Comments on: “Male and Female” or “Masculine and Feminine”? http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/ Helping people live better lives by re-examining what they really believe. Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:09:06 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: John Alan Turner http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68057 John Alan Turner Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:47:10 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68057 Christie, I would suggest exactly the opposite of your last sentence. Historically, the NT is among the most liberating, female-friendly texts of all time. I believe what you're referring to (and I don't mean to whitewash over church history -- God knows there are skeletons in that closet!) is a parenthesis in history. The Christian Church began as a place where women were elevated above societal norms. The Christian Church became corrupted by societal pressure and demonstrated an oppressive patriarchal bent for a while. The Christian Church is rediscovering a more biblical perspective on women now. I'm not sure if I'd call it progress as much as restoration. Christie,
I would suggest exactly the opposite of your last sentence. Historically, the NT is among the most liberating, female-friendly texts of all time. I believe what you’re referring to (and I don’t mean to whitewash over church history — God knows there are skeletons in that closet!) is a parenthesis in history. The Christian Church began as a place where women were elevated above societal norms. The Christian Church became corrupted by societal pressure and demonstrated an oppressive patriarchal bent for a while. The Christian Church is rediscovering a more biblical perspective on women now. I’m not sure if I’d call it progress as much as restoration.

]]> By: John Alan Turner http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68056 John Alan Turner Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:43:24 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68056 Wendy, I can't speak for the churches you've experienced. I have been part of churches where women are celebrated as equal to men, but it is, ironically, often women themselves who refuse to be elevated. One of the things feminism has brought about is not only men rethinking the role and place of women in society (including church) but women thinking differently about themselves. Prestonia Mann Martin, a leading opponent of the woman's suffrage movement, in a book co-authored with her husband in 1916 expressed her belief that women were not merely the weaker sex, but that they were relatively "disabled" as a sex in comparison with men. Even disabled men, she argued, have a chance to recover, "but womanhood is an infirmity from which women rarely, if ever, recover." Martin went on to warn women against getting involved in the legislative process, on the grounds that women "lack the aptitude either to make laws or to obey them." Women should give up the attempt to change man's world "because it is his world." That wasn't even 100 years ago! She wasn't coerced into writing that. She honestly believed it! Women in general haven't had a healthy view of their capabilities until fairly recently. This is one reason why we haven't seen the kind of change we hope for. I think another reason is b/c it hasn't been an issue related to cultural apologetics. What I mean by that is people don't often walk in, look at the platform and wonder, "Why aren't there any women up front?" It hasn't been seen as a barrier to people joining us. This mindset, however, is changing -- particularly in larger, more metropolitan places. As more and more people begin to view the role of women in church through a sociological lens and not simply a theological lens, I bet we'll find more and more churches open to re-examining their thinking. Wendy,
I can’t speak for the churches you’ve experienced. I have been part of churches where women are celebrated as equal to men, but it is, ironically, often women themselves who refuse to be elevated.

One of the things feminism has brought about is not only men rethinking the role and place of women in society (including church) but women thinking differently about themselves.

Prestonia Mann Martin, a leading opponent of the woman’s suffrage movement, in a book co-authored with her husband in 1916 expressed her belief that women were not merely the weaker sex, but that they were relatively “disabled” as a sex in comparison with men. Even disabled men, she argued, have a chance to recover, “but womanhood is an infirmity from which women rarely, if ever, recover.” Martin went on to warn women against getting involved in the legislative process, on the grounds that women “lack the aptitude either to make laws or to obey them.” Women should give up the attempt to change man’s world “because it is his world.”

That wasn’t even 100 years ago! She wasn’t coerced into writing that. She honestly believed it!

Women in general haven’t had a healthy view of their capabilities until fairly recently. This is one reason why we haven’t seen the kind of change we hope for.

I think another reason is b/c it hasn’t been an issue related to cultural apologetics. What I mean by that is people don’t often walk in, look at the platform and wonder, “Why aren’t there any women up front?” It hasn’t been seen as a barrier to people joining us.

This mindset, however, is changing — particularly in larger, more metropolitan places. As more and more people begin to view the role of women in church through a sociological lens and not simply a theological lens, I bet we’ll find more and more churches open to re-examining their thinking.

]]> By: christie B. http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68054 christie B. Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:14:31 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68054 JT if by your note you mean to say that the Bible is no longer used to prove a "natural order" of men's superiority over women, I'm glad to hear it. Historically that has not been the case so that's progress. JT if by your note you mean to say that the Bible is no longer used to prove a “natural order” of men’s superiority over women, I’m glad to hear it. Historically that has not been the case so that’s progress.

