# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S316
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
is “not mere improvement but Transformation.”56 In the language
of the Apostle Paul, God’s sons and daughters in Christ are not
upgraded versions of the old: “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he
is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has
come. All this is from God …” (2 Cor 5:17–18a). “Let each of you
look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.
Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus”
(Phil 2:4–5). The new life we live as men and women has its source
in Christ Jesus. May He conform our relationships to the Creator’s
tapestry.
✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶

MAN AND WOMAN
IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD
Scriptural Affirmations and Implications
The goodness of man and woman:
individuality in community
At the end of the sixth day, Genesis 1:31 declares that all God
had made was “very good.” The very good stands apart after five
days of creation had been declared “good.” God pronounces His
creation of man and woman on the sixth day “very good,” for they
perfectly reflected His very image. Despite the subsequent fall into
sin and the total loss of our “likeness to God” with respect to righteousness, holiness and purity, it is still true that creation—humanity included—is judged to be “good” in some sense. Fallen man
and woman are “good” not because we are in any way righteous,
but because we reflect God in other ways specific to human nature.
Both Genesis 9:6 and James 3:9 refer to the image or likeness of
God, even in fallen humanity, and so condemn the taking of human
life and any cursing of human beings. From this comes an understanding reflected both in early orthodox teachers and our Lutheran
Confessions:

• That human righteousness has been totally lost after Adam, so also the
image of God’s righteousness in all people is lost and must be restored
by new birth.
• That in terms of natural abilities (for example, reason, intellect, speech,
and physical abilities that distinguish man from the rest of creation) the
image of God continues, although marred, deformed, and debilitated
by sin.57

One more aspect of goodness from the image and likeness of
God is still clearly reflected in humanity, despite our fallen nature.
Man is created not merely as the male, Adam, but as “male and
female.” Genesis 1:26–27 makes reference to humanity both in the
singular, “man” and “him,” and in the plural, “male and female,”
“them.” Both in our individuality (or “personhood”) and relationships, particularly the relationship of male and female, essential
aspects of the goodness of God’s creation of humanity are revealed.
Individual personhood, therefore, must be distinguished from
the fullness of humanity. Every individual is fully human, but an
individual alone cannot express the fullness of humanity. St. Augustine argued for peace and unity in society in the remembrance
that all men were created from one man, and “this fact should teach
mankind to preserve a harmonious unity in plurality.”58 Or, as C. S.
Lewis put it: “Jointly the two become fully human. ‘In the image of
God created he them.’ Thus, by a paradox, this carnival of sexuality
leads us out beyond our sexes.”59
Our creation as male and female therefore tells us that “We are
created not for life in isolation but for community, a community
which binds those who are different.”60 God’s “very good” work of
human creation continues to be seen in this beautiful fact that from

316

the beginning, we are made not to stand alone, but together. As
individuals, we were made not to be isolated tangled threads, but to
be part of a divine tapestry reflecting His beautiful design.
This determines how Christians understand human personhood.
In contemporary society personhood is often understood autonomously, in isolation from relationship. “I am my own person,” is
our declaration, by which we intend to assert a measure of independence from accountability to others. Such a perspective does
not acknowledge that individual identity is thoroughly connected
to relationships. Especially within marriage, but also in our other
relationships, to make autonomous personhood the ideal is dangerous.61 To the contrary, our creation as male and female shows that
while each individual is unique and fully human, personhood is not
distinct from, but dependent upon relationships. I am not some autonomous person against the world—I am a person who is always
united in relationship to other persons as son or daughter, father,
mother, husband, wife, brother, sister, coworker, friend. I am not
and cannot be a human person apart from my relationships. Individuality cannot be separated from community.
The procreative paradigm
The human individuality-community connection is clearest with
respect to our nature as male and female. In the unique combination of male and female persons there is a completed humanity
which is able to procreate and pass on the image of God (albeit
in a marred and corrupted sense). Moreover, in our male and female uniqueness, humanity exhibits two very different types of
individual personhood which are able to live with one another in
a community that is enriched, not diminished, by our differences.
“[T]he fellowship for which we are created is a fellowship of those
who are different and who yet are joined in a personal community
of love.”62
If we are to draw implications from creation as male and female
for a proper understanding of the complementarity of human individuality and community, we are compelled by Scripture’s story to
highlight marriage, as this document does. “For this reason a man
will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they
will become one flesh” (Gen 2:24 NIV). Both our Lord Jesus and
His apostle Paul draw the proper understanding of marriage from
Genesis 2:24. Marriage requires a loosing of the bond with father
and mother for the sake of a new bond: the faithful union of man
and woman which culminates in their becoming one flesh. From
this text, Jesus identifies divorce as a sign of sin in its failure to
observe that what God has joined, man must not separate (Matthew
19:1–9). From it, Paul insists that husbands must love their wives
as they love their own bodies since the two are one flesh (Eph
5:29–31). When God blesses a marriage with the birth of a child,
the child is in every sense the “one flesh” of his or her mother and
father. There, in the little child, we see the most obvious earthly
result of the goodness of individuality in community.
Implications beyond the paradigm
The goodness of individuality in community goes beyond procreative marriage itself. A childless couple is also able to exhibit,
richly and beautifully, the blessings and goodness of individuality in community. Every marital union of faithful, committed love
will make known God’s intention that all individuals are called
into community. Godly marriage takes us beyond our individual
identities, so that we give ourselves to another. Indeed, the childless couple may more easily model a life of service to others than
couples whose commitment to their children makes it more difficult to engage in generous love toward the wider communities of
church and society.63
2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 316

4/15/10 2:40 PM