he or she

I do not yet know the sex, but I refer to my unborn baby using the male pronoun anyway. This confuses people…

I guess it is time to explain why I do not employ politically-correct gender-inclusive language… (first of all, I can’t call the baby “it”—I’m not carrying a wad of playdough, I’m carrying a human life.)

I grew up in the twentieth century, just like you (or most of you)—I learned full well what is supposed to be “proper” when addressing both sexes. And I am, after all, a woman; Shouldn’t I therefore be particularly offended when someone says man or mankind instead of humankind? or he instead of the cumbersome he or she or the grammatically awkward they? Heavens no!

I have several reasons for my stubbornness, but I want to try to keep this brief. Most significantly I think something valuable is lost with gender-inclusive language…

I must give credit to Dr. Wayne Grudem who greatly influenced my opinions on this subject in his book, Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth. Dr. Grudem reminds us that Adam was created first. God gave Adam a direct command to not eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (Gen 2:17). This is before Eve even existed. (112)

God created Eve from one of Adam’s ribs. Adam gave his suited helper a title and called her “woman” because she came out of man (Gen 2:23). And He also named her (Gen 3:20). In calling her woman and naming her Eve, Adam exercised authority over her his wife. Eve did not name Adam, God did. And Adam, as the head of his wife, named Eve. This is all before the Fall, before sin perverted everything.

God appointed Adam as the head. Adam (not Eve) is our covenant representative. Both Adam and Eve sinned against God, but ALL of mankind fell with Adam’s sin.

I find it interesting, that the curse God gives to Eve is one that cannot be immediately directed on man (although to a limited extent men do, in patient support, persevere with their wives). But the curse given to Adam, is one which women also commonly suffer. This used to bother me. But it makes sense when you remember that Adam is the representative for all mankind. Eve cannot represent all of mankind, neither does her curse directly effect all of mankind. Both man and woman have responsibility in the Fall, but on account of Adam’s sin we ALL are cursed. We ALL are spiritually dead.

Grudem points to the parallels in Scripture which teach that we are likewise saved by one man, Jesus Christ, who was our representative on the cross. On account of Christ’s righteousness, we (men and women alike) are made blameless in the sight of the Lord.  The Apostle Paul writes in Romans 5:19, (112)

For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. (esv)

In my mind, the use of gender-inclusive language really dilutes the significance of our representation in Adam and in Christ.

The male pronoun can and does properly cover both sexes whereas the female pronoun cannot. Society at large today may strongly disagree. I know I am a very small minority on this, even among Christians and especially among women. I probably just put my bare neck on the slaughtering block. That’s okay…I’m not really interested in pursuing popular ideals, I’m more interested in pursuing Truth.

Argument from Scripture—Part 3

Dr. Richard Dawkins notes that the gospels were written long after Jesus’ death, even after the Letters of Paul, and therefore we cannot trust them as reliable historical records. Dawkins also suggests that the authors of the Gospels had twisted the facts in order to serve their bias and satisfy Old Testament prophecies (The God Delusion, 93).

Today biographies are often written even while the subject is still living. But that’s today. It is true that the Gospels were written after Jesus’ death, yet still within the same century that he lived. However you want to slice it, the distance between Jesus’ death and the written account of his life very obviously cannot exceed one hundred years (or even come close). That might seem like a long time in today’s terms, but really it is a very short time for the first century. The earliest accounts of Alexander the Great—also written in the first century—were penned four hundred years(!) after Alexander’s death.

A gap of four centuries leaves a lot more room for suspicious fabrication. I am curious whether Dawkins would accuse the Greek historian authors like Arrian of the same flim-flam that he accuses Luke and the other Gospel authors.  That is, twisting the facts in order to fulfill Old Testament Prophecies.

Granted there are questionable stories surrounding Alexander the Great, but I do not think very many question much about Alexander’s seige of Tyre–an event in history that Archaeologist Dr. Merrill Unger sees as a powerful fulfillment  of the Old Testament prophecy in Ezekiel chapter 26:  (Archeology and the New Testament, 31)

4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD… 12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. (niv)

Speculative? perhaps. But it really is very curious when you study how Alexander invaded and conquered the city of Tyre. He demolished the main land city and threw the remains into the sea in order to build a land bridge to reach the island portion of the city…

Probably the best-known episode in the history of Tyre was its resistance to the army of the Macedonian conqueror Alexander the Great who took it after a seven-month siege in 332. He completely destroyed the mainland portion of the town and used its rubble to build an immense causeway (some 2,600 feet [800 metres] long and 600–900 feet [180–270 metres] wide) to gain access to the island section…. Alexander’s causeway, which was never removed, converted the island into a peninsula.

“Tyre.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2008. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 09 Dec. 2008 <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/611914/Tyre>.

Where did I go?

I guess after a long silence I am supposed to explain to you where I’d been. I have no plans to close this blog, but I don’t promise to write consistently either. I haven’t had energy to get online, much less to read, and my brain is no more. Why? I’m pregnant. And that’s all I have to say about that.