Sunday 02 • 03 • 19

When no bush of the field was yet in the land, and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground. And a mist was going up from the land and was watering the whole face of the ground. Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. And the man became a living creature, and the Lord God planted a garden in Eden in the East, and there he put the man whom he had formed. Then the Lord God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone I will make him a helper fit for him. Now out of the ground, the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam, there was not found a helper fit for him. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man. And while he slept, took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man, he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, this at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called woman because she was taken out of the man. — Genesis 2:5-8, 16-23

For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. — 1 Timothy 2:13-14

For man was not made from woman, but woman from man, neither was man created for woman, but woman from man. — 1 Corinthians 11:8-9

The word of our magnificent Lord. Thanks be to God.

Would you pray with me? Father, I pray that the words of my mouth, the meditations of all of our hearts would be pleasing and acceptable in Your sight. Lord, You are our rock and our fortress and our Redeemer. We pray these things in Jesus' name. Amen.

Several years ago, the Chicago Tribune featured an article called "Forget There's Beauty in Asymmetry." Asymmetry, which means when things are not mirror images of one another. And the writer, Stephanie Shapiro, puts it this way. She says, "From a Japanese rock garden to actress Drew Barrymore's crooked smile, the visual universe brims with lopsided masterpieces. Together, these images undermine the airbrushed and unattainable measures of perfection found in glossy magazines, unreformed shelter publications, the minds of those who equate coordinated suits, dishes, and lamps with a sense of control."

Now, the article goes on to say that there's something about we think symmetry is what is most beautiful. And yet there have been all these studies on how the people who are some of the most famous people in our culture, and sometimes the most attractive, are actually people whose faces are not symmetrical. So we're going to look at some slides, and I'll show you what these are. So in the middle, this is Eleanor Roosevelt. In the middle is the real picture of Eleanor Roosevelt. On the left side is a picture where someone has taken the left side of her face and made a mirror image of it. And on the right side is someone who has taken the right side of her face and made a mirror image of it.

And we're going to look at several of these to see: is symmetry always the most attractive? This is Ted Gunn. Sarah Jessica Parker. Tony Blair. Not as attractive, right? Billie Holiday. The last one. Robert De Niro. Maybe not the most attractive person, all right? But there are all these—if you look at images of Tina Fey and Ryan Gosling and Izzy Azalea and Harry Styles, all these famous people, their faces are not symmetrical, and yet they're considered attractive to us.

And here's the question we're going to ask today: Is there something attractive or beautiful about asymmetry when it comes to gender? Could there be something beautiful in asymmetry when it comes to gender?

Why Genesis 2 Again?

So today we're going to look at Genesis chapter 2, as we just heard. And you may think, "Why are we doing this?" We've gone through this series. This is week five in our series on gender, and we've done three weeks on creation. Last week we talked about the fall, and the next three weeks we're talking about redemption. And so it may seem odd that we would go back to Genesis 2. I mean, the fall in Genesis 3—it's very well articulated how the fall affects gender relationships: the woman's desire will be for the man and he will rule over her. There are some words there about distortion in relationships. So one might think, why would we be preaching on Genesis 2 again for life in the modern church?

Life in this on this side of the fall, in restoration and redemption—why would this apply to us? There's only one reason that we would do that: because the Bible does it. The Bible, over and over in the New Testament, we're going to look at today, refers back to Genesis chapter two and says, "Look here. God has created two equal, asymmetrical image bearers who find glory in unity and diversity. And yet God points here and says there's beauty in this asymmetry." There's beauty in it, even in the modern church.

So today, I'm going to do something really dangerous. I'm going to try to say something definitive and positive about what makes a man and what makes a woman. This is really dangerous ground, and I'm going to do so by touching briefly on some of the most controversial passages in the Bible: First Corinthians eleven and First Timothy two. They're in your bulletin. They'll be on the screen during the sermon. These passages are usually the touch points of major debates in the church about what a woman can or cannot do in the church. Today, I'm just going to tiptoe around that gigantic sinkhole like this—because I want to say something positive. I want to say something positive about what it means to be a woman and what it means to be a man. There are helpful things here for us about gender specialties. And Paul cites details back from Genesis chapter two when he walks through what does it mean to be a man and a woman, and he does so for the church.

