Our churches have debated it. Our school refuses to take a stance on it. Why then be so out-spoken about gender roles? We (the Gender Matters Club) are passionate about this issue, because we want the Gospel to define every area of our lives—including gender.
Most people are only aware of gender roles in the New Testament, leading to many accusations of these roles (“cultural regulations” they say) as being restrictive on our freedom in Christ. A fuller teaching, however, and a correct understanding of the redeeming work of Christ, will reveal God’s beautiful design in gender roles.
When Moses writes, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gn 1:27), he accomplishes two things. First, he establishes the equality of men and women. Since each are made in God’s image, both enjoy the benefits of knowing and enjoying God forever. Second, he not only clarifies that we glorify God as a race of “man,” he implies something very distinct in our being created “male and female.” This distinction is manifest in different roles.
God created Adam first (2:7), put him in the Garden (2:8), and gave him his primary roles: “to work and to keep it” (2:15). As God called mankind to “have dominion over . . . all the earth” (1:26), he gave man these roles of leadership and responsibility, duties summarized in provision and protection. Because God saw that it was not good for Adam to be alone, he created “a helper fit for him” (2:18): Eve. She was to come alongside Adam, to support and encourage him, as they together obeyed God’s command: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it” (1:28).
Gender roles are assigned to men and women in creation, in a world without sin. Therefore, when God looked upon these assigned roles on the sixth day, he declared them “very good” (1:31). When Paul wrote Ephesians 5 with the Genesis account on his mind, he calls the husband the “head” in part because he is to provide for and protect his wife as a servant leader. He calls the wife to “submit” in part because she is to help and encourage him, affirming his leadership.
Adam and Eve, however, did not fulfill their roles. As Satan tempted Eve, Adam stood passively by her side (3:6) and did not protect the Garden from sin. Eve also, rather than affirming Adam’s role to “keep” the garden (2:15-16), usurped his headship and took the fruit.
Subsequently, the curse twists these very roles, as God addresses Eve, “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (3:16). This verse is illuminated by God’s address to Cain just before he killed Abel: “Sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it” (4:7). Just as sin desired to control Cain like a puppet, so too, joyful submission in women is now supplanted by coercion and manipulation. In the same way, as Cain was to rule over sin, so too, loving headship in men has given way either to passivity or to unloving authoritarianism.
Even though gender roles are twisted in Genesis 3, and the whole world becomes enslaved to sin, the Messianic hope dawns as God addresses Satan concerning an offspring of the woman: “He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel” (3:15). This hope grows (12:1-3; 22:18; Jer 4:2; Gal 3:16) and becomes manifest in the God-man Jesus Christ (Acts 3:26). Through his atoning sacrifice, he not only pardons all who come to him in faith, he also ushers forth his sons and daughters to once again regain loving headship and joyful submission in marriage. This is evidenced by Paul each time he addresses gender roles (1 Cor 11, 14; Eph 5; 1 Tm 1), when he also references the creation account (1 Cor 11:8-9; 14:34; Eph 5:31; 1 Tm 2:13-15).
Fellow students, let us glorify God as men and women, freed by Christ to live in the Genesis 2 world. Take your gender seriously and submit to the authority of Scripture on this issue.
1.16.2010
Gender Matters For Singles
Gender matters.
Moses agreed. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gn 1:27). Mankind alone bears the image of God, and he made us distinctly male and female. Don’t you think this matters?
Paul also thought gender matters; Peter agreed. Have you ever noticed though that they only write to husbands and wives? Thus, many are left wondering how much gender matters for single people. It is true, gender roles are addressed to husbands and wives because the teaching comes to fruition in marriage, but what about those who are single like Paul? Does gender still matter?
Yes.
All men should grow to maturity as fathers; all women should grow to maturity as mothers. Whether you ever get married and start your own family, this is your calling because you belong to the family of God in a local church.
The family unit each of us grew up in is simply a microcosm of the Church. Paul calls the church the “household of God” (1 Tm 3:15), and he uses the family as a training ground qualification for elders: “[F]or if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?” (3:5).
In fact, the family structure is modeled after this truer spiritual reality. Notice how Paul addresses Timothy (“my true child in the faith,” 1 Tm 1:2) and Titus (“my true son in our common faith,” Titus 1:4). A family relation in blood can be superficial if there is no family relation in the Spirit. What joy is ours then when these ones we care for the most are also a part of the “household of God” (Eph 2:19)!
Paul never had any biological children, but he fathered many spiritual children. Along with Timothy and Titus, Paul mentions another: “my child, Onesimus, whose father I became in my imprisonment” (Phl 10). Paul was a mature man of God, and he fathered several individuals and entire church families.
Paul, as a single man, thought that gender matters, and he met numerous needs within the church family; are we able to see those same needs? Timothy had no father figure as he was raised by his mother and grandmother (cf. 2 Tm 1:5), and there are many children and young adults like Timothy in our churches. We need more people like Paul: older men to teach younger men and older women to teach younger women (cf. Titus 2:2-5).
Paul, who wrote extensively on gender roles, heeded his own teaching, though he himself was single. Everyone is commanded to be a mature believer: for men it means being fatherly, for women it means being motherly. The family of God is huge, and so are the needs, which should be nurtured by mature men and women—married and single alike.
