Does God prefer men?
Nov 14th, 2009 by Cheryl Schatz
Recently I had a woman write me who was troubled by some Bible texts that seemed to indicate that God preferred men. I felt that the questions she posed and the answers I provided would be good to put on line in case there are other women out there who also have been troubled by these same questions.
Question: I have been struggling with a question for the past several weeks. Do I as a woman, have less worth in God’s eyes than a man does? Given that Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill the law…I was (and still am) struggling with several scriptures where women are concerned and the seemingly “double-standard.” I could not fathom why in Leviticus there is a law that states that women who give birth to male children would only be unclean for 33 days, but if they give birth to female children they would be unclean for 66 days.
Answer: Regarding the seemingly “double-standard” of the unclean period for a woman when she bears a girl which is double the period of the unclean period for a boy, it is not altogether clear why God created a different time period, but because of His character revealed throughout the Scriptures showing His love and justice, we can know that He will not be unjust towards women. Romans 2:11 tells us this clearly.
Romans 2:11 For there is no partiality with God.
So why is there a difference with baby girls? The Bible isn’t clear why the extra time period for uncleanness for the mother after the birth of a daughter, but there have been some suggestions by commentaries:
The reason she was unclean for a longer period for a girl is not stated, but perhaps a postnatal discharge lasted longer in the case of a girl…
The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures. Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary.
(3) the fact that the blood discharges after the birth of a female last longer or have greater toxicity than they do after the birth of a male
Vol. 3A: Leviticus The New American Commentary (183). Rooker, M. F. (2001)
Why the more extended time of uncleanness after the birth of the female child? Given the obsession with seeking male offspring, the regulation may have been to protect the wife from an overzealous husband. He might be inclined to resume marital relations too soon after the birth of a female to the physical discomfort and possible jeopardy of the wife.
The Pentateuch (2nd ed.) Smith, J. E. (1993)
The important thing that we should note is that the child was not considered unclean, it was only the mother. So while we do not know the biological influences on the mother’s body that resulted in her needing extra time for healing and for being considered “clean” from her discharge, we do know that God has promised us that He is not partial with people. Because of this promise we can know that He is not discriminating against female babies.
Question: Also, the issue of rape in the law. If a woman was raped, all the man need do was pay her bride price and marry her. What woman in what world would want to marry her rapist???
Answer: It is important to understand the culture of that day. The culture was based on shame and honor just as the Muslim nations carry that same culture of shame and honor today. A woman was required to be a virgin at her marriage so if she had been raped no man would want her because she was no longer a virgin. God’s law about rape protected the woman. It required the man who raped her to take her as his wife and provide for her as well as for the child that may be a result from that rape. The biggest stipulation was that although divorce was allowed in marriages, the man who was forced to marry the woman that he had violated was required to support her for the rest of his life because he could not divorce her. This would have been a deterrent to rape and it provided for the woman who would not have been able to be married as a virgin bride. The Bible Knowledge commentary puts it well by saying:
A man who raped an unbetrothed virgin was forced to marry her (after paying the bride-price of 50 shekels to her father) and had to forfeit the right of divorce. This protected, to a degree, the girl’s honor and assured her (and her child if she became pregnant from the rape) permanent support. This stipulation may also have served as a deterrent against rape since the man would have to live with that woman for the rest of his life. The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary
Question: Another issue that irks me: why was David silent when Tamar was raped by her brother?
Answer: Amnon was Davd’s first born son. David favored his sons even though they did evil things but this was not the only issue. The law said that Amnon was to be forced to marry Tamar and provide for her the rest of her life without any possibility of divorce but there is another law that conflicts with this one. Tamar states that Amnon’s rejection of her after the rape is worse than the rape itself since his rejection means that she will never be able to be married. The issue of David’s lack of forcing the issue is said to be a lack of responsibility:
David … was very angry. Fury and indignation were David’s reactions to the report of the rape (Gen. 34:7). Because he did not punish Amnon for his crime, he abdicated his responsibility both as king and as father. The lack of justice in the land would come back to haunt David in a future day (15:4).
