I’m slowly critiquing through Rachel Held Evan’s book Inspired but I want to deal with something that last week someone commented on our blog about. Rachel Held Evans had a favorable retweet of the following:
Just in case the Tweet disappear Evans said “Y’all know I love this one.” What she was referring to to was someone’s tweet that she reposted which says “don’t 👏 say 👏 you want 👏 a biblical 👏 woman 👏 unless 👏 you’re prepared 👏 to have 👏 a tent peg 👏 driven 👏 through 👏 your skull.”
I find it incredible the twisting of Scripture Rachel Held commits and also the endorsement of others twisting the Scripture in order to attack the idea of Christians being biblical.
So does having a biblical woman in one’s life mean she might drive a tent peg through your skull?
- The references to a woman driving a tent peg through someone’s skull is from the narrative in Judges 4:17-22. In the passage a woman name Jael drives a tent into a man name Sisera.
- We must consider the context of what’s going on. I believe seeing the context here would demonstrate that having a biblical woman in one’s life does not mean she will have to drive a tent peg through your skull. Notice that the tweet does not give any context; of course one might say its the limitation of Twitter with limits on amount of word per tweet. True. But the tweet uses the biblical passage contrary to the intent of the passage in its context. Don’t forget that a use of a biblical text without context is often pretext for an agenda other than the author’s intent.
- We must keep in mind the literary form of the passage. The genre of Judges 4:17-22 is historical narrative. We must remember that just because something is mentioned in historical narrative that does not mean the actions are required of readers to do. Some might rebut this by noting that Jael driving a tent peg into Sisera is mentioned in the following chapter in Judges 5:24-31. There it is a song praising God and in the midst of singing to God Deborah who was singing it view what Jael did to Sisera positively. Again I think as we look at more of the context we see there’s a reason for the incident being seen favorably. But that doesn’t mean this is something that every “biblical woman” has to do to me or to others. Neither in Judges 4:17-22 nor Judges 5:24-31 do we see any Hebrew imperative verb commanding readers or women readers to do the same thing as Jael. The tweet confuses narratives for law; that is, it is comitting an is/ought logical fallacy. Just because the event is mentioned does not mean it is a command for every woman to carry out.
- Who is Sisera? Asking this question is important since I want to show that as we know more about Sisera it removes the force of the tweet making it as if a biblical woman will drive a tent peg into “you,” with the “you” being understood as any ordinary Tom, Dick and Harry today. That would be incorrect according to the context.
- In Judges 4:2 Sisera is mentioned as the commander of the Caananite army.
- The second half of Judges 4:3 mentioned that “he oppressed the sons of Israel severely for twenty years.”
- The oppression by Sisera was so bad that the first half of Judges 4:3 states “the sons of Israel cried to the Lord.” Israel seeking the Lord for help is incredible here for before they have not sought the Lord; that’s how bad the condition under Sisera was.
- Judges 4:3 also gives additional details of why Israel cried out to the Lord: “for he had nine hundred iron chariots.” Chariots is the ancients’ version of our tanks. Apparently Sisera as the commander of the Caanite army also had 900 chariots! Putting this in perspective to parallel it to something we can understand a little bit more today the average German Panzer Division has a 190 main battle tanks. Speaking roughly in terms we can understand Sisera having over four division size level of chariots (with accompanying logical and other military supporting elements). Sisera with that many chariots was the equivalent of World War Two German field marshal and general Erwin Rommel. Sisera is not the equivalent of any ordinary Tom, Dick and Harry today. The tweet is not considering the passage properly to slander the Bible.
- The passage in Judges 4:17-22 is not meant to teach that a biblical woman should go out actively hunting evil men such as Sisera to drive a tent peg into their skulls. Note in Judges 4:17a that after a military defeat “Sisera fled away on foot to the tent of Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite.” Jael found herself face to face with Sisera. In her own tent. That’s like a house wife in Turkey finding an ISIS commander on the run from a military defeat and coming into her home. Sure ISIS might not be attacking Turkey just as the Canaanites were not attacking Jael’s people the Kenite (Judges 4:17b) but one knows about the oppressive ways of the ISIS just as Jael would have known about the Jael and the Caananites. This is a situation which can be dangerous which Jael decided to act. Knowing this context removes the force of the tweet’s slander on Christians trying to be biblical, as if a biblical woman would randomly drive tent pegs into “you.”
- Who is Jael? It is important to answer this question since the more we know about Jael the more it questions the tweet’s assumption that the intent of the passage is to make her out as a “biblical woman” to emulate with her action. Judges 4:17a describe Jael as “the wife of Heber the Kenite.” Who were the Kenites? Judges 4 itself is conscious of the Kenites. In Judges 4:11 there’s a reference of Moses’ father in law was a Kenite. Jael was not a Hebrew woman. She’s a Gentile and might even have foreign gods. This isn’t a woman who is necessarily intent on being a biblical woman; she just happened to kill the infamous Sisera and the narrative recorded that.
