"To Obey is Better than to Sacrifice" - A Response to "Evangelical Feminism" + other stuff

alright, so a couple of things:

a) i just checked Time's top 100 books of all time: http://www.time.com/time/2005/100books/the_complete_list.html

I am graduating with an Honours degree in English Literature. I have read seven of the books on the list :S:

CS Lewis - The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Anthony Burgess - A Clockwork Orange
Zora Neale Hurston - Their Eyes were Watching God
JD Salinger - The Catcher and the Rye
George Orwell - Animal Farm
JRR Tolkien - Lord of the Rings (and only the first one, and i thought it was boring)

Yeap - with this thorough knowledge of the English canon I would need only two years of teacher's college to be qualified to teach your future children grade 12 English. Excellent....

b) Evangelical Feminism
"All people are equal before God and in Christ. All have equal responsibility to use their gifts and obey their calling to the glory of God. God freely calls believers to roles and ministries without regard to class, gender, or race. We believe this because the Bible and Jesus Christ teach it to us. That is biblical equality." - Christians for Biblical Equality

"I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet."- 1 Timothy 2:12

So, I read 1 Samuel 15 today, and it talked about how Saul was told to destroy all the Amalekites and all their stuff, but he didn't. He saves some good cattle and oxen and he saves their king, which is in direct disobedience to God's command to him.

When Samuel questions him about it, Saul says something to the effect of "I was saving this cattle to sacrifice to the LORD". Samuel then explains to him the folly of this argument saying "To obey is better than sacrifice" (1 Samuel 15:22). In other words - God does things God's way. He doesn't need your logic and your gifts to help Him out, He's really serious about what His Word says.

Now, I have friends who are evangelical feminists (though they may dislike the term), meaning that they think, and i've heard this personally, that there is no difference in the roles of men and women, but each person is designed by God with different gifts which they are to steward in whatever Godly role they can. I can't guess everyone's motives, but I sense there IS a genuine desire to see God Glorified in their lives. However, there is a mistake that I think this passage helps out on. Notice the similarities in these arguments:

a1) There are lots of nice cattle, very fattened and ideal for worship purposes.
a2) There are lots of gifted women who explain doctrine well and have God-given leadership qualities.

b1) Cattle are made by God, and are part of His good creation.
b2) The spiritual gifts and the natural gifts are from God.

c1) Therefore, we should save the cattle for Worship purposes
c2) Therefore, women should not be limited in their capacities to utilise these God-given gifts.

Saul was wrong (if in fact this was his motive). And I hope you'll understand that the argument of evangelical feminists, or evangelical egalitarians, is wrong. God doesn't need our logic. God does things God's way. And His way is clearly found in His Word.

I believe that, read in the context of the book and the whole Bible, 1 Timothy 2 means that there are certain offices which are reserved for men. For an explanation, go to http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/TopicIndex/49/684_Manhood_Womanhood_and_the_Freedom_to_Minister/

The danger is that God's Word is clear. God tore the kingdom away from Saul. May He have mercy on us who are slow to trust in God's way as we do God's work.

This should be a call to men and not an attack on women. There are way too many poor male leaders. There are way too many boring male Pastors. I hope more and more faithful and gifted women will arise, but they should not feel a need to occupy the roles set aside for men. If only there would be a generation of strong Godly women AND men.

Anyways, not sure if anyone will misinterpret/be offended by what I just wrote, but feel free to give your thoughts.

What's the deal with Mormons?/What's the deal with Blogger?

sup,

i'm so confused with this new blogger system, apparently my yahoo address is my new google account... if someone understands, please let me know.

this isn't extremely interesting, but just wanted to talk a bit about mormons. they are often really nice. this has struck me as odd, cause.... they are heretics. i don't think that's harsh, or pharisee-esque, since the apostle paul (thus, the word of God) says, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8). So - Mormons = nice, and be nice to them, but have nothing to do with their "church" and know that they are accursed (so Preach the Gospel).

anyways, just watched this john piper video on youtube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czVmYKAavGQ&mode=related&search= (note: thus youtube has so many redeemable qualities). if you don't actually watch it, it essentially says that false teachers/heretics aren't gonna look evil and have devil-horns comin out of their heads, but they're gonna be real nice, just like satan doesn't appear in evil forms all the time, but usually satan works by seducing us.

so, i realized "man, thats why mormons seem so nice, satan loves to send us evil in attractive packages". on top of that, they have to earn their salvation, explaining their good behaviour. so, in conclusion, don't be surprised the next time you meet a mormon with a big pretty smile.

ps. if you feel i'm being harsh to mormons, check out http://www.aomin.org/LDSGrace.html or http://www.mormonwiki.org/Main_Page
pps. these thoughts, in my mind, apply to any group/individual that claim to proclaim the "gospel" but denies the basic teachings of the Gospel: saved by grace alone through faith alone, Christ's resurrection, our sinful nature, Christ's deity, etc.