This last Thanksgiving I was visiting with my in-laws. During that visit I made this statement to my sister-in-law “Yes mam, I am a proud sexist!” Why would I say such a thing? Isn’t being a sexist inconsistent with Christian values?
Before I explain why I made that statement in front of many family members let me first give a little background on my wife and her family. My mother and father in-law are really good salt of the earth people who are kind and generous. Truly they have treated me far better than my first wife’s parents ever did and I actually get along with them very well. They really do not look for confrontation and for the most part try to stay out of my marriage to their daughter.
And just for those Christian’s and others who are concerned about the phrase I just used “first wife” – I divorced her for a specific type of fornication which was adultery and God allows this(see Matthew 19:9 and also my article “If We Treated Divorce Like Killing” for an exhaustive study on Biblical divorce).
In regard to my in-laws, as kind and as loving as my mother and father in-law are – they are feminists. Don’t get me wrong, they are not drooling at the mouth, man-hating feminists and they would not even call themselves feminists. They certainly would never march in a feminist parade. My in-laws just believe in equality for men and women, partnership marriage and my mother in-law told me she taught her daughters to and I quote “be independent and not need a man”. Their father worked in a factory but he wanted better for his daughters and he encouraged them to get a higher education and have successful careers like their mother who was an accountant.
My wife and her sister are actually on different sides of their parents on this issue. My wife’s sister is more feministic than her parents and my wife is less feministic than her parents. My wife will at least tell people she believes in male headship in the home and she tries to a certain degree to fight her own feminist tendencies. But it is extremely difficult for my wife because of the combination that she is very intelligent, strong willed and she was raised by parents who instilled feminist principles in her. So there are days when she full on gives into the dark side and goes full blown feminist on me. Those are the days when she says “you can’t tell me what to do – you are not my father”. Other days I can tell she is truly trying and waging a war against the dark side in her that she knows in her heart conflicts with the Bible and what God wants for her.
On the other hand, my wife’s sister is a completely different story. She fully embraces her dark side (aka feminist tendencies). Her sister is also a Christian and is actually very involved in her church. She believes in partnership marriage and that her husband does not have any more say in the marriage than she does. For a very brief time when she was on the verge of her second divorce she tried to embrace submission in order to save that marriage. But in the end the marriage still died and he divorced her.
In the beginning of her third marriage she was very submissive to her husband, but about a year or so into that marriage she returned to her old ways and fully embraced her feminist attitudes of the past. My sister-in-law believes in the Christian feminist doctrine of “mutual submission” between a husband and wife. One of her favorite Bible verses is Ephesians 5:21 which states “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.” She uses that verse to try and explain away the next three verses in Ephesians chapter five.
Now if you are wondering how I – Mr. Biblical Gender Roles himself, ended up marrying into a feminist family that is a longer story for another day. To that end I will just say this. There is an old saying that “You learn more from your mistakes than from your successes” and that is especially true when it comes to choosing who you marry. And yes it was a mistake that I chose to marry into a feminist family.
But God used my mistake for his glory. Let’s say I had never married into a feminist family and had a feminist wife. What if I married into a traditional, conservative Christian family and found a woman that completely embraced Biblical gender roles? What if I had little conflicts with her because our world values just meshed up? If that had happened then this site probably would have never existed.
But God used my mistake as the inspiration for this site that I started back in April of 2014. And that mistake I made of marrying a feminist woman raised in a feminist household lead to this ministry reaching over 3 million people who have made more than 5 million views on this site by the end of 2017.
So with all that said as a background on my in-laws here is why I made the statement “Yes mam, I am a proud sexist!”
We were sitting around the family room as we usually do after we eat dinner together for the holiday. We usually just make small talk about how all the family members are doing and generally avoid political or religious topics as my in-laws are not very religious people and they don’t normally discuss politics. But every now and then my sister-in-law who is a bit feisty will say something or I might make a joke about something. We both know where we stand on things.
So my sister-in-law brings a situation to my attention. Her husband was not there because he had to work. She asked me about a disagreement she and her husband had about their kids. He has a son from a previous marriage that is 17 and she has two daughters from her second marriage that are 14 and 16. I won’t go into the details here but I will just summarize it by saying she thought he was not protective enough of his son and allowed him too much freedom. I told her I agreed with her husband and that I allowed my sons at that age to have almost full freedom except for my four rules. No girls in their bedrooms, no drugs and no drinking in my house or on my property and if they drove one of my vehicles in an intoxicated state I would ask for the keys and they would not drive it again.
I also added that my sister in-law needed to support her husband even if she disagreed with him.
So she turned it on me. She said “will you do the same with your daughter who will soon be turning 16?” I told her “no I will not” to which she replied “That is not fair! You can’t treat your daughters differently than your sons” and then her 14 year old daughter replied “that is sexist!” So here we have a room with my sister-in-law, my mother and father-in-law and my five children along with my wife and I – and I have just been called on the carpet by my sister-in-law and her 14 year old daughter.
My response was “Yes mam, I am a proud sexist! I fully believe that women need added protection from their fathers until they are married to their husbands. Sons when they become men don’t need the protection of their fathers but daughters do.”
My sister-in-law’s only response was “Well admitting it is the first step.” What she meant was that she thought I was admitting to doing something wrong. Many Christians would say no Christian should say what I said and that no Christian should be proud to be a sexist. In this article we will explore if such a condemnation of sexism matches up with the Bible.
