Women, Slaves, and the Gender Debate: A Complementarian Response to the Redemptive-Movement Hermeneutic
An Accessible Complementarian Response
Cultures vary in times and places. Certain practices that are culturally acceptable in one part of the world may not be in another. Practices/behaviors that were, at one time, culturally acceptable in a particular culture may no longer be acceptable in that same culture as the years have passed or vice versa. In light of a world comprised of ever-changing cultures, the question arises as to how we are to apply the pan-culturally authoritative and unchanging truth of GodÃ¢ÂÂs Word to the oft-changing cultural practices and expectations of our day.
In terms of biblical interpretation, one hermeneutical approach that has developed over that last 50 years which attempts to deal with reading and applying the Scriptures in a world of changing cultures, has come to be known as the Ã¢ÂÂredemptive-movement hermeneuticÃ¢ÂÂ or the Ã¢ÂÂtrajectory hermeneuticÃ¢ÂÂ. Those who advocate the use of this interpretative method believe that Ã¢ÂÂthere are indications in the Bible that move us beyond the specific instructions of the Bible and toward an ultimate ethicÃ¢ÂÂ (emphasis original). For example, such an approach seeks to answer the question of why slavery, while mentioned in the Scriptures, is never expressly condemned. Taking the approach a step further, proponents seek to utilize a redemptive-movement hermeneutic to Ã¢ÂÂgo beyondÃ¢ÂÂ what the Bible proposes in terms of the role distinctions between men and women, thus abolishing any Scripturally prescribed distinctions (i.e., Egalitarianism). Though many scholars/authors advocating such an approach do not arrive at the following conclusion, some are using a trajectory hermeneutic to go even further, thereby condoning the practice of homosexuality.
Does the Bible indicate the validity of the redemptive-movement/trajectory hermeneutic (RMH, moving forward)? Should we move beyond the prescriptions of the Holy Scriptures toward an Ã¢ÂÂultimate ethicÃ¢ÂÂ? The ultimate resulting question is, as with slavery, how do we reconcile certain prescriptive and/or restrictive areas of Scripture when it appears there are also elements present that would appear to point toward a fully liberating ethic?
In his new book, Women, Slaves, and the Gender Debate: A Complementarian Response to the Redemptive-Movement Hermeneutic, Benjamin Reaoch (Ph.D., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) engages the arguments of RMH proponents (most thoroughly, Kevin Giles and William Webb), and provides a soundly exegetical and hermeneutical complementarian engagement and response. Reaoch states his thesis as follows:
The significant differences between the New Testament instructions to slaves and to women seriously undermine the conclusions made by the redemptive-movement hermeneutic. The fact that the New Testament Ã¢ÂÂpoints beyondÃ¢ÂÂ the institution of slavery does not indicate that it likewise points beyond GodÃ¢ÂÂs design for gender roles.
After a helpful introduction, which serves as a very accessible primer to the issues at large, Reaoch handles his engagement in 6 chapters, along with helpful concluding chapter and a chapter which examines the continuing discussions within the RMH debate. Beginning with a chapter entitled, Ã¢ÂÂThe Redemptive-Movement HermeneuticÃ¢ÂÂ, Reaoch surveys the surfacing and development of RMH through the writings of Stendahl, France, Longenecker, Thompson, Webb, Giles, and Marshall. Through brief profiles, he notes each author/scholars contributions to the RMH in terms of books, articles, and significant conclusions. Reaoch then summarizes the complementarian responses offered by Grudem, Schreiner, and Yarbrough. Utilizing these responses, he moves into what serves as an introduction to his study of slavery and womenÃ¢ÂÂs roles in particular.
Chapters 2 and 3, respectively, address slavery and womenÃ¢ÂÂs roles according to the Scriptures. Reaoch includes a helpful section addressing the manner and place of slavery in the ancient world. He then moves forward to engage the aforementioned scholarsÃ¢ÂÂ arguments and conclusions which he intersperses throughout his analysis, in which he structures by addressing the passages concerning each issue, the grounds for obedience in terms of slaves and women, and then the purposes for obedience. ReaochÃ¢ÂÂs organization provides for a very accessible survey and understanding of the issues at hand in light of the biblical data.
Chapter 4, entitled Ã¢ÂÂComparing the DataÃ¢ÂÂ assessed the Scriptural data that was presented in chs. 2 & 3, but focuses mainly on the differences between the passages concerning slavery and womenÃ¢ÂÂs roles. Ultimately, Reaoch draws the similarities from common purposes of obedience while the grounds for obedience show marked differences.
Chapter 5, Ã¢ÂÂHeremenutical Considerations: Part 1Ã¢ÂÂ, critically engages William WebbÃ¢ÂÂs work Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis. Reaoch examines WebbÃ¢ÂÂs idea of Ã¢ÂÂtheological analogyÃ¢ÂÂ and several aspects of WebbÃ¢ÂÂs guiding criteria.
Chapter 6, Ã¢ÂÂHermeneutical Considerations: Part 2Ã¢ÂÂ continues to critique WebbÃ¢ÂÂs work with particular attention given to the arguments that Webb gives to bind the slavery and womenÃ¢ÂÂs roles arguments together.
As Reaoch concludes, he summarizes the issues and avoids mere academia by demonstrating what is at stake in the debate as it relates to his role as a pastor, husband and father. Reaoch notes, Ã¢ÂÂThis study has not been an abstract, academic endeavor for me. As a pastor, I am zealous to teach and preach and lead in such a way that individuals are inspired and instructed to glorify God in every aspect of their lives, not least of which is the area of manhood and womanhood.
In sum, Reaoch provides a thorough and largely accessible summary, critique, interaction and response to the issues of trajectory hermeneutics from a complimentarian perspective. His writing is fluid, and his organization is clear. For those who have interacted with proponents of the redemptive-movement hermeneutic in general, or specifically, William WebbÃ¢ÂÂs work in particular, this is a first-rate response that is both scholarly and pastoral. I recommend it!
*A secure, digital copy of the book was provided by the publisher, at no charge, for the purpose of review. I was under no obligation to offer a positive review.
September 27, 2012