Unfortunately almost every woman I have ever known either has been, or is currently, a slave.
I know that might be shocking or offensive to you, but please bear with me. No, I’m not talking about slavery to sin in the more general sense; I am talking about something much more specific. Just like any other form of widespread slavery, the slavery I am talking about is so prevalent that it has become an accepted way of life. When slavery becomes the norm, the slaves often lose their sense of freedom and accept their bondage as ‘normal’ life.
I have observed three major areas in which satan seeks to enslave a woman. While not all women are enslaved in all three areas, almost every woman I know has been, or is currently, enslaved in one or more of these areas. If you are a woman, you will probably be able to relate to one or more of these areas of enslavement. Sadly, many assume this ‘slavery’ is their God given destiny. Out of all the articles that I have written to date, This has been the most difficult for me.
I. The Physical Slavery Of Women
Make no mistake about it, Satan hates women. Yes I know he hates men too, but he has a very special hatred for women. The woman represents something very special, and Satan knows it. Before the foundations of the world were ever created, inside the very heart of God a Bride for the Son was being selected. This beautiful bride is a woman (church), and this ‘woman’ (church) will give expression to the very one who was destined to crush Satan’s head (Christ). I believe the physical ‘woman’ is a reminder to Satan of the nature of Christ’s heart for His bride, and of his own defeat. Consider this statement by the LORD to Satan from Genesis 3:15:
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed (the world) and her seed (Christ)…
That ‘enmity’ between Satan and the woman can be seen all throughout history. As the scriptures tell us in Ephesians 6:12, the root of everything is spiritual. There is a spiritual darkness that seeks to enslave women. The seed (or offspring) of Satan is the world and all of its ‘systems’. A simple study of world society at any time or place throughout history will quickly reveal how the women of that society have been exploited or enslaved in some way. The enslavement and exploitation of women seems to be a never ending epidemic.
For all the anthropologists out there that have bought into the misconception that societies and communities are slowly ‘evolving’ regarding the treatment of women, nothing could be further from the truth. Aside from the political and economic strides that women have made in modern times, the slavery and exploitation of women is at a all time high. Without going into this subject, women are the chief victims of today’s pop and porn culture.
The sex slave and human trafficking industry is the largest form of slavery the world has ever seen. It goes on in front of us in our cities at this very moment. I have no doubt that you have unknowingly met and interacted with women who are enslaved in this way already. These women slaves are hidden from us in plain sight. While this is a huge problem today, astoundingly it is only an outward sign of a much deeper spiritual issue that can be traced back to the fall of mankind in the garden and the assault on a woman’s true identity. This brings me to my second point…
II. The Slavery Of Sisters In Christ
By ‘sister’, I am referring to women who are in Christ. Believe it or not, I believe the slavery of our sisters in Christ is a much deeper epidemic than the slavery of women in pop culture because this kind of slavery is much more difficult to see. The lies that sustain this kind of slavery are widely accepted and continue to be taught by many well meaning, but mistaken, preachers and Bible teachers.
Satan’s offspring is the world’s system (Genesis 3:15). While most of us think of the world’s system as an economic or political system, there is a ‘system’ of the world that many have a hard time seeing. The world’s system that I am referring to is the world’s ‘religious’ system.
As I mentioned before, all the ‘systems’ of the world seem to have a special hatred for women because of what she represents. The world’s religious system is certainly no exception. Just like in global society throughout history, if you look at the history of the world’s religions, you will see this same pattern of enslavement and domination of women. Although Christ came to set His Bride free, even a casual study of church history will demonstrate that the reality of the world’s religious ‘system’ has unfortunately crept into the body of Christ and has deeply assaulted the identity of our sisters.
Upon closer examination, I have come to realize that most of what is taught and believed about our sisters in Christ have not come from Jesus Christ, but the author of the world’s fallen system.
The Role Of Sisters In The Church
There is a great promise in the Old Testament about a future day that was coming that was, frankly, quite radical for a Middle Eastern, patriarchal society to comprehend. Consider this passage:
It will come about after this that I will pour out My Spirit on all mankind; And your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Even on the male and female servants I will pour out My Spirit in those days. (Joel 2:28-29, NASB)
This promise, written before Christ, completely goes against the grain of the culture it was written in. This promise seems to indicate that God will reveal and express Himself through a group of people equally, irregardless of their age or sex. Again, this idea might not seem like a big deal to us, but to them it was a foreign thought as this promise was written to a male dominated patriarchal society.
When Jesus came on the scene, His treatment of women was revolutionary. Unlike any other religious figure or rabbi, the close community of people that lived and traveled with Jesus were made up of men AND women (Luke 8:1-3). In addition to this, Jesus seemed to go out of His way to break cultural traditions simply to engage women in conversation. In the gospels, some of the most profound conversations and demonstrations of worship were with women. The first person that Christ revealed Himself to after His resurrection was a woman! Remember, all of this was done in a patriarchal male dominated society.
When the Holy Spirit was poured out on Christ’s followers after the resurrection on Pentecost, male and females were equally affected in the same company. What was the explanation for what was happening? That’s right, Joel 2:28-29!
Without getting into an entire theological discourse about New Testament ‘prophecy’, there is one thing to keep in mind. Prophecy is concerned with the revelation and testimony of the person of Jesus Christ (Rev. 19:10). Once we understand this, we’ll see that most of what gets passed off as ‘prophecy’ is anything but prophecy. That is another subject for another day, however.
in light of Joel 2:28-29, we can see that it is the destiny and role of brothers and sisters in Christ to express and testify of the person of Jesus Christ. This is exactly why New Testament church gatherings were participatory. Both men AND women testified of Christ publicly during their church gatherings. Christ is so big that He must be expressed by all the members of the body! This is why prophecy is the only gift that Paul encouraged all the believers to engage in (see 1 Cor. 14:1, 24-31).
In addition to this, Paul also taught that the fleshly distinctions that formerly defined our identity are now null and void in Christ. Consider this passage:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Gal. 3:28, NASB)
Again, to us, this doesn’t seem like a big deal, but to Paul, this was a radical departure of everything he knew in his Jewish life. In Christ, our fleshly distinctions no longer prevent us from testifying and expressing Him. Throughout Paul’s letters in the New Testament, he publicly names prominent men AND women of influence in the church. Again, this is right in line with Joel 2:28-29 that is fulfilled in Christ.
With that said, Paul seemingly made some statements that seemed to depart from this. For brevity’s sake I’d like to look at just one passage that has been the source of much heartache for women and their ability to contribute to the body of Christ.
A Woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. (1 Tim. 2:11-13, NASB)
In all honesty, this passage has always made me cringe. It simply seems so out of character for Paul and the New Testament church. I have also come across several people who, because of this passage, have reduced their wives into second class citizens who can only express themselves behind closed doors with other women. This is very similar to the way women function in Muslim societies as well.
A biblical scholar named Jon Zens has written an entire book exclusively to address 1 Timothy 2. I can honestly say that this has been the most informative and eye opening book that I have yet to read regarding the New Testament role of women and the cultural background behind passages like 1 Timothy 2 and others that have been twisted and used against women.
The title of the book is ‘What’s With Paul And Women?’ You can order a copy on Amazon by clicking here or you can obtain a copy through Jon’s website by visiting www.searchingtogether.org
If we only knew the context and history of the New Testament, we would never be able to take a passage of scripture and use it to assume and teach a reality that simply did not exist in the New Testament. Because of this ignorance of the New Testament, preachers week in and week out stand behind their pulpits and preach from the Bible while at the same time promote a religious system that looks nothing like the New Testament church. Jon’s book on 1 Timothy 2 is very helpful in this regard.
The passage mentioned above in 1 Tim. 2:11-13, and a few others, have been used to assault sisters in two ways:
1. 1 Tim. 2 has been used to silence women from expressing Christ in corporate church meetings where both men and women are present.
This is very unfortunate, and is absolutely NOT Paul’s intention at all. Many translations badly translate or interpret ‘quiet’ or ‘quietly’ as silence. This is false. Sisters are NOT to be silent in corporate church meetings, rather they are to testify of Christ right along with their brothers in Christ.
Paul wrote the letter of 1 Timothy to Timothy who was spending time with the church in Ephesus. Timothy was an apostolic co-worker of Paul who traveled with him to plant churches. He was NOT the ‘Pastor’ of the church of Ephesus as many mistakenly assume. A simple understanding of the story and context of the New Testament makes this clear.
Paul left the Ephesian church after spending a significant amount of time with them, but he asked Timothy to stay there to help the church deal with some problems they were experiencing. There was a faction in the church that had introduced false teaching. As a result, there was quite a commotion stirred up. Paul therefore urges Timothy to instruct ALL the members of the church to live a ‘quiet’ life and to stay away from meaningless disputes. (1 Tim. 2:2).
Obviously, this did NOT mean that the whole church had to take a vow of silence. That would be ridiculous. How would they express Christ? The Greek word used in 1 Timothy 2:2 that was addressed to the whole body is the word ‘hesuchia’ which means ‘quietness’. Paul wanted the whole body to lead a peaceable and ‘quiet’ life.
There was, however, also an issue with a faction of women who had introduced false teaching into the church. They were refusing to mutually submit themselves to the body and were causing much commotion. As a result, Paul addressed the same instruction he gave to the whole body in 1 Timothy 2:2 specifically to those women causing issues in 1 Timothy 2:11-12.
The word used for ‘quiet’ and ‘quietly’ regarding his instruction to the women in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is EXACTLY the same word used a few verses earlier to instruct the whole body in 1 Timothy 2:2. Again, it is the Greek word ‘hesuchia’ which means ‘quietness’. This applies to both women AND men as 1 Timothy 2:2 was addressed to men as well. Paul simply repeated this instruction to the women specifically because of what was happening in the Ephesian church, NOT because he was introducing a more severe form of ‘quietness’ on the women. That is simply a ridiculous assumption.
2. The passage in 1 Timothy 2:12 has been twisted to restrict women from teaching men or making leadership decisions in the church.
1 Timothy 2:12 has been incorrectly translated from the Greek language. What we read in the English translations of the Bible are bad translations. There really is no other way to explain it. The traditional, but faulty, translation of 1 Tim. 2:12 is this:
But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. (NASB)
This is an outright incorrect translation of the Greek word ‘authentein’. The Greek word ‘authentein’ is mistakenly translated ‘to excersice authority over’. ‘Authentein’ has no history of ever being translated in such a way. In the common Greek, the word ‘authentein’ literally means ‘to dominate; to get one’s way’. It means ‘to dominate for the purpose of getting one’s way’. This is a very important distinction! 1 Timothy 2:12 should be understood this way:
But I do not allow a woman to teach for the purpose of dominating or getting one’s way over a man.
Wow, that puts things in perspective when we understand what was actually happening in the Ephesian Church! The city of Ephesus was the center of a religious system devoted to the goddess Artemis. The temple of Artemis is considered one of the wonders of the ancient world. In this religious system it was taught that women were superior to men because Artemis, the daughter of the mythical Greek god Zeus, was born before her brother Apollos (also a Greek god).
Temple life and practice devoted to Artemis worship was dominated by women. Artemis was considered the goddess of fertility and protection of women during child bearing, and a lot of the religious practices that occurred in that temple involved illicit sexual activity. In this system men were dominated by the women through the use of manipulation and sensual behavior.
Many of the people in the Ephesian church had come out of the Artemis cult and brought these tendencies into church life. The woman were used to teaching for the purpose of manipulating and dominating men. Because of their background, they were used to sensual religious behavior. This is why Paul addressed this issue head on by saying that women teaching for the purpose of dominating and having authority over men is not correct for church life, nor was provocative outward appearance to be used by women for the purpose of manipulation and control. All of this was regular practice by women in the temple of Artemis.
By Paul singling out women here, he was in no way asserting that it is conversely ok for men to teach for the purpose of dominating or getting their way over a woman, however. This is addressed elsewhere in scripture (Matthew 23:8-12, 1 Peter 5:1-3, etc…). I also wrote an article that specifically addresses the non-hierarchical nature of church leadership. You can read it by clicking here.
1 Tim. 2:11-12 is also commonly twisted and used as the ‘anti-women pastor’ proof text. What the ‘anti women pastor’ crowd doesn’t realize, however, is that the institutional concept of ‘Pastor’ that is based on hierarchy is not only not acceptable for women, it is also NOT acceptable for men as well! That is another subject for another day however.
Many mistakenly use the passage in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 to deny our sisters the ability to teach or make decisions along side of the brothers in church life. Sadly this is a major problem even in many ‘house church’ circles as it is in the institution. When this occurs in the church, it is simply a sign that specific group has not been built on the foundation of Jesus Christ, and also does not understand the context of 1 Timothy. In Christ, male & female are one, and the church should reflect this New Covenant reality (Gal. 3:28).
To contrast the emphasis of the teaching within the Artemis cult that women were superior because Artemis (a Greek goddess) was born first before her brother Apollos (a greek god), Paul reminded them that Adam was formed first before Eve, and that she was deceived (1 Tim. 2:13-14). Paul was certainly NOT communicating the belief that women are second class or inferior to men, he was simply correcting the pagan mentality that was coming into the church from the prevalent Artemis cult in Ephesus.
Knowing the context in which scripture was written is vitally important. Because most believers in Christ are ignorant of the context of the New Testament, passages like 1 Timothy 2 are commonly twisted and abused to assume and create a reality that simply did not exist, and is inconsistent with New Testament church life. It is for this reason that I strongly urge you to obtain a copy of Jon Zens’ book that I linked to above. He goes into much more detail about this, and also examines other passages of scripture that are commonly abused to restrict sisters in church life. This brings me to my last point…
III. The Slavery Of Wives
What was meant to be a beautiful picture of Christ and His Bride has become a twisted picture of control, guilt, and manipulation for far too many marriages. How could what was meant to be so beautiful become so destructive and enslaving to women? Here are three reasons why:
1. The unwillingness of husbands to submit to their wives…
I know that you may be thinking ‘Aren’t wives supposed to submit to their husbands?’ The answer is yes, but husbands are likewise to submit to their wives as well! Scripture does not teach that this is a one way street. In Ephesians 5, Paul instructs the church to be filled with the Holy Spirit. What flows from that in Ephesians 5:21 is the command to be subject to (or submit) mutually to one another in the fear of Christ. The command in verse 21 to be mutually subjected to one another applies to the whole church. This obviously includes husbands and wives as well.
Remember, because of the context in the city of Ephesus regarding the cult of Artemis and the specific issues that church experienced with women, Paul repeats this command to wives in Eph. 5:22. In the Greek, the word for ‘be subject’ is not actually there in verse 22. The idea that wives are to be subject to their husbands is tied to the verb in Eph. 5:21 that says that the whole body is to be subject to one another. Just in case some women think they are exempt from this (as was the case in the Ephesian church), he also applies the command for the whole body to mutually submit to one another to the husband wife relationship as well. Ephesians 5:22 literally reads:
“Wives, to your own husbands, as to the Lord.”
Again, this statement in verse 22 is simply a carry over from the command to the whole body to mutually submit (or be subject) to one another in verse 21. To think that there is an exclusive command for wives to only submit to their husbands, while husbands should not submit to their wives is a complete misunderstanding of the intent of the passage. Unfortunately, this is commonly taught with devastating affects for many wives.
2. A False Understanding Of Headship
For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church…(Eph. 5:23, NASB)
When many think of ‘Head’ they think of control, or ‘authority over’. The reason many think this is because that is the hierarchical system that we have always operated in. There is no hierarchy in the Godhead, however. The Trinity is a community of mutually submitted persons who exist for one another in the highest form of sacrificial love.
The biblical understanding of Headship is not about control or authority over, but about the giving of life and undergirding of the Bride. As the Head of the church, Christ does not manipulate or control His Bride. As the Head, He lays down His life for the Bride.
He, as a servant, comes to undergird her and to give her His life, expression, and prominence.
That’s what Christ, as the Head, does for His Bride. This is completely different than a hierarchical view of headship that seeks to control, manipulate, and restrict. Christ is not a controlling husband that squelches the life and expression of His bride.
While the husband wife relationship was meant to be a beautiful expression of Christ and His Church, a hierarchical understanding of headship keeps wives enslaved and does much damage to this picture of Christ and His Bride.
