I just finished Aimee Byrd’s latest book, Recovering from Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. It was a good read! Concerning the title, I admit that I’m not very familiar with the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. I’ve heard of it, but I’ve not read any of their resources; the movement never interested me and I don’t follow online debates. Therefore it was helpful for me to read Byrd’s critique of the movement. I also enjoyed how Byrd highlighted the various stories in the Bible where women had leading roles. I’ve been convinced of many of Byrd’s points for years, but I still appreciate her teaching.
One part of the book I highlighted yellow was where Byrd critiqued the gender specific study Bibles:
Producing devotional Bibles specifically geared toward men and women separately shapes the way we do our devotions and the very way we read, interpret, and apply Scripture. It puts a lens of interpretation on God’s Word – the lens of biblical manhood and womanhood. The underlying message is tha tthere is a men’s version and a woman’s version to read. There is a male and female way to meditate on the Bible’s teaching. And this separates the sexes by our cultural gender paradigms. While the intentions of reaching men and women may be good, it conditions men and women to constant reflection on how God’s Word is relevant to their own sex. The emphasis is on the differences between men and women. I affirm that there are differences between men and women. God made male and female. But we need to be careful not to reduce us by our distinctions. Men are more like women than any other creature God made. Adam poetically acknowledged this when God made Eve. Men and women are not opposing beings; we are all human beings bearing the image of God. Offering two versions of Scripture separates and isolates our devotion time; ignores our likenesses, and misses all the important nuances in our distinctions.
The above quote is found in Aimee Byrd, Recovering From Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, p. 41.
Hammond, WI, 54015