Comment by Tamara (September 2, 2008 @ 7:59 pm )
Just wanted to clear up two things.
1. I didn’t make a comment about her daughter being pregnant. I was pregnant at 14 myself and that road is not one I want to make harder for someone else.
2. My closing comment about dung was not necessarily directed at you Amy. I know it came across rather rude. My comment was more for the articles upon articles that I have been reading telling me how wonderful Palin is when I know deep down (even though I don’t doubt that God can use any one of us for His glory) that what Palin promotes is not Bible centered. Any honestly, I think that anyone of us who says that she is right where God wants her to be more than likely is a feminist in some way. I will admit I cried when I heard her speak but then I had to get a hold of myself and ask what does the Bible say. I know Christians interpret the Bible differently so I will leave it at it is my interpretation and my opinion.
Anyway, didn’t mean to come across as rude because there are places I do that but your blog is not usually one of them.
Comment by Mrs. Damian Garcia (September 2, 2008 @ 8:23 pm )
I worry that this thread is going to take on a very secular-feminist thrust in a few comments from now. Does anyone else feel it moving toward the “we can have it all!” mantra?
Women who are wives and mothers should be at home being wives and mothers. *Except* when they are called by an extraordinary God, acting completely within His character, to devise an extra-ordinary call on a person’s life. Any person of His choosing. Including Sarah Palin.
I am 100% confident in saying that He put Palin on that ticket; what remains to be seen is the…why? To win? To loose? To judge us? Time will tell.
And to those who would suggest that being a mother is a more high calling than being a VP? Puh-leeese! Don’t patronize me!
Now…I regard my role as mother and home educator eternally significant–and I love it, desiring nothing different. But the responsibility of maintaining the safety and liberty of millions and millions of Americans so that we are free to die to self and fulfill our God-given purpose is exponentially more significant!
And it doesn’t take anything at all away from me to say that.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 2, 2008 @ 9:16 pm )
Ok, we’ll have to meet over coffee for this one. I agree and disagree. I’m a much better communicator in person than through the internet. So we can pick up on this in a few weeks.
Comment by Laura in KY (September 2, 2008 @ 9:21 pm )
Well written, Amy! I would like to add the observation that the Biblical culture we are trying so hard to emulate as wives and mothers was made of close-knit communities and shared multi-family dwellings. If a woman was gifted in business or had to go work the fields, there were always family members and friends to help with each other’s children. The culture we live in now isolates families and mothers instead of bringing them together to support each other in their “highest callings”.
Comment by Lisa S (September 2, 2008 @ 10:11 pm )
Great Post, Amy. A friend named Angela sent me your way and I am grateful that you did. Interesting and thought-provoking.
Blessings.
Comment by Michelle Bentham (September 2, 2008 @ 10:37 pm )
Lots of thoughts here and I just have to weigh in…
As long as she has children at home, her HIGHEST calling is to raise them “as they should go”. That is very difficult to do when she is not there and a part of their daily lives and decision making.
I’m all for women in office / women in business but until her children are of adult age, I don’t think her best energies, thoughts, creativity should be directed outside of her family.
We don’t have to look far to find children that have felt abandoned by their well-intentioned, hard-working (outside the home) mothers.
If God has ‘called’ any wife/mother into anything outside the home, it (the calling) will still be there after her children are on their own, or it will be something that does not affect her ability to nurture the lives of those in her family.
First and foremost her responsibility is to her husband and family…anything that takes her energies (yes, even ministry!) away from that is cheating her family.
Our first and foremost calling is to be under the lordship and discipleship of our Lord Jesus Christ. If we seriously asked HIM to outline our priorities (as long as we have a husband and kids at home), I’m pretty confident His answer would be to honor them as we would honor Him….
Comment by V. (September 2, 2008 @ 10:41 pm )
My point wasn’t about Palin–the discussion only brought the jumping off point to mind. Again, I still haven’t decided on a position for that for some of the reasons other people have stated here and some not. (See my previous comments.)
My point still stands about a woman’s highest calling being that which God calls her to, and that it is careless to say that all women’s highest calling is that of wife and mother. I’m not adding anything to that, and I stand by my original post–despite what happens in the comment section.
Emily’s point (#69) about Mary and Martha was very good. Thank you for adding that.
It’s interesting to see people’s passion about this, and the way it is/has become so divisive among people who generally have most everything in common.
I appreciate the discussion here, though, as always it is polite and without name calling. Mrs. DMG, I understood you, but thanks for the follow up. I have history with you, and I know you didn’t mean to be rude so I didn’t take it that way.
Bringing it back to the original point, I’m going to be slow to speak on judging another’s calling, knowing that there are some things I still don’t understand. As I said before, we bloggers would have a fun time with the dancing naked thing.
Hosea was told by God to marry a prostitute. That was God’s will for Hosea, but I can think of a lot of Bible verses more clear on that issue than the ones we’re trying to extrapolate here.
Can you imagine the God bloggers on that one.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 2, 2008 @ 11:38 pm )
Lol. I think you want to talk about David dancing naked! O.k., I’ll bite. Wasn’t he wearing a linen ephod? And when his wife, Michal, was disgusted by his expression of joy, didn’t the Lord close her womb forever?
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 2, 2008 @ 11:58 pm )
Very well-stated. Thank you. For those of us who are very enthusiastic about our roles as wife and mother, it easy for us to place those roles above the role of servant of Jesus Christ. The Lord has truly had to work on me with this issue. I pray that I will seek Jesus and his Kingdom and righteousness above all else I could aspire to here on earth.
Comment by Victoria Carrington (September 3, 2008 @ 12:13 am )
Dancing Naked. Marrying A Hooker.
Those would be posts worth reading!
Now, if we could just figure out how to throw in housekeeping tips and the occasional recipe we’d have one hot blog.
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 3, 2008 @ 12:23 am )
Hey, it’s all in the Bible.
Heh.
(See Leviticus for those recipes.)
Comment by Amy Scott (September 3, 2008 @ 12:27 am )
Excellent piece! Greatly needed right now.
I just wanted to step up to the plate and defend Deborah, a great woman of God who I have seen being absolutely savaged by posters and bloggers the last day or so. To quote one of the early posters here:
This is the line I have been reading all day, in one form or another.
I just have to ask, where does the text of Judges say anything of the kind? It is not there. Read all of Judges over the period of a day or two (it’s not that hard), you will find the circumstances of Deborah’s service as a judge of Israel is no different from that of any judge related in that book. No where there can you find a hint of there being a particular lack of “men not doing what they needed to do.” It’s not there. Is there a hint that Israel is under God’s judgment for their lack of good male leadership? No. The introduction to Deborah begins exactly the way nearly every account of a judge begins in the entire book. Israel forgets God, God judges Israel for turning to idols, Israel is oppressed for many years, a judge is raised up how restores God to rightful place in Israel and peace reigns for many years after that.
Deborah was an honorable and Godly leader for many years, who helped bring about 40 years of peace for the Nation of Israel. And, by the way, she was married during this time. This desire by some Christians to destroy Deborah’s witness is disgusting.
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 3, 2008 @ 12:41 am )
“it is nothing but arrogance to assume the reason your own children haven’t been found in sin is because of your own good parenting.”
When taken in context of Palin’s pregnant teen daughter, I look back on my teen years and think of the strong foundation my parents laid for me. With God’s gift of free will, I chose the wrong path. This was all my doing, my sin, not that of my parents.
Comment by Tressa (September 3, 2008 @ 1:23 am )
Pretty balanced thoughts.
Comment by Organizing Mommy (September 3, 2008 @ 1:53 am )
Amy, my comment isn’t specifically about “high calling” but is for those of your readers who plan to vote for McCain or for those (like yourself) who are undecided. I said it at Carmon’s blog and it is with “loving but frustrated” urgency that I’ll say it here, too:
~~~~~~~~
Even when all the arguments against Palin are stripped away, the question still remains:
How can ANY Christian vote for a man who believes it is acceptable to slaughter a child, born or preborn?
Explain to me how this could possibly be PLEASING to our holy, righteous God?!?
The blood of innocent children runs freely through our land and pro-life sidewalk counselors are BEGGING fellow believers to be a life-saving presence at the abortion mills.
CHURCH, WAKE UP!! YOU’RE ASLEEP IN THE LIGHT!!
Comment by Ruthanne (September 3, 2008 @ 2:00 am )
Ruthanne, you mentioned McCain, but Obama is the one who supports abortion and infanticide. I couldn’t believe (actually, I’m not surprised) that he could have passed a bill that would PROTECT those born alive through a botched abortion, but he did NOT let it pass. This was when he was a senator in his state. The babies were just put in the trash room left to die. He says he supports abortion because he doesn’t want his daughters to be “punished” with a baby.
I am all for McCain/Palin-NOT Obama. Who else do we have to vote for? The 3rd parties might be on the ticket, but I don’t think they stand a chance. McCain has always supported the pro-life issues. When Pastor Rick Warren interviewed McCain and Obama, he asked both of them when they believe life begins. Obama said it was “above his pay grade”, but McCain said immediately after he heard the question “at conception”. That should say something right there. If you didn’t see Pastor Rick Warren’s interview with McCain and Obama, you need to watch it. I don’t know if they will show it again, but it came on Fox News. It is called “Saddleback Civil Forum”. If you can find it, watch it-it will show a BIG difference between McCain and Obama. McCain gave an immediate answer for every question; Obama tried to go around and give 2-way answers trying to “please” everyone. He thinks he can just “talk” to our enemies and “smooth” it over, but it doesn’t work that way. You can’t “smooth-talk” everyone-especially our enemies with other countries.
Comment by Cassie (September 3, 2008 @ 9:43 am )
[...] however, we must keep the correct framework in mind. Like I was recently reminded, the highest calling for a woman is not to be a wife and mother. It’s not to be President of the United States or shatter [...]
Pingback by Palin’s Biggest Asset and Biggest Weakness « MInTheGap (September 3, 2008 @ 10:01 am )
I agree with Ruthanne. Some of the comments I hear from Christians comparing Palin to Deborah and excusing McCain’s infedilty because, hey, David did it, too, make me shake my head. Are people really thinking McCain/Palin were anointed by God? I guess we will see come November. But it is a LOT of pressure to put on a VP to hope her pro-life beliefs will in some way sway the President and Congress. We’ve just come through 8 years of a self-proclaimed, pro-life Christian President and unborn babies are no safer than they were before.
Comment by Amanda (September 3, 2008 @ 10:31 am )
Cassie, I’m well aware of where Obama stands on things.
McCain is NOT pro-life. He believes it’s acceptable to murder a preborn child in the cases of rape, incest or the “life of the mother” (a vague phrase, at best).
It’s not my desire to be obnoxious, but I must again ask:
How can ANY Christian vote for a man who believes it is acceptable to slaughter a child, born or preborn?
Explain to me how this could possibly be PLEASING to our holy, righteous God?!?
No one even needs to respond to my question(s), as it’s also not my desire to hijack Amy’s thread much further. I just want folks who hold the name of Jesus dear to honestly and prayerfully consider these concerns.
Chuck Baldwin and Ron Paul are both excellent, truly pro-life men worthy of our votes. Whether or not they “stand a chance” of winning is not the issue. It’s a matter of principle.
May everyone here, along with their husbands (and/or wives), prayerfully take these questions seriously!
Would Jesus vote for a man who thinks it’s permissible to rip from the womb one of his creations?
Would He want YOU to vote for that man?
The “lesser of two evils” is still evil.
Thoughts offered in love,
Ruthanne
Comment by Ruthanne (September 3, 2008 @ 10:45 am )
Who’s excusing infidelity? Just trying to keep perspective here that we are all born in sin, and prone to sin, and in need of grace and a Savior. McCain doesn’t even defend his infidelity! He accepts responsibility for that shameful episode the only way he can–with humility.
As for anointing….I haven’t seen that word used here. But if you’re asking whether I believe that the McCain/Palin ticket is by the sovereignty of a righteous, wrathful, just and merciful God–ABSOLUTELY! As is everything else, including whether or not my vacuum is going to work in a minute as I do my floors.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 3, 2008 @ 10:54 am )
Doug Wilson on the issue (which I find myself in agreement):
Here is the whole article, which is very good.
Ruthanne, telling us that we need to wake up assumes that we are asleep. I assure you that we’re not. There are many people who love Jesus and His Word who do not fit in the Patriarchal camp, though for the life of me, I can’t figure out how our lives are any different. (said in a very broad sense)
1. I have a zillion children in close order….DING!
2. I homeschool them…DOUBLE DING!
3. I stay home and my husband works….DING!
4. I affirm Biblical complementarianism….DING!
5. I am thinking through Sarah Palin –wondering if this is a notable exception, one of those weird things God does–instead of ringing the alarm of feminism ….
BUZZZZZZZZZZZZ. The condescending tone of the Patriarchalists on the issue for anyone who steps out of line makes me very “glad” I got snubbed a long time ago, most notably on my Quiverfull position but beginning on my “working women” post. I wish it were not so, as I believe in the unity of the Church, and I welcome the opportunity to show grace where none has been shown to me. I know, I know, I’m a relativist now.
I can’t help but wonder if TIME will cause some of my dear brothers and sister–real friends–to reconsider the tone and angst to which they condemned their fellow believers under. I wonder if time and life circumstances will cause them to reconsider if all women working for a paycheck outside of the home at any time is always sin. I wonder if they would like to be judged by the same manner that they judge others.
Ruthanne, I know that you are a dear friend, and I only speak to the movement as a whole and for whom the shoe fits. You are most gracious, and I hope my words are received in the manner intended. I am not in a bad mood. I am not patronizing you. I am simply speaking from my heart.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 3, 2008 @ 11:14 am )
First I want to apologize for the grammar and spelling error in my above comment (#87). That’s what I get for not proof-reading my writing.
I like what Amy has written here because it addresses an issue (the role of women) that the Church has become too extreme on. I believe that a commenter above speculated that that this excessive position has come about in response the actions of secular feminism. I agree with this assessment and I agree that a response, at least within the Church, is necessary. However, these kinds of responses to pressure are always in danger of overreaching, of swinging the pendulum too far in the other direction. I think Amy wisely and articulately attempts to correct that imbalance in this post.
As for the issue of Christians and politics, I believe that we, on both sides of the aisle, have placed far too much faith in politics to save us. Politics is not the answer to the problems of this world. Jesus is.
Politics can do some good things, but only after a sea change has taken place in the spiritual lives of the people. The greatest political movements in history (from a Christian perspective) followed close on the heels of spiritual revival. Politics will not save us, nor will it ever do anything to advance the Kingdom of God. At best, politics is a human tool for achieving occasional earthly good (and a lot of bad, unfortunately).
In that light, I quote my earthly father, Greg Alterton (who is a very wise man indeed):
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 3, 2008 @ 11:20 am )
Amy, I didn’t even mention anything about patriarchy, homeschooling or being “quiverfull”.
My comment was strictly about abortion. (I even mentioned the stripping away of all other arguments, to emphasize that.)
McCain (and Obama, obviously, but I’m talking about McCain here) being a pro-abort is my biggest problem of all with this.
You may not be asleep, and others here may not be asleep, but the Church in general is in a dead slumber.
Comment by Ruthanne (September 3, 2008 @ 11:24 am )
Thank you for clarifying, Ruthanne. You have a good point if it is true. I read conflicting things about McCain’s abortion stance. I have understood him to be pro-life through and through. Perhaps there is more clarification on his website.
Your point is well received on the Church in general, as I took it to mean you were addressing me when you said, “those of your readers who plan to vote for McCain or for those (like yourself) who are undecided.” I’m not sure how to read that differently.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 3, 2008 @ 11:39 am )
I cannot argue that some women do not feel the “call” to be mothers, etc. HOWEVER, she IS a mother. And, in my humble opinion, her children should be her first priority and I question her ability to still be the mother God has called her to be while serving as VP. As a stay-at-home mom of three preschoolers, I know how time consuming (and what blessings) children are. I speak from first hand experience.
I suppose the point I would like to make is this:
Sure, not all women feel they should be mothers, and that is fine. They should work (in whatever arena) to glorify God. But this woman CHOSE to be a mother - FIVE times over. Obviously, she felt this call on her life and it would be unfortuate if she were to pass up this (involved) role for the role of VP. That is my opinion.
Comment by Leslie (September 3, 2008 @ 11:41 am )
Amy! I love you more and more!!!
I, too, feel that I need to post my credentials when I have these conversations. They are the same as yours: Zillion kids. Homeschool. Stay at home. ETC. It plays out the same. But it is foundationally different.
I LOVED what Doug W. had to say. I love that he is thinking, and that you are too.
We MUST get together sometime…you are only four hours from me now!
Comment by Holly (September 3, 2008 @ 11:43 am )
Two comments I forgot to make:
1) We DO love our female brain surgeon when we need her, don’t we? Suddenly, we don’t care that she is a woman working outside of her home OR that she has young children. We view her as an angel from God himself!
