The First Mistake

Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. Genesis 2:7 NASB

Man – Sometimes Christian theologians argue that because man was created first, men have primacy of authority over women. Bruce Ware makes this argument is his work, “The Beauty of Biblical Womanhood.” It has been a fairly standard claim in conservative Christian circles for many decades. But it is a mistake; perhaps the first mistake since it involves the first human being.

Ware argues for male headship on the basis of the man’s primacy in creation, that is, man was created before woman and therefore has priority in authority. This seems tenuous. Do we argue for primacy of authority of individuals over government because individuals were ontologically first? Do we argue that animals have precedence over men because they came first? Do we maintain the covenant commandment of circumcision because it came first? Is the horse and carriage to be given priority because it came first? Can you see how specious this argument from priority is? Actually, even in Genesis, God displays a consistent pattern of choosing the second as His vehicle of covenant relationship (Isaac, Jacob) and the discarded and rejected as the means of grace (Tamar, Joseph). I’m not sure you can make much of the “cardinal order of creation.” God seems to choose to ignore it quite often. First, second or third really makes no difference with respect to authority. The critical issue with authority is not cardinal priority but rather assigned priority. Thus, laws that were first adopted are not given priority of authority on the basis of their cardinal order. In fact, in the legal system, it is often the case that authority is given to subsequent laws. On this basis, we should argue that women have priority of authority because they were created second. Once you examine the claim, you see how foolish it is.

Furthermore, the Genesis text indicates that both men and women are given the prime directive, and given it equally. They are equally responsible to jointly cooperate in finishing God’s creative effort. And they are equally held accountable for the violation of the first commandment. Of course, the precise consequences are different because the relationship between source and outcome differs, but they equally share in the blame.

Ware ignores this part of the story because he is looking for a way to promote male headship, but if male headship were really a biblical principle, then we ought to hold Adam solely accountable for permitting the woman who is under his authority to bring sin into the picture. By the way, Paul argues that it is Adam, not the woman, who deliberately sins.

What does this mean for us? It means that partnership, not priority, is the biblical model. It means that men are not spiritually chosen bosses because of their gender. It means reorienting our cultural bias and establishing a kingdom where neither male nor female genders matter. It means that she is right too, and we better listen.

Topical Index: gender, headship, authority, man, Genesis 2:7, Bruce Ware