Two weeks ago, in Gender Roles in Balance With Human Equality, I wrote primarily about how Genesis 1 and 2 teach the equality of men and women so that we understand correctly that gender roles do not negate that equality. This week I want to write how we see gender roles within the first family in Genesis 1 and 2, before the fall, intentionally established by our good God for the flourishing of humanity. Paul says these gender roles are present in the creation account and that they have significance for Christian families and for the Church. Today we want to point out multiple ways they are visible. We are looking today at Genesis, not specifically what Paul comments on Genesis, to ask like a skeptic: Are gender roles really in Genesis?
Genesis 1 repeats several times a pattern of God planning, speaking His plan, carrying it out, and then recording “it was so.” “Let there be … and it was so.” When it comes to the creation of humanity in verses 26 through 28, the pattern is still there: “Let us make man in our image, according to our own likeness …So God created man in his own image, …. he created them male and female.” Plan and fulfillment of His plan are repeated throughout this chronicle of creation. The plan for the creation of the family always included male and female with anatomical differentiation and different physical roles to play in fulfilling the purpose of their creation. This is one piece of evidence which I cited two weeks ago (Gender Roles in Balance with Human Equality) for God designing the family with gender roles. The Scripture differentiates between male and female and the physical reality of our bodies provides the observable evidence that “it is so.”
However, that doesn’t prove that wives are to submit to their husbands. The word “submit” is not found in these Genesis passages. The words “head” and “leader” are not found either. What is present in Genesis 1 and 2 is more subtle. Because it is subtle, it is more disputable. Can I say with certainty that God is signaling something to us about gender roles by the following facts? I believe the answer is yes.
- Adam was created first. God does things meaningfully, and He often creates a pattern. Israel was taught by God to give a position of leadership responsibility to the first-born son. In the New Testament, there are references to Jesus as “first-born” from the dead among his many brethren (Romans 8:29) and appointed as head of the church which is God’s family (Colossians 1:18). Luke refers to Adam as the son of God in his genealogy of Jesus Christ (Luke 3:38). So Adam is a kind of first-born in the human family. Additionally, because Adam is created first, before the woman is created, he is therefore alone when God speaks the commandment to him about the trees from which to eat and not to eat. That Adam is alone when he is entrusted with that critical information for all of humanity suggests a leadership role for him as the husband. He also begins the work of ruling God’s creation by naming the animals. It is important to realize that our powerful Creator could have created both Adam and Eve simultaneously, to prevent any impression of role differentiation. And He could have delayed such important instruction until Eve was present. I believe the sequence of the creation events is intentional and meaningful. (This is one of the key facts which Paul cites when he teaches about different roles for men and women in the church.)
- Eve’s role as a wife is defined as Adam’s helper. This suggests an assisting role to her husband, because being a helper generally means being focused not on one’s own direction but on the direction given to one being helped, which then becomes the couple’s joint mission. (This is another of the creation facts that Paul cites to teach us about role distinctions between men and women in the church.)
- The woman is issue of the man’s body. Another way to say that is that Eve proceeds from Adam’s body. This suggests a subordinate role for the woman, though that is not all that it suggests, as I will discuss below. (This is the third creation fact used by Paul in the teaching of role distinctions between men and women in the church.) This method of creating Eve, as with the order of Adam and Eve’s creation, also corresponds with a pattern in Scripture. The roles within the Trinity itself are the first part of that pattern. The Son of God, though He is equal with God the Father proceeds from the Father, and submits to the Father.
- God names Adam (Genesis 5:1-2). When the man names the animals, he is expressing some rule over the animals as the one bearing the image of God. That he names his wife as well suggests his leadership role among the two of them. Adam did not name himself. God names him and Adam is to submit to God. Eve does not name herself. Adam names her. This, too, probably signals an understood headship role appointed to her husband.
- “Man” is the Hebrew word Adam. Adam has multiple meanings: it is a proper name for the first male human; it can simply mean “a man;” and it is the name of the human race – In English, we have expressed this in varying ways over time: Man=Mankind=Humanity. An analogy can be made to a woman taking her husband’s surname at marriage, and all of the children in the family taking the father’s surname. When a culture has that practice, it is understandable that they interpret it as signaling a cultural perception of the headship of the man over his family. It is God who names the human race Adam. (Genesis 5:1-2) Adam, as the name of the whole human race in the Bible probably suggests that God is teaching a unifying leadership role for husbands from the outset of His Word.