2) Actually, in regards to the Doug Wilson article, my Muslim friends have been MUCH MORE personally gracious and loving than some of my conservative friends. OUCH!
Comment by Holly (September 3, 2008 @ 11:48 am )
I’m sorry, Amy, for the confusion and hope you’ll forgive me. It was my poor communication.
It was really my *questions* I was specifically directing to your readers and to the undecided Christian voter (such as yourself). The comment about the Church being asleep was a more general thought.
I’ll let y’all get back to the discussion of “high callings”.
Love,
Ruthanne
Comment by Ruthanne (September 3, 2008 @ 12:15 pm )
Amy, in light of your question on #97, here are the facts:
1. McCain supports the overturning of Roe v Wade (although it has been reported that he’s taken a different position in the past).
2. He supports federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
3. Has stated that if abortion was made illegal, he would want to prosecute the doctors who performed abortions, not the women who got them.
4. Supports adoption and foster care as the best alternatives to abortion.
5. Voted “Yes” on the partial birth abortion ban (S. 1692).
6. Supports the Hyde amendment, which prohibits public money from subsidizing abortions.
7. Voted “Yes” on parental notification act, Bill S.403.
8. Voted “Yes” on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions (S. amdt. 3330 to H.R. 3043)
9. Voted “No” on expansion of services to teens that would include greater access to “family planning services,” force health plans to cover contraceptives, and increase education programs for teens concerning “emergency contraceptives.” (S. Amdt. 244 to S. Con. Res. 18)
10. Voted “Yes” on criminal penalty for harming the unborn while committing another crime (S. 1019/HR. 1997).
11. Voted “Yes” on maintaining the ban on abortions on military bases (S. 2549).
12. Voted “Yes” on banning human cloning (S. 1601).
13. NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) lifetime rating: 0%
14. NRLC (National Right to Life Committee) lifetime rating: 75%
As you can see, John McCain’s record on abortion is not perfect. I wish he would change his mind on federal funding for stem cell research (although this is now a completely dead issue due to advances in stem cell research from non-embryonic sources), and on the exceptions for abortion in the cases of rape or incest (possibly the life of the mother as well, but that one is the only really tricky issue in all this as there is so little good data on the survivability of many of supposedly “life-threatening” complications). I agree with McCain (and I think virtually all passionate pro-lifers will) on the rest of his positions.
That said, I’m afraid significant change in abortion law will not come through the government. After years of watching many great pro-life leaders get nowhere with political solutions to the problem, I am convinced that governmental change on this issue will only come about once abortion has been virtually eliminated in practice by through the simple fact that the people no longer believe it’s acceptable. As I said in my last comment, there will have to be spiritual change before the government will follow.
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 3, 2008 @ 12:16 pm )
Actually, in regards to the Doug Wilson article, my Muslim friends have been MUCH MORE personally gracious and loving than some of my conservative friends. OUCH!
What is in our water that’s causing this to be normative rather than a rare exception? Barna’s polls all show “judgemental” and “critical” to be the number one words that come to mind when secular people hear the word, “Christian.”
Is it because, in reaction to the lack of boundaries in post-modern culture, we’re reacting by setting ultra high walls and fences in order to guard what we see as God’s laws? It seems like it’s often born of good intentions, but it’s interesting how much it resembles the Pharisee sect of Jesus’s day.
I was reading 1 Corinthians yesterday and this verse jumped out at me. I don’t think I’ve ever noticed it before:
“Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written, in order that no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.” 1 Cor. 4:6
It got me thinking…all the bloggers chastising the VP candidate, “grieving” for Palin and her family, all because she feels called to be in politics.
Where is it written that a woman can only be called to the home? When Paul tells women to keep the home, he can’t be setting down a rule for all women at all times, because otherwise he’d be saying that Jesus broke God’s law (since He had female followers, including married ones who were not with their husbands while following Christ). Paul himself sends women out of the home (one good read through Romans 15, in a good translation, not the ESV please, that emphasizes just what these women were doing).
In other words, we are “exceeding what is written” when we preach a law (women must be home-keepers) what the *whole* of the Book does not teach as a law.
But then I also got to thinking of how many times I “exceed what is written” and start beating a drum, (in God’s name), and getting arrogant and acting in a spirit of “one against the other.”
Gar.
Comment by Molly (September 3, 2008 @ 12:30 pm )
Amy- Thank you for writing such a thought provoking post. I have read through most of the comments, although not all of them and a few stand out in my mind.
Nathan- great comment, we are putting too much faith in our leaders.
Ruthanne- your comment about the lesser of two evils bothered me a bit. (sorry I can’t find it among the sea of comments!) The bible clearly teaches us that we are all evil, there are none more or less evil than the other. “For all have sinned and fall short…” I am not criticizing you for wanting to vote for a third party candidate, but please do not elevate them to a status that they do not deserve. Perhaps you agree with their positions but they are no less wicked than Obama or McCain in the eyes of the Lord.
As for the attacks on Gov Palin, I know little about her, but after reading these comments last night I came across this passage in my morning devotions-
I think we need to be careful with our words on this subject. It seems that many know what is best for her family and her children. If you don’t want to vote for her based on her positions then vote for someone else. But the criticism of her personal life and decisions are a bit harsh, in my opinion.
Please know all of this is said in love,
Toni
Comment by The Happy Housewife (September 3, 2008 @ 12:35 pm )
A single or married man with or without children could also face the same situation with the elders in his church.
Plus, what if he is considering signing some bill to which his wife is opposed? She may have just read one of the many popular but ridiculous “how to manipulate your husband while pretending to be submissive” books/blogs and is busy shaking her curls, pouting, rubbing his biceps and pleading with him to vote the way she wants, while making promises about how happy she’ll be, etc.
You know what? I don’t think men should run for office, either! They’ll be giving into their wives, just to keep the peace and enjoy the benefits of a happy wife. They’ll be letting their elders and pastors tell them how to decide issues. If they’re homeschooling fathers who have bought into some sort of multi-generational hundred-year vision, they’ll be letting their fathers and possibly even grandfathers tell them how to decide issues.
What a mess!
I think perhaps the best candidate is a godless guy who doesn’t go to church, couldn’t care less what his wife thinks, and is a complete maverick who decides everything his way, without being influenced by anyone.
OK, sarcasm mode off.
Comment by Rebecca (September 3, 2008 @ 1:07 pm )
Amy,
I am on board with the excerpt from Doug Wilson that you posted. A blog that I read last night said that women should stay at home to serve their dads until they’re married and then when they’re married, they are to serve their husband. I don’t want to parse words, but nowhere did it say that they are to serve the Lord. When I told my husband what I’d read, he said, “Where is that in the Bible?”
We love Jesus. We are Reformed in our theology. We have a big family. We homeschooled for many years (until I bagged it). We do not have issues with college or with women wearing pants. We try to live out our lives in a way that is biblical. Those things, though, aren’t my identity. Without sounding pious, my identity is in Christ.
I was thinking about your blog on the way home this morning. I was musing about what one reader posted (#20) about her being infertile. I think of my daughter, who at 31, who would like to be married, but the Lord hasn’t brought anyone into her life. She is content in Him. At one time, I may have even parroted those words about motherhood and being a wife being the highest calling, but how does that work when God hasn’t allowed some to be married or to have babies? I am ashamed of how I used to think. Did I denigrate hurting people through my cliches?
I think this is a healthy discussion. Some of the other blogs are heavy and heated. Hurling “truth” grenades is pretty ineffective.
Lastly, people who love Jesus and think through the issues are not mutually exclusive.
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 3, 2008 @ 1:23 pm )
This is for Molly…
I read Romans 15. Are you talking about Priscilla? Others? How do we know they had families/children at home? I really want to understand all of this. Please, include scripture references for the female followers of Jesus. Thanks in advance…
Andrea
Comment by andrea (September 3, 2008 @ 1:24 pm )
Great post Amy! Right there with you! Interesting comments from all. Here’s my thoughts.
Earlier this year I attended a retreat on “Calling”. I mistakenly use to think that a person’s calling was all about the roles they were in. I knew I was “called” to be a mother - I desired it so much and it was biblical. But what I failed to realize was our true “Calling” is only about accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior and following him. Being a wife, mother, father, doctor, preacher,lawyer, VP, teacher, missionary are roles and assignments we have. And no matter what role or assignment (even if temporary) we have we must use our calling with our unique spirirtual gifts and talents within those.
While being “called” to be a mother and a part-time professional and many other things in my life, I must do so under the direction of the “highest calling” of following Christ. I personally do not have the skills, abilities, opportunities and desires to be VP. But maybe Sarah Palin does. I don’t think she will put the vice-presidency as a priority over her children. I don’t think George Bush did. Within God’s will are different gifts and opportunities and roles that we have in freedom.
I will definitely be voting McCain/Palin. Neither one is perfect. But they are a far better cry than Obama/Biden. And I don’t see how any Christian could vote otherwise. Some have touted it’s better to stand up for your principles and vote for some candidate that represents them better but doesn’t have any chance of winning. That’s not standing up for your principles. That’s allowing some one to win that would be devastating for our country and especially to Christians. There is no principle in that, maybe just pride.
I admit, I wish there were better choices than McCain/Palin. But I also admit that I’m liking the ticket more and more as I truly educate myself on their background and performance. I am pro-life to the core, but I’m not for overturning Roe v. Wade. Just like McCain. Outlawing abortion is not going to make it go away. People who desire to abort would have no difficulty breaking a law. We need to change peoples hearts instead. And churches have alot of work to do.
Didn’t mean to write a novel
Comment by Liesl Marie (September 3, 2008 @ 1:25 pm )
There is a lot to sift through here and some of the discussion has been really interesting. I have a couple questions and comments, if I may.
Who are these married women who left their husbands to follow Jesus? It was mentioned here a couple times but I didn’t realize any of the women with the disciples were married.
Why is it that when the very conservative Christians voice their opinion then it is seen as hate and being judgmental? I don’t know how many times I have been told that I am being judgemental even when I am trying to be the gentlist of spirit.
I personally think that Christians are labeled as judgmental mostly because people don’t want to be told they are living wrong. We can’t open our mouths and voice our beliefs without it offending someone, and it is not always our faults! I mean, I don’t let my girls go swimming and all of a sudden people started saying our family was a cult! For goodness sakes, where did that come from?
I do think that there are different degrees of evil. The Bible uses words like evil and then there is abomination. I always thought that meant God had two different degrees of what He finds evil. This is just my opinion though.
The argument for Deborah is interesting. I think that by all that I have been reading here and elsewhere it simply comes from the way that you view the Bible. Even feminist Christian women can find scriptures to support what they do and do not think - support their position. If I stand in error regarding my view on Debroah then may the LORD change my heart.
I have to say that I do try to respect where others are at with their thinking. When I jumped on the quiverfull bandwagon I went running full force into that lifestyle. After growing and maturing as a woman of God I found myself wondering a lot of different things. I try to always go back to the word of God but every so often I find myself thinking like a red, white and blue American, which is “to each his own”. I still think that majority of women belong at home, raising up the next generation (which is why I also believe the last few generations have gone downhill so much - they didn’t have momma there to guide them) but I also know I am thankful for those women in the labor and delivery ward that understand a women right after delivery or the women nurse that comforts me when I lost a child to miscarriage. I don’t understand it all and don’t think I pretend too. I just say what I say because when I read the word of God, I see it the way I do. I hope and pray that if I am in error in my beliefs then God corrects me (gently LORD, GENTLY!) On the other hand, I think that there is a deep sense that women have to see that they can do it all. After all, I did it when I first became conservative. I had to have the perfect home, perfect children, no messy hair or clothes. After growing as a person but also a mother I see how silly it was. There are more important things to do like kiss on babies or read Amy’s Humble Musings and see what trouble I can get into
I truly pray that we all ask God to open our eyes and hearts to what is His will, not our reasoning and thinking but what is His will. That is why I respect Amy so much - I think she lives that out everyday and even though I disagree with her on some issues, I know that she is praying before God just as I am.
Comment by Mrs. Damian Garcia (September 3, 2008 @ 1:27 pm )
Toni said, “The criticism of her personal life and decisions are a bit harsh.” So so true. But that is the liberal media digging up any kind of trash they can to put her and her family down. Did you see much trash on Obama in the first few months of the election-when it all started? No, not much. Maybe a few things here and there, but the majority of the media, IMHO, is Democrat and they are doing anything and everything they can to put down the Republicans or Conservatives and ESPECIALLY Christians. I heard that Palin and her family belong to a church in Wassila, Alaska-not sure of the name, but when the media hears about some Christian running for Senator, Governor, VP, President, etc., they are going to do everything they can to put those people down, digging up all of the trash they can and even making up their own stories sometimes.
One article I read earlier this week was saying that the Down Syndrome baby did not belong to Sarah, it belonged to one of her daughters. That was somebody making that story up because Monday Sarah announced that it WAS her baby and her daughter is pregnant out of wedlock, but Sarah and her husband are still supporting their daughter and boyfriend-at least she didn’t make her get an abortion. It shows that they are really pro-life. We can teach our kids all of the right things, but it is the kids’ decisions on the choices they make.
This is probably the most important election in this country because it will determine where our country will go from here. McCain/Palin may not make the country any better, but then again, maybe they will! Obama will be an “obamanation” to our country since he is for abortion, homosexuality, change (whatever that “change” will be), etc.
Also, how many other women are in the White House as judges, Senators, Governors, etc.? Does that make them any less of a mother-some, maybe, but I’m sure most of them have kids. I know I heard that Nanci Pelosi has 5 kids of her own (not sure how old they are), but is anyone questioning her?
If you want fair and balanced on news-but they are still not perfect-go to OneNewsNow.com or watch Fox News. They have their faults, but they are not the liberal media that we see on CNN, NBC, ABC, or any other media source.
Comment by Cassie (September 3, 2008 @ 1:51 pm )
I offer a few quotes. The first characterizes the nature of some comments I have read here and there, and yes I do read there, you know where I mean, surely you do.
“It’s possible that I shall make an a** of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way.” - Karl Marx
Someone with a more creative mind might title their comment with a few minor modifications to this actual title.
“A Comment on Heidegger’s Comment on Nietzsche’s Alleged Comment on Hegel’s Comment on the Power of Negativity.”
Source:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1425758/posts
OK, hope someone laughed.
Comment by Ethan (September 3, 2008 @ 2:05 pm )
Man Cathy (#108), I so wish you had a blog!
Amy, just wanted to say this is THE single best discussion on this issue in the blogosphere. Your intellect and grace on such matters never ceases to amaze me.
Comment by Michelle (September 3, 2008 @ 3:22 pm )
Yo, Andrea. I’ll make this brief because
a.), it ain’t my blog, and
b.) I don’t think Amy agrees with my take on things (but then again, I don’t really know that for sure—she’s always full of surprises-*grin*).
1.) Female followers of Christ-
Luke 8:1-3
Matthew 27:55
Mark 15:40,41
Luke 23:49
Unless Jesus was in sin, or didn’t start His women-home-keeping rule until post-resurrection, these verses suggest that all women, including married ones, aren’t called of God to stay home.
2.) Romans 16, not 15 (whoops. My apologies for the wrong chapter number):
Among the 29 people Paul mentions by name (all movers-and-shakers in early church life), ten of them are women.
Verses 1-2 are a letter of recommendation for Phoebe, in which word, “deacon” is used. If Phoebe were a male, we would assume that the office of deacon is what was being talked about. But since she is a female, many translators take the word and translate it into “helper,” or “servant.” When the word is used of males, it is translated, deacon, pastor, etc. Ie, translator bias is evident and it is not helpful to us as we work through what the Bible actually says about women.
The same goes for Junia, who, since translators assumed was being referred to as either an apostle (most translators assumed this), or a church leader renowned among the apostles (a few, namely those who felt that there were only 12 apostles and no more, felt this way), decided she HAD to be a he and so “translated” the name to be Junius, a male name, instead.
The joke was on them, though, because it’s now been discovered that there was no such thing as the male name of Junius during that time period. Ie, Junia HAS to be a female, and the title Paul gave her is what he said about a woman in the church. Renowned among the apostles is said of a woman. That either means a woman was an apostle, or that she was such a mover-and-shaker that all the apostles knew about her. Either way, this was not the kind of woman that was quiet and took a back seat—-and Paul is praising her for that. Sadly, because of translator bias, many of us grew up reading about Junius and never really thinking another thing of it.
The list goes on, but I will stop because I’m trying (but it’s oh so against my nature) to be BRIEF, but it’s an important chapter, I think, because it helps us flesh out what Paul *meant* in the other passages where he seems to be telling women to be quiet and to never take leadership positions. Unless we rip Romans 16 out of our Bibles, or do some serious gymnastics with it, I think it’s fair to say that we have to take another look at the “women, be silent” passage, and/or the “women, keep to the home” passage and consider other interpretations than the ones the patriarchy camp gives us.
My 2 Cents, which is wholly my own opinion and does not necessarily represent the views of this fine piece of blogland.
