There is no question that at least in the modern western world, marriage is not just deteriorating, but also diminishing. One argument for same-sex marriage is the breakdown of hetero-sexual marriage. I am not sure how that legitimizes a redefinition of marriage, but it is still made.
It is also debated whether through God or evolution, marriage came to be a relationship for family to exist in a healthy way.
There is no honest question but that major religions agree that marriage is a divine creation between a male and a female. Government involvement has been simply a consequential confirmation to facilitate certain elements (Mainly the safe raising of children.) of a sacred union.
Evolution presents a whole different scenario. If gender and marriage evolved to facilitate child rearing, it can also evolve to something else when marriage becomes unnecessary. A relevant example would be the bee colony. A queen bee reproduces, female worker bees facilitate the hive, and male drone bees simply fertilize the eggs and then die. I assert that this could be a very real possibility for human evolution.
Until recently in the western world, and still in most of the rest of the world, the roles of husband and wife were/are very clear. The male is the head of the home (Doesn't that push buttons now...), who provides for and protects his wife and children. The wife manages the home and children.
Now, the glass ceiling has been shattered (Or maybe broken...). Simply put, anything a man can do, a woman does. As Jennifer Aniston recently put it, that includes birthing and raising children without a male. In addition, the father of that child has absolutely no say in whether his child is even birthed or aborted. He is at a disadvantage in the case of a divorce, especially regarding custody of the children. In job settings, any minority participants are many times given an advantage.
The question can reasonably be asked now,“What are men good for?”“What needful purpose do they offer?” We have gone from John Wayne to Charlie Sheen. Self care for many males is the only responsibility they have. Could that be a part of why men are most often portrayed in the media as 'jerks'? Or even the breakdown of gender distinction?
This change is even more profound for women. While men have had purpose removed (Think about that...), women have had full responsibility loaded on their shoulders. Makes me wonder if evolution has had time to keep up!
Marriage is caught in this change. What was once a crystal clear identity and purpose is now weak and fuzzy. Is it any wonder a change of definition is pursued?
I have not made any judgments about this change so far. But that question begs to be asked. Think of the social experiment we have engaged in! Have we really thought out the implications (For men, women, children, social structure, etc.)? Has this 'progress' been beneficial so far? Does history give us a example (Amazon women?)? Have we considered where it will end?
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Friday, November 12, 2010
Gay Marriage
Same-sex relationships are not the same as a heterosexual marriage.
I don't think there has ever been a person who is not sexually broken in some way.
That brokenness may be a genetic deformity (born that way), the result of twisted modeling from within the family or outside, abuse/molestation, improper initial sexual experiences or choice (sex outside of marriage in any form).
However, nature, culture, history and religion all point very consistently to a norm. If not, this debate would have been over long ago.
Casting stones does no one any good, nor does trying to make the abnormal normal.
I would suggest our greatest challenge is not each other, but honestly facing and dealing with our own brokenness.
Scientist are not sure why two genders evolved, but it makes sense that one gender focused on protection and provision, while the other on reproduction and nurture.
It is interesting that the Bible indicates just that; Adam was created, and out of that single gender Eve was created. Both had unique purposes that brought 'completion' or 'oneness' when re-united in marriage.
It is not only the perfect setting for reproduction and the nurture of young. It is also a relationship where both genders find 'balance' in a number of ways through an exclusive, life-long commitment in marriage.
One obvious example is the physical expression of oneness in sexual union between a man and a woman. Male and female were made for each other sexually. Homosexual union does not naturally fit.
Same-sex relationships can certainly have genuine love and many other qualities. But it is impossible to match the diversity and balance of heterosexual marriage.
Same-sex relationships have every right to be defined in specific ways. They should also have the necessary protections and justice. However, to provide that within the scope of the marriage relationship is not right or logical.
I have no desire to make you defensive or offend you. I hope we can debate these issues in a polite and fair way. I know I have much more to learn, but this is what I have come to so far.
You are right that marriages in the western world have taken a downward turn in the last few decades. I have some thoughts about that for later.
In the historical context I was speaking of, marriages have been between a man and a woman across cultures, religions and human history.
You are right that homosexuality has always been around and is present in the animal kingdom. But in neither places to a great degree. Among animals there is often a extenuating circumstance.
Among humans it has been and is more often rejected as 'abnormal' or worse. If you re-consider what I listed as possible causes of homosexuality, only one or maybe two would be a choice.
There is certainly a broad genetic variation between masculinity and femininity expressed in genders. However, there is a point where a unusual genetic variation becomes abnormal. I do not say that in a moral sense at all.
The influences of society and family, abuse or molestation also must have a factor in our sexuality. Those are also amoral factors on the part of the recipient.
Our initial sexual experience may be a choice, and therefore possibly unwise. Some people experiment sexually later in life as the Apostle Paul spoke about in Romans. Those are choices.
As I stated earlier, I think we are all sexually broken. God does not excuse us because of that. We are held accountable for how we handle our brokenness.
My experience has been to tightly hold on to two truths. First,'those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God'. And second,'if we confess our sin He is faithful and just to forgive us'.
I have had years of daily mercy, and all to brief periods of victory. I try to keep the perspective that this present time is a micro-second in the span of eternity. This is where God has led me so far.
Sometimes our battle to convince others is nothing more than a battle to convince ourselves.
I suspect you have wrestled longer than Jacob. Sometimes our measure is how hard we fight, but sometimes it is who we surrender to.
I found a little known book by C.S. Lewis to be profound; 'Till We Have Faces'.
My best wishes to you!
I don't think there has ever been a person who is not sexually broken in some way.
That brokenness may be a genetic deformity (born that way), the result of twisted modeling from within the family or outside, abuse/molestation, improper initial sexual experiences or choice (sex outside of marriage in any form).
However, nature, culture, history and religion all point very consistently to a norm. If not, this debate would have been over long ago.
Casting stones does no one any good, nor does trying to make the abnormal normal.
I would suggest our greatest challenge is not each other, but honestly facing and dealing with our own brokenness.
Scientist are not sure why two genders evolved, but it makes sense that one gender focused on protection and provision, while the other on reproduction and nurture.
It is interesting that the Bible indicates just that; Adam was created, and out of that single gender Eve was created. Both had unique purposes that brought 'completion' or 'oneness' when re-united in marriage.
It is not only the perfect setting for reproduction and the nurture of young. It is also a relationship where both genders find 'balance' in a number of ways through an exclusive, life-long commitment in marriage.
One obvious example is the physical expression of oneness in sexual union between a man and a woman. Male and female were made for each other sexually. Homosexual union does not naturally fit.
Same-sex relationships can certainly have genuine love and many other qualities. But it is impossible to match the diversity and balance of heterosexual marriage.
Same-sex relationships have every right to be defined in specific ways. They should also have the necessary protections and justice. However, to provide that within the scope of the marriage relationship is not right or logical.
I have no desire to make you defensive or offend you. I hope we can debate these issues in a polite and fair way. I know I have much more to learn, but this is what I have come to so far.
You are right that marriages in the western world have taken a downward turn in the last few decades. I have some thoughts about that for later.
In the historical context I was speaking of, marriages have been between a man and a woman across cultures, religions and human history.
You are right that homosexuality has always been around and is present in the animal kingdom. But in neither places to a great degree. Among animals there is often a extenuating circumstance.
Among humans it has been and is more often rejected as 'abnormal' or worse. If you re-consider what I listed as possible causes of homosexuality, only one or maybe two would be a choice.