3. The Insecurity Of Husbands
If you have ever been around an insecure coworker or boss, you probably know that the person who is insecure feels they must overshadow you and ‘out do’ you. Because they feel threatened by you, these kinds of people will attempt to put a ‘lid’ on you. This is exactly what we see in regards to the religious leaders’ attempt to silence and kill Jesus.
In the same way, many Christian husbands have a deep seated insecurity. Much of this is rooted in an incorrect hierarchical view of headship. They feel they need to shine brighter than their wives in order to be the ‘head’ of this relationship. Unfortunately, this leads to many husbands literally putting a ‘lid’ on their wives through the use of guilt, manipulation, and sometimes even violence. Many times wives, who themselves have bought into a hierarchical view of headship, have put undue guilt on their husbands for not ‘out shining’ them spiritually. This is tragic, and is the opposite of Christ.
Christ is a picture of ultimate security. There is no competition between Christ and His Bride. Christ knows who He is. As a matter of fact, Christ is so secure in who He is that He specifically has chosen to put His Bride on display to the entire universe.
She is the one who expresses Him!
Christ, as the Head of His Bride, enables His Bride to be His expression by receiving His glory (John 17:22).
She, as His body, is the one out front and on display.
An insecure husband is simply not capable of this. Can you imagine the wives that would flourish and be put on display to shine brightly if only their husbands were secure in their own identity?
Conclusion
I would like to conclude this article by telling you the four reasons why I felt compelled to write this article.
1. Because women are suffering and are physically being enslaved because of a false identity. Women are a special picture of the Bride of Christ. The Lord desires to set the captives free. (Luke 4:18-19, Gal. 5:1)
2. Because the church cannot fully express Jesus Christ unless the sisters are fully functioning in the body of Christ. Sisters in Christ must reject the twisting of passages like 1 Timothy 2, and others that are mistranslated and taken out of their proper context. They must KNOW their identity in Christ.
3. Because I believe many women, like men, are called to the apostolic work of foundation laying and church planting. In the New Testament, there were women who functioned as apostolic workers as well as men.
It is estimated that in China today, 80% of all apostolic church planters among the ‘underground’ church are women. (this is not simply because men are not available). I’m convinced that there could be many women who are called to such work, and they will need to know that this is a very real possibility for them.
4. Because you are a beautiful and vital part of the Body of Christ, and Christ wants you to be His display!
Jamal,
I’ve been processing these very things for years. Jon Zens’ book on the subject is amazing.
1000 amens!
Mark
Thank you for this detailed explanation of a question that has plagued me (and others)for decades. Reading the scripture as a whole I could never see the heart of God being this male-dominated system our religious sytem dictates as His design, using the 1 Tim 2:12 verse. Knowing the context now, it is all clear and the confusion is gone. Praise be to our Lord for His indescribable love! (I would still be interested in reading the “uncut” version!)
Mark,
I appreciate your kind words brother. I feel liberated by what I read from Jon Zens’ book, and I am not even a woman! I simply wish every woman on the planet could know what is true about them.
I also appreciate the fact that you are willing to read long blogs:)
Blessings on you brother:)
“I freed a thousand slaves I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves.” ~~ Harriet Tubman
GeorgiaAna,
This is a perfect quote for this article. This quote is a major reason why I wrote this article. It is the blindness that some women have to their own slavery that is so hard for me to see. May the Lord awaken them all.
A few brothers and sisters and I were just discussing this last night. It’s so easy to leave God’s character out of these verses! How terrible!!
This article is a beautiful reminder of Christ’s love for His bride. Thanks for sharing this Jamal.
Oh! And I agree that Jon Zens book is great!
Erin,
I am especially glad that you know who you are sister! Thx for reading and commenting. Blessings:)
I still can’t fathom why Jesus would give His Bride His own glory. It blows me away! It’s like the truth of God cannot really be as true as He is, yet when He acts in Who He is we are astonished by it, or maybe that’s just me
It almost seems to good to be true, but I guess that’s the way it should always be 
Anthony,
Good to hear from you brother. I know what you mean. It really is ‘good news’ (gospel).
As a man, I can understand women’s plight only from a distance. But I have never liked the standard biblical interpretation of a woman’s value and usefulness as less than a man’s. I believe there are more than a few power hungry men (and women) who will interpret scripture in favor of their own personal value system. No question women don’t get a fair shake on a number of things in some secular circles and even less in Christian ones, i.e., the pay for women’s ministry positions are considerably less than men’s for the same job.
There is much to agree with here, such as mutual submission and headship as a source of life, not authority. However, perhaps you can clarify a couple of points for me about this article. I do not claim in any way to be a Greek scholar, but you said that “The word used for ‘quiet’ and ‘quietly’ regarding his instruction to the women in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is EXACTLY the same word used a few verses earlier to instruct the whole body in 1 Timothy 2:2. Again, it is the Greek word ‘hesuchia’ which means ‘quietness’.” The Greek word hesuchia (meaning quiet, as in desisting from language)is in 1 Timothy 2:12, the Greek word in verse 11 is alethes (meaning not hid or conceal the truth) and in verse 2 it is eremos (meaning tranquil or quiet) and, therefore, are not exactly the same.
Second, in verse 12 in changing the words “nor to exercise authority” to “for the purpose of dominating” you make an excellent point for a better interpretation of “authority,” but changing “nor” to “for the purpose of” doesn’t seem supported by the Greek, literally or in spirit. (I hope I am wrong.) The Greek “nor” is oude, meaning never or neither. If the correct interpretation is “for” then I would expect words, such as: hoti, hyper or gar would be used, as in 1 Timothy 2:2,3. I couldn’t find an instance of oude interpreted as “for.” (If you can, please let me know.)
Lastly, I sincerely would like to hear more of your thoughts on 1 Timothy 2:13-15.
Lots to think about here, as usual Jamal.
By the way, I do plan on reading Jon Zen’s book.
Frank,
Thx for reading and commenting here. A couple of thoughts.
First, I really am not sure where you got your info about the Greek word used for ‘quiet’ or ‘quietness’, but the Greek word is ‘hesuchia’, and it is used in 1 Timothy 2:2, 11, 12. The correct meaning of the word is ‘quiet’ or ‘quietness’ and absolutely does NOT mean silence. If it did, the entire church would have to be silent. That is obviously not what Paul is saying. That would be ridiculous.
Secondly, regarding 1 Timothy 2:12, the Greek word used ‘authentein’ means to dominate, to get one’s way. The essense of the word means dominating for the purpose of getting your way. Manipulation, so to speak. What I said about the way 1 Timothy 2:12 ought to be understood is accurate based on the meaning of the Greek word ‘authentein’. The traditional translations of 1 Tim. 2:12 are flat out wrong. It is a complete mistranslation of the Greek word ‘authentein’.
Obviously, my suggestion regarding how 1 Tim. 2:12 should be understood is based on the meaning of the verse and the word used. It is a paraphrase. I was not wrangling over personal pronouns and such. We have to understand the context of what was written and the meaning of the words used. What is the idea being communicated? It is very clear when we understand the meaning of the Greek word ‘authentein’ that Paul used. When we know the context of what was happening in the church in Ephesus, we will understand exactly why Paul uses the word ‘authentein’.
Regarding 1 Timothy 2:13-14, I actually touch on this in my article. It has to do with what the Artemis cult taught about the superiority of women because of the birth order of Artemis and Apollos. Paul was speaking directly against this line of thinking that had come into the church. You may want to go back and reread that. 1 Timothy 2:15 also makes perfect sense when you truly understand the context and background of Ephesus and what the church was dealing with. I decided to skip that entire explanation in my article because the article was already way too long:)
I am very glad to hear that you are going to read Jon’s book about this. I’ll let you read the book. He does a great job of explaining the heart behind 1 Timothy 2:13-15.
Blessings!
Jamal,
You are right about the same Greek word for quiet in I Timothy 2:2 and verses 11,12. In the KJV in verse 2 the word “quiet” is eremos, but there is another word “peaceable” which in other versions is translated “quiet” and is the same Greek word in all three passages, hesuchia. That’s why initially I saw it differently. Now, I am on the same page as you with regards to that issue.
Jamal,
I think it is always essential that we try to shed new light on scripture and its meaning. However, changing words in the text changes its intended meaning. Just above you said, “Obviously, my suggestion regarding how 1 Tim. 2:12 should be understood is based on the meaning of the verse and the word used. It is a paraphrase.” How is it that you have to change Paul’s words in order to better reflect his meaning? This makes no sense. The ASV translates this verse very well: But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over [dominate] a man, but to be in quietness. You had a basis for correcting the word to say “dominate”. But you had no basis to in adding an entire phrase so that the issue of teaching no longer stood on its own. There are two items in this statement. Paul does not permit a woman to (1)teach OR to (2) dominate a man. If this is the approach Jon Zens uses with scripture, I will pass on reading his books.
Gary,
Welcome to the blog. Just curious, are you asking me to clarify something from this article, or are you simply making a statement?
Well, Brother, I am raising a concern. My point is that the commentary you present does not fully agree with the verse. It seems Paul did not permit women to teach men. If you have a clarification on this particular verse, I am open to better understanding.
Nope, I’m afraid I don’t have any clarification for you (other than this article and the additional comments here). I also think you should not read Jon Zens’ book that I linked to in this article. It would be a waste of your time I’m afraid.
Actually I saw something Jon Zens wrote on line and found that I agreed with much of it.
http://www.restorationgj.com/id166.htm
Wow, that’s great news Gary, so glad to hear that;)
this is a very liberating article…do you have any house churches in the san diego area?
Leana,
I really wish I knew of something in your area. Unfortunately, I do not. Sorry I can’t be of more help right now. Just curious, do you know any other people in your area that may be interested in ‘organic’ church life?
Wow, wow, wow! Jamal, you’ve really done a masterful job of revealing this insidious monster that’s binding our Lord’s women in so many ways. I pray He’ll send your post around the world, and that it will spark a rise to godly freedom like Paul Revere’s midnight ride.
I can just hear Him saying “let my women go!”
Early in my marriage and walk with Christ, I was taught about patriarchy and male headship by the church and several para-church family ministries. In my immature zealousness to “live for the Lord”, I attempted to implement this perspective in my household, but the fruit was immediately rotten [thankfully]. He had led me principally by the taste of His fruit previously, with good fruit to show for it, and so the bad fruit was thankfully easy to recognize before any real damage was done.
The scriptures and teachings seemed “so clear”, but the bad fruit in my marriage (and many others, and in the institutional churches) was so undeniable, that I just stepped back, and sought the Lord. And I heard Him encouraging me to “love her, build her up, help her be free in Me, make her strong in Spirit, give her wisdom, help her to know My voice, encourage her to believe and run her race”, etc, etc. Basically, He was telling me to build her up and set her free, instead of lord it over.
And I’m so glad that I’ve been listening to His voice instead of my ego, the pastors, book-writers, and theologians. Bcs now I’m getting to share my life with a true companion, who knows Him, loves Him, and brings Him into our marriage, family, and life; humbly, confidently, and fruitfully.
I’ve read Jon Zen’s books, and they’re great.
Trevor,
Brother, thx so much for your encouraging comment! That means a lot. I would very much like every woman on the planet to understand what I have shared here. I hope it can be shared around the world too.
This slavery has gone on way too long. As long as women don’t know their identity and are not able to fully function and express Christ, the church will not be able to be the expression of the fullness of Christ that she was designed to be. I pray this changes.
Thankful for you brother,
Jamal
Thank you Jamal, untold damage has been done to the body in this area. I had heard arguments on the other side of issue and they seemed very convincing even came from women. I am very encouraged that my uneasiness with such teachings is justified. I will indeed get the book from Jon Zens, he is by far one of my favorite scholars.
Otto,
Thx for your comment. I have noticed a trend. Women who are in abusive relationships often tend to gravitate back to their abuser. They even tend to stand up to and attack those who are trying to help them. This always used to perplex me. I think I am beginning to get some clarity about why this is.
It has everything to do with identity. We will fight for the reality that we think most corresponds to what is true. Many women have a false and damaged identity about themselves. If someone treats them in a way that does not correspond to the low identity that they have, many times they feel uncomfortable and even threatened. They will not be able to be free until their identity changes. When we have an accurate revelation of the person of Jesus Christ, we will also know who we are in Him as well. This will change everything.
Thanks Jamal for another great and thought provoking article! I was a woman in bondage for many years but no longer! In bondage to my first husband for 14 years before freeing myself. Thanks be to Father I now have a husband that values me as an equal and would give his life for me. What a wonderful gift this is. I really have a heart for women still under this kind of bondage. I WISH I COULD FREE THEM ALL! I left a church because of the erroneous interpretation of 1Tim. 2:12. The pastor was adamant that women were only to teach children and have no position of leadership whatsoever. I don’t deal with that anymore since being out of the IC. You are right when you say that every woman AND man should read this article. It reveals the freedom of ALL in Christ.
Pam,
Thx for reading and I’m grateful that you know your true identity in Him:) Christ is our freedom!
I am with you as I also wish that I could free all women from this bondage. What gives me comfort, however, is the fact that no matter how much my heart breaks for this freedom for women, it is only a fraction of Christ’s full longing for their freedom. We are only carrying a portion of His heart. Eventually, Christ’s prayer will be answered. What a day that will be:)
I would like to talk to you about this..
As usual, Jamal gives us something to ponder. That is a good thing. I need to take more time to study this sufficiently for myself, but I am intrigued by 2 things I discovered in just several minutes of separate research: 1) John Chrysostom, the 4th century church leader and preacher, translated “authentein” as “sexual license” and 2) in Revelation 2:20 Jesus warns of the woman pretending to be a prophetess who misleads (manipulates) men into sexual immorality.
I will study this further.
Jim
Jim,
Brother, thx for reading and commenting here. What you found is interesting indeed. The passage in the book of Revelation 2:20 is very interesting. I think it is worth taking note that Jesus did not condemn the fact that a woman was teaching, but He was addressing the fact that this specific woman (women) were teaching immorality. If it was wrong for women to teach in general, you can be assured that Jesus would have mentioned that in His rebuke as well.
Jim, let me encourage you to get a copy of Jon Zens’ book that I linked to in this article. It is the best that I have read. Almost everything that is out there in the evangelical world is flat out wrong regarding this. Many guys, like Piper and others recently who have written about this subject, seem to be approaching this issue from their own modern institutional church grid. This causes them to miss or twist the text of scripture into validating their own traditions. I know they don’t mean to do this, but this is exactly what happens. It is astounding how people’s self defense mechanisms kick in and they become blind to what is plainly in front of them in the scriptures.
Blessings to you brother,
Jamal
Thank you Jamal. This could be the most important and helpful piece that you have ever written. It is absolutely courageous. I don’t know of anyone else that is saying this, except for the author that you mentioned. I am so fortunate to have you for a Christian brother. I am going to share with my family today. I want my wife, daughter, and sons to know this and to be equipped to discuss this with others when it comes up.
With all love, and Blessings, Ellis.
Ellis,
I am truly humbled by your comment. Thx so much. Thank you for sharing this with others as well. I do feel that this is one of the most important articles that I have written as well. This has everything to do with the expression of Christ through the expression of ALL of His body, not just half of His body.
I am grateful for His heart in you. Blessings!
I also recommend this book. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002W5UM18/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=1278548962&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0801052505&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=101826NXZTNEPBB1FN9D
According to the Kroegers, the translation of “authentein” as “to usurp authority” was a crude slang from the mid-second century. It never meant this in St Paul’s time. In the first century (and for 500 years before then) it meant “to be the author of”, i.e. “to create”. So the correct translation of 2:12 is probably something like:
“I do not permit a woman to teach that she created man; for Eve was not made first, but Adam was…”
In other words, what is being forbidden is a specific heresy. This heresy is externally attested, and the Kroegers tell you all about it. It’s not directly related to the Artemis cult, but there is certainly an indirect connection; it’s plausible that both kinds of idea would have co-existed at one time and place.
Are there slaves in the Kingdom of God? This is a rather absurd question, yet this absurdity is beyond epidemic, for this is a common and accepted practice among those in Christ.
Do we not see the evident pride of the first Adam when he said, “The woman YOU put here with me…”? Adam took of the fruit, and then blamed God Himself! Since then, most males have not stepped down from this prideful stance in the world, and even in the gatherings of the saints. This is the greatest division in the body of Christ, in fact, this pride is the epitome of division, and is the direct result of the fall of humankind.
Understand this my brothers, and this is not an overstatement of fact; this is the actuality of Truth: When you deny the expression of Christ in me, you are denying Christ!
Kat,
Powerfully spoken sister! Please know that I am grateful for the freedom in Christ that He has brought you to. It is a blessing to many in the body of Christ!
As always, thx for being a blessing and encouragment. Thx for sharing this article as well. I hope all women can truly know their identity and freedom in Him.
First off, thanks for writing this much needed article. I believe many sisters, and even brothers, will be built up and edified by its content.
Second, AMEN!
Third, Zens’ book is absolutely a must-read for many. Without context into Paul’s letters, many things can be used to enslave and control women, men, and even children. This is sad. Jon Zens gives much needed context to the passage.
Thanks again, bro!
Michael,
I appreciate you sharing this article brother. You are right, apart from the right context, Paul’s letters are often twisted to do the very thing he was often times speaking against in the church.
I appreciate you bro:)
I feel truly free for the first time in my life after reading “The Universal Enslavement of Women.” The ramifications of this experience cannot be overstated. Thank you for standing up and telling the truth. I am sharing this with my girl friends, many of whom have been plagued for decades by incorrect interpretation of scripture.
Praise Jesus!!!
Deb,
Your comment is worth more than all the money in the world to me. Your comment brings me joy that I cannot describe. May your freedom spread. This is exactly why I wrote this. Blessings on your new found freedom sister!
Reading this article is like breathing a huge breath of clean air after years of being confined to a religious “sanctuary” of smoke and mirrors– male preachers being the illusionists. The most compelling argument for church gatherings to encourage women to express Christ is what happens to the body if we don’t: We are in disunity and incomplete.
“…[T]he church cannot fully express Jesus Christ unless the sisters are fully functioning in the body of Christ.”
Cheryl,
Thank you for reading and commenting here. I am excited about the prospect of the church fully expressing Jesus Christ because of the sisters finding their rightful place at the table.
Also, thanks again for your editorial help. I need that:)
Blessings sister,
Jamal
This was a tremendous article Jamal! It really opened my eyes to the oppression I feel so much of the time (or should I say, it helped me to see where it is coming from). Woman are created to be a help-meet…we long to be-long and yet we are cast out…both in the Church and in the marriage as we are always considered 2nd rate/of lessor importance. You have made it clear…that this is a “LIE” from the pit of hell! I will reread this again and again and share it with others as most women I know…are oppressed in some way–by men, by the church, and by their own ignorance. Again…Thank you Jamal!!!
Thank you for a great article on the predicament of so many women in the church as well as society. When a man writes about these things, not only will other men listen, it validates women who also think this way. When women write about it, they are perceived as having a feminist agenda. It takes Barak working with Deborah to produce a Kingdom movement.
Even though many of us now have freedom theologically, for many women, they have so many years of conditioning to just take a supportive role, it is difficult for them to step out into the destiny God has for them.
I believe that men and women co-laboring together in the church will be one of the next major moves of the Spirit.
Felicity,
Thank you very much for your comments here. I am glad that you found this article to be an encouragment. I have to say that your life’s example is an encouragment to many. What you said about Barak & Deborah is so very true. I am praying with you that the eyes of the hearts of brothers and sisters in the body of Christ would be opened to God’s eternal purpose in Christ. When this happens, we will see that there truly is no more male or female in Christ. We will see that we are one in Him.
Blessings sister,
Jamal
Thank you, dear brother in Christ, for writing such a thought-provoking, insightful article. I had bought into that quiet, submissive role – but had taken it WAY far out of the context in which it was written. We are to mirror those traits, but NOT in the context of “don’t speak unless you are spoken to.” Women have been reduced to this because of ignorance; I know I was ignorant about it. Thank you, Jamal, for loving your sisters in Christ so much that you would write and bring this to the light, so chains TRULY can be broken…off men and women!
MANY thanks!
Velvet Hale
Velvet,
Thx for your comment. What you have said here is very important. In the religious ‘system’, our identity is usually assaulted under the guise of ‘piety’ or being ‘true to the word of God’. It almost always leads to the opposite of freedom, however. This is very unfortunate because it was for freedom that Christ has set us free (Gal. 5:1).
When we know our proper identity in Christ, everything changes!
Thx again for reading:)
This was amazing. I’m a woman in ministry and I want to dig deeper into this. I feel free from the shame, and will send this to my co-workers at where I’m a part of. Thanks for sharing the word!
Thx for reading!
Jamal,
The article was very encouraging. I was really blessed by it. Reminded me of who I am in Christ.
Ashis,
Thx for reading the article sister:) I’m so glad that it reminded you of who you are in Christ. Mission accomplished!
Please tell Seth hello for me as well.
Blessings!
Jamal, this is another bold and truth-filled article. After reading it, I feel fortunate I haven’t had to deal with these attitudes first-hand in the church (I am probably unique in this due to a variety of reasons), but I know they are very prevalent, particularly in evangelical churches, which I attended for many years. I have found that Charismatic and Pentecostal churches lean much more towards letting all believers — men and women – operate in their spiritual gifts and callings, believing that this is how the Body of Christ was designed to operate in the Kingdom of God — led by the Holy Spirit. I have experienced it, and it’s a truly beautiful thing. My favorite sentence in your post is your Comment “When we have an accurate revelation of the person of Jesus Christ, we will also know who we are in Him as well. This will change everything.” More than anything, knowing who you are in Christ sets you free to walk into your destiny in the Kingdom of God. No weapon formed against God’s plan will prosper.
Thx for reading the article sister:) You are right, those from an evangelical background seem to struggle with the idea of sisters teaching and taking part in decision making more than those from a Charismatic background.
I will say this about both evangelical and charismatic institutions, however…they BOTH restrict the body from fully functioning because they both operate in a hierarcical system that is kept propped up by an unbiblical clergy / laity divide.
The solution is not to allow select women and men to operate as clergy, but that the concept of select clergy would be abolished. In the New Testament, the Greek word for ‘clergy” (cleros) means one who inherits a lot or portion. The New Testament describes that all believers have been given a portion of Christ as our inheritance. In the New Testament, cleros is used to refer to the entire body of Christ. We have all received Christ as our inheritance and portion. In the second and third centuries A.D. we begin to see the idea of a ‘separate’ class within the church referred to as the ‘cleros’ (clergy). This has had devastating affects.
Since all of us in the body, both brothers AND sisters, have received an inheritance of Jesus Christ, we must all (not just a select class) be able to fully express Him. By expressing Him, we are talking about more than just expressing knowledge (evangelical), or signs (charismatic), we are talking about expressing a person.
Thx again for reading and commenting:)
Thanks for your reply Jamal. I agree, and don’t believe man-made hierarchies or denominations were ever God’s design for us. My experience in the institutional church has been non-denominational, and the word “clergy” was not used….but there were levels of authority that I’m sure were restrictive to women. I guess I was trying to say my experience has been there is generally more expression of Christ in charismatic/Pentecostal environments, even within a hierarchical system. Not just in “signs” but in the prophetic (speaking God’s life-giving words to brothers and sisters) teaching, encouraging, etc. More expression of the indwelling Holy Spirit (whom the Bible calls the Spirit of Christ) is more expression of Christ. Thanks for your insights here, brother.
Hi Jamal! Loved the article concerning women! We had to go through the whole patriarchal thing too at one point in our lives… I think I told you about that? Anyway, one of the things that we kept coming back to that sealed it for us was the community and equality in the Godhead. For example, in Genesis it says,”Let US make man…” Jesus WAS long before he had a physical body. When God made women where did she come from? From the ground like a new Adam? No, but… Genesis 2:23 “And Adam said:
This is now bone of MY BONES And FLESH OF MY FLESH; She shall be called Woman,” Too often we forget we, as a couple, were made in His (God’s) image. Originally “we” were ONE from the very, very, very beginning as a “couple.” How’s that for “equality” for you? This is how GOD sees us in HIS original design. It wasn’t until later that God separated our parts and made two. THIS is why the “therefore” is therefore…Genesis 2:24 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.”. I so enjoyed this post… There is such a need for this… Sorry I’ve been too busy to post lately. I got so behind after having so many surgeries! I always enjoy them!! Margaret
Because she was taken out of Man.
Margaret,
Thx for reading and commenting here. I am very glad that you are feeling better. You’ve been missed!
Jamal,
Thank you brother for writing this most excellent article. I agree completely with Felicity about a brother taking the lead in pointing to the truth of this matter. People will listen when a brother speaks, but tend to dismiss when the same very valid points are made by a sister. Thank you for being one of the many Baraks who are working along side the Deborahs for the Kingdom.
Never did make any sense to me that God would give a speaking gift to a woman and then tell her to “be quiet”!
Blessings brother,
Jan
Jan,
Thx so much for your comment. It is an honor to take this issue on. What is at stake is the full expression of Jesus Christ. Christ must be expressed by all of His body. The slavery of women is a picture of the Bride of Christ that still needlessly lives in slavery. Christ longs for the freedom of His Bride. Indeed, He has already set her free. The only thing that keeps Christ’s Bride in slavery now are lies. Christ, who is truth, sets us free from those lies. When we know the truth, the truth will make us free!
Hey Jamal,
Intriguing read. I agree with most of what you’ve written, but also think that you neglected to clarify an important distinction: that while men and women are equal in *value* before God, they are not equal in *role*, especially in the context of marriage.
Just as the Church’s role is not the same as Christ’s, the husband’s role is not the same as the wife’s. And while I do think that many of the problems within Christian marriages exist because of misinterpretation of the passages you addressed above, I think just as many problems exist because these passages are ignored completely. Say what you will about specific words being misinterpreted from the Greek, I think that when Peter tells wives to emulate Abraham’s wife Sarah, who called her husband lord (1 Peter 3:6), there is a pretty clear message here: the husband is the leader of his family.
Does this mean that I have no rights? That I cannot speak out? That I have no ability to read and understand Scripture for myself? Of course not. Peter even clarifies that in the very next verse, reminding husbands to love their wives and to “show her honor as a fellow heir in the grace of life.” Submission is not enslavement or silence.
I do think that these passages are misused to justify overbearing husbands who reduce their wives to mere shadows of the heirs Christ intended them to be, but I also think that to dismiss the importance of different roles within a marriage is to reduce marriage to nothing more than two Christians who happen to be housemates, rather than the glorious reflection of the marriage of Christ and the Church as it was meant to be.
Perhaps it is because the word “submission” has been so twisted in and of itself and now carries an incredibly negative connotation. But I think that it is a beautiful set up. Wives conceding to their husbands with grace, husbands loving their wives sacrificially. Each is called to give something, and, as is typical with the upside-down way of Christ, each receives far more than he or she has given, as long as they are willing to give it away to begin with.
I love submitting to my husband. He is not bossy or demanding (at all), but I show submission in simple things, small things, and my “giving in” silently shouts that *I trust him*. I believe that he will do this well and he will do it right. And if it doesn’t work out, I will be there, not to blame or accuse, but to start the next step together.
This is how the Church is supposed to follow Christ, is it not? To follow in faith, knowing that He has her best interests at heart; to follow trustingly and confidently, knowing that He will not lead her wrong. Not silently–Christ always listens to conversation and questions and He often (though not always) explains. But at the end of the day, if there is a difference of opinion, if the Church follows herself, she runs straight into tragedy.
So anyway, all that to say that I agreed with a lot of your article, but am not convinced that equality means that we are supposed to all do the same thing. Husbands and wives are different parts of the body, and, as always, the body functions best when roles are not only accepted but reveled in. The wife’s role is one of beauty and strength, and I am proud to hold it.
Keep writing, brother. I always enjoy the challenge of what you have to say.
Sarah~
Sarah,
Thx for reading the article. I appreciate you taking the time to emphasize the fact that husbands and wives have different roles. Indeed they do! I have a couple of thoughts about your comment:
1. You mentioned submission. Submission is a great thing. My article was not intended to minimize the fact that wives should submit to their husbands. Rather, I was making the all to often neglected point that husbands should also submit to their wives. The context of Ephesians 5:21-22 is NOT wives only submitting to their husbands, rather it is the mutual submission of the body of Christ to one another. Because of the issues in the Ephesian church, wives submitting to their husbands was specifically mentioned. Obviously, this submission is not simply a ‘blind’ submission, but a submission in the Lord. Don’t you think it is quite interesting that when talking about ‘submission’, only the ‘role’ of the wife submitting is talked about in Christian circles? Why do you think that is?
What does it look like for husbands to submit to their wives? Why is this such a ‘mystery’?
2. You mentioned roles. Did I not say in my article that the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church? I don’t think I mentioned anything about a marriage simply being about 2 adults living in a house together. Some interpret what I have said as minimizing the role of husband headship simply because they still have a top down hierarcical understanding of headship. Many cannot imagine headship outside of a command and control structure. In Christ, headship is something quite different! In Christ, headship is bottom up. In Christ, headship is life giving. In Christ, headship is undergirding. In Christ, headship is promoting of the body (wife).
I hope that makes sense. Thx again for adding to the discussion:)
For me, it has been important to realize that the “kingdom life” is now, and yet it is progressive. He has “given us all things”, and yet there is a tending of the vine unto more fruitfulness (growth and development) going on as well. Both are true, and hold each other in balance.
With this in mind, I describe the “roles” of husband (head) and wife (submitter) that are described in the above referenced passages as the “default setting”. In other words, when Christ’s mind by the Spirit is not totally clear, then it’s good for the wife to defer to the husband’s leadership.
However as each person grows spiritually, then mutual submission is the higher state-of-being for the marriage, with each person seeking Christ’s mind and will, and gladly submitting to the other whenever His perspective is revealed through them.
I think some good “balancing scriptures” are 1 Cor 7:9 and Mark 12:25. In 1 Cor, Paul admonishes husbands to “live as though they have no wife” (It would be equally applicable for the wife to “live as though she has no husband”); and Mark 12:25 where he reveals that in the resurrection, the institution of marriage doesn’t exist. In other words, if both parties are so focused on Christ that the light of His glory overcomes the shadow of the marriage, then the “roles” are swallowed up in a revelation and manifestation of Him.
Then the marriage and family transitions from being like a train (with wife and kids following linearly behind the husband as he follows Christ); to the solar system where Christ is the overpoweringly glorious center, and each family member (who is different, and has different functions within the family) orbit around Him in equality.
Sarah, I know where you are coming from because our family was there too. I still believe in submitting to my husband like I always have. However, my husband now sees the error in having a patriarchal mindset for himself. He believes that authority structure was set up by God in the Old Testament AFTER the Fall to maintain order for a fallen people until the Christ. Even today we still need those structures for those that aren’t under Christ. But, when Christ came he has called us to a higher standard. A standard that doesn’t neglect the old but surpasses it. It’s always “there” if there is a breakdown in a marriage but it should not be seen as the goal when BOTH partners are believers. The goal when both are believers is that they again are restored as ONE and “heir together.”
Now, what if BOTH are not believers? Yes, I believe you are correct and that we need to yield our rights in Christ in order to keep piece in the home. There is an example of this in 1 Cor 11 when two groups of women wanted to throw off the head coverings. I imagine some with married Christian husbands felt in Christ that they had this liberty while other that had nonbelieving husbands would have been seen as in totally rebellion against their husbands and not very “submissive.” So the problem. Paul’s summary was let each woman decide for herself what she needed to do. (I wore a covering for years and am serious in my desire to submit.) Each woman had “power” (authority) on her head to decide. That’s radical for the time!! Later in 2 Cor. 3:16-18 it talks about the veil being taken away for ALL of those in Christ. The veil or cover was originally a symbol of shame. In the garden Adam and Eve “covered” themselves to show their SHAME before God, not humility. THIS is the origin of the head coverings that is talking about in 1 Cor 11. It’s talking about how it should be for the world’s kingdom. A way we know this in the beginning it talks about God being “over” Jesus. Is this true in the Kingdom or are they equal? Or is this true as his example as a man under God in the worlds system? It’s telling us by this WHICH Kingdom it’s talking about. Just some thoughts… It’s taken us a long time to work through all this…
We have to be careful with marriages that both aren’t in Christ or they walk after the flesh. The authority structures help them to keep peace. Just saying;-)
Sorry, that is so fumbled it’s morning and 12 people are beginning to run around now and it’s hard to think!