Molly
Comment by Molly (September 3, 2008 @ 3:31 pm )
May I link to this post on my blog?
Comment by Danielle (September 3, 2008 @ 3:51 pm )
Understand off the top that I know virtually nothing about American politics. However, let me just speak out of my ignorance anyway! (always a *grand* idea). If nothing else you can all tell me I’m wrong and the conversation will continue. Here is a question, and one I don’t necessarily have an answer to: If it were her husband who were on the ticket to be VP, do you think she would be any more free to be “all mom”? I’m just guessing that First Ladies have lots of help and little time to be a typical stay at home mom. Someone needs to be the President and Vice President, and regardless of whether they are male or female, their family-life will be a challenge for them; all of them. The White House is not a normal place to grow up, neither is the VP’s residence (see? ignorant. Don’t know what it is called). Someone needs to run the country: for your sake and for the sake of the watching and interconnected world I do pray for the Lord’s will to be done.
Comment by Barbara (September 3, 2008 @ 4:08 pm )
okay, Amy, if my questions for Molly are out of line, just say so:o)
It is just that I think there are others out there wanting to understand these “lines” better.
Molly,
Thanks for your reply. While I see what you mean about Jesus not making them stay behind and be keepers at home….what about all those who say it is simply a curse (Is 3:12) for women to “rule”.
Thanks for helping me and possibly others, hash this stuff out!
Andrea
Comment by andrea (September 3, 2008 @ 4:23 pm )
Hi Amy
You said: If there were a “highest calling” award, it would be for the unmarried woman who is devoted completely to the Lord’s affairs…
I think that’s what used to be called a nun. I’m just saying.
You successfully dodged the issue of what one’s highest calling is after one has produced children, one of whom is pregnant at 17.
Don’t get me wrong. I think I’m going to vote for the republicans, if only because I think the democrats are SO SCARY that I would actually vote for a rotten squash if that were the option and it had a chance of beating them.
The situation with Sarah Palin’s daughter could be “used” to their advantage as tangible proof of their pro-life persuasion. However, I hate to see anybody “used” for anything. These are lives: a 17-year-old girl, a boy and a conceived baby. What priority do they have in a situation like this? What will happen to them if Mrs. Palin is off in Washington busily fighting the status quo? Is it my problem to figure this out, or do I just leave these issues to the higher powers and vote against the ruination of the country by radical left-wing extremists?
Sadly, I think the best solution for a 17-year-old mother and her baby is adoption, but you can’t do that very well when your mom is famous. People figure out who the baby is and the drama never ends.
Hmmm. Maybe they will have to limp along and do the best they can, imperfectly, like the rest of us.
Comment by ruth (September 3, 2008 @ 4:32 pm )
Andrea,
On Isaiah 3:12, the much-touted verse of late, I thought this was an excellent commentary:
http://truewomanhood.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/continuing-our-discussion-on-patriocentricity-thread-2-karen/#comment-14923
(read that comment and then the next one)
The Septuigent was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, done BEFORE the time of Christ, widely recieved as an acceptable/good/holy translation by the Jews. For example, in Matthew 4 when Jesus was rebuking the Devil, He quoted from the Septuigent. With specific reference to the book of Isaiah, Jesus quotes from the Septuigent (Mark 7:6-8) there, too, or the famous passage in Luke 4—also the Septuigent version of Isaiah. Paul, certainly a man WELL trained in the Scriptures, quotes from the Septuigent frequently, including the book of Isaiah.
In the comment (below the one I give a direct link to), Lynn says:
Here is the Septuagint passage. The Septuagint translators think it’s a judgment of God when the mighty woman was taken AWAY.
Out of the approx 300 OT quotes in the NT, about 2/3 of them come from the Septuigent translation.
The Septuigent is the Bible translation used by the early church, and it is likely the most accurate rendering we have of the Hebrew Scriptures, in that it was done 2,000 years ago and approved of by the Jews themselves.
So, yes, we have a verse pulled out of context in Isaiah 3 that some are using to say shows an Eternal Rule of God For All Time that women and children are shameful rulers. The translation by the Greeks of the Hebrew text of Isaiah, however, does not say that, but rather laments the removal of strong men AND women, in sorrow about the rulership of oppressive people.
Do I want to use one sketchy verse as a foundation with which to base a claim that women leaders are shameful?
No.
Again, this is my opinion only. I’m a fallible human being. If anything, my journey through patriarchy taught me that. I’ve got strong opinions in this area, and, yes, I could use a lot more growth in the area of gentleness, but, by God’s good grace, I’m growing. My apologies if my comments have been at all hurtful to any who see things differently.
Comment by Molly (September 3, 2008 @ 5:05 pm )
[...] Amy’s Humble Musings [...]
Pingback by Excuse my absence « Dandelion Days (September 3, 2008 @ 5:30 pm )
I said I knew a little about the Septuagint, but I never promised I could spell it correctly…

Comment by Molly (September 3, 2008 @ 6:08 pm )
Thank you Amy. That was excellent
Comment by Debbie (September 3, 2008 @ 6:27 pm )
Molly said in comment #74, “Bottom line:
Let’s let Sarah Palin and her family decide whether or not God’s called her to run for VP or not, and keep our noses busy with the business of our own homes.”
Who we vote for is part of the the business of our homes. They are not separated. People vote for/against a candidate for a variety of reasons. Another person may feel their reasons are not valid for rejecting a candidate, but in a society that gives us freedom of the press/blog and privacy of the voting booth; we are allowed to openly discuss our reasons or secretly cast them without telling a soul.
I’m glad we’re discussing this issue and heartily welcome it. Those that find it uncomfortable or not worth discussing have the privilege of moving on without uttering another word, but for the rest of us who care about our family, our daughters, and our country, I say carry on!
Comment by Spunky (September 3, 2008 @ 7:34 pm )
Thank you!!! My husband and I are infertile. We are blessed now with an adopted son but prior to that I struggled when people made comments like that. It wasn’t my fault I couldn’t have children and I wanted them desperately. I learned on my own that my highest calling was whatever God called me to be.
Comment by Stacy (September 3, 2008 @ 8:07 pm )
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you for saying this, Amy. I have 2 very dear friends - one has never been able to have children and the other is single - and the heartache that such a lie causes runs deep. This has been a heartbeat of mine for a long time. Thank You for saying it.
I will admit that I have not read all 125 posts before me so maybe this point has been made. I also realize that whether or not Governor Palin should even be running is not the point of the original post. My thoughts stem from a few things I read in the comment section. As a believer, we are to be Christians first - that is our highest calling. I do not know of the spiritual condition of Governor Palin. If Gov. Palin does not claim to be a believer, then I do not expect her to act like one and to understand God’s standards. She is choosing a path that makes a good solid marriage and good solid parenting virtually impossible, but Christ needs to be the key ingredient to the discussion. All the opinions in the world will not change Palin, but Christ can. I think that is how we need to pray.
John Newton says it best - I am not what I ought to be; I am not what I would like to be; I am not what I hope to be. But I am not what I once was, and by the grace of God, I am what I am.
Comment by Tina (September 3, 2008 @ 11:02 pm )
I’m going to take a daring move and say that if we follow the lines of what Molly has written then we can just all say that the Bible is full of mistranslations and we can do what we all wish. After all we are under grace, right?
And from now on I’ll keep my narrow mindedness to myself because for me, I would rather believe that the Bible is infallible, without mistakes and is in fact completely whole and true. I would rather believe that God used the men He wanted to translate it and despite their humanness, it is everything that God wanted it to be. Because honestly, if we find out that the translators meant something one way but wrote it in a certain fashion, what that really says to me is that the Bible can not be depended on and God is playing us all as fools, us searching for what is the truth only to not ever *really* know what it is.
And I think that is why I am so a the bottom line kind of girl. I don’t and will not believe that the Bible is full of errors just so I can go about living life the way my flesh wants to.
Comment by Mrs. Damian Garcia (September 3, 2008 @ 11:53 pm )
Yes you may link and yes to Molly’s discussion, so long as I don’t have to answer for Molly.
(Not a slam, just a time issue, as I can’t respond to everything, though Mrs. Damian Garcia, you’ve missed Molly’s point. Saying a word is mistranslation isn’t questioning the infallibility of Scripture.) And yes to meeting Holly (and Molly…just so you don’t feel left out). By golly.
Spunky, I don’t know if God called Palin to her position or not. I think people’s general point is that we can’t say the mind of God on the matter. The rebuttal, of course, is that she can’t be a wife and mother, etc., etc, and surely God wouldn’t ordain it. Generally, I’d agree. But since God told Hosea to marry a prostitute (Hosea is glad Al Gore didn’t invent the internet yet….), I have to leave that door open to God doing something crazy weird. I don’t want to spend time arguing whether or not she should be doing it, because she didn’t email me for my opinion and she is going to do it anyway. Just saying.
Good speech tonight, no matter if you love her or not. (Watching while typing….)
Thanks ya’ll for not throwing the insults and punches. On my bloglines that is pulled up alongside of my post here, a blogger calls Reformed Christians who haven’t protested the ticket “acting like two year olds.” I’m a “conservative” in quotes now. In another article, I’m told that I’m obviously “theologically naïve.” That’s just the nice ones. Party on.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 4, 2008 @ 12:23 am )
I just watched the acceptance speech by Palin. I seriously can not imagine anyone realizing how gifted she is, realizing that all good gifts come from above, and saying that she can’t possibly run for office because she is a woman!
She’s my kind of girl, too, Amy.
Comment by Holly (September 4, 2008 @ 12:23 am )
BTW, I linked an article today (if my delicious tags are working right) about how they are now scanning the Dead Sea Scrolls and digitizing them. As they scanned them, they realized that they can now see clearly words that have been illegible. The Dead Sea Scrolls are the earliest manuscripts, closest to the times of Christ. I am very interested in what they learn! I believe God’s Word to be infallible, too…when we actually are able to see and read it as it was intended and not marred by damage or mistranslation. They are going to make them available to the public soon.
Comment by Holly (September 4, 2008 @ 12:28 am )
Holly…now that’s something we can all be excited about!
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 4, 2008 @ 12:35 am )
http://online.worldmag.com/2008/09/03/artifacts-to-go-digital/
My tags aren’t working. There’s the link.
Comment by Holly (September 4, 2008 @ 12:39 am )
Molly,
Can you share with us where you got the Septuagint translation you quote from above?
Thank you,
Patricia
Comment by Patricia (September 4, 2008 @ 7:23 am )
I’m curious (as I am trying to form my own opinion) as to whether or not anyone has changed their plans to vote because of Sarah Palin. To clarify, was anyone NOT going to vote for one of the two major parties - but now is rethinking their position because of her addition to the ticket?- PS I think this is the toughest election since I began voting, when I was 18!
Comment by Kelli C. (September 4, 2008 @ 8:12 am )
KelliC, I haven’t voted in 16 years - I will be voting in this election. So, in my case, Palin on the ticket has made a difference.
Comment by sara (September 4, 2008 @ 9:34 am )
Kelli, I did not change my mind-I was going to vote for John McCain all along-I sure didn’t want Obama or Hillary (when she was on the ticket). When Hillary was running, I said that we didn’t need a woman in the White House, but that was mainly because I didn’t want another Clinton or Democrat elected. Well, now I believe that maybe a woman can change the White House. I am more Conservative than anything-like Sarah Palin-and she seems to be one of us-hockey Mom, small town person, and she seems to connect with most of us. So she didn’t change my vote since I was going for McCain the whole time, but since I saw him on the Saddleback Civil Forum answering Pastor Rick Warren’s questions, he boosted my confidence then when he brought out Palin and announced her as VP, he boosted my confidence even more.
Comment by Cassie (September 4, 2008 @ 9:36 am )
Molly,
Can you share with us where you got the Septuagint translation you quote from above?
Sure, Patricia. I have no idea where the commenter I linked to got hers, but here is the passage from my Orthodox Study Bible (the Orthodox Church uses the Septuagint to this day):
3:1-2 “For behold, the Lord, the Lord of hosts, takes away from Judah and from Jerusalem the strong man and the strong woman, the strength of bread and the strength of water, the mighty man and the man of war…
3:12 O My people, your punishers gather you, and those who make demands of you rule over you. O My poeple, those who bless you lead you astray and trouble the path of your feet.”
Mrs. Damian,
I believe that the Bible is infallible. I do not, however, believe that translators are infallible. God’s breathed words to us are perfect. We humans have a tendancy to muck that up, though.
I think remembering that helps to keep us humble, and that’s a good thing. God is the one who remains infallible, not me, not you, not EVEN Amy (snort), and not Doug Phillips, either.
Amy,
I expect a full invitation to your farm the next time we do a family-drive-through-the-US. If we ever do one of those again, that is. Greg gave us space program presents when he visited, so I will reciprocate. With moose poop. Lots of it. Moose poop earrings, moose poop whistles, moose poop dice…
Muttering up here in Alaska about the lack of a stinkin’ summer,
Molly
Comment by Molly (September 4, 2008 @ 1:38 pm )
Oh, quit ocmplaining, Molly. You’ve got Sarah Palin. I realize that she’s not the Messiah, but her speech was pretty fun to watch. I think Piper has a future in politics, too. I love the “innocence” of kids…giving the baby a spit bath was a hoot. Gives “cowlick” a whole new meaning.
Comment by Cathy (September 4, 2008 @ 2:10 pm )
Now if I could only type “complaining” correctly. “O” before “C” except after…oh, forget it.
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 4, 2008 @ 2:17 pm )
Molly,
Help! I have looked up the verses you are talking about in the two versions of the Bible I have here at home, the NASB and the NIV. Neither of them are close in meaning to what you have written from the Septuagint or the Orthodox Bible. As you stated: “The Septuagint translators think it’s a judgment of God when the mighty woman was taken AWAY.”
Which is correct? And if this huge variance in translation exisit, what others exist? How can the Bible be my ‘guide book for life” if it doesn’t truly represent what was actually written in the original language?
Thanks,
Patricia
My question is this: how can the Bibles I have here at home (NASB, NIV) be trusted if they do not translate anywhere near to what was actually written in the Hebrew?
These verses in my NASB tell me that children and women are not suited for governmental leadership. But the Septuagint and the Orthodox Bible say that
Comment by Patricia (September 4, 2008 @ 2:39 pm )
Molly, I cut and pasted and messed that up, but I think you can get my drift!!
Patricia
Comment by Patricia (September 4, 2008 @ 2:40 pm )
I think the problem is with the people who told us that the Bible is error free in translation. In stressing the infallibility of Scripture, they forgot to explain that what we have are *translations* of those original words.
God’s words are error free. But we are fallible people, both the translators and then us as we interpret.
So we all do our best. We see “through a glass darkly.” It’s good to remember that. Then we remain humble, because we know that we are fallible humans. Only God is without error. So we do what all of His other sons and daughters did and do: we cling to Him, the One who is infallible.
When we think our translators, and even more so, our own interpretations, are infallible, we are putting our trust in the wrong thing.
Remembering our own frailty helps us to hold to our beliefs WHILE remaining a humble people. It frees us to be able to love others. Love comes above correct knowlege, says Paul when he shakes his head at the man who has all knowledge but does not know Love. Which is not to say that we do not strive for correct knowledge—far from it—but rather that we hold God tightly and our interpretations a bit loosely, remembering that God is the one who is infallible, not us.
God, who is infinitely above all yet has deigned to stoop down to our level and communicate, did so not primarily through a book, or so Hebrews 1:1-3 reminds us, but with the *Person* of His Son, the Word Who is a Living Being. Our relationship was never supposed to be with a book (though we treasure that book, since it came from His mouth), but with the Person of God, Himself.
PS. I love the NASB. It’s my most-used translation, very marked up and ragged from heavy use.
Also, I don’t think Isaiah 3:12 (in the NASB, etc) is telling us that women and children aren’t suited for leadership ever. Assuming that the Septuigant is incorrect and the NASB, etc, translations are correct, I think that the passage is a statement that was well suited for a very patriarchal time, when women and children leading would have been a great shame.
But to take it a step past that and say it’s a rule for all time, that God was saying that women in leadership was a shame and is always a shame, period, is taking it past what the Scripture actually says.
Ie, it’s *human interpretation* to say that Isaiah 3:12 says that women are unfit for leadership in government. Because Isaiah 3:12 doesn’t actually say that.
Judges, for example, says that God raised up the judges it then goes on to talk about. So we know that *God* raised up Deborah for civic service. No where does it say that Deborah was shameful or a mark of shame on man (no where except for the patriarchy blogs, that is).
Was God not sovereign enough to raise up a man to lead instead of Deborah? Hey, God planned Jeremiah from before he was even born. Could God not have planned a male leader during Deborah’s time? Do the patriarchalists not believe God is sovereign enough to plan ahead? Or did God slip up that one time and so was forced to pick a woman?