There is certainly a broad genetic variation between masculinity and femininity expressed in genders. However, there is a point where a unusual genetic variation becomes abnormal. I do not say that in a moral sense at all.
The influences of society and family, abuse or molestation also must have a factor in our sexuality. Those are also amoral factors on the part of the recipient.
Our initial sexual experience may be a choice, and therefore possibly unwise. Some people experiment sexually later in life as the Apostle Paul spoke about in Romans. Those are choices.
As I stated earlier, I think we are all sexually broken. God does not excuse us because of that. We are held accountable for how we handle our brokenness.
My experience has been to tightly hold on to two truths. First,'those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God'. And second,'if we confess our sin He is faithful and just to forgive us'.
I have had years of daily mercy, and all to brief periods of victory. I try to keep the perspective that this present time is a micro-second in the span of eternity. This is where God has led me so far.
Sometimes our battle to convince others is nothing more than a battle to convince ourselves.
I suspect you have wrestled longer than Jacob. Sometimes our measure is how hard we fight, but sometimes it is who we surrender to.
I found a little known book by C.S. Lewis to be profound; 'Till We Have Faces'.
My best wishes to you!
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
MERCY MIGHTY
Mercy mighty
such simple greatness
foundation of all virtues
made solely for me
victorious, no, triumphant over all shame
Mercy unmeasured
a sacred exchange
personified in a baby
perfected on a cross
the ark that saves from deadly depths
Mercy met
now, lest lost
the measure given
is the multiplied gift
in His Holy House, a Mercy Seat for me
Mercy me
fill this vessel full
mark me son
paint my portrait mercy
the enemy mercy vanquished to friend
such simple greatness
foundation of all virtues
made solely for me
victorious, no, triumphant over all shame
Mercy unmeasured
a sacred exchange
personified in a baby
perfected on a cross
the ark that saves from deadly depths
Mercy met
now, lest lost
the measure given
is the multiplied gift
in His Holy House, a Mercy Seat for me
Mercy me
fill this vessel full
mark me son
paint my portrait mercy
the enemy mercy vanquished to friend
Monday, September 6, 2010
I AM
I am a sojourner, my days like a shadow,
there is no expectation of remaining.
I am a stranger, looked on as a outsider,
“You're not from around here are you?”
I am an alien, my allegiance to another,
my home a different place, always leaving here.
I am a pilgrim, with those from all nations,
yearning for and on my way to sacred Zion.
there is no expectation of remaining.
I am a stranger, looked on as a outsider,
“You're not from around here are you?”
I am an alien, my allegiance to another,
my home a different place, always leaving here.
I am a pilgrim, with those from all nations,
yearning for and on my way to sacred Zion.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
“We Have No Other Practice, Nor Have The Churches Of God”
THEN WHY DOES THE CHURCH TODAY?
What does the Bible say about gender authority?
By
Gregory D. Kirschmann
INTRODUCTION
In our society and even the Church today, the question of authority based on gender seems not only settled, but even beyond question. The adamant assertion is that a female has the right to any position of authority in the home, Church or government that a male does.
Dare dispute that assertion, and you will likely be labeled bigoted, ignorant, a woman hater or worse. You may hear, “What about Deborah?“, or, “There is neither male nor female…“. But interestingly, I have never read or heard a consistent, complete compilation of all the biblical passages that teach or reflect gender relationships by those who support that view. Instead, you find extremely selective, partial passages taken out of context.
What does God’s Word say? Does it really place the husband as the head of the home as historical Christianity asserts? Is formal leadership in the New Testament Church to be held only by men? Is it unscriptural for women to be in authority over men? Is the Body of Christ today accepting a viewpoint and practice that is contrary to the Church of God?
Please understand, this is not about any person’s ability, no matter what gender, to exercise tremendous influence apart from any formal position of authority. This is not a question about the privilege of any gender to be involved in ministry, to be anointed in their service, to fulfill a legitimate God designed purpose, or to be ‘called’. It is solely about whether the Bible asserts a male is the God appointed authority in marriage and specifically assigned to formal positions of authority in the Church (Elder and Deacon).
There is no question that I have faulty filters that can slant my understanding of this issue ~ just as every other person, male or female, also does. That struggle does not remove our responsibility or privilege to address and understand what God says about gender authority. I do so with a holy reverence. I even fight a fleshly fear. This has been a process of deep, long soul searching and study. I still hold this matter before the Lord, looking for greater insight. I trust that the Holy Spirit has been faithful to lead me to a place of correctly interpreting the Bible in a way that upholds the Word in truth and spirit. My desire is to rightly submit to God-established authority. I believe that is the best and only way to honor, strengthen and protect every person, no matter what their gender or position.
As you ponder these thoughts, please keep in mind these things;
1. My focus in this dissertation is only to observe what Scripture says about gender authority. I do not engage in a debate about what theologians say about gender authority. That has been done many times. I simply assert that God would not make His Word so confusing, that we would be easily led astray by an overt reading without human commentary. Nor do I doubt that the Holy Spirit will do His job to guide us in a accurate understanding of what God is saying.
I also do not attempt to define how it is to be practiced. I do encourage a careful, sensitive, but obedient response to whatever Scripture and the Holy Spirit reveal to you.
2. I believe that when we live in the parameters God has established, we are released into full freedom, and not limited in any way from our God-given potential. There is no doubt that woman can exercise leadership with great skill in many spheres of authority. I believe the question that over-rides that truth is, does God allow them to exercise formal authority in their marriage and ministries over men?
I understand that what I am presenting has immense implications. However, if gender authority is what the Bible teaches, and women of Scripture were never hindered in their call by living under gender authority, then how can we do any different?
3. We all, both male and female, are under authority. While we may have certain positions of authority, we are also in the same position as the Roman Centurion, "For I, too, am a man under authority..." Luke 7:8 (NASB). Jesus honored him as having the greatest faith in Israel, simply because he recognized the importance and truth of God ordained authority. A Centurion getting top honors for faith that simply understood Kingdom authority! Among all God’s people, a Roman soldier! Is that not an incredibly potent example of the importance of authority?
The teaching today about gender authority is a recent radical turn-around. Not just from a limited period a couple decades ago, but from the basic doctrine of the Church since the Apostles! Is the doctrine of gender authority a two thousand year old misinterpretation of God’s Word, only until now correctly understood? Or is the present gender neutral authority being practiced today an disturbingly blatant distortion of God’s Word? Is it one of the major symptoms of capitulation to culture by the Western Church? I believe it was Francis Schaffer who said, “Look at a value of society today, and you will see a value of the Church eight years from now.”
Consider the recent best-selling novel, The Da Vinci Code, now a movie. As Citizen Magazine puts it, “Here in a nutshell is the history of Christianity according to Dan Brown... It’s all been one big sexist plot to empower men and oppress women... Jesus was never God at all. He was a man who married Mary Magdalene, had children with her and left her in charge of the Church... But Peter got jealous of her, as did the men who followed him in later generations. So they buried the evidence of her elevated status, made sure only male-oriented Gospels made it into the Bible... In short, the entire Church has been built on lies.” It must be noted, that this assertion pollutes the entire New Testament and all of Church history with bigotry and far more!
Keep in mind that while this is a fiction book, it is also purportedly based on rejected but true facts and holy writings. Isn’t that the prophecy of 2 Thess. 2:9-12 (NASB) that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. And for this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they might believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.
Or more recently, consider two movies that ironically came out at the same time, “A Night With the King”, and the Spartan epic, “300”. One shows a tender, loving and romantic king, the other, a twisted despot. They both depict the same king, Artixersis from the book of Esther. Guess which one is historically more accurate?
