In this post, I would like to discuss the topic of gender roles in the home as it relates to submission and headship. Egalitarianism has been shaping hermeneutics recently and the result has been questioning or entirely ignoring various texts that refer to concepts such as submission, headship and authority. This is especially true as it relates to roles of men and women in the church as well as in the home. My focus on this forum will be to discuss this role in the home.
The simple question to discuss is: Does God desire women to be subject to their husbands in the home?
Egalitarians argue that the Bible does not teach that women should submit to their husbands. Often this concept is classified as sexist, bigoted and cruel. What is their justification for this stance? Egalitarian arguments can be summarized as:
The simple question to discuss is: Does God desire women to be subject to their husbands in the home?
Egalitarians argue that the Bible does not teach that women should submit to their husbands. Often this concept is classified as sexist, bigoted and cruel. What is their justification for this stance? Egalitarian arguments can be summarized as:
- Gender roles were part of the ancient world, just as slavery was part of the ancient world. The instructions of the NT are about how early believers were to live evangelistically in their context and is not intended to be part of God's design for Christian male and female relationships.
- Submission in the Bible among Christians is mutual. We are to "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." Thus, while wives submit to their husbands, husbands should also submit to their wives.
- The word for submission in the Bible can also be understood as identifying with another or and expression of love or service to another. It does not mean rank or authority.
- Because men and women are one in Christ, there are no longer any gender distinctions.
- Gender roles are not simply held up as means by which Christians can evangelize outsiders in their culture. If this is the case, then all forms of submission referenced in the Bible (such as parents and children) can be said to be merely cultural. Also, the commands of submission and headship in the NT are based in unchanging theological truth and not portrayed as acquiescing to cultural norms. If such roles are evil (as egalitarians would claim) then the Bible would hardly teach an "ends justifies the means" type of evangelistic strategy.
- Submission is not mutual. No where in the NT are husbands told to submit to their wives. In fact, such a view is forced to say that Christ's act of sacrifice was ultimately due to his submission to the church. This is seriously flawed. Christ is not in subjection to the church in any fashion. Acts of love and service should not be confused as submission to authority.
- The word in the Bible that is translated "submit" is hupotasso. The word literally means, "to appoint under." The word is pregnant with hierarchical meaning. When referring to persons, it always relates to submission to authority. The word is often used in a military sense in which someone is under the authority and command of another. Egalitarians define this word differently based on a preconceived understanding of Eph. 5 and then use that understanding to redefine the words.
- The Galatians passage about no longer being male or female has nothing to do with gender roles or authority. This text is related to salvation and unity in Christ. We all have equal standing in Christ. Gender roles have nothing to do with equality, but submission and authority. Children do not have lesser value then their parents, yet they are in a role of submission to parents. Christ does not have lesser value than God the Father, but he was in a role of submission to the Father.