These are all noticeable facts of the creation story. They form the “plumb-line” of gender roles within marriage and the church in the Scriptures. Honest readers of this account cannot ignore or dismiss these five facts. Even if Paul had not subsequently taught us in the New Testament about gender roles in marriage and church, we would have noticed these signals anyway. We would have asked with more uncertainty what they mean because they are more subtle than the words “submit” and “head.” But nevertheless, they sound “patriarchal” even to the uninformed reader.
Paul, as an apostle/prophet of Christ, was moved by the Holy Spirit to write instruction for the Church. Alongside the other apostles, he composed Scripture. Scripture is not a collection of apostolic opinions, but God’s Word to us. 2 Peter 1: 20-21 reads: “Above all, you know this: No prophecy of Scripture comes from the prophet’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
One premise of understanding Scripture as authoritative speech from God is that Scripture is the authority on how to interpret other Scripture. That means that when an apostle tells us what an Old Testament passage meant, that is authoritative. New Testament commentary on Genesis, for instance, is accurate, and takes priority over our present-day interpretations of Genesis.
But I want to assure you that the “plumb-line” of equality is beautifully present amid these specific creation facts as well. And it is also present in apostolic (Paul’s and Peter’s) teaching on gender roles, which we will discuss in upcoming weeks. Not only does Scripture rightly interpret other Scripture, but I believe we will see that Scripture is in harmony with other Scripture.
How does God signal equality even within these differentiating facts?
“Helper” is a word of great substance and dignity. It does not exclusively indicate a subordinate role. God uses that word to refer to Himself as the Helper of Israel. When God uses that word to refer to Himself, He is telling us that the Helper role is not an inferior role. He, the unparalleled God of the universe, is willing to assist Israel in the accomplishment of Israel’s calling. Here in reference to the woman, it is coupled with “suitable,” which means something like “corresponding to.” The animals are clearly lesser beings than the man and not “suitable” to be the man’s “helper.” Therefore, while this statement “I will make a helper suitable to him” indicates differentiation of roles, it also supports the equality of the woman, both by calling her by the grand word “helper” and by saying she corresponds to the man.
Sharing substance with the man’s body also reinforces equality. “Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” affirms her correspondence with the man. Man and woman are of the same material and the same maker. She is not inferior in construction. Sharing substance also affirms solidarity between the man and the woman. She is not something “other” than him. While she is different in some respects, she is not alien.
These facts speak loudly of unity, of teamwork. The concept of the first born Adam is not primarily about prominence but about responsibility for care and unity of the race. The name Man unites the race. The sharing of bodily substance unites the race. The deploying of both to common tasks as a team composed of leader and helper unites the race. The teamwork that Ruth described last week is made possible in large part because Nyron and Ruth made a decision together to not be individuals with individual competitive goals but to be leader and helper with mutual respect, working on all the endeavors of their life together.
It is no surprise then that Moses says “therefore … the two shall become one flesh.” The woman was taken from the man’s body and then brought to be re-joined to him in marriage. Eve, corresponds to (is equal) and is complementary to (is different than) Adam and therefore is qualified in both sameness and difference to be one flesh with him.
Why is God being “subtle” in Genesis 1 and 2? I believe it is because humanity had no sin in the garden of Eden before they rebelled against God. If they had continued to obey God, I believe they would have recognized both their roles and their equality and would have naturally fulfilled them. They wouldn’t need to be told to submit or to love. Not so with us. Even as believers, what comes naturally to us is tainted by sin. We have never lived a day without sin tainting our hearts, making us yearn for what we do not have instead of all the beauty of what we do have. We need Paul’s more explicit instruction to remind us both of our roles in marriage and the church, and of our equality. As we move forward to discuss Paul’s teaching, and the teaching of others, we will note both in each passage. If we humbly receive this instruction from the Word, I believe we can recover much of the intended harmony of the roles and mutual respect as partners in God’s Kingdom work.