Context Matters

Before reading this post, I highly recommend you read The Scary Truth and Approved Conclusions. It provides necessary context.

Next to the Holy Spirit, context is one of the most important aids to understanding the Bible. A lack of context is one of the primary reasons most of the false teachings in the world have come about, and it's vital if we actually want to know the truth about what God is telling us through His word. For proper context, you generally have to read the verses around the verse and sometimes the chapters around it (In the case of Paul, the entire letter, the words of Jesus, and the Old Testament. I'm only half kidding.). Without getting the context, you can come to some pretty wild conclusions, like sin is good and we should sin more so that the grace of God can abound more in our lives. So the context around a particular verse is important, but also the subject (who or what is being talked about), and who the recipient of the verbal or written instructions is. In other words, who it (whatever is being said or written) is directed at. 

Without this context, you might leap to some pretty odd conclusions based on nothing more than a misunderstanding of the text. The context of the culture will help us understand it better in a lot of cases, but it is not a fitting excuse to say that something doesn't apply to us because it was written for another culture. We are all still people, and the problems of one culture are the problems of another culture. If I had a dime for every time someone used cultural context as an excuse to take something out of context, I'd be a rich man. 

I'd like to return to the topic of who something is written to for a moment, because this is the context most miss (including myself), but it's actually quite important. There's a difference between something being said for someone, written for someone, or preserved for someone, and being said to someone or written to someone. As an example, something can be written for the benefit of someone else without being directed to them, as in the case of what Paul said.

Romans 15:4 NASB95 — 4 For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.

Were the things written before written TO the congregation in Rome? No, not at all. For example, the instructions given for Israel to slaughter every man, woman, and child in Jericho was not written to the congregation in Rome, but it was written for their instruction. Likewise, the prophecies written to the ten tribes of Israel were also written for the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, but it wasn't addressed to them, so some serious misunderstandings could occur if they interpreted them that way. 

The same goes for men and women. There are plenty of instructions written to men that you would have some difficulty applying if you try to say they were also written to women rather than for women. For example, this one from Genesis: Genesis 17:10-11 NASB95 — 10 “This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 “And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.

Women can still learn from these instructions, but they weren't given to them. I hope I'm making the distinction clear about something being written to and something being written for, because it's about to become a very important distinction. The Bible wasn't written to us; it was written for us. This is a toughy because a lot of us view the Bible as if it were written to us personally, but it wasn't. There were real people, real nations, and real congregations that it was directed to at the time it was written, and they aren't us. This doesn't mean everything that was written wasn't written for us and our education and learning, but it wasn't written to us. When Paul wrote the church in Rome, he said that everything written before was written for them, and we can apply the same thing to ourselves today. It wasn't written to the congregation in Rome any more than it was written to us, but it was still written for us. As Paul says in Timothy:

2 Timothy 3:16-17 NASB95 — 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 

17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

That's the living part of the word of God; it doesn't ever cease to be applicable just because society changes. It's still the very words of God. However, to understand it and a lot of the plan God has set in place, context matters.

Really!

It's true.

As you saw in the examples I shared, understanding who it is written to changes the meaning and understanding of the passage. A lot of very poor translations have changed the words of God to conceal who specific things are directed at and change the meaning of what is written. 

Growing up, especially in Proverbs, I was taught to read things as though they applied to both men and women, which is true in a lot of cases, but over time, this caused me to begin to read the Bible in a gender neutral way. Many of these translations have done the same thing, translating things in a gender neutral way which distorts the meaning and intentions of God's words. They purposely change the gender (though not of the circumcision command, oddly) to push a feminist agenda that goes against the word of God. I'll share some examples here in a minute, but it's shocking. 

Many of the translations are gender neutral, which trains people to read the Bible as though it is gender neutral, but it's not.

Not at all.

Not even a little bit.

Imagine if the purity laws were gender neutral. You'd have a hard time explaining that one! The truth is, that the context of whether it is written to men or women matters just as much as any of the rest of the items that need to be in context. Greek and Hebrew are both gendered, so to translate them as gender neutral is pretty ignorant. I don't think anyone would argue with this point, so we'll move on. 

