Is the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Drinking Mormon-Flavored Koolaid?

***

Will there be Complementarian or Egalitarian marriages in heaven?  What about Biblical gender roles in heaven?  What in the world is Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) talking about?

***

A link to an article was posted in the comments today.  I don’t have time to flesh it out (trying to get another important article done), but I’d love to know your thoughts.  CBMW is the group started by John Piper and Wayne Grudem.  Their agenda is to remind us of their interpretation of Biblical roles of manhood and womanhood.  Remember, Wayne Grudem wrote 83 rules for women – – i.e., women can’t teach hearing men, but they can teach deaf men – – ya know – those kinds of rules.

***

Source

photo credit: h.koppdelaney via photopin cc

***

Here’s the article:  Relationships and Roles in the New Creation  The author is Mark David Walton, a senior pastor in Tennessee who went to the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. I could not help but think of the Mormon teaching on the afterlife of marrieds.

[NOTE:  The day after the publication of this article, CBMW removed the article lined above.  Here is a cached copy of it.  Here is a new article discussing the removal of the article:  Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Removes Article about Complementarian Roles in New Creation  ~ja 3/14/14]

The introductory paragraph:

In an earlier article, I set out to answer the question of whether resurrected saints will be distinguished as male and female in the new creation.  The weight of evidence, both biblical and logical, convincingly suggests that gender is central to our personal identity and shall remain an integral characteristic of our lives for eternity-a conclusion that is scarcely controversial. (Most of us, after all, are quite comfortable with our gender, and would regard the prospect of change in that department as . . . well . . . unsettling.)

And then there’s this:

The new creation will, indeed, be a place where equality reigns-but not as feminists define the term. It will be equality as biblically defined, equality that has its basis in divinely established human worth.

Um, chapter and verse, please?

And this:

But, if Lewis is correct, we would do well to begin now ordering our lives in such a way as to acquire a “taste” for things to come.

**

I’m not sure all ladies will be looking forward to a heaven where women submit to all men. I’m wondering does this include single ladies, too?  Maybe Grudem can better define this for us:  83 Rules for Women in the New Creation.

The closing paragraph:

There is so much that we cannot yet know about life in the new creation. We can be confident, though, that “God must have some very profound eternal purpose for manhood and womanhood.”52 There is every reason to believe that gender-based distinction of roles will remain. The social fabric of gender-based distinctions of roles was weaved in a pattern that accords with the prelapsarian decree of the Creator. In the new creation, that fabric will not be discarded or destroyed. The stains will be removed and rips mended. The fabric will be cleaned and pressed. But the pattern established in God’s “very good” creation will remain.

If what CBMW says is true, I’d rather be a Mormon.  At least if you’re Mormon, you get your own planet.

***

***

135 comments on “Is the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Drinking Mormon-Flavored Koolaid?

  1. Chapter and verse? Really? Julie Anne, don’t you know that there’s a 576 page book explaining everything for your convenience. There’s lots of chapters and verses in there, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is all true. It’s in print, so it must be.

    Silly!

    Like

  2. Mormon-flavored or UTAH Mormon-flavored?

    Because this sounds a LOT more hard-assed than anything I’ve ever heard from California Mormons.

    And there’s precedent. YEC Flood Geology was a shot of Seventh Day Adventist Koolaid straight on the rocks.

    Like

  3. Chapter and verse? How about a direct quote from Jesus in answering the Saducees on who the husband of a seven-time widowed woman will be in heaven: “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.” Matthew 22:29-30

    For the CBMW to make doctrine out of gender roles in light of the above passage from Jesus (which has parallel passages in other of the gospels), they reinforce that they believe in gender roles outside of marriage between two non-related people. I’ve experienced the “all women submit to all men” belief here on earth. I have a doozie of a story I will probably tell at another time, but it can get really ugly.

    If there’s no marriage, then there’s no children and no parent/child relationships. That leaves all women submit to all men, no?

    Like

  4. Julie, tell these guys that you will obey them when you get to heaven. You will have all eternity to get it right, so why bother? So in the meantime, leave it up!

    Like

  5. This reminds me of the Emperor’s New Clothes. There’s nothing to see, and the verbiage is incomprehensible. I went back and read the gibberish twice, even checking footnotes for a couple things. From what I can figure out (granted I have the flu, can’t sleep, and my mind is working) even in eternity, women who make it to heaven will remain barefoot, pregnant, submissive, and silent. This applies only to married women. Having read things written by other Complementarian authors, women like moi, who have never married, don’t stand much of a chance in getting into heaven, in the first place.

    Okay, pray tell, please explain the role of the Blessed Virgin in all of this. Oh, wait, that’s Catholic. Never mind. My bad for even trying to complicate things. I’m sure glad I’m Episcopalian and think women really are the equal of men!

    Like

  6. Are members of a Hyper-reformed church going to have their own Kolob? Will they get a special set of underwear? Who here wants to see John Piper modeling a set of Hyper-reformed underwear? Will you be able to have multiple women as brides? Think of all the conquering and penetrating one can do!! Finally as John Calvin is linked to all this…will members of Hyper-reformed be able to practice blood atonements on the Michael Servetus they cross? Man..maybe I should have been baptized Mormon after all!! :-p

    Like

  7. @Headless: The following are all YEC denominations: Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Synod. YEC may be held by SDA, but that does not make it wrong.

    Like

  8. Elizabeth Elliott’s going to be quite busy in the afterlife. Didn’t she outlive five or six husbands? Polygamy for women was never part of the order for women under Old Testament law, but it was for men. This is a real switch. Will an angel help her keep a tight schedule so she can space out her eternal submission duties? Maybe they will be prorated per husband based on how long the marriages lasted?

    These boys didn’t think all of this through first.

    Like

  9. “This reminds me of the Emperor’s New Clothes. There’s nothing to see, and the verbiage is incomprehensible”

    This is the part I never got. Their articles are incomprehensible from any basic reasoning as believers. And this is from day one of CBMW. Frankly, one can drive mac truck size holes through the problems with the Danvers Statement which is so obviously proof texted where scripture is even mentioned. But wasn’t that the point? Sell the badly interpreted proof texts as overarching principles?

    (Most folks are not aware that CBMW came about as a backlash to the culture back in the 70’s to deal with uppity women who were going to college enmasse and climbing the career ladder)

    So how come this stuff worked so well? Here is how: The information is mostly and generally accessed by ministry people. Ministry people who spent most of the 80’s and 90’s fighting a culture war. These were mostly people who work in churches whether in women’s ministries or pastors because CBMW during those days was a journal and sent out speakers.. Those types tend to believe whatever the current gurus teach. They then pass along such thinking to the pew sitters.

    In my opinion, despite the efforts and money, it has not been nearly as successful long term as it should have been. Why? Because 30 years later, Russ Moore is complaining that comps are wimps and we need more patriarchy. The donations to CBMW have dried up over the years from quite the heyday (perhaps that is why they turned it over to the young Strachan who is Bruce Wares son in law)

    And had the blogosphere existed during those early days, I doubt it would have lasted long at all.

    So what was the allure? People are attracted to rules, roles and formula’s for life. Isam is growing. Mormonism is growing. You see it all around us. These “religions” have a checklist of what to do that will make them more pious.

    The only thing comp doctrine did was to delight satan because so many people were caught up in playing their Christian “role” instead of actually abiding in Christ.

    Like

  10. I hope that people didn’t miss this footnote (#14):
    To be precise, Jesus did not explicitly declare that there would be no marriage of resurrected saints in the new creation. Rather, he said that there would be no new marriages between resurrected saints, though the context of his words certainly seems to indicate that marriage no longer obtains. A stronger case for the end of marriage can be made theologically when scriptural prohibitions against polygamy (Lev 18:18; Mal 2:14-15; Matt 19:4-5; Mark 10:2­8; 1 Tim 2:3, 3:12; Titus 1:6; Deut 17:17) are considered together with the Pauline declaration that the death of a spouse frees the surviving spouse to remarry (Rom 7:3).

    Apparently, Ben Witherington III published in a book somewhere that Jesus was not talking about all marriages, just new marriages. It’s in print, so it must be true. I could not help but think of that old Everybody Loves Raymond show where Ray says something about heaven and how God limits the “heavenly congestion” when discussing what happens when we die. I think that I’d get better answers about this topic from Ray Romano than from Witherington.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/will-we-be-married-heaven

    Like

  11. Lydia, I’m pouncing on this one.

    Many of you may recall this, but Bob McGreggor Wright pointed this out in an old article in the Priscilla Papers and in some other journal, soon after Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood was published. It concerns the term “role.”

    We derive the word “role” in English from the concept we borrowed from the French. It refers to acting in a play — a performance. It refers to reading from a roll of paper on which the play’s script was written.

    There is an equivalent word in the New Testament for role. Anyone want to guess what it is?

    The term is hypocrite.

    Like

  12. Cindy K, Elizabeth Eliot is prepared, having made a profession in leadership while also claiming the legality of submission. But don’t forget, in heaven all men are over all women, transcending marriages of which there will be none. Heaven will be colonized, baby.

    I will be found in the egalitarian corner of God’s Empire.

    Pfft

    Like

  13. Cindy K, so they want to tie it up tight as can be by also insisting that ye olde marriages will still exist. Arg.

    Best advice is to never marry since it’s forever, just like diamonds. lol

    Like

  14. Lydia wrote, “So what was the allure? People are attracted to rules, roles and formula’s for life. Isam is growing. Mormonism is growing. You see it all around us. These “religions” have a checklist of what to do that will make them more pious.”

    I agree. And I suspect that when things get more difficult (middle class wages were waning and two wages only slightly increased what our parents got on one), there is a tendency to hold more tightly to rules, roles and formulas. Suspect it’s also why there’s been recent doubling/tripling down on all things narrow and rigid, and a perpetual moan about tithes.

    Like

  15. “women like moi, who have never married, don’t stand much of a chance in getting into heaven, in the first place”

    If i’m going to have to submit to some dude for all eternity, I think I’ll take the other choice..

    Like

  16. Patrice,

    Is the egalitarian corner of the Kingdom closer or further away from the Catholic section in heaven? I wonder if they’ll have a DMZ?

    Like

  17. Patrice,

    Go back and read the article. You say that marriage is transcended in heaven? Not according to the author of this…um…piece of work. There’s a section that says that husbands will really know how to love their wives in a better way, and women will have mastered submission.

    Finally, consider that in the new creation, those who were husbands in the former dispensation will, at last, be unencumbered by the flesh. They will be able, as never before, to genuinely love “as Christ also loved the church” (Eph 5:25). They will, as never before, have the capacity to relate to those they love “in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life” (1 Pet 3:7). Consider, moreover, that in the new creation those who were wives in the former dispensation, will have the mind of Christ, “who, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and . . . humbled himself” (Phil 2:6-8). They will see in the example of Christ, as never before, the beauty and glory that inheres in gracious, selfless submission.

    That’s why I think Elizabeth E is going to have some interesting work to do.

    Like

  18. Here’s the Witherington quote. How convenient for CBMW:

    The case put forward by the Sadducees is particularly extreme. Not only had six brothers attempted and failed to impregnate the woman in question, but she had also outlived them all and was single when she died. It is perhaps this last fact which prompts the question: Whose spouse will she be in the resurrection? ..Jesus stresses that in the age to come people will neither marry nor be given in marriage. Notice what Jesus does not say. He does not say there will be no marriage in the age to come. The use of the terms “γαμουσιν” (gamousin) and “γαμιζονται” (gamizontai) is important, for these terms refer to the gender-specific roles played in early Jewish society by the man and the woman in the process of getting married. The men, being the initiators of the process in such a strongly patriarchal culture, “marry,” while the women are “given in marriage” by their father or another older family member. Thus Mark has Jesus saying that no new marriages will be initiated in the eschatological [resurrection] state. This is surely not the same as claiming that all existing marriages will disappear in the eschatological state. Jesus, then, would seem to be arguing against a specific view held by the Sadducees about the continuity between this life and the life to come, a view involving the ongoing practice of levirate marriage. In the eschatological state we have resurrected beings who are no longer able to die. Levirate marriage existed precisely because of the reality of death. When death ceases to happen, the rationale for levirate marriage falls to the ground as well. When Jesus says…that people will be like the angels in heaven in the life to come, he does not mean they will live a sexless identity (early Jews did not think angels were sexless in any case; cf. Gen. 6:1–4!), but rather that they will be like angels in that they are unable to die. Thus the question of the Sadducees is inappropriate to the conditions of the eschatological state…In Mark 10 Jesus grounded normal marriage in the creation order, not in the order of the fall, which is the case with levirate marriage (instituted because of death and childlessness and the need to preserve the family name and line). Thus Jesus is intending to deny about the eschatological state “that there will be any natural relation out of which the difficulty of the Sadducees could arise.”

    Ben Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2001), 328.

    Like

  19. Cindy, from what I hear, it’ll be on the opposite end of where the institutional religious stay, populated by those who love Christ but found no solace in hierarchical structures. I’m not sure, but it actually might end up being a substantial area just outside the Empire of God, proper. For eg, I know three Catholics who will be there and I don’t know all that many people.

    And once it becomes clear to everyone what’s what, I expect a flood of immigrants. We’d better prepare! lol

    Like

  20. “We derive the word “role” in English from the concept we borrowed from the French. It refers to acting in a play — a performance. It refers to reading from a roll of paper on which the play’s script was written.

    There is an equivalent word in the New Testament for role. Anyone want to guess what it is?

    The term is hypocrite.”

    I can remember my own “aha” moment when I was researching this stuff and came across this particular fact. I was astonished at what had become part of “Christianese mainstream speak” was actually advocating what scripture deems hypocritical. But then, redefining concepts and words is very prevelant in ministry circles.

    Just another reason to test everything as scripture tells us.

    Like

  21. Yeah, saw that after my first comment. It’s gonna be busy for some of us up in heaven. All that bowing/scraping could develop some great back muscles, I imagine.

    Now I know why it’s not a good idea to remarry. Ever, for any reason.

    Just dump the whole thing, I say. The Shakers had it right. Also those who change their gender from female to male. Let’s all get some operations and become men! How else can we be full co-believers, really? Scripture says it, we believe it!

    Like

  22. Cindy K, Witherington III (who I’ve never heard of before and I hope never will again), says, “Jesus, then, would seem to be arguing against a specific view held by the Sadducees about the continuity between this life and the life to come, a view involving the ongoing practice of levirate marriage.”

    And thus he completely misses the obvious point about how dumb it is to parse the law as all-in-all top-to-bottom because it sets up absurd quandaries. Witherington continues the same thing and looks just as ridiculous. (Insert something about leading horses to water…)

    Like

  23. “I agree. And I suspect that when things get more difficult (middle class wages were waning and two wages only slightly increased what our parents got on one), there is a tendency to hold more tightly to rules, roles and formulas. Suspect it’s also why there’s been recent doubling/tripling down on all things narrow and rigid, and a perpetual moan about tithes.”

    Interesting perspective. One of their goals early on was to keep as many women out of the workforce as possible. You would hear things like “you are taking a job away from a man who is trying to support his family”, etc. And it was considered a huge sin to work if you had children unless you were a celebrity minister’s wife. Then you could leave your kids and travel the world having midnight buffets with Yasser Arafat in Saddams palace. (Dorothy Patterson)

    But that was not working because the average family needed two income earners. So the tweaking of comp doctrine began. Some became more rigid like Piper and some less like the “love and respect” guru, Emerson Eggerich. You would hear female comp CPA’s say things like I “respect” my husband but because he “loves” me, he asks me to help him with finances. Stupid stuff like that. Trying to make their “roles” fit into their paradigm of comp doctrine. The most important thing was to “look” submissive. It was all so fake.

