I apologize for the lapse in posting. I was hoping this would be a quick series of blog posts, but it's hard to make a series quick if you stop partway through! So, let's try to wrap this up!
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."
—Galatians 3:28 KJV
Galatians 3:28 is without a doubt the best verse for arguing equality in the Bible. It says that in Christ, we are all equal. Race doesn't matter (neither Jew nor Greek), economic and social status doesn't matter (neither bond nor free), and sex doesn't matter (neither male nor female), we are all one in Christ Jesus.
Despite some preconceived notions some might have, this isn't a point that's actually at variance between the Egalitarian and Complimentarian camps when it comes to gender. Both sides of the debate insist and believe that men and women are equal before God. The difference is that the Complimentarian position insists that, while they are equals before God, women and men are designed to function in different roles in the church and the home as part of a divinely ordained hierarchy. Egalitarians insist that gender is not something that determines roles in the church, but that God can gift anyone, regardless of gender, to be a leader.
Let's take a look at these differences as they contrast with the verse above. In the verse above, all three categories are declared to be equal before God. But to what extent are they equal? Are there certain things in the church which, by divine command, can only be done by people of a certain race? Can only Jews be leaders in the church, while Greeks must remain followers? Certainly not! What about the distinctions between economic and social status? Should the poor and slaves be forced to remain in separate church roles, while the upper levels of church hierarchy are reserved for the wealthy? While historically it may have worked out this way more often than not, I think we can all agree that this is merely our human prejudice stepping in rather than a divinely ordained division of roles. In fact, the Bible flatly condemns such prejudice in James 2:2-7 (and that just in a simple thing like seating arrangements!). It is clearly not established by God.
This is where the problem comes in to the Complimentarian reading of Galatians 3:28. In the first two cases, we can agree that the equality the verse speaks of is a total equality that encompasses all church life, that there is no God-ordained division between races or classes to restrict their roles in the church. When the verse says they are equal, it means they are completely equal and can fulfill any role in the church to which God may call them.
But when it comes to the third pair of the verse, the Complimentarian reading has to make a radical shift. Men and women, in Complimentarianism, can't be equal in the same way as race and class are in the church, because while race and class cannot be used in the name of God to restrict roles within the church, gender must be. While the verse clearly says that all three sets of distinctions are done away with in Christ, and all three are equal in the same way in Christ, the Complimentarian can only take the verse seriously on the first two. When it comes to the third, the Complimentarian must suddenly restrict the kind of equality meant by the verse to an equality of salvation (men and women are both saved in the same way) or worth (men and women are both equally loved by God). An equality of roles (which exists in the previous two sets of distinctions) cannot exist between men and women because the Complimentarian view holds that men are divinely appointed leaders at home and in church and women can never rightly hold a leadership role over men—that is, male vs female is still a very important distinction and division within the church to God, in a way that Jew vs Greek and slave vs free isn't.
This bothered me for years, and was one of the reasons I eventually became an Egalitarian. It's textually inconsistent to switch meanings in the middle of a sentence. It's especially inconsistent to switch meanings in the middle of a list. If I say, "I love pizza, meatloaf, and spaghetti" it would be a strange interpretation indeed if one were to understand me as saying that pizza and meatloaf were my favorite foods but that I only liked spaghetti occasionally. Yet that is exactly what I was forced to do when I read Galatians 3:28 as a Complimentarian. Neither Jew nor Greek meant just that: race doesn't matter to God, and doesn't determine standing or role within the church. Neither bond nor free meant just that: economic and social status doesn't matter to God, and doesn't determine standing or role within the church. But neither male nor female? That I had to switch up and understand in a completely different way, because that one obviously still mattered to God and determined standing and role within the church, despite what this verse was saying to me. I knew that, because of this forced shift of meaning, my understanding of the passage was fundamentally unsound. That bothered me, and it was only as I began to see the way other passages I struggled with fit together neatly in Egalitarianism that I was able to let go of this weak and warped interpretation of the passage and take Galatians 3:28 seriously. Neither race, nor social or economic status, nor gender matter before God—and none of them can determine or limit our roles in our service to Him!
No comments:
Post a Comment