Source: “PAUL WITHIN JUDAISM: Restoring the First-Century Context to the Apostle”, Fortress Press 2016.
The Question Of Gender Relocation PaulIn Relation To Judaism.wav
Kathy Ehrensperger's "The Question of Gender: Relocating Paul in Relation to Judaism" argues that Paul's views on gender and his interactions with women are deeply rooted in his Jewish tradition, rather than being uniquely innovative or contradictory to his message. The podcast challenges universalizing interpretations of Paul that suggest he sought to erase differences, including gender distinctions, emphasizing that Paul's approach to diversity, both ethnic and gender-related, aligns with Jewish understandings of unity in difference. By examining evidence from Second Temple Judaism, such as mixed synagogue assemblies and the active roles of women in Jewish communities, Ehrensperger proposes that Paul's guidance concerning women's participation and conduct in early Pauline gatherings was consistent with the Jewish ethos of his time. Ultimately, the podcast advocates for reading Paul within his Jewish context to better understand his perspectives on gender, highlighting the resonance between gender-critical approaches and studies that firmly locate Paul in Judaism.
Topic 1: Paul's Complex and Often Misunderstood Stance on Gender. Paul's perspective on gender is often viewed as a difficult subject, becoming even more complicated when his Jewish background is considered. Paul lived in a society where elite men held dominant positions in structure, perception, and social practice. Some of his explicit views about women appear to align with these general societal norms. However, his actual actions suggest a different approach, as he clearly acknowledged women who played crucial and leading roles in the work of the gospel. While Paul himself asserted his authority in asymmetrical relationships, reflecting patterns of elite male leadership common in first-century CE Mediterranean societies, a different image of him emerges when viewed through the lens of Roman imperial power and ideology. In this context, Paul is sometimes seen as "feminized," vulnerable, beaten, and suffering, a member of a conquered nation, which contrasts sharply with the ideal of masculinity in Greek and Roman perception. The perceived tension between these various images of Paul and his discourse on gender largely stems from the interpretive assumptions used when reading his letters, including the assumed historical and cultural contexts.
Topic 2: Critiques of Earlier Feminist Interpretations and the "Good/Bad" Judaism Fallacy. Historically, some feminist approaches posited that Paul introduced hierarchical structures and patriarchal or oppressive practices into what they believed was a previously egalitarian movement. In certain instances, these practices were even attributed to his Jewish tradition. However, this specific viewpoint is now rarely found explicitly formulated in recent gender-critical studies. Nevertheless, even when Paul's Jewishness is generally acknowledged, and the risk of reintroducing anti-Judaism into interpretations is noted, there has been insufficient analysis of the full implications of such an acknowledgment. Instead, notions of different types of Judaism persisted, with some viewed as having positive and others negative implications for Paul's attitude toward women. For example, "Hellenistic" Judaism was often considered the definitive context for Paul, suggesting he consciously chose not to draw upon his Pharisaic tradition. This portrayal often positioned Paul as distancing himself from a "wrong," narrow form of Judaism, like Pharisaism, and aligning with a "good," more open, "Hellenistic" Judaism. This interpretation echoes approaches that consider an ethnocentric version of Judaism as the problem Paul overcame in Christ, often implying that the Christ-event provided liberation for Gentiles or women from the perceived constraints of "bad" or narrow Jewish practices.
Topic 3: The Crucial Yet Understudied Relevance of Paul's Judaism for Gender Studies. Despite inherent connections at both a structural level (Paul's way of arguing and theologizing) and in terms of content (his explicit statements and activities regarding women), the relevance of Paul's Judaism to gender has been considered in detail by very few recent studies, mainly in general terms. This indicates a significant gap in gender-critical approaches to Paul. Although gender-related questions might not be the primary focus of Paul's letters, some texts directly address such concerns arising from specific issues within the early Christian communities (ekklesia). The fact that women are addressed, commended, or greeted in his letters also points to his interest in gender dynamics within these communities. Therefore, a thorough re-evaluation of the claim that Paul existed within an inherently androcentric and kyriarchal social context requires a detailed assessment, particularly when relocating Paul within Judaism. Understanding the perception and role of women in first-century Judaism, through literary, epigraphic, and socio-historical evidence, is critical for comprehending Pauline discourse. This deeper understanding extends beyond Paul's direct views on women to include broader historical and ideological contexts, such as the feminization of conquered peoples in Roman imperial propaganda, and draws analogies between the study of "Paul within Judaism" and contemporary gender discourses, especially concerning the emphasis on difference and particularity in identity formation.
