First Born, Part III
In this series of blogs, I celebrate that God has redeemed sinful men and women and made them co-heirs of his Savior-Son, Jesus (Sean kicked us off with Seabiscuit, Zoolander and Sonship). Yet the patriarchy implied in this promise, and implied in passages of Scripture such as 1 Timothy 2:11-15, has made me wrestle in my role as a woman, wife, mom, and ordained Anglican pastor. We wanted to address patriarchy in the Bible from faithful, biblical, orthodox scholarship to show that the Gospel trajectory undoes patriarchy. Part I noted that not all Christians agree that it does. Both views see women as equal worth to men, but one view still supports male leadership in our roles. Both sides, however, agree on the Gospel. I argue that the Gospel trajectory ultimately undoes hierarchies between all people—men and women, slave and free, Jew and Greek (Galatians 3:28). Part II takes a closer look at 1 Timothy 2 and how Paul employs the Law to convict women of sin in Ephesus, yet he balances it with convicting all humanity through one man, Adam elsewhere. I argue that 1 Timothy 2 shows how the Bible works—to attack our sin with the Law and drive us to Jesus, our Forgiver, Gospel-giver, and Redeemer. In Part III, I will show how the grand scope of “first-born-sonship” throughout the Bible conveys God’s missionary passion and grace for all people. I hope that after this, whenever you read patriarchal passages in the Bible you would hear Jesus speaking to you in your historical context as he was to the people back then. He might be killing your sin first – but he’s killing you to resurrect you to far better life in Him.
“The Creation of Adam,” by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel
Primogeniture in Creation
Paul “shares the blame” for sin in the world between men and women throughout his writings. In 1 Timothy 2:13, Paul highlights Eve’s role and deception in the Fall of humanity for a pastoral reason. He highlights primogeniture—the created order of man and woman—in the Genesis 2 creation account to show that women ought to respect men, not usurp their power. He highlights Eve’s deception in order to stress the importance for women in the Ephesian church to learn sound doctrine and not stray from it.
Paul also convicts men in 1 Timothy 2, not just women. The men are quarreling and he exhorts them to pray and lift their hands in prayer (versus a left hook!) in 1 Timothy 2:8. So, before any man takes this passage out of context and tells a woman to remain quiet and not teach him, Paul would ask him if he has been quarreling or lifting his hands in prayer? In both cases of men and women, Paul uses the “Law” to convict of sin in order to drive them to repentance and the grace and forgiveness of Jesus Christ. That Spirit-led death-and-resurrection-process alone will change their hearts. Paul is applying the Law to convict both men and women in 1 Timothy. He desires that the women in Ephesus learn the faith and walk in reconciliation with men in a culture that did not.
Jacob (younger son) took Esau’s (oldest son) inheritance. Esau wanted to kill him in response. Sir Peter Paul Reubens painted their reconciliation. On view in the National Galleries of Scotland.
Paul does imply primogeniture in the Genesis 2 account. That seems to undo my thesis that the Lord ultimately undoes primogeniture amongst humans. Why would he use it in creation? William Webb is helpful here. He notes that the Lord overturns primogeniture all the time to highlight his sovereign choice and his plan of salvation that is greater than our human constructs (bloodline, circumcision, or firstborn status).[1] With Cain and Abel, God accepts the younger son’s offering over the older son (Genesis 4:1-16); through Isaac, God blesses the younger son, Jacob, to form his chosen family, not the older son, Esau (Genesis 25:23; cf. Malachi 1:2-3); Jacob blesses the sons of his younger son, Joseph, instead of his eldest son, Reuben (Genesis 48:12-20) to name a few key ones (Webb has two pages of biblical examples!).[2] God overturns primogeniture to highlight that we are not saved by our effort or any perceived status or importance. God intervened over and over again throughout history to show He saves us by grace. In his book, One Lord, One Faith, my father, Peter Moore, notes that Mary’s virgin birth of Jesus Christ also shows we are saved by faith through grace. In this case, God took men (and any human contribution) out of the picture completely! He completely disrupted the patriarchal order in order to highlight his sovereignty and his un-stoppable compassion for sinners like you and me.[3] Paul emphasized God’s grace when he wrote to Timothy’s church again in the letter to the Ephesians: “For by grace you have been saved, through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is a gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8). The way God handles primogeniture throughout the Bible communicates his grace to a people engrained in the patterns of patriarchy. He is saying, I save you by grace, in a way they understood.