Ephesians 5:22-24 NASB95 — 22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 

23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 

24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Colossians 3:18 NASB95 — 18 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

1 Peter 3:1-6 NASB95 — 1 In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, 

2 as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. 

3 Your adornment must not be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; 

4 but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. 

5 For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands; 

6 just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.

Philippians 4:2-3 NASB95 — 2 I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to live in harmony in the Lord. 

3 Indeed, true companion, I ask you also to help these women who have shared my struggle in the cause of the gospel, together with Clement also and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Genesis 3:16 NASB95 — 16 To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.”

Isaiah 32:9-10 NASB95 — 9 Rise up, you women who are at ease, And hear my voice; Give ear to my word, You complacent daughters. 10 Within a year and a few days You will be troubled, O complacent daughters; For the vintage is ended, And the fruit gathering will not come.

That's the complete list! See if you can figure out what they all have in common while we work on the next list. 

Titus 2:3-5 NASB95 — 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, 4 so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored.

1 Timothy 2:9-15 NASB95 — 9 Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, 

10 but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. 

11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 

12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 

13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 

14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 

15 But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

1 Corinthians 14:34-38 NASB95 — 34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 

35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. 

36 Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? 

37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. 

38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.

Genesis 18:13-15 NASB95 — 13 And the LORD said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?’ 

14 “Is anything too difficult for the LORD? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son.” 

15 Sarah denied it however, saying, “I did not laugh”; for she was afraid. And He said, “No, but you did laugh.”

Leviticus 12:1-2 NASB95 — 1 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 

2 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying: ‘When a woman gives birth and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean for seven days, as in the days of her menstruation she shall be unclean.

There's a semi-complete list, but it's enough for you to get the idea. Have you figured out what they all have in common yet? Well, the first list is the complete list (Near as I can find. If you find others, please share them in the comments) of places where women are directly addressed by the Bible. I don't mean the complete list of where they show up in the narrative, I mean the complete list of where they are addressed by the Bible, where it is written to women. The second list is where women are addressed through their husbands. 

The reason for this is that in most places in the New Testament the narrative is addressed to the brothers. 

Really!

It is!

I'll show you what I mean. There are two words in Greek for brothers and sisters. Adelphoi and adelphe are both used throughout the New Testament. However, contrary to what has been suggested by some, adelphoi does not refer to both men and women. It translates to “brothers,” not brothers and sisters. There are a few places where the words are used together to distinguish between men and women, so there is no reason to think from the Biblical text that adelphoi ever refers to women. Not one.

ἀδελφός

A brother

ἀδελφή

Sister (i. e. by birth): Matthew 19:29; Luke 10:39; John 11:1, 3, 5; John 19:25; Romans 16:15, etc.; respecting the sisters of Christ, mentioned in Matthew 13:56; Mark 6:3, see ἀδελφός, 1.

2. one connected by the tie of the Christian religion

There is no direct textual proof that adelphoi includes women unless we assume it based on external reasoning. The consistent pattern in the NT is that when women are meant to be included explicitly, separate terms are used (e.g., sisters, wives, mothers).

1 Timothy 5:1-2 NASB95 — 1 Do not sharply rebuke an older man, but rather appeal to him as a father, to the younger men as brothers, 2 the older women as mothers, and the younger women as sisters, in all purity. 

1 Corinthians 7:15 NASB95 — 15 Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.

Here, Paul uses the two words in the same section to distinguish between men and women, which is pretty clear. What should also be noted is that brother or sister here refers to a male or female believer, which is why they are called brother and sister. If brethren referred to both men and women, he simply could have used that word, but he didn’t. He made the distinction between men and women.

Here is the point and why context matters. Most of the Bible was written to men specifically and for a very good reason. 

It's true.

I'm serious.

Men were created by God to be the heads of the family and handle the spiritual instruction of their families. The instructions were relayed to the rest of the family through them by God. We see this repeatedly throughout scripture from the time of the Israelites clear through to the New Testament. It's the created order that has existed from the beginning, and that began when God relayed His instructions through Adam to Eve, and named the human race after Adam. 