These distortions in society today can only find credence because the Church has already allowed a platform. What birthed this audacious twisting of truth? Could it be that over the last few years the Church has diluted and rejected the teaching of God’s Word regarding gender authority and other important issues? Is it not ‘politically correct’ not only in society, but also in the Body of Christ to accept women in every position of authority, and certainly not to make waves by even speaking otherwise.
There cannot be the vast separation of belief in the Church about gender authority today without one party fitting into the following passage. It should a sober warning to anyone who takes any position about this issue. 2 John 1:9-11 (NASB) Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. [10]If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; [11]for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.
It is amazing to me that in the very context of where it was first said, it is again being asked, “Did God really say?“ I ask you to lay down your position about gender authority for a moment. Take a fresh, thorough look at the pertaining passages in context, and let the Holy Spirit guide you in all truth. I love the promise of John 7:17-18 (NASB) “If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself. [18]“He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who is seeking the glory of the One who sent Him, He is true, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.
I invite you to do a ‘Berean study,’ with God’s Word as your primary text and the Holy Spirit as your partner. Acts 17:10 (NASB) Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.
What does the Bible say about gender authority?
By
Gregory D. Kirschmann
INTRODUCTION
In our society and even the Church today, the question of authority based on gender seems not only settled, but even beyond question. The adamant assertion is that a female has the right to any position of authority in the home, Church or government that a male does.
Dare dispute that assertion, and you will likely be labeled bigoted, ignorant, a woman hater or worse. You may hear, “What about Deborah?“, or, “There is neither male nor female…“. But interestingly, I have never read or heard a consistent, complete compilation of all the biblical passages that teach or reflect gender relationships by those who support that view. Instead, you find extremely selective, partial passages taken out of context.
What does God’s Word say? Does it really place the husband as the head of the home as historical Christianity asserts? Is formal leadership in the New Testament Church to be held only by men? Is it unscriptural for women to be in authority over men? Is the Body of Christ today accepting a viewpoint and practice that is contrary to the Church of God?
Please understand, this is not about any person’s ability, no matter what gender, to exercise tremendous influence apart from any formal position of authority. This is not a question about the privilege of any gender to be involved in ministry, to be anointed in their service, to fulfill a legitimate God designed purpose, or to be ‘called’. It is solely about whether the Bible asserts a male is the God appointed authority in marriage and specifically assigned to formal positions of authority in the Church (Elder and Deacon).
There is no question that I have faulty filters that can slant my understanding of this issue ~ just as every other person, male or female, also does. That struggle does not remove our responsibility or privilege to address and understand what God says about gender authority. I do so with a holy reverence. I even fight a fleshly fear. This has been a process of deep, long soul searching and study. I still hold this matter before the Lord, looking for greater insight. I trust that the Holy Spirit has been faithful to lead me to a place of correctly interpreting the Bible in a way that upholds the Word in truth and spirit. My desire is to rightly submit to God-established authority. I believe that is the best and only way to honor, strengthen and protect every person, no matter what their gender or position.
As you ponder these thoughts, please keep in mind these things;
1. My focus in this dissertation is only to observe what Scripture says about gender authority. I do not engage in a debate about what theologians say about gender authority. That has been done many times. I simply assert that God would not make His Word so confusing, that we would be easily led astray by an overt reading without human commentary. Nor do I doubt that the Holy Spirit will do His job to guide us in a accurate understanding of what God is saying.
I also do not attempt to define how it is to be practiced. I do encourage a careful, sensitive, but obedient response to whatever Scripture and the Holy Spirit reveal to you.
2. I believe that when we live in the parameters God has established, we are released into full freedom, and not limited in any way from our God-given potential. There is no doubt that woman can exercise leadership with great skill in many spheres of authority. I believe the question that over-rides that truth is, does God allow them to exercise formal authority in their marriage and ministries over men?
I understand that what I am presenting has immense implications. However, if gender authority is what the Bible teaches, and women of Scripture were never hindered in their call by living under gender authority, then how can we do any different?
3. We all, both male and female, are under authority. While we may have certain positions of authority, we are also in the same position as the Roman Centurion, "For I, too, am a man under authority..." Luke 7:8 (NASB). Jesus honored him as having the greatest faith in Israel, simply because he recognized the importance and truth of God ordained authority. A Centurion getting top honors for faith that simply understood Kingdom authority! Among all God’s people, a Roman soldier! Is that not an incredibly potent example of the importance of authority?
The teaching today about gender authority is a recent radical turn-around. Not just from a limited period a couple decades ago, but from the basic doctrine of the Church since the Apostles! Is the doctrine of gender authority a two thousand year old misinterpretation of God’s Word, only until now correctly understood? Or is the present gender neutral authority being practiced today an disturbingly blatant distortion of God’s Word? Is it one of the major symptoms of capitulation to culture by the Western Church? I believe it was Francis Schaffer who said, “Look at a value of society today, and you will see a value of the Church eight years from now.”
Consider the recent best-selling novel, The Da Vinci Code, now a movie. As Citizen Magazine puts it, “Here in a nutshell is the history of Christianity according to Dan Brown... It’s all been one big sexist plot to empower men and oppress women... Jesus was never God at all. He was a man who married Mary Magdalene, had children with her and left her in charge of the Church... But Peter got jealous of her, as did the men who followed him in later generations. So they buried the evidence of her elevated status, made sure only male-oriented Gospels made it into the Bible... In short, the entire Church has been built on lies.” It must be noted, that this assertion pollutes the entire New Testament and all of Church history with bigotry and far more!
Keep in mind that while this is a fiction book, it is also purportedly based on rejected but true facts and holy writings. Isn’t that the prophecy of 2 Thess. 2:9-12 (NASB) that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. And for this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they might believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.
Or more recently, consider two movies that ironically came out at the same time, “A Night With the King”, and the Spartan epic, “300”. One shows a tender, loving and romantic king, the other, a twisted despot. They both depict the same king, Artixersis from the book of Esther. Guess which one is historically more accurate?
These distortions in society today can only find credence because the Church has already allowed a platform. What birthed this audacious twisting of truth? Could it be that over the last few years the Church has diluted and rejected the teaching of God’s Word regarding gender authority and other important issues? Is it not ‘politically correct’ not only in society, but also in the Body of Christ to accept women in every position of authority, and certainly not to make waves by even speaking otherwise.
There cannot be the vast separation of belief in the Church about gender authority today without one party fitting into the following passage. It should a sober warning to anyone who takes any position about this issue. 2 John 1:9-11 (NASB) Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. [10]If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; [11]for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.
It is amazing to me that in the very context of where it was first said, it is again being asked, “Did God really say?“ I ask you to lay down your position about gender authority for a moment. Take a fresh, thorough look at the pertaining passages in context, and let the Holy Spirit guide you in all truth. I love the promise of John 7:17-18 (NASB) “If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself. [18]“He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who is seeking the glory of the One who sent Him, He is true, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.
I invite you to do a ‘Berean study,’ with God’s Word as your primary text and the Holy Spirit as your partner. Acts 17:10 (NASB) Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.
CHAPTER ONE
Do you think a Bible passage is extremely important that begins with,
1 Cor. 11:1-2 (NASB-U) ‘Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. [2] Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.’
Don’t you think it is a very defining portion of Scripture that concludes with,
1 Cor. 11:16 (NASB-U) ‘But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.’
Would this qualification injected in the start of a discussion include your church?
1 Cor. 14:33b (NASB-U) ‘as in all the churches of the saints.’
Do you recognize the subject matter of this passage as the Lord’s commandment?
