Galatians 3:26-29, “On Equal Opportunity Salvation”

“You are all sons of God through Jesus Christ, ²⁷for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourself with Christ. ²⁸There is neither Jew or Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” -Galatians 3:26-29

A few years ago I took a class in philosophy at a local community college. This class touched on such philosophical classifications as theology, metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and politics, or how man organizes themselves in relation to one another. It was a fascinating class and I used the class somewhat to challenge my faith, and indeed I found it steadfast, though I will admit, somewhat shamefully, that obedience in this faith was not a direct result of my studies.

My professor was somewhat of a feminist and instead of a 4.0, I got a 3.9 due to one thing, that I referred to God as a “he.” This somehow offended her, and rather than make an issue out of it, I decided to, “choose my battles,” so to speak, and accepted the grade. I give this personal example as testimony to the fact that some believe the Christian God to display favoritism or be chauvinistic in some fashion. Yet, this is not only disproved in a philosophical context, but more importantly by the Scriptures.

There is no shortage of amazing women in the Bible and two books in the Bible are dedicated to such amazing women, the Books of Esther and Ruth. In addition, it’s worth mentioning that the last creation of God was woman, almost as if God were stamping His seal of approval onto His creation. As a man I have no issues with saying this and by me at least it is easily understood, and I say so without sin. Furthermore, in the life of Christ, or rather prior to, we are given the account of Jesus’s mother Mary who was beloved by God to such a degree she was chosen to bear the Messiah, which is no small blessing. Throughout Christ’s life, He both revered women and, in the case of Mary Magdalene, forgave her of her grievous sins. In fact, it was to her and a group of women that Christ first appeared after the resurrection.

In addition to women, the Bible is full of accounts of different nationalities, not only the Jews, but Gentiles from all regions, including all over the Middle East, Rome, Greece, Spain, Asia Minor, Africa, including specifically mentioned, Libya, mentioned in the table of nations, and Ethiopia, which represented the race or nationality of Africa. Even eunuchs are mentioned in Daniel and Paul is instrumental in the conversion of one such eunuch in the Book of Acts.

God is frequently cited for favoritism by the secular community, and to be honest, it is a little understandable when one approaches some of the verses located within the letters of Paul, where he warns against women being spiritual leaders. Yet, we tend to forget that these letters were written to a specific place at a specific time. When Paul’s ministry began, paganism was rampant throughout the Mediterranean and beyond. According to many of these false religions, fertility was one of the cornerstones of such paganism and was worshipped accordingly, in the bacchanalian fashion one might expect. It is no coincidence that the letters of Paul containing such verses are directed to churches in areas where such perverse temples of worship were located. This was nothing new, for the Old Testament speaks of ceremonies around so called Ashera poles which depicted an explicit phallic symbol. Its not confined to the days of old either, for such worship and even Ashera poles still exist in some countries.

These religious practices were in some locations presided over by an oracle, who was generally female. Due to the ancients worship of fertility, women were frequently the priestesses of such paganism. The worship of an earth mother still has its representation today in the public lexicon with the term, “mother nature.” In addition to their perverse acts of worship, they also made hand crafted idols, or so called, “Venus Figures,” like the famous Venus of Willendorf, which they worshipped. One of the most infamous examples of these female priestesses is the Oracle of Delphi, also referred to as the Pythoness, Pythia, or Sibyl, and who supposedly delivered messages and spoke from the god Apollo, son of Zeus, and, according to Greek mythology, god of knowledge, light, music, plague, poetry, and the sun. The Oracle of Delphi would seemingly speak from him after chewing many a laurel leaves, and being surrounded by “noxious fumes,” as writes one contemporary witness. The prophetess would then slip into a trance and begin speaking from the false deity.

Venus of Willendorf

Thus, because of women’s role as leaders in the paganism of the day, and the bacchanalian festivals, Ashera poles, or detestable acts of pagan worship, as well as the struggles of the male gender, the emerging Christian church was to be set apart from such practices and protected against such pagan influence, by having no semblance to the paganism of the day. As in the Old Testament, the bloodline through which Christ was to come needed be protected, so too did the new church need to come under this same protection. Paul’s commands to the churches were means of this protection and not condemnation of women. It has to deal with location, history, and the acts or beliefs of man, rather than the acts of God.

Oracle of Delphi

Yet, why do we refer to God as, “he?” Isn’t this rather chauvinistic of God? The truth is that God doesn’t have a gender, for God is beyond such physical classifications. If God had a gender, then, due to His perfect nature, it would have to serve some sort of purpose, for if there were any arbitrary, unaccountable, and erroneous details about God, then it would speak to imperfection, which cannot be, or else we would not be. The main purpose of gender is for procreation, and why would God need to procreate? Since He is a self-existent being and speaks everything into creation it serves no purpose. Rather, the personification of, “He,” is necessary and representational of our close relationship with the Lord, for this is what, above all, God desires. If we were to refer to God as, “it,” would this not diminish and disrespect that relationship? Certainly it would, for the term alone suggests distance and indifference.

When one examines the proper family structure that God put into place, we see God more fully than if we were to just apply the Lord to the male gender. The next couple paragraphs are going to concern this and I implore the reader to stick with me. In the political structure of man, that is how man organizes culturally, males are usually the authoritative figure. Yet, this is far from being absolute. This cultural trait is merely a consequence of Eve’s original sin, and doesn’t at all reflect how God relates, or reveres the female gender.

In the family, the Lord tells us that the wife is to be submissive to the husband and this is popularly refuted by feminists and those who consider God to be chauvinistic. Yet, what they fail to acknowledge is the other side of the coin, those commandments to the husband. The husband is to love the wife as himself and have great reverence for his significant other. Thus, this argument begins to fall apart, for the degree of the submissive role that is supposed on the woman by the feminist ideal, begins to lessen when one takes this extreme love and reverence into account. It is supposed that the wife need submit to ANY request from the husband, even if it belittles her or is against her wishes. Yet, this would not be the case in an obedient marriage as God has designed. For, a husband, out of his love and reverence, should not request, or desire, anything that belittles his wife, or that makes her do anything outside her being and nature, which drew him to her in the first place. This immediately negates and violates the Scriptures command. As Christ reveres those who come to Him, and we are, in fact, referred to as the bride of Christ, likewise we shall revere each other in a proper godly relationship. Thus, we find that the chauvinistic idea of God is not due to God, but due to a lack of understanding in the very Word of the Lord.

In today’s society, the rearing and motherly role of the wife has been greatly disrespected and diminished. In fact, many feminists regard “housewives” as an outdated and disrespectful position within the family. The “traditional” family, and anyone who belongs to it, are thus subject to ridicule from feminists. Despite their supposed declaration of equal rights and choice on the side of mothers, they mock and have a deep contempt for any woman who chooses to raise a family other than work, or be the, “primary bread winner.” Let it be known, that I by saying this, am not saying that women shouldn’t have an equal position along with men in the work place. Each should get equal reward for their efforts, as men and women get the equal reward of eternal life by their faith and relationship with the Lord.

The fact is that man likes to categorize their efforts or deeds, and assign levels of importance on them. The Scripture refutes this and says our roles are all equally important in the body and eyes of Christ. Feminists presuppose that to be a wife and mother is a less important role than that of the male, but in reality they are equal, as it is said, in marriage the two become one. Thus, feminism is more about insecurity rather than truth. These levels suggested by feminists, are of their own accord, and don’t reflect at all what the Scriptures tell us. The role of the mother in a family structure is highly blessed by God. In fact, it makes more sense to say that the man provides the means upon which the woman can rear the children, rather than anything else. Yet, the man has a vital role in child rearing as well. In addition, I feel another clarification is in order, I don’t feel that women shouldn’t work, so please do not conclude that. I am only addressing the emerging absolute in our culture against the traditional family structure. However, child rearing is a blessed institution and necessary as we see what happens to children when the antithesis is represented, though again, this is not an absolute.

Given all this we come to a clearer understanding of those gender attributed pronouns which refer to our Lord. God is our Father, not because He is disrespecting women, but that He provides for us. In addition, God is referred to as such, because the male was the role He was to take upon and in Jesus Christ. Yet, He has the characteristics of women too. His rearing of us in the faith, His compassion, and nurturing character all testify to this. So is it wrong to refer to God as a, “she?” Yes. Not because God has a gender per say, but rather because this is how He chose to reveal Himself to us, when both speaking through the prophets and in Christ Himself. So to refer to our Lord as, “she,” is an example of a needless, silly, willful rebellion, and thus disrespectful to God.

In Galatians 3:26-29, we find that Paul refers to all of us as sons. Why? Is this cultural or chauvinistic? Again, the answer is no. In fact, Paul is emphasizing the equality in and of righteousness we find when we put our faith upon Christ. We, by this faith, clothe ourselves in the Son of God, and thereby in the sight of the Father we share in His righteousness. Thus, as Jesus is the Son of God, we too become so under His blood. Thereby, in the Father’s eyes, our sin isn’t seen, only the righteousness of His Son, and because of this, those worldly distinctions of gender, race, social standing, or anything else become irrelevant.

The Jews are the chosen people of God, not because of favoritism or because they were the only ones offered salvation, but rather because it was through the Jews that God was to first reveal Himself and into which the Messiah was born. The salvation by and through Christ is offered to everyone and at any time. Thus, we find God not to have any favoritism, but rather are all equal in The Son, and this surpasses the equality of the world, where there are seemingly always distinctions and classifications, both just or not. As Christ and the Father are one, we become one with Christ by our faith and in this no favoritism exists, other than the favor bestowed upon The Son. In addition, in our faith, we are granted this same favor, and become sons of God, thanks to our Lord and Savior, who came not to condemn the world, but rather save the world by and through His blood. Amen.

