Fee on Women and the Spirit

A number of fine folk have pointed to this article, the first I saw was Nick so I'll HT him, here's the section of the article dealing with Fee's stance on women in minstry:

“It’s a given,” he says. “The real question is, Which comes first, gender or gifting? What [opponents of women in ministry] are trying to tell me is that gender comes above gifting. How can that be? The Spirit gives the gifting. If a woman stands and prophesies by the Spirit, and men are present, does the Spirit not speak to them? Come on! How dumb can you get?”

His advocacy, Fee says, is on behalf of the Holy Spirit rather than women. “The Spirit is gifting women,” he says, “but many evangelicals are not prepared to adjust because of the ‘box’ they’re in.

“I’ve been blacklisted over this issue,” he adds. “People have said, ‘We can’t have Fee speak because he’s pro-women.’ I am pro-Holy Spirit! I just can’t get over that some people think gender comes before gifting.”

Let me know what you think :-)

More good stuff

So much good stuff landing online at the moment, check out:

• NT Wright on CS Lewis
• Gordon Fee on Revelation and understanding scripture
• Ben Witherington on Atonement
• Clayboy's review of a book on "liturgy"
• James McGrath musing and enthusing about education
• Larry Hurtado suggests a reason for Mark's "ommissions"
• Rod points out the contradictions in the way early Christianity is used to bolster people's agendas

Top 4 Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

Here's my favourite commentaries from 2 years of researching 1 Corinthians, I've used plenty of others but these are the ones I keep coming back to.

Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT, 1987

Fee is always good value and what is good about this commentary is its evenness of approach and his tendency to argue everything clearly point by point.  You are never left wondering, how did he get here from there?  This makes him a good converstaion partner, especially if you want to disagree with him!

Anthony Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NIGTC, 2000

Thiselton can be a little frustrating and every esoteric subject is explored in intimate detail, but this is really the strength of this book.  Its extra sections on selected issues are especially useful, his cross-disciplinary engagement is nigh on comprehensive, and his own translation is idiosyncratic enough to be interesting.


David Garland, 1 Corinthians, BECNT, 2003

This commentary can be a little cumbersome in places but is a favourite for very useful engagement with other 1st century literature and for not being afraid to depart from the beaten track.  If you need another opinion, Garland is your man.

Jospeh Fitzmyer, First Corinthians, AYB, 2008

Fitzmyer's engagement with the text is terse and sometimes indecisive, a positive and a negative depending on circumstances, but the bibliographies at the end of each section are indispensable.  His introductory section is also essential reading.

Anyone have anything else to add?  Sins of omission or points of contention?

σκεῦος = penis

Most of your Bible translations have two possible rendering of 1 Thes 4:4, something along the lines of either

that each one of you know how to control your own body in holiness and honour (NRSV)

or

that each one of you know how to take a wife for himself in holiness and honour (NRSV, note)

But the word translated variously "wife" or "body" is σκεῦος, which is a very strange word to use for either.  Of course the "wife" translation is especially wierd, as "knowing how" to take a wife presumably has little effect on your behaviour unless you actually do so!  And they are both wierd because if σκεῦος is a metaphor for either, what does the use of that metaphor add to the discussion?  σκεῦος is essentially a word for a useful object and has a semantic range broad enough to cover ship's rigging, kitchen pots, and human functionaries!  Instead, as both FF Bruce and Gordon Fee argue in their respective commentaries on 1&2 Thessalonians, σκεῦος is here best understood as a euphemism for penis.  There is even an example of this usage in the LXX (the Greek version of the OT) in 1 Sam 21:5-6.  

My contribution to this discussion is simply to concur with Fee's (much more detailed- this is just a very brief summary) argument and to point out that this would help explain Paul's use of τιμή (honour) here as in 1 Cor 12:23 he also talks about how the less presentable parts need to be treated with special τιμή (honour).

My translation suggestion?

that each one of you know how to control your own thingy in holiness and honour

Let me know what you think, :-)