Skip to main content

Nicole on Biblical Egalitariansim

Roger Nicole, reformed Baptist theologian has passed on.  One thing that serparated him from many of those now extolling his virtues was his outspoken egalitarianism.
Since biblical egalitarianism is still viewed by many as inconsistent with biblical inerrancy, it is desirable to state in a very brief manner my position on this subject.
The matter of the place of women in the home, in society, and in the church is not an issue that can be conclusively determined by a few apparently restrictive passages that are often advanced by those who think that subordination represents God’s will for women.
The starting point must be at the creation of humanity, as our Lord himself exemplified by quoting Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 in response to a question by the Pharisees (Matt. 19:4-5, Mark 10:6-7). The climactic point must be at the consummation of the redemptive plan in the wedding supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9, 21-22), as St. Paul notes in discussing marriage in Ephesians 5:22-33. These two moments are the only ones in which sin has not damaged the institution. Thus, the line that connects creation and the eschaton of redemption represents the relationship of males and females in its unadulterated form. What comes in between may include factors due to human “hardness of heart” (Matt. 19:8).
Rest of his article on this subject available here.

Comments

  1. Many of us have tried to make this point in various online venues, but the reaction has been to invent hierarchy before the Fall (creation order, naming, etc.) and in eternity (the Trinity). Yet there are only two possible conclusions such a reaction can reach: that women must not be quite as human as men, or women must not quite be grown up enough to manage themselves as men do. That is, women are by nature and divine decree forever under male authority, since the "fault" of being female apparently lies in the soul and not just the body.

    But I grieve and marvel at the fact that we are still, as believers, even discussing what women can or cannot do. Just as society no longer approves of slavery and therefore the church has no reason to enforce instructions on how Christian slaves must behave, so also society does not hold femaleness against women and malign their souls or brains, yet the theology of being mindful of society is thrown out the window.

    I do try to remind women that egalitarianism is not a matter of asking men's permission to be adult human beings, but simply of stating a spiritual and social reality. It is not a polite request for room at the table but a declaration of freedom from having been wrongly excluded.

    It seems to me that the irony of the church lagging far behind society in terms of freeing the human spirit is quite lost on many of the church's influential elite. It is long past time for them to face reality.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Just as society no longer approves of slavery and therefore the church has no reason to enforce instructions on how Christian slaves must behave, so also society does not hold femaleness against women and malign their souls or brains, yet the theology of being mindful of society is thrown out the window."

    Paula, that is a very interesting way of putting it, thanks for that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You're very welcome, Jonathan. :-)

    The whole "culture" thing can be a very winding road. One minute it's a bad thing and the next it's God's divine order. I should make up a chart sometime.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I was just reading about that this morning,
    http://www.patrolmag.com/2010/12/culture/mark-driscoll-jay-z-avatar-engage-culture/
    On a different subject, but the same point.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh, Driscoll... don't get me started. ;-)

    Debating Christians and culture is like debating nutrition between western and alternative: in the end you conclude there's nothing safe to eat, drink, or breathe.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That one time Jesus got the Bible wrong

It's so typical isn't it? You are preaching all day long, training your disciples, sparring with the Pharisees, encouraging the poor and down trodden, healing the sick and casting out demons, all day, day after day, and even when you go up a mountain to get a rest the crowds hunt you down and follow you up, and then the one time you get a bit muddled up with some of the details of a biblical text . . . that is the one they write down in the first gospel - verbatim. At least Matthew and Luke had the good sense to do some editing. But Mark, he always had his eye on giving the public the "historical Jesus" whoever that is supposed to be . . . warts and all. Thanks a lot Mark!

Some think I made the mistake on purpose, just to show the Pharisees up.

For some there is no mistake worth mentioning, only a slightly ambiguous turn of phrase.

Others think I am doing something tricky with Abiathar's name, getting him to figuratively stand in for the priesthood.

It really has…

Thor Ragnarok and Parihaka: Postcolonial Apocalypse

Thor: Ragnarok is a riot of colour, sound, violence, humour, sci-fi and fantasy. As a piece of entertainment it is the best Marvel has produced so far. As in many of Taika Waititi's films the plot often seems secondary to the humour and a number of quirky moments seemed only to serve for a quick giggle. I left the theatre overwhelmed by the sensory experience, but ultimately unimpressed by any deeper meaning.

It wasn't until the second morning after my trip to the movies that I woke to the realisation that the movie could function as a profound postcolonial metaphor (I do some of my best thinking while alseep, also it can take me a while for the penny to drop). Unfortunately a quick google showed me that I was neither the first, nor the second to have this thought.

[Spoiler Alert!]

It's easy to miss with all the other stuff going on but Thor undergoes a postcolonial awakening during the film as he slowly realises that his beloved Asgard and its dominion of the nine realms …

Dale Martin does Mark

Dale Martin is an important and frequently controversial NT scholar. Those of us who can't make it to Yale to hear him teach can access some of his lectures, in fact his entire introduction to the NT course, through the magic of the internet.

Here he is holding forth on Mark . . .