Gender Specialties and the Three Grand Asymmetries

So here's my outline, if you're going to take notes—and I urge you, please take notes, because you will want to quiz me afterward about what I'm talking about. We're going to look at the asymmetries of gender: the three grand asymmetries of gender as highlighted in the New Testament. Asymmetries of origin, order, and intent.

Before I do so, though, I want to explain what I mean this morning by gender specialties. I'm going to use that language over and over again. What are gender specialties? A specialty is a role. Gender comes in specialties. A specialty is something that we all might do, all of us might do sometimes, but the specialist focuses on especially doing this in relationship. We may do things for one another—men and women—that are the same. But here's what we're going to see: the magic happens when we lean into the gender specialties. The magic in relationships. Just as physically males and females need both types of hormones—both androgen and estrogen—but in different amounts, gender specialties are things which we all can do, oftentimes we all do, and yet when leaned into as specialties, they're the secret sauce. This is the stuff that propels relationships in the church and in marriage.

Now the problem of talking about gender specialties in this cultural moment is that any time you say there's a difference between genders and there's a specialty related to either gender, there's a huge argument that you enter into almost immediately. And you do so because in our society, we can't distinguish between essence and function. We can't distinguish between what is ontologically the case and what's a role. And so, if you've spent any time in the military, you have language for this, but mostly in our culture we don't.

In the military, there's a term where we say, "Salute the uniform, not the person." Do you know what that means? It means that you're giving respect to the office, to the role, but you're able to distinguish between the role and the person. There's an essence to this person that is not the role. And that person may be somebody you have a hard time respecting, and yet you still respect the role. And this is important for us because gender specialties are things that we put on like a role, like a uniform, and they are for one another in relationship.

God created two equal asymmetrical image bearers. That's a statement of ontology. But God gives gender specialties. That's a statement of role or function. And these are things we could put on in particular contexts for the good of one another, for the glory of God. The reason we act in gendered ways in relationships is something we can give one another that we don't have by ourselves.

The categories I'm going to use today come from the writings and research of a really good friend of mine, Sam Andreatus, who was a pastor for many years at the Village Church in New York. Sam and I went through the assessment center to plant a church together. He's a brilliant guy and has done a lot of work because where he pastored—in Greenwich Village in New York—they were in a full-blown gender revolution in the early 2000s, just that the rest of the country is doing right now. So he has had years and years of experience thinking through how gender matters in relationship.

He did a doctoral thesis on that question, where he did studies looking at people who had been in monogamous gay relationships for years and who left those over time to gay men who became married to women. And he did all this research. You'll never hear anybody else talk about this, but his book Engendered is a lot of his studies. He calls it DSM studies—Does Sexuality Matter? And asking this question: does gender matter in relationship? What's the difference between being, for that man, in a monogamous gay relationship with being married to someone of the opposite gender. What he found is there's a lot. There's a lot in the secret sauce of gender specialties and roles. And a lot of his stuff is the backbone of the series. I'd highly recommend this book. There's no way I can give you all the great stuff of his research in these sermons. But I highly recommend this if you want to see it. It's up here afterward.

He highlights these three asymmetries of gender we're going to look at today: the asymmetry of origin, asymmetry of order and asymmetry of intent. And we're going to look and find the specialties that come out of each of those.

Asymmetry of Origin

Genesis two pictures two different things in the creation of man and woman. Genesis 2:5-8 highlights the creation of man, Adam, out of the dust of the earth where God blows into him the breath of life, and he becomes a living being. The second passage there in Genesis two highlights the creation of woman from Adam out of his body.

You may think like, okay, that's fascinating. So what? First Corinthians 11 highlights this and says this matters. This matters for the redeemed people of God.

