This is the first in a four-part series; Part 2 will present teaching and examples from the Old and New Testaments, and Parts 3 and 4 will be a consideration of some of the most common objections to gender roles as taught in the Bible.
Why do we do it that way?
Have you ever been asked — by a Sunday school student, an interested friend, or a member of your ecclesia — why we have different roles for men and women in the ecclesia? If so, did you have a good answer? It’s a question we’ve probably all thought about at some point, as we compare our practices to those of other churches or to organizations in the world and wonder: why do we do it that way? If someone approached you — either from outside or inside the ecclesia — to try and convince you that the Bible’s teaching about the roles of brothers and sisters is not what Christadelphians think it is, would you know what to say in response? Maybe you, like me, have wondered — are our practices really based on Scripture, and if so, do I understand these practices personally?
Are the roles we practice in ecclesial life a product of human tradition and culture? Are they a reflection of male dominance, sexism, and the putting-down of women in general? Or are they a reflection of something deeper: a rich Biblical symbol that God challenges us to put into practice in our lives together as Brothers and Sisters? I’d like to challenge you to look into the teaching of the entire Bible on this subject and to help, I’m going to use the next several pages to outline the path I took and the conclusions I found in God’s Word. Whether you’re seeking answers for yourself, or whether you realize that one day you may be called upon to explain or defend the Bible’s teaching about men and women, I hope that the following thoughts will give you a good springboard. I should probably start with a disclaimer: writing a full description of God’s roles for men and women in the Bible, including all of the examples we’re given of the many ways we can serve Him, would take an entire book. This article isn’t about the role of brothers and sisters in general, and I won’t be detailing all of the facets of what it means to be a sister in the Truth. Instead, I’ll be showing from the Bible why we believe that the formal roles of teaching and leading the ecclesia are reserved for brothers.
Even though I was raised in the Truth, I’m still amazed every time I realize in a new way how that our ecclesial practices fit with the example set in the New Testament. For example, a listener’s knee-jerk reaction to the phrase “the Truth”, could be that it sounds too dogmatic and exclusive… before seeing that it happens to be a direct imitation the words of Jesus and Paul (John 8:32, Col 1:5). The “right hand of fellowship” mirrors the first century ecclesias’ way of welcoming someone into the Body of Christ (Gal 2:9), and our use of arranging boards and committees mimics the New Testament way groups of believers were specially delegated for decision-making. The older I get, the more examples I notice: phrases used during prayers that sound archaic to modern ears, but are actually direct quotes from God’s Word; our singing of hymns on Sunday morning before leaving to bear our cross throughout the week, echoing the night when Jesus and his disciples sang a hymn before he left to bear his cross. Perhaps the most intricate of all is the way our Sunday morning service tries to reflect the Last Supper, with individual brothers acting in the role of Christ as he taught, prayed, and gave the bread and wine to his disciples.
Bible history versus human history
As with the examples above, I have come to appreciate the differences between brothers’ and sisters’ roles more over time, as I observe how deeply we try to root our practices in God’s Word. In contrast, human societies throughout history have either treated women with cruel oppression or, conversely, sought to downplay or erase any differences between the genders. In the Western world today, many churches have swayed toward the latter approach by promoting men and women to the same positions of leadership, using credentials such as level of education, leadership experience, and public speaking skills to decide who should teach and shepherd the congregation. The result is an almost political environment, where religious leaders and teachers maintain their positions through their human skills and talents, and their popularity with their congregations. In an environment like this, to freely admit that my church has different roles for men and women — and that, truth be told, I like it that way — takes some courage! The very idea that God has chosen different job descriptions for men and women in the church could sound offensive in today’s culture. However, this is nothing new; God’s way has always been offensive to some, and it has always taken courage to uphold God’s word against human culture. Here’s a quote showing an example of that courage:
“Being a sister… only precludes her from the act of public speaking and involves subjection to her husband. It does not shut her up to babies, pots and pans… She is a partner, a helper, a fellow-heir in all things pertaining to Christ, and the man who would degrade her from this position is not fit for a place in the body of Christ”1
These words, spoken by our Brother Robert Roberts, sound a bit traditional and old-fashioned today. But how would they have sounded in 1879? Compare this with an older quote taken from Thomas Aquinas, who is often considered the Catholic Church’s greatest theologian:
“As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active power of the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of a woman comes from a defect in the active power” 2
This quote shows the Church’s historical view of women: in other words, men are a perfect likeness of God, and women are the defects of creation! In a world that taught female inferiority in most things, for Robert Roberts to suggest that men could lose their salvation for not regarding women as their spiritual fellow-heirs would have sounded radically progressive. However, since then our world has swung to the other extreme, Robert Roberts’ words now sound unusual for a different reason: because he suggests that there are some limits on what jobs a sister can perform in the ecclesia. Even though the times change, our practices and teachings shouldn’t change with them; regardless of how radical or conservative it may appear to the current culture, the Bible’s message hasn’t changed.
