The Empire as Kosmos: Walter Wink and the Structural Mistranslation of Power
Walter Wink's work dismantles a crucial misunderstanding in biblical exegesis: the word kosmos, often translated as "the world," does not refer to creation itself, but rather to the systemic structures of power—in Wink's argument, the Roman Empire (now what we call the "Master's House). This means that the biblical injunctions about “not conforming to the world” were not originally about rejecting worldly pleasures but about resisting the imperial order.
When this mistranslation is mapped onto gender, we see a perverse inversion: the system that was meant to be resisted became the authority that shaped gender roles. The patriarchal order of Rome—where women were property, where citizenship was predicated on domination—was mistaken for divine law itself. The biblical mandates for women's silence (Let women learn in silence with all subjection—1 Tim 2:11) were not divine edicts but the echoes of an empire obsessed with control.
To challenge this, we must ask: If Jesus was crucified for challenging the Dominator System, why has Christianity been used to uphold that same system? The answer lies in how empire co-opts resistance, transforming it into new modes of submission.
Ezer Kenegdo: The Erased Power of Woman's Creation
Another key mistranslation cements the biblical justification for female subordination. In Genesis, Eve is called Adam's ezer kenegdo, which is often mistranslated as "helper" or "helpmate." This term, however, does not imply servitude. The Hebrew ezer is a word used elsewhere in the Old Testament to describe God as a military ally or divine rescuer (The Lord is my help—Psalm 54:4). The phrase kenegdo means "corresponding to" or "equal to," not "subordinate to."
The original text, then, does not present woman as an auxiliary being but as a force of equal power. The distortion of ezer kenegdo into “obedient wife” is one of the most profound acts of semantic violence in religious history. It transformed an archetype of mutual strength into one of submission.
If women's original role was as an empowered equal, what are the implications for our present reality? It suggests that patriarchy is not ordained but artificially sustained. If the original design was cooperative, then our task is not to "fight for equality" within the system but to resurrect an entirely different paradigm—one that was always meant to be.