The Role of Women Bible Quiz

Scorpion

> http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0301/roleofwomen.html

aChristian

I have to disagree with "Landover Baptist Church."

For we have strong reason to believe that the words written by the apostle Paul which are most often criticized as being "sexist" and "chauvinistic" did not actually reflect the apostle Paul's own beliefs about how women should be treated in the Christian Church. The words written by Paul which I was referring to are those recorded in 1 Cor. 11:3-10, 1Cor 14:34,35 and in 1 Tim. 2:8-15.

These words in the New International Version of the Bible read as follows:

"Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head." (1 Cor. 11:3-10)

"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (1 Cor. 14:34,35)

"I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing. I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she
must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety." (1 Tim. 2:8-15)

Many Christians have long had a very hard time understanding how the apostle Paul could have written words such as these. Why? Because Paul encouraged Christians to, "Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ." (1 Cor. 11:1) And the Bible reveals that Jesus always treated women with respect and gladly discussed spiritual things with them. ( Luke 10:36-42; John 4:7-27) And because Paul was the same man who said that, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:28) And because we know that Paul accepted both women prophets and women deacons. (Acts 18:26; 21:9 Romans16:1) And, we can't help but ask, how did Paul expect women to serve as prophets if he did not allow them to teach or even speak in church, as 1 Cor. 14:34 and 1 Tim. 2:12 would seem to indicate?

With these things in mind, I will here discuss what I believe is strong evidence which clearly indicates that Paul was in these passages actually citing false teachings then being promoted by others for the purpose of correcting those false teachings. I'll here tell you what that evidence is.

I am convinced that Paul's words in 1 Cor.11:3-10 described a teaching promoted by some in Corinth which the Corinthians sent to Paul for his critique. To me, Paul's words in verse 2 serve as an obvious tip-off that Paul was about to directly quote and then comment upon a false teaching that was then circulating in the Church. For in that verse Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings just as I passed them on to you."

The next words he wrote, recorded in verses 3-10, were those in which I am convinced Paul then quoted the false teaching which the Corinthians had sent to Paul for him to comment on. That teaching was this: "Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this
reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head."

I believe that the contents of the next several verses, 11-16, clearly show them to be Paul's rebuttal to the false teaching he had just referenced. For the words in these verses clearly rebut the arguments advanced in verses 3-10. Thus they can only be understood as being Paul's own explanation of the true Christian position on this issue, the position which Paul was really promoting. That position was this: "In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God."

After quoting those who demanded that women wear head coverings to show their submission to men Paul said, "Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? ... LONG HAIR is given to her AS a covering." So, Paul was saying women do not need head coverings as some false teachers were demanding. Furthermore, Paul clearly pointed out that men and women were equal in the faith. "For as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God." (vs 12). This argument by Paul clearly refuted the false teachers' statement made in verses 3 and 8 that, "The head of woman is man'" because "man did not come from woman, but woman from man."

I believe that the now common "male chauvinistic" understanding of Paul's words developed in large part due to the way in which Paul wrote. I believe that Paul's use of sharp contrasts in place of clear transitional phrases is largely responsible for causing some of what he wrote to be widely misunderstood. However, Paul's words would have been perfectly understandable by those to whom he originally addressed his letters. For they knew what Paul had previously taught on such matters. And they knew the teachings of others which they had asked Paul to comment on. However, when a third party, such as ourselves, reads the letters which Paul wrote they do not have such "inside" knowledge. And without it, it is sometimes difficult to recognize when exactly Paul was quoting false teachers and when he was actually setting forth true Christian teachings. Because of such difficulties in understanding Paul's letters I believe that many of the words Paul actually wrote for the purpose of refuting false doctrine later became widely used to promote false doctrine. And in the process I believe Paul, God and the New Testament have acquired very undeserved reputations as being "anti-woman."

I'll now comment on 1 Corinthians 14:34 and 35. Though I normally use the NIV, I'll use the KJV here because in this passage the NIV is missing an important element. There we read: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Here again, like 1 Cor. 11:3-10, I am convinced that Paul was quoting the words of false teachers for the purpose of rebuking them. How do we know this? By simply reading the three following verses, 36-38. There Paul wrote: "What? Came the word of God out from you? Or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant."

Paul identifies false teaching with either strong rebuke or by clearly pointing out the error and correcting it. Or by doing both. But he does so, as I mentioned earlier, while using minimal transitional phraseology. Here that transitional phraseology is extremely minimal. In fact, it consists of only a single word. But for Paul it only took one word to identify a false teaching. That word was one very strong word of rebuke. In case you missed it, that word was, "What?"

Though missing from the NIV, this "particle of distinction between two connected terms," as Strong's Greek dictionary defines the Greek word used at the beginning of verse 36, is translated as "What?" in the KJV and the Amplified Bibles and as "What!" in the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. By Paul's use of that Greek word to begin his thoughts recorded in verse 36 it certainly appears that Paul was expressing both shock and outrage at the blatant sexism which some false teachers were then promoting as Christian doctrine. For those who question if that is truly the sentiment which Paul meant to convey by the first word he used in verse 36, the many words of rebuke which followed Paul's "What?" show beyond a doubt that he was disgusted that such chauvinistic teachings were being promoted in Christian congregations. And he reminded the Corinthians that, unlike the false teachers who were demeaning Christian women, "The things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord." (vs.37) One of the things to which he obviously here referred was his consistent teaching that in Christ, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, MALE NOR FEMALE, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:28)

By the way, the content of this passage (1 Cor. 14:34,35) itself clearly indicates that the sentiments expressed therein could not have been those of Paul. For verse 34 says that women "are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law." But, as I am sure you know, Paul was the apostle who continually preached Christian freedom and how Christians were not under the Jewish law. Thus the idea that Paul would use the authority of the Jewish law to support his teachings seems most unlikely. To me it seems quite clear, that when discussing here and elsewhere the idea that women should be treated differently than men within the Christian Church, Paul was citing the false teaching of some legalistic Jewish Christians. He was not presenting his own beliefs and teachings.

