Women’s Role in Scripture
It is the intention of this study to look at what Scripture says regarding the role of women. The following are to be considered:
Within Creation p.1;
Man/Woman p.1;
Chay-vah/Eve p. 2;
Within Ancient Jewish Society p. 3;
Betrothal p. 5;
Within the household p. 6;
Within Greco-Roman Society p. 6;
Within Contemporary Society p. 9;
Within the Renewed Covenant Society p. 10;
The lay woman p. 11;
The woman in leadership p. 13;
Miryam, the Master’s mother p. 16;
The Chosen Women p.17;
References and Credits p. 18.
Women have invariably been barred from all spiritual roles within an assembly, but can this be supported by scripture? Does the restriction upon women support the misogynistic hierarchy that is self-sustaining in allowing only men to have a teaching ministry? Are women being subjugated or are they following Scripture?
Throughout generations, Scripture has not been made available in the common tongue so that its interpretation was given by a relatively select few. Many martyrs were killed trying to get the Scriptures to the lay people. Once Scriptures were made available, the grip of the religious authorities was lost. There is no contradiction in Scripture IN THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT. When an apparent contradiction arises, it is due to a mis-translation, a mis-understanding or an abuse of Scripture for specific ends.
Within Creation
Man/Woman:
“Yahuah`Elohiym formed man in His own image. In Yahuah `Elohiym He formed him; male and female He formed them. Yahuah `Elohiym blessed them (both). Yahuah `Elohiym said to them (both), ‘Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it.’” (Gen. 1:27, 28a) (my parenthesis). This is the first mention that humanity consists of both a male and female component. Under Yahuah `Elohiym’s natural order of things, it took both male (#H2145 *551 זָכָר zar-khar ) and female (#H5347 *1409b נְקֵבָה nay-kay-var) to procreate. The importance of this union is in the fact that this is the first commandment given by Yahuah `Elohiym to Mankind.
“Yahuah `Elohiym said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.’” (Gen. 2:18). “Therefore, a man will leave his father and his mother, and will join with his wife and they will be one flesh.” (Gen. 2:24). Adamis shortly to embark upon the first of the tasks Yahuah `Elohiym has for him. This is the only part of
-1-
Creation that we learn that deems to be bad and Yahuah `Elohiym sets about making a companion suitable for Adam. #H5828 *1598a עֵזֶר ay-zair – helper or assistance, usually of a divine nature (bible-history.com). #H5048 *1289a נֶגֶד ne-ged – before, is invariably mis-translated as suitable. Of over fifteen possible meanings, there is none that even suggests or infers the woman’s position subordinate to Adam. In fact, נֶגֶד ne-gedrefers to one that is corresponding or equal to and adequate for the divine purpose. Amongst all the animals, there was no נֶגֶד ne-gedto be found (BDB).
It has been said that Adam suffered from loneliness after watching the pairing of the animals and Yahuah `Elohiym determined that a mate must be made. However, this is a western (Greek) paradigm in that loneliness is an abstract concept. The original Hebrew viewpoint is a physical state, as Adam was without a suitable companion and was alone. A person can be alone without being lonely as a person may experience loneliness whilst be in the company of a crowd (verywell.com).
“The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She will be called Woman because she was taken from Man.’” (Gen. 2:23). #H802 *137a אִשָּׁה i-shar-wife, woman. #376 *83a אִישׁ eesh – man, husband. There may well be a word-play in this verse, but it signifies the very close, intimate relationship between Woman and Man. Yahuah `Elohiym provided the woman as a physical and intellectual compatible partner (Harris et al).
“The man named his wife Chay-vah, because she was the mother of all living.” (Gen. 3:20). #H2332חַוָּה Chay-vah – life, living. This does notmean Chay-vah was the mother of all creatures and plant life. Rather, the verseis the subject of poor translation and would be better translated ‘…mother of all clankind/humankind.’(Hertzp.12 quoting W. Robertson Smith). In this verse, Adam has given Chay-vah the name (#H8034 *2405 שֵׁם shame – name) that will distinguish her from all other people: who she is. However, in Gen.2:23, Adam has called (#H7121 *2063 קָרָא ka-rar– called) Chay-vah woman. This refers to her primary attribute: what she is. This is why this study (and as all studies should) be critical of the wording of translations.
Chay-vah/Eve:
If Chay-vah is the name given to the first woman, from where does the name ‘Eve’ come? The above paragraph shows that Chay-vah is Hebrew for life or living.Chay-vah is translated in the Septuagint (LXX) as zωή zoh-ee. zωή zoh-ee features in the Gnostic mythology of Creation (gnosis.org). The early Gnostic teachings (The Testimony of Truth) regarding Creation rely heavily upon Judaic traditions where Chay-vah is very close in sound to the Aramaic for serpent (Birger). Another Greek word meaning life is #G2096 Εὕα hue-ar and it is this word that has been transliterated into Eve. It was to partly counter the emerging Gnostic teachings within the Ephesus Assembly that Sha`ul wrote to Timothy (newlife.id.au) and against the Jewish and Greek attitudes towards women (Barclay(1) p.76). It may well be that the early Church Fathers, in distancing themselves and thus the Church from the Judaic foundations, utilized this transliteration. This would have occurred contemporaneously with the transformation of Yahusha into Ἰησοῦς Yeh-soos that would morph into Jesus. As Eve is a transliteration of a translation, it may likened to a commentary and thus open to opinion (chabad.org).
-2-
Therefore, from Creation, it can be seen that the roles of women were a helper and wife for man and a mother of children.
Nevertheless, the most important roleChay-vah has to play is when, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring (זֶרַע zeh-rare) and her offspring (זֶרַע zeh-rare). He will bruise your head, and you will bruise His heel.”” (Gen. 3:15). So is the battle joined. HaSatan did not know whom of all Chay-vah’s descendants will be its Destroyer. Therefore, at each and every generation, HaSatan had to wait to see who is the Chosen One.
It is of the utmost importance to note that it was not from the seed of Adam but from the seed of Chay-vah that the ultimate הַזָּ֑רַע (HaZeh-rare), the Master Yahusha HaMashiach would come. The outworking of this prophecy is that it was not from the seed of Man but from a young virgin that הַזָּ֑רַע was conceived, “Miryam said to the angel, ‘How can this be, seeing I am a virgin?’ The angel answered her, ‘The Ruach HaQodesh will come on you, and the power of Ha`Elyon will overshadow you. Therefore, also the Set Apart One who is born from you will be called the Son of `Eloakh.’” (Luke 1:34, 35). (For a fuller study please refer to the Maxi Bible Study The Seed – First Generation Assembly).
