At Least It’s Not A Woman Preaching, Right?

“And it came to pass, when he began to reign, as soon as he sat on his throne, that he slew all the house of Baasha: he left him not one that pisseth against a wall, neither of his kinsfolk, nor of his friends.”– 1 Kings 16:11

Nothing like a good old fashion sermon on men “who pisseth against the wall.” This dude can preach because he is a man, and by his own definition, to be a real man means pissing against the wall. So, that’s the difference between men and women! No wonder we can’t teach scripture, it’s all so clear now! :)

Did you guys know that urinals were divinely sanctioned? Who woulda thunk?

Really, could a woman do much worse than that dude?

Ok, this video is posted for strictly humorous purposes, and because I haven’t had a lot of time to work on more “meaty” posts. But I just want to make it clear that I DO NOT believe this bizarro-idea of “man-ness” is the crux of the complementarian argument or represents most complementarians in the least. In fact, I am hoping that this winner is the only one who thinks likes that. :)

But his mindset begs the question: Are our beliefs on “what makes a man a real man” distorted? Are our ideas of ideal masculinity shaped by scripture or by something like old western flicks, where men are gun-slinging, macho cowboys who pee in the wind and never shed a tear? Since the start of this series, the idea of gender roles and how they relate to or define our masculinity/femininity has consistently come up. So, I would like to know:

Which roles do you consider to be solely feminine and and solely masculine?

Which qualities do you consider to be solely female and solely male?

Or do you believe that most qualities are overlapping, but the ratio present within each sex should be distinct?

The reason I ask, is because I could not really pinpoint for myself inherent qualities (outside of the biological realm) that are solely male/female. I am sincerely curious of what the consensus is out there on this topic.

Daughters Who Claim Their Inheritance

There are three short, obscure stories within the Old Testament that give me hope for women being empowered to reclaim their full spiritual inheritance in The Kingdom of God. So certain people don’t have an aneurysm, I am not claiming that this hope is the definitive meaning of these scriptures or that they necessarily “prove” anything. They are just tiny glimmers of comfort that God has used in my own journey because I personally struggle with much of the old testament.

Some of these instances don’t seem like a big deal to those of us who live in our modern part of the world, where women possess far more rights and “worth,” than they ever had in ancient Israel. These stories made it into scripture and I believe they exist for a reason: to foreshadow a time when women, too, would be redeemed from the curse and be able to reclaim an equal inheritance with their brothers in their Father’s kingdom.

Zelophehad’s five daughters; Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirza; who defied Israel’s longstanding male-dominated tradition and approached Moses to grant them the full portion of their father’s inheritance. Their father had no son and since women were considered unworthy to own anything, the inheritance would be distributed to far-off relatives while his daughters were left destitute. This was an ugly reality for families with no male heir. So, they waltzed up to Moses and said, “Why should our father’s name disappear from his clan because he had no son? Give us property among our father’s relatives.” (Numbers 27:4).

This is a remarkable and revolutionary act for women in ancient Israel to risk. They are not only asking for the inheritance that a son would get, but are questioning the logic of Israel’s law! Talk about assertive eh? Laws in theocratic Israel were different from the law of secular countries, they were equated with God’s truth. So this is an incredibly ballsy move! Moses actually took these bold women seriously and inquired of the Lord about what to do.

God gives an amazing reply:

Numbers 27:5-8

“So Moses brought their case before the LORD and the LORD said to him, ‘What Zelophehad’s daughters are saying is right. You must certainly give them property as an inheritance among their father’s relatives and turn their father’s inheritance over to them. Further, you shall speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘If a man dies and has no son, then you shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter. ‘”

J. Lee Grady expounds on this passage:

“In that moment, God contradicted centuries of prejudice and wrong-headed tradition. He made it clear that in His kingdom, women are not afterthoughts or domestic appendages…When God looks at redeemed mankind through the blood of Jesus Christ, He does not limit women from full participation in His kingdom.”

So, God gives Zelophehad’s daughters their inheritance, demonstrating His tender concerns for their well being and their due as human beings. God commands that Israel’s legal code be changed as a result of Zelophehad’s daughters, legislating that daughters were to receive the full inheritance, if the father had no sons. Not exactly what we would consider today to be full equality, but for a time when women weren’t considered worthy to own anything, this was a miraculously liberating development. Their courage benefited many other women, who would have been “disowned” and left with nothing. If Moses is a picture of Christ, then him bringing these women’s case before the Lord becomes all the more meaningful.

