Sexism on the mission field can do so much damage.
In so many parts of the world, patriarchy is already baked in. Jesus should be rescuing us from that! But what happens when missionaries come in and teach about Jesus–but also bring patriarchy? Then instead of being set free, so many women have patriarchy baptized for them. It’s so sad.
I read a story last week about how a bad translation of the Bible in India left women feeling so inferior--and how a proper translation fixed that.
It was supposed to be a hopeful story about how proper translation can transform a community. But the story of the impact of the original translation has stuck with me, and I want more people to hear this story.
Here’s what happened:
A UNICEF team was in rural India to bring health education to small communities
They had to do this quickly, and cover a lot of communities, and so they consulted with the community about what would work and how they should do this task. But then something unfortunate happened:
In order to train our team effectively, we modeled community development techniques by facilitating discussions where they created their own interventions and methods of reaching the community. The newly hired young men joined these discussions with enthusiasm, ideas, and humor, but the young women pulled their shawls closer around their faces and refused to say a word.
Why wouldn’t the women speak up?
They needed the women’s input, but the women wouldn’t say anything.
We cajoled, we lectured, and as the weeks for training disappeared, we begged for their participation. Finally, one young woman said, “Why are you so desperate for our input? We are just feeble-minded women.” The rest of the women nodded in agreement.
Where had the “women are feeble-minded” idea come from?
These women were not illiterate, but had completed high school and often had other training. And they were not Muslims; they were Christians! This was surprising to the team; why were Christian women feeling so inferior?
Well, it turns out it all goes back to Bible translations.
They asked where the women got the idea that women were feeble-minded from, and they said from the Bible.
So Kimberly, the author of this article, started to do a Bible study with them, starting in Genesis, looking at how God sees women.
But it was with Genesis 3 that everything fell into place.
As I read aloud from my English Bible about the serpent’s words to the woman, the women in the study stopped me and had me read it again, astonished. They explained, “Our Hindi version says that the serpent spoke to the woman because she was feeble-minded—but you’re not reading that in English.” The four of them gathered around my Bible to read it for themselves.
Their Bible translation made women sound inferior.
Their Bible translation mistranslated words and passages so that women were seen as “less than” men. And this was the main Bible translation used, as done by missionaries previously.
They also left out the phrase in Genesis 3 that Adam was right there with Eve when the serpent was talking, making it sound like it was Eve who brought sin to the world, while Adam was innocent.
Kimberly was shocked to learn later that the Bible translation that these women were using wasn’t done using the original Greek or Hebrew, but with an old English translation that was rife with errors. It was a translation of a mistranslation, rather than a translation of the original.
And so often on the mission field this is what happened. People with their own biases came in and made translations of the Bible which put women in their place, rather than set them free as Jesus did.
The story has a happy ending.
Kimberly writes that after the women saw what the Bible really said about women:
Nothing was the same again. Our women teammates now came to our planning meetings with their heads held high and their shawls relaxed around their shoulders. They shared their brilliant ideas and delighted in the growth of our team. They learned to ride mopeds to reach remote villages. Their self-confidence and competence inspired the village girls in what women could do. They internalized all the excellent training from our community organizer—how to disregard caste strictures and relate to people at their own level, to live in the villages if the opportunity arose, to trust that people can and will change, and how to facilitate groups so that each group determined how to solve its own problems.
That’s wonderful, and I’m glad there was a happy ending.
But I still find this story tremendously sad.
Missionaries were supposed to be bringing the Jesus who loved women and who set all people free to those who needed Him, and instead they just baptized patriarchy.
How often do we still do that on the mission field? My inbox is filled with emails from all around the world saying that a missions team is using a Slovenian translation of Love & Respect in all their Bible studies, or a Swahili translation of another horrid book, and do I have our books in those languages instead? I hear about how these groups of new Christians are told to submit to abuse in their homes.
And I just get so sad.
I’m thinking about working on some translations of The Great Sex Rescue, and if you want to help with that, we’ll be raising money through the Good Fruit Faith Initiative of the Bosko Foundation for this soon (but you can give now or become a monthly donor!). But we simply have to make sure that our missionaries don’t go to the most vulnerable women in the world and make them even more vulnerable.
Our good news should really be good news.
What do you think? Have you heard stories like this too, where missionaries brought patriarchy with them? What can we do about this, because this genuinely keeps me up at night!
Ah, another “translation” that leaves out the fact that Adam was RIGHT THERE during the Serpent’s temptation.
I’ve even seen some people on the internet claim that Adam wasn’t there, since “who was there with her” doesn’t necessarily mean REALLY there.