Within Ancient Jewish Society
From early in Jewish history, women were subjugated with the reasoning (excuse?) that Woman was made secondary to Man and was the cause of death entering into the world. This was strengthened around the 3rd. Century B.C.E. by the surrounding nations, influenced by other Semitic, Egyptian and particularly Greco-Roman societies that kept woman repressed (jwa.org/post-biblical). This subjugation led to women being segregated from men in the Temple (bible-history.com) and later in synagogues. By the time the codified Oral Law in the Babylonian Talmud – Succah 51a-52b (circa 500 C.E.), segregation was considered mandatory. Superficially, this was supposed to prevent the men from being distracted by women’s bodies, but of deeper concern was the innate differences between a man’s soul and a woman’s soul caused by a difference in their respective physiological and psychological make-up (chabad.org/…separation; www.jewfaq.org).
However, this separation can be viewed to be symbolic of the separate but complementary roles allocated to Woman and Man by Yahuah `Elohiym;
(i) Woman building a home and her family, “Yahuah `Elohiym fashioned the rib, which He had taken from the man, into a woman, and brought her to the man.” (Gen. 2:22). #H1129 בָּנָה build, establish; *255 synonymous with child-birth, weaning, rearing and teaching her children and establishing a family; ~1037-H (V) alluding to intelligence, understanding, wisdom, intuition #995 בִּין bean ~1037-M (M) dividing wall; (V) teacher, discern.
These meanings are shown by the woman’s role in child-birth, “To the woman He said, ‘I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. In pain you will bring forth children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.’” (Gen. 3:16); and in refusing to take part in the Golden Calf worship (Gen. 32:1-10).
-3-
(ii) Man with the provision of food for, “cursed is the ground for your sake. In toil you will eat of it all the days of your life… By the sweat of your face will you eat bread until you return to the ground,” (Gen 3:17b, 19a).
Nevertheless, it is important to remember that for the vast majority of people then, as it is today, was subsistence living with all members of the household tending the fields and animals.
Tal Ilan relates how historically women held positions of senior leadership within synagogues (jwa.org/post-biblical). The historian Josephus records how women played major roles in secular life as Queen (Josephus Ant. 13:407-32) and later in the revolt against Rome (Josephus Wars 3.303; 7.393). This is further expounded in The Role of Women – Judaism 101 (JewFAQ) regarding the four Matriarchs, prophetesses, Miryam, Na`omi and Rut These roles have been ‘conveniently’ overlooked, played down or eradicated by later Judaic and Christian authorities.
The only similarity between the doctrines of the Jewish communities and Christian Churches is their denigration of the role and then subjugation of women, contrary to their true scriptural role. This can be seen in the high regard women were held in the 1st. and 2nd. Century synagogues. In the earlier years, there is clear evidence that women attended the synagogue and were generally not separated from the men. Indeed, not only were they allowed to read Torah to the mixed assembly, but had major leadership roles to play. (hebraicthought.org/…synagogue).
Therefore, a woman had no standing in society in later centuries, being known only as a daughter then as a wife. This misogynistic attitude was strengthened by the divorce laws. The Tanakh (Written Law) has concessions for divorce, but does not condone the practice, “He said to them, ‘Moshe, because of the hardness of your hearts, allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it has not been so’” (Matt. 19:8). It does not legislate on male-initiated proceedings, but this became part of Rabbinic (Oral) Law, codified in the Babylonian Talmud and Mishnah. However, when a wife became a mother, she became a valued member of society. Although she had no overt authority, she had a great influence upon the family (bibleandjewishstudies.net) and upon her race.
Having said that, Rabbis acknowledged one area where women were superior and that was in #H2617 *698a חֶסֶד khe-said– lovingkindness, mercy, loyalty (to a covenant) and is of a voluntary nature. This was in relation to the giving of charity (wjudaism.library), as a woman was deemed more compassionate. Moreover, since the Second Temple destruction in 70 C.E. the Rabbis had to look for another means of atonement other than sacrifices. “For I desire mercy (חֶסֶד khe-said), and not sacrifice; And the knowledge of Yahuah more than burnt offerings.” (Hos. 6:6). However, this is not the meaning or intent of this verse. The passage refers to the breaking of a covenant and points to the atoning work of the Messiah, “Come, and let us return to Yahuah… After two days will He revive us. On the third day He will raise us up, And we will live before Him.” (Hos. 6:1, 2). This verse would be better understood as “For I desire you to desire loyalty to my covenant, and not sacrifices…”. This voluntary fidelity is what Yahuah requires; a willing heart and not out of duty or obligation (see also below In Greco-Roman society).
-4-
It was tradition that a child’s identity came from the paterilineal but from around the 2nd. Century C.E. this identity would come from the matrilineal (wjudaism.library). Modern Jewish culture reaffirms that a child is a Jew if its mother is a Jew (jewishanswers.org). Many scholars consider that if a Jewish woman was raped, a possible outcome of the persecution during and after the Jewish Wars (with Rome), the child would take her identity rather than an unknown father. This may be one reason, but a more probable cause would be that it was the mother that imparted the child’s spiritual and religious education during the early, most impressionable years (wjudaism.library).
“He (Sha`ul) came to Derbe and Lystra: and behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Yehudi (Jew) who believed; but his father was a Yevanit (Gentile). Sha`ul wanted to have him (Timothy) go out with him, and he took and circumcised him because of the Yehudim (Jews) who were in those parts; for they all knew that his father was a Yevanit.” (Acts 16:1, 3). From this passage, it is obvious that Timothy had a Jewish mother and Gentile (maybe Greek) father. Therefore, it would have been his mother who reared Timothy and he had good reports from fellow Jews in the area. Nevertheless, because he was not circumcised, he was not considered fully a Jew. Hence it was necessary for Timothy to be circumcised; not to become a Jew and most certainly not for his salvation, but to be in full (and acceptable to other Jews) covenant relationship. This passage refers to a time in the middle of the 1st. Century C.E. and before matrilineal identity was accepted by Jewish authorities. The overarching emphasis in Jewish Society was the well-being, safety and security of women. They grew up in a household under the protection of father (or male guardian) until they were betrothed. At this time, they went to live with the husband’s family.
Betrothal:
Betrothal was the period between a marriage agreement and the taking up of sexual relations as husband and wife.
