Introduction
This essay was developed from preparation for a four-week Bible study.
The members of the original study group were unmarried men and women ages
18-29. Several group members requested the teaching notes, so I fleshed them
out into this essay for clarity.
Understanding the Bible’s teachings on
gender is foundational for understanding God’s plan for marriage and family,
order and administration within the church, and a number of other aspects of
our identity and relationships in the Lord. Given the propensity for this topic
to produce controversy and misunderstandings, we’ll first review some basic
assumptions about understanding the Bible, explore the fundamentals of what the
Bible says about male and female gender, discuss biblical perspectives on
sexuality, and then work out a scriptural understanding of gender roles in the
family and church.
Background Assumptions
It is always good to ground any study of
Scripture in sound hermeneutics, but this is especially true when seeking to
understand teaching that is prone to misrepresentation in both church and
society, and a teaching that underpins much of our identity in relation to God,
the church, and one another. Several basic principles of sound biblical
interpretation that I find helpful to keep in mind are:
1. Allow the Bible to interpret the Bible
2. Give primacy to directly stated commands and explanations and cling
tightly to these truths (especially those repeated across Scripture)
3. Seek to understand the context of a teaching: how a verse fits into a
passage, a passage within a book, a book within the rest of Scripture; how the
teaching fits into the context of other teachings on the topic (see principle
1, above) and how it fits into its literary and historical context
4. Repeated themes, allusions, allegories, and the like can provide useful
enrichment of our understanding of Scripture, but these muse be subordinate to
clear and direct teaching (so hold loosely to these ideas, but do not neglect
them)
5. Romans 1 teaches us that much can be known about God by observing His
creation. But, again, these principles must be interpreted against clear
teaching in Scripture, and should not be the basis for any significant
theological conclusion.
If we fail at any of the above steps, we
will quickly and certainly arrive at a “Christianish“ theology. It may sound
good and correct, but it is ultimately at variance with Scripture. In
Christianish theology, we approach Scripture with our worldview guiding our
interpretation. This, in turn, often results in neglecting teachings that do
not conform to our existing biases and focusing on teachings that do. Many of
the great tragedies of Christendom were perpetrated under the justifications of
Christianish theology. At a personal level, Christianish theology results in a
person who claims citizenship in the kingdom of Christ, but whose way of
thinking and living varies little from that of the world and culture around
them. Ultimately we are all prone toward Christianish theology, because
worldview is an incredibly powerful force.
The alternative is to approach Scripture in
a manner that recognizes its authority for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and
training us in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16), and to allow it to transform us
by renewing our minds (Romans 12:2). As we approach Scripture to understand a
topic that comes with so much cultural baggage, it is imperative that we do so
with a sense of humility and a willingness to allow Scripture to transform our
way of thinking. (A good exercise that helps me be mindful of the God of
Scripture is to read and reflect on Job 38. Job had been receiving a lot of
advice that was “Christianish” in nature, and in chapter 38 God seeks to reboot
Job’s theological perspective. You might pause here and read and reflect on it
now before continuing.)
My goal here is to allow Scripture to speak
for itself. As you proceed, I encourage you to read each verse or passage for
yourself and reflect on it before reading my comments. Also, while I strive to
be thorough, this is not meant to be an exhaustive treatment of the topic. Our
focus is on reviewing a good cross-section of Scripture to lay a foundation for
thinking about gender from God’s perspective.
Foundational Principles from First Woman and Man
In Genesis 1:26-28, we learn:
· Male and female both created in God’s image
· Male and female both ordered to be fruitful and multiply
· Male and female both given dominion over created things
Read Genesis 2:7 & 21-23. Compare how
God created the first male and how God created the first female. What was
similar, what was different? Why were the methods different?
Here we learn:
· Male was created from two components: dust of the earth and breath of
God, giving us our temporal and our eternal natures
· There was nothing wrong with Adam, but God declared it was “not good”
for him to be alone (and the animals, plants, and everything else in creation
did not satisfy that aloneness)
· Note that this is the state of things BEFORE any sin, and this occurred
in the absolutely perfect environment of the Garden of Eden; that is, our need
for human companionship was built into us by the Creator
· So God made a “helper” who was “like” Adam; that is, at the most
fundamental level, male and female are alike
A few additional questions emerge. Why the different creative methods for the male and the female? Apart
from the obvious, that God is sovereign and can make whom He wants how He
wants, it seems reasonable to conclude that the first human was fundamentally
complete, that the creative material (e.g., genetic material) needed to make an
infinite number of humans was already in place. In short, He didn't need to
create Eve from the dirt because He encoded Adam with material capable of
generating the entire species.
Also, why God chose the rib is a mystery, but its symbolism suggests that,
being drawn from the male's side, the female is equal (as head and feet are the
body parts typically used in Scripture to represent leadership or submission).
In Genesis 2:24, the creative process
described above is cited as the reason a husband and wife are considered “one
flesh,” and also provides the biblical foundation for marriage as being between
a man and a woman. In Genesis 2:25, we learn that both of them
were naked, but felt no shame. There is much we could discuss about this, but
it is beyond the scope of our current purpose. Suffice it to say that because
sin had not yet been introduced into the world, shame also did not yet exist.
Read Genesis 3:1-7. Here we learn that Satan (via
the serpent) tempted Eve. It’s not clear that he targeted her because she was a
woman or was somehow inferior. Possible interpretation is that he did so
because she may not have been created yet when God gave the actual command
regarding the tree, which is supported by the serpent's initial appeal to doubt
(“Did God really say...”).
It's also worth noting that the serpent's
two tactics for tempting Eve are the ones that Satan still uses to great effect
today, especially with regard to sexuality. On the one hand there is the “Did
God really say that?” attack. We see the effectiveness in this strategy where
things like divorce, out-of-wedlock sexual activity, lust, and same-sex sexual
intimacy are ignored or even endorsed in Christian churches. “Did God really
say that you can't have sex until you're married?” On the other hand is the
exaggeration of the actual prohibition (God stated clearly that they could eat
from every other tree, but the serpent twisted the prohibition to be against
eating from trees in general). We can see the effectiveness of this tactic in
teaching that implies that sex in general is a bad thing or that a person
should endure any and all kinds of abuse rather than divorce.
A variation on this temptation is when the
enemy prods us toward making a moral behavior a sort of idol. Like all
temptation, the goal isn't necessarily to lead us into debauchery, but to cause
to be out of step with God's purposes, the result of which is bearing witness
to a gospel that is not Christ's Gospel. We see the effect of this temptation
in practices that elevate sexual purity to its own end (as opposed to being a
function of the Holy Spirit's transformative work in the life of a believer
seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness) and programs that seek
to replace same-sex attraction with heterosexual attraction.
Read Genesis 3:16-19. Here we learn that the
female’s punishment is enhanced pain in childbirth (but note pain resolves
after childbirth, John 16:21) and being subject to her husband. Note that it
doesn’t say all women subject to all men. It's also worth noting that the
Hebrew grammar here allows for a number of reasonable interpretations of the
nature and direction of the woman's “desire” for her husband and the husband's
contrasting “rule” over her. We won't try to unpackage all of that here.
Suffice it to say that it would be unwise to build much in the way of dogma on
Genesis 3:16. The male’s punishment is on the earth itself, a result of which
is that work becomes a struggle in ways it wasn’t before; until this point, the
earth was simply fruitful.
We can infer some principles from these
punishments (though, because this isn’t the explicit teaching of the passage,
we need to infer with caution). Because this sin was fundamental, it is
reasonable to suggest that God’s punishments for each likely addresses each
person’s fundamental source of worth. For Eve, the punishment suggests that the
ability to produce other humans is foundational, so it was this ability that
God allowed to become tainted with pains and other things to make childbirth
lose some of its dignity. For Adam, the source of pride is the ability to be
productive and to provide, and so obstacles are put in place to hinder that
productivity. These verses have also been interpreted to suggest that the
husband's fundamental role is to provide and the wife's is to bear children.
While this interpretation is not unreasonable, it would be unwise to use these
verses as a primary justification for hard and fast role assignments. Much more
importantly, notice also that the serpent’s punishment is carried out by the
“seed of the woman.” God put the woman, despite her sin, in a central role in
His redemptive plan.