For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. — 1 Corinthians 11:8

Paul's highlighting the facts of their origin as significant. Well, significant in what way?

Imagine the scene. Here's Adam, who is restless as he names the animals. He's given a role within the creation order where God says, "I want you to go and identify and name all the animals." Now naming is a complicated task because it involves both creativity and also science, taxonomy, ability to make distinctions. So Adam enters into this work of naming, separating, distinguishing, and there's a summary statement: there's no body fit for him. There's no one suitable.

So God puts him—verse 21 in this passage—into a deep sleep. The language there, translated in the Greek version of the Old Testament, a book called the Septuagint, the word there for a deep sleep is the word ecstasis, which is where we get our word ecstasy. That's the root word of that. So what's pictured here is that the genesis of Eve, the beginning of Eve, comes out of a place of deep rest and ecstasy for the man, great pleasure. So much that when he wakes up, what are the first things he says to her? "At last." It's this exclamation of joy. There had been something that was missing and unresolved in him that was resolved by the making of her from his body. It answers the unrest that he had suffered.

And then he gives her a name. The climax points to the dynamics of their union—that she restores in him a type of divine rest, and he secures her with a name. And these function together. Adam secures Eve. Eve in some way is a home to him.

So this is the asymmetries of origin. I want to highlight the two of them: for the man, securing; for the woman, giving rest. Gender is for relationship, and gender is worked out in these specialties.

What Does This Mean?

Let me clarify both of those. So giving rest—what is in view there is not domesticity. It's not men bring home the bacon, women fry it up in the pan. That's not what's in view in that passage. It's only really since the nineteenth century that women in this country have been removed from the means of production and economics, such that if a woman gets a job today, in a lot of places, she struggles to find meaning and value and worth if she doesn't work, and if she does, to be paid an equal wage. But that's really only since the nineteenth century in this country, since the Industrial Revolution.

Before that, we were all farmers. Everybody's involved in production. Everybody's involved in the economy of production. So think even biblically about this. What's in view in giving rest is not domesticity. Again, Proverbs 31—if you've ever heard and grown up in the church, the Proverbs 31 woman—she's very much involved in economic work, in bringing value, financial value to her family. And we've got to be really careful.

There is no rigid dichotomy of the genders that has been honestly distorted by the church in a lot of places. The Bible never teaches that women shouldn't have careers outside the home. The Bible never teaches that men should have nothing to do with being a stay-at-home dad or household chores. We have to be careful that we stay where the Bible does in terms of how we talk about this.

It's rest-making, not domesticity that's womanly in the Bible. Not homemaking, but providing a place for context for reflection and restoration. On the other side of this, securing what Adam does as he names her is providing a context for her to have meaning and value. He says, "This is who you are and not that. You're not one of just the rest of the animals." He gives her value and worth.

So this idea of men providing, securing women—that can be very traditional. That can be very nontraditional. That can be everything from marauding dragons to making coffee. First Peter 3 tells particularly to husbands:

Husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman. — 1 Peter 3

In an understanding way? So let's ask these questions for the two arenas the Bible sets us apart in: in marriage and in church life, single or married.

So that means for men, securing a woman in marriage means asking questions like this: What will make my wife secure? What communicates to her that I value her, that I want to hear from her, I want to know her, I want to promote her?

In the church, single or married, we have to ask these questions. Is our community group a place where women's voices are valued and given full weight and understood? Are women honored in our church? Are women's voices welcomed into leadership decisions in our church? I think the measure of a church, honestly, in a lot of ways can be measured by how well women are treated and how much their value is affirmed in the life of a congregation.

This theme of securing and giving rest is repeated in lots of places in the Bible. Let me highlight a positive and a negative example of this.

Negatively, think of Samson and Delilah in the book of Judges. Samson—strong guy, long hair. Delilah, the Philistine woman he ends up dating, we could say. And so he finds no rest in her home. Over and over again, what happens? He's awakened in the middle of the night at her permission-giving, so that Philistines could come and try to capture him. Over and over, he finds no rest in her home, and he ultimately only finds rest toward the end of his life in a dungeon. That's the only place he finds rest.

