1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them.5 In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7 ‘The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ ”8 Then they remembered his words.
9 When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. 12 Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
I just want to reiterate what I heard NT Wright point out last year when he was in town. The first witnesses of the resurrection are women. The first to deliver the message "Jesus is risen!" are women. And the first people to reject the good news are the majority of Jesus' male disciples.
May I forever be humbled before the gender whom God has honoured so highly
May I be blessed to learn from their theological insight and experience
May they be empowered and encouraged to speak boldly and may their words be honoured and accepted
Lest we not receive the good news God has prepared them for and entrusted them with
Egalitarianism!
Dude.... really?
ReplyDeleteI love NT Wright. I love women. God made them. They have worth and Value and should be treated like the image of God, God created them to be but don't make this a gender verse... that's lame sauce and good example of bible isegesis. It's like saying women are dirt because they are the fruit first....
I don't think this post is attempting to turn the verses into 'gender verses'...whatever that means... at all. The fact that women were the first to proclaim the good news shows the value that God places on them whether you like it or not, and given their second-to-men statuses (and although that gap has lessened in our culture, is most certainly still present today)this would have been more significant in their time.
ReplyDeleteI don't think your 'women are dirt because...' comparison is fair either. If the post was saying 'and the male disciples are tools because they rejected the idea that he rose from the dead' then I could see your point, but I really don't think that's what was meant in this post. With the clear and wide variety of amazing and Godly men in the bible, I think it's fair to say that these verses can be interpreted to give some props to the women, as they do not often play a big role, and can teach us, both men and women alike, about having great faith and boldly proclaiming Christ.
I dont understand the triumphant egalitarian bomb at the end of this. Forgive my ignorance, but could this not be a complementarian back up as well. Equal but different? or is that heresy these days? Women are great.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments anonymous. I think that you raise some valid points. I agree that if we base our point of view on this passage alone it will be flawed. If this were the only passage in the Biblical narrative that highlighted the authority and blessing of women then we might have to re-think egalitarianism. However, I do see the authority of women as a central theme in the book of Luke and therefore find Duncan’s reading of this text appropriate.
ReplyDeleteI do not think that complementarianism is heresy but simply one theological idea that stems from a more literal interpretation of scripture. Usually the complementarian view holds that men and women are created equal in their being and personhood but created to complement each other via different roles and responsibilities in marriage, family and ministry. In my opinion this passage does not support complementarianism but undermines it because Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James speak the truth in boldness to men. This is a key example of female ordained ministry and leadership.
Also, I think this is a “gender passage”. I believe that the gender of those that went to the tomb of Jesus was of crucial importance to the historical context and should be remembered. I am aware of a church in Botswana that celebrates Easter by holding an all night service and traditionally only allows women to preach after midnight because they recognize the significance of the gender of those who went to the tomb.
My interpretation of scripture and spiritual convictions have led me to the conclusion that the manner and teaching of Jesus abolished discrimination against racial minorities, slaves, and women, in both the church and marriage. My view is not based on this passage alone but on scripture as a whole.
As we have stated in the past Silas, Duncan and I are not ultimate authorities on the issues we raise and questions we ask on this blog. One of our anticipated outcomes in writing publically is to give voice to diverse opinions and to learn from one another. That being said it would be nice to know who we are dialoguing with.
Well said, thank you for that sweet reply Danielle.
ReplyDeleteFor some odd reason I was hoping for a response to my anonymous comment, and your treatment to it was fantastic.
I am not a big fan of using complementarianism as a foundation for oppression/suppression of women. I am also not super familiar with egalitarian stuff, I guess I catch the opposite side of the conversation. I see people using egalitarianism at times to portray inequality, like (I may have miss read) in the text above, as the women do get the privilege of being the first witnesses(much like the woman at the well in John's gospel). But thank you for the context, it is very hard to understand 'stand alone' word egalitarianism statements at the end of a passage like that without the right footing.
I apologize for not elaborating regarding my meaning. Danielle, thank you for explaining so clearly, maybe you should teach theology or the Bible... My reason for this post was regarding my wonderful experiences of learning from amazing women both formally and informally and the giftedness for teaching, preaching and leading that I have seen in them. Where as complementarianism would suggest that these women should not teach or hold positions of authority or severely qualify both of these, egalitarianism would argue for equal opportunity based on giftedness, calling, education, interest etc. While I would not base the argument for egalitarianism on this text alone, I think it is a valuable one that gets minimal attention. I hoped to be an encouragement to specifically female pastors and theological students following God's calling on their lives often facing harsh and unfair criticism or exclusion due to the ongoing influence of patriarchy in both society and especially the church. This is a big deal, people lose jobs over this. From my experience, the pastoral world is still very much a boys club and I would desire empowerment for women in whatever God has called them to including leading and teaching and pastoring. It is in part, precisely because there are genuine gender differences that the female voice is an important addition to theological and pastoral conversations. I do not believe that gender differences in particular qualify or disqualify anyone from particular roles. Diversity has always been an important characteristic of the church, it is sad to see the negative and damaging influence of patriarchy and male ego in the church even after society has moved beyond it.
