Man and Woman in Genesis 2

In Genesis 1, we find that God made everything and that he gave form to everything, distinguishing things and designing them for their purposes. As Psalm 104:24 remarks, “O LORD, how manifold are your works! In wisdom have you made them all…” This harmonious order, with everything working according to its design, we call the “creation order.” This includes God's creation of man as male and female. This distinction is good and ought to be obediently affirmed by the way we think about ourselves, present ourselves to others, and live.

We find in Genesis 1 that God made both the man and the woman in the image of God and gave them a shared mandate to be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. In Genesis 2 we are given details about how man and woman are different, created differently to contribute to this shared task in unique ways.

A common but erroneous view today treats men and women as the same and expects equal outcomes from them. Any difference or disparity between them in society is due to discrimination and custom, both of which are seen as evil restrictions on individual autonomy. When they get married, they are supposed to have the same role in the marriage by default. Marriage is subordinated to the pursuit of individual dreams and is a wax nose which the couple can shape as they will. This is not in accord with Scripture or the creation order it describes. 

In Genesis 2, we find man and woman distinguished by their origins, names, and distinctive purposes. 

What was Adam made from? Adam was formed from the ground (Gen. 2:7). What was the woman formed from? The woman was formed from Adam’s rib (Gen. 2:22)

Where does the word "Adam" come from? "Adam" (אָדָם), which can be translated as man or as the name Adam, comes from adamah (אֲדָמָה), the word for “ground” used in Genesis 2:5-7. “...the LORD God formed the Adam of dust from the adamah…” Where does the word "woman" come from? The word for the "woman" (אִשָּׁה, ishshah) is linked to אִישׁ (ish), which means man. Adam said, "she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man" (Gen. 2:23). And where does the name Eve come from? Eve (חַוָּה), the woman's second name given to her in Genesis 3:20, is from חַי, the word for living. "The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living" (Gen. 3:20). 

Genesis 1 spoke of how mankind was made to glorify God as his image, but Genesis 2 points to additional and distinctive purposes behind the creation of man and woman. Why was Adam created? Adam was created to work the ground and keep it (2:5, 15). Before he was created, "there was no man to work the ground" (2:5), and after he was created, the Lord God "took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it" (2:15). Why was the woman created? The woman was created for Adam as a helper fit for him. God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him" (2:18, cp. 2:20).

Thus, the man was taken from the ground, named after the ground, to work the ground. The woman was taken from the man, named after the man, to help the man as one fit for him. There is a clear orientation of the man to the ground and the woman to the man. The ultimate end for both of them was the creation mandate as God's image, but Adam found the task and therefore received a beloved helper, while Eve found the man and thus received the task.

This is not just about marriage. This is about our origin as men and women. This is about how we were made and designed and named. Now, this text does show how important marriage is, how it is tied up in our very creation. Our design corresponds with marriage. Woman was taken from man, and ever since there has been a desire to become one flesh again, to be fulfilled in marriage. But these distinctions which are especially evident in the context of marriage are rooted in our natures, in our identities as men and women, and thus have implications for all of life. Here are a few of those implications. 

1. With respect to each other, the man is designed for leadership. God gave his command about the trees to the man, leaving it for the man to communicate it to the woman. The man was to give instruction, direct the work, and communicate the mission.

The woman was made for the man. As 1 Corinthians 11:8-9 says, "man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man." Thus, this inequality and order is not a product of the fall, but of creation. This does not mean she was made for the man’s self-satisfying whims. She was made for the man so as to help the man with the task God had given him. So the man is designed not only to pursue this task, but is placed to lead others onward.

2. Men are designed with an orientation outward to the world while women are designed with an orientation inward to the family. Thus, men go to the front lines of work, war, and politics, while women are to be workers at home (Titus 2:5), that being the center of their work.

Not that the man should neglect his family. He cleaves to his wife (Gen. 2:24) and is responsible to raise his children well (Eph. 6:4). Nor does the woman neglect the world. She is to be a diligent and productive manager of resources as she tends to her household, and Proverbs 31 illustrates the diversity of this work. But the work and priorities of each are shaped by these basic orientations.

3. One way this orientation manifests itself is that men are given the primary task of guarding the community. The man is placed in the garden “to work it and keep it.” To “keep” is to guard and protect it. The man should defend his ground and protect his territory and home. This responsibility was expanded more in time (e.g. Neh. 4:14, Num. 1), but foundations were laid in Eden.

4. Another way this orientation manifests itself is that women are given the unique task of giving birth and nurturing the young. Eve is named as the life-giver. Women are uniquely designed to nurture and nourish children. While obviously men and women are both needed to be fruitful and multiply (and the father has responsibility for and claim to his children), yet this responsibility is especially borne by women. This takes up a great deal of energy, time, and strength. It is something that only they can do, to their credit and honor, and it also uniquely limits them. This design is a good thing, but it is considered a bad thing by egalitarians, so that abortion is brought it to abolish this difference between men and women. As the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, “It is essential to woman’s equality with man that she be the decision maker, that her choice be controlling. If you impose restraints that impede her choice, you are disadvantaging her because of her sex.”

The unique orientations of man and woman also show up in Genesis 3 after Eve and Adam sinned. What God said then to the woman had to do with her relation to childbirth and the man. The woman was cursed with pain in childbirth. She was placed again with and under her husband (see more about that here). There would be hope through childbirth.

