* * *
Oh boy. I did not know this. There is a new ESV Bible by Crossway to be released later this month: Gospel Transformation Bible. Look at this quote:
A team of over 50 pastors and scholars contributed to the Gospel Transformation Bible notes and book introductions.
In the quote above, when it says “50 pastors and scholars,” did it ever occur to you that they could be referring to WOMEN in that number? Whoa, blow me down.
Why would strong complementarian men endorse and contribute to a Bible which has notes written by women in addition to men? Think about it – when you are reading the notes in your Bible, you are being taught. A woman teaching a man through the notes? That’s not going to fly with complementarians, right?
Are these men compromising their strong complementarian standards?
Let’s take a look at who is endorsing this Bible. Are you ready for this – how about Mark Driscoll?!?!
“This is a fantastic tool for Jesus-centered Bible study compiled by a world class team of Bible teachers.”
MARK DRISCOLL, Founder, Mars Hill Church, Resurgence; Co-Founder, Acts 29
And then there’s Carl Trueman:
“Crossway has done a fine job in recruiting an able list of contributors and the thoughtful Christian will find much here that is encouraging, challenging and transforming. I anticipate this will be useful tool for preachers, Bible study leaders, and individual Christians who wish to study the Bible more effectively.”
Carl R. Trueman, Paul Woolley Professor of Church History, WTS
But check this out – CJ Mahaney!!!! So many YRR pastors fawn over Mahaney and highly respect him for his strong stance on compelmentarianism. I’ve heard mention that in Sovereign Grace Ministry church’s membership agreement, married couples sign that they are in alignment with the complementarian view of marriage. So, let’s think this through. He wants all of his church members to be complementarians – and yet he’s okay with women teaching men in the notes in the Bible? hmm
Now this one is one of the bigger surprise endorsements – Owen Strachan, the Executive Director of the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood – you know, the organization that is in existence to remind and interpret for us Biblical gender roles because we can’t figure it out ourselves. Here is Strachan’s endorsement:
“This is a remarkably helpful resource, both an accessible Bible commentary and a theology of redemption. The Word of God is a living symphony, with many sections and parts, and in this unique resource we hear the harmony of salvation.”
Owen Strachan, Assistant Professor of Christian Theology and Church History, Boyce College
Here is a complete listing of endorsements. You will probably recognize more names.
In light of some very strong teachings on women’s roles in the church and specifically who women are allowed to teach Biblically, it was very surprising for me to see that Bruce Ware went even beyond endorsing this Bible – – he was a contributor along with other women. :::::ja’s head is sooooo confused:::::
Bruce Ware, Professor of Christian Theology, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, is a council member at Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW). The following excerpt comes from an ethicsdaily.com article which has been removed, but I found the entire original article linked at theopotic musings blog. It is common knowledge that anyone who is a member of CBMW is a strong proponent of complementarianism. You tell me if it sounds like he is agreeable to women in a teaching position over men.
“It means that a woman will demonstrate that she is in fact a Christian, that she has submitted to God’s ways by affirming and embracing her God-designed identity as–for the most part, generally this is true–as wife and mother, rather than chafing against it, rather than bucking against it, rather than wanting to be a man, wanting to be in a man’s position, wanting to teach and exercise authority over men,” Ware said. “Rather than wanting that, she accepts and embraces who she is as woman, because she knows God and she knows his ways are right and good, so she is marked as a Christian by her submission to God and in that her acceptance of God’s design for her as a woman.”
Kevin DeYoung is another contributor to this particular ESV translation. It took me one minute on Google to find this excerpt written by Kevin regarding men/women roles and teaching:
3. Most importantly, Christians must affirm and teach and model that men and women are different—biologically, emotionally, relationally. There are a lot of passages I could turn to make this point, but I’ll limit myself to 1 Corinthians. Here we see that the husband is the head of his wife (1 Cor. 11:3). We see men have a teaching role in the church that women do not have (14:34). Source
Who can explain this disconnect for me? I’m completely baffled.
* * *
Related link:
Photo credit: Source
I need to give a special h/t to Tony Miano for tweeting about this (you know, that Tony Miano).
Spiritual Sounding Board 
Brian,
I agree with Wes’s comment: “As I said egal and comp are theoretically different but in practice quite the same.”
It’s all in a person’s character: respect and the fruit of the Spirit. If those are there, it doesn’t matter what you call yourself.
My parents would say they are comps, but live 100% egal. They have a lot of respect for each other’s talents and abilities. I never remember a time that Dad pulled rank on Mom.
LikeLike
“I didn’t say you were elect, just that Jesus loves you”
But that would mean he has “special” love for His elect he does not have for all mankind that he otherwise damns to hell. Maybe Mark Dever will do the keys thing and announce me elect?
LikeLike
Lydia,
Seems to me Brian’s attitude is that anybody who disagrees with him is embarrassing themselves. It’s just that he saves the putdown for you, a woman.
LikeLike
I don’t know Brian but in this thread I don’t see where he has exhibited a know-it-all attitude any more than those claiming to be egal.
As for Lydia’s description of Patriarchy it is correct only if viewed through American western culture. Abraham is a clear example that the summation is not all inclusive. Sarah’s advice was always followed by Abraham when he liked it and when he didn’t like it.
I think we Western Christians often make the mistake of trying to liberate people from things that they are not in bondage to because the conditions do not fit our cultural frame of thought. I have heard the testimony of Islamic women that don’t feel oppressed because they have to have a male relative with them when they leave the home but they feel safe. Yet we would classify it as oppression and unchristian even when there is no Scriptural support for our western way of doing things. I am not saying the East or West is right or wrong but simply saying that different things work for different people and the people that it does not work for have a really hard time seeing how anyone could accept what they don’t accept. Tolerance is not really tolerance if it doesn’t go both ways .
LikeLike
Brian:
I feel sorry for your wife and anyone else who has to look to their husbands for the final decision. Heaven forbid you or another husband not be capable of making decisions–pray tell what will happen.
Brian you and others that think you are the HEAD in this life are spouting nonsense.
LikeLike
This need to have final say or final word disturbs me. It seems to me to be a symptom of a larger problem, namely, the need for certainty where there is no certainty. In the software world (my other hat) we at times talk about a program being decidable meaning that we can test all possible inputs and outputs. A decidable program can, in theory, be bug free. Is that the attraction here? Are we looking for a path to a bug free marriage? For myself, I don’t see the value of a marriage that runs like a computer program. Kelly and I have been married 30 years and neither of us has ever seen the need for this kind of decidability in our life together.
LikeLike
::::JA falls off her chair:::: Are you a fraud pastor or what, Craig? That simply cannot be. Someone must have the final say in a marriage. Are you sure you don’t want me to disguise your name? I think if this gets leaked out, there could be trouble for you and your ministry. Let me know, friend. I’ve got your back here.
LikeLike
Brian & Wesley Roy, I am trying to understand.
Do you believe marriage “reflects the gospel” and “reveals something about Christ and the Church” by the husband playing the role of initiator and leader and having authority and the wife playing the role of responder and follower and submitting to her husband’s authority?
Wesley Roy, am I understanding you self-describe as complementarian, but your marriage is not characterized by unilateral male authority and unilateral female submission? If so, have you described in this thread how you are defining complementarian? I’ve been trying to follow most of the day, but can’t remember if you stated it earlier.
LikeLike
“I don’t know Brian but in this thread I don’t see where he has exhibited a know-it-all attitude any more than those claiming to be egal. ‘”
Ok, but we don’t do “final say”. So being a “know it all” won’t get you far. :o) We have to actually work it out, listen and be objective. That is what happens when you think of each other as equals in value and worth in ALL things, even decision making.
My “know it all” demeanor comes from living this fraud in upclose in terms marketing this stuff for mega churches. Boy oh boy was it a money maker. My husband thought it ridiculous from day one and told me he was not that insecure. But then he is not from the American Evangelical ghetto, either.
