I’ve been reading this book called Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood for about a year (You can read it for free here). It’s taking me forever, but I thought I’d share something I keyed in on from the book when I was reading it at lunch a few weeks ago.
In my most recent post, I wrote about my Dirtbag and the things I experienced while with him, but I also mentioned that I have a theory about why romance is probably the #1 obstacle to women’s faith. Here’s the theory:
Eve’s original sin isn’t necessarily just disobeying God’s command not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The real problem was her attempt to snatch authority that does not belong to her. She sets herself up as a rival to God because the serpent urges her that if she eats the fruit, she will be elevated in such a way as to be equal to God.
Isn’t that the foundation Evangelical Feminism is built upon? Man has authority as the leader (of the family, the church, etc…), and therefore, I must take it from him (or at least share in his leadership) in order to become equal… as far as I can tell, that’s the main issue.
Eve should never have entered into this conversation. I’m pretty sure I’m stealing this idea from the Mars Hill Doctrine series, but I know for a fact that I enter into conversations that I should never be in. Why was she talking to the serpent? Under what circumstances is that a good idea? I don’t know. Yet I’m foolish enough to follow her path.
Finally, (I’m going to talk about men now) another piece of the fall story is that Adam wasn’t fulfilling his role as the head. Where was he when Eve was talking to the serpent? Oughtn’t he to have been protecting his wife? It says that she eats the fruit and gives some also to her husband who was with her. He was there and could have fulfilled his role as head, but instead gave her his responsibility. When God calls Adam to account, he throws his lady under the bus and even hints that the original sin was God’s fault because He gave Adam the woman who led him into disobedience.
If the original sin was an issue with gender roles, it makes sense that the same issue plagues us today. In my opinion, that original confusion and distortion of gender roles is the reason romance is so gosh darn difficult. We still don’t get it. I certainly don’t.
So my theory is that romance is THE spiritual issue for women (and probably men too) BECAUSE the original sin was one having to do with roles in romance. I remember years and years ago, Friend Steve saying something about how dating was the make or break issue with so many people who ended up leaving the church. I agree with him.
I’ve had a lot of conversations lately with ladies at my church about what’s going on in their relationships with God, and EVERY one of them said something about romance. Granted, I’m talking mostly to single women, but I think there’s an argument to be made that a problem with role acceptance in relationships with people probably indicates a similar problem with accepting our role with Creator.
Now, let’s apply this to my post about Dirtbag Jason. When I started spending time with him, I knew that he wasn’t in a position to lead me spiritually since he wasn’t even a Christian. Yet I decided that I’d do the missionary dating thing. I’d LEAD him to god. I was going to be the spiritual leader in the relationship, which (even if it had worked, and he had come to know Christ) was a bad idea. It was setting us up for an innappropriate relationship that didn’t display covenant love as romance should. Also, I was being super impatient and initiating things that God was meant to initiate. With God, I decided to be the leader & push myself into romance because that’s what I wanted… even if it wasn’t what He wanted. I was trying to force – to lead.
I don’t have a nice conclusion to tie up the loose ends here, so…