The man was cursed in his relation to the ground. He would have pain and difficulty in his work and opposition to his cultivation of it. The ground would gain dominion over him in the end in death. From Adam came death to all mankind. Yet he would produce and eat bread. And one man would be born of woman to crush the serpent, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Describing Manhood and Womanhood

God has made us in wisdom. He intricately and purposefully designed men and women differently. Not only did he give them different responsibilities, but he gave them different designs to match those responsibilities. These differences are ingrained in our natures, not restricted to roles we play in certain contexts.

Allan C. Carlson has described the traditional family as the "natural family" because it is not merely traditional, but rooted in nature, the creation order (see his books, The Natural Family: A Manifesto and The Natural Family Where It Belongs). Men and women are designed to create the natural family and to build society in conformity to it, but our society continually suppresses and rebels against this design in the name of the unnatural ideology of egalitarian individualism.

The Bible teaches that men and women are different and that these differences are not a total mystery. The fundamental differences are taught in the biblical account of the creation and the naming of man and woman (see Genesis 1-5). They can be found in other parts of Scripture. Furthermore, they can be observed in nature. The Bible treats this knowledge as common sense. When it says that a particular army became like women (Jer. 50:37, 51:30, Is. 19:16), it assumes you know this is not a compliment. When it asks if a woman can forget her nursing child or fail to show compassion on the son of her womb (Is. 49:15), it assumes you know that this is a rhetorical question.

One passage where some of the characteristic strengths of men and women are described is 1 Thessalonians 2. There the apostle Paul compared himself, Silas, and Timothy to a mother and a father. This does show that men can and should have virtues like gentleness that are more characteristic of women, just as the whole congregation can be exhorted to "act like men" in 1 Corinthians 16:13, that is, to be courageous. But at the same time, it affirms that men and women have unique gifts and strengthens which particularly equip them for their place in life.

But we were gentle among you, like a nursing mother taking care of her own children. So, being affectionately desirous of you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us. (1 Thessalonians 2:7–8)

A woman is uniquely designed be nurturing and tender. She is designed to compassionately share her self with her children. She carries them in her womb and even after giving birth keeps them alive with her body, giving them milk. A mother best exemplifies what it looks like to be gentle and affectionately desirous of someone. And while not all women become mothers, all women have the nature of mothers, engrained as it is into their embodied existence. And therefore this sacrificial care, personal affection, and gentleness is characteristic of femininity in general.

For you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory. (1 Thessalonians 2:11–12)

A man is designed to rule and to lead others to accomplish the mission. Note the words Paul uses. "Exhort" - a father calls his children to act. "Encourage" - a father motivates his children and gives them confidence. Without this, children get provoked to anger. "Charge" - a father entrusts responsibility to his children and holds them accountable. To see an example of what this fatherly exhortation looks like, read Paul's second epistle to Timothy. While a mother is best equipped to nurture and comfort a child, a father is best equipped to correct and direct the child unto maturity. Both of these elements are important for a child's upbringing. And again, while not all men become fathers (Paul, for example), all men have the nature of fathers.

While 1 Thessalonians 2 does not encapsulate everything about manhood and womanhood, it assumes a knowledge of sex distinctions which our culture is hesitant to admit. Our culture is hesitant to affirm that there is a natural order at all - this impinges on my freedom to be what I want. Instead, all these distinctions are explained as mere social constructs, which can and should be challenged. But if a design deeper than a social construct undergirds traditional gender distinctions, then it would be wiser to make peace with the Creator and begin to learn how to live in the world he designed.

Men, Women, and Sin

God created mankind as male and female. Here are four ways in which sin corrupts and distorts this aspect of God's creation order:

(1) Masculinity and femininity, which are good, being twisted and redirected by sin. For example, man’s strength and aggression, designed to work and keep the garden, is used instead to oppress, exploit, and rob. Both men and women use their respective strengths for evil ends.

(2) Men and women rebelling directly against their design. For example, men who were given strength to protect and provide become lazy and soft, abdicating their responsibilities. Women who were given a unique ability to nurture their young can yet prove cruel and heartless to them. Men and women, designed for sexual relations with the opposite sex, sometimes pursue sexual relations with the same sex, contrary to nature.

(3) Enmity between men and women. They blame each other, are bitter against each other, hating and being hated by each other. There are men who despise and mistreat women, and women who despise and mistreat men. Masculinity and femininity get despised, blamed for their sinful perversions.

(4) Rebellion against the sexual distinction itself. Since the distinction between man and woman is an occasion of conflict, some want to solve it by getting rid of it. Other may be motivated by a desire to transcend their createdness, to avoid any prescribed identity. But one way or another, people rise up against this distinction and promote androgyny. Especially in our day, people seek to leverage the powers of science to overcome nature and free humanity from this distinction, making men and women interchangeable.

The good news is that redemption for sinners is found in Christ. Apart from Christ, humanity is lost in a labyrinth of confused and miserable rebellion, but that is not the case when one is in Christ. In Christ, you are forgiven and reconciled with God. In Christ, man and woman become co-heirs of grace, fellow members of the household of God. In Christ, you all are restored to live in accordance with your created design as the image of God and as men and women. 

Some error by thinking that in Christ we transcend our created nature and are freed from these created distinctions. But the problem was not in your created design. The problem was in rebellion and the misery it caused. Redemption does not destroy nature but restores and perfects it. The unity and distinctiveness of man and woman is restored, purified, and perfected in Christ. 