    It got to be so Talmudic it was impossible for folks to keep up and that started killing it off with the mega masses. The mainstream pew sitters were claiming comp but living egal and that was making guys like Russ Moore in his ivory tower world,
    furious. And it only got worse with ESS being touted to shore up all the pecking orders from God to your husband. (Bruce Ware– women were made in the indirect image of God…a derivative)

    And we wonder why we see overtones of Jehovah Witness and Mormonism in some of their teachings? It was a foregone conclusion. They are running on empty and desperate.

    But their biggest problem is that comp stopped being the huge money maker it was for so many back in the 80’s and 90’s. I mean it was it’s own industrial complex. Now we have the wacko fringe like Doug Wilson being mainstreamed by guys like Piper. But even Piper is wearing thin in his own movement.

    Not to mention the most famous promoter of gender roles for women is our very own Nancy Leigh DeMoss. A stinking rich heiress who has never married or had children!

    Work that one out.

    I feel for all those women/men who tried so hard thinking that following the way of hypocrisy (roles) taught to them by the gurus made them more pious. It only made them tired and took their eyes off Christ.

    Like

  24. Lydia, I have no idea how the translators rationalize such disrespect of the material. Is it mostly that bias is so strong, they don’t even see it?

    Like

  25. BTW: I have had a few chuckles over patriarchal preacher types who “submit” to the very rich Nancy DeMoss for donations.

    Like

  26. Wow, I woke up to so many great comments. CBMW annoys me like crazy. Why do we need a para-church organization (that begs for money) to tell us how we should behave as a man/woman? I find it strange that with these guys’ obsession on authority and hierarchy in the church that no one has called CBMW out for usurping the “responsibility” of the pastor in the local church. Basically, by the mere existence of CBMW, they are saying that the local churches aren’t doing it right and need their help. What utter arrogance. And then for them to assume they have the right interpretation of scripture and we must follow their line of thinking. I think not.

    Note: I get to teach a HS choir class this morning while the teacher is out sick. I’ll be out for a bit if you notice a comment stuck in moderation.

    Like

  27. “Lydia, I have no idea how the translators rationalize such disrespect of the material. Is it mostly that bias is so strong, they don’t even see it?”

    It breaks my heart but also teaches me a lesson. I was furious with myself when I discovered it because I felt like I had been taken in and did not do my own homework. I do think in this day and time we have so many resources at our fingertips for free we have little excuse to be taken in anymore. I can only imagine how having the bible printed in ones own language was much the same experience as we are having with all the free resources of lexicons, interlinears, etc for study..

    One thing it does is make you lose respect for so many who have deemed themselves “teachers/preachers” to the rest of us. To be honest, there are very few I could ever recommend. And quite frankly, they do not acknowledge what they don’t agree with. I think they mostly suffer from group think because they stay in the same ghetto from seminary on.

    Like

  28. Lydia, yep, I think when people began feeling the pinch of falling wages (esp compared to actual costs), some Christians wanted to blame the womens (because feminism) instead of doing a more comprehensive examination of “worldly” causes such as the rise of global business, computerization, “free” trade, a shift in economic theory, increase in Wall Street gambling, gov’t action that entrenched corruption, etc.

    IMO, their answer is a direct result of seeing the world “out there” to be in opposition to Christianity. In shutting themselves away from it, they slowly lost their ability to think about anything except the Bible. This is most obviously apparent in many Christians’ views of psychology, I think.

    Thus, in looking for causes within the faith community, their only option was to search for bad theology.

    Like

  29. First heretical subordinationism regarding the Trinity. Now we will be married in heaven. Are these people just bored? Always some new -ism , “movement’ or “ministry”. Why? Money, power, excitement?

    Like

  30. Lydia, I’m sorry you were furious with yourself. I mean, we need each other to have integrity and we have to rely on each other to an extent. When we can’t, which is an increasing problem in our country at large as well as in such eg as this, everything lands on the individual even while it is an impossible task to know everything needed.

    I feel this way sometimes when I go to the doctors. I need to know more than most of them do about auto-immune disease because they aren’t taught it properly and few seem to have time or inclination to learn about it. That is their fault and I am furious at them for not knowing their own field. I shouldn’t have to know more than them in order to get basic help.

    In the same way, we should be able to rely on translators to do their best—they are academicians and one of its foundations is to understand one’s own bias as much as can be managed, to minimize it in one’s work, and to declare it openly in one’s analysis. If they had a better understanding of underpinnings of the scientific method (and it’s offshoots), they’d realize this more clearly.

    We humans have a constant tendency to fail in integrity. It is something that should be taught first middle and last in every course. Lack of integrity is rampant in the US these days and the Christian community, for all their ideas of separation, are no better than any other group. Until we accept that evil comes from the heart, not from the outside, we will always do as every one else. And that was the central flaw of the culture wars–that evil comes from out there and must be defeated.

    Ach!!!

    Like

  31. Are members of a Hyper-reformed church going to have their own Kolob? Will they get a special set of underwear? Who here wants to see John Piper modeling a set of Hyper-reformed underwear? Will you be able to have multiple women as brides? Think of all the conquering and penetrating one can do!! Finally as John Calvin is linked to all this…will members of Hyper-reformed be able to practice blood atonements on the Michael Servetus they cross? Man..maybe I should have been baptized Mormon after all!! :-p

    I’m wondering if CBMW has its own Danites.

    Like

  32. First heretical subordinationism regarding the Trinity. Now we will be married in heaven.

    How else can you have the Man’s Boot on the Woman’s Face FOREVER?
    “WOMAN, SUBMIT!!!!!!!”
    (And when you add Penetrate/Colonize/Conquer/Plant and Driscoll Sex into the mix, who needs al-Qaeda’s eternal 72-virgin p***y parade?)

    Like

  33. IMO, their answer is a direct result of seeing the world “out there” to be in opposition to Christianity. In shutting themselves away from it, they slowly lost their ability to think about anything except the Bible.

    Like Talibani and the Koran.

    Like

  34. @Patrice:

    Just dump the whole thing, I say. The Shakers had it right. Also those who change their gender from female to male. Let’s all get some operations and become men! How else can we be full co-believers, really? Scripture says it, we believe it!

    Patrice, that’s not far off from a Dake’s Annotated Bible FOR REAL.

    Like

  35. @Lydia:

    So what was the allure? People are attracted to rules, roles and formula’s for life. Isam is growing. Mormonism is growing. You see it all around us. These “religions” have a checklist of what to do that will make them more pious.

    And then the One-Upmanship games kick in without limit or end, all PROVING “*I* Am More Pious Than Thou”. (“Polish My Halo!”)

    Like Extreme Jihadi Muslims smashing their heads against the floor of the Mosque on Fridays, giving themselves cracked skulls and concussions to show They Are More Muslim than the other Muslims around them. More Muslim than Mohammed.

    Like

  36. Lydia and Cindy K, it IS from egal Ben Witherington in the context of an article by another guy and it was about how marriage will possibly remain in heaven but that all our relationships will be raised to that level of intimacy so it won’t be of the import that we might think. And it is set in the context of egal marriages, so I think it doesn’t work towards the CBMW stuff which is a completely different pair of glasses.

    Like

  37. He lost me at the very beginning – stating that he would provide “Biblical” and “logical” evidence. I admit that I read a little more and found neither form of evidence available.

    Like

  38. P.S.
    @Lydia:

    So what was the allure? People are attracted to rules, roles and formula’s for life. Isam is growing. Mormonism is growing. You see it all around us.