Gen 1:27 (NASB95) — God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

The word for mankind is Adam, the same as the name of the first man. God created a patriarchal society, and it does not function when this order is abandoned. God inspired the Bible to be written in a gender specific manner for a reason, and up until recently, I completely missed this because I was using a poor translation of the Bible that concealed the gendered nature of the words God inspired to be written. Seriously, if you are still using any translation other than the NASB95 or the NKJV, I strongly suggest you consider changing. 

Jeremiah 44:24-25 NASB95 — 24 Then Jeremiah said to all the people, including all the women, “Hear the word of the LORD, all Judah who are in the land of Egypt, 

25 thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, as follows: ‘As for you and your wives, you have spoken with your mouths and fulfilled it with your hands, saying, “We will certainly perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn sacrifices to the queen of heaven and pour out drink offerings to her.” Go ahead and confirm your vows, and certainly perform your vows!’

Men bore the responsibility and the guilt for the nation, not the women. All the men were required to appear before the Lord three times a year, but not necessarily the women. Even in places where it says it was directed to all the people, it is not directed to the women, as Jeremiah specifies that the women were present here, then addresses only the men, unless women have wives. The point is that the entire structure of the Bible reinforces the roles God set in place for the family and for society. He could have used gender neutral language, but He didn't, and He did so in a very prominent place. Jesus is speaking to the Samaritan woman at the well here, but notice what He says.

John 4:13-14 NASB95 — 13 Jesus answered and said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again; 

14 but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.”

It does say him here, and it's not gender neutral. This isn't an accident, not at all. The words written were either recorded faithfully or they weren't, but as I said, it's not an accident. It goes back to the reason men and women were created, namely, men were created for God and women were created for men to be their companion and helper. That is their purpose.

Really. 

I'm serious.

Women were created for the purpose of providing companionship and a valuable helper for the man. 

Genesis 2:18 NASB95 — 18 Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.”

Genesis 2:21-23 NASB95 — 21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 

22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 

23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.”

Paul also clarifies this in his writings as well, but it's clear enough just right here. So the family structure and the structure of the Bible reflects this when the instructions are given to the men. In the Old Testament, it's mostly addressed to the sons of Israel, and in the New Testament, it is addressed to the brothers (Usually translated brethren, which isn't an incorrect translation, but it means brothers. The two words mean the same thing, but “brothers” says it more clearly). 

What I am NOT saying is that only men will receive salvation or that only men can read the Bible and apply it. Not in the slightest. I'm only pointing out how important the context of the gender addressed in the Bible is, and that it must be taken into account if a full understanding is going to be reached. It also lays out the order and structure God has for the family and squarely places the responsibility of learning and teaching the word on the shoulders of the men. Women should absolutely read and learn the instructions and directions God has issued to the heads of the families, but with the understanding that they were issued to their head to be carried out by and through that man. 

I'll give a couple of examples of some places where taking it out of context completely obscures the meaning of the passage. The two following passages are ones that have been wildly taken out of context to support feminist ideology for as long as I've been discussing the Bible, but in order to do that, they have to be taken out of their gender context. 

1 Corinthians 14:34-40 NASB95 — 34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 

35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. 

36 Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? 

37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. 

38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. 

39 Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues. 

40 But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.

Notice what it says Pauls says the law says. He doesn't say that it says they must be quiet, he says that they must be quiet because the law says they must be in subjection. 

Really!

That's what Paul is saying.

The law does indeed say that, both in Genesis and in Numbers as well. That's the first part people take out of context, mostly through misreading because almost every translation I checked that verse in got it right. The next part that is taken out of context is in verse 36 and 37 where Paul says he is writing the Lord's command. The assumption people have made is that he is refuting their statement that women should be silent, but that's not correct. Not at all. 

Some background is helpful, though not necessary to understand this, but it is interesting so I'll include it. Many think 1st century Rome was terribly Patriarchal and that's what Paul was trying to overthrow in so many of his letters, but, well, let me share a few things.

