Make a Joyful Noise

A few days ago, I sat on my couch doing my morning journaling an wrote “Today I am going to write, I can feel it. I am not sure what I am going to write and I am open to what you want me to say God.” Then my day went on and it didn’t seem like I would end up writing. It was not until later that evening after I received a text message from someone I love dearly who was quite upset about an article they read. The article and its author, whom I will not name here, centered upon a long-argued topic of women’s role in creation and their authority or non authority to preach, teach, and yield authority. As a woman who is seeking to be ordained in the PCUSA and highly educated I was all the usual things angry, sad, and heartbroken. I chose to approach this article and the author’s argument from a mostly scholarly point of view (those of you who know me well, know I had some less scholarly things to say at times). I am still hurt when this argument comes up—I will never forget standing in the middle of Target as someone who does not know me told me it should be a man in the pulpit, not me or people like me. Here is the thing, I am not here to try and change anyone’s mind on these matters. 

I graduated with my Mdiv May 16, 2020. My life has been and will continue to be making a joyful noise!

This author and that person in Target felt a deep conviction that their interpretations of scriptural texts is the right way to interpret the texts. I am not here to belittle them or get into any sort of argument. What I am here to do with the particular article is to read it and respond on my own time and in my own way using the incredible tools of knowledge, research, and language skills I have been trained to utilize. I feel passionate about this topic for so many reasons; one being when I was 16 or 17 years old I wondered if God loved me less because I am a woman. Now I have the confidence, knowledge, language, and assurance to know and trust that no, God does not love me any less. I want to take and am going to take these skills and use them to comfort, empower, and provide an alternate narrative. I do not pretend those texts instructing women to be silent do not exist and I choose to acknowledge all the texts, stories, and women in scripture that provide evidence that God has called women since the beginning and is still calling women today.

            The Christian Bible is full of controversial texts—things that make us cringe, hurt, question, and ponder. I find these things to be helpful because they instill in me a desire to dig deeper, ask questions, have hard conversations, to pray and engage God and my colleagues deeply, to think. I believe this is part of the reason I chose to pursue a Masters of Divinity and ultimately ordination. I love this theological, exegetical, and language based work. This author, yes, I disagreed with his argument on the basis that I am a woman pursuing ordination, who has preached, and taught, and is pursuing a call that will incorporate these things and I was fired up because his words and his loosely constructed argument hurt someone I love dearly. I was also aware of the danger and harmful nature of his argument due to the lack of scholarly research and approach. 

Without erasing or ignoring the difficult, controversial nature of the these texts, without simply pretending they do not exist I chose to respond to this article and deconstruct an argument with my own. An argument that does not deny the realities of those texts, rather chooses to acknowledge them, analyze them within the many contexts they are found and prayerfully grappled with. 

What I hope to provide here is a scholarly attempt to respond to an article and argument that brought an agenda to a text rather than doing the difficult leg work of exegesis (drawing the meaning out of texts). Again, I will not be providing a link, title, or author name to the article. I am going to primarily be working with the texts and general arguments the author established. It is imperative that we as engagers of the text be mindful of how we approach it. Context is truly key: historical, scriptural (what book, chapter, part of the Bible), our own context we are reading in. We must also remember and be mindful of the translations we rely upon. One of the first things I learned when I began doing the work of translation (I can translate, with resources, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) is that translation is a form of interpretation. Translators make choices about which words they use. One Greek case (I believe it is the dative) can add “to, by, for, with, in” before the translated word. The Greek word kaimeans “and, but.” With those two examples it is clear translators make choices and this doesn’t even scrape the complications of copied documents and manuscripts and the mistakes or edited choices scribes chose to make. Translation and even at time the work of copying a document is biased.

The author began with one of the most famous scriptures used as justification as to why women cannot preach, teach, or have authority. 1 Timothy 2:12 “I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.” This particular translation is the New Revised Standard Version which is the translation I most commonly use. While not a bias free translation, it is preferred amongst many scholarly institutions (my undergraduate and seminary both required the HarperCollins Study Bible which is a New Revised Standard Version). Right off the bat I knew I was in for a controversial article that would make my tummy turn and my heartrate spike. I powered on. 

A few paragraphs in, I noticed several things that are worth noting from a scholarly standpoint. The author emphasizes a part of the scripture he does not provide a translation for and focuses in on language. I will briefly reiterate what I previously stated, translations are never without bias they are in their own form interpretation. The author never clarifies which translation he is using or if he is using his own. His analysis of the language is not well supported. It would have been significantly more helpful had he provided the translation he used—because in Greek, which this letter would have been written in, a translator can translate a word found in the dative case as “to, by, for, with, in” and kaias “and, but.” If we are going to get technical about the language I think it is important to engage in the grammatical technicalities of the language.

