Page 11

Barth meets Austin and Searle

Page 11

At no point is the pressure for accommodation more strident in the

modern world than in the area of sexual ethics and sexual roles. It is at this
very point that there is the most pressure from within Evangelicalism to
deviate from our classical stance on Scripture. Let us look quickly at the
interpretation of Galatians 3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is
neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all
one in Christ Jesus. Some evangelicals have argued that all three of these
relationships are totally abolished so that there should be no role distinction
in society, church, or home between men and women.

This position ignores the canonical context, not to mention the Pauline

context. The Bible, for instance, clearly distinguishes between the origin of
these three relationships--the male/female distinction is established by God
at the creation, the Jew/gentile difference is a result of salvation history, the
slave/free distinction is regulated but not established by God at all.
Furthermore, Paul fleshes out the continuing relevance of these distinctions
in different ways. No one can read Ephesians 5 without acknowledging that
Paul believed continuing role distinctions between husband and wife were of
the deepest theological significance. A number of other passages would
indicate that he thought male/female distinctions important in the ministry of
the church. How, then, can evangelicals argue on the basis of Gal. 3:28 that
these distinctions no longer matter?

Some have argued that Paul's own age limited his understanding of

the principle enshrined in Gal. 3:28. We, these people say, are better able to
see that the principle of Gal. 3:28 was leading to an abolition of male/female
role distinctions. Thus by our own deeper insight we have dismissed the
plain and pervasive moral instruction of the New Testament.

This, indeed, is a "strange land" for those who believe that the Bible is

God's final revelation of Himself. The proper approach is to see how Paul
and other Biblical writers flesh out the general statement of Gal. 3:28 in their
other writings. Paul's point is certainly that the distinctions mentioned have
no relevance in terms of the full participation of people as members of the
body of Christ. There is no other issue that is putting more pressure on the
classical understanding of Scripture within Evangelical circles than this
issue.

While those with this position may say they are advocating no distinction, what they really mean is no

distinction in authority. But surely this is an illogical reading even of a de-contextualized Gal. 3:28. One
might argue that this de-contextualized statement ruled out all distinctions, but one could hardly argue that
it ruled out only distinctions in authority. After all, there was no clear "authority" distinction between Jews
and gentiles in the roman world--only a distinction of spiritual privilege.