The Troubling Texts

There is a great deal of evidence of women’s participation in the early church and the role they played in early Christianity. Certainly, scripture and history itself show that women actively participated in the life of the early church in all areas, including leading, teaching, disciplining, praying, and prophesying.

Yet it’s claimed that women must keep silent in church, with three New Testament texts put forward as proof. But is this what the Bible teaches?

The verses in question are found in 1 Corinthians 14:34-36, 1 Timothy 2:11-12, and 1 Corinthians 11:1-16.

These verses are sticking points for many people, and form the basis for the framework adopted by the church I grew up, as well as many other churches today. The practical outworking of this framework stretches to accommodate what is known as ‘soft complementarianism’ (meaning women are generally involved in many aspects of ministry, although the role of the senior minister or pastor, and often eldership, is reserved for men), through to a more traditional understanding of complementarianism, in which women are restricted from most areas deemed authoritative, leadership, or teaching, as was the church I grew up in.

As I elaborate on further in my article ‘Women + The Church‘, my understanding and position have shifted dramatically. I have had the opportunity to read the texts for myself, from multiple translations, and with a wealth of scholarly critique and commentary available alongside. My previous approach to scripture – essentially proof-texting or cherry-picking verses, is now quite different. Context is king – and whole letters are included in my consideration of interpretation and application, not just a verse or sentence on either side. Additionally, I have the clear framework of Genesis at my disposal – God’s original intention for humanity:

The book of Genesis is a means to a theological end; its purpose is to illustrate God’s relationship to creation and His intention of dwelling with us. “The whole purpose of Genesis 1 is to set the ideal human community  – a place in which the image of God, or the imitation of God, is actually going to be realised.  That, of course, gets distorted in Genesis 3 when humans disobey God. But the first chapter outlines the ideal.” (Professor C. John Collins) (emphasis mine).  

With all this in mind, here are my thoughts on the ‘troubling texts’. My conclusions are summarised for brevity and I’ve arrived at these conclusions from the many different resources I’ve personally read, listened to, and watched. I certainly don’t expect my reader to consider them, alone, to be conclusive arguments for an egalitarian position. I would urge anyone interested or unsure about this topic to make a point of studying both the passages and reading or listening to the resources and commentaries (both for and against) for themselves. 

1 Timothy 2:11-12 – Firstly, the context of the letter to Timothy is important. Paul is writing to his young associate Timothy, who was helping train new believers and carrying Paul’s letters back and forward between Paul and the newly planted churches. Paul writes to encourage and guide in the development of healthy leadership within the church – not ego-driven or self-centered but governed by mutual submission to Christ (Ephesians 5:22). The best kind of leadership is always the kind modeled by Jesus, who came as a servant to minister in truth and humility and who is the life-force of the church (John 15:5). Badly formed and misguided leadership can cause great damage (and this is why 1 Timothy is still such a relevant passage for us today).

But before Paul begins to even discuss leadership, he encourages men to first focus on intimately praying with God and the women likewise (worship). A humble relationship with God (Micah 6:8) must precede any kind of leadership. Paul then addresses the men, commenting that he wants them to ensure they are free from anger and controversy in every place of worship, and the women, stating they are not to be obsessed with the latest fashions or beauty routines but focused on true beauty: God’s message of salvation in Jesus.

However, the significant issue that Paul bookends his letter with is that of false teaching. He had already urged Timothy to stay in Ephesus (where he was when this letter was written) and stop those whose teaching is contrary to the truth. (1 Timothy 3:3). He now writes again to instruct the believers to be filled with love, have a clear conscience, and genuine faith. Some, however, had missed the whole point and were speaking confidently as teachers, even though they didn’t know what they were talking about (1 Timothy 1:5-7).

Paul urges Timothy to command the false teachers to stop teaching false doctrines. These ‘teachers’ were devoted to myths and endless genealogies, abusing the law, and forbidding marriage and certain foods. For a church to be healthy and flourish, it needed to be grounded in truth and empowered by genuine faith, its leaders devoted to sound teaching and holy worship, things that the church at Ephesus was in danger of losing sight of.

The subject of false teaching and how to combat it in a church context is a recurring theme throughout the letter and it seems clear that this is the overarching context of Paul’s comments.

Approaching the first ‘troubling text’, then, “Women should learn quietly and submissively. I am not permitting women to teach men or have authority over them; Let them listen quietly” (1 Timothy 2: 11-12), there are several ways in which this passage can be interpreted. In light of the context, culture, and the framework of Genesis, the one that I believe makes the most sense is this:

This passage is not a prohibition on women speaking or teaching, universally or for all time, but a time-limited injunction to deal with a specific and local issue. Paul’s comments are instructions for how the believers in Ephesus, both men and women, are to generally conduct themselves in church affairs, and for women, particularly, how they ought to behave in matters of learning and teaching.

False teaching was an issue, that’s clear, and it seems that women, who had long been barred from the traditional all-male sphere of learning Torah and rabbinic study, were behind the eight-ball, so to speak. By-passing the appropriate framework for adequate instruction would result in godless ideas and old wives tales, and the church at Ephesus needed to pay greater attention and give specific focus to sound teaching, for both genders but particularly in relation to the women, who had no experience in this area.

Women were to learn in quietness and obedience, just like everyone else. This is the posture advocated for students of rabbis – catch the connection to the story of Mary I commented on earlier – and Paul, rather than silencing women, is actually advocating equality and liberation for women in Jesus, far surpassing what they may have experienced in their culture. But it must be done properly, and not at the expense of the equality of men or at the cost of false or shallow teaching. Women must first learn, then they can teach, with the same attributes of faith, truthfulness, and love in leadership to be shown by both men and women (1 Corinthians 13:4-8).

The original word translated as authority in English is the Greek word authenteō, used only once in all of the New Testament, and is not the usual word used in Greek to mean authority, as we would understand it.

Over the course of its history this verb and its associated noun have had a wide semantic range, including some bizarre meanings, such as committing suicide, murdering one‘s parents, and being sexually aggressive. Some studies have been marred by a selective and improper use of the evidence. The issue is compounded by the fact that this word is found only once in the New Testament, and is not common in immediately proximate Greek literature. | CBM Resources

It’s important to ask why Paul uses this rare word when he could have used other more common words to convey authority, if that’s what he meant. A single word can’t be severed from its context, so the entire letter and surrounding text particularly need to be taken into account when trying to understand and interpret Paul’s use of this word and his overall meaning.

I believe what he was getting at was this: concerning their learning and teaching, women aren’t to take over, act in domineering ways, or tell everyone else what to do (just because they are now ‘free in Christ’). Neither are they to use their gender as a weapon, either sexually or authoritatively, claiming superiority over men or absorbing the cultural myth (that Eve was formed first and was therefore more important).

Paul concludes this section by reminding the believers of the dangers of false teaching and poor leadership, which results in deception and transgression. He recounts the Genesis story of humanity’s fall, giving the example of Eve who was deceived by the serpent’s false teaching (and sinned first), with Adam right behind her (who, although not being deceived, sinned anyway). Yet, although Adam was made first (and could be considered by the men as ‘more important’), it was through Eve that salvation came about.

This passage isn’t about prohibiting all women, for all time, from leadership or teaching, but about matters of faithful church leadership and careful church teaching, specifically for the church at Ephesus, but still applicable to us today.

Links: https://bit.ly/2wMnDXk, https://bit.ly/3dGijp9 https://bit.ly/39z4Ufm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdTtrONvrCo https://shorturl.at/eikC2

1 Corinthians 14:34-36 – These two verses are a somewhat jarring and odd inclusion in a long dialogue from Paul about spiritual gifts, which begins in chapter 12. In fact, they are at direct odds with the force of Paul’s argument and, quite frankly, do not seem to fit the context through these previous chapters in which Paul is discussing the ‘body of believers’ – those who gather together in Jesus’ name – and what that looks like in real terms. He uses phrases like “To each person has been given the ability to manifest the Spirit for the common good” (1 Corinthians 12:7), “As it is, there are many parts, but one body” (1 Corinthians 12:20), “Now you are the body of Christ, and each of you is a member of it” (1 Corinthians 12:27) and “Some of us are Jews, some are Gentiles, some are slaves, and some are free. But we have all been baptised into one body by one Spirit, and we all share the same Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:13).

The context of the first epistle to the Corinthians is one of a church in disarray and Paul tackles all manner of issues that had arisen in this church – irresponsibility, promiscuity, immorality, quarrelling, and disunity. In short, the Corinthians had forgotten that they were God’s church – the body of Jesus, set apart for a spirit-led life – and that the knowledge of their salvation in Jesus was meant to transform them, in love, to a life in common ‘with Jesus’. When we get to Chapter 14, Paul is still discussing the importance of acting for ‘the greater good’ of the church, in relation to spiritual gifts.  There are three explanations around verses 34-36, which are as follows:

1. These verses are considered to be a reader-added marginal gloss. They were added at some point in the translation process, probably very early on, as a notation in the margin by a scribe. Subsequent translations either added them in position between verses 33 and 36 or place them at the end of the chapter, after verse 40. The fact that they ‘float’ in several translations, in terms of positioning, does lend weight to this idea, along with the presence of a distigme (two dots) in the margin, the general symbol marking the location of any kind of textual variant. You can read more about this here: https://bit.ly/3arPNp2. You will notice that if you skip over these verses (as if they never existed in the original letter), the flow of the chapter remains intact and Paul’s conclusion to his dialogue makes perfect sense. Commentators have noted that ‘this ‘gloss view’ explains all the external and internal data, preserves the chiastic structure and integrity of Paul’s argument, and avoids conflict with Paul’s other teachings.
2. If these verses are original, then it is an entirely reasonable conclusion that they were written to address a specific issue in, admittedly, a very messed up church. Given we know that women did pray and prophesy from other passages in the Bible (Luke 2:36, Acts 21:7-9, 1 Corinthians 11:5-11), the seeming prohibition on the women in these verses must be specific and contextual, rather than general and unlimited in time, much like the injunction in 1 Timothy 2. 
3. 1 Corinthians is largely Paul’s response to a large number of topics that the church had written to him about, seeking clarity and instructive advice (1 Corinthians 7:1 “Now for the matters you wrote about:“). From Chapter 7 onwards, he speaks to a number of topics the Corinth church had asked him about, at times quoting their statements or comments verbatim. We certainly don’t take those comments themselves to instructive or inspired, merely Paul’s reiteration of certain questions asked (followed by his replies or comments in relation to those questions). We see this pattern at the beginning of Chapter 7 (‘concerning sexual relations/married life), Chapter 8 (‘concerning food offered to idols’), Chapter 11 (‘concerning worship and the Lord’s supper’), and Chapter 12 (‘concerning spiritual gifts’). 1 Corinthians 14 is a continuation of Paul’s thoughts in relation to spiritual gifts, and the passage is question (1 Corinthians 14:34-36) can quite easily be read as ‘the matters you wrote about‘ (forbidding women to exercise their spiritual gift of prophecy or tongues). His comments, including a refutation to this question/statement are in verses 36-40, which makes it clear that they (“my brothers and sisters“) “should be eager to prophesy, and are not to forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.“

Any one of these explanations would be acceptable to me. The one that doesn’t make sense is that women are being prohibited from ‘speaking in church’, universally and in perpetuity. Here’s why:

– Paul’s comments are intended for both men and women. Some English translations may inadvertently obscure this by their use of the word ‘brethren’ or ‘brothers’ but the correct understanding of the original Greek (ἀδελφοί (adelphoi – meaning brothers or siblings) is that Paul is addressing men and women both – the believers as a whole, who are the family of Christ.

– The context is a call to orderly worship and, in particular, the appropriate use of spiritual gifts, such as prophesying, speaking in tongues, interpretation, and special revelation. We know that these gifts were given to both men and women (Acts 1:14, 2:4, 17-18, Acts 21:9-10), and in fact, only a few chapters earlier Paul had instructed the church on the culturally correct way this gift was to be exercised (either by a man or a woman) (1 Corinthians 11:4,5). It would seem rather odd that only a few chapters later, he would reverse this entirely and silence women, especially those who had been gifted with prophecy, tongues, or interpretation.

– These gifts were given for the edification of the church ie they were intended to be heard aloud by all, and not for personal or private edification.

– The context of the immediate text in question is ‘if they have questions, they should ask their husbands at home‘. Some differentiation seems to be being made here, that the women in question are possibly ‘wives with questions‘, not just the women in the congregation in general. Again, the context is orderly and edifying worship for all, and wives who have questions are instructed to ask those at home, rather than during congregational worship where it would be distracting and disorderly. (The Greek word for woman and wife (as for man and husband) is the same, so several differing interpretations could be drawn from this alone.)

– Paul concludes his thoughts by encouraging everyone to be eager to prophesy and not to forbid speaking in tongues. His caveat (and the actual context of the chapter) is that everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

Links: https://bit.ly/3arPNp2 and https://bit.ly/2wD2G15

1 Corinthians 11:1-16This is by far the largest section of verses and can initially appear somewhat confusing and challenging to interpret. In fact, these verses are regarded by commentators as ‘one of the most obscure passages in the Pauline letters’.

Again, we must remember the context of this epistle – that is, it was written to a church in disarray with a multitude of issues that Paul was speaking into. The particular issue he is addressing here, in these verses, distinctly relates to the cultural context of Corinth. Particularly, Paul is referencing the issues of homosexuality, gender fluidity, and immorality rampant in that culture, and which influences we know the Corinthian church were floundering under.

The particular passage that seems to indicate hierarchy is this: “But I want you to realise that the head (κεφαλὴ (kephalē) of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3-4). However, there are fourteen primary reasons to interpret head as referring to “source” rather than “authority” in this passage (see links below), and this alternate translation changes the meaning of the passage entirely. (Incidentally, this same word is used by Paul in Ephesians 5 – the ‘husbands and wives’ chapter, where, once again, source rather than head seems to be a much better translation of the original word and better fits the overall context of the passage. I write more specifically about this passage in my article ‘Husbands and Wives‘.

I believe 1 Corinthians 11 is not describing a system of hierarchy, as is sometimes supposed, but rather is speaking to the fact that men and women within the church should present themselves in ways that honour the uniqueness of their own created gender, particularly in the light of their gospel witness, as well as honouring the source of each gender. 

These verses (particularly 4-5) are, again, a striking affirmation of women’s equal standing with men in church leadership in that Paul simply assumes that “every woman,” like “every man,” could prophesy and pray in public.

To briefly summarise, Paul is addressing the importance of believers exercising their freedom in Christ carefully, so as to not bring disrepute to their witness of the gospel. Christians need to be mindful and culturally aware not to display themselves in ways that malign the gospel or damage its credibility. Their ‘oneness in Christ’ does not mean that markers of gender are no longer relevant or valued. As Ronald W Pierce comments, “General decency or even one’s cultural preferences should never distract from the message being preached.” 

The relationship between men and women in the church is an important one and the overall principles of respect, mutual submission, and love shown by all are continually argued for in all Paul’s writings.  However, one of the most important principles that is being emphasised in this passage is the importance of the way a Christian behaves (here, particularly in relation to their gender signaling), so as to be a credible witness for the gospel, a theme also picked up by Peter in his first letter to the early church (1 Peter 1-5). You can read more about these ideas and the context of Peter’s first letter here

The message [of 1 Corinthians 11] is, “Don’t use your freedom in Christ as an excuse to dress immodestly. In demeanour and word keep it clean!” Furthermore, men and women should show respect to each other, honouring the opposite sex as their source. As Paul stresses in the climax of this passage, believers must affirm the equal rights and privileges of women and men in the Lord. Women, as well as men, may lead in public Christian worship. Since in the Lord woman and man are not separate, women who are gifted and called by God ought to be welcomed into ministry just as men are.” – Philip B Payne, Ph.D New Testament Studies

Links: https://bit.ly/2QVZa8I and https://bit.ly/3auVuCP

Conclusion

I believe these ‘troubling texts’ have often been mistranslated, have long been misinterpreted, and largely misunderstood, leading to a faulty understanding of God’s will for Christian women and their place in the church. They have been used to build a flimsy framework that does not stand up to close analysis and which runs contrary to Scripture itself, the historical and biblical evidence of women’s full involvement in church ministry, and the greater scope of the gospel story.

