Difference between revisions of "Woman"

<p> In an age of women's liberation, modern Bible readers have understandably scrutinized [[Scripture]] for its teachings on gender. Assessments have alternately found it hopelessly patriarchal and gloriously redemptive. A brief survey can do no more than scratch the surface of key issues and perspectives. </p> <p> <i> [[Creation]] </i> . In the first creation account, God fashions man and woman as fully equal bearers of his image. They jointly receive his blessing and commission to rule the earth (&nbsp;Genesis 1:26-31 ). In the second account, it is specified that God created the man first, and that he created the woman from the man's rib only after all the animals proved inadequate companions (&nbsp;Genesis 2:18-23 ). The controversial words, "suitable helper" in verse 18 have traditionally been taken to imply a functional subordination of the woman to the man as part of God's design in creation, but this interpretation is increasingly being rejected. Certainly, the emphasis of Adam's outburst, "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" (v. 23) highlights the similarity rather than any differences between these first two human beings. </p> <p> <i> The Fall </i> . The utter goodness of this primeval human pair (&nbsp;Genesis 1:31 ) quickly turns into rebellion. The serpent coaxes the woman to eat forbidden fruit, and her husband, in apparently more conscious disobedience (&nbsp;1 Timothy 2:14 ), follows suit. As a result, God utters a three-part curse on the triad of rebels. To the woman he promises increased pain in childbearing and then adds, "your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you" (&nbsp;Genesis 3:16 ). For those who see hierarchy in &nbsp;Genesis 2 , what was intended to be fully harmonious will now deteriorate into seduction and tyranny. For others, here is where relationships of authority and submission first appear. "To love and to cherish" has degenerated into "to desire and to dominate." </p> <p> <i> Old [[Testament]] [[Culture]] </i> . Old Testament culture was overwhelmingly patriarchal. Women were valued most for their roles as wives and mothers, as bearers and rearers of children. Because of the importance of having children to preserve the family line and inheritance, barren women were particularly disgraced. On several key occasions, God miraculously intervened to overcome such barrenness (as with Sarah—&nbsp;Genesis 16; and Hannah&nbsp;1 Samuel 1 ). Although never condoned, this same desire for progeny could lead to illicit sexual relationships (e.g., Lot's daughters with their father &nbsp;Genesis 19:30-38; [[Tamar]] with Judah &nbsp;Genesis 38 ). </p> <p> Old Testament wives can function as windows to their husband's career and character. David's first wife, Michal, aids his escape from Saul (&nbsp;1 Samuel 19:9-17 ). [[Abigail]] stands out for her intelligence and good judgment (&nbsp;1 Samuel 25:3,33 ) and comes to the fore during David's ascendancy to the kingship. Bathsheba, as the victim of David's seduction and adultery (&nbsp;2 Samuel 11 ), portends the decline of David's family and fortunes. </p> <p> Yet despite all these androcentric illustrations, the ideal woman of Old Testament times can seem surprisingly modern. The wife of noble character (&nbsp;Proverbs 31:10-31 ) works industriously not only in traditional domestic spheres but in running a business out of her house, purchasing property, making investments, speaking wisely, and ruling her household. Men should value such a prudent wife far above property and wealth (&nbsp;Proverbs 19:14; &nbsp;18:22 ). </p> <p> The Old Testament consistently commends women to monogamous marriage and sexual fidelity, based on God's creation ordinance (&nbsp;Genesis 2:24; endorsed again by both Jesus [ &nbsp;Matthew 19:5 ] and Paul [ &nbsp;Ephesians 5:31 ]). Song of Songs celebrates the erotic bliss of newlyweds, often from the woman's perspective and initiative. Subsequent faithfulness remains equally crucial (&nbsp;Ecclesiastes 9:9; &nbsp;Malachi 2:14-16 ). The ordeal for a suspected adulteress seems harsh today (&nbsp;Numbers 5:11-31 ), as does Ezra's edict for the [[Israelites]] to divorce their newly but illegally married foreign wives (&nbsp;Ezra 9-10 ). But the positive side of each of these episodes is the high value placed on sexual and spiritual fidelity. The notion that polygamy was common or condoned in ancient [[Israel]] is seriously misguided. [[Polygamy]] remained the exception rather than the rule; in twelve of the thirteen Old Testament instances in which it occurred, the husbands were men of great wealthkings and aristocrats. Few others could afford such luxury! Solomon's many wives clearly led to his ruin (&nbsp;1 Kings 11:1-13 ); concubines often played more a political than a romantic role (&nbsp;2 Samuel 16 ). </p> <p> As in all ages of human history, the Old Testament shows women who were victimized by abuse, rape, and even murder: [[Dinah]] (&nbsp;Genesis 34 ), Tamar (&nbsp;2 Samuel 13:1-22 ), Jephthah's daughter (&nbsp;Judges 11:29-30 ), and the Levite's concubine (&nbsp;Judges 19 ). The latter two atrocities illustrate the depravity of a society in near-anarchy; the former two are each avenged by kinsmen. In other instances, women seduce men (Delilah and [[Samson]] &nbsp;Judges 16 ) or unjustly accuse them (Potiphar's wife and [[Joseph]] &nbsp;Genesis 39 ). God never condones such behavior, but, like evil in general, he often permits it. An overriding and encouraging message of the Old Testament is God's sovereign outworking of his plans in spite of his people's failures. </p> <p> In the same vein, the queens of God's own people may prove murderous and idolatrous, leading them to ruin (Athaliah &nbsp;2 Kings 11; [[Jezebel]] &nbsp;1 Kings 21 ). Or God may use the compassion of pagan royalty to preserve and nurture the savior of his own people (Pharaoh's daughter and Moses Exe 2:1-10). Perhaps the paradigm of God's sovereignty through the grace of unlikely heroines is the story of Rahab, the [[Canaanite]] prostitute, who believes in the God of the Israelites, protects their spies from her own officials (&nbsp;Joshua 2 ), and becomes one of the great persons of faith praised in &nbsp;Hebrews 11 (v. 31). Similarly, Ruth the [[Moabitess]] epitomizes the foreigner who attaches herself to Israel. Her devotion to her mother-in-law [[Naomi]] leads to her covenant-faithfulness to [[Yahweh]] and to a surprising proposal of marriage to her redeemer-kinsman [[Boaz]] (&nbsp; Ruth 3:9 ). </p> <p> <i> Old Testament Legislation </i> . Old Testament laws also send mixed signals. In some places, women are clearly prized as equals to men. Both father and mother deserve equal honor from their children (&nbsp;Exodus 20:12 ) and share in the trial of a rebellious child (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 21:18-19 ). In cases of alleged rape, if unable to summon help, the woman is given the benefit of the doubt (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 22:23-27 ). But women consistently remain under the control of their fathers or husbands (&nbsp;Exodus 21:7; &nbsp;Numbers 30:3-15 ), although in the (unusual) absence of such men may be granted equal rights with them (&nbsp;Numbers 27:1-11 ). Various laws seem to value women less than men. They incur greater uncleanness for menstruation than do men for seminal emissions (&nbsp;Leviticus 15:16-33 ) and for giving birth to female children than for males (&nbsp;Leviticus 12:1-5 ). [[Male]] slaves command a higher price than do females (&nbsp;Leviticus 27:1-8 ); the more important sacrifices require male animals only (&nbsp;Numbers 15:22-29 ). In other cases, certain laws simply did not apply to women (&nbsp;Exodus 23:17 ). Some of these injunctions may be seen as accommodations to the prevailing cultures, but it is hard to explain them all in this fashion. </p> <p> [[Widows]] are consistently presented as a paradigm of the dispossessed. Because they came under no specific man's care, they became the responsibility of the whole community (&nbsp;Exodus 22:22-24 ). </p> <p> <i> Old Testament [[Leadership]] </i> . Although women were not permitted to be priests, they did on occasion hold other offices or leadership roles in Israel. [[Deborah]] was a judge (the "political" leader of her day) and, like [[Miriam]] (&nbsp;Exodus 15:20-21 ) and [[Huldah]] (&nbsp;2 Kings 22:11-20 ), a prophetess (&nbsp;Judges 4 ). [[Jael]] (&nbsp;Judges 4 ) and the anonymous woman of &nbsp;Judges 9:53 proved timely and valiant in battle. Although [[Athaliah]] was a wicked queen, Esther, who came to power in [[Persia]] under most unusual circumstances, used her position to save her [[Jewish]] kinsfolk. The wise women of [[Tekoa]] (&nbsp; 