Loading...I’d like to conclude this thread on the Pastoral epistles by discussing at greater length the one passage that I think has done more damage than nearly any other. It involves women in the church. The story of women in the entire Bible is long and complex, but it starts in the beginning (Genesis 1-2) and continues all the way through. The traditional Christian views ultimately derive from the New Testament.
In an earlier set of posts I explained why women were actually prominent, important, and authoritative leaders of the Christian church in its earliest days – they were unusually present and active in the Jesus movement while he was living, as well as in the earliest churches we know about, those connected with Paul (who has received a rather unfair rap as one of the world’s great misogynists).
But it was not long before men took over the movement and suppressed women’s voices and roles. We are obviously still living with that today, in a world where the largest Christian body, the Catholic Church, still will not allow women to serve as priests (let alone higher-ups above priests), and the fastest growing churches in developing countries (very conservative by most American and European standards) look askance at women in leadership roles. They are to be subservient.
But why? Because, ultimately, the Bible says so. Really? Where?
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
I wish this post could be printed on the editorial page of every newspaper in the country. Do you have a distribution list, Bart?
THanks. But no, no distribution list beyond the blog!
How is it that evangelicals uphold this passage, yet listen to female preachers like Joyce Meyer? I’ve never understood that.
Depends which evangelicals you talk to. But it sure doesn’t seem consistent with disallowing women pastors…
1 Timothy is often presented in tandem with 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, which shares similar views: “Women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak but should be subordinate, as the law also says. If there is something they want to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.”
So whoever actually wrote Timothy was not alone in holding such views. I wonder how commonly or broadly held they were, among these earliest Christians?
If you look 1 Cor 14 up on the blog you’ll see a discussion of it. These verses are widely thought to be an interpolation into 1 Corinthians (on a number of grounds), not written by Paul himself.
Hello Dr. Bart Ehrman
Do you think Peter travelled a lot, well he was a preacher so he probably had intrest, but travelling in the first century was very expensive. He deffenetly had been in Antioch and mayby Rome when he died but if he traveled so much and didnt he debunk many of the legends created by oral tradisions?
I travel a lot more than he did, and there’s no way I can debunk the things said about me even at my own university.
As a septuagenarian Catholic, I will say the role of women in the church has improved over the decades. However, the preclusion of females for the priesthood has been a longtime peeve of mine. Arguments in favor of such, IMO, are indefensible and pathetic. I have experienced 60+ years of constant whining about lack of “vocations” for the priesthood, with the resultant immigration of foreign pastors with language barriers to compensate. Well, if you eliminate half of your faithful from the clergy, why are you surprised about lack of staffing? Protestant denominations seem to do quite well with female ministers!
Dr. Ehrman,
Do you require your undergrads, graduate students, or post-graduate students to use the Septuagint?
Either way, do you have a preference for any of these:
1) A New English Translation of the Septuagint / Oxford Univ. Press,, $23.85
4.6 stars from 380 ratings
2) The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English Hardcover, Brneton / Hendrickson Academic, $26.72
“You’ll gain a better understanding of the Scriptures because the Septuagint vocabulary is frequently found in quotations and terms used by the New Testament writers.”
4.7 stars from 1,6657 ratings
3) The Orthodox Study Bible, Hardcover: Ancient Christianity Speaks to Today’s World
St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology / Thomas Nelson, $27.98
Old (from Septuagint) and New Testament
Includes the Deuterocanon
Commentary from the early Church Christians
The NT and Psalms are interpreted from the doctrinal foundation of the Orthodox Church
4.8 stars from 4,598 ratings
or
4) a better version with TANAK and New Testaments.
Thank you.
Steve Campbell
I don’t use it with my undergrads. If my graduate students use it they need to use the Greek I’m actually not familiar with the various translations.
The temptation of Eve and then Adam to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is when the babes in paradise become fully human, more than just sated beings cavorting in a playground. When they become fully human, being able to distinguish between good and evil and capable of doing both, paradise ends and reality begins. In many ways Genesis is a theodicy: if God created the world and declared it good, why is there evil in God’s world? Humans, having eaten that apple, might surmise that either God isn’t all that good or God is good but incompetent. The authors of Genesis claim it’s those darn humans, more specifically women who can get men to do anything they want through the promises of fleshly delight that are the source of evil. And to absolve God the author has to introduce the Snake.
This was the theology my parents raised me with, in fact we left a church because a woman was allowed to teach a Sunday School class my father attended. So, how do you talk with someone who is a fundamental believer of the inerrancy and perfection of scripture to convince them this isn’t something they really need to follow anymore because it’s “ancient”? I know your position ( and most scholars for that matter ) contend that the pastoral letters weren’t written by Paul, but that’s an even harder discussion to have with someone who believes the bible has been supernaturally written and preserved through the ages because god was personally involved in the writing and transmission of the documents. I usually hit a brick wall with fundie believers when trying to tell them the bible doesn’t need to be followed to the letter.
I would not be the first to contrast ancient Jewish culture and ancient Roman culture and point out that the latter was far more masculine, and point out the strong influence of the Roman culture on Paul. I know I am raising a very controversial topic here (i.e., Roman influence on Paul), but how can we address questions like patriarchy (and many more) without facing this topic. I know, history can be threatening to some people, but ignorance is a far greater threat.
Thing is, if we create a toxic environment for women, we also create a toxic environment for the prenatal, and therefore for all of humanity.
If people can’t or won’t care about women specifically, the least they/we can do is care about infants and the health and chemistry of the unborn.
Could the bit about women being saved through child bearing mean saved from dying in childbirth, not saved spiritually.
Interesting idea. I’m not sure the Greek would suggest that (“through” childbearing rather than “from” or “despite”), or the context (since that interpretation would presuppose that women who do not continue in faith love and holiness would NOT survive childbirth, which seems an unlikely claim)
I reference Numbers 27:1-11, the story of Zelophehad’s daughters as an example of God extending social agency and law to women. Of course this is a mythical story written by a religious philosopher at a time to grant women more authority over their own lives. The support for women is so strong that their names are specified; giving them greater identification and agency. In the story Zelophehad died leaving behind only daughters – no sons to inherit his property; The daughters could not inherit his property. The daughters basically said “what the …” why should we not inherit. Supposedly, Moses brought their case before God who said the daughters are right. Give them their inheritance.” The daughters’ petitioning changed inheritance law so that the nearest surviving relative received the inheritance regardless of gender.
Another point: God does change. His metaphysical form changes throughout the OT and he changes is mind. Of course this is a mythical story. I would also say that the 1 Timothy passage is a counter attempt by a religious philosopher to muscle-out women.
“Let a woman learn in silence with full submission”. Does this refer to women fully submitting to God or men?
Men, I’m sorry to say.