The man (or a member of his household or match-maker) always made the first approach to the woman’s father (bible.ca). After discussions, an agreement was reached as to the conditions of the marriage. The woman was then consulted as to whether she would be the wife. Once this decision was made the wife then became betrothed. This can be seen in the beautiful chapter Gen. 24:1-67. (Incidentally, this is the longest chapter in the Torah.) In this chapter, Abraham has assigned his most trusted servant to find a suitable (נֶגֶד ne-ged?) wife for his son, Yitz-chak. Once betrothed, the woman had all the rights and obligations of a wife, but without the consummation (cf Matt. 1:18-25).
The formal agreement was called a ketubbah, originally a verbal agreement but later generations produced a formal written agreement. This would include details of the dowry and promises of the husband to the wife’s proper maintenance, security and protection and the consequences of the breakdown of this contract (Edersheim p.138). It would also provide the length of time the betrothal would take. This may vary from days to many years. Young children may become betrothed but each would remain under their father’s protection until both became of age (Josephus Ant. 17:12-18) (bible.ca).
However, it was not uncommon for marriages to be arranged for political considerations (bible.ca). This usually was for the purposes of cementing peaceful relations between warring clans or nations and the ketubbah would form part of the peace treaty between both sides (Josephus Ant. 16:221-228; War 1:555-560).
-5-
An exception to the general rule that it is the man who approaches the woman’s father may be seen in the case of a Levirate Marriage (Deut. 25:5-10). When a woman’s husband dies leaving no children, the man’s brother, if he is free to do so, is to marry the widow. This is to ensure that a man will leave heirs to his estate and for his name’s continuance. If the brother(s) refuse, the duty may fall upon another close relative. In this case, it was the widow that usually instigated the marriage.
Within the household:
The term ‘household’ not only covers members of the same extended family, clan or tribe, but also would include hired workers and guests (hebraicthought.org/…household).
“These words, which I command you this day, shall be on your heart; and you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise up.” (Deut. 6:6, 7). It was laid upon the father to teach his children Yahuah’s commandments. However, the phrase ‘your children’ – לְבָנֶ֔יךָ la-bane-eh-ka comes from the word #H1121 *254 בֵּן bane that has the ambiguous meaning of son or children (whether all male or mixed male and female). With the repression of women being codified in the Babylonian Talmud, it is not surprising that this ambiguity dictates that only sons and not daughters are to be taught (jwa.org/learned-women). Mothers were instrumental in the nurturing and teaching of the young child and then the older girls.
“and that older women likewise be reverent in behaviour, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good; that they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sober-minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that `Eloakh’s word may not be blasphemed.” (Titus 2:3-5). Sha`ul was brought up in an orthodox Jewish household, and this may have been in mind when penning this letter to Titus, indicating that Sha`ul intended that Renewed Covenant Believers should follow traditional Jewish households.
Traditionally, women had the responsibility for the fulfilment of three commandments; challah, “Of the first of your dough you shall offer up a cake for a heave-offering: as the heave-offering of the threshing floor, so shall you heave it.” (Num. 15:20); niddah, “If a man lies with a woman having her monthly period, and uncovers her nakedness; he has made naked her fountain, and she has uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.” (Lev. 20:18); and nerot (traditional lighting of candles) (jewfaq.org)).
Within Greco-Roman Society
Women were generally isolated from details of everyday life, and for the vast majority of people, men as well as women, largely went unrecorded. Ancient history tends to document major events and personalities. Thus, it is difficult to make an accurate assessment of societal status of the common people in ancient Jewish, Greek and Roman society (enrichmentjournal.ag.org).
-6-
It would appear that for the common peasant, life was similar the world over and throughout time; to survive the day, provide food and shelter for the family and pay whatever taxes were due. Therefore, in society, the upper classes divided gender along the lines of male/outdoors/labour/commerce/politics and female/indoors/cottage crafts/family. Respectable women did not go out in public unless accompanied by a suitable male and excluded from public speaking.
However, by 200 B.C.E., women were becoming more emancipated and had more freedom over their lives, especially in the areas of commerce, marriage and divorce (enrichmentjournal.ag.org). This emancipation spread from Greek society into a Roman society that considered the Greek society as being more cultured. Marriages were generally arranged between families for socio-economic reasons and in order to be married, all that was needed was consent between the two parties. As it was very easy to marry, so it was easy to divorce, with historians noting that it was common for upper class men and women to be married and divorced several times. The only restrictions upon the divorce were that men kept the children (leaving mothers reluctant to divorce) and women were given back their dowries (leaving men reluctant to or unable to afford a divorce) (womenintheancientworld.com).
It was generally considered that by the 1st. Century C.E. women had no legitimate role in spiritual worship. In fact, Jewish women were given only the very basic Torah education that enabled them to fulfil the relevant female commandments and were forbidden to follow rabbis. The restriction on teaching Torah to women was so vehemently exercised that, according to Author M. Silver who quotes of R. Eliezer ben Azariah saying, “Let Torah be burnt before being handed over to a woman.” (bible-history.com). Was this prohibition a means of keeping women subjugated, not able to read, study or be taught what role Yahuah `Elohiym created them for? However, this concept may derive from traditions dating from medieval times and a much more progressive (retrospective?) view should be taken.
When an itinerant Rabbi named Yahusha ben Yosip from Nasrath, commenced His ministry in Galil, many came to hear what He had to say. “‘The Ruach of `Eloakh is upon me, because He has anointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to proclaim release to the captives, recovering of sight to the blind, to deliver those who are crushed, and to proclaim the acceptable year of `Eloakh.’ He closed the scroll, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of all in the assembly were fastened on Him. He began to tell them, ‘Today, this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.’ All testified about Him, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth, and they said, ‘Is this not Yosip’s son?’” (Luke 4:18-21). This Teacher, expounded the Torah as it had never been before. Great crowds flocked to hear what He had to say, coming out of their towns and following Him to deserted locations (cf Mark 6:33-44).
Yahusha’s teachings were always in accordance with the Written Law (Torah) whereas the authorities interpreted Scripture in light of the Oral Law and traditions and expediency. It was not, therefore, surprising that His expounding of Scripture was often in conflict with that of the authorities (cf Matt.12:1-8; John 9:1-34). “They (the authorities) sent their disciples
-7-
along with the Herodians to Him (Yahusha), saying, ‘Teacher, we know that you are honest, and teach the way of `Eloakh in truth, for no matter who you teach, you do not take note of the status of any person.’” (Matt. 22:16).