This unchanging message was shown in the way God organized the community of Israel. Those who aren’t well acquainted with the Law of Moses and the history of the surrounding nations might assume that the Law was oppressive toward women, but in fact the opposite is true. One historian, Charles Ryrie, writes that “Judaism . . . guarantees women a standing before God which they did not have in any heathen religious relationship.”3The Law of Moses was a haven for women, a place of refuge from the ill-treatment they were afforded in the pagan religions of the time. For example, the entire nation of Israel was in a covenant relationship with God. Men and women alike were involved in offering sacrifices, attending religious feasts and festivals, and taking the Nazirite vow in a gesture of special devotion to God (Exod 34:27, Num 6:1-2, Lev 5:4, 6:3-6, 12:5-8, Deut 17:2). Hand-in-hand with these benefits came the teaching that both men and women could be guilty of breaking the covenant; men and women are both naturally sinful and responsible to God for repentance and sacrifice. The Law made it clear that in terms of spiritual value, devotion to God, and responsibility for sin, men and women are “one”.
One, but not the same
I prefer to say that men and women are “one” before God, rather than using the word “equal” — after all, the Bible doesn’t speak of men and women using this term! The world understands equality to mean “alike” or “the same:, as in, receiving the same treatment, opportunities, payment, jobs, and so on; but this isn’t the Bible’s perspective on men and women. Instead, the Bible explains the ways in which men and women are “one”:
“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal 3:26-29).
No matter what gender, nationality, or social class we are born into, once we have been baptized, we are “all one in Christ Jesus”, referring to our state as God’s children, our covenant relationship through baptism, our connection to Abraham, and our place as heirs of God’s promises. We are one in the salvation we have in Christ. The flying leap in reasoning made by some people is that men and women should therefore do exactly the same things in the ecclesia, even though this passage doesn’t say a single thing about ecclesial roles! To say that there should be no gender distinction among believers because of this verse is inconsistent with the rest of Scripture. “Oneness” does not mean that men and women are always permitted by God to do the same functional jobs. If this were not true, we would expect to look through the Bible and see Him commanding men and women to take on the exact same spiritual roles; however, in both the Old Testament Law and in the New Testament ecclesia, God’s own design included some very different job descriptions for men and women.
The very idea that God would limit the roles of Sisters might be enough to ignite a sense of unfairness in some of us. After all, God didn’t make any difference whatsoever in His teaching toward Jews and Gentiles, or free men and slaves… did He? Taking a look through the New Testament, I was surprised to find that women aren’t the only ones limited by God’s teaching: everyone in the ecclesia is under some kind of limitation! Here are just a few New Testament examples of differing spiritual “roles” and instructions for different groups of people:
- Children are told to obey their parents (Col 3:20).
- Fathers are commanded not to provoke their children to wrath (Eph 6:4).
- Servants are to “be subject” to their masters, “with all fear” (1 Pet 2:18).
- Masters are to provide for their servants what is right and fair (Col 4:1).
- For those who were “called” to Christ while uncircumcised (Gentiles): “let him not be circumcised” (1 Cor 7:18).
- For those who were “called” to Christ while circumcised (Jews): “let him not become uncircumcised” (1 Cor 7:18).
- For single brethren, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman” ( 1Cor 7:1).
- Within marriage, each spouse has power over the other’s body (1 Cor 7:3-4).
- A new believer or “novice” may not be a bishop or ecclesial leader (1 Tim 3:6).
- A man who is not the husband of one wife may not be a bishop or an ecclesial leader (1 Tim 3:2).
- Older women had the specific instruction to teach the younger women. (Titus 2:3-4).
- Older widows (over 60 years old) could be counted for ecclesial support, but younger widows should remarry (1 Tim 5:9-14).
- Elders who “rule well”, especially those “who labor in the word and doctrine”, should be doubly honored (1 Tim 5:17).
- Those who are “masters”, or teachers, will be judged more strictly (James 3:1).
God gave different spiritual instructions to different groups of people, sometimes based on factors they themselves had no control over – such as whether they had been born a slave or free, how long ago they had become a believer, or the age of a woman when she was widowed. Some of these differing instructions applied only in personal life, and some applied to the functioning of the ecclesia. Despite all of the various roles or instructions given, Gal 3:26-29 still teaches us that there is a oneness of standing before God, and the availability of salvation for everyone in the ecclesia. However, as we can see, this doesn’t mean that everyone in the ecclesia is commanded to serve God in the exact same way. For those who may feel it is unjust that a sister’s role seems limited, take note — everyone in the ecclesia is limited in some way! The service of both brothers and sisters in the ecclesia is limited by the Bible’s commandments, and while some of these limitations apply to everyone, others apply only to certain groups of people. Biblical oneness does not mean that we are all the same.
