[Editor's note: Yesterday, Gender Blog began a four-part series by Randy Stinson on baseball and biblical manhood. Part 1 introduced the series and today in Part 2, Stinson, who serves as president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, gives the first four ways in which he uses the game of baseball in the lives of his two sons to build Christian character and cultivate biblical masculinity.]

Play Ball: Umpires and Understanding Authority

Once a player steps out onto the field, the umpires control the game. As mentioned above, there are an enormous number of subjective calls: balls, strikes, infield-fly rule, fair, foul, out, safe, and the list goes on. There is no instant replay (yet!), and baseball is notorious for its "colorful" interactions between coaches, fans, players, and umpires. Entire games can hinge on any of these decisions.

But what I want my sons to understand is that submitting to the judgment of the umpires is part of the game. Imperfect authorities are going to make mistakes, they are going to sometimes show favoritism and they are sometimes going to avenge a rude fan or disruptive coach.

Too bad.

We trust in a sovereign God who is meticulous in overseeing all things and in our life will use unfair employers, rude people, poor judgment, and the like, to shape us into the image of Christ.

Principle for Manhood: Players do not argue with the umpire. They do not express disgust or disappointment with the umpire. That is the coach's prerogative. You do not blame the outcome of the game on the umpire and you do not use him as an excuse because your team did not play well.

Take One for the Team: Self-Sacrifice and Toughness

"Take one for the team" is a common expression in baseball that usually means leaning in and getting hit by a pitch intentionally. On an inside pitch, the batter turns his hip in slightly allowing himself to be hit in the back area and thereby getting a free walk to first base. This type of sacrifice can many times be the difference-maker in a game both in terms of score and morale.

Yes, it hurts, hence "take one for the team." But every baseball player knows that self-sacrifice and toughness wins games. This may sound harsh, but every fan knows it is part of baseball, and every man knows it is crucial to being masculine. Intentionally putting oneself in harms way for the good of another is at the heart of masculinity and only one who has cultivated a sense of toughness will be willing to do it. This notion points us to Christ, who set His face like flint to Jerusalem and the cross, willingly bearing the Father's wrath for the sins of His people.

Principle for Manhood: Get hit by the pitch if necessary or unavoidable. Then run to first base as if nothing happened. The men in the stands all high-five because they know there is a shortness of toughness, and they just saw some. Remember, "there is no crying in baseball!"

Slide! Obedience to Authority

Coaches are central to the game of baseball. While umpires represent an ultimate authority, coaches are the generals on the field, making all sorts of key decisions that will impact the outcome of the game.

One of the hardest things for young boys to do is to listen to their coach's base-running instructions. Proverbs is full of instruction to young men to not be so wise in their own eyes. Very often I see a young boy stop at first while his coach is yelling, "go to second!" The young man "didn't think he could make it." Very often I observe a young player running to second, watching the ball in the outfield instead of his third base coach, trying to be wise in his own eyes. And how many games have been won or lost by good and bad baserunning? Coaches continually have to tell young players if the coach makes the call, he will take the blame.

Authority is given by God for our protection. We should listen to those who have charge over us. Home, church, government, and even the Godhead, all have a structure that involves authority. It is part of the stamp of God on all of creation.

Principle for Manhood: Submit to the coach. Move in when he says to move in. Play deep when he says to play deep. Bunt when he says to bunt. Run when he says to run and slide when he says to slide!

You're Out! Unfairness

Because men are called to be leaders, providers, and protectors, they need to be accustomed to dealing with unfairness. The world is full of it.

One of the ways I determine maturity levels of my sons is how they respond to unfairness. Many times on the field they are direct recipients. On the pitcher's mound, the umpire calls a ball that was clearly a strike. At the plate, the umpire calls a strike that was clearly a ball. Playing first base, the umpire says you pulled your foot that you clearly know was on the bag. Playing shortstop, the umpire says you missed the tag you know you made.

How do they respond in those moments? Do they pout or throw their glove down? In certain cases, appeals may be made, but a man knows that in a fallen world, unfairness abounds, and God will sort these things out according to His pleasure.

