Abstract
For centuries, Eve’s role as depicted in Gen 2:18, 20 has been translated in the KJV as ‘help meet,’ a translation that eventually came to be rendered ‘helpmate.’ This article provides linguistic analysis of the Hebrew words ‘ēzer kenegdo, translated in the KJV as ‘help meet,’ as well as a brief analysis of the reception history of this Hebrew phrase that includes the intertextuality of New Testament allusions to Gen 2:18, 20 and the intersectionality of contemporary interpretations regarding women of color.
Introduction
As my contribution to the Matriarch’s issue for the fall 2018 issue of the Review & Expositor, I bring to you an expansion on portions of a sermon I preached in my congregation as a part of our Women’s History Month celebration in 2018. In response to the “Me Too” movement, my pastor, Rev. Dr. H. James Hopkins, of Lakeshore Avenue Baptist Church in Oakland, CA, asked three ordained women from the congregation to preach about their experience as women in ministry. My pastor is a very brave man! As my academic discipline is biblical interpretation, I decided to bring to the congregation what I know about the biblical text as it relates to the topic of women and women’s roles. To achieve this goal, it seemed best to start at the beginning, with our first named biblical matriarch, Eve of Eden.
In this article, I will do three things: provide a linguistic analysis of the Hebrew words ‘ēzer kenegdo, the phrase used to describe the first woman created in the Bible as found in Gen 2:18, 20; provide some evidences of reception history of the Gen 2:18, 20 text, including allusions to these verses as found in the New Testament (intertextuality); and discuss the implications of this reception history for contemporary women, especially women of color (intersectionality).
What the @#$! is a helpmate?
In 1611, the King James Bible (KJV), commissioned in 1604 by King James of England, was published as the Authorized Version (AV) of the Bible in English. Two earlier English versions of the Bible had been approved by the English church authorities—the Great Bible (1539) and the Bishop’s Bible (1568)—but were thought to have problems and weaknesses which the new Authorized Version would fix. Thus, this new translation, the KJV, was politically and socially motivated. 1 Historically, the KJV has been noted for its majestic style and described as one of the most important books in English culture and one of the driving forces that shaped the English-speaking world. 2 In other words, it has had much influence on language, thought, and culture in the English-speaking world.
The impact of the KJV should not be underplayed when addressing the traditions that have been formed from interpretations of Genesis 2. The KJV translates the Hebrew ‘ēzer kenegdo found in Gen 2:18, 20, as “help meet,” which according to Merriam-Webster is an old-fashioned literary term for “helpmate.” Merriam-Webster defines “helpmate” as “one who is a companion and helper; especially a wife,” “helper” as “one that helps; especially: a relatively unskilled worker who assists a skilled worker usually by manual labor,” and “help” as “to give assistance or support to, e.g., help a child with homework.”
How, then, are we to understand the meaning of ‘ēzer kenegdo as found in Gen 2:18, 20? A textual and linguistic analysis of this Hebrew phrase will help us answer this question. One means for determining the full meaning and significance of a word is to study how it is used in other contexts. Let us take a closer look at the Hebrew word ‘ēzer.
Some form of the Hebrew word ‘ēzer appears twenty-one times in the Old Testament. Table 1 provides the data for its appearances; it includes every biblical reference in which a form of ‘ēzer is found, the subject to which the word is being applied, and the NRSV translation for the verse under study. As can be easily determined, the vast majority of the uses of the Hebrew word ‘ēzer refer to God helping humanity (thirteen out of twenty-one appearances). Of the remaining uses, we find the following subjects: Eve (twice), a priest, King David, Egypt, the Judean King’s military men, the Maccabees, and no one.
Instances of the word ‘ēzer in the Bible.
Genesis 2:18, 20
Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the (hu)man should be alone; I will make him a helper (‘ēzer) as his partner” (v 18) The (hu)man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field; but for the (hu)man (Adam) there was not found a helper (‘ēzer) as his partner. (v 20; NRSV)
The semantic range for ‘ēzer as found in the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament is: help, a help, helper. 3 From this little word, only three consonants in the Hebrew Bible, a long-standing, highly developed tradition has evolved—a tradition that shifted the translation from “help” to “help meet” in the KJV and eventually to “helpmate,” and proceeded to define the latter term, “helpmate,” as one that is subordinate to her husband and expected to obey the wishes and commands of her husband. 4 In other words, the tradition has developed in such a way as to suggest that the Hebrew word ‘ēzer ought to be understood as one who is subordinate. Let us, however, recall the uses of ‘ēzer outlined in the table 1.