LikeLike
think we Western Christians often make the mistake of trying to liberate people from things that they are not in bondage to because the conditions do not fit our cultural frame of thought. I have heard the testimony of Islamic women that don’t feel oppressed because they have to have a male relative with them when they leave the home but they feel safe. ”
Wesley, this is not a good example. They do not know freedom. Even the ones here. They do not know they are in bondage. Just like many unsaved people do not know they are really in bondage and have not tasted real freedom in Christ. They are parroting what they have been taught.
(I have done a lot of refugee work with Muslims)
LikeLike
Thanks Julie Anne for having my back. I have very cleverly disguised my name. I comment as craigvick where my real name is Craig Vick. Oops. I’ve done it now.
LikeLike
As for Lydia’s description of Patriarchy it is correct only if viewed through American western culture. Abraham is a clear example that the summation is not all inclusive. Sarah’s advice was always followed by Abraham when he liked it and when he didn’t like it.”
Wesley, I always get nervous when OT characters are held up as examples for us in anything but faith. Much of their behavior was atrocious and they would go to jail today.
LikeLike
“Seems to me Brian’s attitude is that anybody who disagrees with him is embarrassing themselves. It’s just that he saves the putdown for you, a woman.”
Gary, I live at ground zero. I have very thick but well maintained skin. :o) I am used to the “you are embarrassing yourself” insult. You usually get it with any prolonged disagreement. You are supposed to crumble and it comes when they realize you are not crumbling under their brilliance.
It is used here all the time by YRR. You have NO idea how much of this stuff is universal in that movement. They need to get new writers for some new material. :o)
LikeLike
The ESV is published by Crossway, a non-profit that filters money to conferences, publishes books, and performs other services for many of the folks who have endorsed it like Al Mohler, C.J. Mahaney, and Wayne Grudem.
If there’s money to be made by selling a Bible I guarantee that these guys will find a way to get around any issues you have with its content.
It’s interesting that folks like Al Mohler and Wayne Grudem, who claim that the Bible is inerrant, didn’t have a big problem with the NIV, that is published by Zondervan, a Crossway competitor, until Crossway came out with its own version of the Bible – the English Standard Version.
When the ESV came out Mohler, Inc. suddenly (insert sarcasm here) discovered all kinds of translation problems with the NIV.
Mohler, Inc. will claim that financial considerations played no role in their sudden antipathy toward Zondervan and the NIV it publishes. Their issue with the NIV came about as a result of Zondervan publishing an updated version of the NIV.
The fact that they ran a big anti-NIV campaign about at the same time that the ESV, that is published by an organization that puts big bucks in their pocket, was released, is just a big coincidence.
If you believe that I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you. 🙂
Zondervan even took these guys seriously and tried to address the translation issues they brought up. But alas they could not meet Wayne Grudem’s exacting standards no matter how hard they tried.
So on the one hand these so-called Biblical scholars expect us to believe that the Bible is inerrant and could not possibly have been edited at any point in the last 2000 years because the translation issues that have been brought up for centuries are so insignificant that Al Moler called them “footnotes” once on his show when a caller brought up the inerrant Bible/translation issue on his radio show.
But when an organization like Crossway, that puts big money in his pocket, created a new version of the Bible suddenly serious translation issues forced Al Mohler to declare the NIV off limits and proclaim that the ESV the only acceptable version of the Bible in the world.
That’s definitely trying to have your cake and eat it too, Al. 🙂
LikeLike
‘I feel sorry for your wife and anyone else who has to look to their husbands for the final decision. Heaven forbid you or another husband not be capable of making decisions–pray tell what will happen.”
Well it does happen. And the wives are told that they have to put up with it so he can “learn” to make better decisions. Like not buy a kayak when you have 3 kids and wife and a big mortgage but are listening to “headship” sermons and think that gives you carte blanche.
Oh, the stories I could tell on the poor schmucks in those conferences who started beating their chests with their new found power as “head”. Of course they are excused away by the movement leaders saying not all are like that. Oh, but enough are and those types are ATTRACTED to it. .
thing is, the guys that STAY in deep in this doctrine are usually the ones who NEED the affirmation they have power. The others drift off finally realizing they already live mutualist marriages and don’t need the check off list of roles.
LikeLike
Janna, Not to mention that Al Mohler’s employer has a Bible Translation of their own so there are no royalties for Lifeway.
LikeLike
Lydia:
I think these guys love being in their minds a type of god.
LikeLike
SM, I believe the Bible clearly teaches that marriage reflects the relationship of Christ and Christians (individually and corporately) as a result of the Gospel.
I don’t think we are being honest when we equate comp to a unilateral male leadership and a unilateral female submission. No such dynamic exists in marriage for long because two adults are involved. I am simply saying that Lydia’s characterization of comp is applying one definition without nuances and it is not accurate. I define comp as males and females using their unique abilities and gifts both as humans and as males and females as a complement to one another when working together on common goals.
Lydia I don’t get nervous about using OT people as examples because God clearly intended that by immortalizing their lives. I think our problem with their lives is usually not the problem that they violate Scripture to some greater extent than we do but with the fact that their lives do not fit our western individualistic thinking. Their culture is so different that we automatically assume it is wrong.
Lydia I would say that you are wrong about my illustration as well. There are American women who opt for what you called bondage instead of what you called freedom after tasting what you called freedom. The women of the Nation of Islam do it all the time and they are not Middle Eastern but African-Americans who know exactly what American life is like. As I said previously, life is not one size fits all especially in as personal an area as egal and comp.
LikeLike
Is there any chance Tom that these guys and girls simply have a different way of doing marriage than yours and both parties are quite satisfied and happy?
LikeLike
Wesley Roy said, “I think we Western Christians often make the mistake of trying to liberate people from things that they are not in bondage to because the conditions do not fit our cultural frame of thought. I have heard the testimony of Islamic women that don’t feel oppressed because they have to have a male relative with them when they leave the home but they feel safe.”
Umm, no. Having lived in Saudi Arabia for six years, I can assure you that many women do feel oppressed being the property of men. As the Internet and social media have made inroads into the Middle East, this discontent has only grown. I think you’ve used a very poor example here to make your point. There may, indeed, be women who feel safe and protected being treated as children, but a few examples do not reflect the feelings of the majority of women in these cultures. Ask a woman who faces being stoned for charges of adultery how “safe” she feels in that culture.
LikeLike
Wesley Roy, your use of complementarianism (made up word) seems to do justice to the presumable root word “complementarity” and makes sense. However, I have done extensive reading and listening of the movement and there is a consensus among the original coiners of the term and its leading proponents and authors that complementarianism is a reference to the unilateral male authority and unilateral female submission. The very complementarity nature is the male authority and the female submission. In their view, if there is mutual submission or mutual authority, the roles and genders are interchangeable, hence unbiblical.
In my view, among prominent complementarian teachers and authors there is no nuance of definition though they concede there is nuance in application. It is this hierarchy, or chain of command, that makes it distinct from egalitarian or a non-hierarchical marriage. It is this hierarchy, male authority and female submission, that prominent complementarian pastors, teachers, and authors say “reveal a truth about the gospel” and “reveal something about Jesus and the church” which is different than what you are saying about marriage reflecting Christ and Christians.
LikeLike
What amazes me is that while the world teeters on the brink of global war, Fukushima threatens the whole Pacific Ocean, people are becoming more vicious and animalistic every day, and global finance is about to collapse, what matters most to some Christian leaders is…. whether women know their place. Unbelievable.
LikeLike
Barbara Roberts@1:15am
Dr. Jones was one of my favorite professors at Covenant. If he endorsed your book, I’m sure it’s very good.
LikeLike
Wesleyroy2 said, “I think we Western Christians often make the mistake of trying to liberate people from things that they are not in bondage to because the conditions do not fit our cultural frame of thought. I have heard the testimony of Islamic women that don’t feel oppressed because they have to have a male relative with them when they leave the home but they feel safe.
Is there any chance Tom that these guys and girls simply have a different way of doing marriage than yours and both parties are quite satisfied and happy?”
