Women Are Welcome at the Table
Read, watch, or listen, and join the conversation below.
A few weeks ago, we talked about how Jesus broke down established boundaries and extended an all-inclusive, unconditional invitation to his table. But we saw that while his boundary-breaking actions were good news to those who had been excluded—the poor, the marginalized, and the oppressed—many of the religious establishment were angered by his inclusive stance. They could not let go of what they perceived as the unalterable boundaries established by their interpretation of their Scriptures, boundaries shaped by patriarchy, nationalism, and purity codes, which prevented those who were viewed as outside those boundaries, from approaching God or being accepted in the community of God’s chosen people.
This week, we want to focus in on the theme of patriarchy in the ancient world and in the ancient Hebrew culture specifically, and how it affected women in particular. Patriarchy not only set boundaries that prevented women from being welcome at the table, but it also worked to devalue and exploit them as human beings as well. And as we’ll see in a couple of weeks, in addition to devaluing women, patriarchy was also one of the predominant factors behind the devaluing and exclusion of sexual minorities in the ancient world, and it continues to be a major factor in the devaluing of women and LGBTQ+ people, whenever it rears its ugly head today.
Remember, patriarchy was common in ancient cultures, so the patriarchal system of the ancient Hebrews, which can be seen throughout the Old Testament Scriptures, was not new. And even though the Old Testament Law can be seen as a step forward in the treatment of women compared to the surrounding pagan cultures of that time, women were still predominantly viewed as if they were property. They were generally seen as less valuable, weak-willed, emotionally and psychologically compromised, and inferior. Let’s look at a few scriptural passages that exemplify the point.
One of the clearest examples of this way of thinking about women, occurs right at the beginning of the Covenant Law, the Ten Commandments. Exodus 20:17 says, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male slave, or his female slave, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor” (Exodus 20:17 NASB). Did you catch that? Anything that belongs to your neighbor. Notice, the wife is thought of in the same way as the house, the slave, or the donkey.
Another example of the relative worth of women occurs in the book of Leviticus. Leviticus 27 outlines the monetary assessment prescribed for the worth of a person making a vow. It says, “…When someone makes an explicit vow, he shall be valued according to your assessment of persons belonging to the Lord. If your assessment is of a male from twenty years even to sixty years old, then your assessment shall be fifty shekels of silver, by the shekel of the sanctuary. Or if the person is a female, then your assessment shall be thirty shekels’” (Leviticus 27:2-4 NASB). So, in addition to the idea of a woman being a man’s property, in patriarchal cultures, a woman’s life in general was seen as having less value than a man’s.
Patriarchy affected all areas of life in the ancient Hebrew culture, but it can be seen most clearly within marriages and families. It positioned the father or eldest male as the head of the family, holding all power over female family members, servants, and slaves. For instance, Deuteronomy 21:7 says, “Now if a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do” (Deuteronomy 21:7 NASB), and Exodus 22:16-17 says, “If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and sleeps with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the dowry for virgins” (Exodus 22:16-17 NASB). Not only does the father have the right to sell his daughters into slavery, but he is the one who receives compensation for anything associated with the lives of his female family members or slaves.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 says, “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives” (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV). Now, even though this may have been seen as a protection for women in comparison to the way they were treated in other cultures at the time, that doesn’t minimize the fact that under this law, not only is the girl required to marry her rapist, but again, she is purchased from her father for a price. In patriarchal cultures, rape or adultery (if the woman was married or betrothed), were both viewed as the violation of another man’s property.
As we discussed last time, once a woman was married (in ancient cultures, around the age of 13 or 14), she became the property of her husband, and as with her father, he literally held her life or death in his hands. Deuteronomy 22:13-21 says that if a man takes a wife and she displeases him, he can call her virginity into question, and the girl’s parents would then be required to produce proof of her virginity. If the proof (the bedsheet from the wedding night) is produced, the man need only pay a fine for his slander, and the woman is required to remain married to him. If proof of her virginity is not produced however, she is to be stoned to death for bringing shame on her father’s house. The death penalty was also required if a woman was accused of adultery as well.
In addition to the accusations of not being a virgin or being a prostitute or an adulteress, a woman could also face accusation, shame, and abandonment if her husband found anythingabout her that displeased him. We’ll revisit this passage later, but, Deuteronomy 24:1-5 says that a man can write his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away if she “finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her”. Because the wife who was sent away would no longer be a virgin and would have been seen as “defiled”, many women were left without protection or any means of support. Sometimes they could remarry, but many times they were driven to prostitution, adultery, or servitude to survive.
In patriarchal cultures, childbearing and childrearing became a wife’s defining value and purpose. Because women were viewed as passive vessels and men and their “seed” were thought to be the dominant, controlling force behind procreation, the lineage of the family was traced solely through the male line, with all power, inheritance, rights, and blessing being passed down through the male heirs. Hence, there was deep shame and condemnation if a woman was unable to bear sons and continue the family line. Women slaves and concubines were often used to provide children for the man’s household, but they were treated with even less value than wives and daughters. For example, captured women from rival people groups could be taken as plunder and forced to become slaves or concubines, and men were justified in using them in whatever ways they saw fit.
Wow! So, what’s going on here? Because we find these things in Scripture, does that mean God condones this patriarchal view? Some in the church today would have us believe that. In fact, this idea remains a hotly debated topic in religious circles today. Disagreements over the value and roles of women in society and in the church, have split congregations and whole denominations. So, what are we to make of this? Why do we find this in Scripture?
Well, there are a number of theories, depending on who you talk to, but some scholars believe that we find these things in Scripture because God was working with people where they were, in their ancient understandings of the way the world worked, and then trying to move them forward. This could be why, though the Old Testament laws seem horrific to us, they were viewed as a step forward in the treatment of women at the time, and why we see a few boundary-breaking examples of women leading in Scripture.
For instance, Miriam, Moses’ big sister, is not only portrayed as having a hand, along with her mother, in saving Moses’ life as a baby, but she was also tasked with a leadership role along with her brother Aaron in the nation Israel’s wilderness wanderings. Later in the biblical story, we meet Deborah, a woman appointed by God to lead the entire nation Israel as a judge, and Huldah a woman prophet tasked to give counsel to King Josiah, one of the kings of Judah.
But, even if we consider these examples of women leaders in the Old Testament, and we acknowledge the theory that God was not content with the situation at hand, but instead, was leading people forward, patriarchy was still a deeply entrenched idea in the Hebrew culture and the wider Greco-Roman world well into Jesus’ day and beyond.
Aristotle, the Greek philosopher and mentor to Alexander the Great who lived a few hundred years before Jesus, summed up the ancient patriarchal view of women when he said, “…the male is by nature superior and the female inferior; the male, ruler; the female, subject”, and “Freedom in regard to women is detrimental…for they live without restraint in respect of every sort of dissoluteness and luxuriously”. Meaning women are overly emotional, soft, and have no self-control so they must be ruled over. In fact, Aristotle went even further than that. He believed all babies were supposed to be born male, but if something went wrong in utero, they were born female. Hence, he wrote that the female is just a “deformed male”.
This is the patriarchal world in which Jesus began his ministry, but right away, we see him start to turn it upside down. In Matthew 19, Jesus upends the patriarchal view of marriage when he is confronted by a group of religious men asking if they can break their marriage covenants and devalue and discard their wives whenever they grow tired of them. Jesus leaves no doubt in that conversation. He says, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no person is to separate. They said to Him, “Why, then, did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
Now, I know many people who use this passage as a justification against same-sex marriage, but think about the context of this passage. These men were not asking Jesus to define marriage, they were not asking what genders are allowed to marry. In fact, they were not asking anything about gender at all. They were asking if men could devalue their wives without any justification.
Jesus begins by quoting the second part of a passage in Genesis 1 that these religious men would have been very familiar with, one that would have called to their attention the fact that at the beginning, both men and women were created as image-bearers, both in the likeness of God, both of equal and immense value to God in their own rights. Jesus was telling them they were not to devalue their wives as was their custom, because their wives are beloved image-bearers as well. Then he quoted the second part of a passage in Genesis 2 to remind them how deeply God values committed, covenantal relationships. He was making the point that from the beginning, marriage has been the creation of a new, loving, covenantal, kinship bond, a heart relationship between two people that should not be easily broken. He was saying that breaking that bond for the sake of your own selfish reasons, because of your hardened hearts, and entering into it with another, was committing adultery in your heart.
The irony in this passage (which I think is intentional on Jesus’ part), is that the exception Jesus gives for breaking this covenantal bond of marriage is “sexual immorality”. The word Jesus uses is, “porneia” which means “fornication” or “idolatry”. It comes from the root “pernao” which means “a selling off”, or “to sell off one’s value”. It’s where we get the word “pornography”. So, in other words, sexual immorality, “porneia”, is when one uses sex in an idolatrous way. Instead of using it to convey covenantal love, it is elevated above love and used to devalue, objectify, disempower, exploit, abuse, or harm yourself or someone else. But here’s the ironic part, as we’ve seen, in patriarchal cultures, that is exactly how many men had been treating women. Perhaps, Jesus is telling these men that love has always been about valuing people, and marriage was always meant to be a committed, covenantal promise of love and value between two people, so stop devaluing your wives and start loving them.
And that’s exactly what Jesus did, he valued and elevated women throughout his ministry, but let’s focus in on just a few to illustrate the point. First, we see that before Jesus is even born, the monumental responsibility of bringing the long awaited, God-anointed Messiah into the world, not to mention the responsibility for his care and upbringing, was bestowed upon a teenage girl—Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Then, in Luke 10, we find the story of another Mary and her sister Martha. In this story, a meal is being prepared at Martha’s home, but instead of helping prepare the food, Mary is “seated at the Lord’s feet and listening to his word”. Martha is incensed, not only because Mary is not helping prepare the meal, but because her sister is breaking patriarchal gender boundaries. To “sit at the feet” of a rabbi meant that you were his student—his disciple—studying under him to follow in his footsteps. Remember, women were not allowed to study Torah, learn alongside men, or be schooled by a rabbi. But Jesus is permitting Mary to do exactly that. Scandalous! And to take it even further, he admonished Martha, “‘Martha, Martha’, the Lord answered ‘you are worried and upset about many things, but few things are needed—or indeed only one. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her’” (Luke 10:41-42 NIV).Along with Mary and Martha, many women followed Jesus as his disciples, they sat at his feet as his learners, and they were also the ones who were the financial benefactors of his ministry.
Another Mary who takes a prominent role in Jesus’ ministry is Mary Magdalene. She’s one of the women disciples who followed him from the beginning and helped sustain his ministry, but she is also credited in the Gospel of John as being the first person to see the resurrected Jesus, and the one tasked to deliver the good news of the resurrection to the men. So, you could say, Jesus appointed her to be the first apostle to the Apostles.
In fact, all the male gospel writers attest to the fact that it was the women disciples who were there at the cross, because all the men had fled; it was the women who were first at the tomb on that first Easter morning, because the men were hiding; and it was the women who were told to bring the news of the resurrection to the men, even though the men did not believe them. For these events to be written down as a part of the story of Jesus, would have been seen as a radical break in gender boundaries given the patriarchy of the time. Remember, women were seen as unreliable and easily compromised, that’s why they were unable to testify or bear witness. Apparently, Jesus doesn’t agree.
And Jesus’ followers continued to break gender boundaries and move forward out of old patriarchal ways of thinking, by elevating the status of women. There are many women leaders mentioned in the New Testament but here are just a few. In Romans 16 we learn that Junia, a woman who was in prison with Paul, was considered an apostle; and we meet Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae. In Acts 18 we meet Priscilla, a teacher of the gospel and a fellow co-worker with Paul, and in Acts 21 we learn that the Apostle Philip had four daughters who were all prophets.
Even some of the New Testament passages in Paul’s letters that seem to uphold patriarchal boundaries, can be seen as a step forward when interpreted in the context of the situation being addressed. For example, in 1 Corinthians 14, Paul says that women should be silent in church and if they have questions, they should ask their husbands at home. First, notice that women are in church along with the men, which was a radical shift from what was happening in the Temple. And second, remember, women had not previously been allowed to learn Scripture, so scholars suggest, in this case, that women may have been asking questions in church and disrupting the service. Paul is addressing order in worship in the Corinthian church and how women should get their questions answered.
1 Timothy 2 is probably one of the most quoted verses when trying to justify patriarchal gender roles in the church. First of all, it’s interesting to note, that because of differences in writing style, there was some debate in the early church, a debate that still continues today by the way, over whether or not Paul actually wrote this letter at all, even though he is named as the author in the greeting. The passage in question says, “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet” (1 Timothy 2:11-12 NASB). Again, note that women were called to learn along with the men, and some scholars believe their submissiveness could be interpreted as being submissive to God or the gospel, which would have been the same for men.
Scholars have also discovered that the second part of the passage could have been addressing a specific situation in Ephesus at that time. In that city there was a huge temple dedicated to the worship of the fertility goddess, Artemis, a temple which was completely female run, with all authority given to women alone. Some scholars believe that the author of 1 Timothy could have been addressing the situation of setting up women above men in the worship service as in the idolatrous temple, and instead, as we saw in the previous example, he was calling women to learn alongside the men without disruption.
No matter what we think about these verses, and how scholars interpret them, there is no doubt that even though patriarchy was still the norm, the New Testament authors began to move forward in their thinking about women and their value in the church. Paul summed it up for the Galatian church this way: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28 ESV).
Jesus set the trajectory of Scripture toward radical inclusion. In his embrace and elevation of women, he showed us that patriarchy and gender hierarchy are not his way, that all people, regardless of gender, are image-bearers, loved and valued by God, and that each and every one of us is invited to use our unique, God-given gifts and talents in whatever way we’re called, and wherever he leads. Women not only have a place at Jesus’ table, but they also have a vitally important role in his church today. They have a voice that needs to be heard.