2 Samuel 14 ) and of [[Abel]] [[Beth]] [[Maacah]] (&nbsp;2 Samuel 20:14-22 ) probably were the heads of city councils. Although each of these examples of women in leadership were exceptions and not norms, there is no evidence to support the claim that God used women only when there were no available or willing men. </p> <p> <i> Jesus and Women </i> . The first-century Jewish world shared many of the cultural assumptions of the Old Testament concerning women. In the [[Hellenistic]] world, women at times gained greater wealth, freedom, or privilege. Against these prevailing cultures, Jesus' own teachings and practices stand out as radically liberating. God highly favored Mary with the privilege of bearing and rearing his Son; the most detailed accounts of Christ's birth seem to reflect Mary's (and Elizabeth's) perspective and may well have been transmitted by her (&nbsp;Luke 1-2 ). Several of the recipients of Jesus' healing were women (Jairus's daughter &nbsp;Matthew 9:23-26; and the crippled woman &nbsp;Luke 13:10-17 ). In two instances their faith is particularly praised (the hemmorhaging woman &nbsp;Matthew 9:22 ), even when one is not a Jew but a [[Syrophoenician]] (&nbsp;Matthew 15:21-28 anticipating the church's ministry to [[Gentiles]] ). In another episode, the woman healed was Jewish but still illustrates Jesus' ministry of compassion to the outcasts of society (Simon's mother-in-law [ &nbsp; Matthew 8:14-15 ]), as the third in a series of such miracles (cf. &nbsp;Matthew 8:1-4,5-13 ). In the same spirit, Jesus forgives a notoriously sinful woman who demonstrates her repentance through her love, even when she expresses it in culturally suspect ways (&nbsp;Luke 7:36-50 ). The later, similar actions of Mary of [[Bethany]] elicit Jesus' praise in language evocative of the memorializing of Jesus himself in the Lord's Supper (&nbsp;Mark 14:9 )! </p> <p> Women play an important role among Jesus' followers. An unspecified number forms part of the larger company of disciples that regularly follows him on the road and forms his "support team" (&nbsp;Luke 8:1-3; cf. &nbsp;Acts 1:14-15 ). Jesus specifically praises Mary of Bethany for choosing to "sit at his feet" and learn from him (&nbsp;Luke 10:38-42 )a quasi-technical reference to a disciple being trained by a rabbi and a practice usually denied to women in Jewish circles. Martha's traditional preoccupation for domestic chores receives only censure! Jesus chooses women as the first witnesses to his resurrection (&nbsp;Luke 24:1-12 ), even though their testimony would have been thrown out of a legal court, and Mary [[Magdalene]] becomes the "apostle to the ( <i> male </i> ) apostles" (&nbsp;John 20:1-2,18 ). No woman appears among the company of the Twelve; but it is not clear if this reflects any timeless principle besides a commitment to present the gospel to a given culture in ways which will most likely speed its acceptance. </p> <p> Jesus' ethics preserve and intensify the strong Old Testament emphasis on sexual propriety (&nbsp;Matthew 5:27-30; &nbsp;19:1-12 ), but for the first time make clear that women and men will be judged by identical standards (&nbsp;Matthew 5:32; &nbsp;Mark 10:11-12 ). Luke frequently pairs episodes in which men and women function in identical ways. Both [[Elizabeth]] and Zechariah praise under the Spirit's inspiration (&nbsp;Luke 1:41-45,67-79 ). Both [[Simeon]] and Anna prophesy that in Christ they have seen Israel's salvation (2:25-38). Male and female cripples receive identical healings (13:10-17; 14:1-6). The parables of the mustard seed and leaven (like the lost sheep and coin), each make the same point but alternate between male and female protagonists (13:18-21; 15:1-10). [[Clearly]] Luke wants to highlight God's care for both genders and Jesus' concern to relate to both. The story of Jesus meeting the [[Samaritan]] woman perhaps epitomizes his commitment to revolutionizing the lot of the disenfranchised of his day. Despite strong cultural taboos against any social exchange between a Jewish holy man and a sexually promiscuous Samaritan woman, Jesus speaks to this woman in private, affirms her personhood and leads her to faith in himself and to service as an evangelist (&nbsp;John 4:1-42 ). </p> <p> <i> Acts </i> . With the arrival of [[Pentecost]] comes the fulfillment of Joel's prediction about the egalitarian outpouring of the Spirit (&nbsp;Acts 2:17-21 ). Women as well as men prophesy. Apart from the ministry of the New Testament writers, [[Christian]] prophecy does not supplement or contradict the canon but applies spiritual truth to specific contexts in the lives of God's people. To the extent that contemporary preaching involves this spiritual gift, gifted women must be encouraged to preach. Acts also describes a significant Christian woman teacher, Priscilla, who with her husband [[Aquila]] enabled [[Apollos]] to learn and disseminate correct doctrine (18:26). Inasmuch as her name more often than not appears before her husband's (cf. vv. 18,19), she may well have been the more prominent. </p> <p> Women in Acts continue to receive other spiritual blessings. As in the Gospels, they benefit from miraculous healings (the slave girl 16:16-18) and resurrections (slave [[Tabitha]] 9:36-42). [[Lydia]] is the first-mentioned European convert (17:11-15); Paul's willingness to preach to a group of God-fearing women without any men present itself carries on Jesus' tradition of boundary breaking. Damaris, a woman, is among the few to respond favorably to Paul's [[Areopagus]] address (17:34). </p> <p> <i> The [[Epistles]] </i> . Just as in the Old Testament women enjoyed many prominent roles save one, the rest of the New Testament reveals women in all positions of spiritual leadership save that of elder or overseer. But their participation in these roles was much more common and accepted than in Old Testament times. Paul calls [[Phoebe]] a <i> diakonos </i> [Διάκονος] (probably "deacon") and <i> prostatis </i> [Προστάτις Παραστάτις] (most likely "patron") of the church in Cenchreae. First Timothy 3:11 is best understood as containing injunctions for women deacons rather than deacons' wives (it would be incongruous for Paul to be concerned about deacons' wives but not overseers' wives!). Junia(s) in &nbsp;Romans 16:7 is most likely a woman, and she is called "an apostle." This will be in Paul's broader sense of the term as a missionary or church planter. </p> <p> [[Chloe]] in [[Corinth]] (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 1:11 ) and [[Nympha]] in [[Colossae]] (&nbsp;Colossians 4:15 ) are women whose households figure prominently (and the fact that the households are attributed to these women suggest that no male heads are present). The elect ladies of &nbsp;2 John 1,13 almost certainly refer to house-churches, although quite possibly hosted by individual Christian women (as more clearly with Nympha). Paul calls [[Euodia]] and [[Syntyche]] his fellow workers (&nbsp; Philippians 4:2-3 ) and frequently praises women as co-laborers in ministry (&nbsp;Romans 16:6,12 ). First Timothy 5:2 commands respect for older Christian women. The term used here, <i> presbytera, </i> is the feminine form of "elder" ( <i> presbyteros </i> [Πρεσβύτερος]), but the context and parallel passage in &nbsp;Titus 2:3 , which uses a more unambiguous term for "old woman" ( <i> presbytis </i> [Πρεσβῦτις]), suggests a nontechnical sense. &nbsp;Titus 2:4-5 also insists that older women train younger women in godliness, which includes being good "home-workers." </p> <p> In the domestic sphere, wives must remain submissive to their husbands, who are the heads of the family (&nbsp;Ephesians 5:22-24; &nbsp;Colossians 3:18 ). Attempts to interpret "head" ( <i> kephale </i> [ &nbsp; 1 Peter 3:7 ) probably has nothing to do with physical or emotional weakness but rather refers to a voluntarily adopted position of greater "vulnerability." </p> <p> Two passages in the epistles that do not directly refer to women doing anything nevertheless have far-reaching implications. First Corinthians 12:7,11, makes clear that God's Spirit dispenses his spiritual gifts as he wills, which surely implies "irrespective of gender." This means that Paul envisioned women not only as apostles, prophets, and teachers but speaking in tongues, working miracles, ministering as evangelists, and pastors/shepherds (11:5; 12:8-10; &nbsp;Ephesians 4:11 ), indeed, exercising every other spiritual gift that God may choose to give them. &nbsp;Galatians 3:28 proves even more programmatic, declaring that in Christ, "there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female." It cannot be demonstrated from this statement that Paul thereby imagined no timeless role differentiation among