Wesleyroy2, with all due respect, cultural differences don’t excuse inequality between men & women. Whether just one person or every person is okay with inequality, doesn’t make inequality okay! That’s just irrational, IMO. There are many cultures throughout history where inequality exists in race, gender, age, etc. At no time EVER does that make inequality right. What is going on with this irrational thinking? I just can’t understand it. That’s like saying if I find a few slaves who liked slavery then it’s okay. We can do better folks, “wise Christians” should not be an oxymoron. And don’t you know that’s what Cal reformer Doug Wilson wrote in his pamphlet, “Southern Slavery, As It Was”. He said slavery was enjoyed by both races. Baloney! And no matter if everyone did enjoy it, it is wrong! I certainly hope you don’t buy that, Wesleyroy2.
And there are Muslim daughters in America who are scared for their lives when they find out they’re pregnant… before they are married. They head straight for the abortion docs. usually, afraid their fathers will kill them. Does that sound satisfied & happy to you, Wesleyroy2?
We are either naive or messed up. Either way we need to wake up & listen to & think about what we are saying!
LikeLike
Will this passage even make it into the ESV Gospel Transformation Bible?
Galatians 3:27-29
27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 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. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.
LikeLike
A Mom:
You said:”Will this passage even make it into the ESV Gospel Transformation Bible?
Galatians 3:27-29
27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 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. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”
It will make it but their commentary will twist it into something that meets their needs. Pitiful.
LikeLike
I would assume that among the 50 scholars who are women who worked on this volume, they contributed chocolate chip recipes and tips for polishing silverware and ironing, which appear in the work itself, which would explain why the complementarian males approved of their work(*). 😆
And the ladies who contributed would probably be said to be working under the leadership/headship of whatever males worked on this thing, too. 🙄
*On a serious note, I have seen a certain amount of acceptance by gender complementarian males to allow or approve (usually married) women to speak or teach both genders via books, conferences, etc, provided those women claim to buy into gender complementarianism as well. To me, that’s a little hypocritical of them.
Some of them make up all sorts of exceptions. Isn’t it John Piper who says it’s okay for women to give directions to a lost man who pulls over and asks her for help provided she does so in a way that doesn’t make the guy feel like less than a man?
And he (or some other famous comp) said he would be okay with a woman writing about Christianity because reading a woman’s written word is not the same thing as sitting with one teaching in the same room where her “femaleness can be distracting” -or something like that.
Can we do links on this blog? I’ll try to link to a page about it.
What John Piper sees when women teach
LikeLike
I think the problem is that you guys who are against what is called complementarianism want it to mean something it doesn’t mean. You want it to mean men who degrade and lord it over women, and the truth is it just doesn’t mean that and, more importantly, for those who understand what it DOES mean, that is not how it works out practically.
Granted, there may be some out there who do this, but they are not being complementarian. A complementarian sees each gender as having different, yet complentary roles. What you guys are describing is barbarism, not complementarianism.
LikeLike
Wesley Roy said: “As a matter of fact, I would say that everyone is comp in practice. No one believes everyone can do everything as well as everyone else can. I would think that everyone would also be willing to concede the fact that women and men have differences beyond our physiology. I think all of us who are married would have to admit that their are times that we have no idea how our spouses process information and arrive at the conclusions that they do. As a comp I have to admit that there are some things that my wife does a much better job at than I do so I do like all other comp’s and egal’s and stay out of her way while she does it or ask her what can I do to help her. For example, I have the accounting skills with formal training in accounting, Quickbooks, Peach Tree, etc. but my wife handles the day to day finances. It’s simple she is a much more disciplined spender and likes the job. I don’t think there is a home that operates successfully that does not take advantage of the strengths of the members of the family in their respective areas. Unfortunately, she does make me do the taxes….. lol.”
========
Wesley, that’s a description of an Egalitarian marriage, not a comp marriage. Egalitarians don’t believe that men and women are “the same”. In fact, we believe they “complement” one another.
Comps believe in hierarchy based on gender. We don’t believe that. But what comps believe has nothing to do with what your post describes as complementarianism.
LikeLike
Paul said the relationship between husband and wife was to be a picture of Christ and the church. Like it or not, there IS a hierarchy there. Christ is the head of the church, not the other way around. And they are not functionally equal.
Everyone (except for abusers) is practically and functionally complementarian. As Wes stated earlier, we may come at it from different theological angles, but practically it’s basically the same.
LikeLike
S, Brian Thornton… is the man to play “Father” to his wife’s “Son”? Does that sound like something Christians are to model?
LikeLike
Every husband or boyfriend who would claim authority to dominate his wife or girlfriend, even if only to the extent of having the final say, is sinfully fulfilling the prophecy spoken to Eve by God Himself that Adam would rule over her. Such domination, in howsoever small degree, is not a working out of God’s perfect plan for relationship between the sexes. It is sin.
Because God is Love, and because we are called to oneness with Him, unconditional love is the exclusive foundation for all Christian relationships, whether between each other or between believers and Jesus Himself. Authority is a sorry substitute for love.
LikeLike
” think the problem is that you guys who are against what is called complementarianism want it to mean something it doesn’t mean. You want it to mean men who degrade and lord it over women, and the truth is it just doesn’t mean that and, more importantly, for those who understand what it DOES mean, that is not how it works out practically.”
It means exactly what it does not say. That is the whole point. It is an Orwellian term meant to try and soften patriarchy for the generation it was introduced in. (It is almost a joke to the gen xer’s who are not following gurus)
And you walk around with your final say trump card in your pocket. You may never use it but you have it because YOU need it. When you do not need that trump card, you will be a mutualist.
It is nothing but a sell on a phallocentristic Christianity. Which is not Christianity at all.
LikeLike
Gary, Where do they get hierarchy in a “one flesh union”?
Maybe they get it from Bruce Ware who says women were made in the “indirect image of God….a derivative”
LikeLike
maybe, there is no conspiracy and for most of the names (of men), isn’t a conflict. potentially speaking, maybe their teachings are taken to “logical conclusions” that the authors themselves would not agree with. Hence, their names along side those of Christian women leaders. This would mean, we, the reader and observer, have taken sound bytes and composed entire arguments against teachers that don’t practically describe the fullness of what they believe, teach, or practice. just a thought.
p.s. this is not meant to gloss over the Miano’s of the world.
LikeLike
” A complementarian sees each gender as having different, yet complentary roles”
Physical or spiritual.
Besides the biological body parts necessary to create and have children, what are the different “roles” we are pretending to play that complement the body parts?
See, my Savior came as a male. Can I strive to become like him? Or is there another model for me…as a female?
LikeLike
Brian Thornton said,
Jesus Christ served and serves the church; He does not lord authority over the church, as comps think males should do females.
To the guy above (Brian, I think) who said those who reject compism don’t understand it – oh so wrong! I was brought up by a mother who believed very strongly in compism (though it was not known by that name when I was growing up).
I understood gender complementarianism and tried to accept it, but as I got into adulthood, various things about compism did not add up. The over arching message I see in Scripture is one of equality, not one of one group having authority, power, and control over another.
LikeLike
Julie Anne said, Those who call them comps cannot keep it straight. Grudem says women can teach deaf men. Wassupwiththat? Deaf men? Deaf men have brains and every other faculty – – they are just hearing impaired.
That is just weird. Very weird. 😆 But it also is another example of all the exceptions and inconsistencies within gender complementarianism.
Some gender comps are fine with women teaching and leading men to Christ overseas, as missionaires, but won’t allow those same women to teach and lead white (or maybe even black) males within American churches.
Some churches allow women to lead and teach males but only when those males are up to age twelve or eighteen. Some let women lead Sunday School classes, but not any other teachings roles that are considered higher or more powerful. Others will, but it has to be a married women who is “under authority” of her spouse.
I’m sorry to be a broken record on this, but since we are oft forgotten: I am a never married adult, over age 40. Most of these conversations and rules about gender roles almost always pre-suppose the women in question are married.
That is, for the churches that are fine with a woman teaching, so long as she is under her husband’s headship – what if you are a never-married woman who God has gifted with the ability to teach? You apparently don’t get to ever use your gift, since you have no spouse “over you”.
There is much fixation on married women (and mothers) and what married women (and mothers) can and cannot do by gender complementarians.
Never-married ladies such as myself are brushed aside and forgotten once more.
I don’t know how to express it, but I feel this is some kind of chink, or vulnerable spot, in the gender comp armor. Someone more intelligent than myself should probably look into this and blog about it.
IMO there is something very amiss about a view of the female gender by Christians that leaves out a good chunk of the group. A lot of Christian people these days are not getting married and not having kids, not necessarily by choice but that there is nobody to marry. (There are older, never married, childless Christian men who feel the same way; some churches don’t let them serve in positions of leadership, either.)
The gender complementarian rules, ideas, and concerns generally only spell out the sphere of the married woman (and one with kids, especially) – if you are a female, and not married and no kids? They have little to say to you, for you, or about you.
Even if you are a gender comp, I see nothing in the Bible that forbids a never- married woman from preaching, teaching, and leading either or both genders.
LikeLike
It has been an enjoyable conversation. I hold to my original statement that people may be egal or comp in theory but in practice it will usually look the same.
I also hold to the statement that the western view of equality is not the only view and is not the only biblical model for family life.
I also hold to my definition of complementarian. I am not aware of any other word in the English language that does not have multiple nuanced definitions so I will just go with that for this word as well.
This is not germane to the conversation but I think that any daughter pregnant outside of marriage should be concerned for purely secular statistical reasons but if they are a Christian it should be really problematic for them. A Mom I don’t think there are enough unmarried muslim women in America to account for our abortion rates so there must be other factors besides fear of a father’s displeasure driving these stats.
I land where I started. These guys need to be commended by this board for having women scholars as contributors to the notes for this study Bible. It seems they have moved from comp definition #1 to a nuanced definition that is closer in practice to what egals claim in theory. I wonder if they flipped a coin to decide who would be contributors to keep anyone from making the final decision….LOL I would submit that unless your home is run by a flip of the coin you are not pure egal either.
LikeLike
missdaisyflower: reading through your post, you said, “there is nobody to marry.”
makes me wonder what you mean here. I’m starting to think as I’ve gotten older, it must be hard to find a spouse in the 40’s and 50’s (or later), but hadn’t had to worry about it as I’m married (27 years now… woo hoo!). Anyway, this may be an OT question, but I’d be interested in what you mean by nobody to marry, if you are willing to share.
Thank you ahead of time.
LikeLike
“I would submit that unless your home is run by a flip of the coin you are not pure egal either.”
LOL!. I can relate. We once used a dreidel for variety.
LikeLike
Mod note: I changed all of the “five solas” posts to “Brian Thornton” Something might be up with Word Press changing Brian’s name, but I think it’s important to keep consistency in names here.
LikeLike
Brian, you haven’t been objective since you have been here. You ask the same questions over and over and over again, that get answered over and over and over again. The conclusion is that you have no objective to figure out why we believe what we do, nor do you have an objective to figure out why we don’t believe what we don’t. And for some reason, you are confused that you aren’t convincing us to believe in your tyrannical god, with a small g.
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
“Every husband or boyfriend who would claim authority to dominate his wife or girlfriend”
No one is here is promting or even hinting that this is what we are talking about when we say we are complementarians.
LikeLike
“The over arching message I see in Scripture is one of equality, not one of one group having authority, power, and control over another.”
Again, this is just another mischaracterization of what those here have been talking about who favor complementarianism. It is not about having authority, power and control over another.
LikeLike
“These guys need to be commended by this board for having women scholars as contributors to the notes for this study Bible.”
Yes! And therein lies the irony for this whole post. This board’s actions are to be commended. Why Julie Anne and others can’t give credit where credit is due reveals a lack of charity. They did something you guys agree with. Why can’t you celebrate that instead of turning it into a negative. Even when we comps do something good it’s not good! Jeese…
LikeLike
For Wesley and Brian’s benefit:
Woohoo for the guys for “allowing” the women to contribute to the notes on this Bible. Woo-freakin’ HOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
🙂
LikeLike
Ric, since I know a lot of Daisy’s story from another blog, I’ll take a stab at answering it. I too am single although I am in my mid-20’s. When you are a single woman in the church, you are often expected to get married in your 20’s, the sooner the better. And you are expected to remain a virgin and pure and basically live your life in waiting for the magical husband who has been promised to you. But if you don’t get married by the time you are 30, something is wrong with you. There is a lot of talk about sex and how magical it is but you have to wait for marriage but there is no teaching on remaining single in your 30’s and beyond. And heaven forbid if you are 35 and still a virgin then surely you are at fault. People are then shocked that you managed to wait so long and assume that you are either homosexual or asexual when the real problem lies in the fact that women just outnumber men in most churches. Oh and you are told paradoxically that you aren’t supposed to covet marriage but you are still supposed to live your life in preparation for your future spouse. I could go on and on and on. Books like Josh Harris’s on dating only further the problem by creating so many man-made standards to live up to. What it really comes down to is an idolization of the traditional nuclear family and if you don’t fit into that idol then you are useless.
This past weekend I had the great privilege of attending the wedding of a dear childhood friend (15 years and counting!) and her delightful fiance. It was the most unusual, non-traditional, joyful wedding I have ever been to and I will never forget it. The marriage sermon also was different from what I am used to; the minister (a woman) focused on the mutual submission of marriage and how my friends had already been living out that beautiful aspect of love. There was no talk about marriage roles or the wife submitting to the husband, etc… I cried tears of joy. Granted, there may have been a little sweat in there too as it was in the Texas Hill Country and outdoors. 😀 When you lose the focus on man-made rules and couples are free to love each other, beautiful things happen.
LikeLike
Five Solas Guy,
FSG: “Paul said the relationship between husband and wife was to be a picture of Christ and the church. Like it or not, there IS a hierarchy there.”
It seems to me the head-body metaphor of Christ the *head* of the church *his* *body* is drawing a comparison to the symbiotic union of a physical head and body. I contend the support for view is “Savior of the body,” “loves his own body,” “nourish and cherishes his own body,” “love wife as himself (body.” Can you point to the words or phrases in this metaphor which support your assertion that the comparison being made is to a hierarchy? Also, it seems to me you have it backwards. Christ relationship as head to his body the Church is the picture of how the paterfamilias was to treat his wife. Christ as Savior of the Church, who feeds, nourishes, cherishes (agape) the Church, serves as the example for the paterfamilias.
FSG: “Everyone (except for abusers) is practically and functionally complementarian. As Wes stated earlier, we may come at it from different theological angles, but practically it’s basically the same.”
I haven’t heard that former claim before. I have heard that complementarians are functionally egalitarian which has been been lamented by prominent complementarians. Wes is using complementarian in a novel way. The coiners and defenders of the term invest unilateral authority in the husband and require unilateral female submission. That is in contrast to the theological angle of non-hierarchicalists or mutualists. If in practice complementarian marriages functionally appear egalitarian, I would venture to guess they are not functioning within the hierarchy they claim is necessary to be the picture of Christ and the Church. .
LikeLike
Brian said, “CON/Miano/Mahaney group”
What is CON? I’m not familiar with Miano or Mahaney outside of what I’ve read on these blogs about them.
I come from a Southern Baptist background and was raised to believe in gender complementarianism, but grew to reject gender comp, by my oh, mid to late 30s, but had niggling doubts about gender comps in my teen years that grew into severe, bigger doubts in my 20s.
Not all who reject gender comp have heard of or met or experienced Mahaney and these other people you have mentioned. I’ve never been to an SGM church, either. I don’t have a pony in that race or an ax to grind about it.
I’m also right wing politically (I always vote Republican), a social conservative, have always been a YEC (Young Earther, which gets mocked and made fun of, even on these types of blogs) who takes the Bible literally where it’s meant to be taken literally (adherence to biblical literalism also gets mocked or put down by a lot of visitors to spiritual abuse blogs).
I do not completely embrace secular feminism though I recognize they do make a valid point here and there on some subjects. I have disagreed with a lot of secular feminism since my teens years, though, so you can’t peg my rejection of gender comp on feminism or liberalism, either. The biggest reason I reject gender comp is that it does not line up with the whole of Scripture.
LikeLike
Since or precious Brian replies to something I didn’t actually say, please allow me to repeat myself, emphasizing the part Brian avoids dealing with:
“Every husband or boyfriend who would claim authority to dominate his wife or girlfriend, EVEN IF ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF HAVING THE FINAL SAY, is sinfully fulfilling the prophecy spoken to Eve by God Himself that Adam would rule over her. Such domination, in howsoever small degree, is not a working out of God’s perfect plan for relationship between the sexes. It is sin.”
And Brian accuses us of setting up straw men? Sorry Brian, but I have difficulty seeing the difference between selectively quoting to make it seem like I said something I didn’t and a lie. Who is your father Brian?
LikeLike
gettin hot in here….
LikeLike
What is CON?
* * * * *
It takes a while to figure out a CON, that’s for sure. CON stands for Chuck O’Neal the pastor who sued me and 4 others for $500,000 in a defamation lawsuit for writing negative Google reviews and blogging about him.
LikeLike
missdaisyflower,
You won’t catch any flack from me on the concept of Biblical literalism. There may be room for discussion as to what is and is not intended to be taken literally, but for the most part, I have been taking a face-value approach to Scripture, and getting myself in trouble with self-proclaimed Biblical literalists (I hope not you), for a good long while now. For example, I expect most complementarians, and patriarchists would claim to be Biblical literalists, but they sure do squirm to overcome a literal reading of this one:
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)
Unfortunately, I find myself having to be cautious about taking verses literally where there is good reason to think the English translation has been gamed to fit a theological point of view and/or some agenda.
LikeLike
Brian said, “Leaders in the home are the husbands.”
I will commend you for participating here, and replying to people. I usually duck out of threads where it’s like ten- to- one (where I am the one going up against ten). I can only handle debating with one or two people at a time, but you have several.
Anyway, about your comment, “Leaders in the home are the husbands.”
You are, I take it, reading “authority,” “control,” or “power over,” or concepts such as those, into the word “leader”(?), but Jesus said a true leader has to serve others, which may mean at times deferring to what the other person wants and not getting the final “say so,” or final decision, in a disagreement.
Yet complementarians often depict complementarianism (in marriage) as meaning a married lady always has to let her husband have the last word, or final decision, on whatever topic is under consideration – by golly, it’s so nice and touchie feelie sensitive of hubby if he considers the wife’s desires, but in comp world, he still has the “right” to over-ride whatever the wife wants. That does not sound like what the Bible teaches about “servant leadership.”
(And again, I’ve no idea how most of this stuff plays out for women like me who have never married. Or for never- married males.)
Jesus also told His followers not to “lord authority over each other,” and “whoever wants to be first must put himself last.”
The Bible says that all believers are priests, and that the only High Priest is Jesus Christ Himself, meaning that a woman, married or single, does not need a human male (husband, brother, son, uncle, father, preacher) as a representative for her, or to act as conduit to God on her behalf. The Bible does not teach that a woman needs or requires “a (human male) leader,” or not in the sense the comps teach it.
LikeLike
https://twitter.com/TonyMiano/status/375099686241452032
LikeLike
For JulieAnne who said,
“It takes a while to figure out a CON, that’s for sure. CON stands for Chuck O’Neal the pastor who sued me and 4 others for $500,000 in a defamation lawsuit for writing negative Google reviews and blogging about him.”
Thank you for the explanation. I don’t reject gender comp because of CON, either, if that calms Brian at all. 🙂 I’ve got other reasons why I gave up belief in gender comp.
For Gary W who said,
You won’t catch any flack from me on the concept of Biblical literalism
I just tend to see a lot of mocking of belief in biblical literalism at various spiritual abuse blogs or emergent blogs I visit.
I do recognize that the Bible contains various literary genres, and a bit of allegory, so I realize that 100% of the Bible cannot or should not be read as woodenly literal.
Jesus said that ‘He is the vine,’ but I don’t take that to mean he is actually a vine. There’s also a line in the Bible about the “trees of the fields clapping their hands,” which I recognize as figurative. Stuff like that. 🙂
I’m in a really odd place on these blogs.
I appreciate the sensitivity to hurting people that I see (I’ve been hurt myself by other Christians and have been heading into agnosticism lately), and I have also had my eyes open to some of the contradictions and flaws in conservative evangelicalism/Baptist churches, but as far as being a Christian at all, if I am one, or stay one, I am still a regular, run of the mill conservative, pretty much.
If I am going to believe in the Bible, I am going to take it literally. I’m still going to be pretty conservative in my Christian views and am still a social conservative, so I can’t fully get on board with some of the more liberal tendencies I see on the emergent blogs, things like assuming the Bible is mostly allegorical or filled with error, etc etc. I’m sympathetic to a degree with some of the biblical questioning I see but disagree or am uncomfortable with other parts of it.
LikeLike
I think it’s sad that the Five Solas Guys have read “hierarchy” into Ephesians 5:21-33. Jesus’ lordship is never mentioned in this passage. What is mentioned is Jesus’ sacrificial love and nurture. This is what is required from husbands, not lordship, with unity being the overarching principle.
I think it’s sad that complementarians believe that marriage – a relationship of just two people – needs a hierarchy in order to function in an properly. Marriage can be tough going at times, but I can’t see that a hierarchy helps. I think most mature Christians should be able to get along and resolve issues without one person always holding the trump card.
LikeLike
Wesleyroy2 said, “It has been an enjoyable conversation. I hold to my original statement that people may be egal or comp in theory but in practice it will usually look the same.”
Wesleyroy2, You are really an egalitarian in complementarian clothing. And I’m glad you don’t practice Comp. 🙂 But seriously, this is what many wise Comps do, they function in real life as egalitarian. VERY wise Comps jump the fence into reality & call what they practice equality. Many preach, teach & agree with Comp but don’t touch it with a ten foot pole in their own marriage.
Everyone,
And there is a downside of Comp. Some families are destroyed. I know a couple, the wife was told her husband may have to learn the hard way & eventually, but at least she would be “covered” by obeying her husband. I’m not going to go into the personal side of it, but it was devastating not just for her but the kids. And this is just one example. I’ve been in church since a baby, there are many that I know. And many wives sweetly go along with head of the house, but are master manipulators, yuck! Other people have said numerous times on this blog they don’t know one marriage like that. They are either out of touch or lying.
Doesn’t everyone want what’s best for their family? I’ll take advice or an idea from a child if it makes sense. I’ll take advice from a bum on the street if it’s good. Are we so rigid & inflexible we can’t appreciate each for who they are & what they bring to the table? And let each couple decide who does what best, instead of applying predetermined roles?
Bottom line, if equality is what’s practiced in marriages, what’s wrong with calling it what it is & wholeheartedly approving it?
LikeLike
Lydia, I’ve enjoyed many of your posts here and on the other threads. You said, Piper was running around teaching women in conferences all about marriage and all about their roles. Where was Noel? No where to be found. It was like that for many years. She homeschools so it is not l like they could not travel together. She simply was not part of his life.
Oh, this reminds me. A lot of gender comps are loathe to admit it, I think, but they seem to (secretly) idolize 1950s US culture (they used to be more open to admit this, now a days they try to downplay it), especially the TV sit com depiction of family life on “Leave It To Beaver,” where you have this picture perfect family of Ward Cleaver, stay- at- home- wife and mom June Cleaver, and their two sons.
I was skimming a book on Google Books a few weeks ago and found the funniest thing. The author of the book (I’m sorry I don’t remember its title) explained that June Cleaver (the actress who played her) did not even live a June Cleaver life.
The actress who played June Cleaver said she had to work in the TV studio several days a week to film the ‘Leave It To Beaver’ TV show. She would have to drive to her acting job and leave her real-life kids behind at home (I think she may have said she had a nanny or baby sitter to watch them).
A lot of gender complementarians hanker nostalgic for Beaver Cleaver, traditional families. But not even the Beaver Cleaver family was like the Beaver Cleaver family in real life 😆
LikeLike
Wesleyroy2 said, “This is not germane to the conversation but I think that any daughter pregnant outside of marriage should be concerned for purely secular statistical reasons but if they are a Christian it should be really problematic for them. A Mom I don’t think there are enough unmarried muslim women in America to account for our abortion rates so there must be other factors besides fear of a father’s displeasure driving these stats.”