Topic 4: Women's Evident and Active Participation in Early Christian Ekklesia Gatherings. Paul's statements about women, particularly those found in 1 Corinthians, frequently reveal an internal ambivalence. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, Paul seems to waver between presupposing the unquestioned participation and active role of women in the gatherings of the ekklesia, while simultaneously upholding a principle of subordination that governs relationships between men and women. Nevertheless, a significant point that is often overlooked is that Paul's discussion of issues concerning the active role of women in these assemblies provides clear evidence that women were not only members of this messianic movement but were self-evidently integral to the actual gatherings and played an active part in them. The very necessity for Paul to provide guidance to both men and women regarding the "orderly" conduct of "assembly meetings" clearly demonstrates that these were mixed gatherings where both sexes were actively involved. This fact is quite remarkable within the context of Greek and Roman societies, where gender segregation was generally the norm, at least at a theoretical level. Paul never challenged women's fundamental participation in the ekklesia gatherings. Instead, his advice focused on the conduct of both men and women on these occasions, as well as on practical matters like being "married to an unbeliever." The Corinthians sought Paul's advice on these aspects, possibly indicating that such joint gatherings were not something they were accustomed to from their predominantly non-Jewish cultural backgrounds.
Topic 5: The Foundation of Mixed Gatherings in Jewish Tradition and Practice. Paul's understanding and guidance concerning mixed gatherings of men and women within the early Christian communities were deeply rooted in Jewish tradition. For Paul, the practice of mixed assemblies of people worshipping the God of Israel would have been entirely normal, as it was a common practice in synagogues throughout the Roman Empire. The presence of women, alongside men and children, as part of "all Israel" during the reading of the law is frequently attested in ancient biblical texts. Furthermore, historical accounts from the first century, such as those by Josephus, affirm this communal practice. Josephus explicitly mentions that both men and women were granted the right to build a synagogue, assemble, and celebrate the Sabbath, and also details a decree that affirmed the Jews' right to assemble, including women and children. Philo also consistently includes women in his descriptions of assemblies as a matter of course. The implications of this clear historical evidence are significant: women were taught and participated in prayer alongside men, and there is no indication from these sources that women were excluded when it came to learning the Scriptures.
Topic 6: The Influence of Paul's Pharisaic Background on the Inclusion of Women. Paul's Pharisaic background offers further illuminating insights into the inclusion of women, not just as members of the early Christian movement, but as active participants in the actual gatherings of the ekklesiai. Convincing arguments have been presented that women were members of the Pharisaic movement in their own right. For example, an ancient text suggests that the daughters or wives of ordinary people who married into the Pharisaic community were required to undergo an initiation process to be deemed trustworthy within the movement. If this interpretation holds, it strongly suggests that women were initiated as full members of the Pharisaic movement and participated in their communal meals. Following this line of reasoning, it becomes clear that Paul would have been intimately familiar with, and would have taken for granted, the active participation of women as full members within a specific subgroup of Judaism. Consequently, it should not be seen as an innovation or surprise that Paul would have considered the participation of women in the assemblies of the Christ-movement to be nothing more than what was expected and normal based on his Jewish upbringing and tradition.
Topic 7: Extensive Evidence of Women's Active Religious and Leadership Roles in Second Temple Judaism. Beyond their presence in synagogue assemblies, Second Temple Judaism provides extensive evidence of women's active roles in religious and communal life. Philo, for instance, mentions male and female choirs, drawing on traditions that portray Miriam and Moses as choir leaders, suggesting that mixed choirs were not merely for historical purposes. In his detailed account of the Therapeutae, the prominent hymn singing by separate male and female choirs raises the question of whether this activity was unique to that specific group or a more widespread communal practice. Literary traditions also refer to mixed choirs or singing and dancing by women and men. Furthermore, literature from the Second Temple period often envisions women as prophetesses, such as Judith and the daughters of Job, and as leading people in prayer. Heroine stories like those of Esther and Judith, who played pivotal roles in liberating their people, along with the portrayal of figures like Deborah, Jephtha's daughter, and Hannah as major characters—with Deborah notably depicted as a prophetess, ruler over Israel, and a teacher—all strongly indicate the active participation of women in Jewish assemblies. This rich literary evidence makes it highly probable that Paul would have assumed the presence and active role of women in the ekklesiai tou theou as normal, rather than perceiving it as an innovative or liberating development introduced by the Christ-movement. This collective evidence of mixed assemblies, women's participation in prayer and singing, and the high value attributed to prophets and prophetesses, collectively demonstrates that Paul's practical guidance in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 accurately reflects his Jewish background. He presupposes the joint participation of men and women, both praying and prophesying, and his primary concern is simply that these activities are conducted in an orderly manner.