I’ve heard an (equal and?) opposite patriarchal interpretation that one of the main problems in that story was about the serpent’s circumventing proper authority by speaking to the woman in the presence of her husband, and the man’s dereliction of duty by not telling the woman under his command to not eat the fruit.
Just making the point that accurate translations aren’t a silver bullet for questionable theology.
We’re still struggling to get the English translations correct. We should be quarantining, not exporting our problems.
https://wtctheology.org.uk/theomisc/contrary-women-genesis-316b-now-non-permanent-esv/
My heart goes out to the poor women labouring under this because they were trying so hard to do what was right. ♥️
Very interesting article, thank you so much for linking to it.
I feel like this story should be posted on bulletin boards and websites in churches everywhere. *This* is why we have to be careful with translations, our theology, and even what teachers specifically say when teaching. Beliefs have consequences. Imagine what would have happened if that medical team had not dug down to the root of the issue, and just went “Oh well, it’s the culture”. Not only would those women still be living with the belief that they are a liability to themselves and everyone around them, that area would have received health education that would be missing the input of roughly half the population! This is why I loathe it when people go “eat the meat, spit out the bones” or “I just don’t bother with theology”.
Absolutely! This matters so much. It makes me so sad.
Question: did Adam not say anything when the serpent tempted Eve because *he too* was curious about the fruit, and wanted to see what would happen before he tried it? Maybe his thought process was, “The fruit looks tasty and I don’t understand why God said to not eat it. If Eve eats it and dies, then I won’t have to eat it. If she lives, I can find out what it’s like.”
In that sense, was Adam’s sin graver than Eve’s because she was willing to take the consequences on herself, but Adam was using her as a guinea pig?
I may not be the right person to answer, since I don’t directly believe in the literal story of the Garden of Eden. I only believe in the symbolism. However, Adam appeared silent as the serpent talked to Eve, then Eve ate the fruit, then Adam ate the fruit. My takeaway from that is that men and women are equally imperfect and prone to sin, although maybe sometimes in different directions. Also, after being caught, Adam blamed Eve and Eve blamed the serpent, so they’re both willing to shift blame or make excuses.
Neither one comes out of that looking any better or worse than the other.
The usual interpretation has Adam as a passive figure until he agrees to try the fruit. But why is he passive? If men aren’t passive by nature (right, Christians?), why does he stand by? I think he’s interested in the results but doesn’t want to test it out himself. He’s a king and Eve is the food taster.
Hi Nathan, I’ve heard the “both blamed something else and didn’t take responsibility” theology and was taught it for years.
But it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny of the text. Eve does say that the snake deceived her (Genesis 3v3) and she fully owns up to her own deception. The fact she was indeed deceived is reiterated by Paul in 1 Timothy 2v14.
Adam was not deceived. He blamed what he did on the woman – and also kind of on God. (“The woman you gave me gave me the fruit …” v12)
The result was the protoevangelium of Genesis 3v15 – enmity would exist between the snake and the woman and her seed would crush his head. She acknowledged that she was a sinner – and received the promise of the gospel. The only human parent Christ had was a woman.
I’m not trying to be misandristic here. But there is a theological bent to this that has been ignored or written out of history when it has raised its head.
Before Jesus and John Wayne, Kirsten Kobes du Mez wrote “A New Gospel for Women” – which explores some of these concepts further.
https://www.amazon.com/New-Gospel-Women-Katharine-Challenge/dp/0190205644
Yes, Eve was deceived and she admitted it. Adam deliberately disobeyed.
I’m going to push back on the “Eve blamed the serpent” comment here: it is true that she said “the serpent deceived me and I ate,” but is that a way of blaming or a simple statement of fact? The serpent did deceive her, and she did eat. That’s all there was to say. She didn’t say to God, “the serpent YOU MADE,” as Adam did, and she didn’t try to claim that she only ate because the serpent gave her the fruit. She just said, “I was deceived.”
Also, I’m with Jane Eyre (now that you mention it!) — I think he used her as his taster. So she was deceived, manipulated, and blamed — boom, boom, boom — it was a really bad day for her!
Wow. I’ve never thought of that aspect.
What a cad!
I do believe that Adam, out of love for God and for Eve (the 2 greatest commandments) ought to have implored Eve to not eat.
Purely relational, not heirchal.
It’s true that Adam could have implored Eve not to eat the fruit. But that was only the beginning. There was so much more he should have done.
A present-day parallel would be that of a couple enjoying an evening together in their backyard when a stranger approaches the wife and starts pressuring her to buy heroin. After all, if he can get her hooked, she’ll have to continue buying her supply from him.