1 Cor. 14:36-38 (NASB-U) ‘Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? [37] If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. [38] But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.’
Does your behavior dishonor God’s Word?
Titus 2:5 (NASB) so that the word of God will not be dishonored.
Each one of these Scriptures is directly connected to key passages on gender authority!
Are these not some of the most severe and strongest warnings Paul gives for any issue he writes about? Not just one warning, not two or three, but five!
If this subject is not important, why did Paul bracket it with these incredibly pronounced statements and commands?
How can we dare ignore, reject and disobey these portions of Scripture? And yet the message of these commands is flagrantly ignored, minimized, rejected, or twisted to mean the opposite of what it says. Will we not suffer serious consequences disobeying a principle that has such strong cautions around it?
WHY IS THE QUESTION OF GENDER AUTHORITY IMPORTANT?
First, we may not understand why God has given a certain command. That does not release us from obeying it. We may not agree with the command (King Saul, I Samuel 15). Nor may we want to follow the command (The prophet Jonah, Jonah 1). None of these reasons void our responsibility to obey.
Are you willing to obey clear, specific instructions simply because God says so?
Second, if my understanding of authority goes against the structures of authority that God has established, it is no less than rebellion. Isn’t that exactly what Jezebel did in establishing her own structure in worship and taking leadership in her marriage and the government?
Wasn’t Ahab held accountable for allowing it? 1 Kings 21:25 (NASB-U) Surely there was no one like Ahab who sold himself to do evil in the sight of the Lord, because Jezebel his wife incited him.
Like Jezebel, are we not ’designing’ our own religion when we deny and distort the clear commands and instructions of Scripture regarding leadership structure in the Church?
Like Jezebel, are we seeking to structure marriage as we chose, and not as God established?
Are we caught up in a worldly definition of equality, at the expense of obedience to God and submission to the authority He has established?
As believers, we aren’t so brash as to openly encourage rebellion. But isn’t that even what ‘mutual submission’ really is, if it is unbiblical?
Samuel’s words to Saul about rebellion and rejecting God’s Word are no less true to us today; 1 Samuel 15:23 (NASB-U) "For rebellion is as the sin of divination, And insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He has also rejected you from being king."
When Christ says a key sign of the end times is rebellion, any issue of authority is too important to ignore. And when the people of God violate authority in the Church and home, do we not open the flood gates of rebellion for society?
Third, if gender equality in authority is unbiblical, what might be the consequences? Is it part of the cause of the gender, marriage and family issues we see today? The implications are huge, they run through society and governments, into the Church, and down to the foundations of marriage and family. So far the Church has been losing the battle to restore health to society. Even our witness has been feeble, if not at times damaging. Christian marriages have not been the example they ought to be. Has the Church itself opened a major door to numerous problems by setting aside the husband as the head of marriage? Doesn’t the rejection of a male head-of-home open the door to a same-sex marriage? I believe the Church posture today will be looked at as a devastating cultural capitulation in the eye of history.
Maybe our prescription for health in society has missed a key, fundamental diagnosis of what the problem really is.
There is a fourth reason gender authority is important. If a improper structure of authority puts people in positions they are not created for, it sets up not only failure for the person, but destructive consequences for all those involved around them! Is our attempt at fixing ‘inequities’ creating even greater ones? Again, could this explain at least some of the frustrations we see in society today?
There is no question that abusive authority in the home and Church has and does exist. I think women many times suffer the most in that twist. But as a result of a faulty reaction to abuse, I think the American Church has tried to establish practice and doctrine from a place of victimization rather than freedom in Christ and faithful obedience to God’s Word. I think we have exchanged a distortion for a lie as a result.
Sadly, we end up ignoring a powerful example and critical command of Christ in the very context of the issue of gender authority,
1 Peter 2:21-3:2 (NASB-U) For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, [22] who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth; [23] and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; [24] and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. [25] For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.
[3:1] In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, [2] as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.
Scripture is filled with astounding examples of men and women being led by God through extremely difficult times of submission to ungodly authority. We are missing our very purpose and losing our testimony of God’s power and authority today because of disobedience and rebellion.
I am well aware of the implications and repercussions of this truth being re-established in Churches and Denominations where women are in leadership over men. But isn’t that what God has always called His people to? If the world has watched the Body of Christ reject truth, isn’t it time they see us reclaim truth? Could this be the Reformation of our day? If we do not return to this foundation, God will raise a new crop of obedient followers.
HOW DO WE DISCERN THE TRUTH ABOUT GENDER AUTHORITY?
We have seen a major shift in the issue of gender authority in the Church and Marriage from historic Christianity (See chapter 15 of Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood by John Piper and Wayne Grudem as one excellent resource). One writer in a recent book goes so far as to say that women have been ‘lied to by the Church’. Consider for a moment the judgment that puts on literally every Saint of times past! Has historic Christianity really been abusively wrong about this vital issue?
But even more serious, would that not mean that the Holy Spirit failed to guide the Body in all truth for thousands of years? John 16:13 (NASB-U) "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth.”
I think the following four points (In order of importance.) are foundational guides to correctly understanding what scripture says about gender authority.
1. The first and most important guide is, what does God’s Word teach about gender authority?
Do you know what the passages are that relate to gender authority? How can you have an opinion without knowing and studying God’s Word before taking any other person’s view?
When was the last time you heard a sermon on the passages that deal with this? Would your pastor dare preach these passages in this day and age? Would it be a rebuke to your Church and marriage structure to even read these passages?
2. What was the practice in the Bible regarding gender authority?
What examples of the application of gender authority does scripture give? How was it practiced in Biblical examples? I think gender authority is clearly presented in Scripture as a command and consistently supported by examples.
I also assert that this Biblical command supercedes cultures. I believe that even when a perceived cultural practice (Therefore possibly an adjustable issue.) conflicts with a specific biblical command (Unchangeable.), the Word always takes precedence.
When scripture not only gives a command, but even states the rational for the command, I do not believe we should over-ride that reason because of ‘culture’. Paul in particular, states reasons for gender authority that stand apart from culture.
I also do not accept that the passages referenced here are so culturally bound, that they are pointless for our time. While cultural practices may be different in our time, that does not eradicate the many benefits of God including those practices in His Word. There is always a principle in cultural practices that we are to apply in our context.
3. What was the practice of the early Church after New Testament times?
After the writing of the New Testament, how did the Church speak about gender authority? What was their practice? When did changes occur, and what was the result?
4. What is the fruit our practice of gender authority produces?
God told the Israelites that their world would be a mirror to reflect back the consequences of their choices. There would be life and blessing in obedience, but death and loss in rebellion. Deut. 30:15-19 (NASB-U) "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity; [16] in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the Lord your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it. [17] "But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them, [18] I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You will not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it. [19] "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, “
How is the American Church doing in our enlightened age? Better or worse than before? What is being reflected back by society to the Church? Why are African, Asian, South American and even Chinese denominations experiencing dramatic growth, yet being forced to denounce and distance themselves from their American counter-parts in key issues?
Is there an increase in obedience, or growing rebellion in society? Is the Church distinct from it? Has there been an increase or decrease in the health of marriages since we corrected ‘chauvinistic’ doctrine? Do Christian marriages stand apart from those of the world now?
One of the arguments the Episcopal homosexual community made in pursuing gay priests was, “The Church accepted women priests, it will learn to accept homosexual priests.” They then go on to use the same methods of re-interpreting or ignoring God’s Word that are being used to discard gender authority.
