Large tables in blogger

Anybody know of a good way to handle large tables in blogger? I'm getting ready to start my study bible spreadsheet and I'm trying to figure out if I should have the sheet link from a blogger post or be in one. I'd rather have it on blog but it seems that tables run off the edge and you don't get a scroll bar.

Any ideas out there?

5 Questions about abortion

1. In the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands women who have access to free abortions  in convenient state clinics have few abortions per million women than women in the USA, at a rate between one third and one quarter of the USA rate. This is due to excellent sex education and easily available birth control. That is if the USA were to make birth control easily accessible and free we could have a 70% decrease in abortion.  Yet the "pro life" movement has hindered birth control availability in the USA at every turn.  Why? 
2. Should women who miscarry be charged with involuntary manslaughter?  What if they did something like trip because they weren't be careful, negligent homicide?  
3. If life starts at fertilization then what should we do about all these couples carelessly having sex 9 or days after ovulation. According to NHS these are the implementation failure rates for the average women in days after ovulation:
   
• 3% by day 9
• 26% on day 10
• 52% on day 11
• 86% on day 12 or more
Death rates this high certainly mean that late sex constitutes negligence in the extreme.

4. Statistics show that things like good education, economic opportunity and higher wages for people at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder reduce unplanned pregnancy and abortion.  Why the opposition to social programs from the pro-life movement, when these policies could save hundreds of thousands of lives per year?  
5. Can we name one country that has banned abortion where the lives of women have improved within 20 years of the ban?  

NLT Study Bible Seminar + Giveaway

Over on the NLT blog they are having a bible giveaway contest You actually have a pretty good chance if you keep playing. And the seminar should be good. This bible has been reviewed all over the blogosphere:

Bryon
David Ker
Rick Mansfeld
Better Bibles Blog: More NLT buzz
An old discussion on theologica
The original NLT vs. CEV cage match (part1, part2, part3)

I'l be including the NLTSB in my Study bible spreadsheet coming out around December. The more time I spend with the NLT/NLTSB the more I like it. I've moved my recommendation for first evangelical study bible from TNIVSB to NLTSB as I've spent more time with the translation and the notes (the notes are both more correct and more useful). The NLT as a translation offers many of the dynamic advantages of the REB while being almost as readable as a paraphrase, on par with the CEV. It has the same "more literal" translation notes as the HCSB, and thus offers most of the advantages of more formal translation. NLTSB offers a sort of NISB both more conservative and lite. It also trains people in how to use tools they may not be exposed to. Basically it does 85% of what the NISB, TNIVSB and Learning Bibles (see Dave's review) offer, making it a broader choice. Also the maps are striking clear, best I've seen in a study bible.

Most of my readership are evangelical protestant, so do yourself a favor follow the link and try and win yourself a copy.

Priscilla, A female leader

In the church of St John at Heidelberg we have the window pictured to the left of Aquila & Priscilla; note in the lower pane we can see Priscilla teaching.

There are several mentions of Priscilla in the New Testament. The first is in Acts 18 where she instructs Apollos:

Acts 18:1 After this Paul departed from Athens and went to Corinth. 18:2 There he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to depart from Rome. Paul approached them 18:3 and because he worked at the same trade, he stayed with them and worked with them (for they were tentmakers by trade)...
18:19 When they reached Ephesus, Paul left Priscilla and Aquila behind there, but he himself went into the synagogue and addressed the Jews...
18:24 Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, arrived in Ephesus. He was an eloquent speaker, well-versed in the scriptures. 18:25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and with great enthusiasm he spoke and taught accurately the facts about Jesus, although he knew only the baptism of John. 18:26 He began to speak out fearlessly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained the way of God to him more accurately.

The next is in Romans where Paul uses the term synergoi, colleague to refer to her:

16:3 Greet Prisca and Aquila, my colleagues in Christ Jesus, 16:4 who risked their own necks for my life. Not only I, but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them.

Co-worker which is how the word is often translated is too weak. This term can even be used as a euphemism for sex (though I'm not arguing or implying Paul means it that way), colleague, good friend perhaps. What the word is never used for is a subordinate, while the word in "co-worker" in English can imply a subordinate. That is Paul considers Priscilla an equal, he is addressing her as an equal. This means that at least in Paul's mind she is not beneath him either directly or diagonally. This rules out the usually counter claimto Priscilla being a leader, that Aquila was a peer and Prisca worked under Aquila, because then Priscilla would be a diagonal subordinate and the word choice would be inappropriate.