]]> By: Wendy http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68053 Wendy Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:09:25 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68053 JAT... "That’s a remarkable group of men — forward-thinking — some might even say “inspired”. In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female” (Gal. 3:28)." So why do women have such a second class role in most churches? And why do most men not care to change things to reflect a more Christlike approach to the role of women? JAT… “That’s a remarkable group of men — forward-thinking — some might even say “inspired”. In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female” (Gal. 3:28).”

So why do women have such a second class role in most churches? And why do most men not care to change things to reflect a more Christlike approach to the role of women?

]]> By: Dave http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68052 Dave Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:45:31 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68052 My wife and I have counter-cultural roles - which I don't think I would say are "counter-biblical". She is a corporate executive and I am a stay at home dad. I worked as a physical therapist about 15 years before maturing into my stay at home role. I became a Christ follower in my mid-20's a few years after being married. As we began having children (we have four...from 11-23 currently!) my wife and I saw a growing need and desire to have more impact/influence in their daily lives. This was also different in that we felt this desire as our two oldest children were entering their teen years. I truly felt this was what Christ was calling me (and us as a family) to do. My wife and I had great conversations about this change. Honestly I could not have done it if my identity wasn't rooted in my relationship with Christ - and if my wife hadn't been fully on board with the change. Lots more to the story and the transition but it really came down to what we felt was God's will for our family. So often our identity comes from what we do rather than whom we follow and I would not have been able to make the transition to stay at home dad if my identity had been tied up soley in my job. My wife has also been uniquely positioned within her company, we believe, and she views this as part of the mission field God has called her to as well. So - Biblical masculinity/feminity? Not so sure on that one other than pursuing your biblical "identity" in Jesus...abiding in Him....Him abiding in you. Striving as huband and wife to honor Jesus in the purposes He has prepared for us - and hoping we are good listeners to His spirit. (All of the above is said understanding that yes...indeed....men/woman are created/wired differently but each finds their unique identity in/through Christ. Hmmm....lots there...don't know if I truly expressed what I am feeling. : ) My wife and I have counter-cultural roles – which I don’t think I would say are “counter-biblical”. She is a corporate executive and I am a stay at home dad. I worked as a physical therapist about 15 years before maturing into my stay at home role. I became a Christ follower in my mid-20’s a few years after being married. As we began having children (we have four…from 11-23 currently!) my wife and I saw a growing need and desire to have more impact/influence in their daily lives. This was also different in that we felt this desire as our two oldest children were entering their teen years. I truly felt this was what Christ was calling me (and us as a family) to do. My wife and I had great conversations about this change. Honestly I could not have done it if my identity wasn’t rooted in my relationship with Christ – and if my wife hadn’t been fully on board with the change. Lots more to the story and the transition but it really came down to what we felt was God’s will for our family. So often our identity comes from what we do rather than whom we follow and I would not have been able to make the transition to stay at home dad if my identity had been tied up soley in my job. My wife has also been uniquely positioned within her company, we believe, and she views this as part of the mission field God has called her to as well.

So – Biblical masculinity/feminity? Not so sure on that one other than pursuing your biblical “identity” in Jesus…abiding in Him….Him abiding in you. Striving as huband and wife to honor Jesus in the purposes He has prepared for us – and hoping we are good listeners to His spirit. (All of the above is said understanding that yes…indeed….men/woman are created/wired differently but each finds their unique identity in/through Christ.

Hmmm….lots there…don’t know if I truly expressed what I am feeling. : )

]]> By: John Alan Turner http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68051 John Alan Turner Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:05:20 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68051 Christie, It is my opinion -- and I share this opinion with the great majority of conservative Biblical scholars -- one would have to do serious violence to the text in order to justify the position that women brought about the downfall of humanity. In fact, the New Testament teaches clearly that Adam was primarily responsible for the historical origin of sin (cf. Romans 5:12-20). As for the notion of a wife being subject or in submission to her husband -- that comes in the broader context of a conversation where the writer also commands the husband to love his wife as Christ loved the church -- with a sacrificial, humble, selfless love. In the end the true command is for both parties to be in a state of mutual submission. Moreover, this is to be taken only in the context of a marriage -- this is not a blanket statement that all women must be subject to all men. The point I want to make really clear here is that you have to twist the text of the Bible if you want to make it misogynistic. There are other sacred writings (the Koran and the Talmud leap to mind here) which must be twisted in order to avoid discrimination against women. Christie,
It is my opinion — and I share this opinion with the great majority of conservative Biblical scholars — one would have to do serious violence to the text in order to justify the position that women brought about the downfall of humanity. In fact, the New Testament teaches clearly that Adam was primarily responsible for the historical origin of sin (cf. Romans 5:12-20).