He is using every case of primogeniture to lead us to the true first born: his Son, Jesus.
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. (Colossians 1:15-19)
Jesus has the authority of the first-born. This passage is not saying he was created, like us. (That is what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe.) This passage is quite clear to say we were created through him. However, our missionary God is speaking to his people about the supremacy of Jesus Christ. He is saying, there is One who has the authority, the privilege, and the inheritance of the first born; it’s my Son. He is preeminent. And what He and I say about you is what counts - not what your father or mother or spouse or ex-spouse or friend or enemy said about you. I am preeminent; I hold you together; I redeem you; I like being with you and I say you are mine.
In the case of 1 Timothy 2, Paul uses the concept of primogeniture to humble the Ephesian women. They also are culpable in the curse of sin along with men. They also need to be saved by grace, not their own best thinking. In order to convict any woman resistant to learning the faith as a true student, Paul reminds them that the first woman was the one who was deceived. This sounds like a pastor who loves these women and won’t let Timothy write them off – he is helping anxious Timothy pastor them. This sounds like the people who have boldly, lovingly spoken truth to me.
Rembrandt, Adam and Eve, 1638, National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC
Positive Cultural Uses of Patriarchy and Missionary God
God is the Ultimate Missionary who shares the Gospel with people in a way they can understand in their culture. At the time that Genesis 2 was written (orthodox Christians and Jews would say written by Moses), primogeniture had a positive role in the family. Webb notes primogeniture was “good for the family” in agrarian societies where property was held throughout several generations. He writes, “At the heart of the creative order custom lie concerns about agricultural land transference, lineage survival, large/extended families, sufficient provision for animals, and so on.”[4] However, Webb notes that the pragmatic concerns that made primogeniture good for the family in the ancient world no longer exist. He explains the reason why it is not needed and indeed not good for the family: “In our contemporary culture where strength is measured in mental and character capacity (not in physical strength), where laws permit females to retain resources, where polygamy no longer prevails, where family battles are fought in court (not through military excursions), etc., the preference for a male leading the other siblings is no longer sustainable. Ability and gifting become the standard for leadership among siblings, not gender and birth order.”[5] This is certainly playing out in our society today.
In Genesis 2 we see overtones of primogeniture because the audience understood such a culture. It was such a culture. God did make Adam first. That made sense to them. It would have been too hard to hear the Gospel in that culture in that place in history if God had made Eve first. God accommodates patriarchy (all the while overturning it to show his sovereign intervention and inbreaking of His kingdom where all are saved by grace and made co-heirs of his Son our Savior) until his people are ready for social change. It usually takes a long time. John Stackhouse again is helpful to see our missionary God at work bearing Gospel fruit:
“God goes along with the general contours of patriarchal society, even as the impress of the Holy Spirit on that society first ameliorates some of the most oppressive aspects of patriarchy and then ultimately opens it up to the full equality of women. The church, especially when it is in the white heat of revival, shows us glimpses of the order of the kingdom of God to come, but the world is not ready for it yet, so the movements subside into patriarchy, awaiting the day when such compromise is no longer strategic. That day has come in some societies.”[6]
I believe ours is among them. We welcome the contributions of men and women in all levels of society. Elderly parents are cared for by the sibling with the gifting and capability, which is not automatically the first born or the male. Our secular culture has moved on from patriarchy. I do not fault faithful Complimentarian Christians for their patriarchal read of Scripture - primogeniture is in there! However, this essay argues that the trajectory of the Gospel undoes it. The secular culture needs to hear the Gospel taught and preached and lived—from both men and women.
Intimacy is not sameness
There is a beauty in the disagreement amongst Christians seeking to be faithful to Scripture. Paul says to Christians who disagree about foods to eat, “Each should be fully convinced in his own mind” and eat from a place of faith, not doubt (Romans 14:5, 23). Whether Egalitarian or Complimentarian, each of us should hold our position “unto the Lord” (Romans 14:5,6). Perhaps what is needed most at this moment of gender confusion/rejection is for Christians to honor our differences and keep the Gospel the main thing. While I’d like everyone to agree with me, I realize that is unlikely ;). It is as important to seek to understand, to respect, and to honor our differences, and to show love and honor in light of those differences. That’s what we will need around the Thanksgiving table while one family member votes Republican and another Democrat—we need the grace of Jesus to say, we don’t agree, I love you, let’s eat stuffing. I could see the Spirit doing that. Isn’t that how we are going to share Christ’s love to anyone with whom we don’t “agree”?