In Joshua 15:18-19, we meet Achsah, the daughter of Caleb. When Caleb acquires a lush portion of land in Judah, his daughter asks him for part of land. Again, in a time when women were traditionally not permitted to own anything, let alone property, this is shockingly bold. Caleb gives her the land of Negev. Achsah then asks for more: “Give me a blessing since you have given me the land of Negev, give me also springs of water.” So Caleb gives her the “upper and lower springs.” His daughter receives a triple portion, above and beyond what she asks for. She receives her own land, and two sets of springs. Having access to fresh water was considered a great luxury in ancient times. The story of Caleb and Achsah paints a beautiful picture of a father’s love for his daughter, a love that empowers her.

And my favorite instance is found in Job 42: 12-15.

The LORD blessed the latter part of Job’s life more than the first. He had fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand camels, a thousand yoke of oxen and a thousand donkeys. And he also had seven sons and three daughters. The first daughter he named Jemimah, the second Keziah and the third Keren-Happuch. Nowhere in all the land were there found women as beautiful as Job’s daughters, and their father granted them an inheritance along with their brothers.

Job, considered to be one of the most righteous men of all time, thought it best to bestow his inheritance upon both his sons and daughters, which was virtually unheard of in ancient times. If Job is a picture of Christ, the fact that he chose to empower all of his children with the same opportunities and resources, with a full inheritance, is significant, at least to me.

All these stories reveal the subtle theme of a father’s love for his children and how that love takes shape. Jesus came to redeem us, to restore humanity to this beautiful parent/child relationship, to live out a full inheritance in His Kingdom. Let’s empower all of God’s children to rise up and take it, and let the Spirit determine how this inheritance takes shape, not our reproductive organs.

On To The New Testament…

Miriam: The First Worship Leader

I’m pretty sure that most moderate-complementarian churches allow women to hold the position of head worship leader, but since enough complementarian churches do not, and Miriam is the first woman in scripture to be given the title prophetess, her story is worth telling.

Miriam, sister of Aaron and Moses, is called a prophetess (Exodus 15:20) and leader (Micah 6:4).

God declares through Micah that He sent “Moses to lead you [Israel], and also Aaron and Miriam.”

Miriam also leads the Israelites in their first service of worship as a free people. At first glance, the text would appear to indicate that Miriam is only leading other women, but that is because of our sometimes limited English language.

Shawna R.B. Atteberry of The Voice: Biblical and Theological Resources For Growing Christians provides a textual analysis based on the original language:

In verse 20, Miriam apparently leads the women in dancing and celebrating Yahweh’s victory. However, the imperative “sing” [Heb: shiru] is a masculine plural form (not feminine). Since Hebrew uses masculine forms for mixed gender groups, this implies that she led all the people in celebrating their victory and worshipping Yahweh, and not just the women.

Just another example of a woman of God leading both men and women.

Huldah: The Lost Prophetess

How many of you have honestly heard of Huldah?

Even though her story is intertwined with Josiah, a notorious and good king of Israel, she is rarely mentioned.

Paganism swept over Israel and reigned supreme for over fifty years. When Josiah became King, he began a long journey of undoing the wickedness done by previous kings. His “clergy” stumbled upon the Book of the Law, hidden in the temple (2 Chronicles tells us this book was from the law of Moses, many believe it to be a lost segment of Dueteronomy). The people had forgotten God’s Law and turned their hearts to other gods. The two kings prior to Josiah were perhaps the most wicked in all of Israel’s history, leading their nation into idolatry, witchcraft, human sacrifice, temple prostitution, and other heinous practices. When the words in the book were read out loud, Josiah tores his clothes and repented. Josiah then sent the High Priest Hilkiah to bring the book of the law to one of God’s faithful:

“Go and inquire of the LORD for me and for the people and for all Judah about what is written in this book that has been found” (2 Kings 22:13, emphasis added).

So Hilkiah brings the book to Huldah, a prophetess and wife of Shallum (another married women who holds a position of spiritual authority), who remained faithful in one of Israel’s darkest moments in history. She interpreted the words in the book and delivered a prophetic message to Hilkiah, the high priest, for King Josiah. So, they took scripture to a woman to find out what it meant….interesting. I’ll refrain from pointing out the obvious implications of this…Oh, who am I kidding? She’s teaching them scripture! Men, in leadership no less, are asking a woman to tell them what the words of the book mean and what they need to do next! Sorry, I just couldn’t resist. :)

Huldah then speaks for God:

“Tell the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of the LORD, ‘This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says concerning the words you heard: Because your heart was responsive and you humbled yourself before the LORD when you heard what I have spoken against this place and its people, that they would become accursed and laid waste, and because you tore your robes and wept in my presence, I have heard you,’ declares the LORD.”–2 Kings 22:18-19

Read the entire story here: 2 Kings 22 or 2 Chronicles 34

So we have a king, a high priest, and other men holding a position of spiritual authority seeking spiritual direction from a woman. They even receive a blessing from the Lord because they humbled themselves and listened to what God has spoken through her.

She faithfully delivered the words God gave to her. Luckily, these men were not deluded by pride and could humbly receive the commands of God via woman.J. Lee Grady makes this correlation:

“It is odd that a group of spiritual leaders operating under the Old Covenant in Israel looked to an anointed woman of God for advice when some Christian leaders today–in the New Covenant age–would consider Huldah ‘out of order’ for assuming a place of influence in the church.”

Yet again, we have a woman, Huldah, who throws a wrench in rigid complementarians’ “clean-cut” theology.

Deborah: A Fundamentalist’s Worst Nightmare!

Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites came to her to have their disputes decided.”–Judges 4:4-5

Before I start posting on specific bible verses that seem to bar women from serving in all levels of ministry, I want to look at some unique women in the Bible, who break apart our nice, neat, gender-separated boxes.

The story of Deborah, a biblical heroine, has devolved into a passing mention in many evangelical circles, and in more fundamental circles, she’s been deemed “a reproach,” only used by God to shame men because all the men of Israel apparently refused God’s call to fulfill His work. That’s right, Deborah must be the bottom of the barrel, God’s last choice, simply because she lacked a penis. But this viewpoint does not hold up under honest evaluation of biblical texts. Hence, the reason why Deborah’s story is rarely taught in depth within these circles.

Some Facts about Deborah

• She most likely lived between 1209 and 1169 B.C.
• She was a judge, prophetess, and leader called by God, who gave Israel both civil and spiritual direction. Judges 4 and 5 says Deborah “sends,” “summons”, and “COMMANDS” the people (men and women), telling them God’s will and direction.
• She lead Israel, possibly for forty years.
• She settled disputes among her people.
• She was respected by all the people.
• The land had peace for forty years due to her ministry (Judges 4 and 5).
• She governed Israel by prophetic oracles.
• Deborah led 10,000 troops into battle against the oppressive Canaanites.
• She was the instrument God used to deliver Israel from her enemies and return the nation back to God.
• Deborah called upon kings and princes to give thanks to God for what He had done.

Another little overlooked fact about Deborah is that she was married. This is a significant detail, because married women, above all other women, have the most restrictions placed upon them. Whether we believe a married woman’s purpose is to only aid her husband’s ambitions or that they must solely be a housewife, Deborah defies all our expectations of what a married woman (possibly with children) should be.

So, why does Deborah hold this position of authority and not her husband? God called her and not him, that’s why. Fancy that! The fact that Deborah has a vagina instead of a penis does not preclude her from being God’s chosen spokesperson: a brave, faithful, civil AND spiritual leader of Israel and servant of the Most High. We do not know how old Deborah is at this time or whether or not she had any children. My guess would be that she did in fact have children, because barren women were looked upon as “cursed.” These men humbled their male pride long enough to listen to the wisdom of God via woman, but I’m pretty sure doing that for a barren woman might be too much to ask. :)

The fact that Deborah was married, with no “ruling” husband in sight, affirms the fact that Genesis 3:16, where God says a man will rule over his wife, is descriptive and NOT prescriptive (See previous post: Adam and Eve: The First Egalitarians?) If man ruling over his wife had been God’s will (as oppose to the inevitable consequence of sin), even after the fall, then Deborah’s position would not be in line with God’s “command.”

And yet here we have a married woman stepping out into public service, exercising national and spiritual authority, leading battles, commanding, summoning, sending, and instructing men and women on a myriad of earthly and spiritual matters. She does not even consult her husband before leading an entire nation into battle: a battle that was viewed as a suicide mission, since Israel’s army was vastly outnumbered.

