Your Glory: A Reflection of His
Sexual distinction has become irrelevant in a world gone mad.
But if men and women don’t realize the extent of God’s intentions for creating that difference, then it’s impossible for them to live in obedience to Him. That’s why it’s so important for them to appropriate their sexuality and demonstrate it in the manner He intended for them to.
So how are they supposed to do that?
To begin with, a man is entrusted with an obligation to fulfill his office of reflecting the glory of God:
“For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God.” [1Cor. 7a] [my emphasis]
An office is different from a role, being an assignment given with no option to renounce. While men and women are equal in His eyes, their roles aren’t necessarily set in stone. Roles are sometimes disregarded or exchanged for any number of practical reasons.
What about a woman’s office?
She’s also an imager of her Creator, “… but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man. For indeed, man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake.”” [1Cor. 11:7b-9] [my emphasis]
[δόξα: (dôć-sâh) glory, splendor, grandeur, power, kingdom, praise, honor; pride brightness, brilliance; revealed presence of God, God himself]
These are the words of the apostle Paul written to the assembly in Corinth, including“…all in every place who [were] calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…”
It seems to me that men and women reflect their respective glories most effectively by seeking to accomplish the Lord’s intended methods for doing just that. However, it’s likely they’ll never hear how it’s supposed to happen by listening to sermons.
But, if I choose to actually read for myself, maybe I can recognize the common thread throughout the Bible which reveals how femininity has always been expressed as a typical responsive attribute in the presence of God since day one. Perhaps then I’ll be able to recognize just how that dynamic is being perverted today. [see: Gen. 1-3, Prov. 8]
God: the Creator=Masculine
Creation: responds to the Creator=Feminine
All of creation acknowledges the Creator in aggregate as a feminine response to Him, which would also include the man when he acts in that corporate capacity. But a man’s gender-specific office was never intended to be negotiable.
So, when we place women—instead of men, in leadership situations that are necessary to reflect the glory of God, we’re placing the glory of man above the glory of God, i.e., the creation above the Creator.
What are we thinking?
Print This Post
I am thinking, as I long have, how remarkable it is that Augustine figured out nearly 2000 years ago that sex has no relevance in eternity since there is no need of procreation, and that resurrected Christians will, like the angels, have no sex–but somehow the Almighty Himself DOES, despite NEVER procreating (“begotten, not made” because the Lamb has been slain from the foundation of the world.) I am also thinking, as I also long have, that God made Deborah a prophet and Judge of all Israel a good 1500 years before Paul came along to put her in her place. Further, I am thinking, as I also long have, that Paul explicitly states in one of his epistles that a particular instruction is not from God, but Pauls own conclusion, which tells us right there that some of what he wrote was simply his own informed opinion rather than the divinely inspired Word of God delivered to him through the Holy Spirit. Unlike God, Paul is a product of his time, condemned then for theological liberalism and now for theological conservatism, while remaining always the same Paul preaching the same doctrines.
None of that is to dismiss Paul, merely an acknowledgement that he does not share Gods inerrancy, nor did he ever claim to do so. The Holy Spirit DID grant Paul great insight and powerful messages, such as “Receive those weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things,” or, perhaps more appropriate here,
“For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.”
Finally, I am thinking, as I have for too long, that the greatest menace to the Church today is the ravening wolves infesting and infecting it with secular politics to the exclusion of Christ and His gospel: How many souls are the people who claim a monopoly on the Great Commission winning to Christ? Because every survey in recent memory shows people leaving the Church in droves because when people habitually and systematically libel the Living Lord with impunity non-Christians believe their claims to speak for Christ. The declared motive is to grow the Church that it is instead SHRINKING, often because those who will not embrace evil simply because it is ascribed to God leave, but sometimes because congregations expel members devoted to God for the grave sin of violating the voting guides that somehow find their way to the pews every two years or so. While Paul was as fallible as anyone, Jesus is not, and it was He who reminded us that a tree is known by its fruit: What strange fruit is this?
I am no mans judge, but if forced to choose between someone too impious to even recite the Apostles Creed at a state funeral or someone who repudiates that person for Christs sake, I stand with Christ.
Thanks Herb!
I’m not too familiar with the reasons God made Deborah a judge if indeed the texts give us a clue at all. But could it have been recompense for His people’s irresponsible leadership? This notion wouldn’t seem to have demeaned the value of femininity, only misapply it to make a point.
Consider the reasons He gave His people their king Saul?
I wholly agree that there is a “…menace to the Church today [which] is the ravening wolves infesting and infecting it with secular politics to the exclusion of Christ and His gospel,” though we might disagree about where it would be on the scale of relevance. 🙂
I would only question your statement: “The declared motive is to grow the Church that it is instead SHRINKING…” If you’re referencing the Great Commission, as it’s called, I can’t square what you claim to be Christ’s disciples’ motive with the text:
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you…” [Matt. 28:19-20]
I see the command here to make disciples as a primary objective rather than to evangelize. While belief is something that grows as well, discipleship is a skill that is developed through training, learning and application. I believe that’s what Paul felt his commission was as well.