We don't often do this knowingly though. But we should be aware of it and hopefully lovingly point it out.

You all should just come to any given Episcopal, congregational, or Universalist church up here in the Northeast. There is really no gender debates, whatsoever. Women preach, women teach, women do whatever they want. Having moved alot, this seems to be in Baptist, southern fundamental denominations. Up here, we dont even see any walls, they have been long gone and we are working on taking down even more walls. I love my new home.

If Mark had read my parable more closely, he would see that my views and the point of the parable align more closely to his than he might realize. With that said, his response merely reminds me of the way Jesus would answer the quesions from the religious leaders about the biblical texts with parables instead. Let he (or she) who has ears to hear, hear.

@ Mark A. I certainly agree with you in that we should rely on the word of God and not fine sounding parables or arguments. I still think Karen did a great job and that parables and stories can clarify and show truth--general revelation-- "All truth is God's truth" etc. But being in ministry and having studied etc. and having followed Jesus, I hope closely, for 24 years, I do have to say that it is never Sola Scriptura. There's always a lens through which we interpret the Scriptures and a context in which it was written. Even our dear John Piper who is a strong "Sola Scriptura" complementarian when it comes to women's roles does not abide by Sola Scriptura when applied to himself, when it comes to stepping down from leadership. When his son rebelled he did not step down from church leadership (Titus 1:5-6)--although he and the church did enact church discipline by ex-communicating his son. We want to be faithful to God's word! Yes! Yes! Yes! And we want God to have preeminence and be glorified. But very few abide by the Sola Scriptura that we so strongly defend. We often pick and choose our "Sola Scriptura" verses to enact when it suits us and our theology/understanding and dismiss "Sola Scriptura" when it is at cross-purposes with our outlook. We don't often do this knowingly though. But we should be aware of it and hopefully lovingly point it out. Also, John Piper isn't the only Calvinist pastor who has somehow wiggled out of those instructions we find in Titus. In fact, many would not now be pastoring if they took the injunctions in those verses seriously. Not even Charles Stanley. And he does a lot of good in the world even though he is divorced.

Mark Adams, first of all, I commend you for reading this blog. But (I believe) the Word of God does not teach what you say you believe it does--no matter how good your interpretation (reads). Sola Scriptura, my brother.

Hi Mark, I think the meaning of the parable has escaped you, since you seem to be "arguing at the wall" so to speak. The point is this: Complementarians and egalitarians both agree that women can be leaders. The difference emerges in regards to the extent of that leadership. Since they do have that in agreement, it’s time to focus on what unites us rather than divides us. The leadership potential of Christian women has been truncated by the theological debate over the nature of women’s leadership in the church. While this conversation is an important one, it’s not the only conversation we should have about Christian women leaders. This is concerning because individuals have a responsibility to steward their giftedness and communities of faith have a responsibility to ensure that members of the body of Christ are able to exercise their giftedness in freedom.

The discussion should not be about how nice the parable is, but rather about whether or not the Bible contains absolutes in regards to the role of women in the church. Just because something is well worded or captivating it should not be taken as more authoritative than the Word of God. If the Bible teaches (as I believe it does) that women should not exercise teaching roles in the church where they are over men, then it does not matter how good the parable sounds (or reads) women should not teach or exercise authority over men in the church. I.e., Sola Scriptura!

Thank you, Mary, and others for engaging graciously with me on a subject that I am continuing to explore for myself. The parable form, I thought, would open up the question for further exploration for me and for readers. I love the comments that fleshed out the metaphors further, stretching the parable (and my own thinking!) even more. I think this is the power of story, and I appreciate those who are coming along to explore these important questions with me through this form.

Karen, I appreciate this parable and the heart with which it was written. Many, many issues about which the church squabbles could be put into a much more appropriate context if more of us remembered to simply love the the Lord and love our neighbor. But as a mother of a bright and vibrant daughter, as an educated woman who is trying both go about my Kingdom Work and the business of raising a someday woman who will be confident in how to go about her own Kingdom Work, I feel the gender wars of Christianity absolutely must be addressed. What are we doing to women of the church when we (implicitly or explicitly) tell them that their primary role is at home (God bless the women who can do this)? What are we doing to the women of the church when we (implicitly or explicitly) tell them that they are fit to cook for potlucks or volunteer in Sunday School? That they may coordinate Women's Bible Studies and Retreats or sing and make music during worship hour; but, after those activities are over, their intelligence must be checked in the coat room and they must take a seat back in their pews? My daughter is a whole being. For the Church, of all places, to be a place where she is told that her mind and her body and her spirit are only valuable in certain contexts, is dangerous. Because to bring my daughter's soul to Christ-making the arms of Christ a safe place for a woman to be- I would absolutely argue that that IS Kingdom Work.

SMM: The Bible in no way condones slavery ... Paul could have advised Philemon to free Onesimus, but did not. That is only one example. The Bible does not promote slavery, but neither does it condemn it. SMM: mistrust of women Well, OK, you're right. Paul evidently "trusted" women so much he forbade them to be in authority over men ... and referred to them, at least in the KJV, as the "weaker vessel". SMM: The idea that the Bible is mere "literature" ... The Bible is certainly not less than literature. Whether it is more or not is a matter of theological and philosophical conviction. SMM: If our culture has truly, "moved on" from Biblical principles ... Well, we have and I would argue that, in most ways, we are the better for it, e.g., giving women the vote, laws against slavery, no mandatory genocide a la the conquest of Jericho, no death penalty for unruly kids, etc., etc. And that's not even counting things like religious tolerance, democratic government, etc. That is not to be critical of the Bible. The Bible was a text of its time. The oldest parts date from the middle or late Bronze age, and the newest parts are from and of the first century CE, not the twenty-first. It is fallacious to criticize the Bible for being what it could not be, i.e., a text 2K years ahead of its time. But neither is that to say that we should accept every "jot and tittle" uncritically as relevant to today. JRC