Additional Examples of Women in Scripture
Working our way through the Bible, we find
some historical examples of roles that women have played. In Exodus, women were
central to preserving Moses, and Moses’ sister became a key player in God’s
delivering His people out of Egypt. Similarly, Rahab was key to preserving
Israel during the conquest of Canaan (and she became a direct ancestor of
Jesus); Deborah led Israel as a “prophetess and judge” (Judges 4); the books of
Ruth and Esther are studies of women God used in special
ways (and Ruth is also an ancestor of Jesus). Proverbs 31:10-31 describe the
hallmarks of a good wife. Note that she doesn’t exactly stay at home barefoot
and pregnant. Job gave his daughters an inheritance like sons (Job 42:15).
Though the 12 disciples were men, there were
women in the larger group of disciples who “followed him and helped him” (Mark
15:40-41). Mary and Martha were Jesus’ close friends. Christ appeared first to
women after his resurrection, and women factored heavily in the work and
ministry of the early church in Acts (including being imprisoned for their
faith).
These are just a few examples. I reference
them to highlight the fact that the modern American view that biblical
womanhood somehow equates to a 1950s housewife doesn’t bear up under scrutiny.
However, this is not an essay about biblical womanhood. The key point is that
any differences the Bible describes between the roles of men and women are not
based on any sort of inequality of worth or ability. In fact, the only
fundamental differences the Bible describes are biological distinctions which
manifest in sexuality and procreation.
Gender Roles and Sexuality
Because the most foundational differences
between men and women are biological differences related to sexuality and
procreation, sexuality is always at least a subtext in any consideration of
biblical views of gender. Similarly, the sexual relationship between men and
women is a pervasive symbol throughout Scripture of the relationship between
God and His people. This is why sexuality is emphasized so much in Scripture,
why sexual sins are often singled out as more egregious than other sins, and
why sexual sins are often described in such a way that suggests they are the
clearest measuring stick for an individual’s and a people’s relationship with
God.
For an extremely gritty example of sexuality
as a symbol of a person or people’s relationship with God, I refer you to Ezekiel
23. I highly recommend reading it in the Holman Christian Standard Bible. This
passage illustrates that sexual purity is a symbol of devotion to God (and
God’s devotion to us) and sexual immorality is a symbol of idolatry. This
concept is also mirrored in Romans 1:21-23 & 24-27.
In Romans 13:13-14, Paul contrasts between
impurity (including sexual immorality) and being “clothed in Christ.” Though he
doesn’t cite it directly, this presents an interesting cross-reference to the
Genesis account of the man and woman being naked but unashamed, then after sin
being ashamed of their nakedness, a condition that ultimately could only be
resolved by the covering God Himself provided by way of a blood sacrifice. This
is not only a beautiful picture of sanctification, but also highlights the way
that our own sexual purity—to include modesty—bears witness to God’s plan for
salvation.
The most explicit links between sexual
purity and devotion to God in the New Testament can be found in 1 Corinthians
6:12-20. Here we find the famous overturning of the “food for the stomach and
the stomach for food” argument, which can be thought of as the first century
version of more modern sentiments like “if it feels good do it”, or more
sophisticated appeals to natural science and biology to justify any sort of
sexual desire. In contrast, Paul reminds the Corinthians that God will
ultimately do away with both food and the body (and by extension, sex). Paul
goes on to highlight that although the body was designed by God to be capable
of sex, sex is not the purpose for which the body was created; rather, the body
was created “for the Lord.” This passage also explicitly identifies sexual
union of a husband and wife (in his citation of Genesis 2:24) as a symbol of
the joining of a believer to the Lord. So, again we see that sexual purity
matters because it is the purest form of devotion to God: deliberately
constraining our sexual behavior to conform to God’s standards for sexual
behavior is an act of worship to Him (see also Romans 12:1-2).
Elsewhere (Galatians 5:19-26), Paul contrasts
the works of the flesh (including sexual immorality) with the fruits of the Spirit.
In 1Thessalonians 4:3-8, Paul answers the oft-asked question of “what is God’s
will” by stating that its cornerstone is abstaining from lustful desires and
sexual immorality.
Therefore, sexual purity also matters
because it is the most specific way God has given us to show faithful obedience
and stewardship of what He’s given us (our bodies). I believe this symbolism is
also related to why sex is designed to be so physically and emotionally
pleasurable. Our sex differences exist for our sexuality, and our sexuality
exists as the most physically and emotionally salient way that God has given us
to represent the love and affection He wants us to feel in our relationship
with Him. It’s the most salient way God has given us to “feel” His love and
affection. (This is way beyond the explicit teaching of Scripture, but I
personally believe that for the follower of Christ, heaven is going to feel
like an eternal orgasm.)
Because sexuality is so important to God, we
needed to understand our sexuality through His eyes before we can begin to
reflect upon His teachings about the relationships between husband and wife in
a marriage, which ultimately symbolize all other relationships within the
family, within the church, between the believer and the Lord, and between the
church and Christ. While there are a lot of ways to achieve sexual pleasure,
the one that God has ordained is that between a husband and wife in a covenant
marriage. When sex is used within the context of a biblical marriage, it often
is practically more enjoyable, but more importantly, it carries spiritual
significance in its capacity to symbolize substantial spiritual truths. When we
deploy sex outside of a biblical marriage, we present an affront to the
spiritual truths that God-ordained sex between a husband and wife are meant to
reflect.
At this point, we’ve surveyed the Bible to
get a sense for what kinds of differences exist between men and women. In
general, males and females are equal in every fundamental and important way,
and the differences that exist are primarily biological specialization related
to sexuality and procreation. We also observed that sexual purity is one of the
most fundamental ways we can worshipfully submit to God’s authority, by
willfully constraining our sexual behavior to conform to God’s standards.
Beyond the simple but important aspect of obedience, when our sexuality is
constrained to a covenant marriage between a man and a woman, we also are able
to bear witness to important spiritual truths.
It is important to have these factors in
context before looking at the teachings we typically associate with gender
roles. Without this context, it is easy to approach these passages from a
thoroughly cultural perspective, which inevitably will distort our
understanding. So, as we look at concepts such as submission, it is important
to keep in mind the fundamental equality males and females possess as bearers
of the image of God, and also to remember that sexuality that is subjected to
God’s authority bears witness to important spiritual truths.
Submission in Relationships at Home
One of the classic passages on submission in
the home is Colossians 3:18-24. However, before looking at these verses, it is
helpful to look at the context in which they are offered. Specific commands for
submission are preceded by a general overview of the life in the body of
Christ. Before calling believers to specific standards of behavior in their
homes, Paul first calls all believers to high standards of conduct within the
church. Colossians 3:12-17 urge believers to treat one another with compassion,
to pursue unity, and to teach and admonish one another in wisdom, doing all in
the name of Jesus and while giving thanks. It is reasonable, based on the flow
of the text, to regard verses 12-17 as a sort of preamble, with verses 18-24
providing some (but not comprehensive) examples of ways to live out the
preceding principles within specific relationships.
Paul leads off in verse 18 by calling wives
to submit to their husbands. First, and most importantly, note that he does not
call women to submit to men. For a wife to submit to her husband is one of the
ways she can live out the standards of Christian relationships Paul described
in the preceding verses, and to do so is “fitting in the Lord.” This phrase,
“as is fitting in the Lord” is open to a couple of viable readings. First, that
for a wife to submit is fitting in the Lord. However, it also is reasonable to
consider that wives are to submit to their husbands in ways that are fitting to
the Lord; that is, Paul may be setting some parameters to the submission, more
or less constraining it to submitting in things that are “fitting in the Lord.”
This provides grounds for ensuring that Christian wives are not being asked to
submit to abuse, for example, or to follow their husbands into crime or other
sinful behavior. Another thing that is extremely important to note is that Paul
is addressing wives. Obedience to this teaching is the responsibility of the
Christian wife. Husbands are not directed to subjugate their wives. Just as it
is fundamental to our understanding of atonement that Christ voluntarily
submitted to the will of God the Father in laying down His life on our behalf,
Christian marriage best images spiritual truths when submission in the marriage
is voluntary, not coerced.
Paul goes on to charge husbands with loving
their wives. I’ve often wondered whether the distinctive commands to husbands
and wives are because these are the aspects of the relationship that often come
least naturally to each party. In caricature, one might imagine the classic
hen-pecking nag of a wife and the self-absorbed oaf of a husband, each needing
to fundamentally change their view of their role in the relationship. In any
event, husbands are to love their wives and not be bitter toward them. More on
this love later.
Colossians 3 teaches children to
obey and fathers not to exasperate and discourage their children. It then urges
slaves to approach their work as for Christ, not for men. Slavery and worker
attitudes are beyond scope here, but I think this verse is useful not only for
slaves, but also for anyone in a modern employee role. Finally, Paul ties the
passage together by reiterating in verse 23 an idea previewed in verse 17 about
doing everything for the Lord. It is this structure that gives best support to
interpreting verses 18-24 as specific applications of verses 12-17.
Peter also calls for wives to submit to
their husbands, even when the husband is not a believer. In 1 Peter 3:1-2, he
calls for submission of wives to their husbands in general, and suggests that
if the husband is an unbeliever, his wife’s submission serves as a testimony to
the Gospel which may win him over. (Note that this is not an endorsement of
pursuing a relationship with an unbeliever; rather, this scenario is most
likely a situation in which one party in an existing marriage becomes a
follower of Christ.) In verse 7 of the same passage, husbands are directed to
be tender and understanding toward their wives. This verse also contains the
controversial “weaker vessel” phrase. Regarding this, we know that Peter is not
endorsing some sort of fundamental inequality. First, that sort of reading runs
counter to what we’ve already learned from our review of Scripture regarding
fundamental inequality. But second, he straight up references equality when he
calls husbands also to honor their wives as “coheirs of the grace of life.”
Furthermore, the language here does not demand that the wife’s nature be
understood as weaker. It may also be valid to read it as a simile, as in the
NASB: “as with someone weaker.” If you need additional reassurance, I’d direct
you back to Proverbs 31. The Bible’s most elaborate description of an ideal
wife describes a woman who is anything but weak.
Another passage which adds some illumination
to the nature of submission between a husband and a wife is 1 Corinthians 7:1-7.
Note that both the husband and wife are each called to regard their own body as
the property of their spouse (verse 4). Fundamental equality. Also, although it
is beyond our scope here, verses 10-16 offer some thoughts from Paul about what
a Christian spouse should do with regard to an unbelieving spouse. Finally, in
verses 32-38, Paul reminds us that despite its value in imaging the relationship
between Christ and His Church, marriage
ultimately is a significant distraction from living with a singular focus on
serving the Lord.
Submission in the Church
As we move now to discuss submission and
gender roles within the Church, a good place to start is Galatians 3:27-29.
This passage reiterates that we are all fundamentally equal in Christ. If we
lose sight of this truth, then we are going to be prone to misunderstanding
teachings regarding specific roles.
Ultimately, the different roles assigned
within church serve a purpose. Why does how we order things in the church
matter? In Ephesians 3:8-10 we learn that God is using the church to reveal His
wisdom to “rulers and authorities in the heavens.” This idea is not developed
in much detail in scripture, but it is certainly worth reflecting on the fact
that this is one of the ways in which the church bears witness and that there
is substantial spiritual significance to the orderliness of Christian
fellowship.
In 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 we find one of the
most controversial New Testament passages relating to gender. The prescriptions
and proscriptions contained here are often interpreted as being culturally
bound to the time and place of Paul and his original audience, although Paul himself
suggests in verse 16 it is universal. Because standards for dress and
appearance are at once intensely personal and relentlessly cultural, passages
such as this can be uncomfortable. In handling such teachings, I find it
helpful to take a step back and ask a few questions.
First, when I feel uncomfortable upon
reading a passage of scripture, I need to ask myself why I feel uncomfortable
and try to discern what aspects of the teaching are invoking the discomfort.
Next, I need to check my attitude: Am I approaching scripture to have my mind
renewed and transformed (Romans 12:2)? Put more pointedly, am I seeking new
ways to make my life a living sacrifice of obedience (Romans 12:1) or am I
trying to figure out what I can get away with? When scripture provides a “do
this” or “don’t do that” directive, I ought at least to consider adopting the
assumption that the teaching applies to me unless it is clearly demonstrated
otherwise.
Another mental model with which one may
approach such teaching is to consider what is gained by adhering to the
teaching and what is lost in disregarding it. If it is a teaching upon which
salvation may be gained or lost I’m certainly going to seek to ensure not only
I, but also others, are aware and are seeking to obey. If it is not salvation
or some other eternal stake, I’d categorize it as an opportunity to “delight in
[the Lord’s] commands” (Psalm 119:47) through personal obedience, but make
relatively little of it in sharing the gospel and training new followers of
Christ in discipleship.
Beyond this general approach, it is also
helpful when interpreting any biblical teaching to seek to understand the
function the teaching or command serves. Paul introduces the section as being
about “traditions” he is passing on (verse 2). In verse 3 Paul points again to
the relationship between husband and wife as symbolic of Christ’s relationship
to believers and the church. From this introduction, I believe it is reasonable
to interpret the following section as relating to traditions which are meant to
testify to the relationship between Christ and the church. In obeying these,
believers are helping to amplify important truths about Christ and His church
in ways that words cannot. Conversely, though, there is nothing in the passage
which suggests that salvation or other eternal matters hang in the balance.
Additionally, it is worth noting in verses 11-12 that, once again, fundamental
equality between women and men is emphasized; therefore, the different roles
assigned to each gender here are about symbolically imaging spiritual truths,
not about a hierarchy rooted in the relative value of each gender. Finally, I
strongly believe that it is up to each man and each woman to apply and obey
this passage in counsel with sound discipleship and fellowship. The symbolic
nature of this fashion of ordering worship is tarnished when obedience is
coerced rather than voluntary.
In sum, I’d encourage all believers to
approach 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 as an opportunity to bear witness to spiritual
truths about the relationship between Christ and the church.
Along similar lines, in 1 Timothy 2: 8-15, Paul
again offers specific, gender-aligned exhortation regarding believers’ behavior
in the church. The main guidance to men is to pray and to avoid letting anger
and arguments disrupt fellowship in the body of Christ. But this passage is
most famous for its commands to women regarding modest dress and a prohibition
against teaching or exercising authority over a man in the church. Interestingly,
Pauls supports these behavior guides with the order of creation (Adam created
first, then Eve) and the order of the fall (Eve first, then Adam). There are
those who interpret these prohibitions as being cultural and/or specific to the
place and time of Paul’s original audience. Indeed, “I do not allow” in verse
12 lends some support to this interpretation. On the other hand, Paul repeats
the command in 1 Corinthians 14:33-35, and this time explicitly makes it
universal. There are other aspects of this passage that can be difficult to
sort out, but I will not attempt to do so here. Instead, I point the reader to
a couple of thoughts about how to interpret and apply the Bible. First, as with
nearly all of scripture, it is not for one person to coerce or otherwise
attempt to force another to obey; rather, we each need to humbly approach God’s
Word with an eye toward obedience, trusting that obedience even—or perhaps
especially—to difficult teachings produces fruit that can only be brought about
by His Holy Spirit. Second, allow scripture to interpret scripture. Are the
teachings here reflected elsewhere in scripture? If so, how do similar passages
interact with this passage to enhance our understanding of God’s message to us
on these matters? Finally, when a passage is very clear regarding what is
expected but I find it difficult to accept and obey, how can I move toward
agreeing with God on the matter? Can I start with a small change in one aspect
of the teaching?
Paul offers additional guidance for ministry
within the church along both gender and generational lines. In Titus 2:1-7,
Paul delineates specific responsibilities for older men, older women, younger
women, and younger men. There are specific aspects of behavior that are
emphasized for each, but there is also a principle laid out in which older
individuals mentor younger individuals of the same gender. In the typical
American church, ministry tends to be divided by “age and stage” of life. While
there are practical reasons for doing so, there is no clear biblical principle
for doing so. Furthermore, this arrangement introduces artificial barriers to
faithfully obeying this teaching from Titus. In light of this, believers ought
to actively seek opportunities to be mentored by older believers of the same
gender, and also to be a mentor to younger believers. Pastors and others in
leadership roles in churches would be wise to create opportunities which
encourage such mentoring relationships.
Perhaps the most comprehensive passage on
submission is Ephesians 5:15-32, which describes both submission in the church
and submission at home. Furthermore, this is the passage which most explicitly
describes the ways in which submission in marriage bears witness to spiritual
truths about the relationship Christ and the church. This passage builds on
itself, and I think that is an important aspect in how one ought to interpret
and seek to apply it. The passage opens with an exhortation to diligently attend
to how we walk and behave, with an emphasis on behaving wisely. Two main
reasons are given for behaving wisely: to make the most of the time that we
have, and in recognition that we live in evil times. I believe these dual
purposes are ultimately about kingdom building, bearing witness and making
disciples. To protect our testimony we are urged not to get drunk (verse 18),
but to allow the Holy Spirit to empower us to teach and encourage one another
through “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs,” giving thanks, and submitting to
one another “in the fear of Christ.” I won’t attempt to unpack what the “fear”
of Christ may be, but as the first verses in chapter 5 seem to refer to future
judgment, it is reasonable to think of it as referring to Christ’s eventual
role as judge. So, our submission to one another is rooted, at least in part,
in recognizing Christ not only as savior, but as judge.
Paul then refines the concept of submission
within the body of Christ by delineating submission within the households that
make up the church. He starts with wives, calling them to submit to their “own
husbands.” That it is submission to one’s own husband is absolutely essential; as
we discussed earlier, women are not called to generally submit to men. The
rationale for this submission is the symbolic representation of the church’s
submission to Christ. The church submits to Christ because he has saved the
church. He restates the command and the rationale, then calls on husbands to
“love” their wives. Seems easy enough, until you look at how he defines this
love: “just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her.” Furthermore,
the focus of this self-sacrificial love is to “make her holy.” He further calls
on husbands to love and care for their wives with the same care and love they
show to their own bodies, again drawing the parallels between Christ’s love and
care for His “body,” the church.
When reflecting on this passage, I find it
helpful to also consider Philippians 2:5-11, which provides an even more
detailed description of how Christ loved the church (and by extension how
husbands are to love their wives). In this passage, we see Christ first and
foremost submitting Himself fully—His will, His desires, His plans, His
possessions—to God (even though He was fundamentally equal to God), and then
willingly giving them up for the benefit of those whom He died to save. Of
course, this passage is not written specifically to husbands, but to all
believers. In this way, this passage goes even further to provide a rich
context for how submission within the family and within the body of Christ
work. When every believer makes their attitude like the attitude of Christ
(verse 5), then we are all considering our equality (in our case not equality
with God, but our equality with one another, which we’ve already established
earlier in this essay) as something not to be used for our own advantage (verse
6), but as something we can voluntarily lay down, taking on the relative worth
of a slave (verse 7) in complete obedience to God’s will. In so doing, we allow
God to exalt not only us, but more importantly Himself. Using this passage to
expand our frame of reference for “submission” also helps us see how Paul, back
in Ephesians 5, found the relationship between Christ and the church such a
“profound mystery” (verse 32).
Putting all this together, we see that we all
are called to submit. All of us must submit to the authority of Christ and the
authority of the church. Within our homes, wives are to submit to husbands,
children to parents. Those submitted to are called to serve and sacrifice
themselves for those in their charge. All are fundamentally equal in the eyes
of the Lord, but we are asked to constrain our equality to create a prescribed
order of things in the home and the church. Ultimately, the reason for this is
that it bears witness to important truths about God.
