An Explanation - A Defense of Biblical Equality

It may appear strange that my wife and I, theologically conservative, Bible believing and Christ honoring Christians can at the same time espouse gender equality, but it is true. By gender equality we mean identifying men and women as equal in being and function, (ie. we believe that there should be no semblance of hierarchy in the Church or home) both are equal to serve on the basis of gifting not gender. We base our belief on the full attainments of Christ's redemption rather than the descriptive results of the fall. This means that we read everything in Scripture concerning men and women, in Church and home life, in response to God's redemptive revelation throughout the Old and New Testaments.

It is our firm conviction that men and women were created equal and were given the same responsibilities in creation (Genesis 1). God's original intention was interrupted by the willful disobedience of Adam and Eve and innocence was lost forever (Genesis 3). However, the redemption promise given prior to their expulsion from Edenic paradise and fulfilled in Christ means that men and women, in Christ, are new creations and as a direct consequence are restored to innocence and equality of being and function.

Very occasionally, when OT saints were truly walking with God and in the Spirit, the Biblical account reveals a tenderness and acceptance of women based on equality and full worth. An example that comes immediately to mind is Ruth and Boaz, the kinsman redeemer. Without question Jesus totally disregarded societal, cultural and religious protocol by His full acceptance and considerate treatment of women throughout His earthly ministry. Ready examples, Mary, Martha and the Samaritan woman at the well.

Despite arguments to the contrary (the so called 'problem verses') we believe that the Apostle Paul not only fully endorsed the equality and service of women he attempted to include women in every way. Most of the instruction he gave in his letters to churches was corrective or practical in nature and was never intended to be uniformly applied as prohibitive for all time on the basis of hierarchy or creation order. Our view is that Paul is grossly misinterpreted and misrepresented in these passages.

Furthermore, if it were God's intention to establish and maintain man's superiority or hierarchy over women (ie. men being solely responsible for spiritual leadership of the Church or home) He would never have sent angels to speak to women about His intentions before speaking to the men. The facts are that on numerous occasions God used angels to inform women ahead of men and in some cases the men still found it hard to believe! Notable examples would be Elizabeth and Mary in the birth of John the Baptist and Jesus. Mary's magnificat being an outstanding example of prophetic insight even while yet unmarried.

What does, or can it mean to accept the restoration of innocence and full gender equality as God's redemptive purpose for the both Church and home life? Firstly, no one needs to be in charge! Responsibilities can be shared on the basis of ability or giftedness and worked out mutually with Christ as the one true Head. If there is any submitting required it would be best achieved by a willingness for mutual servanthood in honour of Christ. If men and women are truly submitted to Christ, and one another, and together seek to do the will of God, for themselves, the family or the Church, everyone must benefit.

Secondly, should there be that inevitable disagreement, no one moves! Each serves and submits to the other by listening, identifying with and attempting to understand the other(s) until all the issues are freely (without emotional or 'headship' blackmail) shared. Then, and only then can there be consensus in discovering what God may be directing the Church or family to do. The family is a microcosm of the Church. True community must be discovered and demonstrated in the family first and can then be the model for healthy relational and community life within the Church.

~~~

Mystery - A Defense of Mutual Submission

In that classic Bible passage on marriage (Eph. 5:21-33) so often used, or alluded to in the marriage ceremony, the narrative closes with the admonition, "this is a great mystery, but it is an illustration of the way Christ and the Church are one." (vs. 32 NLB). The mystery would appear to be, from the preceding verse, that two married people could somehow become one, in thought, purpose and action. Obviously it is a picture of the complete unity within the Godhead which translates into the unique relationship of Christ and the Church. Further, from what we read here, it is equally the ideal that God intends for marriage.

Is it conceivable that two, previously individual persons, especially as products of our pluralistic culture, should, or could, become essentially one? The injunction (vs. 31) suggests to me that neither of those persons is better equipped or more divinely entitled to lead the other, but each, as they acquiesce to the other, for the higher purpose of oneness can achieve that glorious ideal.

Having said that I now come back to the thought of mystery. The Bible definition of mystery suggests something that is veiled, hidden, secret or even parabolic. The theme of mystery occurs repeatedly throughout Scripture beginning in the book of Job. God is a revealer of mysteries for Daniel the prophet. Jesus Himself is said to always speak in parables and thus fulfill OT prophecy as He, "explains the mysteries hidden since the creation of the world." (Matt. 13:35 cross referenced to Psalm 78:2 NLB)

Is it just possible that one mystery hidden since creation is that God's intention for married humanity is a oneness based on mutuality, as opposed to hierarchy? In hierarchy the husband leads and the wife submissively follows, in respect to a supposed divine ordering or fulfillment of a God ordained role. The Living Bible, erroneously I believe, paraphrases it that a wife should simply, ".fit in with her husband's plans." (1 Peter 3:5) By contrast, in a mutually submissive marriage, "each submits to the other out of reverence for Christ." (Eph. 5:21 NLB) Both see the greater good of being united together in thought, purpose and action and strive for that ideal mutually. No one person has the final say by virtue of gender.

This is a great mystery. Paul acknowledges it as such. To see it as anything less does it, 'oneness', a grave injustice. We would do well to explore the mystery rather than have it explained away by mute acceptance of the 'traditional', patriarchal, hierarchal, or in modern parlance, complementarian model. I'm reminded that Jesus came to explain the mysteries of God, things hidden since the beginning of time. Surely then His own treatment of and attitude toward women, in His own highly volatile, male dominated patriarchal culture speaks to us of a better way?

In keeping with the theme of mystery, there are still things yet to be revealed. Things that relate to Israel and end times (Romans 11:25) and other future events (1 Cor. 13:2) that will remain a mystery, despite the many and varied interpretations, until closer to the time. Only God knows the way that history will ultimately unfold and has sovereign control over world events. (Rev. 10:7) Even the way we live out our faith is regarded as a mystery, says the Apostle Paul, that is bound up in the incarnation of Christ. (see 1 Tim. 3:15,16 NLB) Yes, unfathomable to the world, mysterious at times even to ourselves.

In the book of Job, where the mystery journey begins, Zophar felt the need to correct Job's depressive, seemingly ungodly ramblings. In response to his theologically correct but insensitive harangue Job replied in part, "People who are at ease mock those in trouble. They give a push to people who are stumbling." (Job 12:5 NLB) It appears to me that a great many women, and also men, who struggle with wanting to honour God Biblically, by living out equality and mutuality, are also insensitively denigrated and demeaned by the proponents of 'correct' theology. This is legalism in its ugliest form with no room for divine mystery.

Perhaps it is from a position of ease and idealism that people make such pronouncements. Their apparent theological high ground may prevent them from identifying the reality of the pain and injustice inflicted on believers who question, or have suffered under, the 'traditional' interpretations of hierarchy and female subordination. Our experience has been that people who are 'stumbling' are indeed 'pushed' out of the church or relegated to the fringes of Christian usefulness by the application such an uncompromising theological attitude. Victims of such injustice are wrongly viewed as heretical, adding to their pain.

Let us return to the element of mystery and let God be God. Let us leave some things for Him to explain. The Christian life is a walk of faith after all. Let us allow Him to work out the mystery of 'oneness' by the power of His Spirit at work within as we, "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." (Eph. 5:21) To my mind a far loftier and more God honouring goal, with a far greater incentive to holiness of life, would be to practice Spirit dependent mutual submission rather than to adhere doggedly to maintaining supposedly 'assigned roles' for men and women. Quite naturally this would apply to all facets of Christian relationships, within the church and community, having been first fleshed out in the home.

Trevor Sykes