The Creation Order for Man-Woman Relationships

[Tom Wetmore]

An important summary from OT scholar at the Adventist Seminary of the significance of the references in Genesis 1-2 to the creation of Adam and Eve - http://www.memorymeaningfaith.org/blog/2013/05/creation-order-genesis.html#more

The author effectively refutes this root argument of male headship.

[olger]

Genesis 1-3 lays the very foundation of Biblical manhood and womanhood. All other verses must be interpreted consistently with these chapters. Here, the twin principles of male-female equality and male headship are properly defined, instituted, and remain permanent beneficent aspects of human existence.

Equality. Man and woman are equal in the sense that they bear God’s image equally.

Male headship. In the partnership of two spiritually equal human beings, man and woman, the man bears the primary responsibility to lead the partnership in a God-glorifying direction. The model of headship is our Lord, the Head of the church who gave Himself for us. Right here is a distinction that many fail to make in our world. The antithesis to male headship is male domination. By male domination I mean the assertion of the man’s will over the woman’s will, heedless of her spiritual equality, rights and value. This article will be completely misunderstood if the distinction between male headship and male domination is not kept in mind throughout. Feminism acknowledges no such distinction.

Christian feminism argues that God created man and woman as equals in a way that excludes male headship. According to them, male headship was imposed upon Eve as a penalty for her part in the fall. It follows, in this view, that a woman’s redemption in Christ releases her from the “punishment” of male headship. What then did God intend for our manhood and womanhood at the creation?

Genesis 1:27

“So God created man in His own image,

in the image of God created He them;

male and female he created them.”

Each of these three lines makes a point. Line one tells us how we got here. We came from God.

Line two highlights the divine image in man. We bear a resemblance to God.

Line three boldly affirms the dual sexuality of man. We are male and female.

Finally in verse 28, God pronounces His benediction on man. “God blessed them and said to them…” In His benediction, the Creator also authorizes male and female together to carry out their mission to rule the lower creation. To sum up, man was created as royalty in God’s world, male and female alike bearing the divine glory equally. Most Christian feminists would heartily agree with this paragraph. But Genesis 2 and 3 are more controversial. I must challenge a point of feminism before we move on.

As in verse 26 and 27 God refers to both male and female as man in Genesis 5:2. “He created them male and female and blessed them. And when they were created, he called them “man.”

This is a striking fact indeed. It demands explanation. After all, if any of us were Creator, would we after creating humans use the name of only one sex as a generic term for both? I expect not. Our modern prejudices could detect a whiff of “discrimination” a mile away. But God cuts across the grain of our peculiar sensitivities when He names the human race, both man and woman, “man.”

Why would God do such a thing? Why would Moses carefully record such a thing? Surely God was wise and purposeful in this decision, as He is in every other! His referring to the human race as man tells us something about ourselves. Let me suggest that it only makes sense against the backdrop of male headship.

God did not name the human race “woman.” If “woman” had been the more appropriate and illuminating designation, no doubt God would have used it. He does not even use a neutral term like “persons”, no doubt to the dismay of the more politically-correct among us.

Genesis 2

So was Eve Adam’s equal? Yes and no. She was his spiritual equal and, unlike the animals “suitable for him.” But she was not equal in that she was his “helper.’ God did not create man and woman in an undifferentiated way, and their mere maleness and femaleness identify their respective roles. A man just by virtue of his manhood is called to lead for God. A woman just by virtue of her womanhood is called to help for God. The very fact that God created human beings in the dual modality of male and female cautions us in an unqualified equation of the two sexes. This profound and beautiful distinction is not a biological triviality or accident. God wants men to be men and women to be women. A man trying to be a woman repulses us, and rightly so. It is perverse. The same is true when a woman attempts be a masculine.

`oG

[CoAspen]

You have not refuted the authors research, only voiced your opinion...again.

You also try to take the subject into areas not related to subject.

Quote:

...feminism....God wants men to be men and women to be women. A man trying to be a woman repulses us, and rightly so. It is perverse. The same is true when a woman attempts be a masculine.

[Tom Wetmore]

... as if the article linked in the OP wasn't read or comprehended.

[Neil D]

Genesis 2

So was Eve Adam’s equal? Yes and no. She was his spiritual equal and, unlike the animals “suitable for him.” But she was not equal in that she was his “helper.’ God did not create man and woman in an undifferentiated way, and their mere maleness and femaleness identify their respective roles. A man just by virtue of his manhood is called to lead for God. A woman just by virtue of her womanhood is called to help for God. The very fact that God created human beings in the dual modality of male and female cautions us in an unqualified equation of the two sexes. This profound and beautiful distinction is not a biological triviality or accident.

`oG

I've left out the overflow of opinions as much as I can without changing the meaning to the word "helper".... definitely a contrast of meaning...