When Paul says in Galatians, “there is no male or female,” he explains what he means by saying, “for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Both men and women are fully and equally members of Christ and united as one body of Christ. There is no distinction in that respect, but that is not the case in every respect. The same Paul teaches that men and women in Christ do not loose their distinctive natures and duties, but are enabled and instructed to be godly men and godly women. Just as you are the image of God, and Christ restores your conformity to that identity, so in a similar way you are men and women and Christ restores your conformity to those identities in a way that is good and pleasing to God. 

How Did God Create Man?

The tenth question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism asks, "How did God create man?"
 It answers, "God created man male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness and holiness, with dominion over the creatures."

The doctrine of man is a major area of conflict in our day. Contrary to popular belief, you do not get to create yourself and choose all your obligations. You are created by God, and while you have some chosen obligations in life, you have other obligations by virtue of how God made you. You are created and designed by God as either male or female and as one made after his own image, to reflect his knowledge, righteousness, holiness, and dominion. 

"So God created man in his own image,

 in the image of God he created him;

 male and female he created them."

 (Genesis 1:27)

How did God make man male and female? 

He formed the man's body from the dust of the ground and formed the woman's body from the man's rib. Notice, God did not at first create an androgynous person without a sex, and then divide that person into a man and a woman. No, he created first the man, and then from him the woman. Sex identity as male or female was there from the beginning and is good.

Are there more sexes than two? 

No, there are but two sexes, male and female. Rare physical anomalies may occasionally make it complicated to identify, but they do not create a third sex or nullify the link God has made between biological sex and a person's identity as male and female. A woman is an adult human female, and female denotes the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs. That is what old and new dictionaries say and is the biblical usage too. When Adam named the woman, he did not ask her about her psychological experience and whether she felt like a woman. He named her "woman" because her body was formed from the man’s, corresponding to it.

What implications might this have for you? 

You should affirm the goodness of this distinction. Affirm it in the way you dress and act (Deut. 22:5). Treat men as men, women as women. Fulfill your particular responsibilities as men or women, using your particular gifts well (e.g. 1 Peter 3:1-7). Men marry women, and women marry men. Sin seeks to blur the distinctions God has appointed, and the more it holds sway, the more it distorts human desires, destroying natural orientations (Rom. 1:26-27) and natural affections (Rom. 1:30-31). In our day, this sinful distortion is an ideology being promoted in our society. The creation order (natural law) is contrary to androgyny, egalitarianism, queerness, homosexuality, transgenderism, effeminacy, irresponsibility, and the hatred of either sex. Both men and women should be valued and honored as such.

What was made after God’s own image? 

God created man in his own image. "Man" here refers to mankind, male and female. And it refers to man, not merely some part of him

What does an image do? 

An image resembles something and it represents that thing. As the image of God, man represents God and resembles God. Genesis 5:1-3 connects the ideas of image and son. The son resembles his father and represents his father. Especially in an ancient household, the son would represent his father and would bear his authority under him. Likewise, Adam was created as a son of God (Luke 3:38), to resemble God and to rule God’s earthly household on his behalf (cp. Acts 17:28). The doctrine of the image of God shows us what we are and what we are called to do. If you learn that a rock is a statue, you know what it is and what it is supposed to do. It is a statue that represents someone and it is suppose to resemble that person.

How does man represent God? 

Man is God’s representative on earth, his vice-regent. Just as a king might set up statues and flags and images on coins to assert his reign - the violation of which is taken personally - so God has set up man as a symbol of his royal authority on earth. To mistreat man is to attack God (Gen. 9:6, Prov. 14:31). Man’s basic value does not come from his abilities, his usefulness, his race, his independence, or his mental capacity, but on his or her identity as a human, made in the image of God. From conception, each child is made in the image of God. 

How does man resemble God? 

Particularly, we resemble him in knowledge, righteousness, holiness, and dominion. This resemblance is connected to the first point - we resemble him to display his glory on earth.

Does man’s body resemble God? 

The divine nature is spiritual and invisible (1 Tim. 1:17, John 4:24), so no, the resemblance is not physical. Nevertheless, man was made to physically manifest God's invisible attributes. Our bodies are intended to be instruments of righteousness and dominion. Our bodies do not physically resemble God, but our resemblance to God does express itself through the body. The whole man is the image of God.

How does man resemble God in his dominion? 

Man was made as a productive being who at least originally exercised true and good dominion (Gen. 1:26-28, 2:15). God had worked to create the world with power, wisdom, and goodness, forming and filling the earth. He also created mankind to have dominion over his creation and work the earth, to exercise power, wisdom, and goodness. We are sub-creators who reflect God in our work, working on his behalf.

How does man resemble God in his knowledge? 

Man was made as a rational being with true knowledge (Col. 3:10). Think also of how knowledge and wisdom is discussed in Proverbs 8, as active in God’s work of creation and as something which man is to take hold of and exercise. Man was created with the knowledge of God and was taught right away about God’s covenant and creation. Man is able to know God and communicate with him. He can communicate with one another, and reason about and investigate this world.

How does man resemble God in his righteousness? 

Man was made as a moral being with true righteousness (Eph. 4:24). True righteousness is conformity to the moral perfection of God. Unlike the pagan gods who expressed human vices on a supernatural scale, the true God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. He is faithful and just. His children ought to be as well. His moral law is not an arbitrary expression of his whims, but a definition of what it looks like for man to reflect his righteous character.