Ending with the Gospel!
Paul pastorally convicts the Ephesian women in order to bring them back to the Gospel. That is just what Paul’s strange saying does. He writes, “But the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness with self-control” (1 Timothy 2:15 ESV). Does Paul mean that women are not saved through faith in Jesus Christ but only if they have children (sorry single and infertile women!)? Clearly no. No Christian worth his or her salt has ever read it that way. Anglican theologian, John Stott, thunders through the possible interpretations with this conclusion:
Women ‘will be saved through the Birth of the Child’, referring to Christ…The definite article before ‘childbearing’ in the Greek sentence is explained. Above all, this interpretation commends itself by its ‘extreme appropriateness’. Earlier in the chapter the ‘one mediator between God and men’ has been identified as ‘the man Christ Jesus (5), who of course became human by being ‘born of a woman’. Further, in the context of Paul’s references to the creation and fall, recalling Genesis 2 and 3, a further reference to the coming redemption through the woman’s seed, recalling Genesis 3:15, would be most apt. The serpent had deceived her; her posterity would defeat him.[8]
This is Paul’s counterbalance. Paul had given a specially targeted rebuke of the particular sins of the women in Ephesus - the women who “denied marriage” and “usurped authority” and perpetuated heresy instead of sound doctrine. He had killed their sin with the Law. Now Paul gives them a specially targeted gift of the Gospel to raise them to new life. These women would experience the same redemption Eve did. They, like Eve, were deceived. Yet, Eve’s offspring overcame Satan—the deceiver of us all. Generations later, Eve’s child – Jesus - brought salvation to the whole world. Her child is alive and at work in his brothers and sisters through his Holy Spirit.
The Cowper Madonna, Raphael, 1550, National Museum of Art
You will know Jesus’ sisters because they will bear fruit. Paul lists the fruit: faith in Him who forgave their sin, love for their brothers and sisters in Christ, a desire for holiness where they wanted to serve themselves before, and new found self-control (that no one has unless the Lord gifts it). Perhaps Paul is giving the Ephesian women one more jab with the Law by warning them “if” they maintain these things they will be saved? This little “if” cannot undo the major doctrine of Christian assurance. Article XVI of the XXXIX Articles assures the Christian that sin after baptism cannot undo your salvation. Jesus assured us that once he holds us, he never lets go, neither does his Father in John 10:28-30. Paul wrestles with his sin as a Christian in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10 and God reassures him, “My grace is sufficient for you; my power is made perfect in weakness.” No sin is too big for Jesus’ forgiveness. A Christian is fully forgiven, fully a saint… and until heaven she is still fully a sinner who banks on Jesus promise to bring her home.[9] Thus in light of the “major” Scriptures that assure sinful Christians that their place as co-heirs of God’s kingdom with Christ is sealed by grace, we can revisit Paul’s “if” in 1 Timothy 2:15. That “if” is descriptive not prescriptive. The faith, love, holiness, and self-control describe what Jesus’ grace does in sinners. It always bears fruit. Whether you see it or not; Jesus sees it. It is His righteousness in you. We will see this powerful fruit of faith when we see sinful men and women made new in heaven. I bet you’ll see some fruit before then too. Jesus came for sinners; he is able to keep them.
Paul wrote this just a chapter before our passage: “The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners,” and then he adds, “Of whom I am the foremost” (1 Timothy 1:15). The sinful women of Ephesus are in good company - Paul’s company. And Jesus’ family.
[1] Webb, Slaves, Women, & Homosexuals, 137.
[2] Webb, Slaves, Women, & Homosexuals, 137.
[3] Peter C. Moore, One Lord, One Faith: Getting Back to the Basics of Your Christianity in an Age of Confusion, (Nelson, 1994), 80.
[4] Webb, Slaves, Women and Homosexuals, 139.
[5] Webb, Slaves, Women and Homosexuals, 140.
[6] Stackhouse, Finally Feminist, 84.
[7] Stackhouse, Finally Feminist, 58.
[8] John R. W. Stott, The Message of 1 Timothy & Titus, Edited by John R. W. Stott, The Bible Speaks Today (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996), 87.
[9] The Reformation really clarified this teaching from Scripture. In Latin it is “Simul Justus et Peccator” or “simultaneously justified and a sinner.” Read more about it from the Lutheran Resource 1517 or a short description from Mockingbird.
Recommended Reading
