While I have not been blogging much lately, I have still been reading the blogs, and it seems that the topic of women and the Bible has not cooled. Quite the opposite, it is warming up. I want to contribute a few notes, as I can.
Noel Bullock of British Columbia has written a paper called FIRST TIMOTHY 2:8–15. HT CBE Scroll. She covers material that I have presented on this blog in the past and does a very thorough job of it. I think my readers will be grateful to have her paper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Thank you so much for posting the link to Ms. Bullock's paper.
If you ever stumble across more such similarly thorough and considered scholarship on this topic, or egalitarian marriage, I do hope you will continue to pass it along.
My husband tends to agree with me that the church must allow women to utilize their gifts fully in the church; he is, however, for complmentarian marriage. While this opinion doesn't impede us (we both emphasize the mutual call to serve the needs of the other before our own), I would still love to win this debate. :)
Keep such excellent resources coming!
I notice that many are in favour of equality for women in the church, but not necessarily in the home. This is the place where some men really have a serious need for entitlement.
Unfortunately I know of no way to win this debate. I was not successful. The only thing I can focus on now is helping a younger generation of women become less vulnerable to the doctrine of male authority, and more sensitive to the reality of male humanness, of the simple and unadulterated humanity of men. Does that make sense?
It makes a great deal of sense. At the end of the day, that's where I must land, too. It's a delicate balance, too: how to insist on equality without developing bitterness against those who would snatch it away as their right?
I'm lucky enough to have a husband who considers the matter a gray area, open for debate, and who feels that a Christ-like 'Headship,' at any rate, cannot exist where a wife is forced and a man insists.
It's refreshing to have a partner in the pursuit of answers, rather than a stolid figure attempting to seize and enforce authority.
Thank you for your thoughts. :)
It looks like Bullock consistently misspells Vern Poythress's name in the footnotes and Bibliography with an "l" - i.e., as "Polythress"
I left a comment to that effect in the comments section at CBE Scroll.
Anyone with an open mind who studies the arguments for and against the Pauline authorship of the Pastorals will inevitably conclude that Paul did not write them. Wouldn't it be better to admit that the men (!) who defined the canon were only human, and that in accepting into the canon the work of someone who clearly believed in the superiority of males, they were simply reflecting the prevalent majority viewpoint of men in that period of history? Their action, together with the probable interpolation of 1 Cor 14:33b-36 into a genuine letter of Paul, had the regrettable result of obscuring Paul's more enlightened attitude.
Suzanne, thank you for your kind words regarding the paper I wrote. May I clarify two minor points? First, I am actually a man. A minor detail, but an important one nonetheless. Being referred to as "Ms. Bullock" made me chuckle. Second, I appreciated E's correction of my spelling of Vern Poythress' name. I was helping my kids with geometry at the time of typing and had "polygon" stuck in my brain. Yeesh! I trust that no offense was given to Mr. Poythress. Certainly none was intended. Thanks again! And have a good day!
Post a Comment