Biblical equality or soft-core feminism?

I stated earlier that Vaun Swanson's argument for women's ordination was neither helpful nor persuasive for one glaringly obvious reason. Several readers have taken a stab at what that reason is and have made the general observation that it is an argument rooted in cultural, rather than biblical, considerations. That is good, because it confirms that I was not alone in noticing not only Swanson's lack of engagement with Scripture and Christian tradition, but also her eagerness to bow at the altar of cultural relativism.

Swanson represents an organization known as Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE). I first became aware of this organization while in seminary and never cared much for it. Even though I was rather agnostic on the issue of women's ordination at the time, I never appreciated the manner in which the CBE folks rammed their agenda down our throats at chapel services once per semester through the indignant preaching of a woman with a chip on her shoulder or a whiny-voiced man with a guilt complex. Much like the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy nor Roman nor an empire, Christians for Biblical Equality seems to be pushing an agenda that is neither Christian nor biblical nor equal. Indeed, the term "biblical equality," when employed in the advancement of the organization's agenda, is little more than a euphemism for soft-core feminism.

True "biblical equality" is defined early on in Scripture:

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them. (Genesis 1.27)

Biblical equality is rooted in the creation of human beings, male and female, in the image of God. It is an equality of being, not an equality of doing. That men and women have different roles to play in creation does not make one superior and the other inferior. It is all too common for advocates of "biblical equality" to engage in a subtle game of obfuscation, conflating the larger issue of women in ministry with the more narrow question of women's ordination. Their aim is to marginalize opponents of women's ordination by making it appear as if they oppose women in ministry altogether. There are, of course, plenty of biblical and historical examples of women engaging in various forms of ministry. But there are also plenty of biblical and historical reasons why the church reserves the particular ministry of elder/presbyter/priest to men. I will eventually get around to delineating those reasons as time permits, but suffice it for now to say that a nefarious desire to hold women back or prevent them from utilizing their spiritual gifts is not one of them.