The MacArthur Study Bible, MacArthur, J. J. (1997).
David somehow heard what had happened, and though he was furious he did not invoke the penalty prescribed by the Law. Perhaps this was because Amnon was his oldest son. But Absalom … hated Amnon.
The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures. Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary.
There is another serious issue that caused quite a dilemma. While the law was to be used to force the man who raped a woman to marry her, there was also a law that forbade a brother and sister to marry.
Absalom and Tamar were children of David by his wife Maacah. Polygamy was an accepted social arrangement in those days, but its evil consequences revealed it not to be the will of God for his people. Children of the same father were not supposed to marry (Lev. 18:9). This and other of God’s laws were often broken, always with serious consequences. The teacher’s Bible commentary, Paschall, F. H., & Hobbs, H. H. (1972)
So it seemed that the law conflicted here in this situation. David would have been in a quandary because the law both required the marriage and forbade the marriage because they were sibblings. As you can see from the culture, the woman’s virginity was of great value and a rape changed a woman’s life forever. In the middle east countries even now, if a Muslim girl is raped she may be killed by her family for the shame that this brought on them and some girls have been put into jail.
In the Old Testament law, God made sure that the woman who has been raped was taken care of which is a very kind thing to do for women. God’s concern was for the welfare of the woman. How did the law treat the rapist? The life of the rapist depended on the status and welfare of the woman. The law was that if a man raped a woman who was a virgin but who was engaged to a man, the rapist had to die. But if a man raped a woman who was a virgin but who not engaged (technically belonged to another man), the who who sinned against the woman must provide for her for the rest of her life.
It is obvious to me that God is looking out for the welfare of the woman who would be left without the possibility of a husband and without the ability to provide for herself. The law made sure that rapists understood the seriousness of raping and knowing that they would be stuck with her for life would be a deterrent . In this case the woman was always provided for because of God’s law.
When I read Buddhist texts I see sexism.
When I read Islam texts I see sexism
When I read Jewish texts I see sexism
When I read Christian texts I see …
I read the Bible everyday and live by it, but I still must ask the question, “Can we honestly say there is no sexism in it?
Hi Jay,
Welcome to my blog!
As far as the Bible goes, it does record sexism just as it also records murder, rape and adultery. The question is not whether there is a record of man’s sexism, but whether God demands it. It is my opinion that God does not. What I see instead is God’s law limiting the extent of sexism allowed in a very sexist culture. It wasn’t until Jesus broke down the barriers through His death and resurrection that the death of sexism was fully dealt with by the indwelling Holy Spirit. Is there still sexism in the church? You bet! But God is changing all of us as we grow in Christ and the wickedness of our hearts are being softened and changed as we allow the work of the Holy Spirit to form us into the image of Christ. I speak here to include myself since I too felt that women were somehow inferior. There was a time that I looked with suspicion at women who used their gifts in public. God has done a miracle in my own heart and for that I give Him all the glory and praise.
What are you thoughts on the story of Jephthah, and the sacrifice of his daughter?
Hannah,
The story of Jephthat’s daughter is a very tragic story of a rash promise used as a bargaining tool to get what Jephthat needed. It is actually an example of the ultimate abuse. The righteous person in the story turns out to be Jephthat’s daughter who not wanting her father to suffer for having a failed vow to the Lord, willingly offers herself to be killed by her father.
What is quite amazing is that after making a rash vow to the Lord and understanding the stupidity of having made his rash promise, he actually blames his daughter for bringing him trouble. It is an unfortunate event and one that should never have happened. However it is not a command by God for human sacrifice and there is provision in the law for the redemption of a sacrifice.
If a dog would have come out of Jephthah’s house first, the dog would not be considered a proper sacrifice as it was unclean.
The entire story is very unfortunate and a lesson regarding making hasty vows.
