There is a strong feeling floating around our society that if you are a historian, you don’t have to do much because nothing ever changes. History is history, right? What happened, happened. You can’t discover anything new. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. For example, if you are a historian of early Christianity, it is simply impossible to keep up with all the books and articles published every year. For years, I had a subscription to the two most important journals for the study of early Christianity (one English, and one German). Praise to dr. Albrecht Diem (Syracuse University) and his incredible access to all of the journals. He kindly sents every article I need. But, my point is that the pace of publication is just too high – to keep track of everything. I did develop several “techniques” how to summarize the massive amount of new journals and books. It is far from the perfect system, but it is what it is!
Anyways, recently I’ve come across a book entitled “The Air We Breath: How We All Came to Believe In Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality“. It was published a couple of months ago! The author is Glen Scrivener – an ordained Church of England minister and evangelist who preaches Christ through writing, speaking, and online media. In other words, Scrivener is an apologist (the word has nothing to do with forgiveness. It comes from the Greek word “ἀπολογία” – speaking in defense. In this case, an apologist is the one who tries to defend the truthfulness of Christianity by using rational arguments and logic.). And I’m totally okay with that – apologists can be really great, sharp-minded, and interesting people (e.g. Father Robert Barron). A lot of them write and speak about the history of Christianity (especially the history of early Christianity). And Glen’s book is precisely about that. In it, he argues that the “Jesus revolution” (by which he means the impact of the historical Jesus and the practical work of the early Church) shaped modern culture and society in numerous ways! More precisely, Scrivener thinks that some of the most important cultural ideas were introduced into the world by Jesus and early Christians. The book is not too long: around 220 pages. I’ve read it in a couple of days. Besides the “Introduction” and “Final Words”, the book is divided into 10 separate chapters each (except the first one) related to one important cultural idea (or value) brought about by Christianity: equality, compassion, consent, freedom, progress… The book is well structured and easily readable with enough references to other historical and sociological studies. Nevertheless, it is a one-way street. Scrivener can’t escape his own bias so he drives the “car” in one and only way. His goal is simple: to show that we owe Christianity the greatest credit for all of those beautiful value judgments mentioned above (from equality to progress). Sometimes he is on point and I couldn’t agree with him more! For example, in the third chapter, Scrivener talks about compassion by showing amazing charitable work done by the early Church (I wrote about it here, and here). Furthermore, his chapter on science is another example of fine scholarship. There Scrivener notes that Christianity in the last 1000 years didn’t (generally speaking) oppose science, but (in many cases) advance it. Actually, there is a consensus among the contemporary historians of science that the old theory of conflict between Christianity and science is a myth, an idea that isn’t supported by historical evidence (see: here). However, in other cases, he’ll bend and break logic and historical data just to show that his overreaching theory is correct. The prime example of poor scholarship is his contention that the idea of human equality was introduced into this world by Jesus and the early Church.
He starts off by explaining how scientists can’t find human equality by looking at human DNA. Also, he notes that the Greco-Roman world (e.g. Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, Cicero, etc.) isn’t the place where one can go and find this idea. On both points, he is absolutely right. But then, Scrivener goes further. He thinks that the value of human equality can be traced all the way back to the first chapter of the Book of Genesis where “God created Adam in his image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them (1, 27)”. He points out the differences between the Jewish story of creation and all other ancient creation stories. In the latter, you have some sort of chaotic divine beings that are involved in the creation of the world, and human beings are created to serve them as slaves. Unlike that, the Book of Genesis claims that God created men as a pinnacle of His work. And He gave them the authority above all other creatures. In this “Imago Dei” motive, Scrivener sees one of the roots of human dignity and equality. Christians went even further than that, claims Scrivener, by developing the belief that God didn’t just bless men as a pinnacle of His creation, but He also became man in the person of Jesus Christ. In other words, the foundations of humanism, dignity, and equality for all people are to be found in those two places: The Book of Genesis with its emphasis that God created human beings in His image; early Christians and their belief that God became human in the person of Jesus Christ. From there on, you get the idea that every person has dignity. That is the reason why Paul states: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal 3,28).”