By the late Hellenistic Age, this had resulted in a metamorphosis in the position of women. Equality for women extended beyond politics into economic life, and in some occupations such as plumbing they came to dominate. The rate of divorce increased enormously, and the power “of the paterfamilias was shaken to its foundations and eventually swept away altogether.” “The meek and henpecked Roman husband was already a stock comedy figure in the great days of the Second Punic War.” This changing relationship led Cato the Censor to protest bitterly, “All other men rule over women; but we Romans, who rule all men, are ruled by our women.” Equality had progressed to the point that by the late Empire a woman who married retained her property, “and, legally, the man had not even the right to enjoy the income from it.” Source

Before Cato died in 149 BCE, women were essentially equal to men and could retain their property and own businesses separate from their husbands. 

Then there is Hortensia, who, in 42BC publicly argued down the Roman senate who wanted to impose a tax on women. The women could own property and businesses, so the senate wanted to tax them, not their husbands. Hortensia argued them down and effectively got the tax stopped. A woman argued the entire senate of Rome down. Sounds like women were pretty oppressed, doesn't it?

According to the Roman historian Cassius Dio, at one point, Fulvia controlled the politics of Rome, even to the point that no business was conducted against her good pleasure. 

“The following year Publius Servilius and Lucius Antonius nominally became consuls, but in reality it was Antonius and Fulvia. She, the mother-in-law of Octavian and wife of Antony, had no respect for Lepidus because of his slothfulness, and managed affairs herself, so that neither the senate nor the people transacted any business contrary to her pleasure.” Source

Or this from the book “Sex and Culture” by J.D. Unwin, page 397:

“In the second century (B.C.) confarreatio disappeared  …  Free marriages became usual, made and broken by mutual consent. Indeed the will of one party only was sufficient for a divorce, the intention to dissolve being communicated either by word of mouth or by messenger. There was no ceremony, no registration, no formality. Women were free from any trace of marital authority; they could hold property and could contract in their own name.” Source

All this sounds like a pretty egalitarian culture, and all this was a hundred years before the time of the Apostles, and things were only even more egalitarian by that time. 

The congregation in Corinth that Paul addressed in this letter came out of this egalitarian culture, this progressive mindset, even to the point where, early in the letter, Paul rebuked them for being proud of how progressive they were in allowing a man who was having sex with his mother to remain in fellowship with them. What are the chances that what was actually happening is that they were allowing women to speak, and they were proud of it being so progressive, just like they were with the man who was sleeping with his mom? We're not told explicitly, but likely. Very likely.

Notice how Paul says, “Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?” It's a rebuke of these people, but not all of the people, just the men. The Greek grammar in this sentence makes it abundantly clear that this was addressed to the men of the congregation, just like most of the rest of the letter was. Paul was rebuking them for thinking they knew better than the word of God in something, and that something was allowing women to speak. “Or was it from you (men) that the word of God first went forth? Or has it only come to you?” A stinging rebuke indeed!

The next passage is this one where many have used it to say that we all have to submit to each other, even the men to the women and the women to men other than their husbands. Well, that's just ridiculous, and for a very good reason. This passage was directed only to the men, and we know this because again, most of the Bible was written to men. Also it says so a few verses earlier. 

Ephesians 5:21 NASB95 — 21 and be subject to one another in the fear of Christ.

Ephesians 5:15 NASB95 — 15 Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise,

If you take either one of these passages out of their gendered context, you'd miss the point entirely, as so many have. 

I want to be absolutely clear on this point. Women absolutely have the same spiritual potential as men do and a place in the plan of salvation. That's not what this post is about. Not at all. The context of gender is about the way God intentionally designed things to be done, and the way He inspired His word to be written. When we ignore that, well, He recorded a warning about that too. 

Isaiah 3:12 NASB95 — 12 O My people! Their oppressors are children, And women rule over them. O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray And confuse the direction of your paths.

1 Corinthians 14:38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. 

This is what happens when the gender of the Bible is ignored by those who read it. We end up with a backward structure and are led astray because of it. This is why context matters! Context is vital if we are going to fully understand any part of the Bible, but it's easy to ignore it in favor of taking little bits of verses and using them to break the rule God has set in place.