CBMW: Christian Feminists, Complementarians, and Are Men Protecting Their Position of Privilege?

179 thoughts on “CBMW: Christian Feminists, Complementarians, and Are Men Protecting Their Position of Privilege?”

1. Shannon H- thanks for the humor . No need to test it out by joining a patriarchal church 😉 I did the legwork for ya.

   Julie Anne said, “That makes me wonder – – how would a patriarchal man treat a young lady visiting their church who didn’t adhere to the patriarchal lifestyle? Do they brush their role aside and let her do her thang or do they hang onto their perceived notion of authority. Shannon – – can you go test this out for us and report back? LOL?”

   Definitely the latter. A single woman in SG is to submit to all men (a major beef I have with the teaching I used to ascribe to, and now challenge my single friends still in SG on.) For example, care group leaders all have “assistants”, who are either their wives or a single woman who is to “submit” to the single man leading. Meaning, the Assistant must defer to the Leader for even trifle decisions that affect the group. The main skewing I observed of gender roles in SG was the lack of freedom given to women, married and single, to make decisions for themselves. Married women would always say they need to “see if it was alright with my husband” when making even non spiritual decisions like making plans to see a friend, and single women were expected to “seek counsel” from the male leaders in the church on many aspects of their lives. I see SGM and others taking what IS in the Bible and adding what ISN’T, creating a legalistic list of how “biblical femininity and masculinity” should look.

   I could list many other examples, but I’m in a good mood and would like to stay that way;)

   To Wesley Roy’s critique of Julie Anne noting the close relationships of SG and CBMW, that was no exaggeration. CBMW’s tenets were regularly referenced and directly quoted in sermons in SG churches, and used as a case for very specific legalistic “application” we were to draw from Scripture passage at hand. A whole culture was created on the foundation of those extra biblical teachings. The hypocrisy of the system they have created needs to be challenged. Women have been oppressed and silenced to the point of their claims of abuse being dismissed and even been told the abuse is due to their own sin. Whether or not CBMW agrees with SGM’s recent handling of things, they certainly have not spoken up to say otherwise.

   LikeLike

2. I have a unique position on these trends. I am currently watching friends go down the path as dictated by Sir Mohler and his “Friends”. Y’all, this is incredibly painful to witness. In case you are wondering just how influenced my college friends are, Phillip Bethancourt taught my freshman Sunday School class before attending seminary under Mohler. He is now considered to be Mohler’s protege and thought of as “Mohler Junior”. Many of the younger men (not women) in our college group were influenced to follow Phillip to seminary. They did not necessarily grow up in complementarian homes but their marriages are very much so. The term “submission” is hammered home at all times. When one friend wanted to travel back for her friend’s wedding, her husband said “no” and that she would be a better example to her friend by submitting than by being foolish in the care of her family and forcing the issue. Kinda hard to argue with that. These women were once incredibly strong women, ready to change the world. Now all they can hope for is that possibly their husbands will be called to the mission field and they can follow. These examples are the end result of the CBMW’s formula of how to have a perfect marriage and family. And it is not only men who are pushing the agenda and willfully taking a leadership role. There are many women who are also pushing the comp agenda and encouraging women to make their husbands lead appropriately.

   If CBMW perspective is how you define perfection, I will pass. I am a disabled woman and I grew up with the men in my family taking care of housecleaning so as to relieve the burden on my joints. That alone pretty much makes me a heretic in the comp world. 🙂

   LikeLike

3. Thank you, RP. Wesley, can you please read RP’s comment two times? LOL. She speaks from experience. I’ve been reading Sovereign Grace stories for the last 5 years. There is a reason I brought them into this discussion. I’ve been reading about CJ’s very close involvement with these CBMW leaders. CJ himself is a council member. And here is the listing of board of directors.

   I found this little piece on a Google search from someone who experienced CJ’s brand of Biblical womanhood. Tell me if you think this is okay:

   I have suffered under their patriarchal system. CJ Mahaney is numbered among the prominant leaders that embrace the theology of CBMW.

   Also, when we were members, my husband and I tried to get marital counseling. There was some domestic abuse involved and instead of addressing the abuse, I was blamed for being unforgiving (Note: I had about five minutes to try to get control of my emotions, dh said, “sorry,” and I didn’t immediately say, “I forgive you,” and, because of that, I was the problem.

   I was always the problem because I wasn’t a submissive enough wife.

   LikeLike

4. It is not just the Spirit that is a ezer/help, it is God. An ezer/help is someone who has the power or strength to help someone or some group who needs help. Wesley should use the Bible’s meaning of the word ezer/help, not our culture’s meaning. And the full phrase in this case is ezer kenegdo or help face-to-face or help equal-to.

   LikeLike

5. Wesley,

   Concerning my comments you say, “When your hermeneutic is applied then people are able to justify enslaving Africans and African-Americans because they are different.” I will ignore what appears to be a strategy of ascribing inherent racism to my arguments, but excuse me. I am the one who is specifically and emphatically saying that the ownership of one person by another is and always has been abhorrent. My whole point is based upon the contention that slavery is never acceptable. You are the one saying that the Roman form of Slavery was acceptable, at least in Paul’s day. You provide practical explanations as to why we do not have slavery today, but you do not explain how it could have been morally acceptable in Paul’s day, while being morally unacceptable today. It was not morally acceptable in Paul’s day, nor is it morally acceptable today. Likewise, the treatment of women in Paul’s day was not acceptable, nor is the treatment of women today acceptable.

   As to your contention that you will go with the entirety of Scripture, I contend that I have already given you a Scripture that you are not going with. Again: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28 ESV). You cannot go with your reading of Paul as to the role of women in the church, and at the same claim to be going with Paul in Galatians 3:28. That would require an impossible mental gymnastic.

   There is only one option that I can think of that preserves the notion that Scripture is inerrant. It must be conceded that, in describing the role of women in the church, Paul has been misunderstood and/or misapplied.

   LikeLike

6. I know I’m late to this discussion, but it seems the whole comp/egal debate is majoring on minor issues. I believe 1 Cor. 13 and all the “one another’s” of scripture take precedence over the need to enforce and follow through with these gender role descriptions (which are different depending on who you ask).

   It breaks my heart to hear this quote:

   “I was always the problem because I wasn’t a submissive enough wife.”

   Majoring on the minor.

   BTW: This may seem picky, but it’s complementarian with an “e”, not complimentarian.

   LikeLike

7. God is described as an ezer to David. Eve is described as an ezer to Adam. So please explain patriarchy carrying out the Edenic mandate of Eve being a “helper” to Adam, since that is the translation of ezer. Was God submitted to David? BTW, Paul gets his idea of women submitting to their husband from Eve being an ezer to Adam.

   LikeLike

8. Good point, Monique – The spelling reinforces the intended meaning of the word. ComplEment refers to one spouse completing the other, not like paying a kind compliment. I’m pretty sure that’s what I heard Piper say in an audio I listened to a while back.