Moses agreed. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gn 1:27). Mankind alone bears the image of God, and he made us distinctly male and female. Don’t you think this matters?
Paul also thought gender matters; Peter agreed. Have you ever noticed though that they only write to husbands and wives? Thus, many are left wondering how much gender matters for single people. It is true, gender roles are addressed to husbands and wives because the teaching comes to fruition in marriage, but what about those who are single like Paul? Does gender still matter?
Yes.
All men should grow to maturity as fathers; all women should grow to maturity as mothers. Whether you ever get married and start your own family, this is your calling because you belong to the family of God in a local church.
The family unit each of us grew up in is simply a microcosm of the Church. Paul calls the church the “household of God” (1 Tm 3:15), and he uses the family as a training ground qualification for elders: “[F]or if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?” (3:5).
In fact, the family structure is modeled after this truer spiritual reality. Notice how Paul addresses Timothy (“my true child in the faith,” 1 Tm 1:2) and Titus (“my true son in our common faith,” Titus 1:4). A family relation in blood can be superficial if there is no family relation in the Spirit. What joy is ours then when these ones we care for the most are also a part of the “household of God” (Eph 2:19)!
Paul never had any biological children, but he fathered many spiritual children. Along with Timothy and Titus, Paul mentions another: “my child, Onesimus, whose father I became in my imprisonment” (Phl 10). Paul was a mature man of God, and he fathered several individuals and entire church families.
Paul, as a single man, thought that gender matters, and he met numerous needs within the church family; are we able to see those same needs? Timothy had no father figure as he was raised by his mother and grandmother (cf. 2 Tm 1:5), and there are many children and young adults like Timothy in our churches. We need more people like Paul: older men to teach younger men and older women to teach younger women (cf. Titus 2:2-5).
Paul, who wrote extensively on gender roles, heeded his own teaching, though he himself was single. Everyone is commanded to be a mature believer: for men it means being fatherly, for women it means being motherly. The family of God is huge, and so are the needs, which should be nurtured by mature men and women—married and single alike.
7.10.2009
Should We Say "All I Ever Need is You" to our Wives?
Some time ago, James wrote us this question. I thought it would be helpful to put up as a main post:
"I have one question from you that I'm curious about. Since you said the song is idolatrous, if I same this song to my wife [singing "All I ever need is you"], would I be committing idolatry? "
James,
I am so sorry that it has taken me a while to write back to you. I have not checked this blog (regrettably) for quite some time.
Concerning how we are to interact with others, the Lord Jesus says, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26, ESV)
This is strong language. Now, I take it to be hyperbole mainly because we are commanded to love our children and wives in other places (Ephesians 5 & 6, for example). Nevertheless, the command to "hate" still exists, which I take to mean that our love for Christ must be so great that it makes our love for others seem as though it were hatred.
Idolatry is simply taking a good thing (wife, girlfriend) and making it a "God thing"--that is a bad thing.
Of course, saying things like "All I ever need is you" to your wife/girlfiend is NOT necessarily idolatry, if one's partner knows that they supremely love God. However, why would one say something like that if it has to die the death of a thousand qualifications, if "all you ever need" is really NOT "you"?
Let me put this a different way: What is love? Is it:
1.) Making much of another individual.
2.) Striving and caring with all one's energy to enable another to make much of God.
The first is idolatry. And I say that very purposefully. That is not love; it is elevating another finite human to the realm of all-sufficiency, when they simply are not.
The second is love. It is one that labors for his wife/girlfriend to see Christ as glorious in all things. And that is what is of most benefit to their soul.
"7But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. 8Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith." Philippians 3:7-9
"I have one question from you that I'm curious about. Since you said the song is idolatrous, if I same this song to my wife [singing "All I ever need is you"], would I be committing idolatry? "
James,
I am so sorry that it has taken me a while to write back to you. I have not checked this blog (regrettably) for quite some time.
Concerning how we are to interact with others, the Lord Jesus says, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26, ESV)
This is strong language. Now, I take it to be hyperbole mainly because we are commanded to love our children and wives in other places (Ephesians 5 & 6, for example). Nevertheless, the command to "hate" still exists, which I take to mean that our love for Christ must be so great that it makes our love for others seem as though it were hatred.
Idolatry is simply taking a good thing (wife, girlfriend) and making it a "God thing"--that is a bad thing.
Of course, saying things like "All I ever need is you" to your wife/girlfiend is NOT necessarily idolatry, if one's partner knows that they supremely love God. However, why would one say something like that if it has to die the death of a thousand qualifications, if "all you ever need" is really NOT "you"?
Let me put this a different way: What is love? Is it:
1.) Making much of another individual.
2.) Striving and caring with all one's energy to enable another to make much of God.
The first is idolatry. And I say that very purposefully. That is not love; it is elevating another finite human to the realm of all-sufficiency, when they simply are not.
The second is love. It is one that labors for his wife/girlfriend to see Christ as glorious in all things. And that is what is of most benefit to their soul.
"7But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. 8Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith." Philippians 3:7-9
4.14.2009
Relationships: Healthy Expectations
Note: From early February to mid-March, I taught a series of lessons on sexuality and relationships for the youth group at First Baptist Church in Webster, WI. This article, hopefully followed by a number of others, will draw from those talks.
