Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Paul Misunderstood: Women in the Church (Part 2)

In a culture like ours where EQUALITY is highly valued and talk of gender DISTINCTIONS is taboo, the teachings of the Apostle Paul, as they relate to women in the church, have been classified as ‘male chauvinistic’.  But is this label warranted? Have we correctly understood what Paul meant when he said things like, “Men are the image and glory of God but women are the glory of man” and “Women should remain silent in the churches?”

In the last blog, we began to make the case that these statements are often misunderstood because they are understood outside of the context in which they are made. So is Paul trying to suppress the voice and influence of women in the church by demanding, “Women should remain silent in churches?” Let’s find out…

THE CONTEXT
As we learned in the last blog, women were allowed to pray and prophecy in the church as long as they were wearing a head covering (for cultural reasons). Paul makes this clear in 1 Corinthians 11. And so we must ask ourselves, “Is Paul contradicting himself in 1 Corinthians 14 or did he change his mind later in the letter?” The answer: NO!

In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul is addressing the disorder that has presented itself while people in the church are together prophecying (that is, presenting a hymn, word of instruction, revelation, or a tongue and interpretation—1 Cor. 14:26). Apparently, everyone in the church is trying to prophecy at the same time (14:31) and this is presenting confusion and discouragement rather than instruction and encouragement. This disorder is also not allowing an adequate pause so that the individual prophecies can be weighed and evaluated (14:29-30).

So how does Paul’s statement that women should be silent in the church fit into this context?

WHO IS PAUL ADDRESSING?
Apparently, some of the women in the church are bringing disgrace to their husbands by speaking in the church (1 Corinthians 14:35). So then why does Paul instruct ALL women to be silent in the church and not just wives? Answer: HE DOESN’T! The Greek word gyne used here can refer to either “women” or “wives” depending on the context (There is not a separate Greek word for ‘wives’!).  And in this context where women are bringing disgrace to their husbands, the word gyne is clearly (in my opinion) referring to ‘wives.’ And so Paul is really saying, “WIVES should remain silent in the church.”

So is Paul communicating that WIVES can never speak in the church?

THE EXTENT OF PAUL’S INSTRUCTION
The context is clearly indicating that wives are bringing disgrace to their husbands. But how are they doing this? The context would indicate that the wives are ‘inquiring’ about their husbands’ prophecies and ‘asking’ them questions in the public forum rather than at home.

But what’s so bad about asking your husband a question in public? Well, the compound Greek verb for ‘ask’ (epe-rotatosan) in this passage (14:35) is used elsewhere to mean ‘interrogate’ (Mark 11:29; 14:60-61). And so the wives are not just innocently ‘asking’ (rotatosan) their husbands questions, they are ‘interrogating’ (epe-rotatosan) them in public during the time when prophecies are being weighed and evaluated. It isn’t difficult to imagine how a wife could bring shame to her husband by interrogating him after he gives a prophecy. As Ben Witherington puts it, “The speaking in question denotes activity of sifting or weighing the words of prophets, especially by asking probing questions about the prophet’s theology or even the prophet’s lifestyle in public.” This type of interrogation certainly would bring a sense of disrespect to just about every husband I know!

THE BOTTOM LINE
And so Paul is not making a blanket statement that wives must never speak in the church. He is instructing wives NOT to speak within the church in ways that bring shame and disgrace to their husbands. In fact, the word ‘silent’ (sigao) does not always communicate an unqualified ‘lack of speech.’ Depending on context, it can mean ‘to hold one’s tongue, hold one’s peace, or to refrain from using a particular kind of speech, or speech in a presupposed context.’ And so in this context, wives are being instructed to hold their speech in church contexts when their husbands are prophecying.

APPLICATION
And so the principle we can draw from this passage is NOT: “Wives (or women) are not ever allowed to speak in the church.” NO. The principle Paul is applying in this context is: “Wives should respect their husbands by NOT belittling them in public.” And I would submit that husbands should do likewise toward their wives! And so may God strengthen your relationships as you show honor and respect to others (including your spouse)!

Saturday, April 19, 2014

Paul Misunderstood: Women in the Church (Part 1)

Did you know that the Apostle Paul wrote, "...he [man] is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man" (1 Corinthians 11:7) and "women should remain silent in the churches, they are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says" (1 Corinthians 14:34)? Is Paul a male chauvinist and a promoter of male elitism? Many in our culture certainly think so. And these verses are used as ammunition to fire the label 'female suppressionists' at the Christian faith. Of course, most people who place this label on Paul and Christians have not studied these texts in any great detail (and usually not in their literary context and original languages!). And so I want to do that here...

