I have more in common with Pastor Gino Jennings than most would think. I certainly identify with his no nonsense spirit, passion for family values and refusal to compromise.
Someone recently said he preached ‘a sound gospel’ but was a bit ‘off’ sometimes…like on the matter of women preachers. I was amused to hear that from a Baptist whose extra-Biblical stance on women preachers, which explains away the apostle Paul’s explicit admonition against women teaching in church by sundry arguments appealing to the cultural limitations of his apostolic mantle. (arguments which I favor but am under no illusion that such arguments have any explicit, scriptural foundation).
I’m very clear minded that the patriarchal context of Judeo-Christian scripture requiring women to cover their hair, sit in silence in church, shun excessive jewelry, fancy hairstyles and the like is undeniably coded into New Testament writings, as much as are the teachings on the adulterous nature of post divorce remarriage, or the abomination of homosexuality.
All these scriptural taboos, insofar as they are condoned, justified or encouraged by sections of the church today (as was the eating of pork or Sunday worship in the times of the apostles) owes itself to modern religious innovation or adaptation to the cultural evolution of society.
From Apostle Jenning’s position, he does have the upper hand of biblical orthodoxy. Baptists and Pentecostals can disagree if they want to, but not on the basis of a strictly Biblical Hermeneutic. Appeal has to be made to some extra Biblical revelation or authority. To claim otherwise is to be simply deceitful. {we are hard pressed to find precedent in the law and prophets for Paul and Peter’s doctrinal departures from Jewish tradition. The fonte essendi (source) of these new understandings and practices came as Peter confessed….in a vision …. nothing so concrete as tablet of stone or otherwise Holy Writ}
Here is the issue that the church mired in narrow-minded fundamentalisms must eventually face square on if it is to overcome its internal bickering, finger-pointing and name calling and arrive at a place of maturity in demonstrating in contemporary times the character and power of a Christ bigger than all his many cults:
What is our teaching producing in its adherents?
I care not what the teaching is, nor from where or when its source. From our perspective, every single Christian doctrine has both a history and a shelf life. That may be more apparent to those familiar with the history of ideas – though fundamentalism’s tunnel vision (not all together a bad thing) tends to obscure the fact. Creeds and doctrines, useful as they are, were not numbered among the three things that will remain according to 1st Corinthians 13.
An infantile preoccupation with legalities can only produce a fractious Pharisaism. But the life of the Spirit, which allows us to see not just one’s words but also evaluate their works….their fruit, to behold their character and discern their intent; to graciously embrace (even if that grace is rejected or spurned) those things that are good and worthy therein….and build relationship, rather than reject it (certainly one of the most un-Jesus behaviors, judging by the character described in the scriptures, yet we who practice in His name so often defend such as ‘holiness’);….that Spiritual life alone can guide us through strong difference, contrary convictions and fervent disagreement to still practice the quintessentially Christian spirit of respect and regard for all men….even those we are duty bound by conscience to offend.
I love but also deeply admire my brother Gino (of course he has some disagreeable ways…that does not diminish my respect). If he were a fraud, his wife and children perhaps would have told us already. And until or unless she does, the brother seems to be producing men with strong backbone. That cant be so evil. I’m sure some Black Christian women, given the times, might be inclined to agree.
© YeKengalé 2017 All rights reserved
See also Who do women say that I am?
YeKengalé 