Should Women Bear The Sword? By Pastor Kevin Feder

 Over the past two weeks at GCF we have and are devoting ourselves to the discussion on gender roles. We believe that gender roles are rooted in creation as a part of God's glorious design. It will inevitably sound archaic and sexist to modern sensibilities that men are primarily called to assume sacrificial responsibility characterized by leadership, protection and provision while women are primarily called to be helpers characterized by nurture, gentleness and caring. Yet, we believe this is what the Bible seems to clearly suggest. Scripture itself is clear in Genesis 2:18 that Adam needed a helper, so God created Eve who was fit to his specifications, and he to hers. 

Creation itself self-evidently bears witness to the beauty and goodness of male and female complementarianism. The anatomy of males and females work together to create new life, for instance. And speaking of anatomy and physical attributes, simply by looking at the female form it is evident that she was constructed for gentleness, for nurture, and for helping. When Psalm 19:1 tells us that the "Heavens declare the glory of God" and then later on we read that "their voice goes out throughout all the earth" and there is "no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard" it isn't just suggesting that the skies speak a language that can be understood no matter the spoken language but the design of God revealed through the male and female frame is also clearly perceived. Whether you speak Spanish or German or even Creole, the female frame speaks every language and tells a clear story of a person who was made to give life, to nurture it along and to gently bring support and help to those around her. This designation is beautiful and liberating, not oppressive and controlling.

This is what needs to be in our minds as we ask and answer the question: should women bear arms? Should they be activated in roles of combat? Should they occupy positions where they will be counted on to provide protection against those who threaten physical harm? Should they take on political roles where they will be responsible to bear the sword (Romans 13)? Not to destroy any sense of suspense or to discourage you from sitting at the edge of your seat, the answer to that question is a resounding "no." That is to say, no, women should not bear the sword and women should not be police officers or firefighters or serve in the military. 

On top of being sexist you can also accuse me of being close minded. I understand the accusations that will come my way. "Women should have the same rights as men" will be the cry. To this I actually agree. Rights are one thing and roles are another but they shouldn't be confused. Women and men should have equal rights because they equally are created in the image of God. Yet, equal rights do not necessitate equal roles. There are some roles that men rightly should occupy that women shouldn't. This is true even if a particular woman may be qualified to execute a certain role as well as or even better than a man. 

One more evidence of Scripture to support my claim would seem, at first glance, to deflate any momentum towards making my point. In the book of Judges we read of Deborah who successfully judged Israel and led the Israelites to military conquest. Surely this would support the notion that women can and should bear the sword. One thing is for certain, women certainly can bear the sword and do so successfully. Deborah proves that. But does this passage teach us that they should? That is the question. 

The answer is no, they shouldn't (and I am not one for creating suspense with the questions I raise, at least not today in this particular post). No, women should not bear the sword just because they can and Deborah in Judges isn't a biblical vindication of women doing so. A closer look at Judges and the student of Scripture will begin to see the way the text actually suggests we should arrive at the opposite conclusion. First of all, the instance of Deborah is just that, an instance. She is the only one of God's people to ever rise to the ranks of military leader and it is always danger, as a hermeneutical principle, to build a theology off of one verse or in this case, one instance. Second (and this is all), the student of Scripture must also come to grips with the context of Israel as it is revealed in Judges. This was a time of great weakness and idolatry amongst the people of God. They were not in the canon of Scripture at this point because they were so exemplary. Quite the opposite, they were quite compromised. The writer is painting a picture of shame upon the Israelites that things were so bad that a woman had to step up to do the man's work. In other words, things were very bad in Israel! How bad were they, you ask? They were so bad in Israel that their men refused to take responsibility so that their women had to. Like it or not, this is what the Scripture communicates. Deborah is not a biblical endorsement for females in the military, it is the bible shining light on the shame of the Israelites who would allow such a thing to happen. 

Thus, women should not bear the sword and God is not pleased, not in the least, with the women who do or the culture that allowed it to happen. 

In Christ,

Pastor Kevin