Women: God's Answer

“Then God said, 'let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.' So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”

Genesis 1:26-27 [NIV]

The first two chapters of Genesis are loaded with symbolism, meaning, and the foundations of theology. For instance; by the second verse the discussion of the Trinity is begun (Genesis 1:2 “and the Rûwach of God” or the Spirit of God), by verse four we see the original state of creation (it was good), and we have the cosmological framework for time set up. The rest of this creation story is equally pregnant with essentials of the conversation of God's interaction with His creation. There are two events in the first five chapters of Genesis that are written about more than any other; the creation account, and the fall of humanity. Sandwiched, however, in the middle of these two principals is the story of the creation of man, that is mankind (the Hebrew word for man, adam is the generic term for mankind and becomes the proper name Adam [Archaeological Study Bible, p.5]), but specifically the creation of woman, and her place in the created order. It is one of the most pressing issues in the life of the Church, and one that I believe is widely misconceived. It is the intent of this discourse to articulate the innate equality of women in the site of God in creation, the hierarchical consequences of the fall, and the plan of God on earth to reconcile creation from the moment of the fall all the way through the salvific Christological act. As a Christian, operating out of a Christocentric philosophy, we see the scripture in light of Christ's coming, and the teaching He delivered. In Matthew 22:36-40 Jesus says that the entirety of Scripture revolves around people; loving God, and loving each other. Scripture then in the eyes of Jesus is a redemption narrative, restoring His creation to right relationship with each other and Himself, at any cost. A compilation of verses from Deuteronomy and Numbers from the Torah is the most obvious source for Jesus' quotation, but we must look back further.

Jesus operated in what is known as a Talmudic interpretation [Young, Jesus the Jewish Theologian, p144] of scripture, which means that He was not only well versed in the Scriptures, but also in the recorded rabbinic discussions of His day. One of the common practices of a Talmudic rabbi, like Jesus, was to look to the principal of first mention [Fergussen, Wright, Packer, New Dictionary of Theology, p44], which calls into question the first place in Scripture where a given principal or understanding is born. Where was the idea of the relationship between God and mankind formed, and how is mankind to interact? We look to the Genesis Creation Narrative to find the answers to this question. In Genesis 1:27 God creates mankind. Now, mankind was created very specifically last, and in a very special way. We learn that mankind was created in the image an likeness of God. An early heresy dispelled was that God exists as both male, and female, which is simply not true, but rather that the Godhead exists in community. The Godhead exists in trinity, and each person has infinite love toward both of the other persons. If God did not exist triunely His love would have been egocentric in nature, something we know not to be true. Thus we see, reflected in the relationship of the Godhead, the love meant by God in creation. The maleness and femaleness of the people, is a reflection of the image of the Godhead [Oden, The Living God, Systematic Theology: Volume I, p.181]. We see this beautiful language set up in Genesis 2:24 where two whole people, become one whole person. While it is not a direct correlation, it is very symbolic of the distinction and oneness of God. There is this equality set up in the persons of mankind. Apart from one another they do not reflect the Godhead.

Its interesting to learn that Genesis is the only ancient creation narrative, of which there are many, that talks about the creation of woman. From its onset the one true God is wanting to communicate the equality of humanity “This is the only full account of the creation of woman in all of ancient Near East literature [ASB, p7].” We have this understanding that the God of the Old Testament is the only true God, not that He is greater than other gods, but that no other God exists. In the current of what is then the one true creation narrative we find that God created man and female equal. There is a thread in the scholastic communities that explains the creation of Eve. The etymology of the word rib in Hebrew is the same root of the word center, and they are often used interchangeable in the ancient world. Thus we note that in taking a rib of Adam's, God is symbolically showing that Eve is taken from the very center of what it is to be man. This thread of understanding states that it is important to realize that she was not made by man's head, the source of the man's power, that she might be ruled or lorded over by him. It is also important to see that she was not created from his feet, to be trampled by him [Walton, Matthews, Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, p. 28]. In this teaching we see the intentionality of God. This is eventually expounded upon with verse 23 “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh [NIV].” Adam was not only saying that she was one with him, she was saying so much more. To a Jew bone was the strongest part of a person, and flesh, the weakest. Woman was man's strength, and his weakness. Back in verse 18 it says “I will make a helper suitable for him [NIV].” In his sermon titled “Sex by Design,” Peter Yoshonis points out that the word used for helper here is the word 'êzer, a word that is most often used to describe God (see Psalm 33:20 “Our soul waits for the LORD; He is our 'êzer and our shield [ESV].”). Woman was not meant to be man's petty servant, but in the likeness of God, was meant to be the strength of man. There is this sense, buried in the Genesis narrative, that mankind can only exist as male and female, that it would be incomplete and fragmented if either gender were to be missing, or unequal.

By the third chapter of Genesis however everything is about to change...

“Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.' "The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die! "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Genesis 3:1-5 [NASB]

The Genesis Fall is classically understood from two theological principals that we glean from St. Augustine of Hippo. He states first that because only good was created in Genesis that evil is in fact not created but rather a brokenness of the good, we call this notion privation of the good [Augustine, Enchiridion of Augustine]. We know that man was both created in the image and likeness of God, and is thus meant to be like God, as well as meant to appreciate beauty. We see the serpent of Genesis 3 using the way mankind was created to twist the good creation of God. This privation was accomplished by telling Eve that she would be like God, and by calling attention to the inherent beauty and utility of the fruit. The act of creation was change, because it had not previously existed (the dotrine of ex nihilo creation [Aug., Ench. p.35]), and thus because it was changed, it was able to be changed; which it was. One of the things that is interesting to note is that until the fall man and woman enjoyed a beautiful sense of equality. Enter the fall, we see a tragic repercussion; as a result of the fall a new hierarchy began within the life of humanity. “...Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you [Genesis 3:16, NIV].” No longer was man and woman existing in a state of equality, but this divisive order had begun, that has continued into this day.

If one were to look at history, one would observe the lack of attention paid to women. They are not included in stories, not valued by political leaders, not regarded for opinion, and not allowed to be educated in almost every past civilization. They have no place in government, no position in the home, no property, no voice.

Yet there is this glimmer of hope. Immediately following what has become known as the Curse a radical turn is taken in the tone of God toward humanity; a tone that savors strongly of the first two chapters of Genesis. “The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them [Genesis 3:21].” It is impossible to define the nature of God – it is far too complex, and lofty for our minds. However we learn certain things of God from His word, among them is that God is immediately compelled to reconcile His creation to Himself once it has fallen. We entered into a sinful and depraved existence at birth, but part of the salvific act of Christ is that God longs to reconcile us to right relationship; made apparent from the foundations of time. We see this call to the restoration of gender equality from the very first story in the Bible. God was at work in the lives of women all throughout the Old Testament. The lives of Deborah, Ruth, and Esther prove that God left no room for women to remain at the bottom of the hierarchical system. All of these point to the eventual coming of the Messiah, where all things would be made right again. The belief of the Jews throughout the entirety of the Old Testament was that God would be at work in His creation, through His Messiah, restoring the world. It is also important to note that at the time when most of the Old Testament was written Jews had a very weak understanding of the afterlife. This concept grew over time to the current theological interpretation we have today, but to a Jew in the Old Testament, they expected the changes the Messiah brought to be for that point in history. That the redemption of creation was meant to happen in this lifetime, not in the next. Thus when many people argue that equality, and sanctification are only dreams, able only to be actualized in death, they are sorely mistaken, and in grievously poor exegesis of Scripture.

In conclusion it must be understood that from the beginning of creation - mankind was meant to exist in a state of equality, that inequality was merely a result of the fall, and that the restoration of Biblical gender equality is meant to be achieved in this lifetime. All persons must be doing their part to inform and propagate the equality of genders. This is accomplished by a personal commitment to reform your perception of gender, and by a fervent effort to reform that of others. Everyone must be at work in the act of redeeming and restoring the woman of the Church.

Reflection: I began this research paper as a look into God's design for sex, and it really morphed as I progressed. The Wesleyan Church has always taken a strong stance on the elevation of women to roles of pastoral leadership, and in the world at large. They architected, and actualized much of woman's suffrage and helped women to achieve the place they currently enjoy. The work is hardly over. I saw this deep need to research, and to portray the original respect of woman. One of the things that stuck out to me so intensely was that inequality was a result of the fall. Dr. Chris Bounds spoke in class one day about the fact that God, by nature, MUST in fact move to redeem. It is as though one component of who God is, is redemption. This paper helped to make the idea of woman in ministry that much more simple to me. A precedent was set in Genesis as to God's heart for woman, one that continues forever.

Works Cited:

“The Holy Bible: New International Version,” International Bible Society, copyright 1973,1978, 1984 a.d.

“New Dictionary of Theology” Sinclair B. Fergussen; David F Wright, J.I. Packer. Downers Grove, Illinois. Inter Varsity Press. 1988 a.d.

“Archaeological Study Bible, an illustrated walk through Biblical History and culture.” Grand Rapids, Michigan. Zondervan Publishers, 2005 a.d.

“Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.” by James Strong. Madison, N.J. World Bible Publishers Inc. 1986 a.d.

“The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament” by John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas. Downers Grove, Illinois. Inter Varsity Press. 2000 a.d.


“Jesus the Jewish Theologian” by Brad Young. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Hendrickson Publishers. 1995 a.d.

“The Living God, Systematic Theology: Volume 1,” second edition. By Thomas Oden. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers Inc. 2008 a.d.