The Birth of “Sexism”
For 2000 years Christians were proud of their Holy Scriptures that are commonly referred to as the Bible. But about 150 years ago Christians began to start apologizing for things in the Bible. It began with Christians apologizing for the Bible allowing and regulating the practice of slavery. Eventually with the rise of feminism which was built off the abolitionist movement Christians began to apologize for the “unfair” treatment of women by the Bible.
In the 1960’s during the rise of Second Wave Feminism a new word was coined. This new word, “sexism”, was as actually built using the fight against racism as a model.
Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary defines “Sexism” as:
“1 : prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2 : behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex”
Now some may contend that sexism always existed – it just did not receive an official label until the mid-1960’s. But we need to realize that along with this new label “Sexism” came a new set of morals not previously recognized in human history.
Is Discrimination Always Wrong?
Since the creation of mankind women were in fact discriminated against. But here is a truth that every Christian must realize – discrimination is not always wrong. To discriminate against someone is to treat someone differently based on certain demographic characteristics.
For instance we don’t allow people put in prison to vote. That is a form of discrimination. We don’t allow children to vote and we allow parents to make decisions for their minor children. This another form of discrimination (age discrimination). We also only give welfare assistance to people who make under a certain amount of money – if you make over that amount you won’t get assistance. That is discrimination on the basis of how much you money you earn. There are many college scholarships that are only available to you if you are an African American – that again is a form of discrimination based on race.
The point is, we as a society have made judgements as to what types of discrimination are moral and just and what types of discrimination are immoral and unjust. The question for us as Christians is – does the Bible agree with American standards of what is just and or unjust discrimination?
Is Stereotyping Always Wrong?
Stereotypes are another example of something that is not always wrong. Stereotyping is simply recognizing patterns of human behavior or social norms. If you were to open a small market store in the middle of a Hispanic neighborhood than it would be silly for you not to have in stock food that Hispanics typically eat. If you were to open your store in a predominantly Chinese area it would be equally silly for you to not stock up on foods that Chinese people typically eat. In fact in the business world – if you do not stereotype your customer base you will go out of business.
The New Anti-Sexist Movement Was Used to Condemn Historic Social Norms
This new “Anti-Sexist” movement contended that that women could no longer be seen as house keepers and mothers. In the 1950’s and 1960’s it was extremely common for employers to choose men over women for open positions. The reasoning went that men were providers to families and women belonged in the home. Only if there were no men contending for a position and it needed to be filled would a woman have any chance of getting that position. Even then some positions would be closed to women no matter what.
But under these newly defined social morals of Second Wave Feminism, if a business chose to hire men over women that was now classified as an immoral form of discrimination and labeled with the new term “sexist” or “sexual discrimination”. In the same way if a person was to contend that a woman’s place was in the home as it had been since the beginning of human civilization – this would be called immoral stereotyping.
The New Feminist Formula –> Sexism = Misogyny
So if you felt as the vast majority of people up to that point had felt that women did not belong in politics, the military or most other occupations outside the home you were now labeled with this new term “Sexist”. And the term “Sexist” was equated to “Misogynist” which means “a hater of women”.
It really was a masterful PR campaign by feminist groups. If you dared to believe in the historic views of the roles of men and women in society you were now labeled a hater of women.
This tied into the larger egalitarian movement. If you believed any class of human beings should rightly have any less rights or privileges than another you were now a “hater” of that group of people. You were “dehumanizing” that group of people. This thought pattern of the 1960’s would eventually lead us to open immigration policies and to legalizing gay marriage and criminalizing any form of discrimination against homosexual and transgender people because to be human is to have equal rights and opportunities with all other humans.
Christians Who Are Ashamed of Their Own Bible
It is very common for Christians today to apologize for the Bible treating men and women differently because to do so is now considered “sexist”. The most common way people make “apology tours” for the Bible is to say something like “God did not condone everything in the Bible”. Others say “God just went along with the cultural customs of the times even though he did not really approve of things like patriarchy, slavery, polygamy or genocide”.
While it is true that God did not condone everything that occurred in the Bible whatever he gave commands to do or to allow he did in fact CONDONE. God does not command or allow sin in his law. Not Ever. The real truth that so many Christians run from and cower at is that God did in fact command or allow patriarchy (Genesis 3:16, Ephesians 5:22-24, I Peter 3:1-6), slavery (Leviticus 25:39-46), polygamy (Exodus 21:10-11, II Samuel 12:8) and genocide (Deuteronomy 20:16–18, I Samuel 15:2-3). I encourage you to read each of the passages I just listed to confirm what I have just said.
And on this subject of sexism, God does in fact make statements and commands in the Bible through his Prophets and Apostles that are considered today to be the very definition of “sexist”.
10 Sexist Biblical Statements or Commands
1. Only Men are Made in God’s Image, Not Women
“For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.”
I Corinthians 11:7 (KJV)
2. Women Were Made for Men, Not Men for Women
“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”
I Corinthians 11:9 (KJV)
3. Women Were Executed for Lying about the Loss of their Virginity, Men were Not
“20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: 21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.”
Deuteronomy 22:20-21 (KJV)
4. Women Ruling a Nation Are No Better than Children Ruling a Nation
“As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”
Isaiah 3:12 (KJV)
5. Wives Are Regarded as the Property of Their Husbands
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”
Exodus 20:17 (KJV)
6. Women Are Commanded to Submit to Their Husbands
“22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.”
Ephesians 5:22-24 (KJV)
7. Women Can Have their Decisions Overridden by their Fathers and Husbands
“5 But if her father disallow her in the day that he heareth; not any of her vows, or of her bonds wherewith she hath bound her soul, shall stand: and the Lord shall forgive her, because her father disallowed her…
8 But if her husband disallowed her on the day that he heard it; then he shall make her vow which she vowed, and that which she uttered with her lips, wherewith she bound her soul, of none effect: and the Lord shall forgive her.”
Numbers 30:5 & 8(KJV)
8. Women are Called Weaker Than Men
“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.”
I Peter 3:7 (KJV)
9. Women Are Forbidden From Teaching Men or Taking Authority Over Men
“But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
1 Timothy 2:12 (KJV)
10. A Woman’s Place Is in The Home
“4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”
Titus 2:4-5 (KJV)
The Choice Every Christian Is Faced With
If this is the first time you as a Christian have read these Scripture passages showing that God did in fact commanded or allow things like patriarchy, slavery, polygamy and genocide and also the 10 passages where God made sexist statements and commands your head is probably spinning.
You are faced with a moral dilemma.
You must either condemn God or condemn the American culture you have been raised in. Before you make your decision I highly recommend you read Job chapters 38 to 40. These three chapters are some of the most humbling chapters in all the Bible. Simply put, they put us as human beings in our place.
In Job chapter 40 God says this to Job:
“1 Moreover the Lord answered Job, and said, 2 Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.
3 Then Job answered the Lord, and said,4 Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. 5 Once have I spoken; but I will not answer: yea, twice; but I will proceed no further.
6 Then answered the Lord unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said,7 Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me. 8 Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?”
Job 40:1-8 (KJV)
Before you make your decision let me try to help give a little relief in that decision process.
On the subject of slavery, God only allowed slavery under a particular set of circumstances and it was not based on viewing one race as subservient to all races as the slavery of Africans in the Americas was. For more on this huge topic of slavery see my previous article “Why Christians shouldn’t be ashamed of Slavery in the Bible”.
Also on the subject of genocide I want you to think about this more. In the book of Joshua we read:
“17 And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the Lord: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent…
21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.”
Joshua 6:17 & 21 (KJV)
Literally God commanded through Joshua that every man, woman and child was to be killed in that city with the exception of Rahab and her family who helped the Israelite spies. This was a command to commit genocide against these people.
But before we so quickly condemn the Israelite people and God for his commands to them let us remember that the United States dropped atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima for the good of the American nation. The United States indiscriminately killed over 75,000 people at Nagasaki and over 150,000 people at Hiroshima. This included men, women and children. This included pregnant women and infants.
During war sometimes it is necessary to utterly wipe out those in an enemy territory but like slavery this is a much larger discussion for a separate article that I will write in the future (justified war and its tactics).
But this still leaves things like patriarchy, polygamy and sexism which God commanded in the case of patriarchy and sexism and then polygamy which he allowed. For those who may be able to swallow patriarchy but not polygamy I encourage you to read my previous article “Was polygamy a sin in the Old Testament that God overlooked?” I will give you a sneak preview of that with the conclusion I show in that article based on the Scriptures. Polygamy was NOT a sin God overlooked – God cannot overlook sin nor can he allow for it. So those Christians who condemn polygamy as allowed in the Bible are assaulting the righteousness and justice of God in order to appease their own hatred of the practice of polygamy.
The Bible shows us that feminism’s assertion that Sexism = Misogyny is false.
The Bible shows that God honored women like Sara (Hebrews 11:11) and Rahab (Hebrews 11:31) and that he used women as Prophetesses like Deborah and Hulda in his service. But none of these women challenged his design and order that women were made for men and that God called only men to be Priests in the Old Testament and then Bishops and Pastors in the New Testament.
The fact is Jesus was sexist in how he chose his twelve disciples. If a modern Christian feminist were following Jesus around back then they would have said “he had twelve slots to fill and he could not find one woman to fill any of those slots! What a sexist!”
God was even a sexist in finding Judas’s replacement. He chose another man (Matthias) to replace Judas as the twelfth disciple (Acts 1:16-26) to which the Christian feminist would say “come on God – you had an opportunity to correct your sexist hiring practices and you went and did it again!”
The truth is that God tells us to honor our mothers (Exodus 20:12). God tells us to honor our wives (I Peter 3:7). But what really throws of “Sexism” propaganda pushers is that God actually calls men to honor their wives for their weakness in comparison to men! This means we don’t mock or belittle women for being weaker, softer and gentler than us as men but instead we honor them for it. We honor women, not for trying to compete with men, but for humbly assuming the supporting role God has given them in his creation as wives and mothers. We honor widows and other women who choose to serve in the church in ways which do not conflict with his rules for men and women in the Church (I Timothy 5:3).
Should we as Christians be ashamed of the fact that God tells us he made men to be his image bearers and women to be help meets to his image bearers by being in subjection to them? Should we be ashamed of the fact that God says a woman’s place is in the home bearing children, caring for them and caring for the needs of her home?
Jesus Christ made this statement that should send shivers up the spines of those who seek to apologize for the Bible’s Sexist treatment of women:
“38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”
Mark 8:38 (KJV)
Now many Christians will immediately respond – “Well Jesus was not speaking in any of those 10 Scriptures you quoted so he was not talking about being ashamed of those words!”
Well my feminist Christian friends let me educate you on some other things that Christ said.
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” Matthew 4:4 (KJV)
“17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew 5:17-19 (KJV)
Jesus Christ is the very Word of God (John 1:1). He spoke his Word through his Prophets before him and he spoke his Word through his Apostles after him. That is why Paul could make the following statement given to him by God:
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”
2 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
The Scriptures are clear on this matter. The Bible teaches us that it is not misogyny(hatred of women) to be a sexist and it shows us that God is in fact a sexist while at the same time loving the women he created. If we are ashamed of the Bible teaching sexism then we are ashamed of God himself who authored every word of the Bible. And if we are ashamed of God he will be ashamed of us at his coming. This is why as I said to my in-laws during a thanksgiving family get together that “I am a proud sexist”.
