Genesis Blueprint

We don't need to read far into the Bible to see Gods blueprint for the earth and humanity. All of creation was designed to work in harmony and at peace with one another. Everything was 'good' until He created mankind and it was the completion of everything including humanity, which earned his final, sixth day 'very good'.

God said "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over...[every living creature].. so God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them" (v26-27). God is fully expressed in the combination of male and female. One is not complete without the other. Not necessarily in a marriage sense, but humanity is only complete when both male and female are fully expressed as they are in God. It is here also that the counter culturedness of scripture is established. Early readers and writers of scriptures were familiar with predominantly male kings and rulers being 'like God', and here it is proclaimed that humanity itself, both male and female, is created in the image of God.

Humanity, the full expression of the male and femaleness of God, was created to rule over the creatures in the sea, the sky and on land. There was no distinction made in this first, foundational chapter of the scriptures between male and female. So the blueprint was laid in Genesis 1 with no hierarchies in place. Reading the following chapter can seem to be a little tricky. I believe this is because most of us have been taught the Bible through a patriarchal lens. However the Bible cannot contradict itself. The foundation laid in chapter 1 is not changed by the further discussion in chapter 2.

So if the foundation is equality between the sexes in terms of ruling in chapter 1, what is chapter two saying? I think the final verse holds the key; "That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh" (v24). This verse bookends the central verses by reiterating the equality of humanity and speaking to those who saw females as sub-human to males. In the ancient world women were possessions to be traded and sold. Women left their families to go to their husbands homes. Yet here, the balance is redressed, shocking the ancient readers out of their world-view. The man was to leave HIS parents to be united with his wife. 

Additionally, to become one 'flesh', or to become the complete sum of parts, the parts must of course fit, but there must also be equality between the parts. No one part of the body is more important than another as we see in 1 Corinthians 12:12-26, pointing to an equal partnership.

So what of the complementarian view that because the man was created before the woman and named her and even the status of 'helper', that he is the 'head' of her?

I believe that what we see in the interim verses in Genesis two is pretty close to what complementarians see too... just slightly different in the conclusion. The relationship between Adam and Eve was made to be reflective of Gods desire for a bride. As egalitarian writer Sarah Connor says "Adam was first not because he's better or deserves more respect or is just a little bit more human, but because in this eternal representation he reflects who God is to humanity. Which means that Eve reflects who humanity is to God. Neither represents the more important reality since, in this case, they are naught but reflections. In the real world, where all of us pass our everyday lives, Adam is no more Godlike than Eve and Eve is no more human than Adam. Genesis 1, which we were supposed to read before we got to Genesis 2, makes that clear".






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Day Three 16 days - Exploited

Exploitation: "the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work" The exploitation of women and girls represents the ultimate outcome of multiple layers of inequality. Women and girls are more likely to be in poverty, less likely to have an education, more likely to have suffered abuse at the hands of family members. Girls who have no access to school but need to work end up with no autonomy over workplace so are more vulnerable to being exploited by 'recruiters'. They are therefore disproportionately represented in modern slavery - 99% of victims of sexual exploitation are women and girls. One of the reasons modern slavery continues to proliferate is the gendered power imbalance which is upheld by patriarchal structures globally. Culture, some religious beliefs, laws, societal norms and gender roles all contribute to this power imbalance and this is clearly demonstrated in human trafficking where women are dehumanised to the extent t...
Read more

Thoughts on Elders - pronouns and tradition

Let me first start by saying that the only skin I have in this particular game is that I love to pick away at threads where I feel that patriarchal systems have sought to supress and 'keep women in their place' through an interpretation of the scriptures. I don't personally want to be an elder, nor do I think I necessarily fulfil all the requirements regardless. I do however believe that the church family and wider church is poorer for this prohibition and that is my motivation for this whole blog really.  That off my chest, for this post I wanted to put down in writing some of my thoughts on this so far. Also, they are just that, my thoughts so far and for this post I've landed on 'pronouns' and 'tradition'. I've come on a journey from a complementarian stance to a mutualist/egalitarian stance and I hope I am still learning and developing all the time. I've talked to MANY people about this and funnily enough it was a recent discussion about the ...
Read more

Thoughts on Elders - "For Adam was formed first, then Eve"

I'm back with more (personal!) thoughts on Elders. This time about 1 Tim 2:13 "For Adam was formed first, then Eve". See my previous post here focusing on 'Pronouns and Traditions'  based on 1 Tim 3:1-12. I think for some who have a complementarian stance, the linguistics of the passage in 1 Tim 3:1-12 are not so relevant an argument, it's more about what they see as the original principles of male headship, ergo male only elders. So if you truly believe that male headship is correct, then of course the linguistics of chapter 3 are irrelevant because you'd only see the explicit language as confirming the male bias. So headship. First up two things, I think it's interesting that male headship is not mentioned until Ephesians 5:23 (when Paul first used the term 'kephale'). I also think it's interesting that Jesus didn't mention headship at all and when he did talk about marriage, he said it in the context of the Eden blueprint of a husban...
Read more