Some men follow rainbows, I am told,
Some search for silver, some for gold
But I have found my treasure is in your soul
All I ever need is you
Without love I would never find the way
Through ups and downs of ever single day
And I won’t ever sleep at night until I hear you say
“All I ever need is you”
With these words, Kenny Rogers and Dottie West conclude their country hit song, “All I Ever Need is You.” The song is about romantic relationships, and we as humans, both young and old alike, naturally find ourselves identifying with the message. Of course, God has created love, and it is a wonderful thing is his eyes, but is this song an attitude a young man or woman should have in a relationship? Or, more pointedly, could one feel these words and truly be loving? I would suggest that although they seem innocent enough, these lyrics are NOT loving, but rather selfish and idolatrous.
To see how this works out, let’s look to the Bible. In the beginning of time, God made Adam and Eve, and he proclaims everything as being “very good.” Given as a test, a tree is placed in the center of the Garden, and God forbids the happy couple from eating of its fruits. After some time, the serpent comes along, makes God’s rules look terrible, and convinces Eve to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. In the events following hereafter, we learn three things about relationships: Adam chose gift over Giver, a conflict between the sexes ensued, and a hope for redemption was administered.
We first learn that Adam chose gift over Giver. When Eve ate of the fruit, she disobeyed God. Adam, who was standing right beside Eve, was then presented with this fruit, and it was at this time that he had an incredible choice to make. On the one hand, he could obey God’s commands and trust him, or on the other hand, he could enter into sin with the gift given to him, his wife. He chose poorly. He turned to Eve and said, “I think I will find true life with you, obeying you, rather than obeying God and getting my life from him.” Sadly, Adam did not realize that Eve was given as an aid and complement rather than one that could fulfill.
Secondly, as soon as Adam placed Eve above the place of God, conflict ensued. Though he should have taken responsibility for what he had done, Adam cowardly places the blame on God and Eve (“The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate” 3:12). The woman is cursed, having a desire to manipulate men through beauty and sex, serving their own desires rather than the glory of God (3:16). The man is cursed in relation to his sphere, the field, where he will now struggle to provide for his wife and family. Idolatry in relationships did not pan out well.
Finally, we see hope for redemption. In Geneses 3:21, an animal dies to cover the nakedness of Adam and Eve. Their sin caused the death of another. All the progeny of Adam and Eve have found themselves elevating different things to the level of ULTIMATE, and this often includes the opposite sex. We are cursed, drowning in our inward-bent. Someone needed to become a curse, like the lamb, and die so that we could be released from that curse. That man was Jesus Christ. He came so that we could finally be givers and leaders and nurturers rather than simply takers, expecting others to satisfy us. In Christ, we can finally truly love our boyfriends/girlfriends, fiancé, or spouse by pointing them to God rather than self to find true fulfillment.
Are you looking to another boy or girl to fulfill you? Are you pining away for a relationship, thinking that you will only be satisfied if you have it? This approach did not work well for Adam and Eve, and it will not work well for you. Only when you trust in God as the wellspring of life (Ps. 16:11), are you then truly ready for a relationship, being a giver rather than just a taker.
3.21.2009
Boys Wrestling Girls?
John Piper recently wrote an article about a local wrestler making history as the first girl to compete in the state tournament. He rightly addresses the need for fathers to step up to the plate and say, “Over my dead body are you going to wrestle a girl.” He continues his exhortation by stating, “Give your sons a bigger nobler vision of what it is to be a man. Men don’t fight against women. They fight for women.”
Piper’s exhortation is much needed and greatly appreciated. As my wife and I wait for the birth of our first child I occasionally think of my future as a father. I want to preach into my sons that men fight for women to the glory of God and for their good. This is what the apostle brings out in 1 Peter 3:7, “Husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel.” Piper writes:
There is a way to honor a woman. That’s our job as men. This honor “understands” something. It understands that women are the “weaker vessel.” This has nothing to do with less personal worth and in many cases not even with physical stamina. It has to do with pervasive realities that shape the way healthy societies work.
It means that we should raise sons to think of themselves as protectors. Tell them they should lay their lives down to protect girls. Help them know that God designed them to grow up to be a picture of Jesus in their marriage. Nurture the instinct of a boy to fight for girls not against them.
I pray that God gives me the grace to teach my sons to fight for their sisters, their mom, and their wife as Jesus fights for the Church. It is a tragedy that culture flips this biblical principle on its head by praising the girl who wrestles against boys and scorning the boys who seek to honor girls by refraining (see comments at the end of article). May we build men who fight for women and not against them.
Zach
Piper’s exhortation is much needed and greatly appreciated. As my wife and I wait for the birth of our first child I occasionally think of my future as a father. I want to preach into my sons that men fight for women to the glory of God and for their good. This is what the apostle brings out in 1 Peter 3:7, “Husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel.” Piper writes:
There is a way to honor a woman. That’s our job as men. This honor “understands” something. It understands that women are the “weaker vessel.” This has nothing to do with less personal worth and in many cases not even with physical stamina. It has to do with pervasive realities that shape the way healthy societies work.
