Not only is it helpful to frequently revisit why we believe what we believe, but a new generation is always rising for whom the complementarian/egalitarian arguments are new. Every year, a new batch of young men and women encounter afresh questions surrounding what the Bible teaches about men and women, and many are wrestling with what biblical fidelity requires of them. This struggle is made especially difficult by a culture which from the crib has subtly catechized them in male-female interchangeability. Egalitarianism is in the air we breathe and the water we swim.

One of the many challenges confronting complementarians today is trying to avoid sounding too much like a broken record. In the face of a veritable cottage industry of egalitarian publishing, which perennially puts out new arguments as to why the church should abandon her traditional position on men and women, complementarians are tasked with re-articulating the same position over and over and over again. But what I’ve come to realize is just how necessary this task is.

Not only is it helpful to frequently revisit why we believe what we believe, but a new generation is always rising for whom the complementarian/egalitarian arguments are new. Every year, a new batch of young men and women encounter afresh questions surrounding what the Bible teaches about men and women, and many are wrestling with what biblical fidelity requires of them. This struggle is made especially difficult by a culture which from the crib has subtly catechized them in male-female interchangeability. Egalitarianism is in the air we breathe and the water we swim. We could say that in our current moment, egalitarianism is easily caught while complementarianism must be taught.

I write this short piece on complementarianism with this new generation in mind. It is not my aim to give a comprehensive account of every biblical nook and cranny; you can find that elsewhere. What I want to do here is to give a concise, re-presentation of why I am a complementarian, and why I believe you should be, too.

Complementarianism is most often defined generally by the theological position articulated in the Danvers Statement. At root, complementarians believe men and women are equal yet different by divine design, and that God’s design makes a difference in how we ought to live as male and female.

Most concretely, complementarians believe the Bible teaches male headship in the family (1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5:23), a principle that is affirmed and not undermined in the covenant community by restricting some governing and teaching roles to men (1 Cor. 14:33–34; 1 Tim. 2:12). Just as importantly, complementarians also believe biblical headship and authority are subordinate to God’s headship and authority (Eph. 3:15; Col. 1:18), are to be ruled by the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23), and are servant-hearted and sacrificial, never overbearing or abusive toward those under authority (Mark 10:42–45).

With this definition in mind, my thesis is simple and involves three parts: I am a complementarian because (1) Scripture clearly teaches male-female complementarity and the principle of male headship, which is grounded in (2) the pre-fall creation order and (3) nature.

I am convinced by Scripture and by plain Reason of complementarianism, and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. Below I hope to briefly unpack why.

(1) Scripture clearly teaches male-female complementarity and the principle of male headship.

Bearing the divine image is a person’s most significant aspect, and the imago dei establishes male-female equality in dignity and worth. In the very first chapter of the Bible, we learn that God created both male and female in his own image:

Genesis 1:26–27: “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’

So God created man [adam] in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.”

In Genesis 1:26–27, not only are male and female both created in the image of God, but they are also both denoted by the generic term “man,” or adam. Importantly, this term becomes the particular name of the first man in the very next chapter. But in Genesis 1, this name signifies equality between the sexes while also establishing Adamic headship and, by implication, male headship in the family, a concept developed in Genesis 2 and referenced in later revelation.

Directly after the Bible establishes male-female equality in the imago dei, we are taught in part why God established male-female difference: for procreation.

Genesis 1:28: “And God blessed them. And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.’”

We see male-female equality reinforced in this verse as both male and female are addressed by this divine command: God “said to them.” But the command cannot be carried out apart from complementary difference; the male and female have different obligations in carrying it out. The act of procreation requires male-female difference working together — itself a reflection of bodily complementarity. Moreover, some interpreters have recognized that the command to “be fruitful and multiply and fill” plays more to feminine attributes, and the command to “subdue” and “have dominion” more to masculine attributes. While each domain of activity is given to both the man and the woman in ways fitting with their bodily uniqueness, how this activity is carried out will necessarily be inflected through the gendered reality of God’s crowning creation.

Male-female similarity and difference are further affirmed and developed in the second chapter of Genesis. Take time to read this chapter carefully and note especially the detailed differences in how and why the man and woman are created. Man is made first and from the ground (Gen. 2:7) and put in the Garden to work it and to keep it (2:15) and to name the animals (2:20); woman is made second and from the side of man (2:21) as a “helper fit for him” (2:18) and is named by the man (2:23).

Why these differences? God could have made man and woman at the same time and in the exact same way. But the different, complementary way in which God makes the man and woman is meant to teach us something already from the beginning about male and female peculiarity. We see something similar in how God created the universe. Instead of creating everything instantaneously, God created in six days and rested on the seventh. He did so for a purpose, in order to establish the pattern of the week (see Exod. 20:11). In a similar vein, the very way God created man and woman is meant to teach us about the pattern of male-female equality and difference. Genesis 1–2 are meant, in part, to prepare the people of God to receive special instructions from the Scriptures about what male-female difference means for their lives.

While we believe all Scripture is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training all of God’s people in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16), the Bible does give certain commands according to male-female difference. Some of these commands point to particular callings. The principle of male headship and authority in the family and the church is not only affirmed but commanded in multiple places in the Bible. Perhaps it is helpful to list the verses that directly address upholding and honoring this principle:

1 Corinthians 11:2–3: “Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.”

1 Corinthians 14:33b–34: “As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.  If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.”

1 Timothy 2:12: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.”

Read More