How does man resemble God in his holiness? 

Man was made as a religious being with true holiness (Eph. 4:24). True holiness is total consecration to God and separation from the defilement of sin. You shall be holy, for the Lord your God is holy (Lev. 19, 1 Peter 1). God is set apart, undefiled, and pure - completely good. He is “inclined to all moral purity and recoils from all impurity of sin.” Mankind reflects God’s holiness by being totally consecrated to God, conforming its will to love and reject what he loves and rejects, demonstrating its devotion to him in worship and service.

What has sin done to God’s image? 

Sin distorts and defaces the image of God. If you learn that a rock is a statue, you know what it is and what it is supposed to do. If it gets defaced, it is still a statue, but it does not fulfill its purpose well, and it is in need of restoration. Humanity should still be respected as God’s image, but man has marred the image and acts contrary to it. He remains a rational, moral, religious, and productive being, capable by God's common grace of some earthly good, but his thinking is blind to God and ultimately futile, his righteousness is as filthy rags before God, his religion is idolatrous, and his dominion is ultimately vain and often cruel.

How might God’s image be renewed and restored? 

Only by God's grace. Thanks be to God that he has sent Jesus Christ to redeem his people, to break the power of sin over them, and to write God's law on their hearts by his Spirit. When we come to Christ, we "put off the old self and its practices" and "put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator" (Col. 3:10). The resemblance to God is being restored in believers, who are transformed by the renewing of their minds, enabled and taught to put to death their former sinful practices and to put on the ways of Christ.

“For as when a figure painted on wood has been soiled by dirt from outside, it is necessary for him whose figure it is to come again, so that the image can be renewed on the same material - because of his portrait even the material on which it is painted is not cast aside, but the portrait is reinscribed on it.” 

- Athanasius, On the Incarnation

Presbyterian Statements on Women and the Draft

Since it is in the news again that the US Senate Committee on Armed Forces is proposing (once again) to start requiring women to register for the draft in the 2025 NDAA (see here), I thought I would share a few statements from Presbyterian denominations in NAPARC on women and the draft/military. This is not comprehensive, as other denominations have made similar statements. My local church also has its own statement on this in its constitution. Hopefully this provision is taken out of the final bill, and perhaps these statements might be worth including in a letter to your senator or representative. I believe the requirement for women to register for the draft to be both unwise and immoral on account of the distinction between the sexes revealed in creation and in the Bible. In the Bible, men alone are assigned the responsibility for national defense (Neh. 4:14, Num. 1:2-3, Deut. 24:5), and this was not something pertaining to ancient Israel alone, but a moral principle based in the creation order (Gen. 1:27, Is. 19:16, Jer. 51:30). 

Orthodox Presbyterian Church, 68th General Assembly, 2001:

“The 68th GA declares that the use of women in military combat is both contrary to nature and inconsistent with the Word of God.”

Presbyterian Church in America, 30th General Assembly, 2002:

"1. Acknowledging that the child in the womb is 'a person covered by Divine protection' (Statement on Abortion, Sixth General Assembly); and that women of childbearing age often carry unborn children while remaining unaware of their child's existence; and that principles of just war require the minimization of the loss of life-particularly innocent civilians; the PCA declares that any policy which intentionally places in harms way as military combatants women who are, or might be, carrying a child in their womb, is a violation of God's Moral Law. Adopted

"2. This Assembly declares it to be the biblical duty of man to defend woman and therefore condemns the use of women as military combatants, as well as any conscription of women into the Armed Services of the United States. Adopted

"3. Therefore be it resolved that the Thirtieth General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America adopts the above as pastoral counsel for the good of the members, the officers, and especially the military chaplains of the Presbyterian Church in America. Adopted

"4. Be it further resolved that the Presbyterian Church in America supports the decision of any of its members to object to, as a matter of conscience, the conscription of women or the use of women as military combatants. Adopted"

Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, 168th Synod, 1998:

“Therefore, be it now resolved: That, while recognizing the right and duty that women have to self-defense, which may involve physical violence (Judges 9:53), it is our conviction that Biblical teaching does not give warrant to employ women for military combat.”

Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, General Synod, 2016, Index 20:

“The Word of God gives no warrant expressed or implied that women are to be conscripted into military service or required to participate in military combat. Therefore, the General Synod of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church opposes the registration of women for Selective Service and the assignment of women to combat duty or to duties which involve a significant risk of engaging in combat.”

Many of these quotes are also found in Paul Barth's post on the topic: Women in the Military and in Combat. The PCA and OPC's statements can be found along with the committee reports that preceded their adoption here (PCA) and here (OPC), although I would note it is the statements rather than the reports that were adopted by the general assemblies. You can also find my earlier post about the 7th century "Law of Adamnan" on this topic here.

Desire "for" or "contrary to" in Genesis 3:16

I think the English Standard Version (ESV) had Genesis 3:16 right in its 2011 edition and messed up with the 2016 edition when it came to this verse. 

ESV 2011: “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

ESV 2016: “Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you.”

The 2011 translation make more sense on a number of levels, is more compatible with historical exegesis, and is the option most compatible with similar uses of the phrase in Genesis 4:7 and Song of Solomon 7:10. 