In Deuteronomy 33, before going to his death Moses gives his final blessing to the Israelite tribes and prays, “O LORD give heed to Judah and be a help against his adversaries.” Similarly, in twelve other instances YHWH is called on to give help or is esteemed for being the one who can and will give help, i.e., bring deliverance from trouble.
In Ps 20:2, the psalmist begins in verse 1, “May the LORD answer you in the day of trouble!” Then in verse 2, “May he send you help from the sanctuary ….” Whether YHWH is the help or is designating a helper, perhaps a priest from the sanctuary, is not clear. In Ps 89:19 the LORD says of king David, “I have set the help (crown) on one who is mighty.”
Isaiah 30:5 speaks against Egypt, who was not a help in Israel’s battle against Assyria. In Ezek 12:14 the prophet warns that YHWH will remove the help of the king and that he will go into exile, where he will die. Daniel 11:34 speaks of the “wise ones” receiving help from the Maccabees during the time of the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes IV in the second century BCE.
Thus, what might we conclude? If Eve is designated by God in Genesis 2 as an ‘ēzer and the word ‘ēzer does not connote subordination, but rather salvation, then Eve is not being designated a servant in Genesis 2, but a savior of some kind. To reinforce this analysis of the word ‘ēzer is the next word in the Hebrew text, kenegdo, which has the semantic range like him, corresponding to him, his counterpart, and was translated in the NRSV “as his partner.”
Also significant for understanding this text is the process of creation in Genesis 2. Five Hebrew words are used for creation in Genesis 2: br’, ytsr, bnh, `sh, tsmḥ. According to the story, the universe/world is br’ = “created,” with an emphasis on initiating something new; br’ is generally used with God as the subject. The first human is ytsr = “formed, fashioned,” out of the dust of the earth, using the same term used in other parts of the Old Testament to describe a potter forming clay. Thus, the first human is formed out of a pre-existing substance. On the other hand, the first woman is bnh = “built” out of a pre-formed substance; e.g., a house is built out of two by fours that have been formed from the wood of trees. The first woman is parallel to the house as she is built from the pre-formed substance that is the first human. In contrast, the animals are “formed” (ytsr) like the first human out of the ground. The plants, on the other hand, are caused to “spring up” = tsmḥ from the earth. The language of creation in Genesis 2 emphasizes the sameness of the first human and the first woman. She is not unique and different from the first human but rather built from the same pre-formed substance.
The Genesis text clearly states that the first woman is created as an intended partner to help the first human, to save him from being alone and having to do everything by himself, not to be his servant. But the tradition clearly developed in another way.
Reception history—intertextuality
Let us turn to the New Testament use of the Genesis 2 story, first to 1 Tim 2:12–15—a text often attributed to Paul, but scholars are not so sure that it does come from Paul. 5 “I forbid a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she is to keep silent … for Adam was first formed then Eve” (vv 12–13). The argument in 1 Tim 2:13 is that Adam has hierarchical superiority because he was formed first. This is an argument that comes from the time period. In the ancient world, the first born was the one destined to lead the family and to inherit the land and resources from the father when he died. But, what we fail to remember is that one of the major themes in the book of Genesis is the first born never gets the inheritance. Ishmael is first born, but Isaac inherits; Esau is first born, but Jacob inherits; Rueben is first born, but Joseph is the favored son and Judah inherited; in Genesis 38, Zerah was first to stick his hand out of the womb, but his twin brother, Perez, came out before him. If in the book of Genesis the first born never inherits, what does that say about Adam as the first formed? Is he the favored one? Is he the one that will inherit?
First Timothy 2: 14 states: “… and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (referring to the conversation in Genesis 3 between Eve and the snake and the eating of the fruit from the tree of knowledge). The logic here is that Eve, having been deceived, was the weaker vessel. But, we may rightly ask whether that logic holds up? If Adam was not deceived, then Adam blatantly disobeyed and was wooed by the charms of Eve to disobey. Thus, which sin is greater? Which behavior exhibits the greater form of weakness?
The writer of Timothy, however, leaves Eve an out in verse 15: “Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty”—in other words, provided she continues to act as she ought to and provides her husband with children.
Let us examine one more New Testament text, this time an undisputed Pauline text, 6 Eph 5:21–33, in which we find the famous verse that has been touted for centuries: “Wives, be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife … ” (v 22). The remainder of this passage is rarely remembered and discussed. Yet, this section of Scripture begins with a grammatically dependent introductory verse: “Be subject to one another out of reverence to Christ” (v 21). Verse 21 rarely seems to be read or discussed and in many translations, including the NRSV, it is separated off from verse 22 in the English printed format. Further, Eph 5:25–29 says: “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her … He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hates his own body, but he nourishes and tenderly cares for it … For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh … ” (see Gen 2:24). Paul is not preaching subjugation but rather mutuality. Paul calls husbands and wives to live counterculturally in the Roman Empire, in which women were treated as possessions, and servants, and as part of the estate! Paul declares the two become one flesh who, as such, ought to behave toward one another with mutual love and respect.
