04.03. The Norm God had revealed
We may conclude: Deborah and all Israel with her could know from God’s Word that male and female alike were equally dependent on God’s grace for forgiveness of sins and therefore for life and breath itself.
3.2 The relation God has placed between man and woman in their inter-personal relation
- PARADISE As it turns out, God has given to the man and to the woman different positions with respect to each other. Though equal in talent no doubt, and though certainly equal before God, God has nevertheless arranged a hierarchy in the relation between the man and the woman. In Genesis 2:7-8 we read that "the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. The LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed." The man -that is Adam- received a place in the garden with the mandate to "to tend and keep it" (Genesis 2:15). Then in verse 18 [Genesis 2:18] we read that "the LORD God said, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him." From the rib of the man God made a woman (Genesis 2:21-22).
Note that the woman is characterised here as a helper. The term ’helper’ does not denote that the woman is less than the man. With our sinful (western?) ears, we tend to hear in the word ’helper’ the notion of ’assistant’, i.e. one who is told what to do. The Scriptures do not allow that loading of the term ’helper’. That same word is used repeatedly in Scripture in relation to God being a helper for His people. Consider the following Psalms:
Psalms 33:20 : "Our soul waits for the LORD; He is our help and our shield."
Psalms 70:5 : "But I am poor and needy; make haste to me, O God! You are my help and my deliverer."
Psalms 115:9-11 : "O Israel ... O house of Aaron ... You who fear the LORD, trust in the LORD; He is their help and their shield."
In the above passages there is no concept of ’less’ involved in the term. That underlines the point that we may not think of men and women in terms of ’better’ or ’lesser’.
Still, the term ’helper’ remains in the relation of woman to man. It is important to note that the woman is given to the man that she may be his help and we do not read of it being the other way around. It is not so that the man is given to the woman to be her helper. The man receives the position of leader; he must go to his garden to fulfil his task of tending and keeping it, and the woman is his helper in carrying out that task. Before God both are to fulfil the cultural mandate, but in their working side-by-side the one is the helper and the other is not, (and so) the one is the leader and the other is not.
Again, it is important to note that in Genesis 2:22 the Lord God brought the woman to the man and not the man to the woman. There is a God-given order, a hierarchy in their relation together; the one is the leader and the other is the helper. In Genesis 2:23 we read that Adam greeted her; she did not greet Adam. Adam took the initiative; the one is the leader and the other is the helper. To give names is (as we learn from Genesis 2:19) a function of leadership. Adam gave Eve a name; Eve did not give Adam a name. Whilst man and woman are equal before God, the Lord God, in Genesis 2:1-25, put in place an authority / submission structure in the relation between the man and the woman.
- FALL The Fall into sin in Genesis 3:1-24 ruined God’s creation. However, this authority / submission structure as implied in Genesis 2:1-25, is maintained. It was Eve who was tempted and consequently fell. Yet God called Adam to task first. See Genesis 3:9 : The Lord God knew that Adam and Eve had fallen into sin but "the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, "Where are you?" Adam was responsible first of all. See Genesis 3:10-11 : "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself." And (God) said, "Who told you that you were naked?" The man was addressed. This is a theme that comes back in the New Testament, e.g. Romans 5:12, where Paul writes, "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin .…" This "one man" is a reference to Adam; by one man sinned entered the world. Similarly, in 1 Corinthians 15:22 we read, "For as in Adam all die ..."; i.e., death came through Adam. We would possibly have expected to read that death came through Eve, for Eve sinned first. Yet we read that God held Adam responsible. Here we see the authority (or responsibility) aspect. The relation between man and woman (husband and wife) after the fall into sin is described in Genesis 3:16 b. The Lord says to the woman, "I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." How are we to understand the word ’shall’ in this text? Does the word ’shall’ reflect a command: the man must rule over the woman? Or does the word ’shall’ reflect a prophecy: in the brokenness of a fallen world, the woman will find her husband constantly trying to dominate her? If it is the latter, of course, redemption in Christ will mean that the Christian husband will not seek to "rule over" his wife, and the Christian woman will not quietly accept the man’s domination. In a word: do we have here a different relationship structure between man and woman than that portrayed in Genesis 2:1-25 which speaks of an authority / submission structure? As it turns out,[1] the formulation in Genesis 3:16 is parallel[2] to what we read in Genesis 4:7. There the Lord says to Cain, after he has offered his sacrifice, "If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you shall rule over it." God is telling Cain that sin wants to master him; that is a reality in this fallen world. However, God adds to this that Cain is responsible; he is not allowed to let sin master him. Cain must fight sin. That is also exactly what is meant in Genesis 3:16. The woman, God says, as a result of the fall into sin, desires to rule over the man ("your desire shall be for your husband"), but the man must not permit her to succeed ("he shall rule over you").[3] In Genesis 3:16, then, we have the same thought as that presented in Genesis 2:1-25 : an authority / submission structure. Whereas in chapter 2 however it was a structure which lived itself out in harmony, now the Lord says that this authority / submission structure is going to be a battle. To accept the place that God has given is going to be difficult. Genesis 3:16 "describes the beginning of the battle of the sexes."[4] So we see that the authority / submission structure implied in Genesis 2:1-25 is maintained after the fall, but now the woman protests her place and the man does not have the wherewithal to keep the woman kindly in her place. There is therefore pain for the woman and for the man as a punishment on the fall into sin.[5] - AFTER THE FALL That the authority / submission structure of Genesis 2:1-25 is maintained after the fall becomes evident from what we read further in the book of Genesis and the other books of the Pentateuch:
Only masculine names are to be found in the genealogies of Genesis 5:1-32; Genesis 10:1-32 : In these chapters we read who lived, for how long, and who begat which son. Why is it that the names in the chapter are all of men? It is so because headship lies with the man so that the woman is known by and with her man. Here expression is given to the principle that the man is the leader and the woman is his helper.