I believe that when they are read and understood correctly, as Paul intended them to be, they affirm women’s active and fully participatory role in the church alongside their male counterparts and provide a robust and inspiring framework for the church today, as they did in Paul’s day, recognising that wherever the church gathers together, it’s most basic principle is to incarnate Christ.

I haven’t adopted this position simply because I wanted to, because I’m a raging feminist, or because I have no regard for what scripture really teaches. I’ve arrived at my position – egalitarian – because I genuinely and wholeheartedly believe this is what scripture consistently and cohesively teaches about women and the church.

This might be your position also, or it might not. Either way, I’d love to hear from you. Don’t hesitate to get in touch via the contact form or drop a comment below.

This article was first published 17 October 2023. You can read the entire articles relating to “Women + The Church here‘

There was a time, not so long ago, when my world was very dark. Have you ever stood outside, on a moonless night, with the thick, velvety air pressed all around you and the inky black sky above, and realised that you could see precisely nothing? That’s the kind of dark I mean.

Of course, I had all the feels as well; sadness, disorientation, confusion, an underlying sense of panic, but, primarily, the overwhelming sense was one of complete obscurity. I couldn’t see through the impenetrable blackness all around me, I couldn’t even see my hand in front of my face.

I had never been in a place like that before. It wasn’t until a long time afterward that I was able to be thankful for such a darkness, but right in the middle, I longed for light, for the path to be made clear, for God to give me a sign.

GIDEON’S FLEECE

A story kept coming to me during this time—one about a man named Gideon from the Old Testament, whom God raised up as a mighty hero and rescuer of Israel (Judges 6-8). The Israelites had been harried for seven long years under the hand of the Midianites (who were related to Israel through their common ancestor, Abraham).

The angel of the Lord appeared to Gideon one day while he was secretly threshing wheat, so as to hide the grain from the marauding Midianites. 

The angel told Gideon, “Go with the strength you have, and rescue Israel from the Midianites. I am sending you.” 

Gideon wasn’t so sure. It wasn’t so much that he doubted God, but rather he doubted God would use him. He wanted proof.

He asked God for a sign. He would put a woollen fleece out overnight on the threshing floor and if the fleece was wet with dew in the morning and the ground around it was dry, he would know for sure that God was with him and would help him rescue Israel.

The following morning, Gideon awoke to find a wet fleece on a dry floor. In fact, it was so wet that he was able to wring it out into a bowl, filling it to the brim. Convincing, yes?

Not quite enough for Gideon. Maybe it wasn’t God’s doing, just some strange quirk of overnight temperatures and precipitation and such.

He asked for a second sign, imploring God not to lose patience with him. He would put the fleece out again, but this time he asked that the fleece be dry in the morning while the ground all around would be wet.

Amazingly, that’s exactly what happened. And that’s where the story also ends, at least in relation to the signs. 

Gideon does go on to march against the Midianites, winning a decisive battle and freeing the Israelites from their control. The book of Judges, which chronicles these events, tells us that the Midianites never recovered from that day onward. The people of Israel were so impressed with Gideon’s bravery and leadership, that they tried to make him king, but he refused, 

We’re told nothing, however, about Gideon’s thoughts or feelings after receiving the second sign, only that he went confidently into battle soon after, clearly believing God to be with him.

I had always taken this story to mean: ‘ask God for a sign and the way will be made clear.’ And so, as I entered my dark night of the soul (although I didn’t know that’s what it was at the time), I repeatedly asked God for a sign. Not so specifically as, ‘make this or that happen’, but more like ‘show me which way to go.’ Metaphorically speaking, I was laying out my fleece each night, looking for a change; either a wet fleece and dry ground, or a dry fleece and wet ground. I didn’t much mind which one it was, I just wanted some indication of God’s presence, showing me which direction to take.

Like Gideon, I wanted to be brave but I didn’t want to make a decision without knowing for sure that God was with me in it. 

Bafflingly, it felt like God remained silent. I couldn’t understand it, I felt like I desperately needed a sign, I was actively looking for a sign – and yet my world remained dark. 

THE SIGN WAS  THE SIGN

I kept wondering about the story of Gideon and the message I thought the story communicated – ask God to show you, and then go that way – yet I couldn’t understand why God wasn’t coming through for me.

And then, suddenly, it hit me. The sign was the sign.

The story of Gideon wasn’t so much about direction but about trust. God already knew the way and could see the future mapped out, even if Gideon couldn’t. And Gideon didn’t need to be able to see that future to trust that God was already in it and that He had already gone before him. He just had to believe.

God had proven to Gideon He was able to do both things in relation to the fleece, and that, in fact, nothing was impossible with God. 

This was the God who had led the Israelites out of Egypt and through the Red Sea on dry ground. This was the God who had spoken to Moses from the depths of a burning bush which had not been consumed. This was the God who had called faithful Abraham out of the wealthy and prosperous civilisation of Ur to come to a place that only God knew, to a place that would become his home.

The sign was the sign – God can do anything. He already had my future mapped out, I just had to trust Him with it and step out. 

I needed to make a decision. 

STEPPING OUT IN FAITH

I’d like to be able to say that I then stepped out boldly and unafraid into a darkness that seemed all-encompassing. In reality, however, the fact that I couldn’t see where I was about to place my first step was terrifying.

Although deeply unhappy with where I was, I was also really scared to leave the place of no-decision. At least it was safe. At least it was known. At least I didn’t have to wrestle with all the doubts and fears that come when trying to make a decision – will it be the right one, will my family be ok, what if this changes everything…?

I was really scared to say ‘yes’ to God, without a single clue as to where He would take me. But I finally understood that the lesson of the story of Gideon wasn’t about waiting for the perfect sign before stepping out, but rather stepping out in faith, believing God had gone before me—and then watching God go to work.

They say that courage isn’t the absence of fear, but feeling the fear and doing it anyway (although the definition of stupidity is much the same which is why life can get complicated at times).

I noticed, almost immediately the moment I stepped out, a small glimmer of light. Things shifted in my world, doors began opening, new relationships began to flourish, and the darkness began to edge away. Like someone who has been deep underground, I felt my eyes adjusting to the light, my skin soaking in the warmth of the sun. 

“Sometimes when we’re in a really dark place, it can feel like we’ve been buried, but we’ve actually been planted.” – Christine Caine

I discovered that what had felt like a sentence of death was really a season of dormancy. I was like a seed, waiting for the right kind of conditions to grow. And, strangely enough, the truth is that most seeds germinate best in dark conditions. 

The darkness wasn’t an unhappy accident of fate, but a determined season of God. Things needed to die in the darkness in order to be reborn again in the light. 

THE DARK NIGHT OF THE SOUL

Even now, still thinking about that time, I become still and quiet, deep within my soul. It’s a difficult period to contemplate, a time of profound pain for me. 

The dark night of the soul is, as Inayat Khan writes, a total annihilation of all that you had believed in and thought that you were. Yet as Joseph Campbell states, “the dark night of the soul comes just before revelation. When everything is lost, and all seems darkness, then comes the new life and all that is needed.“

I’ve recently been reading ‘Confronting Christianity’ by Rebecca McLaughlin, who tackles the topic of suffering in Chapter 11 of her book. This chapter perhaps wouldn’t have resonated with me back then as it does now; I would venture to say that I had, generally speaking, suffered very little in my life up until that point. 

Rebecca offers a biblical framework around our concept and experience of suffering, sharing the story of two sisters, Mary and Martha, whose brother Lazarus had died (John 11:1-26). When Jesus finally arrives at their house, Lazarus has been dead for four days and both sisters are grief-stricken. We wonder that Jesus, who could have come sooner, didn’t, and instead chose to stay away. Yet even when Jesus does come, he does not fix Martha’s problem but instead invites her into a deeper, more profound realisation…

“Jesus looks her [Martha] in the eye and says, “I am the resurrection and the life.” As you stand here in your desperate grief, your greatest need is not to have your brother back again. It’s to have me.

This statement is yet more shocking than Jesus’ failure to come in the first place. Far from being the “good moral teacher who never claimed to be God” of modern mythology, Jesus here claims not that he is offering good guidelines for life, but that he himself is life: life in the face of suffering, life in the face of death.

Jesus’ power over death is absolute. I believe it is the only hope we have in the face of our inevitable end. But what fascinates me about this story is how little focus there is on Lazarus himself. Rather, the narrative draws our gaze to profound questions…In this strange stretching of the story, we get a glimpse of the whole biblical framework for suffering. The space between Lazarus’ death and Jesus’ calling of him out of the tomb is the space in which Martha sees Jesus for who he really is: her very life.” |  Rebecca McLaughlin, Confronting Christianity, pages 199-202

OUT THE OTHER SIDE

The dark night of the soul is the place where we confront the reality of death, natural or spiritual, perhaps for the first time. It’s the collapse of everything we thought we knew and understood, a painful shedding of possibly our identity, relationships, career, habits, or belief systems that had allowed us to construct some meaning to our lives.

It is often a time of existential crisis as we wrestle with our identity, our sense of self, and the purpose and meaning of life.

Yet it’s also the place where we confront Life, the true Life of the world, maybe, too, truly for the first time. “Our suffering is an entry point to relationship, a relationship formed through suffering as much as through joy. If, as Jesus claims, the goal of our existence is relationship with him, finding him in our suffering is the point.” (Rebecca McLaughlin)

As C S Lewis, British writer, literary scholar, and Anglician lay theologian, who experienced overwhelming grief at the loss of his wife, commented,  “Pain insists upon being attended to. God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our consciences, but shouts in our pain. It is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.” 

I wasn’t necessarily a better Christian walking out the other side of that dark tunnel. I wasn’t necessarily wiser, braver, or more certain of my next steps. The pain I experienced didn’t suddenly evaporate like mist in the bright light of day, and I wasn’t instantly fixed.

And yet, somehow, I had changed. When I emerged, finally, I did so with a deeper recognition of where I needed to be putting my trust, a better understanding of what is truly of value, and a resolution to allow the painful experience to shape me into a better person moving forward.

And I can still recall the moment in the middle of that dark night of the soul when I suddenly understood the call of God to mean that I must step forward into the darkness. And that, as I took that first step, light began to spill in through the darkness, illuminating my path, and I discovered that the One I was following had been there all along. 

I recently studied the book of Ephesians with a small Christian connect group I’m fortunate to be a part of and it was an amazing few weeks, taking a deeper dive into this ancient letter. As we worked our way through the letter, week by week, we heard words of wisdom, counsel, and encouragement from one of the greats of the Christian faith, Paul the Apostle.

Paul starts his letter by commending the church at Ephesus for their strong faith in Jesus and their love of God’s people everywhere. He comments that he hasn’t stopped thanking God and praying for them constantly.

In Chapter 2, Paul reminds the believers that Christ himself had brought peace between two opposing sides – Jew and Gentile – uniting them into one people. These two groups had become one, members of God’s family, a holy temple for the Lord in which His Spirit dwelt.

In Chapter 3, Paul shares his insights into God’s mysterious plan, which had long been hidden; that both Jews and Gentiles share equally in the riches found in Christ. And, in fact, this mysterious plan was that at the right time, God would bring everything together – all things in heaven and earth –  under the authority of Christ. The church’s purpose in all this is to display God’s wisdom and its rich variety to all, a cameo of what God intends for all things.

Chapter 4 is an inspiring sermon about living in the light; as Paul encourages the church at Ephesus to constantly renew their thoughts and attitudes through the work of the Spirit in their lives. The purpose, Paul comments in Chapter 5, is to imitate God, living a life filled with love, following the example of Christ. He encourages the believers to be careful how they live, letting the Spirit guide every aspect of their lives and he prays that God would empower them with inner strength from His glorious, unlimited resources.

As we drew closer to the end of Chapter 5, however, we all grew a little (comically) hesitant and uncomfortable. Those awkward verses about submission were approaching and, in particular, wives submitting to their husbands. Nobody wants to discuss those, even at the best of times!

In the light of this, I want to take a closer look at those verses (Ephesians 5:21-22), and their surrounding context, and I hope to demonstrate just how inspiring these verses really are and just how glad we can be that they form part of the Word of God!

Ephesians 5:21-22: Wives, Submit To Your Husbands

These verses have sometimes been bundled into the conversation about women’s role in ministry, a topic I recently covered in more detail in my article ‘Women + The Church‘. However, the context of Ephesians 5 shows that these verses aren’t intended for women specifically, or speaking particularly to aspects of women in ministry, but rather form part of Paul’s discourse on how all believers are to live spirit-filled lives, ‘carefully determining what pleases the Lord’ (Ephesians 5:18).

Paul begins by commenting (v21): “submit to one another, out of reverence for Christ.” This verse is often treated as a singular comment or instruction in its own right, followed by a secondary instructive: “wives, submit to your husbands“, but, in the original Greek, these two verses are connected and are intended to be part of an entire thought. Verse 22 isn’t a complete sentence as there is no verb. It literally translates as ‘wives to their own husbands as to the Lord‘, with the idea of submission (as we have it in our English translations) therefore coming from the previous verse (21).

The separation of 5:21 and 5:22 into separate sections demonstrates the sometimes misleading consequences of dividing biblical books into sections, chapters, or verses, which simply did not exist in the original manuscripts. The punctuation and various textual divisions that we see in our modern Bibles (sentences, verses, chapters etc) came much later and sometimes, unfortunately, as is the case in Ephesians 5, separate what is clearly intended to be a whole unit of thought.

The most important thing to notice is that the relationship between husbands and wives is not the main theme that Paul is addressing.

Ephesians 5:21-22 must be read as one unit of thought, contained within an even greater scope of thought: living by the Spirit’s power (Ephesians 5:15-6:19). Paul is instructing all the church about how to outwork their spirit-filled lives in conjunction with their relationships of interdependence, giving examples of what this looks like for spouses, parents and children, and (specifically in Paul’s time) slaves and masters.

Living By The Spirit’s Power: Respect + Love

Believers are not isolated individuals but one body – Christ’s, empowered by his Spirit – also connected within the context of Christ’s body through the differing dynamics of human relationships. All are encouraged to live a life filled with love (Ephesians 5:1) and empowered by the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18), deploying a servant heart in all these interdependent relationships, which is modeled on the pattern of Jesus. Paul writes elsewhere about this theme of servant-heartedness in his letter to the church at Philippi, where he says:

Don’t be selfish; don’t try to impress others. Be humble, thinking of others as better than yourselves. Don’t look out only for your own interests, but take an interest in others, too. You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, he gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When he appeared in human form, he humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross. | Philippians 2:3-8, NLT

As author and theologian C S Lewis puts it, “humility is not thinking less of yourself but thinking of yourself less.”

The structure and context of Ephesians 5 make it clear that Paul’s words about submission in marriage are given as an application of his primary theme, which is life in the Spirit. Further, this submission is mutual and is motivated by an individual’s love and respect for Jesus.

Before I take a look at the specific passage in more depth, however, I’d like to ask a question that I think is super helpful in trying to understand any text: is there additional context?

“When in doubt, zoom out.“

Concerning Ephesians 5, is there a further context that speaks into Paul’s words? And yes, I think there is.