It means that we should raise sons to think of themselves as protectors. Tell them they should lay their lives down to protect girls. Help them know that God designed them to grow up to be a picture of Jesus in their marriage. Nurture the instinct of a boy to fight for girls not against them.
I pray that God gives me the grace to teach my sons to fight for their sisters, their mom, and their wife as Jesus fights for the Church. It is a tragedy that culture flips this biblical principle on its head by praising the girl who wrestles against boys and scorning the boys who seek to honor girls by refraining (see comments at the end of article). May we build men who fight for women and not against them.
Zach
3.09.2009
A New Post: Complementarians and the Issue of Competence
Although we may no longer have any followers due to our very long delay, this blog will be an attempt to get the ball rolling again. This article first appeared in NWC's newspaper The Column on Feb. 26, 2009. Thanks for all who have not left us!
Complementarians and the Issue of Competence
In the Column’s recent issue outlining the gender debate on campus, there were some comments made by complementarian students that ought to be corrected. When asked what position they hold, they said something like, “I am complementarian because God made men and women different, and each gender is better at different things.” Although not completely incorrect, this comment implies that men have roles that women can’t fulfill (and vice versa) because a certain level of competence exists in that area. But is this really the case? I think the student in favor of egalitarianism maintained much better logic when she argued, “Men and women can do the same exact things, and sometimes women can do the task and jobs better than men.” In terms of competence, she’s exactly right! But is competency really the issue?
I have been married now for just over 2 years and continually see how incompetent I am in comparison to my wife. For example, she will meet a person one time and never forget their name. I really struggle with names. If a pastoral search committee wanted an extroverted individual who was more competent at remembering every church members name, my wife would be a better choice than I would. Likewise, there are many women, like Nancy Pearcey and Elizabeth Elliot for instance, who may be more competent at speaking and writing than their husbands. Shouldn’t competent women, like these, at least join their husbands in pastoral ministry?
Good biblical research will find that the Bible never speaks on competence as the reason for gender complementarity. When Paul writes to Timothy under the context of church leadership, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man,” he roots his reasoning in the creation account, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:12-13). Note that Paul does not say, “For Adam, and all men, are better than women at leading people.”
Paul writes what he does in 1 Timothy not because of any supposed level of competence, but with the knowledge that God created men and women to joyfully complement one another for His glory. Eph. 5 reveals that husbands are to “love their wives, as Christ loved church” (v. 25) and women ought to submit to their husbands “as to the Lord” (v. 22, 24). He then goes on to write of this “mystery” (a hidden plan that God has now revealed) as “profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church” (v. 32).
He is pointing out that the union between husband and wife was created by God as a reflection of the relationship between Christ and the church. In other words, the roles of men and women have nothing to do with competence in as much as obedience to God, so that in our marriages and church life, we might be a living reflection of the Gospel.
The question still lingers, however, if the issue is not competence, how are we different? Say, for example, Freddy and his wife, Carly, are asleep in their king-sized bed when they hear a loud noise in their house. Now, Carly is a black-belt in karate and Freddy is not so coordinated. Should he passively let her search the house since she’s more competent? Or should he protect her as Christ protects the church despite his lack of coordination?
This is a measly attempt to do justice to the reality of God’s creation. But here’s the point: God’s plans for His creation are never based upon the competence of an individual. Rather, he works through incompetent fishermen, tax collectors, and even introverts to accomplish His will (1 Cor. 1:26-31). I pray that we all step out of our anthropocentric, competence-centered mindset to see that the gender debate is not so much about boundaries as it is about God’s creatures functioning as obedient vessels for His glory.
Zach Tarter
Complementarians and the Issue of Competence
In the Column’s recent issue outlining the gender debate on campus, there were some comments made by complementarian students that ought to be corrected. When asked what position they hold, they said something like, “I am complementarian because God made men and women different, and each gender is better at different things.” Although not completely incorrect, this comment implies that men have roles that women can’t fulfill (and vice versa) because a certain level of competence exists in that area. But is this really the case? I think the student in favor of egalitarianism maintained much better logic when she argued, “Men and women can do the same exact things, and sometimes women can do the task and jobs better than men.” In terms of competence, she’s exactly right! But is competency really the issue?
I have been married now for just over 2 years and continually see how incompetent I am in comparison to my wife. For example, she will meet a person one time and never forget their name. I really struggle with names. If a pastoral search committee wanted an extroverted individual who was more competent at remembering every church members name, my wife would be a better choice than I would. Likewise, there are many women, like Nancy Pearcey and Elizabeth Elliot for instance, who may be more competent at speaking and writing than their husbands. Shouldn’t competent women, like these, at least join their husbands in pastoral ministry?
Good biblical research will find that the Bible never speaks on competence as the reason for gender complementarity. When Paul writes to Timothy under the context of church leadership, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man,” he roots his reasoning in the creation account, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:12-13). Note that Paul does not say, “For Adam, and all men, are better than women at leading people.”
Paul writes what he does in 1 Timothy not because of any supposed level of competence, but with the knowledge that God created men and women to joyfully complement one another for His glory. Eph. 5 reveals that husbands are to “love their wives, as Christ loved church” (v. 25) and women ought to submit to their husbands “as to the Lord” (v. 22, 24). He then goes on to write of this “mystery” (a hidden plan that God has now revealed) as “profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church” (v. 32).
He is pointing out that the union between husband and wife was created by God as a reflection of the relationship between Christ and the church. In other words, the roles of men and women have nothing to do with competence in as much as obedience to God, so that in our marriages and church life, we might be a living reflection of the Gospel.
The question still lingers, however, if the issue is not competence, how are we different? Say, for example, Freddy and his wife, Carly, are asleep in their king-sized bed when they hear a loud noise in their house. Now, Carly is a black-belt in karate and Freddy is not so coordinated. Should he passively let her search the house since she’s more competent? Or should he protect her as Christ protects the church despite his lack of coordination?
This is a measly attempt to do justice to the reality of God’s creation. But here’s the point: God’s plans for His creation are never based upon the competence of an individual. Rather, he works through incompetent fishermen, tax collectors, and even introverts to accomplish His will (1 Cor. 1:26-31). I pray that we all step out of our anthropocentric, competence-centered mindset to see that the gender debate is not so much about boundaries as it is about God’s creatures functioning as obedient vessels for His glory.
Zach Tarter
11.09.2008
The Importance of Sexual Purity
Once a month, we hold a men's event at NWC promoting biblical manhood. Last month, Dr. Tim Tomlinson spoke to men about the importance of theology in the life of every man (and every human for that matter).
This month, Dr. Irv Woolf spoke to men about sexual purity. He began by asking the question, "What master's you?", and we went on to look at 1 Cor. 6:12. Paul writes, " 'All things are lawful for me,' but not all things are helpful. 'All things are lawful for me,' but I will not be mastered by anything." Dr. Woolf made the point that although God has given us much in His grace, we still have a moral responsibility to uphold. For example, eating is lawful, but gluttony is not. Drinking alcohol is not necessarily sinful, but drunkenness is. Sex is good in the covenant of marriage, but is sin outside of marriage.
Under this context, Dr. Woolf mentioned how most men get stuck in a sin pattern that cannot end apart from a divine work of the Spirit. This pattern is extremely destructive, and unfortunately, very common. 65% of evangelicals admitted in an anonymous survey to looking at pornography every month. Perhaps a more disturbing statistic revealed that 35% of evangelical pastors admitted to the same sin. Despite these discouraging statistics, we do have a savior. Jesus Christ died to save people from the bonds of sin, and so, through Christ's victory over sin, there is victory available to us as well. Dr. Woolf did make it clear, however, that there is no quick fix. In fact, he mentioned that one will not be free from sexual immorality until they have the deep conviction that "I would rather die than continue in this sin!"
He went on to mention 5 crutches that prevent men from coming to this conclusion:
1. "It's no big deal." This minimizes a monumental lie from Satan. The Bible makes sexual sin a very big deal (1 Cor. 6:12-20, Eph. 5:3) and we ought to as well.
2. "I'm not hurting anyone but myself." This is also an outright lie. One caught in sexual sin affects their wife/girlfriend, women they are lusting after, and first and foremost, God
(Psalm 51).
3. "I can quit any time I want." Clearly, sin is still in driver's seat here. These comments reveal the bondage of those addicted to porn, etc.
4. "Everybody does it. It's just normal for guys." This is also false. Research suggests that 15% of evangelical men are sexually pure. What is more, this crutch implicitly accuses the Bible of making false commands. Eph. 5:3 states, "But among you, there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality."
5. "You don't understand, I have a stronger sex drive than other men." Again, this is a lie. The very fact that this is a common "crutch" shows that many guys have believed this. And so, it's illogical for anyone to make the claim that their sex drive is stronger than any other man. I think a better claim is that God gave men strong sex drives. Thus, we should not distort God's plan for sex in marriage by using this lie as a pretext to sin.
In the end, sexual immorality is as prevalent as it has ever been, and the availability of sinful material does not make the struggle for purity any easier. As men, we must begin by recognizing the wickedness of distorting God's plan for sex, and press on with the conviction that "I would rather die than continue in this sin!" God is gracious, and when one continues in this conviction and in the power of the Holy Spirit through Christ's death and ressurrection, victory is possible.
Dr. Woolf leads the National Coalition for Purity, and starts purity boot camp for men on January 17th, 2009 at River Valley Church in Apple Valley, MN. For more information, shoot me an email at zbtarter@yahoo.com
Zach
This month, Dr. Irv Woolf spoke to men about sexual purity. He began by asking the question, "What master's you?", and we went on to look at 1 Cor. 6:12. Paul writes, " 'All things are lawful for me,' but not all things are helpful. 'All things are lawful for me,' but I will not be mastered by anything." Dr. Woolf made the point that although God has given us much in His grace, we still have a moral responsibility to uphold. For example, eating is lawful, but gluttony is not. Drinking alcohol is not necessarily sinful, but drunkenness is. Sex is good in the covenant of marriage, but is sin outside of marriage.
Under this context, Dr. Woolf mentioned how most men get stuck in a sin pattern that cannot end apart from a divine work of the Spirit. This pattern is extremely destructive, and unfortunately, very common. 65% of evangelicals admitted in an anonymous survey to looking at pornography every month. Perhaps a more disturbing statistic revealed that 35% of evangelical pastors admitted to the same sin. Despite these discouraging statistics, we do have a savior. Jesus Christ died to save people from the bonds of sin, and so, through Christ's victory over sin, there is victory available to us as well. Dr. Woolf did make it clear, however, that there is no quick fix. In fact, he mentioned that one will not be free from sexual immorality until they have the deep conviction that "I would rather die than continue in this sin!"