I hear you. I agree, pregnancy outside of marriage is not best for us. However, killing the daughter is not the solution. I didn’t bring it up because I think unmarried Muslim women are driving the abortion rates. I brought it up as another clear example of how women & men are not viewed with equal value. And it may or may not be cultural. But either way, it is still wrong. You seem to think inequality is okay because it’s cultural. You even said women like not having a choice but to be escorted everywhere by a male. I tell you the truth, I would want a male escort if I were in certain countries. But not because it’s such a great thing. But because I would be in danger if I wasn’t in the company of a male. An escort is necessary because women have less value. See the difference?
I used to run around the neighborhood all day as a little kid. Kids don’t normally do that today, parents don’t usually let them out of their sight when they’re 6. Do some kids appreciate their parents going with them & keeping an eye out? I suppose so. But it’s a crying shame it’s this way. See the difference?
School shootings were unheard of back in my day. Now, you have to be buzzed into school. Parents want the protection let’s be clear, but I guarantee they wish it weren’t necessary to being with. See the difference?
LikeLike
Wesley Roy said, “Patriarchy, however, is not deemed evil or good in Scripture. It is purely a cultural construct and offensive to American sensibilities though not condemned in Scripture”
Same thing could be said of white Americans holding black people as slaves in the 19th century. I don’t know of many Christians today who would defend slavery, though.
LikeLike
Mandy said, “What it really comes down to is an idolization of the traditional nuclear family and if you don’t fit into that idol then you are useless. ”
I completely agree & it kinda ticks me off. Again, we can do so much better as Christian brothers & sisters. I have relatives & long time close friends, male & female, who are not married & in their 30s & 40s. They are some of the most honest & mature, most level-headed, most Godly individuals I know. They are some of the best examples of how to live a Christian life that I personally know. Maybe that’s the problem, you have to be in deep sin & brag about how bad you are most times to get any appreciation. And thank the Lord they haven’t settled.
There is NOTHING wrong with them. And everyone knows it. And some married may be a little jealous of them, I think. Yes, there are single kooks out there, but there are a lot of married kooks, too.
LikeLike
Brian T quoted the Bible, ““But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” – 1 Cor. 11:3”
I am never married and over 40 years of age. I guess I am “headless.” I love how these gender comp interpretations leave the singles out of the equation / discussion.
LikeLike
missdaisyflower: Without a head, I don’t know how you can see where you are going. Please be careful, ya hear?
LikeLike
Wesley Roy said,
The women of the Nation of Islam do it all the time and they are not Middle Eastern but African-Americans who know exactly what American life is like.
I’m not completely sure I follow here, so maybe I am not understanding you correctly, but if you are saying some women are relieved to turn to a man, that they desire to turn themselves over to a man, to submit to a man, and let the man be in charge of them or their life, I would agree that yes, some women willingly do so, that but is not Biblical nor is it safe for the woman.
God predicted that women seeking to defer to a spouse would be one outcome of the fall in the Garden: that women would turn to men to be their saviors and their ‘everythings’, instead of turning to God Himself to get their needs met: “You will desire the man, and he will rule over you.” – that was God pronouncing the impact of sin, not God sanctioning male headship over women.
Some women do want to be taken care of by a man, to turn to a man for financial support, safety, and decision making because life seems safer, easier, and cozier with someone else in charge.
However, doing this is not approved of in the Bible, and is one symptom of something called “codependency,” which the Bible usually refers to as “fear of man” but which is also taught against in other biblical illustrations and passages.
Women depending on men too much, or deferring their personal responsibility and relegating all decision making on to a man (or on another women) is actually condemned in the Bible.
LikeLike
Julie Anne said, missdaisyflower: Without a head, I don’t know how you can see where you are going. Please be careful, ya hear?
😆 I’ll be careful. Maybe I should get a guide dog?
By the way, I hope nobody is put off by me commenting so much. I just enjoy chatting with people online. I don’t have a lot of family I can talk to off-line/ real life. I don’t mean to annoy or “monopolize” threads here or at the Wartburg Watch blog. 🙂
LikeLike
I’m supposed to commend the ESV team when out of 50 pastors and scholars, they let 4 women write something? I suppose compared to zero, four might be sort of better, but really– not by much. It’s a thing called “tokenism.” Sorry, not impressed.
LikeLike
Hannah Thomas said, “Remember that silly article by Piper stating he can read and recite a ‘biblical’ book by a woman, because she wasn’t in his presence ‘pushing’ her femininity upon him? ”
http://eaandfaith.blogspot.com/2013/04/john-piper-women-teaching-men.html
Hannah, Thanks for the link. I checked it out & here’s some of what Piper said, “And so I distinguish between personal, direct exercises of authority that involve manhood and womanhood. Because it’s personal. She’s right there. She’s woman. I’m man. And I’m being directly, uh, pressed on by this woman in an authoritative way. Should she be doing that? Should I be experiencing that? And my answer’s, No; I think that’s contrary to the way God made us. So those two words: Personal and direct. Here, here would be an example of what I mean. A drill sergeant that gets in the face and says, Hut One, Hut Two, Keep Your Mouth Shut Private, Get Your Rifle Up Here, Turn Around Like I Said. I don’t think a woman ought to be doin’ that to a man – because it’s direct, it’s forceful, it’s authoritative, it’s compromising something about the way a man and a woman were designed by God to relate.”
1.Why would either one, a man or woman, normally treat each other this way in a marriage? Why does Piper make this a gender issue? What does this have to do with female or gender? Piper implies it’s not okay for women but it is okay for men.
2.What if a woman was screaming at the top of her lungs at Piper? Should he automatically ignore her, reject her “supposed authority over him”? Is she in sin for being direct, forceful, authoritative? What if Piper were crossing the street when the sign said “walk” but a car was barreling toward him & she was yelling at him to jump out of the way? My Dad used to say, “You might be right, but you may be dead right.” I guess Piper would be right for ignoring her, but he might be dead right. Control freak right.
LikeLike
Brian said: “Like it or not, there IS a hierarchy there. Christ is the head of the church, not the other way around. And they are not functionally equal.”
Then he added:
“Everyone (except for abusers) is practically and functionally complementarian. As Wes stated earlier, we may come at it from different theological angles, but practically it’s basically the same.”
Sorry, no. There is no hierarchy between me and my husband, and neither of us is abusive. “Complementarian,” as defined by complementarians, means “having male-over-female hierarchy in marriage and the church.” Differing roles is really just a smokescreen. Egalitarians don’t believe in male-over-female hierarchy.
LikeLike
SM wrote,
It is this hierarchy, male authority and female submission, that prominent complementarian pastors, teachers, and authors say “reveal a truth about the gospel” and “reveal something about Jesus and the church”
This is akin to something I said above. I too have seen gender comps say that a woman submitting to her husband is some kind of affirmation or proof to the world that God exists, or it shows unbelievers the kind of God we serve, or it serves remind Christians about their relationship to God, or something…
But again, if you have never married, if you are still single, outside of the verse about “everyone submit to each other,” single ladies do not have a spouse to submit to, and single men do not have a spouse that submits to them.
Therefore, (according to the gender comps), this makes it appear as though the unmarried have no part in Christianity or cannot reflect Jesus or God, because according to them, only married couples (with wives in submission to a husband) can paint a picture of God. Or, this is implied in their teaching, or is the logical outcome of it.
I happen to believe there are teachings in the Bible that support that unmarried people also represent the relationship between God and the church, but we never hear about those passages or biblical concepts from the gender comps, or from most preachers in general.
LikeLike
Missdaisyflower, you mentioned earlier that you’d like to read what other singles have to say on this. I recommend Retha Faurie of “Biblical Personhood.” In this post she raises the very points you are raising:
http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com/2012/03/02/question-to-complementarians-what-is-my-gender-role/
LikeLike
Missdaisyflower: This place is named SSB for a good reason. Your voice is important here. 🙂
LikeLike
thank you, Krwordgazer, I’ll bookmark that and have a look.
Thank you, Julie Anne. BTW, I post as “Daisy” at the other blog.
I tried posting under that name here but sometimes have tech problems registering/ logging/ posting when I sign up at blogs on word press or blogger, the blogs don’t want to accept my e-mail address or whatever.
Sometimes it comes down to I forget what name/ e-mail address I used to register for a blog and have to re-sign up with a new name or address.
I was stalked on the internet many years ago by a weirdo which is yet another reason I sometimes post under other names. But I usually post here under some variation of “Daisy” or “Daisy Flower.”
LikeLike
I kinda thought you were Daisy from TWW 🙂 Word Press can be finicky on user names. I know that!
LikeLike
@ Julie Anne, yep, it’s me, Daisy from TWW.
I also post on occasion as Daisy at Rachel Held Evan’s blog, but there are two other “Daisy’s” there too, so I try to post as “DaisyFlower” at RHE, but sometimes that blog rejects that name, so I have to revert to “Daisy” there.
I’m not trying to dupe anyone, but between tech issues on blogs and that weirdo from several years ago who followed me around and harassed me at e mail accounts I had, I can’t always post under the same screen name everywhere (nor do I want to, to avoid the stalkers).
LikeLike
Lydia wrote,
“Maybe they get it from Bruce Ware who says women were made in the “indirect image of God….a derivative”
Most of the time, a lot of comps try to point to creation order (the man was created first, followed by the woman) to substantiate male hierarchy, but now this guy introduces the “direct vs indirect” model.
I am really, really, very uncomfortable with the “woman is a derivative” notion. It makes women out to be sub-human, or not as much in God’s image as males.
LikeLike
wesley roy said,
These guys need to be commended by this board for having women scholars as contributors to the notes for this study Bible
I’d like to, but them allowing women to print commentary or research in a Bible actually goes against what most of them teach about women most of the time.
How am I supposed to take gender complementarianism seriously or make sense of it, when they are not consistent about when and how women may serve/ teach/ lead?
I also suspect that they only allowed a small number of token women to participate in this version because, they would say, these women were under the male leadership and approval of a male preacher or husband, and/or that these women all fully subscribed to gender comp views in the first place. I know I kind of joked about that in my first post about this, but I bet dollars to doughnuts I’m right about that.
LikeLike
@ Ric. There are no men my age in churches or on dating sites. Especially not Christian ones.
I have given up on the idea of dating or marrying a Christian guy and will settle for marrying a Non- Christian at this point. I don’t care what the Bible says about being yoked to unbelievers anymore.
Christian TV and Christian magazines on the web are always doing stories about how Christian men have affairs on their wives, have porn addiction issues, have pre marital sex, some admit to seeing prostitutes (I’ve seen some of these guys interviewed on Christian television shows).
And of course, there are blogs where you can read about Christian women now divorced from Christian church-going men who physically abused them. I am not seeing an “up” side to marrying a Christian guy, not that there are any single ones at my age anyhow.
I have also thought about leaving the Christian faith altogether the last couple of years after being a Christian since I was a kid, for reasons I don’t want to list here.
LikeLike
Brian Thornton wrote,
[quoting Miss Daily Flower]
“The over arching message I see in Scripture is one of equality, not one of one group having authority, power, and control over another.”
That is what you were talking about when you said a man should be a leader to his wife. You think a husband should be in power, control over, a wife.
Either that, or you must have another definition of “leader,” where leader means “servant of,” which means the wife is actually winds up being the “head” in the marriage, functionally speaking, because in the Bible, the first is to be last, and a leader is called to be a servant to the other person.
Brian T said,
Why Julie Anne and others can’t give credit where credit is due reveals a lack of charity.
It’s not that anyone is failing to credit these guys, but that we are pointing out it is an inconsistency in their views.
We shouldn’t have to credit them anyhow; it’s like men who feel they deserve a pat on the head for changing dirty diapers or doing the dishes: they should be doing that stuff anyhow. Their wives shouldn’t have to praise them for it to start with. Nobody praises me when I clean my dirty dishes or those of any guests I have over.
LikeLike
Mandy above did a pretty good job of summarizing my views and experiences as a single in Christianity. 🙂
LikeLike
Brian:
It must be “incredible” always having “the’ answer. I reject comp, it is not Biblical.
LikeLike
Jumping in here from a different time zone, hemisphere and season (It’s Spring! Yay! At last!).
“Teaching women to be manipulating connivers because their husband is so full of himself and insecure for you to have a grown up discussion with. You have to manipulate to make him think it was his idea. ”
Brian may have said this in jest but this is exactly what I was taught by my mother, a dear Christian woman who tried very hard to fit the ‘good Christian wife’ ideal. She told me if I want a man to listen to my ideas, he has to be made to think it was his idea in the first place. In her experience, that was the way the world worked for women; as a woman, you had it tough. Tried it myself in our first year of marriage but it didn’t feel right. I have a man who wants a woman who can stand her own ground and he gives credit where credit is due.
Mom also told me that a lot of what her mother taught her, she ‘threw out the window.’ Well, I’m learning to do the same.
LikeLike
Brian said: “Paul said the relationship between husband and wife was to be a picture of Christ and the church. Like it or not, there IS a hierarchy there. Christ is the head of the church, not the other way around. And they are not functionally equal.”
My response: Jesus SERVES the church (called out ones). Jesus washed the feet of his disciples. He called them friends. So, like it or not, there is NOT hierarchy there. The head of the Church, Christ, SERVES his bride.
Now, I know that you have quoted scripture, but here is something you may have missed:
Ephesians 5:
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: 30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
So far, that is describing “ONE”.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Again, that is describing “ONE”, not one OVER another.
I suppose that you didn’t realize that submitting to Christ is the same as submitting to freedom?
The above reference is the same that Jesus said about “Love Thy Neighbor As Thyself”.
You cannot do that if you think that you are in charge.
Jesus is a servant to us, and yet, he is Lord. So, if you aren’t serving your spouse, as Christ serves the church, then you have a twisted view of submission to Christ.
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
Jesus said, “Not so among you” and washed his disciples’ feet. Whoever refuses to humble himself as Jesus did is not fit to lead in His kingdom.
LikeLike
Gary said: “Because God is Love, and because we are called to oneness with Him, unconditional love is the exclusive foundation for all Christian relationships, whether between each other or between believers and Jesus Himself. Authority is a sorry substitute for love.”
My response:
Yes, oneness. I saw your reply just after I posted mine, which shows that both husband and wife are one, not two. One implies that no one is in charge of the other.
I am perplexed that Calvinists just can’t do things which come naturally, which is why they must write books to make money, in order to manipulate scripture to say what it does not.
Burn them books! How many different inerrant Bible versions will they sell? At one time, the NIV was inerrant, UNTIL…
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
“Wesley Roy said, “Patriarchy, however, is not deemed evil or good in Scripture. It is purely a cultural construct and offensive to American sensibilities though not condemned in Scripture”
I cannot believe this statement. Patriarchy is what we see right out of the gate after the fall because it is a consquence of the fall. Not sure how anyone cannot see the consequences of the fall, as outlined by God would be. He makes it clear and Eve is partly to blame. She would be ‘turning” to Adam (instead of God) and because of that, Adam would rule over her. (There is our Patriarchy)
Now, all the comps teach that Eve wanted to rule over Adam. They totally twist it.
How Wesley cannot look at history and not see millineum of women being oppressed, I will never know. I suppose Polygamy was not deemed good or bad either?
This is the irony of comp thinking/teaching. They teach SIN as virtue.
LikeLike
You listen to these guys for years on this subject and it becomes so obvious they cling to their supposed power. They NEED it. It is an insecurity problem. But comp would NEVER work without women. Women have to give them the power first and that is the irony. And plenty of women love it. I have seen women one up each other on whose husband was the best spiritual leader. Lots of people spending a ton of time dealing with roles, watching each other on roles, making careful steps on roles, being proud of roles, being confused on roles for every situation.
Satan loves it. They are so busy with all the roles stuff (making sure they are not doing soemthing Piper does not like which is a full time job as he gets detailed) they have no time to just ABIDE IN CHRIST. Actually, it is harder to abide in Christ than it is to play a role in life. You can check boxes, listen to soem teacher on stage tell you how it should work, etc. People LOVE rules, formulas and roles. It makes them feel pious.
Abiding in Christ is a much different way of living. And the way it should be.
LikeLike
missdaisyflower,
You had said: “If I am going to believe in the Bible, I am going to take it literally.”
The only problem with that is that the spiritual story is being missed when you only take it literally. I am not discussing Jesus as being a vine, either.
I am discussing treasure in the [what most people call the Old Test] “The Law, and The Prophets”.
Many times Jesus scolded people for not knowing scripture…but they did indeed know it. They knew the literal…but they couldn’t figure out the spiritual.
For example, how many of us believe that the story of Noah’s Ark is about a boat with animals, and that God saved 8 souls? Yes, that is what it is about, in the literal sense. But it goes much much much deeper in the spiritual sense. How many have put on spiritual lenses to see what the spiritual story is? Here is a hint: Jesus is the Ark, and there were 8 souls “IN CHRIST (Christian)”, above the earth, while judgment was being done below…hence, a spiritual story about the rapture, which many deny, as there is many beliefs about whether it is true or not. This is also where the phrase, “Come Hell or High Water” came from.
In regards to young earth, I believe in a young mankind, animal kind, but not the earth itself. Day 7 God rested, and Hebrews 4 shows that he is still resting, indicating that day 7 isn’t over with, hence, I cannot take day 1-6 literal as defined based on 24 hour days. If God is light, how is darkness over the face of the deep on day 1? Darkness is a spiritual word, not just a carnal word. Darkness is another reason that I cannot take that word literal, but I have to see it as spiritual (not allegory, not poetry either).
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
Lydia you are not being honest when you accuse comps of teaching sin as virtue. Polygamy is condemned in Scripture but Patriarchy is not. Because people mess it up like them mess up everything else does not make it evil. I understand your distaste for what is a norm in other cultures but it does not make it evil.
LikeLike
missdaisyflower,
You share that you have thought about leaving the Christian faith altogether. Some would perhaps say that I already have left the faith. To some, faith has come to mean submission, but not submission to Jesus. To some, faith means submission to man made institutions, to men who have arrogated authority to themselves that belongs only to Jesus, to rules, to agendas, and to what has become the eleventh commandment, which is to fork over a tenth of all we have and earn. And yes, if you are a woman, you are supposed to get married to a supposedly Christian man to whom you are expected to give unquestioning control, also known as “the final say.”
Yes, if the Christian faith consists of submitting to authority mere men have stolen from the Son of God, I have left, even been driven away from, the faith. This leaving, however, has been the price of turning to Jesus. It has been a part of that dying which must precede resurrection.
Although I know from my college years that it is possible for Christians to live in real Christian community, I have next to no hope that I will find love-based community in any organized “church” to which I have access, at least in the small town where I live. There is nothing left but Jesus. It is not a bad thing. At least that is how it is working out for me.
LikeLike
WesleyRoy, Patriarchy and polygamy were prevalent throughout the time of the… patriarchs. God also allowed divorce, “because your hearts were hard”. So if God can allow something without endorsing it, who can say God ever endorsed polygamy… or patriarchy? So in declaring that patriarchy is not condemned, you also argue from silence that polygamy is not condemned, since no scripture explicitly states such a thing. There are in fact many evils that scripture does not expressly condemn… including slavery. Bad logic. (more about slavery: http://www.fether.net/2009/11/02/sound-familiar/)
LikeLike
Wesley, we read:
But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:25-28, ESV)
How can the exercise of coercive authority by one believer over another not violate this teaching; nay, this command? Maybe you don’t think patriarchy involves the application of coercive authority, but in that case one of us is in Wonderland where words mean what we mean them to mean, in which case they have no meaning at all.
No, to say that any relationship between Christians is to be based on authority (and that includes patriarchy) is to call evil good and good evil.
LikeLike
“Other people have said numerous times on this blog they don’t know one marriage like that. They are either out of touch or lying.”
They don’t know because for many church has become a place you put forward your FAKE life. The one that fits the current teaching. It is amazing what people hide to fit in. But equally amazing what those in paid ministry hide.
LikeLike
Exactly, Gary. It’s Orwellian doublespeak to invent words such as “servant leader”, an oxymoron if ever there was one. The under-rower is not found at the helm; ergo, whoever is at the helm is not a servant. Those who crave control (regardless of how benevolently it may be wielded, or how this craving is called “a heavy burden”), know nothing of “washing the feet” of others.
LikeLike
boatrocker! You made my next point before I got to it. While Paul instructed that being a husband of one wife was a condition of being recognized as an overseer or elder, nowhere in Scripture is polygamy actually prohibited, or even said to be sinful (as far as I can recall). Maybe, just maybe, part of what it means to receive a the new heart we receive under the new covenant is that we can figure some things out on our own.
It took the better part of two thousand years for Christians to figure out slavery was wrong. Hopefully it won’t take another 2000 years for us to figure out that it is simply wrong for husbands to dominate their wives, even if the domination is cleverly couched in terms of having the final say.
LikeLike
“Lydia you are not being honest when you accuse comps of teaching sin as virtue. Polygamy is condemned in Scripture but Patriarchy is not. Because people mess it up like them mess up everything else does not make it evil. I understand your distaste for what is a norm in other cultures but it does not make it evil.”
Patriarchy is a RESULT of sin. Of choosing sin. It is a consequence outlined by God Himself.
The only way you can declare Patriarchy NOT a sin is to see it declared by God before the fall. and we can go line by line of Genesis 1-2 if you want and I will show you how so much has been READ INTO IT to make Patrarchy the “design” when it was not.
So, I would have to believe that God formed (Gen 2) penises to be in charge over vaginas if I follow your logic.. After all that is what it boils down to-to be blunt. What extra “spiritual” gift or special knowledge was the formed man given that the formed woman was not? If we really want to get technical, Eve ADMITTED she was decieved and was sorry for it. Adam BLAMED God and Eve. Based upon that fact alone, which one is better suited for “leadership” if there is not really a “one flesh union”? I will take the one who admitted they were decieved and sorry for it. Not the one who blamed everyone but himself for his choice.
But it is a moot point because Patriarchy is sin.
LikeLike
“Maybe, just maybe, part of what it means to receive a the new heart we receive under the new covenant is that we can figure some things out on our own”
Ha! But there is not a verse to tell you exactly what to do or think about it? How can we manage? As you know, scritpure covers EVERYTHIG so we do not have to think or abide in Christ. The Holy Spirit must be busy.
LikeLike
“It took the better part of two thousand years for Christians to figure out slavery was wrong. Hopefully it won’t take another 2000 years for us to figure out that it is simply wrong for husbands to dominate their wives, even if the domination is cleverly couched in terms of having the final say.”
Gary, I would hope this is true. But experience tells me the opposite. In message boards around the world there is a strong, growing, maddening push for male preeminence in all things, even to the point of taking away women’s right to vote. They blame all the world’s problems on women not knowing their place. And “they” are largely the young people (not just males), the next generation. It is an evil beyond reason, that ancient “enmity”, the hatred of the serpent for the woman.
LikeLike
“Yet complementarians often depict complementarianism (in marriage) as meaning a married lady always has to let her husband have the last word, or final decision, on whatever topic is under consideration”
You guys keep addressing something that has not been depicted here by the proponents of complementarianism. This makes it sound like the whole marriage relationship is just one long power struggle where the man is always supposed to win. I pity the couple whose marriage is even remotely like that.
True biblical complementarianism is not about winning. It is about mutual submission through some defined structures as both submit to Christ. When the husband loves his wife as Christ loved the church, and the wife respects her husband, complementarianism truly is a wonderful thing.
LikeLike
“So, I would have to believe that God formed (Gen 2) penises to be in charge over vaginas if I follow your logic.” Such logic would be a great phallusy.
LikeLike