Wineskins Contributor・08/01/19

These are brief: one tidbit each from the Hebrew Bible, thewritings of the New Testament, and from the history of Churches of Christ.

Hebrew Bible

In Genesis 4:1, Eve explodes on the scene East of Eden asone who is already subverting the “man will rule over the woman” script ofGenesis 3:16. She names a man!

Eve produced (qanah)a man (ish) with the help of Yahweh.Cain (qayin) is the noun form of qanah, and he is called an ish rather than a child, or a human, or aboy. Eve gave birth to a man, andnamed the man. Just as Adam named thewoman (ishah) “Eve” after God questionedthem in the Garden, now Eve names a man (ish)whom she has brought into the world with the help of Yahweh.

This anticipates Paul’s point in 1 Corinthians 11:11-12where he recognizes the mutual reciprocity between male and female rather thanthe domination of male over female: “in the Lord, woman is not independent ofman nor man independent of woman for just as woman came from man, so man comesthrough woman; but all things come from God.”

New Testament

In Christ, Paul writes, there is neither Jew nor Gentile,and there is neither slave nor free. Then he also adds a third pair: there isneither male and female. There is no“nor” as in the first two pairs but the conjunction “and.” Why the difference?

Paul writes “male and female” (arsen kai thēlu), which is the precise language that appears in theancient Greek translation of Genesis 1:27. This is not typical language forPaul who only uses “female” in Romans 1 and nowhere else. He drew it directlyfrom the Genesis 1 creation account. In other words, Paul recalls the creationof humanity as male and female.

This appeal to creation is important because what Pauldescribes as “in Christ” is part of the “new creation” (Galatians 6:15). Thisnew world renews the partnership of the original creation when “God blessedthem” and told “them” to co-create and co-shepherd God’s good creation. Inother words, the equality and partnership envisioned in Genesis 1:26-28 isrenewed in the new creation.

History

In the nineteenth century, many leading teachers among thechurches of Christ believed that 1 Timothy 2:12 had universal application. Itwas not limited to the assemblies of the church but applied to the whole ofsociety. Consequently, 1 Timothy 2:12 was used to deny women the vote, opposepublic speaking by women in any social situation, and reject any kind of publicleadership on the part of women.

If the traditional interpretation is correct, they had apoint. If the prohibition of 1 Timothy 2:12 is rooted in some kind of “order ofcreation” (a kind of primogeniture), then it applies universally—whether in theassemblies of the church or in political assemblies. Whatever is rooted increation applies to every aspect of human life.

It would seem a consistent application of 1 Timothy 2:12—ifone thinks this contains a timeless prohibition—excludes women from any publicleadership or authority, whether in the church or in society. That is how our“forefathers” read it until women were given the right to vote, hold politicaloffice, sit on juries, and become Presidents of universities. Then, we nolonger believed that, adjusted our interpretation, and decided that the textonly applied to assemblies of the church while continuing to ground theprohibition in some kind of “creation order.”

More next week.