Elsewhere, Paul said, “In Christ there is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). Paul calls the faith community to live counterculturally, to put aside the differences that divide us, and to treat one another as equals. Paul was, after all, a good Jew, and he was a good student of Hebrew. 7 He knew what ‘ēzer kenegdo meant and he understood the significance of the first woman being built (bnh) out of the substance of the first human.
Historical interpretations of Genesis 2:18 and 20
In this section of the article, I will examine the interpretations of Genesis 2 and its New Testament parallels by some of our most historically predominant leaders of the church—men whose writings, sermons, and ministerial work became the foundations for the formation of denominations.
Martin Luther (1483–1546)
Of Luther’s view on women, scholar Kirsi I. Stjerna, Professor of Lutheran History and Theology at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California states:
Luther’s primary concern is why God created two sexes, rather than why God created women specifically. Related to this, the other matter that attracts Luther’s attention is the relation between the two genders and their respective callings—in other words, the “why” of their creation. While amazed by the physical creation of Eve and giving a theological rationale for Eve’s biological difference from Adam, Luther also underscores the sameness of the two genders and their equality in flesh and status. While emphasizing their equal standing as creatures made in the image and in the similitude of God, as recipients of God’s word and commandments, with dominion over the rest of creation, and with an equal future glory, Luther notes that Adam and Eve’s stated difference is their physical sex and the method used in their creation. Only Eve is created out of a rib. And yet, that rib is significant: God’s choice of using the physical rib of Adam allowed Adam to immediately recognize and love his new partner Eve, who started her life in the same Garden of Eden, with the same commands and promises. While Luther sees in creation a fundamental sharing of the divine life and equality under God’s eyes, he describes a particular hierarchy from the beginning as a way to define the roles he sees God intended for the two sexes. Women are created with a certain inferiority—not meaning a lesser good—in terms of their status as the second-born; this makes perfect sense for Luther. Yet, more important for Luther is the sharing of the “stuff” of creation—the flesh. The rib being the same substance indicates a fundamental equality that is more important than the hierarchy that follows. The difference with the two products of creation, Adam and Eve, Luther interprets as complementary, with the differences smoothed away by the love that holds them together from the first moment they see each other.
8
Thus, Martin Luther understands that a hierarchy of the sexes exists owing to the order of creation. The book of Genesis, however, never alludes to a hierarchy between the sexes arising from the order of creation. 9 We do not find this interpretation in the Bible until 1 Timothy 2.
John Calvin (1509–1564)
John Calvin had an interesting dichotomy in his theology around the sexes. According to Mary Potter, “On the one hand, he praises and blames women as responsible actors equal to men, and on the other hand, he praises and blames women as inferior creatures with a well-defined and restricted role to play.”
10
It seems Calvin’s thought on the sexes was based upon a dual theological system that differentiated between cognitio dei (knowledge of God) and cognitio hominis (knowledge of humankind). Through this system Calvin conjured a revival, although limited, for women, declaring them equal to men from the perspective of cognitio dei, but inferior to men from the perspective of cognitio hominis.
11
Potter further observes:
Also permeating Calvin’s entire theology is the uncompromising view that women are innately inferior to men. In his development of the doctrine of creation in his commentary on Gen. 2:18, for example, immediately after declaring women as equal to men as the created image of God, he adds the following qualifying clause: “though to a lesser degree.” In his eleventh sermon on Job, he returns to this point that women are created in the image of God in “an inferior degree,” adding a warning to the men in the congregation that they are not to despise women on this account since all human beings are obligated to respect one another as the image of God.
12
John Smyth (1570–1612)
John Smyth was an early defender of the distinctly Baptist idea of religious liberty. This was written regarding him:
The role of women in the ministry of the church was one of those difficult questions that the radical questioning mind of the early Baptists compelled them to face. Before adopting Baptist views, John Smyth wrote his Principles and Inferences concerning the Visible Church, published in 1607. He distinguished between two sorts of church member: ‘prophets’ and ‘private persons’: ‘Prophets are men … Private persons are 1. men, 2. women.’ The distinction was emphasized by the categorical prohibition against women speaking in the church in time of prophecy. If they have a query, they should ask their husbands privately at home or, if unmarried, other male members. Smyth further asked ‘whether women, servants, and children admitted into full communion, yet under age may not give voice in elections, excommunications, and other public affairs of the church’ but without giving us his answer. Women deacons (otherwise defined as widows at least 60 years of age) were appointed, ‘to visit and relieve the widows, the fatherless, sick, lame, blind, impotent, women with child and diseased members of the church.’
13
By the time they had become General Baptists, John Smyth and Thomas Helwys both confirmed women as eligible for the diaconate. Paragraph 16 of Smyth’s Short Confession of Faith in XX Articles of 1609, reads, ‘That the ministers of the church, are not only bishops (‘episcopos’) to whom power is given of dispensing both the word and sacraments, but also deacons, men and women, who attend to the affairs of the poor and rich brethren.’
14
Two years later, Helwys’s A Declaration of Faith of the English People remaining at Amsterdam in Holland states: “That the officers of every Church or congregation are either Elders, who by their office do especially feed the flock concerning their souls … or Deacons, men and women, who by their office relieve the necessities of the poor and impotent brethren concerning their bodies.” 15 There the matter ends as far as confessions are concerned: women are not specifically identified in any of the later confessions of faith of either General or Particular Baptists in the seventeenth century. 16
According to Smyth and Helwys, women could not “dispense the word and sacraments” but had to remain silent in the congregation (a clear adherence to 1 Tim 2); yet, they were allowed to be deacons (helpmates) and care for “the poor and impotent brethren concerning their bodies.”
John Wesley (1703–1791)
John Wesley held very different views of women, and interpreted Gen 2:18–20 in a very different way. He was raised and formed by a very strong mother, Susanna Wesley, a person who had so much influence over John and his development that she is called, even today, the mother of Methodism. Wesley championed the rights of women in the context of a deeply patriarchal society. From an early time the Methodist movement involved women at all levels. They prayed, led classes, visited the sick, and traveled as itinerant preachers. Cracknell and White suggest Wesley “… seemed entirely willing to lay aside 1 Tim 2:13 ‘I permit not a woman to speak in the congregations’ so that these women [who, he argued, had an ‘extraordinary call from God’] might engage in the preaching ministry.” 17
In his sermon entitled “On the Visiting of the Sick,” Wesley portrays his general support of women:
It has long passed for a maxim with many that “women are only to be seen but not heard.” And accordingly many of them are brought up in such a manner as if they were only designed for agreeable playthings! But is this doing honour to the sex? Or it is a real kindness to them? No, it is the deepest unkindness; it is horrid cruelty; it is mere Turkish barbarity. And I know not how any woman of sense and spirit can submit to it.
18
Consequently, he urged “the natural right” of women to resist this kind of oppression: “Let all of you that have it in your power assert the right which the God of nature has given you. You as well as them are rational creatures. Yield not to that vile bondage any longer. You as well as men were made in the image of God: you are equally candidates for immortality. You too are called of God.” 19
It seems Wesley, the latest of the four denominational patriarchs discussed here, was very enlightened for his time. His declarations in support of women as fully equal and called to the ministry as well as his statements against sexual harassment make him sound quite contemporary. As we shall soon see, the culture was not in step with Wesley on these points.
These are but a few examples of ways Protestant denominational leaders understood and interpreted the Gen 2:18–20 texts and New Testament allusions to these texts within their own social and cultural locations. Herein lies the key for our received understandings of these biblical texts, in contrast to the original meanings of the words found in Gen 2:18, 20. The biblical texts themselves were written in a particular time and reflect a particular socio-cultural context, as do the varied interpretations of them that have been imposed upon the Christian church over the years.
Robert Alter (1935–)
In contrast to the Christian interpretations discussed above, Robert Alter, Jewish scholar at the University of California, Berkeley, interprets Gen 2:18–20 in this way:
The Hebrew ‘ēzer kenegdo (King James Version “helpmeet”) is notoriously difficult to translate. The second term means alongside him, opposite him, a counterpart to him. “Help” is too weak because it suggests a merely auxiliary function, whereas ‘ēzer elsewhere connotes active intervention on behalf of someone, especially in military contexts, as often in Psalms.
20
Alter translates Gen 2:18 as follows: “And the LORD God said, ‘it is not good for the human to be alone, I shall make him a sustainer beside him.’” 21
The King James Version
Since the completion of the King James Version in 1611, many newer versions of the Bible have been undertaken that are more “true” to the Hebrew and Greek texts, for two very important reasons:
There have been numerous significant archeological discoveries since 1611 that have helped us do a better job in translating the Bible. We do not have grammar and word books from the time period in which the Bible was written, and there are many words, phrases, and idioms in the original manuscripts of the biblical text that are difficult to translate because they appear so infrequently. Archaeological discoveries (inscriptions, letters and manuscripts) since 1611 often contain words and ideas that appear in the biblical text only a few times, providing additional data from which translators can derive meaning.
The English of the KJV is quite archaic today, to the point of being confusing and at times incomprehensible. For example, the word “gay” is used in the KJV to refer to people being happy, but “gay” means something very different in the twenty-first-century English-speaking world. Similarly, the word “meat” meant all types of food in the time of the writing of the KJV, but today it refers specifically to animal flesh.
Consequently, contemporary communities of faith may gain better insight into the meaning of the biblical text by studying some of the more updated translations. Contemporary translations strive for dynamic equivalence in meaning between the ancient Hebrew and Greek and the contemporary English audiences.
Recall that, as stated above, the KJV translated Gen 2:18–20 in the following way:
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him … And Adam gave names to all cattle, and the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found a help meet for him.
Finding the term “help meet” archaic and confusing, contemporary English translations have translated ‘ēzer kenegdo as follows:
Revised Standard Version (RSV) “… a helper fit for him.” New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) “… a helper as his partner.” New International Version (NIV) “… a helper suitable for him.” The Common English Bible (CEB) “… a helper that is perfect for him.” Jewish Publication Society (TANAK) “… a fitting helper for him.”
All of the above translations have stayed with some form of the word “help” to render the translation. This is why I appreciate Alter’s translation so much. His statement that “‘Help’ is too weak because it suggests a merely auxiliary function” addresses the problem with contemporary notions of help, mainly that one who helps is somehow subordinate. However, the Hebrew word ‘ēzer does not suggest subordination; thus, I find Alter’s rendering “… a sustainer beside him … ” to be very “helpful.” 22
Contemporary implications
We, the citizens of the United States of America, frequently hear stories of how our nation, its laws, culture and society, were formed on Christian principles. Much historical evidence suggests that the Christian religion, including the Bible and its interpretation, was front and center in the debates that took place between the founding fathers of our nation. Happily, some, like Thomas Jefferson, did not believe our nation should be developed wholly dependent upon Christian doctrines, beliefs, and biblical interpretations. 23 Yet it is clear the Bible, and more specifically, particular interpretations of the Bible, and even more specifically, particular interpretations of the King James Version of the Bible, have impacted the formation of laws, society, and culture in our nation. To address this reality, I turn to a very brief outline of laws being made and overturned from 1769 to the present that specifically relate to issues of equality for women in the United States.
The feminist movement in the United States
1769
The early American colonies based their laws on the English common law, which said, “By marriage, the husband and wife are one person in the law. The very being and legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated into that of her husband under whose wing and protection she performs everything” (cf. discussion in this article on 1 Tim 2, Eph 5, Luther, Calvin, and Smyth).
1777
All states passed laws taking away women’s rights to vote. (Notably, this was during Wesley’s lifetime.)
1870
The Fifteenth Amendment was ratified, saying, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” African Americans could vote then, but women could not.
1920
The Nineteenth Amendment was ratified, granting women the right to vote. It declares: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”
1923
The National Woman’s Party proposed a Constitutional amendment: “Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and in every place subject to its jurisdiction. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” It did not pass.
1937
The US Supreme Court upheld Washington State’s minimum wage laws for women. But it was not until 1963 that The Equal Pay Act was passed, promising equitable wages for the same work, regardless of the race, color, religion, national origin, or sex of the worker.
1969
In Bowe vs Colgate-Palmolive Company, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that women meeting the physical requirements can work in jobs that had been for men only.
1972
Katharine Graham became the first woman CEO of a Fortune 500 company (The Washington Post).
1974
The Women’s Educational Equity Act funded the development of nonsexist teaching materials and model programs that encouraged full educational opportunities for girls and women. (I am shocked by this late date; I was a sophomore in high school.)
1974
The Equal Credit Opportunity Act was passed. It did away with the practice of banks requiring single, widowed, or divorced women to bring a man along to cosign any credit application.
1994
Congress adopted the Gender Equity in Education Act to train teachers in gender equity, promote math and science learning by girls, counsel pregnant teens, and prevent sexual harassment.
2016
Hillary Rodham Clinton made history when she secured the presidential nomination for the Democratic Party, becoming the first US woman to lead the ticket of a major party. She lost the election.
2018 Women are still at a higher risk of poverty:
There is a twenty-cent wage gap between men and women.
Women bear the burden of low-wage jobs and unpaid caregiving work.
One-third of single mothers live in poverty.
Women are still underrepresented in leadership:
19% of all members of Congress are women.
Of fifty state governors, four are women (8%).
Of the Fortune 500 companies, twenty-five are led by women CEOs (5%). 24
Although women have made tremendous progress in achieving civil rights and finding their place, in the work environment they continue to be oppressed, and more specifically they continue to be sexually harassed, as evidenced by the recent popularization of the “Me Too” movement.
#MeToo: Coined in October 2017
Activist Tarana Burke founded the Me Too campaign in 2006, but it did not take off until October 2017, when actresses started using the #MeToo hashtag on social media to demonstrate the widespread prevalence of sexual assault and harassment. It followed on the heels of the Harvey Weinstein sexual misconduct allegations, in which the Hollywood producer was accused of sexually assaulting eighty-four women, many of whom were actresses and models. Millions of women have used the feminist hashtag; many have also shared their stories of how they have survived sexual violence or manipulation. It took the Internet by such force and has brought the conversation about sexual harassment to the forefront. 25
#IAmANastyWoman: Coined in October 2016
During the third presidential debate, Donald Trump was seen muttering, apparently to himself, “Such a nasty woman,” while Hillary Clinton answered a question about social security. It did not take long for #IAmANastyWoman to catch on among Trump critics as an ironic rebuke of his insult. Women reclaimed the “Nasty Woman” label to describe a woman who was tough, powerful, dynamic, and unafraid to call it like it is. 26 Today, in 2018, social media feminist hashtags have become so common that some are experiencing feminist hashtag burnout.
Intersectionality
The citizens of the United States are a diverse group of people. As such we frequently encounter moments of competing agendas. The theological school in which I am employed is also a diverse community, and as such frequently encounters moments of competing agendas. The other day I was speaking to a colleague as we were planning an event. As part of our conversation we bumped into a bit of a conflict—a mild conflict, but a conflict none-the-less—on how to prioritize discussion/agenda items between race and gender. In the course of the conversation I was told by my African American male colleague that historically the battle has always been to prioritize the issue of race so that race does not fall off the table in the midst of other issues being brought forward at the same time.
The institution at which I teach, the American Baptist Seminary of the West, is officially recognized as a multi-cultural institution. Our student body in spring 2018 was: 43% African American; 26% Asian; 10% Caucasian; 9% unknown; 7% international; 3% Latino; and 2% Pacific Islander. Our student body in spring 2018 was also 36% female. The subjects of race and gender are therefore pertinent and sometimes touchy ones. Thus, my question to my colleague that day was, “If we are always going to prioritize race over gender, when do we ever get to the conversation about females of color and how they fit into the job market? What am I supposed to tell the female students of color? When and how do their needs, and concerns, become prioritized?” These questions are relevant and prevalent in today’s discourse, and the “Me Too” movement has helped to catapult it forward.
The Honorable Barbara Lee, Congresswoman for the Thirteenth District of California, wrote this in an article found in Essence magazine dated Oct 24, 2017:
Last year, Black women across America beamed with pride as the movie Hidden Figures told the true stories of Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson—NASA employees who exuded the brilliance and resilience of Black women and helped send John Glenn into orbit.
This award-winning film resonated with millions of African American women because it affirmed a truth that we all know too well: No matter how smart or qualified you are, neglect and hostility can be expected. 27 Valentina Zarya wrote in Fortune magazine in March of 2017, “It’s a well-documented fact that female founders receive less venture capital funding than their male counterparts. What is perhaps more surprising is that things haven’t improved—and have actually worsened—over the past year.” 28
Statistically speaking, between 2010 and 2015 of the Top 100 companies supported by Venture Capitalists in Silicon Valley, only 7% were founded by women, and of that 7% less than 1% were founded by black women. 29
The famous speech delivered in 1851 at a Women’s Convention in Akron Ohio still rings true today:
That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man—when I could get it—and bear the lash as well! And ain’t I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain’t I a woman?
30
We have often heard it said that women are the weaker sex—Sojourner Truth’s testimony challenges that idea! So also does a 2017 study documented in Science Advances entitled, “Prehistoric Farm Workers had Strength Superior to Modern-day Athletes:”
Prehistoric women who ground grain and tilled soil by hand were stronger than today’s female rowing champions, according to skeletal analysis. A recent NPR interview addressed this study and the scientists noted that ancient skeletons formerly believed to have been males, due to the size and strength of the bone structure, have now been confirmed through DNA analysis to be females.
31
We may find that many women today are weaker than men, but that is the result of social conditioning. Women that do heavy labor are as strong and stronger than many men. Women that never do heavy physical labor will naturally be weaker, so too men.
Sojourner Truth’s speech made clear that she could do as much heavy physical labor as any man; it also makes clear that white women have historically been treated differently than women of color. Sadly, her words are as meaningful today as they were in 1851.
Where, then, does this leave us? We (all of us) are the victims of long-standing traditions. We are products of our cultures and our societies, just like the Apostle Paul, the early Christians, and our patriarchal denominational forefathers. Indeed, just as Paul exhorted the people to live counterculturally, so too Jesus exhorts us to live counterculturally today. We are called to put away our differences, our prejudices, our petty jealousies that cause us to persecute and oppress one another, and to put on the mantel of discipleship.
Conclusion
This article has provided a linguistic analysis of the two-word phrase, ‘ēzer kenegdo, as found in the Hebrew text of Gen 2:18, 20. A linguistic analysis has revealed that the word ‘ēzer does not connote “help” as from a subordinate, but rather “help” for one who is in trouble—“help” toward salvation/deliverance. The article presents various views of the reception history of the phrase ‘ēzer kenegdo as found in Gen 2:18, 20, beginning with the translation of these words in the King James Version of the Bible.
As part of the reception history of Gen 2:18, 20’s use of ‘ēzer kenegdo, this article walked through New Testament allusions to the Genesis 2 creation story, as found in 1 Timothy 2 and Ephesians 5. The New Testament’s use of the Genesis 2 creation story plays a vital role in the development of a tradition that interprets Gen 2:18, 20 as evidence that Woman, i.e., Eve as the first woman, was created as a subordinate helper for Adam.
Next, the article reviewed the theologies of gender roles held by four denominational forefathers: Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Smyth, and John Wesley, and found that all but Wesley adhered to the tradition that women are to be understood as subordinate to men based on their interpretations of Genesis 2, 1 Timothy 2, and Ephesians 5. Wesley stood out as “enlightened” beyond his generation, as he affirmed women as equal in every way to men and equally called to preach and teach in the church.
Then the article outlined key moments in the making of laws in the United States of America that relate specifically to the equality of women in the United States. It was discovered that during Wesley’s time, in 1769, in the United States, women were understood to be one with their husbands (cf. discussion on Eph 5) in marriage and that their legal existence was suspended; in 1777, all states passed laws that took away a woman’s right to vote. In 1870, African Americans were given the right to vote, but women did not regain this right until 1920. On the economic and work front, it was not until 1963 that the Equal Pay Act was passed, 1974 that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act passed, and 1994 when the Gender Equity in Education Act was passed. Although laws had been made to enforce voter, economic, and work-force equality (although evidence suggests we are still having trouble with the implementation of these laws) between 1769 and 1994, women were still being sexually harassed in the work place, leading to the 2017 “Me Too” movement.
The article concludes with a brief discussion on the intersectionality between race and gender, in which evidence is provided to show that the tradition of treating women as subordinates, especially women of color, continues. A quote from the famous Sojourner Truth speech, “Ain’t I a Woman,” drives the point home. This speech, given in Akron, OH, in 1851, still rings true today.
My appeal
Let us excel in living counterculturally; let us excel in creating equitable and equal communities of faith; let us excel in respecting, supporting, and encouraging one another, no matter the race, class, or gender; let us be a light to the world of equality for all people! Let us be a light that is so bright it blinds all that walk through our doors, so bright that it blinds them to the prejudicial traditions by which our society has been shaped and formed: traditions that were based on prejudicial interpretations of Gen 2:18, 20; traditions that were formed from poor translations of these verses; and traditions that reflected the cultural norms of their day. Let us be a light so bright that it not only blinds those who come into our space, but also blinds our neighbors and our city and our state and our world, for if we are to take the Christian call to discipleship seriously, then we are called to live counterculturally; we are called to live counter -isms.
Footnotes
1.
Robert Carroll and Stephen Prickett, eds., The Bible: Authorized King James Version, Oxford World’s Classics (Oxford University Press, 2008), xi–xlvi.
3.
Louvain Lipinski, “`a͞zar,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, vol. XI, ed. George W. Anderson, et al. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 16.
4.
Note the example used by Merriam-Webster to define the word “helper”—“… especially a wife ….”
5.
For a full discussion on the authorship of 1 Timothy see Martin Dibelius and Hans Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles, Hermeneia: A Critical Commentary on the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989).
6.
For a full discussion on Ephesians as an undisputed Pauline text see Ernest Best and Christopher M. Tuckett, Ephesians, ITC (New York: T & T Clark, 2004).
7.
Daniel Boyarian, A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). Gabriele Boccaccini and Carlos A. Segovia, eds., Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016).
8.
Kirsi I. Stjerna, “Luther and Gender: Shifts in Paradigms and Orientations,” Dialog: A Journal of Theology 56.2 (June 2017): 165.
9.
Often this statement is countered with a nod toward Gen 3:16, when Adam and Eve are expelled from the garden and cursed. “To the woman he said, ‘I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.’” The curse put upon Eve is descriptive of the socio-cultural reality of the time and continues to our present time. It does not, however, reflect the original creation scene found in Gen 2. Though preachers often preach against the sustainability of the curse post-death and resurrection of Christ, they seldom include this portion of the curse in their catalogue of items from which we have been freed.