Margaret
Margaret, I appreciate your desire to share your story, but to be honest, your ideas bothered me more than a little.
I don’t see where in Scripture there is support for the idea that God set up this “patriarchal” system AFTER the fall. In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul’s reasons for wearing the headcovering go back to CREATION, not to after the fall. He says, “For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.” So here we have TWO reasons for wearing the head covering that have NOTHING to do with culture or whatever was going on at that time in Corinth. They are rooted in CREATION and because of the ANGELS. Paul’s summary was NOT to allow each woman to choose what she wanted to do regarding the covering. When Paul states, “Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered?” This directly follows his previous statements I just quoted. He is by no means telling the women they have the authority to decide. When you read the passage, it is clear what Paul is saying.
You say that these structures are needed for those not under Christ, but believing couples are exempt. Could you share with me how you get this from Scripture? Marriage is to be a reflection of Christ and the Church. Believing couples are the only couples that can fully reflect this relationship and if you opt out on the grounds that you are both believers, you are opting out of God’s design.
Perhaps you need to clarify more what you are saying?
A note on equality. God the Father and Christ are indeed EQUAL, yet have different roles. Jesus “did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but humbled himself…” Jesus SUBMITTED to the Father. God the Father NEVER submitted to Jesus. Could you correct me if I’m wrong or misunderstanding? Obviously, Jesus was His Beloved Son, whom He loved.
Regarding what you said about the veil in 2 Cor. 3, this specifically refers to the veil which Moses covered his face(v.13), and does NOT refer to the coverings of which Adam and Eve covered themselves. If that was what it referred to, then you could say we can all walk around naked. No, 2 Cor. 3 is talking about a covering of a completely different nature than 1 Cor. 11 and Paul makes it clear. 2 Cor 3 is discussing a veil which in essence lies over our hearts until we turn to the Lord and Christ takes it away, allowing us to “behold His glory.”
Margaret, I know my words sound strong. Please clarify if I have misunderstood. Hope my words make sense. I’m trying to type this out while 2 year old sleeps and 3 month old sits on my lap.
Jess,
Hey there sister, I would like to add a couple of things.
1. 1 Cor. 11 is a passage that is commonly confused and used to infer hierarchy between man and women and husband and wife. If we read this passage from a hierarcical filter that sees ‘head’ or ‘headship’ as a hierarchy, then we will read that into this passage. Paul was not advocating an ‘over / under’ type of relationship.
2. There is a principle being communicated in 1 Cor. 11. The idea of ‘head covering’ is certainly a cultural one. The concept of having your head covered had very specific meaning in their culture. The principle that Paul is talking about, however, does go back to creation as you said. This principle Paul was communicating has everything to do with males and females not being independent of one another, (Read 1 Cor. 11:11-12), as was the specific issue occurring in this church. This is why understanding the context of what was happening in the church he was writing to is so very important. The curse of sin separates us as individuals from one another. In the Lord (1 Cor. 11:11), we are not separate, however.
3. The phrase ‘because of the angels’ is a powerful statement. This can be a confusing statement if we are not sure what Paul is talking about, however. There is a reason he states this. Many people mistakenly think our pattern of male female relationships are supposed to be patterned after the angels. They most certainly are NOT! Angels were NOT created in the image of God, but mankind certainly was. Angels have an order of operating as independent units operating under a hierarcical chain of command. The angels do not reflect the Godhead in this. The Trinity does NOT operate this way. Man was patterned to reflect God’s image, not angels. After the fall, mankind’s fallen system is patterned after the angels. This is why in man’s system (government, business, religion) hierarchy is present in man’s fallen system. (Satan is an angelic being) This is also why Jesus said that hierarchy was NOT to be present among those who belong to Him (see Matthew 23:8-12).
4. The Trinity is made up of 3 distinct (not separate) persons who are MUTUALLY submitted to one another. In the 4′th century, there was a heresy called ‘subordinationism’ that crept into the church that taught that the Son was only subordinate to the Father because the Son was not equal with the Father. While this heresy was eventually rejected by the church, its damage remains to this day. Role always reflects reality. The institutional church system teaches that while the Son is equal with the Father, He is subordinate to the Father in role. The passage in Phillippians 2:5-8 is used as a ‘proof text’ to teach this. This is repackaged subordinationism. While Christ did humble Himself and became a man who submitted Himself to the Father, it is a mistake to assume that this is all there is to Christ. We have to look at the whole of the scriptures. There is a reason Christ did this. When we understand what Biblical Headship and submission is, we will see that the Father, Son, & Spirit ALL mutually submit themselves to one another. There is much more that I could say about this. Because we are made in God’s image, life in Christ brings our relationships in the church and, among husbands and wives, back to this model of interdependence. This will actually be the subject of my next blog post where I will explain this much further. I hope you will check it out Jess.
Here is something that needs to be mentioned here. The mentality that sees the wife as the primary one who ‘submits’ is not Biblical. Again, this comes from misunderstanding. Mutual submission is what the scriptures speak of, and wives submitting to their husbands is specifically mentioned in that context because of the issues the New Testament churches were facing. The assumption that wives have some sort of ‘extra’ role of submission, or that they have a primary role of submission is just not accurate. Husbands have just as strong a mandate to submit to their wives in the Lord as do wives their husbands. This is one of the points that I made in the article.
Hey Jamal! This is Adam writing.
So this has been a bit a discussion for us and we had a few clarifying questions…
1. Where in scripture do husbands have a mandate to submit to their wives?
2. Where does is say that Christ submits to the church? (since the analogy of a marriage is to be that of Christ and the church)
3. And where does it say that God the Father submits to the Son?
That’s all for now. Hope you’re doing well!
Adam,
Hey bro, thx for asking these questions. They are great questions. Question #2 and question #3 are quite involved (more than just a verse for proof texting). My next blog post is actually going to be a book review of a book called ‘The Community Life Of God’. The premise the book is making is that the Trinity (a community of 3 mutually submitted persons) is actually the pattern for human relationships since we are made in the image of God. Your questions will be addressed in this blog post, so stay tuned:) In the meantime, it would be great if you and Jess would read through the book that I linked to in the article by Jon Zens titled: ‘What’s With Paul And Women’. You can get it from Amazon, or Jon’s website. It is a small book that has a ton of great insight.
Regarding question #1 that you asked about where in scripture husbands have a mandate to submit to their wives…I actually addressed this in this article. I’ll repeat what I said in the article because I think it explains it pretty well. Here is what I said:
“In Ephesians 5, Paul instructs the church to be filled with the Holy Spirit. What flows from that in Ephesians 5:21 is the command to be subject to (or submit) mutually to one another in the fear of Christ. The command in Eph. 5:21 to be mutually subjected to one another applies to the WHOLE CHURCH. This obviously includes husbands and wives as well.
Remember, because of the context in the city of Ephesus regarding the cult of Artemis and the specific issues that church experienced with women, Paul repeats this command to wives in Eph. 5:22. In the Greek, the word for ‘be subject’ is not actually there in verse 22. The idea that wives are to be subject to their husbands is tied to the verb in Eph. 5:21 that says that the WHOLE body is to be subject to one another. Just in case some women think they are exempt from this (as was the case in the Ephesian church), he also applies the command for the whole body to mutually submit to one another to the husband wife relationship as well. Ephesians 5:22 literally reads:
“Wives, to your own husbands, as to the Lord.”
Again, this statement in verse 22 is simply a carry over from the command to the whole body to mutually submit (or be subject) to one another in verse 21. To think that there is an exclusive command for wives to only submit to their husbands, while husbands should not submit to their wives is a complete misunderstanding of the intent of the passage. Unfortunately, this is commonly taught with devastating affects for many wives.”
Thx for the dialogue bro. I hope all is well with you guys.
Hi Jessica and Adam,
I don’t mind honest questions.
1. Verse 3 Paul gives us clues he’s talking about an earthly kingdom first when he says, “But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God.” From this verse we can see the structure of THIS fallen world. Like you said, “Jesus ‘did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but humbled himself…” Jesus SUBMITTED to the Father.” This is true but in HEAVEN he is restored to total equality.
2. I DO agree that verses 3-10 speak about why women SHOULD wear a covering. These are women that are yielding themselves under the world’s system just like Christ “lowered” himself.
3. In verse 10 it says, “Because of the angels.” What did Paul just tell them about the Angels? To THEM it was only a few minutes ago in a letter! “Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judge by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angel? How much more the things that pertain to this life? 1 Cor. 6:3-4
Paul is REMINDING these ladies that they have enough brains to judge what goes on their heads if some day they will be judging angels!!!
Verse 10 the word “power” in Greek means “authority.” So, it would read that SHE would have the authority to decide what she needs to do with her own head regarding the head covering.
Here’s why… During this time there were two thoughts… One, feminist that shaved their heads and lorded their power over men. The other was women that wore coverings or their husband’s could divorce them and throw them in the streets. The Talmud goes into great detail about the woman causing the fall and why the veil is needed to cover their shame. This is part of patriarchal history. It stems from the fall. Do your homework and you will find it… (Goggle is your friend) If the woman with an unbelieving husband were to throw off her covering he wouldn’t see her as very submissive and would probably throw her out into the streets!
To the other women in the church with believing husband they were probably seen as being under bondage when they were really trying to honor their husbands. While to these they wives they could have been seen as “lose.” Paul was called in to settle the dispute. So he argues both sides…
His main argument to the ones with unsaved husbands was “Christ yielded himself to this world system so can you.”
4. HOWEVER, in verse 11 he turns his attention to the other bickering ladies that want to cast off the covering… That “Nevertheless” means he is changing sides and going to argue the other side. Both ladies have good cause and he teaching both of them to give each other “space.”
1. NOW he setting things straight for those “in the Lord.” He is clarifying again who this applies to…. “Neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, IN THE LORD. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man, also by the woman. But ALL THING OF GOD.” V. 11 He making them focus on their interdependence at the BEGINNING.
Jesus is taking us ALL back to the BEGINNING….
2. I did not say that believing couples are exempt as much as it’s like the Commandments written on the believer’s heart and not on stone. Married couples “in the Lord” will reach to re-establish their original Makers plan which is inter-dependence.
3. You said, <>
Actually it has EVERYTHING to do with Adam and Eve and the fall. It’s about the restoration of the fall. In verse 14 it is a spiritual AND physical veil. But, still not a symbol we should want to emulate today in America when we do have freedom, especially when taking it off for “ALL” (if you have the liberty) is considered following Christ. (Now if I was trying to minister to Muslim in their society or had a patriarchal husband that didn’t know any better I would wear one.)
4. It’s interesting that it says we are ALL being made into the “glory of the Lord” sound familier??? 1 Cor. 11:7 Look it up! “…are changed into the SAME IMAGE from GLORY to GLORY, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” Vs 2 Cor. 3:18 This isn’t going to happen overnight and we need to be patient and allow the Lord to deal with our husbands. ESPECIALLY if they are patriarchal. This is CREATION language he is using here!!! From glory to glory means that us woman need to be lovingly patient with our men. This is a lot for them to grasp sometimes too.
The larger picture of 1 Cor 11 is more about bearing with each other in love. Giving each other space to grow up into his image.
One Question:
What are the practical day to day implications of what you are saying as far as mutual submission within a marriage?
One Comment:
As Adam and I have been discussing this, we have both asked, “What about the men?” Despite the fact that it is often men in leadership positions, at the same time, it is also the men who are so often the butt of jokes. They are disrespected in all kinds of ways and made to feel stupid, often by jokes from the pulpit! The church has come to embrace the attitude of our culture…Women are superior, and men are stupid. Watch just about any sit-com these days and this is what you will see and it has seeped into the church as well. In my personal opinion, it is more often husbands who are enslaved to their wives… and yes, in Christian marriages. They are enslaved to wives who manipulate and verbally degrade their husbands, who fail to give the honor and respect that is to reflect that of the respect and honor given to Christ from the church. Any thoughts?
Jess,
Great question. I completely understand what you are saying. In some circles, there is much disrespect toward men and a superior attitude by the women. This could be similar, in some ways, to what was happening in the Ephesian church. The solution is not to silence or restrict women where no restriction is intended, rather a New Testament understanding of Christ is the real solution to any sexist position regardless if it is by women or by men. When we operate in Christ, and by His divine life, what Paul says about there not being any Jew or Gentile, male or female in Christ becomes a reality. Mutual submission becomes the norm. In this context of Christ’s life, sacrificial love (Headship by the husband), and respect (by the wife) naturally occur. It is not a law, but a overflow of His life.
This topic came up after a friend listened to and asked for my thoughts regarding the “Participatory Meetings” audio on this website: http://www.ntrf.org/audio/index.php
After listening to the audio, I was somewhat confused and sensed there was something amiss in the teaching.
I had never really studied specifically the topic of a woman’s place in the body of Christ -though I’d heard many opposing arguments regarding the issue- but was brought up with the mentality/understanding that men and women are both equal in the body of Christ, and that “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” etc.
However I still had many people telling me (including “pastors,” “youth pastors,” “missionaries,” etc.) the opposite, and as I said, ended up -for the most part- confused. I knew that the bible simply could not be contradicting itself (and if what most said/believed regarding this -and other similar passages- were true, that would be the case). It just didn’t add up. And yet I found it hard to believe that so many godly men and women I love and deeply respect could POSSIBLY be so very wrong.
In some ways the conflict was good, because it caused me to dig deeper, and ask difficult questions– regardless of what the answers might entail. I got some answers, but they were mostly related to the cultural context, not the literal Greek– what Paul was REALLY saying. I somewhat “knew” and understood men and women were to submit to each other in the body of Christ, but still I had unresolved questions– and they were nagging me.
Then my mom recommended I read this article. It is very long! I didn’t read it for a day or two; not until tonight. But after reading it I feel like a weight has been lifted off my heart, and I am beginning to understand why this was always such a difficult subject for me.
I’ve also recommended that my friend (with whom I was discussing this topic a month or two ago) read the article, because he -like me- has been asking similar questions and honestly seeking answers.
You see, something about what I was hearing from nearly everyone (except my parents) didn’t “fit” in with the rest of Paul’s letters/exhortations. Either what I kept hearing had to be at least in some way a little off, or there was something seriously wrong with the bible, because the passage seemed to contradict other passages in Scripture.
If you’re a woman, you will probably (at least at first) chalk the confusion and questions up to be some sort of rebellion or your “inner-eve” emerging.
It may seem to you that it doesn’t line up with the rest of scripture that women -and only women- should be “submissive” (and submission -in the eyes of many- equals silent in the gathering of believers), truly living as slaves in many ways (when as Jamal said, that is not even biblical submission). But you love Christ, and if He tells you that you must, you’ll shut-up and sit down, and do your best to be “submissive.”
As a woman, it is very VERY difficult to challenge the hierarchy because then you get the attitude from many men “Well of course you’re going to say that. You’re a woman. You WANT power, you are simply refusing to submit to MY God-given authority and the word of God out of sinful inner-rebellion.” and you are perceived as having an ulterior motive. And even women will rebuke you!
But now I’m thinking that, perhaps, the reason we women find the whole thing in general so confusing and hard to settle in our own hearts is because it so directly affects us; because it is so near our hearts, not because we are power hungry or somehow -being women- more strongly desire eve-il things then men. In some ways it feels like we HAVE to play dumb woman (in that we have nothing beneficial to share in the gathering of believers, only men are capable and approved for teaching, etc.).
I also know many women who “in submission” pressure their husbands to lead (during fellowship gatherings), and to lead RIGHT then and there. And maybe they are the ones who were meant to share something just then, not their husbands. He’s sitting there looking at his wife like “what’d I do?” while she gives him meaning looks that somehow he should be able to understand. I can laugh about it- now!
But I do have this question: Isn’t it better for women with unsaved husbands (or those, even, with saved husbands who haven’t discovered this truth yet) to continue to “obey” them, in order to win them to Christ?
Thank-you very much for posting this Jamal, it answers several life-impacting questions for me.