This sentence is a reaffirmation of the creation order in the context of the fall. It was indirectly a chastisement, in that they were fallen and this subjection was less voluntary and agreeable. But it was primarily a correction of the woman's waywardness and a mercy that reaffirmed marriage and the fulfillment of their original design. They would not be separated. Man would not be alone and the woman would still be a helper fit for him, under his rule and care.

The basic idea of the preposition in question, אֵל, is that of "toward." Since we are speaking of desire, it is most natural to translate it as "for." When a person's desire is directed toward an object, we say that he or she has a desire for it. 

The 2011 and 2016 translations offer very different meanings. In this context, “for” is a good thing and “contrary” is a bad thing. In Genesis 4:7, sin’s desire was for Cain, and that was bad because sin is bad. A “desire for” is the idea of possessing or having, which is good in the case of a husband and wife (Song 7:10, Gen. 3:16), but not good when sin wants to have you (Gen. 4:7). 

Likewise, "rule" in Genesis is a good thing, but it looks differently depending on what is being ruled. A bad thing like sin will be ruled by being crushed (4:7), while good things like day and night (1:18), a wife (3:16), a household (24:2), brothers (37:8), or Egypt (45:8, 26) will be ruled in a way that provides care, direction, protection, and well-being in a way that befits the particular relationship. Of course, Christ's benevolent rule of his church, exercised with self-sacrificial love, is the ideal for the way this is supposed to work in marriage (Eph. 1:22-23, 5:22-33). 

The pronouncements in Genesis 3:14-19 are actions of God. They are God's response to sin, expressing both his justice and his mercy. They are not merely his description of the situation, except for the "because" clauses in verses 14 and 17. It would be odd for God to make the woman's desire contrary to her husband, but it does make sense for him to reaffirm his design. As Matthew Henry observed, God put enmity between the woman and the serpent, not between the woman and the man. Thank God! 

The Law of Adamnan

Iona Abbey

In 697, a law was adopted in the British Isles at a council in Birr, Ireland called the Law of Adamnan or the Law of the Innocents. It was drafted by Adamnan, the abbot of Iona, and accepted and guaranteed by forty clerical leaders and fifty-one civil leaders, including all the major rulers in Ireland and two kings from Scotland. The law forbade the practice of sending women into battles and fights, forbade the killing of non-combatants, including women, children, and clergy, and gave these non-combatants other protections as well. An early explanation of the law described the origin of the law in this way: 

“…women were in bondage and in slavery, until Adamnan, son of Ronan, son of Tinne, son of Aed, son of Colum, son of Lugaid, son of Setne, son of Fergus, son of Conall, son of Niall, came…

“The work which the best women had to do, was to go to battle and battlefield, encounter and camping, fighting and hosting, wounding and slaying. On one side of her she would carry her bag of provisions, on the other her babe. Her wooden pole upon her back. Thirty feet long it was, and had on one end an iron hook, which she would thrust into the tress of some woman in the opposite battalion. Her husband behind her, carrying a fence-stake in his hand, and flogging her on to battle. …

“Now after the coming of Adamnan no woman is deprived of her testimony, if it be bound in righteous deeds. For a mother is a venerable treasure, a mother is a goodly treasure, the mother of saints and bishops and righteous men, an increase in the Kingdom of Heaven, a propagation on earth…

“This is the beginning of the story. Once Adamnan and his mother were wending their way by Ath Drochait in Uaithne in Ui Aido Odba in the south of Bregia. ‘Come upon my back, dear mother!’ saith he. ‘I shall not go’, saith she. ‘What is this? what ails you?’, saith he. ‘Because you are not a dutiful son’, saith she. ‘Who is more dutiful than I am? since I put a girdle upon my breast, carrying you about from place to place, keeping you from dirt and wet. I know of no duty which a son of a man could do to his mother that I do not do for you, except the humming tune which women perform ..... Because I cannot perform that tune, I will have a sweet-sounding harp made for you, to play to you, with a strap of bronze out of it’. ‘Even so’, she said. ‘Your dutifulness were good; however, that is not the duty I desire, but that you should free women for me from encounter, from camping, from fighting, from hosting, from wounding, from slaying, from the bondage of the cauldron [another cruel practice described in the document].’”

Other similar reforms of warfare would take place during the Middle Ages, such as in the “Peace of God” in 10th century France. Yet in our own day there is a bill awaiting a vote in the U.S. Senate that inclusion a provision that would require women to register for the draft. Will we abandon our good heritage and fall back into the ways of the days before Adamnan, forcing women into combat?

The Creation of Mankind

Q. 10: How did God create man?

Answer: God created man male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, with dominion over the creatures.

The doctrine of man is a major area of conflict in our day. Who are we? Who decides who we are? Should we seek to live up to some universal moral standard, or should each of us create his own? Should we seek to fulfill some God-given purpose, or is each of us left to create one's own purpose for one's existence?

This simple but powerful answer from the Westminster Shorter Catechism states that (1) God created mankind, (2) he made mankind male and female, (3) he made mankind after his own image, (4) this image is expressed in man’s knowledge, righteousness, holiness, and dominion. The first three assertions can be found in Genesis 1:26-28, and the fourth can be found partly in the same passage as well as in two verses which describe the renewal of this image: Colossians 3:10 and Ephesians 4:24.