But positively speaking, I can think of Elisha and the Shunamite woman. Elisha, in 2 Kings, was a prophet of God who was charged with raising up others, holding the torch for God's people and speaking God's Word. And there's this couple, but it's particularly the woman in the couple, the Shunamite woman, who identifies that this man needs care, needs a place of rest, and needs a place of restoration. And she has built onto her house an extra room for Elisha to come and rest in with a bed and a desk and a place for restoration and a place for reflection. What is she doing? She's acting in a gendered way toward this prophet and allowing and promoting him.

The Asymmetry of Order

This is the asymmetry of origin. Number two: the asymmetry of order. You guys hanging in with me? Write these down. The asymmetry of order. The second distinction we find in Genesis 2 that is identified as important in the New Testament is pointing back to a birth order in Genesis 2—that Adam came first, that he was born first.

Now I know for us we're like, "Okay, he was born first. What does that matter?" But look at 1 Timothy 2:13-14:

For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but a woman was deceived and became a transgressor. — 1 Timothy 2:13-14

I know I'm crazy for putting that up on the wall and just mentioning it in an offhanded way in a sermon. Like, that is high-level explosive material, right? And it's a Pandora's box of challenges that I'm going to deal with more next week. So come back.

But for our purposes, this is what C.S. Lewis identifies out of this passage: The man is always older. He was created first. So what, right? In our culture that means nothing. But in biblical terminology, the firstborn of a household was charged with responsibility and accountability after the death of the head of the household for all the other members. Responsible and accountable for taking care of everybody else. There's a huge weight put on the firstborn—not as some incredible honor, but actually a really heavy burden.

And this is why this language is used in Colossians 1 to describe Jesus as the firstborn of all of his people, everything and everybody. He has authority over all of it.

And not because he's first person ever born, but because he's given all the responsibility and accountability. This issue of firstborn authority touches on what is probably the hardest issue for us to talk about: in gendered relationships, who gets to lead? This is one the church has a hard time debating, and for good reason. A lot of people look at Genesis chapter three, where the woman will have desire for the man and he will rule over her, and say, look, there's all kinds of distortion. There's all kinds of coercion. There's all kinds of manipulation and competition that comes from this. Why would we ever say anything but egalitarian in every way? I mean, I understand that. But Genesis three is not prophetic. It's not determinative. It's not fate. It says this is the tendency. This is going to be the temptation. This is the thing to watch out for, but it's not fate.

See, so if you ask the question, why does anybody need to be over anyone else? Why in a relationship of love would he exert his will over hers? We have to follow the pattern of what's in Scripture and listen and make sure we're hearing really what it says.

Remember equality. Remember I said this a couple weeks ago: what we see in the Bible is not guys are great, women are bad. What we see is two equal image bearers—not asymmetrical ones. Remember, she gets the same spirit as he does. She has the same spiritual gifts as he does. Women prophesied like men in the New Testament. They received revelation. They led in worship.

And yet, in all parts of the Old Testament and its history, the office of king and priest—the institutionalized leadership and representation of the covenant community—are asymmetrically reserved for men. And Jesus has countercultural relationships, by a long shot, with any other men in his day: the way he included women in his teaching, in his inner circle, the way he took them with him, the way that women are portrayed in his parables, the way that they are portrayed in the Gospels—wholly positive.

And yet, they're not named among the 12 apostles. They're not named among the early leaders of the church. And finally, in the rest of the New Testament, it's the same. Women are fully participating in worship, but are not among the elders who judge the prophets. We'll get into more of that next week.

But if he's firstborn, what does that mean? And we're gonna look back at this passage. It means accountability. Now that's not how this is taught a lot of times. This is taught as if the guy is saying, I get to decide. I'm in charge. Well, let's read the fine print of this passage.

