- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostSession 8 - Al Mohler
- Next Post »The Marketing of Evil
Session 9 - Ligon Duncan
- 03/04/06
- 20
This is the final session of the 2006 Shepherd’s Conference. J. Ligon Duncan, pastor of First Presbyterian Church of Jackson, Mississippi and chairman of The Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, will bring us the final address. It is interesting to see that this place has cleared out quite a bit already as clearly many of the pastors have needed to leave early to return for Sunday worship services in their home churches. Chris Taylor, a pastor with whom I enjoyed some wonderful fellowship this week, is one of them. Doug McHone has also already headed home.
I am still not entirely sure what I will do this afternoon. I will head out immediately afterwards to visit a nearby nonprofit organization, but following that I have absolutely no plans. I’m sure I will have a great afternoon and evening before my flight departs at a (revised) time of 11:30 PM.
Duncan’s session will deal with gender. MacArthur suggested, when introducing the speaker, that few Evangelicals are aware of the importance of this issue. I would even suggest that few are even remotely aware that there is an issue! Dr. Duncan is an authority in the area of biblical manhood and womanhood and I look forward to hearing the message he will bring to us today.
Today’s message will show that biblical manhood and womanhood is absolutely essential to discipleship within the local church. You cannot make a Christian disciple without addressing the issues of biblical manhood and womanhood.
Duncan will make five arguments for why this is the case - five reasons why biblical manhood and womanhood is crucial for discipleship. This will be based on Genesis 1 and Ephesians 5. The fundamental justification for the importance of speaking of this topic is more than just that it is part of the whole counsel of God.
Genesis 1:26-31 tells us of the creation of man. In the creation, man and woman, made in the image of God, entailed them being a walking, talking, breathing witness of God. Biblical manhood and womanhood is essential to them fulfilling their responsibility to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. They are reflecting God’s truth. Their roles are essential to imaging and representing God in the world. At the outset of creation manhood and womanhood matters for man to image God in the world - to point to a reality of God. Gender, then, is part of the very reason we were created.
In Genesis 2 we see God saying “it is not good for man to be alone…” The Divine definition of being between one man and woman is rooted in these words, “for this reason.” What reason? Because the Lord God fashioned a rib out of the man, brought her to the man, and said “here is Eve.” Here is the helper that answers the need of fellowship. Marriage is created in the marriage order and.
Ephesians 5 is a well-known passage on this topic. It is an extraordinary passage in many ways. Men often miss the reason they are to love their wives. The job of a husband is to be an instrument in the hands of the Holy Spirit for her sanctification. We are to help prepare our wives to face the Lord. We are to live dying for our wives daily for their sanctification. When you live this out in marriage, you are a living, breathing, walking, talking illustration of union with Christ. You are the picture of the kind of relationship that Christ has with His church and that His church has with Christ. Biblical manhood and womanhood is not just a subcategory of all we do as disciples. Rather, it is an essential of our bearing witness of the sovereign God in this world and our witness of Christ’s redeeming work in the world. It cannot be avoided, ignored or de-emphasized, but needs to be taught, celebrated, expressed, gloried in, advanced, an apologetic must be provided for it, it must be inculcated in the discipleship of the church. Why? There are several reasons:
Our culture is now completely egalitarian and this poses a particular challenge to the church. Christians can no longer be assumed to be instinctively complementarian. On the other hand, we look out at the culture and see even the sons of this age wiser than the next. Another conflicting indicator we get is the infringement of egalitarianism into Evangelicalism. The lines are becoming increasingly blurred so that we now have people claiming to be complementarian egalitarians.
Why is it important to address biblical manhood and womanhood?
Because men and women are different and these differences need to be recognized and taken into account in the course of Christian discipleship: It is glorious to celebrate the differences between men and women. When we say that the roles of men and women are interchangeable, we suppress the truth. The differences between men and women are part of what makes us image bearers of God and should not be apologized for!
If we celebrate biblical manhood and womanhood in the local church, our attitude ought to be vive la difference!”. God made us this way and it is better than any other way. But it is so radical that it needs to be deliberately and specifically inculcated.
Because the Bible teaches so much about biblical manhood and womanhood: People sometimes argue that this is not worth discussing as there are really only six or seven dividing verses. But this issue goes far deeper, as it is rooted in creation and redemption as an essential part of what God is doing in us to display His glory. We can never ignore biblical teaching. A church that wants to be biblical, wants to make sure that women embrace the teaching of Scripture with joy and energy, and that the men will take up their responsibilities with joy and energy.
Because when biblical manhood or womanhood is ignored or not practiced, it results in disasters for marriages and families: More marriages dissolve between the husband and the wife did not embrace biblical teaching on manhood or womanhood than those that dissolve because of adultery. Unbiblical understanding of manhood and womanhood can only lead to chaos and disaster.
Because the issue of manhood and womanhood is at the very heart of the cultural transition we find ourselves in right now: The gender issues are not simply the tip of the iceberg in the cultural mega-shift we are seeing now. This pagan worldview wants to erase the creator-creature distinction. All our problems, they say, can be traced to monotheism. If God created male and female distinct, and in their living together in the roles He prepared for them, they were to image Him as the creator of all creation, and in our marriages we are to image this relationship between God and His people, what better strategy can there be than to erase the male-female relationship as a step to erasing the creator-creation relationship. This is a war plan for Satan to destroy Christianity.
Because it is one of the, if not the way that biblical authority is being undermined in our times: If you can get women’s ordination, room for homosexuality, women as pastors in the churches and no male headship in the home out of the Bible, you can get anything out of the Bible. If you can get Paul’s statement “I do not permit a woman to teach” to say “I do permit a woman to teach” you can make people believe anything. In this case there is nothing you cannot get out of the Bible or read into the Bible. We also undermine authority when we believe something from the Bible but refuse to teach it.
No matter how unpopular, it is the job of the pastor to teach what the Bible says to the eternal glory of God.

I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 


Releasing on April 1, The Next
Comments (20)
Tim,thank you again for all your blogging. I truly have enjoyed reading all the sessions. I’m sure that Ligon Duncan did a wonderful job today. I have a personal connection to him, in that he was my youth pastor.
I hope you enjoy your free time. If you get a chance you should try and go to the Ronald Reagan Library. It is a wonderful place and so beautiful. They just recently opened the Air Force One pavilion in which they have the retired Air Force One for you to tour. It is located in Simi Valley and is about a 30 minute drive from the conference.
God bless you and your family and thank you again for all your work this week.
I second what Beth-Renee has said. I can’t thank you enough for taking so much care in blogging for those of us not there, all that was discussed throughout the conference.
I pray for your safe return home and happy birthday for your son tomorrow.
God bless you and your family, as it was their sacrifice that allowed “dad” :-) to blg the conference.
Tim,
Thanks for blogging the conference.
You reported that one of the points in the message was that “more marriages dissolve between the husband and the wife did not embrace biblical teaching on manhood or womanhood than those that dissolve because of adultery.” Very interesting. Did Duncan provide any data to back up this assertion?
Wayne Shih
“MacArthur suggested, when introducing the speaker, that few Evangelicals are aware of the importance of this issue. I would even suggest that few are even remotely aware that there is an issue!”
I wonder if this is the reason so many pastors obviously felt this was a session they could comfortably skip.
It’s depressing to learn such a crucial message went unheard by a significant percentage of the attendees.
Thanks so much for your hard work in blogging the conference, Tim! It’s been much appreciated and enjoyed.
As we say here in Texas….
You done good. ;^)
I enjoyed our time as well. As I told you when I left, I thank you for your ministry that definitely helps me in mine.
I’m going to copy and print your notes from the general sessions and hand them out to my fellowship tomorrow! You did far better than I ever could encapsulating the week.
Chris
Thanks Tim!! You did a great job.
“I wonder if this is the reason so many pastors obviously felt this was a session they could comfortably skip.”
It very well may have been. There certainly were quite a few who opted out of it.
