Gender and the Fall

There some passages of Scripture that are just hard to get around. They are fundamental to our understanding of Christianity and are foundational to all of our doctrines. Without them or in diminishing them many other underlying doctrines fall apart. One such passage is the account of the fall. Found in Genesis 3, it explains why man is not in perfect fellowship with God, why the world is full of pain and suffering and ultimately why Christ had to become human in flesh and die on the cross. Without the Fall, man is not lost in sin and Jesus had no need to make propitiation for sin. I was thinking about this issue when Dr. Mark Talbot was dealing with the curse of God on man at the Fall and how that applies to us in a post-cross world. This is the passage in question, one of the most familiar events in the Bible but one that doesn't get nearly enough attention (perhaps because it is so well known):

Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." To the woman he said, "I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return." The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. (Gen 3:13-20)

So here is the curse in a nutshell: God tells the serpent that an offspring of the woman will be his enemy and ultimately will crush his head (i.e. Christ). The woman is going to bear children in pain and be ruled over by her husband. The man is going to have to struggle and sweat to coax food out of the ground, which implies that prior to the Fall the ground yielded up food without effort. For the serpent, his fate is sealed. It would take four thousand some odd years but ultimately the Son of God would crush His head at the cross. For the man and woman, they were being cast out of the perfect fellowship with God and into a world where nature itself was at odds with them. The world they inhabit and we inhabit is tainted with sin, groaning under it until the time when it will be made anew.

So what does that have to do with gender roles?

Not trying to be a misogynist but the curse is clear. God cursed the serpent for his deceit of the woman. God cursed the woman for eating the fruit in direct and willful disobedience of what God has said. God cursed the man for listening to his wife instead of obeying God. One sin, three curses but most of the church recognizes the one sin but only recognizes 2 1/2 of the curses. The result of the curse is demonstrated in a couple of passages in the New Testament having to do with gender roles and directly applying to the first three chapters of Genesis.

Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. (1 Tim 2: 11-14, emphasis added)

For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. (1Co 11:7-12, emphasis added)

The covering of a woman's head and the prohibition against leading/teaching are a direct result of the events of the first three chapters of the Bible. Let’s be clear. Headcovering is entirely about the Fall and the creation order and has zero to do with culture and the church in Corinth. Paul's restrictions on women leading and teaching in the church and home tie back to the Fall and the order of creation. Man was created in the image of God from the dust. Woman was created out of man. The woman is cursed to be ruled over by her husband and suffer pain in childbirth. You don't have to like it but you can't ignore it.

This speaks to the broader issues of gender roles in the church and the home. Women not teaching or having authority over men is not a cultural issue from the first century. It goes back to the very beginning. God told the woman that her desire would be for her husband and that he would rule over her. That is precisely what is being repeated in the gender role passages.

Well, one might argue a couple of things here. One is that the curse was upon Eve and not upon all women. The other is that the curse was lifted at the cross and therefore that curse is not applicable in a post-cross world.

I only have one follow-up question to that: have you ever been in a maternity ward?

All women, Christian or not, suffer great pain in childbirth and it is not some random evolutionary adaptation. It is a curse. Even if you dull it with drugs, it still looks pretty painful from where I was watching it take place eight times. People will deny that husbands rule over their wives until they are blue in the face, stomping their foot because it is not fair but those same people would not be so silly as to claim that childbirth is not painful. The pain in child birth and the rule of the husband are inextricably linked. Pretending that the gender roles don't exist makes as much sense as pretending child birth doesn't hurt.

So here is the deal. I will say it is OK for women to pray with their heads uncovered and to lead in the church and home just as soon as the ground gives up food without work and birthing a baby stops hurting. Fair enough?