The recent article The Bible’s high view of women rooted in the creation account generated a lot of feedback, both positive and negative. Deb H., Australia, wrote in, saying:

I felt sad as I read this article. As an egalitarian Christian, I am disappointed to see CMI take a preferred position on the issue of ‘gender roles’ other than the obvious biological ones. This has taken the shine off CMI for me, although we have been steady supporters for about 30 years. I don’t feel comfortable being associated with an organization that favours an hierarchical church.

Under the New Covenant, we are all priests of the kingdom (1 Pet 2:9). We are also free in Christ, to serve with all our gifts, whatever they may be… gifts which have not been distributed according to gender, skin-colour or privilege.

By limiting women in Christ’s service, CMI does no better than the evolutionists who argued that dark races were inferior and only suited to service, or that women had not been subject to sufficient selection of the fittest, and thus were not optimally evolved.

As Creationists, we hold the higher moral ground in accepting that God has made of one blood all nations of men (Act 17:26), but do we include women in this generous anti-discriminatory edict, or do we say they are “equal…BUT”? If some members of a group are restricted and operate under bans, then they are NOT equal, despite all affirmations.

Many golden Christian principles are violated by arbitrary limits and rules, such as:

“love your neighbour as yourself”

“do unto others as you would be done unto”

“esteem others as better than yourself”

“in honour, prefer one another”

 “submit every man to his neighbour”

Who is my neighbour? Anyone but a woman?….

Continue Reading on