Yep. And it is strange to talk of a man being "made of a woman." If this merely meant that Jesus was human, but from some new line straight out of heaven, wouldn't the inclusive "man" be used?
And if not Mary, then what "woman" was he "made" of?
SD
All comments are welcome.
One of the reasons for division in the church is the fact that its leders too often have ignored our Lord's admonition, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them.....Yet it shall not be so among you.........whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave" (Matthew 20:25-27). Jesus never inteded that a professional clergy elevate itself above the rest of the church to form an elite ruling class. The system in which he, himself, had been reared and in which the apostles had functi8oned was a synagogal Judaism, an egalitarian exercise which featured the interaction of a multitude of conselors the model in which the safe exercise of leadership can be found (Proverbs 11:14). Plurality of eldership and collective decision making were the norm in the earliest church (Acts 6:3; 15:6; Galatians 2:9).
When church leaders in suceeding generations neglected the servant leadership paradigm which Jesus demonstrated, they began to model their leadship styles after the autocratic political and/or business systems of their societies. Leaders became increasingly turf-protective, seeking to preserve and extend the aegis of their dominion. Sects within the church became more and more elitist and parochial. Increasingly, the church became a quasi-political organism, and leaders competed for political and economic power. Monarchial bishops assumed control over the church in geographic areas. Finally, the bishop of Rome sought to establish his primacy over the entire church, an effort that culminated in the establishment of the papacy, producting susequent abuses of power and precipitating the East-West schism. Christianity became Christendom.
When the Reformation came, leaders adopted the models of government common to their societies. Nationalism produced state churches and an ever-increasing sectarianism, as movements crystallized into entrenched bureaucracies. Unfortunately, these denominations escalated the infighting and strife within Christianity. Still others arose seeking reform from newly entrenched strutures; however, their efforts produced other crystallized movements, fostering still more divisions in the universal church.
When men seek for dominion within self-serving bureacracies rather than sacrificing their egos to submit themselves one to another in a humble search for truth, they have allowed demonic strongholds to be erected in their lives that bind them in pride, conceit, and arrogance and produce abusive behavior that wounds and weakens the members of the body of Christ. When the church departs from the servant-leadership principle espoused and employed by Jesus and the apostles, it reads dangerous ground.
It should be noted that Jesus ascribed abusive exercises of power as being typical of Gentiles, implying that such condust was not the norm in Hebrew society in which the disciples had been reared. This was especially true in the religious life of the Israeli people. Though the priesthood and the temple order remained important, the daily religious practices of the people had centered in their synagogues since the time of the Babylonian captivity. Synagogal Judaism was the firs grand experiment in the democratization of religion. Iwas this model, rather than the Gentile examples, that the apostles were to employ in their exercise of leadship over the reformed congregation of Jesus.
Here is the biblical description of servant leadership:"...a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in oppostion, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth" (2 Timothy 2:24,25). Whoever is the chiefest in the churches, let him employ this kind of conduct inproviding oversight for God's people.
Surely the church can now return to that model that was manifest in its earliest years. When leaders learn to serve rather than "lord it over" God's heritage, they will be able to avoid the attitudes that have promoted division. When they are submitted to one another in love, they can promote the unity that the church so desperately needs.
Can I get a couple of amens? (at least) :-)