The Wider Context Of Ephesians 5

A significant issue that Paul had tackled in his letter to Timothy concerned the church at Ephesus. We learn in 1 Timothy that false teaching was a problem for the Ephesian church and Paul writes to Timothy to instruct the believers to be filled with love, have a clear conscience, and genuine faith. He then specifically addresses the requirement for an appropriate framework around learning and teaching, particularly for women, to combat this false teaching.

Part of his discourse involved discussing the interdependent dynamics between men and women and, importantly for our consideration here, how these dynamics were to be outworked in the church in contrast to the false narratives of the culture. Women weren’t to take over, Paul instructs, act in domineering ways, or tell everyone else what to do (just because they were now ‘free in Christ’). Neither were they to use their gender as a weapon, either sexually or authoritatively, claiming superiority over men or absorbing the cultural myth (that Eve was formed first and was therefore more important).

Men and women ‘in the Lord’ are interdependent, Paul states, regardless of how the surrounding culture may view this relationship. Neither one is without the other – and all things come from God. (1 Corinthians 11:8-12). (To read more about the situation in Ephesus and Paul’s thoughts in his letter to Timothy, head over here).

The flow of his argument is firmly rooted in the Genesis narrative and the interdependence between husbands and wives established from the beginning, a framework that he specifically addresses in his letter to Timothy (Ephesians 5:31-33 cp 1 Timothy 2:13-15). Their status as equals is shown in not just their relationship to one another as fellow humans, but also their relationship with each other as spouses.

Beautiful theological overtones are hidden within the creation story concerning marriage, which point to the redeeming work of Jesus and the creation of the church, styled ‘his bride’ (John 19:34, Ephesians 5:25-27, 1 Corinthians 12:27). We are given to understand from Ephesians 5:31-33 that the relationship between Jesus and the church wasn’t modeled on the first marriage but, in fact, it was the other way around. God had the church in mind from the very beginning. Marriage is our human way of experiencing and understanding how we, together as one body, relate to Jesus as his church.

I believe these same ideas form part of the context of his flow of thoughts and better informs our understanding of the kind of interdependence (mutual submission) that Paul has in mind, concerning marriage.

Within this framework and with this perspective in mind we’re guided in our interpretation of Paul’s instructions to husbands and wives.

Mutual Submission

Ephesians 5:21-22 (and onwards) is speaking of mutual submission. The ‘what’ (submission) is the same for both spouses, the ‘why’ is the same (out of reverence for Christ); it’s the ‘how’ that differs. Before looking at this in more depth, it would be helpful to unpack submission a little more.

Submission for most modern English readers is taken to mean ‘subjection’, ‘subjugation’, ‘lesser in authority’, ‘under the rule or authority of’. Certainly, the dictionary supports this as one interpretation, defining submit in the following way:

“submit (verb): a. to yield oneself to the authority or will of another : surrender. b. : to permit oneself to be subjected to something, to defer to or consent to abide by the opinion or authority of another.”

However, submit can also mean: “to present or propose to another for review, consideration, or decision, to deliver formally”, and: “to put forward as an opinion or contention.”

The original Greek word from which we get our English translation is Ὑποτασσόμενοι (Hypotassomenoi) which is a passive form of the verb ὑποτάσσω (hypotasso). It was a military term (which is fascinating in light of Paul’s later thoughts in Ephesians 6), and, when used in a military context, there is a strong sense of submitting to someone of higher rank. For example, a soldier must arrange himself in order under his sergeant. A sergeant arranges himself in order under the master-sergeants, and so on and so forth.

In a non-military sense, it’s used to mean a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden. 

Side Note: it’s interesting to understand how we arrived at our English word ‘submit’. The New Testament texts, written in Koine Greek, developed over time, keeping pace with the growth of the early church. It wasn’t until around 380-400AD that a Latin translation was made by St Jerome, which later became known as ‘the Vulgate’. Jerome’s translation became the standard Latin version of the Bible for the Western Latin-speaking Church for many centuries.

It wasn’t until 1535 that the first complete English Bible was published (the Coverdale Bible), which used, as its source, much of Tyndale’s work in translating the Hebrew and Greek texts, but which also relied heavily on the Latin Vulgate (which had been in use in the church for over 1000 years) as well as Luther’s German New Testament.

Our English word submit (English) is borrowed from the Latin words “sub” (under) plus the verb “mittere” (to send forth), which was originally translated from the original Greek hypotasso). Incidentally, we also get the word “mission” from the same word (mittere).

It’s sometimes difficult to fully convey an original meaning in a target language. Nuance is often important in using a particular word but differences between languages mean that an exact translation is often not possible. The target language finds a word that is close, but missing some of the nuance that gave the original word its depth and range of meaning.

I think this is very much the case here. Paul is using a military term in what seems, initially, to be a non-military context but, as he progresses, it becomes obvious that warfare is very much at the front and centre of his thoughts (Chapter 6), as well as the example given by Jesus regarding humility/servanthood, and it’s likely the use of this word is intentional

The Latin translation contains some of the original meaning but has lost much of its military connotations and, by the time it makes its way into our English translation, ‘to set forth under‘ has become ‘under the authority of‘, losing almost entirely the true sense of the original word.

However, considering the context of Paul’s usage (retrospectively guided by his commentary in Ephesians 6), the idea of submission here, I think, is very much: ‘deploy yourself in support of’, ‘think of your spouse as better than yourself’, ‘be prepared to go into battle for your spouse’s interests, not just your own’, ‘arrange yourself in formation, in devotion to’, ‘be on mission in support of your spouse’.

Life in the Spirit, Paul says, is a life completely different from what a believer had previously known, a life that had been corrupted by lust and deception (Ephesians 4:22). This new life is one in which they are created to be like God – truly righteous and holy. And yet, they also needed to be on their guard. They hadn’t just entered into a new life, but an old battle, one which had been raging since the dawn of time, in which good fought against evil, light against darkness, the God of truth against the enemy of lies.

“Stay alert“, he exhorts, “and be persistent in your prayers for all believers everywhere.” (Ephesians 6:18). In their spirit-guided relationships, husbands and wives needed to be aware of the reality of the battle they were in, that they were on mission together, and to deploy themselves in support of one another, following the model patterned by Jesus – servant-hearted submission.

For Wives

Wives are “to submit to their husbands as to the Lord. For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body, the church.”

In the same way that Christ is the head of the church, Paul says, so the husband is the head of his wife.

This passage is often interpreted to mean that Jesus is the head of the church in that he is the supreme authority of the church. Certainly, all authority in heaven and earth has been given to Jesus (Matthew 28:18), he is far above any ruler or leader, not only in this world but the world to come (Ephesians 1:22-23), and is described by Paul as Lord over creation (Colossians 1:15), over all spiritual power (Colossians. 1:16), and the eternal God and Sustainer of the universe (Colossians. 1:17). There is no doubt of Jesus’ supremacy over all things.

But is this what Paul means by head? What does he have in mind when he says that Jesus is the head of the church?

Interestingly, Ephesians 1:22 states that God has done all these things – ie put all things under the authority of Christ for the benefit of the church. The church is not a separate entity to also be put under Christ’s authority but part of his own body, a beneficiary of the work that God has done in Jesus.  We – the church – have been made more than conquerors because we are part of Jesus’ own body. His victory becomes our victory, and his authority becomes our authority.

Paul expands on these thoughts in Ephesians 5:21-33 and gives us exactly what (I think) he means by head. He qualifies that Jesus is head of the church because he is the saviour of his body, which is the church. There is nothing authoritative or hierarchical in these sentiments, conversely, Paul’s language is sacrificial, life-giving, nourishing, and empowering, a theme that he often picks up elsewhere (Colossians 1:18, 2:19; Ephesians 4:15–16).

The church only exists because of the sacrificial death of Jesus, prefigured by the deep sleep that came upon Adam in the Genesis story. Her entire identity is shaped by her source (head); in Eve’s case, Adam, and the church’s case, Jesus. She, the church, is made of the same stuff as him. Through Jesus’ death and sacrifice, she was created and at his resurrection, she becomes a living creature.

Paul doesn’t only touch on this topic here, in Ephesians, but these same thoughts also form part of his discourse in 1 Corinthians 11:3-4. In that particular passage, there are fourteen primary reasons to interpret head as referring to “source” rather than “authority” (https://bit.ly/2QVZa8I) and I think the same reasons apply here in Ephesians 5.

Paul wants wives to understand that in this spirit-led life, they are not independent of their husbands but one flesh and one body, in the same way that Christ and the church are one. Wives are to view their husbands through the lens of Christ’s sacrificial love and devotion and, because of this, show respect, honour, and devotion in the same way the church respects and loves Christ. The way in which Paul frames the perspective of wives is compelling evidence that he wishes them to think of their marital relationship as one of unity and mutual support. Rather than painting a picture of husbands as distant and authoritative, he describes them as close and intimate, the selfless nourishers of the body, head in the same way that Christ is head of the Church.

“Every time Paul talks about the husband being the head, it seems to me the point is not hierarchy but unity. The point is that the head and the body are connected to each other and dependent on each other.” | Keith Gregoire

In the first century, there was no need for anyone to tell wives to obey their husbands; obedience was already an expectation in that culture, but to take an active involvement in their mutual spiritual battle, voluntarily deploying themselves with a servant heart for the good of their husband was probably a concept which was foreign to many women. Hence Paul’s specific advice and instructions for wives on how to contribute to the flourishing of a spirit-led marriage through their posture of submission.

For Husbands

What did it look like for husbands to submit to their wives? What was the ‘how’ for them?

Paul tells them that submission from a husband looks like love, in the same way Jesus loved the church. 

Everything that Jesus did was for the welfare of the church, his body. He washed her, made her holy and clean, exalted her to the position of unblemished glory, cared for her, and fed her. She is his very own, bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. He doesn’t consider her as lesser or under him, a separate identity from himself, but a worthy equal, actually part of his own identity.

It’s so interesting that Paul presents the same situation for each spouse, but from a slightly different perspective. For wives, they were to look to Jesus’ connection to the church through the lens of sacrifice. Husbands are to look through the lens of Jesus’ love for the church. This is the blueprint for understanding how they are to show submission in their relationship.

Paul instructs husbands to view their wives with the same regard they view themselves. Whatever privileges, opportunities, or benefits were afforded to them were also to be afforded to their wives. Husbands contribute to the flourishing of a spirit-led marriage by loving their wives fully and completely, as if they were loving themselves.

In a fundamentally patriarchal society, with men occupying most public roles and wielding significant authority in the private sphere, women were viewed as perpetually under the guardianship of a man, be it a father, husband, or other male relative. Paul addresses this inequality through the lens of Jesus, pointing husbands to the reality that their wives were akin to their very own bodies, worthy and deserving of the same standard of love and care that a husband would show to himself.

Mutual Submission In A Collaborative Partnership

Marriage is a collaborative partnership, Paul says, and, more than that, spouses are fellow soldiers in the same battle, one in which they are engaged not with flesh-and-blood enemies, but an enemy far more devious with stakes far higher. This was spiritual warfare, a fight against mighty powers in this dark world and against evil spirits in the heavenly places. Paul’s warfare language – deploy yourselves in support of (your spouse) – is exactly the right kind of language to employ for these interdependent relationships guided by the Spirit of God.

Husbands and wives are presented with the model of Jesus who, having gone into the ultimate battle and given up his life for the church, became both conquering victor over death, and saviour of the church. Both husband and wife are reminded of the key aspects involved; love, devotion, and sacrifice.

For husbands, biblical submission looks like love, with all its facets of personal sacrifice and loving devotion. When a husband looks at his wife, he is to picture the church as Jesus’ own body, not separate from him but part of his very identity, the woman for whom he died. He is to love his wife in acknowledgment of that love and sacrifice.

For wives, biblical submission looks like reverence, with all its facets of profound honour and loving esteem. When a wife looks at her husband, she is to picture the incredible way in which Christ saved the church, even to the laying down of his own life. She is to reverence her husband in acknowledgment of that love and sacrifice.

This mutual submission – this looking to the other, and not just one’s own interests – is a work of the Spirit, the blueprint given by God for a flourishing and life-giving relationship between husbands and wives. Rather than being a passage instructing wives only to submit to their husbands, or emphasising men as the authoritative leader in marriage, these verses offer a compelling picture of what marriage touched by the hand of God looks like; mutually submissive, collaboratively protective, and spiritually nourishing. These relationships are outworked in the glorious resurrection light of God’s new creation, brought into the life of the Spirit, and guided by the preeminent example of Christ’s love and sacrifice for the church.

Ephesians 5:21-22 through 33 are inspiring and empowering verses that encourage us to look beyond ourselves and toward Jesus, modeling the kind of love and sacrifice he demonstrated in a beautiful illustration of the way Christ and the church are one.

“As the Scriptures say, “A man leaves his father and mother to get married, and he becomes like one person with his wife.” This is a great mystery, but I understand it to mean Christ and his church. So each husband should love his wife as much as he loves himself, and each wife should respect her husband.” | Ephesians 5:31-33, CEV

“If, then, there is any encouragement in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any affection and mercy, make my joy complete by thinking the same way, having the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility consider others as more important than yourselves. Everyone should look not to his own interests, but rather to the interests of others. Adopt the same attitude as that of Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be exploited. Instead he emptied himself by assuming the form of a servant, taking on the likeness of humanity. And when he had come as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death — even to death on a cross.” | Philippians 2:3-8, CEV

“You can’t read the New Testament without seeing the call to holiness in the Christian life. But that holiness is a work of God’s grace as the Holy Spirit empowers the believer to live a life pleasing to God. New Testament holiness is a joyous privilege, not a heavy burden and duty.

 

New Testament holiness enhances life, it never diminishes it. This is what Jesus modelled so well and it’s why genuine seekers of God were drawn to him. Simply put, he was attractive.

 

He didn’t just do holiness, he was holy. Yet no one had more life and everywhere he went, dead things came to life.

 

New Testament holiness is a mark of real life, the one that Jesus rose again to give us. It’s Jesus living in and through us.” | Lance Ralston

“In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.” | John 1:4, NIV

While it’s true that repentance – a change of mind –  is absolutely a factor in deciding to follow Jesus, repentance is not just a sudden and miraculous renovation of our previously bad life. Jesus didn’t come to make bad people good but to make dead people alive.

Christianity isn’t about behaviour modification (although getting to truly know Jesus will inevitably result in our behaviours changing) but about life being breathed into dead things.

People who were spiritually dead, dead in the most significant way there is to be dead, are reanimated and resurrected by the same power that raised Jesus from the dead; given a new identity, a new purpose, and a new hope.

The holiness that develops and grows in someone who has decided to follow Jesus is a work of the Holy Spirit, as their hearts become convicted by the things that need to change in their life. It’s not as a result of ‘modifying and conforming to acceptable Christian behaviours’ (outward conformity) but because of an inner conviction of the heart, as the flourishing life of God takes root and begins to grow in them.

In the same way that light causes natural things to grow, the light of Jesus will cause growth and flourishing in our lives. This holiness is a joy, not a burden, a mark of the real life that we were always intended to live.

Repentance isn’t a one-time act, then, but an ongoing process, a conscious decision to turn from darkness and begin walking in light. But this doesn’t happen instantly and it doesn’t happen without opposition and difficulty.

Paul the Apostle likens it to a war constantly being waged within us:

“I have discovered this principle of life—that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God’s law with all my heart. But there is another power within me that is at war with my mind. This power makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin and death? Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord.” | Romans 7:21-25, NLT

Christianity is primarily a choice to enter into a relationship with God, not simply a ritual or a religious code of ethics. It’s living in communion with the Father and His Son and allowing ourselves to be led by the Holy Spirit in each decision we make in our lives. It’s living in freedom from the power that sin and death formerly had over us, even though that power continues to clamor for our attention and tries to convince us that the old way was better.