women and men; clearly patriarchal rabbinic sources could nevertheless make quite similar claims. But the baptismal context (v. 27) does suggest that Paul had more in mind than merely equal access to salvation. As an initiation rite that included women (unlike Jewish circumcision), baptism publicly affirmed the equal value of women and men in a way that suggests that the church should continue to seek outward, visible forms for demonstrating this equality. </p> <p> <i> Restrictions on Leadership </i> . [[Notwithstanding]] the overwhelming emphasis on liberation, privilege, freedom, and equality for women that characterizes most of the New Testament teaching, three passages stand out as implying certain limits on women in church leadership, perhaps analogous to the relationship of wife and husband in the family. At least they have traditionally been so taken, throughout almost all of church history, corresponding to the general lack of women in the highest or most authoritative positions of ecclesial office (even as women's roles in all other positions of leadership have been more plentiful than the average textbook of church history discloses). Today, however, Christian feminists have seriously challenged the traditional interpretations of all three of these passages. </p> <p> In &nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:3-16 , Paul commands women to cover their heads (with either veils or long hair) as a sign of respect to their spiritual headstheir husbands. The cultural impropriety of women either unveiled or with short hair (often involving sexually misleading connotations) probably lay behind these commands. But a timeless principle appears as well: "man did not come from woman but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man" (vv. 8-9). These observations are immediately qualified with reminders of the mutual interdependence of the genders in Christ (vv. 11-12), but it is not obvious that these verses imply the reversibility of the statements in verses 8-9. Although not immediately germane to the question of church office, the reminder of the relevance of the structure of the family for church life probably provides a foundation for Paul's teaching in the next two passages below. </p> <p> In &nbsp;1 Corinthians 14:33b-38 Paul enjoins women to be silent in church. In view of 11:5, this cannot be an absolute prohibition. Many have taken it to be entirely time-bound (due, e.g., to gossiping or noisy or uneducated women), but Paul bases his rationale in the law (v. 34) and says nothing of these cultural phenomena. Others take verses 33b-35 to be a [[Corinthian]] slogan that Paul refutes in verses 36-38, but this relatively new interpretation ignores the quite different length, style, and content of all other Corinthian slogans (e.g., 6:12-13; 7:1; 8:1). Inasmuch as twenty of the other twenty-one references to "speak" ( <i> laleo </i> [Λαλέω Ἀπολαλέω]) in &nbsp;1 Corinthians 14 refer to tongues, their interpretation, prophecy, or evaluation, it is probably better to see one of these forms of speech in view. Given that the first three of these are spiritual gifts that the immediate context is one of the proper response to prophecy (vv. 29-33a), and that the ultimate responsibility of reevaluating prophecy would have fallen to the (presumably) all male leadership of the Corinthian congregation, it is best to limit Paul's prohibition to speech in the context of the church's authoritative response to prophecy. </p> <p> The text which is most hotly debated of all is &nbsp;1 Timothy 2:8-15 . Here Paul forbids women "to teach or to have authority over a man" (v. 12) in church (3:15). Again this prohibition cannot be absolute (recall &nbsp;Acts 18:26 ), and in view of Paul's penchant for hendiadys, or pairs of largely synonymous expressions in &nbsp;1 Timothy 2 (cf. vv. 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 3,4, 5,7a, 7b, etc.), it is probable that "teach" and "have authority" are mutually interdefiningPaul is prohibiting "authoritative teaching." In view of the distinction between (apparently) all male overseers and both male and female deacons in 3:1-13, a plausible interpretation of 2:12 is that women may not hold the highest office in a given ecclesial context (perhaps roughly analogous to modern-day senior pastors in congregationally governed churches). Again, egalitarians have regularly proposed some historical background (most notably the presence of heresy in [[Ephesus]] &nbsp; 1 Timothy 1:3-7 ) as the rationale for Paul's mandate, which is then seen as culturally limited in application. But Paul's own explanation appeals instead to the order of creation (&nbsp;1 Timothy 2:13 ); the explicit evidence of women's roles in the [[Ephesian]] heresy elsewhere in the [[Pastorals]] is entirely limited to their roles as victims rather than propagators (&nbsp;2 Timothy 3:6-7 ). </p> <p> <i> [[Conclusion]] </i> . [[Christianity]] will doubtless be divided for the foreseeable future over women's roles in the contemporary home and church. The scriptural evidence is sufficiently ambiguous that room must be given for both complementarian and egalitarian perspectives. [[Charges]] that one or the other are heretical are unfounded and destructive. Church history does not inspire much confidence that Christian consensus will ultimately be based on exegesis rather than the trends of secular society. But Bible-believing [[Christians]] should stand against this tide and seek to ground their views on the best understandings of Scripture possible. Perhaps team-ministry remains the most appropriate model, in which team leaders remain male but in which women are warmly encouraged to participate and exercise pastoral gifts. So too, in the home, if husbands do retain any unique authority, they must exercise it entirely in seeking the well-being of their wives. </p> <p> [[Craig]] L. Blomberg </p> <p> <i> See also </i> [[Eve]]; [[Family Life And Relations]]; [[Headship Head]]; [[Marriage]]; [[Personhood Person]]; [[Human Sexuality]]; [[Widow]] </p> <p> <i> Bibliography </i> . A. Berlin, <i> Poetics and [[Interpretation]] of Biblical [[Narrative]] </i> ; G. Bilezikian, <i> Beyond Sex Roles </i> ; E. Cantarella, <i> Pandora's Daughters </i> ; D. Dockery, <i> CTR </i> 1 (1987): 363-86; R. B. Edwards, <i> The [[Case]] for Women's [[Ministry]] </i> ; E. S. Fiorenza, <i> In [[Memory]] of Her </i> ; M. Hayter, <i> The New Eve in Christ </i> ; J. B. Hurley, <i> Man and Woman in Biblical Perspective </i> ; <i> ISBE, </i> 4:1089-97; W. C. Kaiser, Jr., <i> Toward Old Testament Ethics </i> ; R. C. and C. C. Kroeger, <i> I [[Suffer]] Not a Woman </i> ; A. Mickelsen, ed., <i> Women, [[Authority]] and the Bible </i> ; J. Piper and W. Grudem, eds., <i> [[Recovering]] Biblical Manhood and Womanhood </i> ; A. B. Spencer, <i> Beyond the [[Curse]] </i> ; J. Stott, <i> [[Issues]] Facing Christians Today </i> ; L. Swidler, <i> Biblical Affirmations of Woman </i> ; P. Trible, <i> Texts of [[Terror]] </i> ; R. A. Tucker and W. Liefeld, <i> Daughters of the Church </i> ; L. Wilshire, <i> NTS </i> 34 (1988): 120-34; B. Witherington, <i> NTS </i> 27 (1981): 593-604. </p>

<p> The position of woman in any section or period of society is a recognized test of the contemporary level of morality and general enlightenment. [[Apostolic]] Christianity need not fear this test. In fact, the exaltation of womanhood is justly claimed as one of the best examples of what Christianity has done for the world. [[Doubtless]] this feature of its influence has often been exaggerated, either by painting too darkly the vices of paganism or by neglecting the actual Limitations of historical Christianity. We must certainly beware lest we take the sixth [[Satire]] of [[Juvenal]] as descriptive of the character and conduct of women in general in the 1st cent. of the Roman Empire. ‘At the worst, these vices infected only a comparatively small class, idle, luxurious, enervated by the slave system, depraved by the example of a vicious court.… Both the literature and the inscriptions of that age make us acquainted with a very different kind of woman’ (S. Dill, Roman Society from [[Nero]] to [[Marcus]] Aurelius2, p. 87). Nor must we forget that the just rights of married women were much more fully recognized by Roman law than by the ecclesiastical law which replaced it: ‘it is by the tendency of their doctrines to keep alive and consolidate the former [proprietary disabilities of married females], that the expositors of the [[Canon]] Law have deeply injured civilisation’ (H. S. Maine, [[Ancient]] Law, new ed., 1907, p. 163; cf. EBr 11 xxviii. 