What Paul Really Said About Women

Reference: John Temple Bristow. What Paul Really Said About Women: An Apostle’s Liberating Views on Equality in Marriage, Leadership, and Love (New York; HarperCollins Publishers, 1988.

Paul is perhaps the most maligned apostle of Jesus Christ. Others call him “arch-male-chauvinist” who believes in the inequality of men and women in marriage relationship, church leadership and matters of love. It is as if demeaning women—using proof texts from Paul that are mistranslated and misinterpreted—is biblical. Yet, the opposite is true. The degradation of women is not Paul’s; it’s Greek philosophy that permeates modern construal, considering women as second class. Socrates in particular disdained women as “the weaker sex”—half-way between being man and animal (4). Hence, the followers of Greek philosophy adhered, women are inferior to men. That is according to the Athenian custom where women are subject to men’s commands, object of men’s physical pleasures without due honor. Added to these is the Stoic norm that treats women as distraction from the pursuit of philosophy and womanly beauty as temptation to men (9).

During Paul’s era, the Greek concept of womanhood was influential among Christians who grew up after Alexander’s greatest campaign for Hellenization of cultures. Is Paul in conformity? Quite the contrary. Paul was also a student of Gamaliel, an exceptional teacher and philosopher who valued womanhood (27). Paul was a radical teacher of equality of sexes, unlike his predecessors and modern interpreters. He is concerned with women in church leadership. As the custom of the Jewish worship was, men and women are separated in congregational worship within the synagogues—men on the main hall, women at the balcony far (and hidden) from the eyes of men. But Paul, in Jesus’ tradition, honored women, talked with them, and valued them equal to men. Hence Paul also recognized the importance of women in church leadership. He baptized women (Acts 16:11-15) and treated them with equality in his ministry (17:34). He respected women leadership in local churches. For example, his dealing with Euodia, Synteche, Prisca or Priscilla (1 Cor 16:19; Rom 16:3-4), Phoebe and other eight women among twenty-six men in leadership (16:1ff), and probably Junias (v.7), are indicators of Paul’s appraisal of women leadership. There is greater certainty that Paul approved “the practice of having women lead in worship alongside with men.” (57)

For Paul, women can deliver inspired messages as a form of prophecy (Acts 2:17-18; Cf. Joel 2:28-32). There were, indeed, women prophetess in the early church (Acts 11:21,13:1;15:32;21:9-10). It is also reasonably an established practice in the church (within a biased Greek culture) that women pray and prophecy in public worship (1 Cor 11:4-5). Paul’s positive outlook on women as “the glory of man”(11:7) is supported by his argument that “woman was created because man needs women”(v.9)(59) and every man cam out from a woman as his mother (60). Paul’s following argument that women should be “silent” should be interpreted like that of Jesus’ voluntary silence (Mk 14:61). Since women were known for having conversation in public gathering—not accustomed to listening to public speakers—Paul, in retrospect to orderliness and decorum urged women to cease from talking to each other. Paul “did not write that women are not to preach, or teach, or declare, or give discourse, or proclaim, or affirm, or aver, or speak for something.”(63). For as there is no male or female in Christ, all of humanity is equal; women are not inferior men. As a matter of fact, Paul affirmed their leadership in church. Any interpretation of male dominance is, certainly, not Pauline.

Relating to Non-Human Universe

Summa from: Charles Kraft, Anthropology for Christian Witness. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1996. Part III: “Relating to Non-Human Universe”

Christian witness in relation to the non-human universe focuses on technology’s significance to human nature. Hence, anthropology takes into consideration the utilization of tools and techniques, as well as social customs (165). Charles Kraft argues that no human society that is not touched by non-human technology (166); at least to some degree, all of human societies have forms of technology in it whether in crude or advance type. With all the best and worst of technology can bring, humanity ought to control technology instead of being controlled by it (166). The same is true with Christian witness; technology is not the controlling factor in doing ministry. It must be used as a tool not as an end. Technology as a part of complex human construct, capacity, and custom is situated between the interaction of culture, biology, and environment (178). Technology is a product, to some extent, of the tension between the three components related to human beings. But the more technology advances, the more that the human culture becomes complex (176). This consequential effect is not bad in itself; however, there should be an “appropriate” consideration that will be given to it without overshadowing the people in any cross-cultural witness (179). Anthropological concerns may deal with self-sufficiency upon technology by which human feels it unnecessary to trust God. While it is humans that produced technology due to their limitations—as well as capacities—there is a present temptation always to trust in technology and usurp the place of God. Nevertheless, technology can be a means towards and efficient and effective witness, rather than an end.