PAUL EXPRESSED DIGNITY TOWARD WOMEN
Often overlooked are the unprecedented liberties Paul and the Christian faith afforded to females in the male dominated Roman culture of the 1st century. Women were allowed to pray and prophecy in the church (1 Cor. 11:5, 14:31). And many women were influential co-workers in the church (including Phoebe, Junia, Prisca, Mary who are enthusiastically greeted by Paul in Romans 16)! And Paul even expresses man's codependence on women when he says, "In the Lord 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" (1 Cor. 11:11-12). That's not all! Paul calls for mutual submission between a husband and a wife in Ephesians 5:21 when he instructs the husband to love his wife "just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her." Does Paul sound like a person who lacks respect for women?

But what are we to think of the statement, man "is the glory and image of God; but woman is the glory of man?" After all, this doesn't sound like much of a compliment. But what did Paul mean and what was the context of this statement? Let's find out...

THE MAIN ISSUE
This statement didn't emerge out of thin air. NO. It is part of a greater context. So what is the context? Well, throughout 1 Corinthians, Paul is addressing disorder in the Corinthian church. And this disorder stems from tension between Jesus' teachings and the practices of the popular culture in Corinth: Patronage. Social Classism. Elitism. Pagan Worship. And so Paul is teaching the Corinthians how to follow Jesus in a secular culture full of competing values and practices. And the issue that is raised in 1 Corinthians 11 revolves around head coverings. Specifically, do Christian women need to continue to embrace the cultural norm of wearing a head covering?  

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF FEMALE HEAD COVERINGS
But why would Paul even care about this issue? And why were head coverings such a big deal in the Corinthian culture? Well, head coverings were a symbol of modesty according to Philo. This is why an adulterous woman would have her hair shaved off. This was a public sign of disgrace and shame. Additionally, going uncovered in public was a way for women to give nonverbal clues that they were "available." This is why sexual promiscuity was associated with the uncovered head of a married woman in public. Most husbands probably didn't want their wives "playing the field."

So how might this have factored into the church context in Corinth? Anthony Thiselton summarizes the issue well when he writes, "Public worship was neither the occasion for women to become 'objects' of attraction to be 'sized up' by men; nor an occasion for women to offer cryptic 'suggestions' to men." (I guess this serves as the Biblical basis for ChristianMingle and eHarmony!)

But not only this, a married woman who did not have her head covered in the public setting of the church community brought dishonor to her husband. Why? Sexually promiscuous, married women were the ones walking around with uncovered heads in public NOT modest Christian wives. This is why Paul writes, "Every woman who prays or prophecies with her head uncovered dishonors her head (that is, her husband see 1 Cor. 11:3) - it is the same as having her head shaved" (1 Cor. 11:5).

But if women had to wear head coverings then shouldn't men also? After all, head coverings were a cultural norm in Corinth for men too! But Paul instructs the church in 1 Cor. 11:4, "Every man who prays or prophecies with his head covered (lit. 'having down from the head') dishonors his head (that is, Christ see 1 Cor. 11:3)." Is Paul promoting a double-standard here?

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF MALE HEAD COVERINGS
In this passage, many people believe that Paul is disallowing males to have long hair (that is, "hair down from the head") because it effeminates them. This type of hair style that blurs gender distinctions dishonors Christ. While this is a possible interpretation, Plutarch uses this same language to describe Scipio walking through Alexandria attempting to go incognito by "having his garment down from the head." And in fact, it was normative in the Roman culture for males to wear their togas over their heads (and hanging down from the head) at pagan sacrifices as an act of piety and devotion. Based on this cultural understanding, Paul is indicating that such a pagan practice shows disgrace toward Christ in the setting of Christian worship. This is why Paul instructs men not to have anything "down from the head" in worship.

CONCLUSION
So when Paul says in 1 Cor. 11:7 that man "is the image and glory of God; woman is the glory of man," He simply means that males are visible representatives (that is, the glory) of God and women are visible representatives of man (specifically, their husbands). BUT it is important to note that the disjunctive word 'but' present in most English translations is not in the original Greek text. Why is this important? The 'but' makes it appear as though Paul is communicating that women are NOT the "image and glory of God" BUT merely the glory of man. But this is not so! Rather, Paul is communicating that as visible representatives of God, men should not engage in the pagan practice of wearing their togas "down from the head" during Christian worship. This brings shame to God. Likewise, as visible representatives of their husbands, wives should not follow the flirtatious practice of walking around with uncovered heads (especially in worship). This brings shame to their husbands.