I'd point to 1Cor 3:9 shows again Paul stating that he and Apollos are working together, another use of synergoi, not that Apollos works for Paul. When one reads 1Cor 3 the whole point of the chapter is rejecting the sort of hierarchy which would put one or the other on top; Jesus is on top.

Then in first Corinthians he mentions how she runs a house church (this one in Emphasis):

1Cor 16:19 The churches in the province of Asia send greetings to you. Aquila and Prisca greet you warmly in the Lord, with the church that meets in their house.

Finally in 2Tim 4;19 he greets them again indicating they travel as well:

2Tim 4:19 Greetings to Prisca and Aquila and the family of Onesiphorus.

As can be seen above, Priscilla is mentioned before Aquila in (Acts 18:18,26, Rom 16:3, 2 Tim 4:19). The reason this is so key, is that normally the man would be named first or exclusively; meaning she is the better known and more prestigious of the two. And this is occurs in books addressed to various cities, so she is not just some well known/respected person locally rather she is well known and respected within the whole of the Christian community; and better known and more respected than Aquila.

Moreover there is strong evidence according to the experts that the shift in Acts 18:2 was a later change. Ben Witherington for example in he anti-feminist tendencies of the "Western" text in Acts (Journal of Biblical Literature 103 no 1 Mr 1984, p 82-84.) mentions the shift of Acts 18:2 and argues that Priscilla was consistently named first. Metzger in the textual commentary on the NT has this verse with Priscilla named first and gives the same reason. The Teachers' Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles By Francis Nathan Peloubet, is cited by both as for the importance of this shift (i.e. diminishing her role).

So in other words we have Prisca approximately equal to Paul in Paul's mind; and Priscilla generally regarded as well above Aquila by the broad Christian community. Those two facts together are strong evidence of the extent of her leadership. But there is even more evidence. In Acts 18:26 she is portrayed as teaching a theologian about theology. Again she is listed first, with regard to the act of teaching. And this is devastating to the argument that women should not teach because it means that she is well respected as a teacher / missionary not because of some secondary factor.

Karl Josef Rudolph Cornely in Commentarius in ep. ad Romanos" (Paris, 1896) collected the various ancient authorities on this subject and there seems to be agreement that Prisca is the more important of the pair since otherwise she would never be named first. Chrysostom held a similar opinion regarding her being named first indicated she was the teacher of Apollos.

This too is worthy of inquiry, why, as he addressed them, Paul has placed Priscilla before her husband. For he did not say, “Greet Aquila and Priscilla,” but “Priscilla and Aquila.” He does not do this without reason, but he seems to me to acknowledge a greater godliness for her than for her husband. What I said is not guess-work, because it is possible to learn this from the Book of Acts. [Priscilla] took Apollos, an eloquent man and powerful in the Scriptures, but knowing only the baptism of John; and she instructed him in the way of the Lord and made him a teacher brought to completion (Acts 18:24-25). (John Chrysostom, “First Homily on the Greeting to Priscilla and Aquila”)

In his commentary on 2Tim he says essentially the same thing. Incidentally in Homily 40 on Acts he indicates Paul left them in Ephesus specifically so they could teach. Again another direct reference to Priscilla being a teacher.

The current Pope commented on church tradition, "Later hagiographic tradition has given a very singular importance to Priscilla, even if the problem of identifying her with the martyr Priscilla remains."

A few more pieces of evidence are archeological. In Rome to this day there is still a street named after her (but not him) in the aventine Via de Santa Prisca. There is a large church built in her honor, that goes back to the 4th century and possibly earlier, which legend says was the location of her house. Incidentally under the church was a mithric temple, so it may have been that Prisca's "house church" was really quite nice, a converted temple, it also contains Christian catacombs from no later than the 2nd century. Her grave still has veneration.

So to summarize the bible teaches

• Paul does not consider her an inferior.
  
• That she outranked Aquila.
• That she taught theology.
  

External sources teach

• Church fathers agree she was a teacher.
• As that the interpretation of her being named first indicating primacy was upheld in both the ancient and modern world.
  
• Archeology indicates she was the more important of the pair.

Finally while highly speculative we have Adolf von Harnack's view that Priscilla wrote Hebrews (link to Ruth Hoppin summary). Luther suspected Apollos was the author. In either case we have the differences between the Pauline theology and the theology of Hebrews coming from Priscilla's school, and indicating the importance of her theological and philosophical teachings.