God made us male and female. He formed Adam's body from the dust of the ground and formed Eve's body from his side, and he named them accordingly. There are two sexes, and these identities are given to us, ingrained into our bodies, not left to the choice of individuals. This sexual identity, as man or woman, is a good part of God’s creation and should be affirmed. Sin seeks to blur the distinctions God has appointed, and the more it holds sway, the more it distorts human desires, destroying natural orientations (Rom. 1:26-27) and natural affections (Rom. 1:30-31). In our day, this distortion is not merely something individuals might deal with, but an ideology being promoted in our society. One of the ways to resist this ideology is to affirm our God-given identities and demonstrate the beauty and goodness of his design in our lives as we are renewed by his grace.

God created man, male and female, in his image. We are the image of God. This means two things. First, it means we represent God. To mistreat man is to attack God (Gen. 9:6, Prov. 14:31). Man is God’s representative on earth, his vice-regent. Just as a king might set up statues and flags and images on coins to assert his reign - the violation of which is taken personally - so God has set up man as a symbol of his royal authority on earth. Second, it means we resemble God. This is connected to the first point. We resemble him to display his glory on earth. Particularly, we resemble him in knowledge, righteousness, holiness, and dominion. (There are certainly some differences as well: unlike God, we are physical, visible, and finite; unlike us, God is infinite and eternal in all his attributes.)

Sin distorts the image of God. Humanity still has some dignity as God’s image (and should be respected as such, Gen. 9:6), but man has marred the image and acts contrary to it. He remains a rational, moral, religion, and productive being, but his thinking is blind to God and futile, his righteousness is filthy rags, his religion is idolatrous, and his dominion is ultimately vain and often cruel. But thanks be to God that he sent Jesus Christ to save his people that they might “put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator” (Colossians 3:10).

Describing Manhood and Womanhood

I once had a professor, very good in other respects, who told me that men and women were different but that we cannot (and should not) say how they are different beyond obvious biological differences. Any attempt to do so was, in his thinking, an unwarranted generalization, certainly one unwarranted by the Bible. This was in reaction, I believe, to the concept of biblical manhood and womanhood promoted by people like John Piper and Wanye Grudem. I found my professor's position unconvincing.

It was interesting that another professor at the same school strongly emphasized the importance of the fact that we are embodied beings. He taught that our bodies are essential to us. We are material beings who have been given life. This has implications for gender differences. I remember him making a point that LGBT advocates have been able to promote a low view of the body because many Christians already viewed humans as essentially souls. Looking back at my notes from his class, I find this note: "More work needs to be done on the content of gender differences. (We had quite a bit of discussion in the second half of class.)" 

Indeed, the physical differences between men and women can be too easily minimized, as if they didn't make much of a difference apart from reproduction. But God has made us in wisdom, intricately and purposefully designing men and women differently. Not only did he give them different responsibilities, but he gave them different physical designs to match those responsibilities. These differences are ingrained in our natures, not restricted to roles we play in certain contexts. 

Allan C. Carlson describes the traditional family as the "natural family" because it is not merely traditional, but rooted in nature (see his books, The Natural Family: A Manifesto and The Natural Family Where It Belongs). Men and women are designed to create the natural family and to build society in conformity to it, but our society continually suppresses and rebels against this design in the name of the unnatural ideology of egalitarian individualism. 

So contrary to what my professor taught, I believe the Bible teaches that men and women are different and that these differences are not a total mystery. The fundamental differences are taught in the biblical account of the creation and naming of man and woman (see Genesis 1-5). They can be found in other parts of Scripture. Furthermore, they can be observed in nature. The Bible treats this knowledge as common sense. When it says that a particular army became like women (Jer. 50:37, 51:30, Is. 19:16), it assumes you know this is not a compliment. When it asks if a woman can forget her nursing child or fail to show compassion on the son of her womb (Is. 49:15), it assumes you know that this is a rhetorical question. 

One passage where some of the characteristic strengths of men and women are described is 1 Thessalonians 2. There the apostle Paul compared himself, Silas, and Timothy to a mother and a father. This does show that men can and should have virtues like gentleness that are more characteristic of women, just as the whole congregation can be exhorted to "act like men" in 1 Corinthians 16:13, that is, to be courageous. But at the same time, it affirms that men and women have unique gifts and strengthens which particularly equip them for their place in life.

"But we were gentle among you, like a nursing mother taking care of her own children. So, being affectionately desirous of you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us." (1 Thessalonians 2:7–8)

A woman is uniquely designed be nurturing and tender. She is designed to compassionately share her self with her children. She carries them in her womb and even after giving birth keeps them alive with her body, giving them milk. A mother best exemplifies what it looks like to be gentle and affectionately desirous of someone. And while not all women become mothers, all women have the nature of mothers, engrained as it is into their embodied existence. And therefore this sacrificial care, personal affection, and gentleness is characteristic of femininity in general. 

"For you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory." (1 Thessalonians 2:11–12)

A man is designed to rule and to lead others to accomplish the mission. Note the words Paul uses. "Exhort" - a father calls his children to act. "Encourage" - a father motivates his children and gives them confidence. Without this, children get provoked to anger. "Charge" - a father entrusts responsibility to his children and holds them accountable. To see an example of what this fatherly exhortation looks like, read Paul's second epistle to Timothy. While a mother is best equipped to nurture and comfort a child, a father is best equipped to correct and direct the child unto maturity. Both of these elements are important for a child's upbringing. And again, while not all men become fathers (Paul, for example), all men have the nature of fathers. 

