This is Part 7 in an 8-Part Series on Women (and Men) in the Bible
"He was seen by Peter and then by the Twelve. After that, He was seen by more than 500 of His followers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then He was seen by James and later by all the apostles. Last of all, as though I had been born at the wrong time, I also saw Him." - 1 Corinthians 15:5-8
For the most part, every time a story is told, the person doing the storytelling has to do some editing. They have to make some decisions - whether intentional or unintentional, whether conscious or subconscious - about which details to include and which to leave out; about which details are important to the story and which are not. Typically, when telling a story orally, these are spontaneous, subconscious decisions. In writing, however, they tend to be more deliberate; we may even spend a significant amount of time editing our work or even have other people act as editors, giving us feedback as to what to include, what to leave out, or how to best word something. Whether orally or in writing, we can make intentional decisions to leave out key details without any intention of misleading or deceiving; we may even say something like, "to make a long story short", "let me cut to the chase", or "just give me the Cliff's Notes". The problem is, just because some of the details aren't the most important details to the story doesn't mean they aren't important! And repeatedly leaving them out of the story ultimately changes the narrative of the story.
In his first letter to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul is giving an account of Jesus' resurrection, and he is listing the instances in which people saw the resurrected Jesus in chronological order, and there is a glaringly obvious omission: the women.
The women were the first to arrive at the tomb and the first to see the resurrected Jesus, and yet, in some of the first written accounts of these events, they are excluded from this story. I'm sure some of my more liberal friends might jump to the conclusion that this is purely a case of misogyny, but I personally think we need to dig a little deeper than that.
Although Paul wrote over half of the books in the New Testament, he was not a disciple of Jesus; in fact, he was a persecutor of Jesus and His Followers. Paul was a devout Jewish Pharisee, a religious leader who condemned Jesus' teachings and was involved in the stoning of the first martyr, the apostle Stephen. As verse 8 indicates, Paul was the last person to see the risen Jesus ... and he was a very unwilling participant! When praying for non-believing friends or family members, I often hear Christians say something along the lines of, "Well, they have to want it for themselves.", and while I believe that to be true in many cases, Paul (originally known as Saul) was on the road to Damascus to persecute Christians when Jesus struck him down, blinded him, and said to him, "Saul! Saul! Why are you persecuting Me?" (Acts 9:4) ... Apparently, it made quite an impression on him because Saul became known as Paul and did a complete 180, living out the rest of his life spreading the Gospel message of Jesus Christ to anyone and everyone who would listen!
In verse 3 of his letter, Paul writes, "I passed on to you what was most important and what had also been passed on to me." In other words, Paul is acknowledging that he is passing along details that other people relayed to him and that he has done some editing. This was a written letter, so if Paul knew about the women, he would have most likely made a deliberate decision to leave them out. It's possible Paul was misogynistic and excluded the women simply because he just didn't think the women were important enough to include, but, while that's a possibility, I don't believe that was the case; all of the writers in the New Testament felt a divine responsibility to stay true to the facts. Paul even writes in Galatians 1:20, "I declare before God that what I am writing to you is not a lie."
Paul wasn't physically present for any of the resurrection events prior to his own personal encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus, so he was relying on other people's accounts of what had happened. What most people don't realize is that, after his conversion on the road to Damascus, Paul spent time alone, in solitude, with the Lord. He consulted only with God; he didn't want other people's perspectives or opinions to influence his message. (See Galatians 1:15-20) More than 3 years after his conversion, he went to Jerusalem and spent 15 days with the disciple Peter. This would have been the first time Paul had heard about these events from a first-hand witness. Personally, I don't think it's any coincidence that Paul lists Peter as the first one to see the risen Jesus. In my opinion, Paul didn't exclude the women from this story; Peter did.
There are 3 possible reasons why Peter may have excluded the women. The first is obviously misogyny, but I really don't believe that was the case. The second is egocentricity; we have a tendency when telling a story to focus on the details and events that are most significant to us, particularly when telling a story orally. It's just human nature. You could easily make a strong case for this, but this was a very significant detail to leave out. I think the most likely reason for the omission is far more personal; Peter felt ashamed.
Peter had denied Jesus 3 times before His crucifixion, and he clearly felt ashamed about that even though Jesus never publicly rebuked him for it and extended grace to him regarding it. But Jesus had publicly rebuked the men - including Peter - for not believing the women, and we have a tendency to want to leave out details that we feel guilty or ashamed about. If we are honest with ourselves, we all have certain stories we would rather not tell, and we will have a tendency to gloss over them at the very least or, at worst, omit them altogether, sometimes to the point of "rewriting history".
I think it's important to note that, if this were the case, Peter had already been forgiven and reinstated by Jesus, and yet, he still seemed to carry some guilt and shame for his past failures and shortcomings. I think we can have a tendency to do this as well; even when we know we have been forgiven by God and/or other people, we can sometimes fail to forgive ourselves. We can mentally beat ourselves up over things we have done in our past - even our honest mistakes. But blame and shame are not from God; Truth and Grace are.
The first books of the New Testament to be written were authored approximately 10-20 years after Jesus' death and resurrection, which means that for 10-20 years, the events were passed along orally. And when we pass along stories orally, we have no choice but to do some heavy editing, whether intentionally or unintentionally, consciously or subconsciously. Unfortunately, over time, the women had been excluded from the Gospel message of Jesus Christ.*
There are 4 gospel accounts in the Bible written by 4 different authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), and each writer tells Jesus' story through their own unique "lens". For example, Luke was a well-educated physician, so he had a tendency to focus on Jesus' miraculous healings and sometimes included details the other writers left out. John was the last of the Gospel writers to write his Gospel, composing it, at the very least, 10 + years after the other 3 writers. In fact, his Gospel, his 3 letters, and the Book of Revelation were the last 5 books of the Bible to be written. John's Gospel is much different than the other 3, not only in terms of tone, but also in terms of content.
According to the Life Application Study Bible,
"Of the eight miracles recorded [in the book of John], six are unique (among the Gospels) to John. ... Over 90 percent of John is unique to his Gospel." In addition, unlike the other 3 Gospels, "... John does not contain a genealogy or any record of Jesus' birth, childhood, temptation, transfiguration, appointment of the disciples, nor any account of Jesus' parables, ascension, or great commission."
Clearly, John had done some very deliberate and intentional editing. In fact, in the very last verse of the Gospel of John, he states, "Jesus also did many other things. If they were all written down, I suppose the whole world could not contain the books that would be written." (John 21:25) So one of the most interesting things to me about John's Gospel is that it seems like he made a point to make sure the women were added back in to the story. In fact, two of the stories about Jesus affirming the women are found solely in the Gospel of John. While it may seem like John left a lot of things out, he seemed to be focusing on what he saw as the "gaps" left by the other Gospel writers, and one of those gaps was Jesus' interactions with women.
Unfortunately, over the past 2000 years, we have largely gone back to hearing these stories orally, and, once again, there has been a tendency to exclude the women. According to Statista, while 90% of American households own a Bible, most Americans have read none of it, a few verses, or several passages or stories. According to Scott McConnell, Executive Director of Lifeway Research, "The only time most Americans hear from the Bible is when someone else is reading it." That means that most people get their exposure to, and understanding of, the scriptures from other people; whether it's their priest, pastor, elders, or Christian friends. And, let's face it, most church leaders, pastors, and Bible study authors and leaders have been, and continue to be, men. Whether they have intended to or not, they have had a tendency to focus on the details that either resonate with them or which seem most important to them, and when important details are repeatedly left out - especially for 2000 years! - it has a tendency to change the narrative ... sometimes to the point that the story looks and sounds much different than the actual story.
I recently watched a sermon by Pastor Travis Greene from Forward City Church ("He Picked the Wrong One This Time" - 05/29/22). He was preaching from the book of Exodus when God supernaturally delivered the Israelites from centuries of slavery at the hands of the Egyptians. As a black man in the United States and having had experiences I have never had, he brought a different perspective to this scripture, pointing out details and drawing parallels that I had never noticed or thought about before. Same story; different "lens".
God is the same God. The Bible is the same Bible. But God is deep and complex and personal and mysterious and present in every single detail. And repeatedly leaving out important details has a tendency to rewrite history. Christian or not, if we only hear about Jesus through the "lens" of our friends or family members, priest or preferred pastor, politicians and talk show hosts, or movie writers and editors, then we may have a very distorted view of who He really is and what it means to follow Him.
© I Lift My Voice, 2022.
* "gospel" means "good news" - the Gospel is the Good News of Jesus Christ.
Comentarii