Abram is called; not Sarai: In Genesis 12:1 we read that "the LORD had said to Abram: "Get out of your country, from your kindred and from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you." Why is Abram called and why is Sarai not called? Sarai did come along, for she was married to Abram. Yet God was pleased to address the man. Why? It’s because of that same authority / submission structure of Genesis 2:1-25.
Only males were to receive the sign and seal of the covenant; not the females: In Genesis 17:10 f we read, "This is My covenant which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you shall be circumcised." Why are the females not circumcised? Circumcision for the female is possible. Besides, God, sovereign as He is, could have given a different sign and seal of the covenant, one that could easily be applied to both male and female. But God did not do so. Why not? Again, here God gives expression to the leader / helper structure established in the beginning and maintained despite the fall.
Only the men were addressed with regard to how the people of Israel were to sanctify themselves in preparation for the Lord’s coming to Mount Sinai. On the mountain God would make His covenant with His people. One of the instructions received in relation to this sanctification was this, .".. do not come near your wives" (Exodus 19:15). That is: this passage is addressed to the husbands, the men. God makes His covenant with Israel and He speaks to the men. It’s not that the women don’t have a place in the covenant, for they most certainly do. But here is evidence again of the authority / submission structure where the one is the head and the other is the help.
God appointed only men to priesthood: In Exodus 28:1 the Lord gives this instruction to Moses, "Now take Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister to me as priest, Aaron and Aaron’s sons: Nadab, Eleazar, and Ithamar." Why not Aaron’s children or Aaron’s daughters? It’s because of Genesis 2:1-25 : the place of the man is to be the head and the woman to be the help.
Only the males are commanded to appear before the Lord, and not the females: "Three times in the year all your males shall appear before the Lord GOD" (Exodus 23:17; Deuteronomy 16:16). Were the women not welcome? They definitely were welcome: didn’t Hannah go along with Elkanah to Shiloh once a year to worship the Lord there? The point is that the instruction is to the male because he is the head.
Elders were to be men: Moses’ father-in-law, inspired by the Lord, gives this advice to Moses, "Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens."... And Moses chose able men ..." (Exodus 18:21, Exodus 18:25). Why are the women not mentioned? Because the man is ordained by God to the position of head, leader.
Only the males to be counted in the census of Israel: The Lord tells Moses in Numbers 1:1-4 to number the people. "Now the LORD spoke to Moses in the Wilderness of Sinai, ... saying, "Take a census of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by their families, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number of names, every male individually ...." God gives instruction according to the principle revealed in Genesis 2:1-25.
The wife is under her husband’s authority: In Numbers 5:19 f we read of God’s law concerning the unfaithful wife, "And the priest shall put her under oath, and say to the woman, "If no man has lain with you, and if you have not gone astray to uncleanness while under your husband’s authority, be free from this bitter water that brings a curse." Notice the phrase, "your husband’s authority." "The wife is ’under’ [
ת ּחת ] her husband. It is an explicit statement of the wife’s subordinate position."[6] This text does not reveal simply an aspect of Israelite culture, but the ordinance of Genesis 2:1-25.God’s use of the masculine pronoun: Leviticus 1:1-17 tells us of the offerings that the Israelites had to bring if guilty of specific sins. In verse 3 we read, "If his offering is a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD." Why is the pronoun masculine? Is that because only the men were to bring a sacrifice if they were thankful? We appreciate that that was not the case. Inclusive language translators would translate this in the following drift: "If anyone offers a burnt offering of the herd, let that person offer ...." The Lord however uses the masculine pronoun. That’s not culture, but a reflection of the structure which God has placed in Genesis 2:1-25 : the man is the head and the woman is the help. The masculine pronoun does not exclude women, but gives recognition to fact that woman is part of man and therefore the masculine pronoun can stand for all people.
It is clear then that what God ordained in the beginning, namely, that man is the head and the woman his help, is a norm that God consistently applied throughout the Pentateuch. Though both man and woman are equal before God, their functions in life are different. The man is characterised by ’leadership’, the woman by ’helping’. This is material that Deborah could know.
----- Footnotes -----
[1] For this paragraph I am indebted to Susan Foh, Women & the Word of God: A Response to Biblical Feminism (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Colossians, 1979), pg 68f.
[2] The Hebrew is identical except for the pronouns.
[3] If I may quote Foh’s own words: "After the fall, the husband no longer rules easily; he must fight for his headship. The woman’s desire is to control her husband (to usurp his divinely appointed headship), and he must master her, if he can. Sin has corrupted both the willing submission of the wife and the loving headship of the husband. And so, the rule of love founded in paradise is replaced by struggle, tyranny, domination, and manipulation" pg 69.
[4] Ibid.
[5] NOTE: Genesis 3:16 b is not a curse!!! The serpent is cursed (Genesis 3:14) & the ground (Genesis 3:17), but not the woman (Genesis 3:16) nor the man (Genesis 3:17-19).
[6] Foh, pg 75.