Moving on to another concern; the author confidently claims that Paul, “the Paul” wrote 1 Timothy. Many people might not know, I certainly didn’t until I was in college, that all the letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament are not all written by “the Paul.” I do not expect anyone to know that unless they are highly interested in biblical history/studies, in a Paul focused Bible Study, or theologically trained. 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus are examples of what scholars refer to as disputed letters, meaning they may or may not have been written by “the Paul.” In this case, 1 Timothy was most likely written by someone using Paul’s name to gain authority and the author of 1 and 2 Timothy was most likely also the author of Titus (Jouette M. Bassler, Introduction to 1 Timothyin the HarperCollins Study Bible, p. 2015). This may seem a small fact, however, it ought to be mentioned. Many scholars, not all, believe that this letter was not written by Paul because as Bassler calls is there are “un-Pauline features” (Bassler, p. 2015).

While Paul, in his non-disputed letters, does say controversial things it is important to note that Paul worked with lots of women. In one of his letters he gives thanks for a whole slew of people that have helped him along the way and many of those people he thanks are women. There are more examples I can provide—I am going to wait until another post. This deserves to be its own post! 

As I got further into the article, my hunch that the author had brought an agenda to the table became even clearer. The author chose several of the most controversial texts in scripture to make their case. His explanation of 1 Timothy 2 is “supported” by his interpretation of the second creation story. Yes, there are two creation narratives. He chose to completely ignore the first creation narrative where God creates humankind in God’s image at the same time. Genesis 1:26-28. Verse 27 reads, “So God created humankind in God’s image, in the image of God, God created them; male and female God created them.” Here it is also important to note that the Hebrew word adam (this is transliterated) is not the word for man it is a word for human, earthling. It comes from the Hebrew word adamah which means ground (I learned this from my Old Testament professor in seminary and A Grammar for Bibilical Hebrew by C.L. Seow, p. 14). While the second creation narrative, the one the author solely relies on, is a beautiful account it is not the only creation narrative and this is an incredibly important thing to take note of. Scripture should not be picked and plucked and taken out of context—one can make any argument and find something, somewhere in scripture to support themselves. 

The problem with this article’s argument is that it conveniently ignores the first creation narrative in order to focus on the second one as a means to prove that women cannot have authority over men or preach and teach. That there is a particular ordering to the world. However, the first creation narrative throws this argument into question and presents a challenge. In this equally scripturally based narrative, humans were created together. My personal interpretation of the second creation narrative proves we as humans were literally designed to be in relationship with other human beings. For in the narrative it states that God said “it is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.” Then we get animals—they were not the right kind of partner. The adamneeded another earthling, another human. To me, this text is not about hierarchies, it is about relationship and our human need for connection and relationship.

Another justification for the inferiority of women, one I have heard before, is the use of “helper” in reference to the woman. The Hebrew word for “helper” is also used in reference to God, so I personally do not take that as a strong enough justification that women are inferior. 

 The rest of the article was heavily focused on his build up argument and needless to say, I was not convinced by the first half and certainly not by the second. He ends his essay discussing yet another controversial, perfectly plucked scripture from Colossians, another highly disputed letter of authorship (the author is most likely not “the Paul”). Colossians 3:18-19 “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and never treat them harshly.” I think it is important to remember the context this was written. According to J. Paul Sampley, the scholar who provides the footnotes and introduction to Colossians in the HarperCollins Study Bible, “On the exhortation wives, be subject to your husbands,a common notion in the Greco-Roman world” (Footnote for v.18. p. 2003). Yes, this is in scripture and yes, we are called to wrestle with this. We are also called to remember one of the most important rules of engaging biblical texts: context, context, context. We have to see where the text comes from within its chapter, book, the wider canon; the historical context; our context we are studying in; etc. According to Sampley, this was a common cultural understanding and societal structure in the Greco-Roman world. 

I believe what happened in this article is not abnormal and I do believe it is dangerous because of the harm it can do. I had to remind myself to calm down and to not take it personally, to look for a scholarly argument I could make as well as where my personal interpretations differentiate from this author’s. I am not going to change the author’s mind and I am not trying to. I am trying to offer a scholarly albeit feminist (meaning I believe fully in the flourishing of all God’s people) counter argument. If this author’s or others’ like this have harmed you or someone you love all I am trying to do is offer another way to interpret. I believe wholeheartedly in a God who created me and created you, calls us by names, holds us tenderly in the palm of God’s very own hand, embraces us, accepts us, extends us grace, and unconditionally loves us. 

I pursued theological education because it provided me with the tools to engage scripture and biblical history in ways I never thought possible. I do not have all the answers, if any at all, I do have a deep passion though. A deep passion to wrestle with scripture and the Living God they refer and introduce us to and the people whose stories are a part of my rich, ancient tradition. And if you know me, you know that I just want to love God’s people well and using my training allows me the opportunity to do that. 

Ultimately, I am not here to argue with whether someone thinks I or anyone else is capable of preaching, teaching, being a minister because they are not the one who calls me or my colleagues, they do not deem me worthy, the One who created me and you and calls us by name and declares us beloved. Take heart dear ones, God has got us in the palm of God’s hand. You are beloved, you are enough, and you are capable and empowered by God to be a leader and teacher of whatever you feel called to. 

Grace, Peace, Blessings, and All my Love,

Margaret