As for the notion of a wife being subject or in submission to her husband — that comes in the broader context of a conversation where the writer also commands the husband to love his wife as Christ loved the church — with a sacrificial, humble, selfless love. In the end the true command is for both parties to be in a state of mutual submission. Moreover, this is to be taken only in the context of a marriage — this is not a blanket statement that all women must be subject to all men.

The point I want to make really clear here is that you have to twist the text of the Bible if you want to make it misogynistic. There are other sacred writings (the Koran and the Talmud leap to mind here) which must be twisted in order to avoid discrimination against women.

]]> By: Christie B. http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68050 Christie B. Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:41:33 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68050 I appreciate your positive reading of the text -- i too try to hold a positive, open read of the text. and I know that you also know, there are other readings of the bible that are not so generous. As I said before, I don't want to pretend to be a bible scholar - or a feminist scholar for that matter -- but I personally have heard quoted to me, verses that (according to the quoter) signify that woman directly brought the downfall of man; that the bible calls for women to be subjects of their husbands, etc. You don't need me to continue. and also -- as i noted, i do believe there's been some sort of divine inspiration and interaction that informed the bible's creation. but at the same time, men are finite, and fallible. i believe some of that finite-ness has been interwoven into this wonderful, frustrating text. I appreciate your positive reading of the text — i too try to hold a positive, open read of the text.

and I know that you also know, there are other readings of the bible that are not so generous.

As I said before, I don’t want to pretend to be a bible scholar – or a feminist scholar for that matter — but I personally have heard quoted to me, verses that (according to the quoter) signify that woman directly brought the downfall of man; that the bible calls for women to be subjects of their husbands, etc. You don’t need me to continue.

and also — as i noted, i do believe there’s been some sort of divine inspiration and interaction that informed the bible’s creation. but at the same time, men are finite, and fallible. i believe some of that finite-ness has been interwoven into this wonderful, frustrating text.

]]> By: Smockity Frocks http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68049 Smockity Frocks Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:11:09 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68049 Are we made masculine and feminine? Maybe I am oversimplifying this, but how about the fact that women have breasts and a uterus? That makes us perfectly suited to nurturing tiny, helpless babies. Men have test...osterone which makes them suited to defending nursing mothers and babies from savage beasts and marauding raiders. Seems to me to be a match made in heaven. Oh, wait... it was. Are we made masculine and feminine?

Maybe I am oversimplifying this, but how about the fact that women have breasts and a uterus? That makes us perfectly suited to nurturing tiny, helpless babies.

Men have test…osterone which makes them suited to defending nursing mothers and babies from savage beasts and marauding raiders.

Seems to me to be a match made in heaven. Oh, wait… it was.

]]> By: John Alan Turner http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68048 John Alan Turner Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:04:19 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68048 If the Bible is a document created by mere MEN, then they were the most counter-cultural, enlightened men of their time. The Bible begins by affirming the equality of the sexes -- right there in Genesis 1 -- mentions midwives by name while neglecting to mention the name of the Egyptian Pharaoh, shows us a woman as Commander in Chief of the Israeli armies (Deborah), has a beauty contest winner save her entire race from a holocaust (Esther), has as its main character (Jesus) a guy who associated with, ate with, spoke to and taught women alongside men, shows women as the first witnesses and proclaimers of the resurrection, advocates just treatment for widows and instructs the early church "In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female" (Gal. 3:28). That's a remarkable group of men -- forward-thinking -- some might even say "inspired". :-P If the Bible is a document created by mere MEN, then they were the most counter-cultural, enlightened men of their time. The Bible begins by affirming the equality of the sexes — right there in Genesis 1 — mentions midwives by name while neglecting to mention the name of the Egyptian Pharaoh, shows us a woman as Commander in Chief of the Israeli armies (Deborah), has a beauty contest winner save her entire race from a holocaust (Esther), has as its main character (Jesus) a guy who associated with, ate with, spoke to and taught women alongside men, shows women as the first witnesses and proclaimers of the resurrection, advocates just treatment for widows and instructs the early church “In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female” (Gal. 3:28).

That’s a remarkable group of men — forward-thinking — some might even say “inspired”. :-P

]]> By: Terry http://blog.faith20.org/2009/11/04/male-and-female-or-masculine-and-feminine/comment-page-1/#comment-68047 Terry Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:33:33 +0000 http://blog.faith20.org/?p=1204#comment-68047 I don't see any "laws" in the Bible for your question. I think God looks at us as His children. The idea of sexes was for filling up His earth with us. I think culture has been the fly in the ointment. I think all the stipulations that the church populated by humans has about putting pecking order on us were put there by man not God. I don’t see any “laws” in the Bible for your question. I think God looks at us as His children. The idea of sexes was for filling up His earth with us. I think culture has been the fly in the ointment. I think all the stipulations that the church populated by humans has about putting pecking order on us were put there by man not God.

]]>