Why was Sodom destroyed?

It is often asserted that the defense that Sodom was destroyed for lack of hospitality is a modern interpretation part of the gay rights movement. I found the following little passage in the Zohar from many centuries ago:

As for S'dom, its people were punished because they refrained from giving charity. As it is written: "neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy" (Yechezkel 16:49). And this is why the Judgment upon them came solely from heaven--because "charity" and "heaven" are one. As it is written: "For your kindness is great above the heavens," (Tehilim 108:5) INDICATING THAT "CHARITY" AND "KINDNESS" ARE BOTH DRAWN FROM THE HEAVENS ABOVE. Because charity depends on the heavens, their Judgment is also drawn down from the heavens, as it is written: "from Hashem out of heaven." (Zohar 3.20.285)

Judeans and the scholars version

There is always a bit of complexity in trying to figure out what the best way is to handle the translation of Hoi Ioudaioi. A common literal translation is "The Jews". The problem with "The Jews" is that Judaism is seen primarily as a religion or ethnicity not a nationality. One someone uses the term "Italian American" what they mean is an American of Italian descent. They don't mean a person with dual citizenship. When someone uses the term "Catholic Americans" they mean an American who is a member of the Catholic church. "The Catholics" means the religious group. When Romans use the term Ioudaioi they were thinking of the people of Judea, or the religion of the people of Judea (the sacrificial cult from Jerusalem). A reasonable and literal translation of that term is "The Judeans".

The scholars version does precisely this, it translates the word literally. It doesn't tie it to a current day religion but rather to an ancient province. To avoid some of the anti-Semitic leanings of Acts and John translation like the CEV and the NLT typically use terms like "Jewish leaders" which is not justified by the text nor likely accurate. Their heart is in the right place since these verses are quite harmful in the current day. But I think the way the SV handles this accomplishes the same task is more accurate and more faithful.

Anyone agree or disagree?

Is it a choice?

This is a rather informative 4 minute commercial on the homosexuality issue. It addresses:

• Is homosexuality natural
• Is it genetic
• Is it curable

While it is not terribly biblical it is a fast and entertaining way to address many of the scientific issues

For those disbelieving the claims of homosexual behavior in animals here is a link to a wikipedia article and the following video from National Geographic is rather striking:



The Wikipedia article on prenatal hormones and sexual orientation contains links to Bearman- Blanchard study in the video.

A few quotes by Ellen White

SDA is often accused of being a cult. Generally I've found them to be pretty reasonable on most issues. Here are a few quotes regarding discipline from Ellen White herself. We've recently been discussing what good leadership would do in trying to take a church which has become overly harsh and judgmental in a more reasonable direction. Those churches which many of my regular readers come from might do well to learn something from what she had to say to her lower leadership:

Perverted Discipline

In dealing with the erring, harsh measures should not be resorted to; milder means will effect far more. Make use of the milder means most perseveringly, and even if they do not succeed, wait patiently; never hurry the matter of cutting off a member from the church. Pray for him, and see if God will not move upon the heart of the erring. Discipline has been largely perverted. Those who have had very defective characters themselves have been very forward in disciplining others, and thus all discipline has been brought into contempt. Passion, prejudice, and partiality, I am sorry to say, have had abundant room for exhibition, and proper discipline has been strangely neglected. If those who deal with the erring had hearts full of the milk of human kindness, what a different spirit would prevail in our churches. May the Lord open the eyes and soften the hearts of those who have a harsh, unforgiving, unrelenting spirit toward those whom they think in error. Such men dishonor their office and dishonor God. They grieve the hearts of his children, and compel them to cry unto God in their distress. The Lord will surely hear their cry, and will judge for these things.--Review and Herald, May 14, 1895

Control Self First

Those who control others should first learn to control themselves. Unless they learn this lesson, they can not be Christlike in their work. They are to abide in Christ, speaking as He would speak, acting as He would act,--with unfailing tenderness and compassion.--Review and Herald, April 28, 1903. {ChL 65.2}

Pastoral Ministry 36.1:

Those with incorrigible, unbending, stubborn traits of character, when transformed, make the most valuable ministers.--Ministers have been presented to me, with their course of action and their character before they were converted--the hardest and most incorrigible, the most unbending, the most stubborn--and yet, every one of these traits of character was what they needed in the work of God. We don't want to kill that. It is needed in order to fill important positions of trust in the cause of God. There must be a transformation of character. The leaven must work in the human heart, until every action is in conformity to the will of God, and they are sanctified; then they become the most valuable. It is this very kind of individuals that God can use in the different branches of His work.--9MR 61.PaM36.1

