Because Christianity is bigger than Biblical manhood or Biblical womanhood (Blog of Retha Faurie)

John Piper said (bold mine):

So when God created man and woman he made us the way we are — with the differences of manhood and womanhood — so that we would be suited for these complementary roles (and for the other expressions of complementarity outside marriage). In this drama man was meant to play the role of Christ, and the woman was meant to play the role of his bride the church.

And we have stressed for five weeks now that these differences are not the result of sin. … Before sin ever entered the world God ordained and fitted Adam to be a loving, caring, strong leader for his wife Eve. And before sin entered the world God ordained and fitted Eve to be a partner who supports and honors that leadership and helps carry it through…

Firstly, a question: Is Piper teaching that God wanted humans to sin, so he made one of the two to exemplify a repentant sinner?

Then, an observation:

Piper says in a world without sin, without man or woman, a man was made to exemplify the redeemer from sin, and a woman to exemplify the sinners who get redeemed. God did not make man play the role of the Redeemer because of sin, nor did women have to play the role of the redeemed because of sin. Even if nobody ever sinned, it would still have been right to let the man play the role of the Redeemer from sin, and the woman of the redeemed.

Huh???

You could as well tell me the TV was invented in order to show a documentary of the negative effects too much TV has; because the inventor wanted to keep people from watching too much TV.

Advertisements

Comments on: "John Piper, you make no logical sense on gender roles – Part 1" (3)

  1. ”In this drama man was meant to play the role of Christ, and the woman was meant to play the role of his bride the church.”

    Piper makes an interesting jump. Before the man and woman sinned, they had no need of a savior. The need for Christ had not yet arisen. But Piper says that the man was created to model Christ the Savior. Forget that Scriptures never say this in Genesis or anywhere really. It has to be read into something. Let’s deal with the assumption that God has determined already (in Piper’s thinking) that the Christ is definitely going to be needed. This causes a problem with God’s having given humans the freedom to choose.

    In Genesis, it seems quite clear to me that God put no pressure on the humans to sin. If anything God stated several time what they were NOT to do giving them much encouragement NOT to sin. And a savior was not mentioned until AFTER they sinned. Piper’s idea does not fit in with what Scripture actually says.

    In addition, we know that Piper and CBMW comps take this idea from Eph. 5. However, Paul’s admonishment to husbands to love their wives with the same devotedness as Christ loves the church, cannot logically be interpreted as Paul telling husbands to take on a role of a spiritual savior to their wives. Adding in the concept that wives are to take on a role of fallen humanity toward their supposed savior husbands equally chopsuey’s logic.

    31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[c] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church.

    This also cannot logically be an admonition to husbands to become saviors and wives represent fallen humanity. This is merely saying that Christ’s love for the church is like the love of a man leaving his parents to become united to his wife and living as ONE. IN Christ we are to become ONE just as the Father and Son are One unified unit. Marriage is a complementary unit of two living as one.

    It’s so sad, that in their desire to promote male superiority they take precious pictures of God’s Love and destroy it with ideas of who does and doesn’t have power and control.

    Like

  2. […] John Piper asserts women were made, right from the start, to represent the church, and man to represent Christ. (Why his view is logically untenable can be found here.) […]

    Like

  3. I’m absolutely certain that hardcore Calvinists would have no problem with this–because the process of sin and redemption was ordained from before creation for supralapsarians. 😛 Because a 6-syllable word helps us allll understand Jesus better. 😛

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: