Comments on: Created in God’s image

By: Evelyn

Evelyn — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:55:26 +0000

I have noticed that religions, whether implied or text interpreted, have engendered a mindset that explicitly gives the impression that the sins of males and females differ in the view of God. Examples include Adam and Eve, Lot and his wife, Abraham and Sarah, the women at the well, Rahab, and Mary Magdaline. The sitting of popes and coronations of saints denote male supremacy. In western religions, especially in Christian orthodoxy and Islam, we see this tradition handed to each generation. I have come to realize God is one and cannot be divided. Love is unconditional and withholds judgment. “God is Love” means “not simply implied.”

God cares for and embraces people who have labels attached to them, since labels are not the essence of any human being.

By: cokhavim

cokhavim — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:59:32 +0000

Rebecca Groothuis just made her essay “Equal in Being, Unequal in Role” available online here. I highly recommend this essay. Although it’s a bit long, it’s precise, thorough and blunt.

Patriarchalists (ie “comps”) are preaching the inferiority of women and at the same time denying it. In effect, not only are they putting women down, they are lying about it (albeit unintentionally). This is a serious charge laid against patriarchalists that should not be taken lightly.

I invite all those who call themselves “complementarians” to wrestle with this issue and to either show how the arguments in Groothuis’ essay are wrong, or to repent of this grievous lie which they are propagating.

By: cokhavim

cokhavim — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:00:23 +0000

The “equal in being, different (read: unequal) in role” reminds me of Animal Farm’s 10th commandment: “all animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.” Rebecca Groothuis does an excellent job at exposing the logical inconsistency of the “equal being/unequal role” construct that is the foundational teaching of modern evangelical patriarchalists. Her essay is published in the book, Discovering Biblical Equality. An older and less-developed version of her argument can be found here.

As for the Trinity, if the “role differences” in comment #1 referred to the subordination of the Son to the Father, Kevin Giles showed here that the early church considered this doctrine a heresy for the very reason that eternal and comprehensive subordination implies a subordination of being (ie, Groothuis’ argument). Modern evangelical patriarchalists are now reviving this ancient heresy in order to justify the subordination of women.

By: Kathryn

Kathryn — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 02:58:32 +0000

The image of God is that we are spirit beings in ways that animals are not. God is a Spirit (John 4:24). Male and female are different in many ways. Spiritually, they are not different. That, I believe, is the true essence of Galatians 3:28 where “There is neither Jew nor Greek;…neither male nor female;…”. If people are not different spiritually, that means no one rules over others because of race, gender, or social standing in God’s Kingdom. No one stands between Jesus and me as a priest. No one can say to me “I will tell you what God is calling you to do.”

By: Kathryn

Kathryn — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 21:45:16 +0000

Re: Comment # 1: It seems to me that putting people into cookie-cutter “roles” is to try to make everyone in that group exactly like as everyone else in that group. Those gender “roles” are attempts to make all women alike, and all men alike. That’s why they are unworkable.

By: Liz

Liz — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 11:34:05 +0000

Brian — it was not meant to be an argument against statements in regard to male or female salvation etc. but trying to make the point that if male and female persons were created differently in God’s image then there would have to be different ways to bring people back to the image.

“God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself” [2 Corinthians 5:19] is just one of the verses which inform our finite minds that God is one God.

By: Light M.

Light M. — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 15:13:28 +0000

Good points. What would seem to be obvious to some, however, is so greatly distorted by others. One pastor, a Dr. Bill Mouser, has written a bible study called The Five Aspects of Woman (there’s a companion one for men.) In it, he clearly states that “Men picture* God in their roles more fully than women do.”

*Picture? This sounds like a little sleight of hand for the word image to me. Pretty twisted stuff.

By: Brian Andrews

Brian Andrews — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 14:43:36 +0000

Actually, God is one and three. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinct, different, and yet each is fully God. The Spirit is equal to the Son who is equal to the Father, and yet each has a different role in the Godhead.

The Father did not die on the cross, the Son did. The Son was not poured out on Pentecost, the Spirit was.

This does not mean that one is better than the other. There is no “infighting” or civil war within the Trinity.

Male and female are made in the image of God. Without a doubt. I don’t know of anyone who has claimed that there is a female image, female sinfulness or female salvation as opposed to a male one. If you know of a responsible writer/speaker who has made such a claim, state his name and counter his argument. But if you do not know of a person who has claimed that, why are you arguing against something that no one has said?

You wrongly assume that differences in role imply differences in value, essence, or being when it comes to humanity. It doesn’t within the Trinity. And it doesn’t within humanity.