Would any present-day husband worthy to be called a man stand by and do nothing while she buys the drugs? Like Hades he would!
Such a man would tell her point-blank not to buy the heroin! He’d pull her into the house and lock all the doors! He’d yell at the dealer to get out of his yard! He’d call 911 and get the police involved! If it came to the final extremity, he’d fight to the dealer’s death –or be killed himself.
Adam should have taken on Satan in battle. His struggle was not with flesh and blood (Eve) but with Satan himself.
–He could have interrupted the conversation as soon as he knew what the serpent wanted and told Satan to deal with HIM.
–He could have pulled her to safety.
–He could have commanded the serpent to leave.
–He could have called on the host of heaven, the same 10,000 angels Jesus had at His disposal in Gethsemane, for help. Throughout Scripture when a child of God in righteous standing is resisting spiritual attack, God has obligated Himself over and over to come to their aid.
–He could have eaten from the tree of life instead and given some to Eve. That would have confirmed them in righteousness for all time.
Adam could have done any and all of those things. Instead, he stood and watched and did absolutely nothing.
“Adam should have taken on Satan in battle. His struggle was not with flesh and blood (Eve) but with Satan himself.”
I love all of your comment; this in particular stood out to me.
Yes, the sin was in not doing battle for Eve and for God.
I would say yes, and this is what Tru316 with Bruce Fleming argues as well.
I’m from Kenya and for over a decade I was part of an evangelical church, founded and pastored by an American missionary couple. Everything you’ve said is true. One of the problems I’ve observed, living in the US, is that a lot of Western Christians who fund missionaries don’t know or care (or believe us nationals when we speak up) about the long term harm being done by their people abroad. The “mission-field” is a disembodied construct, all about getting “souls to heaven.” While what people need is the freedom and hope that Jesus promised those who follow Him. Right here on earth.
Exactly, Ngina. This bothers me so much.
Thank you Ngina for commenting and giving us your perspective. It’s precious. It sounds like you’ve experienced or been a witness to harm done in the name of the gospel. I am truly and deeply sorry for it. This is so wrong. I’m sorry for the voices that have spoken up about their lived experience, trying to be heard – and were ignored.This is wrong.
Thank you for trying again.
Hi K,
Ngina has a blog with some great marriage posts and resources, too. If you’re curious, you can check it out by clicking/tapping on her name which is linked to her website. 😀 (My apologies if you know this- I just didn’t want to assume.)
Hi Nessie! Thank you for your response! I’m not at all offended by your letting me know! I do know that Ngina is a solid marriage teacher.
I agonized a bit before my response to her, and your reply is a great example of why. I am hurrying to an appointment now but would love to come back and revisit this issue again, because there are things I’d like to learn when it comes to intersectionality, and I’m hoping this could be an opportunity. ♥️
Nessie – thank you for your comment. I really appreciated it and feel grateful for you. (I mean that completely sincerely.) ♥️
When I read Ngina’s initial comment a few things struck me…
1. She introduced herself as from Kenya.
2. She told of her own negative experiences in a missionary church there.
3. She mentioned that western Christians either don’t know or don’t care about what is happening – or don’t believe it when they ARE told by the very people on the receiving end of the harm.
4. She mentioned “us” so her comment is made on behalf of a group that is bigger than herself.
5. She mentioned the “mission field” as a “disembodied construct” – I.e. impersonal, and in context, unhelpful/harmful.
After reading a number of things struck me.
Ngina could have introduced her comment from a place of power (“as a well respected teacher … …” for example). But she didn’t. She introduced herself as a Kenyan and chose this as the group of people that she was identifying herself with in making her comment. And she was someone (in that identity) who had been hurt. By western Christianity. On this level, she deserves a compassionate response. What she experienced was quite simply, wrong. Being someone who today is well respected doesn’t remove the wrongness of what she experienced.
She alerted us to a group that was larger than one person. A group that has been rendered voiceless by western lack of concern or outright denial in the face of being confronted with what is going on. I wondered – would anyone else from her group (or one who had very similar experiences) see her comment. Feel validated by it – and then be struck by the utter silence that potentially could greet it? That silence felt inappropriate to me.
Ngina has experienced impersonal and disembodied Christianity. I felt that her comment shouldn’t be greeted with more of the same.
These are some thoughts that were tearing through me. In my response, I tried to see Ngina as a person – not someone who no longer needs compassion because she has moved beyond any of her hurts needing to be acknowledged now.