Christianity is about the reality that we are saved (justification), we are being saved (sanctification), and we will be saved (glorification). It’s a process, not a one-time event, and it’s a lot messier in our own life – and in other’s lives – than we are likely to be comfortable with.

But we are not without help, and we know that our help comes from One who has already won the battle. If we continue to put our trust and confidence in Jesus, there is nothing that will come against us that he hasn’t already defeated and over which we will not prevail.

It’s a lifetime journey, ‘a long obedience in the same direction’ (Eugene Peterson), which sometimes we’ll get right and many times we’ll get wrong.

We are people who, as Paul the Apostle comments, were once dead in our sins but are now being made alive in Christ.

What Does This Mean Practically?

The great commission given to all believers – go into the world and make disciples – was an imperative to make followers of Jesus; to collaborate in the great mission of God of bringing dead people back to life.

In the original language of the New Testament, the word disciple is translated from a Greek word, mathētēs (μαθητὴς), from manthano, meaning “to learn”. Mathētēs therefore means (unsurprisingly) a learner, a pupil or a scholar. More accurately though, it means to be a learner in the style of an apprentice, that is, someone who not only accepts the views of their teacher but is also practicing the same to eventually become like their teacher (Matthew 10:24, Luke 6:40), an accurate replica of the original.

Catch a couple of keywords there?

Learning. Practicing. Apprenticing. An accurate replica.

The Christian life takes time, and learning, and failure, and practice, and repetition. It’s a process that is moving us from dead to fully alive, from looking and being nothing like Jesus to being an accurate and true replica of the original. And it’s all done in partnership with the Holy Spirit, Who has taken up residence in our life, Who leads us and convicts us in all truth, and Who has been given to us as a seal and a promise of God’s intention to complete the good thing He has begun in us.

What this means practically is that we need to have courage, be kind, and get more specific.

Have Courage

Sometimes it can feel like choosing the Christian life is signing up for one seriously long slog through endless trenches of mud. We tell ourselves, it’s going to take back-breaking work, deprivation, difficulty, and desperation. Nevertheless, we steel our nerves, clench our knuckles, and resolve to get on with the work ahead.

If we approach the Christian life as a sole endeavour, viewing its success as entirely down to our own merits and strengths, we will inevitably fail. Remember what Paul had said: “there is another power within me that is at war with my mind. When I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong.” Left to ourselves, we’ll get it hopelessly wrong, every. single. time.

But while the Christian life certainly won’t insulate believers from hard times or difficult situations, the most important factor before taking that first step is to know and understand that we are not doing it alone. It’s not down to our own willpower, strength, or capacity. And I’m not talking about being part of a local church, although that’s a vitally important aspect of Christian life. I’m talking about being in a partnership with the Holy Spirit, allowing the Holy Spirit into our lives to do the work He is meant to do.

The Spirit dwells inside every true Christian and the evidence of the result of His work is “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control” (Galatians 5:22). The same power that raised Jesus from the dead is constantly at work in us, convicting us, guiding us, comforting us, leading us, renewing us, and changing us so that we are becoming more and more like the One we’ve chosen to follow.

But it’s a partnership, not a dictatorship. We need to allow Him to do this work.

Sometimes the biggest step in our Christian journey is to decide not to try to control more, but actively choosing to relinquish control, to surrender our will to God and allow Him to change us. He’s more than willing, He wants us to succeed, and He’s provided everything we need to be more than conquerors.

Have courage. The battle is the Lord’s – all you need to do is wear the armour He’s given you.

“Finally, be strong in the Lord and in His mighty power. Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.” | Ephesians 6:10-18

Be Kind

We’re all at different points in our spiritual journey. Some are just beginning; with a lifetime of regret they’ve chosen to lay at Jesus’ feet. They have all the enthusiasm of a newborn calf, trying to run on wobbly, newly unfurled legs, yet none of the finesse and experience of seasoned Christian life. They’re still holding tightly to things from their old life, craving the comfort and familiarity of the things they’re used to, even though they know in their heart these things are burdens that need to be set down. For sure, they’re going to mess up. We know this because everyone does, no matter how well-intentioned a person starts out.

Some may hit the ground running – no newborn stumbles for them, but, like in the parable of the sower and the seed, difficulty strikes, hardships appear and their faith suddenly begins to waver. The heat of desert seasons becomes all too much and they’re in danger of throwing it all in.

Others start out more steadily, less forest-fire blaze and more home-fire burning. They grow in faith but, as time passes, they also grow attached to spiritual performance. They begin to major in minors and become drawn into extremes in a misguided zeal for religious purity. They begin to employ the use of ‘formulas’ and ‘doctrines’, pressing good people of faith into conformity with systems, and setting up rigid religious and social guidelines for themselves and other believers. Their faith has metastasized, becoming toxic and destructive, a kind of spirituality that slowly imprisons the mind and poisons the soul.

All these people (ourselves included somewhere in the mix) are people that Jesus died for. Our first action, always, when trying to ‘build each other up in our most holy faith’ is to remember who these people are.

There are few truly evil people in our churches (although, there are some and we need to be aware of that reality) and a great deal more only-human people, who struggle with what it is to be human, with all our emotions, fears, doubts, mistakes, and joy.

While, as Paul the Apostle says, this doesn’t mean we should continue in sin that grace may abound – on the contrary, we continually encourage and preach the necessity of turning from the old life and pressing forward in the new – our encouragement, teaching, counsel, and reproof to one another needs to be wrapped by kindness, the same kind of loving kindness that God has shown to us, and which led to our repentance.

“And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.“But you, dear friends, must build each other up in your most holy faith, pray in the power of the Holy Spirit, and await the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will bring you eternal life. In this way, you will keep yourselves safe in God’s love. And you must show mercy to those whose faith is wavering. Rescue others by snatching them from the flames of judgment. Show mercy to still others, but do so with great caution, hating the sins that contaminate their lives.” | Jude 1:20-22, NLT

Get More Specific

Jesus wasn’t just a great teacher, an inspirational leader, or a good person.

He was the One and Only Son of God. The Word, who took on humanity and dwelt among us.

He came into the world to save the world from the consequences of sin. He came to overthrow death. He came to vanquish the enemy of all things true, and just, and right. In his own words, he came so that we might have life and have it in abundance.

Knowing this, we need to get more specific about what it is that God is doing in and through us, right now in our little corner of the world. He’s in the resurrection business, busy making all things new and He’s invited us to participate in that mission, to bring that light and life to others.

The kind of Christianity we live and demonstrate isn’t about adhering to strict religious ethics or morals, convincing others about the rightness of our doctrines, advancing a particular denominational brand or flavour, or showing a pseudo kind of holiness we wear like a badge. It’s about living the real life that Jesus came to give us, a resurrection life that brings healing, transformation, flourishing, and genuine holiness.

The question, then, isn’t what should we be doing? (or not doing) but what is life-giving? Is what I’m choosing, promoting, or advancing flowing from that flourishing, resurrection life that Jesus came to give us? Does what I do and say enhance life, bring freedom, initiate transformation, and cause holiness to develop in myself and others?

Are we becoming more and more like Jesus, an accurate and true replica of the original?

Let’s get more specific and remember: we’re in the resurrection business.

Let’s continually point to Jesus, the light and life of the world, the one who has made it all possible. He didn’t just do holiness, he was holy. And yet no one had more life and everywhere he went, dead things came to life. That’s the kind of Christianity we want to have too.

“God the Father knew you and chose you long ago, and His Spirit has made you holy. As a result, you have obeyed Him and have been cleansed by the blood of Jesus Christ. May God give you more and more grace and peace. All praise to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is by His great mercy that we have been born again, because God raised Jesus Christ from the dead. Now we live with great expectation, and we have a priceless inheritance—an inheritance that is kept in heaven for you, pure and undefiled, beyond the reach of change and decay. And through your faith, God is protecting you by His power until you receive this salvation, which is ready to be revealed on the last day for all to see.” | 1 Peter 1: 2-5, NLT

 

(Not a reader? Take a listen instead ⇓)

“Always seek to do good to one another and to everyone.” | Thessalonians 5:15, ESV

Fidelity.

It’s a word perhaps more likely to be used in the context of its absence rather than its presence. Regrettably, it often comes to our attention through it’s lack; infidelity.

While we tend to think of fidelity as describing physical faithfulness in committed, intimate relationships, it’s not just restricted to these.

The word fidelity is also used to describe employee loyalty to a company, accuracy of scientific modeling and simulation, and, in audio, how accurately, a copy reproduces its source (the term ‘hi-fi’, a shortened version of ‘High Fidelity’ refers to the high-quality reproduction of sound from its original source).

Derived from the Latin word fidēlis, fidelity is the quality of being faithful, loyal, accurate, or true. And it’s a quality essential to all authentic, interpersonal relationships.

Faithfulness + Loyalty

In a consumer-driven and highly narcissistic society, fidelity is a fast-disappearing commodity. Those who espouse fidelity as some kind of virtue, particularly in relation to marriage, are considered by many to be childish and somewhat naïve. Increasingly, we’re being told that more important than your word, promise, or loyalty to someone else, is doing what’s best for you*.

Like those who once believed the universe revolved around the earth, this generation is perhaps the most faithless of its time; producing friendships that are largely built on utility or pleasure, by those who believe that all else is subordinate to their own interests or needs.

Unlike the philosophers of old, who wrote copiously about the importance of friendship, it seems that while we certainly still place a premium of sorts on friendship, it no longer carries the same significance to us today as it did for the ancients.

Much has been written about fidelity in marriage; but what about fidelity in friendship?

More Than Utility Or Pleasure

Friendships built on either utility or pleasure aren’t innately wrong in and of themselves. But they are both transient and short-lived, simply because one’s needs and pleasures are apt to change over time. Fidelity doesn’t really form part of the dynamic. Loyalty isn’t really a requirement in a relationship that is largely transactional. If needs or pleasure are no longer being met, one simply moves on to another source or supply, with no sense of guilt or attachment.

Yet, as humans, and particularly as Christians, we’re encouraged to go deeper in our friendships. Our relationships are intended to be built on something far more permanent and meaningful than simply passing transactions of utility or pleasure.

The Bible offers life-changing wisdom on how we’re to approach friendships and what a friendship of fidelity, built in a culture of goodness, looks like.

A Culture Of Goodness

One of the first things we’re told about the creation of the world in which we live is that it was good. Translated from the Hebrew word tov (טוב), the constant use of the word good throughout Genesis 1 connects the flourishing and harmonious creation that springs to life with God’s own life (Genesis 1:1-31). All the goodness that exists flows from God Himself and is infused throughout this new creation; its goodness is simply an extension of Him.

Humanity, created for the purpose of imaging God’s goodness, is included in this summary of good. From Genesis, we discover that all that is around us and, indeed, in us is intended to be God-shaped and God-filled; a culture of goodness.

We know, of course, this goodness did not last.

Disobedience…shame…mortality; the evil of sin entered God’s good world, and would eventually spread across the surface of the earth. From the world that existed then, a perfect Eden where God’s glory shone softly between the tall, slim trees and Heaven and Earth were as one, to now, is a long and sorry tale.

But even in the dark, God has been busy making all things new. His story of reconciliation and redemption finally find light and life and goodness in Jesus Christ.

We, the church, as the body of Christ, are created anew, now empowered to flourish in the purpose for which God intended; celebrating and demonstrating a culture of goodness.

Just as in the first creation narrative, so it is in the second. God becomes the dynamic and life-giving goodness that permeates the culture of the church and our relationships; both those with the household of faith and those with our unbelieving neighbours and friends. These relationships are built on something lasting and valuable; the innate goodness of God.

“Bad people can be friends for reasons of pleasure or utility, but only good people can be friends for each other’s sake.” | Aristotle

What Does Fidelity In Friendship Look Like?

Centered and rooted in the goodness of God, fidelity is a crucial element to friendships built in a culture of goodness.

Firstly, fidelity in friendship means we’ll be people who are reliable in our friendships and that our friends are people who can be relied upon. We trust and know that their word is good and that they’re faithful, and they’re assured of the same from us in return. (Proverbs 18:24, Proverbs 12:26).

Unsurprisingly, faithfulness is more likely to be tested in times of adversity than joy but Proverbs 17:17 assures us that true friends will be found in times of trouble too. The parable of the Prodigal son is a lesson in the disappointment of friendships built on the lesser, more transient ground of utility or pleasure, friendships which soon disappear when the transactional nature of the relationship runs its course (Luke 15:11-32).

Secondly, fidelity in friendship quenches the evil of gossip and slander. It’s impossible for fresh water and saltwater to flow from the same spring. Likewise, it’s impossible for us to praise our Lord and Father in one breath, and then curse our friends with another (James 3:1-12). This kind of dynamic in friendship isn’t life-giving, but life-destroying, akin to lighting a forest fire from a single, seemingly insignificant spark. Small but catastrophic, gossip and slander will poison any friendship (James 4:11, Proverbs 16:28). However, a commitment to fidelity in friendship will prevent the ruin that gossip or slander inevitably brings.

Thirdly, fidelity in friendship models the sacrificial love shown by Jesus. This will show itself in not just words but action; desiring our friends’ good and acting to bring it about, advocating on their behalf (Job 16:20-21), showing compassion (Galatians 6:2), exercising humility in our interactions with each other (Philippians 2:3), resolving to choose patience and kindness (Proverbs 22:24-25), and being willing to offer forgiveness when asked, or, conversely, accept forgiveness when it’s offered (Colossians 3:12-14).

Does fidelity in friendship require us to overlook sin? Not at all. But a friendship built in a culture of goodness will also acknowledge that we exist in a still-fallen and yet to be completely redeemed world and, because of this, we will fail and be failed during this lifetime.

Perhaps this is where fidelity finds its greatest test; do we think good, speak good, and want good for our friends, despite the reality that they can and will let us down? Do we feel the goodwill of our friends towards us? Do we know, deep within our hearts, that they too think good of us, speak good of us to others, and actively want good for us, despite the reality that we will sometimes fail them?

“The friend who can be silent with us in a moment of despair or confusion, who can stay with us in an hour of grief and bereavement, who can tolerate not knowing…not healing, not curing…that is a friend who cares.” | Henri Nouwen

“Wishing to be friends is quick work, but friendship is a slow ripening fruit.” | Aristotle

What fidelity in friendship ultimately looks like is this: a tree on a lonely hill, and a beloved Son giving his life that we might have life, and have it more abundantly. What we learn from Jesus’ example of faithfulness and fidelity is that greater love has no man than to give his life for his friends.

Fidelity In A Fallen World

It’s important to acknowledge that while we may desire to build flourishing friendships of fidelity, we’re still creatures of the earth, living in a fallen world. Paul, the Apostle comments in Romans 7:19, “For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing.“

While this doesn’t mean we should give up on our pursuit of fidelity in friendship, we should perhaps expect the best, plan for the worst, and prepare to be surprised (Denis Waitley).

Expecting the best is, I think, defined in this context as what we’re responsible to bring to any prospective relationship. More than just a requirement for utility or pleasure, we must be ready to contribute to building our friendships in a culture of goodness. Are we personally prepared to offer steadfast loyalty, demonstrate a pursuit of truth, and show a commitment to discretion and faithfulness?

Christian discipleship is a process that moves us from being spiritually and emotionally immature children to be fully mature and developed adults – “people dedicated to God, and capable and equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:17).

This process of discipleship is a principle-centered, character-based, “inside out” approach to developing our authentic self in Christ. It means to start first with ourselves; even more fundamentally, to start with the most inside part of self – our core – and to honestly analyse our paradigms, our character, and our motives. We cannot expect a culture of goodness to flourish in our relationships if we’re ill-equipped ourselves to contribute to that.

