Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
Donate to Christianity Today
November 21, 2009
Free Newsletters:
RSS Feeds | Audio | Twitter

Home > 2008 > JuneChristianity Today, June, 2008  |   |  
Wounds of a Friend: Egalitarian
Egalitarians should rely more on careful exegesis and less on political ideologies.




ADVERTISEMENT

It seems hypocritical for egalitarians to complain that complementarians use 1 Timothy 2:12 as a proof-text when they do much the same with Galatians 3:28. It's also ironic that egalitarians use a Galatians verse about salvation to talk about church government, while at the same time criticizing complementarians for using a 1 Timothy verse about a specific church to talk about church government in general.

When Galatians 3:28 is used out of context, the egalitarian argument can easily be perceived as promoting a genderless church. Though most egalitarians emphatically believe that men and women are not the same or interchangeable, it is hard for the unconvinced to hear the wisdom of their message— and easy for others, like the gender-confused, to twist the meaning of their message into something it is not.

Egalitarians would do well to rededicate themselves to careful exegesis instead of leaning on political ideologies that ultimately don't help them to win their case.

Sarah Sumner is professor of theology and ministry at the Graduate School of Theology at Azusa Pacific University and author of Men and Women in the Church.



Related Elsewhere:

John Koessler wrote from an complementarian perspective on how his movement needs to recover a fully biblical view of women — and of handling theological disagreement.

Timothy George addressed egalitarians and complementarians in "A Peace Plan for the Gender War" and "A Modest Proposal."

Other articles on gender roles include:

Christian History Corner: Is Christianity Oppressive to Women? | Sometimes our Christian heritage must be overcome, not celebrated. (March 1, 2004)
Adam and Eve in the 21st Century | "When it comes to gender roles, CT readers oscillate between complementarian and egalitarian ideas." (March 11, 2002)
A Different Kind of Women's Lib | A dispatch from the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood conference. (October 10, 2001)
share this pageshare this page



E-mail this pageWrite CTPrint this articlePost a comment





  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]
Average User Rating: 

Displaying 1 - 3 of 14 comments.See all comments
jlp   Posted: July 01, 2008 12:21 PM
Anyone who has read and is familiar with the body of egalitarian literature can tell right away that the author of this article has not studied egalitarian material. If the author had read egalitarian literature she would have found that most of her criticisms are already answered there. The criticisms she makes of egalitarianism are for the most part straight from complementarian critiques of it. I myself have conversed several times with complimentarians over the precise criticisms she makes in this article. My suggestion is that the author read the main body of literature about egalitarianism before she critiques it again. And for that matter, before she critiques anything, spend time reading the literature before making criticisms of it.

Sharon   Posted: July 01, 2008 10:04 AM
“...it is also undeniable that Scripture nowhere tells husbands to submit to their wives.” Is this not an argument from silence? Hasn't she missed the ENTIRE point of this passage?

Mary   Posted: July 01, 2008 8:27 AM
What I found unfortunate is that Sumner merely parroted the gross distortions that the complementarian camp frequently publishes about biblical equality, rather than dealing accurately with egalitarian scholarship. I concur with those who've wondered if she actually IS egalitarian. She seems remarkably unaware of the excellent scholarship produced by Christian egalitarians. She might start, for example, by recognizing that virtually all egalitarian scholars agree that KEPHALE is rightly translated "head." While the context often is informed by the common metaphorical meaning of "source," Sumner ignores the fact that egalitarian scholars (like most scholars who aren't out to prove a patriarchal presupposition) also agree that KEPHALE does NOT mean "authority over." Yes, those who want to believe that it DOES mean that in Greek (because it sometimes means that in English) totally miss the head/body metaphor. Sumner likewise seems to have missed it. What an opportunity CT missed!

The allotted time for commenting has ended.

sponsors 








[Browse More Christianity Today]

Search






















Search by Name
Or use Advanced Search to search by program, region, cost, affiliation, enrollment, more!

Search by:





Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Outcomes
Kyria.com
Your Church
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com