I have no idea how to do this well. How to communicate what is in my heart without any hint of sounding patronizing or sounding like someone who is “giving” – being personally beyond such “need”. Someone serving myself by “looking after” other people, or something negative like that.
I just wanted to acknowledge the personal side and real wrongness of what she shared.
I would LOVE to know how to do this better. I don’t believe that Ngina is sitting watching her feed to find out what an anonymous person on the internet has to say – but if someone has the ability to speak into this so that it is a learning opportunity for me, I would be SINCERELY and deeply grateful for that. ♥️
It is a time to learn. I don’t want to pass it up.
(Still doing appointments and on my phone – no response is not me ignoring anyone!)
Thank you!!
K,
I was just trying to let you and others know that Ngina has experiences/thoughts that she has shared, and has great posts and resources available, especially if someone can identify with any of the aspects of her life she mentioned If Ngina or Sheila feel I failed to give her a “compassionate response” then please delete my comment as that was not my intent. I thought I was helping another reader/commentor by sharing access to a blog where someone with her perspective has more to share on her personal website and share how to access that. I certainly didn’t think I was greeting her “with more [impersonal and disembodied Christianity.]”
I obviously need to take a break from comments on this site if you can find so many ways in which I was wrong. While I appreciate you started out saying you feel grateful for me, following that with paragraphs about how I was invalidating displays otherwise.
Ngina and Sheila, I apologize if I was inappropriate, hurtful, or invalidating..
Oh Nessie – no, no, no!!!
My comment isn’t directed at finding fault with you in **any way** at all – if it read that way then I messed it up horribly and SINCERELY and EARNESTLY apologise!! ♥️
I was GENUINELY grateful for you commenting, because I had felt weird responding to Ngina – she’s obviously worthy of respect and I was offering compassion (as a nobody) and I felt conflicted.
My comment was trying to spell out why I decided to push post – and to try and explain some of the conflict that I was experiencing in doing that. In no way was I writing to tell you that you had done something wrong. I was trying to write it hoping ***I*** hadn’t done something wrong – which is why I invited feedback from anyone who felt that I could have done it better.
Nessie you are a WONDERFUL person on this website!!!
Please, please understand that I am TRULY grateful that your comment gave me an opportunity to explain why I posted – because you made me aware that I could have done something that could be interpreted as something else.
The fault here was mine – not yours in any way!!!! ♥️♥️♥️
Sheila, if I’m making a hash of this please let me know – I don’t want Nessie to go anywhere!! 😱
Nessie, I think the mix up is that after my initial response to Ngina, I was second guessing myself. I didn’t want her to feel like I was being patronizing in any way. I didn’t know if I should have done or said something differently. I didn’t feel like the BEST person to respond to her – but didn’t feel comfortable not responding. So I did.
You commented to let me know who she was – just kindly. Because maybe I didn’t know and – as you say, I could benefit from her resources. (I do TOTALLY understand this.)
When you commented, my second guessing turned up in volume – because I did know who she was, but had pushed post on my comment. And maybe I shouldn’t have.
My detailed response to you is totally about me second guessing myself and trying to explain why I commented. If I hadn’t been second guessing myself, I wouldn’t have needed to respond – except with a “thank you for letting me know” – to you.
This is totally on me. ♥️
Again, my explaining my mind is on ME – it’s not meant to be a value judgement on you in any way. I was overthinking. You did absolutely nothing wrong.
Please can you forgive the hurt and distress that I’ve caused you? I don’t want you to go away. I would rather do that. ♥️
As someone with Ugandan family and who has traveled there, there’s a lot of truth to discuss from Ngina’s comment. This isn’t the forum for my thoughts on that, but I did want to drop a comment to beg anyone reading: If a [white] Christian says that they are going to a country in Africa, 1) Africa is not a country; remember the name of the country they tell you, and 2) don’t conclude it is a missions trip, especially when they have told you the [non-mission] reason they are going. Removing those two errors in world view would be a significant step forward for white American Christianity, at least the segment I have experienced.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Nethwen. I was grateful to read them.
You have said this isn’t the place to discuss your thoughts more fully – but do you have one resource (blog? book?) that you would recommend to someone who wants to do better in understanding and being sensitive to the challenges of race and cultural differences? Just somewhere to start?
I would appreciate some direction. Thank you!!
Hi K,
I don’t have a specific resource. I think beginning a general education on Africa is a start. Really, this applies to any country, especially those from the two-thirds world.
TLDR: Be curious and look for sources directly from the country of interest.
Long Reply:
Spend time looking at Google maps. How many countries are in Africa? Which ones have you never heard of? Which capture your attention?