I am a proud sexist because I am proud of my God and his Word.
And on a closing side note – God used that discussion for me to have an opening to share the truth of God’s Word with my 14 year old niece. She came to my house during the break between Christmas and New Years to spend time with my wife (her aunt). She and I get along well and we joke with each other all the time. Despite what occurred earlier during thanksgiving my niece does have a lot of respect for me and she knows that I know the Bible very well.
She made another joke while she was at my house when talking to my wife and she said something like “that’s just because Uncle Larry is a sexist”. I was able to take that opportunity and to talk with her. I explained to her that when I said that earlier I meant it and it was not a joke to me. I explained to her that being a sexist from a Biblical perspective means believing that men and women should be treated differently because men and women have different roles to play in God’s design. I was able to have a quick Bible study with her where I took her through Genesis 1, Genesis 2, I Corinthians 11 and Ephesians 5. I opened a world to her that she never knew existed. She had never heard why God created men and women and why God created marriage. She had never heard that God created women for men or that God created marriage to be a picture of the relationship of God to his people.
It was a lot for her to take in and her first response was the typical response you would expect from a 14 year old girl raised by a feminist mother – “but that’s not fair! Why would God do that? Men are not perfect like Christ and they will abuse their power over women.” She added “plus women are usually smarter than men”.
This is what our children have been raised with. A society that teaches them God is unfair to women, men abuse women and women are smarter than men and women should be in charge of the home.
This is spiritual war we must wage for the hearts and minds of our young people.
“3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: 4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) 5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;”
2 Corinthians 10:3-5 (KJV)
29 thoughts on “Why Christians Should Be Proud Sexists”
Flat out one of your best articles ever.
Thanks again BGR.
Great stuff. Western Christians have given up on the word of God in any form that has not been put through the wringer and the majority if meat and nutrients ripped from it. We love our scripture sugary sweet and easy to swallow! Add to that the fact that your prospects of a wife as a man (and therefore, sex), means having to contend with at least 2-3 generations of feminist trained women and you have all manner of compromise. Even the majority of Christian women, though they would never outright declare themselves as feminist, would bristle at the words of the bible that indicate men and women are different, and that husbands and fathers have control over their daughters and wives.
Serious question, though, and one I may have asked you myself before, but a rehash for newer readers would be useful: What is the fix? How do we cause women and men to understand that Gods words are not only real, but they are meant for our benefit, not our detriment? I mean, you and I and many of your readers understand that the gender roles created by God are good and benefit both men and women, but other Christians would argue all day long that God would NEVER hold men and women to different standards, and that wives are different from daughters, therefore husbands have no right to administer REAL authority over their wives or allow them to remind their wives they are to be submissive. Its the whole “Husbands have authority but should never use it” situation I see all the time. Or even better, husbands lead by being “servant-leaders”, and only lead by doing what their wives tell them to do or by doing everything to further their wives careers, wants and desires, while also providing for her needs.
You probably already have a post that answers all of this.
The part where you said God chose Matthias tp replace Judas was incorrect, as God did not tell Peter and the others to do that, they got ahead of Him. God simply said they did that, not that He told them to. The Holy Spirit had no come down into them them(that happened in chapter 2), and therefore Peter and the others didn’t do this by the leadership of the Holy Spirit, But rather because they wanted to then in a misguided effort to follow Scripture rather than wait for God’s instruction. Other than that, wonderful article, and hopefully your niece will realize the wisdom of God’s Word, follow it, and apply it to her life. And accept Jesus as her personal LORD and Savior if she hasn’t already. 🙂
Excellent summary, but I think it might be better if we were humble sexists. Humble, because have failed at upholding God’s standards and acquiesced to women and culture. Humble because we are men under authority, humble because humility is the posture of God-fearing men who have apprehended grace.
I understand that you probably meant proud as in unashamed and certain of our convictions, but pride is the very sin of feminism that we humble men contend against.
I see where you are coming from with what you said about humility. The Scriptures say “God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble”(James 4:6). But where I was coming from was what you alluded to in your second statement in that we are called to be “unashamed” which is “proud of” God, the Gospel, Christ and his Word. This is not a pride in ourselves or anything we have done, but instead we are proud of what God has created and what he has commanded. We are not ashamed of his commands toward us in regard to gender roles or any other area of holy living.
This is a pride in God himself and his Word which I believe is not only permissible for Christians but commanded for us.
This was one of my major themes in this article. Our Christian culture when it comes to many things, not just gender roles, but other things in the Bible are ashamed of things in the Bible. The make apologies for things God did in the Bible. We as Christians should never ever do that. We may not fully understand why God did certain things – but we should never be ashamed of anything God did and to be unashamed is in essence to proud of what he has done.
I appreciate your challenges as always but on this one I will show why this is more of a debatable issue.
Even before the coming of the Holy Spirit God spoke through prophets and prophetesses throughout the Old Testament and even into the time of Christ(Anna the prophetess in Luke 2:36-38). The Holy Spirit did not permanently indwell people but he came upon men throughout all ages. The Scriptures give us these examples of the Holy Spirit coming upon men in the Old Testament:
Christ told them to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit – he did not tell them they could make no decisions and do nothing while waiting for coming of the Holy Spirit.