How have gender issues such as domestic violence, gender manners and sexual behavior been affected? For example, is same-sex marriage a result of our societies’ rejection of gender authority?
SOME SIMPLE PREPOSITIONS ABOUT UNDERSTANDING GOD’S WORD
I believe that whatever the Holy Spirit is saying to us as a Church regarding gender authority will be in harmony with Scripture.
Passage after passage dealing with this issue is painted as insignificant or, ‘not for our time’. Time honored interpretation is turned upside down with new definitions from ‘modern’ dictionaries. Even worse, other passages are declared misleading or meaning the opposite of what they overtly say. God does not confuse us that way. Nor is that what the Holy Spirit will do with Scripture. When someone teaches a doctrine that distances and detaches itself from what Scripture teaches on the subject, they are not being led by God’s Spirit. When they indicate you need their teaching to understand what Scripture says, they are claiming the place of the Holy Spirit who Jesus promises will lead us into all truth.
This also means Scripture will be in harmony with itself. When all the passages on a particular doctrine are compiled, they should present a consistent message in both instruction and practice. Unless a major practice is specifically shifted (ie., Gentile participation in worship), there should also be consistency between Old and New Testament. They should be looked at together and understood as a whole. I have heard and read many of these pertaining scriptures dissected alone, asserting gender equality in authority. I have yet to see all these scriptures compiled together reaching a coherent conclusion.
I believe that all Scripture is profitable, and was included for our benefit.
“A low view of Scripture ensures a high risk of distortion!” I am troubled when we so discount passages that they become meaningless. I call us back to the full essence of 2 Tim. 3:16-17 (NASB-U) All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; [17] so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
Please note these two points in particular;
1. “All Scripture is inspired by God,” and not to be twisted, ignored, minimized or
rejected by man’s opinion at some point down the road of time. Every single
passage has the stamp of God’s approval on it.
2. “All Scripture... is profitable,” and none of it is wasted space to be ignored or
discarded. Every single passage has a divine purpose.
There can be a measure of flexibility interpreting passages that stand alone in a specific issue, but those that have supporting references of teaching and examples are unavoidably important.
With some passages related to this issue, I have also found the application of such harsh and rigid interpretations, that the passage becomes impossible to apply. The passage is then rendered pointless, and therefore ‘unprofitable’. The implication is that, “If we can’t apply it, we don’t have to pay attention to it.” I reject that conclusion. Instead, we need to search for meaning until our understanding makes it applicable.
Matthew 5:17-19 (NASB-U) "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. [18] "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. [19] "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
2 Peter 1:20-21 (NASB-U) But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, [21] for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
I believe that the common believer can read the Bible, and not be misled by the overt message.
I do not believe God would allow a careful reader to be misled in a 180 degree direction. Yet that is the assertion about many of these passages, ’They really mean the opposite of what they seem to say…’ I shouldn’t need someone’s study guide to understand the basic truths of a passage and at least be pointed in the right direction. I am amazed at the audacity of some writers who work to reverse the expressed meaning of God’s Word. When you read these passages without notes, what conclusion do you come to? I believe the Holy Spirit protects and guides sincere believers in correctly understanding truth. I believe He will be faithful to you and I also.
I believe that when it comes down to God’s Word and man’s opinion, the Word prevails.
I don’t think God let the Church be misled for centuries about gender authority until now. I believe that the historic Church has not ‘lied to the body’ on this issue. The doctrine of gender authority in marriage and Church leadership has been consistent throughout Church history. We need men and women of integrity to stand up to the clamor and pressure of modern opinion, especially in the Church! I grieve that many modern Bible teachers deny or stand silent on these passages.
WHAT CONCLUSION DO YOU COME TO ABOUT GENDER AUTHORITY WHEN YOU READ THESE PASSAGES?
I present a challenge. Have a pre-teen read these passages, and then ask them what conclusion they come to. If you were reading these for the first time, what understanding would you conclude with?
*Underlined portions are only to point out key portions that I see relating to the
issue of gender authority.
Genesis 2:18-25 Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” 19Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. 20The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.”
24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
Genesis 3:16 (NASB-U) To the woman He said,
"I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you."
1 Cor. 11:1-16 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.
[2] I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings, just as I passed them on to you.
[3] Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. [4] Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. [5] And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is just as though her head were shaved. [6] If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. [7] A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. [8] For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; [9] neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. [10] For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.
[11] In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. [12] For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. [13] Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? [14] Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, [15] but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. [16] If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God.
1 Cor. 14:33-38 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints, [34] women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. [35] If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
[36] Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? [37] If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. [38] If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.
1 Tim. 2:11-3:15 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. [12] I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. [13] For Adam was formed first, then Eve. [14] And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. [15] But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
[3:1] Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. [2] Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, [3] not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. [4] He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. [5] (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) [6] He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. [7] He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.
[8] Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. [9] They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. [10] They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
[11] In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
[12] A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. [13] Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.
[14] Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, [15] if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
1 Tim. 5:1-2 Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but exhort him as if he were your father. Treat younger men as brothers, [2] older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity.
Titus 1:5-9 The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you. [6] An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. [7] Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless--not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. [8] Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. [9] He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.
Titus 2:3-5 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. [4] Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, [5] to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.
1 Peter 3:1-7 Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, [2] when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. [3] Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. [4] Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. [5] For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, [6] like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.
[7] Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.
1 Cor. 11:1-2 (NASB-U) ‘Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. [2] Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.’
Don’t you think it is a very defining portion of Scripture that concludes with,
1 Cor. 11:16 (NASB-U) ‘But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.’
Would this qualification injected in the start of a discussion include your church?
1 Cor. 14:33b (NASB-U) ‘as in all the churches of the saints.’
Do you recognize the subject matter of this passage as the Lord’s commandment?
1 Cor. 14:36-38 (NASB-U) ‘Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? [37] If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. [38] But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.’
Does your behavior dishonor God’s Word?
Titus 2:5 (NASB) so that the word of God will not be dishonored.
Each one of these Scriptures is directly connected to key passages on gender authority!
Are these not some of the most severe and strongest warnings Paul gives for any issue he writes about? Not just one warning, not two or three, but five!
If this subject is not important, why did Paul bracket it with these incredibly pronounced statements and commands?
How can we dare ignore, reject and disobey these portions of Scripture? And yet the message of these commands is flagrantly ignored, minimized, rejected, or twisted to mean the opposite of what it says. Will we not suffer serious consequences disobeying a principle that has such strong cautions around it?
WHY IS THE QUESTION OF GENDER AUTHORITY IMPORTANT?
First, we may not understand why God has given a certain command. That does not release us from obeying it. We may not agree with the command (King Saul, I Samuel 15). Nor may we want to follow the command (The prophet Jonah, Jonah 1). None of these reasons void our responsibility to obey.
Are you willing to obey clear, specific instructions simply because God says so?
Second, if my understanding of authority goes against the structures of authority that God has established, it is no less than rebellion. Isn’t that exactly what Jezebel did in establishing her own structure in worship and taking leadership in her marriage and the government?
Wasn’t Ahab held accountable for allowing it? 1 Kings 21:25 (NASB-U) Surely there was no one like Ahab who sold himself to do evil in the sight of the Lord, because Jezebel his wife incited him.
Like Jezebel, are we not ’designing’ our own religion when we deny and distort the clear commands and instructions of Scripture regarding leadership structure in the Church?
Like Jezebel, are we seeking to structure marriage as we chose, and not as God established?
Are we caught up in a worldly definition of equality, at the expense of obedience to God and submission to the authority He has established?