783). J. Donaldson (one of the editors of the Ante-Nicene Christian Library) indeed went so far as to say that ‘in the first three centuries I have not been able to see that Christianity had any favourable effect on the position of women, but, on the contrary, that it tended to lower their character and contract the range of their activity’ (CR lvi. [1889] 433). So far as this somewhat questionable judgment is sound, it relates to the asceticism of the Church subsequent to the Apostolic Age. The [[Pauline]] ‘asceticism’ springs from a different source, i.e. the expectation of a rapidly approaching end to all earthly things. This is an important fact to remember, for the attitude of apostolic Christianity to woman is largely due to the interaction of two distinct principles-the fundamental Christian assertion of the intrinsic worth of human personality, and the eschatological foreshortening of the time, which could not fail to hinder the social application of the former principle. </p> <p> 1. The religious equality of woman with man before God is clearly asserted by Paul: ‘as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ. There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus’ (&nbsp;Galatians 3:27-28). The mutual dependence of man and woman, and their common origin in God, teach that the male has no exclusive place ‘in the Lord’ (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:11-12). This result of the evangelical evaluation of human nature (see art. Man) lifts the Christian idea of woman clearly above that of the contemporary Judaism, which in several noticeable ways differentiated woman religiously from man (cf. Bousset, Die [[Religion]] des Judentums2’, p. 490 f.). The morning service of [[Judaism]] still retains the ancient thanksgiving: ‘Blessed art thou, [[O]] Lord our God, King of the universe, who hast not made me a woman’ (Authorised [[Daily]] [[Prayer]] Book, p. 6). We naturally think of the ‘Court of the Women’ in the Temple, beyond which no woman might pass. ‘Her work is to send her children to be taught in the synagogue: to attend to domestic concerns, and leave her husband free to study in the schools: to keep house for him till he returns’ (C. Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers2. Cambridge, 1897, p. 15). If such significant limitations as these are found in contemporary Judaism, notwithstanding the general humanity of its relationships and the intensity of the national religion, it need not surprise us to find no effective assertion of the religious equality of woman emanating from Roman patriotism or Greek philosophy. Plato, it is true, had argued that the differentiae of sex ought not to constitute any barrier to the exercise of a woman’s personal powers: ‘None of the occupations which comprehend the ordering of a state belong to woman as woman, nor yet to man us man; but natural gifts are to be found here and there, in both sexes alike; and, so far as her nature is concerned, the woman is admissible to all pursuits as well as the man; though in all of them the woman is weaker than the man’ (Republic, 455, Eng. tr. 3 by J. Ll. Davies and D. J. Vaughan, London, 1906, p. 161 f.). But this theoretical judgment relates to social, not religious, equality. Probably the nearest parallel to the welcome given to woman in Christian worship could be found in the cults of [[Isis]] and Magna Mater, which became so popular in the early Christian centuries (not to be found in Mithraism; cf. F. Cumont, Les Mystères de Mithra3, Brussels, 1913, p. 183). To the welcome which those cults gave to woman they owed no small measure of their success; by its deeper satisfaction of woman’s needs Christianity was helped to win its victory over them. That there is much in the gospel of the Cross to appeal to the peculiar nature and temperament of woman needs no argument. There is some measure of truth in the assertion that ‘the change from the heroic to the saintly ideal, from the ideal of [[Paganism]] to the ideal of Christianity, was a change from a type which was essentially male to one which was essentially feminine’ (Lecky, History of European Morals8, vol. ii. p. 362). But the full truth is seen rather in the perfect humanity of Christ; as F. W. Robertson has well said (Sermons, 2nd ser., London, 1875, p. 231): ‘His heart had in it the blended qualities of both sexes. Our humanity is a whole made up of two opposite poles of character-the manly and the feminine.’ </p> <p> 2. A larger life of social fellowship and service was thrown open to women by apostolic Christianity. The story of the primitive Church significantly begins with the inclusion of women in the apostolic meetings for prayer (&nbsp;Acts 1:14). Their presence and activity are clearly illustrated by the references to Tabitha (9:36), Mary the mother of John Mark (12:12), Lydia (16:14), [[Damaris]] (17:34), [[Priscilla]] (18:2). The story of [[Sapphira]] (5:7f.) implies the comparatively independent membership and responsibility of women within the Christian community. Priscilla illustrates their active evangelism (18:26). Attention is expressly called to the ‘multitudes’ of women converts added to the Church (5:14). The story of Thekla (Acts of Paul and Thekla, in F. C. Conybeare’s [[Monuments]] of Early Christianity2, London, 1896, pp. 61-88) doubtless rests on some historic basis. ‘Thekla became the type of the female Christian teacher, preacher, and baptiser, and her story was quoted as early as the second century as a justification of the right of women to teach and to baptise’ (W. M. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, London, 1893, p. 375). [[Clement]] of Rome, at the end of the century, refers to the sufferings endured by women under the Neronian persecution (Ep. ad Cor. i. 6). The spread of Christianity amongst women of high rank is probably exemplified in Pomponia Graecina (Tacitus, Annals, xiii. 32), the wife of Plautius, the conqueror of Britain. Another probable example is supplied by [[Domitilla]] (banished in a.d. 96), the niece of the [[Emperor]] [[Domitian]] (Dio Cassius, lxvii. 14). </p> <p> The details of Church life which we gather from the Pauline Epistles, particularly as to the Church at Corinth, amply confirm what has been said (e.g. &nbsp;Philippians 4:2-3, &nbsp;1 Corinthians 1:11; the numerous salutations to women in Romans 16). Paul speaks of Phœbe as a ‘deaconess’ of the Church at [[Cenchreae]] (&nbsp;Romans 16:1), in terms that suggest her ability and will to give generous help to poorer Christians. The deaconesses of whom Pliny speaks, early in the 2nd cent. (Ep. x. 96), were slave girls. It is clear that women equally with men could be regarded as the organs of the prophetic spirit in the Corinthian Church (cf. Priscilla and Maximilla among the Montanists), since Paul desires that every woman praying or prophesying shall have her head veiled (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:5). This is a corollary from the admission of women into the Church, since Christian fellowship is essentially constituted by the gift of the Spirit (&nbsp;Romans 8:14). To this proof of woman’s religious equality with man there seems to be no necessary contradiction in the fact that Paul a little later (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 14:34) forbids women to speak (λαλεῖν) in the churches (see, however, the [[Commentaries]] on this disputed passage); the contrast simply shows that the Spirit could over-ride ordinary social conventions (cf. the prophesying of the four daughters of [[Philip]] the evangelist, &nbsp;Acts 21:9; the virginity of these, as of the daughters named in &nbsp;1 Corinthians 7:36, does not yet constitute an ‘order’). In the Pastoral Epistles we find a regular roll of ‘widows’ (see art. Widows), who have provision made for them by the Church (&nbsp;1 Timothy 5:3 f.; cf. &nbsp;Acts 6:1; &nbsp;Acts 9:39; &nbsp;Acts 9:41). Thus Christianity met the physical needs of a class specially likely to suffer (cf. E. Renan, Les Apôtres, Paris, 1866, p. 122), as it met the spiritual needs of women in general. </p> <p> 3. The place of women in marriage gained a higher interpretation. The Greek world is characterized by the practical absence of family life in the best sense; the Greek wife lived in seclusion and ignorance. ‘The courtesan was the one free woman of Athens’ (Lecky, op. cit., ii. 293). The Roman matron had indeed held a high place in the ancient Roman home, though she passed into the absolute legal power of her husband by the older type of religions marriage. Under the early Roman Empire, the position of married women was often one of social and legal independence (Friedländer, Roman Life and Manners, Eng. tr. , i. 236), but this was the outcome of the newer type of marriage as a civil contract; its laxity of divorce and the break-up of the older family life show its peculiar