Now Barak, the military general who refused to go to battle without Deborah by his side, gets a lot of flack for needing a woman to accompany him in battle. But his downfall was not that he depended on a woman to be at his side, but that he lacked faith in God’s message of victory to go it alone. Had Samuel or Joshua been in Deborah’s place and Barak demanded they go with him, his fate would have been the same: Sisera (their enemy) would have still been delivered over to Jael, a gentile woman. Barak’s dilemma was a faith issue, not a gender issue. However, we should give Barak some credit for recognizing Deborah’s anointing and wanting her near by.

Deborah, this remarkable prophetess and Judge of Israel, defies nearly every restriction placed upon the “ideal” woman of faith. She does not fit neatly into the quiet-submissive-barefoot-and-pregnant-housewife-that-would-never-dare-exercise-authority box. She’s assertive, strong, and forthright. She holds the position of judge, prophet, and military commander (talk about a career gal, eh?). Her path is determined by God, not by the status quo or social constructs. She was the God-appointed leader of Israel, to whom MEN, powerful men, came to receive spiritual direction, authoritative earthly decisions, and orders from God. All Deborah prophesied came to pass. Deborah’s faith and leadership not only delivered Israel from the oppression of the Canaanites, but restored Israel SPIRITUALLY to God.

Isn’t it ironic how Deborah spoke FOR God to men and women with authority and her story is considered to be a part of God’s Word, the Bible, yet a woman today (in most evangelical church settings) could not stand behind a pulpit and teach the body about it?

When will we tear down the barriers that keep all of God’s children from going deeper with God and each other? When will we submit ourselves to God and one another, not on the basis of gender, but on the basis of human and spiritual equality, all being made uniquely in the image of God with gifts to use? When will we put our faith in the Holy Spirit’s taboo and surprising guidance (Deborah’s story is nothing if not taboo), instead of trying to enforce blanket admonishments on people of faith?

Eve: The Helpmeet

“Until Eve arrived, this was a man’s world.” – Richard Armour

Eve has been a controversial figure throughout history. Theologians have argued for centuries over why God created her, what purpose she was to serve, if she was innately inferior, and as of late, if she possesses a what I like to call, “conditional equality,” meaning Eve (and therefore all womankind) is equal in worth, but limited in ministry, leadership, and authority.

The basis for “conditional equality” (when referring to Adam and Eve) is the belief that the purpose of Eve’s creation was solely for Adam’s benefit–solely to be of service to him because God declares Eve will be a help to Adam or his “help meet.”

Since the bible calls Eve a “help meet,” it has been assumed that she was created as a subservient being to man and for the sole purpose of aiding his will, ambitions, and desires. In Genesis, Eve is called ezer, a Hebrew word, and while some versions translate this word as “help meet” or “helper,” other versions translate ezer as “partner” or “companion” because in English, “helper” usually connotates subservience or a subordinate role. However, the Hebrew word ezer carries no such connotation. Ezer implies deep intimacy and partnership. Ezer is formed from two root words, one meaning “strength” and the other “power.” Ironically, the same word ezer is used to describe God 17 times in the Old Testament including: Duet. 33:7, 26, 29; Psalm 33:20, 70:5, 115:9-11 and 146:5. In the New Testament, the same word is used to describe the Holy Spirit (John 14-16). We would never assume that because God is called our “helper” that He is “under us,” subjugated to us, exists solely for us or that “helper” is His only role. The same is to be true of Eve.

J. Lee Grady, an ordained minister, author, and leader of The Mordecai Project, articulated this concept well:“The fact that Eve was presented to Adam to help him does make her inferior. One the contrary, God had already said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone,” acknowledging that Adam was in an inferior condition without a mate. In the ideal marriage, a wife is a help to her husband and he is a help to her in return. Their need for each other and their deep sense of mutual dependence are what make marriage so satisfying…Marriage is not about who is in control or who serves whom. It is about becoming one.”

In my last post: Adam and Eve: The First Egalitarians? I demonstrated how Adam and Eve were called by God to rule and subdue the earth together without a gender hierarchy. Adam’s first words upon seeing Eve further confirm, not only her equal worth, but her equal capability to live out their shared-calling, to commune with God and to fill, subdue, and rule the earth.