Yet, when it comes to sisters’ roles, there is a tendency to question whether the Bible really means what it says; we are tempted not to take the clear teaching of the Bible at face value, or we doubt whether those instructions are relevant to us today. I’m not saying that asking these questions is wrong in itself; however, it’s possible that many of us will approach this subject with a bias from the start. The world points us in the direction of sameness for men and women, teaching that a woman is not truly equal with men unless she is doing all the same things as a man. Equality is measured by the kinds of activities men and women are doing; their jobs, their acceptance into school programs, their pay grade. In contrast, oneness in the ecclesia is an amazing, lofty concept that exists independently of whether brothers and sisters have the same roles; instead, it hinges on God’s love and His covenant with us through baptism. To suggest that we are not truly one unless we are serving the ecclesia in the exact same ways, greatly devalues the concept of Biblical oneness.
The first man and woman
The Bible doesn’t just give us a set of arbitrary instructions for brothers’ and sisters’ roles, it explains them. Paul tells us where to start looking for an explanation:
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression” (1 Tim 2:11-14).
Paul states that the God’s teaching on this subject goes all the way back to Genesis — so if we hope to understand the first part of his statement (about sisters’ roles), we have to understand the second part (about Adam and Eve). We can see from the outset that the reasoning behind Paul’s inspired instructions doesn’t hinge upon a particular quirk of a certain ecclesia, or a pressing issue of his day; instead, the reasoning goes all the way back to creation.
Adam was God’s first-created human, his firstborn. Biblical, being the firstborn never made a general statement about an individual’s spiritual fitness, but it almost always came with some sort of leadership job in the family (Gen 27:29, Deut 21:17). We are reminded of this firstborn status in 1 Cor 11:9, which says that “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man”. However, so we don’t mistakenly think that Adam was somehow more valuable than Eve, we are reminded that “Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord” (1 Cor 11:11). We find one particular responsibility of Adam’s firstborn status:
“And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen 2:16-17).
It was Adam who first received God’s commandment. Now, as soon as Eve had heard of this commandment from God, she was equally responsible for following it — this is why both Adam’s and Eve’s sins were given the same ultimate punishment of death. But the Bible record clearly distinguishes between the nature of their sins, with one of them being deceived and the other, not. Paul not only points this out, he tells us that this is part of the reason why God makes a distinction between brothers’ and sisters’ roles.
We know how the story ends: Adam did a flawed job of communicating God’s commandment to Eve, as she somehow understood the original command to include the phrase “neither shall ye touch it” (Gen 3:3), which God did not say to Adam. We later see Adam fail at his role as firstborn once again, when Eve “took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her” (Gen 3:6). This adds the possibility that Adam was “with her” at the time of temptation, was not deceived by the serpent’s lie, but didn’t intervene to help keep Eve from sinning. Whether he was physically with her or not, he certainly fell into sin at Eve’s suggestion rather than rebuking her or seeking God’s mercy for her. Eve also failed at being a “help meet” or a “fitting helper” for Adam, by encouraging their sin and being the first to lead the couple into disobedience, rather than submitting to the commandment given by God.
Historically, many churches have interpreted Paul’s words about Adam and Eve to mean that women are more easily deceived than men, and thus unfit to teach — but note that Paul does not draw this conclusion. Adam and Eve’s sin resulted partly from a role reversal, in which Adam did not intervene to lead and teach in the role that God had given him, and Eve took the lead in sin and brought her husband along with her.
So, we might say, Adam and Eve were married — don’t these lessons only apply to husbands and wives? Not so — Paul uses creation as a motivation for the behavior of all men and women in the ecclesia in 1 Cor 11 and 1Tim 2. After all, Adam and Eve’s family was the ecclesia of their time, and their family later expanded naturally to include the whole nation of Israel, and then expanded again spiritually to include Gentiles in the family of God. In case we’re thinking that these long-ago events aren’t relevant to us today, both Old and New Testament teachings consistently challenge men to take on leadership roles, particularly in teaching, and for women to act as helpers in the congregation. The Hebrew word used for “help” in Gen 2:18, “ezer” (Strong’s #5828), is most often used in the Old Testament to refer to the help given by God (as in Psa 121:1), showing that women have the ability to bring Godly, powerful help to their brothers. It’s as if God is challenging brothers and sisters in His family to face the same challenges as the original man and woman, but to get it right this time.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One