“Their Scribes and the Pharisees murmured against His disciples, saying, ‘Why do you eat and drink with the tax collectors and sinners?’” (Luke 5:30). Although the Master ate with women not of His household, He was never criticised for His association with the women.Nevertheless, a number of women ran the risk of incurring the authorities’ wrath by following Yahusha and were amongst His staunchest disciples, “Many women were there watching from afar, who had followed Yahusha from the Galil, serving Him.” (Matt. 27:55) in spite of probable persecution of or ostracizing by the authorities, linking them with the sinners/prostitutes that the Master welcomed, “Yahusha said to them, ‘Most assuredly I tell you that the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the Kingdom of `Eloakh before you’” (Matt. 21:31).
Kreider argues that the growth of the early Church had very little to do with the direct preaching of the Good News, but more to do with Believers living a life according to the Scriptures (Keider p. 10). Early persecution by Jewish authorities post-Resurrection and later by pagan societies in the Diaspora, was not conducive to open evangelisation. A systematic programme of out-reach was impossible. Nevertheless, growth was evident throughout the Greco-Roman world.
The Messianic lifestyle of the early Believers was radically different to that of the pagan world, in that it was not necessary to vocally proclaim the Good News because it was apparent in the everyday dealings with Believers. Not only were Believers looking after the vulnerable within their own community, but actively sought to help all in need of healing, food, shelter and assisting in births and burials, where ever the need was required.
“In like manner, wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; so that, even if any do not obey the Word, they may be won by the behaviour of their wives without a word; seeing your pure behaviour in fear. Let your beauty be not just the outward adorning…but in the hidden person of the heart, in the incorruptible adornment of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of `Eloakh very precious.” (1 Pt. 3:1-4). Kreider further argues that the most significant factor in making the faith of Believers attractive, even during the time of persecution, was in the role of women (Kreider p. 87). Scarcely anything is written by the early, male writers, scholars and leaders of the early Church, for various misogynistic reasons, but it is evident that the early driving force behind Church growth, was the women of faith. Society in general lends to more female participation in religion than men, and it was common that a wife would come to faith first. It was such situations that HaRuach inspired Keefa to instruct how a believing wife should live with a non-believing husband.
Life for a wife in this scenario was very difficult. The Greco-Roman philosophy of patria potestas (possession of the father) ensured that women had no protection and very little legal standing. Nevertheless, by their acts it was not only husbands coming to faith but other members of their pagan communities.
-8-
Within Contemporary Society
In the 17th. Century, there was an Agricultural Revolution in Britain that resulted in a rapid escalation of population; more food was available and a larger workforce was required.
Women (and children) labourers were used mostly at sowing and harvest time, whereas men worked most of the year on the land. Thus, women had some time in which they could work off the land. According to Joyce Burnette, prior to the Industrial Revolution in Britain in the 18th. Century, women were generally occupied in child-rearing and household duties, agricultural labourers or working at home in traditional cottage industries. These included spinning and weaving, pin-lace making and straw plaiting (eh.net).
However, with the Industrial Revolution, there was a huge migration of these large families off the land and into the industrial towns. Wages for men were significantly better with work all year round. Along with the men, their wives and children, young single men and women sought employment in the new ‘manufactories’ to be later abbreviated to ‘factories’. The loss of people from the land, especially the women, coincided with the decline of the cottage industries caused by the mechanisation of these traditional crafts. There was an associated increase in wealthy merchants and their households, requiring domestic staff that was readily available with the influx of women.
It is important to understand that the idea of ‘childhood’ derives from this era, and must be considered as a Victorian social construct. Children went from being an essential part of the household labour force to an essential part of the factory labour force, both in order to support the family economy (Blablawriting.com).
Women were allowed to do most jobs, but were kept out of the better paid supervisory roles and lucrative mule-spinning. The salaries for women for similar jobs and piece rates were 20% to 55% of the men’s rate. Male unions, misogyny and ideology of the male workers and management were instrumental in keeping women segregated and in low-wage employment (galbithink.org). As society developed, the necessity for child labour and then for female labour, diminished.
Nevertheless, one positive outcome of factory work was that women met in large groups to discuss home and working life. At this time, only middle- and upper-class, land-owning men could vote. Women, no matter what their status was, were not allowed to vote. A woman’s role was in home-making and child-rearing and not to engage in political matters. It was considered part of a husband’s authoritative role to assume responsibility for his wife’s well-being, and that included her political views (bbc.co.uk/…suffrage). Further false arguments were put forward against women voting, in that a woman’s place was in the home, most women did not want to vote or that women were not knowledgeable in public and political affairs and thus incapable of making a qualified decision, irrespective of their social status.
In 1897, Millicent Fawcett founded the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies. This was set up to lobby for women to be able to vote, as this non-militant was regarded as the best route to foster change in women’s overall conditions. However, these were meetings of middle-class women property owners who want the law to change in line with male voters. The N.U.W.S.S. were to be known as suffragists and, in time, began to attract working-class women who had no other voice.
-9-
Yet, by 1903, very little progress had been made using peaceful, law-abiding methods. This led Emiline Pankhurst to found the Women’s Social and Political Union. The W.S.P.U. set on a more militant course of action, involving disruption of political meetings, arson attacks, and when imprisoned, hunger strikes. The new, organised, militant campaigners came to be known as suffragettes. Along with differing tactics to the suffragists, the suffragette movement wanted universal enfranchisement for women. Only when a woman could vote and have any influence, would her situation change. In 1907, a schism formed in the W.S.P.U. with a third suffrage group, the Women’s Freedom League being founded (bbc.co.uk/…suffrage).
The suffrage movement was always seen to be purely about getting to vote in Parliament elections. However, the ability to vote would mean that women had the power to influence the making of laws and abolish male subjugation and bias. Prior to 1884, a woman’s property and substance automatically became her husband’s upon marriage. In 1884, a further amendment to the Married Women’s Property Act was passed, allowing women to retain possession of their pre-nuptial property. If this property formed a business, the woman could retain ownership, and that included the payment of any taxes levied against the business. Although women paid taxes on these businesses, they had no representation in Parliament. Thus were the seeds of women’s suffrage sown.
Women in the United States of America were years ahead of their British ‘sisters’. The first recorded, organised meeting was held at Seneca Falls, N.Y. on 19-20th. July 1846, where a Declaration of Sentiments was signed. However, instead of moving toward women’s enfranchisement, in 1868, the 14th. Amendment was passed into law in which the word ‘male’ was inserted to describe eligible voters. This resulted in an escalation in the campaign for suffrage with the slogan being penned, “Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less”. This was the situation until the 19th. Amendment to the Constitution was passed giving universal enfranchisement (scolastic.com).
It was not until 1918 that the situation in the U.K. improved. The Representation of the People Act was passed due to public opinion after soldiers returned from World War I. All men over 21 but only middle-class women over 30 were eligible to vote, those who own land or were the wives of landowners. It would not be until 1928 that all women over 21 could vote in Parliamentary elections (bbc/…votes).