perils. Roman morality, in fact, broke down, here as elsewhere, because it had not found its reinforcement and transfiguration in religion (cf. W. Warde Fowler, The [[Religious]] [[Experience]] of the Roman People, London, 1911, p. 466). It was in the identification of morality and religion that the strength of Judaism lay. The Jewish wife, it is true, held a legal position decidedly inferior to that of the husband. But the relationship was redeemed by the quality of the humanity which was so typical a product of the OT religion. Consequently, the family life of the Hebrew-Jewish people, in some measure, prepared for the applications of the principle of woman’s religions equality made by apostolic Christianity (cf. the fine portrait of the ‘virtuous woman’ in &nbsp;Proverbs 31:10 f.). What these were may be seen from Paul’s statement of the mutual relationship of husband and wife (&nbsp;Ephesians 5:22-33). Not only is the spirit of that relationship to be the new law of love, but the relationship itself is made sacramental by its comparison with that existing between Christ and the Church. We can hardly exaggerate the gulf that separates this idea of marriage from that in which the relationship is primarily physical. Indeed, the religious disabilities of women seem to rest, at least in part, on primitive sexual tabus (cf. W., Robertson Smith, The Religion of the Semites2, London, 1894, pp. 299 n. , 379 n.; A. E, Crawley, The Mystic Rose, London, 1902, p. 52). Christianity, in principle, if not always in practice, has lifted woman above the sexual level, at which her chief raison d’être is the gratification of man’s passions, and has joined her personality to his, as contributory to a common social life. Marriage is to be held in honour among all (&nbsp;Hebrews 13:4; cf. &nbsp;1 Timothy 4:3). Paul, indeed, prefers celibacy because of the peculiar conditions of the time (i.e. on eschatological grounds). But he recognizes both the innocence of the sexual tie and the equal claims of the man and the woman in regard to it (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 7:3 f.)-surely a disproof of any ‘asceticism’ in the ordinary sense of the word. The emphasis on chastity (6:13f., &nbsp;Ephesians 5:3), so characteristic of early Christian ethics, is based on the principle that the body is the temple of the [[Holy]] Spirit (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 6:19); the condemnation of extramarital sexual relationships is the natural complement of the attitude to marriage itself (&nbsp;1 Thessalonians 4:4). The moral tie that unites the Christian even to an unbelieving partner is fully recognized (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 7:12 f.); the unbelieving husband may be won by the conduct of the Christian wife (&nbsp;1 Peter 3:1), which is a better adornment than that of outward apparel (v. 3f.; cf. &nbsp;1 Timothy 2:9). The ideals of Christianity in the 1st cent. in regard to womanly conduct are well summarized in the exhortation of Clement of Rome: ‘Let us guide our women toward that which is good: let them show forth their lovely disposition of purity; let them prove their sincere affection of gentleness; let them make manifest the moderation of their tongue through their silence; let them show their love, not in factious preferences but without partiality towards all them that fear God, in holiness’ (ad Cor. xxi. 7, The Apostolic Fathers, tr. J. B. Lightfoot, London, 1891; cf. &nbsp;Titus 2:3 f.). </p> <p> 4. The limitations of apostolic Christianity in regard to women were such as were inevitable from its historical origin and eschatological outlook. The Jewish training of Paul, for example, accounts for much in his attitude, such as the argument that women should be veiled ‘because of the angels’ (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:10). The expectation of a speedy end largely explains his preference of celibacy to marriage (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 7:7; cf. &nbsp;Revelation 14:4), which is certainly not due to his Judaism (cf. Bousset, op. cit., p. 493). The asceticism of Paul must be ascribed to a cause different from and more innocent than the dualistic (Greek) asceticism of the later Church. Naturally, some of the premisses in the NT arguments for woman’s subjection to man no longer appeal to us, even if the conclusion does (e.g. &nbsp;1 Timothy 2:12 f.). Westermarck’s criticism of this ultimately Jewish emphasis on woman’s subjection to man, as being ‘agreeable to the selfishness of men’ (Origin and Development of the [[Moral]] Ideas, i. 654), ignores the atmosphere which redeems it, i.e. its moral and religious interpretation in the Christianity of the NT. We should rather recognize, as Dobschütz does (Christian Life in the Primitive Church, p. 377) in regard to Paul’s asceticism, that ‘Christ triumphs in him over the spirit of the age.’ </p> <p> Literature-L. Friedländer, Sittengeschichte Roms8, Leipzig, 1910, Roman Life and Manners, Eng. tr. of 7th ed., 3 vols., London, 1908-09, vol. i. ch. v.; W. E. H. Lecky, History of European Morals8, 2 vols., do., 1888, ii. 275-372; C. L. Brace, Gesta Christi, do., 1882, bk. i. chs. iii., iv.; R. S. Storrs, The [[Divine]] Origin of Christianity, do., 1885, pp. 146 f., 466f.; C. von Weizsäcker, Das apostolische Zeitalter der christlichen kirche, [[Freiburg]] i. B., 1886. Eng. tr. , The Apostolic Age, 2 vols., London, 1895, bk. v. ch. iii. § 7; J. Donaldson. ‘The Position of Women among the Early Christians,’ CR lvi. [1889] 433; J. Gottschick, ‘Ehe, christliche’, in PRE 3 v. 182f.; W. F. Adeney, art. ‘Woman,’ In HDB lv. 933-936; E. von Dobschütz. Die urchristliehe Gemeinde, Leipzig, 1902, Eng. tr. , Christian Life in the Primitive Church, London, 1904; A. Harnack, [[Mission]] und Ausbreitung des Christentums2, Leipzig, 1906, Eng. tr. , The Mission and [[Expansion]] of Christianity2, 2 vols., London, 1908, vol. ii. ch. ii. § 4 (best survey of the data); S. Dill, Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius2, do., 1905; J. McCabe, The Religion of Woman, do., 1905 (attacks the Christian claims); W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im neutest. Zeitalter2, Berlin, 1906; E. Westermarck, The Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas, i. [London, 1906] ch. xxvi., ii. [do., 1908] ch. xl.; T. G. Tucker, Life in the Roman World of Nero and St. Paul, do., 1910, ch. xvi.; A. Robertson and A Plummer, ICC , ‘1 Corinthians,’ Edinburgh, 1911, pp. 130-162, 230-236, 324-328; C. Clemen, Primitive Christianity and its Non-Jewish Sources, Edinburgh. 1912, Index, s.v. ‘Woman’; W. M. Ramsay, The Teaching of Paul in Terms of the [[Present]] Day, London, 1913, sect. xlv., ‘The Family in the Teaching of Paul.’ </p> <p> H. Wheeler Robinson. </p>

<p> Woman in Bible times lived in a patriarchal society. Both the Old and New Testament worlds normally restricted the role of woman primarily to the sphere of home and family, although a few strong women emerged as leaders. In religious life she was subordinate to man. Father and then husband or other male relatives gave protection and direction to woman. Jesus raised the window for women. He paid attention to them. His manner was inclusive and acknowledged their place in the kingdom He proclaimed. By what He did and what He said He elevated the status of woman. Paul also caught Jesus' vision. Although Paul faced the need to preserve order in the early church, he exclaimed in &nbsp;Galatians 3:28 : “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” The final barrier preventing woman from fully participating in the kingdom of God toppled under Jesus' influence. </p> <p> What the Old Testament Teaches About Woman The Old Testament shows woman in at least two lights. The predominant view is one of woman in subjection to man. However, at times, woman is also the object of adoration and admiration. The creation narratives in [[Genesis]] foreshadow two different perspectives regarding woman. In the account in &nbsp;Genesis 1:26-30 , man and woman are created simultaneously (&nbsp;Genesis 1:27 ). Woman, like man, is made in the image of God. Together, man and woman reflect the image of God. Woman is not in an inferior place in creation. In &nbsp;Genesis 2:7-25 , man is created before woman. In this second account woman is viewed as being created for man as his helper. This account is often cited as supportive of the view that woman should remain subject to man since she has a subordinate position in creation, but the narrative describes woman as a “suitable partner” (&nbsp;Genesis 2:20 REB) for whom man leaves his family. </p> <p> The subordination of woman appears more clearly in a close reading the Ten Commandments. The [[Commandments]] are