- Judges 4:17-22 should also be understood in the context of the chapter. God called Barak to be a Judge to free Israel from the oppression of Sisera but Judges 4:8 mentioned that he was rather cowardly and did not believe God’s Word that says he will be victorious against Sisera but wanted Deborah to go with him; he even said he won’t go unless she goes. As a result in Judges 4:9 God spoke through Deborah saying Sisera will fall to a woman and not Barak. Judges 4:17-22 gives us the detail of who it was that had the honor of getting rid of the evil Sisera. In its chapter context we see the main intent of Judges 4:17-22 is not to say every biblical woman must emulate Jael but it is a lesson to not doubt God’s Word.
Rachel Held Evans’ retweet of that tweet and affirmation of that tweet in her own comment reveals how poor her interpretation of the Bible is.
Spinning interpretation of Scripture is futile when dealing with people who know God’s Word. Hey! I think I’ll tweet that! 😀
Your quote is worth tweeting! “Spinning interpretation of Scripture is futile when dealing with people who know God’s Word” Very true. Unfortunately biblical illiteracy is high even among Christians. I feel with the passing of time Rachel Held Evans’ handling of Scripture goes from bad to worst like this example. However handling the passage she and her friends twists has made me grown more in the Scripture and sharpen my skill of interpreting the Bible carefully. I didn’t intend to grow through it but I think God used that…isn’t amazing how God’s providence works?
So true!
She must hold women who choose to follow the Bible as they read it in pretty high contempt. Imagine how that makes them feel what she said. Sad when other “Christians” mock fundamentalists worse than even the atheists isn’t it?
“Sad when other “Christians” mock fundamentalists worse than even the atheists isn’t it?” Indeed it is sad! I think that there are some atheists more civil and more charitable than Rachel Held Evans which is shameful. Sometimes I think liberal “Christians” mockery against Bible Believing Christians does more damage since Christians tend to be nice and have their guard more down with people who profess to be Christians. But the handling of the Bible here shows she’s just as sloppy like the skeptic I refuted yesterday in the handle of God’s Word…its so sloppy how she “serves” God’s Word, you think she’s making sloppy Joe.
Loved that last line LOL!!
Excellent Jim. Not surprising she said this as she never, that I’m aware of, goes beyond superficiality using the Bible to make any kind of point.
If I were to be as charitable as possible, I would say she intended to mean that biblical women are a force to be reckoned with, which is true.
But, if Evan’s or any other woman who retweeted this were asked what it means (just guessing here because I have not checked Twitter myself) I would bet they could not explain it.
I do think biblical women are a force to be reckoned with, being daughters of the Most High! But I don’t think her intent was that, more of making mockery of Conservative Christians trying to be biblical. I hope to post part 4 of my look at her new book but thus far into the book I think you are right her handling of Scripture is super, well, superficial. Still thinking and praying for you and your family with everything…
Judging from the thread on that tweet it is meant to make fun of Christians who thinks biblical values such as being virgins is something to make fun of with that misinterpretation
I very rarely look at Twitter so I am going to assume what you are saying is true.
Even if, though, making fun was not the original intent, she could have shut that down and didn’t which speaks volumes.
On a side note, I have seen other female evangelists and Bible teachers take a stand against conservative Christian ideals before. Usually, I think, to score points with the “I’m a Christian but…” crowd. It seems like this plays well and sells well these days which is a shame.
Thanks, Slim. I have to be very careful about joking about such things, because sadly,many people really are biblically illiterate.
I assure you, women only drive stakes through the bad men, under very specific circumstances. Unless we’re bad women, in which case we might just dance for a king and get a man’s head on a platter. It’s actually kind of complicated, isn’t it? 🙂
I think what’s sad about RHE is how she takes that out of context so that it becomes a feminist message,one where ALL men better be prepared to have women drive tent stakes through their heads. Clearly the bible says nothing of the sort, nor does it promote female superiority, nor male superiority for that matter. So parts of the bible taken out of context and used as backup for one’s personal ideology is simply not okay.
Love your comment! I think your humor beats that of RHE! But with truth.
I’m afraid “liberal Christian” is an oxymoron.
That’s right
Since everyone is in a light mood with insanitybytes22’s humor and leeduigon pointing out oxymoron let me say SlimJim’s post nailed it.
Thanks for this thorough debunking of Held Evans’ employing a Bible passage totally out of its context.
You’re welcome. This one is so blatantly a misrepresentation of the Bible and other Christians I just had to respond. Her favorable mention of elements Roman Catholicism in her book will make you go bonkers Tom. I continue to be mystified at the popularity of Rachel Held Evans among Evangelicals and the favorable response to things like this Tweet.
RE: Her favorable mention of elements Roman Catholicism in her book will make you go bonkers
I figured as much with her joining up with Episcopalianism.
Yes, it’s incredible what and who “evangelicals” will support these days. I’m going to guess that a lot of people like her because she’s a female crusader who is challenging the “patriarchal” conservative leadership in evangelicalism, but they don’t have enough Bible knowledge themselves to really make a critical judgement.