In fact their method of casting lots to determine who God had chosen to replace Judas was approved of God multiple times in the Old Testament. Sometimes he directly commanded people to cast lots to make decisions and other times those who appointed ordered that lots be cast to make decisions. The scriptures tell us:
We must also remember that Christ gave the Apostles authority BEFORE the coming of the Holy Spirit during his earthly ministry.
My point is the Apostles already had authority and power from God before the day of Pentecost. The coming of the Holy Spirit was simply the completion of that power.
But then of course we have Paul being called to be an Apostle of God. And in Revelation is shows there are only 12 Apostles names written on the city of God God:
My point is nowhere does the Bible condemn the Apostles appointing Matthias as the 12th apostle. We don’t know what happened to him as he never mentioned again – but then some of the other 12 are not mentioned in the rest of the New Testament. Is it possible that Matthias died and then Paul was appointed? Who knows.
But even in God choosing Paul as his Apostle – he was still “sexist” by feminist standards in that he did not choose any women to be any his Apostles.
The “fix” you are asking for is four fold in my view.
1. We must first trust Christ as our Lord and Savior. For some they have always believed, but they have been babes in Christ only feeding on the milk of the Word. We must encourage them to eat the meat of the Word and grow in their walk with God – this is the discipleship process of progressive sanctification.
2. We must use a similar strategy with Biblical gender roles as we do the Gospel. What do we do with the Gospel? We tell others about it. But while some may not shrink from sharing the Gospel – most Christians, even though who accept what God has said about gender roles, shrink from sharing these important teachings of the Bible. Gender roles are considered something “too personal” that we can’t talk about. But we have to change that perception. Yes we first teach people the Gospel – but once they have accepted Christ one of the first parts of Christian discipleship is learning about Biblical gender roles.
3. Building on points 1 & 2 – we must look for opportunities like I did with my niece. Wherever God opens a conversation that could lead to us sharing God’s wonderful truth of gender roles – we should have the courage and do it. If you present it correctly – it really is a beautiful picture of God and his people and the relationship between Christ and his church. We must help people to understand that this is not about men selfishly acting domineering over women or getting a sick thrill out of telling their wife’s do things like “dance on one foot till I tell you to stop”. And yes I have ran into men that do that. It is about men imaging God in the lives of their wives and children and women picturing the obedience and love of God’s people that he so desires.
4. As Christian fathers and mothers it is crucial that we teach and live out these truths with our sons and daughters.
If we do these things we can truly rebuild the family unit as God intended it to be and then as a result of this our churches could be rebuilt and eventually our nation could be rebuilt.
Now will this happen on a national and world wide scale? I don’t know. Only God knows. There are many who believe the Biblical prophecies teach that the world will become more and more evil – not better – before Christ returns to rule this world by force. All we can do is spread his Word to all those within our sphere of influence and make right decisions as individual Christians before God.
Yeah, I have read many times that the disciples did not cast lots out of impatience or hoping on some “lucky guess”, but rather that they believed God would do as He would, and the lot cast was under Gods control.
I follow your logic, but I am concerned by where some of it leads. You explain in this article that everything that God commands or allows in the Bible is something that he condones and is not sin. Among the things He actively endorses are, as you say, polygamy, slavery, and genocide. Do you, then, find these to be acceptable and think Christians should stop “running and cowering” from them, since God commands them just as He commands sexism?
I know this is a big question, but what is your take on how we should understand commands like those? Is our aversion to them just another result of our cultural context? Or is His commanding them a unique event that was not sin in that context, but is not to be repeated? I would love to hear your thoughts!
Well done BGR, another great article that is spot on.
My prayer as always is that this blog will continue to speak biblical truth, as it is a beacon of light amidst a world that is lost in darkness, especially the “professing” Christian world
Sometimes I fear that the damage of feminism is too great, and too pervasive for women to ever to begin to see God’s perspective on things, but then I see this article and a spark of hope grows in me
My bible tells me that argumentative, contentious women, Proverbs 21:19 ,have always been with us, and that instead of being a blessing, a woman can be as rottenness to a man’s bones…..We need to keep praying that God will continue to speak into women’s lives and make them feel ashamed for their unsubmissive, contentious, rebellious ways, so that once again women will become the help meets they were meant to be.
Next time a Christian “feminist” ( a misnomer if ever there was one), spouts off her unbiblical garbage, tell her that a woman’s place as a wife is to serve her husband and be a helpmeet to him, NOT the other way around, tell her that a woman’s place is to support her husband’s needs, goals, aspirations, and that her goal in life is to serve Christ by serving her husband, tell her that God does not want them to be equal, and that her role is ALWAYS subservient, submissive, compliant and respectful….Tell all that to a Christian “feminist”, and we will see how God fearing she really is
Another proud sexist
and NO I wasn’t being sarcastic, I truly believe in what I just wrote
I love what you just wrote. I would just add that I am a proud sexist because I am a proud Christian and this pride is not in myself as I and my wife and every other man and woman who have ever lived except Christ were sinners before a righteous God. I simply am proud of His Word and His design(even though I fall short of it because I am a fallen man) and I will never apologize for God or his Word.
Much appreciated BGR ☺
I will continue to follow this thread and see how it pans out lol
Have a nice day my friend, blessings upon you and your family
One other thing I would add here. I know some Christians have a genuine concern about us using the word “proud” as Jonadab expressed here. And when it comes to pride in ourselves I agree we must be extremely careful as the Bible exhorts us to humility and the Scriptures are true that “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall”(Proverbs 16:18).
But we must realize that with many other things in the Bible pride, like anger is not always wrong. There is a righteous pride and a sinful pride just as there is a righteous anger and a sinful anger. Every job we work on – we should do so that afterwards we can be proud of that job and not ashamed of what we have done. We can and should rightly be proud of our children when they do well in school or perform great feats in athletics after working hard to achieve those things. And we can most certainly be proud of our God, His Gospel and His Word and not be engaging in sinful pride.
Today some Christians mistake the Bible’s call for Christians to humbly recognize their position before God as sinners to mean Christians must be timid and that there is absolutely no place for a Christian to take pride in anything or to be bold about anything.
But this is what the Apostle Paul said and did:
Christians should boldly and proudly(as opposed to timidly and ashamedly) preach and teach what God says in his Word as the Apostle Paul and the other Apostles did.
Interesting article. I agree that feminism is a problem and that we need to be careful to uphold what God says in His word above all else.
However, I respectfully disagree with your assertion that ONLY men are made in the image of God, and women are not.
Everyone points to Genesis 1:26-27 in this argument so I’ll use other passages.
“This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.”
Genesis 5:1-2 KJV
This passage says that God created man (Adam) in His image, and also that male and female together He named Adam. Thus both male and female are made in His image.
“Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”
Genesis 9:6 KJV
This is where God is giving His commands to Noah after the flood, and He gives the reason why murder is wrong – because it is the unjustified taking of one image-bearer’s life by another. This differentiates murder from the killing of animals (which God told Noah was allowable in order to eat)- humans bear God’s image, animals do not. If woman does not bear God’s image as man does, then this passage would imply that it is not murder to kill a woman. Further – if men are the only image-bearers, then wouldn’t that mean that women are equivalent to animals?
“Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.”
James 3:9 KJV
‘Men’ here is the Greek ‘anthropos’ which is the word primarily used to describe the human race. Or is this passage saying that we bless God and curse only men with the same tongue?
Men and women are both made in the image of God. They just reflect that image in different ways. As you have previously pointed out, men/husbands image God via their God-given authority. How do women/wives image God? In their God-given role as helper. There are countless passages in Scripture where God/Holy Spirit is described as helper. Here are just a few:
“But I am poor and needy: make haste unto me, O God: thou art my help and my deliverer; O Lord, make no tarrying.”
Psalms 70:5 KJV
“Behold, God is mine helper: the Lord is with them that uphold my soul.”
Psalms 54:4 KJV
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”
John 14:26 KJV
“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.”
John 16:7 KJV
To defend your statement that only men, and not women, are made in the image of God, you used 1 Cor. 11:7. However, Paul’s point in this passage is in regards to ‘glory’, not image. If Paul had meant to say that women are not the image of God, why did he not just say so? If Paul is indeed saying that women are not made in God’s image, as you say, then whose image are they made in?
Follower of the Way,
Thank you for the respectful disagreement – those types of disagreements are in short supplies these days. 🙂
Neither Genesis 1:27 nor Genesis 5:1-2 which uses similar phrasing says God made man and woman in his image. It says “he him“, as in who is was created directly in God’s image. In the Hebrew this phrase is “eth haa-‘adam” which means “this same man” or “this particular man”. It is true that one of the hebrew words for man “adam” can refer to all mankind(men and women) but sometimes it refers particularly to Adam or just male human beings. In both Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 5:1-2 “eth haa-‘adam” translated as “he him” refers particularly to Adam and the male human beings.
The phrase in both passages “male and female created he them” is simply a statement that God created both man and woman – not that he equally created them in his image.
Now this is where I can explain my position in finer detail and that might clarify some things for you. But I need to tie I Corinthians 11:7 in here to make my case:
The Greek word there translated as “but” is a contrasting word. It means what comes next is not what has just been said – it is different. The entire reason for men NOT wearing head coverings and women having to wear them is because man is God’s DIRECT image bearer. Woman INDIRECTLY bears the image of God in as much as she bears the image of man. What doe the masculine human and feminine human natures share in common? It is that they both human. The human attributes of things like self-awareness, creativity, emotions and so many other human traits come from God’s image. But woman inherited her humanity from man who inherited his from God. But while women and men both have their humanity from God – Man is the direct image bearer and that is why God is refereed to as our father, and as the husband to his people.
So having said all that – this is why when God condemns the killing of man because he is made in his image this directly applies to men and indirectly applies to women. Both men and women have the image of God in them – but man’s is the direct image and woman’s is only an indirect image from man.
I disagree that Paul is only talking about glory. He expressly says “image and glory”. As to your question who women are made in the image of – I just answered that above but it is man. Woman was taken from man. In fact this is stated in the I Corinthians 11:7-8:
So God is saying man was made directly in his image and glory, but he took the rib from Adam and made woman in man’s image. But just as man is a weaker version of God and dependent upon God, so to woman was made to be a weaker version of man(I Peter 3:7) and to be dependent upon man.
I disagree with your theory that man and woman together represent the image of God as if God divided his image between them. I know that is a popular theory. But God is not represented as feminine, but masculine in the Scriptures. Some have tried to point to gender neutral terms for the Spirit or even a feminine noun in Genesis 1:2 but the problem with that is throughout the Scriptures masculine pronouns are used to refer to the Spirit of God. Therefore we can conclude from the Bible that ALL three members of the trinity(Father, Son and Holy Spirit) are represented by the masculine human nature and not the feminine human nature.