Principle for Manhood: You do not cry or stomp your feet. You do not throw your glove, bat or helmet. Move on to the next play.

Tomorrow: Baseball and failure, humility, resilience, grace, mercy and honor.

Part 1    Part 2    Part 3    Part 4

Now that the hype of the Final Four is over, and since hardly anyone pays attention to professional basketball, its time to turn some attention to the "boys of summer." Baseball, otherwise known in our home as the greatest sport ever played, is the sport of choice for our family. Over the next three days, I will point out some ways in which we use the game of baseball in the lives of our sons to build Christian character and cultivate biblical masculinity.

Why We Love Baseball for Character Building

We believe that sports in general can help us observe our children in various contexts to see how their character is developing. As a dad it is particularly important to me. I am gone during the day because of vocational responsibilities and since my job is such that I cannot bring my children with me (such as a farming situation) I do not have the opportunity to see them in a crisis or under pressure.

Baseball helps me with this. Since the game is played at a slower pace than some sports, each play, and player, is highlighted on every pitch. You do not need to watch the game film later to know who missed a fly ball, who struck out, or who got thrown out stealing second base. I can easily observe what my sons do when they miss a ground ball, when they strike out, and when they are put in to pitch under a pressure situation with no outs and bases loaded.

The game is so full of subjectivity that I can easily see them in situations when they are treated unfairly. A ball is called a strike. A safe slide into third is called out. And most of the time, because of the easy access to players in the dugout, I can make mid-game character corrections, without waiting until we all get home.

I can see what they do when they lose big, when they win big. It gives me an opportunity to see what comes out of them in situations that I cannot possibly manufacture at home. I am not living for the day when my sons become the next Derek Jeter or Alex Rodriguez. In fact, I would generally not wish the life of a professional baseball player on anyone. And although we love to play the game, we are not living for it. It is a parental tool that also happens to be really fun.

Beginning tomorrow, I will look at the first four of 11 connecting points between baseball, biblical masculinity and godly character.

Part 1    Part 2    Part 3    Part 4

In New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ, NT scholar Thomas R. Schreiner discusses the NT understanding of men and women in a chapter on "The Social World of God's People." In a section examining the role of women, Schreiner highlights the prominent role that women play in the NT, particularly in Luke/Acts and John. Women fill vital roles in accomplishing God's purposes, are the recipients of Jesus' compassion, follow Jesus as faithful disciples, and play a significant part in the spread of the gospel. According to Paul's letters, "women were involved in the ministry of the church in remarkable ways," Schreiner writes, and a number of women are identified by Paul as "laborers" and "co-workers" in the gospel (p. 772). Men and women are "one in Christ, and have equal access to the promise of salvation" (p. 774). 

Yet this same Paul who declares "the fundamental equality of men and women in Christ" also affirms a difference in role between men and women (p. 774). "The equality between men and women," Schreiner affirms, "does not cancel out a difference in function or role" (p. 775). Paul clearly prohibits women from teaching or exercising authority over men (1 Tim 2:12). Attempts to explain away Paul's directive as a temporary restriction should be rejected, Schreiner contends, "for Paul grounds his directive in the created order—in Adam being formed before Eve (1 Tim 2:13)" (p. 773).

Schreiner argues that, according to Paul, women can serve as deacons but not as elders/overseers. The diaconal ministry is a supportive role, but the "qualifications for pastoral ministry include being apt to teach and the ability to lead (1 Tim 3:2; 5:17; Titus 1:9)—the very two activities prohibited for women according to 1 Tim 2:12" (p. 774). Thus, the new age inaugurated by Christ "clarifies that men and women are equal in Christ" but "did not signal an abolition of all role distinctions" (p. 776).

Schreiner also examines the NT passages on marriage. He warns that one must not restrict Paul's understanding of the husband-wife relationship "so that it becomes one dimensional." On the contrary, it is evident that Paul understood "that husbands and wives are to relate to one another as equals and co-heirs in the gospel" (p. 781). Once again, though, Paul's teaching on equality and mutuality "does not cancel out the particular responsibilities to which husbands and wives are called" (p. 781).

