1 Timothy 2.8-15
N.T. Wright translates this passage as:
So this is what I want: the men should pray in every place, lifting up holy hands, with no anger or disputing. 9In the same way the women, too, should clothe themselves in an appropriate manner, modestly and sensibly. They should not go in for elaborate hair-styles, or gold, or pearls, or expensive clothes; 10instead, as is appropriate for women who profess to be godly, they should adorn themselves with good works. 11They must be allowed to study undisturbed, in full submission to God. 12I’m not saying that women should teach men, or try to dictate to them; they should be left undisturbed. 13Adam was created first, you see, and then Eve; 14and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived, and fell into trespass. 15She will, however, be kept safe through the process of childbirth, if she continues in faith, love and holiness with prudence.
His thoughts and explanation are recorded here.
What do you think about this troubling passage that is so inconsistent with our culture and with Paul's other writings (Gal 3)?
So this is what I want: the men should pray in every place, lifting up holy hands, with no anger or disputing. 9In the same way the women, too, should clothe themselves in an appropriate manner, modestly and sensibly. They should not go in for elaborate hair-styles, or gold, or pearls, or expensive clothes; 10instead, as is appropriate for women who profess to be godly, they should adorn themselves with good works. 11They must be allowed to study undisturbed, in full submission to God. 12I’m not saying that women should teach men, or try to dictate to them; they should be left undisturbed. 13Adam was created first, you see, and then Eve; 14and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived, and fell into trespass. 15She will, however, be kept safe through the process of childbirth, if she continues in faith, love and holiness with prudence.
His thoughts and explanation are recorded here.
What do you think about this troubling passage that is so inconsistent with our culture and with Paul's other writings (Gal 3)?
Labels: church of christ, exegesis, theology, womens role
posted by Eric Livingston at
4/06/2008
6 Comments:
No takers so far, so I'll just say my take on it:
Wright's explanation (though maybe accurate) seems to just stretch the text to try to fit our culture. He's still approaching the issue by trying to fit our churches and our culture fit into the letter to Timothy.
I would come at it a bit more broadly. Perhaps the word of God, which was written and translated by men, is something that reveals to us the nature of God. It informs us of the story in which we find ourselves. If that's the case, then maybe the Bible sets us on a trajectory where we will eventually come to the place to which God is moving us. We catch a glimpse of that place in the latter part of Revelation, and it happens to look a lot like Gen 2.
Then, if we are moving towards God's shalom that he intended for the world, perhaps we have to use the scriptures to faithfully guide us as we contextualize what was written to the 1st cent church, so that we can more faithfully approach God's dream for us.
I acknowledge that this brings in more subjectivity to our interpretation of scripture, but I believe it is faithful both to God, and to the Fathers that handed down to us the Bible.
I just finished reading the paper, and some parts two or three times. I have some trouble with his take probably due to my upbringing and some traditional views. I'm not sure I completely understand Eric's take. It seems to me that your positipn is very similar to his. I think it is important to understand the context in which Paul is writing, but I don't think we can truly understand what he is trying to say. I think we look at those scriptures and find what principles God is communicating through Paul to the first century and to the 21st.
Then here's the tough part. Let Christ judge if those principles were understood and put into practice the way He wanted. Let us not forget that it is His body, He will judge.
Rom 14:4 Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
Sam
Oh my!
My take is a bit different than Wright's because, although we probably end up with the same conclusion: "women should not be made to be silent in church", we arrive there differently.
Wright seems to do some gymnastics with the text to get there. I'm not discrediting his reasoning, he may very well be correct. Rather, I'd just rather look at the scope of Paul's writings, the Bible at large, and what we know of the character of God to arrive at the above conclusion. That is, elsewhere Paul writes that we should not discriminate in Christ, there are many, many texts in the NT that indicate women had a more active role in the church, and God made humanity in his image, both male and female, so it would seem that God has utility for both men and women in his church.
Why can't we just read 1 Tim 2 for what it is, then call it inconsistent with the bulk of Paul's teaching, with NT example, and with God's heart, and then say it is not binding on the church today?
Eric, I got to your blog by way of Cope's. In my "Life of Paul" class, I'm having the students read the on-line speech by Wright on "Women's Service in the Church" (I think is the title) where the last passage he talks about is 1 Tm. 2. I had some of the students report on the various sections of the speech. Now they're reading an open letter to egalitarians written by Wayne Grudem. Grudem's defense of a traditional reading of the passage seems persuasive to me. (It's also online).
Thanks Frank. I haven't read Grudem's letter. I'll check it out.
I just wrote an exegetical paper (focusing on v. 11-15) and also found some good conservative arguments. I'm doing most of my research at Reformed Theological Seminary (Presbyterian) and they had some sources with some new-to-me takes on the issue.
No question that the debate will rage on. I think we have to consider the broader scope of the NT to figure it out. If we put a pericope under the microscope, we fail to leverage the wisdom of the entire NT canon.
In my mind, that broader view of the NT encourages a broader role for women than has been traditionally accepted.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home