As believers, we aren’t so brash as to openly encourage rebellion. But isn’t that even what ‘mutual submission’ really is, if it is unbiblical?
Samuel’s words to Saul about rebellion and rejecting God’s Word are no less true to us today; 1 Samuel 15:23 (NASB-U) "For rebellion is as the sin of divination, And insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He has also rejected you from being king."
When Christ says a key sign of the end times is rebellion, any issue of authority is too important to ignore. And when the people of God violate authority in the Church and home, do we not open the flood gates of rebellion for society?
Third, if gender equality in authority is unbiblical, what might be the consequences? Is it part of the cause of the gender, marriage and family issues we see today? The implications are huge, they run through society and governments, into the Church, and down to the foundations of marriage and family. So far the Church has been losing the battle to restore health to society. Even our witness has been feeble, if not at times damaging. Christian marriages have not been the example they ought to be. Has the Church itself opened a major door to numerous problems by setting aside the husband as the head of marriage? Doesn’t the rejection of a male head-of-home open the door to a same-sex marriage? I believe the Church posture today will be looked at as a devastating cultural capitulation in the eye of history.
Maybe our prescription for health in society has missed a key, fundamental diagnosis of what the problem really is.
There is a fourth reason gender authority is important. If a improper structure of authority puts people in positions they are not created for, it sets up not only failure for the person, but destructive consequences for all those involved around them! Is our attempt at fixing ‘inequities’ creating even greater ones? Again, could this explain at least some of the frustrations we see in society today?
There is no question that abusive authority in the home and Church has and does exist. I think women many times suffer the most in that twist. But as a result of a faulty reaction to abuse, I think the American Church has tried to establish practice and doctrine from a place of victimization rather than freedom in Christ and faithful obedience to God’s Word. I think we have exchanged a distortion for a lie as a result.
Sadly, we end up ignoring a powerful example and critical command of Christ in the very context of the issue of gender authority,
1 Peter 2:21-3:2 (NASB-U) For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, [22] who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth; [23] and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; [24] and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. [25] For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.
[3:1] In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, [2] as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.
Scripture is filled with astounding examples of men and women being led by God through extremely difficult times of submission to ungodly authority. We are missing our very purpose and losing our testimony of God’s power and authority today because of disobedience and rebellion.
I am well aware of the implications and repercussions of this truth being re-established in Churches and Denominations where women are in leadership over men. But isn’t that what God has always called His people to? If the world has watched the Body of Christ reject truth, isn’t it time they see us reclaim truth? Could this be the Reformation of our day? If we do not return to this foundation, God will raise a new crop of obedient followers.
HOW DO WE DISCERN THE TRUTH ABOUT GENDER AUTHORITY?
We have seen a major shift in the issue of gender authority in the Church and Marriage from historic Christianity (See chapter 15 of Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood by John Piper and Wayne Grudem as one excellent resource). One writer in a recent book goes so far as to say that women have been ‘lied to by the Church’. Consider for a moment the judgment that puts on literally every Saint of times past! Has historic Christianity really been abusively wrong about this vital issue?
But even more serious, would that not mean that the Holy Spirit failed to guide the Body in all truth for thousands of years? John 16:13 (NASB-U) "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth.”
I think the following four points (In order of importance.) are foundational guides to correctly understanding what scripture says about gender authority.
1. The first and most important guide is, what does God’s Word teach about gender authority?
Do you know what the passages are that relate to gender authority? How can you have an opinion without knowing and studying God’s Word before taking any other person’s view?
When was the last time you heard a sermon on the passages that deal with this? Would your pastor dare preach these passages in this day and age? Would it be a rebuke to your Church and marriage structure to even read these passages?
2. What was the practice in the Bible regarding gender authority?
What examples of the application of gender authority does scripture give? How was it practiced in Biblical examples? I think gender authority is clearly presented in Scripture as a command and consistently supported by examples.
I also assert that this Biblical command supercedes cultures. I believe that even when a perceived cultural practice (Therefore possibly an adjustable issue.) conflicts with a specific biblical command (Unchangeable.), the Word always takes precedence.
When scripture not only gives a command, but even states the rational for the command, I do not believe we should over-ride that reason because of ‘culture’. Paul in particular, states reasons for gender authority that stand apart from culture.
I also do not accept that the passages referenced here are so culturally bound, that they are pointless for our time. While cultural practices may be different in our time, that does not eradicate the many benefits of God including those practices in His Word. There is always a principle in cultural practices that we are to apply in our context.
3. What was the practice of the early Church after New Testament times?
After the writing of the New Testament, how did the Church speak about gender authority? What was their practice? When did changes occur, and what was the result?
4. What is the fruit our practice of gender authority produces?
God told the Israelites that their world would be a mirror to reflect back the consequences of their choices. There would be life and blessing in obedience, but death and loss in rebellion. Deut. 30:15-19 (NASB-U) "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity; [16] in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the Lord your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it. [17] "But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them, [18] I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You will not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it. [19] "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, “
How is the American Church doing in our enlightened age? Better or worse than before? What is being reflected back by society to the Church? Why are African, Asian, South American and even Chinese denominations experiencing dramatic growth, yet being forced to denounce and distance themselves from their American counter-parts in key issues?
Is there an increase in obedience, or growing rebellion in society? Is the Church distinct from it? Has there been an increase or decrease in the health of marriages since we corrected ‘chauvinistic’ doctrine? Do Christian marriages stand apart from those of the world now?
One of the arguments the Episcopal homosexual community made in pursuing gay priests was, “The Church accepted women priests, it will learn to accept homosexual priests.” They then go on to use the same methods of re-interpreting or ignoring God’s Word that are being used to discard gender authority.
How have gender issues such as domestic violence, gender manners and sexual behavior been affected? For example, is same-sex marriage a result of our societies’ rejection of gender authority?
SOME SIMPLE PREPOSITIONS ABOUT UNDERSTANDING GOD’S WORD
I believe that whatever the Holy Spirit is saying to us as a Church regarding gender authority will be in harmony with Scripture.
Passage after passage dealing with this issue is painted as insignificant or, ‘not for our time’. Time honored interpretation is turned upside down with new definitions from ‘modern’ dictionaries. Even worse, other passages are declared misleading or meaning the opposite of what they overtly say. God does not confuse us that way. Nor is that what the Holy Spirit will do with Scripture. When someone teaches a doctrine that distances and detaches itself from what Scripture teaches on the subject, they are not being led by God’s Spirit. When they indicate you need their teaching to understand what Scripture says, they are claiming the place of the Holy Spirit who Jesus promises will lead us into all truth.
This also means Scripture will be in harmony with itself. When all the passages on a particular doctrine are compiled, they should present a consistent message in both instruction and practice. Unless a major practice is specifically shifted (ie., Gentile participation in worship), there should also be consistency between Old and New Testament. They should be looked at together and understood as a whole. I have heard and read many of these pertaining scriptures dissected alone, asserting gender equality in authority. I have yet to see all these scriptures compiled together reaching a coherent conclusion.
I believe that all Scripture is profitable, and was included for our benefit.
“A low view of Scripture ensures a high risk of distortion!” I am troubled when we so discount passages that they become meaningless. I call us back to the full essence of 2 Tim. 3:16-17 (NASB-U) All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; [17] so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
Please note these two points in particular;
1. “All Scripture is inspired by God,” and not to be twisted, ignored, minimized or
rejected by man’s opinion at some point down the road of time. Every single
passage has the stamp of God’s approval on it.
2. “All Scripture... is profitable,” and none of it is wasted space to be ignored or
discarded. Every single passage has a divine purpose.