“Did Duncan provide any data to back up this assertion?”
He said that this was his experience based on his years of pastoral ministry.
No doubt Duncan is right. Mess with the God-ordained roles and you’ll have problems.
I’m not sure from what is written here, though, what the practical mistakes are that lead to marriages failing when we talk about male-female roles going off the biblical track.
Did he mention anything in particular as being wrong?
The understanding of Biblical womanhood and manhood isn’t necessary now just because of our culture, it was always necessary. We took certain things for granted. We thought women had certain chores, men had others, and that was the meaning of being helpmates.
It’s so much more than that. Of all of the analogies God uses to express the relationship between Himself and mankind, which is used most often? Vine and branches? Father and son? Bridegroom and Bride? You got it! Marriage.
God stamped into our bodies the clearest explanation of who He is that we can ever have. Adam and Eve didn’t have the Bible, yet they understood God. The Bible explains the relationship, if we know what to look for.
God is love. Adam was alone and realized that he needed someone to love (not a helpmate to help him with the gardening chores). God gave him Eve.
They were naked without shame. There was no shame, because they saw each other as complete beings. Their bodies represented the soul and spirit inside. When a man ogles a woman, she feels naked and ashamed. He isn’t seeing her as a person. He’s seeing her as an object of desire. That’s naked with shame. We can see it in our relationship with our spouse. The closer we grow to our spouse, the less shameful it feels for the other to see our bodies. We know that our spouse sees the beauty inside.
I’m so glad you had a speaker talk about this.
God Bless,Terrihttp://womanunleashed.blogspot.com
I would have left early no matter what. I was limited on flight times and had to be back Saturday evening to preach on Sunday (which was the first official Sunday of our church plant). The fact that it was Dr. Duncan or that the topic was biblical manhood/womanhood had no bearing on my decision.
That said, I have a biblical family manifesto that I have taught/preached through that is specific on issues such as the roles of the husband, wife, the issues of sex, homosexuality, divorce, etc. I have had people leave in the midst of sermons particularly on the issue of the biblical role of women in marriage, the home and the church.
I cannot speak for others that left, but as for me, well, circumstances dictated I do so.
Chris
I have recently preached and studied in this area.
I would simply note that biblical manhood and womanhood has never been acceptable in any culture — full equality of persons and distinct roles in marriage and the church is denied in both conservative and liberated cultures.
If we had eyes to see clearly, and we lived in London in 1860, we would have critiqued Victorianism. Leave it to Beaver is no more Christian than Seinfeld. Islamic practice of gender is not less evil than American feminism. Conservatism is no friend of the faith — conservatives murdered Jesus.
I think it is an issue in every culture. Psalm 2 still holds true — humanity is in rebellion against God. Romans 1 is still true — a form of rebellion is rejecting created order.
Marriages fall apart because of selfishness. The doctrine of sin says sin “turned us in on ourselves” — that kills marriage. Only the Gospel can change the heart.
Wayne and Tim, If memroy serves, Ligon got that information from a practicing psychologist working in the marriage counseling field. Ligon married (pun intended)that information with the Biblical view of man/woman relationships where adultery was the product of the the failed distictives. (At least that’s what my notes say but I don’t type as fast as Tim.)
MHK
Sorry, that’s MEMORY. I don’t know if “memroy” was there or not.
MHK
I’m always interested to see what the next “depraved ideas” are coming out of the CBC. They always seem to be on the front-lines of unveiling the evils of our society and tonight proved that again. Apparently there is now a pill that can suppress a woman’s menstrual cycle, so that she never has to have a period again. (sorry for the “female” topic, men) But this again makes me think that there is an all-out war on feminity and masculinity that is becoming yet another means of Satan carefully crafting an attack on God’s creation and design.
(I’d be very interested to read the book you reviewed, Tim, The Marketing of Evil(?) )
I can see how many people don’t realize the importance of gender… but it again returns to the issue of God’s sovereign design and ultimately, our submission to Him in every regard.