“The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him…” But for Adam, no suitable helper was found. 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.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.”--. Genesis 2:18-24

Adam immediately recognizes his perfect match, whose likeness (different than sameness) allows him to experience intimacy on all levels. She, too, is made in the image of God, fully capable of carrying out the calling God gives to both of them in Genesis 1:26-28. Why would Adam rejoice about being untied as one flesh (which has massive implications) with someone who existed solely to aid him and was less qualified spiritually, mentally, and physically? Doesn’t it make more sense to be united with someone with whom you share mutual dependence, intimacy, and capability; as partners who mutually enhance each other’s individuality, calling, and full potential? Both “lead” and both “help.” These concepts are not mutually exclusive.

For many, Eve’s identity is solely wrapped up in her relationship to Adam. And while she was indeed created to complement Adam, Adam also complements her. More importantly, both Adam and Eve were ultimately created to commune with God. This is a crucial biblical truth because it ties Adam’s and Eve’s identities to their Creator, independent of each other. This does not negate Eve’s calling to Adam, but broadens her calling to embrace and live out the highest of all commandments, the commandments upon which Jesus declared, “hang all of the Law and Prophets.” Adam and Eve were created and called to love God with all their heart, soul, mind and strength and love each other as they loved themselves. Think of Adam’s words: “Bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh, …” He would love Eve as his own body or self, which has a myriad of implications that will be discussed in another post.

The First Couple mirrored Jesus’ greatest commandments, which all believers find their complete identity and purpose in. This is not to say that Adam and Eve didn’t need each other. On the contrary, this truth enhances their need for each other. Their unique connections and communions with God are what makes them beneficial to each other and allows them to impart godly wisdom and insight to each other. This enables them to become one mentally, physically, and spiritually. It is precisely this equally shared-capacity that makes men and women perfectly complementary to each other.

For further analysis on this topic, Allison Young from Christians For Biblical Equality put together this informative article, briefly walking through the creation story and it’s implications.

Next Post: Deborah: A Fundamentalist’s Worst Nightmare

Adam and Eve: The First Egalitarians?

“Eve was not taken out of Adam’s head to top him, neither out of his feet to be trampled on by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected by him, and near his heart to be loved by him.”–Matthew Henry

Since a Christian woman’s identity and function are irreversibly intertwined with the idea of gender roles, we must examine what gender roles are: what do they entail? Do they enforce limitations? Are they all-time binding? What was God’s original intent for the sexes?

To adequately examine biblical gender roles, we must take a holistic look at scripture and start at the very beginning. So, what do Adam and Eve tell us about gender roles? Well, I’m glad you asked. :)

Genesis is a fascinating book for many reasons, but the tale of the first man and woman is especially telling. The Creation account portrays the ideal purpose and function of man and woman. Unfortunately, Adam and Eve’s failure overshadows their brief time living in God’s ideal–in perfect unity and harmony with Him, each other, and all of creation. As a result, we glorify the altered relationship between man and woman that came as a result of the fall and hold it up as God’s ordained model. One of the greatest misconceptions about the creation account is that a divine gender hierarchy which places women “under” men was seamlessly instituted from the moment Eve was created. This is simply not so.

The Fall instituted a plethora of consequences—a deteriorating creation, death, separation from God, rampant sin, and the dominance of men over women (“a man will rule over his wife…”). Since this ugly change is part of the curse, we must conclude that male domination or gender hierarchy was NOT part of God’s original plan and did not exist between Adam and Eve prior to the fall, since it is an explicitly new development existing because of sin. The Good News of the Gospel is that Christ, the second Adam, came and died to restore all of us, men and women alike, to God’s original design.

Biblical Scholar Phyllis Trible notes that:

“The Fall created an inequality in the family relationship that had not existed before. And if Christ has become a curse for us (Gal. 3:13), then that curse of inequality is undone in Him.”

God reveals the terms of His ideal plan in Genesis 1: 26-28. Keep in mind that the word “man” here is not synonymous with male, but mankind and humanity.

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

Notice that God commands BOTH Adam and Eve to rule the earth and over all creation. God didn’t say, “Adam, you are to rule and Eve, well, you can go do some dishes, maybe fold a little laundry…” They were both called to rule, complementing each other, supporting each other, serving each other, sacrificing for the other, and deferring to each other.

Alas, sin stripped humans of this inheritance. The implications of the fall, that mankind would be stuck with a sinful nature, indicates the stronger would inevitably exploit and dominate the weaker and more vulnerable. This is not exclusive to gender, but hierarchies also developed between races, the wealthy and poor, the powerful and the weak, and so forth. When God declares that “a man will rule over his wife,” in Genesis 3:16, it’s important to make the distinction between description and prescription, between what will happen and what should happen. All sorts of horrible consequences came about because of the fall: death, separation from God, murder, rape, incest, oppression, abuse, perversion, etc. None of these are God-ordained, but the unfortunate consequence of free will (sorry Calvinists!). And all of which, Christ came to redeem. He bore the curse of the fall, took it upon himself to free us from lives of sin and restore humanity to God’s original design, a relationship with our Creator and spiritual equality among His people. We won’t come fully into that until Christ returns, but it begins now.

John Temple Bristow, a new testament scholar, elaborates on the realities of the Fall:

If this kind of marital relationship, far from being divinely ordered, is the product of sin and the curse, then it is to be avoided rather than commended. It is characteristic of marriage outside of God’s grace. To prescribe this kind of relationship is to advocate living under the penalty of sin imposed upon Adam and Eve, as if Christ brought nothing new to marriage relationships.”

Part of the redemption we find in Jesus is “the great reconciliation.” Our spiritual place has been restored with God and each other. Just as we are no longer alienated from God through Jesus’ death on the cross, we are no longer under the curse that creates the dysfunctional hierarchies between races, socio-economic classes, and the sexes. Yet, we are hesitant to claim and live out humanity’s original calling that Christ paved the way back to.

Redemption is a multidimensional, beautiful truth of the gospel that invades every area of our lives.

Next post: “Eve, The Help Meet,” which will explore who Eve is and why she was created.

Where Do Women Belong?

“Never make a principle out of your experience. Allow God to be as original with other people as He is with you.” -Oswald Chambers

Hey All! My name is Tia Lynn and I blog over at Abandon Image. Linda, this site’s gracious creator, asked if I’d cross post my ongoing series on biblical equality. March is Women’s History Month, so it’s a perfect time to address this very important topic. 

The last few months I have been researching biblical equality as it pertains to the roles within marriage and roles within public church life. I absorbed so much information from both complementarian and egalitarian camps that my brain is starting to seep out of my ears. However, I have gained some imperative insight into the Bible’s most bizarre and difficult verses to interpret from a consistent, holistic-scriptural-perspective, taking cultural and historical contexts, as well as original language into account. Since there is SO much information on the subject of women in church leadership and gender roles within a marriage (and society), I will be putting together a series of posts on various topics. So stay tuned!

For now, I will leave you with a summary of the beliefs of both complementarianism and egalitarianism for clarity purposes.

Christian Egalitarianism:

Derived from the French word égal, meaning equal or level, also known as biblical equality, is a recent adaptation of the historic moral doctrine of Egalitarianism which holds that people should be treated as equals. Ultimately, Egalitarianism holds that all human persons are equal in fundamental worth and moral status.

Christian Egalitarianism holds that all people are equal before God and in Christ. All have equal responsibility to use their gifts and obey their calling to the glory of God. God freely calls believers to roles and ministries without regard to class, gender, or race.

According to Christian Egalitarianism, gender equality in Christian church leadership (including pastors) and in Christian marriage is biblically sound. Its theological foundations are interpretations of the teachings and example of Jesus Christ and other New Testament principles. It refers to the biblically-based belief that gender, in and of itself, neither privileges nor curtails a believer’s gifting or calling to any ministry in the church or home. It does not imply that women and men are identical or undifferentiated. Christian Egalitarianism affirms that God designed men and women to complement and benefit one another.

Complementarianism

Complementarianism is a term to describe a theological view held by some Christians that differing, non-overlapping roles between men and women, manifested in marriage, church leadership, and elsewhere, is biblically required. The term Complementarian was coined in recent years and largely replaces today what previously was known as the Traditionalist or Hierarchical view of gender relationships. It comes from the tenet that men and women are designed to complement one another. The opposing viewpoint is Christian egalitarianism which maintains that there are no biblically-required distinctions between men and women in marriage, church leadership, or elsewhere.Complementarianism holds that “God has created men and women equal in their essential dignity and human personhood, but different and complementary in function with male headship in the home and in the Church.” Unlike the historic Christian Traditionalist or Hierarchical patriarchal perspective of gender relationships, complementarianism maintains that men and women are equal in the sense that they bear God’s image equally. But with respect to roles in the church and in marriage, gender-based differences determine or restrict the roles appropriate for each. Specifically, there are requirements of men, and restrictions on women.

