Can use of proper hermeneutical methods transcend gender bias in interpretations?

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Mar 2000 by Talbert-Wettler, Betty

I. INTRODUCTION

Christians can transcend interpretive differences among themselves regardless of gender or culture. With proper hermeneutic skills we discover the meaning of Biblical passages and transcend gender bias in interpretation. There are two reasons why the Christian can transcend bias. The first reason consists of the simple argument that either knowledge is possible or no knowledge is possible. Consequently, if bias cannot be overcome, then no knowledge or truth is possible outside of two separate biased experiences. Secondly, Biblical revelation supports the view that women and men and people of different ethnic backgrounds can access, understand, and apply Biblical truth. 1 Since this is the case, bias can be overcome. The question then becomes, "How?"2

Bias is commonly defined as "a mental leaning or inclination: partiality; prejudice; bent."3 No doubt gender and cultural biases exist. Biases attributed to gender or culture may arise based upon previous individual experience or assumptions.4 Women and men share many common life experiences, such as working for a living, the need for intimacy and friendship, marriage or raising children, but they both may have differing cultural experiences or expectations related to how roles are defined, expressed, and experienced in the world and between each other. These experiences can he further confused by misplaced assumptions or biases about the opposite sex. Stereotypes that arise from a misunderstanding of Scripture further complicate male/female relationships.5

The term "gender bias" in interpretation implies that Biblical truth is not fully accessible to men or women based upon supposed idiosyncrasies of either sex. These idiosyncrasies may be considered cultural, biological, emotionally based or even willful in nature.

The following illustrations provoke difficult questions, and they paint out the need to both understand and overcome gender bias in Biblical interpretation.

One common view suggests that man, by his very nature, is more prepared and competent than woman to judge religious and Biblical matters. James B. Hurley makes the statement:

The man, upon whom lay responsibility for leadership in the home and in religious matters, was prepared by God to discern the serpent's lies. The woman was not appointed religious leader and was not prepared to discern them. She was taken in.6

If Biblical interpretation is the specific realm of the man, then Biblical truth is not totally accessible to women except through men's teaching or headship. This argument is self defeating. If all men are more spiritually or intellectually prepared than women, based on Adam's example and 1 Tim 2:15, how can women understand men's guidance unless they can tell the difference between truth and lie? No one is always correct and accurate in Biblical interpretation. Perhaps there is an answer yet to come, explicating women's ability to recognize truth in Scripture. Yet here we certainly have a view that women are less endowed with theological potential than men. Women, it seems, are at either a spiritual or intellectual disadvantage when interpreting God's words. So are women really at a disadvantage when it comes to knowing, apprehending or applying the truth of Scripture? If so, should we encourage women to learn interpretive techniques? If they do not learn interpretation skills, are they not at even more of a disadvantage with a man, or women, teaching heresy?

Wherever Hurley may stand on women's ability to know, apprehend, and apply truth, this position brings up one final question which is not within the scope of this essay to resolve: Is it possible that 1 Tim 2:9-15 teaches that women are, in some way, irretrievably biased so that they are more easily deceived than men in Scriptural matters? And a counterpoint to this query: How far can we push interpretation of this one verse in Light of other Scripture that might suggest such deception may be overcome in Christ?

Berkeley and Alvera Mickelsen suggest many translations contain male bias.7Although one may not accept all their conclusions, it is surely true that some Biblical passages, including 1 Tim 2:12-15, contain notorious difficulties that may leave room for cultural bias in interpretation.8 Many of these passages deal with women's role in the church and home.9

On the other hand, liberation feminist theological models promote a "hermeneutic of suspicion." These feminists suggest the Bible includes patriarchal material that must be sought out and eliminated before Biblical passages may be applied to women.10 Men who authored Scripture or interpret Scripture may be considered intentionally or unintentionally biased based on their social conditioning. Undoubtedly social conditioning can play apart in bias. But this position holds that at least some of the Biblical authors were not inspired by God and unable to overcome their own male bias. So the questions are raised: What part does social conditioning play in gender bias? Are men damaged by bias? Are men irrevocably damaged? Or are these women perhaps demonstrating their own bias against men by some of these feminist definitions?