More could be said. If you are interested in more in this vein, you might listen to C.R. Wiley's talk "Toxic Matriarchy" here or read one of his books, Man of the House and The Household and the War for the Cosmos. I think this topic is particularly an important point for millennial men like myself. While older generations of men might have been more prone to be overly distant, workaholic, or harsh, my sense is that millennial men tend to turn away from these faults and are prone to become overly informal, lazy, or soft. While we should be accessible and loving, we must not neglect the fact that we are particularly designed to have gravitas and bear authority so that we might lead others onward.

While 1 Thessalonians 2 does not encapsulate everything about manhood and womanhood, it assumes a knowledge of gender distinctions which our culture is hesitant to admit. Our culture is hesitant to affirm that there is a natural order at all - this impinges on my freedom to be what I want. Instead, all these distinctions must be explained as mere social constructs, which can and should be challenged. But if a design deeper than a social construct undergirds traditional gender distinctions, then it would be wiser to make peace with the Creator and begin to learn how to live in the world he designed.

Marriage in Genesis 2

In an earlier post, we saw from Genesis 1:26-28 that humanity - created male and female in the image of God - is given a mandate to be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it, and that this task is especially given to married couples. Men and women share this task in common, but as we move to Genesis 2 we find that men and women approach this task differently. And here we will focus on how they relate to each other in marriage, although these natural differences have relevance in all of life.

A common view today is that man and woman are equal and that marriage is subordinate to their pursuit of their (individual) dreams in which each has the same role in the marriage. (Even as I write this at the local library I hear a mother reading to her daughter the "Feminist ABCs" where D is for dreams and E is for equality.) This makes sense in an individualistic worldview where each person is their own maker, creating their identity and purpose out of thin air. But all this changes when we view the world through the lens of Scripture.

In Genesis 2, we find that man and woman were created by God, and that they were created differently. God made Adam from the dust and His breath (Gen. 2:7), while God made Eve from Adam’s rib (2:22). They had unique purposes behind their creation: Adam was created to work the ground and keep it (2:5, 15), while Eve was created to help Adam with this task (2:18, 20). Neither one of them was independent of the other, but they depended on each other differently. The ultimate end for both of them was the creation mandate, but Adam found the task and therefore received a helper, while Eve found the man and therefore received the task.

The fact that Eve was formed from Adam gave them unity. When Eve was brought to Adam, he saw that she was from his flesh, and so they united in marriage as one flesh (Gen. 2:23-24). Woman was taken from man, and ever since they have desired to become one again, a desire which is designed for marriage. Companionship, friendship, love, romance, and physical union thus play an important and natural role in marriage. And this union of affections and bodies also promotes their original calling to multiply and subdue the earth: it naturally leads to childbirth and it unites them closer so that they might work together as one.

Some have claimed that God's primary intent in marriage is not to make you happy, but to make you holy. But I'm not sure that marriage made Adam any more holy - it did, though, make him quite a bit more happy (Gen. 2:23). In our fallen state, marriage is supposed to make you holy as well as happy, and neither of these exhaust the purposes of marriage (since it's not all about you). Because of sin, marriage sometimes does not achieve its purpose, but this does not alter its purpose and design.

This one-flesh unity shapes the rest of the marriage relationship. Marriage is designed so that husband and wife work as one and treat each other as part of his or her self. The husband does not treat his wife as an external force to be conquered, but as his body to be directed and cared for. The wife does not see her husband as a conquering invader to be resisted, but as her head to be supported and obeyed. John Calvin commented on this chapter that “something was taken from Adam, in order that he might embrace, with greater benevolence, a part of himself. ” He says, “In this manner Adam was taught to recognize himself in his wife, as in a mirror; and Eve, in her turn, to submit herself willingly to her husband, as being taken out of him.”

We see from Genesis 2 that neither man or woman is independent - they both need each other - but they depend on each other differently. Adam helps as a head by directing and caring for Eve in love as His flesh and helper. Eve helps as a body by respectfully following and extending Adam’s leadership. As Calvin comments, “women, being instructed in their duty of helping their husbands, should study to keep this divinely appointed order. It is also the part of men to consider what they owe in return to the other half of their kind, for the obligation of both sexes is mutual, and on this condition is the woman assigned as a help to the man, that he may fill the place of her head and leader.”

Much more could be said on the topic, but from this chapter we can draw the following applications (in line with Scripture's own commentary on this passage in places like 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, 1 Timothy 2:8-15, Proverbs 31:10-31, and Ephesians 5:22-33):

Both Husbands and Wives: love and desire the other as one’s self. Seek your spouse's good and be close to your spouse in soul and body. Both should seek to help the other and promote God’s glory and fulfill His mandate together. Your marriage serves more than your respective needs - it is so much bigger than you.

Husbands: view your wife as your body. You provide and protect your body, so protect and provide for your wife. You direct your body for purposeful ends, so give her direction and instructions for purposeful ends. You train your body, so teach your wife as an intelligent human and co-heir of grace. You treasure your body, paying attention to what it communicates about its pains and needs, so value your wife and be understanding towards her. You honor your body before others since your body is you, so do not degrade or disgrace your wife before others.

Wives: view your husband as your body, particularly as your head. Even as your body works in unity with the head by following its direction, so help your husband by working according to his direction as one. As the body furthers and implements what the head intends, so take initiative to further your husband's mission by being faithful over your charge. Represent and reflect your husband, working as a faithful steward over his house.