According to Ephesians, husbands are to show a sacrificial love for their wives. Wives are to "submit" to their husbands because the husband is the "head" of the wife, indicating that the husband's authority is in view. It is significant that Paul points to Gen 2:24 and declares that this husband-wife relationship is a "mystery" that "reflects the relationship between Christ and the church" (p. 782). "Since marriage mirrors Christ's relationship to the church," the specific roles assigned by Paul to husbands and wives "cannot be dismissed as a cultural accretion." Moreover, the fact that the husband's love is to be modeled after Christ's love for the church rules out severity and harshness. "[H]eadship is not to be exercised tyrannically or abusively," Schreiner insists, "since husbands are to nourish and cherish their wives" (p. 782).

Schreiner also observes Peter's admonition to wives to subject themselves to their husbands—even unbelieving husbands (1 Pet 3:1-7), with the hope that they might be won to the gospel. But, this submission "should flow from hope in God rather than fear." In the Greco-Roman world, to worship a God other than one's husband was counter-cultural. A wife's submission, then, is not absolute. In the most important arena of life Peter expects wives not to follow their husbands, but "to influence husbands by their gentle spirit and godly behavior" (p. 784).

Schreiner's New Testament Theology is a masterful work. Though some complementarians may occasionally disagree with his interpretation or theological perspective on other matters, Schreiner presents a clear, bold, and winsome picture of biblical manhood and womanhood. In keeping with the book's subtitle, we pray that his work will encourage God's people to magnify God in Christ.

Over the last thirty-four years, evangelical scholarship has produced a small handful of books offering to expound a "Theology of the New Testament." Writing a New Testament Theology is no small task. On the contrary, it is colossal. It requires a broad expertise of all twenty-seven NT books and the ability to highlight their diversity and unity. A NT Theology allows each NT author to have his own distinct voice, while also recognizing the one divine Author standing behind each human author who gives the whole NT (the whole Bible!) a unifying storyline. It is no wonder, then, that few evangelical scholars have been qualified—or willing—to step up to the challenge of authoring a NT Theology.

Since an author of a NT Theology attempts to treat the complex variety of issues that the NT addresses, one might ask, "How have the NT texts on manhood and womanhood in the home and in the church fared in these treatments?"

Two of the earliest works by two excellent scholars, George Eldon Ladd (A Theology of the New Testament, Eerdmans, 1974; rev. ed. 1993) and Leon Morris (New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986), are very good in many ways. But their discussion of the roles of men and women is minimal at best—with some NT gender-related texts not even receiving mention.

Two other scholars address the relevant biblical texts more directly. Donald Guthrie (New Testament Theology, InterVarsity, 1981) and I. Howard Marshall (New Testament Theology, InterVarsity, 2004) are prolific authors and have produced many fine commentaries on NT books. However, their understanding of passages dealing with manhood and womanhood is consistent with the egalitarian view. For example, both Guthrie and Marshall believe Paul's prohibition in 1 Tim 2:12 applied only to a local, first-century situation in Ephesus and is not meant for universal application. 

A fifth evangelical NT Theology is the exceptional work by Frank Thielman (Theology of the New Testament, Zondervan, 2005). Though his discussions on the relevant texts are brief, Thielman affirms that the NT teaches "a divinely appointed ordering of the sexes at creation." This order of creation "implies distinct roles in the church for each gender" (p. 419). However, Thielman argues that the verb authenteo in 1 Tim 2:12 probably means "that women should not exercise inappropriate authority over men [in the church], not simply that they should never exercise authority over men" (p. 418, n. 40, emphasis added). But in light of Andreas Köstenberger's study of the sentence structure in this verse in the book Women in the Church (2d ed.; Baker, 2005, pp. 53-84), this interpretation is very unlikely. Several evangelical egalitarian scholars—and even non-evangelical scholars—have commended Köstenberger's study for its sound exegesis (see also his article in the Spring 2005 issue of JBMW, esp. pp. 47-51).

To these works has now been added Thomas R. Schreiner's New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ (Baker, 2008). In addition to several books and commentaries on the NT, Schreiner has written many articles and essays on the NT gender passages, as well as co-edited Women in the Church (mentioned above) with Köstenberger. He is a rigorous scholar with a pastor's heart, and his New Testament Theology has been greatly anticipated.