Pick a country and read about it from that country’s own tourism website. What matches what you have heard? What is different? How does what the country say about itself compare to, for example, Wikipedia or the CIA Factbook?
Look up the percentage of Christians in the country. Compare that percentage to the stats for your own country. What are the implications for those numbers on your country sending missionaries to the country you’re studying?
You can also read newspapers directly from that country. If you can’t find them online for free, sometimes a public or academic library will have digital subscriptions that are free to library users. How does the country talk about itself? What cultural differences do you see? How does this compare to how your country talks about that country?
Watch YouTube videos from vloggers from that country. How does their representation of their country compare to what you see from tourist/missionary videos about that country?
That’s not an easy answer. Instead of getting overwhelmed, I would pick one country of interest and a couple of avenues of study that you enjoy and spend a long time with it. Even if you only learn about 1-2 countries a year, you’re still learning.
Nethwen, you have SUCH a sweet spirit! Thank you for your time, kindness and patience in replying to me!!
You haven’t accused anyone or been harsh – but looking at the basic issues which you brought up in your first response, I shudder to think what you (or those you care about) have been subject to.
I am *SO* deeply sorry for it.
THANK YOU for taking the time to share your thoughts with me – and for doing it so generously and creatively. I feel invited (and delighted) to learn and explore, not scolded or shamed into it.
♥️ Blessings to you!!
Nethwen, great points! I would also add that some denominations are actively recruiting missionaries from African countries to come be priests/pastors for congregations in America, because of the shortage of US clergy.
This story is about priests, but it is also occurring with Protestant churches.
In Kenya, for example, it was not uncommon in churches for me to hear discussion of “mission trips” to reach secular Americans and Europeans.
I tried to include a link to a story about recruiting African priests, but it didn’t work. Any search engine though will turn up such recent stories.
AGREED! I went to Botswana this June, and the amount of people who asked me if I was going on a mission trip was kind of insane, especially considering how it’s primarily a Christian country. It was like that — not the beautiful scenery, amazingly friendly people, and incredible wildlife — would be the only possible reason a person would have to go there.
Side note: if you’ve never read The Number One Ladies’ Detective Agency series, please do. You too, will fall in love with Botswana <3
When I read the part about women being “feeble-minded” and the part where Adam was left out of the Bible passage, I immediately thought of Lori Alexander, a.k.a. the Transformed Wife. I always feel like she puts women down in general, but rarely talks about men sinning.
She recently had a post on Gab, talking about how Eve was deceived and women are more emotional, and that’s why wives should submit to their husbands. But she didn’t say a word about Adam and the sins he committed. Adam let Eve sin, he ate the fruit too, and he blamed his wife when God confronted him.
In the short time I was on TwiX, I NEVER saw Lori talk about men’s sin — it was ALWAYS about how women were sinning by their very existence and needed to shut their mouth and go home. (She needed her own advice, but that’s a different discussion for another day.)
The story of the Indian women is a perfect example of why western missionaries going into non-western nations can be so downright dangerous — first, they assume that they have far better answers to the struggles of life than the people they are talking to do, and so they think that whatever they say will automatically be good (and as we see here, it’s not); second, they assume that their theology is always right and should never be questioned (and here we see the results of that!); and third, they often fail to realize that they really don’t have enough knowledge of the local culture to speak into it in any constructive way. It’s egg on the face of the western church. We really need to take a deep breath bite our tongues for a really long time. Our listening skills are really suffering.
Not saying that the issues you’ve highlighted haven’t been massive issues, not that they aren’t still in places. But none of the people I know who are involved in missions (of whom there are many) would ever imagine they have the best answers to every problem or perfect theology, nor tell locals what to do without taking time to learn the culture. Again, you’re highlighting genuine issues, but you’re also making massive generalisations and treating people who are genuinely working on solutions to those issues as if they’re part of the problem, which I think is really unfair.
I know some absolutely lovely people who are missionaries, and exactly 0% who carry no cultural bias with them to the field. Some more, some less, but ALL — and that included myself. We need to be more self -aware, but few of us realize that.
Thanks for the response. In hindsight, your original comment wasn’t really over generalising in the way it struck me on first reading (I missed the key phrase ‘can be’), so my reaction was probably an over reaction too. I don’t think we disagree on much here. Apologies if I caused confusion.
Lori always strikes me as spectacularly illogical. The fact that she can call all women feeble-minded while expecting us to listen to her, a self-confessed feeble-minded woman… #mindblowing. Either that, or she’s trolling us all!!
We only wish she had that much of a sense of humor!