The apostasy of the churches seems to be well underway. I was on a "Christian" blog that permits commentary on their articles just yesterday. I innocently posted what I thought were Biblical resolutions to many of the theological problems which women can experience in evangelical churches. I was immediately attacked by a group of extreme "Christian feminists."
First, let me say that I was NOT supporting the "women should sit down and shut up" variety of theology that you will often find in very conservative churches--I merely said that the Bible supported the husband as being in authority over his wife and that she should submit to him, but with a warning that unless he treated her properly, his prayers would not be heard. I did NOT say that women should submit to all men in the churches (nor do I believe it) because I'm fairly certain that the passage which tells Christians to "obey" their leaders is a faulty translation and should be something like, "be open to the persuasion of your [godly] leaders".
Second, I believe that Paul did indeed employ a woman, Priscilla, to teach and exercise authority over Apollos (the text places her name before her husband's, indicating that she was in the lead when teaching Apollos). Paul did not tell Timothy that the Holy Spirit did not permit women to teach and have authority (i.e. correcting faulty understanding--the two are linked) over men--he said that HE (Paul) did not. By way of a possible explanation, Paul obviously did not need any more trouble with the Gentile authorities than he already had. From his letter to the Corinthians, you get the idea that some Gentile women were taking advantage of their new freedom in Christ and it was likely offending the men in the congregations. That was probably the case throughout the Gentile areas that Paul was entering to establish churches. What added to the trouble was likely that Gentile women (even high-born women) were not well-schooled in a knowledge of God (that would not have been the case in Jewish households of Paul's acquaintance) and their ignorance paired with stridency, was impeding the gospel message.
Third, I also tackled the line in 1 Timothy 2:15 where Paul insists that women will be "saved through child-bearing", if they continued in "faith, love, holiness and modesty" (a delicate way of referring to chastity?). I had to admit that this was a bit of a head-scratcher for me until I happened to read in a report on ancient medical practices, that women in Greece and Rome were often terrified to have children (they would often seek "pessaries" to end pregnancies, so great was their fear) because so many women died during childbirth or shortly after, by infection. Those with sexually-transmitted disease were even more at risk--much more than the average, chaste Jewish woman (which, again, Paul would have known before he encountered the wider Gentile world). There was apparently a great deal of STDs in both Greece and Rome because of all the sexual depravity throughout the Roman Empire (don't ask). There were a wide variety of nostrums marketed for venereal disease of one sort or another. The light bulb went on for me at that point. In the Jewish mind, "salvation" often referred to the preservation of one's mortal life. Paul may have merely been referring back to the previous line where he discussed the Fall of Adam and Eve and their subsequent punishment. For women, that meant difficulty and pain in child-bearing as their punishment. He may have been comforting the Gentile women that, if they led chaste lives, they would be helped and preserved through the perils of child-bearing.
These all seemed to be reasonable and civil points, and I was looking forward to discussion--but...the viciousness of the attacks from the "Christian feminists" took my breath away. I was told first that my opinions were not backed up by Scripture (they were as much as possible). I was told that I was betraying all women and that I had been "brainwashed" by evil men in my church. Then I was told that I was undoubtedly not even a woman--just an evil man trying to defend an evil doctrine! They began to coarsely joke between themselves that I was a trans-sexual! Then they began to tell me of their "horrible," "rights-denying" experiences in conservative churches. When I suggested that it was not helpful to them to be so bitter, I was told that they had every right to be bitter and to just stop posting. To top it off, the woman who owns the blog told me that my views were "antiquated and peculiar" and that she was putting me on "permanent moderation" and that I should take my opinions elsewhere. All of my posts defending my position were scrubbed and no further rebuttals have been posted. This seems crazy to me--what say you?