I believe that 1 Timothy 2:8-15, like 1 Cor. 11:3-10 and 14:34 and 35, were also words written by Paul quoting false teachers. In the last verse of 1 Timothy chapter 1 the apostle Paul was explaining to Timothy about Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom he "handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme." Thus we have reason to believe that in the early part of 1 Timothy chapter 2 Paul was actually refuting some of the teachings of these men. Then in verse 7 Paul pointed out forcefully that, "I am telling the truth, I am not lying - and am a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles." I believe his words in verse 7 indicate that he was there contrasting his position as a teacher of truth with the false teachers he had just been discussing and whom he would now quote.

With this in mind, I understand Paul's words in 1 Tim. 2:8 through the end of Chapter 2 to be a false teaching he was quoting for the purpose of exposing it as such. There Paul wrote, "I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing. I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."

In the very next verse, in referring to what he was next to write, Paul wrote, "Here is the trustworthy saying." With these words, "Here is the trustworthy saying," I believe Paul clearly implied that the words which he had just written, namely those in the verses immediately preceding his words, "Here is the trustworthy saying," were not "trustworthy."

As I mentioned earlier, I believe Paul's scant use of transitional phrases, clearly distinguishing his own teachings from the false teachings he sometimes cited for comment, is largely to blame for the problems we now have in understanding the passages we are here discussing. And Paul's use of such transitional phrases is certainly quite scant in this passage of scripture. Fortunately, however, we here have additional reason to understand that Paul must have here been citing the doctrine of false teachers. What reason is that? We know that Paul could not have here been presenting his own beliefs because he had already shown in 1 Cor. 11:12 that the argument, "Adam was formed first, then Eve," (1 Tim. 2:13) in no way proves that man is superior to woman. For, as Paul there pointed out, "As woman came from man, so also man is born of woman." So, why would Paul present an argument which he himself had previously shown to be flawed? ( 1 Timothy was written after 1 Corinthians ) I do not believe he would. And I do not believe he did.

Thus I can only believe that the verses which lie between 1 Tim. 2:7 and 3:1 contain the false teachings of Hymenaeus and Alexander quoted word-for-word and shown, by Paul's comment in 3:1, to be teachings which were considered untrustworthy by Paul.

Something which also helps us to identify the teachings recorded in 1 Tim. 2:8-15 as being those of false teachers is the fact that they are full of regulations and restrictions typical of legalistic Jewish-Christian sects which were already beginning to spring up in the first century. Such sects promoted a form of prayer, during which the men only raised their hands, common to the first century Jewish religion. They also promoted a dress code for women but not for men and in effect dictated a women's lifestyle, (leaving more money for the men or contributions for the leaders by eliminating expensive jewelry) all on the pretense that God was being served by such.

1 Tim. 2:11,12, "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." Anyone who saw the movie "Yentyl" with Barbra Streisand can appreciate the effect such doctrine had and has on women, and why Paul would condemn those who promoted it.

With these things in mind, I do not feel it is fair to label these comments by Paul as "sexist." I now firmly believe that the man God used to write much of the New Testament did not, as is often alleged, promote sexism. Rather, I am convinced that the apostle Paul was actually a very strong promoter and defender of full equality of the sexes within the Christian Church.

LDH

Scorpion,

Thank you for posting this link. This church's views on women were demeaning and hateful.

We need to know about ALL of the lunatics, not just the ones who wear the JW label.

larc

Hi all,

If you go to the web site posted above, then go to search on the page and type in the word - India, you will find a hiarious satire on end of the world beliefs.

RedhorseWoman

Oh, I LOVE the Landover Baptist site. They have the greatest satires and parodies on religion that I have ever seen. During the big uproar about Pokemon, they had an absolutely hiliarious article about the "Pocket Demons".

Thanks for posting this. (hehehehe)

Scorpion

Glad all of you liked the site. I was on a mostly Christian forum and this site came up as a topic of discussion. You can imagine the frowns.

aChristian,

I agree with what you posted as a clarification for what the Bible says as far as womens role in the Bible. Deborah held a rank almost as high as Moses and Samuel. Also the Prophetess Mariam was held in great respect.

The site does give one a different way of looking at things, which is what some people who are stuck in the mind rut need.

happytobefree

This Landover Church is a REAL church? Oh my goodness, now I understand this awful guy I use to work with, he was a fundamentalist.

This is a scary site. There are some sick SOB's in this world.

Happy to be Free (Me)

RedhorseWoman

Happy, Landover Baptist is a real church only insofar as that they compile real doctrines of many fundamentalist churches and take them to the limit. They are satire at its finest, IMO.

The Role of Women Bible Quiz

Share this