This is a symptom of rampant biblical illiteracy. What is the solution? What is the cause of this effect? Why are seminary professors being led astray? Why do they then lead their disciples astray? Why are these led astray pastors being hired by churches? Why are pastors recommending authors who are led astray?
Why does the flock resist and dismiss solid bible study. Why is it that so few have the desire and dedication to read the bible cover to cover. Why is that in a church with over 100 men 7 come to the men’s bible study? Why is it that so few can accurately define common theological terminology? Why is it that steadfast every Sunday members after 40 years are just as theologically illiterate as they were the day they began? Every effect has a cause! Perhaps it is time for pastors to remember Pogo’s revelation.
[…] Rachel Held Evans: A Biblical Woman will drive a tent peg through your skull? […]
One interesting admission by RHE is her love of Midrash. The only source she cites for it in her Endnotes is ELCA Associate Professor Wil Gafney. Gafney is the one who has linked the Holy Spirit to Canaanite goddess Asherah. She loves Midrash because she can re-imagine any given text into her preferred meaning.
Pastor Jim…This one is for you! “Bless her heart…”
LOL…I, a non-Southerner for most of my life, get it.
“She loves Midrash because she can re-imagine any given text into her preferred meaning.”
Yep. And Evans ignores the obvious: Midrash writings were made by the Israelites, who are thoroughly condemned throughout scripture for getting things about God completely wrong. I’m not saying I would have done any better, just that using those writings as a standard is ridiculous.
[…] As a bonus here’s also a response to one of her Tweet: Rachel Held Evans: A Biblical Woman will drive a tent peg through your skull? […]
How dumb was she?
Twisting Scripture is not cool. Don’t know why she’s so popular with Millennials
She should not have mocked the Lord. Its evidence that she’s an apostate
Man the blasphemies from her Twitter!
I’ll be honest, while I was no RHE supporter, I felt for her. I know what it is like to be a woman in ministry and I also know how difficult it is being a woman who is called to theology. With that said, this tweet was Scripture twisting and she knows it too. She wanted to make a point. For some people some attention was better than no attention. I didn’t know much about RHE other than the bigger her platform grew, the more progressive she became. While I do understand the struggles of women in ministry RHE and other progressive women actually make it harder for women in ministry (especially in more Reformed circles) as men think our intentions are that of RHE, Moore, Hatmaker etc. The abuse that Aimee Byrd and Rachel Green Miller (to name a few) who are Reformed and complementarian have had to endure is wrong and a sin against God in my opinion.
Anyway, I stumbled across this post looking to see if you have any posts refuting the age/order of Noah’s sons (Gen 5:32 vs 10:21). Please pray I can stay awake tonight! I really want to hear your teachings on the attributes of God!
I know of Amy Byrd more than the other women you mentioned. I know the historical theologian Carl Trueman thinks highly of her and welcome her input in his books there’s acknowledgement and footnotes attributing things to her input. It does seem to me that sometimes people get more nasty when someone they disagree with is a woman and that is not right. In this one theological group I’m in which someone added me into there’s a debate about infant baptism and I saw how nasty it got because this one woman boldly said she doesn’t believe in infant baptism and baptism doesn’t save. I can’t help but to see the comments and think that some people were more nasty because she’s a woman. So sad huh? Reading RHE reminds me of one of my biological sister who is much stronger than most woman and before she got saved had a more progressive bent but still she was reasonable. She became a Christian and is complementarian but she said she said it was important for her she had her questions answered and patience towards her while she worked through the issues. I wonder sometimes if there wasn’t that for RHE base upon reading the autobiographical elements in her writing. I’ll have to look at that in Genesis 5 and 10 I suspect a certain answer but I usually chew on the Scriptures very slowly before it becomes a Bible contradiction posts sometimes for weeks and months so while I want to respond right away I’m cautious I don’t misinterpret and force harmonization just because I want to answer or think I know the answer. Is that ok? (By the way I know you are a capable scholar too and no way am I implying you are relying on me to find an answer 👩🎓). But then again I’m very slow in general in how I study compared to my peers and I often feel I have to make up for that by making more hours to study. It takes me a whole hour usually for one verse to translate and parse and make personal observation and write down questions. I know classmates in seminary went way faster lol. Were you one of the faster students or in the pack of the middle in seminary with languages?
Slow, slowest of the slow! I use Bible software and it takes me absolutely forever!! Please don’t take this the wrong way but I think Greek is a little easier than Hebrew. I had an Intro to Aramaic, Ugaritic and Akkadian. Anyway, my Greek professor the first week of class he made us record ourselves reading Mark 1 in Greek. It was the most horrific, awful and stretching exercise I have ever had to do in my life. While I was not a fan of my Greek professor, he forced us to learn the alphabet and sound things out from the start. I need to do more work with Greek, I just love Hebrew and the Bible Jesus read!
That’s great about your sister, thank you for sharing a bit of her story! I do think that was part of the problem for RHE; however, I don’t know.
In regards to Noah’s sons Answers in Genesis has refuted this apparent contradiction. This one I can actually understand because there are different orders and ages given for the sons and Noah’s age. While we know there is no contradiction, people will still try and prove so.