Planning for the worst is, I think, the reality that both ourselves and those with whom we wish to grow in friendship will make mistakes, will fail each other, and will cause pain and disappointment. Indeed, all of creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of the one who subjected it (Romans 8:19-23). Until that perfect day, we can and will continue to fail.

Do we acknowledge these flaws exist in ourselves and others? Do we choose to love, despite these failures? Have we planned and prepared for the time where we may need to offer forgiveness, patience, gentleness, and kindness to those who have disappointed us? Or the time when we too must plead forgiveness and pursue reconciliation with those whom we have failed? And let’s not overlook the fact that it was at the time that we were still enemies of God that He most proved His love for us by sending His Son  (Romans 5:8).

And prepare to be surprised! Prepare to be surprised at what the love of God, which has been shone into our hearts through His Son, Jesus Christ, is able to accomplish! In Jesus, we are free to set down doubt, judgment, rejection, loss. We’re free to take up the crown of the kingdom, and our identity as a much-beloved son or daughter. From this position of knowing and being known, and deeply loved as a child of God, we’re free to live in a life of love, and His grace will give us capacity and strength far beyond what is humanly possible.

“God is love. When we take up permanent residence in a life of love, we live in God and God lives in us. This way, love has the run of the house, becomes at home and mature in us, so that we’re free of worry on Judgment Day – our standing in the world is identical with Christ’s. There is no room in love for fear. Well-formed love banishes fear. Since fear is crippling, a fearful life – fear of death, fear of judgment – is one not yet fully formed in love. We, though, are going to love – love and be loved. First, we were loved, now we love.”  |  1 John 4:17-21, MSG

---

*This article should not be interpreted as critical or not in support of the need for self-care, the reality of a requirement for appropriate establishment of boundaries within relationships, or the necessity of recognising, naming, and leaving toxic relationships. I would argue that these are also aspects of championing a culture of goodness. Doing what’s best for you is sometimes a valid and necessary step in growing this culture in your own life on the basis that God is the foundation for living. “If we don’t have a sense of the primacy of God, we will never get it right. Not God at the margins, not God as an option, not God on the weekends. God at center and circumference; God first and last; God, God, God.” | Eugene Peterson

This article was first published 16 August 2021

Life can be described as one long journey with many different paths and choices along the way. Like any kind of journey, the journey of life requires us to be aware, to plan, and to make decisions about how we’re going to reach our destination, looking for navigation points and signposts to guide us along the way.

We could choose to relinquish any idea of intentionality, but approaching life in this haphazard, unplanned way makes the likelihood of us reaching our desired destination more a random accident of fate rather than any kind of expected certainty.

Much like a traveller prepares for any kind of trip through careful researching, resourcing, and planning, being intentional in how we live and the choices we make increases the probability of us actually reaching our goal.

Intentionality can be defined as “with purpose” or “an aim or a plan”, but more than simply something that one “hopes or intends to accomplish”. The dictionary definition of ‘intentionality ‘ is ‘thoughts, beliefs, desires, hopes which consist in their being directed towards some object or state of affairs‘. It is a word that’s connected to specific aspirations, dreams, objectives, or goals, and is the opposite of being aimless, purposeless, mindless, or drifting.

Sometimes people can confuse intention with action. Yet living intentionally doesn’t require massive, dramatic action. While it would be impossible to live intentionally without some kind of action, it shouldn’t be confused with doing. Intention falls into the category of being; who we are and who we intend to become.

Living mindfully, or intentionally, then, is learning to value ‘being’, as much as we value ‘doing’. It’s operating with purpose, rather than on autopilot or being disconnected from what’s going on.

Living intentionally requires us to ask who am I right now, and who will I be in the future. The question of ‘how do I make that happen’ becomes a natural result of the mindset of intentionality.

Living with intention doesn’t complicate life or overstress it, it simplifies life. It allows you to live on your terms, proactively, in the direction of your purpose. It clarifies everything that you’re surrounded by and allows you to strip away the complexities that don’t fit with your desired goals, aligning what you do with your personal values and who you intend to become.

It’s important to remember that living intentionally doesn’t necessarily guarantee successful or happy outcomes in every scenario. What it does guarantee, however, is the ability to navigate life’s ups and downs in a positive way. Paul the Apostle commented on the value of self-regulation and true happiness (which is not found in circumstances or possessions), when he says, “I have learned in whatever state I am to be content” (Philippians 4:11-13). He knew who he was and he knew where he was going and in knowing this, he was able to be deeply content, despite some terrible circumstances he experienced.

When we consider intentionality in the light of spiritual life, we realise just how important living intentionally is to achieve our goal.

The goal of being more like Jesus doesn’t come naturally or happen randomly, it requires purposeful choice in a specific direction. Having the mind of Christ is something that is developed in us, not something we’re naturally born with.

There’s a whole chapter in the Bible devoted to ordinary people made remarkable by the intentionality of their choices. Consider the impressive lineup of men and women found in Hebrews 12, who found their place there by their intentional and responsive obedience to the work of God in their lives. Who they were – their belief, their mindset, their intentions – was what God approved of; their actions were secondary to the way – or better yet, the direction – in which they chose to live.

Intentionality can be synonymous with mindfulness, that is, choosing to be mindful and ready to respond as and when situations arise.

The book of Romans tells us how important it is for our minds to be transformed (12:2), and the letter to the church at Philippi tells us what our minds need to be transformed by (4:8) but it is the letter to Timothy that really shows us how this is done (2 Timothy 1:7) – “the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid but gives us power, love, and self-discipline”.

We’ve been given the ability to be transformed by the Spirit of God through powerful, intentional choices in our lives. God’s Spirit motivates us to love and self-discipline, emotions that are connected to our spiritual health. It’s our emotions that tell us important data about our personal values and learning to listen and respond to those emotions, in step with the Spirit of God, forms a powerful framework for intentional living.

Here are 5 areas I believe we can focus on that will help us live more intentionally and mindfully each day:

1. Be present: make contact with the present moment.

Focus on where you are right now. Appreciate the present moment and learn to let go of past distress or future worries. Allow the peace of God to sit comfortably in your heart and really spend time being in the present. Ask yourself, who am I in this present moment and what am I seeking to cultivate in this present moment, without any sense of judgment around those questions.

2. Be aware: be aware of your thoughts and feelings.

Listen to what your emotions and thoughts are telling you, again without judgment. Emotions are important data, aligned with your personal values, and listening carefully to these will better help you to make intentional choices and decisions as you move forward.

Ensure that the choices and decisions you make are responsive, not reactive, and that you’re connecting emotionally in that process. However, don’t be led by your emotions or thoughts alone, but rather, consider what information they might be trying to tell you and use that information to make more intentional choices.

Is what you’re doing connected to your purpose and leading you toward your goal? This may include making choices that others might think of as ‘purposeless’, such as saying ‘no’ to something (when normally we might feel compelled to say ‘yes’) or taking time out from activities or people (when normally this would seem antisocial or lazy). Remember, for every ‘yes’ – things that we step into or agree to, there is a corresponding ‘no’ – things that we choose to move away from or not participate in, and vice versa. ‘Yes’ or ‘no’ are not ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ but rather are considered outcomes of our intentional way of living: knowing what to pick up and knowing what to set down.

3. Be non-judgmental: allow things to be as they are not as you would wish them to be.

Learn to withhold judgment of situations or people. You aren’t in control of everything or everyone and allowing your thoughts to focus on unpleasant circumstances or people in a judgmental way only causes unnecessary stress and anxiety to ourselves. It also distracts us from being able to make positive, intentional choices in the moment, which are related to our own personal values.

Instead, learn to be with things as they are and ready to change mindfully when it’s required.

4. Be compassionate: calm the inner critic.

There is no condemnation for those in Jesus, yet we often replay our failures over and over, hyper-focused on where we failed or what we did wrong in the past.

We need to accept what has been with compassion, understanding that whatever has happened, good or bad, can’t be undone. Yet those things are also lessons, and offer us guidance and a sense of renewed direction in decisions we are yet to make.

When we fail to accept our past decisions with compassion and understanding, we hold ourselves back from receiving the wisdom that those experiences bring and using those lessons to make better, more informed decisions in the future.

5. Be connected: find your tribe.

We were not meant to do this journey of life alone. Part of living intentionally includes choosing to walk alongside trusted companions, those people who constantly direct our attention to the significant things of God, who encourage us to be our most authentic selves, despite difficulties, and who love us wholeheartedly through good times and bad.

Paul the apostle tells us to ‘be followers of me, even as I am of Jesus’. Paul isn’t trying to impress us with his importance or success, rather, he’s pointing to the interconnected, intentional nature of Christian life. We look to others and, ultimately, of course, to Jesus, for guidance, mentorship, and companionship in the journey of life. Connectedness through community is a key aspect of being intentional in our lives.

Finally, be fearless in pursuit of what sets your soul on fire. As scripture puts it: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength… Love your neighbour as yourself.”

 

The world is not the same place it once was.

Certainty has given way to subjective reality. Truth can no longer be pinned down. Common sense doesn’t seem quite so common after all.

At times, it feels like the whole world has gone mad.

And perhaps we have…

One of the biggest conversations of our time is the gender/sexuality* debate. It used to be that gender, now a contested term, and sex were largely synonymous. If your sex or gender was ‘male’ then you were a man. If your sex or gender was ‘female’, then you were a woman.

Certainly, more is perhaps encompassed in the use of the descriptor ‘man’ rather than just ‘male’ (or ‘woman’ rather than just ‘female’), binary terms which refer to a human’s sexuality (gender, not ‘orientation’), but these terms are nonetheless indelibly connected to one another, two aspects of the same reality.

Historically, most societies have recognised only two distinct genders, a binary of masculine and feminine largely corresponding to the biological sexes of male and female. Simply put, if you had an X and a Y chromosome, you were a male human. Two XXs and you were a female human. Immature undeveloped humans were called boys and girls, respectively. Mature, fully developed humans, were called men and women.

The discovery of sex differentiation chromosomes is a relatively new science but its discovery in 1905 only confirmed what humans had believed and understood for millennia.1

“During the first decade of the 20th century, it was established that the sex of almost all many-celled biological organisms is determined at the moment of fertilisation by the combination of two kinds of microscopic entities, the X and Y chromosomes. This discovery was the culmination of more than two thousand years of speculation and experiment of how an animal, plant, or human becomes male or female.” | Nettie N Stevens And The Discovery Of Sex Determination By Chromosomes.

The Human Genome

This XY sex-determination system is shared by humans, many mammals, insects, and other animals. The perpetuation and reproduction of many species, humans included, is a result of the combining of the chromosomes from one X individual and one Y individual. Humans have forty-six chromosomes (including the two sex chromosomes, XX in females and XY in males), 23 of which are inherited from an individual’s father (a male), with the other 23 inherited from an individual’s mother (a female).

Our sex chromosomes form only part of the approximately three billion base pairs of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) that make up the entire set of chromosomes of the human organism. One of the most significant and ambitious scientific endeavours of our time has been the sequencing of this entire set of chromosomes – the human genome, a project which was begun in 1990 and which, by 2022, had produced the first truly complete human genome sequence.

The objective2 of this project was ‘to decode the human hereditary information (human blueprint) that determines all individual traits inherited from parents.‘ Dr Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, and one of the world’s leading scientists, has long worked at the cutting edge of the science of DNA, which he describes as ‘the language of God‘. He argues that science and God are in harmony – that, indeed, science is of God, and that the sequencing of the human genome ‘was both a stunning scientific achievement and an occasion of worship‘.

The sequencing of the human genome only confirmed what many have long believed; that we are ‘fearfully and wonderfully made‘ (Psalm 139:14). Humanity has been created and brought into being by an intelligent designer, who has carefully constructed the complex genetic material that makes up a complete human, with the ability for that human to replicate and reproduce in his or her own likeness. We are not an accident, a vague collection of random cells which have collided together, but a highly complex sequence of chromosomes that have formed a complete human, with a soul, intellect, morals, capability, and purpose.

In fact, the Bible comments in its earliest chapters that we are made in God’s image.  We are unique in all of creation because we are made like God. Who we are is directly connected to the One who created us.

The Emperor Has No Clothes On

Post-modern ideology would try to tell us that there are (currently) 57 genders. Gender, it’s claimed, is not something we are but something that we feel. Not only that, gender is something that is fluid, an experience that can remain static or be in constant flux. Today we may feel female. Tomorrow we may feel male. Next week, we may feel somewhere in the middle or possibly both at the same time.

But, we’re also told, gender is somehow some kind of social construct, that our gender is expressed through the roles we take on, the expectations placed on us, our relationship with others, and the complex ways that gender is institutionalised in society. Gender – how we feel and who we know ourselves to be – is unrelated to our biological and physical realities, that is, our sex and our gender are not the same thing.

The historical recognition of two genders – male and female (called the gender binary) is usually based on someone’s anatomy (the genitals they were born with), but, we’re being told, these markers are unreliable as to the true person’s self (or gender) which emerges with time (or is forced upon them by society), and which may or may not match the gender they were assigned at birth.3

(At this point, I’m looking around, wondering, when is someone going to tell the Emperor he has no clothes on?)

We are more than just our genitals, this is true. But these outward markers are only part of a complex series of chemical reactions that were set in motion the moment that fertilisation took place, the moment that we began, and the unique individual that would eventually become us sparked into reality. This sex determination, which will include all the physical, emotional, and psychological traits we will uniquely possess happens during fertilisation, and it doesn’t change during the pregnancy. 

“All human individuals—whether they have an XX, an XY, or an atypical sex chromosome combination—begin development from the same starting point. During early development the gonads of the fetus remain undifferentiated; that is, all fetal genitalia are the same and are phenotypically female. After approximately 6 to 7 weeks of gestation, however, the expression of a gene on the Y chromosome induces changes that result in the development of the testes. Thus, this gene is singularly important in inducing testis development. The production of testosterone at about 9 weeks of gestation results in the development of the reproductive tract and the masculinisation (the normal development of male sex characteristics) of the brain and genitalia. In contrast to the role of the fetal testis in differentiation of a male genital tract and external genitalia in utero, fetal ovarian secretions are not required for female sex differentiation. As these details point out, the basic differences between the sexes begin in the womb.” | National Library Of Medicine 

We are not merely male or female because our bodies say so, we are male or female because our brains also say so; neurochemically distinct from one another as either ‘male’ or ‘female’ brains. While similar in many basic ways, male and female brains show consistent differences that have important implications for each sex. Our sex (most commonly observed and confirmed by our exterior genitalia at birth) and our gender – whether we are male or female – are one and the same, and this differentiation shows up time and time again in the way we think and behave.

Diane Halpern, PhD, and past president of the American Psychological Association, comments that “there is simply too much data pointing to the biological basis of sex-based cognitive differences to ignore.” She references a catalogue of human behavioural differences that have been studied and observed4:

“Women excel in several measures of verbal ability — pretty much all of them, except for verbal analogies. Women’s reading comprehension and writing ability consistently exceed that of men, on average. They out­perform men in tests of fine-motor coordination and perceptual speed. They’re more adept at retrieving information from long-term memory. Men, on average, can more easily juggle items in working memory. They have superior visuospatial skills: They’re better at visualising what happens when a complicated two- or three-dimensional shape is rotated in space, at correctly determining angles from the horizontal, at tracking moving objects and at aiming projectiles.” | Stanford Medicine Magazine

Halpen concludes; “new technologies have generated a growing pile of evidence that there are inherent differences in how men’s and women’s brains are wired and how they work and many of these cognitive differences appear quite early in life.“

This process of sex differentiation, begun at fertilisation, continues throughout our life, influencing our physical and mental growth and development (bone structure, weight, height, genitalia, brain, and characteristics). The complex process encoded in our DNA resolutely follows the invisible instructions given at fertilisation, and, barring abnormality or mutation, results, without fail, in a gender or sex that matches our physicality.

