Comments on: The Fall and Women http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/ Wed, 01 Feb 2012 23:11:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Does It Really Mean “Helpmate”? | Shawna R. B. Atteberry http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-161590 Does It Really Mean “Helpmate”? | Shawna R. B. Atteberry Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:39:31 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-161590 [...] that is a result of the Fall is now done away with (For more on what the Fall meant for women, see The Fall and Women). All of us have equal standing before God. Our relationship with God through Christ is what [...] [...] that is a result of the Fall is now done away with (For more on what the Fall meant for women, see The Fall and Women). All of us have equal standing before God. Our relationship with God through Christ is what [...]

]]> By: shawna http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-5692 shawna Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:11:02 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-5692 Helper only has a negative connotation because it's been given that by complementarians. I have heard this in sermons and in complentarian writings: women were created to help their husbands and be subordinate to them. And a "power equal to" is not PC--it is the literal translation first done by Old Testament scholar Dr. David Nolan Friedman in the 80s (he's also the endowed chair of Hebrew Studies at University of California). The Old Testament Professor at Nazarene Theological Seminary, Dr. Joseph Coleson has also done a lot of work on this phrase, and he has come to the same conclusion. It's not something that I came up, but an accepted translation of ezer cenedgo. They both agreed that since "helper" was used to subordinate women to men that the language should be changed. In fact as I said in the opening of "Does It Really Mean Helpmate?" the only time I saw Dr. Coleson mad was over the mistranslation of ezer cenedgo. God created men and women to be equal partners obeying him in their relationships, families, ministry, and anything else they do together. There's nothing PC about it: it's biblical. It's also backed up by Jesus in the way he treated the women in his life. He always treated them as equal to men. Helper only has a negative connotation because it’s been given that by complementarians. I have heard this in sermons and in complentarian writings: women were created to help their husbands and be subordinate to them. And a “power equal to” is not PC–it is the literal translation first done by Old Testament scholar Dr. David Nolan Friedman in the 80s (he’s also the endowed chair of Hebrew Studies at University of California). The Old Testament Professor at Nazarene Theological Seminary, Dr. Joseph Coleson has also done a lot of work on this phrase, and he has come to the same conclusion. It’s not something that I came up, but an accepted translation of ezer cenedgo. They both agreed that since “helper” was used to subordinate women to men that the language should be changed. In fact as I said in the opening of “Does It Really Mean Helpmate?” the only time I saw Dr. Coleson mad was over the mistranslation of ezer cenedgo.

God created men and women to be equal partners obeying him in their relationships, families, ministry, and anything else they do together. There’s nothing PC about it: it’s biblical. It’s also backed up by Jesus in the way he treated the women in his life. He always treated them as equal to men.

]]> By: Matthew http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-5313 Matthew Thu, 15 Feb 2007 02:38:52 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-5313 Something still rubs me the wrong way about this. I'm not saying that I think the Hebrews didn't have an appreciation for the role women played in their history (which was and is often a larger role than men). I'm just extremely weary of importing abstract liberal democratic ideals into the mouths of the biblical authors. I'm also not so sure that the word helper has the negative connotation in English that you suppose it has. If I ask someone for help with something it may be because the task is too large, so I need someone to pick up the slack, or I could ask someone to help so that they might learn from me, such as one does with children, or I could ask for help because the other person knows how to do the task better than me. So I'm not sure the word helper has any hierarchical connotation at all, unless the context makes it so. In Genesis 1-2 there doesn't seem to be any hierarchy implied by the context to impose any negative connotation to the use of the word helper, which I find much less unwieldy and PC than "a power equal to." Something still rubs me the wrong way about this. I’m not saying that I think the Hebrews didn’t have an appreciation for the role women played in their history (which was and is often a larger role than men). I’m just extremely weary of importing abstract liberal democratic ideals into the mouths of the biblical authors.

I’m also not so sure that the word helper has the negative connotation in English that you suppose it has. If I ask someone for help with something it may be because the task is too large, so I need someone to pick up the slack, or I could ask someone to help so that they might learn from me, such as one does with children, or I could ask for help because the other person knows how to do the task better than me. So I’m not sure the word helper has any hierarchical connotation at all, unless the context makes it so. In Genesis 1-2 there doesn’t seem to be any hierarchy implied by the context to impose any negative connotation to the use of the word helper, which I find much less unwieldy and PC than “a power equal to.”

]]> By: shawna http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-5283 shawna Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:28:27 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-5283 Actually the Hebrews did. See my post <a href="http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2010/04/21/does-it-really-mean-helpmate/" rel="nofollow">Does It Really Mean Helpmate?</a>, which goes through Genesis 1—2. My series on <a href="http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/career-women-of-the-bible-series/" rel="nofollow">Career Women of the Bible</a> shows how this equality does come through time to time in the Bible, even with the patriarchal culture God and these women had to work with. Actually the Hebrews did. See my post Does It Really Mean Helpmate?, which goes through Genesis 1—2. My series on Career Women of the Bible shows how this equality does come through time to time in the Bible, even with the patriarchal culture God and these women had to work with.

]]> By: Matthew http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-5264 Matthew Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:52:11 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-5264 Did the Hebrews have a notion of equality? I don't feel comfortable reading that into the text, as it is a relatively recent idea. Did the Hebrews have a notion of equality? I don’t feel comfortable reading that into the text, as it is a relatively recent idea.

]]> By: Kim http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-4140 Kim Sat, 03 Feb 2007 05:20:43 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-4140 Good job on this, just wanted to add that in the passage “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” the word "and" is also "but" in the Hebrew and the word for "rule" is that of a tyrant not a designated place of authority. So, you could translate this, "Your desire shall be for your husband, but he will dominate you." God is not giving a new hierarchy but stating the consequences of the sin. The wife will now desire or long for her husband rather than God and he will dominate her now rather than be a co-ruler with her. Good job on this, just wanted to add that in the passage “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” the word “and” is also “but” in the Hebrew and the word for “rule” is that of a tyrant not a designated place of authority. So, you could translate this, “Your desire shall be for your husband, but he will dominate you.” God is not giving a new hierarchy but stating the consequences of the sin. The wife will now desire or long for her husband rather than God and he will dominate her now rather than be a co-ruler with her.

]]> By: shawna http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-4113 shawna Sat, 03 Feb 2007 00:37:17 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-4113 Thank you Hugo. Bill Spenser is supposed to be looking at several of my articles, but I haven't heard anything, and I don't know how much of a nuisance to make myself. Thank you Hugo. Bill Spenser is supposed to be looking at several of my articles, but I haven’t heard anything, and I don’t know how much of a nuisance to make myself.

]]> By: Hugo http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/comment-page-1/#comment-4110 Hugo Sat, 03 Feb 2007 00:15:07 +0000 http://www.shawnaatteberry.com/2007/02/01/the-fall-and-christian-women/#comment-4110 Wonderful post, Shawna; I'm permalinking to it. You should be writing for CBE constantly, you do a great job rebutting the complementarian stance. Wonderful post, Shawna; I’m permalinking to it. You should be writing for CBE constantly, you do a great job rebutting the complementarian stance.

]]>