    Years ago on the Web (the “Why Men Quit Going to Church” site), there was an essay as to why Islam appeals to men. Besides the usual male-supremacist reputation, there was the reputation that Islam Gets Results. That if you become Muslim and follow all the Five Pillars and Koran and Hadiths, your son won’t leave the faith and will grow up to be a Real Man, your daughter won’t get pierced and tatted and pregnant by 16, just Follow All The Suras and Hadiths and you’ll be protected from all the Evil of the World. That you’re In Right With God.

    And all the rules give you an obvious measuring stick as to how Pious and Devout and Godly you are. An easy checklist for How I’m Doing.

    Like

  39. When there is no penalty for crossing a boundary, people cross it and that becomes the new edge. Apparently the only way to distinguish yourself in neo-reformed world is to keep crossing that boundary and pushing it out. And these border excursions are celebrated as new and deep wisdom rather than reproved. So it just keeps getting weirder and weirder. Whatever its problems, preventing this sort of doctrinal creep was one of the historic benefits of creedal theology. It is a matter of some irony that those who would hold themselves out as the most pure and conservative in doctrine have adopted a freewheeling anarchy in actual practice.

    Like

  40. Julie Anne wrote, “CBMW annoys me like crazy”
    One primary annoyer, for me, is their obsession with hoodship. “Oh, Dave!” You’re gonna say, “You mean headship!” Nope. I mean hoodship. Walton quotes Heimbach (never heard of either one before) “God must have some very profound eternal purpose for manhood and womanhood.” I am a man. Mrs A A is a woman. God has some very profound eternal purpose for men and women. But what’s up with all this “hood” stuff? Must be in the Bible somewhere! Let me look…………………….. Just a sec………………. Maybe in II Wayne ch 3? Or XVIII John ch 197?

    Like

  41. Great comments going on here, sisters. Keep it up!

    I liked this from JA in the original post:

    “Remember, Wayne Grudem wrote 83 rules for women – – i.e., women can’t teach hearing men, but they can teach deaf men – – ya know – those kinds of rules.”

    Oh yes, you mean the stupid kind of rules.🙂 Just one reason why I won’t be taking Grudem or John Piper seriously anytime soon.

    I got through the CBMW article somehow. It left me shaking my head and sighing, and not just because of its strange assumptions and lack of common sense.

    I had suspected before now that complementarian gurus were getting some mileage out of certain writings and thoughts from C.S. Lewis. Sadly, this article confirmed it. Lewis has long been one of my favourites, but I was never quite certain what to make of many of his writings on marriage. Part of me wanted to listen to him as one who had studied and thought on the Bible much more than me. But part of me thought and felt that the whole male-headship thing was just… wrong somehow. No matter how I tried to justify it, it seemed so fundamentally chauvinist and unjust.

    Of course, Walton never mentions what Lewis himself often took pains to remind his readers: That Lewis was a bachelor for most of his life. Most (if not all )of what he wrote on marriage was before he got married — and to a very vibrant, brave and intelligent woman, from what I hear. Actually experiencing marriage seemed to change C.S. Lewis’ mind on some issues, if “A Grief Observed” is any indication.
    Apparently, Walton ignores this entirely.

    I had a hunch it was coming, but it’s still a bit disappointing to see the words of a writer I much admire being used to promote nonsense. Maybe if Lewis had thought his views through a little more…😦

    Like

  42. Patrice,

    You know that CBMW doesn’t care about context. When they’re looking through their “Trinitarian lenses” as Ware repeats, they can see the “truth.” Even the egal devils know and tremble. They’ll wave it like a flag for their “truth” if they can make it work. (If they cared about context, there wouldn’t be a CBMW.)

    But you know that. 😉

    Like

  43. “Lydia, I’m sorry you were furious with yourself. I mean, we need each other to have integrity and we have to rely on each other to an extent. When we can’t, which is an increasing problem in our country at large as well as in such eg as this, everything lands on the individual even while it is an impossible task to know everything needed. ”

    So true. I was furious because I half way (I always had reservatoins which makes me more guilty!) believed it and passed it on without doing the hard work of testing before I did so. How many lives did I screw up because I organized so many comp conferences, promoted comp celebs, etc? Oh sure, we can be forgiven such things but we also have a duty to get the truth out, too. To share what we have discovered and to ask them to forgive us. And yes, I mean forgive me for promoting untested, unverified things even if they don’t agree it was wrong. Forgive me for going along. For being led by the blind. As an adult, I had the ability to know better.

    It is one thing to be deceived out of ignorance and quite another to decieve on purpose (1 Tim 1) After I realized that teaching roles was teaching hypocrisy, I had a duty to tell this to as many as possible I had helped to deceive.

    So, what else have we fallen for that is not onlya lie but teaches people to be fake or dependent on charlatans disguised as Christianity or altruism? It sends chills down my spine. For one thing, the “roles” focus keeps eyes/hearts from Christ and people watching each other role playing. The evil one is delighted.

    “I feel this way sometimes when I go to the doctors. I need to know more than most of them do about auto-immune disease because they aren’t taught it properly and few seem to have time or inclination to learn about it. That is their fault and I am furious at them for not knowing their own field. I shouldn’t have to know more than them in order to get basic help. ”

    I hear ya. And I fear it will get worse. They do not like problems that don’t fit into neat categories. My mom suffered and died from a very rare auto immune disease and I saw this first hand.

    Like

  44. “One primary annoyer, for me, is their obsession with hoodship.”

    Dave AA, maybe from listening to too much rap on the sly. “Music from the hood” will find entry to your heart and mind one way or another. lol

    Like

  45. “Oh yes, you mean the stupid kind of rules. Just one reason why I won’t be taking Grudem or John Piper seriously anytime soon.”

    RK McGregor Wright that Cindy mentioned earlier related some of the stupid rules that came out of the early comp world. Such as a woman could teach men but only through audio. NOT in person. Or the “sacred furniture” position where a woman could speak to the church but not behind the pulpit.

    The thing is we have had about 30 years for the rules to get sillier and sillier. Then they change depending on the venue or person.

    Ex: Women cannot be pastors in the SBC but Mrs Criswell of FBCDallas taught a HUGE SS class of some 300 men and women that was even on the radio back in the day. She got a pass because well, after all, she was THE Mrs Criswell. :o)

    So if we womens are going to hell for teaching men —the lack of applicable consistency— with such a serious sin seems like malpractice by the men. Wasn’t Criswell worried about his wife’s eternal life since he taught this stuff concerning women? I just don’t get it. (wink)

    I know Cindy has been around this issue as much as I have. We both have forgotten more than we can remember of all the silliness and strange applications of the doctrines of comp/pat.

    For those who are just now diving into this issue and not sure where to start, I would highly recommend Cheryl Schatz’ DVD series, “Women in Ministry”. She takes on the proof texts typically used to prop up the comp/pat doctine and puts them into both grammatical and historical context. Cheryl is a precious soul who is totally sold out to Christ. She has been involved in a ministry to the cults and because she was rebuked for teachnig men she decided it was time to deal with the proof texts. And she did her homework

    She also did an excellent DVD serious on the horrible heretical ESS. The Trinity: Eternity Past and Future.

    I would also recommend Katherine Bushnell’s, God’s Word to Women. But eat your wheaties, get out your highlighter and post it notes. And prepare to check it all. But while reading, remember she did all this study BEFORE the internet and used snail mail to interact with scholars all over the world while being a doctor and missionary.

    What concerns me the most is that we women will answer for not being all we were meant to be as a servant of Christ. We cannot afford to believe wrong things about ourselves AND Savior– all our lives.

    Like

  46. I have always taken that passage to mean that there is no legal institution of marriage in Heaven. But all the same I would really like it if we were given the choice to remain together.

    Like

  47. Lydia, yeah, ok, but you were not only having to see contrary to what your culture was presenting as truth, but also needing to see beyond that, to the translations themselves, which were presented as The Word of God, many of which were done a loooonnnggg time ago. So understanding/acting differently was a huge and courageous task and you did it.