Material culture can be a potential hindrance to effective witness (180). Missionary strategies ought to consider the economic factors in every culture (191). Principles of kinship, social roles, and concepts of self and communality are organizing elements to be considered in any anthropological relations (183-85). By these considerations, church strategies, form and structure of church building, location of the building, pastoral staff and support, can make adjustments and interactions for the furtherance of the ministry (191-3). Hence, Kraft emphasizes that, “church leadership patterns should be appropriate to the economic and social patterns of the receiving society, as they were in the Bible” (194). There is also a concern among foreign missionaries in relation to integrity of funds. Matter of “appropriateness” is in demand. Cultures practicing any form of bribery are called to question (195).

Since technology is, to some extent, related to religious belief, the problem of dichotomy—prevalent among Westerners—are affecting cross-cultural ministries (196-7). To “wholistic” cultures, separation of natural and supernatural is abnormal. The scientific orientation of the missioner is challenged by the worldview of the local society, especially in situation where religion is the core of the culture (198). Of course, technology posits a tendency to naturalize religious beliefs and practices. Such secularization of Christianity is a virtual anti or non-supernaturalistic religious belief. This is where powerless religions contribute to the “dual allegiance” of the converts. The recipients who encountered “powers”—and yet left without explanation to their experience—remains upholding that reality as well as embracing the powerless, anti-supernatural form of Christianity. Hence, technology as a non-human universe ought not to dehumanize religious beliefs.

Although Kraft is aware about the difference between a religion and a worldview, the tension between them remains an anthropological challenge (199). The difference, however, is amplified on matters of allegiance. Worldview as “basic perspectives on all of life” is distinct from religion as “allegiance” to divine structures. When commitment to God becomes central, worldview becomes more than just religiosity. A person may worship with various religious structures but with different allegiance towards the one God (200). The structure of worship is not the same as the object of worship.

The “power questions” are main concerns that gave impetus to the charismatic and Pentecostal movements (201).

The Mission to the Gentiles

Without a doubt, Paul is a dominant figure in the history and development of early Christian theology. One of the main reasons is that he wrote almost half of the New Testament. With few traditions referring to his existence, most of the resources that lead to his life and works are found in the New Testament, especially in the book of Acts. In the outset of theological framework where there were a handful of followers of Jesus proclaiming him as the resurrected Lord and soon to come, there was a general atmosphere of explaining the person and significance of Jesus Christ. For Paul, Jesus is the ground of unity of all Christian believers. No matter how popular Paul is in the development of Christian theology, Jesus is still the very foundation of it. Placher carefully maintains that the New Testament is not mere story of Paul or his perspective alone on Christ; it is a record of diverse expressions of faith in Christ and various perceptions of him. This “diversity of belief” in Christ is evident in the New Testament

The Second Coming

The coming of an expected Messianic figure has been anticipated by some apocalyptic Jewish writers. In relation to Christ’s return, this implies an end of the present age, the establishment of the kingdom of God, the resurrection of the dead towards the reception of their rewards and punishments. These various expectations created diverse impacts on the early believers of Christ since there was no general resurrection that occurred and certainly, the present is age is still continuous. Christ’s resurrection seemed to be an isolated case in the history. Some of the believers of Christ’s soon appearance slowly died away and many were concerned already. Even Paul assumes that Christ will return in their lifetime (I Thess. 4:14-15,17). This expectation was not abandoned by Paul but the odd thing that happened was that Paul and many early Christian believers gradually realized that they were wrong in their strict anticipations. And yet, this realization never made a major impact to shake their faith in Christ’s coming. There is no such crisis that occurred. The delay of the Second Coming was a part of faith in Christ but not essentially integral. In fact, gospel writers have various perceptions of Christ’s return. Luke seems to see the Second Coming as “far in the future.” He seems to perceive a worsening growth of evil in the apocalyptic whole and he rejected the imminent coming of Jesus. On the other hand, John depicted that “Christ had already come in glory.” In Christ’s preaching, the new age depicted has already begun and his life was a triumphant one. The place for the Second Coming was meager.

