Monday, January 02, 2006

Gender and the Image of God: The End

In as much as it is difficult to detect tone and sentiment through our current medium, I think it is best to move on from this discussion. You all have been great conversation partners and I want to thank you for making this particular series one of the most spirited, well thought out, and most beneficial discussions that has taken place on my blog.

In closing I wish to clarify a few comments I made previously. In regard to the offense of male-representative language, I wish to state clearly that it is not my aim to offend. There is no reason to be improperly or needlessly offensive. But there are occasions when one’s commitment to the truth as he or she sees it will inevitably lead to the offending of those who do not agree with his or her version of the truth. I am aware that the broader complementarian paradigm—including its language preferences—is offensive to many. I wish it were not so. But in as much as I feel the scriptures explicitly teach male headship, I feel compelled to uphold this model regardless of the offense it may be to some.

Having said that however, I recognize that good Christian brothers and sisters often disagree on important issues. This is one of those issues. So on the majors-conviction; the minors-charity; and in all things love. God’s best to each of you.

2 comments:

Suzanne McCarthy said...

Gerald,

I have written about kephale in response to your last post and comments on that post. I argue that its primary meaning was more closely related to money in the bank, or summary and conclusion, than leader or ruler.

Gerald said...

Very intersting post, Suzanne. Thanks for noting it here. Looking forward to reading your interview with Packer on BBB.