I do agree with a lot of your post. Women have been beaten back and relegated to the kitchen or nursery by men out of arrogance, insecurity and a whole list of other personal flaws. They miss out on the richness and security that a proper relationship is supposed to bring. But I think the tone and implication of the way you are saying it goes a little beyond the scriptures. Much of this stems from viewing and interpreting the subject form the view of the world. Worldly honor and worldly power.
Husbands are to honor their wives as Christ honors the Church. And wives are to submit to their husbands as the church submits to Christ. He is the Head, we are the body. Everything physical thing God created was to display a spiritual concept. The head, i.e. brain and receiver of all input from the senses, makes the decisions for the whole body. It possesses something the body does not, all the information and the ability to process it. This doesn’t mean the body doesn’t have desires. The hand is hurt, “Hey, brain! Do something about this!” Or the stomach says it is hungry. But it is the brains job to decide if it is good for the body over all or not. Someone has to decide. The body cannot rule. It is incapable of it. It was not designed for that. Sometimes it does, and we have all seen the effects of that! But is the brain more noble, more praise worthy because it is what it is? Likewise, we will never make decisions for Christ. He is something we are not. To lead or guide someone you must be greater than them. Otherwise the follower would be able to go father than the guide. The husband-wife role is obviously a typology of Christ-Church. And He says, “The two will become one.” as I believe Christ and the Church will become one. But will Christ, God incarnate, ever stop being greater than the Church though the two become one?
Consider this: A soldier doesn’t act on his own behalf or decision. All commands come from the ‘head’quarters. But when the battle is won who gets all the glory?
Men and women were created very differently with very different roles in mind. It is not anymore noble or ignoble to be a man or a woman. The world exults and glorifies leaders, but is the leader really the one doing the work that brings the success? Does not the worker deserve glory too, but in a different way and for a different reason? God created men to lead. It is hard wired into us. It is what comes naturally. God created women to follow. It is hard wired in them. It is what comes naturally. Look around all of God’s creation and you will find this to be true. It is what is natural.
God is in the business of radical change and not submitting to mans ideas of what is right and what is wrong. And yet you think that He went along with the patriarchal society because it was just the way things were? You say that these things were cultural and time specific, but when did God ever care about conforming to the traditions of men? Jesus made many radical, offensive claims. The organization of the Israelite nation was radically different than the nations around them. God instituted many new ways and practices. If He wanted to change the patriarchal society He would have, He had the perfect opportunity. If he didn’t want men to be the leaders of society He wouldn’t have identified Himself as a male figure. Because He certainly isn’t a man or woman. And Jesus would have overturned the stigma and traditions of His day if He wanted to. He certainly threw a bunch of them off with the ‘eat my flesh and drink my blood’ thing. And He could have picked women to be His disciples if He was trying to communicate that women were to lead in the church equally, but He didn’t.
Being born a male and having the inherent responsibility to protect, care for, and lead is just hard and weighty as being born a woman with the inherent responsibility to obey and submit. When Jesus comes back and all things are made new there will be neither male, nor female. Everyone will be the same. But we will be rewarded for how we lived the life God gave us and fulfilled the roles He set before us. If you are faithful in the little, He make you ruler over much. And this goes for men and women.
Jeremiah,
Thx for reading the article. You said that you agree with a lot of this post, but after reading your comment, I would have to say we agree on very little at all. If you think we agree, then you may need to reread the post a little more carefully. Your comment shows 3 major unbiblical sentiments that you have bought into.
1. You have bought into a hierarcical, top down understanding of headship.
In the ‘Western’ world in which the mind is glorified and seen through the lens of ‘command and control’, it is assumed that when headship is mentioned in the scriptures, this is the primary meaning. This is a classic example of reading the scriptures through a ‘filter’. In the scriptures (which are not ‘western’ in origin), decision making is seen as coming from the heart, or the inner man (spirit). The mind is often times pictured as something that needs to be transformed and renewed. While ‘command and control’ is how man’s system views headship, in the scriptures, headship means something quite different. Reread what I said about headship in my article, and I would also strongly suggest you get a copy of Jon Zens’ book that I mentioned in my article. It will explain this in much greater detail.
2. You fail to understand the difference between a ‘picture’ and ‘reality’.
Although the husband wife relationship is a ‘picture’ of Christ and His Bride, it is just a picture. It is not reality, and the picture breaks down at some point. If not, then wives would be called to ‘worship’ their husbands because husbands are a ‘picture’ of Christ. That is obviously ridiculous. By suggesting that men are ‘greater’ than their wives because Christ is greater than the church is a perfect example of how men have abused this ‘picture’ to assume something that is clearly unbiblical. You said this:
“To lead or command someone, you must be greater than them.”
Those are your words, and many men have abused this picture to incorrectly assume that husbands and wives do not have equal roles. This is FALSE. Scripture is clear that both male and female are equal, however, because mankind is made in the image of God, and mankind is made up of BOTH male AND female. To suggest that only the male is a picture of Christ is also an example of where the ‘picture’ breaks down. The New Testament describes Christ as having BOTH a Head, AND a Body (church). This ONE person with a Head and a Body are NOT seperate. This one person is Christ.
The picture, while beautiful, is not reality. This is why in eternity, there will be no human marriage. The picture gives way to the ‘reality’. It is only the church (Christ’s body) that is destined to express Christ for all of eternity, but that is another article altogether!
3. You have clearly bought into the lie that only the wife is called to ‘submit’ to her husband.
As I have mentioned in my comments above, this is NOT biblical. This idea comes from a misunderstanding of scripture. It is a ‘filter’ that you read the scriptures through. It is NOT reality. In reality, MUTUAL submission is the context in which wives are told to ‘submit’ to their husbands in scripture. In reality, husbands have an equal mandate to submit to their wives as well!!!!
Go back and re-read what I said about this. It is one of the last points I made in the article. Do NOT skim over this. Ephesians 5 is clear that MUTUAL submission of the entire church to one another is what is called for. Obviously this would include husbands submitting to their wives and wives submitting to their husbands. You must understand the context of the letter Paul was writing if you really want to understand what he was communicating. We cannot just lift a sentence here or there to build a doctrine or try to create a reality that simply did not exist.
I think it may be good for you to go back and re-read this article slower and more carefully. I would also suggest that you get a copy of Jon Zens’ book ‘What’s With Paul And Women’.
I will. May the Holy Spirit open my eyes and free of any prejudices.
Jeremiah, one thing you may want to examine for further reading is the different meanings within Roman and Greek culture concerning the word “head.” I’ve found at least in my own unbiased, open-minded contextual study that the most appropriate translation is the word “source”, which is interestingly enough where we get the English word “headwaters” to describe the source of a body of water. The word “head” as we currently view it was a translation of the word that almost exclusively referred to military matters.
When the text is reexamined in this way we find that the husband (man) is the source of the wife (women) which is keeping in line with the Genesis origin of women’s creation. We also find that Christ is not the “head” (in a militaristic sense), but rather the “source” of the ekklesia. I find these reconciliations to not only shed better light, but to also keep more in perspective that which is from Christ, a source of life that flows through us all.
One other thing to consider about this subject is that the descriptions of Church leadership are all male. Women are included and mentioned when talking about church function, but never leading anything. People may argue for implications of female leadership in the scriptures, but it is all speculation. The Bible has clear, concise, and repeated commands and references to patriarchal leadership.
I have nothing against women. I know by me arguing the opposite of what you are saying may make it seem that I find women inferior. It’s not a pride or dominance issue. But the game of life is not a game. We don’t get to play around with it as we like and try out new things to see if they work. When you use something for something other than it’s intended purpose, you damage the item you use, you don’t operate at the efficiency you were meant to, and you don’t produce the product you were meant to.
The Devil knows that he isn’t going to stop everyone from seeing the light. His tactic for those who do is to give them a hard push and send them right on past their intended target. If God wanted to overturn the traditions of the day He would have. But modern interpretations right and wrong, and social roles have nothing to do with righteousness.
Consider this:
God never told us to not own slaves. But slavery is one of the ‘atrocities’ of our day.
Jeremiah,
In the New Testament church, ‘leadership’ is neither ‘patriarchal’ or hierarchical as you have assumed. New Testament leadership is NOT based on an external ‘title’ as it is today in the institutional system. Many of us think of leadership from a hierarchical perspective and then try to deny women from those positions. If we’re going to be true to the scriptures, then both men AND women have no business occupying hierarcical positions that were never intended. ‘Elders’ in the New Testament are NOT what the institutional system makes them out to be today. Because we have only known this hierarchical grid, when we read about elders in the New Testament we envision a person with a position with selective authority over others. This is unbiblical. (This is a completely different subject however).
The fact is, Paul publicly mentions many prominent women in the different churches of the New Testament. This completely went against Paul’s Jewish culture that would never refer to women in such a way. There were women deacons, and women apostles who planted churches like Paul. Most Christians know very little about this.
Hi Jeremiah!
All this to mean we have to learn to go back to the earlier text… We also can’t rely on what we “think” we “know” from our tradition.
The scripture that started us thinking about all this was…
Psalms 68:11 “The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it.”
תהילים 68:11 Hebrew OT: Westminster Leningrad Codex
אֲדֹנָ֥י יִתֶּן־אֹ֑מֶר הַֽ֝מְבַשְּׂרֹ֗ות צָבָ֥א רָֽב׃
In the Hebrew it actually means… The Lord doth give the saying, The female proclaimers are a numerous host.
Which lead us to question WHY it (and many other scriptures) was translated that way? That was downright. WRONG. So, my husband started doing research…
We have to remember that in America the main English Bible since the 1600’s was the King James Bible. Now with the Internet the common people are again getting the earlier text in in their own hands in a way they can understand. THIS is what all the division is all about today.
Long ago King James was losing power because the Church was losing power. No Church. No King. King James was NOT a godly man. The reason why he was losing power was because other translations of the Bible were coming out that were based on the original languages that spoke about a “priesthood of believers” and gave the people power in their worship. His solution was to write an “Authorized Version” that gave authority to patriarchs in the home, priest and Kings… All in the name of “God.” Authority from the King to the home had to be consistent all the way through to work. By this the translators had RULES they had to stick by or they could not be a part of a work that they knew would go down in history. Many translators thought it was better for the common people to have this Bible than no Bible at all so they went along with his rules. To some it meant their life if they didn’t play by the King’s rules. All other earlier translations, like Young’s, the King had destroyed. Hmmm…. (Just a few survived and have been reprinted.) These were also used to translate the majority of the King James.
These are facts of history… You can find out more about this at http://youtu.be/lkO-0W0ij3E
Then there were other places where word meanings were changed like… the word congregation for Church (make people think of a building) and that is a whole other story… Or verbs for ministering like apostling, pastoring, evangelizing, etc… were made into “professional offices.”
There are places in the King James when it’s a man ministering it’s a “minister” but when it’s a woman doing the same thing with the same Greek word it’s a “servant.”
BTW, our favorite Bible to study at our home is still the New King James. The majority of the text is great we just have to watch it when it comes to issues of authority. All Bibles have their strengths and weaknesses… But the problem here is most churches and our common thought in America is base ON the OLD King James Bible.
So, then the question becomes do we go back to the earlier text, like Psalm 68:11 and change or promote an error in tradition? When whole denominations were built around this… ouch….
Just some things you might want to consider…
Margaret
Thank you for writing this Jamal, this clears up a LOT of confusion and hurt in my heart that came from misunderstanding the scripture.
I am also thankful that you insist that hierarchy in the Church is unbiblical– as I have difficulty these days submitting to pastors, ESPECIALLY female pastors, based on my suspicion that they are usurping the authority of the body at large. Well, rather, that the body tends to defer her authority to pastors.
Before I got married and while I was getting to know my husband, he told me he had attended a church led by a female pastor– and immediately I was filled with jealousy over him, not because I want to be in authority over him (I don’t) but because I assumed that the woman who was pastor sought out that role in order to subdue and dominate men. It was a very knee-jerk reaction, and was very confusing to me at first, but in light of the ACTUAL meaning of the word that is translated as authority, it does make sense that I’d want to protect my husband from a woman who might dominate him in order to obstruct him from operating in Christ and in order to lead him into sexual immorality. (Not that it’s especially relevant, but that particular female pastor did teach unbiblical things to her congregation. I learned this after my knee-jerk reaction, though.)
Also, I’ve never really understood the passage about head coverings, but from the comments regarding them I assume that the head covering is a symbol of authority, and that women are to wear them specifically to indicate to angelic beings that they have equal spiritual authority with men when they pray? Is this close to the correct interpretation, or am I off here? Because it sounds like, the head covering is to assert womens’ spiritual authority, and not to indicate a lack thereof. I can understand how this could be important in spiritual warfare.
Sarah,
Hey sister, it’s great to hear from you. Congrats on your marriage as well:) I am very glad this article encouraged you and helped in the healing process. That is truly a monumental thing. Christ is amazing! I have a couple of thoughts to share here:
1. I am not an advocate of the traditional office of ‘Pastor’ as defined by the institutional church system regardless if a man or a woman holds that position. This article is not advocating for women or men to hold that position as that is not a biblical position. Shepherds and elders are descriptive terms in the New Testament that describe functions of some members of the body of Christ. It is not an ‘office’ with selective authority as some assume.
2. Regarding head coverings that 1 Cor. 11 talks about, Jessica posted a comment above that brought up that same passage of scripture. Take a look at her comment above that talks about head coverings. I responded to her comment with some of my thoughts about 1 Cor. 11 and head coverings. Those comments might be helpful for you.
3. I would recommend that you get a copy of Jon Zens’ book ‘What’s With Paul And Women’ that I linked to in this article. He is a biblical scholar that goes into a lot more detail than I did regarding these issues. It is a short, but very well done and informative read. You can purchase a copy from Amazon, or his website. I posted the links in my article.
Blessings to you sister, and great to hear from you again!
Yeah, I definitely understand that you are not an advocate of the traditional office of pastor as defined by the institutional church. I’m pretty sure that had something to do with warlords (EG Constantine) hijacking the name of Jesus to use as a weapon of war. At least, a lot of the problems the Church faces came from that.
I’m not so much saying that it’s especially wrong for a woman to be a pastor, moreso than a man, just relating that as a woman, I feel very uncomfortable with a woman dominating the men I love. Not that I’d be happy about a man dominating them, either… I certainly wouldn’t.
I guess the struggle for me now is to figure out how to submit to my brothers and sisters in Christ without deferring my responsibility and authority to “leaders”. I don’t want to cause any division or strife, so I do want to be careful about how I live this out.
I definitely read all the comments about head coverings, my question is actually based on those comments, and trying to understand them. I was trying to piece together the different bits into something that made sense, but even after rereading them, I really don’t understand… of course you’re going to redirect me back to the Jon Zens book though so I won’t even even ask! lol… I will make a point to get ahold of a copy somehow.
Jamal- this is a phenomenal expose on such an important topic today. Thanks for taking this on and providing such clarity on something that has been so abused by Christians for so long. I so appreciate the time you invested to lay out the misconceptions and the proper context for accurate understanding. You are right – context is everything when it comes to a proper interpretation of the New Testament. I continue to be amazed at the depth of your thought, analysis and grasp of such weighty and supremely important topics. Well done good and faithful servant!
Matt,
Thx for your encouraging words brother! I appreciate your heart very much! Thx for reading and commenting here:)
I recommend a book titled “Every Woman In the Bible” by Sue and Larry Richards, 1999, published in Nashville by Thomas Nelson, Inc. The chapters on creation of the first couple in Genesis; the spiritual, psychological, physical and societal effects of the Fall on men, women, and Satan; and Paul’s treatment of women in the epistles address these questions and topics with such a straightforward, systematic, yet simple treatment that I found extremely refreshing and comprehendable. If you like side-by-side comparisons and clear charts, you will like what the Richards have done to clarify this material without any shortcutting. Like several of you, I *knew* deep inside what I was seeing and being told in churches had to be wrong, but I didn’t know how to refute it. After reading these chapters–no, while reading these chapters–I experienced such a sense of justification and encouragement, as well as a tremendous swelling of faith and optimistic outlook embracing all I am to become as I become God’s perfect work. I’ve not yet read the book Jamal is reviewing here, but after reading “Every Woman In the Bible” I am greatly interested to read more work in this vein. Jamal’s paraphrasing of the Artemis-worship culture alone has been very insightful, indeed.