For comparison here are some dates women became eligible to vote world-wide: U.K. – 1928; U.S.A. – 1920; New Zealand 1893; Russia – 1918; Albania – 1920; Kazakhstan 1924; Mongolia 1924 (womensuffrage.org). The last four countries would not normally be considered as progressive-thinking governments. Although the Sex Discrimination Act came into force in 1975, by 2022, there were still large discrepancies in the opportunities and salaries and campaigning was still on-going.
Within the Renewed Covenant Society
This study hopefully shows that throughout history since creation, women have suffered bias and subjugation at the hands of men. The above study is a measure of the world-view of the role and value of women in society. It is now imperative to see how women are viewed within the Renewed Covenant (New Testament), and to compare both narratives.
-10-
The lay woman:
“Their wives in the same way must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things.” (1 Tim. 3:11). Pastors’ and deacons’ wives are to set an example to the other women of the assembly by having a restrained character, not given to frivolous activities or idle and malicious gossip.
“So also, that women (appear) in a chaste fashion of dress; and that their adorning be with modesty, and chastity; not with curls or with gold, or with pearls, or with splendid robes; but with good works as is becoming to women who profess reverence for `Elohiym” (1 Tim. 2: 9, 10 AENT). All women all called upon to dress modestly so as not to distract or boast about the wealth and position. What should be attractive to onlookers are the deeds carried out by both women and men.
“exhort…the elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, in all purity.” (1 Tim. 5:1b, 2) so that they are respected, “Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which Yahuah your `Elohiym gives you” (Exod. 20:12). The elderly women should be highly valued by the assembly for their knowledge, wisdom and understanding so that they may teach the younger women how to be good wives and mothers, “that they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sober-minded, chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that `Eloakh’s word may not be blasphemed.” (Titus 2:4).
This verse is one proof text that forms part of the false doctrine that has denigrated women throughout this age, along with misogynistic authorities that have latched onto the word ‘subjection’ as meaning wives to be under the dominance of their husbands. This is as far away from the truth as the word could possibly take it. #G5293 ὑποτάσσω hoo-po-ta-so is the term used for the authority the ruling powers have over the general public (Kittel & Friedrich p.1156). These local rulers do not have an authority of themselves, but is derived from the divinely appointed Caesars, Kings and Emperors of the Greco-Roman world. With this authority comes the responsibility of the Caesars etc. to provide a peaceful and secure living environment. This is how ὑποτάσσω hoo-po-ta-so must be considered.
“Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to our MasterYahusha. For the husband is the head of the wife, and the Messiah also is the Head of the assembly, being Himself the Saviour of the body.” (Eph. 5:22, 23). #G5293 ὑποτάσσω hoo-po-ta-so to submit, subject (cf Col. 3:18; 1 Peter 3:1). This word has a negative connotation in that it has been considered to mean that the husband takes complete control or domination over the wife. This is incorrect. The wife voluntarily places herself under the guidance and authority of her husband both in secular and spiritual matters.
“Be submitting (Ὑποτασσόμενοι hoo-po-ta-so-men-oy) yourselves to one another in reverence of Christ: wives to their own husbands as to the Lord for [the] husband is head of the wife as also – Christ [is the] head of the church He Himself Savior of the body” (Eph. 5:21-23 biblehub.com). This interlinear passage shows the caution necessary when dealing with traditional translations. It is not only women who should be submissive, but all men and women should voluntarily place themselves under the guidance of other men and women, if they in turn are under the guidance of HaRuach.
-11-
“But as the assembly is subject (ὑποτάσσεται hoo-po-ta-se-tie) to the Messiah, so let the wives also be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as the Messiah also loved the assembly, and gave Himself for it…Even so ought husbands also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself. For no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourishes and cherishes it, even as the Master also does the assembly;” (Eph. 5:24-29). It is, therefore, a husband’s obligation to ensure that all his decisions are based upon the well-being of his wife (and children). The husband must not dominate his wife. This was the true meaning of the word ὑποτάσσω hoo-po-ta-so. The wife was to voluntarily put herself under the `Eloakh-given authority of the husband, who in turn was to love his wife, more than their own life.
“And being found in human form, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross.” (Phil. 2:8).In writing to the Assembly at Philippi, Sha`ul has a similar idea in mind. The Master Yahusha divested Himself of all Deity in order to become subject to death. In humbling Himself, the Master willingly submitted to the humiliation and agony of crucifixion, for the good of all Mankind. Likewise, a husband must be able to subject himself to the uttermost, for the good of his wife. In showing his willingness to do so, a wife must have no qualms that all her husband does is ultimately for the good of her and her family.
“Honour widows who are widows indeed.” (1 Tim. 5:3). Elderly childless widows who need help are to be supported by the assembly whereas younger widows are encouraged to remarry so as to refrain from idleness, “But refuse younger widows…Besides, they also learn to be idle…gossips and busybodies…I desire therefore that the younger widows marry, bear children, rule the household, and give no occasion to the adversary for reviling.” (1 Tim. 5:11-14). There are several times where Sha`ul states his own opinions and clearly indicates that this is not a direct word from Yahuah; this is one such case. If a woman can find another husband, she should do so and, “do not let the assembly be burdened; that it might relieve those who are widows indeed.” (1 Tim. 5:16). Nevertheless, this is to be considered advice to a young assembly leader, but not a commandment for, “There was one Hanah, a prophetess… (she was of a great age, having lived with a husband seven years from her virginity, and she had been a widow for about eighty-four years), who did not depart from the temple, worshipping with fastings and petitions night and day.” (Luke 2:36, 37).
“As in all the assemblies of the set apart ones, let your wives keep silent in the assemblies, for it has not been permitted for them to speak; but let them be in subjection (ὑποτάσσω), as the law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home, for it is shameful for a woman to chatter in the assembly.” (1 Cor. 14:33b-35). Sha`ul does not clarify as to what part of Torah he is referring. After searching numerous different versions of Scripture, none have any marginal or foot note, drawing the reader’s attention to the referred passage. It can only, therefore, be assumed that Sha`ul was not referring to the Tanakh, but to Oral Law or tradition. He may be mindful of his upbringing, given a woman’s status in Jewish society (see above) was, although not prohibited, women rarely, if ever, had the opportunity to speak out in public. This passage also begs the question of what should a woman do who is not married or is widowed. How is she to learn and develop?
