After taking a hiatus from my blog in order to work on some writing projects, I admittedly return to it with a strangely titled post. Yet, believe it or not, there is a way in which all followers of Jesus Christ, yes even you ladies, are my brothers. Let me explain.
There are a number of places in the New Testament where all
the followers of Christ in a particular place (male and female) are addressed
by the word, “brothers” (examples: Acts 11:29; 15:3, 7, 13, 23, 36; 18:18;
21:17; Romans 1:13; 8:12; 12:1; 1 Corinthians 1:10; 2 Corinthians 1:8;
Galatians 1:11; Ephesians 6:10, and so on). One of the most striking is Acts 1:15
where we are told Peter “stood up among the brothers.” Luke goes on to tell us
there were 120 people. We know from 1:14 that women were present in the crowd.
The question arises, “Why would the label, “brothers” be
used when women are present? Some might answer that since both the Jewish and
Greco-Roman cultures were male-dominated, it was just a matter of the women
being ignored and the men being the focus of attention. It is true these were
male-dominated cultures. However, that is not sufficient to account for this
phenomenon. Luke very deliberately emphasizes the role of women in the ministry
of Jesus (Luke 8:2-3; 23:49; and 23:55-56), highlights them as the first
eyewitnesses of the resurrection of Jesus Christ (24:1-10), and clarifies they
were among the group gathered to pray and to await the coming of the Spirit in
Jerusalem (Acts 1:14). Likewise, Paul singles out women to greet who were a
significant part of ministry in the church in Rome where he addressed the “brothers”
(see Rom. 16:1-2, 3, 6, 12). In Ephesus where he used the designation “bothers”
to refer to all, he stands out above the male-dominated Greco-Roman culture by
not just telling wives they have a responsibility unto their husbands, but
husbands also have responsibility to their wives (Ephesians 5:22-33). No, the
New Testament authors were no misogynists.
I believe it most likely there is a theological reason
behind the use of the term to refer to all believers. In Romans 8:14 Paul
writes, “all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.” Paul uses a
term here that is normally used merely of males—“sons”. However, he uses it to
refer to all believers: male and female. This seems to be not only supported
from the implication throughout the book that he is speaking to all the Christ
followers in Rome, but also from the parallel use of “children” in 8:17. I
think we discover the reason why “brothers” or “sons” can be appropriate titles
for male and female believers in the context. Paul writes that “you have
received the Spirit of adoption” (8:15) and “we are…heirs of God and fellow
heirs with Jesus Christ” (8:17). In both Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures it was
sons who were usually the heirs and males were the ones to be adopted. What Paul
is teaching here is that any true follower of Jesus Christ is a full-fledged heir
of all the saving blessings of God because each one is united to Christ and so
adopted into God’s family with all the rights and privileges that come with
that. Later in that same chapter we learn that God is working in us that we
might “be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the
firstborn among many brothers” (Romans 8:29, emphasis added).
It appears that Paul uses this language to show that no
matter who we are (male or female) we are full heirs, wholly adopted into the
family because of our union to the
Son. As such, it appears that the significance of a mixed group
being referred to as “brothers” is that an emphasis is being sounded—namely that
our salvation is absolutely dependent upon the who has for all eternity been in
a relationship to the Father as Son (John 1:14; 3:16; 1 John 4:9, NKJV). God
worked in the ancient world in such a way (especially Jewish and Greco-Roman
settings) that the sons were heirs, the ones who received firstborn
double-portions of inheritance, and males
the ones who were adopted so that we could see very clearly that only in the Son,
the firstborn,
the one who is the
heir, we find our full blessing and inheritance from God. In
other words, I believe there is a strong possibility that terms like “brothers”
and “sons” are used to refer to all believers at times to highlight our status
is a reality only because we are united to the Son , i.e. we are “brothers” of the
one who has won for us our adoption and our inheritance (see also Hebrews
2:11-17).
So, bottom-line, the term “brothers” is not merely saying
believers have a special relationship to one another—that we are part of the
family of God—it is also highlighting we have a special relationship to the
Son, Jesus Christ (brother), which brings a special relationship to God (full
adopted son and heir). So, when the New
Testament authors refer to fellow believers as “brothers,” they are not first
and foremost highlighting they are males who have a faith-family relationship
to other believers (though this is true for men). They are highlighting a
relationship to God the Father and God the Son.
Does this mean that we should not translate “brothers and
sisters” in those passages where “brothers” is used to refer to male and female
Christians? No. That can be a fine translation to bring out that men and women
are being addressed. Also, “sister” is a very appropriate address to use of a woman who is a fellow
follower of Jesus Christ (e.g. 1 Cor. 7:15). Nevertheless, whenever we see the
title “brothers,” applied to all followers, it is good for us to remember this is
calling us to consider our relationship to Jesus Christ and the full-salvation
blessings we have in him.
So, sisters, you are my sisters as part of the family of God
in Christ. But, sisters, you are also my brothers, my full-fledged, adopted
children of God and heirs with Christ; “Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to
promise” (Galatians 3:28-29)!
No comments:
Post a Comment