Romans 1:25, “On Negating God For The Worship of Physicality”

“They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator – who is forever praised. Amen.” -Romans 1:25

The thing that always amazes me about the Bible is the depths of its wisdom, though it’s not surprising with it being God breathed. I am fascinated when I find multiple meanings in God’s word for any given verse. This one is no exception and I find a couple things in it.

First off, “They exchanged the truth about God for a lie,” sounds remarkably like our world today. Though one can make a case for denial of God not being a new thing, one would be hard pressed to find a time where it was so prominent and where the created things take place of or negate God.

In the past, God was replaced with other gods. Some were created by the hands of man, such “household gods” are still very much common today. In addition, the creation itself is worshipped and believed to have sprung from nothing and developed into the complex ordered universe that is our cosmos. So the things that God has created and the things that man has have both taken place of the true Lord and upon such people who create supposed holy idols and separate creation from the Creator, judgement is to surely come. May we pray for wisdom from God and not seek it in the creation, that by our granted wisdom we may glorify Him among all men who proclaim the wonder of the creation, but forego the Creator.

Romans 1:23, “On The Probability of God and The Impossibility of Gods”

“. . . and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.” -Romans 1:23

 

I have looked at a few different translations of this and it has only served to add to the wisdom behind the verse. This is one of the reasons I encourage people to read different versions, for by doing so, the mere wording alone may bring another important lesson to the forefront of your mind that the Lord wants you to focus on.

When I first read this verse, I can’t help but see the theory of evolution being addressed somewhere in here. In addition to evolution, I further see many of the polytheistic religions represented as well. When we look though history upon places like Egypt, or even the religions of Central America we find illustrations of their gods. These are included in their sculpture, paintings and carvings. These echoes from the past show their earthly kings as well as their deities.

 

When we look upon these examples, the gods are shown to be humanoid in their basic shape, with attributes of animals interlaced within the human form. The wording in Romans 1:23 to me is so precise in almost addressing is very thing that I find it rather awe inspiring. Indeed, many peoples of the past and even today worship gods whose being is an aggregate of both human form and a whole bestiary of assorted creatures. The, what must be, perfection of god represented by the corruptible nature of man and beast.

Concerning the evolution theory, we see that this is man’s new god and the transfiguration from some organism from the primordial soup into modern man, the supposed steps of evolution of form, are shown to progress through many different supposed species, though the fossil record has not one of these. Even recent accounts of a missing link being discovered have been extremely premature and led to the embarrassment of several individuals in the scientific community.

 

When we examine this verse we find a clear juxtaposition between the incorruptible God and corruptible man. The image of a mortal, with mortal understanding and imperfections, as a god, along with other gods at that, can only lead to such a contradiction that if it were true than chances are we would cease to exist altogether.

 

God needs to be perfect, and immortal, for if He were otherwise, existing outside of time, time, that edifice He created under Him, as well as all His creation, would fall apart in an instant and we would not be.

I once had the opportunity to talk to a coworker some years back who was a neo-pagan. Though they call themselves neo-pagans, neo meaning “new,” there is actually nothing new about it. Indeed it’s been around for thousands of years.

 

Anyway, this gentleman was devout, even had a shrine, and despite knowing I was a follower of Christ, wrote runes all over my truck, but intended no malice from it and hence I let it go and did not raise issue. For some reason, and despite his initial ridicule of Christianity (though it should be mentioned it wasn’t nearly as vicious as I have encountered), God opened his heart to respect me for some reason. It was in mutual respect that we began to discuss how the scriptures came to be, including in the canon, and the validity of the Word itself.

 

I respected him because he was truthful and honest concerning his own beliefs and we had conversations, which supposedly don’t happen, that is respectful discourse between two opposing schools of thought concerning religion. I have no idea what became of him, but I pray the Lord used our discussions to some higher purpose that he may be saved.

At any rate I reasoned with him concerning his numerous imperfect gods, four of them total, which included the likes of Esther and Odin. He had informed me that each controlled a season, and I made the argument that such polytheism could only reach an absurdity like the one brought up earlier. I half jesting asked him if it was like the other three gods took a vacation while one was in power, and to my surprise, he said there was nothing untrue about my statement, that indeed all other three took some sort of divine recreational break. It was due to this degree of truthfulness and honesty that I came to respect him, though not his gods.

 

Truth is the immortal and incorruptible God is a necessary condition for our existence. The polytheism we hear about, read about, or are confronted with, is so logically improbable and contradictory it makes reading the Greek mythology and the like almost laughable. Yet, people being led astray by such beliefs is not a laughing matter. Rather it is tragic and it is of the utmost importance that we not succumb to these ideas and work on, in a respectful manner, to denounce any such belief. This too is the reason the Trinity must be, for if there were three gods, each of their own will, we will eventually reach some sort of battle between them, in which the destruction of creation would be immediate.