It may well be that Sha`ul is not commanding women to be silent according to the Law, but
-12-
in being submissive (ὑποτάσσω hoo-po-ta-so) to their husbands. There again, there is no Tanakh reference for women to be submissive to their husbands in public.
Usually when Sha`ul does not explain himself with regards to the Law, it is because it is taken that Law is well known to the recipients. However, the Corinthians were mostly Greek and so would not be conversant with Torah and Greek women were becoming more emancipated and thus more vocal and disruptive in public.
This liberty may well be the basis of this passage. #G2980 λαλέω la-lay-oh – to vocalise sounds, to babble or prattle in contradistinction to speaking intelligible words (Kittel & Friedrich p.506 4a) and is used several times in 1 Corinthians Ch. 14 and has the connotation of speaking out or forth (as in v2 tongues or v6 prophecy). This whole chapter is not about what is said in the meetings, but about how it is said. It may well be that some of the Corinthian Assembly women were not well educated and not able to follow even the basic thread of a preacher’s message. This may lead to speaking out contentiously or given over to idle and distracting chatter.
The emancipation of women, although becoming more accepted in Greco-Roman society, would be contrary to Jewish society and could cause a rift between Jewish and Gentile worshipers. Barclay adds that this prohibition should not be taken out of its historical context given Sha`ul’s teaching on equality between the genders particularly in 1 Cor. 11:4, 5 and Gal 3:28 (Barclay(2)). 1 Corinthians may well be the written reply of Sh`aul to the Assembly leaders, partly to counter any possible division between Jewish and Gentile factions’ according to their traditions.
It has been said that this passage in 1 Corinthians 14 was added at a later time by a Deutero-Pauline writer as in 1 Timothy (Barrat). It was a common practice amongst Jewish teachers to ascribe their teaching under the guise or ‘in the name’ of a former well-respected and acknowledged sage.
As in all Biblical exegesis, if there is a seemingly contradiction then it is we readers (of the original manuscripts and their translations) that have got it wrong. No one passage should be taken as doctrine, especially if there are others passages that are in opposition to it.
The woman in leadership:
There is an on-going dichotomy about whether women can be preachers, pastors or teachers within an assembly or that Scripture prohibits women in any leadership role. “He (`Eloakh) gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;” (Eph 4:11). “`Eloakh has set some in the assembly: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracle workers, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, and various kinds of languages.” (1 Cor. 12:28). In penning these epistles to the two Assemblies, Sha`ul bands together similar groups of people. In the Ephesian Epistle, Sha`ul gives a list of what are commonly known as ‘Offices’ of the Ruach HaQodesh. HaRuach bestows His gifts to every Believer to use, as and when necessary. However, He calls and
-13-
anoints some people to a specific office. This can be likened to playing a guitar. Anyone can be taught to play the guitar, but very few can be called guitarists. These are people who have been endowed with the specific skill and aptitude over and above the others. Similarly, all Believers can evangelise, prophesise, teach etc. but only those called and anointed by HaRuach can be Evangelists, Prophets, Teachers etc.
It has been said that this is true for men only. However, this cannot be borne out by Scripture. Although in the 1 Corinthian 12 passage describing the various gifting, Sha`ul is talking to ‘brothers’ and ‘men’, this may be an abbreviated form of address that uses the masculine nouns to represent both genders. This rendering is further strengthened in 1 Corinthians 12 as the passage refers to all the people of the Assembly as being of one body. It is to this one body that HaRuach gives His gifts and from which He calls some to Office. It must be noted
that in v12, prophesy and tongues are mention as part of the gifts. These are attested to being used by men and women in other parts of Scripture, “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonours his head. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonours her head…” (1 Cor. 11:4, 5a).
“But the Counsellor, the Ruach HaQodesh, whom the Father will send in my name. He will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I have said to you.” (John 14:26). It is presumptuous of male leaders to assume that HaRuach only speaks through men in mixed assemblies and that only women during women-only meetings.
Another area of contention is in the question as whether women can be pastors/bishops. The next passages are usually quoted as to the prohibition of women being in any form of leadership but hopefully this can be shown to be in error.
“The pastor therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, modest, hospitable, good at teaching;” (1 Tim. 3:2). “…and appoint elders in every city, as I directed you; if anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, who are not accused of loose or unruly behaviour. For the pastor must be blameless, as `Eloakh ‘s steward; not self-pleasing, not easily angered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for dishonest gain;” (Titus 1:5b-7). In these passages of 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 3, Sha`ul gives his directions as to the qualifications of pastors and elders. These are ideals, but do not prohibit women in leadership. Similarly, it does not prohibit single men from leadership roles.
1 Tim. 3:1-7 gives the resume of minimum qualifications of a pastor and consistently refers to the pastor in the male gender. This is a passage that is commonly quoted as barring women for the role as pastor. The following section, 1 Tim. 3:8-13, gives the resume for a deacon (#G1249 διάκονος dee-a-ko-nos) and likewise refers to the deacon in the male gender. However, in Rom. 16:1, Sh`aul praises Phoebe for her role as servant (#G1249 διάκονον dee-a-ko-non). Therefore, the references of male gender of a deacon must be generic as in Mankind and consequently must be applied to pastors.
When Assemblies have segregated teaching for men, women and children, it is the husband’s/father’s responsibility to ensure that the teaching is in line with Scripture. Although pastors have spiritual oversight, it does not remove the husband’s/father’s role. This may mean that the husband reads the notes on or discusses the wife’s meeting (or taking an active role in teaching the children). If a woman speaker is teaching or preaching to other
-14-
women, how does the husband know if what is said is Scriptural or how it is received was how it was intended? This is why it is difficult to reconcile segregated meetings within an assembly.
“Let the word of the Messiah dwell in you richly; in all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your heart to `Elohiym.” (Col. 3:16); “What is it then, brothers? When you come together, each one of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has another language, has an interpretation. Let all things be done to build each other up.” (1 Cor. 14:26). In both of these passages, Sha`ul exhorts Brethren (male generic) and so Believers (without reference to gender) to teach and admonish each other in love (without gender reference).
“Obey your leaders and submit (ὑπείκετε hoo-pi-keh-tee) to them, for they watch on behalf of your souls, as those who will give account, that they may do this with joy, and not with groaning, for that would be unprofitable for you.” (Heb. 13:17). #G5226ὑπείκω hoo-pie-ko to submit, subject. This word refers to one who is weaker or less mature handing over authority to one who is stronger or more mature. Although ὑποτάσσω hoo-po-ta-so and ὑπείκω hoo-pie-ko have the same meaning in English, they are for different circumstances. The Ephesian passage means that the wife is of equal status, but defers to her husband as the head of the household. The Hebrew passage is where an immature man or woman puts themselves under the spiritual authority of the more mature leadership of the assembly.