APPLICATION
So how does this culturally distant passage apply to us today? Paul is explicitly drawing from a principle: Males and females are representatives of both God and their spouses. Therefore, they need to avoid anything that would bring dishonor and shame to God or their spouses. Is there anything in your life that is bringing shame to either God or your spouse?

So what are we to make of Paul's statement, "Women should remain silent in the churches, they are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says?" Find out in the sequel to this post!


Thursday, April 10, 2014

God's Love Misunderstood (Part 3)

Because love means so many different things to so many different people, it is at risk of losing its meaning altogether. To some, love is a feeling of infatuation, to others it is a willingness to sacrifice, and to others it is an unconditional acceptance of everybody. But how does God define His love?

GOD'S LOVE AND HITLER
To many people (including a majority of Christians), God's love is unconditional. And so according to them, God loves Hitler in the same way that He loves a follower of Christ. But imagine that someone tells a follower of Christ, "God loves you just like he loves Hitler." How is that person to take this 'compliment'? Does this statement bring immense value to God's love or does it cheapen it? And more importantly, is it true? Does this statement accurately represent God's love?

Some would resoundingly say, "YES! God's love is so great that it cannot be fathomed. God loves both believers and Hitler in the same way." They would then quote Romans 8:38-39, "For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

But is Romans 8:38-39 saying that God's love is limitless toward everybody? I guess the answer lies in the details. Who is the 'US' referring to in the phrase, "[nothing] will be able to separate US from the love of God in Christ Jesus?" Not only this but can someone experience the love of God that is IN CHRIST JESUS if they themselves are not IN CHRIST JESUS?

My take on this passage is that the 'US' is referring to those IN CHRIST JESUS (8:1), who are living according to the Spirit (8:4), and in whom the Spirit lives (8:9-11). In short, you can only experience the love of God that is described here if you are in Christ Jesus. And so because Romans 8:38-39 only applies to those in Christ Jesus, the security of God's love is only available to authentic Christ followers!

So does God NOT love sinners like Hitler? ANSWER: It depends. John 3:16 tells us that God sacrificed for everybody through Jesus to demonstrate His love. In this way, God loved Hitler. But Psalm 5:5 seems to indicate that God hates ALL who do wrong [in the sense that they are defiantly living in rebellion toward God]. In this way, God hated Hitler. This is why John 3:16 also teaches that belief in Jesus is a requirement for eternal life with God [versus perishing apart from God]. And so as we can see, God's love is multifaceted. He sacrificed for all but he does not accept all people.

GOD'S LOVE AND CHRIST FOLLOWERS
So, does God accept ALL people unconditionally who claim to be Christ followers? After all, if nothing can separate Christ followers from God's love in Christ Jesus, can't they just live however they want without putting God's love toward them in jeopardy? NO. Remember that Christ followers by definition have the Spirit of God living in them (8:9-11). If God lives in a person, He will ultimately manifest Himself in that person's life. Think of it this way, if the spirit of Mother Theresa lived in me, don't you think that I would have a desire to feed the poor and a passion to commit my life to issues of social justice? If I didn't, don't you think that it would be legitimate for people to question my claim that I possess her spirit? In the same way, people who do not manifest God in their lives (at all) do not have the Spirit of God living in them. 

And so does God accept ALL people unconditionally who claim to be Christ followers? NO. God's love isn't unconditional even in relation to Christ followers! However, the Spirit of God and the death of Jesus satisfy God's conditions on their behalf. In other words, God's love and grace satisfy His requirements in us! This is the reason nothing can separate us from God's love IN CHRIST JESUS.

CONCLUSION
So why are Christians so hesitant to distance themselves from the idea that God's love is unconditional? SIMPLE. It causes people to question their salvation! And to many, this is an unhealthy insecurity to place in the life of a professing Christian. But the apostle Paul seems to see things differently when he says in 2 Corinthians 13:5, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves." Some professing Christians need to examine themselves to make certain that the Spirit of God is truly living in them. This was certainly the case with the church in Corinth.

But there are believers who are carrying with them the weight of guilt from past sins that the Spirit of God and the death of Jesus have conquered. These Christ followers need to embrace the reality of God's love as described in Romans 8:38-39. God wants us to be driven by His love and not burdened by the guilt of our past sins.

And so may God give you the grace you need to conquer sin in your life and live in the security of His love!