Tag Archives: gender roles

What does the creation story tell us about gender differences?

28 Replies

15_gn02_25So let’s go back to the beginning.

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1:27)

Two different sexes, both made in the image of God. (which shows us that we’re not talking about the physical image of God… but we won’t follow that tangent)

“the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed.” (Genesis 2:7–8)
“The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.” (Genesis 2:15)

In Genesis 1, “man” referred to both male and female. In Genesis 2, it refers to male. Paul saw significance to the order in which man and woman were created. (1 Timothy 2:13; Ephesians 5:23)

Man is put in the garden to work it and take care of it.

“The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”” (Genesis 2:18)
“So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.”” (Genesis 2:21–23)

Woman is created as a “suitable helper.” She was the solution to the problem of man being alone. She was created as his complement, not as his servant. She fulfilled his need for companionship in a way which no animal could do.

“When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.” (Genesis 3:6–7)

Again, worth noting that Paul saw significance in the fact that the woman was the one who was deceived by the serpent. (1 Timothy 2:14)

“Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. But the LORD God called to the man, “Where are you?”” (Genesis 3:8–9)

Here God apparently makes a mistake. Failing to remember the need to be gender inclusive, he calls to the man, even though the text emphasizes that the man and his wife were together.

It’s an important text. This is not a consequence of the fall; that comes in a moment. God held the man responsible for what was going on and expected him to answer for it. That was the order in Eden. Not domination. Responsibility.

“To the woman he said, “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it,’ “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.”” (Genesis 3:16–19)

Man had been given the task of working the garden. That task became more difficult. Could we not say that God did the same with the woman, making her appointed task more difficult? The next verse says that Adam called the woman Eve because she would be mother of all living things. Was that merely a consequence of the fall?

One consequence of the fall was the idea that man would rule over woman. It’s interesting to note that that’s precisely the leadership style that Jesus forbade for his followers. And it’s interesting that in the passages where Paul refers to the creation story, he doesn’t make reference to this point. That’s not why men are given the responsibility of leadership. That happened before the fall.

Creation paints a picture of equality. It also paints a picture of different tasks for men and for women.

Image from The Brick Testament

Does Galatians 3:28 provide the final word on gender roles in the church?

11 Replies

Bathroom-gender-signWhen discussing gender roles, one passage is often played as a bit of a trump card. It’s the magnificent statement by Paul in the third chapter of Galatians, where he affirms the equality of every Christian:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek,
slave nor free,
male nor female,
for you are all
one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

There it is, for all to see. Gender differences are wiped out, they claim. I definitely agree. As far as access to salvation is concerned (Paul’s concern in this context), there is no difference between the genders.

Most scholars consider Galatians to be one of Paul’s earliest writings, if not the first. Some place the Thessalonian letters earlier. The vast majority agree that the following come later:

  • Paul’s discussion of gender roles in 1 Corinthians 11
  • Paul’s description of gender differences in Ephesians 5
  • Paul’s specification of male-only elderships in Titus 1 and 1 Timothy 3
  • Paul’s discussion of gender roles in Titus 2
  • Paul’s teaching about widows (and not widowers) in 1 Timothy 5

I’ve intentionally avoided “the two passages,” though there’s no valid reason to ignore the fact that instructions are given considering the different genders in 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2.

Let’s discuss the extent to which there is to be a differentiation between genders today. Let’s discuss how men and women can each function within the modern church. But let’s not pretend that Galatians 3:28 did something that Paul never intended it to do: obliterate the differences between men and women. (And please stop saying that there are only two passages that discuss limiting what women do in the church)

Does Paul go against the rest of the Bible on the topic of gender roles?

3 Replies

Bible by fireplaceOne of the myths in the debate on gender roles is the idea that the weight of the biblical record supports full egalitarianism, but two verses written by Paul have led churches to discriminate against women. That’s not the case at all.