There can be a measure of flexibility interpreting passages that stand alone in a specific issue, but those that have supporting references of teaching and examples are unavoidably important.
With some passages related to this issue, I have also found the application of such harsh and rigid interpretations, that the passage becomes impossible to apply. The passage is then rendered pointless, and therefore ‘unprofitable’. The implication is that, “If we can’t apply it, we don’t have to pay attention to it.” I reject that conclusion. Instead, we need to search for meaning until our understanding makes it applicable.
Matthew 5:17-19 (NASB-U) "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. [18] "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. [19] "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
2 Peter 1:20-21 (NASB-U) But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, [21] for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
I believe that the common believer can read the Bible, and not be misled by the overt message.
I do not believe God would allow a careful reader to be misled in a 180 degree direction. Yet that is the assertion about many of these passages, ’They really mean the opposite of what they seem to say…’ I shouldn’t need someone’s study guide to understand the basic truths of a passage and at least be pointed in the right direction. I am amazed at the audacity of some writers who work to reverse the expressed meaning of God’s Word. When you read these passages without notes, what conclusion do you come to? I believe the Holy Spirit protects and guides sincere believers in correctly understanding truth. I believe He will be faithful to you and I also.
I believe that when it comes down to God’s Word and man’s opinion, the Word prevails.
I don’t think God let the Church be misled for centuries about gender authority until now. I believe that the historic Church has not ‘lied to the body’ on this issue. The doctrine of gender authority in marriage and Church leadership has been consistent throughout Church history. We need men and women of integrity to stand up to the clamor and pressure of modern opinion, especially in the Church! I grieve that many modern Bible teachers deny or stand silent on these passages.
WHAT CONCLUSION DO YOU COME TO ABOUT GENDER AUTHORITY WHEN YOU READ THESE PASSAGES?
I present a challenge. Have a pre-teen read these passages, and then ask them what conclusion they come to. If you were reading these for the first time, what understanding would you conclude with?
*Underlined portions are only to point out key portions that I see relating to the
issue of gender authority.
Genesis 2:18-25 Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” 19Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. 20The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.”
24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
Genesis 3:16 (NASB-U) To the woman He said,
"I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you."
1 Cor. 11:1-16 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.
[2] I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings, just as I passed them on to you.
[3] Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. [4] Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. [5] And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is just as though her head were shaved. [6] If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. [7] A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. [8] For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; [9] neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. [10] For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.
[11] In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. [12] For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. [13] Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? [14] Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, [15] but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. [16] If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God.
1 Cor. 14:33-38 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints, [34] women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. [35] If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
[36] Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? [37] If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. [38] If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.
1 Tim. 2:11-3:15 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. [12] I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. [13] For Adam was formed first, then Eve. [14] And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. [15] But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
[3:1] Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. [2] Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, [3] not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. [4] He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. [5] (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) [6] He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. [7] He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.
[8] Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. [9] They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. [10] They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
[11] In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
[12] A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. [13] Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.
[14] Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, [15] if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
1 Tim. 5:1-2 Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but exhort him as if he were your father. Treat younger men as brothers, [2] older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity.
Titus 1:5-9 The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you. [6] An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. [7] Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless--not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. [8] Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. [9] He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.
Titus 2:3-5 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. [4] Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, [5] to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.
1 Peter 3:1-7 Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, [2] when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. [3] Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. [4] Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. [5] For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, [6] like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.
[7] Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.
CHAPTER TWO
WHAT IS THE FIRST EXAMPLE IN THE BIBLE OF A WOMAN LEADING?
Genesis 3:6 (NASB-U) When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.
Since Eve led in this disobedience, and if there is no gender authority, then why is Adam/man ultimately held responsible for the fall?
Romans 5:14 (NASB-U) Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
1 Cor. 15:22 (NASB-U) For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
The responsibility always ends at the leader’s feet.
WHAT ABOUT EVE?
Genesis 3:16 (NASB-U) To the woman He said,
"I will greatly multiply
Your pain in childbirth,
In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he will rule over you."
The New Jerusalem Bible interprets it this way;
Genesis 3:16 (NJB) To the woman he said:
I shall give you intense pain in childbearing,
you will give birth to your children in pain.
Your yearning will be for your husband,
and he will dominate you.
What does this verse say to you?
1. Note the context. Adam, Eve and the serpent are being judged for the violation of God’s law.
2. The consequence for the woman is two fold;
A. In one of the most precious moments of a female’s life (child birth), intense
pain will be present.
B. Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you.
The first part of this judgment is not our focus, the second part is where our debate occurs. There is brief but uniform biblical information to clearly understand what is implied in this second judgment.
The word used for desire is teshuwqah, from Hebrew 7783 (shuwq) in the original sense of stretching out after; a longing: intense desire. It is used only two other times in scripture;
Genesis 4:7 (NASB-U) "If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."
Here, the ‘intense desire’ is that of sin for Cain.
Song 7:10 (NASB-U) "I am my beloved's, And his desire is for me.
In this passage, the beloved has ‘intense desire’ of love for her.
We must ask, what is the subject of the ‘intense desire’ in Genesis 3:16, “Yet your desire will be for your husband” ?
The traditional interpretation is this; The woman will have an intense desire to usurp the rule of her husband (Since the exercise of authority is the context it is used in.).
I hold this interpretation for at least four reasons.
First, because the line of verse declaring desire is directly connected with “and he will rule over you.” It is important to note that Scripture teaches that Adam already had authority over Eve. Adam’s authority was not a new consequence of Eve’s sin, her fallen nature’s response to that authority was new.
1 Corinthians 11:7-10 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
1 Timothy 2:12-13 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.
This curse indicates a shift, not in the order of authority, but the response of woman to that authority. She now had an intense desire to rule that would be frustrated.
Second, the word desire also has the closest proximity to the second use of the word (Gen. 4:7) where it is a wrong desire. The use of the word is also set in a negative context of judgment.
Third, Paul confirms that interpretation and consequence in the authority structure of gender.
1 Tim. 2:11-15 (NASB-U) A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. [12] But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. [13] For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. [14] And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. [15] But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.
Please note that in verse 13 the order of creation is first given as a reason for gender authority. Then in verse 14 Eve’s deception is given as a second reason for gender authority, and tied into New Testament application with clear consistency. It even includes the context of childbirth! It also clearly extends gender authority into the Church structure.
Fourth, I also think the truth of this judgment of tension in the exercise of authority between husband and wife is inferred in a number of biblical passages and incidents.
Proverbs 27:15 (NASB-U) A constant dripping on a day of steady rain And a contentious woman are alike;
Amos 4:1 (NASB-U) Hear this word, you cows of Bashan who are on the mountain of Samaria, who oppress the poor, who crush the needy, who say to their husbands, “Bring now, that we may drink!”
Here the sense of the female struggling to assert their will is indicated.
Certainly Delilah is an example in her devious badgering of Samson,
Judges 16:16 ( NIV ) With such nagging she prodded him day after day until he was tired to death.
I think Sarah (Pursuing offspring through her handmaiden.), Rebekah (Putting Jacob ahead of Esau.), Miriam (Seeking along with Aaron to displace Moses.) and certainly Jezebel to name a few also show examples of ungodly desires to subvert gender authority.
Col. 3:18-19 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. [19] Husbands, love your wives and do not be embittered against them.
In the context of commanding wives to submit, embitterment would be a natural reaction against an un-submitting wife.
Fifth, the unauthorized assertion of authority to encourage rebellion makes this judgment a profoundly appropriate consequence of both Eve & Adam’s sin. The desire to dominate will be unquenched in the woman, and the responsibility to lead will be unendingly challenged for the man.