addressed to men, a fact evidenced by the use of masculine pronouns. A major of evidence of women's subordination is the reference to man not coveting any of his neighbor's property. His wife is included in the list of possessions (&nbsp;Exodus 20:17 ). Marriage and divorce are areas in which woman's rights were subordinate to those of man. If a woman about to be married was suspected of not being a virgin, she was required to submit to a test. If her virginity was not established, she could be stoned to death at her father's door (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 22:13-21 ). No such requirement was made for a man. [[Adultery]] was seen as a crime against a husband's rights. Both male and female caught in the act of adultery were stoned, but it was the husband's rights which were being vindicated (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 22:22 ). A husband who was jealous of his wife and had some fears about her faithfulness could take her to the priest and have her submit to an intricate test to determine her innocence or guilt (&nbsp;Numbers 5:11-31 ). No such avenue was open for a woman who suspected her husband of being unfaithful. </p> <p> Divorce was also slanted toward the husband. He could obtain a divorce from his wife “because he finds something objectionable about her” (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 24:1 NRSV). The phrase “something objectionable” was variously interpreted by the [[Jews]] and ran the gamut from adultery to burned toast! </p> <p> Inequity between boy and girl babies existed from the very beginning of life. A mother who bore a girl baby was considered unclean for twice as long as a mother who bore a male child. During her “purifying” time after the birth of a baby, a mother was not to “touch any holy thing, or come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purification are completed” (&nbsp;Leviticus 12:2-5 ). </p> <p> [[Aside]] from specific inequities in the way men and women were treated, the Old Testament, particularly the Book of Proverbs, warned of tempting, “loose” (&nbsp;Leviticus 2:16 NRSV), “loud,” “ignorant” (&nbsp; Leviticus 9:13 NRSV), and “contentious” (&nbsp; Leviticus 21:9 NRSV) women. Women were also seen as fearful (&nbsp; Isaiah 19:16 ). &nbsp;Proverbs 31:1 also pictured the hardworking, praiseworthy, “virtuous” woman. </p> <p> Woman's most positive image was wife and mother. Against the predominant pattern of women in subordinate roles, several positive images of women emerged from the Old Testament. Undoubtedly, woman was venerated in her role as wife and mother. The Ten Commandments cite a son's duty to honor both his father and mother (&nbsp;Exodus 20:12 ). The ideal woman, eulogized in &nbsp;Proverbs 31:1 , is a wife and mother who fulfills well both roles in addition to engaging profitably in the business world. </p> <p> The birth of children was a sign of God's favor bestowed upon a good woman. A particular sign of God's favor was the birth of male children (&nbsp;Genesis 29:31-30:24 ). The story of Ruth is a good example of a traditional woman who was admired for her role as a good daughter-in-law. Ruth and Naomi, whose husbands died, were women of worth whom God aided by sending Boaz as their protector (&nbsp;Ruth 1-4 ). </p> <p> A thread which crosses the dominant pattern of the subjection of women is one which depicts women positively. Wisdom, which held high value for the [[Hebrew]] people, was personified as “she” (&nbsp;Proverbs 1:20; &nbsp;Proverbs 7:4 ). The prophet Isaiah used a mother's love for her child as a model for God's love for His people. (&nbsp;Isaiah 49:15 : &nbsp;Isaiah 66:13 ). Several women—including Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, and Esther—earned the respect and admiration of the [[Israelite]] nation by playing a significant role in times of national crisis. See Deborah; [[Esther]]; Huldah; Miriam . </p> <p> What the New Testament Teaches About Woman Jesus was able to retain the best in the Hebrew tradition and yet cut away some of the rigid structure that restricted it. He was able to do the same for woman. Without radically changing her roles, Jesus enlarged and transformed women's possibilities for a full life. His manner and teachings elevated her status and gave her an identity and a cause. Jesus' manner in His interactions with women is at least as significant as His teachings about woman. At the risk of censure from a male-oriented society, Jesus talked to women, responded to their touch, healed them, received their emotional and financial support, and used them as main characters in His stories. Jesus saw women as persons. [[Martha]] wanted Jesus to make Mary help with the serving duties, but Jesus affirmed Mary's choice to learn as a disciple. Women of that day could not be disciples of rabbis, but Jesus recognized women's potential for intelligent thought and commitment (&nbsp;Luke 10:38-42 ). </p> <p> On another occasion, Jesus welcomed a woman's anointing His head as indicative of her understanding of His real mission. Instead of rejecting her public display or chiding her for extravagance, He commended her for her act of love. He treated her as a person of insight and feeling (&nbsp;Mark 14:3-9 ). The woman at the well in [[Samaria]] is another example of Jesus seeing women as persons. Jesus would not have talked theology to her if He had related to her primarily as a woman or as a Samaritan. However, He saw her as a person, so He was not restricted in His interaction by her sex or race (&nbsp;John 4:1-42 ). The woman caught in adultery was treated as a person. Her action was not condoned by Jesus, but neither did He allow her to be subjected to a double standard by her male accusers. Jesus offered her new possibilities of living with His directive: “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again” (&nbsp;John 7:53-8:11 NRSV). </p> <p> Besides seeing women as persons, Jesus involved them in His earthly ministry. Luke mentioned a group of women who traveled with Jesus as He journeyed from town to town (&nbsp;Luke 8:1-3 ). Among them were Mary of Magdala, Joanna, and Susanna. These women provided financial support for Jesus and the twelve apostles. Women also proclaimed the gospel. In His encounter with the Samaritan woman, Jesus revealed Himself as the Messiah. She immediately left and began telling people, “He told me everything I have ever done” (&nbsp;John 4:39 NRSV). Many [[Samaritans]] believed in Jesus because of the woman's testimony. </p> <p> Women were the first at the tomb after the resurrection; and, as such, they were the first to broadcast His victory over death (&nbsp;Luke 23:55-24:11 ). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all called attention to the loyal women who participated in Jesus' [[Galilean]] ministry and followed Him all the way to the cross and the grave. They shared the greatest news: “He is not here, but has risen” (&nbsp;Luke 24:5 NRSV). </p> <p> As a master teacher, Jesus used parables to teach about the kingdom of God. He reached out to the women in His audience by telling stories about their life experiences. By capturing their attention and commitment through parables, He offered them a place in the kingdom. </p> <p> God's seeking activity is the theme of two parables, the lost sheep begins, “What man of you” and the parable of the lost coin, “What woman.” The woman looking for the lost coin represented God's activity in seeking the lost, just as the man represented God's seeking activity. Jesus appealed to women through their housekeeping experiences. He elevated their experiences by likening them to God's activity. </p> <p> The twin parables in &nbsp;Luke 13:18-20 point to the way the kingdom of God grows. Again Jesus used the life experience of woman to illuminate an eternal truth. Jesus meant for women to identify with His mission. He meant to involve them in spreading the gospel. His parables taught that both women and men would be involved in the kingdom work. </p> <p> Jesus spoke directly to the matter of treating a woman as a sex object. In the [[Sermon]] on the Mount, He redefined adultery to include a lustful look (&nbsp;Matthew 5:28 ). While making religion a matter of the heart instead of the law, Jesus elevated women to the level of full personhood, from the level of sexual exploitation. Marriage and divorce were issues of great importance to women, since their lives were lived mainly in the roles of wife and mother. Their emotional, social, and financial security was dependent on their marriages. Jesus said that divorce is a testimony to the hardness of the human heart, not God's will (&nbsp;Matthew 19:1-9 ). To those who were casually divorcing their wives, Jesus stated plainly