While I intend to include books like these as mandatory reading for the adult curricula I’ve put together (men and women), for the same reasons Jamal asserts, I do have just one small comment of pondering to add to this conversation:
Despite great books and even nice, straightforward charts, which make the arguement seem so clear to many of us, there are and probably will always be those who can’t or won’t “see it.” Could it be that, like trying to lead people to Christ, logical arguement won’t persuade people to faith? At some point, would not foregoing all the talk for outright demonstration of the point of the matter shoot straight past the intellect into the spirit, changing them? In what ways, then, can women demonstrate beyond a doubt the giftings, annointings, and glory of Christ such that observers cannot deny the grace they are seeing? Much like one who doubts healing cannot deny it after having been healed or seen someone they know personally get healed, what occurrence would be the equivalent such that one who doubts the equality of women in the BoC would be forced to admit, “but after I saw/experienced _____________________, I just knew it had to be true”? Things equal to what men can do? Things greater than what men can do? Things unique that men cannot do? Outright mighty miracles?
Hi Jamal,
It’s my first time here and I think you’ve touched on a really sensitive issue. I’ll probably have to read again and again and then take time to process all you’ve said…
I live in Nigeria and it is widespread tradition that men rule over their homes with unquestioned authority. I know of churches that have problems because some women have turn out to be as influential and anointed as the male leaders.
It will take a lot to correct all the wrong attitudes and beliefs concerning women, but that correction will make the church and society in general a much better place.
Bem,
Welcome to the blog, and thanks for your comment. Blessings to you brother.
I don’t think the disagreement in my comment to the post is the one you think it is. I am a complimentarian, not egalitarian.
Maybe the problem lies with: (1) Men enforcing wrong views of what freedom and submission are via wrong views of leadership. (2) Husbands who are not willing to die for their wives. Thus, not seeking her good first.(3) Men do not love/cherish wives the same as their own body. Thus are insecure. This is different and harder than the burden of being in submission or respectful.
A woman submits to a man’s lead when they dance. Nothing bad is ever said of dancing because of this. In fact, pairs are better off dancing when the man encourage the women to enjoy herself and excel. The highest forms of love necessitate certain freedoms. I would never want to marry a women who couldn’t dream or was not use to thinking for herself. I would only ever encourage her to dream bigger as a couple, than apart or alone as an individual.
I would say leadership/headship of men as the bible describes is different than that of the world. I have no problem limited biblical leadership to men. Its more of a curse. Its not just getting people to follow you and your vision but seeking to pursue a coporate good and a greater vision of God.
I feel the article skirts support on 1. What is true submission that the bible asks? and advocate egalitarian points of view that are foreign to some of the biblical texts which are talking about only salvation or gifts, not roles. (Gal 3, Joel). Next, I agree 1 Tim 2 is a hard passage to read. 1 Cor 14 is similarly hard. I cringe a bit when paul continues on in 1 Cor 14 about how you must accept this.
I think the main point is that men (not women) are the corporate teachers/overseers. Married women pursuant of many faith answers and male teachers should not be not be in common company. 3 John clearly shows a women over/teaching male childern. You also have indications that Timothy was coverted via his mother and grandmother. I also think women can be great evangelists without many restrictions. We just have a conflated modern view of teaching and look for supergifted pastors. Maybe by conflating what a teaching elder does, women were pushed out of what God has allowed gifted/them to do.
Dave,
Thx for your comment. Before I address some of the issues that you have brought up here, let me give our readers some background regarding why you posted this comment. On facebook, I posted a link to this article with a statement that summarized a major point in this article. You disagreed with this statement:
“In contradiction to most tradition regarding marriage & church life, the New Testament speaks of MUTUAL submission, NOT one party submission!”
You disagreed with this statement without reading this article. Therefore, I asked you to read this article. I then told you this; if after reading this article you still think that Ephesians 5:21 ONLY applies to wives and NOT husbands, then I asked you to post a comment to this blog stating WHY you think Ephesians 5:21 does NOT apply to husbands. Your response completely skirted the question.
Using doctrinal terms like ‘egalitarian’ and ‘complimentarian’ does not answer the question as to why you think Ephesians 5:21 ONLY applies to wives and NOT husbands.
In my opinion, those doctrinal terms seek to pigeon-hole people into groups and are not helpful in this discussion of discovering what the scriptures actually mean. In my opinion, the reason you are not able to see that Ephesians 5:21 applies to all believers (including husbands and wives) is because of a ‘filter’ that only allows you to selectively apply Ephesians 5:21 to wives and not husbands. That is unfortunate.
Your use of the term leadership / headship is revealing.
In the ‘Western’ world in which the mind is glorified and seen through the lens of ‘command and control’, it is assumed that when headship is mentioned in the scriptures, this is the primary meaning. This is a classic example of reading the scriptures through a ‘filter’. In the scriptures (which are not ‘western’ in origin), decision making is seen as coming from the heart, or the inner man (spirit). The mind is often times pictured as something that needs to be transformed and renewed. While ‘command and control’ is how man’s system views headship, in the scriptures, headship means something quite different. Reread what I said about headship in my article, and I would also strongly suggest you get a copy of Jon Zens’ book that I mentioned in my article. It will explain this in much greater detail.
Regarding commonly twisted passages about women, 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Cor. 14:34-35 are only ‘hard to read’ (as you said) because of completely incorrect translations and ignorance of the context. Once we know what words Paul actually used and the context of why he wrote what he did, those scriptures are no longer hard to read.
Although I touched on the context and translation mistakes regarding 1 Timothy 2, I did not have the time to address 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 in this article. What most people do not know about 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that Paul is quoting in those verses. Those are NOT his words!!!!
Did you know that the letter of 1 Corinthians was Paul’s response to a letter that he received from some in the Corinthian church? It would have been helpful if the Greek language had quotation marks, but it didn’t. In the letter that Paul received from the Corinthian church, they quoted a portion of the Jewish Talmud (Jews considered this the Law) that specifically said that women were not to speak in the assembly (synagogue). The Talmud taught that women were to be taught at home. Judaiazers had come into the church and were teaching the ‘law’ (Talmud) and were restricting the sisters from speaking in the meetings contrary to the example that Paul had set for them previously.
In their letter to Paul, they stated why they were not letting the sisters function and speak in the meetings. Just like we do when we are rebutting something in writing, Paul quotes their statement (1 Cor. 14:34-35) from the law (Talmud) and then address them. Again, 1 Cor. 14:34-35 was NOT his words but theirs that they quoted from the Talmud. Paul was completely opposed to the Judaiazers attempt to make the church operate under the Jewish law as was a common problem in the New Testament churches. This is exactly why Paul asks them the questions that he asks them in 1 Cor. 14:36. He was directly challenging their assertion that the word of God had ONLY come by men to men. Most people who do not know this context have no idea why Paul asks the questions he does in 1 Cor. 14:36.
Again, the New Testament church meeting did NOT look like our institutional church services do today. Brothers AND sisters shared the word (Jesus Christ) with one another in their meetings. The concept of one glorified ‘teacher’ that regularly taught in the meetings while the rest passively sat on a ‘pew’ cannot be found in the scriptures. We read that into the scriptures because of our institutional ‘filter’ that we read the scriptures through. We need to lose our ‘filters’.
Dave, I think it would be monumentally helpful if you purchased a copy of Jon Zens’ book that I linked to in this article. He goes into much more detail than I shared here. He also lists many sources that substantiate these things as well. This book is one of the most helpful and eye-opening about this topic that I have seen.
["In contradiction to most tradition regarding marriage & church life, the New Testament speaks of MUTUAL submission, NOT one party submission!”
You disagreed with this statement without reading this article. Therefore, I asked you to read this article.]
I still disagree with mutual submission after the article. (P.s I did read it before the statement.) Though it could be a matter of linguistics. My comment was along the lines. “Women submit to/respect your husband. Men love/die for your wives. Men got it harder.”
No one has really dealt with the call on men to love/die for their wives. It is extreme. Maybe that is the problem instead of the “enslavement of women.” or the lack of women participation in some areas. Men are not doing as they aught.
Feminism was originally primarily about fixing the men. It was not about women empowerment or participation EXCEPT when men shirked their duties/callings and women had to step up. (They needed the right to step up.) I tend to follow this kind of thinking. Now as it pertains to the topic at hand in the church. I think many women feel the effects of a man’s sinful use of leadership as enslavement. I don’t think the call needs to be women must be freed to participate. Maybe the problem isn’t the system but the men of the system. Women would have no need to lead if the men weren’t bad/sinful at it. They would have no need to be anything but “quiet” if they were constantly considered.
Love and die for the wife includes considering her interests but much more. There is much I could say about how open communication, validation (especially when one was wrong), and respect are needed in the church and relationships. But a call to die in these things seems more extreme.
Finally, perhaps the mutual submission you point to for men is the same thing that is spelled out in the various verses. ‘Love and die’ for your wife then is submission to her. If so, then there is not as much disagreement as you think.
Dave,
I will refer you to Jon Zens’ comment below. He spells out ‘submission’ beautifully. Take the time to read his comment here on this thread below.
Also, you failed to mention what I said about 1 Cor. 14:34-35. Do you see how failure to know the context can hinder our ability to know what Paul really was saying? Did you know the context that I shared with you about this commonly twisted passage?
Jamal, thanks for opening up a vital subject with such love, conviction, and concern for Christ’s manifestation on earth through both genders! We’ve been traveling since Sept 25 (including a visit with you & the ekklesia in Nashville!), so I haven’t been able to say much on the net.
I quickly read over the many responses you received. Most of the questions and concerns raised are covered in What’s With Paul & Women? For example, there are two infinitives used in 1 Tim 2:12. The important question is, How are they to be correlated as a “neither/nor” construction? There are about six ways this could be taken, but the one that makes the most sense is that of “purpose” — “I am not now allowing a woman to teach for the purpose of having her way with a man.”
Further, why does Paul move from two plurals — “I will that men pray…I will that women pray adorning themselves” — to a singular — “I am not now allowing a woman to teach…”? It would appear that Paul’s narrowing his thought to the singular indicates that he is not including all believing sisters of all ages in his concern expressed here.
“Submission” is a subject that needs careful handling, in light of all the perversion of it by bible-teachers. The best summary I have seen is from the pen of Dennis Preato:
“Submission: What Does It Mean?
Submitting yourselves to one another out of reverence for Christ (Eph. 5:21) represents a horizontal interaction that takes place between believers. It is difficult to comprehend and live out. Why? Because I believe “submission” is often misunderstood and misapplied. First of all submitting is not a command. Submission is passive in nature and results only within the context of being continually filled (saturated) with the Holy Spirit (Eph. 5:18). Second, submission is mutual and applicable to all believers in Christ (Eph. 5:21). This means that submission applies to both husbands and wives equally (Eph. 5:22). Third, submission is not something you do but is something you receive. It is not an action to be attained but an attitude of the heart to be maintained.
The Greek word, hupotasso, is often translated as “submitting to” or “being subject” in Ephesians 5:22. However this Greek word has more than one use and a range of meaning that is quite different from what people today generally think. “Hupotasso” actually has two uses: military and non-military. The military has a connotation of being “subject to” or “to obey” as if you are under someone’s command. Most people would probably think of this meaning. However the non-military use means “a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden” (Thayer’s Greek Lexicon #5293). In ancient papyri the word hupotasso commonly meant to “support,” “append,” or “uphold.”[22]
Some Bible translations recognize that hupotasso has more than one use. For example: The Message Bible translates Eph. 5:21 as be courteously reverent. The New Century Version translates hupotasso as “cooperate” rather than “submission” in 1 Tim. 2:11 and 3:4. Andrew and Judith Lester, authors of It Takes Two: The Joy of Intimate Marriage suggest a better translation is “be supportive of,” “tend to the needs of,” or “respect the needs and desires of.”[23]
In the context of Ephesians 5:18-23, Christians are cooperating, supporting, upholding, and respecting one another as one result of being filled with the Holy Spirit. Doesn’t that make sense? And here are some compelling reasons. First, verse 21 states the reason: because of our reverence for Christ. Christ is our example. Did Jesus Christ come as a military commander to rule and give orders over his Church? No! In fact Christ warns us not to exercise authority over anyone (Matt. 20:25-27; Luke 22:25-27). Jesus came as a servant to give his life for us. Second, maintaining a mutual attitude of cooperation and support reduces disunity and promotes harmony in the Church. This is how the body of Christ is supposed to relate to one another. And that fulfills God’s desire for us to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph. 4:3) and in our marriages as well. Also the church is referred to as the body of Christ. Picture the physical body. How do the various members, the hand, brain, heart, lungs, feet work? They cooperate and work together to support the entire system. In the same way, we as members of the body of Christ, both need and must support one another. Third, why would Scripture need to command Christians to be filled with the Spirit in order to be subject to, follow orders, or be under someone’s authority? A person does not need to be filled with Spirit to follow orders, for even nonbelievers demonstrate this fact when they “submit,” or obey their superiors.
The phrase: Wives, to you own husband, as to the Lord (Eph. 5:22) expands this relationship of mutual support to include the marriage relationship. Unfortunately bible translators elect to present verse 22 as a new sentence with an added verbal command such as: Wives, be subject (NRSV, NASB, REB); submit (NIV, NKJV); submit yourselves (DNT, KJV, ISV); yield (NCV); will submit (NLT); must submit (TLB) to your own husbands, as to the Lord. This is regrettable because there is no verb in the Greek text. No command is given that wives are to submit to their husbands. Only a few translations use italics or brackets as a way to indicate that the words be subject etc. are not found in the Greek manuscripts. In addition, verse 22 is not even a separate sentence. It is a phrase, a continuation of verse 21, that must be understood in light of the context of verses 18-23 which is really one long sentence in the Greek.[24]
Wives or husbands are not commanded to submit, be ruled or dominated by their spouses. Both are meant to cooperate and support one another in the spirit of love and unity. Marriages based on egalitarian concepts of equality, shared power and leadership are the happiest of all marriages. The research independently affirms these marriages and supports the egalitarian view of Scripture.
We should also remember the culture and law of that day gave men supreme control of their entire household. Women had no rights and were under the authority of either their father or their husband. The apostle Paul is not advocating nor is he repeating this cultural reality. What Paul is presenting are the results of being filled with the Spirit, and this result produces a counter-cultural transformation in the lives of believers. Christians are now to cooperate and support one another regardless of the class, race or gender prejudices that permeated the culture in which they lived.”
I also think that more discerning attention needs to be given to the Greek word for “head,” kephale. Too many Western church people assume is carries with it the idea of “authority over.” This has resulted in untold confusion and misinformation. The word actually has a more organic-relational flavor when translated as “source.” Adam was the “source” of Eve — she came out from him. Christ is the “head,” source, of the ekklesia — she comes into life from her Lord. This is not the place to elaborate, but for those who are interested, here is a link to an extensive article on Kephale: http://www.doxa.ws/social/Women/head.html
As Felicity Dale pointed out in a 2006 talk in Denver, the body of Christ is hemiplegic — half of it is paralyzed. The sisters have been wrongly muzzled for too long. It is past time for them to function in the freedom that has already been purchased by Jesus!
Jon,
Well said! Thx so much for adding to this conversation. I hope all who have participated in this dialogue will read what you have shared here very carefully. Blessings to you brother, and thx again for your vital work regarding all of this!
I totally loved this article! There are men who don’t need to humiliate women in order to confirm their “dignity” and “value”. But there are many who do have an almost “savage” tendency to and recite the passage from the Bible, where it’s stated that “women should submit to men”. And it seems that where all their knowledge about God is around this passage.
When you have mentioned about the physical slavery of women, I remembered a movie named “Human Trafficking Movie”. I was in a total shock after watching this movie. You know that this is happening, you hear about it, but watching the movie makes you feel (in a way!) what trafficked women experience. Even though, reality is much more cruel than a movie.
THANK YOU FOR THE ARTICLE!
Thx so much for reading the article Selenity!