    And you’ve been doing a fine job correcting it all over, which is a good witness to the fact that we humans are sometimes wrong and we can correct it. And that’s another lost art these days.

    “So, what else have we fallen for that is not onlya lie but teaches people to be fake or dependent on charlatans disguised as Christianity or altruism? It sends chills down my spine. For one thing, the “roles” focus keeps eyes/hearts from Christ and people watching each other role playing. The evil one is delighted.”

    Yeah, roles are for actors and that is the only place it isn’t sodden with hypocrisy. The term might have first appeared in psychology, not sure, but it was bad from the start. Teacher role, wife/husband role, mother/father role, academic/business role, housekeeper role, blahblahblah as if we “donned hats”, as if we were mixed-media, as if we weren’t simply doing various jobs and the definition wasn’t in the job to which we brought our full selves.

    No one ever said that about “artist”. One either was or wasn’t an artist, and I found that interesting.

    Like

  48. “Years ago on the Web (the “Why Men Quit Going to Church” site), there was an essay as to why Islam appeals to men. Besides the usual male-supremacist reputation, there was the reputation that Islam Gets Results. That if you become Muslim and follow all the Five Pillars and Koran and Hadiths, your son won’t leave the faith and will grow up to be a Real Man, your daughter won’t get pierced and tatted and pregnant by 16, just Follow All The Suras and Hadiths and you’ll be protected from all the Evil of the World. That you’re In Right With God.

    And all the rules give you an obvious measuring stick as to how Pious and Devout and Godly you are. An easy checklist for How I’m Doing.

    YES!!! I grew up with Muslim foreign exchange students in and out of our home for years and I can attest to this. Even cultural Muslims were very concerned about coming to the West and its influence but the pros outweighed the cons academically back then. In fact, because of the rules/roles, etc cultural Islam was not that different from Religious Islam when it came to the rules and checklists.

    What you describe above we are seeing in so many segments of Christianty with shaming rules on modesty, dating, marriage roles, etc.

    . But my question to Christians is how can you measure a love relationship with Christ? How can you “check off the boxes”?

    Like

  49. “No one ever said that about “artist”. One either was or wasn’t an artist, and I found that interesting.”

    Lucky dog!!!

    But it is even more interesting when I stopped and thought about that one for a moment. How can one play a “role” as an artist? One either is or isn’t? Correct? I mean, I am not saying there isn’t some learning involved with technique or practice (hope my explanatoin is not cracking you up—I am NO artist)

    So, artist is “part” of “what” you are that make up your whole. I am not explaining this well and would love some feedback from the group here.

    For example: If we do away with the word/concept of “role” that has been drilled into our psyche and the concept of “hood” (love it Dave!) then how do we describe ourselves, our functions, our relationship to the Body of Christ and the other gender. etc? There is the gamit but as believers what rises to the forefront? Spiritual.

    Like

  50. Lydia, so even though I plead for you to give yourself some grace on getting it wrong for a period in your life, I also agree with this: “What concerns me the most is that we women will answer for not being all we were meant to be as a servant of Christ. We cannot afford to believe wrong things about ourselves AND Savior– all our lives.”

    Given that we all do things wrong, some things are more importantly wrong than others and this is a vital issue. The job also lands largely on women because the majority of men don’t, by and large, feel the strain of it. It is a shame that this remains the motivator even for believers, but there it is. Yet I insist that the responsibility is as much on men, because they are the half that has the wherewithal in the system to institute change in a way that would minimize distress/division. Moreover, it is via their half that these horrid doctrines have again gained foothold. That they don’t do the necessary, as a group (some do), means that the change will be more damaging over the long haul.

    This is also more difficult to get right because it requires a willingness to alter the foundations of what we are taught as truth and the way to live. We have to look at the Bible in a different way, similar to that which science knowledge presses on us. It truly is radical in that way and very frightening for humans.

    It must be done, it is vital, and it is difficult.

    Like

  51. ‘Given that we all do things wrong, some things are more importantly wrong than others and this is a vital issue.”

    Yes! This says it better. The issue we are discussing is so vital because it affects not only our lives, but our relationship with our children, what they are taught, our husbands, our entire extended family AND most importantly our relationship with our Savior.

    When both sides show grace (without the rules and roles) it can be a simple differing opinions. Cindy and I have gone down that road with aspects of it. As my sister, she loves me and accepts my views but NEVER ever judges my positon or beliefs. Visa versa. She knows it is not salvic. And she has been on the front lines of dealing with it putting her neck out there. Some of the responses to her after her presentation on patriarchy at a midwest seminary are so sad and scary.

    But when it comes to being offered up as salvic in nature and hampering the body of Christ in functioning, and elevating one gender to a priestly/prophet/king status, it becomes very wrong and has the potential to make people slaves to what is actually deceptive and evil.

    We right wrongs, right? Hee hee.

    Like

  52. Yes, I am a lucky dog! Moreover, art is one thing I can still do, around the wretched flares, flashbacks, etc. It makes me weepy with gratitude, actually.

    One IS a Christian, one IS a human. They don’t compete. One isn’t female over against male because those are two halves of “being” human. Other things are jobs which we do, bringing our whole selves to each.

    I can say “I AM an artist” but it is shorthand for the self-as-artist, not that I become a different creature when I make art or that I become such when I get out my palette and don my cruddy painting apron.

    No “roles” anywhere except in theatre, which is a wonderful thing on it’s own but never real.

    Interestingly, the issue is clear when dealing with the mental dysfunction. If one has bipolar disorder, it doesn’t mean one IS bipolar. One has schizophrenia, major depression, mental disability, or PTSD. It doesn’t define the core self, although it hugely affects it. It is not something that one puts on when climbing out of bed in the morning. There is no role there, unless one is pretending, lol.

    Like

  53. Lydia, “…when it comes to being offered up as salvic in nature and hampering the body of Christ in functioning, and elevating one gender to a priestly/prophet/king status, it becomes very wrong and has the potential to make people slaves to what is actually deceptive and evil.”

    Yes, it is plain wicked. It doesn’t only have potential to make slaves, it already has done, and for a long time already. It is despicable to see it return so heavily and to see it insinuating itself in so many places. These people have taken the character of God and His/Her hands in this world (God’s people) and have caused destruction. The good that God wants for this world is much diminished because of it, not only in crippling those who agree with it, not only in the defaming God and causing searching people to turn from Him/Her, but also in the energy required to combat it–energy needed for other things.

    Some issues, seemingly secondary, tunnel down to the core of who God is and what S/He created; the CBMW got that part correct. But CBMW decided to change the character of God rather than give up their power-hunger. They decided to redefine humanity rather than bring humility to their rigid reading of the “plain text of the Bible”, as they call it.

    I am quite clear that those who run this particular doctrinal stream are my enemies. This isn’t quibbling over doctrinal emphases or majoring in the minors. This isn’t about celebrating a variety perspectives in the church body. This is at core, a corruption that burbles up from the basement.

    I am also called to love my enemies, and that is what I am working out.

    Like

  54. Why do people insist on following all these “recently” man made rules thinking that they can assure themselves a place in heaven? The Bible and the bible only, thanks.

    I had my own bad religious experience 20 plus years ago. Still plays with my mind. I remain spiritual but unchurched to this day.

    Like

  55. Patrice wrote:
    “Dave AA, maybe from listening to too much rap on the sly. “Music from the hood” will find entry to your heart and mind one way or another. lol”
    (Slapping my forehead) oh– THAT’s why manly man patriarchs like Botkin (who called Christian Rap artists “disobedient cowards”) are no longer friends with those namby-pamby CBMW-ers! It’s cause they listen to/honor/respect Rap-hood! (or is it Hip-hop-hood now?) *If a strange rap musician asks a woman in her back yard for directions, she can give them — she just needs to carefully avoid violating his God-given rap-hood or her God-given hymn-hood.* John 23:16 (Or is that from III Wayne (looks like Lil Wayne on my screen. (If a strange man enters OUR back yard, I trust Mrs A A will tell him where to go…..)))

