The Two Cities

Carrying on in our conversation on gender, we turn to discuss women in 1 Corinthians with particular attention given to the passage about head coverings in 1 Cor. 11 and women being silent in the church in 1 Cor. 14. In this episode, Dr. John Anthony Dunne, Brandon Hurlbert, and Dr. Logan Williams are joined by Dr. Lucy Peppiatt, who is Principal of Westminster Theological Centre in the UK and author of a number of related books, including Women and Worship at Corinth (Cascade, 2015), Unveiling Paul's Women (Cascade, 2018), and Rediscovering Scripture's Vision for Women (IVP, 2019). Dr. Peppiatt's background is in Systematic Theology, so she identifies herself as coming to the text as a theologian rather than a Pauline scholar. In her reading of 1 Cor. 11.2–16—the passage that speaks of head coverings and kind of sounds like women are inferior to men—these verses are not Paul's words, but rather part of rhetorical response to the perspective of the Corinthians. Dr. Peppiatt explains that she does not think that Paul believes these words, and that, if he did, the only legitimate interpretation in her view would be that Paul affirms the subordination of women both functionally and ontologically. She notes that this is how one scholar, Michael Lakie, reads the passage does, suggesting that Paul views women as subordinate and less than men. See Michael Lakie, Image and Glory of God: 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 As A Case Study in Bible, Gender, and Hermeneutics (LNTS 418; London: T&T Clark, 2010). On its face, Dr. Peppiatt does not disagree with Lakie's interpretation of 1 Cor. 11.2–16; she disagrees with him regarding who's perspective it is. She affirms that that theology is in the text, but she contends that it's the perspective of the Corinthians. If it were Paul's perspective, it would not fit what Paul says elsewhere in his letters, or what Jesus says in the Gospels, or indeed what we know from the rest of the Bible. For these reasons and more Dr. Peppiatt reads the passage as a rhetorical interaction with the Corinthian perspective. Such a reading benefits from the fact that Paul does quote “Corinthian slogans” elsewhere in 1 Corinthians, and so Dr. Peppiatt extends this phenomenon to include 1 Cor. 11.2–16. Otherwise, Dr. Peppiatt explains that there's also no reason for women to refrain from wearing head coverings either. At this point in the conversation we had a little bit of fun commenting on who was and wasn’t wearing head coverings during the recording of the podcast. From there we shift to 1 Corinthians 14 and the passage about women being silent in church. We talk about the interesting text-critical possibility that Paul did not write 1 Cor. 14.33b–36, and that these verses were inserted later by a scribe, but Dr. Peppiatt explains why she does believe that Paul wrote those words originally. We then discuss some practical matters about how to engage with people who are committed, on the basis of conscience and a sense of Scripture's authority, with reading 1 Corinthians 11 as teaching that head coverings are mandatory and women are subordinate to men ontologically. And further we conclude with hearing from Dr. Peppiatt on how people should address this topic further who want to see more women in ministry, but feel like they cannot get beyond what they see as the implications of 1 Cor. 11. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Amber Bowen, Dr. John Anthony Dunne, and Grace Emmett are joined by Dr. Valérie Nicolet, Associate Professor of New Testament at the Protestant Institute of Theology in Paris, to continue an earlier podcast conversation on Paul and masculinity. Our conversation begins with Paul's self-presentation, esp. in Galatians, and then extends to address the fuzziness of gender categories in antiquity, as seen with Thecla from the Acts of Paul and Thecla. Dr. Nicolet addresses her "feminine masculinity" in the text and the implications of her baptizing herself. From the there the conversation becomes more meta, with a focus on the gendered culture of New Testament scholarship, which is so androcentric. As the conversation progresses, the episode reflects our most recent podcast with Dr. Ekaputra Tupamahu on the other default category in biblical scholarship of whiteness. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode a group of team members from The Two Cities (Dr. John Anthony Dunne, Grace Emmett, Grace Sangalang Ng, Rev. Daniel Parham, Dr. Chris Porter, Dr. Logan Williams) are joined by Dr. Ekaputra Tupamahu, who is Assistant Professor of New Testament at Portland Seminary, to discuss his recent piece published with the Public Theology Network, entitled, “The Stubborn Invisibility of Whiteness in Biblical Scholarship” (Here is the link: https://politicaltheology.com/the-stubborn-invisibility-of-whiteness-in-biblical-scholarship/). Dr. Tupamahu explains that the key to resisting the imposition of whiteness onto others, Christian scholars ought to bring the church’s questions to scholarship rather than taking the scholarly nuggets to the church. Scholars are asking different questions than those in the church, but, more importantly, scholars also tend to be asking the questions of white European-Americans. One of the common issues in biblical studies that Dr. Tupamahu situates within the particular concerns of whiteness is the Synoptic Problem, which he contends is generated by the rise of the printing press in the West. Given this situatedness, Dr. Tupamahu provides some advice on how to teach Synoptic Problem as a uniquely European-American concern. Dr. Tupamahu also provides us with a sneak peek on how his own current research resists the concerns of whiteness, telling us that his current book project with OUP on “tongues" and “languages" in 1 Corinthians situates the discussion within the immigrant context of Corinth in which multiple languages would have been spoken. He explains how in the whole discussion on tongues Paul is insisting on monolingual order in a multilingual context.Dr. Tupamahu’s piece is part of a series of essays at the Public Theology Network, which are also worth checking out:Jacqueline Hidalgo, “Occupying Whiteness: A Reflection in 2020” (link: https://politicaltheology.com/occupying-whiteness-a-reflection-in-2020/).Angela Parker, “Invoking Paul’s μὴ γένοιτο and Sofia’s ‘Hell No’ Against the Stubborn Whiteness of Biblical Scholarship” (link: https://politicaltheology.com/invoking-pauls-%ce%bc%e1%bd%b4-%ce%b3%ce%ad%ce%bd%ce%bf%ce%b9%cf%84%ce%bf-and-sofias-hell-no-against-the-stubborn-whiteness-of-biblical-scholarship/). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Carrying on with our series on gender and the Bible, Amber Bowen and Dr. John Anthony Dunne are joined by Aimee Byrd, who is the author of several books, including Recovering from Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (Zondervan Academic, 2020). In this episode Aimee explains that, despite what one might suspect from her outspoken detractors, her book is ultimately about discipleship. She critiques the movement that appeals to "biblical manhood and womanhood" as truncating biblical gender down to discrete "roles" that are primarily defined in terms of leadership and submission. The result is a "biblical" portrait that is narrow and damaging. Further, she calls out the "fractional" approach to complementarity that views men and women as two halves respectively that only create a single whole when together. Instead, Aimee points to an "integral" complementarity, where marriage is seen as a process in which two "wholes" come together to generatively create something new. Although she is critical of the complementarian approach, in this podcast she explains her reasons for not being an egalitarian. And at the end of the conversation, Aimee gives us a sneak peek on her new writing project on gender-related matters. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Continuing our discussion on gender from last week with Grace Emmett ("Paul & Masculinity"), we turn to look at the relationship between preaching and gender. In this episode, Dr. John Anthony Dunne, Grace Sangalang Ng, Rev. Daniel Parham, and Dr. Chris Porter reflect on this topic  from the vantage point of our different cultural and ecclesial contexts. Rather than debate particular texts and their meaning in a prescriptive manner, we discuss how various cultural factors have contributed to the relative normativity of gender diversity in preaching in our various denominational settings. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kicking off a discussion on gender in the Bible and how this syncs up the Western Church and broader culture, Amber Bowen, Dr. John Anthony Dunne, and Dr. Logan Williams chat with Grace Emmett, a PhD Candidate in New Testament at King's College, London, who recently submitted a thesis entitled, "Becoming A Man: Unmanly/Manly Self-Presentation in the Pauline Epistles." In this episode we discuss masculinity as presented in the Pauline epistles and reflected in ancient culture, including questions of whether Paul is subversive or imitative of his surrounding culture. Grace highlights several unique features of Paul, such as maternal metaphors that he applies to himself, but ultimately contends that Paul should not be read as neither a chauvinist nor a proto-feminist. Given the ramifications that this conversation has for the contemporary Western church, we address matters of gender neutrality in biblical translation, concerns of the feminization of the church, and also the usefulness of gendered church events (i.e. Men's night), gendered Christian resources (i.e. Women's Study Bibles), and gendered conferences (i.e. Promise Keepers). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Concluding our series on the intersection of faith and politics we turn to address fake news and the spread of misinformation. In this episode Dr. John Anthony Dunne and Dr. Chris Porter are joined by Rachel Wightman, who is Associate Director for Instruction and Outreach at the library at Concordia University in St. Paul, Minnesota. Over the course of our conversation we discuss what makes misinformation so problematic, what unique factors in our communication today have caused the surge in disinformation, how confirmation bias causes misinformation to be so appealing, why people of faith in particular should be concerned about not spreading misinformation, whether Christians are uniquely susceptible to misinformation, and how we should engage friends/family who are spreading false information online. Along the way, Rachel gives us some practical advice for recognizing fake news stories and for evaluating whether a bit of news is legitimate, including when "experts" appear to be spreading misinformation (e.g. the Fresno doctors who downplayed COVID, the doctors who announced that hydroxychloroquine cures COVID, the Plandemic documentary, etc). She also helps us recognize that bias in journalism does not equate with "Fake News." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As another installment in our series on faith and politics, we discuss abortion and single issue voting in the United States. Joining Dr. John Anthony Dunne, Brandon Hurlbert, Tim McNutt, and Dr. Chris Porter for this discussion is our special guest, Jennie Riley, who recently submitted her PhD thesis in Theology at Durham University (England), focusing on the relationship between Evangelical Christianity and Medial Practice. As she explains in the episode, for her doctoral research she interviewed several medical doctors in the UK, who all self-identify as evangelical, about a whole host of issues from the more mundane to medical ethics. As it pertains to abortion, Jennie relays to us the stories of three doctors that had a formative role in shaping her own mindset about the complexities of abortion. Jennie provides us with her academic perspective from a British context, drawing upon the qualitative research of her thesis, but also reflects upon that further from her own Christian perspective for the sake of our broader political conversation. In doing so, Jennie models for us how we can discuss a heavy and complicated topic with kindness, empathy, and charity, even when we might disagree on such important political and ethical matters. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the run up to Election Day in the United States (Tuesday, November 3rd), here at The Two Cities we've been doing a series of political podcasts. This episode extends that conversation further, but situates it as part of a conversation with a major pop-cultural artifact—Watchmen. Originally a comic series in the mid-1980s, Watchmen is revered as one of the best graphic novels of all time. It was made into a (much-derided) film in the mid 2000s by Zack Snyder, but more recently Damon Lindelof extended the storyline in his adaptation of the story for HBO. Set in 2019, the Emmy Award Winning TV show Watchmen addresses relevant political issues in our day just as the original graphic novel did in the 80s. In particular, the show addresses systemic racism, suppressed racial history, and policing. In this episode, Dr. John Anthony Dunne chats with Matthew William Brake, who is the series editor of Theology and Pop Culture (Fortress/Lexington Press) and Religion and Comic Books (Claremont Press), and who also runs a blog called Pop Culture and Theology (popularcultureandtheology.com). Over the course of our conversation we talk about the original graphic novel, how Lindelof handles the original material in the new TV show, and how relevant both stories are for thinking about politics. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Continuing further our recent conversations on politics and political engagement from a Christian perspective (cf. the episodes entitled, "Faith and Politics with Rev. Baroness Maeve Sherlock" and "War & Political Theology with Michael Spalione"), Dr. John Anthony Dunne and Dr. Chris Porter discuss social identity theory and how our social identity shapes our present lack of bi-partisanship in the States and the degrading nature of our political discourse with those in the "out group." Chris explains that the theory originates with Henri Tajfel, noting some of his interesting experiments that show how much we favor the various "in groups" of which we are a part to the detriment of perceived "out groups." Along the way we discuss stereotyping and categorization, the metrics of "normative fit" (emphasizing who "we" are) and "comparative fit" (noting who "we" are not by comparison to an "out group"), the difficulty of compromise from a social identity perspective, and the implications that this all has for nuanced thinking that is regarded as deviant from the "normative fit" of the "in group." All the while Chris shares his perspective on the 2020 US election season from his unique vantage point in Australia. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.