Arguments from Silence

When we approach the Bible as if it was a magic book from which we can yank any verse out to support our belief system, we can certainly prove ourselves right, but such rightness comes with a price. The lose ends keep on growing longer and longer until we can no longer hold a conversation with those who oppose - and sometimes not even with our friends.

One of the most tempting mistakes to make when reading the Bible is to form an argument from silence. If the Bible doesn't mention it, then those who oppose cannot argue against it; it's our word against theirs.

Complementarism uses a lot of arguments from silence. I dare be so bold as to say they use ONLY arguments from silence to support their view, for the Bible doesn't mention the man's authority, not even once.

So, how do they manage to convince their listeners that God gave the man authority over the woman as part of creation? Let's take a look.

1. God created the man first

The man's authority is believed to originate with the man's prior creation, but this belief is deduced from 1 Tim 2:11-15. The trouble is, Genesis 1-3 doesn't say it. Theologians must go from 1 Tim 2 to Genesis 2, and back, to find this evidence. But this begs the question: how did people know about this before Paul wrote a private letter to Timothy?

2. The woman is called a help

That the woman is created subordinated to the man is deduced from 1 Cor 11:1-16. The woman is said to have been created "from the man and for the man."  But when we go to Genesis 2, we find that the woman was created for the man, because the man was alone. The woman wasn't a help, the help was a woman. The only thing Genesis 2 tells us is that the man was alone. No mention is made of the man needing a "help" (read: a maid) to care for the home and the children, for there was no home to care for. That the woman was created from the man signifies her equality with the man. Because she was taken from the man, she also was a human. The man doesn't call her "my subject"; he calls the woman a "female human."

3. Men and women are different

With all the clamor and upset about homosexuality, why do we think it so strange that God created the woman different from the man? If we need to be the same in every way to be equal, homosexuality should be the norm, for most people seek the company of their equals. As is, we find that most men marry women, and most women marry men. If difference makes the woman the man's subject, then we must explain why the difference is the cause why men and women come together. If the man really needed someone who would obey him, wouldn't a dog do a better job?

4. Women should be silent in the church

This is "found" in 1 Cor 14:34-35 and 1 Tim 2:11-15. The trouble is that it is impossible for women to be silent. Women sing, they pray, they make announcements, they sometimes even recite the Bible when they talk! Now why should women be silent in the church if the first woman was created to talk to the first man? The Hebrew word for the animals means "mute." The first woman was anything but mute! She is the one we find speaking to the serpent, while the man is silent. Even today, communication is said to be the key to a healthy marriage, and often the complaint is that men do not talk enough. Why would God prohibit women from speaking in the church, if one of the purposes of the woman's creation was her ability to speak to the man, something the animals could not do?

5. The man is the head of the household

The text that is referred to, Eph 5:21-33 speaks of the husband being the head of the wife, but the wife is hardly the whole household. If being the "head" gives the man authority over his wife, what gives the parents authority over their children, and what gives the masters (both male and female) authority over their slaves?

The authority over children comes with a reference to the Old Testament law.

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. "Honor your father and mother"-which is the first commandment with a promise- "that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth." (Eph 6:1-3 NIV)

Although the Mosaic law has been replaced with the New Covenant, the concept of honoring one's parents embodies the ideals found in the Law of Christ. But where is the corresponding verse in the Old Testament when it comes to husbands? Why does Paul compare the husband to Christ and the wife to the church, if he is giving instructions that have always existed?

The non-existing reference becomes even more troubling when we realize that the authority of the slave owner's is simply assumed, but not explained. The word kurios and kuria were common words for slave owners. Paul uses them without giving the masters' authority any biblical support. He acknowledges their existence, but that is all. So why does he go to such lengths to describe the husband's authority over his wife? Or does he?

What if the idea of the "head" and the "body" is a reference to the dying Savoir who re-claims his bride from the evil one? Who, instead of lording over his bride, chooses to die to set her free? What if this is the reference Paul makes because he wishes all husbands to die to their flesh, and literally set their wives free from the consequence of sin? What if instead of living for the flesh and seeking to please only themselves, husbands would crucify their flesh, and by the Spirit live a new life, a life in which the Spirit causes us to love our neighbors the way we love ourselves? Isn't that the instruction Paul gives to husbands in Eph 5?

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. (Eph 5:25-28 NIV)

If this is the case, and it is, Paul is not giving husbands authority over their wives; he is calling them to lay down their lives, just as Jesus laid down his life for them. He is asking them to forgo selfish ambition, and humbly seek also the interests of their wives.

The goal is love. 

What has become clear so far is that adding the man's authority, that is so clearly absent from the Bible, comes with a great cost. We must ignore almost everything the Bible tells us about the life we have in the New Covenant, and hold on to the patterns created by sin (Genesis 3:16). If the man has always had authority over the woman by God's design, we shouldn't have to create arguments from silence. Instead we would have a solid ground on which to stand. This, however, is not the case with patriarchy/complementarism.