Though this discussion gets exhausting with everyone bringing up their nuanced interpretation of Greek words, phrases, and grammar; I think it is worth pointing out the obvious. Jon, you said that,
“The phrase: Wives, to you own husband, as to the Lord (Eph. 5:22) expands this relationship of mutual support to include the marriage relationship. Unfortunately bible translators elect to present verse 22 as a new sentence with an added verbal command…”
Though that may have been an extension of the previous phrase according to Greek grammar. It hardly excludes the following verses,
23-24″For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”
If verse 22 were unclear or confusing Paul reiterates the same concept two more times. He states three times in verses 22-24 that the husband is the head of the wife and that she is to submit to him and to be further sure that there is not confusion adds the phrase “in everything” at the end. He makes this relationship a direct correlation to Christ’s relationship to the church and so our cues on how that relationship functions and plays out in our daily lives are given quite clearly. Furthermore,have we all forgotten 1 Peter 2:25-3:7?
“For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives… For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.”
Is there ever a time that Christ submits to the will of the Church? Does the Church ever makes decisions for the Body as a whole including the Head? I applaud your mission to give freedom where freedom is due. We are all freed by Christ’s sacrifice, but this is not an issue of freedom. But tell me: How is a women ever to effectively lead if she is operating in Godly submission to her husband? What if he, believer or unbeliever, does not agree with her decisions and so commands her to do otherwise? What else would occur but that he husband become the defacto leader of those she is to be overseeing? This is not an issue of slavery, it is an issue of wisdom and understanding. The whole reason Christ has allowed life to play out in this extended theater of love and hate, pain and pleasure, suffering and relief is so that we can share and comprehend, to a degree, who and what He is and what He has really done for us and wants to do for us in the future. God created men and women with different abilities and natural roles in life. He also gave us spiritual roles. Does this mean that they will carry on into eternity? By no means! All will be equal in their ability to share in the inheritance. Men and women will be rewarded for what they have done with the talent that the master left them with. But just as you are so adamantly against the institutional church because it takes something that Christ created and manipulates it to fit our desires or preconceived notions and there by destroys what was originally created. So trying to rearrange the mission and purpose that Christ created our genders with will destroy His organic Body all over again. Every reformation or revival that has come along through the ages has been accompanied by either holding on to traditions of men or disassembling what Christ meant to remain. I cannot convince you, that is not my job. That job belongs solely to the Holy Spirit. But I do testify now that you are stretching and manipulating a beautiful creation of Christ. It may be by good intentions or through ignorance but the outcome is the same. “God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.” Likewise, this advocacy for rebellion, which is anarchy or chaos in truth, against Christ’s roles and commands will be a thorn in the flesh of the Church and will cause much confusion and division.
Jamal, just to be clear. I am not institutional church. I, like many of you, have been testifying against it for years. I don’t support pastor funneled congregations or closed discussion or prayer.
I do believe that women are used to prophesy and teach. The twelve apostles were leaders by their appointments by Christ. The term apostle simply means, “one who is sent or sent one” it confers no authority. An elder or overseer on the other hand does. It’s very position is to be of authority. The qualifications for these positions were strictly male. I’ve heard a few say in this discussion say that it was just the custom or culture of the day and God didn’t want to upset the culture. But sense when has God ever cared about doing things man’s way? Society has always been patriarchal as far back as history records all the way up to until about 90 years ago when women were given the right to vote in this country. Every reference that you, Jon, or anyone else has given are always implied and interpreted meanings. There is no command or teaching that women be in leadership. Adam was a man, Abraham, Issac, and Jacob were men, Moses and Aaron and all the Levites priests were men, Elijah, Elisha and all the prophets were men. There were no queens who carried God given authority or position only male kings. Jesus was a man, all the disciples were men. Every book in the Bible was written by a man. God spoke through a donkey, He could have spoken through a women if He wanted to. This isn’t lack of access or repression by men through the ages. Men hold Christ’s position in the Christ-Church relationship. Women hold mankind’s position. We, as men, are given the responsibility of acting as Christ does towards the Church and women are given the responsibility of acting as mankind does towards Christ. Who has the greater weight of responsibility? Who has the greater natural ability to understand their role? Women are operating as they will for all of eternity. Men are trying to fill the shoes of the greatest man who ever lived.
Jeremiah,
Hey brother, again you should really get that book by Jon Zens. Secondly, I think you confuse the the fact that marriage is ONLY a picture. It is not the reality. You asked the question:
“Is there ever a time that Christ submits to the rule of the church?”
In order to answer this question, I need to ask you a question:
Is there ever a time that a wife worships her husband as she worships Christ? Why Not?
Think about it. It is for this very reason that husbands, as well as wives, are called to submit to one another as Eph. 5:21 says.
How can you say “ONLY” a picture when Paul clearly says “the husband is head of the wife AS Christ is head of the Church” and Peter said that Sarah “obeyed Abraham and called him her master.” And that women will be her daughters if they do the same.
Have we forgotten Eve’s share in the curse in the garden? “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” You may say that was part of the Old Covenate and now we are free from that in Christ, but are men free from toiling the ground and thorns? Are women free from pain in childbirth?
Should women worship their husbands as they worship Christ? Not at all! Christ has many names. We do not worship Him BECAUSE he is the Head, but because of His divine nature. Christ gave this title of “The head” to men. That much is clear from this passage we are discussing. But that does not bestow all the other honor and glory that Christ also holds. Only the responsibility that come with being the head.
One last note, there are 188 women named in the Bible. Deborah is the only clear, undisputed leader that is spoken of. There are only 10 women in the New Testament that could even be construed as leaders:
Junia
Priscilla
Euodia
Syntyche
Phoebe
Nympha
Lydia
Chloe
Stephanas or Stephana
Dorcas or Tabitha
and only two, maybe three have an hearable argument for any kind of leadership. Though there is no definitive evidence. It is all conjecture and interpretation. There are three points of contention for Junia alone and she would be the best case. So where is this “laughable” list of female leaders? Your starting to make assertions that have little or no backing and then treating them with far more weight than they themselves carry. This is a favorite trick among politicians. I know it would be hard for you to concede anything at this point because so many have read this article and have given you praise for it, but there isn’t a clear case or teaching here. It can only say what you want it to say if you want it to say that. If this was going the other way, arguing for male leadership. Using your methods their would be hundreds of examples rather than a handful and far more clear and definitive. Once again, this sound chauvinist just by arguing this side of it, but I absolutely believe in equal share of the Spirit and inheritance. This is simply an issue of earthly leadership, not dominance. Leader are not dictators or micro-managers. In the Biblical sense, they are standard bearers of the truth and keepers of the peace.
Jeremiah,
I think we are simply going to go round and round about this. I have said this before, and I will say it again, because many have a hierarcical, patriarcical, institutional filter of ‘leadership’ and ‘headship’, we read a top down, hierarcical understanding into the scriptures where NONE was intended. This leads to the position that you hold to unfortunately.
When scripture speaks of the headship of Christ, or the husband, it means something completely different than what you have asserted it means. I have touched on this point in this article, and in many of these comments on this thread. You can read what I have said here. I would strongly encourage you to obtain Jon’s book because it goes into much greater detail about the Biblical understanding of ‘headship’ verses the ‘worldly hierarcical, patriarcical, understanding of headship that many Christians hold to. There is a HUGE difference!
Secondly, just because scripture uses the picture of headship to apply to the husband, this does NOT mean that husbands are not to submit to their wives as well. Headship of husbands and MUTUAL submission are NOT opposities! If you have a ‘top-down, patriarcical, institutional’ view of headship, you will not be able to understand this point. This is exactly where your misunderstanding is coming from.
Again, the scripture speaks of mutual submission in the Lord because the entire body of Christ, (this includes males AND females, husbands AND wives) are the expression of the very life of Jesus Christ. Ephesians 5:21 could not be more clear. The “be subject to one another” in Eph. 5:21 is NOT limited to just wives or women, but to the ENTIRE body of Christ.
When we understand that Christ’s life is expressed by one another in the body, including our wives, we will gladly submit to one another in the Lord. Submitting to one another in the body (including our wives) is submitting to Christ because His life is expressed through the body the same way our life is expressed through our body. We need to understand who we are in Christ. True MUTUAL submission to one another as Eph. 5:21 talks about is only possible as we are ‘filled with the Spirit’ as Eph. 5:18 speaks of a few verses earlier.
Again Jeremiah, I strongly encourage you to research this more, and read Jon Zens’ work on the subject.
Jeremiah,
I want to mention that I appreciate you standing by an unpopular view (in the context of this comment stream). I think you are pointing to questions that have not been satisfactorily answered yet. There are parts of Jamal’s / Jon’s case that seem very presumptive to me, and I respect your tenacity pursuing an understanding that is fully Biblically justified.
I have no additional facts to add to either side of the argument; I have no further light. I am not sure where I stand. I am leaning in Jamal’s direction out of consideration for the big picture – for where I see the ‘arc’ of the revelation of the gospel pointing. The more traditional view of women seems to contain random nuggets going against the grain, such as the verses you mentioned.
Paul really wants women to call their husbands ‘Lord’ after Jesus told his disciples to call no man Rabbi?
Wives are to submit to their husbands ‘as to Christ’ because their husbands will purify and sanctify them AS Christ does?
But as I said, I am not urging this against you, because I have only questions, not explanations.
Thanks for speaking up.
Jeremiah,
I have purposely chosen to ignore the rest of your comment that makes the FALSE assertion that Biblical leadership has been male only. Honestly, there are so many examples from scripture that give examples of women leading that it is laughable to take that comment seriously. I mean that with all due respect brother. You need some serious education on this issue. Do not neglect getting Jon’s book.
I’d like to reiterate that the truth of Christ’s kingdom being ** progressive ** is the bridge that spans this gap between the poles of submission vs. equality, to me.
It seems to be accurate that both perspectives are “true”, but the measuring stick is fruitfulness/spiritual-maturity, not a pile of bible verses/history/context/translations that tip the scale to one side. *** That way we’re looking for Christ, instead of a gender. *** Otherwise we’re in danger of holding too tightly to a perspective that has obvious counter-points from God’s word. Christians have a horrible track record for swinging from one extreme to the next, and throwing the baby out with the bathwater; when wisdom’s path is up the middle road. EQUALITY! NO, SUBMISSION! How about both?
Does God’s word teach that the woman is the weaker vessel and that the husband is the head/source? Yes, clearly.
Does God’s word also teach that in the kingdom there is no male nor female, no being given in marriage, that we are not to regard each other after the flesh (which would include gender), that Christ no longer calls us servants but friends, and that He has Deborah’s? Yes, it certainly does.
For me, the wisdom that alleviates this tension between these two is that we’re (individually, martially, in the church, etc.) growing from the default settings of strict order and submissive type relationships unto spiritual maturity where (like the trinity) we’re fluidly deferring to each other out of love and wisdom as Christ moves through us.
Have women been wrongfully subjected by men? Horrifically so. And so we must repent of lording it over them for all of our carnal reasons and biblical justifications, and learn to love and serve God’s women to set them free, and build them up to help them grow into the spiritually mature Sons of God that He has called them to be.
Have women rebelled (Jezebelled) from the natural order? Absolutely. And so they need to repent of their rebellion, and enter into a season of submission for learning to use their freedom to build His kingdom instead of taking licenses and building their own kingdoms.
I also believe that in this age we have only been given the “deposit” of the Holy Spirit that is the “seed” unto the full manifestation of the kingdom at Christ’s return. And because of this reality, we are enjoying mere [gloriously encouraging] glimpses of the next age where all of these current “institutions” (marriage, male/female, etc) will be completely done away with, and equality will be the norm. And so since the fullness is not here yet, the “default setting” is for the wife to be submissive to the husband and most leadership will flow through the men (but certainly not all). And as His kingdom grows and His return nears, then (individually, martially, corporately, etc) these current governmental patterns will be more and more giving-way to the higher patterns of equality under Christ the king.
The husband should be tirelessly laboring to build his wife up to “no longer be his servant, but his friend” rather than trying to “keep her in her place”. And he should be ready to submit to her, as he sees His Lord working through her. For we are all “seated with Christ, in heavenly places”, and my gender never gives me the freedom to go against wisdom flowing from His throne, regardless of what type of body it flows through. But the decreasing “norm” will be her submission to me, because this is the Christ-ordained-age (classroom) that we’re living in.
Trevor,
Thx for your comment brother. In Christ, I am pretty confident that mutual submission in the Lord (husbands AND wives) is a way of life right now. Ephesians 5:21 is pretty straight forward in my opinion. I have heard it said that the church is the presence of the future. I tend to agree with that statement:)
Hey bro,
In your immediately-above post to me, if I change the word “is” to “has the potential to be”, then I can get into full agreement.
I agree that Eph 5:21 casts a beautiful *vision*, and sets a *high standard*; but I disagree that it’s a discussion-ending proof-text. I do not believe that in Eph 5:21 that Paul is hitting the nuke button on ALL gender distinctions, and asserting that all believers are to immediately begin living with zero consciousness of their gender and/or its role in this age.
To avoid potentially harmful *idealism*, IMHO there are additional spiritual realities that need to be factored-in for living-out these particular spiritual realities regarding gender, with real people in today’s world and God’s current economy.
Regarding the “idealism” that I referenced above, I see this sort-of like the faith and healing movements. They are “very confident” that “by His stripes we WERE healed”, and so they press the issue that ALL sickness and disease is “done away with NOW”. And holding to this viewpoint forces them to explain ongoing sickness and disease as a “lack of faith” (etc), and has been very harmful to many believers. When the truth is, that there is the *potential* for Christ’s provision and power to break through in this age, and it’s good and right for us to believe Him for it, and for us to rejoice when it comes. But when it DOESN’T come, then it’s not necessarily bcs someone has too little faith, or was in unbelief, or needs their mind renewed by deeper teaching; but it’s more likely bcs we’re not living in an age where Christ’s reign is fully overcoming all of the results of the fall.
And so I believe that we must factor-in compassion, patience, and hope in order to deal with the current economy where His fullness is not completely manifested; accepting that it is by His design that we endure the reality that some types/shadows are still here, but are they progressively fading away as His return draws nearer and nearer.
This of course in NO WAY advocates sinful male-domination, EVER; nor does it take away from the truth that our wives/sisters are free to step into as much of the fullness of Christ as possible, and that men should be doing everything possible to help them along this path. But it leaves the door open for men to continue to feel the responsibility to lead, protect, provide, and love, simply bcs we’re men; and provides some basic order, regardless of whether a wife/sister is functioning as king/priest yet.
For example, in my home, I LOVE IT (and sincerely encourage it) when my wife expresses Christ and I gladly submit to her (Him) when she does. However, it’s very comforting to her to understand that when she’s having a little more of a “human” day/season, that I am committed to lead, decide, protect, provide, love, etc, simply bcs that’s my role as the man in the family.
Trevor,
You have shared some great thoughts here that I completely agree with. I totally agree that Eph. 5:21 does not end any consciousness of gender. The point I am making is that the mutual submission talked about in Eph. 5 has nothing to do with gender as many mistakenly seem to indicate. ‘Submission’ was never intended to be gender specific in the body of Christ, and leadership and submission are not opposites at all. This is exactly why husbands can function as the head and mutually submit to their wives in the Lord as well.
Yes! I agree with what you said Jon. And I appreciate your study and sharing of this so much Jamal!!
When I found out, years ago, through study and proper teaching the truth about this very important issue, I was soooo pleased and set free to find that Paul was indeed speaking of A woman, not women in general. Whoever she was she must have caused lots of havoc!
And when I learned that “Head” meant Source it was like a big door had been opened that was previously closed. I now have greater confidence stepping out in my ministry and feel empowered like never before. Goes to show you that TRUTH does indeed set one free!
I have encounterd lots of opposition when sharing the revelation that we were made equal and “submission” is mutual. So much opposition that I have refrained from sharing this revelation. Unfortunately it is one that few have and few WANT.
So, thank you all for sharing this and taking an active stand on casting down what I call “Sacred Cows” among fellow Believers.
Claire,
Thx for reading this article, and for sharing a bit of your journey here. I am so glad that the Lord has shown you these things about your identity in Christ, and what the scriptures actually teach. Your FREEDOM is the fruit that speaks for itself. It was for freedom that Christ has set us free (Gal. 5:1).
Well said Trevor.
This article is PHENOMINAL!! I know several people who need to read this. Thanks for being obedient to God and writing it; I agree with EVERYTHING you wrote. We as the body of Christ need to do an evaluation on what we’ve been taught. I meet so many Christians who are biblically misinformed and it irks my soul because they are not willing to open their minds to truth…but you indeed are sharing it! God Bless!
