The difference in complementarian and egalitarian regarding gender roles at home and church

The difference in complementarian and egalitarian regarding gender roles at home and church

Introduction

Theological anthropology deals with the relationship between God and human beings. Ideally, the basis of this theory is that man was created in the image of God, with them having a special qualitative relation with their maker, unlike animals. Furthermore, it clearly states that the only sin is the corrupter of the relations. Theological anthropology plays a key role in the restoration between broken human relationships with God through the life, death, and the resurrection of Christ Jesus. It also offers a theological framework for studying other different aspects of humanity. As such, theological anthropology would be that areas of answering questions such as would one identify as egalitarian or complementarian, especially about gender roles at home and church? I identity as a complementarian, and in this paper, I explore how my inclination towards complementarianism is important in the ministry.

Differing Positions of the Doctrine

I believe that while men and women are equally created in the image of God, God nevertheless calls them to different roles within the home and the church. God’s purpose for man and woman is equal in value, but also each has distinct roles. This is part of His blueprint for the man’s and woman’s mission on earth to be lived out together for his glory. Husbands may be head of the house, but God also tells them to love their wives as much as God loves His church and followers, that’s huge. “25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;” (Ephesians 5:25).

Complementarian logic has been influential in Christian theology today. One prominent aspect of complementarians today is the representation of equality between men and women while endorsing a functional inequality between the same men and women in family, church, and society. In the wider society, some evangelists will adopt the complementarian logic for egalitarian stances, such as eliminating gender reconstructions in church and society leadership while promoting complementary marriages (Lee, 2016). The idea of complementarianism is also of great significance in opposing issues such as homosexuality among others by Protestants.

My Position on Complementarianism

I subscribe to complementarianism because it is founded on two important biblical truths: men and women were created in God’s image and therefore equal in worth and dignity (Genesis 1:27) and that God designed men and women to function differently. As a complementarianism, I hold that God gave every one of us different responsibilities that the opposite gender should not be forced to share. In-home and church, there are ways that men and women should function to progress God’s glory (Archer and Archer, 2019).

Perception of any gender as superior or inferior should not hold in complementarianism as this does not subscribe to God’s design of men and women. I want to reiterate that gender roles are not based on skill but largely on God’s perfect design of men and women. Men were not called to lead families or homes because they are talented, like some leaders would want to put it. Likewise, women are even much smarter and compassionate leaders, but God had a reason for creating Eve after Adam. Gender roles are largely based on God’s divine design, and the moment we try to interchange that families and even churches come crumbling down (Bowden, 2017). As stated by the scriptures in Ephesians 5: 25, men have the responsibility to protect their wives and children to the point of sacrificing his life for them as a sole responsibility. This did not mean that women are unequal to men and that they should fight for equality by reciprocating this biblical command.

Application in Current mission

In the ministry, an ideal woman, as stated in Proverbs 31, should be praised for her abilities, not her sexuality. Complementarianism is thus more about promoting a gospel that we all equal, and divine responsibilities separate us. Headship in the church and home is an added responsibility to serve and sacrifice, not a chance to oppress. Men at the top of the family or church should not have their ways or command things (Lee, 2016). They should instead provide and protect the family, the church, and the society as expected by God. Headship is an obligation for men, not a privilege that some would want to abuse.

In John 13:1-17, Jesus washed the disciplines as a sign of sacrifice and selflessness that should embody the church and home leadership. More importantly, leadership and submission in the home are solely founded on growing spiritually, not oppressing women. Women are not called into the kingdom so they can tolerate manipulative and abusive marriages. The idea is that complementarianism should make both men and women flourish, not men or women alone (Rowe, 2018).

God designed men as heads, protectors, and providers to their homes and churches, but He did not give them exclusive roles. He also designed women to help and nurture their homes and church but did not give exclusive roles as well. As such, we must live by Gods teaching as we seek growth in God’s kingdom (Archer and Archer, 2019).

Conclusion

I establish that gender complementarity is a new and explosive vision for both men and women in the church. It has developed as a response to more comprehensive changes in today’s societies but also came as a trajectory from the biblical scriptures and broader traditions. It is a widely satisfactory trajectory, especially in Christian theology. For some, however, it has troubling implications towards the whole concept of theology, especially theological anthropology. While these implications can be avoided by carefully interpreting the scriptures and realizing existing distinctions, not all evangelists can do that. Complementarianism has several implications and consequences if not understood as required and would suppress the real purpose of the gospel if not widely thought about. Complementarianism can facilitate an oppressive theological playground among patriarchal men and women and significantly suppress moral development, both at home and the church. Complementarianism is indeed an excellent aspect to interpret the scriptures and apply it without compromise on the broader society.

References

Archer, M., & Archer, K. J. (2019). Complementarianism and Egalitarianism—Whose Side Are You Leaning On?: A Pentecostal Reading of Ephesians 5: 21–33. Pneuma, 41(1), 66-90.

Bowden, J. B. (2017). Equipping the Men of First Baptist Church of Enterprise, Alabama, to be Gospel-Centered Leaders in Their Homes.

Lee, M. (2016). Review of Neither Complementarian nor Egalitarian: A Kingdom Corrective to the Evangelical Gender Debate. Priscilla Papers, 30(3), 29.

Rowe, E. (2018). Loving Our Neighbors: A Review of” The Gospel Comes with a House Key.”