Conclusion
At our most fundamental level, men and women
are equals, and our differences are largely biological ones related to
sexuality and procreation. Obeying God’s laws with regard to sexual purity is
the most personal way we can practice the spiritual discipline of submitting
our will and our behavior to God’s will and standards of behavior, which allows
us access to His purposes and His pleasure we cannot attain any other way. When
two parties in a relationship relinquish their efforts to pursue pleasure for
themselves and focus instead on satisfying the desires of and bringing pleasure
to the other party, each ends up receiving a degree of fulfillment and pleasure
they could not have achieved by asserting their own rights. Sex is the rawest
expression of that, but God gave it as a symbol of that principle of
self-sacrificial love. This is why sexual purity is important, because of this
spiritual symbolism. This is why submission and mutual self-sacrifice in the
Christian marriage is so vital, because it images this spiritual principle to
one another, the church, and the world. This is also why submission within the
body of Christ is so important, because it images this principle within the
church and to the world in ways that preaching and evangelism cannot. Our lives
submitted to God’s laws for sexual purity, our marriages engaged in mutual
self-sacrifice, and our churches ordered according to God’s principles creates
a richly layered, fully animated scale model of God’s love.
What Do I Do If I Find Submission Hard?
Following Christ was never promised to be
easy; Christ Himself described it as daily following Him to His execution
(Matthew 16:24). Ultimately, our willingness—or unwillingness—to obey these
teachings is ultimately a reflection on our willingness—or unwillingness—to
make our lives a testimony for the Lord. In light of these factors, meditation
on the following verses may be helpful in seeking to adopt the mind of Christ:
Colossians 3:5: “Put to death what belongs to your worldly nature: sexual
immorality, impurity, lust, evil
desire, and greed, which is idolatry.”
1 John 2:15-17: “Do not
love the world or the things that belong to the world. If anyone loves the
world, love for the Father is not in him. For everything that belongs
to the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride in
one’s lifestyle—is not from the Father, but is from the world. And the world
with its lust is passing away, but the one who does God’s will remains forever.”
Matthew 6:33: “But seek
first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be
provided for you.”
Psalm 37:3-6: “Trust in the Lord and do what is good; dwell in the land
and live securely. Take delight in the Lord, and He will give you your heart’s desires. Commit your way to
the Lord; trust in Him, and He will act, making
your righteousness shine like the dawn, your justice like the noonday.”
Afterword: Official Church Offices
This essay focused on biblical teachings
related to gender, sexuality, and submission with a view toward personal
obedience. The New Testament also addresses gender in descriptions of
qualifications for officers of the church. Church polity is a large topic, and
I won’t even pretend to give it a thorough overview. When I look at all that scripture
says on the topic, though, it seems to me that it is left intentionally open.
For the most part, the local church is given very broad lanes for organizing
itself and conducting its business. While biblical cases can be made for various
approaches, I think the clearest reading of scripture offers very little in the
way of universals or absolutes. But, where it does offer absolutes, we ought to
pay close attention.
The only passage that officially and
explicitly names church offices is 1 Timothy 3:1-12. Verses 1-7 describe
“elders” or “overseers” and verses 8-12 describe “deacons.” Note, first and
foremost, that gender is not the central theme to the standards and
requirements for these offices. To be truly obedient to these verses, we need
to be absolutely certain we are demanding the characterological and behavioral
standards be met. That said, and most germane to our purposes here, there are
gender and sexuality aspects to these requirements. The clearest reading of the
qualifications for the elder/overseer role is that it must be a man. The main
reason for this is the requirement that they be “able to teach,” which as we
saw earlier, is expressly prohibited elsewhere in Paul’s instructions to the
church. As for deacons, the picture is a bit fuzzier. Many interpreters
restrict the office of deacon to men. However, verse 11 can be honestly
interpreted to be referring either to the wives of deacons or to female deacons
(the Greek word here is “woman” and can be used—and is used throughout the New Testament—to
refer either to women generally or to wives specifically, depending on context).
For those who interpret it as the wives of deacons, the challenge is that it
seems unlikely that there would be special requirements levied against the
wives of deacons but not the wives of elders/overseers, especially in light of
the fact that the requirements for the latter are generally more restrictive.
Suffice it to say, there seems to be room here for churches to restrict the
office of deacon to men only, or to open it to both men and women. Again, the
focus should be on the other qualities first and foremost, and for the purpose
of building up the church (1 Corinthians 14:26).
