Now I’m going to bring us up to a real tense social issue. Thousands of years later, in Paul’s day, he was asked why women couldn’t be pastors of churches. A lot of us ask that same question today as we see both males and females become pastors, but in Paul’s day, he was asked the question, ‘why can’t a woman be a pastor of a church?’ - the leader. You want to see Paul’s answer? Here it is in 1 Timothy 2, Paul says this:
“I don’t allow women to teach or exercise authority over a man but
remain quiet, for it was Adam who was first created, then Eve.”
See, here he was in his day – thousands of years removed from the day God created man and they were asking him about an intensely difficult issue. This was especially true in Ephesus, because Ephesus was a city of pagan religions where all the religious leaders were women. These people who had become Christians were wondering why the women couldn’t lead this church too. So Paul goes back to the myth, back to the mountain, and he says, ‘well, here’s why I don’t think that should happen….because I think God had some original designs in mind.’ And he points to this ‘first’ in creation.
2. Secondly, I want you to notice that Adam in Genesis, is given an occupation and responsibility before Eve’s creation. Here’s what it says in Genesis 2:15:
“Then the Lord God took the man [the male] and put him into the
Garden of Eden to cultivate it, and keep it.”
I don’t know how much time has passed at this point before God created the woman, but here’s what we do know; that God created the man. After He created the man as male, He gave him a job to do – a vocation in the garden of Eden. Then He gave him other responsibilities, orders to obey. During this whole time Eve’s not been created yet. These directions are given to the man exclusively and not to his wife, Eve. We ask “Why?”
All it does is invite the question “why?” It doesn’t answer it; it just asks it by the way it’s set forth there. But if you look at it long enough, you begin to think that it’s almost like there’s some kind of leadership training program going on here.
I believe in many ways, that that’s exactly what’s taking place, because it hints at something central to, and basic about, authentic manhood that we’ll put in a definition later on. I just want you to see the original blueprints at this point.
3. Thirdly, I want you to notice Adam is instructed by God with the responsibility of leading with His word. Genesis 2:16-17 says this;
“And the Lord God commanded the man saying, ‘from any tree of
the garden you may eat freely, but from the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil you shall not eat, for in that day you eat from it, you
shall surely die.’”
By now Eve has still not been created. At this point, there was no Bible, there was only the spoken word of God. God literally spoke to Adam. He’s saying ‘okay, I’ve given you this place. I want you to cultivate it. Now I want to give you some instruction about how to live in this place.’ The thing that’s fascinating is the instruction was not given to Eve, but was given to Adam to then give to Eve, which is what we’ll see a little later on.
But we have to ask the question “Why?” Why did it occur this way? Again, I believe it hints at the spiritual responsibility that God created men to assume as part of real masculinity. A responsibility that thousands of years later is stated outright in Ephesians 5:25-26, when Paul is speaking to men about how to live with their wives. And he says this;
“Husbands, love your wives (I’m just shortening it here to get the essence
of it) love your wives with the Word.”
In other words, a man should lead with spiritual truth when he’s in relationship to a woman. He should lead with spiritual truth – not she should lead. He should lead. That’s a real key — a real nugget to satisfaction and social health, not just for the marriage itself, but for the community at large. It comes under the banner and command, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.” - not with dysfunctional kids, but with healthy ones.
To do that, someone’s got to deposit the truth and be the standard bearer. In the “original blueprints”, that scepter is given to the man.
4. Fourth, notice that Adam names the animals which, to any theologian is a signal of his leadership over creation. It says in Genesis 2:19 these words;
“And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the
field, every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see
what he would call them, and whatever this man called a living
creature, that was its name.”
Now assigninging names to others in the Bible is very significant because it‘s a sign of authority or leadership over something. You see God exercise that kind of leadership in renaming people throughout the Bible. He takes Abram and He renames him ‘Abraham’ because He’s calling him to be a leader – to be the originator of the nation of Israel. God changed Sarai’s name to ‘Sarah’ to show this very same thing. God changed Saul’s name to ‘Paul’ because He wanted him to be a witness of His resurrection to the Gentile world.
God changed Simon’s name to ‘Peter’ as a sign of his authority over Peter and his calling into the leadership of the church. Here, in Genesis 2, in naming the animals Adam gets to show his first-level leadership over creation. This is a responsibility that his counterpart, Eve, will receive through him, but he receives it first.
5. Finally, I want you to notice – that Adam is given a helper suitable for him. A title that offers further evidence of God’s original core social identity for the woman. Here’s the way it’s said in Genesis 2:18;
“Then the Lord God said, ‘it is not good for the man to be alone (up
to this point everything I’ve told you Adam’s been alone, but at this
point He says…) I will make him a helper suitable for him.’”
Now, I want you guys to listen real closely. I know some of this is a little uncomfortable. The deepest and most profound differences between a man and a woman – male and female – are not physical. They’re intensely sociological. What’s happening here in Genesis is what you and I as men feel right now. It is a relational dance between these two equally endowed, equally valuable counterparts. This relational dance poses a very big question that is pertinent to the very core of masculinity - if it’s a relational dance, then who leads? And who follows?
Do you see how relevant Genesis is? Is that not the question of the 21st Century? Today, in the sociological realms of the everyday life, we as men will experience this - whether this week when you take a girl out on a date – or when you go home to the woman you married. This world is intensely sociological. There’s a relational dance going on between man and woman - who leads? - who follows?