   LikeLike

9. Don – Welcome and thanks for your comment. The information on ezer/help is very helpful to the conversation.

   LikeLike

10. one detail on how our church is currently being run – yes the sr. pastor does hold the position of “final say”…however, he doesn’t lord over others. And point in fact, we hold monthly “leadership” meetings that include the wives. and we have complete input to all decisions being made. In fact the pastor’s wife and I run the nursery and all decisions in that area are ours to make. We are very deliberate in letting people “own” the areas of ministry they step into and are called to. We say leadership meetings only because we haven’t come up w/ a better term, because we don’t want to create an us or them feeling, but there is the fact that we four couples are the ones that are completely accountable, and doing the major work of the ministry for the (very small) church. there are definitely decisions in the daily business of the church that need to be made, and we don’t need 20 people to make those decisions. Also the idea that we are all equal before God is quite correct. However, there are absolutely differences in people in general where some lead and some follow. It is neccessary for some things to get done. Believe me we offer many, many opportunities for others to get involved, take leadership of areas etc. but there are many that just don’t move off the pew, despite our best efforts of encouraging them to do so.

    LikeLike

11. A bit about the “role” of the woman: “She extends her hand to the poor, and she stretches her hands out to the needy.” Proverbs 31:20

    Yup, she stretches her hand out to those needy, alright, like the abused, when she should really be staying home taking care of her husband. Yup. Will the real proverbs 31 woman please stand up?

    LikeLike

12. Agreed, the priesthood of all believers, as well as godly leadership, are both in the Bible. One of the reasons for reaction among many of us is that there has been too much of the [wrong kind of] leadership, to the point of dependent and unhealthy sheep and a huge neglect of the ministry of the priesthood of all believers. People have not been encouraged in their giftings. They have not been affirmed, mentored, and allowed to use what Christ has given them to edify the church.

    Somewhere in this struggle for greater harmony of these two biblical components and a disentangling from beliefs and practices that have been unhealthy, stifling, and just spinning wheels, there is a hope that people will find their way back to NT biblical ideals. After people have processed what has NOT worked for them in the past, they will be confident to take risks with and for God in fresh new ways in His Kingdom.

    LikeLike

13. Barb, that’s exactly why I walked away from the traditional church; it’s very set up generally encourages passivity and prevents Christians from exercising their priesthood.

    LikeLike

14. Gary W. I am not justifying slavery in any form. Just as God gave instructions for polygamy though it was not sanctioned so He did for slavery.

    Your premise that there is inherent inequality in differing roles and levels of authority is faulty and that is why you see a conflict with Paul’s one inerrant sentence in Gal. 3:28. Remember this sentence is written to refute the Judaizers attempt to equate their culture to the Gospel. It is not intended to promote the Gentile culture or demonize the Jewish culture but simply to show that no culture, including American culture, equals the Gospel.

    A difference in authority does not relegate one to a position of inferiority as a human when it occurs in the home, church or work place. Different roles does not mean different degrees of humanity. It simply means different roles.

    Simple.

    Now will people abuse their authority? Yes! Not because their is a difference of roles but because humanity is corrupted by sin. No need to deny a clear teaching throughout the body of Scripture in order to attempt to bridle the sinful nature of humanity without the Gospel. Egal. will not fix this because women are as power hungry and abusive as men without the Gospel. Women will protect their position as fiercely as any man. Women will abuse their positions as pastors just as quickly as any man. We are absolutely equal in our sinfulness.

    LikeLike

15. Barb, my experience is that pastors don’t just neglect the ministry of the priesthood of all believers. They will actually crowd out those who are attempting to serve in their gifts. I think this is partly because pastors are used to being the center of attention, and they don’t like sharing the spotlight with those whose giftings are similar to or overlap their own. In my case maybe it is also because I like teaching directly from the Bible, even if there is a Sunday school quarterly, and I don’t always know when I am seeing something in Scripture that must be approached with caution because it is contrary to the particular pastor’s understanding. Also, fresh insight seem to be threatening.

    LikeLike

16. Wesley,

    Maybe you would be willing to go back, read your own comments, and explain how your were not justifying the Roman, and then Egyptian, forms of slavery. Certainly you seem to be taking the position that it was proper for Paul to accept and even enable the Roman form of slavery inasmuch as there were certain ways in which it did not share the evils of American slavery.

    If you are now acknowledging that no form of slavery is acceptable, we are back to my original point. If we are not bound to join in Paul’s acceptance and enabling of slavery, maybe, just maybe, we are not required to recognize Paul’s instructions regarding the treatment of women in a misogynistic culture. Slavery was a fact of life that Paul had no ability to change, and he taught and acted within that reality. First century misogyny was a fact of life Paul had no ability to alter, and he taught and acted within that reality. While we can learn from the manner in which Paul dealt with evil cultural practices he had no ability to change, we dare not apply his teachings and examples in a manner that perpetuate evil, whether in the form of slavery, misogyny or otherwise.

    While our culture is corrupt in many ways, it has made significant progress in overcoming sexism and other forms misogyny, though primarily in the secular realm. On this issue the conservative, fundamentalist and evangelical churches largely choose to perpetuate the sinful, dehumanizing practices of first century culture. You must choose. You can join in what is good about American culture, or you can hunker down and continue to promote the first century devaluation and subjugation of women. The culture has joined the church in making significant, if inadequate, strides in the areas of racism and civil rights. It is time for the Church to joint the culture in overcoming misogynistic views and practices regarding women.

    LikeLike

17. Gary W. Scripture simply regulates the evil of slavery as it regulated the evil of polygamy.

    The fault is in that this audience feels their is an inherent inequality in different roles and levels of authority in the home and church but gladly accept this and seek to move “up the ladder” in the work force everyday. Seems a bit inconsistent. Either different authority levels and roles are evil are they are not. It doesn’t change when you are the manager.

    Paul’s one inerrant statement in Gal 3:28 must be read in context. Paul makes this statement while addressing the Judaizers’ error of equating their culture to the Gospel. It is not written to affirm the Gentile culture or demonize the Jewish culture but simply to show that no culture, including American culture, is equal to the Gospel. Galatians is not about human interaction but about the Gospel.

    Neither the Egal/Comp position are to blame for abuse of authority. Women are just as power hungry and abusive as men. Women are just as adamant about protecting their “positions of privilege” as men. The problem is not Egal/Comp but the problem is the corruption of sin. This can only be cured by the Gospel.

    LikeLike

18. Sorry about the repeated post. I didn’t see my original reply post.

    Gary W. I do not equate distinct roles with misogyny and subjugation. They are just simply different roles based on differences between men and women taught by principle and practice throughout Scripture. The abuses do not result from the Egal/Comp positions but from humanity’s sinfulness.

    Gary W said:

    APRIL 3, 2013 @ 5:38 AM
    “Barb, my experience is that pastors don’t just neglect the ministry of the priesthood of all believers. They will actually crowd out those who are attempting to serve in their gifts. I think this is partly because pastors are used to being the center of attention, and they don’t like sharing the spotlight with those whose giftings are similar to or overlap their own. In my case maybe it is also because I like teaching directly from the Bible, even if there is a Sunday school quarterly, and I don’t always know when I am seeing something in Scripture that must be approached with caution because it is contrary to the particular pastor’s understanding. Also, fresh insight seem to be threatening.”

    I agree with you totally on this one Gary. I don’t think the solution is to abandon the churches because of this error any more than the solution to the sin and error in the world is to abandon the world. The solution is to be salt and light in the churches and to strive to change these errors.

    LikeLike

19. Wesley, or anybody,

    Here is something of a thought experiment. At Ephesians 5:21 we learn that we are to submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. The working assumption seems to be that the one who is instructed to be in submission is under the authority of the one to whom they are required to submit. So, here are two questions relating to the requirement of mutual submission: What authority does a wife have over her husband (and please don’t limit answers to what I believe is the one specific answer given is scripture)? What authority does a single, female church member have over her male pastor?

    LikeLike

20. Like so many other issues in Christianity today (issues mind you, that are not central to the gospel message), the complementarian/egalitarian issue has blown up to one of nearly first importance, with staunch supporters taking extreme sides, often times leaving little room for gray areas. Personally, I fall somewhere in the middle. I do recognize that God made men and women, in general, with different, but complimentary strengths and weaknesses. For example, men, in general, tend to be more agressive than women. Channeled properly, this can be a strength (and obviously if abused can also be a bad thing). Women, in general, tend to be more gentle. This can be a great asset in many ways, and likeways with agression, if not channeled properly, can also be a weakness. Through study, we have learned that men and women do, in general, think differently and tend toward different personality and psychological bends depending. Again, and I can’t emphasize this enough, these are general trends and not true of every individual. These different bends suit people better in some roles than others.

    For example, women tend, in general, to be better caretakers of young children than men. Does this mean though that a woman’s place is to stay at home and take care of the children? Not necessarily. If a woman has aspirations for a career outside of the home, and she feels called by God to do so, then those aspirations should be encouraged. Could figuring out what to do about the kids be a challenge? Certainly. But when would raising children not ever be a challenge in some way?

    I think the New Testament makes pretty clear that men are supposed to lead their families (lead, NOT rule). Amongst Christians at least, I think it can be said with pretty good confidence that the greatest leader was Jesus. How was Jesus the greatest leader? He was the greatest servant. If for example, a couple are married with children, and they come to find that the gifts that each of them have best suit for their roles to be reversed from that of the traditional, then the best way for the husband to lead would be for him to encourage his wife to work while he stays home with the children. By doing so, at least in this instance, he is leading his family to fulfill and use their God given gifts and strengths to their greatest potential.

    Yes, men and women, in general, are hardwired differently, but they are both equally important and must follow God in fullfilling his call for their life, whether it be staying home and raising kids, working outside of the home to support the family, or somewhere in between.

    As for the issue of teaching in the church (which I see as a somewhat separate issue), the Bible seems to say to me that women should not hold the office of head pastor. Honestly though, I do not hold to this view too firmly, and am somewhat skeptical about it. I do know that the culture of ancient Israel was vastly different to that of 21st century America, and so this really may be a moot issue in today’s church. Basically, I am uncertain of what to think about churches where a woman is head pastor. I am not completely comfortable with it, but I am not completely disturbed by it either. I hold that neither view is essential though, and I believe we will see women in heaven that were pastors of wonderful churches. Furthermore, along this same vein, I see no issue whatsoever of a woman leading a ministy within a church, or leading in a civil office outside of the church. I wouldn’t bat an eye at a female youth pastor or a female president (so long as they are qualified).

    LikeLike

21. The pastor one is the easier so I will answer it first. A single lady in a church has the authority/responsibility to question any and all teachings of the pastor in light of the Scripture. She has the authority/responsibility to give input and evaluate how the teachings are lived out in the congregational life of the church. She also has the authority/responsibility to evaluate and address all administrative decisions the pastor makes based on Scriptural principles, proper ethics.

    The wife has the authority/responsibility to point out errors in practice or understanding of Scripture in the husbands life. The wife has the authority/responsibility to evaluate and call into question any administrative decisions made by the husband based on Scriptural principles, proper ethics, and the well being of the family.

    I think the disconnect is that comps and egals are seeing each view only through the lenses of the unscriptural extreme of each. In reality we both practice a hybrid. The only real difference is the pastorate of churches which we all agree is not a leadership position and has no real authority so that is a non-issue 🙂 .

    LikeLike

22. JoeJoe you are my hero. 🙂

    LikeLike

23. Wesley – I liked JoeJoe’s comment, too. I’d like to know why he is your hero. That might help me understand where you are coming from.

    LikeLike

24. He just said exactly what I have been saying except he did not claim to be a comp. nor is he a pastor and therefore already suspect so there is a better chance of it being well received. If I had said that men and women are wired differently therefore by design they usually (emphasis on usually not always) excel in particular areas I think it would not have been received nearly as well.

    LikeLike

25. Wesley said–I think the disconnect is that comps and egals are seeing each view only through the lenses of the unscriptural extreme of each. In reality we both practice a hybrid.

    I haven’t been reading this blog long enough or read near enough comments to have an idea of what Wesley’s stance on various subjects are, let alone if I would agree with them or not or to what degree, but I do agree with the statement above. I think this is true not just of this issue, and not even just with other issues in the church. It is a disconnect in nearly any issue where there are two dominant and opposite sides of the issue. That is why sometimes (though not always) lables can be tricky. I certainly lable myself a Protestant Christian, but I have some difficulty in terms of a lable of tradition or denomination. I grew up Southern Baptist, and in many ways still identify with that tradition (I see my beliefs being closer to those of a baptist than a methodist for example), but there are some things which cause me to distance myself from it at the same time. A good example would be my stance on alcohol. I’d be happy to have a glass of wine or a bottle of beer. In some southern baptists churches, I’d be looked down upon for that.

    In terms of complementarianism vs. egalitarianism, I guess you could say I’m a soft complementarian. I am somewhat uneasy with the idea of a female head pastor (though as I said before, I am not firm in this) and I believe that the New Testament says it is the responsibility of the man to lead his family. My views on what this looks like, though, tend to differ from what I read about most mainline leaders of complementarianism. So am I really a complementarian? I guess it depends on who you ask. To the most conservative, I’m probably more of an egalitarian.

    LikeLike

26. Julie Anne,

    I reviewed the resume of Leaders and looked at their Doctrinal Foundation within the CBMW and SGM, I don’t find it surprising why people are vulnerable to abuse.

    You raised an interesting question at the heading of this blog “Are men protecting their position of Privilege?”

    After what happen to my wife and the shunning (and the crap) that she went through with a couple of Calvinistic women in our church, you may have isolated only one gender in your question.

    Some of the Male Calvinistic Leaders in these organizations have wives who are supportive of these Leaders Doctrines who are capitalizing more control, that they authenticate their beliefs with their abusive interpretation of Scriptures.

    Thankfully you are addressing the abuses that is occurring.

    In most of your recent postings I have noticed that the abused have been surrounded by Leaders that are (in one form or another) Calvinist and practice an abusive and controlling interpretation of scripture that are making some of their following, vulnerable for mental or physical abuse.

    Maybe your question should read “Are Calvinistic Men and Women Protecting their position of Religious Privilege, Power and Prestige?”

    LikeLike

27. Wesley, I’m not sure about your statement here: “The only real difference is the pastorate of churches which we all agree is not a leadership position and has no real authority so that is a non-issue.”

    This seems confusing in two ways. 1. Being a pastor, lead or senior pastor or an associate, IS a leadership position. and 2. “we all agree”. Not sure who we are and that we all agree on this point that you have made re pastor/leadership.

    LikeLike

28. I think both JoeJoe and Wes are mischaracterizing themselves as “complementarian”. Even the most radical egalitarians recognize that people have different strengths and abilities, as well as different comfort zones for what they do in life, and some of those things are clearly correlated with gender, but the distributions on most things do over lap so that many men have more of X than some women and many women have more of the same X than some men. ( I think the only 100% dividing concept is that, at some ages in life, women may be able to bear children, and only men can provide a Y chromosome.)

    But the complementarian position is that gender is determinative, according to the Bible, that the man must make the final decisions in the family, that women cannot be in the pulpit or lead anything other than a children’s or women’s ministry, because that would make then have some “authority” over men.

    Wes’s statement of authority of a woman over the pastor is total anathema to most complementarians. But it fits well with historical Baptist concept of the priesthood of all believers (and I prefer “each and every believer”) making us all equal in authority in the church. That is an egalitarian statement, Wes.

    So I think the label “complementarian” does not fit either of you well.

    LikeLike

29. Wesley,

    I like your 8:13 answers to my 7:29 questions. When I get home this evening I’ll try to remember to look up and post the one Scripture I am aware of that says a wife has authority over her husband. At least this is what is said in the translation I customarily use.

    As to our discussion on the place of women in the church, thank you for patiently indulging me. While we won’t come to agreement on the this particular question, I would understand that we are in agreement in approaching Scripture as inerrant and authoritative. Our understanding of Scripture, on the other hand, is surely fallible. Even what we do understand is seen through a glass darkly (a little KJV there). One day, if it’s important, I expect we will be shown which of us was closer to the correct understanding. Actually, I rather doubt if either of us will still care.

    Well, back to work.

    LikeLike

30. Arce I take the biblical comp. position. That is why I say that we are looking at both sides that we do not agree with through the lenses of the worst case scenario.

    I do believe that the pastorate is a male only ministry but I also believe that counseling women is a female only ministry because of Titus 2. For me that means in the current American church dynamic of over 75% female membership that the women will be tasked with the responsibility of impacting the lives of 75% of the churches while the male pastors will have opportunity to impact on the same level only 25% of the church membership.

    I do believe that the husband has the final word on matters in the home when his wife lets him 🙂 . There is no way that I can think of to force my wife to do something that she really does not want to do. I think those who paint comp. home life as a kingdom don’t have any idea what they are talking about. I really don’t think the guys that are in the patriarchy branch exercise near the power at home that they do on paper.

    These two points would exclude me from the Ega. circle even if I believe, teach, and practice a mutual respect between genders as we compliment each other in the home and ministry as God designed us to.

    LikeLike

31. Acre-

    You may be right that complementarian is not the best term to describe my belief. Rereading the descriptions in the original post, most of my views fall in line with the description of egalitarian, save one.

    “They conclude that male headship is not biblically-ordained either in the home…”

    Ephesians 5:23 states–For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.

    Sadly, I think a lot of complementarians abuse this scripture. I think most people reading this blog would agree with that. This passage (in conjunction with its context) supports the idea as the husband as the leader in the home. The leader should be the one who sets the example. It is the responsibility of the leader to ensure the upbringing of his children in the word of God. It is the responsibility of hte leader to ensure that his family is provided for (I do not believe this means it is the husband that must work and the wife stays at home, see my early comment as an example).

    Now, I will submit that I am no expert in all the ideas of complementarianism and egalitarianism. My understanding may be incorrect, but it is primarily that statement above that I most disagree with, and to me it is big enough that I am more likely to call myself a complementarian because of it, if I must call myself one or the other. Because of some of the other issues of complementarianism though, I would prefer the term “soft” complementarian.

    LikeLike

32. Seth and Gary W, Yes, the whole ‘crowded out’ thing was what I had in mind. Many of us have been stifled in these types of churches. In countless churches you have the shepherd/pastor with the adoring passive sheep model. These types of leaders don’t want to give up the prestige of their position. They are threatened by others and the system makes it easy to hold tightly and not provide opportunities for shared leadership. This also contributes to pastoral burnout as well. It is a flawed system and the fall out is everywhere.

    This type of church leadership philosophy does not reflect a NT church ideal where leaders are admonished to raise up leaders from the flock based on the obvious God-ordained giftings evident among that spiritual community. People need their gifts to be recognized, to be personally affirmed, encouraged, and mentored. This ‘people/ministry task’ is time consuming and often is agreed on in theory, but in practice it is simply not there. Everyone is impoverished and many believers become disillusioned about God, their calling, and the church.

    Having a leadership ‘team’ in place, with a shared ministry model, rather than just a solitary pastor, may help move things forward in some communities. The old model is hard to break, but there are enough places where churches and leadership are getting it and the benefits to all speak for themselves.

    LikeLike

33. Arce – so what would you label JoeJoe and Wesley? Or is there such a word? See, that’s why this is so confusing.

    BTW, I’ve had my panties in a wad over Tim Challies recent article. http://www.challies.com/articles/in-the-crosshairs-of-the-discernment-bloggers

    LikeLike

34. So what bothers you the most about the poor, beleaguered Mr. Challies’ apologia, JA? Do tell. Inquiring minds and all that…

    LikeLike

35. So, I have a few questions for those who would call themselves complementarian. I hope you don’t mind. I haven’t been able to read through all the comments as much as I’d like, so perhaps these questions have been addressed. I’m really trying to understand since I’ve received different descriptions depending on who I ask. Also, I’m not sure I understand the difference between soft and hard complementarianism (looks like my computer doesn’t like that word either!)

    What do you think of the view that a woman can’t read scripture in the pulpit? Or I’ve heard can’t even make announcements? Is that considered extreme to you?

    Also, what do you do with a woman teaching on the missionary field? Sometimes they’re the only ones out there. I have a friend in mind who is overseas (woman) who is in that position and doing great!

    Blessings, and thanks in advance. I’m really trying to hear both sides.

    LikeLike

36. Pingback: Challies Rails against Discernment Bloggers: Fear of Truth Exposed | Spiritual Sounding Board

37. Hello Monique. Let me give a quick answer and I am sure others will want to chime in.

    Question #1: In the traditional African-American Baptist churches no one makes announcements from the pulpit. There is always a lectern set up for that purpose whether it is a male or female giving the announcements. This lectern is used for Scripture reading as well unless the person who is preaching is reading the Scripture.

    Question #2: I would be alright with your friend teaching on the mission field, however, I do not think it is biblical for her to pastor any church established there. I think Scripture is clear that we all have the responsibility to proclaim the Gospel and disciple converts whether we are male or female.

    My computer doesn’t like the words unbiblical or hermeneutics either. 🙂

    LikeLike

38. SMG – – I decided to do a whole post on it – lol.

    LikeLike

39. Monique-

    To be perfectly honest, I don’t know if anyone else uses the terms hard and soft complementarian. I have heard soft and hard being used as descripters for cessationism and continuationism as they refer to the charasmatic gifts. I adopted the same descripters here in an effort to help better characterize my belief as it relates to this issue, as I think there isn’t really ONLY two sides, but a spectrum of belief. When I say I am a soft complementarian, I am trying to say that I hold onto some of the same ideas and values as a mainstream comp, but less firmly or even reject others, while also embracing some of the ideas of egalitarianism. I’m kind of a mix of the two.

    For me, the main reason I would not describe myself as egalitarian is for my belief that the Bible teaches that husbands are to be the leaders of the family, based on how I see the interpretation of versus like Eph 5:23. My idea of leading may be somewhat more liberal or egalitarian than a more conservative person, but I think my views on this single idea (which I arbitrarily see as more weighty than the others) are different enough from the egalitarian position to not call myself egal. Make sense? This is all based on my current understanding of the definitions and issues, which I do hold could be wrong or I could be misunderstanding them, and truth be told, I’m also still figuring it out for myself. Furthermore, I see this as a secondary issue to the gospel, important, but secondary.

    As to your other questions: With regard for the first two, I have no problem with a woman reading scripture from the pulpit or reading announcements. Not allowing these things, in my oppinion, is extreme and legalistic.

    I also don’t have a problem with women in the mission field. I believe we are called to share the gospel message. Elizabeth Elliot was a wonderul missionary that did many amazing things for God’s kingdom, before AND after her husband died. I only have a problem with women being in the position of the head pastor of a church, and even then, it is to me only a minor problem, and a position that I do not hold firmly to, because I honestly do not know how the Bible SHOULD be interpretted in that case. It seems clear from Paul’s writings that women should not be the pastor of a church, BUT I am still unsure if this should be taken in light of the culture of the day, or if is something that should apply to all churches. That is something that I still wrestle with personally.

    Hope this all helps!

    LikeLike

40. Monique I didn’t finish my explanation about women reading Scripture from the pulpit. I gave the preface but forgot to say it doesn’t make me any difference at all.

    LikeLike

41. Mark – Thank you for alerting me to your comment. I had missed it. I’ve enjoyed the respectful discussion here, btw.

    I do agree with you that there are some powerful women behind some of the powerful men in these churches, but labeling a woman as “powerful” in New Calvinist circles would never work. Women are never to be in the spotlight – – unless you are CJ and you’re talking about having good sex with your wife. (I’ve read enough of those stories on SGMSurvivors from people who have sat in the audience listening.)

    LikeLike

42. wow JoeJoe – are you channeling me??? you described exactly my views on the whole subject. maybe we aren’t so rare after all. I agree with the husband being a leader in the home, and when I say that, I emphasize truly Christlike leadership. It means being the ultimate servant, laying down your life, doing as others please rather than yourself. My husband is an amazing example of that and Im so very pleased to follow him because of his tenderness and care for us. His giving of himself, for the needs and desires of our family. And that is the crux of my problem w/ Patriarchy – husband head of household movements. It’s all about the husband…his needs, his desires, his favorites, etc. it’s all wrong! He should be discouraging these things, not encouraging.
    Yes as his wife, and wanting to follow his example I should be also considering his needs before my own, and so we’re both happy pleasing the other, because we are having our own needs met at the same time! Of course it’s never perfect, but that’s what we strive for! but it’s not because it’s demanded, but because it’s given.

    On the same vein, our pastor is also of the same mind. It’s not his preference for coffee, it’s what is the membership’s preference? (as a very small example..:) )

    LikeLike

43. Wesley and JoeJoe,
    Thank you for your answers. I’m glad that you both agree women can read scripture from the pulpit (or announcements). 🙂 It does seem there is a “spectrum of belief” as JoeJoe stated. With such “grey areas” you can understand the confusion. I’d never heard of these terms until a few years ago. It’s been frustrating trying to find a definition of these terms ~ I’ve heard so many versions.

    I believe the whole comp/egal debate issues are secondary issues and shouldn’t be considered “essential” to be considered a “real” Christian. I didn’t hear that from you two :). But I have heard, and I can’t remember who it was (Piper?) that implied these were essential to a saving faith. Again, I can’t remember specifics ~ maybe someone can help me out. Something along the line of 4 points or such?

    If these issues are pushed as essential, then that is where I see a danger and a misrepresentation of the Gospel. It’s adding on to what Jesus has done.

    Again, I thank you for your answers. I still have lots of questions (always!), but I’ll save those for another time!

    LikeLike

44. Julie Anne,

    My wife endured more garbage from the couple of women that embraced Calvinism who supported our former Pastor than what she endured from him who infact verbally rebuked her for not embracing his “Methodology”.

    Anybody that embraces any part of TULIP is a Calvinist. For a person to proclaim all 5 Points of TULIP is nothing “New” to the Calvinist. They are simply changing their title and pretty soon those that embrace any “Point” of TULIP are probably going to stop calling themselves Calvinist altogether.

    My Former Pastor embraced all 5 Points of TULIP but refused to acknowledge himself a Calvinist or New Calvinist although the way he practiced “Election Theology” was a text book example of Hyper-Calvinism.

    Many of these guys couldn’t do what they do without women supporting their “Cause”. when I referred to “Calvinistic Men and Women protecting their position of Religious Privilege, Power and Prestige” I wasn’t minimilizing who the figure heads are, but I am suggesting without the support of their wives they wouldn’t be where they are. (speaking from my own wife’s personal experience)

    LikeLike

45. Monique,

    I did mention in I think a couple of my comments that I thought of the issue as secondary, but just for clarity: the comp/egal issue is NOT essential to the gospel, ie, does not need to be embraced for salvation. That would most assuredly be legalism that Chris and the apostles would condemn.

    LikeLike

46. Wesley,

    Just by way of followup, and in case you’re interested, the one verse I can find that specifically gives a wife authority over her husband is 1 Corinthians 7:4: “For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.” It works in both directions, and I believe this may be the only verse that specifically gives a husband “authority,” using the actual word “authority,” over his wife. Everywhere else a husband’s authority over his wife may (or may not) be involved, it has to be inferred from the use of words like head (referring to the husband), and submit, and submission (referring to the wife.

    I’m thinking that to the extent anybody has authority within the body of Christ, it is subject to the principle that love “does not insist on its own way.” 1 Corinthians 13:5. I’m also thinking I would like to see something like the following in the constitution and by-laws or equivalent organizational documents of every church organization: Neither the pastor(s), nor the elders, nor the deacons, nor any board member, nor any teacher, nor any other minister or officer of this church shall insist on their own way.

    LikeLike

47. JoeJoe,

    The head was look on as the source, but the heart was where the mind was thought to be, when that was written. Man was thought to be the source of the woman (cf. Adam’s rib) just as Christ is the source of the church (its founder). “Head” as we think of it in Western organizational thinking is not remotely related. Which is why reading scripture with 20/21 century thinking leads to bad exegesis.

    LikeLike

48. JoeJoe, those are some good thoughts, I agree with a lot of it.

    LikeLike

49. Mark, be careful about linking patriarchy and 5 pt Calvinism. They often go hand in hand, but not always. I’m a 5 pointer, but I’m close to what JoeJoe described comp/egal middle road.

    LikeLike

50. Seth,

    I recoginize they often go hand in hand, but not always. I am recognizing much of the abuses described in within this site have been from Ministries embrace a heavy-handed form of Calvinism.

    My former Pastor was a Stealth 5 Point Calvinist who was Covert in how he was endoctrinating the Congregation by preventing his sermons from contradicting all 5 Points of “TULIP”. When some of us within the Congregation tryed to identify his “Methodology”, he became heavy-handed in way that would prevent him from having to disclose his Doctrine.

    Thanks for the tip.

    LikeLike

51. Mark, yeah that doesn’t sound like a good situation. Even though I’m a 5 pointer, I don’t happen to like any of the reformers and certainly think the whole bible should be taught, even the parts about people’s responsibility to choose.

    LikeLike

52. Seth,

    I wonder if you really are a 5 Pointer especially about the parts about “people’s responsibility to choose”. It sound’s like you may not totally embrace “TULIP” which is the Calvinist handbook that is authenticated in their view, by scriptures.

    My thought is if you refute any parts of TULIP then how can you really embrace TULIP? How is it possible to be a Calvinist and pick and choose what to believe in TULIP and what not to believe?

    I don’t think God has given me authority to refute parts of scriptures and be an accountable Christian.

    If you refute any parts of TULIP then how can you be an accountable 5 Pointer or even a Calvinist generally speaking?

    If you think the whole bible should be taught,then why the need to embrace TULIP using it as a reference to your faith?.

    LikeLike

53. http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/free-articles

    Historically speaking due to the increase in domestic violence and child abuse within the church and the frustration felt in women being held back from exercising the gifts God gave to them due to a patriarchal church structure, a Christian Feminist Movement took root to counter these things. They initially joined forces with the many of the feminist secular supporter to wade through issues that was common to them both in being able to have a voice and to be heard in society and in the church. In time, the Christian Feminist Movement became organized and able to stand on its own. But within the ranks, as in churches there were also members who were more liberal in their thinking regarding scripture and homosexuality.

    When bringing these issues to the table, those who adopted this mandate for the Complementarian position quickly grabbed a hold of dismissing the egalitarian viewpoint by equating homosexuality with feminism. in turn the word, feminist or feminism became a household curse word to anyone that would argue for biblical gender equality in the home and church.

    Now, when the Christian Feminist became a free standing organizations, they also were having conferences nationally and internationally as most organizations do to establish a united agreement on who they are and what they are about, including membership. However, there was a subgroup within this organization that could not agree with including those who supported the homosexuality.

    That group of men and women formed another group called: Christian for Biblical Equality. The link has been provided for you in the above. Although this group used to be or rather originated from a the much large Christian Feminist group, it no longer identifies with them, yet holds to an Egalitarian relationship between the genders.

    Many people have the notion that to be a man or to be a woman means certain ascribed tasks and positions ought to be held by one or the other gender. They also think that if that line is cross then somehow that takes away from one being male or female. This in itself is very telling in understanding how society has played a role in the mindset of what constitute each gender. This has served to enable those who desire to have certain entitlements to be able to maintain controls that virtually places the other gender in an oppressive and subservient position. It also weakens society and the church as half of those made in God’s image are being silenced and literally turned into man’s image instead. In turn, the female gender is virtually objectified, sexualized, and severely oppressed, no matter what language may be, being used to give an appearance that this is not so. All one need to do is look at the stats on divorce, domestic violence, child abuse, sexual addiction, and the rampant adulteress behaviors that are openly permitted within the church and even practiced among pastors and others in leadership roles. Why, because the cultural and societal norms were brought into the church and applied to interpreting scripture through a need to control women in order to feed ones pride and ego instead. You may want to do a research on quotes made by the ‘early” church fathers on their opinion of women, then follow what their teachings were concerning biblical roles and how they defined a woman and the man’s rights in ordering her about and lording over her.

    Christian for Biblical Equality helps the person to understand that the egalitarian position has nothing to do with homosexuality, nor is distinctly feminist either.

    Instead, its whole purpose is to enable the body of Christ to become stronger by enabling both gender to be all that God has called and made them to be in His image. He has called and equip men and women to stand side by side to rule and have dominion over all that He has made available to them. Not for one gender to rule over the other in such a way that she is not able to determine who she is as a woman in Christ and apart from her husband. But as a co heir in Christ on this earth, rather than the notion that this does not take affect until she is home with the Lord.

    Genesis 1:27-28
    King James Version

    27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

    28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    Perhaps the real issue that underlies the complementarian position has far more to do with men need to repent of their lust and fleshy desires instead of scapegoating upon the female population (by carving them out to fit into their fantasies) to justify their need to control and to meet the ungodly and unbiblical standards that defines what a man is, but feeds into their pride and ego instead. Hmmm.

    LikeLike

54. Mark, where am I contradicting myself? It’s been a while since I looked at the tulip parts, but I certainly believe in predestination the way reformed ppl do and happen to think the bible teaches it too. But the bible also talks about ppl changing, repenting, choosing, etc. I think we ought to teach the whole bible and not try to force it into a system. Right?

    LikeLike

55. Seth said:

    I think we ought to teach the whole bible and not try to force it into a system. Right?

    When the system becomes someone’s god, we’ve got big problems. I think that is why we have so many problems.

    LikeLike

56. Mark said:

    If you refute any parts of TULIP then how can you be an accountable 5 Pointer or even a Calvinist generally speaking?

    That’s a good question, Mark, but I know a lot of people who call themselves Calvinist, but do not hold to the full 5-pt system.

    LikeLike

57. I agree with that JA. Systematic theology can be helpful to understand how the bible’s different pieces fit together. But there are many paradoxes that dont seem to have an easy answer. When ppl try to force an answer on a paradox (like God’s sovereignty vs man’s responsibility) then we end up with lop-sided results

    LikeLike

58. Seth,

    I didn’t suggest you were contradicting yourself. I’m taking at face value that you proclaim to being a 5 Pointer.

    I have an issue about embracing “salvation before faith” theology. And I think you were suggesting the same, which to me isn’t a contradiction.

    We start emphasizing or in some cases practicing “Predestination” or “Election” Theology the same way the Pharisee’s did on the Sinner, the Tax Collector and even on Christ when he administered to them, we become like the Pharisee.

    There are Biblical Academics that have countering interpretations about “salvation before faith” I have a tendency to lean against believing “salvation before faith”.

    LikeLike

59. Mark, I certainly don’t think salvation before faith should ever come to our minds when talking to others about Christ. I think it could be helpful to think about for an individual on a personal basis to prevent one from feeling he/she earned salvation through faith, but never used or thought of in regards to evangelism. You’re saying you know lots of Calvinists who think that way?

    LikeLike

60. JA, I never responded to your comment on April 1, at 4:08. What do you mean by where do we draw the line?

    LikeLike

61. Seth – on where do we draw the line. As we’ve seen on this thread – complementarianism looks different for each couple and where one couple might feel freedom to “let” the wife have control over one area, another complementarian couple might balk at that. And then we have people at CBMW who are trying to define that line as well, but have been unable (as far as I can see) to be clear on that. I just don’t have in my mind how this works out in a couple’s life as decisions are made.

    LikeLike

62. Seth,

    I’m not sure where you read that I suggested knowing “lots” of Calvinist that believe in “salvation before faith”. (I know of 3 that I have run across, but I don’t spend much time seeking them out)

    I will add that there is nothing in my words that have suggested you are contradicting yourself. The only thing that I suggested was wondering how devout of a 5 Pointer you are, because of “people choosing” in your language, which makes me wonder how strong you embrace and practice “Election Theology” on others. (I’m under the impression you don’t practice it)

    I have made an attempt to answer your questions but you either are skimming through my answers, suggesting things that I never insinuated or you are simply being argumentative in defense of being a 5 Pointer.

    LikeLike

63. Sorry Mark, don’t mean to make this harder than it should be. All im saying is I believe the bible teaches both predestination and mans responsibility to choose. I know there are some hyper Calvinists that error in not caring about evangelism. But most of the Calvinists I know are very passionate about evangelism and yet fully believe God ordains every aspect of salvation. I see it as a paradox, not a contradiction.

    LikeLike

64. Arce-

    I’m late getting back to this post, but obviously can’t check and respond all day. 🙂

    You may be right about the head being thought of as the “source.” I can see how that could make sense in some aspects. But when reading in context with the rest of the passage in Ephesians 5, the passage seems to be talking about leadership more than a husband being the “source” of the wife, which doesn’t make much sense to me.

    I haven’t fully studied the passage, and I’m not trained in Greek or an expert in ancient Jewish culture or ideas such as this, so I must rely on how others interpret the passage. I learn bits and pieces here and there, as the ancient church and Jewish culture are a growing fascination of mine. I do realize though, that the letters of Paul were written to specific people or groups of people at a specific time. One must take into consideration the culture of the audience at that time. When Paul was instructing them, was what he was saying somehow meant only for that audience, or was it meant for everybody in all places and all times? With many other passages, it is pretty clear that the teaching is meant for everybody in all places and times. With the passage concerning women as having authority over men in the church (i.e. being a head pastor), I’ve heard good arguments going both ways, with both ways being Biblically supported. This is not an issue of applying a 20/21 century mindset to the Bible, but realizing that the Bible was indeed written in another time and culture, and trying to see how exactly the author meant what he wrote, and how those principles still apply today. I see that as very good exegesis.

    Because I see this particular issue as secondary, and really, when it comes to women being head pastor, I see it is not only non-essential, but as not terribly important either, only slightly so, I do not hold to firmly one way or another. I am still slightly …*SLIGHTLY*… more convinced that women are not supposed to pastor a church.

    LikeLike

65. Seth,

    Both the 5 Point Calvinist and 5 Point Hyper Calvinist use TULIP to authenticate their stand, one apparently embraces people choosing and the other doesn’t.

    Most of us know that God is all knowing, we don’t need to convert to Calvinism (who unable to come up with a consensus to what they believe) to figure that out to become a christian.

    We already have the Old Testament and the New Testament to me that is sufficient.

    I think being disciple of John Calvin who was born 1500 years after Christ is risky.

    And judging by the majority of abuse reported in this web site, the abuse are coming from organizations and churches using their Calvinistic abusive interpretations of Scriptures as way to authenticate their existence.

    LikeLike

66. Mark, I can agree to disagree. It’s not a theological issue important enough to me to fight to the death on. 🙂

    LikeLike

67. JoeJoe, Thanks for sharing where you are at as you investigate this issue further. It is much deeper than just an issue of if a woman can or cannot preach or teach in a local church or if they should or should not be called to be the lead pastor. It is a far more core issue about gender that is essential to understand.

    It is important to get back to the Creation story of God’s design for Adam and Eve, pre-Fall, and to factor in the cost to Christ to redeem mankind, male and female. Christ’s victory has restored what was lost. Christ and the Father poured out the Holy Spirit and a new age was ushered in. This is the time that we are now in. The issue of gender equality and mutuality in the home and in the Church is foundational to our belief in what Christ has redeemed.

    Yes, it does take some study to do personal research on sticky passages and come to some resolve. Even more important is to consider the core beliefs of what Christ has done to reconcile Jews and Gentiles, slave and free, as well as male and female. God has destroyed barriers. Unity is the theme. These are all the benefits of Christ’s finished work on the cross, his resurrection and Lordship, and are found in the message of the Kingdom.

    LikeLike

68. Seth,

    Yeah, I know what you mean. If the Calvinist can’t even find a consensus in what they believe they are going to find it difficult defending their Doctrine to the Non-Calvinist Christians.

    Our dialogue has been minimal regarding Doctrinal Indifference, (other than you proclaim to be 5 Pointer and I don’t follow Calvin’s teachings)

    We never dug deep enough to discover anything that is meaningful, that we disagree on. I would rather not debate.

    What I would prefer is for the Calvinist, Hyper Calvinist, 1 Point, 2 Point, 3 Point, 4 Point, 5 Point Calvinist, The Reformed persuasion and the Reformed Calvinist to come up with a Consensus. Then find a title they can agree on and make it stick.

    To make things even more complicated, Stealth and Covert Calvinist who are Low or High Point TULIP’ers aren’t even calling themselves Calvinist anymore.

    LikeLike

69. Seth,

    I didn’t mean to deny the “New Calvinist” being my list of Calvinist School if there are any other forms of Calvinism that isn’t on that list let me know.

    LikeLike

70. Barb-

    You are quite welcome. This whole debate and dialogue on gender equality in general within the church is certainly an important one. Holding to a complementarian or egalitarian view is by no means essential to salvation. I am quite certain we will see both in heaven. It is still an important issue however, as it relates to how members of a family interact with one another (which can in turn influence how those members interact with the rest of society). My mentioning of my beliefs of women as head pastors was relating back to a couple of portions of spread out comments. The issues do run deeper than that. You can get an idea of some of my other beliefs on the matter by looking at my first couple of comments on this article.

    Ultimately, this whole tension between complementarianism and egalistarianism, especially as it relates to the extremes of each position, I think goes back to the question of, “What is the value of a person?” It is something that has been an issue from nearly the beginning of time. Adam devalued Eve by trying to cast blame on her and not accept his own responsibility. Cain devalued Abel by committing the first murder. The Egyptians devalued the Hebrews by forcing them into slavery. The Jews devalued the gentiles in the early days of the church by trying to force them into their own customs to accept them as fellow believers. In the comp/egal debate, the extreme complementarians and Patriarchal model followers devalue their wives and children by placing the husband and father over them in an authoritarian position. The extreme egalitarians devalue everybody by not recognizing the uniquenesss and differences in the genders.

    Everybody wants to know that they are of value. Everybody wants to know that their life is important and means something. I see the extremes on either side of the issue as both devaluing and unbiblical. I do believe there is a place somewhere in the middle, however, that is both Biblical and upholds the value of everybody, while still recognizing the beauty in our uniquesness and differences. Even if we figure out exactly what that is supposed to look like, we still have the challenge of living it out.

    Here is some of how I try to live that out. I try my best to do what I believe God wants me to do and lead my family in a Godly way because I believe that is my responsibility and that God will hold me accountable for it, and because I believe that everybody has great value to God. My wife and I try to work together in making decisions, and I try to always seek her input and take her thoughts, ideas, feelings, and convictions to heart and deep consideration. We don’t have children yet, but when we do, the ultimate responsibilty falls onto me to see that they are brought up in God’s word. The choice is ultimately up to them whether or not to put their faith in Christ, but it is my responsibility to see that they know what faith in Christ is. When they grow up, I will have to trust in God that my wife and I made the right decisions and let them go out into the world to be their own people and find their own way. I will certainly be there for guidance, but they must make their own choices. And even if they make choices I don’t agree with, I must honor those choices as they are their own people, capable of making their own choices. And when I am old, I can look back and know that I played a part in raising a God-honoring, respectful, and independent son or daughter. In a nutshell, that is the kind of family I believe America, and the rest of the world, need.

    LikeLike

71. Thank you for sharing more about yourself and your desires for a godly family. I was making the comment about deeper issues when it comes to gender since the focus is often only on what women can/can’t do in the church so I re-emphasize the point when there is an opportunity. Yes, how we view gender takes us back to core beliefs about humanity and life on planet Earth.

    A helpful tool in doing personal research on this topic is a book entitled: ‘Women in the Church’ by Stanley Grenz with Denise Kjesbo. This book considers foundational beliefs and gives a thoughtful look at the historical, biblical, and theological considerations.

    Here is a brief excerpt from the Introduction:
    “What, then, can be said about contemporary evangelical divisions over the issue of women in ministry? Many complementarians conclude that the time is simply not ripe for women in ministry. They caution the church to wait for a more opportune season. Some offer an even more pointed rejection of the push toward women’s ordination, claiming that it reflects the dangerous inroads of contemporary secular culture into the church. . . .

    Egalitarians, in contrast, are convinced that the time is ripe for changes in the church. They believe that rather than being the result of unwholesome secular ideas invading the church, the push for women’s ordination represents the work of the Spirit. And empowering women for ministry could possibly revitalize the contemporary church.” (p. 33-34)

    LikeLike

72. Joe: I really appreciated and agree with so much of your 10:42 comment. Thank you. And I agree 100% that the comp/egal should not be a primary focus. I think this is a distraction (which you can read about in the article I just posted).

    LikeLike

73. Julie Anne

    Much agreement when you write…
    “the comp/egal should not be a primary focus. I think this is a distraction…”

    Yes – “comp/egal” takes our eyes off Jesus and puts them on “Mere Fallible Humans.”

    If Egals are looking for equality in “the church of God?” The Body of Christ?
    They are more then welcome to become Equal with me. 😉

    Of course, I have NO titles, I’m NOT a leader – NO pulpit – NO power – NO pay.
    Trying to figure this thing out. Wanting to be a “Servant.” – One of “His Disciples.”

    Jesus said, “If any man “Serve me” John 12:26. But – In My Experience…
    NOT many comp/egals are interested in being a “servant.” A low place.
    NOT many comp/egals want to “Deny Self,” and “Forsake ALL,” to be “His Disciple.”
    Forsaking ALL – Power – Profit – Prestige – Honor – Glory – Recognition – Reputation…

    For me, gender is NOT an issue. And comp/egal is about gender – NOT Jesus. Where, and who I fellowship with – gender is NOT the issue. The issue is – Who knows Jesus? Who has revelation from Jesus? Who has a teaching from Jesus? Who is being “Led” by the Spirit? Who is “Hearing His Voice” and Following Jesus?

    NOT following a bunch of Man Made Rules – A bunch of Man Made Traditions.

    It’s “Christ in you the hope of Glory.” Col 1:27. It’s Christ in – Males – Females – Young – Old – The least of these – Those who we think are less honorable – the hope of Glory. When we come together – ALL can, and are expected to, participate. God NO longer dwells in temples made with the hands of men. Jesus dwells in believers, His Church, His Body. You and me…

    IMO – It’s supposed to be about Jesus – NOT about – Male or Female.

    Because it says in Gal 3:28 – “there is neither male nor female.”
    Does this verse say – Male and Female are equal?
    Or – Does this verse say – Male and Female do NOT exist – In Christ Jesus.

    Gal 3:26-28 KJV
    For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
    For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
    There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free,
    “there is neither male nor female:”
    for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

    Looks like – In Christ – there are NO males and NO Females.

    So – If folks are debating gender – are they “In Christ?”

    Yes – “the comp/egal should not be a primary focus. I think this is a distraction…”

    LikeLike

74. Barb

    You write…
    APRIL 2, 2013 @ 3:57 PM
    “Amos… …I believe that you have short changed the egalitarian view.”

    That’s possible – How so? – Could you be a little more specific?

    LikeLike

75. Arce

    Thanks for the response – You write @ APRIL 2, 2013 @ 5:11 PM…
    “So it was not hierarchical in operation, but that took a studious effort by the pastor to avoid being lured into a situation where he would have the final say. He was truly a servant of the congregation, and believed his position was at the bottom of the chart, not the top.”

    Wow – What a wonderful experience – Kinda hard to find servants like that today.

    The problem I still have is…
    I do NOT find “church governance,” in the Bible. – But – I cudda missed it. 😉
    And, I do NOT find “church governance,” run by humans, in the Bible. Where is that?

    Seems, “church governace,” by man, takes place in a church NOT found in the Bible…
    The 501 (c) 3, non-profit, tax deductible, Religious Corporations, the IRS calls church.

    Sould Disciples of Jesus call an IRS Corporation – “the Church of God?”

    Seems, In the Bible, the Church of God – Is Never – A Building, An Organization, An Institution, A Denomination, A Business, An IRS Corporation. The Church of God, in the Bible, is always people, Called out ones, called out of someplace into an assembly.

    I do find in the Bible – Jesus – Governing the Church of God – the Body of Christ.

    Col 1:18.
    He is the head of the body, (The Ekklesia, The Called Out Ones), The Church.

    Isa 9:6-7
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
    *and the government shall be upon his shoulder:*
    and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
    The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
    **Of the increase of his government** and peace there shall be no end.

    Is – *the government shall be upon his shoulder?*
    Do we really believe Jesus when He says… They shall be ALL taught of God? John 6:45
    There is “ONE” Leader? – “ONE” Shepherd? – “ONE” Teacher? – Jesus?

    And, In the Bible, the only one I can find with the “Title” Shepherd is – Jesus…

    Jer 50:6
    “My people” hath been “lost sheep:”
    **their shepherds** have caused them to *go astray,*

    1 Pet 2:25
    For ye were as *sheep going astray;*
    BUT are now returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

    I’m Blest… I’ve returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of my soul…

    {{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}

    LikeLike

76. Pingback: CBMW, John Piper, Women Drill Sergeants, and Biblical Roles | Spiritual Sounding Board

77. JoeJoe–
    I think “head” can be understood in the verse of the husband being the head of the wife as “source” by looking back to creation. A rib was removed from the human’s side to create a woman. So, in a sense, it could be understood that the man was the source of the woman, and this could be to what the verse is referring.

    Also, I have read of word studies that find the word translated as “head” rarely used in ancient sources to mean “authority”. We must be cautious in order to not read our current US understandings of words back into the English language translation of Bible.

    In general– I don’t find complementarianism (if you look up “complementary” in the dictionary, there is not a hint of hierarchy in the original word) and egalitarianism to be two extremes. I believe the opposite end of patriarchy (which “complementarianism” is, though white-washed since feminism created a more hostile attitude toward simply stating that God created females as inferior to males) is matriarchy.

    I would prefer to not focus on this issue, which is one of the reasons I am not now in a church that is familiar with either of the terms in their specialized, evangelical senses (and so they don’t know the term “complementarianism” at all since it was created for the reason I alluded to above). So long as girls and women, and boys and men, are expected to be a certain way and do certain things based on their sex rather than their God-given talents and gifts, I do have to do what I can to help change that situation.

    LikeLike

78. Mark and Seth, have you read “Institutes” by Calvin? Neither have your pastors and elders and teachers and leaders. So maybe you all don’t have a real handle on Calvinism, so what’s the attraction of calling yourselves Calvinists? Calvin did some awful stuff with no evidence of repentance. I’ll take Jesus.

    LikeLike