HCSB Apologetics Study Bible (review)

Everybody (myself included) has been saying such nice stuff about the new NLT Study Bible, and that just doesn't fit with the sarcastic tone of this blog when it comes to reviews. So I went on a quest for the study bible with the worst notes. I had so hoped in would be the MacArthur bible, but alas twas not to be, the honor goes to Chuck Colson and the Apologetics Study Bible. Why would anyone pick Richard Nixon's hatchet man to write a bible? The HCSB is a reasonable evangelical translation well covered on a dozen other blogs so I won't bother critiquing that.


We will focus on the notes. The apologetics study bible has these little notes inserted into the text which give the up and coming apologist valuable information to counter the occult, atheists and other religious claims. There is a large note before genesis about creationism. Everyone already knows about that so it's boring. So lets go to the first small note pictured directly to the left.

The first paragraph asserts that Satan falls between verses 1 and 2, which is at the very least a sign of ignorance and at worst a heresy. Romans 5:12 is quite clear that Adam's sin is the cause of evil in the word, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin..." On the other hand we see Satan tempting Adam, and 1 John 3:8 that the devil has been sinning "since the beginning". That is Satan's fall predates Adam but is Adam's sin which introduces evil, Satan's fall is not the cause of evil. This incidentally is covered quite well in just about every standard reference materials like the Catholic Encylopedia entry on the devil, or Summa Theologica on the malice of the Angels, with the original source Augustine's City of God chapter 14 (which is on the subject of the origin of sin).

Maybe I'm being too harsh in asking them to look stuff up? So lets move onto the 2nd paragraph where we are informed about how Edgar Cayce taught about Atlantis existing 10 million years in the past and how it was inhabited by spirit beings (as per these verses) who took up with Adam and Eve.... Interesting story but absolutely none of it is true to Cayce. Moreover in my entire life I've met 0 people who believe in Edgar Cayce. Why are they bothering with this? And if they were wouldn't it be worth mentioning the best counter Cayce / Atlantis argument was he predicted Atlantis would rise again from 1958-1968 which hasn't turned out so accurate.

OK so what did Edgar Cayce actually believe? He accepted Plato, and Donnelly's dates for Plato and thus had Atlantis dieing 9564 BCE (not ten-million). For Cayce Atlantis was inhabited by normal people (not spirit beings), though many of the people alive today were reincarnations of the people from Atlantis. Not everyone lived there, there were other countries at the time. He agreed with Madame Blavatsky about it being the fourth "race" of humans (not the first), current humans are in the 5th race. (see sacred texts on Atlantis for details). So yes ever single "fact" in that paragraph is wrong. Chuck I'm impressed.

So now we advanced though our trusty apologetics study bible to Genesis 1:27.
where we encounter Lilith. Take a moment to read the entry to the right. Again I am curious which group this is supposed to refute. Vampires? Anyway, the connection between vampires and Lilith comes from a now defunct game called Vampire: The Masquerade. So these "modern-day" vampires are people buying a rule book for a game? The rest of the passage is a gross over simplification of the Lilith legend here some of the facts are correct sorta so let's just focus on mistakes:

• Lilith isn't derived from Genesis she had a pre-existing mythos from Mesopotamia. No one claims she originated as a biblical figure.
• They are confusing two versions of the story. In one she is Adam's first wife. In another she is a demon that Adam has sex with after Cain murders Abel. There is no version where both are true.
  
• In the versions where Lilith gives birth to demons Cain is the father not Adam.
  
• She is never said to give birth to all the demons of the bible, generally it is two Galiu and Alû (or Ailo).
  
• She is never in any legend the Queen of Demons.
  
• Outside of the game there is no association between Lilith and vampires. Within the game she is not a vampire and does not turn people into vampires, vampirism is the curse of Cain.
  

Finally I should mention that if they are going to do Lilith they miss the point entirely. The worship of Lilith is not ancient it is modern. Lilith was always seen as a demon in the ancient world. In the 20th century Jewish feminists picked her up as an icon (not a goddess since they were atheistic). They did this because she is a strong female character associated with rejecting procreation, i.e. masturbation for men and miscarriage for women. Gardner is influenced by them and Lilith comes into Wicca as a lesser goddess. The Church of Satan and Luciferianism then pick her up as a consort (not a wife) for Satan. At the same time directly from Jewish feminism she gets a more major role in modern Kabbalah cults. So if they are going to do Lilith they have completely missed the point.