Another debate which courses through our fellowship is the topic of instrumental music. In that case, instruments were clearly accepted in the Old Testament; the case must be made, therefore, as to why that changed (or didn’t) in the New Testament. [Another topic for another day]

That’s not how it is with gender roles. As we’ve discussed this week, the bulk of the biblical record argues for a difference between what men and women do. There are exceptions, few and easily counted. There’s been a furor this week about the ratio of women speakers to men speakers in Christian conferences. One blogger calculated that 19% of the speakers are women. The percentage of women in leadership roles in the Bible is far lower than that, even if we include ungodly women like Jezebel and Athaliah.

The burden of proof, so to speak, is on those that want to show a marked change in policy. The weight of the biblical record, not to mention church history, is against them. Don’t think that by dealing with Paul’s remarks, we’ve settled the issue. There’s much more to be looked at and studied.

Let me repeat what I said on Wednesday: I think women have often been mistreated, abused, and wrongfully treated as second-class citizens of the Kingdom. I think that the whats and hows of their participation in the Body need to be examined with an open mind.

I just don’t want to start the process with misconceptions.

Gender roles and the cultures of the Bible

5 Replies

Bible by fireplaceContinuing yesterday’s discussion about the interaction between Scripture and the culture in which it was written, I think we need to recognize that there was some interaction. I think that the Bible talks about many natural things in ways that people would understand, such as references to the four corners of the earth, to storehouses of hail, and to the sun standing still. The Bible expresses things in ways that the original readers could understand.

I think there are many things in the Law of Moses that reflect the culture in which they were living. Many of the prohibitions of that law had to do with things which the nations around them were practicing. Some of those are identified as such, others aren’t.

In a missions class with Dr. Ed Mathews, he made the point that one way we can identify teachings that transcend cultures is to look at things in the Bible that are taught consistently in different cultural settings. And, although people talk about “the culture surrounding the New Testament,” the fact is that the New Testament was written to people in different cultural settings by people with different cultural backgrounds. Galatia was not like Rome. It definitely wasn’t like Jerusalem. Crete and Ephesus were not the same. There were similarities throughout the Roman Empire, yet there were great differences.

Look at how Paul was misunderstood in Lystra. That time was because of language. Then he was misinterpreted in Athens, even though he spoke the same language. The worldview of the Athenians was very different from Paul’s.

If we take the Bible as a whole, then we get still more cultural settings. The world of Genesis differs from the world of the judges; life in Egypt was not like life in Babylonia.

Some of those settings were completely male dominated. As Jr pointed out in the comments yesterday, other cultures gave much more public participation to women.

In none of those settings does God call for egalitarian leadership. He does specify male leadership on several occasions. We see the exception being practiced here and there, but never taught explicitly.

I think women have often been mistreated, abused, and wrongfully treated as second-class citizens of the Kingdom. I think that the whats and hows of their participation in the Body need to be examined with an open mind. But I’m not ready to join those who say, like Mark Love, “I am for full gender equality in congregational practice. Period. Everything. Preach. Teach. Eldering.” I don’t think that’s what we see in Scripture.

The Bible, Culture and Gender Roles

8 Replies

Bible by fireplaceAll right, let’s get back to the discussion of gender roles in the church. Thanks for the discussion last time; special thanks to those who recruited others to join the conversation.

One big issue that has to be dealt with is the Bible’s relationship with its historical and cultural context, especially when it comes to gender roles. It’s hard to deny that the Bible paints a male-dominated picture of the world. You find the occasional queen, prophetess, and female judge, but overwhelmingly, it’s a man’s world. So, in such a testosterone-laden context, was the Bible merely a product of that society or did it help shape it?

It’s the question I asked before: did the Law prohibit pork because the Jews didn’t eat it or did the Jews refrain from pork because the Law prohibited it? Did the Mosaic Law establish a system of male leadership because of the society the Hebrews lived in or did the Law seek to shape the Israelites into the society he wanted?

More specifically for us Christians, when Jesus chose only men to be among the Twelve, was that a concession to society or an example for the church? When Paul told Timothy and Titus to appoint men as elders, was that merely a reflection of the world Paul knew or was that an inspired directive? (we can also ask if that was only for Ephesus and Crete or if other churches followed that practice)

I’d like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

graphic from CreationSwap.com