Topic 8: Paul's Directives on Order and Silence as Rooted in Jewish Practice, Not as Novel Restrictions. The perceived contradiction between Paul's affirmation of women's active participation in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and his statements regarding their silence in 14:33-35 can be better understood through the lens of his Jewish tradition. Assuming the latter passage is not a later addition, Jewish practice might have distinguished between women participating in general assembly activities like prayer, singing, and possibly prophesying, and the more specific roles of reading and interpreting the Scriptures or teaching. While the reading of Scriptures might have been open to any member, interpretation and teaching were often considered the domain of learned men, leaders, or "rulers" of the community, during whose expositions the assembly members would listen in silence. Similarly, 1 Corinthians 14 primarily addresses the need for order during assembly meetings to ensure mutual up-building. Paul advises silence in specific instances, such as when no one is present to interpret speaking "in tongue," or when a revelation is made to someone else, the first speaker should fall silent. In this context, the issue of women talking is raised not as a blanket prohibition on all speaking but specifically in relation to learning from or interpreting the Scriptures, as indicated by the verb "to learn" and the reference to "the word of God." It's plausible that, consistent with some Jewish understandings, teaching was seen as the purview of leading men, and therefore anything related to it should not be initiated by women during the assembly. If listening in silence was generally part of the practice during teaching, Paul might have combined these two aspects. Based on this evidence, such a directive should not be viewed as Paul reintroducing a restrictive practice into a previously more liberating community, but rather as reflecting the existing Jewish ethos of mixed assemblies where both men and women actively participate but in an "orderly manner," analogous to synagogue or other communal gatherings. Both the mixed composition of the early Christian communities and the joint participation in worship, including guidance for proper order, are thus grounded in and developed analogously to the Jewish traditions and practices in which Paul was deeply embedded.
Topic 9: The Affirmation of Particularity and Difference as Central to Paul's Jewish Theology. A core aspect of Paul's theological outlook, stemming from his continued embeddedness in Judaism, is his insistence on the value and retention of particularity and differences within the Christ-movement. Interpretations that advocate for universalization—whether by claiming Paul completely separated from Judaism, or by singling out an aspect of Judaism as problematic, or by asserting Israel's identity for Christ-followers—often share the flawed notion that there is something inherently wrong with particular identities, especially Jewish identity, including Paul's own. These approaches, despite their variations, structurally confuse the universal scope of Paul's message with a demand for assimilation and sameness in identity and practice. Such views often imply that in Christ, all differences, including ethnic distinctions between "Jew and Greek" and gender differences, are overcome, suggesting that only a generic "humanity" is relevant. However, Paul does not consider particularity a problem that needs to be overcome. His consistent insistence that Jews and Gentiles retain their distinct identities in Christ is deeply rooted in the Jewish scriptural perception that Israel and the nations are different. Jewish traditions include numerous trajectories that envision non-Jews joining the Lord as "others," without becoming part of the socio-ethnic group of Israel through conversion, thus preserving their distinct identity. This perspective sharply contrasts with the assimilationist tendencies often enforced by Roman imperial ideology. For Paul, unity in Christ is not achieved by eradicating differences but by affirming and respecting the particular identities of both Jews and non-Jews, seeing these differences as the very building blocks of unity and reconciliation. This recognition of particularity extends to human existence in general, highlighting that there are only particular human beings in specific contexts, each embodying gender and other dimensions of identity in unique ways, rather than a single universal, non-gendered abstraction.
Topic 10: Paul's Concept of Equality in Christ: Upholding Difference While Rejecting Superiority. A fundamental principle in Paul's theology is his strong stance against expressions of superiority and humiliating behavior within the Christ-following communities. While Paul unequivocally emphasizes the retention of distinct Jewish and Gentile identities in Christ, this does not imply that one group should claim superiority over the other. For Paul, the only acceptable form of boasting is "in the Lord." This "boasting in the Lord" is not a claim to dominating power or an assertion of superiority. Instead, it aligns with the Jewish tradition of a God who tenderly guides Israel like an infant, freeing them from slavery and obliging them to care for the vulnerable. This God hears the cries of those in need and empowers them. Therefore, Paul's "anti-boasting" stance is not based on a notion of sameness where all differences are erased. He affirms that there is indeed an advantage in being Jewish, noting that they "were entrusted with the oracles of God" and to them "belong the adoption, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises." This is clearly an advantage, but it is explicitly not a reason for asserting superiority over non-Jewish Christ-followers. For Paul, equality does not "obliterate" difference. Instead, what is enabled in Christ is unity and reconciliation between those who are and remain different—whether Jews and Greeks, or men and women—allowing them to recognize each other as equals, as brothers and sisters in Christ. This theological framework suggests that Paul's principles, particularly his stance against boasting and for equality in difference, should by analogy extend to gender relations, ensuring that particularity does not lead to claims of superiority but rather fosters relationships of mutual respect and empowerment.