I could keep going, but I've reached the end of the free Amazon preview. I'm sure there are some notes that are better than these two but I think we have a winner for worst notes in any study bible.

See also:

• Bryon did a follow up with his candidate for worst study bible notes. The Positive Thinking Bible.
• Review on Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth (Nick Noreli)

Miriam, a female church leader

Miriam is a minor biblical character who occurs in a few places. But those places are very telling:

Exodus:

2:1 A man from the household of Levi married a woman who was a descendant of Levi. 2:2 The woman became pregnant and gave birth to a son. When she saw that he was a healthy child, she hid him for three months. 2:3 But when she was no longer able to hide him, she took a papyrus basket for him and sealed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the child in it and set it among the reeds along the edge of the Nile. 2:4 His sister stationed herself at a distance to find out what would happen to him.

2:5 Then the daughter of Pharaoh came down to wash herself by the Nile, while her attendants were walking alongside the river, and she saw the basket among the reeds. She sent one of her attendants, took it, 2:6 opened it, and saw the child – a boy, crying! – and she felt compassion for him and said, “This is one of the Hebrews’ children.”

2:7 Then his sister said to Pharaoh’s daughter, “Shall I go and get a nursing woman for you from the Hebrews, so that she may nurse the child for you?” 2:8 Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, “Yes, do so.” So the young girl went and got the child’s mother. 2:9 Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, “Take this child and nurse him for me, and I will pay your wages.” So the woman took the child and nursed him.

2:10 When the child grew older she brought him to Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son. She named him Moses, saying, “Because I drew him from the water.”

Exodus:

15:20 Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a hand-drum in her hand, and all the women went out after her with hand-drums and with dances. 15:21 Miriam sang in response to them, “Sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously; the horse and its rider he has thrown into the sea.”

Numbers:

12:1 Then Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman he had married (for he had married an Ethiopian woman). 12:2 They said, “Has the Lord only spoken through Moses? Has he not also spoken through us?” And the Lord heard it.

12:3 (Now the man Moses was very humble, more so than any man on the face of the earth.)

12:4 The Lord spoke immediately to Moses, Aaron, and Miriam: “The three of you come to the tent of meeting.” So the three of them went. 12:5 And the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud and stood at the entrance of the tent; he then called Aaron and Miriam, and they both came forward.

12:6 The Lord said, “Hear now my words: If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known to him in a vision; I will speak with him in a dream. 12:7 My servant Moses is not like this; he is faithful in all my house. 12:8 With him I will speak face to face, openly, and not in riddles; and he will see the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?” 12:9 The anger of the Lord burned against them, and he departed. 12:10 When the cloud departed from above the tent, Miriam became leprous as snow. Then Aaron looked at Miriam, and she was leprous!

12:11 So Aaron said to Moses, “O my lord, please do not hold this sin against us, in which we have acted foolishly and have sinned! 12:12 Do not let her be like a baby born dead, whose flesh is half-consumed when it comes out of its mother’s womb!”

12:13 Then Moses cried to the Lord, “Heal her now, O God.” 12:14 The Lord said to Moses, “If her father had only spit in her face, would she not have been disgraced for seven days? Shut her out from the camp seven days, and afterward she can be brought back in again.”

12:15 So Miriam was shut outside of the camp for seven days, and the people did not journey on until Miriam was brought back in. 12:16 After that the people moved from Hazeroth and camped in the wilderness of Paran.

Numbers:

20:1 Then the entire community of Israel entered the wilderness of Zin in the first month, and the people stayed in Kadesh. Miriam died and was buried there.

Micah:

6:3 “My people, how have I wronged you?
How have I wearied you? Answer me!
6:4 In fact, I brought you up from the land of Egypt,
I delivered you from that place of slavery.
I sent Moses, Aaron, and Miriam to lead you.