It is interesting, however, that apocalyptic hopes did not crumble down. The Book of the Revelation is full of imagery and visions of Christ’s return. Including the latest New Testament book, II Peter, is full of powerful hope of Christ’s Second Coming. Thus, in this scenario, two tensions are evident. Early Christians believed that Christ’s Second Coming was soon to occur. Other Christians believed not. And “all can find New Testament support for their positions.”

Jews and Greeks

So far, the tension concerning the relationship of faith and Christ’s Second Coming is not so serious, but the relationship between Christianity and Judaism was severed. The first Christians were Jews. Many remained Jews even if they believed in Jesus as the Messiah. Judaism is still as strong as ever in their religious orientation. From the start, the tension between the Jews and the Greeks was already serious. The twelve apostles were Aramaic speaking Jews and many among the Christian community demanded a fair share in the communal life the church exercised. Thus, the Greek-named deacons were organized to address some of the serious matters in the community life, especially among the Greek-speaking widows. However, the tension between Jews and Greeks was magnified due to the execution of Stephen, one of the seven deacons, by the Jewish leaders.

Judaism was a religio licita in the Roman Empire and the first Christians claimed to be a different kind of Jews because they confessed that since Jesus is the Messiah, only those who believed in him are the faithful Jews or truthful to Judaism. As a result, it created serious repercussions among the Christian community for Jews considered the Christians as not part of Judaism. It made Christianity, therefore, an illegal and unauthorized religion. They were subject to severe persecutions from the Jewish communities. Some Greek-speaking Jewish Christians left Jerusalem and some of those who are loyal to Jewish traditions remained. Those who were left behind experienced the devastating attack of the Roman Empire on 71 AD due to the rebellion of some Jewish nationals. But in Palestine and Syria, traditional Jewish Christian community survived also. After a few centuries, Christianity rapidly grew among the gentiles and Jews when a major issue was clarified. One does not need to become a Jew to be a Christian. This paradigm shift was largely influenced by Paul and the Greek-speaking Christians. Differences between Jews and Greeks are not a major concern in the unity of Christ. Issues like circumcision, dietary regulations, ancestral customs, and other laws are not worthy to be compared to “the unity of those who have faith in Christ”.

However, some gentile Christians took such paradigm shift as a license to sin. They believed that freedom from legalistic religious responsibilities is equivalent to persisting in sin that grace may abound. But Paul insisted that it should not be, for life as a Christian must be lived in gratefulness to God’s love and to stop living a life is sin. “No one with faith in Christ will want to continue sinning.” It is because living in sin injures the community of faith. The same is true in the excessive regard of the Law and misuse of spiritual gifts. Paul himself addressed social issues of his time, i.e. equality of men and women, homosexual activity, slavery, civil obedience, marriage, political issues, etc. Each of these matters must be interpreted in the context of his own time.

The Beginnings of Christology

Jesus Christ, in Paul’s new understanding, is the basis of life and the world. The question on the person and the significance of Jesus Christ was a great challenge to Paul and the early Christians. Speaking of Christ as the messianic hope among the gentiles was not familiar. Thus, Christians must find new ways to identify Jesus to their new audiences. Even in Judaism, the concept of the Messiah included various hopes and the early Christians “combined and modified” them in several ways. Jesus was a descendant of David but not a kind of political and military leader as was expected. He was considered as the apocalyptic Son of Man who was resurrected and soon to inaugurate the kingdom of God. Here, two-stage existence is implied—the earthly life and the apocalyptic return. As of Paul, he offered four stages of Jesus Christ’s life. “Jesus Christ (1) was with God before birth, then (2) lived a life on earth, and now (3) dwells with God in heaven awaiting (4) his second coming.” Christians claimed more concerning Jesus as not just the Son of God in reference to particular faithfulness to God’s will but that he has no human father—as God who volunteered to become human.