He went on to mention 5 crutches that prevent men from coming to this conclusion:
1. "It's no big deal." This minimizes a monumental lie from Satan. The Bible makes sexual sin a very big deal (1 Cor. 6:12-20, Eph. 5:3) and we ought to as well.
2. "I'm not hurting anyone but myself." This is also an outright lie. One caught in sexual sin affects their wife/girlfriend, women they are lusting after, and first and foremost, God
(Psalm 51).
3. "I can quit any time I want." Clearly, sin is still in driver's seat here. These comments reveal the bondage of those addicted to porn, etc.
4. "Everybody does it. It's just normal for guys." This is also false. Research suggests that 15% of evangelical men are sexually pure. What is more, this crutch implicitly accuses the Bible of making false commands. Eph. 5:3 states, "But among you, there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality."
5. "You don't understand, I have a stronger sex drive than other men." Again, this is a lie. The very fact that this is a common "crutch" shows that many guys have believed this. And so, it's illogical for anyone to make the claim that their sex drive is stronger than any other man. I think a better claim is that God gave men strong sex drives. Thus, we should not distort God's plan for sex in marriage by using this lie as a pretext to sin.
In the end, sexual immorality is as prevalent as it has ever been, and the availability of sinful material does not make the struggle for purity any easier. As men, we must begin by recognizing the wickedness of distorting God's plan for sex, and press on with the conviction that "I would rather die than continue in this sin!" God is gracious, and when one continues in this conviction and in the power of the Holy Spirit through Christ's death and ressurrection, victory is possible.
Dr. Woolf leads the National Coalition for Purity, and starts purity boot camp for men on January 17th, 2009 at River Valley Church in Apple Valley, MN. For more information, shoot me an email at zbtarter@yahoo.com
Zach
10.12.2008
The Beauty of Marriage Beheld in Swing Dancing
Last week, I went swing dancing for the first time, and as I was stumbling through the most basic of moves, I realized that dancing can point to the beauties of God’s design in marriage.
When a couple dances, the man and woman must fulfill certain roles for the dance to be beautiful. The man must be a knowledgeable and capable leader, and the woman must be an intelligent and submissive follower. The man is responsible to initiate a certain spin or step sequence, and the woman must complement it by spinning gracefully or keeping in step elegantly. If both try to lead, there can neither be harmony nor beauty in the dance. If both would rather follow, there would be no dance at all. These distinct roles in marriage are not restrictive to either men or women; rather, they allow men and women to embrace their identity in Christ and preserve marriage as the sacred image of the union of Christ and the Church.
Many have questioned the headship of the man and the submissiveness of the woman in a marriage relationship. But what many are not mindful of is that the husband’s headship is always to be motivated by Christ’s self-sacrificial love for his bride (Eph. 5:25), and the wife’s submission does not make her inferior. In swing dancing, the man has the responsibility to take the lead in the next dance move, yet he will always have his partner’s best interest at heart, such as steering her away from colliding with other dancers. The man would never lovelessly yank or fling his partner, and the woman would never follow her partner like an unintelligent dope. Similarly, the husband must love his wife as he loves his own body (Eph. 5:28). Interestingly, Paul says that only when a man loves his wife does he then prove to love himself. Also, the wife’s role of submissiveness never gives her the excuse to follow her husband into sin or agree to a decision that would be detrimental to the family. She must be a “helper” to her husband as Eve was created to be for Adam, but only in striving after right-living.
Finally, it is fitting to mention that in dancing, a man is not taught how to fulfill his role by a woman; neither is a woman taught by a man. Rather, I was instructed and given pointers by a guy who had been dancing for a couple years. The women were not able to help me out as much, because the basic steps for men were opposite than those for women. Also, I needed to see a visual example of a man knowing how to lead well, in order that I would have any confidence to take the lead in dancing with my partner. However, this parallel is much too weak when it points us toward roles in marriage. For, while it is the cultural norm in swing dancing for the man to lead and the woman to follow, culture has rejected these distinct gender roles as they pertain to marriage. To reshape my mindset, I must see Godly men who practice decisive leadership, who do not shirk their responsibilities, and who strive to glorify God and make much of Christ in all areas of their lives, so that I might embrace these same roles I was created to fulfill. Otherwise, I would not know such living was required of me. As a man, I must be discipled by more mature and godly men than myself so that I may have an example to follow and attain confidence to be that kind of husband for my wife. For this reason our gender matters team has decided to hold separate events so that men can teach men how to be men and women can teach women how to be women.
There are many things in this world that can point us to the wonders of mature manhood and womanhood, and swing dancing can do just that, being both simple and profound.
When a couple dances, the man and woman must fulfill certain roles for the dance to be beautiful. The man must be a knowledgeable and capable leader, and the woman must be an intelligent and submissive follower. The man is responsible to initiate a certain spin or step sequence, and the woman must complement it by spinning gracefully or keeping in step elegantly. If both try to lead, there can neither be harmony nor beauty in the dance. If both would rather follow, there would be no dance at all. These distinct roles in marriage are not restrictive to either men or women; rather, they allow men and women to embrace their identity in Christ and preserve marriage as the sacred image of the union of Christ and the Church.
