There's hope for Paul yet...

So I’ve been cruising this new blog I’ve found - which is absolutely phenomenal – and I was reading an article one of the bloggers posted on 1 Timothy 2:9-15. Specifically, they addressed the cultural and historical forces at play during the time this epistle was written, and – subsequently – how our lack of knowledge on these issues might aid in an unintentional misinterpretation of these verses.

Specifically, this blogger addressed Paul’s famous encounter with Artemis and the Ephesians.

“In like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.” 1 Timothy 2:9-15.

Many an independent, freedom-loving woman has had significant problems with these verses, and rightfully so: if taken on a literal and surface level, they seem both demeaning and unjust. What happened to “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for we are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28), right?

This blogger, beautiaful, asserts that these verses are geared specifically to the women at the Church in Ephesus (which was suffering from the injection of neighboring religions and the threat of doctrinal blending). The blogger asserted the following:

1) Verse 9, the verse which extols women to “dress modestly” without “braided hair, gold, or pearls” is not an outcry against beauty, but against pagan beauty. Apparently, these adornments were trademarks of the women who worked Artemis’s temple and, in order to avoid spiritual confusion, Paul didn’t want them adorning another faith’s spiritual robes. (Just like we wouldn’t want a Muslim wearing a Yamika or a rabbi wearing a priest’s robes).

2) The blogger also suggests that the word “silence” is often misinterpreted from its meaning in the original Greek, which is “peacefulness” or “peaceable-ness” – especially the sort of peacefulness found in a learning/educational environment. In other words, Paul was first arguing for these women to receive an education (what a novel concept) and that, because they were being misled by the heretical teachings of the Artemis cult, they should not be teaching these heresies to the Christian body. They had to submit to the true teachings of Christ – as all Christians do.

3) The blogger also contends that the word “authority” from the Greek word “authentin” is also translated in a misleading manner in many modern texts. “Authentin” can apparently also be translated as a violent sort of dominance – the sort associated with sexual abuse, crime, or unchecked power. Here, Paul is arguing that women should not “dominate” or “abuse” men – like those who would adhere to an Amazonian tradition would encourage women to do.

4) The “Adam and Eve” order speech is an attempt to counteract the Gnostic argument that Eve became “enlightened” when she took the forbidden fruit: instead of merely racked with sin. The Gnostics, apparently, glorified Eve’s role in the Fall of Eden, trying to paint as something beautiful and admirable instead of heartbreaking. This verse is less about man’s superiority to women and more about a reiteration of the facts and doctrinal clarity.

5) The women will be “saved” through childbearing is a call for women to place their faith in God, not a pagan goddess, to keep them save and alive through the birthing process.

All in all, I found this article to be absolutely smashing. I love the spirit and intelligence of the arguments. However, being an English major - one who heavily focused on myth and folk lore during my college course work, I had a couple of small qualms I’d like to address. Subsequently, I’d like to offer some alternative pov’s.

The blogger of the traditional blog asserts that the people of Ephesus were drawn so intensely to Artemis because of her roles in fertility rituals and childbearing:

"Ephesus was a decadent Asian city, whose focal point was the fertility goddess, Artemis. The Romans called her Diana. Artemis is said to be the twin of Apollo and the daughter of Zeus and Leto. The cult of Artemis was particularly alluring for women because Artemis was believed to protect her female worshippers during and after childbirth. Plus, women were viewed as superior to men, possessing secret divine knowledge. Men were drawn to this cult as well because sex was part of the worship rituals, where men would receive divine knowledge through engaging in sexual rituals with female priestesses" (beautiaful).

*drum roll* Cue the entrance of my quirked eyebrow and questions.

Traditionally, in so far as I have been taught and trained through my college coursework, it is my understanding that Artemis is not the "fertility" goddess that this blogger is depicting her as. In her original incarnation, Artemis is - indeed - the twin of Apollo and the daughter of Zeus, but I think this blogger unintentionally omitted one crucial thing: Artemis was a virgin.

In fact, Artemis was synonymous with virginity and sportsmanship (specifically game hunting, archery, etc). Artemis also later became associated with the moon, cycles, etc (in direct contrast with her brother, Apollo, who is associated with the sun, diurnal reality etc). In her original myth, Artemis begs her father not to get married because she doesn't want to be "dominated" by men. She has no fear of sex or men: she just doesn't want to lose her freedom, so she chooses to abstain. Her priestesses, likewise, would have had the same views: they too would have abstained from fertility rights and would have avoided contact with men.

It was Hera, actually— not Artemis— who was the original goddess of childbirth and fertility. That was her official station as the "queen" of all Greek goddesses. She - and occasionally Demeter - were the ones women offered incense and prayers to in order to ensure a safe birth. Artemis didn’t become associated with childbirth until the Hellenistic era, usurping that role from older, more ancient Greek goddesses.

In light of this information, I think a slight reinterpretation of this blogger’s reinterpretation is in order. :P

I’d be curious to know where she got her info and what her sources were. In so far as I know, priestesses of Artemis would be anything BUT members of an orgiastic, fertility cult; to do so would be to defy the very nature of their virginal, patron goddess.

So I would like to offer the following potential revisions to this blogger’s assertions:

Assertion 1: Good to go. Love it and it works.
Assertion 2: Also agree. Again, good to go.

Assertion 3: Again, would strongly agree, especially given the prominence of the Amazonian myth. However, I’d like to add a couple of thoughts. The fertility cults that the blogger refers to are most likely either a) cults of Hera/Aphrodite or b) an off-branch of Artemis working outside the established doctrinal practices of the main sect.

Either way, women followers of the Artemis cult most likely prized one value above all others: freedom. Just as their patroness abandoned the affections of men to ensure her personal liberty, so too did these women; they become her chaste priestesses and modeled themselves after her. However, like those who followed the Amazonian line of thinking, there is always potential for liberty to be abused. I think that perhaps the followers of Artemis needed some reassurance that - when they abandoned their faith and their power - that they would not be abused and subjugated by men. Hence Paul’s subsequent charge in 1Timothy 3:1-10:

1 Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.

8 Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

Yes, Paul has forbidden the women in this church from teaching at this time due to the heresies they had been taught to believe. Logically then, I think there was a great fear on the part of these women that they would now become victims of abuse, of authentin. I think that, by going over the qualities that a good deacon, a good leader, should possess, Paul does two things:

1) He provides an example for other leaders to follow and emulate
2) By showing these sorts of leaders to be “good” leaders, he lessens the women’s need to fear abuse during the season in their lives where they are asked to peacefully learn: not lead. This would be especially meaningful for the followers of Artemis, who would have potentially lived their lives in fear of male abuse.

I’d even go so far as to suggest that authentin abuse was common practice at Ephesus, which is why more than one sermon is delivered to the Ephesians on this issue:

22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. (Ephesians 5:22-33).

Again, I’d assert that there are multiple purposes to this sermon:
1) Paul challenges both sexes to behave in a Christ-like manner towards one another
2) Paul challenges the spiritually wayward Ephesian women to learn peaceably from their husbands who – since they had been formally trained in the Judeo-Christian tradition – had more insight in matters of traditional doctrine. (Hence Paul’s previous call for women to be educated so that they would not remain ignorant!)
3) Paul also challenges the “spiritually educated” men not to use their knowledge as a license to abuse or mistreat their wives; they are called to help make their wives “clean” again by washing through the Word (God’s; not Artemis’s!), and – by helping her learn the truth she had been denied access to – encourage her to regain a relationship with God that would leave her blameless, pure, and forgiven.

Assertion 4: Again, again: right on the money.

Assertion 5: Yes, I agree, but I’d like to add another thought: yet another reason women joined Artemis’s cult was the desire to abstain from marriage, sex, and the risk of dying through childbirth. Many of these women might have legitimately feared being “forced” into marriage and into bearing children – risking both their way of life and their very lives – by converting to Christianity. I would be curious to know of the original meaning of the word “in” or “through” depending upon your translation, in 1Timothy 2:15:

“Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control”.

Perhaps, in addition to challenging women to put their lives in God’s hands, Paul was also reassuring them that they would still their liberty. Maybe being saved “from” childbearing was also being subtly implied so that, if they chose, these women could still remain single and serve God: they did not have to become wives and mothers to fulfill their calling – something that had to be hugely empowering for these women. Furthermore, this idea of Christian singlehood something Paul extols not only for women, but men too! He reiterates this idea to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 7:32-39):

32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34 and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. 35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.

36 If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.

39 A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord. 40 In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is—and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.

When looked at from all angles and when examined in light of the cultural and historical elements of this time period, I can happily say: Wow. What a sermon.

I might even be starting to like Paul.

Just a little bit.