The early Christians borrowed ideas from the mystery cults and cultures. Stories of gods and goddesses, secret initiations, resurrected deity, union with deity in new life, hope beyond death, and emphasis on membership were analogies that Christians can find through joining the fellowship, becoming one in Christ the resurrected one, baptism, Lord’s Supper, resurrection, etc. But there is a new demand that Christians wanted from new converts. The worship of only One God and living a life of love is a prerequisite. Faith in this God must have an ethical difference. Much more, the resurrection mentioned in Christianity is a historical one, not a myth. Another analogy from the world beyond Judaism is the concept of the Savior. In those time where great rulers and kings conquered enemies, people confessed him as mighty savior. Yet Christians, on the other hand, proclaimed Christ as the Savior who transforms lives and the world. They also used the concept of the Wisdom of God or the Word (logos) of God. This rational principle that orders the world and guides human understanding is very popular among Greek philosophers, especially Philo, a contemporary of Jesus. In Jesus, the prophetic and creative Word of God became human. The Gospel of John used this concept to present Jesus as the Logos of God. The common ground of the early Christian’s understanding of Christ was that he transformed their lives and the world.

Cultural Applications

The contemporary church can find many analogies in its cultural contexts concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is not just a missiological approach or concern but also a theological challenge in a positive sense. Early Christians have been doing contextualization ever since. Through time, the world has seen a man with a thousand faces and appearance in Jesus. Each prevailing times in the history have their own concept of Jesus and these concepts are popular within their contexts. This is an evidence of theology interacting with culture.

Today, the church should not be afraid to find ways and means to translate Jesus to the common people. Jesus is not a property of the church; instead, the church is owned by Christ and they must be responsible in contextualizing the theological concepts for the propagation of the kingdom of God. The church can use the myths, stories, rituals, ceremonies, and songs (even church building designs) of a certain culture and borrow some of their concepts where analogies are possible. To some extent, it is a way of filipinizing Filipino churches.

Questions

1. What is the motivating factor in modifying Christological concepts?

2. How is Christian theology, especially Christology, to face the life-value of the community?

3. What should be the attitude of the local theologian towards western theological concepts?

4. Is contextualization of Christological concepts a pragmatic approach? In what way?

5. What is the significance of meaningful communication of Christian theology among the community of believers?

synopsis: William C. Placher, A History of Christian Theology: An Introduction (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1983), 32-42.

The Cordillera Prayer Network: A Personal Experience

(Article published in The Cordillera Intercessors, 1:1 October 2007)

Behold how good it is for brethren to pray together in unity! This is my experience—and, I believe, of other spiritual leaders also who joined—in a weekly prayer and fasting with CPN. Unlike in most discussions on personal, church, or denominational programs, one thing I admire with CPN is the dialogue for God’s agenda. Herein, seeking God’s purposes and plan, not personal interests, are the main concerns. Moreover, this is where listening to what God wants becomes a joy. It is, indeed, an experienced dialogue.

This is the missing link of prayer and fasting. Some of the misconceptions revolve on the shallow understanding of prayer as monologue and fasting as means for physical cleansing. These wrong notions on God’s design for prayer and fasting led to an almost derogatory and unworthy idea of this act of worship. It becomes a ritual, not a relationship anymore. The good learning attitude of Christ’s disciples is instructive here.

“Lord, teach us to pray.” Prayer and fasting go together. The biblical principles behind such worshipful acts are to humble ourselves before God. For the more we see God’s nature and glory, the more we realize our human vanity. In prayerful fasting, we submit our will to God, we obey His commands, we declare His revealed will, and claim His promises. Thus, the ultimate goal is not to change the mind of God or manipulate Him, but to align our visions and plans with His kingdom purpose. That’s the supremacy of prayer.

No wonder when we pray and fast, we can experience God’s power and presence. Both are essential for the healing process of our humanity to become like Christ. It is, therefore, a need that we remember Christ’s suffering for the lost and through prayer and fasting we have this shared-experience with Him. Through this, we can take time to enjoy His intimacy in prayerful fasting. Then God prepares us for His plan for the future

I observed: there is no such thing as real revival apart from those who fervently prayed and fasted ahead. In every breakthrough, there were those who walked the minefields to the lead. The same is true in the Christian history of revival. There were firebrands, pacesetters, and forerunners of God who marched the battlefield. Sometimes, they were unknown persons, but celebrities in heaven. Today where Christ’s greater body is more enamored with personalities, human systems, powerless programs, and cheap marketing tools and trends, the call for the body of Christ to fast and pray becomes a necessity.

In CPN, this call is being answered. What are degrees, deeds, development plans, dynamics, and denominational IDs apart from prayer and fasting? What is position without prayer or face-value without fasting? There is even much business meetings than bending on knees! God’s house becomes a marketplace, indeed. I pray CPN remains faceless and open community of faith whose love for the Philippines becomes a passionate affair with God. For that, we must remain faithful as God’s family members and equals in relation to one another. Then God’s fruitful blessings for being united in prayer and fasting continue to dwell with us.

I have a dream. I dream that day will come where every spiritual leaders of Christ’s church in the Cordilleras will all humble themselves in united prayer and fasting, laying down their ministry accessories, and calling upon the Father for the revival of this nation; and the body of Christ in Baguio and La Trinidad City will set the place for this momentous event. Yet, that dream will remain as such when walls of personal power struggles prevailed. Then two things remain to break down those man-made strongholds: prayer and fasting.

Two years passed and God’s approval was made manifest in answered prayers. I’m joyful in our journey together as brothers and sisters in faith and prayer. Mabuhay and CPN!

Prophetic Preaching in the Postmodern Times

With worldwide information on the tips of human fingers, global facts, awareness, and information—at their worst and best—is just a click away. A challenge (and temptation) to contemporary preachers are always present. It is easy to use electronic scissors and pastes to create messages for the hungering congregants. But I always believe that preaching is more than presenting facts and updates. Preaching is a means to assist the listener experience Jesus Christ and find meaning in their existence and community value. To this, I find the prophetic materials fascinating in dealing with current issues similar to our times, i.e. superficial religiosity, injustice, societal evils and the like. While any preacher today is dealing with the contemporary issues, it is also valuable to utilize not only the prophetic materials in the Bible but to keep one’s self updated with the global picture of the trend of times. In that way, prophetic preaching can address—and even confront—not only the need of the church community but to keep them conscious about the picture as a whole. After all, the prophets of old addressed domestic and international issues that threaten the relationship of God’s people with their God.

Complexities are part of human nature. Preaching can do away with superficial simplicity synonymous with mediocrity. Oral communication of divine words is hard to imagine to be handled in contemptuous familiarity. The poetic structures—now on their literary forms—conveys a profound treatment of obvious, but taken for granted, concerns for the community of God. In a creative and innovative—sometimes radical—ways, the prophet of God conveys the message with clear purpose and meaning. The motivation is always the centrality of God, but the methods vary. Modern prophetic preaching can employ complex poetic structure, narrative exposition, modern parables, and shocking funeral dirge, but his biblical material suggests more than that. Prophetic preaching has to deal with the vacuum created by postmodern skepticism on absolutes. While God is absolute and thus “relativizing” everything other than himself, nonnegotiable essentials of faith must be communicated with conviction and passion in accordance to the context of the listener and recipient. It is the modern preacher’s challenge to convey that “godliness in Christ” is an absolute demand that cannot be compromised.

Almost in every culture, the messenger of divine words has authority in his own right. Through personal conviction, the messenger stands, whether his authority is challenged or acknowledged, in the community. But the Christian witness on a certain community cannot do away with his divine calling in addressing human needs and not just presentation of eternal ideas. God is disclosed before the people through imaginative ways. It’s more than “tell me what you know” but also of “tell me what you do.” In that may, the people may see that we really understand what we know; and it is not just in the mind, but also in the heart. A prophet may not be perfect but his call demands a higher standard of life, integrity, and purity. They may be ordinary people in the community, but it is certain that they are not unconscious about their purpose and message. Thus, prophetic preaching is not just about words and articulation of the message; it is accompanied with lifestyle. It addresses current issues and concerns, but its ancient text is always on hand ready to answer those who are asking for the hope that is in us.

Prophetic preaching, therefore, is a potential ministry in postmodern times. It is not threatened with pessimistic disillusionment and relativism of everything. After all, deconstruction is not absolute in itself.