Many have questioned the headship of the man and the submissiveness of the woman in a marriage relationship. But what many are not mindful of is that the husband’s headship is always to be motivated by Christ’s self-sacrificial love for his bride (Eph. 5:25), and the wife’s submission does not make her inferior. In swing dancing, the man has the responsibility to take the lead in the next dance move, yet he will always have his partner’s best interest at heart, such as steering her away from colliding with other dancers. The man would never lovelessly yank or fling his partner, and the woman would never follow her partner like an unintelligent dope. Similarly, the husband must love his wife as he loves his own body (Eph. 5:28). Interestingly, Paul says that only when a man loves his wife does he then prove to love himself. Also, the wife’s role of submissiveness never gives her the excuse to follow her husband into sin or agree to a decision that would be detrimental to the family. She must be a “helper” to her husband as Eve was created to be for Adam, but only in striving after right-living.
Finally, it is fitting to mention that in dancing, a man is not taught how to fulfill his role by a woman; neither is a woman taught by a man. Rather, I was instructed and given pointers by a guy who had been dancing for a couple years. The women were not able to help me out as much, because the basic steps for men were opposite than those for women. Also, I needed to see a visual example of a man knowing how to lead well, in order that I would have any confidence to take the lead in dancing with my partner. However, this parallel is much too weak when it points us toward roles in marriage. For, while it is the cultural norm in swing dancing for the man to lead and the woman to follow, culture has rejected these distinct gender roles as they pertain to marriage. To reshape my mindset, I must see Godly men who practice decisive leadership, who do not shirk their responsibilities, and who strive to glorify God and make much of Christ in all areas of their lives, so that I might embrace these same roles I was created to fulfill. Otherwise, I would not know such living was required of me. As a man, I must be discipled by more mature and godly men than myself so that I may have an example to follow and attain confidence to be that kind of husband for my wife. For this reason our gender matters team has decided to hold separate events so that men can teach men how to be men and women can teach women how to be women.
There are many things in this world that can point us to the wonders of mature manhood and womanhood, and swing dancing can do just that, being both simple and profound.
10.05.2008
A Gentle and Quiet Spirit
At our most recent ‘Exploring Womanhood’ event, we discussed what it meant for us as women in Christ to have a gentle and quiet spirit. We get this term from 1 Peter 3:3-6:“Do not let your adorning be external - the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothes you wear - but let your adoring be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.
These verses tell us that the characteristics of a gentle and quiet spirit are not an external adorning, but an adorning of the hidden person of the heart. This means it’s not merely how we act or what we say…but how our heart is before God. A common misconception with this term “gentle and quiet spirit” is that women ought to be gentle and quiet, therefore we cannot be outgoing, probably shouldn’t do anything too “rough” like play sports, and should not talk too loud or too much. These things might describe someone with a quiet or gentle personality, but that is not what Peter says the Lord is asking of us. The imperishable beauty that comes from a gentle and quiet spirit is one that comes from the inside out. This beauty that is “very precious” in the sight of the Lord will be visible to others as well because “out of the abundance of the heart a man speaks” (Luke 6:45). Whatever is in our hearts is going to overflow into our actions!
But what does this look like? In a talk Carolyn Mahaney gave at Celebration East in 2004, she gave the following definitions of gentle and quiet:
Gentle carries the idea of humility, not thinking one is too important, that results in patiently accepting whatever comes one’s way…especially wrong doing from others.
Quiet carries the idea of calmness and tranquility that delivers one from both selfish assertiveness and anxious striving.
She brought much clarity to my understanding of the term with this description: “A gentle and quiet spirit is an inner disposition of humble contentment and quiet tranquility, rooted in an unwavering trust in God and His purpose.” She sums it up as “A steadfast peace, because of a steadfast trust in God.” We can find this in Isaiah 26:3 “You will keep in perfect peace, him whose mind is steadfast, because he trusts in You.” This gentle and quiet spirit is not so much an action as it is an “inner disposition.” Do you trust that God is who He says He is and that He’s going to do what he says He’s going to do? God promises in Romans 8:28 that “in all things He works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose.” If we trust that God truly is working all things to our good, then we don’t have to respond sinfully when we are sinned against, and we don’t have to strive anxiously when the boy we like isn’t pursuing us. 1 Peter 1:6-7 tells us that God brings us through trials to refine us and make us more like Himself, and although we can’t see at the time how this painful situation is good for us, we can have a steadfast peace because our trust is rooted in a steadfast God!
Now you might be thinking, “This is all well and good on my computer screen, but how do I even begin to remain faithful to this overwhelming calling?” Thankfully, we’ve been given an example in our Savior Jesus Christ who “committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth. When they hurled their insults at Him, He did not retaliate; when He suffered, He made no threats. Instead, He entrusted Himself to Him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in His body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by His wounds we have been healed” 1 Peter 2:21-24. Christ died and bore our sins so that we would die to sin! He is the one who makes it possible to not lash out at the person who cuts you off on the road or freak out at your sister for stealing your clothes for the umpteenth time. When Christ was insulted and experienced injustice, He entrusted Himself to the One who judges justly. We in turn must continually entrust ourselves to Christ and look to His grace and mercy for our supply.
