It has become a common trope to argue that Bible calls us to Christlikeness, not biblical manhood and womanhood. This is a category error. It undermines Christlikeness by turning it into something abstract, gnostic, idealized, even inhuman. It’s also antinomian.
ASSUMING DIFFERENT SHAPES
Christlikeness looks different in different domains. Just consider: Christ offers particular commands to women and others to men; some to masters and others to bondservants; some to fathers and others to children; some to young men, others to old men, and still others to older women; some to pastors and others to church members. He has also ordained that some be born Gentile and some Jew; some barbarian and some Greek.
In each of these locations, Christlikeness assumes a certain shape. It bears different responsibilities, possesses different resources, faces different challenges, seeks various ends. Yet the Lord and Savior of his people has good purposes for each, and for every changing time and season. He means to fashion a body, not produce robots on a conveyer belt.
So, yes, our goal should always be Christlikeness. The harder question is always, “How does Christ mean for me to live here, in this domain, with these responsibilities, roles, resources,
To continue...read the full-length post originally published on this site.