The last verse particularly, Micah 6:4 indicates that Miriam is a leader at the level that Aaron is, that is Moses, Miriam and Aaron form a leadership triad but she is not on the same level as Moses. Calvin even though he disapproves of female elders agrees that both Miriam and Deborah were leaders with authority. That is he considers these two to be exceptions but does not deny they were leaders with authority. Moreover he asserts that this authority was granted directly by God:

Then he adds, I have set over thee as leaders Moses, and Aaron, and Miriam, the sister of them both.... With regard to Miriam, she also performed her part towards the women; and as we find in Exodus 15, she composed a song of thanksgiving after passing through the Red Sea: and hence arose her base envy with regard to Moses; for being highly praised, she thought herself equal to him in dignity. It is at the same time right to mention, that it was an extraordinary thing, when God gave authority to a woman, as was the case with Deborah that no one may consider this singular precedent as a common rule. (John Calvin Commentary on Micah 6:4)

Jewish legend also considers this a triad. Rashi, explains Ta’anith 9a (Ta’anith is the book of fasts and feasts) and provides the background needed to understand Micah 6:4.

Our Sages say that the three great Divine gifts that sustained the Jewish people in the desert-the Manna, the Clouds of Glory, and the Well-were in the merit of these three worthy shepherds, Moshe, Aaron, and Miriam respectively. "Miriam's Well," as it became known - a rolling rock that accompanied the Jewish people on their wanderings - provided fresh water in the desert, not only for the people, but also for their cattle and sheep. It also made the desert bloom with green pastures and beautifully scented flowers. Small wonder the people loved and respected this wise, G-d fearing and saintly prophetess. (Rashi/Chabad link)

This association with water comes from the bible itself, for those of a more mystical bent Numbers 20:1-2 presents a more interesting picture, Miriam dies and the water stops. Right after the song of Miriam the bitter water is made sweet, manah comes from heaver and Moses draws water from a rock. And of course Exodus 2:1-10 where she is associated with the river.

Going to numbers 12, this passage is often used against women teachers. However it says the exact opposite. God asserts quite clearly in 12:6-12:8 that he is directly sending Miriam visions and dreams. He contrasts that with the sort of direct conversation he has with Moses. And there is no question he considers Moses superior but the important thing in establishing female leadership that God is purposely tasking her with teaching. That is while this information is of lower quality than what Moses receives she most certainly is the recipient of revelation meant to be passed on to the people.

There is a lot of Jewish practice that is specific to women. Moses during the 40 years lays down laws that apply specifically to woman, but not in anywhere near enough detail for these instructions to be carried out. Also there are many other blessings and prayers that are woman's only, and presumably Moses wouldn't know these. That is Jews have very extensive customs and laws regarding duties including those that are exclusive and/or generally performed by woman (example menstral ritual purity and separation of dough) and mostly they are passed and taught by women to women. It would not be unreasonable that Miriam as the woman in the triad was the source of these. Especially given Aaron as the third this makes sense, i.e. Moses would have difficulty teaching things he was forbidden to actually do. So we could have Moses handles laws for the community as a whole, Aaron handled the rituals specific to priests, Miriam handled the rituals specific to woman.

So lets be clear on numbers 12. Being subordinate doesn't mean that one is not a leader. In fact in most denominations everyone is subordinate to some agency. In the Catholic church deacons to priests, priests to bishops, bishops to cardinals, cardinals to the pope and the pope to the councils (usually council of cardinals). I'd offer the story of Korah (Numbers 16) as a quick example that what happened to Miriam was because she was opposing Moses not because she was female. God himself states (Numbers 12:6-10) that it is because of his special relationship with Moses that Miriam and Aaron should not speak against Moses. There is no hint that what happened to Miriam is because she is a woman and the same thing happens to a male. So I think this proves that God did approve of Miriam as a leader, just not as one coequal to Moses. Everyone is subordinate to Moses, including Miriam, because he is a servant.

Again Jewish legend also upholds this interpretation, that the issue who she was opposing not that she wanted to teach. Rashi (commentary on Numbers 12:8):

against my servant Moses Heb. בְּעַבְדִי בְמשֶׁה, lit., against My servant, against Moses. Scripture does not say בְּעַבְדִי משֶׁה, against My servant Moses, but בְּעַבְדִי בְמשֶׁה, against My servant, against Moses . [The meaning is thus:] against My servant even if he were not Moses, and against Moses, even if he were not My servant, you should certainly have feared him, and all the more so since he is My servant, and the servant of the king is a king himself! You should have said, “The King does not love him for nothing.” If you claim that I am unaware of his actions, this [statement] is worse than your previous one. — [Sifrei Beha’alothecha 1:42:8, Tanchuma Tzav 13]

In Exodus 15 she acts as a music minister leading the woman in song and worship.

Miriam does not lead in the manner of a 21st century protestant on the list, she is depicted as almost 4000 years ago. But what the bible does teach is a divinely sanctioned teacher of the word who is a leader.