They say that, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder..”. And yet, how true it is that we sometimes have to educate the beholder in how to behold something.
For instance, a cursory viewing of a high-quality man-made flower vs. one of creation may seem that they both are equally beautiful. And yet, with the applying of a magnifying glass it soon becomes apparent that the former pales in comparison with the later the closer one gets. The way we behold something can make a big difference in our conclusions.
Throughout history one can observe the ebb and flow of beauty- and values, and morality, and truth -as Mankind has fluctuated from one extreme to another, pulled this way and that by the ruling sanity of the times. This ruling sanity is the subjective step-child of the above beholding principle. We do not ‘behold’ something deeply enough to grasp its true nature and hence find ourselves believing things that are not true to reality. One can think of Ptolemy’s earth-centric theory of the solar system vs. Copernicus’s sun-centric theory. And though Copernicus was found to be the correct one, even his theory still had the sun as the center of the universe. He ‘beheld’ only part of the truth.
In approaching the subject of men and women's roles- and specifically the one of ordination-, it occurs to me that the beauty and harmony on this subject through-out the Bible is misunderstood and pulled this way & that by the magnets of social acceptance or personal opinion or preference. As a church we have studied out the theology of ordination and unfortunately come to three different conclusions. The reason for this is that we have missed the 'theology behind the theology' on this subject; the typology that links the entire Bible together as one on this subject. We have beheld only a part of the whole.
We all at times set up soap-boxes, or climb mole-hills to propound our understandings of something, all the while not realizing we have not climbed out of the influencing miasma of social conditioning and personal predilection that taints our conclusions. Objective truth is often collateral damage in these endeavors because the pull of the fallen nature tends to warp our assessment and conclusions. God knew our dilemma and so He sent the Truth into this world and called it the Bible. The Bible itself tells us it is Truth: “Thy Word is Truth.”(Jn.17:17). But truth even in the Bible can be manipulated just like statistics can to say what you want it to say. The only way we have ever been able to discern truth about any given subject, for instance, is to immerse ourselves in the Biblical understanding of it as written out by God's divinely inspired pen-men, and let the chips fall where they will. Through parallelism, poetic style, chiasm, typology, divinely inspired ellipsis, and a multitude of other means, God has directed us to His truth through this master-piece of human history called the Bible. Like being lost in a city or wilderness (or in studying the Bible), one must gain altitude to ascertain where one is at and where one is going. Over-all perspective is key to understanding.
When I first became a Christian, and specifically an Adventist Christian, I was taught to study the Bible by subject, like Jesus did on the road to Emmaus with His disciples (Lu.24:27). By this method, I was informed, I could ascertain what the Bible taught on any subject consistently & clearly from cover to cover. Hence, with proper Biblical hermeneutics from such study I could understand what God’s truth was in any given subject area and minimize the ban of subjectivity.
Climbing this mountain of perspective raises one out of the competing opinions of our earthly context and forces one to view God’s perspective via the entire history of Mankind, from Genesis to Revelation. When we apply this method of study in the subject area of men’s and women’s roles or functions through-out the Bible, there is a very clear pattern that emerges. We may not like that pattern; it may go against our personal, deeply held feelings or opinions; but none the less, the pattern is there.
When I came out of the counter-culture of the '60s and '70s and became a Christian, though not rabid, I was never-the-less a believer in women's equality with men, and not the crass 'barefoot and pregnant' foolishness. It seemed only fair that for equal work each should be paid equally; along with all the other attendant social trimmings that would equalize & level the playing field.
But as I read my Bible, I was forced to observe that there was an astonishing amount of “male chauvinism” in its pages. Was this cultural, or was it God-ordained? If cultural, how could I know what else was cultural? And if more “truth” in the Bible was cultural, how was one to know what was absolute and what was relative? I found myself back in the dilemma of my secular life before Christ: I chose what was right & what was wrong! This clearly, was untenable. And then a pattern began to emerge.
From the very beginning, God Himself inaugurated that pattern by creating man first, not woman, as Paul reiterated in the New Testament (I Cor.11:8-9). It had nothing to do with the value or rank God put upon men & women, but solely with God’s choice. But that choice had everything to do with a Theology He was establishing; He was creating a typology that was to gloriously represent something astounding to the universe.
I am saddened when I read or hear such sentiments that, for instance, the roles of men & women are now different in New Testament times. That this Divine pattern- typology –of Eden and throughout the Old Testament is no longer valid or applicable. Do we really understand the implications of believing that? Are we really to believe that the Divinely inspired Word of God was infiltrated by a cultural male chauvinistic perspective, that, in the Bible, has obscured or well-nigh obliterated woman’s true role? And if we do, where do we stop invoking that influence: just before we get to the Sabbath subject? And, who decides? Us?
We must answer Biblically the question: does quoting Gal.3:28 “..there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus...” really trump the Divine typology set forth through thousands of years of Biblical history, starting in a perfect Eden with a perfect man and woman? And most troublingly, if we use Gal.3:28 to emancipate women from a ‘chauvinistically written Bible’, would not the LGBT+ lobby be able to claim similar things about ‘male or female’?
The entire Biblical subject of the roles of men & women is very clear as we just look at the facts written for our admonition. The aberrant bad & sinful behavior of men toward women aside, here are the facts: Man was created first; the Dominion of Earth was to be over-seen by the man (not until satan overcame Adam was it usurped, Patriarchs & Prophets, p.56-57; 68); the Second Adam was to be a male (Jesus); the man was the priest/ head of the family; the father was said to be responsible for the daughters (Nu.30:3-4;13); the first-born male was dedicated to God; when the Levites were chosen, it was the males that served in the Sanctuary; the Messiah was depicted as a male; the priests were to be males; the census only counted the males; predominately, only the males are recorded as dying; genealogies recorded males; Jesus chose 12 males to serve as apostles; only the men were counted in the miracle of the loaves & fishes; elders/pastors in churches were to be ‘..husbands of one wife..”. And on & on it goes. It's no wonder feminists have a problem with the Bible!! Why all this supposed male dominion? Were women somehow inferior? Or second class?
Not at all! The entire Biblical pattern is simply fulfilling the God-ordained typology Paul clarifies for us in Eph.5:22-33. And that is this: husbands/males represent Christ; wives/women represent the bride/church of Christ. Paul says it’s “..a great mystery...” (vs.32), and what a stunning one it is!
When I do pre-marital counseling, I teach that every man is to represent Christ, and every woman is to represent the Church. This is the Divinely inspired destiny of Mankind. Every husband and wife was destined to be a walking billboard, a living representation of Christ & His bride and all that that implies. Just think of the implications of this witness to the world if Christians would reflect this relationship!
Contrary to popular opinion, the lowest common denominator of our race is not a singular man nor is it a singular woman, which could justify the potential raising of woman over a man. The race is defined by God Himself as “..male and female created He them...” (Gen.1:27). Our individual access to salvation through Christ, whether we are male or female, Jew or Greek, slave or free, in no way, shape, or form replaces or destroys this God created reality. In short, the lowest common denominator of mankind is man AND woman; Adam AND Eve. And it is also true that whether a man or woman remains single by choice, by the scarring of distrust of the opposite sex, or by the calling of God, this God-ordained typology still remains intact because it is the very pattern that God Himself decided for us at creation.
Just as satan so masterfully caused Israel of old to mess with the typologies of Jesus as the Rock & the Lamb; the typology of the Sanctuary; the Sabbath, and many others, so he does today. He knows that when you change the type, the message from God is garbled and we are lead away from the truth we should be reflecting. The questions we should be asking are not: “How can we get women to be accepted as full-fledged pastors or leaders?”, but rather, “How can I, as a male, properly reflect Christ in my life in whatever my vocation is, based on the pattern for males I see in the Bible and Spirit of Prophesy ?”; and, “How can I, as a female, properly reflect the Bride of Christ motif, typology, in my life based on the pattern for females in the Bible and Spirit of Prophesy?”
By way of solidifying this typology in the creation account, isn’t it an amazing coincidence that just as Jesus on the cross “fell asleep” Friday, toward the end of the sixth day, so too Adam “fell asleep” toward the end of the sixth day. And isn’t it amazing that when Adam woke up from his sleep, his bride was there to greet him, brought forth from his side by the power of God. How interesting it is, that when Jesus awoke from His sleep, that by the power of God through the blood of cleansing & the water of life that flowed from Jesus’s side, the bride of Christ came forth.
Stay tuned for Part 2 . . .
Bob Stewart is pastor at Grand Rapids Central SDA Church, and Lowell/Riverside Fellowship in Michigan.