Saying that women are not God’s direct image bearers does not mean women do not have value to God. God is equally angered if a woman is mistreated or murdered as he is if a man is. They both either directly, or indirectly bear his image and he cares for them both. But we should never make the mistake of thinking God divided his attributes between the masculine and feminine natures. The masculine human nature is the direct image of God and since woman was taken from man she indirectly bears God’s image in the form of her common humanity with man.
I just wanted to throw this on this thread. I have been debating a woman on Facebook on this article and she was taking the classic egalitarian position that God only put women beneath men because of the fall and in Christ women are “restored” to full equality with men. I answered her in more detail there (you can see the facebook comments on my facebook page). But this was my concluding statement to her:
Entire comment of yours
You will never know how much we appreciate such sound biblical hermeneutics as seen in these threads
Keep up the good work Larry
First I just combined your two comments into one as it makes more sense together.
I have written extensively on polygamy on this site and I absolutely believe that Christians should stop running and cowering from the subject. It is not a corruption of God’s design and I have proven this in multiple articles. These two articles summarize the case for polygamy and answer the most common objections against polygamy:
The scriptures are clear that God both allowed and even blessed polygamy(contrary to assertions otherwise). He condemned the abuse of polygamy, but not the practice itself.
On the issue of slavery I have also spoken in various comments on that and I also wrote and entire post dedicated to the subject here:
God does not command us to have slavery anymore than he commanded Israel to have slavery – but he allowed it. It was not racially based as it was in North and South America and it was not based on the false idea that God created some race to subservient to other races. It was to be done in a humane way which again slavery in the Americas was not done humanely either. In both ways the slavery of America violated the Scriptural allowances and reasons for slavery and it was right that we ended slavery as it was practiced.
However, just as with polygamy – just because something can be abused or done in a way which violates God’s law as slavery wrongly done here, that does not make slavery always wrong. In other words – it is not always wrong for one human being to own another contrary to American values. If we say this is always immoral – then we are calling God the creator of the universe immoral for him telling the Israelites they could own slaves as property and hand them down to their children as inheritance.
Could God have rescinded his allowance for slavery or polygamy – in other words could they have been moral for a time but then he ended the practices make them now immoral for us? The answer is yes he could have. But the fact is he did not. In fact in regard to slavery Paul told slaves to obey their masters – even ones who were harsh and he sent a runaway slave back to his master. Read the article I wrote on slavery for more detail on that.
So could we in America re institute slavery in a way that is keeping with God’s allowance for it? Sure we could. But it could not be racially based and it would have to be done humanely. In fact most Americans do not know that the amendment outlawing slavery in the Constitution actually made an exception for one type of slavery:
That means prisoners can be used as slaves. The Supreme Court tried to soften the 13th Amendment’s clause allowing for slavery of prisoners but we can clearly see the language of this amendment allowing for it.
In the Bible this was one of the ways people could be made slaves – as prisoners. Think of how much we could save the taxpayers if we came up with a way for people to serve their time as being indentured servants working for people. In fact people could pay the government for criminal slaves and it could serve as a revenue source instead of being such a drain on the system. Of course there are safety concerns for both parties that would have to be addressed. But with the technology we have today it could be done. And many prisoners would welcome this as it would be preferable to serve in a persons house than be locked in a cell. They could breath fresh air as they served out their sentences.
Even the idea of indentured servitude for children would serve us well if it was performed within Biblical perimeters. This process would allow families stuck in cycles of poverty to get out of it. Many people today live in the cycle of poverty with their children in bad neighborhoods living off government welfare. What if a parent had 4 children and could sell a son or daughter to a wealthy person as an indentured servant for 6 years for a large some of cash.
Let’s say that wealthy person had to pay the parents one hundred thousand dollars in a lump sum up front for the 6 years their child would serve? So that poor family could buy a home in a better area or use that money to start a business to get themselves out of poverty. In the mean time laws would be in place that the child could not be abused by the person who purchased them as an indentured servant. If the child was a girl – the man could not touch her sexually unless he married her(just as the Bible prescribes). In this way the child would be well provided for while they served their time and if they were a girl they may end up married to a wealthy man.
The Bible’s welfare system is far superior to ours(both with indentured servitude and polygamy).
And finally on the topic of genocide – this is one I still have to write on but I will give you some hints as to where I am heading with it. I mentioned in this post:
General MacArthur estimated it would have taken a million US soldiers to conquer Japan conventionally and that it could of cost hundreds of thousands of Americans their lives and millions of Japanese theirs. It would have been even more bloody than Normandy and the taking of Germany because the Japanese welcomed death in their cause(ex. kamikazes) in a way the Germans did not. In a way the Japanese shared more in common with the Muslim Jihadists of today in their willingness to kill themselves for their cause than the Germans did.
So the decision was made to in essence commit genocide on a small scale(wiping out two cities) to inspire enough fear in the Japanese government that they would surrender and it worked. Truman’s decision put the American people first but it also spared many Japanese lives in a long war that would have occurred.
And yes our aversion to the necessities of war today is just that – cultural. I am not sure in our current world climate any President could make the same decision Truman did. He would be accused of war crimes and brought before world courts for taking the action that Truman did.
The examples of our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq show how we lack the courage to do what must be done. The object of war is to crush your enemy so that they can never threaten you or your interests again. America fights with one hand tied behind its back. We could have decimated these countries with overwhelming fire power and ended the wars much quicker.
I know this is a tough subject – but think of how quickly the Israeli Palestinian conflict would be over with if Israel were allowed to take the the gloves off and implement the war tactics they used in the Old Testament? It could be another “6 Day War” as they fought June 5, 1967 – June 10, 1967. Turn the cameras off and let them do what needs to be done. Instead Israel is forced to fight with two hands tied behind their back and just wait for the Palestinians to attack them and they can only react in “measured ways”. This is not how war was fought throughout the history of mankind.