(4) The woman was created as man’s ‘ezer kenegdo (“helper comparable to him,” Genesis 2:18 NKJV), which in the original does not denote a subordinate helper or assistant; elsewhere in Scripture it is most often God Himself who is called ‘ezer (“helper”): Exod 18:4; Deut 33:7, 26; Ps 33:20; 70:5; 115:9, 10, 11. The word kenegdo in Gen 2:18 means no less than an equal counterpart, a “partner” (Gen 2:18, 22 NRSV).

so where do we place our trust over this meaning of "helper"?

[olger]

Must the male headship balance in Scripture be taken as an insult or threat to women? Not at all. Eve was Adam’s equal in the only sense in which equality creates personal worth.

Adoption into God’s family. In a parallel sense, a church member has just as much freedom and significance as a church elder. But the elder is to lead and the member is to support – no cause for offense there. I see this fallacy again and again in feminist argumentation. “Subordination = denigration” and “equality equals indistinguishability.” Where does this convoluted thinking come from? Was the Son of God slighted because He came to do the will of the Father? Is the church denigrated by its subordination to the Lord? Never. Subordination is entailed in the very nature of a helping role (Genesis 2:18).

Why then, do some fellow church members resist this teaching so energetically? One reason is incidences of male domination asserted in the name of male headship. I have seen examples of this, along with examples of hostile, dominating women. Both are wrong. When truth is abused, a rival position (in this case feminism) that lacks logically compelling power can take on psychologically compelling power. In short, feminism is an emotive reaction to male domination, driven by pain or pride. But male domination is a personal moral failure, not a Biblical doctrine.

If we define ourselves out of a reaction to bad experiences we will be forever translating our past pain into the present where it damages ourselves and others. We must define ourselves not by personal injury, or popular hysteria, but by the pattern of gender and sexual truth taught here in the Holy Scriptures. As the head, the husband bears the primary responsibility to lead their partnership in a God-glorifying direction. This is a Biblical principle that stands forever apart from changing cultures. And when we exchange Biblical principles with culture, we can go down all kinds of wrong roads—such as the July 29th vote by the Columbia Union Committee to “ordain” women in opposition to the expressed will of the world church.

rejoice always,

`G

[Tom Wetmore]

Quote of the day that fits the toic quite well:

"When the female voice is repressed and stifled, the entire community can easily find themselves cut off from the sacred feminine, depriving themselves of the full image of God."

[whbae]

What is a "helper"? When I need "help" for what I am doing, this means I have to call someone else who can function as well as I am or better. If someone is inferior than I am then, one is not going to be a "helper", rather one would be an "interferer". Was Eve created to be a "helper" to Adam or an "interferer"?

[olger]

Quote of the day that fits the toic quite well:

"When the female voice is repressed and stifled, the entire community can easily find themselves cut off from the sacred feminine, depriving themselves of the full image of God."

"Sacred feminine."

You should know better than to use pagan goddess worship quotes.

"Question: "What is the sacred feminine?"

Answer: The “sacred feminine” is a religious movement that emphasizes femininity as being closer to divinity than masculinity. Those of the sacred feminine tradition worship feminine beauty and the power of sexual reproduction. The sacred feminine assumes that women, through the ability to bear children, are more “sacred” than men. Men can only experience the sacred feminine, spiritually, through sexual intercourse. Advocates of the sacred feminine viewpoint range from pseudo-Christians to radical feminists, goddess worshippers, and Wicca witches. Hints of the sacred feminine viewpoint can be seen in the Bible with the examples of ritual prostitution (Genesis 38:21-22; Hosea 4:14) and goddess worship (Jeremiah 44:17-25; 2 Kings 23:7). Other examples can be seen in the Easter fertility rituals and some aspects of Mariology.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/sacred-feminine.html#ixzz2WFPCLMOk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddess

http://www.gospelway.com/religiousgroups/davinci-goddesses.php

[Gordon1]

"When the female voice is repressed and stifled, the entire community can easily find themselves cut off from the sacred feminine, depriving themselves of the full image of God."

"the sacred feminine"??

It seems you're paving the way for Temple Priestesses.

The author has confused the human voice with holiness.

Male or female, most speakers reveal their distance from God.

Self-muzzling would be more blessing than deprivation.

[olger]

Indeed, Gordon.

[Tom Wetmore]

No, it was from a Christian source.

As I said before, you have a most uncanny ability to completely miss the point.

But more disturbing is your ability to pervert and twist the intended meaning and to read into things a fairly consistent pattern of the same few strange themes.

[Gordon1]

No, it was from a Christian source.

This label has been hijacked before..

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

Quote of the day that fits the toic quite well:

"When the female voice is repressed and stifled, the entire community can easily find themselves cut off from the sacred feminine, depriving themselves of the full image of God."

"Sacred feminine."