Here is a link to Carolyn Mahaney's talk on a gentle and quiet spirit. You can download it for free at the Sovereign Grace Ministries Store!
A-Woman's-Beauty-Regimen
Our next 'Exploring Womanhood' event will be Tuesday, October 28th at 7:00 pm. If you are interested in attending or have any questions please e-mail me at em2006@msn.com!
Blessings,
Emily Tarter
9.28.2008
Monthly Manly Movies
Friday night, September 26, kicked off our men’s events for the year. Just as last year, we are having what we like to call Monthly Manly Movies. One Friday a month, a group of 10-12 guys from Northwestern meet at the Robertson Student Center at 6:00, then carpool over to Dr. Tim Tomlinson’s house to enjoy a wonderful home cooked meal by Mrs. Tomlinson. After being thoroughly stuffed, we head down to the basement to watch a movie in which at least one character exudes traits of a biblical man. After the movie, we head back to the kitchen for dessert and discuss how men in the film did or did not act as Christian men ought.
This past Friday, we watched “The River of No Return”. In this classic, Matt Calder just got out of prison for killing a man in self-defense, and after finding his nine-year-old son (Mark) in a “Sodom-like” town, he takes him home to lead a quiet life. On the way, however, a card shark named Weston steals Calder’s horse and gun after beating him up, then essentially leaves him and his son for dead. The love aspect of the movie then unfolds when Weston’s girlfriend, a saloon girl named Kay (who previously befriended Mark at the town), stays with the two men in sympathy. As the plot unfolds, Calder leads Kay and his son down the river of no return without a horse or gun. In the process, he does not sink into self-pity over their circumstances, but rather provides for Kay when the cold river makes her sick. He also protects his son from a mountain lion, and refrains from revealing how much danger the three are actually in. In addition, after they make it safely to their destination, he does not allow Kay to return to her life as a saloon girl, but literally drags her out of that lifestyle. Matt Calder did much to lead, feed, care, and protect Kay and Mark throughout the movie, but still had some moral failings. In fact, our conclusion over dessert was that Mark, the nine-year-old boy, was the one who exuded the most consistent traits of biblical manhood. He was courageous in the midst of trouble. He expressed a real care for Kay despite her immoral lifestyle. He did whatever he could to help his father provide for the three of them. And at the end of the movie, he even had to do the hard task of shooting Weston in defense of his father. Mark was consistent in his values throughout, and taught us all a thing or two about biblical manhood.
All of us who are involved in Monthly Manly Movies appreciate what can be grasped in all of the movies that we watch. Nevertheless, we do not look to role models in movies as a guide for how to be biblical men, but weigh the values and actions of these characters in light of the Word of God. My hope and prayer is that these movies continually point us back to the ultimate man, Jesus Christ, and are used as tools to teach how to provide, protect, and lead others (especially women) as Christ leads His Bride, the Church. I hope this synopsis of Monthly Manly Movie night was helpful, and if any men would like to come next month, shoot me an email!
zbtarter@yahoo.com
Zach
This past Friday, we watched “The River of No Return”. In this classic, Matt Calder just got out of prison for killing a man in self-defense, and after finding his nine-year-old son (Mark) in a “Sodom-like” town, he takes him home to lead a quiet life. On the way, however, a card shark named Weston steals Calder’s horse and gun after beating him up, then essentially leaves him and his son for dead. The love aspect of the movie then unfolds when Weston’s girlfriend, a saloon girl named Kay (who previously befriended Mark at the town), stays with the two men in sympathy. As the plot unfolds, Calder leads Kay and his son down the river of no return without a horse or gun. In the process, he does not sink into self-pity over their circumstances, but rather provides for Kay when the cold river makes her sick. He also protects his son from a mountain lion, and refrains from revealing how much danger the three are actually in. In addition, after they make it safely to their destination, he does not allow Kay to return to her life as a saloon girl, but literally drags her out of that lifestyle. Matt Calder did much to lead, feed, care, and protect Kay and Mark throughout the movie, but still had some moral failings. In fact, our conclusion over dessert was that Mark, the nine-year-old boy, was the one who exuded the most consistent traits of biblical manhood. He was courageous in the midst of trouble. He expressed a real care for Kay despite her immoral lifestyle. He did whatever he could to help his father provide for the three of them. And at the end of the movie, he even had to do the hard task of shooting Weston in defense of his father. Mark was consistent in his values throughout, and taught us all a thing or two about biblical manhood.
All of us who are involved in Monthly Manly Movies appreciate what can be grasped in all of the movies that we watch. Nevertheless, we do not look to role models in movies as a guide for how to be biblical men, but weigh the values and actions of these characters in light of the Word of God. My hope and prayer is that these movies continually point us back to the ultimate man, Jesus Christ, and are used as tools to teach how to provide, protect, and lead others (especially women) as Christ leads His Bride, the Church. I hope this synopsis of Monthly Manly Movie night was helpful, and if any men would like to come next month, shoot me an email!
zbtarter@yahoo.com
Zach
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)