@BGR Sorry, but your proclamation to Isaiah regarding polygyny and slavery being possibly only moral for a time, but then God could possibly have ended their practices and made them immoral for us is completely wrong. The Bible says very clearly that God can’t change. More than once it says so. This doesn’t mean He can’t change His mind about how he going to handle something, as He has at times, such as not destroying Nineveh when they repented and giving King Hezekiah 15 more years after he prayed after initially declaring he’d die sooner, but God can not, and does not change His mind regarding whether something is moral or immoral, as that’s in accord with His unchanging moral character. He doesn’t change, and therefore neither do or can His Judgements regarding whether something is moral or immoral.
We know that Adam and Eve’s sons and daughters had to marry one another – what we would call incest today.
We read in Genesis that Abraham married his half sister:
Yet 400 years later God gives this change in his moral law concerning sibling marriage:
This passage clearly indicates it is a sin – cursed – is the one who has sex with this his sister or even half sister, yet before God issued this change no one was cursed for marrying their sibling.
So how do you explain that it was moral for a time for people to marry siblings and then it was not and was called cursed yet you deny the possibility that God could say polygamy and slavery was allowable for a time then declare those things forbidden?
You know I have written extensively on this that I do not believe God rescinded his allowance for either slavery or polygamy that is not what I am arguing. What I am saying is while God’s character never changes – his laws and his allowances for us do. What God commands or allows is moral and what he disallows is by definition immoral.
I look forward to your explanation on this.
Wrong, God didn’t change His MORAL law regarding marriage, He made it a part of His CIVIL law that that wasn’t to be done anymore, which was done not because He suddenly found it immoral, but rather for the genetic reasons and problems that could come from it. These days we have all kinds of defective genes that can lead to genetic deformities and health problems not originally possible. During Adam and Eve’s time, and going on into Noah and his family and after, for a long time there were no defective genes, nothing to causing any such problems, which is why He allowed it and didn’t prevent until later. In Moses’ time, knowing the possible genetic problems that could result in the future from close inbreeding and maybe even because then the defective genes had started to develop from mutations and such, God forbade close inbreeding to counter the genetic problems, not because He found it suddenly immoral. God blessed Adam and Eve to be capable of having lots of kinds, and Noah’s sons and their wives too, so our present genetic problems weren’t yet present for them. Since God had forbidden close inbreeding in the Law of Moses, anyone who broke it would indeed be sinning against God, because they were disobeying Him, hence the scenario in the Leviticus passage you presented of the man being cursed because of this. Not because close inbreeding is suddenly immoral, but rather because disobedience to God is immoral. But no, incest is not suddenly immoral from God forbidding it then, it was just unhealthy, or would be, and He wanted to spare them the dangers of it. But ultimately, if something is moral to God, its always moral, even if it isn’t always possible or beneficial, and if something is immoral to God, then it is always immoral. As He says, “I am the JEHOVAH, I do not change”(Malachi 3:6).
First sorry I put the wrong reference for incest – it was Deuteronomy 27:22.
I think at the heart of our misunderstanding or disagreement is what “moral” and “immoral” means and what it means that God never changes.
We agree the Scriptures teach that God never changes, yet he does change his laws as he did from the Old Testament to the New Testament. God does not change his mind about what is universally right and wrong, nor does his character change or nature change because he knows the end from the beginning – nothing takes him by surprise.
So some things universally moral or immoral to God and he never changes on those things. But for us as humans – what is moral or immoral is even more than this – it is also based upon what God allows or disallows at a given period of time. If God disallows something for us – even though it is not universally immoral to him, it becomes immoral to us.
God does change what he allows or disallows over different periods of human history and if God disallows something he previously allowed – then for us it becomes immoral as you yourself said. So while polygamy and slavery may not be universally wrong in God’s eyes – God had every right to rescind his allowance for both these activities if he so wished it in the New Testament and that would not have changed his character or nature to do so – it would simply have change his allowance for something.
So I stand firmly by my original statement that:
By your own admission – if God disallows something he previously allowed as he did with sibling marriage then “disobedience to God is immoral”.
@BGR It is still only the disobedience to Him that is immoral, not necessarily the matter in and of itself. Him changing a rule such as that does’t suddenly mean He finds it immoral when He didn’t previously, but it could be for perfectly logical reason pertaining to His nature, such as what I described here about the genetic problems possible from close inbreeding, which could easily be the reason He changed that because of His LOVE of His people and man, which itself is an aspect of His unchanging moral character. I stand by what said. His moral law doesn’t change anymore than He does. God in Heaven will ever change my mind about that when I talk to Him.
By the way, Happy New Year my friend!!
Keep up the awesome work you do in here and all the best for the New Year
A Happy New Year to you and yours as well.
I was looking up some info on incest in scripture the other day for a post I am currently writing. I may have your email address somewhere, can I email you with some questions? I would like a little of your insight. Thanks.
My contact info is found on the top tool bar for the site for it says “Contact Me”.
But I will save you the trip – my email is email@example.com 🙂
I think I found what I was looking for in your reference to Leviticus. Thanks.
I confess that there are some things in the bible that I find very unfair. for example, the man is forced to marry his brother’s widow to give him a child, and if he does not agree to marry her, the woman spits in his face. if I were a man I would rather die than go through such humiliation. I’m sure a man at that time would certainly not be able to hold his temper if the woman spat in his face. And I’m with him.