Journal: Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
Volume: JBMW 08:2 (Fall 2003)
Article: Editor’s Column
Author: Bruce A. Ware

JBMW 8:2 (Fall 03) p. 2

Editor’s Column

Bruce A. Ware

Editor, Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood;
Senior Associate Dean,
School of Theology
Professor of Christian Theology
The Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary
Louisville, Kentucky

These are sobering days for evangelicalism. While there are many signs of God’s favor and blessings, those endeavoring to be faithful to God and his word are faced with departures from sound biblical teaching on many fronts. Within the discussion of biblical manhood and womanhood alone, there are grave reasons for concern, prayer, and renewed fidelity.

David Jones opens our Fall 2003 issue with an eye-opening look at the undeniable historical connections that exist between groups denying biblical views of manhood and womanhood and those same groups being urged to move in the direction of the acceptance of homosexuality’s legitimacy. Jones is careful to avoid making any claim of logical necessity here; i.e., an egalitarian is not logically bound to affirm homosexuality. But, the nature of the arguments for egalitarianism lend themselves particularly well elsewhere, and Jones provides much helpful information on this connection.

Randy Stinson, CBMW’s executive director, suggests another departure the egalitarian movement is being urged to take. Masculine God language has been retained by conservative egalitarians, due to the fact that the God of the Bible has named himself this way. But, it is no surprise that many egalitarians are not happy about this. The pressure to remove masculine God language from our (formerly) Christian vocabulary is strong and growing. Stinson has done a great service for Christian readers in helping us see more clearly just what is happening and what is at stake.

Behind many of these departures stands a method of biblical interpretation that gives rise to these deeply troubling views. Paul Felix offers a very insightful analysis of the hermeneutical methodology employed in egalitarian writings and exposes some of its most significant flaws. Only when we see how egalitarians think in their approach to the Scriptures are we able to assess their procedure and critique their positions.

In striking contrast to these areas of departure from biblical fidelity, we offer two very fine examples of how to understand, articulate, and apply true biblical principles of manhood and womanhood. Pastor David Prince’s sermon, “Saved in Childbearing? God’s High Calling for Mothers,” is both insightful and inspiring. And, Patricia Ennis’s essay, “Portraying Christian Femininity,” offers an abundance of practical wisdom. These two resources are rich with biblical insight, wise counsel, and carefully conceived practical applic...