In Threads of Wisdom, Caroline Mendez responds to a vacuum that exists for Christian women in business. There is little opportunity for them to engage with other Christian businesswomen about how to use their God-given abilities in the workplace while at the same time giving expression to their faith.
Women in the Church is a dangerous book which should not have been published because, while it appears to be scholarly, it actually teems with historical and theological errors and also emotional subjectivity. Alan G. Padgett has provided a critical rebuttal to Women in the Church in the Winter 1997 issue of Priscilla Papers. I refer readers to his technical refutation of the key themes of Women in the Church. I will highlight other problems with the book and critique its basic tone.
Gary Hoag revisits the topic of wealth in the letter of 1 Timothy, asking whether the teachings found there are consistent or inconsistent with other teachings in the NT, or whether it might be a mixture of the two. Scholars are divided on this question. Hoag’s findings rest on cross-referencing the terms in 1 Timothy with a novel, Ephesiaca by Xenophon of Ephesus. This novel was originally thought to have been written in the 2nd or 3rd century CE, but having been recently codified as an ancient Greek novel of the mid-first century CE, we now know that it was written at the same time as Paul’s ministry as portrayed by Luke in Acts. It’s a valuable source in shedding light on the social setting or Sitz im Leben of the letter, and Hoag studies in particular five passages: 1 Tim 2:9-15; 3:1-13; 6:1-2a; 6:2b-10; 6:17-19.
Christian Egalitarian Leadership takes further steps toward broadening the issues (e.g., it is about more than gender) but also focuses on one essential aspect of the thriving of egalitarianism—leadership.
This passage is used as a key building block in theologies portraying gender hierarchy as God’s will. This is while the exegetes offer very contradictory interpretations of the text, typically concluding that Paul was not very logical in his argumentation or alternatively parts of the challenging text are simply ignored. In this workshop, an interpretation is presented that assumes that Paul is logical in his argumentation.
How can we better serve and inform a growing diverse community with an egalitarian theology message that is clearly understood? What are better ways to create bridges of conversation that are not intrusive or divisive?