Jazmine,
Thx so much for reading and commenting on this article. I am very encouraged to know that you were encouraged by this article. You are right, the majority of believers are completely misled about this issue. This has been devastating to the very nature of the body of Christ. Thx for reading and getting the word out about this! Blessings.
Hello there,
Pardon my callousness, but in things like these I am virtually incapable of beating around the bush.
Christ is not servant to the church.
He died to redeem us, yes. He loves the church, yes. He’s our provider, comforter and protector, yes. But nowhere is it hinted that -so to speak- it’s His job to serve and praise us. Scripture shows pointedly that only the creator God, Father and Son, is worthy to be praised (see every time a messenger from God came in contact with a man/woman of God, and how they refused plain out any sort of praise. If not enough clarification, see Lucifer’s story). By suggesting that Christ is to serve us, then you are setting yourself above Him in whom we have life. I really hope this was not your intention at all.
Also, what do you do with passages such as Luke 9.23 (‘take up your cross and follow me’), John 14.15 (‘if you love me, keep my commandments’) and John 17.18 (‘[Jesus, in prayer to the Father] As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world’) under this notion? Service implies obedience, following and honoring. Is Christ to obey, follow and honor us? If so, why would he say these things on his very last night? Where would his integrity stand, if what you say is true?
This is a capital thing, Jamal. Our world has already plenty false teaching going about, so if you really wish to help women (and future generations), do stop spreading falsehood. May God enlighten the both of us, and may truth shine in whichever side it might lay.
I saw there was not one negative comment above, and I realize this is not actually a discussion. You’re giving everyone a piece of your mind, and whoever does not agree will not be featured. I have no problem with that, even though you spammed me via twitter to share. I do hope, however, that -if there was any God-given truth in what I wrote- it might haunt and chase you until you can’t ignore the true voice of the Spirit, and what was meant in the inspired Word. Lastly, I wish to share this last thing with you, in case there’s actually some believing in you:
And he said to me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near. Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy.”
“Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay everyone for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”
Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.
“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.”
The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price.
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
-Revelation 22.10-20
God bless.
Liz,
Thx for reading the article and posting your comment. I appreciate you taking the time to do that. Regarding the first sentence of your comment that Christ is not the servant to the church, I would have to strongly disagree.
Read Ephesians 5:28-30. What is Paul saying?
I’ll paste it here, so we can discuss it together.
Ephesianss 5
28In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
29For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church,
30because we are members of his body.
Paul says a couple of things here:
-The church is the wife of Christ.
-Marriage was design imitate the relationship between Christ and the church.
-The husband should nourish (‘promote the growth of’), and cherish (‘feel/show affection for’) his wife, as Christ does the church.
Still, you have reminded me today that the context is as important as the passage, so I’ll post it here:
31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
32This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.
33However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
Here’s also what Paul is saying.
-The exact way in which marriage resembles the relationship between Christ and the church is not for us to fully understand. Whoever has problem with that might take it up to God, since it’s His word through His servant Paul that calls it ‘mysterious’.
-The husband is to love his wife as himself. Pretty much reminding the community of Ephesus the second greatest commandment.
-Paul also asks us women to respect (‘give special regard to’, ‘esteem’) our husbands.
I still can’t phantom were you’d get that Christ is the servant of the church though :/
In the beginning of me and husband’s relationship, I did put guilt on him for not being ‘as spiritual’ as me or for not knowing the Bible well enough. I have backed off a lot but I just realized I still do it from time to time. Great article Jamal! Thanks for writing it- I’ve learned so much.
Thx for reading and commenting here Stephanie. I’m thankful for you sister:) Blessings.
Jamal,
Thanks for tweeting me this article. To be frank with you, it convicted and stirred me. I have been wrestling for a long time with the backseat I take in my marriage and obedience to Jesus. I wait for my husband to make the first move, rather than stepping out when I know that I should. I catch myself “piggy-backing” off of his obedience, usherings from God and even my prayer life – yikes?
In some ways it feels like a truth I’ve forgotten – that I was fearfully and wonderfully made for God, THEN my husband. I’m responsible to Him first and my husband second.
Way to declare identity in Jesus for all the sisters out there!
Ashley,
Thx for reading and for the honesty of your comment. I appreciate you sharing your perspective because I am convinced that a lot of women can relate to the very thing you shared. I am truly encouraged that this article was an encouragement to you. Blessings sister!
I would like to know how Jamal and others on this thread are reacting to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to three women this weekend, all of whom are activists for women’s rights and equality around the planet. Two are from Liberia (one of whom is the elected President of that nation) and one from Yemen.
in refreence to “It is estimated that in China today, 85% of all apostolic church planters among the ‘underground’ church are women….
If i were to quote you, do you speak of the denomination or apostolic as a verb?
can you tell me where you retreived the info?
Lauren,
Thanks for reading this article and for your comment here. When I use the term ‘apostolic’, I am not referring to any denomination or sect, but the ‘verb’ of being ‘sent out’ to lay a foundation of Jesus Christ among a group of people for the purpose of seeing local churches established.
The 80% number is a statistic that I obtained from Felicity Dale. Felicity is an informed church planting author who has been involved in church planting efforts globally. I have also been to that region of the world, and I can concur with her findings as well.
This is a very brave and inspiring article. Your words are powerful and honest and I am so glad you shared the link with me. Keep writing!
Thx for reading and for your words of encouragement. Much appreciated:)
Oh, this explanation means the world to me. Even in campus ministry, which is pretty egalitarian as far as Christian organizations go, I have faced my brothers in Christ complain about female speakers or lecturers at conferences (that very well-respected pastors and theologians attended, so it’s not as if people didn’t know ahead of time), or tend not to listen to sisters in Christ giving them direction when it is their place to do so. I appreciate so much the biblical truth about who women are. I don’t think God made so many wise ones who just had to keep all their empowering thoughts to themselves!
Amen Lara! Thanks for reading and commenting. Welcome to the blog sister:)
Thanks for the heads up about this post and about this book. Years ago I read what sounds like a similar work by John Bristow, a book called What Paul Really Said About Women. I quote from this book and many others in my brand new book on gender inequality called Unladylike: Resisting the Injustice of Inequality in the Church. (If you’re interested in reviewing it, give me a holler and I’ll hook you up Jamal!) I am SO pleased that the conversation concerning the treatment of women in the contemporary church is becoming louder and louder. The way many churches treat women is not the way Jesus treated women.
Peace to you brother!!
Pam,
Thanks for your comment here, and welcome to the blog;) I’d love to review your new book. Send me an email to: jamal@illuminate-us.com and let me know the details regarding how I can obtain a copy. Blessings to you:)
Love your supportiveness toward the sisters!
QUOTE:”What flows from that in Ephesians 5:21 is the command to be subject to”ENDQUOTE
Just wanted to point out that a “command” would have imperative grammar. The upotasso verbs in Eph 5:21 and 24 are both passive/middle voice and I vote for passive as making the most sense. A body IS SUBJECT to a head in a manner which is organic: no choice nor volition involved.
That your body and head ARE SUBJECT one to another is a description not a prescription. A husband has a kind of gravitational pull and a wife IS SUBJECT to her husband in everything, much like you ARE SUBJECT to gravity in everything.
Charis,
Welcome to the blog sister. I appreciate your comment. Again, it is important to note that ‘Head’ represents source & life, not top down hierarchical command and control. The former is descriptive, the latter is not. Blessings to you sister:)
This is rather astonishing. I’ve read a great many debates on this matter on the internet, and what I found surprising is not the material in your article–I had heard a lot of it before and already agreed very much–but the tone of the discussion afterwards. These things usually degenerate. Sometimes very badly.
Why is the discussion on your blog so respectful? I see that another commenter above has assumed it must be because you block disagreeing comments (in the process assuming you’d block hers) but it’s clear you don’t, because you do have a few. Do you block actively disrespectful comments? Or do these just not show up for some reason?
I’m genuinely curious, because the matter of disrespectful discussions online is something that really makes me think a lot about human nature.
Heather,
Thanks for your comments and questions. I am encouraged to know that the nature of the discourse here has been a blessing to you. You are right, many times these kinds of discussions can break down quickly and become quite contentious and hateful. Thankfully, I do not get a lot of comments on this blog that are along those lines. For the most part, almost all the comments on this blog that come in are approved. There is a huge need for open, honest, and healthy dialogue in the body of Christ. Comments that make personal attacks and judgements against others, or comments that stray off the subject matter of the article, however, are not approved. Again, comments like that are very rare. I actually wrote an article about this very subject. Here is the title and link:
‘Healthy Debate Vs Personal Attacks & Judgementalism…What’s The Difference?’ http://jamaljivanjee.com/?p=22
Thank you! It is rough out here! I am currently leading worship for a southern baptist church. Mind you, they sought me out for over a year before the Lord released me to go. They desire to see their church with full expression of worship (even dancing for Jesus was encouraged a few weeks ago) but they do not desire to hear from me during the worship set unless it is singing. I have stood my ground explaining in love and honesty that I just can’t help it. When the Holy Spirit wants to speak, I let him. I have also been discouraged to pray as long as I do. The Holy Spirit revealed to me that it is the issue of man vs woman here in this body. I am who God created me to be. As I have learned to submit, I am also learning to speak up. It would not be me they are rejecting, it would be Christ.
I just want them to see what they are missing out on. A full, functioning body of believers, set free to minister to the broken, feed the poor and take care of the needy. That’s what it’s about, right?
I appreciate this blog so much. It really gives me the extra drive that I need right now to continue in this work. I really appreciate your hard work in bringing about these tough subjects. Thanks Jamal.
Welcome to the blog KD. So glad to hear this was liberating to you. I hope you will subscribe to the blog so we can continue to dialogue about future posts that are posted here. Blessings to you sister:)
Your interpretation of authentein is improper. First off, classical Greek does not contain the word “authentein.” It was used in Koine Greek and referred to exactly how it’s translated today; authority, exercising authority, etc. The closest classical Greek word does mean murder which is how one would get the idea of “abusive” authority. This is not the word that Paul uses, however. Paul’s phrase “Teach or exercise authority over” makes sense when reading the passage whereas “Teach or place abusive authority over” would not make sense because the issue of the woman teaching is still there. This idea of women teaching over men in the public worship of the Church is a new idea and you will not find one woman in that role in the entire New Testament.
Jamal, how do you reconcile that Paul says in that same verse in 1 Timothy 2 that the women are not to teach or exercise authority over a man that Paul gives his reasoning for the statement just after saying this? It was Adam that was created first. Adam was not deceived, but eve was and fell into sin. This is why women are not to be the teaching authority in the church. God also commanded the Israelites to commit genocide at one point in the old testament. Both of these ideas seem abhorrent to us in the 21st century but you seem comfortable changing one around and not another?
Daoud,
Thanks for posting your comment here. Obviously, I strongly disagree with your assessment. You seemed to completely ignore several things mentioned in this article. Your stance is based on three major misunderstandings. I will list them here.
1. Ignorance of the context:
If we approach the scriptures without the context in mind, we will simply take the scriptures as a string of stand alone theological statements. The New Testament is made up of real letters written to real groups that were struggling with real issues. If you don’t know what those issues were, you will take the statements that Paul said and twist his words to create a reality that is the opposite of what he was advocating for. Ignorance of the context is also why these passages have been falsely translated. Not only are you making this mistake with scripture, you have done this with my article as a whole as well.
For example, you seemed to ignore what I mentioned regarding the mistranslation of the word ‘quietness’ to mean ‘silence’ for women. This is commonly done, although it is 100% false. I will simply state here what I said in my article. Please take note as this has everything to do with the context:
2. You seem to be ignorant of the context of the cult of Artemis & Why Paul referenced Adam & Eve and the order of creation
Since you seemed to completely miss this point, I will repeat what I said about exactly why Paul made reference to the order of creation and why he used the word ‘authentain’. It is factually correct and is backed up by many biblical scholars who know the context of the passage:
3. You seem to be Ignorant of the nature of New Testament leadership
Daoud, If you would like to study these things much further, you would do well to purchase a copy of Jon Zens book that I linked to in this article.
Jamal,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this important (often controversial) issue.
I have a few questions and comments for you.
1. You claim that in 1 Timothy, Paul was addressing a specific situation in the Ephesian church regarding certain women who were creating a faction there and being problematic. I understand the cultural milieu of Ephesus with Artemis/goddess worship. But do you have Biblical or primary evidence showing that there actually was such a problematic women-led faction in the church in Ephesus, or is this just an inference from the larger cultural situation?
2. You argue that because of the cultural/specific situation in Ephesus, it was necessary for Paul to emphasize certain points for the Ephesians that he may not do with other churches in other situations. However, tying apostolic injunctions to specific cultures, and then abandoning them when the culture changes is a very slippery slope. In this way one may do away with almost any apostolic command by saying it was only for specific first century situations. For example – one might argue that women’s head coverings were ‘certainly cultural’ (as you argue in the comments), and not for us; the instructions pertaining to women in 1 Timothy were important for Ephesus because of the Artemis cult; or Paul specifically forbade homosexuality for Rome because it was such a ghastly problem there; etc., etc. Many have argued away almost the entire New Testament in this way.
3. I read in the comments section your argument about the 1 Cor. 14 silence of women. You claim that Paul was quoting a statement made in the Talmud (quoted by a letter previously received by him from the Corinthians) and that he was actually arguing against this practice. This is the first time I am hearing this novel argument. Could you share with me the passage in the Talmud where this statement is made that Paul is quoting? Furthermore, could you point me to some other commentators which argue that Paul is actually here quoting a passage in the Talmud for the sake of refuting it?
Thanks again for sharing, and God bless you.
John
Although in my heart I did not feel I had any issues with this topic, the Spirit checked me a while back. I came to see that my dealings with decisions between my wife and I were in error. In her loving and carting way she brought to my attention how I had not valued her opinion. At the time I quickly agreed, and moved on. A little while latter at a gathering of saints the topic of authority came up. Bam there it was again, that nudging “hey did you get this”?
Men we have been indoctrinated with a position that does not stand the light of day.
Authority is mutual, it is based upon the Triune God. As they mutually submit to ‘one another’ we are do do likewise. There is liberty ,joy and blessing in seeing this in Light of this truth.
Grace and peace to one all.
Jim,
I appreciate your openness. I know many of us can relate to what you shared. I’m thankful for you brother.
Jamal !!!!!
I cannot tell you how much I appreciate this article, no really; I wish I could fist bump you and say your too cool. I cannot tell you the amount of times that I have spoken for the value of women and basically been told to shut up! I will passing this around to all my friends. There was a point in my early teens when I didn’t really like men at all apart from family members. If I didn’t think they smelt I thought they were ignorant. Thankfully I have many great relationships with non Chrisitian and Chrisitian men. To all the ladies this makes a world of difference.
Ok back to topic you actually explained what the text actually meant which was helpful. I think that many men have been sharply misguided on this issue (not entirely their fault.) I think in western society and many others to be a woman is associated with weakness, ignorance and something that needs domination. I pray for the few good men left and more to join that group.
Laura,
Thanks for your encouraging and insightful comment. Thanks for your honesty as well. I completely receive your ‘fist bump’:)
Just curious, how did you come across this article?
I actually googled *Christian women and the devil* I think your article was on the second search page as far as I remember.
In the UK there is huge problems with young women being forced in to sex slavery to pay for their studies. As a young graduate student this makes me very angry , I really want other women to have honour and be respected. Really women shouldn’t have to make this choice, the government don’t care one little bit. It almost feels as if they love women to be abused in this fashion.
That’s the history
Laura,
Yes, this is truly heartbreaking. The roots of this tragedy are spiritual in nature. What is most precious in reality, is the most hated and abused by the world. This will not continue forever.
Awesome. In a society where women outside of the church flaunt their belligerence and try to entice women of faith with their suggestions about marriage without submission… it’s nice to be reminded that we hold a special place in God’s heart and don’t have to be rebellious to the Biblical standard of marriage to be respected and honored.
I liked the points about how a husband is to treat his wife also; young women should be taught to look for these things in a man and married women shouldn’t be afraid to ask these things of their husbands.
Thx for reading and sharing your comment here Olivia. Blessings to you:)