Concerning the extra time given for uncleaness for a female baby as opposed to a male baby I’ve had a couple friends who didn’t know each other come to the same conclusion. This is NOT based on the words of the Bible but on the inner prayer closet of a couple of women who also wrestled with wondering if God loved them less as women. So it should not be put forth as Bible fact, but as women wrestling with God and the conclusions they have felt impressed with in deep, sincere, earnest prayer.
Both these friends, independently, felt as though the extra time given daughters was an extra long bonding time that the mother and daughter needed in a culture that favored sons. It, as mentioned above, kept the father out of the picture to make impatient demands on his wife. It also kept out older brothers who might be favored over the daughter. Basically it set up a time for mother and daughter to just be who they were and bond as such outside the boundary of overwhelmingly male influence, in a little world of their own. Hopefully the bonding time would help and support them both as they worked to figure out how to navigate the sometimes choppy waters of a male-dominated culture.
AFA Jephthah. I don’t know if that has anything to do with gender. His daughter was simply the first one out to greet him and he was an idiot for making such a rash vow. Others most likely have a better idea of it than me.
What about Lot being called righteous by Peter even though he offered up his virgin daughters to the men demanding he hand over his guests for sex? How could he have been righteous?
Mara: I heard that story told one time to show that how a ‘male’ child was spared (Isaac) when he was to be killed, and the sacrifice was stopped. They compared it to the story of this poor girl, and I thought WOW people will twist all kinds of things to show their points.
The bible to me seems quite clear there is no favored gender no matter how much people wish to attempt to prove it. People are the ones that are sexist, and it sad that they don’t see it at times.
Your are right, Hannah.
That was way off the wall.
God asked for Isaac (then provided a lamb in his place). God never asked for Jephthah’s daughter, ever. That was all Jephthah idiocracy.
Who the heck said that? A Patriarch? Atheist? Feminist?
Who? And what was the point? Just curious since I have NEVER heard that comparison before.
That one is right up there with saying that Abigail was acting in an “independent spirit” (i.e. not submitted to her husband). Therefore the blood of her husband was on HER head. In other words, that teacher held Abigail responsible for the death of her husband because she wasn’t properly submitted.
(Forgive spelling errors, typos. Son is pressuring me off the computer. He has a paper to write.)
Lin,
David was called “a man after God’s own heart” yet he committed adultery and murder. Lot’s failure in offering up his virgin daughters was not what made him righteous. Lot failed in many ways just like all of the great men and women of faith did. However the Bible does not sugar coat the account to make them look better than they were. He was still a sinner who failed God and man at times.
Hannah,
This is the really sad part and that so many blame God for the sexism instead of humanity.
Mara,
Someone dear to my own heart told me that he believed God told him why a woman had a period each month and he said that it was to give a woman rest from the demands of her husband for a period of time. I never thought of it that way before. I guess we will have to ask God these kinds of questions when we get to Heaven.
Mara,
I agree. What on earth was he thinking???!!!
“Someone dear to my own heart told me that he believed God told him why a woman had a period each month and he said that it was to give a woman rest from the demands of her husband for a period of time. I never thought of it that way before. ”
If true, it would mean there was likely no menustration before the fall.
I agree about Lot. I also think it illustrates how living in a culture of sin affects us all and how we have to be vigilant in prayer and study. Lot hated all the sin around him yet was tempted to compromise with it.
I also think it illustrates how God worked through sin for His own Glory.
Lin,
I believe that God changed the woman’s conception after the fall so who knows what the original plan really looked like. Another question that we can ask God when we get to Heaven.
To answer the question of your post - NO
A friend of a friend had one of those brought back from the dead experiences a few years ago and reported that the people she saw in what she was pretty sure was heaven were genderless. What would be the purpose of gender in heaven? Perhaps we make way too much of it here and try to base our opinions on Scriptures which can be understood in a number of ways.
Thanks Sam for the comment. It is a good question regarding what gender differences (physical sexual differences) would have for their purpose in heaven.
By the way your comment was stuck in my spam box as there appeared to be a typo in your email address and the software assumed you were someone new.