These two passages create a paradox within the assembly that elects a woman into a leadership role. Therefore, a woman cannot, at the same time, ὑποτάσσω hoo-po-ta-so submit to her husband and yet have her husband ὑπείκω hoo-pie-ko submit to her as a pastor/bishop/elder. This is under the assumption that the husband is always more spiritually mature than the wife, but this is clearly not so in every case. This paradox can only be resolved if the wife is a leader of an assembly different to that at which her husband attends.
“And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.” (1 Tim. 2:12). Sha`ul in this passage is referring to women in leadership as opposed to the passage in 1 Cor. 14:33b-35 where he is talking about women in general within the assembly. Sha`ul occasionally mentions his personal desires in contrast to a direct ruling from Yahuah. His up-bringing, training and experience throughout his travels undoubtedly has a major influence upon his teaching. Nevertheless, he stresses his personal position with regards to how a 1st. Century Hellenistic assembly should be conducted. Judaic teaching infers that, as Adam was made before Chay-vah, Adam naturally assumed the full leadership/authority over Chay-vah. Also, as Man (in the form of Adam) was deceived by Woman (in the form of Chay-vah), the Fall was a consequence of Chay-vah deceiving Adam into the sin of dis-obedience. Sh`aul carries this over in his recommendations to Timothy, “Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection (ὑποταγῇ hoo-pa-ta-gay). But I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to exercise authority over a man, but to be in quietness. For Adam was first formed, then Chay-vah. Adam was not deceived, but the woman, being deceived, has fallen into disobedience;” (1 Tim. 2:11-14) so that the danger of this role reversal may not be repeated. #G5292 ὑποταγῇ hoo-pa-ta-gay – obedience.
This should lead to the logical dilemma: is it better to follow the teaching of one who has been deceived or one who has wilfully disobeyed? If the answer is the one deceived, how is it that women and not men are in leadership?
-15-
“Miryam from Magdala came and told the disciples that she had seen the Master…” (John 20:18a). It was toMiryam that the risen Messiah first appeared and it was to her that He gave the eternal privilege of declaring His Resurrection. She ran from the garden so that she could tell the others. Was she required to meekly approach Simon Kefa and ask permission to talk or to pass the information on so that Kefa could inform the rest? I would doubt very much if the Master appeared to Miryam only for her to be subordinate to Simon Kefa. Yahuah honours those who love His Son. Miryam so loved the Master, that she rushed to the tomb to anoint His body and so received the blessing of proclaiming His Resurrection.
The couple, Priscilla and Aquila were instrumental in the education of Apollos with the wife having the primary position. Nevertheless, Scripture does not have her in any public ministry as teacher or pastor. This is often quoted as another reason that women cannot be in these positions of authority. However, nine out of the fourteen named Apostles do not have any ministry recorded in Scripture outside of the four Good News accounts. Only Yochanan and Sh`aul have any teaching and pastoral role and Shimon Kefa only a teaching role. Any argument, much less a doctrinal stance, cannot be made solely upon the absence of information in Scripture leading to assumptions.
Moshe’s sister Miryam, “Miryam the prophetess, the sister of Aharon, took a tambourine in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.” (Exod. 15:20); Devorah, “Now Devorah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidot, she judged Yisra`el at that time.” (Judges 4:4); and Huldah, “So Hilkiyah, and they whom the king had commanded, went to Huldah the prophetess,” (2 Chr. 34:22) were women prophets and leaders in their own time. These are generally discarded by Renewed Covenant commentators as having any form of precedent with regards to the ‘Church’ administerial structure. The Renewed Covenant assembly was considered a completely new structure to be set in place. This was looking forward to the future when assemblies were conducted in large purpose-built buildings. It was not considering the majority of Believers that meet in smaller groups in homes such as Priscilla’s.
“Since many have undertaken to set in order a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, even as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first, to write to you in order, most excellent Theophilus; that you might know the certainty concerning the things in which you were instructed.” (Luke 1:1-4). Luke is commonly thought of as a physician. However, in his account of the Good News and of Acts, Luke is writing as a historian, not as an Apostle “Of the men therefore who have accompanied us all the time that the Master Yahusha went in and out among us, beginning from the immersion of Yochanan, to the day that He was received up from us, of these one must become a witness with us of His resurrection.” (Acts 1:21, 22). Nevertheless, Luke was closely associated with many eye witnesses and his chronological account of the Good News contain many examples of this intimacy.
In his opening chapters of the account, he mentions, in detail, the circumstances around the birth of Yochanan HaMatbil (John the Baptist) (Luke 1:5-25, 57-80), the birth of the Master Yahusha (Luke 1:26-38, 2:1-52). Not only are the facts recorded, but the emotions surrounding them can also be felt in his writings. Luke’s accounts must be considered as accurate because they are recorded under the inspiration of HaRuach, but were also penned when eye witnesses could verify or falsify said accounts. Luke was not the author but only the recorder of events. Never have these accounts been criticised as not being part
-16-
of the Bible. “Every writing inspired by `Eloakh is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction which is in righteousness, that the man of `Eloakh may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim. 3:16, 17).
Only Miryam, the mother of the Master, could have been the source of much of this material. According, therefore, to 2 Tim. 3:16, 17, Miryam teaches all Believers through Luke. How can it be said, then, that women cannot teach men?!
It can, therefore, be seen that a woman’s status in secular society is far from the ideal as Creator Yahuah `Elohiym intended. However, throughout His word, Yahuah `Elohiym calls for all Believers to acknowledge the differences between the two genders, their mutual interdependence and respect and most significantly, their equality in the presence of Yahuah `Elohiym, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in the Messiah Yahusha.” (Gal.3:28). Never has it ever been considered that a Jew is superior and a Gentile to be submissive; a slave over a free man; so why should a male domineer a female?
The Chosen Women
Although the two genealogies (Matt.1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38) indicate the men, there are numerous occasions when a woman pays a prominent role. Rechav and Ruth were gentile brides, but these were the only recorded wives of Salmon and Bo`az respectively. The women below were chosen to carry the seed, even though their husbands had other wives
Chayvah – “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He will bruise your head, and you will bruise His heel.” (Gen. 3:15); “Adam knew his wife again. She gave birth to a son, and named him Shet. For, she said, ‘`Elohiym has appointed me another child instead of Hevel, for Kayin killed him.’” (Gen. 4:25). It all started with Chayvah.
Sarah – “`Elohiym said, ‘No, but Sarah, your wife, will bear you a son. You shall call his name Yitzchak. I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his seed after him.’” (Gen. 17:19). It was to Abraham that `Elohiym made the covenant, but it would be to from Sarah, not Hagar or Keturah, that the promise would come.
Leah – “She (Leah) conceived again, and bare a son. She said, ‘This time will I praise Yahuah.’ Therefore, she named him Yehudah. Then she stopped bearing.” (Gen. 29:35). Leah was the unloved wife of Ya`akob, but gave birth to Ya`akob’s fourth son.
Tamar – “When she was brought forth, she sent to her father-in-law, saying, ‘By the man, whose these are, I am with child.’ She also said, ‘Please discern whose are these – the signet, and the cords, and the staff. It happened in the time of her travail, that behold, twins were in her womb…Therefore his name was called Peretz.” (Gen. 38:25, 27, 29). Yahudah’s wife, Shu`a the Kana`ani bore the sons `Er, Onan and Shelach, but it was to Tamar who bore Peretz by whom the seed was to be carried on.
-17-
Dawid’s mother – “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity. In sin my mother conceived me.” (Psa. 51:5). “Yishai made seven of his sons to pass before Shemu`el. Shemu`el said to Yishai, Yahuah has not chosen these. Shemu`el said to Yishai, ‘Are here all your children?’ He said, ‘There remains yet the youngest, and, behold, he is keeping the sheep.’ Shemu`el said to Yishai, ‘Send and get him; for we will not sit down until he comes here.’” (1 Sam. 16:10, 11). It would appear that Yishai did not acknowledge Dawid as a son, but considered him only as a child. Therefore, it has been assumed that Dawid’s mother was not the wife of Yishai and mother to Yishai’s seven sons. Judaic tradition, through the Mishnah, considers Nitzevet as Dawid’s mother as well as Yishai’s other sons (Chabad.org/thejewish). Nevertheless, this seems typical of the rabbinic way to cover over the less glorious aspects of some of the Tanakh’s more important people.
Bat-sheva – “and these were born to him (Dawid) in Yerushalayim: Shim`a, and Shovav, and Natan, and Shlomo, four, of Bat-Sheva the daughter of `Ammi’el;” (1 Chron. 3:5). Natan was the tenth son born to Dawid and his wives, although more un-named sons must have been born to Dawid and his concubines.
Miryam – “Having come in, the angel said to her, ‘Rejoice, you highly favoured one! Yahuah is with you. Blessed are you among women!’” (Luke 1:28). Miryam was the culmination of all the woman of promise who was chosen above all women in history to bear הַזָּ֑רַע.
Yahuah bless you and keep you,
Yahuah make His face to shine upon you and be gracious unto you,
Yahuah lift up His face toward you and give you peace.
All glory be to Yahuah,
Ameyn.
References and Credits
In using these references, it is in no way agreeing to or condoning the theological viewpoint of the authors.
Barclay(2) W. (1959) The Letters to the Corinthians, The Saint Andrew Press,
Edinburgh.
Barclay(1) W. (1960) The Letters to Timothy, Titus, Philemon, The Saint Andrew Press, Edinburgh.
Barrat C.K. (1987) The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Hendrickson, U.S.A.
Birger A. Pearson Gnosticism Judaism and Egyptian Christianity, Fortress Press, Minneapolis MN
-18-
Kittel G. & Theological Dictionary Of The New Testament, translated by
Friedrich G. (1988) Bromiley G.W., The Pasternoster Press, Devon.
Brown F., Driver S.R. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, & Briggs C.A. (2005) Hendrickson, Peabody, Mass.
Edersheim G. (2016) The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Hendrickson, USA.
Hertz Dr. J.H. (5748-1987) The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, Soncino, London.
Harris L.R., Archer G.L. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Moody, Chicago.
& Waltke B.K. (1980)
Josephus F. (2006) Jewish Antiquities, Wordsworth Editions, Hertfordshire.
Josephus (1981) The Jewish War, Penguin, London.
Kreider A. (2016) The Patient Ferment Of The Early Church, Baker Academic,
Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Roth A.G. (2011) Aramaic English New Testament, Netzari Press, U.S.A.
Skinner J. (1912) A Critical And Exegetical Commentary On Genesis, T&T Clark Edinburgh.
Strong J. (1994) Strong’s New Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, World Bible, Publishers Inc., Madison. (denoted by #H or #G).
Strong J. (1996) The New Strong’s Complete Dictionary of Bible Words, Thomas Nelson, Nashville. (denoted by #H or #G).
http://www.aish.com/sem/wp/Part_10_Jewish_Family__Responsibility.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/history/britsuff/suffrage/revision/1/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/britain/votesforwomenrev1.shtml
http://www.bibleandjewishstudies.net/articles/biblicalmothers.htm
http://www.bible-history.com/court-of-women/women.html
The history of Childhood as a social construction | Blablawriting.com
http://www.bl.uk/learning/histcitizen/21cc/struggle/suffrage/background/suffragettesbackground.html
http://www.chabad.org/theJewishWoman/article_cdo/aid/335943/jewish/Chavah-Mother-of-All-Life.htm
https://chabad.org/thejewishwoman/article_cdo/aid/280331/jewish/nitzevet-mother-of-david.htm
Separation in the Synagogue – Questions & Answers (chabad.org)
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/women-workers-in-the-british-industrial-revolution/
http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201004/201004_000_christian_women.cfm
-19-
https://galbithink.org/womwork.htm
http://www.gender.cawater-info.net/knowledge_base/rubricator/feminism_e.htm
http://gnosis.org/genesis.html
The Reality of Gender in the Ancient Israelite Household | The Biblical Mind (hebraicthought.org)
Learning from Women’s Roles in Ancient Synagogues | The Biblical Mind (hebraicthought.org)
The Role of Women – Judaism 101 (JewFAQ)
http://www.jewishanswers.org/ask-the-rabbi-category/the-basics-of-judaism/?p=933
https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/post-biblical-and-rabbinic-women
https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/learned-women-in-traditional-jewish-society
http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/adam-and-eve-in-gnostic-literature/
http://traditionarchive.org/news/originals/Volume%2017/No.%203/May%20Women%20Be.pdf
https://www.verywell.com/loneliness-causes-effects-and-treatments-2795749
http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Judaism
http://wjudaism.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/wjudaism/article/view/197/175
http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/divorceinancientrome.htm
http://womensuffrage.org/?page_id=69
U.S. Code › Title 17 › Chapter 1 › § 107 17 U.S. Code § 107 – Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
-20-
.
First Generation Assembly 