First Timothy two:14 says something that I think has been missed a lot in current conversations in the church about gender. Have you heard people say things like this: who's really responsible for the fall? Is it Adam or Eve? Who's blamed for it? Come on, talk to me. Well, Eve is normally who's blamed, right? But look at First Timothy two.

Eve was deceived; by implication, who was not deceived? Adam. — 1 Timothy 2:14

Adam goes into the situation eyes wide open to what's going on. She's deceived, but he goes in and willfully sins and breaks God's law in this area. He trespasses. And so in Romans chapter five, when it talks about who's responsible for everything, Eve isn't even mentioned.

Sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned. — Romans 5:12

Here's what's curious: Eve may have been deceived, but Adam as federal head of all sinners, as firstborn, is entirely made accountable for the fall—entirely in the Bible.

Headship, firstborn leadership is not "what I say goes." It's accountable leadership. It's accountable leadership.

So men, you're going to hear a lot of things about what it means to be a man in this culture. What you're supposed to do. Men, what are you supposed to do? What does it mean to be a real man? It's like make a lot of money, have a big truck with really big tires, right? Like score with women, be successful. I mean, that's boys who shave. But this is what we find from gender specialty number two.

Your gender specialty, men, is accountable leadership. Accountable leadership, responsibility, accountability. This is how—if you've gone through the men's study that meets on Thursday mornings here—this is how Robert Lewis defines it. I love this. He says, this is what acting in a gendered way in relationship looks like for men: rejecting passivity, accepting responsibility. That's it. That's exactly it.

The other side of this—let's talk about what we see the gender specialty of women coming from the asymmetry of order. And it's this: woman as promoter. Now I like that term much better than actually the word that's used in First Timothy two, which is submission.

Submission is a biblical word, but it has connotations in our culture for subjection and domination and is entirely too passive. This isn't the Quran, people. In the Quran, men are told how to make their wives submit. The Bible doesn't call that. The Bible is a call to gender specialty as a gift that is hers to give or not give. Promoting is a gift she can give or she can choose not to. It's not mindless. It's not blind. In marriage, it's unto the Lord. It's an active process of determining God's will. Women don't promote all men, especially fools. She promotes him as he seeks to love and lead, to take responsibility and accountability.

See, Christ doesn't want passive men in his church, and he also doesn't want passive women. Neither of those are pleasing. Women, as bold promoters, this is all over Scripture. Let me point to a beautiful story in the Old Testament. Abigail, first Samuel 25. Abigail's got a fool for a husband. His name is Nabal, and he provokes a young man who's a leader and a military leader named David. You might have heard of him, like eventually becoming king, right? David and his men are provoked by him, and Abigail intervenes. Abigail very wisely goes and appeals to David and turns him away from a rash and foolhardy and actually destructive decision, and in doing so promotes a king and is very much honored within Scripture for the way that she is about promoting him. See, this is the model. Equal image bearers, equally charged with dominion over creation, and yet man is charged to take charge and representation for her sake. She is charged to promote him to that place of responsibility for his sake.

Now this is really hard to do in a Christian home. This is really hard to do in a church. What I find a lot of times—this is like dancing. Have you ever tried to couples dance? This was terrible for me in dance and gym in high school. You end up stepping all over each other's feet. And yet when you watch people who are really good at dancing together, who really are coordinated, who really work together, it's beautiful. It can be exhilarating. It can be breathtaking. And God has given us again these gender specialties, not for damage, but for coordination and beauty and life.

The Asymmetry of Intent

So asymmetry of origin, asymmetry of order, now asymmetry of intent. This is the last distinction in Genesis chapter two that's pointed out in the New Testament. What is that? It's this: both image bearers equally tasked with God's call in Genesis one.

Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, have dominion over the birds of the air, fish the sea, and over every living thing that moves on the earth. — Genesis 1

They're to do this together, and yet again, the New Testament highlights the difference. Let's go back to one Corinthians eleven. See, one Corinthians eleven:eight-nine—we read verse eight just a minute ago, but verse nine highlights asymmetry, but this time asymmetry of intent with regard to God's mission.

Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. — 1 Corinthians 11:9

What does it mean here in this statement? Don't misunderstand this. This is a dangerous verse to take out of context. It doesn't mean that—like, I have a nice piece of cake for you. I have this woman for you. She is for your use and consumption. No, no, no. That is not at all what's meant by this passage. She's meant for the mission.

Here's picture again. Here's Adam, the firstborn, who is tasked by God with this mission—with this be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, have dominion. He can't do this on his own. Any of it. And this is why God twice in this passage says, "There's no suitable partner, no suitable helper for him. No nothing is fit to help him. He's not able to do these things on his own." And she's not made for his purposes. She is made because he could not do what he was made to do.

He is initiator. That's the gender specialty that comes for men from this mission, from this asymmetry of intent. And yet, see, this is what we see in this passage. They are given overlapping and complementary, separate and overlapping contours. He's the who receives the calling, and yet she is—and this is the word I want you to know—Ezer. This is the translation in Hebrew for the word helper or helpmeet. Say that word: Ezer. Ezer. Ezer. I was a terrible Hebrew student, by the way, but this is one you better know from Hebrew. This is a good word.

Ezer is a word that means help. And it's kind of a passive word in English. It's a really powerful word in Hebrew. When the 12 tribes crossed the Jordan River, they stack up these stones, and they stack them up. It's called an Ebenezer. We sing Ebenezer. It's Ebenezer, which means "stone of help."

This far has God brought us.

Over and over, this word Ezer is applied most often in the Bible to God and God in the context of His might and power. This is not a weak word. When you hear "helper," don't picture a little helper. This is what's pictured: the woman possesses a divine power and ability that comes right alongside this man that allows them together to complete this mission. She is essential to this work.

I talk to a lot of young men who are trying to figure out what does it mean for me to be a man in this culture? And that's a hard question. They'd like to open up the Bible and find a verse that says "be a man," and here's what it is. I have a verse for you. Because this appears in one place in all the Bible. Did you know that?

Be a man. Keep the charge of the Lord your God, walking in His ways and keeping His word. — 1 Kings 2

David is dying, and he pulls aside his son Solomon, and his opening words are, "Be a man." And this is what he says. That's the closest thing I can find in the Bible to "initiator"—take on God's tasks.

And the closest thing we can get to "be a woman" is this phrase: Ezer. This word Ezer. And it's nothing like the demure stereotype of the Christian Stepford Wife.

Deborah: A Picture of Ezer

This is Deborah. You know Deborah in the book of Judges? Deborah is contrasted with a man who's also a judge named Barak, who fails to engage in God's mission, who fails to call the people up and help deliberate, who fails to make the call about going to war.

Deborah, she's under a different oak tree, and she's ministering to the people, and she calls for and summons the general Barak. He comes to her, and he's like, "I don't know if we should do this or not." She's like, "We got to go to war." He's like, "Okay, but I'll only go if you go with me." And she says, "Okay, but you know who's going to get honor for this? A woman today."

And what is she doing in that moment? She's acting as Ezer with all kinds of power and authority and strength to say, "We got a mission to fulfill, and we better get on mission."

Real Leadership in Marriage

Let me say this with regard to marriage and the church. In marriage, men are foolish when we go down this road of "headship means I'm the boss. I must lead in everything." Real manly leadership means wisdom to listen well, to steward her gifts to the maximum potential.

You know, she may be better with finances, and you'd be an idiot if you did the finances. You may be better with the children, with shopping. A wise initiator in God's mission says, "I know her. I know what she's good at. I want to promote her on God's mission together."

Women in the Church

And women, the same applies with regard to the church. Can I just time out here and tell you on a personal note how life-giving it's been to our elders to have the commissioned women that we've set apart in this congregation come to our shepherding team meetings and help us with the shepherding load of this church?

We've been doing this for a year and a half, and I would never go back. It provided so much wisdom and capacity to our elders to step into difficult situations with men and women and be able to walk alongside them. Those voices have been really, really helpful for us.