The gender/sex of a person is the final result of unique genetic, hormonal, and morphologic sex-differentiation at fertilisation. It is fixed and it is binary, either male or female.

Your shy sensitive son isn’t a girl trapped in a boy’s body, he’s simply a shy, sensitive boy. Your boisterous, energetic, sandpit-loving daughter isn’t a boy trapped in a girl’s body, she’s simply an energetic, outdoor-loving girl. 

While our sex/gender may be fixed and binary, our unique personalities and characteristics are not. Our identity is not the same as any other person on the earth. Even identical twins are not truly 100% identical, with a complex interaction between our genes, our environment, and our epigenetic markers uniquely shaping who we are.

We are truly, each one of us, one-of-a-kind.

Historical gender roles may have played a large part in the troubling place where we now find ourselves as a culture, insisting that all men must behave in certain ways and perform certain roles (outdoorsy, tough, adventurous..) and, conversely, that all women must behave in certain ways (deferring and submissive, domestic, delicate) (another day, another blog, although I tackle some of this in relation to healthy church function in my article ‘Stop Promoting Gendered Hierarchy!‘).

However, I think a large part of what has contributed to the madness surrounding sex and gender conversations today is the abandonment of the idea of God, an intelligent, thoughtful designer who insists we were created for a purpose.

What Is A Woman?

One of the most startling, and troubling documentaries in recent times is a project undertaken by Matt Walsh, an American Christian conservative and political commentator. In his documentary, “What Is A Woman“5, Walsh asks questions that many people no longer seem willing to answer.

Can a woman be defined? (historically, a woman was defined as an adult human female). Is being a woman simply a feeling or behaving a certain way? Can a woman be trapped in a man’s body? Does being a woman mean anything at all?

In the documentary, Walsh visits a women’s march, where placards are lifted high, campaigning for the rights of women. Unfortunately, nobody seems able to define what a woman actually is, reducing the impetus of the march to nothing more than a ridiculous farce. Implausibly, many of those he interviews in his documentary seem ‘uncomfortable with his line of questioning’, deeming his tone ‘malignant and harmful’.

The prevailing (or, at least, the most vocal) narrative at play is built on a serious and disturbing detachment from subjective reality. If being a woman is simply how one feels on any given day, then being a woman can include everyone and no one. It’s no kind of definition at all.

Gender and sex are no longer something that people are willing to define. Forget science, forget biology; how any one person feels is the prevailing truth of the day. And if you have a difference of opinion in relation to the gender + sex conversation, if you even dare to ask questions, you are deemed hateful, phobic, violent, or discriminatory.

As one person interviewed in the documentary comments, “If you speak up about it … your life will be over in some way”. Defy the trans groupthink and face profound consequences.

Walsh’s long-ranging interview with a gender studies professor finds the star drilling down on a basic principle. Truth. [emphasis mine] One therapist asks, with a straight face, “whose truth are we talking about?” | Hollywood Into To

What Is Truth?

Truth.

A hot-button topic, to say the least.

And truth, it seems, is at the core of the issues we are facing in relation to gender, sexuality, and identity.

Most human activities depend upon the concept of ‘truth’ as an objective reality, including most of the sciences, law, journalism, and, indeed, elements of everyday life. As Sir Isaac Newton discovered, if you throw an apple up in the air, it (or anything else) will invariably come down. The old adage, ‘what goes up must come down‘ is attributed to his discovery of this undeniable truth. The science behind this, is, of course, the law of gravity, one of three ‘laws of motion’ that Sir Isaac Newton formulated.

I have deliberately avoided overly referencing the Bible up until this point, endeavoring instead to defer firstly to science and reason (who are, in reality, both friends of faith) in my initial comments. But humanity has been long discussing the question, “what is truth?” and Jesus himself gave an answer to this question when it was put to him, circa AD33. He replied, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6)

Jesus claimed (and the Bible is in agreement) that truth is not subjective, just some abstract exchanging of philosophical ideas, but rather objective, rooted in the person of God, who has been revealed to us in Christ. Paul the Apostle comments in his letter to the church at Colosse in the early first century that every truthful thing in the universe is found in Christ as the Word, Wisdom and Knowledge belonging to God Himself. Everything that was created was through and for him, he existed before anything else and he holds all things together. (Colossians 1:16-17, Colossians 2:3)

For many, the Bible may seem outdated, irrelevant, out of touch, or even downright dangerous. And I can understand this. The Bible has been misused, misinterpreted, and misunderstood throughout history, often used to control and harm rather than heal and liberate.

The reality, however, is that the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God Himself, whereby He has revealed Himself to His creation and through which we are able to understand His intentions. It offers life-giving wisdom, leads humanity to salvation, and provides meaning and purpose for our human existence. In fact, the Bible is the expression of God Himself, who is all about justice, redemption, and liberation (and who is utterly opposed to injustice and evil).

As such, the implication is that it is entirely sufficient to answer all our tricky and troubling questions, and, because its author is God, those answers can be relied upon to be true. (I’ve written more about the accuracy, authority, and authenticity of the Bible here).

Let’s suppose for a minute that the Bible really does have the answers to all our human problems, issues, doubts, and questions. Does the Bible have anything to say about gender and sex? What truths does God communicate to us about these issues?

Made In God’s Image | Imago Dei

God is The Subject Of Life. The Centre Of Everything. The story of humanity starts with Him and ends with Him.

As I commented earlier in this article, we (humanity) are unique in all of creation because we are made like God. Who we are is directly connected to the One who created us. This belief formed one of the key cornerstones of the early Christian faith and, in many respects, set Christianity apart from other religions of its time; that is, the belief in the intrinsic value and worth of every human because they’re made in God’s image.

Science tells us how we’re (uniquely and intricately) made (and I’ve talked about that earlier in this article) but faith tells us why (what we’re here for and what life is all about). Scripture intends us to understand that we were created intentionally and with a specific purpose in mind; to be God’s image-bearers – imago dei – on the earth, and to rule it wisely and well on His behalf. Nothing about our creation was accidental, and nothing was left to chance.

One of the first things that the book of Genesis confirms, alongside the commission for which we were created, is the binary nature of our humanity:

So God created human beings in His own image. In the image of God He created them; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and multiply. Fill the earth and govern it. Reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, and all the animals that scurry along the ground.” Then God said, “Look! I have given you every seed-bearing plant throughout the earth and all the fruit trees for your food. And I have given every green plant as food for all the wild animals, the birds in the sky, and the small animals that scurry along the ground—everything that has life.” And that is what happened.” | Genesis 1:27-30, NLT

The narrative of humanity’s creation is further fleshed out in Genesis chapter 2 with our gender binary of male and female being connected to our naming as ‘man’ and ‘woman’. (Genesis 2:18-25) (Interestingly, we are also given the blueprint for marriage in this chapter; that is, a committed and exclusive relationship between a man and a woman).

Jesus himself confirms his belief in and understanding of the creation narrative (when discussing the legality of divorce) in Matthew 19: 4-8, where he says, “Haven’t you read the Scriptures? They record that from the beginning ‘God made them male and female. This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.’’“

The differences between the two genders are unique and distinctive, both designed by God with a purpose in mind. Both genders are intrinsically valuable and precious to God, and we see His characteristics displayed by the perfect merging of both masculine and feminine traits. These distinct genders are the fundamental building blocks of God’s creation and are part of God’s plan for His creation.

God’s original design for humanity was built on equality, cooperation, respect, commitment, and support, with both genders bringing unique and valued differences to the partnership. This mutuality, this joint responsibility, forms part of the great narrative of restoration and redemption that Jesus himself came to inaugurate when he ushered in the kingdom of God. Part of this reality includes the binary of our respective genders, that of male and female (man and woman); deeply embedded into our DNA, the very building blocks that make us us.

The Bible insists that we were created for a purpose. It insists that there are two genders; male and female. And it names these genders; man and woman.

“The physical, human body has great significance within Christian understanding, from creation through incarnation to the resurrection and ascension. The Bible recognises and celebrates two sexes. The text does not seem to allow for, and actually on occasion prohibits, identifying as different from your biological birth sex. That said, we need to understand what the Bible means when it says we are made “male and female” and not unwittingly accept society’s stereotypes about sex and gender.” | Premier Christianity

Responding Pastorally

Unfortunately, for some individuals, gender identity disorder is very real. People with gender dysphoria genuinely have a deep sense of unease and distress at the perception their biological sex/gender does not match who they feel they are.

Sensitivity and compassion are crucial in engaging with and in these conversations.

(Additionally, there are individuals born with genetic anomalies (sex chromosomes, gonads, and genitalia) which don’t conform to the usual binary of male/female. Known as intersex**,  the prevalence of such occurrences is thought to be about 0.018% of the population. People with abnormalities of development should be helped to find their place as they see it best, and it’s not the intention of this article to discuss those particular cases in any detail.)6

Yet the statistics would suggest that the reportable numbers of those suffering from gender dysphoria are between 0.002% and 0.005% of the population, actually a very small number. It goes no way towards explaining the absolute explosion that seems to have happened in recent years, as young children and teens are diagnosed as transgender, rushed into hormone treatments, and, more drastically, undergoing life-altering surgeries.

This is such a difficult issue for families to navigate today. Many of us can feel out of our depth engaging in conversations that use terms and language that have shifted so dramatically from historically accepted definitions.

More seriously, parents are being told that failure to affirm a child who may be suffering from gender dysphoria could result in, worst case scenario, suicide and, in a recent amendment to the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 in Victoria, Australia, non-endorsement by parents of a child who wishes to transition is considered emotional and psychological abuse (ie family violence).7

Yet the reality is that affirming a person’s belief (they are the opposite gender to that which they were “assigned” at birth), or advocating the use of hormonal or surgical intervention actually does nothing to truly resolve the issue. As Ryan T Anderson, PhD8 comments, “Sex “reassignment” doesn’t work. It’s impossible to “reassign” someone’s sex physically [because sex isn’t something that is “assigned at birth”], and attempting to do so doesn’t produce good outcomes psychosocially.”

“Cosmetic surgery and cross-sex hormones can’t change us into the opposite sex. They can affect appearances. They can stunt or damage some outward expressions of our reproductive organisation. But they can’t transform it. They can’t turn us from one sex into the other. Transgendered men do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men. All become feminised men or masculinized women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they ‘identify.’ In that lies their problematic future.” | The Heritage Foundation

Carving up bodies and dishing out synthetic hormones is not the answer. Speaking hope and truth into people’s lives is.

“Our minds and senses function properly when they reveal reality to us and lead us to knowledge of truth. And we flourish as human beings when we embrace the truth and live in accordance with it. A person might find some emotional relief in embracing a falsehood, but doing so would not make him or her objectively better off. Living by a falsehood keeps us from flourishing fully, whether or not it also causes distress.” (The Heritage Foundation)

John Whitehall, Professor of Paediatrics at Western Sydney University, comments, “People are not interested in discussing the science. We’ve all got to believe that there’s no such thing as a boy or a girl, that we’re all somewhere in between. I don’t believe that. The good news is that in all the major articles, these children (who may be confused about their gender) will revert to the natal sex through puberty. What we should do then is have confidence in the statistics and not mess the child up along the way.”

A Final Word

Truth. The final word in all of this is truth.

Truth spoken with compassion and care, with sensitivity and love, but truth nonetheless. Encouraging a false narrative will do no one any favours.

We need to confidentially speak what is true in relation to sex and gender, affirming reality, and encouraging acceptance of our physical being, understanding our embodied selves as male or female. Narratives that disguise or distort reality are misguided and do not actually result in human flourishing or wholeness.

It’s not only untruthful to affirm these distortions, it’s unloving and harmful to the individual. The most beneficial therapies focus on helping people accept themselves and live in harmony with their bodies.

And I would argue that nothing is more healing than being able to define yourself as one beloved of God, created with purpose (holistically male or female), and that this reality – that you are a child of God – is your true identity. This is the truth that the world needs to hear, the hope that it needs for whole and healthy flourishing, and the reality that we need to be affirming, with love and compassion.

“You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body and knit me together in my mother’s womb. Thank you for making me so wonderfully complex! Your workmanship is marvelous—how well I know it. You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion, as I was woven together in the dark of the womb. You saw me before I was born. Every day of my life was recorded in your book. Every moment was laid out before a single day had passed.” Psalm 139:13-16, NLT

---

1. https://www.jstor.org/stable/230427#:~:text=According%20to%20most%20biologists%20and,Wilson%20(1856%2D1939).

2. https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/educational-resources/fact-sheets/human-genome-project

3. https://teentalk.ca/learn-about/gender-identity/#:~:text=There%20are%20many%20different%20gender,or%20a%20combination%20of%20these.

4. https://stanmed.stanford.edu/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different/

5. https://whatisawoman.com

6. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001669.htm

7. https://www.hrla.org.au/not-affirming-transgender-children-is-family-violence-in-victoria

8. https://www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/sex-reassignment-doesnt-work-here-the-evidence

---

*Historically, ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ are words used to describe and define the anatomical and physiological differences between men and women. Modern terminology uses ‘sex’ to refer to biological characteristics and ‘gender’ to refer to the individual’s and society’s perceptions of sexuality, identity, and the concepts of masculinity and femininity. This article is using ‘gender’ and ‘sex’, as defined in the historical sense.

This article is not intended to be offensive or divisive in nature, but rather to open a channel of respectful conversation about a subject that is deeply important to many people. I do not encourage discrimination, hate-speech, or sexism towards anyone, at any time, but, particularly in this instance, towards anyone who does not share this point of view.

**This article also purposely does not address or discuss the issues surrounding chromosomal abnormalities or intersex conditions.

God is all about new beginnings. We see the story of humanity starting out in Genesis with a new beginning; light and order being formed out of darkness and chaos.

And we see this theme of light and order echoed in the new beginning that Christians find in Jesus. In 2 Corinthians 5:17, Paul the Apostle confirms that “if anyone is in Christ, they have become a new person, a ‘new creation’. The old life is gone, a new life has begun. And all of this is a gift from God, who brought us back to himself through Christ.” (NLT)

This is, of course, one of the key aspects of the gospel message of good news.

The Gospel Initiative

In the beginning, God made humans in His image, to be in close, harmonious relationship with Him – His family – and be His perfect image-bearers on this earth. But the first humans, Adam and Eve, sinned and in doing so, caused damage and disruption to the relationship between God and humanity. They were no longer able to be God’s perfect image-bearers, as He had purposed for them, and were now subject to mortality and death, which would separate them from God for eternity.

Much of the Bible’s message is subsequently taken up in telling the story of God’s efforts to address the problem of sin, and its consequent outcome, on our behalf. God began this firstly through a single man Abraham, in whom He promises to bless the whole world (Genesis 12:1-3), then through a chosen people, the nation of Israel, who were Abraham’s descendants (Isaiah 43:10), and then finally, through His perfect Son, Jesus Christ, the greatest of all Abraham’s descendants (Revelation 3:14).

No one who came before Jesus was able to live a perfect life. Then Jesus arrived on the scene, a new kind of human, who fulfilled God’s law and lived the perfect life as God’s ideal image bearer. He willingly gave himself on behalf of the world as a perfect sacrifice for sin. He died on the cross for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2) and was raised to life again three days later in a glorious new beginning (John 20:16-18). He was the first of many whom God promises will be just like him, if they confess Jesus as Lord and saviour (1 Corinthians 15:20-23). By being baptised “into Jesus”, a person becomes a new kind of human – “a new creation”- and a whole new life begins.

This invitation to confess Jesus as Lord, to repent of our sins and to trust in Jesus’ sacrifice for our forgiveness, committing to a new life ‘in him’, following him in all things, is offered to everyone! (2 Peter 3:9). God doesn’t want anyone to be lost – so if you are convicted in your heart of sin and want to be baptised into Jesus, don’t hesitate! (If you’d like to speak more about baptism with someone, I’d love to chat! You can get in touch via my contact details here).

Once a person has made a commitment to a new life by being baptised, they become part of the family of God. It’s a new start, a new beginning, with a whole new life ahead of them.

But, as with new year’s resolutions, new beginnings have a way of losing their gloss and the excitement and determination can begin to fade. The Christian life is full of ups and downs and we can lose our passion, become discouraged, or forget the reasons why we even chose this life to begin with.

There are a couple of great examples of new beginnings found in the Bible that I believe can help us in this Christian life – whether we’re just starting out or whether we’ve been at it for a while.

The Story Of Ruth

The first example is the story of Ruth. You may already be familiar with the background of Ruth’s story. She was a widowed Moabite woman, married to an Israelite man who had relocated to Moab ten years earlier. Upon his death, she chose to leave her country of birth and travel back to Israel, with her mother-in-law, both of them with little possessions and a very uncertain future. Her “new beginning”, following on from the death of her husband, brother-in-law and father-in-law certainly looked bleak and her circumstances were very reduced. Her position in Israelite society would be expected to be marginal at best – the Moabites had been cursed in earlier times for their opposition and hostility to Israel (Numbers 24:9), and naturalised Moabites were forever excluded from the congregation of Israel (Deuteronomy 23:3).

We might initially look at her story and assume she was to be simply an inconsequential outsider to the plan of God, peripheral to His purpose. Her ‘new beginning’ certainly didn’t shine with the kind of hope and ‘homecoming’ we would expect.

Our lives can sometimes look like Ruth’s story and we may struggle to see through the reduced circumstances of our current moment, viewing them as the end rather than the beginning.

But God loves a good plot twist. When we think things are hopeless and we cannot see a way through, He confounds us, perfectly weaving our own personal stories into the greatest story of all. What can seem like the end is really a different kind of beginning and those circumstances that seem hopeless are actually leading us to something beyond our expectations.

If you’re in a season that feels like the end rather than the beginning, don’t despair and feel that God has given up on your life. He hasn’t.

If you’re struggling with addictions, with issues in your relationships, with spiritual drift, or financial strain, don’t feel that these things signal the end. God is still there and He is still working. You just need to believe that. The only thing that Ruth really had to go on was faith – faith that the end of her story would be worth the wait –  and that’s all you need too,  even if your faith is only the size of a mustard seed!

Believe that God, who is Himself the beginning and the end of all things, is still intimately involved in your story, even if you’re struggling to see the next chapter.  The prophet Malachi tells us that the names of those whose lives honour God are specially written in His book – and that they are God’s treasured possession. God’s heart towards them is as a father of his son (Malachi 3:16). If all you take from today is this: remember you are greatly loved and God is for you!

The Story Of Nehemiah

The second example is the story of Nehemiah and the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem. After being in exile for many years, the people of Israel had been allowed to return and had finally begun rebuilding the temple and the walls of Jerusalem. This occurred under the leadership of firstly men called Zerubbabel and Ezra, and finally, a man called Nehemiah, who was cupbearer to King Artaxerxes, King of Persia.  It was a time of great hope and fearless faith.

Rebuilding took place in three waves, with the building of the walls coming last, in the third wave under Nehemiah’s leadership. This endeavour began with singleness of purpose and a spirit of reformation but after only 26 days into the project, people became discouraged and wanted to give up. Only 26 days in! Less than four weeks! They had become overwhelmed by fatigue, frustration, opposition, and fear.

Pressures from without, burnout from within, unreasonable expectations, and fear of failure. Many Christians feel all these emotions and challenges, probably many times, at different stages in their Christian life. As with the people in Nehemiah’s time, Christians need to be reminded of their purpose and reinvigorated with a sense of mission!

“If people can’t see what God is doing, they stumble all over themselves” | Proverbs 29:18, MSG

If you’re in a season of discouragement and feel like you’re drifting or have lost your sense of purpose, this message is for you. Do not give up!

Although our purpose and mission may look different today from theirs back then, it’s all part of the great story that God is telling. And we need to remind ourselves of this regularly, to maintain our focus and vision. New beginnings, even ones that start with passion and fearlessness, soon become simply ‘the job at hand’, and we need to be mindful of all the pressures, emotions, and challenges that come with it.  It can be easy to lose sight of the fact that we’re involved in the greatest, most radical project in all of history! What we do is important and does have value, even if we can’t quite see through to the other side of the project right now.

The message from the story of Nehemiah is to make time to regularly step aside from everything that’s going on in our lives and remind ourselves of the story that God is telling, and that we’re now part of.

Humanity was always created with purpose, to be God’s perfect image-bearers and the scope of this is so much greater than you or I, in our current moment. Remind yourself of the importance of the things you do every day, in pursuit of this purpose and mission, whether small or great. And realise that every contribution you make, in your ministry to God, has eternal significance.

How do you do this? Well, here’s some ideas. Take 10 minutes out to read your favourite Bible chapter. Haven’t got one? Make it your mission to find one. Have a coffee with a friend. Catch up with a mate after work. Invite another family around for dinner and reconnect over the good news in Jesus. Listen to a Christian podcast. Take a half-hour out for your own personal worship session with all your favourite songs – or make it bigger and include others! Take some quiet moments to think about your personal skills and gifts and consider what you can bring to ministry in your church. Start a new Christian book. Volunteer your time to help those more disadvantaged than yourself. Have a heart-to-heart conversation with God.

How about setting a reminder in your phone, in your diary, calendar, or notebook, and, using the story of Nehemiah as an example, remind yourself at least every 26 days to ‘check-in and show up’. Go on, do it right now!

The New Covenant

Finally, I want to remind us of what has made all of this possible – the new covenant that came about through the death of Jesus Christ.

“In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.” | Luke 22:20, NIV

“Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.” | Hebrews 7:22, NIV

“How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that He has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.” – Hebrews 9:14-15 | NIV

God has personally dealt with the human condition of sin through the giving of His only Son. There is forgiveness of sins to all through this new covenant. By his blood and in his name, in his freedom we are free! There is no new beginning as awesome as the new beginning we find in Jesus Christ!

Amen!

---

This article was first published 13 January 2020

(Not a reader? Take a listen instead ⇓)

This article is dedicated to two good men in my life, my father, Ken, and my husband, Luke. My father has always supported me, encouraged me, believed in me, loved me, and has never made me feel lesser. I wish there were more fathers like him. My husband’s love and support mean the world to me. He has always treated me as an equal, affirmed my value in our marriage, and rejoiced in my worth as a fellow-worker in the ministry of Christ. I am thankful for them both. “A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children.” (Proverbs 13:22)

---

One of the more detrimental teachings that I believe has defined the church throughout her history and which continues to exert influence today is the idea that God established some kind of hierarchy of men over women at creation. Hierarchy, it’s claimed, was, one; either part of God’s original plan for humanity, established from the beginning or, two; God’s prescriptive punishment (primarily upon the woman), because of sin.

This hierarchy, if it was part of God’s original plan, also then flows through into a church or spiritual context; God’s arrangement for not just the first creation, but also the second (new) creation. While this ‘divine order’ or hierarchical structure might (seemingly) have been largely abandoned, particularly in our 21st-century, secular, western culture (it hasn’t really), it should nevertheless continue to be taught and implemented (and in many places, still is) in the life and function of the church, and should inform our basic understanding of the relationship that exists between men and women.

Off To A Bad Start

Most people would perhaps claim that they don’t believe women are lesser than men in their basic humanness (although the history of female infanticide, particularly in countries such as China, India, and Pakistan would argue otherwise). Many people, particularly from a Judeo-Christian worldview, might affirm that men and women are equal in worth and dignity as fellow humans (all of us, individually, are still more important (if we’re grading) than animals.

Nevertheless, in Christian circles, many would still point to the reality that God made Adam first.

Eve was created second, as a helper for Adam, and this fact – the order of creation, together with the purpose for which each was created proves some kind of divinely established hierarchy.

The bottom line: men were made first, to image God, and women were created second to help men.

It’s somewhat painful to hear it explained, in vaguely apologetic tones, that Eve was perhaps not much more than an afterthought, created to assist with the collecting of firewood, the gathering of berries, and other mundane pre-history tasks that would prove to be all too much for Adam on his own. (God had hoped one of the animals might do the trick but, alas, no joy there…).

It’s even more disappointing to see this perspective outworked in the church, resulting, in practical terms, in women being prevented in many places from contributing in any kind of meaningful ways, as they are gifted. Some hesitate at limiting a woman’s contribution entirely (soft complementarian; we’ll get to that term in a moment) and agree that women can bring their gifts and abilities in a limited capacity and as long as it’s under the leadership of men. However, hard complementarians are, in reality, hardly complementary in practice, allowing little to no contribution from women in the church.

Firstly, What Is Meant By ‘Hierarchy’?

hierarchy

/ˈhʌɪərɑːki/
noun

1. a system in which people or things are arranged according to their importance:
2. the people in the upper levels of an organisation who control it
3. a system in which the people within a company or organisation are organised into levels according to the authority they have:

“Hierarchy describes a system that organises or ranks things, often according to power or importance. At school, the principal is at the top of the staff hierarchy, while the seniors rule the student hierarchy. Also known as a pecking order or power structure, a hierarchy is a formalised or simply implied understanding of who’s on top or what’s most important. All that sorting and ranking can be helpful if you’re a business administrator, but if you find yourself arranging all the produce in your fridge according to a hierarchy of color, size, and expiration date, you might want to consider visiting a therapist.” | Vocabulary.com (emphasis mine)

Implicit in hierarchy are elements of power, importance, or authority (watch for these words later), none of which are necessarily wrong, in and of themselves, of course. For example, in a company or organisation, it may be appropriate and wise to confer more power or authority on someone with greater experience or a higher level of qualification.

Items that are rare, antique, or highly sought after (gold!) are deemed to be more valuable or important than more common or mass-produced items.

And, interestingly, our basic human needs are often laid out by way of a hierarchial pyramid classification system, with our psychological needs at the bottom and our social and relational needs sitting nearer the top.

However, two historical systems of hierarchy that we would perhaps be familiar with whose negative influences can still be felt today are patriarchy and colonialism. It can be argued that the conferral of power and authority to certain persons or classes of persons within these systems was often disproportionate and unjustified.

While hierarchy, in some instances, makes sense as a means of classification, does scripture teach that such a hierarchy exists between the genders? Does a disproportionate ranking of power and importance really exist between men and women? Is this God-ordained and God-sanctioned?

Does scripture teach that men are more important, more powerful, or have more authority simply because they are men? Is this really what God designed for humanity from the beginning?

Hierarchy + Complementarian || Egalitarian

There are two Christian views put forward that endeavour to describe the nature of the relationship between men and women. These views are described as being either Complementarian or Egalitarian. 

Christian Complementarianism is the view that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, and religious life, particularly in areas deemed as ‘leadership’. 

Christian Egalitarians “believe that the Bible mandates gender equality, which implies equal authority and responsibility for the family and the ability for women to exercise spiritual authority as clergy.”

Both these views clearly offer biblical truths.

Men and women are different in many ways. These differences include both biological phenotypes and psychological traits. Some of these differences are influenced by environmental factors, yet there are also fundamental differences between the sexes that are rooted in biology.

The differences between the genders are unique and distinctive, designed to be this way by God. (Titus 2:1-5, 1 Peter 3:7) (1 Timothy 3:1 – 4:16). Both genders are intrinsically valuable and precious to God, and we see His characteristics displayed by the perfect merging of both masculine and feminine traits. These distinct genders are the fundamental building blocks of God’s creation and are part of God’s plan and purpose for His family. His definition of marriage (Genesis 2:24) and the procreation of the species (Genesis 1:28) is the natural outcome of the union of male and female and clearly supports the biological truth embedded in our DNA.

Yet men and women are also the same. Equal in value, dignity, responsibility, and relationship to one another (as we’ll see later in this article).

We are the same. And we are different. We are both equal and complementary. It was God’s intention that these differences exist, complementing one another, and the human race is better for the diversity between the two genders.

Both these factors are incredibly important in our relationship with one another, within marriage, and within our wider communities, and are critical to embrace in a church context. 

Complementarian Is Not Complimentary

The problem with complementarianism is that it’s not truly complementary in practice. Rather, true complementarianism functions as a (sometimes softly packaged but) essentially male-dominated hierarchy. I say true complementarianism because many married Christian couples who identify as  ‘complementarian’ actually function as equal partners – egalitarian in practice. Many churches that identify as complementarian actually function as mostly egalitarian in practice, often restricting only the role of elder or senior pastor to men.

And the reality is that many true complementarian leaders teach that male authority and female submission extend beyond marriage and the church into the rest of society. They believe that God really did instigate a male-dominated hierarchy at creation, that it was His original design for humanity, and that it extends into all spheres of life, including and not limited to the church.

For some, “the theology of complementarianism has become so deeply entrenched in evangelical belief that they have come to see it as an essential doctrine of the faith. That is to say, that it is a primary issue of salvation. For some evangelicals, complementarianism has become the benchmark of theological faithfulness, right alongside belief in God and acceptance of Jesus. As [John] Piper said in 2012, if people accept egalitarianism, sooner or later, they’re going to get the Gospel wrong.” (The Conversation)

Why Is Any Of This Important?

Well, I agree with John Piper in one respect: whichever framework we believe exists in Genesis will impact the way we read the rest of scripture and, by implication, the kind of gospel we teach.

I personally believe this issue directly impacts the way in which we teach this gospel narrative and that it shapes the way we then see church life, our own identity in Christ, relationships between men and women, relationships in marriage, who we raise our sons and daughters to be, and how these different relationships function in healthy and holistic ways.

The framework of Genesis is deeply connected to the gospel story we tell, to our theology and reading of scripture, and our view of what God intends for all humanity, in the end.

Before we even reach the New Testament (and encounter the few verses that seem to support gendered hierarchy), the way we have read and interpreted Genesis will have already determined through which lens we then view other (NT) passages.

In that sense, it’s of primary importance that we start from the correct foundations when building our theological house.

Setting Some Framework: Why Genesis 1-3 Is Foundational Theology

To try to prove that hierarchy is taught and embedded in the record of the creation of humanity and therefore also flows through into the church or a spiritual context, it’s actually necessary to jump pretty quickly away from the record of Genesis and proponents of complementarism will often start in 1 Corinthians 11:3. This verse “the head of the woman is the man” (1 Corinthians 11:3) is often referenced as inarguable proof that hierarchy (authority over women by men) exists, and indeed, was part of the original order of creation.

One of the epistles to Timothy is also referenced (1 Timothy 2:11-15), together with a few verses about husbands and wives from Ephesians (Ephesians 5:22-24) and it’s case closed. No qualifiers, no context, just a few proof-texts strung together and read back into the creation narrative.

1 Corinthians is an epistle written to challenge believers to examine every area of life through the lens of the Gospel. Paul specifically addresses issues such as divisions, food requirements, sexual integrity, worship gatherings, and the resurrection. 1 Timothy is another letter written by Paul, to encourage and guide the new believers in the development of good leadership within the church, not ego-driven or self-centered but governed by mutual submission to Christ (Ephesians 5:21-22). (Chapter 11 of Corinthians is actually considered to be one of the most obscure and difficult passages of scripture, and I talk more about this and the other ‘tricky verses’ here.)

Certainly, the New Testament has some thoughts to offer in relation to the creation narrative, the relationship between men and women, and the relationship that exists between spouses.

But before heading to the New Testament, I believe it’s important to set some framework around our interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis. We must read the New Testament through the lens of Genesis, not the other way around. And I think it’s safe to say that what existed before the fall was how God always intended things to be.