ReplyDeleteThere have been many thoughtful, careful and gracious responses in this thread. My question was spurned by a thought, will be carefully posed and I hope will be received graciously.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is arguable that Luke 24:1-12 is a "gender passage" (to borrow that phrase), I am certain that 1 Tim. 2:1-15 is most definitely a "gender passage." With that in mind, my question is:
How is 1 Tim. 2:1-15 best understood - being mindful of the historical/grammatical context, Paul's intent and the contemporary implications - from an egalitarian P.O.V.?
With sincere curiosity,
- Greg Harris
Greg,
ReplyDeleteYou have asked an excellent question which we are looking forward to answering. However, in order to afford it more time and higher profile we are going to add it to our CYOA list and will list you know when it comes up.
Duncan, I appreciated this post because it does draw attention to the significant relationships Jesus had with some women during his lifetime. Though he was an unmarried male, he was not isolated within an exclusively male domain. As God's Love revealed in flesh, Jesus Christ was free to associate with any and all human beings. It was up to each individual who met Jesus to respond to Christ with love or disbelief.
ReplyDeleteThere were male and females who choose the "better way" of love.
Danielle, You offered an excellent response to some of the comments above. Wise and humble at the same time. Not always an easy blend for Christian thinkers. Well done!!
Greg, I believe you asked your question with "sincere curiosity" and so I thought I might respond in brief to the I Timothy passage. Set in context, it is less a "gender passage" and more likely a "pastoral message" from Paul to Timothy. Paul, writing within a particular time frame and cultural context, is encouraging Timothy to teach his church members to be gracious, merciful and peace abiding.
ReplyDeleteIn this letter to Timothy, Paul is continuing his thoughts about the purpose of the Law. As in the letter to the Galatians, Paul is arguing that legalism kills and damages the living Church. Paul is not setting up a "new law" but rather working out the immediate implications of what it means to follow the "law of Christ" which is love of God and neighbor.
What does it mean for men and women who are filled with the Spirit of the Living God to love well? This is what was important for Paul and continues to be important for church members today.
The possibility of a vital and living relationship with Christ remains today. Jesus demonstrated the heart of God toward men, women, children, sinners, "saints" , etc. May we be kept from replacing this heart of love with a cold legalism that cripples and 'deadens' the Christian message.
I think that it is a bit silly to divide good Christian thought on our relationships into two camps - equal or complementary.
It makes good human sense (and biblical sense) to argue that each and every person is a unique creation of God. This means that there is an equality of "being made" by the one God.
Similarly, human observation and biblical instruction assure us that we are all sinners - each human being "falls short" of who God is and none of us consistently reveal the ultimate perfection of God's nature. Though our sins may differ in intensity and effect, the fact that every one of us sins make us "equal" to a certain extent.
Of course we complement each other as human beings. We are all gifted differently and according to scripture and human organization, things tend to go better when we work together, sharing our gifts, then when we remain isolated from one another. Gifts and abilities are spread across gender and personality.
I am not sure that Paul is arguing that women, as a whole, do not have the ability or gift to teach. In some cultures and historical time frames, the question was (and is) rather: Will the teaching provided by a woman be effective and respected?
Teaching can be ineffective for any number of reasons.
Respect can be withheld for a number of reasons.
Today, as back in Paul's day, it is important to assess whether a woman's gifts and abilities are treated with respect. If there are strong arguments against a woman teaching, her work in that area will not be as effective.
Backlash can disrupt the peaceful work that Paul is looking to encourage.
Some Christians respect certain work of men and women with a different regard than other Christians do.
From my perspective, it is a matter of "How is the gracious, merciful and peace abiding work of God's love being revealed through the work of believers?"
This work when fulfilled through the enabling of the Holy Spirit is "faithful to scripture". Prescribing a legalistic (either/or, all/nothing) approach goes against what Paul is arguing for in any of his letters to the growing churches who were seeking to follow the way of Christ.
The question for today, from my perspective, is: Where and how can I best serve the God who made me, uniquely enabled me to do His work, and now calls me into a relationship of Love through which I am gifted to love others.
Do you know who the artist is on the illustration? Thanks.
ReplyDeleteI love this! Thank you so much! I love NT Wright's teaching on this passage. I love that Jesus chose women to be the first ones to share the good news! I really appreciate this post!
ReplyDelete