10.
Mary Potter, “Gender Equality and Gender Hierarchy in Calvin’s Theology,” Journal of Women in Culture and Society 11.4 (1966): 725.
11.
Potter, “Gender Equality,” 725.
12.
Potter, “Gender Equality,” 727.
13.
J. Smyth, “Principles and Inferences concerning the Visible Church, 1607,” in W. T. Whitley, ed., The Works of John Smyth, 2 vols (Paris, AR: Baptist Standard Bearer, 2009), 255–60.
14.
J. Smyth, “Short Confession of Faith in xx Articles; 1609,” in Baptist Confessions of Faith, ed. W. L. Lumpkin (Philadelphia: Judson Press, 1959), 100–101. Paragraph 76 of his ‘confession of faith of certain English people living at Amsterdam’ (published after Smyth’s death in 1612) has a similar emphasis, in W. T. Whitley, ed., Works, 746 (see n. 13).
15.
Thomas Helwys, “A Declaration of Faith of English People remaining at Amsterdam in Holland, 1611,” in Baptist Confessions of Faith, ed. W. L. Lumpkin (Philadelphia: Judson Press, 1959), 116–21.
16.
John Briggs, “She-Preacher, Widows and Other Women: The Feminine Dimension in Baptist Life since 1600,” The Baptist Quarterly (April, 1986): 337.
17.
Kenneth Cracknell and Susan J. White, An Introduction to World Methodism (Cambridge University Press, 2005), 217.
18.
Cracknell and White, World Methodism, 217.
19.
Cracknell and White, World Methodism, 218.
20.
Robert Alter, Genesis: Translation and Commentary (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1996), 9.
21.
Alter, Genesis, 9.
22.
Alter, Genesis, 9.
23.
For a thorough rendering of this history, see John Randolph Tucker, ed. Henry St. George Tucker, The Constitution of the United States: A Critical Discussion of its Genesis, Development, and Interpretation, vol. 1 (Australia: Sagwan Press, 2018).
24.
This select historical overview of women’s rights in the United States of America comes from a larger history that can be found at YourDreamBlog, “History of Women’s Rights in America,” March 16, 2017, accessed August 5, 2018, http://yourdream.liveyourdream.org/2017/03/history-of-womens-rights-america/?utm_term=feminist%20movement&utm_campaign=LYD+Blog&utm_source=adwords&utm_medium=ppc&hsa_acc=3468286777&hsa_cam=108779833&hsa_mt=b&hsa_net=adwords&hsa_src=g&hsa_ver=3&hsa_ad=242491361681&hsa_tgt=kwd-38211032&hsa_grp=41062763735&hsa_kw=feminist%20movement&gclid=CjwKCAjwwJrbBRAoEiwAGA1B_ddhv8zFlLItrRQPWBobUeGjiyPa01XvCQlLb_A-lqI9iuRhLUTUVhoCHjsQAvD_BwE.
25.
YourDreamBlog, “Every Feminist Hashtag You Need to Know, from #MeToo to #TimesUp,” February 5, 2018, accessed August 5, 2018, http://yourdream.liveyourdream.org/2018/02/feminist-hashtags-metoo-timesup/?utm_term=history%20of%20the%20me%20too%20movement&utm_campaign=LYD+Blog&utm_source=adwords&utm_medium=ppc&hsa_acc=3468286777&hsa_cam=108779833&hsa_mt=b&hsa_net=adwords&hsa_src=g&hsa_ver=3&hsa_ad=249895157884&hsa_tgt=kwd-415241421025&hsa_grp=57271175892&hsa_kw=history%20of%20the%20me%20too%20movement&gclid=CjwKCAjwwJrbBRAoEiwAGA1B_SqyatXakcurrrQzcb2iCdRcWM4ikaFSzEWoBkv4kw5JtRrbEM16RRoCH0AQAvD_BwE.
26.
Ibid. (accessed August 5, 2018).
27.
29.
30.
31.
Nadia Drake, National Geographic, “Prehistoric Women Had Stronger Arms Than Modern Athletes,” November 2017, accessed August 8, 2018, https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/prehistoric-women-manual-labor-stronger-athletes-science/; see also Alison A. Macintosh, Ron Pinhasi, and Jay T. Stock, “Prehistoric Women’s Manual Labor Exceeded that of Athletes through the First 5500 Years of Farming in Central Europe,” Science Advances, vol. 3, no. 11 (November, 2017), accessed August 11, 2018, 
.