Genesis 3:17 (NASB-U) Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife…”
Do not cultures throughout history confirm the truth of this tension? There is both the female desire for authority, but male authority ultimately superceding, over and over. I have even wondered if one of the effects of the fallen nature is not just the female tendency to pursue obtaining authority, but also for the male to abdicate authority.
I also wonder if in the very situation where man abdicated leadership under God, we are not presented a new opportunity to stand up for biblical truth when women assert leadership over men. Instead of repeating the silence of Adam, when female leadership over males is presented as a God-given right is it not a time to say, “No, God does not allow that!”
CONCLUSION
Genesis 3:16 simply states that authority resides in the husband with a frustrated tension from the wife. That gender authority is specifically confirmed in the New Testament in I Timothy 2, which also then carries that same authority structure and practice from marriage into the Church structure.
If the authority of the husband over the wife is marked by tension as a result of the fall, does it not make sense that we will see that tension at work in the Church structure?
There is an additional verse in Genesis that makes a powerful assertion for gender authority based on purpose.
Genesis 2:18 (NASB) Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” There are many ideas of what position of authority the helper holds in this passage, but the overt assumption in any other setting is that it would be a position under authority.
The specific position of this helper is defined in 1 Corinthians 11:8-9 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake. The context of this argument is found in verse three where Paul asserts that man is the head of woman.
This interpretation in no way supports a degrading view of woman. The continuing context of the passage elaborates the special, sacred creation of that relationship.
Genesis 2:20-25 (NASB) The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”
24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
Solomon also gives beautiful expressions of the role of ‘suitable helper’ when he states, “Two are better than one…”, and the wonderful passage in Proverbs 31.
Genesis 3:6 (NASB-U) When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.
Since Eve led in this disobedience, and if there is no gender authority, then why is Adam/man ultimately held responsible for the fall?
Romans 5:14 (NASB-U) Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
1 Cor. 15:22 (NASB-U) For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
The responsibility always ends at the leader’s feet.
WHAT ABOUT EVE?
Genesis 3:16 (NASB-U) To the woman He said,
"I will greatly multiply
Your pain in childbirth,
In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he will rule over you."
The New Jerusalem Bible interprets it this way;
Genesis 3:16 (NJB) To the woman he said:
I shall give you intense pain in childbearing,
you will give birth to your children in pain.
Your yearning will be for your husband,
and he will dominate you.
What does this verse say to you?
1. Note the context. Adam, Eve and the serpent are being judged for the violation of God’s law.
2. The consequence for the woman is two fold;
A. In one of the most precious moments of a female’s life (child birth), intense
pain will be present.
B. Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you.
The first part of this judgment is not our focus, the second part is where our debate occurs. There is brief but uniform biblical information to clearly understand what is implied in this second judgment.
The word used for desire is teshuwqah, from Hebrew 7783 (shuwq) in the original sense of stretching out after; a longing: intense desire. It is used only two other times in scripture;
Genesis 4:7 (NASB-U) "If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."
Here, the ‘intense desire’ is that of sin for Cain.
Song 7:10 (NASB-U) "I am my beloved's, And his desire is for me.
In this passage, the beloved has ‘intense desire’ of love for her.
We must ask, what is the subject of the ‘intense desire’ in Genesis 3:16, “Yet your desire will be for your husband” ?
The traditional interpretation is this; The woman will have an intense desire to usurp the rule of her husband (Since the exercise of authority is the context it is used in.).
I hold this interpretation for at least four reasons.
First, because the line of verse declaring desire is directly connected with “and he will rule over you.” It is important to note that Scripture teaches that Adam already had authority over Eve. Adam’s authority was not a new consequence of Eve’s sin, her fallen nature’s response to that authority was new.
1 Corinthians 11:7-10 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
1 Timothy 2:12-13 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.
This curse indicates a shift, not in the order of authority, but the response of woman to that authority. She now had an intense desire to rule that would be frustrated.
Second, the word desire also has the closest proximity to the second use of the word (Gen. 4:7) where it is a wrong desire. The use of the word is also set in a negative context of judgment.
Third, Paul confirms that interpretation and consequence in the authority structure of gender.
1 Tim. 2:11-15 (NASB-U) A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. [12] But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. [13] For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. [14] And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. [15] But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.
Please note that in verse 13 the order of creation is first given as a reason for gender authority. Then in verse 14 Eve’s deception is given as a second reason for gender authority, and tied into New Testament application with clear consistency. It even includes the context of childbirth! It also clearly extends gender authority into the Church structure.
Fourth, I also think the truth of this judgment of tension in the exercise of authority between husband and wife is inferred in a number of biblical passages and incidents.
Proverbs 27:15 (NASB-U) A constant dripping on a day of steady rain And a contentious woman are alike;
Amos 4:1 (NASB-U) Hear this word, you cows of Bashan who are on the mountain of Samaria, who oppress the poor, who crush the needy, who say to their husbands, “Bring now, that we may drink!”
Here the sense of the female struggling to assert their will is indicated.
Certainly Delilah is an example in her devious badgering of Samson,
Judges 16:16 ( NIV ) With such nagging she prodded him day after day until he was tired to death.
I think Sarah (Pursuing offspring through her handmaiden.), Rebekah (Putting Jacob ahead of Esau.), Miriam (Seeking along with Aaron to displace Moses.) and certainly Jezebel to name a few also show examples of ungodly desires to subvert gender authority.
Col. 3:18-19 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. [19] Husbands, love your wives and do not be embittered against them.
In the context of commanding wives to submit, embitterment would be a natural reaction against an un-submitting wife.
Fifth, the unauthorized assertion of authority to encourage rebellion makes this judgment a profoundly appropriate consequence of both Eve & Adam’s sin. The desire to dominate will be unquenched in the woman, and the responsibility to lead will be unendingly challenged for the man.
Genesis 3:17 (NASB-U) Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife…”
Do not cultures throughout history confirm the truth of this tension? There is both the female desire for authority, but male authority ultimately superceding, over and over. I have even wondered if one of the effects of the fallen nature is not just the female tendency to pursue obtaining authority, but also for the male to abdicate authority.
I also wonder if in the very situation where man abdicated leadership under God, we are not presented a new opportunity to stand up for biblical truth when women assert leadership over men. Instead of repeating the silence of Adam, when female leadership over males is presented as a God-given right is it not a time to say, “No, God does not allow that!”
CONCLUSION
Genesis 3:16 simply states that authority resides in the husband with a frustrated tension from the wife. That gender authority is specifically confirmed in the New Testament in I Timothy 2, which also then carries that same authority structure and practice from marriage into the Church structure.
If the authority of the husband over the wife is marked by tension as a result of the fall, does it not make sense that we will see that tension at work in the Church structure?
There is an additional verse in Genesis that makes a powerful assertion for gender authority based on purpose.
Genesis 2:18 (NASB) Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” There are many ideas of what position of authority the helper holds in this passage, but the overt assumption in any other setting is that it would be a position under authority.
The specific position of this helper is defined in 1 Corinthians 11:8-9 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake. The context of this argument is found in verse three where Paul asserts that man is the head of woman.
This interpretation in no way supports a degrading view of woman. The continuing context of the passage elaborates the special, sacred creation of that relationship.
Genesis 2:20-25 (NASB) The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”
24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
Solomon also gives beautiful expressions of the role of ‘suitable helper’ when he states, “Two are better than one…”, and the wonderful passage in Proverbs 31.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)