Complementarianism is one of the most destructive ideologies in modern church history. I pass up no opportunity to mock it, refute it, and challenge it. You can read other articles where I have more specifically refuted the very foundations of complementarianism [1]; here I only intend to show the lunacy of secondary arguments for complementarian beliefs. I will explain and deconstruct some of the dumbest arguments for complementarianism and unilateral submission of wives to husbands, or women to men in general, that I have ever heard, besides the pitiful misunderstanding of Ephesians 5 that complementarians have often presented to me.
I want to highlight that all of these points are argued from out of narratives. Narratives alone solely describe events; by themselves they do not prescribe moral judgments.
Creation Sequence
The order of creation in Genesis 2 does not tell us anything except that creation occurred in a certain order. If a being created first automatically deserves a more authoritative position than what comes after, then all of us humans need to submit to plants and fish, men and women alike. Non sequiturs abound when complementarians use this pathetic argument, unsurprisingly! That God made Eve to help Adam in no way disproves the teaching of mutual submission in marriage or the fact that men and women are not different beyond their bodily anatomy and physiology. How is egalitarianism falsified by this? It can't be since Genesis 2 isn't even a prescriptive part of the Bible; it is merely a description of the historical creation of humanity. Adam and Eve were intended to rule the garden of Eden, and the whole earth by extension (Genesis 1:26-28), together, not in some gender-based hierarchy:
Genesis 1:26-28--"Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.' So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, 'Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.'"
Yahweh is no sexist deity, for he imbued both men and women with his divine image and gave them both the same commission. All of us, men and women alike, are called to manage God's creation for the glory of God (1 Corinthians 10:31). God does not discriminate in giving talents. Humans have no basis for discriminating against one gender in the application of those talents, therefore.
Adam Naming Eve
Because Adam was created before Eve, he simply decided to name her. As I proved above, nothing about the creation sequence necessitates the erroneous belief of complementarianism, and, likewise, nothing about Adam naming Eve because he existed before she did means that women must not lead men or that men and women should not practice mutual submission. Again, this argument rests on a major non sequitur. It just does not follow. Adam and Eve were still both equally God's image bearers and equally tasked with stewarding the planet.
Temptation Of Eve
As with the previous two fallacy-filled arguments, an argument for complementarianism based upon the fact that Eve succumbed to temptation fails. First of all, this doesn't follow from the text. Second, just because one woman or man is one way doesn't mean all of them are. To say otherwise commits the fallacy of composition. Women do not have some tendency to be or want to be deceived just because they are women, just as men do not have a tendency to want truth just because they are men. Thus, women do not need men to guide them, just as men do not need women to guide them. What we are all told to do is mutually submit to each other, men and women alike, out of "reverence for Christ" (Ephesians 5:21), not because we are helpless and lost without people who have different genitals (non-physical characteristics of "masculinity" and "femininity" do not exist; see below), but because we are spiritual and intellectual equals who serve the same God together.
Logic utterly disproves any absurd claim that someone has certain personality, mental, or spiritual characteristics simply for being a man or woman; reason proves that it does not follow from having a male or female body that any of these traits will be found, enabling people to see through the hollow lies of social conditioning and cultural constructs--and that examples of people who clearly do not have the natures complementarianism ascribes to them exist in abundance. Without there being any innate non-physical differences between men and women, the entire basis for gender roles and gender-specific moral obligations falls apart [2], not that roles logically follow from personality differences anyway. Since there are none, as logic reveals, and as the Bible confirms with its egalitarian theology that contradicts gender stereotypes of all eras.
Egalitarianism, not complementarianism, is logically and Biblically correct. Men and women are not called to live under the sexist, fallacious, irrational, unbiblical claims that complementarians must accept in order to maintain belief in their errors. All it takes to see through the lies of complementarianism is a rational mind.
[1]. See here:
A. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/02/why-ephesians-5-does-not-teach-rigid.html
B. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/08/book-criticism-preparing-to-be-help.html
[2]. See here for a handful of the articles I explain this in:
A. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/05/on-alleged-differences-between-men-and.html
B. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/10/women-are-not-mysterious.html
C. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/11/sexuality-in-marriage-part-3-gender-lies.html
No comments:
Post a Comment