Naturally, a NT Theology cannot address every possible topic in lengthy detail. However, when compared to the works mentioned above, Schreiner's book includes a fairly thorough and robust treatment of the texts dealing with manhood and womanhood. According to Schreiner, Scripture clearly teaches the equality of men and women, combined with a distinction in role for each. These two affirmations are not contradictory. Tomorrow's post will take a closer look.

Yesterday, we considered the depiction of Queen Susan "the Gentle" as a warrior in the film version of Prince Caspian—a significant departure from C. S. Lewis's book—and director Andrew Adamson's commentary on justifying this change. How should Christians respond to the image of women in combat?

After seeing the movie myself, I read reviews on several prominent evangelical Christian websites that offered a mixture of praise and criticism. Conspicuously absent in most of these reviews, however, was any concern over Susan's combat role in the film. It wasn't even mentioned. This left me wondering whether most Christians moviegoers—who read the book and then saw Susan slaying enemies on the battlefield—even batted an eye.

Perhaps many evangelicals will consider this commentary much ado about nothing. But that is precisely my concern. It is not surprising to me that the film's director would opt for a role for Susan more in keeping with contemporary culture. But have we as evangelical Christians come to accept unconsciously the idea of women serving in combat roles without noticing any conflict between this and the biblical view of men and women?    

It is not hard to see how Christians could become desensitized to the notion of women in combat. Given an entertainment culture that gives us characters like G. I. Jane, Xena: Warrior Princess, and countless female superheroes, Susan's role in the film-version of Prince Caspian may be considered rather tame. But given that her character was created by a popular Christian author for a widely-read series of children's literature, this might be a good opportunity to rethink this issue in light of Scripture.

In Old Testament Israel, the men—not the women—had the duty of serving in combat, when war was necessary (see, for example, Num 1:1-3). When the Lord pronounces destruction upon wicked nations, he declares that their troops will be as women (Jer 50:37; 51:30; Nah 3:13). Clearly, this was not a role God intended for them. According to Paul in Eph 5:25, it is Christ who gave up his life for the church—not the reverse. And it is the husband who is commanded to love his wife in the same way (5:28). According to evangelical historian Harold O. J. Brown, "Within both Judaism and Christianity, indeed almost universally in all human culture, the military profession has been reserved for males."

R. Albert Mohler Jr. writes, "A nation's character is demonstrated in many ways, and its treatment of women is one of the most significant indicators of cultural and moral health. . . . The dignity of women is to be defended by men, not undermined by vulnerability in the extreme conditions of combat." To refrain from sending women into combat is not to assign a status of inferiority to them; it is rightly to honor them and affirm their dignity. John Piper observes that a woman may actually be more courageous than a man at a given moment.

She may be ready to do some fearless deed of her own. A man's first thought is not that the woman at his side is weak, but simply that he is a man and she is a woman. Women and children are put into the lifeboats first, not because the men are better swimmers, but because of a deep sense of honorable fitness. It belongs to masculinity to accept danger to protect women.

It may be that in any given instance of danger the woman will have the strength to strike the saving blow. It may be too that she will have the presence of mind to think of the best way of escape. It may be that she will fight with tooth and claw to save a crippled man and lay down her life for him if necessary. But this does not at all diminish the unique call of manhood when he and his female companion are confronted by a danger together. The dynamics of mature masculinity and femininity begin the drama with him in front and her at his back protected — however they may together overcome the foe or suffer courageously together in persecution. A mature man senses instinctively that as a man he is called to take the lead in guarding the woman he is with.

In a culture in which women in combat (at least on the big screen) hardly attracts attention, may God grant that his church would not be numb to seeing this distortion exalted. May we as believers train up our sons and daughters with the beautiful vision of biblical manhood and womanhood — raising our sons to protect, and our daughters to affirm this protection, all for the glory of God.

(For further reading, see CBMW's "Resolution on Women in Combat," adopted in 1996.)

Part 1      Part 2