For more on this topic, see my recent sermon "Marriage and Sexuality."  

Gender Identity in a Culture of Autonomy

The desire to define oneself is strong in modern culture. Tradition, the created order, and authority (divine or human) are seen as dehumanizing assaults on the freedom of the individual. In this struggle for radical autonomy, the area of sexuality has been front and center. Earlier, I wrote about how this struggle defines the current debate about the bounds of sexual intimacy. Another aspect of this struggle has been the issue of masculinity and femininity - does the individual have the right to choose and create his or her gender, or are we responsible to embrace the gender we have been given? On this issue, God takes a clear position in His word.

"So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them."
(Genesis 1:27) 

“A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God."
(Deuteronomy 22:5) 

Here we see that our identity as male or female is rooted in creation and that it is an abomination to rebel against this order. It is not a personal choice. For a man to put on a woman's cloak is to identify as a woman, and this is forbidden. Gender is determined, not by personal choice, but by biological sex, which is clear for the vast majority of people. Notice, in these verses there is both the fact of gender - you are male or female regardless of how you choose to present yourself - and the duty to then embrace this identity and live it out. Someone who is male by birth also has a duty to be a man.

The law in Deuteronomy is a case law. That is, it expresses a principle by using a particular case. Masculinity and femininity involve more than clothing. Clothing is a symbol of a larger identity. Some of the symbols that identify us as masculine or feminine are rooted in the created order and do not change from culture to culture (for example, beards are masculine not feminine). Some symbols, though, may be culturally relative - yet this does not mean we get to ignore them. Language, for example, is culturally relative, but this doesn't give us free rein to use it however we want. The English word "woman" only means "woman" because that is how English-speaking people use the term, but this doesn't give someone a right to use the word to mean "man." Culturally relative symbols with a longer history (like words) will be less flexible than symbols of recent creation. Distinctive clothing, of which Deuteronomy 22:5 speaks, is usually partially based on creational differences (such as body shape) and partially based on cultural language (such as pink and blue baby colors).

Masculinity and femininity go deeper than the symbols. A man who wears manly clothes but fails to provide for his household or proves to be a coward when faced with difficulty and danger is not manly, despite his clothing. A woman who dresses in a feminine manner but seeks to rule or disrespect her husband or church is not feminine, despite her appearance. While men and women were both created in the image of God, they were created differently with different bodies, different abilities, and different responsibilities (Gen. 2-3, 1 Cor. 11:7-9, 1 Tim. 2:11-15, 1 Pet. 3:7), and we are called to live accordingly.

The desire to define oneself apart from God's created order is not new. The people of God has lived among sexually rebellious peoples for its entire history and has been in an ongoing struggle to be distinct from this rebellion. For example, the early church drew a strong line between the practice of Christians and that of a sexually perverted Greco-Roman society. Clement of Alexandria, a church father of the 2nd century, strongly condemned not only sexual sins, but also effeminate men who sought to appear smooth and feminine by plucking out beards and wearing jewry and soft clothing. "Luxury has deranged all things; it has disgraced man ... Men play the part of women, and women that of men, contrary to nature ... O miserable spectacle! horrible conduct!" (The Instructor, 3.3).

Clement, as well as many others, recognized a connection between this effeminacy and sexual immorality, particularly homosexuality. It is effeminate for a man to have sexual relations with a man - he is acting like a woman. It is a feminine thing to have sexual relations with a man. As Romans 1:26-27 teaches, natural sexual relations involve a man and a woman - perversions of this are shameful and a rebellion against the natural order. So a man who seeks sexual intimacy with a man not only commits sexual immorality, but he also violates the principle of Deuteronomy 22:5 by acting as a woman.

In our age, the church continues to live among people who seek to blur what God has made distinct, who seek to rebel against God's created order and assert their autonomy. Not only do individuals practice sin, but egalitarian feminism, transgenderism, homosexuality, and gender autonomy are promoted and affirmed in the schools, media, entertainment, and politics. To oppose someone's right to define themselves or call them to repentance is seen as a denial of their humanity. What ought the church to do?

1. The church ought to be "a pillar and buttress of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). It ought to clearly proclaim and defend God's word in the midst of a people who despise it. Rather than retreating to more popular parts of the truth, we ought to defend it where it is under attack. This is a primary task of the church.
2. The church ought not be unequally yoked with lawless unbelievers (2 Cor. 6:14-7:1). It should not tolerate within in it those who teach or promote sexual immorality or sexual confusion (Rev. 2:20). This principle also applies to Christian parachurch organizations and ministries.
3. Christians ought to live out a Christian understanding of sexuality. The church is a city on a hill, called to let the light of its good works shine before men so that they might glorify God (Matt. 5:14-16). The church's defense of the truth is not only intellectual. We also defend it by our example. There are destructive forms of masculinity and femininity out there, and Christians need to demonstrate the beauty of virtuous masculinity and femininity that accords with God's word.
4. As Christians live among unbelievers and do business with them (1 Cor. 5:9-13), they are to do good to them (Matt. 5:43-48), and to lovingly call them to repentance and faith (Luke 5:29-32), being ready to graciously defend the biblical position when they question it (Col. 4:6). We live in the same world, fellow members of civil society, yet we are commanded: "Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them" (Eph. 5:11).