that they were committing adultery. Responsive to the plight of women, He offset the male bias toward divorce and strengthened marriage as a permanent union. (See &nbsp;Matthew 5:31-32; &nbsp;Matthew 19:1-12; &nbsp;Mark 10:1-12; &nbsp;Luke 16:18 .) </p> <p> Jesus' parable of the ten maidens, five foolish and five wise, hints at the way Jesus saw and dealt with woman (&nbsp;Matthew 25:1-13 ). He saw women as neither inferior nor superior, but simply as persons. He saw their potential, their sinfulness, their strengths and weaknesses, and He dealt with them directly. As a group, He elevated their status and strengthened their participation and influence in their world. But as individuals, He treated them as friends and disciples. </p> <p> Paul's theological vision (&nbsp;Galatians 3:28 ) was that there was no partiality among persons with God. Yet Paul felt the tension of maintaining order in the New Testament church. He often fell back on Jewish social customs of the day to ensure that the fledgling church would not be seen unfavorably by the rest of the world. A man of his time, he still had a vision toward which he strove. </p> <p> Paul moved ahead of his Jewish background when he called for mutual submission between husbands and wives (&nbsp;Ephesians 5:21-33 ). The prevailing custom was for wives to be submissive. However, Paul reflected Jesus' concern that all relationships reflect the grace extended by God.—Responsibilities of both husbands and wives to love each other follow the initial exhortation to submit to each other in love. In other passages Paul implied a hierarchy of submission from God, to Christ, to man, to woman, to child as the sequence. However, the tone of this hierarchy was not military, but voluntary and self-sacrificing. Here again was a concession to order and not the ideal (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:2-16; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 14:33-40; &nbsp;1 Timothy 2:8-15 ). </p> <p> Paul wrote in response to problems in churches. Paul was concerned that the Christians should “give no offense to Jews or to [[Greeks]] or to the church of God” (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:32 NRSV). Therefore, he wrote responses to the way specific problems should be handled in different churches. Some of his remarks do not have direct relevance to our day. For example, he spoke of meat offered to idols (&nbsp; Romans 14:1 ), and women wearing jewelry and braiding their hair (&nbsp;1 Timothy 2:8-12 ). In contrast to these specific problems, Paul espoused basic principles which have relevance to every age: (1) A Christian should take into account how his or her actions may influence others (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 8:13 ) and (2) A Christian should do all things to the glory of God (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:31 ). </p> <p> Of equal weight with what Paul said regarding women is how he related to them. Paul welcomed women as colaborers in the churches and commended them for their gifts and faithfulness (&nbsp;Romans 16:1 ,Romans 16:1,&nbsp;16:3-5 ). Phoebe, Prisca, Lydia, and others were seen as partners in the gospel. To the Roman church Paul said, “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae” (&nbsp;Romans 16:1 NRSV). He called Phoebe a “benefactor of many and of myself as well” (&nbsp; Romans 16:2 NRSV). [[Evidently]] Paul relied on women to exercise their gifts (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 12:1 ) as a part of the body of Christ. See [[Deacon]]; Offices; Phoebe; [[Prisca]] . </p> <p> Summary Woman is the subject of many questions and controversies in the church today. Is she equal to man? Can she exercise the same spiritual gifts as man in the church? Should she be subject to her husband in all matters? As Christians turn to the Bible for guidance in responding to these questions, they must be careful not to focus on one verse or passage. The total impact and message of the Bible should become the guiding spirit in answering these and other questions. </p> <p> The Old Testament clearly subjected woman to the will and protection of her husband. She was extolled for performing her important roles as wife and mother. On occasion she rose above those roles and led the Jewish nation in times of crisis. </p> <p> The New Testament brings a different picture of woman into focus. Jesus, and later Paul, elevated the status of woman so that she could be a full participant in the kingdom of God. However, she is urged to use her responsibility as well as her freedom to find her place in the body of Christ. The spirit of freedom and love in Christ is woman's as well as man's. See [[Divorce]]; [[Family]]; Marriage; Sex, Teaching on. </p> <p> Kay W. Shurden </p>

<p> <strong> [[Woman]] </strong> </p> <p> 1. In OT ( <em> ’ishshâh </em> , ‘woman,’ ‘wife’; <em> nÄ•qçbâh </em> [&nbsp; Leviticus 15:33 , &nbsp; Numbers 31:15 , &nbsp; Jeremiah 31:22 ], ‘female’) woman’s position is one of inferiority and subjection to man (&nbsp; Genesis 3:13 ); and yet, in keeping with the view that ideally she is his companion and ‘help meet’ (&nbsp; Genesis 2:18-24 ), she never sinks into a mere drudge or plaything. In patriarchal times, Sarah, Rebekah, and Rachel stand side by side with their husbands. In the era of the deliverance from Egypt, Miriam is ranked with Moses and Aaron (cf. &nbsp; Micah 6:4 ). In the days of the judges, Deborah is not only a prophetess (wh. see), as other women in Israel were, but is herself a judge (&nbsp; Judges 4:4 ). Under the monarchy, Jezebel in the Northern [[Kingdom]] and Athaliah in the Southern, afford illustrations of the political power and influence that a woman might wield. In religious matters, we find women attending the [[Feasts]] along with men (&nbsp; 1 Samuel 1:1 ff. etc.), taking part with them in acts of sacrifice (&nbsp; Judges 13:20; &nbsp; Judges 13:23 etc.), combined with them in the choral service of the [[Temple]] (&nbsp; Ezra 2:65 etc.). And though in the Deut. code woman’s position is one of complete subordination, her rights are recognized and safeguarded in a way that prepares the soil for the growth of those higher conceptions which find utterance in Malachi’s declaration that divorce is hateful to [[Jehovah]] (&nbsp; Ezra 2:16 ), and in the picture of the virtuous wife with which the Book of Proverbs concludes (ch. 31). See, further, Family, Marriage. </p> <p> <strong> 2. In NT </strong> ( <em> gynç </em> , ‘woman,’ ‘wife’; <em> thçleia </em> [&nbsp; Romans 1:26-27 ], ‘female’; <em> gynaikarion </em> [dimin. fr. <em> gynç </em> , &nbsp; 2 Timothy 3:6 ], EV [Note: English Version.] ‘silly women’). Owing to the influence of Rabbinism, Jewish women had lost some of their earlier freedom (ct. [Note: t. contrast.] with the scene at the well of [[Haran]] [&nbsp; Genesis 24:10 ff.] the surprise of the disciples by the well of [[Sychar]] when they found Jesus ‘speaking with a woman’ [&nbsp; John 4:27 ]). But Jesus wrought a wonderful change. He did this not only by His teaching about adultery (&nbsp; Matthew 5:27 f.) and marriage and divorce (&nbsp; Matthew 5:31 f., &nbsp; Matthew 19:3 ff.), but still more by His personal attitude to women, whether good and pure like His own mother (there is nothing harsh or discourteous in the ‘Woman’ of &nbsp; John 2:4; cf. &nbsp; John 19:26 ) and the sisters of Bethany, or sinful and outcast as some women of the [[Gospels]] were (&nbsp; Luke 7:37 ff; &nbsp; Luke 8:2 , &nbsp; John 4:1-54 ). The work of emancipation was continued in the Apostolic Church. Women formed an integral part of the earliest Christian community (&nbsp; Acts 1:14 ), shared in the gifts of Pentecost (&nbsp; Acts 2:1 ff., cf. &nbsp; Acts 2:17 ), engaged in tasks of unofficial ministry (&nbsp; Romans 16:1 f., &nbsp; Philippians 4:2 f.), and by and by appear (&nbsp; 1 Timothy 3:11 ) as holding the office of the <strong> deaconess </strong> (wh. see), and possibly (&nbsp; 1 Timothy 5:3 ) that of the ‘ <strong> widow </strong> ’ (wh. see, and cf. Timothy [Epp. to], § <strong> 5 </strong> ). St. Paul’s conception of woman and of man’s relation to her is difficult (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 7:1-40 ), but may be explained partly by his expectation of the [[Parousia]] (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 7:29-31 ), and partly by the exigencies of an era of persecution (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 7:26 ). In a later Pauline [[Epistle]] marriage becomes a type of the union between Christ and the Church (&nbsp; Ephesians 5:22-33 ). And if by his injunction as to the silence of women in the Church (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 14:34 ff.) the [[Apostle]] appears to limit the prophetic freedom of the first Christian days (&nbsp; Acts 2:4; &nbsp; Acts 2:17 ), we must remember that he is writing to a Church set in the midst of a dissolute Greek city, where Christian women had special reasons for caution in the exercise of their new privileges. [[Elsewhere]] he announces the far-reaching principle that in Christ Jesus ‘there can be no male and female’ (&nbsp; Galatians 3:28 ). </p> <p> J. C. Lambert. </p>