The statement by Ligon that more marriages dissolve because of them not embracing their biblical roles, than adultery. If that is based on his experience, that seems pretty anecdotal evidence to make a big statement like that. Of course if he is in counseling, and he holds the view of Biblical roles, than anyone he is counseling who doesn’t hold to those is obviously in the wrong in his opinion most likely. It seems that anyone who holds that view would of course blame failed marriages on that issue, rather than the “real” issues that may have existed. I would like to see his evidence and statistics of this, and not just his words based on his experience. Anyone could make statements like that based on their experience. Who is able to challenge that?
I stayed for the final session expecting some great teaching on the biblical roles of men and women and why the distinctions were created by God, and consequently why we should strive to maintain them.
Admittedly, I was very tired for the last session, but I felt the whole address was as clear as mud. I do not feel the passages used were explained well and I had a really tough time even catching the main points Ligon was trying to put accross. I recall one of the points ending up as a paragraph long rambling statement.
Brothers, I am on your side on this one, trust me. However, after the sermon I felt I walked away with nothing other than the statement quoted by many others in comments above. Please take no offense Pastor Ligon, maybe it was just me after a long, tiring, but fabulous week. On the other hand, many of my fellows relayed they felt the same way.
John
John,
Glad it wasn’t just me!
I’m always hearing about marriages failing because the two spouses weren’t living out the biblical ideal of manhood and womanhood, but when pressed, the actual practical aspects of what that means aren’t made clear by the people advocating for it.
The problem is that too often those who talk about male and female roles are actually talking about “old fashioned” cultural norms, many of which are merely extensions of American culture. But you have to talk about biblical praxis by intersecting the Bible with culture. Neither the Bible nor culture can be allowed to exist in a vacuum if a practical expression of biblical truth is desired. If we can’t marry biblical commands with practice, then all we are doing is hanging millstones around people’s necks.
For instance, is the biblical model that a dad should go to work a half hour from home in an office building downtown while his wife stays home and homeschools the children? Many Christians would say that this example is exactly biblical. The problem is they would be dead wrong in just about every aspect of that example. Most of what I just gave as an example is a cultural construct and reflects very little biblical reality, yet just to question that presupposition will get you hanged in many Christian circles.
So without practical examples of what Duncan means, it’s very hard to make sense of what he’s saying. If he says that wife should be in submission to her husband, what does that look like in 21st century North America? What are the practical things that the husband does and the wife does that make that submission a reality? Does it mean he handles all the money in the household or that she never be allowed to wear pants? If not, then what?
If people don’t understand the proper biblical roles, perhaps it’s because they don’t understand how the admonition intersects with 21st century North American culture. Are pastors making this easier to understand or not?
Thanks for your comments. I enjoyed them. It’s amazing how many people are unaware of the issue. Thankfully, conferences such as this are addressing it. Also, I wonder if the discussion of such a topic could be more front and center in future conferences? That way everyone can go.
I read the trackback for this post. I have never read anything like what that person wrote. They said that there are two creation stories. They also referred to God as a ‘her’. Can someone explain this to me. Does anyone else reading this blog accept this reading of the text in Genesis 1 and 2?
Blake, I believe you’ve just had your first run-in with Feminist Theology. This is yet another attempt to remake God in the image of pop-philosophy. Says this theology, “Because some carry baggage with poor feelings associated with male figures, we ought not refer to God always (extreme versions replace “always” with “ever”) as male, but explore models of God as “Mother,” “Friend,” or “Lover.”
Like nearly any of the heresies from Pelagianism to “Open” Theism, the fundamental error here is the anthropo-centric approach to the issue. We have a problem: the concept of “Father” for some conjures concepts of abuse and pain. The erroneous solution: think of God as a Divine Mother rather than Father. The Biblical approach rather, is to recognize God’s transcendence of the human definitions of gender. If we stop trying to make God in our image, we understand an infinite, limitless Sovereign. Even if painful baggage follows human descriptors such as “Father,” we recognize that we serve a God who is not limited by such language and can lift the baggage from our shoulders.
Ok, I’ve gone on a bit of a tangent. I hope that helped though.