Warmly, along with the reminder that these are
WHOLLY my OWN opinions—- which may be running terribly off-track (tell me to go away, Amy, and I will) or in direct opposition to Amy’s views (I don’t know) and come from a VERY fallible human being (who spent 8 years deep in the patriarchy trenches and emerged *because* of Scripture, not in spite of it),
Molly
Comment by Molly (September 4, 2008 @ 3:11 pm )
Molly - Keep the moose “stuff”. Bring Twinkies.
Comment by Greg (September 4, 2008 @ 4:11 pm )
Patricia,
(In response to your question to Molly in #140)
I’ll be very brief, as I don’t want to steal Molly’s thunder.
Which version is right? They are both right. The problem you are having, and one that many Christians have, is that you are confusing the actual words of the passage with the message of the passage.
When it comes to translating a document, it is often extremely difficult to do a direct word-for-word translation and maintain the original’s structure and message. What the translators of the Septuagint decided to do was to maintain the message of the passage and it’s basic structure, but in doing so they had to change some of the specific words. This has to be done all the time in translation to maintain a message’s integrity. In this case, the message is that Israel will be bereft of all it’s strength and resources, leaving it an empty husk and oppressed. The actual words used to communicate this message aren’t as important as the integrity and clarity of the message itself. Of course, the translators do their best to maintain as much of the original wording intact as possible as well.
As to the reliability of your Bibles: Don’t worry, they are reliable. However, keep in mind that we who aren’t scholars able to read ancient Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, and Latin, are somewhat at the mercy of the presuppositions and bias of the translators. They do the best job they can and generally try to do translation by committee in order mitigate problems of presupposition, but those problems still occasionally impact the text. This is why it’s good to have a couple different versions translated by different committees or individuals to help minimize this problem. When mistakes are made, not every translation board will make the same mistakes in the same places.
A lot more could be said about this. I hope it helps a little, and I look forward to reading whatever response Molly has to share as well (especially if I need a little straightening out on any particular point
).
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 4, 2008 @ 4:19 pm )
Molly you hit the nail on the head with this one. Both translations are making almost the same point. As always when reading scripture we must look at the Bible as a whole and look at the context. In the time of that scripture women were looked at as being mere property of little or no value. While God created women to be under man in some regards, He did not create us to be of lesser value. As we all know, Jewish leaders, while trying to follow the law, unfortunately created additional regulations that were not God’s intent - i.e. look at everything Jesus says about the Pharisees.
So indeed it was noted to be an insult to the male Jewish leaders that women rule over them them. The judgement was about that there are or would be women leaders. It was all about reprimanding an errant nation under errant male leaders. It would be like if today God said - Christians you are errant, therefore Obama shall rule over you. That would be a huge insult to us, an judgement on our behavior. It in no way implies that a black male had no capability or no right or value in being a leader.
Oh and a disclaimer - I am no way saying that God is saying to us right now that he is putting judgement over us and having a woman rule. Or Obama rule.
Comment by Liesl Marie (September 4, 2008 @ 4:32 pm )
I have stated on other blogs where there were non-Christians trying to contradict the Bible saying it is wrong; it was written years ago; we can’t rely on it today, etc., etc., that don’t you think God was watching over those translators who were translating the Bible making sure His Words weren’t being taken out of context? I believe He was watching over them and if they made a mistake I’m sure He put in in their head to go back and change it. Go to the website http://www.backtogenesis.com and look it up there. They can explain how the translators were very careful in translating the Bible even going back to counting each and every word to make sure they had the exact number of words as the original scrolls had.
Comment by Cassie (September 4, 2008 @ 4:36 pm )
You have NO IDEA how glad I am that I found your blog on this very topic, and now that I think about it it was probably from someone’s twitter comments.
This is so eloquently and gracefully written and I am so blessed by your words. FINALLY someone who is showing grace, peace, and love when it comes to Sarah Palin. I have been thoroughly disheartened by the people who call themselves Christians who are slamming, slandering, and just being down right mean and nasty to this woman. Yes, she is running for one of the most important positions in the world, but still, there is a filter that we should run things through, and as Christians it is God and His grace.
Thank you so much for taking the time and energy to really think through this and share it with so many others.
Be Blessed,
Melissa
Comment by Melissa in Mel's World (September 4, 2008 @ 4:36 pm )
Ok, after reading my post I realize I left out a big word “NOT”
The judgement was NOT about that there are or would be women leaders. It was all about reprimanding an errant nation under errant male leaders by insulting them saying women would rule over them - oh the shame to the men because they thought women were low-lifes.
Comment by Liesl Marie (September 4, 2008 @ 4:42 pm )
I don’t think I have a high enough I.Q. for this discussion.
Comment by Valerie (September 4, 2008 @ 4:53 pm )
Wow. I’m SO glad I happened upon your blog this afternoon! My husband and I are in complete agreement that no matter who you are, where you live, what you do, or your marital status, GOD IS MOST GLORIFIED when we are MOST SATISFIED IN HIM. When we press into Him, when we love Him with all our hearts, and when we live and walk in His Spirit, He is pleased. And when we live this way, He *also* gives us the wisdom to make choices that can be controversial amongst both the Christian AND secular worlds (be it political or not). Thank you for posting this. It was not only spot on, but wholly Biblical and God-honoring.
My husband and I just finished a post at our blog about our take on Sarah, her governing of our state (being Alaskans), and our thoughts on her as the potential (hopeful) next VP of the US. Check it out if you like and let us know what your thoughts are. After reading this post of yours, however, I may have to go edit a couple of things! ha!
love in Him,
jessica
Comment by Jessica (September 4, 2008 @ 5:07 pm )
This is all helping!! Thanks! I am understanding!!
Patricia
Comment by Patricia (September 4, 2008 @ 5:13 pm )
“I’m curious (as I am trying to form my own opinion) as to whether or not anyone has changed their plans to vote because of Sarah Palin. To clarify, was anyone NOT going to vote for one of the two major parties - but now is rethinking their position because of her addition to the ticket?- PS I think this is the toughest election since I began voting, when I was 18!”
I wasn’t planning on voting for either major candidate. This nomination has caused me to take a second look at the Republican ticket. But a look is not a vote, not even close. Palin is the #2 on the ticket, and that says a lot. We’re all excited about the #2, but that does not change a thing about #1.
McCain could have just as easily picked Lieberman or Ridge. And given that he didn’t, both of those men could feature in a McCain presidency. Remember, McCain is the man who signed McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Feingold, and McCain-Lieberman. So as much as I like seeing him partner with a “soul mate” conservative, he’s crossed the aisle to link arms with a few too many liberals. It’s going to take a little bit more reassuring before I just jump back on to this Republican ticket.
Comment by Spunky (September 4, 2008 @ 5:17 pm )
This is all way above my pay grade….lol…but it seems to me, Molly, that if you really have something important to get across, and presuming that you want to get it across to the hyper patriarchal types (and not just preach it to the choir–of which I don’t think I’m one) that the effort would be more effectively spent coming from…a man.
Eeek! Yes. I said it.
My motive, though, is not to offend. Right this minute I’m praying for some nice thing I could say to establish my humble posture in this hard-to-decipher medium called the internet. (And I think that statement was all I could come up with.) Anyway…
After all, Paul said that he became as those whom he wanted to reach, right? If you can find a godly man to call out error, as Michael Pearl did recently when he addressed the Homeschool Cloistered Syndrome, and I know more of the body will read, listen and potentially be built up.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 4, 2008 @ 5:21 pm )
Respectfully Amanda (#93),
Are you suggesting that a person’s past history of sin makes it impossible for him/her to be called to serve God’s purposes?
Surely you wouldn’t dare.
At the heart of Christian theology is the belief that not a one of us is worthy of God’s grace - and by extension, His annointing. When you, a sinful human reconciled to God only by His blood and His grace, presume to judge another’s “fitness” to be called by God, you deny the truth of the most basic tenets of our faith.
Tread lightly, lest the foundation of moral superiority you seem to be resting on crumbles beneath your feet.
Comment by Bethany (September 4, 2008 @ 6:26 pm )
Slightly off topic but not really.
I *heart* Piper Palin.
Comment by Janet (September 4, 2008 @ 7:00 pm )
Spunky, Sara, and Cassie, Thanks for letting me know your thoughts on this. My husband and I were not going to vote for the Reps. or Dems. I don’t think that will change but I really find it helpful to hear from others on these types of issues. It helps me think in a more well rounded way ( i understand what I mean –even if no one else does ;-)*grin* )
Comment by Kelli C. (September 4, 2008 @ 7:48 pm )
Hmm. This is SO interesting. I’m loving it. My 16 year old is reading over my shoulder for the last 20 or so comments. He “got it” immediately. He said: “What Isaiah is saying is that someone who is considered culturally inferior will rule you. That was an insult.” That’s not the same as saying that women are inferior.
Yes. That’s why I homeschool. My children have much more to teach me.
Comment by Holly (September 4, 2008 @ 7:56 pm )
Kelli, please, please vote. This is the most important election of all (I’m sure they say that on every election), but it is important to vote so we can try our best to keep this country from going down. I’m sure most everyone on this blog would agree that we do not need a man like Obama running our nation-he is just too scary. It will probably be a tight election, but you and your husbamd’s vote will count. Please pray about it.
Comment by Cassie (September 4, 2008 @ 9:43 pm )
With regard to Bethany in comment #154, addressing Amanda of comment #93 (This can really get confusing sometimes; my apologies.) ~
My name got included with Amanda’s thoughts and it gave the impression I, Ruthanne, may have raised the issue of McCain’s marital woes or other subjects.
So that things are VERY, VERY clear, I must remind folks that my original comment NEVER mentioned a THING about any of the following subjects:
Anyone’s infidelity
The Deborah idea
Patriarchy
Homeschooling
Being “quiverfull”
Feminism
SAHMs
Working moms/women
Baking bread from scratch
Macs vs. Windows
Top Loaders vs. front loaders
Starbucks or Dunkin’ Donuts
Polyester vs. cotton
Etc.
The issue on my heart is that of ABORTION ~ the violent act of murdering an innocent preborn child.
Here is what I said:
McCain claims to be pro-life but approves of snuffing out the lives of babies in the cases of rape, incest or “the life of the mother” (a vague term, at best). He also supports embryonic stem cell research.
The man is not pro-life.
My hope is that every person who has visited this discussion will honestly and prayerfully ask themselves:
Would Jesus want me to cast my vote for a man who thinks it’s acceptable to tear a baby limb by limb from its mother’s womb?
(I’m not using inflammatory language just to be obnoxious. The words are accurate.)
As a friend said to me the other day, “God will still be on his throne if Obama is President.” Friends, we do not need to fear! (Do you hear that, dear Cassie?)
There are other men for whom you may vote, who revere God and the life he gives: Chuck Baldwin and Ron Paul.
Thanks for another block of space, Amy, and for the opportunity to clarify what I did and did not write about.
Love,
Ruthanne
Comment by Ruthanne (September 4, 2008 @ 10:43 pm )
KelliC–yes, the addition of Sarah Palin *did* cement my vote. I had considered voting the Constitutional Party (we’re really Ron Paul folks), but was holding out to find out whom McC picked. When I heard about the intense needs Palin has in her family, I felt it was wrong of her to pursue such an overwhelming public office at this time. I would have said the same thing if the “First Dude” Todd Palin were running for VP of the US. Doesn’t matter if it’s the man or the woman Palin running–that family is in a very tough time and Mom and Dad are both needed at home. So, I’m voting for Chuck Baldwin.
Comment by Cappy's Wife (September 4, 2008 @ 11:25 pm )
Humbly submitted for further consideration:
http://christiannewswire.com/news/712327747.html
Comment by Ruthanne (September 4, 2008 @ 11:41 pm )
Don’t think that last link went through, Amy. Will try again.
Comment by Ruthanne (September 4, 2008 @ 11:43 pm )
Humbly submitted for further consideration:
http://christiannewswire.com/news/712327747.html
May need to copy & paste into your browser because I couldn’t seem to link correctly.
Comment by Ruthanne (September 4, 2008 @ 11:44 pm )
Not trying to cause trouble here (much, anyway…) but with all due respect, neither Chuck Baldwin’s nor Ron Paul’s families (kids, aunts, uncles, etc.) have gone through the media scrutiny that the other candidates have. Even though they (Baldwin’s, Paul’s) family are great people, I’m sure you would find skeletons or at least things you would disagree with them on. If people looked at your (generically speaking) life OR mine, and dug enough, and pulled out everything since my birth, they would find plenty to hang me on. I suspect the same is true of everyone. You will not find a perfect candidate.
Ruthanne, are you SURE? I am fairly certain that you mentioned Windows vs. Mac, AND it was with an insensitive tone.
And on a serious but reciprocal note, how can you NOT vote for a woman who will surely help to change the horrific genocide of the Down Syndrome population? We would not stand for DOGS being killed in such a holocaust. Sarah Palin in the VP position would place her son, Trig, before America’s face for four years. We would watch him grow up, and fall in love with him, and wonder why on earth anyone would abort such precious children. Do you really doubt that this woman would be vocal about the Down Syndrome genocide? I don’t think she’s afraid to say anything!
Hey, please know that I love you all and wish you all the best. I just want y’all to consider another side. Who’s to say that John McCain might change his consideration of when abortion is acceptable after he spends a couple of months with Trig? You could pray for that….
Comment by Holly (September 4, 2008 @ 11:47 pm )
Never said anything about finding a “perfect” candidate, either, Holly. But *as far as I can tell*, these men love the Lord, uphold the sanctity of life (all of it) and are biblically qualified to fill the position.
Am I a one-issue woman? Not necessarily, but you’d better believe I START with whether or not a man truly honors the life God gives, then I go from there to evaluate — to the best of my ability and with the guidance of my husband — if he is biblically qualified to serve in the position and if I agree with him on other issues.
P.S. I live in a house divided. We have both PC and Mac lovers within!
Comment by Ruthanne (September 5, 2008 @ 12:01 am )
My son loves Macs. The rest of us don’t know enough about computers to make that decision.
Blessings, friend.
Comment by Holly (September 5, 2008 @ 12:08 am )
Just wanted to clarify–it’s not the so-called “skeletons” in Palin’s closet that bothers me. Indeed, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” no? It’s just the intense environment in her family at this time. I cannot imagine devoting myself to politics at a time my family was in such crisis. It bothered me that, even though she began having contractions during her last pg, she continued to fly so that she could attend political rallies and give speeches.
I do understand the possible attention DS babies could receive from her v-presidency; that’s the only aspect that could even begin to make me consider voting from McC/Palin. I found out in my last pg my baby was anencephalic. I was offered the option of abortion. I turned it down. Our little one lived less than a day, but the baby was precious to us. So, I “get it” about that. Still, the Palins have bigger fish to fry.
Comment by Cappy's Wife (September 5, 2008 @ 12:11 am )
You too, Holly.
Comment by Ruthanne (September 5, 2008 @ 12:11 am )
Ruthanne: So in the pursuit of ending ALL abortions, you will vote for someone who has no chance of ending ANY abortions?
That, my friend, is sleeping in the light.
By all means, vote your conscience.
But don’t tell us that by voting McCain/Palin we are doing otherwise.
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 5, 2008 @ 12:42 am )
And just to have fun:
HOLLY: can I betroth your son in marriage to my daughter?
CATHY: how many “cowlicks” does it take to tame messy baby hair? ‘cuz i’ve got a baby with 2–going in opposite directions and no amount of hand-licking gets it straight! but maybe Piper Palin would do a better job?!
MOLLY: may I suggest a little wine for your stomach? ‘cuz even if you were reading from the dead sea scrolls you wouldn’t change these ladies’ minds! so chill, girlfriend. we all love you and accept you. now, about that riesling…
and lastly: DUDE! I’M COMMENT #170!!!! sweeeeeeeeeeeet.
what prize did I win????
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 5, 2008 @ 12:52 am )
oh, and just one more:
AMY: DO YOU MIND IF I”M TAKING UP SPACE ON YOUR BLOG? CUZ IF YOU DO PLEASE TELL ME TO STOP!
sheesh, ladies. obviously she doesn’t mind. where are we at, now? 171? sweeeeeeeet.
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 5, 2008 @ 12:53 am )
Ruthanne,
I’ve communicated with you personally and though we’ve not always seen eye-to-eye, I have enjoyed our dialog.
Would you mind answering a question?
If after praying and thinking about the issues, I vote McCain, am I sinning?
Furthermore, as I asked on Elizabeth’s blog, can a woman work outside the home and still be a “keeper at home (I use that terminology since it appears on a myriad of blogs that are staunchly against women working outside the home)?” I ask that of you, as well, because I noticed that you commented on another blog with regard to Titus 2.
Furthermore, while you said that if Obama is elected that “God will still be on His throne.” Cannot the same can be said if McCain is elected?
After Palin was introduced last week, she went through the crowd shaking hands and said to some of the people with whom she chatted, “Pray for God’s will.”
I think that’s what I’ll do. Regardles of my vote, God has a purpose and plan. Makes me feel kind of small…
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 5, 2008 @ 12:55 am )
Um… she didn’t make FUN of Ron Paul with that Mickey Mouse comparison, did she? I wouldn’t exactly call that a “humble musing”. This is my first read (sent via email from a friend) and I can’t get beyond the teasing to enjoy the rest of the post like the rest of you who are praising Amy. Ron Paul is the MOST qualified candidate - MORE people were in attendance in MN than at the RNC - and he is a God-fearing man. A write-in would certainly do this country some good.
STILL a Ron Paul supporter…
Comment by Stephanie (September 5, 2008 @ 7:56 am )
Hi, Cathy,
but, Yes! We are kinda small! Indeed, God directs the heart of the king, like a watercourse…He is in control regardless of who is elected–McCain, Obama, Mickey Mouse. I do think it’s important to vote, however, we are responsible for only our own vote. We’re not each responsible for the entire election. When Bill Clinton was elected, that wasn’t my fault! LOL I have not carried around guilt for that. I “said” my piece (as in voting) then it was up to God. He gave us what we needed for that moment in time, for His own reasons. (mysterious, no?)
You weren’t talking to me
I guess my philosophy is “Be responsible in your own vote, then leave the rest up to God.”
Comment by Cappy's Wife (September 5, 2008 @ 8:18 am )
I wonder when people in the Ron Paul camp or the Mickey Mouse camp will wise up and realize that it is just another vote for Obama in all reality because you are taking away a vote for McCain. When it comes down to it which party do we want running our country? There will never be enough votes for Ron Paul to win so why write him in? You just take away votes from McCain and give Obama the lead… think about it.
Comment by Anonymous (September 5, 2008 @ 9:21 am )
I went to bed last night after posting, then thought of this question. It’s really the same one Elizabeth asked. (Our children are betrothed, you know.)
I almost got back up to post…but refrained until this morning.
Question: So, in the theoretical presupposition that Chuck Baldwin *might* someday, somehow, someway be elected and *might* save the babies who result from rape or incest (Does anyone know the percentage of all abortions that fall into this category?), you will not vote for a woman who has the opportunity to change the demographics of the Down Syndrome population NOW?
I continue to think that this is one of those “out of the box” circumstances where the Lord sent a remarkable situation to our specific time in history.
Let’s see: A WOMAN, who is 44 years old, uniquely positioned as a Governor. She was not seeking higher office. He sends her a baby. He knew she would not abort the child as many high powered women might, but would welcome it.
The baby is extra special. Down Syndrome.
The nation is currently sacrificing almost all Down Syndrome children to Molech. But not this little one. He is spared from the fiery pit of destruction. Instead, he is loved, and clothed, and cuddled…indeed by a large family who adores him and spit styles his hair.
God could have launched the father. He could have launched another man with a large, beautiful family…a MAN to rule as is customary.
God, instead, stepped out of our usual way of operating (How LIKE HIM!) and launched this tiny boy!!! His mama came with him. And because she is a Mama Bear, she will fight fiercely for him and for those like him. Immediately…not in some ethereal and supposed future of our republic. Because, frankly, the republic might not be around by then.
And, you know…so many God lovers missed the entire point. They were so busy destroying the mama and swatting her back into her kitchen that they could. not. see. the. potential. They discounted HOW God might choose to work, because, they said, “the canon was closed and God does not CALL anyone today.” (loosely translated from Buried Treasure Books.)
Sisters, friends…I DO love you all, and I do NOT speak with anger or any malice. But I am in LOVE with the Lord who has mercy upon us all, and I am eager to see Him move on our sad nation as we have so often implored Him to do. I refuse to turn away a woman, a mother…one that I believe will give not 100 percent of herself but 300 percent so that all of her responsibilities will be covered…in the event that perhaps it is the Lord who has sent her.
Whew. My own household calls.
Have a good day, friends!
Comment by Holly (September 5, 2008 @ 10:03 am )
Ruthanne, God may still be on the throne but we discovered after 8 years of Clinton (with a Republican congress) that WAY more babies died under him (look how many times congress tried to pass the partial-birth abortion ban that Clinton always stopped) than after Bush came along.
McCain may not be all that we want him to be but you have to ask yourself. Which is better - McCain who may try to pass some federal laws for abortion restrictions or Obama who most likely would undermine partial-birth abortion. I am almost soley a one-issue woman and I will take whatever candidate will prevent more deaths of babies even if it isn’t all that I want to happen.
Comment by Colleen (September 5, 2008 @ 10:34 am )
Who is Mickey Mouse, by the way? Someone that I don’t know of on the 3rd party using that nickname? Just wondering.
Ruthanne, I appreciate your comments, but I agree with anonymous about writing in a 3rd party name will take away McCain’s votes and give Obama the lead. There will be NO ONE perfect EVER to run this country until Jesus comes back. EVERYONE has their faults. Yes-even me. But, we as Christians should forgive EVERYONE-just like God does-and see past the faults of our politicians and our neighbors, at that. Like I said, NO ONE is going to be perfect, but we just have to deal with what we’ve got, and pray that GOD’S will be done in this election and then AFTER the election for whoever gets into the office.
BTW, I thought McCain’s speech last night was good, did anyone else think so?
Comment by Cassie (September 5, 2008 @ 11:04 am )
@175 -
Seriously, when is that “lesser of two evils” motto gonna die out? The whole idea that a vote for “anyone” other than John McCain is a vote for Obama is relativistic hogwash to the tenth degree. If a Christian cannot, in good conscience, vote for McCain, then they have every right (and I would say, even reason) to write in a candidate like Ron Paul. There is a reason that every ballot allows you to write in a candidate — because it’s a constitutional right to do so. If you’re convinced you can vote for John McCain, then good — but do the rest of Christendom a favor and don’t try to bind our consciences with a Republican tag line.
‘BH
Comment by Brother Hank (September 5, 2008 @ 11:18 am )
I am not for abortion in cases of rape or incest. However, I am for being accurate with the truth, and this news report isn’t:
This is purposefully misleading. Everyone else would say “tax-funded surgical abortion in the case of rape or incest”. I don’t know of anyone who is advocating for tax-funded abortions for women who have had the poor sense to let criminals impregnate them, even if they were rapists. This makes it sound as if the rape could have been committed years before. The author refuses to acknowledge that we are talking about women who become pregnant as a result of rape.
It the truth is on our side — and I believe it is — we had better be on the side of truth.
So, I’m sorry, but I find it difficult to believe anything else in this inaccurate, misleading article. It is simply not a credible source.
Comment by Rebecca (September 5, 2008 @ 11:43 am )
As I mentioned in a previous comment, two of McCain’s closest political friends are Lieberman and Ridge - both are pro-choice. So while I respect McCain’s position on abortion, he did tell us that Democrats and independents will feature in his administration. Do you want Tom Ridge the head of the Department of Health and Human Services? And then there is the UN to consider? They are not pro-family and funding them funds many of the things conservatives abhor. Will pro-life McCain appoint Lieberman as US ambassador to the UN? Passing laws to restrict abortion in Congress isn’t likely unless it becomes a Republican Congress, but who McCain appoints to various cabinet level positions will affect funding on various issues including abortion.
Not saying that this is enough not to vote for McCain, but it is something else to consider.
Comment by Spunky (September 5, 2008 @ 11:52 am )
Getting back to the “obedience to God” notion, I worked outside the home in a very prestigous and high-paying job. I had men who took orders from me, as I was their boss. I hated my job and begged my husband to let me stay home, but he insisted that I work (he worked at the same job). To the ultra-conservative evangelical crowd (of which I belong), I would have appeared to have forsaken my family and disobeyed my husband by working outside the home, especially in a job that placed me in higher authority than a man. The truth was, I was in complete submission to my husband by doing what he wanted me to do. I now am able to stay home with his blessing (after much crying out to God in prayer).
I am impressed that Sarah Palin brought her Down Sydrome baby to the convention, and that her entire family took turns holding him. Think about it - she could have left him at the hotel with a nanny, but didn’t. And for those of us who keep our babies with us in church and constantly walk in and out of the service, I can’t imagine taking a baby to a function like that! I thought it was great and shows how much the family loves that baby.
Comment by Valerie (September 5, 2008 @ 12:01 pm )
I’m a Christian and I’m voting for Obama. I alternate between amusement and resentment regarding
the comments on here that you cannot be a Christian and vote Democrat. I do not recall Jesus being a Registered Republican.
Sarah Palin seems to be an interesting person with a great zest for life. I do not have any problems with her on the ticket as a female. I find myself in disagreement with many of her and McCain’s policy positions to the extent that I will be voting for
Obama/Biden.
I appreciate the author of this blog writing this article. Many evangelical Christians are writing and saying things about Gov. Palin, regarding her undertaking this nomination as a female, that are incredibly viscous and reflect an incomplete or suspect understanding of biblical text. I’m not talking about anyone’s posts on this board–I’m thinking of other things I have read.
Comment by anon (September 5, 2008 @ 12:50 pm )
Love that Elizabeth!
I think sometimes we have to remember that we are voting for someone who will be the best leader of America and not necessarily an elder of or our church.
I’ve told some of my friends who think that voting for Baldwin or Paul is doing the best thing:
Imagine you want a 7 course meal at a 5 star restaurant with great taste and nutrition. But for reasons beyond your control you are forced to eat at McDonalds. You can then choose to order a hambuger that may not be the best for you but still has some nutrition. Or you can insist on still ordering the 7 course fine restaurant meal. Well you’re never gonna get it. And because you didn’t order off the menu they give you instead a pile of manure deep fried in saturated fat.
On a side note, Ron Pauls and McCain’s voting record on abortion is virtually the same. And what we Christians fail to remember is that the President is limited in what he can do in regards to abortion. You have 2 more branches of the power. The best thing is to get the Supreme Court on board and Bush did that with the 2 nominations he had available. We definitely don’t want Obama in office where he will put extreme liberal judges on the bench.
Comment by Liesl Marie (September 5, 2008 @ 1:10 pm )
Excellent, grounded thoughts, Amy. Thank you.
Comment by Cindy Swanson (September 5, 2008 @ 1:28 pm )
I have stated before that the abortion problem will not be solved through politics. I don’t care who is in office, and how pro-life they are, that fact will not end abortion in this this country. That will only occur when the people of this, by and large, have personally changed their minds on this issue. Unfortunately, we are nowhere such a sea change today, although we are closer than at any time since Roe v. Wade.
In the meantime, the best we can hope for is small, incremental changes; such as the passage of parental notification laws, the effective elimination of abortion in the third trimester, and the reduction of it in the second trimester.
The liberals understand the importance of incrementalism, that they can achieve an agenda over a period of years that would not be possible in one fell swoop. We can’t we conservatives get this through our heads? Is John McCain perfect in my eyes on the issue of abortion? Not in my opinion, but he’s in favor of a great many things that will improve the abortion situation in this country. And even if he’s only able to make a small difference in the abortion laws, that translates into real live babies born that otherwise would have been killed. And is that good? Yes it is.
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 5, 2008 @ 1:37 pm )
Hank (I would call you “Dude” but Elizabeth has a monopoly on that moniker–even though I say it ALL THE TIME, because like her, I live in CA),
Like anon, I am in agreement that Jesus isn’t a Republican or Democrat. I couldn’t begin to care how you vote–it is a matter that is between you and God.
ON THE OTHER HAND, many blogs (present one excepted), as anon pointed out, are vicious and vitriolic–all in the name of Christ. Those writers would have you believe that women who do something other than stay at home are outside of God’s will and in sin. One of the blogs even advocates that the husband represents the family and the family should vote as he does. He calls himself an “anti-suffragist.”
So, if you will promise that you won’t claim that the Bible says something when it doesn’t, then I promise that I won’t wrap myself in the Republican flag. Besides, I’m more Libertarian in my politics than anything else.
Finally, Ron Paul has already stated that he isn’t running, so perhaps that would be a wasted vote, but, your right to vote trumps that notion.
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 5, 2008 @ 1:49 pm )
Here’s the real criteria upon which we should base our decision about Palin: OPRAH DOESN’T LIKE HER!!!
Now my mind is completely made up!

Comment by jo (September 5, 2008 @ 2:07 pm )
Thank you for your post, Mrs. Scott. I appreciate your words.
Comment by Anonymous (September 5, 2008 @ 2:44 pm )
[...] it still was interesting to read Challies’ compilation of references. I ESPECIALLY enjoyed Amy Scott’s article on it, tho that was pertaining less to Palin and more to her Biblically based assessment of the [...]
Pingback by Pensive Grace » Blog Archive » Pondering Palin (September 5, 2008 @ 3:14 pm )
Another fantastic post, Amy. And rich debate. Someone asked a statistical question about how many abortions resulted from rape and incest. I wrote a paper in college around 20 years ago and then, the stat I found was .01 percent. We should, of course, keep in mind what Mark Twain said: “There are three kinds of lies–lies, d*mn lies, and statistics.” Even so, it’s a small percentage to figure so largely in the debate. Although when we’re talking about human life, even one is a tragedy, isn’t it?
This is the only blog I’ve read on the Palin “controversy” but from the comments here it seems as though there’s lots of scripture pummeling that is going on out in the blogosphere. There is something so arrogant and smug about finding Biblical figures we think represent someone contemporary and then we twist and strain to make the context fit our neat little premise. Our world is obviously universally the same as Deborah’s world in that we are all fallen humans (though some graciously redeemed) struggling in a fallen world, BUT I don’t think it’s heretical to suggest that there are many things about our world now that are different, and that in this radically different world our calling (or vocation) might be radically different. And as several have already stated, this is no surprise to the omnipotent God of the universe.
Comment by Patti (September 5, 2008 @ 3:18 pm )
To preface - Trust me - I’m trying to be as nice as I can with my comment, but I find myself getting a bit more impassioned about this as each day passes…and, I also agree that God is ultimately the One Who is in control of this election, but He could well allow us what we deserve not totally due to our sin in this nation, but because how we Christians decide on our vote…
I’m about as conservative as they come. I don’t even think women should be allowed to vote. My husband wants me to vote in national elections, so I do. Where do I think Sarah Palin should be? At home with her baby. However, A, I’m not her husband, and B, I don’t care whether we’re talking Rep, Dem, Ind, Const, Lib, Ron Paul write-in, or the Martian party, I’m sure there is sin abounding in one sense or another somewhere since we’re on this side of eternity.
My concern right now boils down to this. Obama and Biden vow to sign FOCA, McCain and Palin do not. If Chuck Baldwin were a viable candidate, I would have to vote for him on principle, even though while viable he might remain the least popular choice or the odds might not be as much in favor of him as the other two. But there is an existing fact. Chuck Baldwin is NOT a viable candidate, and in fact, there are only TWO viable candidates. Which principle is it that I serve if I ignore that fact and vote for Baldwin when instead I can do my part, small tho it may be, to vote against FOCA - is it the principle of my own righteousness? I just don’t understand this way of thinking. Neither does my husband, BTW, and I will be following him in voting McCain-Palin for this very reason.
Comment by Pamela K (September 5, 2008 @ 3:26 pm )
I was re-reading my comment from earlier about being forced to accept Obama’s policies and I realize it was somewhat crude and I apologize.
I had another thought about Palin. While I may not choose to do what she is doing I fully support her. So many talk about her responsibilities of mothering 5 children. My take is that one is fully grown, the next one is about to be 18 and married and raising her own family. That leaves 3 children, 2 of whom can feed, bathe, and clean up themselves (unlike my 2 preshoolers who need constant guidance). With all the extra help Palin will get being VP, I bet she might even get to spend more time with her children than otherwise. My sister is a doctor. Her husband says she is a better mother when she is working. Why? Because when she is working they afford the luxuries of maid service, dry cleaning, lawnkeepers, fine dining, etc. Without these responsibilities she is freer to devote to nuturing her children. When she wasn’t working she was caught up in all the chores.
Comment by Liesl Marie (September 5, 2008 @ 4:17 pm )
I’m still torn. My first gut reaction was, “5 kids???? Including an infant with DS? No way can I vote for her; she needs to be at home raising her children!” I think this is namely for three reasons. First, because of the main thrust of Scripture. Second, because of my personal childhood experience of having a mother who worked outside the home from when I was a newborn to age 18 and the associated feelings of abandonment. Third, because now that I have three littles at home, I project myself onto Palin and think, “I *know* *I* could never be VP with all the responsibilities I have at home!”
But, then I read blogs of people like Amy and Holly, who remind me that God does make exceptions (the Hosea reference was so helpful.) Plus, the dad is going to be at home and they will have help and many of the kids are older. Additionally, the wonderful witness for DS babies as Holly and others have mentioned, would be a coup. I do worry about the role model issue, though. My four year old daughter is already asking me, “who is that pretty lady, mommy?” Generally speaking, I believe if God has blessed a woman with children, she should stay at home and raise them.
My biggest criteria for voting has to be, “which candidate will keep me the safest so that I, as a Christian, will be able to live a quiet, godly life and worship freely?” Nathan A. is right, politics are not going to end abortion. God changing people’s hearts through the Gospel will and I want a candidate who will keep this country safe and free enough for me to live out my faith.
Finally, I do not understand the third party/write in argument at all. Aren’t less abortions better than more abortions? Why does it have to be all or nothing? I can stand before God knowing that my vote for McCain (assuming he governs pro-life) resulted in a PRACTICAL reduction in murder, instead of some principled vote that does NOTHING to reduce the abortion rate. Incremental steps are better than none at all, IMHO.
All that to say, I’m still torn.
Comment by MrsD (September 5, 2008 @ 4:17 pm )
Cathy ~
Absolutely. That’s why, by the grace of God, I can vote — without a moment’s hesitation — by principle, for a man who “doesn’t stand a chance”. Because of our sovereign God, I have no fear of tomorrow.
~~~~~~~~~
I genuinely haven’t the time or desire to discuss the subject here. Thanks for inquiring.
~~~~~~~~~
I’m not the one you need to be seeking for the answer to that.
Even a five-minute perusal of the book of Proverbs alone should give you an indication of what God thinks.
~~~~~~~~~
I cannot vote for McCain even if he claims to care for the lives of some but is willing to send innocent others to a bloody execution.
I also feel a responsibility to Levi, Bristol, their baby, Willow, Piper and Trig not to help take Sarah away from them. (Sure, you can include Track in the list, too.) They need that lady’s constant presence in their lives right now. Think about Bob Pierce and David Livingstone.
I have enough responsibility trying to avoid a millstone being placed around my neck for offending my own little ones, let alone helping others risk the same.
You don’t have to agree with me. You don’t have to like me. You’re even free to think I’m an idiot. That’s okay.
Love to you all ~
Peacefully disengaging from this discussion,
Ruthanne
Comment by Ruthanne (September 5, 2008 @ 4:21 pm )
The 3rd party candidate folks are just the epitome of, “So heavenly minded that they are of no earthly use.”
And not in a good way.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 5, 2008 @ 5:16 pm )
YIKES. Is it OK to respond once again, Amy? When you post again, I’m going to lie low for a while and shut my big yapper.
HOWEVER, even if you’re “disengaging from this discussion,” Ruthanne, I think I would be remiss not to respond.
I don’t want to be prideful, but geez, Ruthanne, I’ve done more than a five minute perusal of Proverbs. I try to read the Bible through every year. Yeah, I’m speed reading at the end of the year, but I try to finish. So, I’ve read Proverbs, and as I read the Bible, I ask God to teach me, to open my eyes and let me focus on His Word.
And, this is exactly about what I am talking. You assume (wrongly) that if others don’t see it as you do, then, well, gosh, they’re just missing it. Look, I don’t want to get into a war of words, but suffice it to say, I take God seriously, I want my kids to follow Him wholeheartedly and I want to do the same. I am flawed, frail and feeble (how’s that for an alliteration), but I desire God. I think through the issues, I talk to my husband and we usually vote the same way, I pray about voting, etc.
If you think that I’m missing something, please feel to pray for me. In the interim, know that I am continuing to listen, watch and study.
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 5, 2008 @ 5:37 pm )
Hey ya’ll, remember me? I’m the blog owner!
Just kidding. I’m glad there is a profitable discussion here. Sorry I couldn’t engage more, but we’re still busy with moving in. To those who’ve asked for “permission” to keep posting, you are doing a fine job with your debate. Please continue without apologizing! If you’re not cat-fighting, you also have my “permission” to continue to post, so don’t feel you have to ask to leave comments more than once.
Ron Paul was the closest I got to a perfect candidate, but even then, he wasn’t perfect. We will always be voting the lesser of two evils, even when/if the Constitution Party gets noticed.
I’ve written other comments and entire posts in favor of Ron Paul. I voted for Ron Paul in the Florida primary.
Mickey Mouse is a widely known write-in for those people who do not wish to vote for any of the candidates on the ballot.
I do a lot of things on my blog, but name calling isn’t one of them. It’s just not classy.
And hey, does anyone want to talk about the post?
Comment by Amy Scott (September 5, 2008 @ 6:16 pm )
Moving a large family across country is hardly an excuse for negligence.*
Cathy
* Said deadpan and with tongue jammed in cheek
Comment by Cathy (September 5, 2008 @ 6:27 pm )
To better understand, can someone tell me what makes a person “biblically qualified” for civil service? Honest question. Personally, I choose the candidate whose values most closely align to those in the Bible (like not killing the innocent), but I am unaware of a list of requirements, like those of elder found in I Timothy 3.
[WOOHOO, I've not piped in all day--#198 notwithstanding, I just wrote it-- and I managed to get comment #200.]
Comment by Amy Scott (September 5, 2008 @ 6:31 pm )
So McCain has friends who are liberal, or more liberal than he is; So what? You can’t be in the senate as long as McCain and not make friends on the other side of the aisle. Or should a TRUE conservative avoid friendships with liberals? McCain has a great many VERY conservative friends in the Senate as well, people who endorsed him from the beginning: John Kyl, Tom Coburn, Trent Lott, (former Sen.) Jack Kemp, and I could go on and on.
Honestly, whether one has liberal friends when one has been in congress for 26 years is not a good way to determine how conservative or liberal one is himself.
While political appointments are important, every president makes some good picks and some bad picks. I’ve seen many picks I thought would be great at the get go, which turned out to be far less desirable later, and vise versa. Sometimes, even a liberal can do a good job (by conservative standards) in a focused political position. For example, here in California, I voted for Bill Lockyer when he ran for his second term as a Attorney General. He’d done a darn good job in that position in his first term, and was highly recommended by a close personal friend, who is a conservative in the district attorney’s office and worked directly under Lockyer. I wouldn’t vote for him for governor, but as an attorney general he was the right man for the job.
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 5, 2008 @ 6:40 pm )
Welcome back, Amy!
ok, so I’m kinda bummed Ruthanne bowed out before answering my question to her. but since it’s such a COMPELLING and AMAZING question, I’m sure she’ll come back.
Here’s what I wrote (way back in comment 169):
[[Ruthanne: So in the pursuit of ending ALL abortions, you will vote for someone who has no chance of ending ANY abortions?
That, my friend, is sleeping in the light.
By all means, vote your conscience.
But don’t tell us that by voting McCain/Palin we are doing otherwise.]]
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 5, 2008 @ 6:52 pm )
From anon at #183:
Hey anon, you know what? I agree with you (not about about the voting for Obama part, McCain has grown on me more and more since late January
), one doesn’t need to vote Republican if one is a Christian. Also, Jesus never joined a political movement, or tried to start one (He began a completely new Kingdom, of which all Christians are subjects).
I just wanted to point out that I don’t believe anyone here has said that a Christian can’t vote democrat. I’ve read all the posts so far (although I have skimmed a few of them), and the only thing that anyone has said in that regard is that they don’t understand how a Christian can be pro-choice on abortion (or support a pro-choice candidate in a few instances). That’s all. I have to admit that I share this puzzlement, although I have known and been friends with many solid Christians who voted democrat regularly.
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 5, 2008 @ 7:01 pm )
Yes, Amy, I would like to comment on the original post. I wanted to when I first read it and then the discussions took off so fast I didn’t even bother.
I thought the post was excellent. I think many forget that while most people marry, there are some that remain single. That doesn’t make them of less worth. We are all stilled called to serve Christ.
So, while I haven’t agreed with every thing you have said in the comments, the original post was excellent. And it is very unusual for me to disagree with you! Except of course, I am a Baptist!
Comment by Rhonda (September 5, 2008 @ 10:38 pm )
OK!! Here is a video from Focus on the Family where Tom Minnery talks about McCain/Palin. It is mostly about McCain because they are covering some specifics about what he said in his speech Thursday night that will help our country if they get elected. Watch other videos on that website, too, if you haven’t seen them. This particular one is about 10 minutes long, but the others aren’t that long, but they give good coverage of all of the conventions/speeches. I’m not computer smart so forgive me if the link doesn’t work. If it doesn’t, google citzenlink and you should be able to find it.
http://www.citizenlink.org/videofeatures/A000008109.cfm
Comment by Cassie (September 5, 2008 @ 11:56 pm )
Well, since Amy asked for comments related to her post… =)
Like another poster has said, I believe the “highest calling” on my life is the one that called me to faith and forgiveness. My devotion to my children has been, and always will be secondary to my devotion to my Father.
Which means that sometimes my children have to take a backseat to the needs of the people God has called me to serve. I am confident enough in my parenting to believe they will not wither away simply because I’m away from them for a few hours every day.
Which do they need more? My presence every moment of their lives or my example of obedience to God’s calling?
Comment by Bethany (September 6, 2008 @ 12:17 am )
Um, Greg, didn’t you see the fine print on the moving-to-the-country contract you signed? The part about no trans-fat, processed dessert-type products wrapped in plastic? From this point forward, it is all freshly milled whole grain, all the time.
On the topic of whether or not the Palin pick has changed anyone’s mind re: voting, I was planning to abstain from the presidential race and just vote my local races (not a McCain fan). I am now planning to vote in favor of the McCain/Palin ticket and I will be happy doing it.
“Riches and honor come from you alone, for you rule over everything. Power and might are in your hand, and it is at your discretion that people are made great and given strength.” 1 Chron 29:12
I draw great comfort in knowing that the rulers over us are put there by the sovereign God. If He sees fit to put Palin into an authoritative position, it will be for His glory alone. Likewise, the Democrat opponents.
Comment by MrsBurns (September 6, 2008 @ 12:18 am )
I haven’t read all the comments, just the first few.
Gov. Palin is from an AoG background, and AoG teaching on biblical manhood/womanhood does differ from the traditional understanding of Paul’s teachings. It’s more in line with evangelical feminism. So, I wouldn’t expect her to be right in line theologically with me on that anyway. That’s their business.
In terms of her “submission” to her husband, that’s something between the Palins and God. Many families do agree to make work/family work by supporting one another through it. It’s not ideal (to me), but I know lots of families who’ve done it and have retained strong ties. Apparently, she began the whole process by joining the PTA in support of her children.
I also believe some are born for “such a time as this.” Perhaps she is one of those.
I’ll admit, I was surprised she accepted the position so soon after her last child was born. But then I looked at her children’s ages. The gap between her next-youngest and youngest is pretty big (from my perspective–my seven children are stairsteps at 2 years apart). She has older children who are either leaving the nest or are close to it (although obviously still needing guidance!). Not so different from presidents’ families of years past.
The biggest differences here are Trig’s age and his special needs, I think. I have no doubt there will be intense scrutiny on his well-being, and I am sure that his family is more concerned than anyone else for his nurturing and care.
The blessings of having a first family with a child born with Down Syndrome are many, however. He is *darling.* A heart-melter. I hope he will cause many families to reconsider the crime of aborting these lovely children.
Comment by Susannah (September 6, 2008 @ 11:44 am )
Well, not “first family.” Sorry. But VP family.
When you think about it, even first ladies and VP wives have heavy schedules that routinely take them from their children.
Comment by Susannah (September 6, 2008 @ 11:50 am )
Amy, I loved your post and it was very humbling for me. I think it is very important for us to consider our thoughts on this as we raise our children. Some of them may not get married and yet their highest calling remains the same, and that is to allow the Lord to direct them and use their lives in such a way that brings glory to HIS name.
Nathan, I like your thoughts! I am checking out your blog…
I have another question for you Amy, because I sincerely want to hear your opinion. I am studying the book of Hosea right now. In nine short verses, God instructs Hosea to marry a woman of whoredom, and then gives him the names of his first three children that Gomer will bear him. Obviously, there is elapsed time in this short passage. My question to you is, do you think it is possible that is was because of God’s foreknowledge that Hosea was instructed to marry this woman of whoredom? His foreknowledge that Gomer would turn to prostitution (which is metophorical of the nation worshipping other gods, and could be the entire meaning of Gomer’s whoring.)
Ok, back to my question, Do you think that there is a chance that Gomer was not a “whore” when they initially got married, but rather God knew she would be. I am wrestling with this because it is hard to understand that God would instruct someone to do something contridictrary to His word.
Would love to hear your thoughts!
Comment by Mindy (September 6, 2008 @ 4:24 pm )
We are called to obey those in civil authority over us (Romans 13:1-7). I don’t recall God ever giving a list of biblical qualifications for those civil authorities.
I suspect this idea of being “biblically qualified” picked up a lot of traction with the promotion of the postmillenial, theonomic and/or reconstructionist thought that is being propagated by certain unnamed ministries. People have been so impacted by that grid of thinking that they process everything through it - even when it flies in the face of accurate biblical teaching.
Comment by sallie @ a quiet simple life (September 6, 2008 @ 4:38 pm )
I’m reluctant to add another comment on the end of such a prolific list, but I want to let you know that I will be linking to you. I am astounded by the grace and just plain good sense that you are inundated with. What an encouragement to keep our eyes on our own prize and let the Holy Spirit be our guide. I want to stay tuned to see what other wise thinking I can glean while pursuing the right path for my life.
Comment by Georgia (September 6, 2008 @ 5:25 pm )
Cassie, I do plan on voting–I didn’t mean to give the impression that I wasn’t. I take it very seriously and over the years have badgered many friends and family members into registering and voting. I may not vote for one of the two major parties. In years past I have felt that voting for another party or independant would just split the vote and was taking valuable votes from someone that could win. This election I have been convicted to Not vote for the lesser of the evils but vote for a candidate that can do the best job. Right to life issues, and traditional family issues are at the top of my list being qualified to do a good job. It does not bode well for a country that does not value it’s young and it’s old. Anyway, I won’t even try to explain my complex thoughts about this through such an impersonal media. But I am totally enjoying this debate as I feel my way towards my final choice. I’ve never been 2 months from election with no clue whom to vote for before–Yet one more thing to make me more humble (I was such a know it all as a younger adult!;-)
Comment by Kelli C. (September 6, 2008 @ 8:37 pm )
Nathan at comment 201 asked in response to my comment about McCain’s decision to include Democrats in his administration,
McCain can have all the liberal friends he wants. I have liberal friends. It is having liberals as his cabinet level advisors that I object to. If McCain is running as a conservative - which he says he is - then I expect he would govern that way as well. His willingness to appoint people who are liberals has me concerned that he’s just pay lip service to Conservatives in Palin’s appointment and that his core advisors would likely be the liberals like Lieberman and Ridge which he has come to rely on.
Comment by Spunky (September 6, 2008 @ 9:32 pm )
People disagree as to whether God commanded Hosea to marry Gomer knowing she was already a whore or knowing she would become one. In reality, it doesn’t matter – they are essentially the same thing. Both possibilities are equally illustrative of Israel’s relationship to God. When God chose them, they were prostituting themselves with Egyptian gods and since God chose them they returned over and over again to their idolatrous ways.
Beyond that, what God knows is reality and He knows what will happen, so saying that Hosea should marry Gomer knowing she would become a whore doesn’t really make the situation any more comfortable.
God does command people to do things that are in apparent contradiction to his decreed will and he commends people for the same. For example, Rahab is lauded as a hero and is honored by God for lying. David is esteemed by Jesus as an example of one who typifies the meaning of the Sabbath when he ate the Bread of the Presence, which was supposedly only lawful for the priests to eat. God commanded Abraham to kill his son as a human sacrifice.
Perhaps all this says a lot about our understanding of God and his will. He just doesn’t want to confine Himself to our nice little boxes and safe little categories and we have to deal with that. But in dealing with that we have to remember that He is not capricious, malevolent, or schizophrenic. As Mr. Beaver said, “Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”
Comment by Amy Scott (September 6, 2008 @ 10:45 pm )
At the time I write this you already have 215 comments. But, I have to leave a comment anyway. This post is simply beautiful. I’ve been trying to explain to my kids that much of this debate is framed by our American culture. I just didn’t know how to explain it like you did. I always encourage moms to stay home if they possibly can and have taught that to my kids. But, home, family and motherhood can become idols too, anything can.
Comment by Anonymous (September 6, 2008 @ 11:13 pm )
Yeah, Anon, and you know? I’m beating myself up for ever falling into the thinking that these things were idols. I would not have said it in such a way, but that is what I unwittingly did. They should not be, and the Lord has called me on it. Amy is right in her post. Love and obedience are our highest calling…for men, women, and children.
Comment by Holly (September 7, 2008 @ 1:19 am )
Amy,
Interesting post, very confusing. What does it have to do with Sarah Palin? She is neither a virgin nor unmarried. She is married, is a Mother and has a direct command for God to be a Keeper AT HOME.
Don’t get it.
Many Blessings
Ace
Comment by ace (September 7, 2008 @ 12:24 pm )
LOL. Why didn’t any of us think of that, huh?
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 7, 2008 @ 2:25 pm )
In regards to #215…
Thank you very much Amy! That is helpful to me and right on.
Comment by Mindy (September 7, 2008 @ 3:30 pm )
This is perfect. Thank you for posting this.
~Jaime
http://www.ChaseNKids.com
Comment by Anonymous (September 7, 2008 @ 3:51 pm )
My husband and I have been reading your blog for years. We met you at a conference in Abingdon 3 years ago and this is my first ever comment. I must say that this post has been in my mind for almost the whole week and I decided to enter blogland for myself after the initial inspiration. Thanks for making people use their NOGGINS… and for doing it with HUMILITY.
Lindsay (wife of: tiller of the backyard garden)
Comment by Lindsay (September 8, 2008 @ 11:10 am )
Enough already. Post something new!
YAWN!
Comment by Tracey (September 8, 2008 @ 11:37 am )
Aw, keep yer skirt on and come over and unpack a box for me, will ya? (And while I have you on the line, Tracey, McGregor wants to know if Matthew got his email last week. He waited all afternoon for him to log on.
)
(Lindsay, I remember having lunch with you. Thanks for touching base!)
Comment by Amy Scott (September 8, 2008 @ 12:08 pm )
Sorry Amy,
Nice try Amy, but Mrs. Garcia (even though I didn’t like the dung reference) hit it on the head. Your Pauline reference was weak. He wasn’t talking about married women. Search the OT and NT and you will be VERY hard pressed to find a single passage of scripture(unless you bend real hard) that will support your belief. Please post any scripture you have used to come to this conclusion. Thanks and God Bless!
Comment by David (September 8, 2008 @ 1:42 pm )
David,
The burden of proof is on those who say, “A woman’s highest calling is to be a wife and mother.” The Bible doesn’t teach that anywhere.
My belief is that each woman should devote herself to the Lord and then to her husband if she has one. If she does not have one, she should not aspire to get one in order to get a “high” calling. This is the teaching of Corinthians and the entire Bible.
Those who are teaching this false doctrine are using Titus 2 has their proof text. Nowhere does it say that woman should seek the vocation of wife and mother over all else. It’s not even hinted at.
My “belief” is supported by Scripture and by historical orthodox Christianity. This thing about motherhood being *the highest calling* is new and unbiblical. Any woman who loves the Lord Jesus Christ has answered the highest calling. That is the voice of her Master that says, “Follow me.” Each woman who does her work unto the Lord receives favor and blessing from the Lord. Motherhood is not more important than the single missionary who gives a cup of water to a stranger. We are a body with each member having its part. The eye cannot say to the hand that she is more important than the hand. This is the clear historic teaching of the Bible.
In case you think I’ve got a dog in the fight, I’ll just make a sub note here and say that I am a stay at home mother to six children. It is always my councel that mothers should arrange thier lives so to be at home with their children, all things being equal. There is always the exception: a woman’s husband who has told her to work, Andrea Yates and other women suffering under a burden they can not bear, and countless other situations.
The Bible tells us repeatedly, get wisdom. Wisdom is the ability to apply the teaching of Titus 2 and I Corinthians at the same time and to real life stories. I am afraid, instead, that we have made hard fast rules that we apply to all women, while thanking God that we aren’t like them. Those who put the word “Biblical” in front of every noun as they speak doesn’t make it so.
This isn’t in-house cat fighting. This ideology is an affront of who we claim God is.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 8, 2008 @ 2:20 pm )
Hit the nail on the head. My exact thoughts, couldn’t have put it any better.
Comment by Occassional Male Reader (September 9, 2008 @ 10:34 am )
Comment by Mrs. Damian Garcia (September 2, 2008 @ 7:30 am )
Hit the nail on the head. My exact thoughts, couldn’t have put it any better.
Comment by Occassional Male Reader (September 9, 2008 @ 10:35 am )
In addition to the subject of calling (specifically, a woman’s calling), I think the issues addressed in Doug Wilson’s article (#96) are equally relevant.
So much of the Church - reformed and otherwise - has fallen into the fundamentalist, legalist trap. Man likes laws and rules and regulations, because by them we can 1) make ourselves holy, and 2) have a measuring stick by which to judge others. Some of the most extreme “Christian” fundamentalist thinking mirrors almost exactly that of fundamentalist Mormonism and Islam - that a woman’s sanctification and glorification hinge on how well she serves her man, not how well she serves The Man.
I couldn’t help thinking, as I read your entry and the comments, that you’ve probably just ruined your chances to be nominated for any Homeschool Blog Awards this year, seeing as how they’re managed by some of our most legalistic fellow homeschoolers. But I have a feeling you don’t really care.
As my teens say, “You rock.”
Comment by TC (September 9, 2008 @ 12:42 pm )
Hate to tell you, but stay at home mom does not equal good parent.
Beat her into the ground with the endless (I do mean ENDLESS) blather about her inperfections and failures if you want to. Reagan was the standard bearer for the conservatives but even he was not perfect; but he was a Man so we can overlook all of his inperfections and failures with his personal and political life.
I know who I am voting for and I am a heart beat away from a president who is solidly pro-life, gun totin’ fiscally responsible and not part of the political royalty. I am good with that.
Keep up the endless quibbeling and have fun with a Dem House, Senate and President.
I was a Paul supporter, but I see a valid and viable alternative now and I am jumping at the opportunity. 
Comment by Occassional Male Reader (September 9, 2008 @ 1:21 pm )
Amy,
I’m new to your blog and this is my first time to comment. Just wanted to THANK YOU for this amazing post. It came right when I needed it. I may link to in a blog post of my own very soon.
Anyway, thanks! You have no idea how timely it was. Awesome!
Comment by Stacey (September 9, 2008 @ 1:47 pm )
[...] is so good I have to put it here for posterity’s sake. This comment was left by TC on Amy’s A woman’s highest calling discussion: So much of the Church - [...]
Pingback by A Quiet Simple Life » Blog Archive » Best thing I’ve read all day (September 9, 2008 @ 2:06 pm )
Thank you, T.C.!!! That was such a great point (Sallie beat me to it!) :). It’s such a blessing to hear these wise comments, and Amy, i thank you for hosting this big interweb party. You gonna bring us some milkshakes from that goat?
Comment by Kat (September 9, 2008 @ 3:03 pm )
I realize this is late in the game, but I also wanted to thank you for a great post. As someone who is a physician and strongly desires to be a mom, too, I realize I’m going to have many people who judge me and think about me in the same ways they think about Sarah Palin. I feel called to be a physician. This is what God wants me to do. This is not something I undertook lightly or just because I had something to prove or wanted some kind of high paying job. I prayed about it a lot in college, and recognized that God has blessed me with gifts that are best used in this profession. I love my job - I get to pray with patients, to ease their pain, and to try to be like Jesus to those who are sick. When I have children (hopefully soon) I don’t think I’m going to suddenly be called to stay home all the time. Will my career look different than someone who does not have children, or than a man’s? Probably. Will my home life look differently that someone who does not work outside the home? Again, I’m sure it will. But I still believe that God will use my talents as a physician in a way that brings glory to himself. Just like with Sarah Palin. God clearly has blessed her with gifts and talents in this political arena. And I definitely feel he can use them even though she is a mother. Ever since I heard about her selection, I’m actually excited about voting in this election. I do not believe that either ticket can save us, but I love what she stands for - that she does not just talk about pro-life issues in theory, but has lived through the tough decisions people face.
Thanks, though, for the reminder of what all our lives should be about.
Comment by Aubrey T. (September 9, 2008 @ 3:39 pm )
Aubrey - by way of encouragement; my dentist has a similar story to yours. However, shen is married, has her own practice and 2 children. She balances her life by having both her children at the practice (in their own space with a Nanny) which allows her to have hours that allow her to be home for dinner every night, and weekends. Everytime I go in for my ‘visit’ I get to see the children, and everyone else (just like me) lavish them with love and hugs. As a side note, her husband is an engineer,not a stay at home ‘Dad/Mom’. I admire her tremendously.
Comment by Jo Anne (September 9, 2008 @ 7:06 pm )
More on Isaiah 3:12, I found the reason for why most of our translations have “women and children” in the passage FASCINATING. Good grief, talk about a translator slip-up. After reading this, if it’s true, I think it’s clear that the Septuanint translators did a much better job on Isaiah 3:12 than more recent groups have.
I think we find another case of prejudiced translation in Isaiah 3:12. The word translated “children” in this verse in Isaiah, is a plural masculine participle of the verb “to glean,” “abuse,” “practice.” It is translated “glean” in Leviticus 19:10, Deuteronomy 24:21, Judges 20:45, and Jeremiah 6:9. The word has no translation such as “children” anywhere else in the Bible, and it occurs 21 times. Another word altogether is used for “children,” and “child,” in verses 4 and 5 of this same chapter; the sense seems to have been fixed by the supposed context, to correspond with “women.”
As to the word translated “women”: Two words, without the rabbinical vowel “points,” are exactly alike. One is pronounced nosh-im and the other na-shim. In appearance the only difference is a slight mark under the first letter of the Hebrew word na-shim. The first word means “exactors;” the one with a vowel mark under the initial letter means “women.”
The entire decision, therefore, as to whether the word means one or the other depends upon OPTION. Those who pointed the word, evidently thought the nation could sink no lower than to pass under women rulers, and then translated the word “children” to match it.
Commentators frequently call attention to the alternate reading. See Adam Clarke on the passage. The Septuagint translates: “As for my people, tax-gatherers (praktores) glean them, and exactors (apaitountes) rule over them.”
There seems little in the context to support the translation “children” and “women.” But study the context as regards the other reading. After complaining of the “gleaners,” (that is, “tax-gatherers”) and “extortioners,” they are threatened in the following language: “The Lord standeth up to plead and standeth up to judge the people. The Lord will enter into judgement with the elders of His people, and the princes (“rulers,” masculine, not feminine gender), thereof for ye have eaten up the vineyard (the conduct of extortionate tax-gatherers), and the spoil of the poor is in your houses. What mean ye that ye crush (R. V.) my people, and grind the faces of the poor?”
http://godswordtowomen.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/isaiah-312-he-nation-could-sink-no-lower-than-to-pass-under-women-rulers/
Ouch! In my opinion, this pretty much ends the use of Isaiah 3:12 as a proof-text against women in leadership positions.
Comment by Molly (September 10, 2008 @ 4:37 pm )
[...] Sarah Palin Present a Dilemma for Complementarians? (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 4) by David Kotter * A Woman’s Highest Calling by Amy Scott * An Unexpected New Motherhood Debate by Albert Mohler * What If Palin Was a . . . by [...]
Pingback by Sarah Palin and Evangelicals: What Do You Think? « Provocations & Pantings (September 10, 2008 @ 5:49 pm )
This is for Aubrey T. - I too am a physician (I was an emergency room doctor for five years). I am now a stay at home mom. When you have children, your outlook will totally change. Trust me. I gave up making $200,000+ per year because I was miserable at work without my kids. I, too, prayed with my patients. I offered compassion, hugs, and tears. Now I pray with my children that I get to be with all day and night, and I offer them compassion and hugs. I too felt called to be a physician, but my highest calling is that of mother.
Comment by Valerie (September 11, 2008 @ 10:56 pm )
Amy,
Thanks for your post. You gave me some new things to consider. I’m not entirely like-minded, but can agree to disagree
You asked about a passage in the Bible that mentions requirements for civic leadership. I know of one, it is found in Exodus 18:21, when Jethro is advising Moses about delegating civic authority to others: “Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.”
It is my understanding that the Hebrew word used for “man” in this passage is specific to the male gender, not a word that would be gender neutral, such as “mankind.”
In my opinion, neither Obama nor McCain measure up to this standard. And of course, if one applies this passage to Sarah Palin, her gender disqualifies her. I plan to write in Chuck Baldwin for president, which allows me a clear conscience. I will trust God for the results.
I don’t know of any similar passages in the New Testament. I don’t think New Testament believers had the privilege of electing their civic leaders. (Correct me if I am wrong…) I imagine they would have been thrilled to have the opportunity to apply the advice Jethro gave to Moses, however, in an election. It might have spared them a lot of persecution, but that was not God’s plan…
Romans 8:28
hth,
Eileen
Comment by Eileen (September 14, 2008 @ 3:39 am )
Honestly I think a lot of poeple are just trying to justify their burning conscious on this one. Amy, I am not saying this is the case with you - I think this is your genuine conclusion based on your writing. But the majority of the evangelical base - I think this base is scrambling to figure out how they can justify this one.
Comment by Anonymous (September 14, 2008 @ 8:43 am )
It occurs to me that while folks are writing in Baldwin or Barr or even Paul to afford them a clear conscience in this election–and quoting all kinds of OT scripture on civil leadership–that the whole democratic process is unbiblical, isn’t it? I don’t see one single instance of God inviting anyone to vote on their king; quite the contrary.
So, if you’re going to place yourself under the law, you had better do it more completely and perhaps just don’t vote at all.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 14, 2008 @ 10:33 am )
Funny, GB, I was thinking something similar: a case could really be made that Christians shouldn’t be involved in politics in any way at all. I’m not saying I agree with that position, but it could be made and probably has been.
Comment by sara (September 14, 2008 @ 12:45 pm )
GB,
Does the law prohibit a democratic form of govt? Does the law prohibit voting? Does the OT have anything to say about picking a leader, a husband, a wife, a friend, a blog to read or not read?
Looking to the OT for principles regarding the character of God and using those convictions to pick or not pick a leader is not an example of placing oneself under the law as far as I can see.
Comment by Ethan (September 14, 2008 @ 4:44 pm )
Aha! Therein lies the difference between the “letter of the law” and the “spirit of the law.”
When principles become exhortations that include implied condemnation…it starts to feel like law to me.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 14, 2008 @ 11:16 pm )
I too wrote a long comment only to erase it.
I’m happy to see we are talking about stuff like this.
Comment by Carla (September 15, 2008 @ 8:47 pm )
[...] articles written by men who deride Sarah Palin for aspiring to be the veep. But this article [link] was a breath of fresh air and I wanted to make sure my readers — men and women — saw [...]
Pingback by Highest Calling - A Son Of Liberty (September 16, 2008 @ 12:06 pm )
Amy,
Sorry, but you still did not provide any solid biblical teaching about the woman’s role. Yes, we are definitely BOTH equal in God’s eyes,
Comment by David (September 18, 2008 @ 9:30 am )
Amy,
The usual defense, and it seems to be by reading some of the above posts, is to label any fellow Christian a legalist if they don’t agree with how women view the clear teaching of Titus 2 and other NT passages on women and their God ordained role in the home. Yes, if a woman is UNMARRIED, then she is quite free to serve God in other capacities, however, the moment she is married and especially with kids, the dynamic (biblical one), completely changes. Guilt over HER CHOICE to work or her husband forcing her to work (as my own father did to my mother) are usually what causes her to throw out the usual mantra of “Well, this is my calling, or God called me to do this.” Is this an unpardonable sin, NO, but does it cause ripples (negative) throughtout the whole family unit? Yes. Again, please don’t bend and reshape scripture to fit what your own presuppositions are regarding scripture. From the looks of the posts you have brought in a large number of women trying to justify their CHOSEN lifestyles with weak at best Bible references. Pray about what you’re putting out into the blogosphere, you may be unknowingly influencing young or immature Christian women to take the wide path most followed by their worldly contemporaries.
Thanks for letting me post. David
Comment by David (September 18, 2008 @ 9:39 am )
David, If you’ll allow me to interact with your comment….
David, I didn’t do that. You’ll have to quote me in the accusation, and then I will offer an apology. Not being antagonistic, truly, it’s just hard to answer for something I didn’t do.
I agree. The teaching in the blogosphere, however, is that all married daughters should stay home serving their fathers. I believe this is a violation of Corinthians. Now, they are certainly free to do so, and they may be blessed in it, but it is unlawful to bind their consciences with the stay-at-home-daughters teaching. That said, it just may well be that my daughters will stay home serving the Lord in some capacity, and I’ll encourage it.
Since you didn’t say this, it’s not relevant. But I think that is where some of the above comments are coming from. So, yes, I agree that unmarried daughters ought to serve the Lord.
If you’ve ever read my blog before this, you know that I am 100% for married women being at home with their children. I said in my post that married women serve their husbands, because that’s what the Bible says. We don’t disagree here.
Where I bristle, David, is when we create fast, hard rules that Scripture doesn’t. What if I work one day out of the entire year for cash (on my husband’s day off)? I am no longer a “keeper at home”? But it’s OK to volunteer outside the home once a week? Who makes these rules? Where can I get a copy? If I am no longer allowed to have authority over a man, do I have to turn our properties over to my husband just because my property manager is a man and I am a woman?
Children need their parents. Why is OK for men to fly around the country and/or hold office? Is fatherhood not as important as motherhood? Don’t good families begin with good fathers (who are actually there to lead them)? Is this a double standard? Does the Bible talk about that?
I am for women at home. The Bible is for women at home. Children need their mothers. Babies need their mother’s breast. See how I can think outside the box, when I wean out of necessity my babies so early?
You knew I’d deny this one. How am I bending it? I really need you to quote from my post and we can go from there. I stay at home with my children. How would I be twisting Scripture to fit my lifestyle, when according to you, I am the epitome of womanhood? (Heh, feel free to deny that one.) Is it because I am unwilling to stone a woman whose husband has told her to work? Is it because I am not against an unmarried woman going to the mission field as Amy Carmichael did? Is it because I allow for God to work in ways that seem to contradict His normal pattern? Is it because I believe a woman can run a business successfully from her home, that includes bossing around men?
Regarding the wide path I am encouraging, I don’t have an answer for this one.
I am passionate about this because I think it reflects on how we characterize God to other people. I believe He is both holy and compassionate. I believe that we are to merge the entire counsel of the Scriptures and not create doctrines out of one phrase. I believe that the midwives, as spoken of regarding Moses’ birth, DID NOT SIN when they worked outside the home. The Bible would not commend them if they were such godless disregarders of His Word and ways. These midwives, who left their homes, were working women. They were paid. They left their homes. Is it OK now because they were helping to proport the doctrine of Quiverfull which trumps the women-at-home doctrine?
David, if I err, I want it to be on the side of grace, and I will pray that the Lord will forgive my liberal self for not calling out the sin of all these working women. I do think some sin considering all things, but it isn’t for me to make pronouncements (especially on the internet) when I don’t know their situations. Perhaps she will actually harm her children if she was around them all day and needs to wean herself into this enormous task? I mean, why do we have to chuck out common sense and compassion? There is a certain measure of wisdom that we weigh all situations with, instead of making rules.
According to Sarah Palin, her husband told her, “Of course you should do it,” so it isn’t for me to say. It’s my hope that we are all careful with our words, myself included, when we remember Scripture’s words that we will be judged in the same manner that we judge others. When life hits you hard, sometimes all those rules don’t work. That said, I am all about Thinking Outside the Box and making hard decisions and sacrifice.
Only on the internet am I not radical enough.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 18, 2008 @ 10:38 am )
Well defended, Amy. I, too, am a stay-at-home, homeschooling Christian wife and mother that leans squarely on the side of mothers at home with their children.
But life is messy. And God is not bound by my expectations or interpretations. For that I am so thankful!
I haven’t read carefully all 250+ comments, but I know I was one who mentioned “legalism”–though not in so many words. And you’re right, I for one, am reacting to the opinions and views of a segment of our Christian conservative society who has become uncomfortably rabid about such ideals since the Palin addition to the ticket was announced.
Who can speak for God to trump the Titus 2 exhortation that women ought to be, “subject to their OWN husbands…” (emphasis mine). Maybe Mr. Palin told her to!
And in so doing, he is more a man–more Christ-like–than many in the way he’s playing this out. I trust she has his full support and that they are not without “vision” in their home. *wink*
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 18, 2008 @ 11:39 am )
No…I would not say that it is guilt that causes women to feel they must justify their lifestyles. I believe that women are put on the defensive by those in the legalistic camp. We, as mature women who are strong in the faith, really need to carry out God’s Will in our lives and respectfully ignore the naysayers. I am a wife, mother, and special education teacher. Every time I have tried to get out of it…God has put me right back in the place He has intended for me.
Comment by Katy (September 18, 2008 @ 1:06 pm )
Hey Amy,
I, too, have thought of the some of the points that you made in your response to David.
I am a stay-at-home mom of ten kids. Most of them are grown and out of the house, but there are a couple of stragglers hanging out. However, I never really wanted to do anything but stay at home, and even now, want to stay at home to be available to watch the cutest grandbaby (with more on the way) you could ever imagine. OK, so I digress.
I continue to read other blogs where the issue of Palin seems to have taken on a life of its own. There are real issues permeating the church that are far more malignant doctrinal issues, e.g., ones that deny the Lordship of Christ (as in, God doesn’t know the future and He learns about events as they happen). Yet, somehow, this is such a poison element of the Church, that if you dare vote the McCain/Palin ticket (I actually may abstain, but not because of Palin–CA, my lovely home state, will, most likely go Democratic), you are in danger of God’s wrath. I. Am. Not. Kidding. Just check out the blogs. Some are downright venomous.
Several of the blogs in a particular camp have put up a link of one of preachers on CNN debating the Palin nomination. The irony is that he is gone an awful lot from his family speaking in various places. Since that is between him, God and his family, no one should have a quarrel with it. HOWEVER, why is that not questioned, but a woman going to work is? Moreover, are these things worthy of debating on CNN? Is this the stuff that will change lives? I submit, once again, that the Gospel makes the difference. Now, how God draws people to Himself is His business (perhaps He will use this debate to drive people to His Word), but practically speaking, all it looks like is infighting.
Consider this: If men are reading blogs that these particular women are writing, is that teaching men? In other words, they are espousing beliefs in which they use the Bible as a reference point. Certainly some men read their blogs based on the comments. What about when men comment and the women respond to either agree with them or bolster their points? Given their premise that women should stay at home, not teach men or have authority over them, isn’t it a logical conclusion that they are, in effect, teaching men through their blogs? What about women who teach women’s Bible studies that are on TV and there may be men in the viewing audience?
How far are we going to take this thing?
I will reiterate: there are THINKING AND PRAYING Christians on both sides of the argument. The funny thing, though, is that MOST of the blogs that I’ve read against Palin, are the ones who are trying to convince Christians that they are wrong should they vote McCain.
Finally, to use your words, “I don’t have a dog in the fight,” but I do weary of reading blogs of God’s impending judgement as though they are a mouthpiece for God. They can write what they want since they own the blog, but I think David (the commenter to whom you responded) should be more concerned that the writers of those blogs are leading younger believers far afield.
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 18, 2008 @ 1:14 pm )
Cathy,
Such excellent points! As a man, I have to say that it is my pleasure to listen and learn when a woman has wise and insightful observations to make (as my wife does all the time).
You are absolutely right to put this issue in it’s proper context, within Christianity there are far bigger problems to address than hammering out the specific quantities of leadership a woman may exercise and in what spheres. Thanks for that post.
BTW, please don’t abstain from the election, even though our state (I’m from CA also) would support a trained lemur for president as long as it had a ‘D’ next to it’s name. The overall vote total matters when it comes to a presidential mandate. There are also a number of propositions this year that are worth supporting (or rejecting, as the case may be): Of course Prop 8, the constitutional amendment for traditional marriage and Prop 11, the constitutional amendment for redrawing this state’s voting districts are both very worthy of support (Prop. 11 will have to pass if we ever want to see some kind of political change in our state senate or legislature). As usual we also have a number of bonds, and while some of them may be for good things, this state is already having enough problems with it’s budget, we don’t need to be building more debts into it’s future 10-20 years from now.
Comment by Nathan Alterton (September 18, 2008 @ 3:05 pm )
A trained lemur! LOL! Exactly, Nathan. I’m a Californian, too and sometimes I’m like: Who stole my state?
Cathy, please vote. I, too, am sick of seeing California go blue every election but still, it’s a privilege and a hard-won right to vote.
And David (248)? Dude, seriously? Amy’s girls wear long dresses from Land’s End like EVERY. SINGLE. DAY!
Yeah, she’s TOTALLY steering women like me down the wrong path.
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 18, 2008 @ 10:52 pm )
Californians Against Trained Lemurs unite!
I’m in.
Comment by emily (September 18, 2008 @ 11:35 pm )
Just curious. If a person feels they can’t vote for McCain because Palin is a woman, does that mean you won’t read a book written by a woman who is a wife and mother? Or listen to a song sung by a wife and/or mother? Or watch a movie with an actress who has children? What about shop at a store where women who are wives and mothers work? Can someone explain to me why these things are not boycotted, but a woman cannot be vice president? I understand that some believe they cannot vote for her in good conscience. I disagree, but that’s okay. We’re all entitled to our own opinions and our own vote. I was just wondering if that conviction carries over to other areas because I’ve never heard of anyone in this day and age refusing to shop somewhere because they hire women and those women should be home with their kids. But isn’t it the same principle? Or is it different somehow? Or maybe I’m just unaware. Just trying to understand a way of thinking that is different from my own and I didn’t know where else it might be safe to ask this. Everyone seems pretty civil here.
Comment by Melissa (September 18, 2008 @ 11:53 pm )
Elizabeth, Girl (I use the word loosely),I’m going to vote, just not sure about the presidential race.
Emily, you must be a lobbyist.
Nathan, thanks for your thoughts. See comment to Elizabeth.
Now, turn in your Bibles to…Just funnin’ w/ya. I really DO believe that there are separate roles–within the Church.
Good night from another Californian against lemurs. Are we against the flying ones, as well?
Cathy
Comment by Cathy (September 19, 2008 @ 12:46 am )
I’m wondering the same thing, Melissa!! So what if the next Vice-President (Lord willing) is a woman? If she does get there, I think a lot of good will come to this country. We need someone like Sarah who did not have her baby aborted, who did not force her daughter to abort her baby, who can stand up strong to all of the lies and hateful things said and done to her and her family by the liberal media, and lives by her Christian standards. She will be a great example in the White House. We need to bring morality back to this country and I think she will be a good start on that. I do believe God will use her to bring the good changes that we need back to this country. Now, she cannot do it alone-we need to be praying for her EVERY day and see what God will do, but we need to do our part and support her as much as we can.
I am a stay-at-home Mom, but I feel bad every day when I see my husband go to work, because I feel like I need to get a job to pay all of our bills. He has been working like crazy for the past 2 weeks-minus yesterday-and that was because he has some kind of allergic reaction to something and has a rash all over his body, so I told him to go to the doctor to see what it was. Still waiting for the results. But, he went back to work today and is leaving for Tennessee tomorrow for work. He just came back from Kentucky last week. I feel bad that I can’t get a job to at least help somewhere, but, I believe God wants ME at home, because I have had no luck in getting any kind of job anywhere. Besides that, we only have 1 running car (which my husband uses for work), I have epilepsy (seizures) which limits my driving, plus I have 3 kids-2 are in school, the other is 8 months. Even if I did get a job, all of my money would go to daycare, so I have made up my mind to just be a stay-at-home Mom. Sarah has her husband backing her up all of the way. I’ve been watching Fox News practically every day now for the past 2 months and every time I see Sarah speaking in a town hall or whatever, I see her husband right behind her smiling the whole time. I know he’s proud of her and he was willing to give up his job to take care of the kids while she was Mayor/Governor of Alaska. I see nothing wrong with that at all. My point is, let’s support her as Christians and not put her down just because she’s not a stay-a-home Mom like most of us.
Comment by Cassie (September 19, 2008 @ 12:57 am )
Where in the world did this stay-at-home-daughters thing come from?
Is this a new sub-culture within the homeschooling sub-culture? Is this like a sub-sub-culture?
I’m completely baffled by this.
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 19, 2008 @ 12:14 pm )
P.S. Lenny The Lemur For President.
Write him in, people!
Comment by Elizabeth Esther (September 19, 2008 @ 12:16 pm )
LOL.
I’m not going there, but yes….you could say that. =)
Comment by Andrea (September 19, 2008 @ 7:56 pm )
And don’t y’all feel sorry for me that I live in NY….
the OTHER big blue state?
I mean….we’ve got Hillary…..
Comment by Andrea (September 19, 2008 @ 7:58 pm )
In light of all the news this week I am starting off with a short quiz…at which event in recent weeks did thousands chant “End the Fed!”?
Which congressman predicated the end of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac four years ago?
#261…NLOL.
#259…Antithesis.
Nathan…regarding far more important issues, the Bible would indicate at times that rather seemingly insignificant things carry great weight within the economy of God. We are not talking about head of Dept. of Transportation here, perhaps this actually is one of the more important issues.
Hypothetical Thought of the Day:
In allowing Mrs. to become V.P., does Mr. still retain the right to say…cancel an visit to Iraq to negotiate a peace accord if the P’s are having marital issues? Doesn’t he technically forgo his authority on things like this for the next 4 years. Can he at any point say, this is too much and tell her to resign? If not isn’t he technically abdicating his authority as a husband, and…can he do that, I mean can I abdicate a duty assigned by God? So even if he has given her permission to run for V.P. I think there are still some rather sticky hypotheticals one could come up with. (Possible Farm name Amy, “Hypothetical Farm”, they couldn’t laugh at that could they?)
Now finally, G.K. again on blog comments (I am guilty too)
“There has appeared in our time a particular class of books and articles which I sincerely and solemnly think may be called the silliest ever known among men. They are much more wild than the wildest romances of chivalry and much more dull than the dullest religious tract. Moreover, the romances of chivalry were at least about chivalry; the religious tracts are about religion. But these things are about nothing;”
Thanks for the stump to stand on Amy. I am sitting down now, I really have no business being here.
Flip your screen over to check your quiz answers.
(cilbupeR ehT roF yllaR:B luaP noR :A)
Comment by Ethan (September 20, 2008 @ 3:08 am )
I think we need to be careful with this line of questions because, frankly, it can cast a really bad light on the many good husbands. It reminds me of the rather childish young husband — probably way too immature to take on the responsibility of marriage — who made it clear to his young bride that he never wanted children because they would undermine his husbandly authority. After all, would she really be willing to leave her newborn for a week or two if he felt that they needed to get off by themselves to work on marriage issues? If he decided that fatherhood was too much for him to handle, would she be willing to put up the child for adoption? Or would his only choice be to leave the marriage?
Most husbands are, I believe, not that immature and not that hung up about the idea that they are supposed to have some absolute authority over their wives or they are abdicating their duty as a husband.
Also, by this same line of argument, a man would need to be very careful in accepting any position of true responsibility. Could a male VP cancel an important trip just because he was having marital issues? Could he just step down from his position if he felt his marriage was being neglected? If not, isn’t a political office holder, CEO of a company, pastor, etc., etc. by the very nature of his career abdicating his duty as a husband to love his wife as Christ loves the Church?
Comment by Rebecca (September 20, 2008 @ 1:07 pm )
At times like this…I wish Jesus had taught us more about this issue of authority…especially when it seems so significant in our religion. I wonder why it never came up?
Comment by Katy (September 20, 2008 @ 1:11 pm )
I hear you Katy. Good question; or, wait. Maybe it did…in the gentle form of the beatitudes.
I’ll put it this way: this very long comment thread is giving me soooooo many opportunities to say, “I’m glad he’s not my husband.”
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 20, 2008 @ 1:27 pm )
*Giggle* Me too…although I must say that the
Brothers who have commented on this thread have been quite benign and respectful compared to some of the outright hateful comments I have read elsewhere that make me want to duck my head in shame for the people saying them.
Comment by Katy (September 20, 2008 @ 1:40 pm )
Agreed. Maybe I’m superimposing the “everyone” into this thread. Sorry Amy, that’s not fair to you.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 20, 2008 @ 1:50 pm )
When will Americans stop putting fornicators in the White House? Everyone knows that Sarah Palin’s daughter conceived a child out of wedlock. But did you know that Sarah Palin herself conceived her first child out of wedlock? It’s the truth. That’s the reason she and Todd Palin eloped instead of getting married before God.
The Bible teaches that sex before marriage is the same as adultery. You can hate the sin and love the sinner, but that doesn’t mean you have to vote her into the White House! It’s time for Americans with family values to STOP putting people like CLINTON and PALIN into the White House. Our children deserve better!
1 Corinthians 6:18: Flee from sexual immorality. SPREAD THE WORD OF GOD!
Comment by Lisa (September 20, 2008 @ 10:31 pm )
Wow…great illustration…thank you Lisa.
Comment by Katy (September 20, 2008 @ 11:31 pm )
Grace…has left the thread.
Comment by Grafted Branch@Restoring the Years (September 20, 2008 @ 11:34 pm )
I have not heard that Sarah Palin had her first child out of wedlock. I have heard that, as a Christian, she understands that Jesus died to cover our sins. I am blessed to know that I, as a sinner, as we ALL are, can receive grace and forgiveness.
Comment by Katy (September 20, 2008 @ 11:35 pm )
I think making it to #269 without a troll was pretty good, dontcha think?
[Lisa, you're banned.]
Friends, just ignore that stuff, don’t feed it.
Comment by Amy Scott (September 20, 2008 @ 11:39 pm )
I’m sorry Amy…I should have ignored…just got steamed.
Comment by Katy (September 20, 2008 @ 11:42 pm )
Right-don’t listen to everything the media says-who knows if what they say is true or not? Only God knows. Also, how many other people in the White House, Congress, Senators, Mayors, etc., have had sex before marriage? No one knows, but the way sex is “advertised” everywhere-TV, internet, etc., not many people, besides true Christians, think it is wrong to have sex outside of marriage. That is how far our society has gone. Even some Christians have sex outside of marriage, even though they know it is wrong. Remember, God will forgive those people if they ask Him and we need to forgive them, too. Nobody is perfect except the Lord Jesus Christ, so if the person you want to elect has done something wrong (who HASN’T done something wrong?) does that mean you can’t elect him/her? If we looked at it like that, NO ONE could be elected because EVERYONE has fallen short. Just pray and ask God who to elect for President of the US and leave it all up to Him.
Comment by Cassie (September 22, 2008 @ 10:12 am )