The complementarian position has clear implications for the ordination of women as well as for Christian views of marriage. Men are expected to take spiritual responsibility, often called headship, for leadership in the home and in the church. Women are restricted from holding the teaching office of the church and from spiritual leadership in the home and in marriage.

a series on women’s biblical issues

we’re in for a treat. the series i mentioned that tia lynn is doing on her blog abandon image is going to be crossposted here. she’s doing such a great job writing about women’s roles from a scriptural perspective that i wanted you all to have a chance to interact with her posts. so stay tuned. they will be up and running shortly.

when i started this group blog i contacted julie clawson of emerging women (she was my inspiration to start this blog :) but i had no idea how many people would find this blog from both her and makeesha contributing here. it’s wonderful if not a bit overwhelming. a bigs thanks to them both.

besides having a place where we can meet and talk about these issues my desire is that christian women and men would know that scripture does in fact support women having the freedom of equality with men–which doesn’t mean sameness–to fulfill their God-given roles and utilize their gifts in all spheres of their lives. so without further adieu we will take a look at what scripture really says about men and women.

linda

the world handicapped by half

**crosspost from my blog

This came in my reader today, it’s fantastic and I encourage you to read the whole thing. 

A world whose favored thesis just a few years ago read, “the personal is political” is now chasing the idea that “the global is local.” Conferences on global change, global development, global needs, global politics, global economics and global agendas swirl around the planet.And yet, little changes.

The question is why? And the answer is hiding in plain sight.These conferences will never solve the major problems facing the human community because half the human community is being left out of the conversation. Half the wisdom of the world is being ignored. Half the concerns of the human race are not even being taken into consideration. Half the resources of the world, women, are not being tapped to solve the problems that face us all.Both halves are suffering from our failure to approach both problems and solutions from the vantage point of the entire human race.

The fact is that the experience and insights of women are glaringly and regularly absent from global conferences that purport to be concerned with both the problems the world faces and their possible solutions.

We are not going to change the world by repeating old and ineffective answers over and over again while leaving new ones out of consideration.

The world’s greatest, untapped alternative resource: women | National Catholic Reporter Conversation Cafe

* note: when I say “church” in the following piece, I mean the church with which I have experience, the conservative, evangelical church in America.

I have had women ask me why I care so much about women being in leadership positions in churches, they often will say things like “we should be humble and we shouldn’t care about titles anyway”.  So I will say that this is the main reason why I insist on continuing to push back the patriarchalism (aka complementarianism) that still dominates the American Christian landscape.

We as Christians should be the loudest voice for justice and mercy, we should be the loudest voice in ensuring that women around the world give their voices wings, we cannot do this when our churches are run by elder boards that are 100% male, when the person “up front” is always male and when 99% of what goes on in the church is ultimate determined by those “lucky” enough to be born with reproductive organs on the outside. In the best case scenario, those men will at least pay attention to the women in their congregations, the Sunday School teachers, the wives of the leaders, the singers, etc. But more often than not, churches are crippled by losing the input, leadership and gifts of half of their population.

Ultimately, it’s more important to me that women around the globe are heard so they and their children can receive humane treatment, clean water, shelter and property rights, decent health care and enough food to sustain them and my little annoying experiences in the American church pale in comparison to those issues -  however, in order to care about those issues, I must also address the manipulation of Scripture for the benefit of male power in my local area of influence – the Christian church, so that women here can help women there.

I genuinely believe that one of the major reasons women and children concerns across the globe are not given proper attention in our local churches is because the decisions about where the money goes and what the preaching is about are made by primarily and often exclusively by men. I believe this is a major reason why the mainline has been better at addressing these issues esp. in the last couple of decades – they have had more of a female presence in the decision-making processes.

I have also had women ask why I don’t just leave evangelicalism for good and join a group that embraces women more fully and then leave conservative evangelicals to their own devices – that’s a very simplistic question in a very complex issue. The main answer to that is because, as in politics, I’m not a one issue voter. But trust me, if it weren’t so hard to get ordained in most mainline denominations, I would probably do just that.

In this week of women, I want to challenge my women readers to give their voice wings, to find a cause where they can help other women find their voice and I want to challenge men to critique their own views of women, power, leadership, etc. in the religious and secular world as well as the home.

And to my fellow women – SHINE ON!

Tags: feminism, women, joan chittister, equity