    Like

  56. Julie Anne,

    The author tried to pull a reducteo ad Hitlerum in the article by quoting Justin Martyr, alleging that people deny their view because they deny the resurrection of the physical body. Apparently the fact that people believe something other than the author is not only due to evil feminism’s agenda (strawman much?), it’s also due to the egalitarians denying the resurrection of the physical body.

    I wonder if the Book of Lewis is anywhere near the Book of Justin Martyr? Or you might be looking in the New Calvinist apocrypha (redundancy?) and not the non-Calvinist one.

    Like

  57. Gardenkatz, you ask rhetorically:

    Why do people insist on following all these “recently” man made rules thinking that they can assure themselves a place in heaven?

    Following rules requires no critical thinking, and it gives the illusion that you are not quite as accountable for your actions because someone else wrote those rules. Social psychologists call this “moral disengagement.” It’s the flip side of Flip Wilson disease: “I was only following the orders of my religious authority. They made me do it.”

    Following the Holy Spirit and mortifying the flesh takes energy, thought, and great trust in God. It’s humbling. So if you’re also trying to hang on to pride, the law keeping works rather well. It’s even better if you believe that those rules are actually God’s rules, especially if you’re told that they are.

    Like

  58. Speaking of our back yard, our next-door neighbor is a very nice Mormon woman with 7 grown kids and nearly 49 grand kids. She had to divorce her abusive husband years ago. But in the hereafter– they’re sealed together for all eternity!😦 BTW, didn’t Joe Smith seal himself eternally to some other men’s wives (while hubbies were off doing god’s work)? And then Brig Young sealed himself eternally to some of Joe’s widows? Hopefully heavenly fodder can sort everything out for Kolob.😦

    Like

  59. Dave AA, yeah, well, Botkin thinks everyone is a coward who doesn’t completely acquiesce to his line of thinking…which is kinda gangsta, come to think of it, so maybe listening to it truly is his secret vice, his version of online porn while preachin’ agin it loudly.

    Or maybe it’s from a literal reading of the fairy tale of Little Red Riding Hood. I mean think of all the kids he had to read that story, over and over, and we all know that anything endlessly repeated creates brain scars.

    Or perhaps the first person to propose ideas for this treasure of a CBMW document had a lisp, so his “should” was heard as “thould” but no one understood what that meant and it simply became “hood” after several translations, I mean, conversations.

    Or maybe they were all talking about the good ship lollypop. And when they realized that lollies are not so good for you, they dropped that part and “good ship” was slowly transformed, again via conversation, into “hoodship” which sounds cooler, after all…and well, likely what they intended when all was said and done, is “hoodwinked”. So it’s a typo, really.

    Never know for sure.

    Like

  60. @Lydia:

    In fact, because of the rules/roles, etc cultural Islam was not that different from Religious Islam when it came to the rules and checklists.

    Islam came out of Arab tribal culture, was optimized for Arab tribal society, and never drew a distinction between religion and culture. There is no hard dividing line between the two; one blends into another.

    What you describe above we are seeing in so many segments of Christianty with shaming rules on modesty, dating, marriage roles, etc.

    And for the same reason you’re seeing so much Extreme “More Islamic Than Mohammed” in Islamic culture. It’s a reaction to Future Shock — the world is changing, fast and scary.

    But my question to Christians is how can you measure a love relationship with Christ? How can you “check off the boxes”?

    It’s called “Correct Theology” — “check, check, check, check, check….”

    Like Twilight Sparkle’s checklist obsession, but NOT funny:

    Like

  61. Dave AA, of course, there’s also that whole thing in women’s romance novels about the innocent female feeling her aristocratic beau’s “manhood” pressing against her when they hugged. This is likely how the women in that group got involved. I mean, a good Christian woman just doesn’t hug in situations like that. Not ever. It’s embarrassing!

    Ok, I’m finished. Sorry. (Sometimes it’s that or be angry yet again which is so wearing.)

    Like

  62. Okay, to compile a video snapshot of CBMW dogma, all we need are:

    – Mormon doctrine videos about eternal celestial marriage.
    – Some other video about a sabre dance (seems like a video game) to learn about courtship and honeymoon.
    – A checklist video from some cartoon called twilight sparkle

    I nominate this one to describe Christian romance in marriage a la Mark Driscoll (save that this video sounds a bit more appealing, frankly)

    Like

  63. The Word of God is for the most part, silent related to details concerning the new heaven and the new earth. Only fools would dare speak where God, Himself has NOT spoken. We are to build our lives upon truth, rather than conjectures, surmisings, and philosophies of men. We are warned…”For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2 Tim. 4:3-4)
    “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” (Col. 2:8)
    “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.” (2 Tim. 2:15-16)

    Like

  64. This seems to be another twisted, roundabout way “to keep women in their place”. I want no part of their afterlife. Do they really believe these things are biblical?

    Like

  65. I recently told JA that I sat through some training for a volunteer program that I’ll be working with. The gentleman leading the session of the hour was discussing cultural competency and he was originally from Eritrea. He mentioned that his country of origin was matriarchal and that anything inherited was done through the mother’s line. All I could do was sit there and think about how men like Piper or Swanson would do in a culture like that! I’m sure that they don’t even consider sending missionaries there!😉

    Like

  66. Preach it, Marion!

    I could not help but to be reminded of Jesus telling people many times that they knew not the nature of what they really asked for/sought, what the Scriptures said, or the power of them.

    I keep prating on here about hermeneutics, and in Biblical language, this is what you’ve aptly pulled from Scripture. We can speak the truth about what is written, and we can’t add or take away from it. We do enough of that in our ignorance when we are young in the faith and inexperienced. How sad it is that those who teach pastors how to divide the Word and discern it have fallen so short of what it requires of them.

    Like

  67. Marion,

    On the contrary,

    I think that the Bible has much to say on the subject of the New Heaven and the New Earth.

    Jesus walked thru walls, for example. 

    It’s what Jesus would call “healing the blind” to see things that are hidden in the Law and the Prophets that no one can see by using any other means but spiritual.  Jesus said to his own “apostles” that he has much more to say, but that they were NOT able to hear it now.  Why?  Because they were still blind to the scriptures.  The Pharisees KNEW the scriptures…IN A CARNAL SENSE…perfectly.  But they had no clue on anything spiritual.  They were blind.  The spiritual topics are hidden and must be dug up with a fine tooth comb.  There is much TREASURE.

    Now, in regards to the itching ears thing, and the philosophy thing, and the vain babbling thing…I am quite certain that the topic of what a New Heaven and a New Earth looks like has nothing to do with those topics. 

    Having said that, the Reformers never look at the spiritual in any way that I have ever seen.  Their Exegesis in ONLY carnal based things…such as GENDER, as if us males are going to have a penis in heaven.  Last I recall, we men are a BRIDE of Christ, so I guess the reformers are trying to figure out how to get rid of our monthly cramps?  IDK.

    It reminds me of a televised religious cult that I watch sometimes that discusses that we are going to RULE AND REIGN with Christ…RULING OVER PEOPLE.  That our eternal life is not about a having fun in paradise, but about WORKING, as little subjects in God’s “GOVERNMENT” being OBEDIENT to God ruling over people with a rod of iron.  What a crock of crap.

    When I have read Revelation, we will all sit on Christs throne.  In other words, what’s his is ours.  No one will be ruling over anyone.  We will be in such awe loving God and others, just as he wanted us to do.  That is obedience, and that obedience is out of a pure heart, for there is no sin in love.  That obedience is not even thought of as obedience, because that is what will come naturally to us.

    Not only that, sin does not exist in heaven (New Heaven/New Earth).  No temptations…NO SEX!  No gender.  No getting married.  No dating.  No courtship, no manly men, no girly man (As Gov Arnold would say). 

    Feminism is an earthly matter, having nothing to do with the Kingdom of God.  I do not say that to cause problems here.  Why?  Because on an equal stance, the fight against feminism is an earthly matter, also, having nothing to do with the Kingdom of God. 

    Man’s government exists, for a reason, for mankind to get along with mankind.  Pay to the government what belongs to the government, but pay to God what belongs to God.

    When are the reformers going to realize that all this gender stuff is an earthly issue only?  They do not think spiritually.

    Some look at the earthly things that have nothing to do with the heavenly.

    John 3:12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

    That’s a hint, that Jesus does reveal “heavenly” things, Marion.

    Ed

    ________________________________

    Like

  68. I loved Sharon’s comment she left on the SSB FB page:

    I followed the link and read the article at CBMW. I feel sort of shell shocked, although I don’t know why. Isn’t this the logical end of their theology? I will never, ever, ever be free of the need for human (male) authority over me because I am a woman. I will never be free to simply love others and worship and serve my Savior. Nope, I’ll forever be locked into submitting to…well, all the redeemed who happen to have the right genitalia on their glorified bodies, I guess. I will never be seen as a full partner in the Kingdom, but always as an underling in the “divine” ordering of creation. I want to weep, and I want to rage, and I want to ask why in the hell complementarians can’t see how deeply wrong this is.

    (As an aside, their argument that it’s really feminists who don’t believe in the equal worth of men and women is not just b.s. – though it is DEFINITELY that. It could also be applied with little to no alteration to anyone who has ever argued for abolition or racial equality. “It’s a shame that you abolitionists think slaves aren’t worth as much as free whites just because of their functional difference. We slave owners aren’t worried about functional differences because we know slaves are worth just as much to God, no matter what they’re permitted to do. Unlike you, we see our slaves as our equals.” Could the doublespeak get any more explicit?)

    Like

  69. Ed, I love this: “…That obedience is not even thought of as obedience, because that is what will come naturally to us.”

    We will do whatever’s asked because it is good and loving and that is what we want too, through and through. I have some intimations of that here, but it often gets stuck together with other stuff. How much fun will that be!

    Like

  70. Pingback: Christian Gender Complementarian Group Teaching That There Will Be Marriage in Afterlife and That Women Must Submit To Males in Heaven (post at Spiritual Sounding Board) | Christian Pundit

  71. I have noticed for a few months now the alarming similarities between the mormons and the cbmw, especially with my move to utah coming up soon. Even my future stepson has commented on this. I don’t understand the appeal of either man-made religion nor do i care to. All i can do is read and research and understand what they are saying so as to better protect myself from falling into the same trap. Please excuse me for not going into more depth or reading all of your brilliant comments tonight – I have just spent a very busy week with my fiance and stepson and i desperately need to catch up on sleep.

    Like

  72. Patrice- Great thoughts on why they love the “-hood”! And your explanations make just as much sense as those proposed in ernest by CBMW.

    Like

  73. My goodness! I guess I’ve been out of the “mainstream” denominations for a while. (Grew up American Baptist, did the Presbyterian thing for a while, and now “independent” type churches.) This just seems over the top. Lived in Utah as a kid – sounds just like what the Mormons believe. They are saying Jesus said something because he didn’t explicitly say otherwise? (I mean, if I understand what their argument is, Jesus didn’t explicitly say you wouldn’t be married to someone in heaven, so therefore you must be married to someone?) Hmmmm. I always took that passage to mean something different. Of course, I only have a degree in computer science and a minor in mathematics, not extra-Biblical interpretation. I guess someone got Mr. Peabody in the Wayback machine and asked Him?

    Like

  74. I consider CBMW to be a cult. It is a doctrinal purity cult that sees every single issue in life as an everlasting battle between the ying and yang of male and female.

    I know CBMW is not a denomination…but it functions like a cult to those that swallow it’s leaders advice and take the “pathway” to”Biblical” manhood, etc…

    Run Forrest run from anyone who spouts this stuff……….

    Like

  75. @ChapmanEd24:

    It reminds me of a televised religious cult that I watch sometimes that discusses that we are going to RULE AND REIGN with Christ…RULING OVER PEOPLE. That our eternal life is not about a having fun in paradise, but about WORKING, as little subjects in God’s “GOVERNMENT” being OBEDIENT to God ruling over people with a rod of iron.

    No, from various radio preacher sources, I’ve been able to piece together that our eternal life is not just ruling over people, but to be wielding the Whip as God’s Enforcers. A specially-privileged SS for the Cosmic Fuehrer. Hold the Whip or Feel the Whip.

    These come from the haze of my memories when I was listening to Christianese radio in the Seventies, fragments of one preacher gushing over Christ’s Millenial Rule as “He Will Rule With a ROD OF IRON!” (i.e. He Holds the Whip, We Feel the Whip) and James Dobson going on about how “Christians must be in training now for the jobs God will be having us do for all Eternity!” Put these two together and the best we can look forward to is the Eternal Black Tunic with Armband.

    Like

  76. @ChapmanEd2:

    Jesus walked thru walls, for example.

    Closest I’ve been to that is walking INTO a wall. Had a sore throat, tried to soothe it with a folk remedy of heated wine with honey (it worked), got up to go into the living room, and WHAM! Where’d that wall come from?

    Like

  77. The Word of God is for the most part, silent related to details concerning the new heaven and the new earth. Only fools would dare speak where God, Himself has NOT spoken.

    Tell that to Medieval angelologists and demonologists, who spun extremely detailed theoretical systems from minimal sources.

    Or Hal Lindsay and his successors who wrote those minute-by-minute checklists of the seven-year End of the World.

    Or Percy Collet and all the others who claimed a tour of Heaven in a vision and described everything in obsessive (and bizarre) detail.

    Like

  78. @Lydia:

    What you describe above we are seeing in so many segments of Christianty with shaming rules on modesty, dating, marriage roles, etc.

    A few years ago, I coined the phrase “When Christianity goes sour, it curdles into something resembling Islam” and another blogger coined the term “Christlam” to describe the same thing.

    Like

  79. All this stuff reminds me of when I read Carolyn Jessup’s story of her escape from the FLDS cult. She said that she had been called in by Warren Jeffs who proceeded to tell her that she had to “keep sweet” & be a better wife or she would miss her chance to go to Heaven, where (of course) she would be one of Merrill Jessup’s plural wives forever.
    She said she told him, “if I have a choice of spending eternity in Heaven with Merrill Jessup, I think that hell looks better. ”

    These people with their manmade rules seem to have put themselves into some pretty bizarre company. I wonder if any of them are squirming at the thought that this “Zooey” woman just compared them to Jeffs? I hope so. A little squirming might do a few of them some good, at least in the long run……

    Like

  80. Pingback: Banning Bossy | The Pink Flamingo

  81. HUG,

    There has been many who have had NDE’s who have described, to the best of their ability to do so, what transpired while in an NDE.  And, those stories, for the most part, are pretty much similar in details.  I do believe their stories.

    Bible reference, in which God is silent, of course…sarcasm!!!, 2 Corinthians Chapter 12.

    Ed

    ________________________________

    Like

  82. ChapmanEd, Google “Percy Collet” sometime. I think his tapes of his Vision of Heaven are online, and they are BIZARRE. Like whats-his-face with the pet angel Emma in Lakeland bizarre. As in Elijah giving him a tour in a chariot that grew or shrank for the number of passengers. As in Spirit Dogs (digression that these are NOT earth dogs because dogs have NO souls) that “neither bark nor bite” but instead repeat “Praise the LORD! Praise the LORD! Praise the LORD!” (Come to think of it, the only thing anyone does in Percy Collet’s Heaven is continuously repeat “Praise God! Praise God! Praise God!”

    Like

  83. Pingback: A letter to our sisters, on biblical womanhood in heavenly places | Strange Figures

  84. Headless Unicorn Guy…if you are piecing together your theology by listening to various radio preachers, how are you to come to the knowledge of the truth? It is not by considering what the ‘pseudo preachers’ have to say and choosing what SEEMS right and reasonable.

    Afer all, “There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” (Prov. 14:12)

    “…thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
    ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Tim. 3:15-17) (caps mine)

    When we neglect the study of the word for ourselves, we are opened up to all sorts of error…believe me….I know.

    We are commanded to “Study to shew THYSELF approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Tim.2:15) (caps mine)

    Because, IF we are born again, unto salvation, by grace through faith, in the atoning blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ, , the apostle John reminds us, concerning those that seek to seduce us (spiritually)…
    “But the anointing which ye have received of him (Jesus) abideth in you, and ye need not that ANY man teach you: but as the same annointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him” (1 John 2:27) (caps mine)

    Of course, you probably know these things, but I, myself find reminders profitable!

    Like

  85. “a place where equality reigns-but not as feminists define the term. It will be equality as biblically defined, equality that has its basis in divinely established human worth.”
    Either you’re equal or you’re not. There’s no special ‘biblical’ definition of equality. CBMW loves this sort of Orwellian manipulation: all people are equal, but some are more equal than others.

    Like

  86. “CBMW seems to have pulled the post. Very manly action, isn’t it?”

    Typical.

    What? Their teaching cannot withstand analysis from the peasants? Hee Hee. How many times have I seen this over the blogosphere years. Quite a few, frankly, which tells me all I need to know about the ivory tower wolves.

    But some clever rogue somewhere usually has a screen shot tucked away so good luck to CBMW trying to erase stuff.

    Like

  87. @DanWilkinson:

    Either you’re equal or you’re not. There’s no special ‘biblical’ definition of equality. CBMW loves this sort of Orwellian manipulation: all people are equal, but some are more equal than others.

    My Dear Wormwood,
    Remember my previous letter about semantics? Specifically, the redefinition of words into their “diablolical meanings”?
    Your Ravenously Affectionate Uncle,
    Screwtape

    Like

  88. Marion, there is a reason why I’m allergic to the word SCRIPTURE(TM). My first thought upon hearing it is “here comes the beatdown”. And the barrage of Bible Bullet proof-texts. (Can you tell I’m from the heartland of Calvary Chapel country? AKA the Burned-Over District of the late 20th/early 21st?)

    Like

  89. Pingback: Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Removes Article about Complementarian Roles in New Creation | Spiritual Sounding Board

  90. Dear Unicorn…sorry to hear that; explains some things…I’m new to this site. Speaking of Calvary Chapel, are you familiar with the following blogs? N4TM and Ephesians 511? They have done massive research into CC…I’ve done plenty of my own, in checking their reports. There is MASSIVE deception that is presented as true Christianity.

    Reference to any site is informational only, and not an endorsement of any person, group, or philosophy.

    Check them out…I’d like your feedback.

    Like

  91. PS…Unicorn, we ought not to allow man and his wickedness rob us of the beauty, the precious truths and blessings bestowed by God to us in His Word!

    He calls us by His gospel, “to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
    “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or by our epistle.
    Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting CONSOLATION and good hope through grace,
    COMFORT your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.’ (2 Thes.2:15-17) (caps mine)

    The comfort…found in His Word…the Scriptures…which God intends for blessing and encouragement, the enemy of our soul takes, twists, misrepresents, that he might do one thing alone…destroy faith!! May all God’s people be strengthened that they mightt STAND faithful to the end!!

    Jesus says, “Behold I come quickly: hold fast what thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
    Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall no more go out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God , which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.” (Rev. 3:11-12)

    Like

  92. Pingback: Why Did CBMW “Driscollize” © (Scrub) Its Article? | The Wartburg Watch 2014

  93. Maybe CBMW thinks that a woman’s glorified body is tantamount to getting a lobotomy here in this life. I often say and believe that this is what it would take to get me to be a comp.

    Like

  94. “…That obedience is not even thought of as obedience, because that is what will come naturally to us.”
    So, in heaven we women will not “know in full.” (1 Cor 13:12) We will only know what to do when men tell us.
    And I won’t inherit all things – there are certain priviledges only inherited by sons*, and I won’t be a son. (Rev. 21:7)
    And God’s female servants won’t reign with him (Rev 22:5) – they will be reigned over.
    ————-
    *The places where God calls all believers his sons may sound sexist to our ears, but I think it is the opposite: In a culture where sons inherited and daughters usually did not, calling male and female his sons was a statement of equality in inheritance.

    Like

  95. *The places where God calls all believers his sons may sound sexist to our ears, but I think it is the opposite: In a culture where sons inherited and daughters usually did not, calling male and female his sons was a statement of equality in inheritance.

    This is it. You know it makes me FURIOUS when they teach Galatians 3 as only about salvation. NOPE. It is about FULL Inheritance of all of it. The “scholars” and pastors lie because they know better.

    Like

  96. Retha,

    Absolutely perfect! We all, regardless of gender, inherit all. And yes, we are all called “sons of God”.

    John 1:12
    But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

    Romans 8:14
    For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

    Galatians 4:6
    And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

    Galatians 4:7
    Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

    Philippians 2:15
    That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

    1 John 3:1
    Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

    1 John 3:2
    Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

    Revelation 21:7
    He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

    Even the Angels are known as the “sons of God”

    Job 1:6
    Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

    Job 38:7
    When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

    ****There is no gender since everyone is a son, both male and female. A female is a son.

    Ed

    Like

  97. Oh for crying out loud… I got the link for here from a friend of mine who made reference to this and all I’ve gotta say is that idiocy like this is why I left the Mormon Church and have no intention of ever going back. At the age of 12 I put my trust in Christ and Christ above all others. Not my parents, not the Church, not my ancestors or the “leadership”. I put my trust in Christ. It took me another ten years to finally realize that trusting Christ didn’t mean that I had to be what the Church told me to be.

    Besides, as a storyteller and a writer, I get to build my own worlds all the time in this life. It’s a lot more fun this way.

    Like

  98. Although I posted this mornig on the ‘husband’ thread, I thought ythat this is a better place for what I saw thi morning.

    I was plodding through the preamble of one of the CBMW’s garbage on the future doom of womankind and even before I got to the bit that laid out their ‘doctrine’ Jesus whispered ‘minas’.

    YES!!!!!😀😀😀 Get it?

    What is the reward for his faithful servants?…. Rulership!

    Over what?…..CITIES….. containing ‘males’ and ‘females’ or neither, whichever view you want to take.

    So if I have been a faithful female now, and if I am still ‘female’ in the New creation I will be ruling over ‘MALES’ !!!

    If THAT is God’s design for then, it is ALSO his design for NOW.

    QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM!!!

    Eat that CBMW!😛

    Like

  99. Pingback: The Logical Fallacy of “Equal But Subordinate”

  100. Pingback: Owen Strachan of CBMW Misses the Point Entirely – It’s Not about the Missing Article, but the False Doctrine | Spiritual Sounding Board

  101. Pingback: Owen Strachan of CBMW Misses the Point Entirely – It’s Not about the Missing Article, but the False Teaching | Spiritual Sounding Board

  102. Pingback: The Logical Fallacy of “Equal But Subordinate” | BLT

  103. Pingback: Part II: The Leader of the Home | The Pink Flamingo

  104. Pingback: The core of the issue | karen d.

  105. Pingback: Doug Phillips’ Vision Forum Revisionist (Art) History | Spiritual Sounding Board

  106. Pingback: Does Pope Francis’ Use of the Word “Complimentarity” Mean the Same as When Used by Owen Strachan or CBMW? | Spiritual Sounding Board

Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s