How should we evaluate these claims? The major problem is that upon a closer look, one soon finds out that the Judeo-Christian value system during the ancient and medieval times was not based on the equality of all human beings. Scrivener neglects the second chapter of the Book of Genesis which is all about the details of how God created people. In a nutshell: He first created Adam. Then He concluded that Adam needs help. Because of that, God created all the animals. However, He finds out that these animals are not suitable to be the helpers Adam needs. Therefore, out of Adam, God created women. It is stated explicitly: she is to be his helper – that is the reason why she exists in the first place. It wasn’t Adam the one who was created to help Eve, it was the other way around! And this is a persistent motive across the Bible: women should be subordinate to men! It is massively evident in the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament. What about the New Testament? When you have the reference to the creation story in the New Testament, women’s subordination is explicitly emphasized. Look at the First Timothy:
- A woman should learn in quietness and full submission (ὑποταγῇ – literally: the act of subjecting/obedience; subjection). I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
Why must she be quiet? Well, because “Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner“. So, you have it: a clear allusion to the Book of Genesis and the creation story. According to First Timothy, women can easily get misled by the devil and therefore they should exercise silence and subjection to men. The author of First Timothy spoke as if he was Paul. And Paul itself told basically the same thing. In his first epistle to Christians in Corinth he wrote:
- Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission, as the law says (alluding to the Old Testament). If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. (1 Cor 14,34-36)
It is true that Paul told the communities at Galatia “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”. However, the key is the last part: “in Christ Jesus (ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ)”. Paul is trying to say that salvation is equally open to everyone, no matter what is their social status, nationality, or sex. Paul didn’t think that men and women should have equal status in the Church and society. He explicitly stated to the women in Corinth that they need to be subjected to men. Just as the husbands are subjected to God! And if you look at the history of Christianity during late antiquity, the middle ages, and the Protestant reformation, you won’t find that the dominating ideology is the one of equality between men and women. It is true that later on some theologians and other authors (e.g. 18. century) took the Bible and used it as a foundation for equality. A prime example would be the Declaration of Independence. So, yes there are some roots for the idea of equality in the Bible! However, historically speaking, during the late antiquity, middle ages, and the Protestant reformation, Christianity supported subordination (women subjected to men), not equality. The final problem (and this is a kind of overall problem) with Scrivener’s book is that he constantly emphasizes the evolutionary approach. For example, he claims that the Enlightenment ideas didn’t appear out of thin air. And he is absolutely right! But, as a historian, I must note that the same line of thinking cuts both ways. Christianity didn’t emerge ex nihilo. One can’t neglect the influence Judaism had on Christianity. Jesus was a Jew, and all of his disciples were Jews. He could have therefore as easily written a book claiming that these ideas were introduced into the world by Judaism, not Christianity. To be fair, Christianity was the main vehicle for spreading these ideas all across the world! Judaism, on the other hand, remained bound by its national demands. But nevertheless, the point stands!
As a way of conclusion, I’ll put a little disclaimer at the end. I’m not a theologian. I’m not claiming that the idea of subjection or subordination is the right way of interpreting these verses. The only thing I do claim is that historically speaking, that was the way people understood it. As a historian, I can say that the Jews in antiquity didn’t look at the Book of Genesis and conclude that it is all about equality between men and women. Can you imagine a group of Jewish men living in Jerusalem around the year 43 CE reading the creation story and concluding that men and women should have an equal status in society? I certainly can’t! These people lived in a patriarchal society and their own take on these verses was in alliance with subordination: women should accept the authority of men. As simple as that. Similarly, I’m not asserting that women really should be silent in the Church. I’m merely pointing out that, as far as we can know, first Christians did see it that way. And neither the middle ages nor the Protestant reformation brought a significant change in that aspect!
What criticisms or counter-arguments might be raised against Scrivener’s interpretation of religious texts as sources of human equality?
I’m not sure that religious texts (e.g. Bible) could be seen as the source of human equality. The growth of the modern conception of human rights and equality is the consequence of numerous different social and cultural factors. Christianity had its role in it for sure, but it’s an overstatement to claim that the Bible is the source of human equality. No one today would argue that women should be inferior to men – and that is precisely what you have both in OT and NT. It shouldn’t, of course, surprise us. These books wee written when women’s inferiority in society was taken for granted!
Cheers!