As Genesis points out, everything that goes wrong occurs after the fall. Sin enters the world (not good news), death hard on the heels of sin (even worse news), and a disrupted relationship between God and humanity from that point onwards.

Additionally, the purpose of the book of Genesis is to illustrate God’s relationship to creation and His intention of dwelling with us. “The whole purpose of Genesis 1 is to set the ideal human community  – a place in which the image of God, or the imitation of God, is actually going to be realised.  That, of course, gets distorted in Genesis 3 when humans disobey God. But the first chapter is outlining the ideal. The  book of Genesis is therefore a means to a theological end.” (Professor C. John Collins) (emphasis mine).

So it seems logical to assert that whatever was instituted before the fall was God’s original design for humanity, was intended to be normative and lifegiving for the flourishing of humanity, and (because of the effects of the fall) is restored and reinstituted through the redeeming work of Jesus (and we’d therefore expect to see this reflected in the life and activity of the new creation (the church)).

Genesis 1-3 clearly constitute foundational theology regarding God’s redemptive and restorative work in our world.

What Genesis Says

1. No Hierarchy In Our Humanity: The crowning glory of God’s creation was humanity, and Eve, the final masterstroke, the finishing touch of the Creator’s hand (Genesis 2:22-24, 1 Corinthians 11:7). Created from Adam’s side, her status was, like him, one made in the image of God, with all the promise and capability of reflecting God’s glory (Genesis 1:27).

“Then God said, “Let us make mankind (Hebrew word Adam) in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. So God created mankind in His own image, in the image of God He created them; male and female He created them.” | Genesis 1:26-27 (NIV)

The words used of Eve at her creation are the Hebrew words ezer kanegdo, translated rather unhappily as ‘helper’ and ‘meet for‘ in English. Our understanding of helper falls far short of the original sense of the word, which is used elsewhere in the Bible to describe God as a helper to His people or of a king to his subjects. The primary idea of the word lies in ‘girding’, ‘surrounding, hence defending‘, to ‘protect or aid’.

A better translation of the word kanegdo is the word ‘worthy’ or ‘suitable for’. The counterpart to the man, therefore, is “a woman of valour, equal to the man in capacity and ability whose worth is incalculable” (Proverbs 31:10). She is neither above man, nor beneath him, but stands confidently at his side, in protection and aid, as he does for her.

(The created order of man first, woman second, or the difference between the way each was created (man from the ground, woman from the side or part of the man), is often brought up in discussions about a supposed gendered hierarchy. Apart from the creation story in Genesis 2, however, the created order is not mentioned in the Hebrew Bible and Jesus does not mention it, but it is mentioned in two passages in Paul’s letters, as referred to above.

In this article, author Marg Mowczko takes a brief look at these two passages and at the significance that Paul places on man being created first and woman second, which she contends does not support a gendered hierarchy.)

2. No Hierarchy In Our Responsibility: God blessed the man and woman and gave them the commission to ‘be fruitful and multiply’, both having rule and dominion over the earth and the animal kingdom (Genesis 1:28). Clearly, neither could undertake such a commission of fruitfulness or multiplying without the other.

They also share responsibility for the care of the inhabitants of this world and the stewardship of the earth and its resources. In fact, this is the first place that we see God’s sovereignty enacted by His image-bearers and we later see this commission echoed in the new creation, where both men and women disciples are entrusted with the responsibility and privilege of ‘going into all the world and making disciples’ (Matthew 28:19, 2 Corinthians 5:19-20, 2 Corinthians 3:6).

This stewardship and responsibility were given to humanity, men and women equally, without distinction. Men and women are both created as equals in their purpose and capacity to fill the earth and rule wisely over it on God’s behalf and were both given the authority to do so from God Himself.

3. No Hierarchy In Our Conjugality: It’s stating the obvious here, but not only were Adam and Eve the first man and woman of the human race, they were also the first married couple. Their status as equals is shown in not just their relationship to one another as fellow humans (as discussed above), but also in their relationship with each other as spouses.

The early chapters of Genesis (prior to the fall) initially seem to offer very little by way of commentary on the nature of marriage apart from this comment in Genesis 2:23-24 (added long after the events of Genesis 2 actually took place):

“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.”That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” Genesis 2:23-24 (NIV)

However, in taking a closer look, Genesis 2 actually offers quite a lot.

The divine view of marriage (and the Bible’s definition is that marriage is between a man and a woman), although only touched on very briefly in Genesis 2, is quite clear. It’s a relationship defined by a commitment of two individuals (already demonstrated to be of equal worth and capability) to one another, which becomes preeminent to all other familial relationships. Two individuals choose to leave their family of origin and form a new family with one another, united together as one in a full and cooperative partnership.

Taken from Adam’s side, Eve is made of the same stuff as Adam. She shares a unique connection with Adam that the rest of the animal kingdom does not, having been created from his own body, bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. There is a unique kinship that exists between them.

Why did God create Eve in this particular way, when He could have just created her from the ground, as He did Adam? Why did God create Adam first and Eve second? And why does Adam name Eve rather than God naming her?

These are really good questions to ask and it’s important to understand what we are being told by this narrative (keeping in mind the foundational truth that the purpose of the book of Genesis is to illustrate God’s relationship to creation and His intention of dwelling with us.)

Jesus + The Church

There are beautiful theological overtones hidden within this creation story in relation to marriage, which point to the redeeming work of Jesus and the creation of the church, styled ‘his bride’ (John 19:34, Ephesians 5:25-27, 1 Corinthians 12:27). Paul the Apostle actually tells us in Ephesians that the church wasn’t modeled on the institution of marriage but rather, it was the other way around. “The church came first, marriage second”, he comments.

This seems odd initially, given the church didn’t exist until many thousands of years after the creation narrative, but it makes complete sense when we realise the Genesis narrative serves as a description of the blueprint for all that God has intended for humanity; God, in complete partnership with His people, to reflect His glory and purpose throughout the earth. The redemption and restoration of humanity, through the sending of Jesus, was never the backup plan, it was always the plan.

The story of Adam and Eve’s creation serves as a representation of the real story that would play out throughout humanity’s history; the good news that in Jesus, who is both saviour and king, God is saving, rescuing, atoning, justifying, ruling, and reconciling people for the glory of His name and in pursuit of His purpose.

The church only exists because of the sacrificial death of Jesus, prefigured by the deep sleep that came upon Adam. Her entire identity is shaped by her source, in Eve’s case, Adam, and in the church’s case, Jesus. She, the church, is made of the same stuff as him.

We are to think of the church – this community of believers – as a woman, a woman whose very life and existence were framed by the death and resurrection of a man. Through this man’s death and sacrifice, she is created and at his resurrection, she becomes a living creature.

Jesus says of the church (responding to Peter’s affirmation in Matthew 16:18 that he is the Christ, the Son of the Living God), “upon this rock, I will build my church; and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” Jesus identifies and names his bride, the ekklesia, who will be called out from among the nations, brought into existence from his own death and sacrifice, and part of his very essence as the temple of the living God.

Additionally, we know of Jesus that “he is the image of the invisible God, the God did it this way (in the order and way He chose to create Adam and Eve) precisely to shape our understanding of the more significant reality at work. The Genesis narrative teaches foundational theology about the church and her relationship to Jesus (and God’s ultimate redemption of humanity), long before she ever exists. (I talk more about the organic reality of the church as a woman of valour here).

Marriage, as depicted in Genesis 2, is a relationship defined by sacrifice, support, defence, commitment, and faithfulness; exactly the qualities we see at work in the relationship between Christ and his church.

Hierarchy: Things Go South

The purpose of the first few chapters of Genesis is to set the ideal human community; how things should have been before everything goes wrong. In essence, it describes perfect kingdom living and perfect human existence; what we hope to see completely restored at the end of all things (Revelation 21:1-4).

But things do go wrong. The first humans disobey God, sin enters the world, and punishment and consequences are set out.

Adam is told by God, “because of what you have done, I will curse the ground (punishment) and through painful toil, you will eat food from 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” (consequence) (Genesis 3:17-19). The consequence of Adam’s disobedience, ultimately, is connected to the ground from which he was taken, death, and how that relates to all humanity.

Eve is told by God “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children (punishment), your desire will be for (towards) your husband, and he will rule over you” (consequence) (Genesis 3:16). The consequence of Eve’s disobedience, ultimately, is connected to the man from which she was taken, life, and how that relates to all humanity.

And this – the punishment and consequence – is where a final argument for the existence of a gendered hierarchy is made, but unfortunately, I believe, holds little weight.

It’s important to recognise the context in which the statements of Genesis 3:16 exists: they occur after the fall. As such, they cannot be considered God’s original intention for humanity, at the very least.

So is it merely descriptive or prescriptive? Is God simply confirming the dynamic of the relationship between men and women that will now exist, because of sin? Or has God had a change of heart regarding women’s previous status and position (demonstrated to be equal) and is now prescribing a hierarchy of all men, over all women, for all time?

I think, reading scripture as a whole, that we’re given a picture of redemption, renewal, and restoration. The new heavens and the new earth spoken of in Revelation show that God intends to restore all things, in short, to return creation to the state of very good as it first was in Eden. If this is biblical teaching, then we will see this reflected in the new creation, in the life of the early church.

And this is exactly what we do see. When looking through the lens of Genesis, we see the radical readjustment required and the challenges faced by the early Christians; where issues of race, class, social status, financial status, and gendered hierarchy are realigned and brought under the scope of what God had designed all along in Genesis. I explore this in more detail in my article Women In Ministry, which you can read here.

When considering the life and function of the early church, which included women fully participating in ministry, there is a marked reversal or divergence from the culturally and historically established norms and that this new reality is God-endorsed. I would contend that if a gendered hierarchy exists, it is a terrible consequence of the fall and not as a God-given prescriptive for what is healthy and good for humanity, or, specifically in light of this article, for the church.

Where Have All The Good Men Gone?

Some may think that, in any event, this is not a primary issue, as relates to the gospel. I agree…and I disagree.

I agree, firstly, that it’s a secondary issue in that I would still affirm those who hold to either view (complementarian or egalitarian) as Christians, fellow believers of the gospel of Christ. I don’t think that believing either one perspective or the other determines whether you are Christian or not.

But I disagree it’s not a primary issue. Where you land on this subject directly impacts the gospel narrative and shapes the way you will see church life, your own identity in Christ, your interpersonal relationships, marriage, and how these different relationships function in healthy and holistic ways.

As we move into the next generation of men and women, the story we tell our sons and daughters matters.

There are many good men who would possibly describe themselves as complementarian (essentially, proponents of a gendered hierarchy) but who also treat women with dignity and respect. While they may *believe* (or say they believe) that leadership and authority are restricted to men in marriage and within the church, they arrive at this perspective with a genuine belief that this is what scripture teaches and they endeavor to outwork this with humility and gentleness. However, in reality, particularly in marriage, and often in the church, these kinds of good men rarely function as true complementarians. They are far more egalitarian in thought and practice.

And then there are other men, those who would also describe themselves as complementarian, who are not good men. They are abusive, controlling, authoritative, demeaning, violent, and entitled.

Sometimes this behaviour is only seen and experienced behind closed doors while a pristine public image is presented to others.

Other times, this behaviour is the same whether at home or in public, with the perpetrators using scriptural teachings on the sanctity of marriage, forgiveness, the submission of women, and male headship to justify their behaviour. Complementarian men are compared, and often compare themselves, to Christ, while women play the role of the church who obeys and serves Christ.

However, as author Rachel Held Evans comments, “complementarianism doesn’t work—in marriages and in church leadership— because it’s not actually complementarianism; it’s patriarchy.  And patriarchy doesn’t work because God created both men and women to reflect God’s character and God’s sovereignty over creation, as equal partners with equal value.” 

One of the most significant challenges Christian women face today is recognising and dealing with the abuse they experience, which is often carefully cloaked and ‘legitimised’ in biblical language – obedience, submission, responsibility, leadership, authority, roles.

However, recognising abuse is one thing. Preventing it is another.

A horrifying statistic is that women inside the church are significantly more likely to have experienced abuse than those in the broader population. A report from the Anglican church found that despite some recent efforts and the fact that evidence of this has been reported on for years, many clergy remain in denial about it.

Many women do, in fact, recognise that they are the victims of abuse, that scripture is being weaponised and used against them to control and manipulate them, and yet are powerless to prevent it, change it, or speak out about it.

Scot McKnight, New Testament scholar, historian of early Christianity, theologian, and author has this to say:

“Complementarians teach biblical hierarchicalism and patriarchy and that men and women are equal, not in a substantive but spiritual sense. Their “role” language quickly morphs into power language. Hence, this hierarchy leads to entitlement and power and the requisite submission of the woman. There is a correlation between hierarchy and patriarchy and abuse by men of women. All abusive males are entitled, lash out in anger, seek control and demand submission. All abusive males think women are inferior.” | Complementarianism And The Abusive Male

There is no possible way that violence or abusive, controlling behaviours are justifiable from the text of the Bible. Perhaps this is most especially true of the few passages that so many abusers craftily and deceitfully employ.

“Males feeling entitled is a cultural product and complementarianism is such a culture that leads to such a product. Males who seize that culture’s control are more likely to abuse.

Two action steps: change the culture, change the males.” (Scot McKnight)

In Conclusion

The gospel is the story in all the Bible. It’s not just a message about our own personal salvation from sin but the story of what God has intended for all His creation. Its massive scope stretches from the first pages of Genesis through to the last book of the Bible, Revelation, and includes lofty themes such as the glory and sovereignty of God, the creation and capacity of humanity to image God’s glory, the fall and redemption of humanity, the purpose and kingship of Jesus, the new creation of a resurrected community of image-bearers and, finally, the arrival of ‘the new heavens and new earth’, when God will be all-in-all and the gospel story will have reached its resolution. 

God’s original design for humanity was not built on a gendered hierarchy. Instead, it was built on equality, cooperation, respect, commitment, and support, with each gender bringing unique and valued differences to the partnership. This mutuality, this joint responsibility, warped and damaged because of the fall, is restored and championed in the new creation; by those who call themselves Christians and who belong to the organic reality called the Church.

We need to keep God’s original intention for humanity (seen clearly in the first two chapters of Genesis) squarely in our sights when traversing the rest of scripture, particularly in light of which gospel narrative we tell.

Not only do I believe that gendered hierarchy doesn’t fit the biblical gospel narrative, I believe it to be theologically unsound. I don’t believe it’s what Scripture teaches at all in relation to the relationship between men and women, either naturally or spiritually.

Further, I believe that communities that engage in and promote the unequal distribution of power and authority between men and women – hallmarks of the complementarianism seen in many churches and Christian relationships – often result in cultures where abuses –  emotional, spiritual, physical, sexual, psychological, and financial – can thrive and flourish beneath the surface. Not only is this obviously harmful to individuals, but it’s also deeply damaging to the organic, corporate reality of the church and far from the abundant, flourishing life that God intended for all of humanity.

Stop promoting gendered hierarchy.

---

There is so much to read, watch, or listen to on this subject (including all the arguments presented for either a complementarian or egalitarian view). If you would like to read more on this subject by other authors, I’d recommend the following: Rediscovering Scripture’s Vision For Women (Lucy Peppiatt), Gender Roles And The People Of God (Alice Matthews), The Blue Parakeet (Scot McKnight), Man And Woman: One In Christ (Philip B Payne), Pagan Christianity (Frank Viola), Reimagining Church (Frank Viola), and this article by Marg Mowckzo (mainly egalitarian writers).

I’d also recommend listening to the Kingdom Roots Podcast by Scot McKnight (there are over 200 episodes and he covers many topics, including the question of gender equality, so I’ve linked one specifically here to get you started.)