You should know better than to use pagan goddess worship quotes.

"Question: "What is the sacred feminine?"

Answer: The “sacred feminine” is a religious movement that emphasizes femininity as being closer to divinity than masculinity. Those of the sacred feminine tradition worship feminine beauty and the power of sexual reproduction. The sacred feminine assumes that women, through the ability to bear children, are more “sacred” than men. Men can only experience the sacred feminine, spiritually, through sexual intercourse. Advocates of the sacred feminine viewpoint range from pseudo-Christians to radical feminists, goddess worshippers, and Wicca witches. Hints of the sacred feminine viewpoint can be seen in the Bible with the examples of ritual prostitution (Genesis 38:21-22; Hosea 4:14) and goddess worship (Jeremiah 44:17-25; 2 Kings 23:7). Other examples can be seen in the Easter fertility rituals and some aspects of Mariology.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/sacred-feminine.html#ixzz2WFPCLMOk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddess

http://www.gospelway.com/religiousgroups/davinci-goddesses.php

Perhaps if you took the time to contemplate the Bible instead of pagan sources you might actually understand the feminine side of God.

For starters - http://clubs.calvin.edu/chimes/970418/o1041897.htm

Or simply read the article linked in the OP that starts by pointing out that God said "Let's make mankind in our image... In the image of God, he created them, male and female he created them.

Now re-read the quote again in that light.

[Gordon1]

Olger's viewpoint simply acknowledges history ...

that order is once again being reversed.

We have a church version of 1984, where Ministry of Peace = the War Dept.

"Unity" is preached but Division is sown. Men and women, once created by God as one flesh,

are now pitted against each other as Bible doctrine is made to bow to modern culture.

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

No, it was from a Christian source.

This label has been hijacked before..

You mean like this topic is being hijacked?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

"When the female voice is repressed and stifled, the entire community can easily find themselves cut off from the sacred feminine, depriving themselves of the full image of God."

I love the book from where that quote is taken.

If one looks at the context, it's not at all referring to paganism. The fact that modern pagans use the phrase really means very little.

The author (Rob Bell) is referring to the influence of women's roles in churches and religious communities where men and ONLY men do the speaking, leading, and decision-making. He's saying that both men and women were created in God's image, not the SAME, but rather, as mirror images, complementary images.... and as such, both men and women should be heard. Bell even notes that the Catholic church, with its all-male hierarchy, still gives the Virgin Mary an elevated role. Women *will* be heard, whether in a "preacher" role, or otherwise...

[cricket]

What is a "helper"? When I need "help" for what I am doing, this means I have to call someone else who can function as well as I am or better. If someone is inferior than I am then, one is not going to be a "helper", rather one would be an "interferer". Was Eve created to be a "helper" to Adam or an "interferer"?

I've had two year old children help me a time or two.

[Tom Wetmore]

If you're looking up the Biblical references to the maternal side of God, here's another good source - http://3dchristianity.wordpress.com/2011/05/06/biblical-maternal-images-for-god/

Pam, yes it is about balance and completeness in the ministry of the church to have reflected the fullness of the image of God. Likewise, we would not have balance with only a feminine perspective of God.

[whbae]

Cricket,

I do not think God had your idea of helper when he created a helper(woman) for Adam.

I am thinking in a professional sense, such as an associates. When a doctor is looking for an associates to help him out in his profession I doubt he will be looking for children. He is looking for a dr. who has an equal quality as his or better.

Won

[olger]

Olger's viewpoint simply acknowledges history ...

that order is once again being reversed.

We have a church version of 1984, where Ministry of Peace = the War Dept.

"Unity" is preached but Division is sown. Men and women, once created by God as one flesh,

are now pitted against each other as Bible doctrine is made to bow to modern culture.

PROFOUND

[CoAspen]

More like "UNFOUNDED"

[Gordon1]

What is a "helper"? When I need "help" for what I am doing, this means I have to call someone else who can function as well as I am or better. If someone is inferior than I am then, one is not going to be a "helper", rather one would be an "interferer". Was Eve created to be a "helper" to Adam or an "interferer"?

We have helpers in farming, neurosurgery, airline cockpits.

They're not interfering, they're assisting the boss.

"Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord.."(1 Peter 3:6)

[Gordon1]

PROFOUND

That's certainly not my wisdom Gerry, but I'm surprised others can't see it.

Didn't Jesus choose twelve men?

Aren't the same feminist arguments being used within Adventism

that were used to divide and conquer the Western social fabric?

Yes and yes.

BTW, this is not the shaking.

The shaking will come when some stand to rigidly denounce error.

Then the fires of persecution will be rekindled.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

Didn't Jesus choose twelve men?

Didn't Jesus wear long robes?

Didn't Jesus wear sandals?

Didn't Jesus walk everywhere or ride a donkey?

Didn't Jesus..............