<div> '''1: '''''Γυνή''''' ''' (Strong'S #1135 — Noun [[Feminine]] — gune — goo-nay' ) </div> <p> for which see also Wife , is used of a "woman" unmarried or married, e.g., &nbsp;Matthew 11:11; &nbsp;14:21; &nbsp;Luke 4:26 , of a "widow;" &nbsp;Romans 7:2; in the vocative case, used in addressing a "woman," it is a term not of reproof or severity, but of endearment or respect, &nbsp;Matthew 15:28; &nbsp;John 2:4 , where the Lord's words to His mother at the wedding in Cana, are neither rebuff nor rebuke. The question is, lit., "What to Me and to thee?" and the word "woman," the term of endearment, follows this. The meaning is "There is no obligation on Me or you, but love will supply the need." She confides in Him, He responds to her faith. There was lovingkindness in both hearts. His next words about "His hour" suit this; they were not unfamiliar to her. [[Cana]] is in the path to Calvary; [[Calvary]] was not yet, but it made the beginning of signs possible. See also &nbsp;John 4:21; &nbsp;19:26 . </p> &nbsp;Galatians 4:4 <div> '''2: '''''Γυναικάριον''''' ''' (Strong'S #1133 — Noun Neuter — gunaikarion — goo-nahee-kar'-ee-on ) </div> <p> a diminutive of No. 1, a "little woman," is used contemptuously in &nbsp;2—Timothy 3:6 , "a silly woman." </p> <div> '''3: '''''Πρεσβύτερος''''' ''' (Strong'S #4245 — Adjective — presbuteros — pres-boo'-ter-os ) </div> <p> "elder, older," in the feminine plural, denotes "elder women" in &nbsp;1—Timothy 5:2 . See [[Elder]] , A, No. 1 </p> <div> '''4: '''''Πρεσβῦτις''''' ''' (Strong'S #4247 — Noun Feminine — presbutis — pres-boo'-tis ) </div> <p> the feminine of presbutes, "aged," is used in the plural and translated "aged women" in &nbsp;Titus 2:3 . </p> <div> '''5: '''''Θῆλυς''''' ''' (Strong'S #2338 — Adjective — theleia — thay'-loos ) </div> <p> the feminine of the adjective thelus, denotes "female," and is used as a noun, &nbsp;Romans 1:26,27 . See Female. </p>

<p> <em> 'Ishshâh </em> ( '''''אִשָּׁה''''' , Strong'S #802), “woman; wife; betrothed one; bride; each.” This word has cognates in Akkadian, Ugaritic, Aramaic, Arabic, and Ethiopic. It appears about 781 times in biblical Hebrew and in all periods of the language. </p> <p> This noun connotes one who is a female human being regardless of her age or virginity. Therefore, it appears in correlation to “man” ( <em> ish </em> ): “… She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man” (Gen. 2:23). This is its meaning in its first biblical usage: “And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man [ <em> ‘adam </em> ], made he a woman, and brought her unto the man” (Gen. 2:22). The stress here is on identification of womanhood rather than a family role. </p> <p> The stress on the family role of a “wife” appears in passages such as Gen. 8:16: “Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons’ wives with thee.” </p> <p> In one special nuance the word connotes “wife” in the sense of a woman who is under a man’s authority and protection; the emphasis is on the family relationship considered as a legal and social entity: “And [[Abram]] took [[Sarai]] his wife and [[Lot]] his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered …” (Gen. 12:5). </p> <p> In Lam. 2:20 <em> 'ishshâh </em> is a synonym for “mother”: “Shall the women eat their [offspring, the little ones who were born healthy]?” In Gen. 29:21 (cf. Deut. 22:24) it appears to connote “bride” or “betrothed one”: “And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her.” Eccl. 7:26 uses the word generically of “woman” conceived in general, or womanhood: “And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets …” (cf. Gen. 31:35). </p> <p> This word is used only infrequently of animals: “Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female” (Gen. 7:2). </p> <p> This word can also be used figuratively describing foreign warriors and/or heroes as “women,” in other words as weak, unmanly, and cowardly: “In that day shall Egypt be like unto women: and it shall be afraid and fear because of the shaking of the hand of the Lord of hosts …” (Isa. 19:16). </p> <p> In a few passages <em> 'ishshâh </em> means “each” or “every”: “But every woman shall borrow of her neighbor, and of her that sojourneth in her house …” (Exod. 3:22; cf. Amos 4:3). A special use of this nuance ouurs in passages such as Jer. 9:20, where in conjunction with <em> re’ut </em> (“neighbor”) it means “one” (female): “Yet hear the word of the Lord, O ye women, and let your ear receive the word of his mouth, and teach your daughters wailing, and every one her neighbor lamentation.” </p>

<p> &nbsp;Lamentations 1:17 (a) The city where GOD had placed His name had become a vile, filthy community. That which emanated from this city was offensive to GOD, and shameful in every aspect. Her manners and her ways were repulsive to the holy GOD who had chosen her. (See also &nbsp;Ezekiel 16:30; &nbsp;Ezekiel 23:44; &nbsp;Ezekiel 36:17). </p> <p> &nbsp;Zechariah 5:7 (b) This woman represents Israel from the commercial standpoint. The ephah, which was a measure, represents her business enterprises. It was the burden of the nation, as it still is. Their object in life was to make money, gain power, and rise to places of distinction. </p> <p> &nbsp;Matthew 13:33 (b) Here is a type of apostate Christendom, and false religions. They use much of the Word of GOD (the meal), but they mingle with it their false and evil explanations which poison the souls of those who partake of it. Every false religion, in so-called Christendom, uses much of the Bible in their writings and utterances. They poison these messages by interjecting their own explanation and false deductions which produce wrong conclusions. The result is that [[Christ Jesus]] is not honored and the Word of GOD is dishonored. </p> <p> &nbsp;Revelation 12:1 (b) This woman represents the nation of Israel with her twelve patriarchs (or tribes), and [[Jesus]] was the child born from Israel. </p>

<p> It is evident from scripture that women were anciently held in much more honour and esteem in Eastern countries than they are now. Solomon, speaking of women, said that such as his soul sought for he did not find one in a thousand. &nbsp;Ecclesiastes 7:28 . This tells of fallen human nature; but the true thought of woman is that she is the glory of the man, his true helpmeet. This is fulfilled in the relationship of the church to Christ. </p> <p> In the N.T. the true place of the woman in subjection to the man is plainly stated, as indicated in creation; and in the assembly the woman is to be silent, and not to teach. Her bearing and deportment are expressive of what she learns as taught of Christ. &nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:3-15; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 14:34,35; &nbsp;1 Timothy 2:11 . &nbsp;12 . Nevertheless women were greatly honoured in ministering to the Lord, and are accredited as helping on the work of the Lord in the gospel and among the saints. &nbsp;Luke 8:2,3; &nbsp;Luke 23:27,55,56; &nbsp;Romans 16:1,3,6; &nbsp;Philippians 4:2,3; &nbsp;2 John 1,10 . </p>

<p> '''(1):''' ''' (''' v. t.) To act the part of a woman in; - with indefinite it. </p> <p> '''(2):''' ''' (''' v. t.) To make effeminate or womanish. </p> <p> '''(3):''' ''' (''' v. t.) To furnish with, or unite to, a woman. </p> <p> '''(4):''' ''' (''' n.) A female attendant or servant. </p> <p> '''(5):''' ''' (''' n.) The female part of the human race; womankind. </p> <p> '''(6):''' ''' (''' n.) An adult female person; a grown-up female person, as distinguished from a man or a child; sometimes, any female person. </p>

<p> WOMAN, n. plu. women. a compound of womb and man. </p> 1. The female of the human race, grown to adult years. <p> And the rib, which the Lord god had taken from the man, made he a woman. &nbsp;Genesis 2 . </p> <p> Women are soft, mild, pitiful, and flexible. </p> <p> We see every day women perish with infamy, by having been too willing to set their beauty to show. </p> <p> I have observed among all nations that the women ornament themselves more tan the men that wherever found, they are the same kind, obliging, humane, tender beings, inclined to be gay and cheerful, timorous and modest. </p> 2. A female attendant or servant. <p> WOMAN, To make pliant. </p>