We need Ezers in our church, and we need initiators in our church.

Gender Specialties Reviewed

Let me review the gender specialties in a couple words. Remember, these are not essentialist qualities. These are for relationships.

From the asymmetry of origin: men are the secure; women are the res-giver.

From the asymmetry of order: men are the firstborn; women are the promoter.

From the asymmetry of intent: men are the initiator; women are the Ezer.

Remember, these are, however, for the redeemed community only. And there's a reason for that. We don't necessarily take our gender specialties out into our world, out into the work world. One is because it's not safe.

Only in a Christian home and only in a Christian church where we're playing by the same rules—where we're saying repentance, forgiveness, prayer, submitting ourselves to the Lord—only under a covenant is it safe really for us to live and lean into these gendered specialties.

We don't look out in the world and say other people should have to do this. We look out and we say, "Would it be good to have a woman who's a president? Yeah, that'd be really good. That'd be really good."

We operate these within the context of the church. And that also doesn't mean it's always a safe place. Of course, because of sin, because of Genesis 3, there are distortions. There's competition instead of cooperation. There's coercion instead of partnership. There can be twisting into power plays and powerlessness. That's evil. But it's not surprising, is it?

Because we have a high definition of sin, it requires a lot of faith and a lot of wisdom to know how and when we exercise our gender in relationship.

I pray that we can grow as a community who more and more lean into the fact that we're made in God's image. Male and female, men and women with these gender specialties—these are good gifts. And we figure out how to steward them together.

A Pastoral Word to Men and Women

Last thing, and this is just a pastoral aside. One of your pastors, I meet a lot of passive men and a lot of frustrated women in the church today. Let me talk about both of those.

Men who have a hard time expressing passion about anything, who are willing to stand up and take leadership, who have their voices heard. I just feel like a lot of men are mired down by cultural sin and generational sin. Cultural sins that are just bombarding us: pornography, obsession with just having more stuff, men who are like big versions of middle schoolers with alcohol. There's just a great need.

Men, listen. You're going to need a big Jesus. You're going to need a big Jesus to overcome those things and to step into boldness and courage and trusting God's Word into these roles of being secure and firstborn and initiator. This is hard. I've got good news for you. You have the Holy Spirit, and you have Jesus, who is the ultimate securer, the ultimate firstborn, and the ultimate initiator. He's given you what you need in this community to try this together.

And women—man, I think you have it worse. There is a full out assault on womanhood. On the one hand, there are glass ceilings and gender discrimination. I know some of you are deeply frustrated with your work. I know that in some contexts, women feel like they have to be like a man in order to actually have their voice heard, in order for people to take them seriously.

And then you come over to the church, and in the church you get this pressure to fit into some weird 1950s norms. And you always feel wrong. You feel like you have to be like a supermodel, supermom, meek and mild, and it's an incredible trap. You hear voices like, "Hey, if you're single, there's something wrong with you." That's not biblical. Or you hear voices like, "If you're a woman who wants to have kids and go to work, hey, that's sometimes sinning." Or if you have kids and you want to stay at home, "There's something deficient in you." Man, I don't know how you guys win. It is rough.

And as one of your pastors, it hurts me to see how hard it is to be a woman in this culture. This is why I just want to tell you: you're also going to need a really big Jesus. You're going to need a really big Jesus to step into some of these gender specialties and trust Him, in order to be in a place where you're like, "It's okay for me to be a rest giver and a promoter and an ezer." Man, we need some more ezers in our church. We need promoters. But you're going to need a big Jesus to do that.

And here's the good news. You have the Holy Spirit living within you, and you have Jesus who is the ultimate rescuer, the ultimate promoter, and the ultimate one who empowers for God's mission.

You see, both men and women, we need Jesus. And both men and women, we get to play the Jesus role in our relationships with one another. It's going to take a lot of courage and a lot of trust and a lot of faith for us to work these out. But I can't wait to see what God does in our church as we lean into Him in these areas.

May He get all the glory. In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen.