ABUSE & VIOLENCE IN THE CHURCH

Discuss: What Can Men Do to Help Remove Misogyny from the Church? Inquiring Elder Wants to Know.

delete

***

I received a private message on Twitter a week or so ago from an elder at a church. He reached out to me after reading Beth Moore’s letter to Christian men. You may recall that Beth Moore, in her letter, asked men to put away misogyny and act Christ-like towards women. Here are a few key paragraphs from Beth Moore’s letter:

As a woman leader in the conservative Evangelical world, I learned early to show constant pronounced deference – not just proper respect which I was glad to show – to male leaders and, when placed in situations to serve alongside them, to do so apologetically. I issued disclaimers ad nauseam. I wore flats instead of heels when I knew I’d be serving alongside a man of shorter stature so I wouldn’t be taller than he. I’ve ridden elevators in hotels packed with fellow leaders who were serving at the same event and not been spoken to and, even more awkwardly, in the same vehicles where I was never acknowledged. I’ve been in team meetings where I was either ignored or made fun of, the latter of which I was expected to understand was all in good fun. I am a laugher. I can take jokes and make jokes. I know good fun when I’m having it and I also know when I’m being dismissed and ridiculed. I was the elephant in the room with a skirt on. I’ve been talked down to by male seminary students and held my tongue when I wanted to say, “Brother, I was getting up before dawn to pray and to pore over the Scriptures when you were still in your pull ups.”

I’m asking for your increased awareness of some of the skewed attitudes many of your sisters encounter. Many churches quick to teach submission are often slow to point out that women were also among the followers of Christ (Luke 8), that the first recorded word out of His resurrected mouth was “woman” (John 20:15) and that same woman was the first evangelist. Many churches wholly devoted to teaching the household codes are slow to also point out the numerous women with whom the Apostle Paul served and for whom he possessed obvious esteem. We are fully capable of grappling with the tension the two spectrums create and we must if we’re truly devoted to the whole counsel of God’s Word.

Finally, I’m asking that you would simply have no tolerance for misogyny and dismissiveness toward women in your spheres of influence. I’m asking for your deliberate and clearly conveyed influence toward the imitation of Christ in His attitude and actions toward women. I’m also asking for forgiveness both from my sisters and my brothers. My acquiescence and silence made me complicit in perpetuating an atmosphere in which a damaging relational dynamic has flourished. I want to be a good sister to both genders. Every paragraph in this letter is toward that goal.

The man who contacted me told me that Beth Moore’s letter was read at their elders’ meeting. He asked me how men could practically put into place what Beth Moore was talking about. Yes!!! I will include his questions and expand them with some of my own. This is the kind of conversations we need to be having in churches.

  • There’s a challenge – especially with some cultures within church that the issue stops at the question of sexual immorality and understanding that there were other issues about how men and women relate – especially how male leaders relate were maybe not so easy to grasp for some. How can male leaders engage in healthy relationships with sisters in Christ? How can men uphold integrity for themselves and women in their day-to-day dealings with women both inside and outside the church?
  • That whole fear culture – how do we get beyond that?Is there a way to move beyond that in a healthy way?
  • How can we talk helpfully and appropriately and honestly as churches in dealing with misogyny?

photo credit: SMBCollege SMBC graduates serve as cross-cultural missionaries and ‘tent makers’ in locations around the world via photopin(license)

1,183 thoughts on “Discuss: What Can Men Do to Help Remove Misogyny from the Church? Inquiring Elder Wants to Know.”

  1. KAS said,

    First week, excellent sermon. Second week, latter third of the sermon the bible was closed and she wants to introduce pseudo-Christian mysticism to the church. No point going back. You could despair at times.

    Sounds just like Steve Furtick, Joel Osteen, Ed Young, Mark Driscoll, Robert Morris – people who have penises.

    Most American churches prohibit female pastors, and only have male pastors.

    So, Christians end up with incompetent, buffoonish, or horrible MALE preachers, such as Rod Parsley, Benny Hinn…. and you’re concerned about women being in preaching or teaching positions?

    Women sure don’t have a monopoly on saying or preaching stupid or unbiblical things.

    Like

  2. “some Christian complementarian men have the same attitudes as these Incel guys towards women.”

    Some?

    Complementarian was created by incels for incels.
    Incels do not want women having the right to say “NO” to them or escape them. Complementarians do not want women having the right to say “NO” to them or escaping them.

    Like

  3. Anongrace said,
    “In essence “feminsim” doesn’t fix misogyny problems. REDEMPTION fixes misogyny problems.” (and etc).

    First of all, I already acknowledged up thread that yes, sometimes women do bad things to other women – and to girls. But the point of this post by Julie Anne is “how can men help decrease sexism in the church.”

    As sexism is largely male- on- female the world over (in the United States and other nations), it makes sense to examine what it is men do and think to hold women back or to hurt them, not to victim-blame women or point to sins by women.

    Some of the activities and actions you describe in regards to women as “sin” is not really sin, but victim blaming, as I was saying in a post on here yesterday.

    Jesus and “redemption” didn’t fix me or help me. If that stuff worked for you, that is great, but it didn’t work for me.

    To escape wrong thinking patterns – which were contributing to my depression, low self esteem and so on – I had to do research, which involved in reading material by Christian and Non-Christian therapists, psychologists, and psychiatrists, which is what eventually helped me – not Christianity, the Bible or Jesus.

    I never said “feminism” was the “fix” for sin or for whatever else, but feminists get a lot of things right about some of these subjects that Christians – especially complementarian Christians – get terribly wrong.

    A lot of Christian teaching and thinking is precisely what kept me stuck in depression for many years.

    Like

  4. Christinaity Hurts said,

    Some?

    Complementarian was created by incels for incels.
    Incels do not want women having the right to say “NO” to them or escape them. Complementarians do not want women having the right to say “NO” to them or escaping them.

    There is a category or type of complementarian Christian man who is not as bad as the other types.

    I hate to pull the “Not All Men” card but – not all Christian men, not all complementarian Christian men – rape their wives, rape or molest or physically abuse girls and women.

    Some of these non-abusive ones are what I’d refer to as “soft complementarians.”

    The “soft” complementarian men usually are living out functionally egalitarian marriages with their wives (whom they love and do not abuse) but only page homage and lip-service to complementarian teachings because they’ve been taught (brain-washed and indoctrinated) since childhood by their churches that anything else is “not biblical” and is evil, feminist, and liberal.

    I (and I am a woman) was trapped in this complementarian thinking myself, up until my mid-30s, Christianity Hurts, and it’s not because I was sexist, hated women, or was a bad person, but it’s because I was taught that was the only correct way of viewing biblical passages about women, marriage, dating, etc.

    Like

  5. In essence “feminsim” doesn’t fix misogyny problems. REDEMPTION fixes misogyny problems.

    Anongrace has turned a talk into how men can be less sexist into one about how sexism and bad behavior by men is all womens’ fault.

    KAS has made the case for continuing to limit women in church, which is part of the problem.

    Nicely illustrating how big the problem actually is.

    Like

  6. The “soft” complementarian men usually are living out functionally egalitarian marriages with their wives

    Daisy, yes, these types typically don’t see the problem because they are not terrible people, and are treating the women in their lives with respect. The women don’t see the problem, because their husbands are treating them as equals.

    The solution then, is dump this nonsense that women are not equals.

    I agree with CH, everyone should be free to say no. If you cannot say no, you cannot say yes. Incels and MRA’s and patriarchal types do have some similarities and they are chiefly rooted in misogyny.

    Like

  7. Notice how KAS in his misogynistic mind has decided a woman preaching mysticism is bad. While his comp men are telling raped children to forgive their rapist and not tell the police. And telling abused women to submit to their abusive husbands and not divorce them.

    Mr. Comp Matt Chandler disciplines wife for divorcing pedophile husband. Of course, the pedophile did not receive discipline.

    https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2015/05/21/insidious-behavior-at-the-village-church-regarding-a-pedophile-and-his-former-wife/comment-page-1/

    Like

  8. “I hate to pull the “Not All Men” card but – not all Christian men, not all complementarian Christian men – rape their wives, rape or molest or physically abuse girls and women.”

    I do not believe all Christian men are raping their wives. But comp says women have to be submissive. She can not say no to sex. She can’t say no to anything. Just because she is having sex does not mean she wants to. She has no choice. So if a wife can not say no to sex it is rape because she had no choice. And I was also raised in comp being told there is no such thing as wife rape.

    Like

  9. @Lea:

    Daisy, yes, these types typically don’t see the problem because they are not terrible people.

    Didn’t the Santa Barbara Shooter’s online Manifesto and Social Media trail go on and on about how he was NOT a terrible person (i.e. it was everyone else’s fault)?

    Like

  10. @ChristianityHurts:
    (who has been through the wringer, so don’t take this as a trigger)

    But comp says women have to be submissive.

    Just like Pornography.

    She can not say no to sex. She can’t say no to anything.

    Just like Pornography.

    Just because she is having sex does not mean she wants to. She has no choice.

    Just like Pornography.

    Just comp gives the orders from Captain Bonerhelmet a Christianese coat of paint.

    Like

  11. @ChristianityHurts:

    Complementarian was created by incels for incels.
    Incels do not want women having the right to say “NO” to them or escape them.

    Because it’s probably the only way someone as repulsive as them COULD get any.

    Like

  12. @Daisy:

    I do not think Incel guys fully realize what a drag it is, how demeaning, it is to be valued only for your looks or sex appeal. It’s objectifying and insulting.

    I was the geeky kid genius who was valued only for his IQ.
    I found it more actually damaging than insulting.

    Like

  13. Didn’t the Santa Barbara Shooter’s online Manifesto and Social Media trail go on and on about how he was NOT a terrible person (i.e. it was everyone else’s fault)?

    I’m not talking about people who say they aren’t terrible people!

    That manifesto was long and I didn’t read it. I know he is a good example of the incel deal, where they think women should be throwing themselves at them, and if they don’t they are ANGRY. It would be fascinating and pathetic if it weren’t so terrifying.

    As far as ‘good’ comps, I think it’s more of a blind spot to what is really going on in other marriages. You don’t know what you don’t know. If you are taking all the ‘love your wife and don’t be harsh with her’ stuff seriously, and actually being self-sacrificing and preferring each other in love, you might think that’s what comp is. When in reality, that’s what an equal, egalitarian marriage is.

    I still think the mentality can be patronizing, but the day to day is probably not for some. I’ve said many times, the chief problems come when men are not doing these things and women are still expected to be loving, self sacrificing, and to never divorce in the face of unloving, uncaring treatment and harsh/dangerous behaviors. I’ve never heard a good answer for this out of that camp that doesn’t blame women or leave them shackled.

    Like

  14. The crazy thing, HUG, about people like Elliott Rogers, is that they see women not actively seeking them out as ‘rejection’.

    Like

  15. I shut off notifications for this thread because I needed to get on to other things and couldn’t get my mind elsewhere. I came back to check how things were going and now feel my disappointment renewed.

    Perhaps it is because of how conservatively I was raised, but I have never seen all of this corruption that women bring into the church, though I have frequently sen them blamed for it. I have never been in one of these churches that has been feminized to the point that men are uncomfortable.

    Every church I have ever attended has been ruled by, dominated by, and (in all but one case) thoroughly corrupted by the men who lead it. Both the men who do the wickedness and those who refuse to confront it openly for what it is. The marriages I have been surrounded by have almost always been “Christian” marriages, thoroughly wrapped up in modern American “Christian” family teaching. Marriages that far too often are shams with women covering for halfhearted or corrupt men. So often pretending at a godly family life to keep up the man’s good image at church. I have watched time and again as men cover for the wickedness of other men and call it grace, forgiveness, healing, or whatever. I’ve been in the meetings. I’ve seen the non-sense. I have felt the powerlessness. I have lived the deception. The grace is cheap, if we can call it grace at all.

    And how does it matter who preaches the gospel if all we care is that it is preached? Read your Bibles. Not even Paul the Apostle was bothered by who preached it, or how it was preached, so long as it was preached.

    The issues have nothing to do with the gospel or who preaches it. That is a red herring that is used to throw others off the scent. The issue is power. The issue is assumptions. The issue is the hopelessness and powerlessness felt by women and girls who are harmed and have no voice simply because they are women and girls.

    I don’t believe that this can be fixed in the average church, because there are so very few men who are honestly willing to address it. That may seem an extreme view to some, but I am middle aged, have gone through ministry school, and have served in and attended American churches of 5 different denominations and it is the same story across the board. As one church leader said after he was questioned about why the church did not deal with a wicked pastor (same denomination that refused to discipline Ravi Zacharias), “He didn’t confess so there was nothing we could do about it.” That is a fool’s game. That is weakness and wickedness in itself.

    I think two things must happen. First, most, if not all, of the current generation of male leadership must pass on. And second, women like Rachel Denhollander must fight and expose every last wolf. Because men will not move on this issue unless they fear losing their power and the church can not heal until these men do lose their power. If this view makes me a “wild woman” in the eyes of churchmen, then so be it. At this point I no longer care what “men of God” think of me.

    What can men do to stop misogyny in the church? Perhaps put aside your notions of so called “Biblical” manhood and just try being decent people.

    Like

  16. “There are cases where older women will “sleep with” teenage boys…..but people will refuse to call it “rape” because an older woman did it. It is still “rape” at varying degrees. A 14 year old boy can easily look and act like a 27 year old man.”

    I have never seen a 14-year-old boy who could pull off being 27. If some pervert woman is saying this she is lying.

    Could it be people do not want to call it rape because so many people believe it is not masculine to be raped and it is masculine to be a guy who has had sex with many women? Often misogyny hurts underage boys too.

    Underage girls who get raped are accused of being whres.
    Underage boys who get raped are accused of being f
    gs.
    Convenient for the child rapist; the child knows he or she will be blamed and condemned if he or she tell so the rapist gets off scot-free.

    Like

  17. “He didn’t confess so there was nothing we could do about it.”

    Indiscriminate screaming

    What can men do to stop misogyny in the church? Perhaps put aside your notions of so called “Biblical” manhood and just try being decent people.

    Yes. Decency is apparently in short supply.

    Like

  18. David, “As father of 2 two daughters, never wanting them to endure “blame” if it arises, I have to ask “why” are women entering into relationships where their husbands are involved in misogyny? How can we open the eyes of our daughters from going into such a thing.”

    I have daughters, too. For me, it’s about teaching them respect and being transparent. For example, we don’t require “instant obedience”. There are requests: “would you please get me a cup of water.” There are commands. “Get your backpack, it’s time to go to school.” We try not to command things that are not linked to a chain of authority – we HAVE to take them to school, therefore it is a requirement that they get ready for school each day. Requests are optional – they can choose to do it or they can choose not to.

    I think one big problem in Christian parenting is the “always obey your authority”. We are trying to help them understand that, even as their “authority” we don’t have a right to have them obey everything we ask them to do. We can only require what we believe they are required to do.

    I was always prepared to “do battle” when one of their other authorities (teacher, elder, pastor, other relative, other adult, etc.) required them to do something that wasn’t within their authority. We have had a lot of e-mails and meetings at school when their authority was abused.

    I think the two biggest things I try to teach my daughters is “worth” and “respect”. The church wields worthlessness like a sword and tries to slay whomever they can with it, man, woman or child. I was a worthless child who became a worthless adult, then I had to wake up when I saw the church attack my wife and kids to destroy their sense of value. Respect goes along with worth. A child who believes herself worthy, will hopefully demand respect. The church sets up children, mainly girls, to be targets of abuse. The church starves children of any sense of inherent worth, and instead redirects worth to their actions, and more precisely, approval by others of their actions. So, now we have a worthless girl who has a boyfriend. She is programmed to “impress” her by her actions, and he just happens to know enough to tie his approval of her to her actions. So, he starts a process of testing – how far will she go to gain his affection? If he gives her affection for certain actions, then withholds affection when she tries to assert boundaries, what happens?

    If your daughters are programmed by the church into complementarian gender roles, they are being set up to have abusive, codependent relationships with exactly the WRONG types of boys.

    Like

  19. KAS – I really don’t know what to say, except that I go back to my point that limiting women in leadership, preaching, and teaching is limiting the work of God.

    1 Corinthians 12 – 13
    Romans 12
    1 Peter 4: 7 – 11

    Like

  20. Lea,
    “Nicely illustrating how big the problem actually is.”

    You nailed it.

    Which is why I don’t frequent this blog very often anymore. I find it terribly depressing to realize what a low opinion some christian women have of other women. 😦

    Like

  21. Kathi – ever since I have given this much thought, I have believed gifts are given freely to both men and women on an equal basis. Prayer and prophecy. I helped lead a church years ago trying to put this into practice. Easier said than done, but to try to get men and women to participate fully. You can’t make people do anything though, can you.

    The line was drawn at leadership and a teaching ministry. Women teaching in the home, vitally important, Priscilla and Aquillas also fine – and I have benefitted from such enormously in my time. Word of instruction in the meeting – fine. Only the office (if you like) of being a teacher in a mixed gathering. We allowed everything up to the point where it would become disobedience as we understood scripture.

    If women were allowed to exercise spiritual gifts as the NT allows, I suspect this would prevent so much of the argument about this, take the sting out of it.

    The women in the fellowship were perfectly happy with this, there was no struggling and striving about it. Unlike today! Maybe because they were treated equally, and not as second-class in the kingdom. They also saw that this was in accord with scripture, apostolic teaching, which had the authority in the church rather than men claiming this for themselves. (This is an important distinction.) They didn’t see this as sexist.

    I don’t share the interpretation of MacArthur or the hang-ups of Piper on this subject. I’ve carefully considered alternative views on this, but you can’t keep going over the same old ground, like water baptism or predestination.

    I think church structures often quench the Spirit much more than a woman not being able to do the sermon.

    Like

  22. KAS,

    Pull out your Strong’s Concordance and look at it in the Greek. The church leadership verses don’t have male or female pronouns because the NT NEVER restricted women from church leadership.

    The Apostle Paul enccouraged women to teach. Don’t get me started on how he was forbidding the teaching of false doctrine in that famous verse, not forbidding women from leadership.

    God isn’t the one trying to keep women out of church leadership. Selfishness and misogyny is.

    Like

  23. Directed to KAS

    I have a very hard time believing that you have not seen institutionalized misogyny. There do not have to be official statements in church records for this to be the case, though in some denominations there are actual statements.

    Set aside preaching for a moment. Misogyny within the church is not limited to that topic. As a matter of fact, even some denominations that ordain women struggle against old mindsets about women and their nature and abilities. This story illustrates that.

    http://www.christiancentury.org/article/first-person/pastors-metoo-story

    The church I am in would look to all outsiders like a fairly good and healthy evangelical church. And it is the healthiest church I have been in. In other churches I have attended I would have had no voice.

    Yet, the pastor always automatically assumes the man is correct, the man is truthful, the man’s grievances are genuine and understandable. The pastor might be persuaded, with a great deal of help, that a man is not so genuine (it took almost a full year in my case before he finally got it), but then will begin down a road of suspecting women who have been genuinely harmed of becoming problem causers. Because that is just how women are in his mind. I have actually had the “wild woman” warning from him twice, just to be sure it took.

    What is a “wild woman” to him? Someone who won’t be quiet and questions his decisions. Someone who does exactly what we are talking about here. Simply discusses these issues. This is a problem for him, because it destroys “God’s work”. This is misogyny and from a man who pushed his three daughters to excel and become college educated and even do things that in many chruch circles are normally only for a man to do.

    In another example I gave further up in the thread a church would not deal with a wicked minister because he did not confess. That churches pastor once recommended me to fill the pulpit on a Sunday morning for another congregation. The wicked minister they would not deal with was my ex husband. They would allow a woman to present the Sunday sermon, but have no real willingness to address wickedness in men (three men I can name off the top of my head). It is that particular churches habit (and that of the whole denomination) even though they give some room to women, they will not deal truthfully with men in positions of power. The denomination has a history of “protecting God’s work” by covering for wicked men.

    Those are not habits of our culture only. They are habits of our churches and in some cases we have taught others the pattern to follow. As a former missionary, I have seen these methods of dealing with men and women in other locations. It exists in parachurch ministry as well.

    Dogma that has been taught in our seminaries and schools and regularly from some pulpits, and in a great deal of “Christian” family and especially home school writing has sunk deep in the church. It is part of the fabric of church culture. No one has to look very deep to see it.

    Like

  24. Not to overly simply this issue, but it would be very well to heed the message of Jesus to love your neighbor as yourself. It means men might need to put themselves in women’s shoes and ask themselves if they would like being treated this way?

    Liked by 2 people

  25. KAS said, “If women were allowed to exercise spiritual gifts as the NT allows, I suspect this would prevent so much of the argument about this, take the sting out of it.”

    So, women are allowed to exercise spiritual gifts except if they’re gifted in leadership and teaching? I know we aren’t going to agree on this, but I’ll keep pushing back. When half (probably more like over half) of the church is not allowed to use their spiritual gifts then you’re not seeing women as equally created and gifted by God.

    I hope the women in fellowship truly are happy with this arrangement. I wonder if you had a heart-to-heart conversation with them if they would reveal otherwise. I know that when I was in college studying for ministry and in church I did not reveal how unhappy I was with the arrangements. Church people do a good job at painting on a happy face and acting as though all is good. Those in the margins know better than to ask questions or push back because it doesn’t do any good.

    Like

  26. Kathi,

    Everything matters, in how people communicate to each other. Men, Women, Kids, Preachers, Doctors, Lawyers and so on.

    Much of what we are talking about involves doctrine. Maybe you go to a church where doctrine doesn’t collide with your ideology or how you interpret scriptures.

    Whereas, a church that embraces a different doctrine, that has a membership embracing of a different ideology or different interpretation of scripture wouldn’t be a good fit for you..

    Obviously, personalities, lifestyle and of course abuse fits in as well,, which is exacerbated even more if doctrinal and social ideology differences collide.

    I remember one occasion when a Pastor preached on abortion, not a good topic for liberal/moderate women (and men) who professes to be a Christian but believes and has even practiced a pro-choice lifestyle. So they leave and go to a different church that fits their comfort level.

    It seems as if everybody is judging one another, some have ligament concerns. (especially when it comes to abuse)

    In the church I attend, the complaint from women, is there isn’t enough men in leadership roles in the church.

    Even though there is a Church Constitution to protect the integrity of the church, men do not want to make themselves vulnerable for scrutiny from women as well as other men. (I know I don’t)

    If a man is asked to serve in a leadership capacity, he’ll decline or simply stop coming to church. So men are no longer asked to serve and the women don’t want to be on the Board either.

    The Pastor is managing to get the membership together usually every quarter to update the membership or discuss business matters involving the church.

    He primarily preaches on Sunday and Wednesday evenings.

    This non-aggressive approach within this church is a result of men stepping back, For better or worse, it seems to be working as attendance is up 10-15%, than a couple of years ago, when the Pastor accepted the position.

    Though I do see a need that both men and women to be more active within the church. I can see with different Pastors who have walked through the doors of the church that have embraced, 5 Point Calvinism and Arminianism, and other ‘Ism’s that has caused a spirit of confusion, has molded the church to where it is today, but it has also opened our eyes, in particular Doctrine..
    (A 5 Point Calvinist Preacher destroyed our Sunday School program, by sending kids home of parents that don’t attend church, which on any given Sunday was 50 to 75% of the kids that attended)

    There is a Board in place, in order to satisfy church status in the eyes of the State, but in truth even though they are dedicated, those men would rather not be on the Board. except maybe one.

    Like

  27. I haven’t read every post since I was last on this thread. I may do that later and maybe reply.

    I can see from a few of the posts at the bottom that I glanced at while the page was downloading, that KAS side-tracked a post about gender related issues once again.

    Almost any time this blog covers a story about complementarianism, sexism, misogyny, domestic abuse (some issue that really impacts or harms girls and women) etc – KAS totally derails it.

    I’m fine with a certain amount of off topic banter, but….
    I think in this thread above all, it’s a bad thing – the OP is asking,
    “What can men do to help eliminate misogyny in the church,” which should be the focus.

    But we have a pro-complementarian and anti- gender egalitarian person (KAS) now getting women (and any men who are not complementarian) here to have to defend why women can and should be equals in marriages, and/or be allowed to preach and lead in churches, and so on.

    This thread has now turned from, “Here are thoughts about sexism and how it affects women, and here are tips for men who want to listen to women on how to make churches / Christianity more friendly to and for women”….

    …to now it has become, “KAS will challenge Christian gender egalitarianism and expect the egalitarians on the thread to defend egalitarianism, and KAS will explain why his interpretation of the Bible says women cannot be X, Y, or Z in churches, and why his view is correct.”

    Does KASM ever bother to study Christian gender egalitarian books and blogs, and research their views first?
    Or does he just assume that he knows what they believe and why?
    Or does he just read (inaccurate) summarizations of egalitarian views as put forth by John Piper, C.B.M.W. and other complementarians?

    I get the feeling KAS just likes to find blogs like this one to debate the topic.
    What is KAS doing to curtail sexism against women and girls in churches?

    (end part 1)

    Like

  28. (part 2)
    What are KAS’ suggestions on how to eliminate sexism against women and girls in Christianity? Has he cited any ideas so far?

    Or has he just said things like, “I don’t think the Bible says women should be preachers, so they shouldn’t be preachers”?

    So, has KAS given any ideas on how churches can combat sexism?

    And I can tell you that enforcing or teaching Gender Complementarianism (which includes but is not limited to doubling down on the mantra, “The Bible says ‘I forbid a woman to preach,’ – so no women preachers”) is not a solution for fighting sexism, if that would be his response.

    Like

  29. Someone up thread, when I skimmed, said he has a daughter.

    I am a daughter or gender complementarian Christians:

    I wrote a blog post or two at my Daisy blog (such as _this one_) explaining why complementarianism was harmful to me and why it’s bad for women generally.

    I explain in those posts that I’ve had to un-learn a lot of complementarianism in my adulthood.

    If you have a daughter, and you care about her, you need to reject gender complementarianiam, and not teach your daughter to believe in it.

    I’m incredulous and dumb-founded that anyone can actually think that complementarianism is helpful in fighting sexism, when it contains ideals or assumptions at its very core that are sexist.

    Complementarianism does not fight against sexism or domestic violence against women, but re-enforces and bolsters it.

    Like

  30. Correction:
    Post right above I typed:
    “I am a daughter or gender complementarian Christians”

    That should read “of gender…” not “or gender…”

    Like

  31. I find trying to discuss complementarianism and sexism with complementarian guys – ones like KAS – very frustrating and pretty much an exercise in futility.

    You’re never going to get guys like this to change his mind on a topic such as gender complementarianism, because of how he is parsing the Bible, because of how his parents or denomination (and other religious influences) have taught him to view and interpret the Bible.

    He is choosing to interpret that Bible in a very particular way (as are other complementarians).

    And I should know, because I interpreted the Bible in the same, or in a very similar fashion, for many years. (I was taught that veering from that manner of interpretation would be “liberal,” and I didn’t want to be liberal, since I’m a conservative, and most Christians equate “liberal” to mean “un-Godly” or “evil”).

    On the other thread, the newer one above this one, about Friel and mental health, we were discussing Biblicism in the comment box. I think that topic is very applicable here.

    I no longer view the Bible through the same prism that guys such as KAS do.

    I think I read that the word “Biblicism” was coined by a Catholic guy. I don’t agree with Catholics on some of their beliefs.

    I don’t think that the Bible is quite as simple and clear cut across all topics as a lot of Protestants, Baptists like to make it out to be.

    They often like to isolate one Bible verse out of context from the verses around it, from the culture it was intended for, etc, and make an entire doctrine out of it, and to also say it’s applicable to every one today.

    They do that in regards to complementarianism and many other subjects, and I don’t think it’s a good, accurate, or wise way of understanding or applying the Bible.

    So long as complementarians continue to interpret the Bible in the very narrow, woodenly literate, cherry-picked, highly specific way they do (which tends to ignore cultural backdrops and considerations and so on), you’re never, ever going to be able to convince them that yes, God is fine with women today being preachers and having equal decision making in marriages, and so on.

    Like

  32. D – I haven’t been a part of a church in almost 10 years, so I don’t hold to any specific doctrine. I hold to the Jesus creed, love God and love your neighbor. I have experienced not being welcomed to teach adults, yet have been exhausted in working with children. I push back only because I know that there are women who are wonderfully gifted in leadership and teaching yet they are told they are not able to use those gifts because God will not allow it when in reality it’s because men will not allow it. I don’t think God really cares who does the work.

    Like

  33. Kathi,

    God wants all of us to chip in to the fullest of our capacity.

    The term misogyny is a rather strong word as one of the definitions is “hatred of women”

    I think in this instance what JulieAnne is writing about, is more doctrinal, but using the word misogyny would be appropriate if there is abuse.

    I don’t think she is completely talking about abuse, but rather women not being allowed to serve at their fullest potential. Which in this instance misogyny is an aggressive word as many women embrace the doctrine of the church they are in and in fact like being in that environment and don’t feel hated.

    To some who don’t hate women and being accused of misogyny, when they are trying to be faithful, may view it as “heretic talk”, Then an exchange of unkind words breaks outs and cause a toxic exchange between self proclaimed Christians retaliating against each other, sometimes writing or saying mean things to each other. Then it turns into a full blown battle of the sexes, rather than a simple difference in doctrinal viewpoints.

    Most Churches, Denominations and Methodologies, that don’t use women in the fullest capacity aren’t purposely being disobedient, they are following their belief system or doctrine, based on how they interpret scripture.

    A hotly debated passage in the King James version is in 1 Timothy 3 in verse 2 and verse 12 states that bishops and deacons are to be the husband of one wife, (a man)

    2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
    12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

    In the NIV Bishops and Deacons are to be faithful to their wives. Which means a man, if we are talking in terms of heterosexuality.

    Like

  34. D – Considering the questions from the church leader came from Beth Moore’s letter, we should be focusing on Beth Moore’s experience. I know her experience is not isolated. In the letter Beth states that she:

    -Had to issue disclaimers.
    -Had to wear flat shoes to not appear taller than a man. (Julie Anne – good luck on that one!)
    -Not been spoken to, talked down to, ignored, or made part of a joke.

    So, you can choose to believe her experiences, be bothered by them, and ask how can we make a change in the church in how women are treated.

    Or, you can choose to not believe her and say that the problem isn’t that bad.

    Again, these are Beth’s experiences. It would be great for more men to ask women what their experiences are and make changes in values and opinions for how women’s experiences can be better. Otherwise, I’m afraid that the church will start losing more women if changes are not willing to happen.

    Like

  35. Kathi,

    I don’t minimize Beth’s experiences and I certainly don’t think its isolated. With me being a man that appreciates the height of all women, I consider it humiliating behavior and totally unacceptable form of body shaming.

    When I responded back to you, you discussed women not being used to their fullest capacity, which sometimes has nothing to do with misogyny but more to do with doctrine.
    Unless the preacher or leaders of the church are retaliating and force feeding there doctrine in an aggressive abusive way, because the woman doesn’t believe in their doctrine, then I don’t consider it as being misogyny.

    Abuse is something different.

    Heck, I endured heavy handed abuse because I tried to pursue an understanding of the doctrine of a former preacher, he repetitively refused to disclose all the while trying to force feed his 5 Point Calvinistic doctrine down the churches throats,, had nothing to do with being a woman, he mentally abused both men and women.

    Kathi, maybe women will leave a church where misogyny is practiced and if it happened to my wife, I would follow her to a church that didn’t practice misogyny, which there are many that don’t.

    Like

  36. D: A hotly debated passage in the King James version is in 1 Timothy 3 in verse 2 and verse 12 states that bishops and deacons are to be the husband of one wife, (a man)

    Yet, the church has no problem ordaining single men into office.

    “namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe”

    Yet, the church has no problem ordaining men without children into office, or ordaining men with children who are rebellious. So, here we go again down the hermeneutical path. Why is it okay to ordain men into office who don’t meet the qualifications, yet it is not okay to ordain women? Why is it okay for men to be divorced and remarried (i.e. not the husband of one wife) and the church gives them a pass? Why is it okay for a church to restore a man to office who has shown himself disqualified by molesting children or women?

    Like

  37. D,
    Do you not think that perhaps doctrine that prevents women from fulfilling their calling because they are women, is doctrine that is misogynistic?

    Abuse is often be subtle. It is not always blatantly obvious and some of it is ingrained into the fabric of society making it hard to recognize.

    Like

  38. Mark,

    Where did I say, that women aren’t allowed to serve to their fullest capacity?

    When I referenced those 2 verses in 1 Timothy 3, I was explaining that there are churches, that interpret certain scriptures that cause them to believe the way they do. And they don’t hate women.

    Your heteosexual single man can never be a wife and a heteosexual woman can never be a husband. Which is why I think they think the way they do.

    You asked “Why is it okay to ordain men into office who don’t meet the qualifications, yet it is not okay to ordain women? Why is it okay for men to be divorced and remarried (i.e. not the husband of one wife) and the church gives them a pass? Why is it okay for a church to restore a man to office who has shown himself disqualified by molesting children or women?”

    MarkI I don’t know where I said it was Ok. I’ll have to go back and check my responses..

    Like

  39. Julie Anne,

    Men like taller women. Except maybe the ones that suffer from Napoleon complexes,

    In fact men think a taller woman, wearing heels looks nice as well.

    Like

  40. Estelle,

    Doctrine becomes misogyny in my view, when there is hateful retaliation.

    I’m sure if a woman goes into a reformed church in Beaverton or in Eastern Montana and began to disputes their methodology which is part of their doctrine and they start to retaliate in a heavy handed and hateful way, they would be practicing misogyny on that woman or any woman (or man) that disputes their interpretation of scriptures..

    I consider the abuse I have seen, as blatant.

    There are doctrines being interpreted by both men and women that believes and actually embraces men to be in leadership roles and they don’t hate each.other.
    And they wouldn’t hate a woman that interprets scripture differently, even though they would elect a woman in a Deacon position.

    Now if my wife and I, were to show up and go to a heavy handed hard core church in Beaverton and didn’t believe staying exclusively within the perimeters of TULIP the mainstay of their Calvinistic doctrine and their narrow beliefs of women not permitted in leadership position while force feeding their will and rebuking us, I don’t think they would just hate my wife, but they would also hate me.

    If my wife and I ever were to attend a church like that again we’d leave, rather than dispute it and force our own interpretation of scripture on them otherwise we’re no different than they are,

    Like

  41. D,

    The truth is that these leaders you were describing actually don’t want to be bothered with any of Biblical evidence for ordaining women. They don’t want to think about it at all.

    What’s happening today feels a lot like the story of Pharaoh trying to negotiate with God.

    God says to Pharaoh, “Let My people go that they may serve ME!!”

    Pharaoh keeps trying to limit that. Sure, he’ll let them go for three days to worship God in the wilderness. But then they have to come back and get to work.

    That’s not what God demanded. God didn’t ask Pharaoh nicely. This was a command.

    Then Pharaoh wants to just let part of the people go, but keep the rest.

    Back and forth it goes until finally Pharaoh realizes that he’s not the one in charge.

    Now the question today is—will the church listen to the heart of God saying, “Let My people go that they may serve me?”

    Nope. The church wants to keep women too busy baking cookies in the back room instead of actually “serving” the Lord in the gifts and talents that God gave us. Just like Pharoah tried to control and limit the people’s roles, today the church as a whole is still trying to negotiate, control, and limit the role of women. Guess what, they don’t get to choose what God has already given us. It’s time for women to fulfill the call of God on our lives regardless of how many people get offended by it.

    Like

  42. Kathi – When half (probably more like over half) of the church is not allowed to use their spiritual gifts then you’re not seeing women as equally created and gifted by God.

    This was the answer I was hoping you wouldn’t make! If you allow women freedom with all of the gifts except a teaching ministry in a mixed gathering, this is not silencing half of them, unfortunately a common response though.

    To answer your points. I really do think the women in the fellowship were happy with the situation. This was in the 1980’s, and there have been a lot of changes in society for the worse since then. (We sadly threw the fellowship away, which took me years to get over.)

    Most of the fellowship had experienced considerable grief from intolerant or authoritarian attitudes from churches, especially over the issue of ‘tongues’. They would hardly want to stay in a fellowship that was frustrating them. They wanted to be in a church that took the bible seriously.

    Many of us had been told that Acts 2, 8, 10-11, 19, 1 Cor 12 – 14 were “not for today”. Having discovered that they are, there was (and still is!) a natural inbuilt resistance to saying 1 Tim 2 is also “not for today”.

    There was no CBMW or Piper to react against. In other words, who does what in church of marriage was not a highly charged issue causing dissention, on the whole.

    It’s interesting to watch the new interpretations and revisions of doctrine that evangelicals are discovering – unheard of in previous generations – that will make them less unpopular with the changes in society around them.

    Like

  43. To attempt to answer the question above direct:

    If you are complementarian in doctrine, make sure you are allowing women to do everything the NT is clear they are allowed to do, and not extend the word ‘silence’ to cover more than it does. Since most of the NT treats men and women without distinction when it comes to standing before God and the gift of the Spirit, most of the preaching should reflect this.

    If you are egalitarian in your understanding, stop saying the complementarian understanding is sexist, let alone misogyny, even if you disagree with it. Most complementarians are wanting to do the will of God in this (at least in my experience), and calling this sexist in front of a watching world harms the cause of evangelism.

    Pastors, when preaching on marriage, should concentrate on what the NT says men should do, of which there is plenty, with minimal teaching on wives and submission. That should be left to the older ladies in the church, as the apostle instructs. This is a vital safety check against stupid and immature men.

    If the younger men are not treating the younger women ‘like sisters in all purity’, come down on them like a ton of bricks rather than giving a diet of God loves you unconditionally, followed by games, treasure hunts, and endless eating of pizza to try to keep them in the church.

    Like

  44. D said, “Kathi, maybe women will leave a church where misogyny is practiced and if it happened to my wife, I would follow her to a church that didn’t practice misogyny, which there are many that don’t.”

    We checked out a church for a couple of weeks. It was one that a lot of people who left our mega-wanna-be ended up going to. The first week we were there they prayed over couples who were opening their homes for small groups. The men stood in the front where elders laid hands and the wives stood behind them, almost out of the picture. The second week we went there the pastor spoke on why women cannot be leaders in the church using Revelation 2 as his text. Then loudly proclaimed, “That’s what this church believes. If you don’t like it, too bad.” He was a younger man, I’d say in his 30s, and the arrogance was seeping out his mouth.

    We never went back to that church and a year later we stopped going to church all together. This was one of many reasons why we stopped going to church. If church leaders want women to remain a part of their fellowship they really should start addressing this issue. I’m sure that the treatment of women is one reason why my daughter will not go.

    If a woman decides to stay with a church that states that she is not able to have leadership roles due to bilblical interpretation, and she agrees with that stance, then so be it. If the leadership is not spiritually abusive toward the members and is helpful to women who are experiencing abuse at home then I really don’t have a problem.

    D, I got the impression when you first addressed me that we were on opposite ends, but the more I read your responses I think we are on the same page. I do think, however, that comp doctrine is thinly veiled misogyny because of the “equal but different” clause in the doctrine of women not allowed leadership in the church or home.

    I, too, am curious about your Beaverton reference.

    Like

  45. KAS,

    According to your reasoning—Corrie Ten Boom should have never taught mixed audiences of men and women!! Yet that’s exactly what God had called and gifted her to do. Who do you think wanted to silence her powerful testimony from reaching both men and women? Not God.

    The real problem is that women are being labeled as “rebellious” for obeying God!! Let’s get one thing straight—the devil is the rebellious one! Where do you think all these accusations are coming from? The accuser, of course!

    “Then I heard a loud voice in heaven saying, “The salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the ruling authority of his Christ, have now come, because the accuser of our brothers and sisters, the one who accuses them day and night before our God, has been thrown down.”” Rev 12:10 (NET)

    Remember that Jesus resisted the devil by staying focused on God’s command, “You shall worship the Lord your God and HIM ONLY shall you serve.”

    We serve the will of God—not the limitations of people!

    Liked by 1 person

  46. KAS – According to this Wiki article, there are 108 interpretations of the complete Bible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations

    There’s always the ESV that can be used to fall back on now.

    Piper’s been preaching since 1980, CBMW started in 1987, and Desiring God started in 1994. The teaching’s been alive and well for some time now.

    Think and believe what you want. We are not going to see eye to eye on this issue and I’m okay with that. If you cross the line of abuse, that’s where I’m most concerned. Doesn’t mean I won’t push back, though, just like I expect you will.

    Like

  47. Julie Anne and Kathi,

    I looked at the introduction of your blog. Then I read up on his Theology which compares with another church in Eastern Montana and to a less extent Westboro. Similar too many in the abuse culture.

    If wouldn’t surprise me if you were “love balmed” with attention (but not in the normal sense of attending a new church) when you first attended that church. After awhile, maybe you discovered his controlling and preaching style was unlike any you have ever seen before.

    I didn’t dig to see if he attended or took on-line seminary classes and where or who mentored him, to defend his ideology at all cost.

    I did some research (Peter Lumpkins for one) and there is a movement “referred as Stealth or Covert” of 5 Point Calvinist who take Calvinism to a whole new level of not disclosing their Doctrine. In fact some of them don’t even called themselves Calvinist anymore, but still follow the teachings within TULIP and will mentally abuse by force feeding their teachings to those who sees holes in their teachings, enough to break them down or run them out of the church.

    It seems as if Stealthiness isn’t as prevalent, as now they realize it is was obviously too deceiving and sinful.
    .

    Like

  48. This was the answer I was hoping you wouldn’t make!

    It is very inconvenient to have these inequalities pointed out I suppose. Imagine how inconvenient for the ones who are actually treated unequally.

    If the men on here are not seeing the misogyny it is because they aren’t seeing it. Not because it isn’t there.

    To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle,” George Orwell.

    Like

  49. If you are egalitarian in your understanding, stop saying the complementarian understanding is sexist, let alone misogyny, even if you disagree with it

    This is a dodge. Beth Moore is talking about every day misogyny and she clearly lays out how she gave these men a pass for some time because she thought that they were honest in trying to follow the Bible and now realizes that their behavior is coming from somewhere else.

    Yet again, people have deal honestly with this. You can’t just handwave bad behavior and poor attitudes towards women as faithful to the Bible because none of it is faithful.

    Like

  50. Kathi,

    The thing about misogyny and not sharing the same doctrine is a fine line.

    It seems as all of us, at one time or another is trying to see it the same as the other.

    When the woman (and her husband) don’t embrace the same doctrine in the church they are attending and try to change the doctrine and the church is trying to change the woman (and her husband’s mind) in a civilize way, but neither are successful doesn’t always trigger.hate.

    Some churches will direct you to their church by-laws and mission statement and leave it at that, choosing not to force feed their doctrine on you and that’s that.

    We don’t agree, but we don’t ridicule and they don’t ridicule.

    Some that don’t agree with their doctrine may still be very critical of that church.

    Other times a church might tell you your destination is hell if you don’t following their version of “Truth.” and be more combative willing to go toe to toe, if you are willing to do the same.

    I choose to leave a church like that. I’m not going to convince Hall, Phelps or O’Neil nor do I want to embrace the abusive tactics the is incorporated in their methodology, one of which triggered a suicide of a youngster trying to defend his father from being stalked repetitively from Hall.

    The doctrinal differences are vast even within the SBC.

    A 5 Point (no TULIP) Arminian that is dug in deep in their doctrine isn’t going to convince a 5 Point Calvinist to see it the same as they do.

    So much so, they are battling in the most vulgar way going so far in some cases of questioning each others salvation,, The Reformed TULIP boys doing most of the judging,, It’s TULIP of bust.

    Essentially they are verbally abusing and insulting one another and yes this is happening within the SBC

    Most Congregations don’t even know this battle is going on don’t know what a Calvinist or an Arminian is.. Up until 5 years ago I thought all baptist had one Doctrine,, Baptist.

    But I’m discovering Baptist isn’t a doctrine.

    You have one Pastor who is an Arminian and leading a church for 5 years and then a stealth Reformed 5 Point Tulip Pastor taking his place who flat out has a different interpretation of scriptures,, then you have a congregation of confusion, which is going on throughout the SBC.

    Sure abuse happens in many denominations, and not all the Reformed TULIP boys are abusive.

    If you don’t know the doct’rine of the church, the by-laws in their constitution or their mission statement, then you probably don’t know what you are getting yourself into and are vulnerable.

    Like

  51. D,

    That’s why we need to focus on the words of Christ. Not the thousands of people’s different opinions on the words of Christ.

    Like

  52. D: “MarkI I don’t know where I said it was Ok. I’ll have to go back and check my responses..”

    Are you the church? I said, “Yet, the church has no problem ordaining…”

    I’m saying that the typical complementarian hermeneutic of leadership qualifications is broad enough to drive a bus through when it comes to men, yet narrowly defined when it comes to women.

    I know men who have been ordained with kids no older than maybe 3rd grade, or out of seminary with a toddler. Then over the years, one or more of their kids become wayward and yet they are never removed from office.

    I think it’s pointless to try and debate this, but according to Strongs, there are 2006 occurrences of the word “ish” (man) in the Old Testament. Ish is most definitely a masculine word, used in places like: Gen 2:24 (man shall leave his father and mother), but it is also used in places like: Lev 19:3 “Every one[man] of you shall reverence his mother and his father”.

    So, here you see the hypocrisy of complementarianism – Lev 19:3 literally says every man shall… but it’s “okay” to say that it is really referring to both men and women. Yet, Lev 20:27 says “Now a man or a woman…” So, there is plenty of evidence for all sorts of interpretations. To give another example, in the Ten Commandments, it says, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife” – we presume that it is also not okay for the wife to covet her neighbor’s husband, and in fact many would say that is understood by the language. But… when Paul says “the husband of one wife”, these very same people assert that the language is not transitive in the same way that they claim for the Ten Commandments.

    Like

  53. “If you don’t know the doct’rine of the church, the by-laws in their constitution or their mission statement, then you probably don’t know what you are getting yourself into and are vulnerable.”

    Beyond that, you need to see how they are interpreted. I had an ordained pastor tell me that members did not have a right to appeal even though he vowed that he understood and agreed with the church constitution and the church constitution explicitly said that members had the right to appeal.

    Like

  54. Avid Reader,

    I don’t dispute that. But all churches within the SBC and other denominations proclaim to focus on the words of Christ.

    Much of the abuse involves people force feeding their will on others.

    Sometimes it involves doctrine other times an aggressive personality bullying a weaker one, Sometimes it involves 2 strong personalities colliding, wasting their time convincing how wrong the other is.

    Hmmm,, Not just isolated in Churches, but also in many marriages. People not getting their way on every little thing.

    Seeings how this is focusing on misogyny in churches and women. It is best (if possible) before entering into a church, to know the doctrine, constitution and mission statement.

    Truthfully how many of really do that? But it can help prevent abuse from happening. I know I didn’t know the various stealth doctrines floating around within the SBC

    As a man, I wish I was given that advice along time ago to do my homework, before entering into a church.

    For marriages, it is similar advice I’m giving my adult kids about entering into a marriage, to understand who they are marrying and for their partner to know who they are as well.

    Like

  55. Mark,

    I wrote: “If you don’t know the doct’rine of the church, the by-laws in their constitution or their mission statement, then you probably don’t know what you are getting yourself into and are vulnerable.”

    Your response back: “Beyond that, you need to see how they are interpreted. I had an ordained pastor tell me that members did not have a right to appeal even though he vowed that he understood and agreed with the church constitution and the church constitution explicitly said that members had the right to appeal.”

    I think there are various things to consider, sure Biblical interpretation is one of them, but that usually coincides with the doctrine they believe. So nailing down what Doctrine the Pastor believes is paramount, to make sure it matches the doctrine of the Church.
    But there are other factors, that I hate to mention, but it also comes down to personality of the Pastor and whether or not the attendee’s personality doesn’t mesh with the Pastor.. (or another’s words, they don’t like each other)

    It doesn’t make it right, but the Pastor is human and so is the attendee.

    When it comes to preaching I’m not a harsh, fire and brimstone kind of guy, my wife likes, but not as much as she use to, out of respect for me. Sure I think it’s great that a Pastor is passionate about teaching from the bible.
    But in my view, some of it is purposely rehearsed and following a script in the harsh doctrine they have been taught out of seminary to teach and preach. Essentially they are force feeding their will. It can be damaging to those that quite frankly is the last thing they need, in their journey in life.

    That is why, people need to do their due diligence before picking a permanent church.

    Like

  56. Kathi – you meant translations, and yes there are too many of them. Pity there aren’t fewer and we all were better at doing what’s in them!

    The stuff you refer from Piper and CBMW is not what I am getting at. I mean the original NT writings, and the understanding of them that has been the normal practice for the last two millenia – with of course strange variations that may not be justified by the text itself. My understanding, apart from the bible, is reflected in the 1662 Prayer Book and its successors when it comes to marriage.

    I think egalitarians would do well to reflect that their interpretation is less than 50 years old and was discovered coincidentally with the rise of modern feminism.

    Any interpretation honestly trying to deal with what the bible actually says by definition cannot be abusive, I don’t see where this cause and effect idea comes from with regard to complementarianism.

    Like

  57. Avid Reader – you keep mentioning Corrie Ten Boom, and I would have no problem with her ministry to both men and women. She wasn’t an expository teacher of scripture in a local church as far as I know. That is what Paul is getting at. (My mother knew her incidentally shortly after WW2.)

    Regarding an earlier comment of yours (as an aside) in my considered opinion you cannot get the meaning of source language words (e.g. Greek) from looking them up in a dictionary or lexionary.

    I looked up Titus 1 : 6 if any man is blameless etc for elders. Is it any man or anyone? The Greek word is tis, and you can learn online that it is an indefinite pronoun and masculine. Is it masculine to agree grammatically with the word elders in Greek that precedes it (NIV), or husband of one wife that follows it? Can it be grammatically masculine gender, but include women as well? I haven’t got the foggiest idea, the only answer is to put in the graft and learn Greek, grammar syntax and vocabulary.

    The German versions of this verse differ in much the same way as English, but at least using einer for anyone which is masculine implies men are in mind.

    I’ve spotted others referring ‘to the Greek’ elsewhere where it is clear they have no idea how translation works, Kephale being the classic.

    Like

  58. KAS,

    Your mother is very lucky to have met Corrie Ten Boom. I would have loved the chance to meet her. Instead I got to know her through her writings which every believer should read. There is so much power in her books.

    Now KAS wrote:
    “I think egalitarians would do well to reflect that their interpretation is less than 50 years old and was discovered coincidentally with the rise of modern feminism.”

    Wrong. God has been raising up women with spiritual gifts from the beginning of time. This goes back in American history to the earliest days of the colonies. Before that in England during the early days of Methodism, Wesley sent out female preachers. Before that, there was Junia the female Apostle in the NT and Phoebe the Deacon. Before that was Deborah the judge over the whole nation.

    Now KAS, you just gave us the perfect example of how Comp theology keeps contradicting itself:

    Step 1: Comps forbid women from teaching groups of men and women.

    Step 2: Comps contradict themselves by allowing Corrie Ten Boom to teach groups.

    Step 3: Comp theology doesn’t want Corrie to teach the Word while she’s teaching in the church because of the plumbing God gave her. That doesn’t make any sense. How can she minister the Word without referencing Scripture? How could God possibly not want the preaching of the Word?

    These kind of silly mental gymnastics are just roadblocks in the way of God’s will being accomplished on the Earth. Think about it. When Jesus sent out the Seventy, did He tell them to teach, but be careful not to do any “expository” teaching of Scripture? Of course not.

    So why does the church keep putting roadblocks in the way of people called by God to minister? There’s a reason that the Apostle Paul had to tell the church to “help these women” who labored with him in the Gospel. (Phil 4:3) Today there’s too much hindering and not enough helping of these women.

    And by the way, if being the husband of one wife is a requirement for leadership—then both Jesus and the Apostle Paul are disqualified! That verse was making the point that someone in church leadership needs to be a “one woman man” not a polygamist or someone who keeps running from one relationship to another.

    Liked by 1 person

  59. KAS, “I think egalitarians would do well to reflect that their interpretation is less than 50 years old and was discovered coincidentally with the rise of modern feminism.”

    The concept of child abuse was ‘discovered’ in the 1870’s. I think despite Calvinists who think the Reformation was the peak of church righteousness and doctrine, God is slowly sanctifying society. So, I would not be surprised to see such novel ideas (such as marital rape, female/male equality and race equality) appear in our society, without precedent.

    When Jesus came, he challenged millennia-old ideas of what pleased God, and I’m sure those ideas were, like our modern ideas, based on “careful exegesis” of Scripture.

    If you want your mind blown, read “The Theory of Ruling Eldership” by Peter Campbell. It’s available public domain. Campbell researched the history of ruling elders and found that Westminster had actually voted against them being one and the same as the elders in the Bible. The “elders” in the Bible were actually pastors, and that was widely held. Then pastors had a group of helpers “commonly called elders” that were not thought of as Biblical elders. That is, until the Scottish church decided that these men were actually elders in the Biblical sense. When the Scottish church joined the Westminster debate, they brought that to the floor. This was debated with the minutes saying that their position was voted down. However, these men returned to Scotland and allowed the misinterpretation (“commonly called elders” = “Biblical elders”) to stand, such that, as far as I know, all the Westminster churches practice a view where the pastor’s helpers are ordained, Biblical elders.

    Like

  60. These kind of silly mental gymnastics

    Avid reader, ‘silly mental gymnastics’ and nonsensical word games and obvious dodges based on this scripture interpretation is what made me dump the idea that women shouldn’t be preachers and all other related silliness in the first place. If you try to really and truly implement it and keep women down it becomes obvious how terrible it is. So you play these little games, and when a woman comes to preach you put her behind a table instead of a pulpit, or you stick a ‘director’ title on her, or you pretend she is just giving ‘testimony’ instead of preaching. It’s all nonsense.

    Like

  61. I think egalitarians would do well to reflect that their interpretation is less than 50 years old and was discovered coincidentally with the rise of modern feminism.

    Even assuming that you’re correct, KAS, how does that prove that the mutualistic approach to gender relations is false? Just because an interpretation or practice is “time-honoured” doesn’t mean that it’s true, or healthy for all believers. Racial segregation and slavery are just a few of the ancient practices which (most) Christians have thankfully outgrown.

    She wasn’t an expository teacher of scripture in a local church as far as I know. That is what Paul is getting at.

    But KAS, how do you know that’s the kind of teaching that Paul was against? I’ve never seen the words “expository teaching” in that passage, or anywhere in any version of the NT, so how do you know that Paul was opposed to women doing this for men, or for mixed groups? And if it’s not OK in a “local church”, why would it be admissible in any other setting? What makes the “local church” so special?

    This is where I agree with Lea and Avid Reader wholeheartedly, and why I find it so difficult to take gender comp doctrine seriously. I think it’s ill-suited to combatting misogyny in the modern church.

    Liked by 1 person

  62. Very interesting KAS that you actually met Corrie Ten Boom.

    I grew up in a family that has FIRST (not second or more) cousins who are from the LEVANT! That means bible origin DNA (not just a “little” but up to 50%)….. so in a modern day situation of race tension my cousins would be affected by things like anti-semetism. there are also OTHER cousins that could possibly have Jewish heritage within 10 generations because “grandpa/dad” took a heritage test with JEwish heritage.

    Now this is MY BIOLOGICAL family. Not some “foreign” family that has no “clue” of the origins and PURPOSE of the HOLY BIBLE.

    The HOLY BIBLE is for HOLY LIVING in males AND females.

    To this day, I regret giving a lot of time and energy to “far-left” who claim that “the law” is not for today (then that means, stealing, bearing false witness etc. are ok today)……”the law” contains many things that say it is wrong to do harm to other fellow “Jews” or to “have hate” in the heart. Are ONLY the “men” required to do these things to BE HOLY? The answer is simple. NO!

    Consider the story of Joseph and how he was treated…….by a woman, Potiphar’s wife.

    From what I recall happened in Nazi Germany, WOMEN who were not JEWS or other targeted groups were attacking men in the camps……it wasn’t just men. RACISM comes through the failure in women to come face to face with her own sin condition…..what ever it is…..anger, forgiveness etc etc.

    So the solution to overcome misogyny……is basically, confront the issues in the heart of man…..and woman. If they are catering to a life of “lawlessness” (God’s laws are easier than man-made laws by the way……yolk is easy, burden is light), they will end up catering to MISOGYNY merely by the aspect of creating their OWN idol of how a man should treat a woman……and how a woman should treat a man.

    If men are attacked (like my cousin)……my mind starts to wonder……what is the problem in the value structure of “the woman”……… My cousin works as a doctor saving lives day in and day out.

    HIS GRACE IS SUFFICIENT…….for righteousness sake.

    Like

  63. This is essentially the “key verse” because “lawlessness” = disorderly conduct.

    Gal_3:28  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

    Like

  64. Hi Anon,

    We can all agree with the point that you were making that evil is not limited to one gender. There are both bad women and bad men.

    I also agree with you that there’s work that needs to be done in dealing with certain attitudes that are fueling misogyny in the church. However the real root of it all is entitlement mentality.

    Pulling that tree up by the roots will require digging up the deeply rooted entitlement mentality. The more we study the NT the more we will see both Jesus and the Apostle Paul directly attacking that.

    For example when the Pharisees protested Jesus healing the lady in the synagogue, Jesus turned the tables on them by arguing that she (as a daughter of Abraham) was entitled to all the same privileges that they claimed (as sons of Abraham). That she had a right to be freed from the oppression that she had suffered for eighteen years, even when her healing was inconvenient to them. Jesus made the point that they were hypocrites for having argued otherwise. (Luke 13)

    Like

  65. Yes avid reader,

    i agree with getting rid of the pharisee attitude. Like the woman caught in adultery, he that is without sin cast the first stone. But Jesus rightly addressed that NO MAN is without sin, and thus the woman was spared her life.

    The Sadducee of the story would want “the woman” to return to “her sin” which would not fix the problem but further ignite……..her adultery driven perhaps misogynous relationship. Hence Jesus told the woman “sin no more”…….pointing her to “the law”….. which is less burden than the Pharisee OR the Sadducee would like to admit.

    Hatred has an origin, essentially. Either leniency or hypocrisy are the culprit.

    Like

  66. avid reader,

    Read the “road signs” on the road. They have a speed limit.

    God’s laws are like that too. We unfortunately have ALL broken these laws……so HE paid the price for that speeding ticket.

    Since he paid the price should we continue to “speed” down the road?

    No.

    It is for a “woman’s” safety. Of course there is a touch of adjustment to different culture, different century, and different statistics…….but “the law” is still the same principle. The “exceptions” are that a person may “speed” down the road WHEN there is an emergency…..but not for any other reason.

    The law is like the “illustrated dictionary” of how to treat humanity. It is simpler than the “man-made” oppressive laws (oh my yes, anyone who won’t ……and keep tabs on so and so…..need to keep up with the Kardashians…..etc etc)

    If a person thinks that “keeping up with the Kardashians” or other similar celebrities will bring “healing” to women……they obviously have a lot of learning to do. It simply isn’t realistic.

    Like

  67. Lea, if I could ‘Like’ your comment multiple times, I would. It’s not surprising, however, that there are women who align themselves with men – oppressed women will often succumb, to grab a little power vicariously. As I’ve said previously, it’s depressing. Hopefully the lurkers will consider all points in the discussion.

    Like

  68. Carmen,

    I don’t follow “the duggars” (I personally don’t think they represent true genuine truthful Christianity)….. but I do notice that the “Kardashians” have endured MORE abusive relationships than “the duggars”….. that says a lot about leniency in the lives of women. It doesn’t “fix” the problem. Take the stats.

    Before women know it……”sharia laws” will knock on the door and lenient women will WISH for a better marriage…..a marriage free from “incest”…..”rape”……”pedophillia” …… “sodomized sons”…… etc etc etc. Some people NEED to do research on the after shock of Islam (or any other political ideology fake-solution….including the values pushed on women in Nazi Germany)……. in order to SEE the value in HOLY BIBLE types of guidelines.

    I’m not saying that EVERY woman/family needs to live in a “no tv” or “no internet” or “no education” state of life (like the duggars seem to push)…..as this in and of itself is a poor exegesis of scripture, but I AM saying to beware of the folks who “claim” woman’s rights when in actuality the TRUTH is not in their hearts about the condition of change in heart for ALL people involved….man/woman/older/younger/tongue/tribe etc.

    Uninformed women, lead others astray. Try doing research.

    Like

  69. I really haven’t read much or anything about “sharia law” in this thread.

    It really isn’t discussed enough in DC either.

    Must be a politically incorrect thing to talk about.

    Like

  70. I disagree with everything you’ve stated, anongrace. We’ll leave it at that because it’s obvious you’ve been thoroughly indoctrinated by – and support – the patriarchal system. Which, in my opinion, is damaging to men but brutal and oppressive for women.

    Like

  71. Carmen,

    I’m not familiar with “the patriarchal system” as to what you are referring.

    My take on the word Patriarch/Matriarch in the Bible, like in the case of Abraham and Sarah being a Patriarch and Matriarch. And when Abraham passed, then Isaac would be considered the Patriarch and not sure who take Sarah’s place as the Matriarch if she passed. Would probably have to be Isaac’s spouse Rebecca?

    In the modern era, some would say that in the Kennedy family, that Ted Kennedy represented being the Patriarch after his father and brothers passed. I would guess the after Rose passed, the Matriarch would be Jean Kennedy. Maybe (Robert’s son) Joe Kennedy being the grandson of Joe Kennedy Sr. might be considered the Patriarch.

    Like

  72. D – a discussion of the patriarchal system would take far too long to explain to you, I’m afraid. If you don’t realize you’re living in one, then what can I say? 😉

    Like

  73. Carmen,

    So it isn’t the same as I described Abraham being a Patriarch and Sarah being a Matriarch.

    I’m in a remote place north and east of the Mason-Dixon Line, if that means anything.

    Like

  74. A patriarchal system is one in which males hold prominent power and predominate in roles of political leadership, moral authority, social privilege, and control of property. That’s from Wikipedia, by the way.

    There are those who think it’s not like that anymore. . . I beg to differ. I will remind you that Julie Anne’s blog is aimed – for the most part – at women who are very much under the influence of the patriarchal system for one overwhelming reason — they are religious. Religion – in and of itself – is notoriously sexist. Several people commenting on this thread are powerful illustrations of that very thing – they are attempting to use Biblical references to justify sexism. Many of us see through their bullshit.

    Now, if you think everything I’ve said is wrong, why on earth would Julie Anne be posting this topic? (And many others she’s posted since she began). She may not be as vocal (or as undiplomatic) as I am, but her message is the same.

    Women need to be empowered.

    Like

  75. What’s interesting about this discussion is that empowering women is the whole point of what we do here.

    Think about how many times the Bible emphasizes the need for “self-control.” Being in control of our lives is the definition of empowering women. That the will of God for our lives is that we would have ownership of ourselves and our resources, time, property, etc.

    There’s a reason that self-control is so important that it’s listed as one of the Fruits of the Spirit. Because we cannot obey God unless we have “control” over our selves. On the other hand, both patriarchy and Comp theology are forms of “other-control” because they require someone else to be in control of our lives.

    Think about why Jesus came in the first place (Luke 4):
    1) To set the captives free
    2) To help people see again
    3) To free the oppressed

    Now think of how that empowers women
    1) Setting them free from all types of oppressive systems
    2) Helping them come out of the fog to see the right direction
    3) Getting them out from under all types of bondage

    Empowering women is very important to the heart of God. That’s why we are going to keep preaching this until the church as a whole finally listens.

    Liked by 1 person

  76. Carmen,

    Thank you for you explanation. I see what you mean with stuff like polygamy is secretly being practiced. But also in cult circumstances.

    Like I mentioned, I live in a remote place and luckily my wife nor I have experience the type of Patriarchy you are referring, with exception of some serious spiritual abuse for not believing in the 5 Point Reformed Doctrine.

    I can’t wait to see Julie Anne tackle Sharia Law, which in my view may end up being more “progressive” of a problem as leaders of our nation change administrations one from the next and gradually allow full blown open borders and more globalization and outside cultures intermixing with ours.

    Like

  77. I’ve still not had time to read all posts in this thread since I was here like around two days ago.
    I just skimmed the last handful of posts, and saw this:

    anongrace said,

    ..but I AM saying to beware of the folks who “claim” woman’s rights when in actuality the TRUTH is not in their hearts about the condition of change in heart for ALL people involved….
    man/ woman/ older/ younger/ tongue/ tribe etc.

    Plenty of people already know the truth about Jesus, sin, the Gospel, in their hearts (and their minds0 and yet sexism still exists in the world.

    When I accepted Jesus as my Savior when I was a child, it did not make sexism cease to exist.

    As I grew older, I had sexist college professors who harassed me. I had strange men proposition me when I worked as a sales clerk. I’ve had men lean out their car windows to cat-call me. Knowing Jesus did not rectify any of that behavior.

    Telling people – especially other Christians – that the root of the problem is sin is preaching to the choir, a big “no duh,” and isn’t going to actually solve world-wide systemic problems.

    You have Christian men who “know the truth” and yet they have affairs on their wives and beat their wives.

    Jesus, the Bible, and the Christian faith also do not cure depression, anxiety, and other problems.

    You cannot and will not be able to convert every Non-Christian on the planet to Christianity, they all believe in Jesus, and magic presto, all sin including sexism will come to a halt.

    Even if you could convert all people to Christianity, they’d still sin. I point you again to the numerous Christian men who end up in the news, some who even work as pastors, who get arrested for using kiddie pr0n, abusing their wives, having affairs.

    You must be into that “kingdom theology” or whatever it’s called. It was followed by TBN’s Jann Crouch. They believe all Christians can make the world holly and pure, and when they do, Jesus will return to earth. That is bogus theology.

    You keep tossing out this non-solution, that if everyone just repents, has faith in Christ, then all problems will cease, sexism will vanish. The Bible does not teach this at all.

    Liked by 1 person

  78. Faith and Feminism from The Banner site

    For many, the term “feminist” may call to mind images of angry, bra-burning, men-hating, abortion-loving women.

    But a feminist is simply a person who believes in the inherent equality of men and women and is committed to advocating for a world that reflects that equality.

    Feminism questions why, since men and women share a common humanity, one sex has more privileges, opportunities, influence, resources, freedoms, and protections than the other. Feminists also aim to correct this disparity by securing legal and political rights for women.

    While Christian feminists may disagree with particular commitments of some modern feminists, including support for abortion, they share with them a fundamental conviction that men and women are created equal and that this equality should be manifest in homes, churches, and society.

    Like

  79. Well, D, if and when tRump implodes you’ll have Mike Pence – a Dominionist – as President. The whole world will see Christian Sharia in action. It won’t be pretty. 😦

    Like

  80. Thanks Carmen,

    If it wasn’t for sites like Spiritual Sounding Board, I wouldn’t have been able to see the amount of spiritual abuse that was going on.

    Sharia Law has a definition all its own in how they view woman.

    Administrations come and go but in the end, American politicians are trending more globalist.

    If open borders and inclusion of things like the expansion of Sharia Law is your thing be patient because after 2024, globalist policies will accelerate and you’ll be able to breath a sigh of relief.

    My daughters have a college education and have a mind of their own, don’t think they will be able to fully exercise their opinion under Sharia Law,, neither will sites like Spiriting Sounding Board.

    Like

  81. Carmen, Even former President Jimmy Carter embraces safe, orderly and legal border crossings,

    The more open we are, the harder it will be to prevent even more toxic cultures who treat their women worse. At least now, we have laws on the books against abuse.

    Just have to enforce those laws.

    Like

  82. You did a great job of missing my point there, D. Then again, I’m used to religious people believing what they want and ignoring reality.

    Like

  83. Anongrace – Very interesting KAS that you actually met Corrie Ten Boom.

    No it was my mother who met her. She mentioned it once and I now wish I had asked her about it. It was before Corried became well known and she stayed in a Christian retreat centre being set up in England just after WW2 (1946 – 7).

    If you want to hear something encouraging, my mother once told us that they once had no food for those staying there – rationing, bankrupt country, the destruction of war etc. So the leaders there, ordinary Anglican ministers, (and long before the charismatic movement!) said we will thank God for his provision for us. So they prayed. A few minutes later a farmer turned up out of the blue, having been harvesting his fields, with sacks full of potatoes and other vegetables. ‘I thought you might be able to use these’.

    They believed God had called them to set the place up in the first place and that he would therefore provide for them, which he did, on more than just this occasion.

    Like

  84. I really haven’t read much or anything about “sharia law” in this thread.

    This thread, D, is about what men can do about misogyny in church. sharia law is a dodge. Many of you have badly lost the plot.

    Like

  85. This site’s purpose is to expose abuse, mainly abuse on women. It seems those that practice Sharia Law embrace misogyny.

    Like I say, I can’t wait for Julie Anne to isolate Sharia Law. she’d never run out of material.

    But then, maybe it won’t happen, as those that defend Sharia Law, tend to retaliate violently to those that criticize it, especially women.

    Like

  86. But then, maybe it won’t happen, as those that defend Sharia Law, tend to retaliate violently to those that criticize it, especially women.

    D, this blog has a scope. It tends to focus on the church and abuse, because that is what JA is familiar with and passionate about misogyny in general culture and how it contributes to misogyny in church is certainly on topic. Sharia law is certainly off topic. If you wish to go off topic, feel free, however don’t be surprised or offended when people are discussing the issue at hand.

    A bad thing in one place does not negate another bad thing in another place.

    This particular thread, for instance, is about misogyny in church. Many people on the thread seem to not like talking about that particular topic, which is interesting to me.

    Liked by 1 person

  87. Still haven’t read all posts on here, sorry ’bout that.

    I don’t know if I should read them. My blood pressure may spike.

    Has the thread still devolved from,
    “How Man Can Stop Sexism In Church,” to, “All the Complementarians in the thread are complaining how awful feminism and egalitarianism is, and they want us to defend both” -?

    Like

  88. Carmen said,

    Daisy, thanks for posting that Faith and Feminism explanation.

    You are welcome.

    Though I’m a conservative and don’t agree with secular / liberal feminists on everything, I think other conservatives frequently misunderstand and misrepresent feminists and what they believe. (I did a blog post about that at my Daisy blog.)

    Anyway, here is another similar link that you may like:
    _Perhaps Feminism Is Not The Enemy_, by Michael Jensen

    I think a lot of conservatives and other types of anti-feminists spend too much time making feminism look like a boogeyman. I think it makes a handy scapegoat for them.

    Rather than cleaning the log out of their own eye, they are forever trying to clean specks out of the cultural eye or the feminist eye.

    I really wish other conservatives would spend more time trying to eradicate sexism against girls and women than in complaining about feminism.

    Liked by 1 person

  89. By the way, I take it that “D” and “anongrace” are the same person – ???

    Carmen said,

    Well, D, if and when tRump implodes you’ll have Mike Pence – a Dominionist – as President. The whole world will see Christian Sharia in action. It won’t be pretty.

    Even when I was a very devout Christian, I was never comfortable with having a “Christian nation” with Christians running everything.

    I once saw a preacher interviewed on TV and he mentioned that he didn’t want a Christian theocracy, either, because “your idea of Christianity and mine might be two different things.”

    I was like, yes, thank you, I agree.

    Not all Christians are like this, but there are plenty whose views come close to, or are just like, Islamic militants.

    They don’t want women working outside the home, they don’t want their daughters dating, going to college, etc. They believe the husband should be “boss over” the wife.

    But even the “well meaning” types of Christians who may not be as severe (who are into traditional gender roles) still do their own type of damage – as in my case, my parents instilling those gender roles into me turned me into a codependent doormat, and it intensified my anxiety, and it made my life ten times worse.

    Then you have your Christian gender role guys who usually give harmful counsel to women trapped in abusive marriages: they tell such women divorce is always wrong and to return to the abuser and “pray and submit” to him more – which only enables the abuse, it won’t stop it.

    There again, these pro- complementarian Christians – especially the “soft” complementarians – THINK they are doing good and that they are “being biblical,” but in reality they are totally blind and oblivious to how harmful these “gender role” teachings are to girls and women.

    Their teachings put girls and women into danger. They make girls and women easier prey for the dishonest, the controllers, and abusive men.

    I don’t want to live under a Christian theocracy because those in charge might believe that these backwards, sexist teachings are good, right and true, and force me to live under them, and I do not want to live under them.

    Liked by 1 person

  90. I don’t know if I should read them. My blood pressure may spike.

    Ha, Daisy. When that happens I take internet breaks!

    Like

  91. these pro- complementarian Christians – especially the “soft” complementarians – THINK they are doing good and that they are “being biblical,” but in reality they are totally blind and oblivious to how harmful these “gender role” teachings are to girls and women.

    This is the reason I think many of us engage. I think those people are potentially reachable, if their eyes are opened. Many of us were them once. I grew up without any of the seriously harmful influences I read about so maybe it was easier for me, but still with the idea that men got some sort of stupid veto over decision making in marriage and they were the only ones allowed to be pastors or deacons. [Deacons! Where did that come from even? As an adult I realize I never heard a sermon about phoebe.] Many things were not discussed, but submission sure was.

    Liked by 1 person

  92. Lea,

    All abuse to women in all religions is horrible. Heck, we even have women who post here that don’t profess to be Christians expressing outage with abuse in general, not just Spiritual Abuse.

    Sharia Law is faith based that allows women to be abused and even tortured and killed. It is expanding into America and leaders are falling asleep while on wheel watch, at the helm. That is how big ships pile into the rocks..

    We have male and female leaders probably from both Parties, receiving truck loads of cash from nations that support Sharia Law, who simply look the other way in order to “try” and get themselves elected.

    I want all abuse, whether it is faith based or not to have extreme consequences to the abuser.

    If Sharia Law wasn’t faith based and didn’t have their own form of misogyny, I would’ve never have mentioned it.

    Like

  93. D (is “D” the same person as “anongrace“?) said,

    This site’s purpose is to expose abuse, mainly abuse on women. It seems those that practice Sharia Law embrace misogyny.

    Like I say, I can’t wait for Julie Anne to isolate Sharia Law. she’d never run out of material.

    But then, maybe it won’t happen, as those that defend Sharia Law, tend to retaliate violently to those that criticize it, especially women.

    Please stop trying to derail the thread and change the topic.

    This thread is not about Muslim misogyny and Muslim sexism against women (which I agree is real and exists), but it’s specifically addressing Christians, Christianity, Christian churches, and how Christian men can help eradicate sexism with Christian churches.

    I personally would not object to a thread about how Islam has a misogyny problem, because I’m a right winger and recognize they do have such a problem where-as many readers of Christian spiritual abuse blogs run left-wing and many liberals tend to be highly defensive of Islam, and are loathe to admit that sexism exists within Islam.

    However, it’s my understanding that the main focus of Julie Anne’s blog is restricted to the confines of Christianity, and specifically the spiritual abuse of Christians by pastors, and she sometimes does posts on how certain doctrines hurt women.

    I totally agree and acknowledge the Islam has a problem with sexism – but then, so too does much of American Christianity.

    I see parallels between the sexism of Islam and the sexism of American Christianity, especially under gender complementarianism, Christian patriarchy, and the Reconstructionist and Dominionist views that Carmen was mentioning above.

    Many Christians like to say that their belief system is so different from that of world religions.
    They are often proud of the fact that Christianity is supposedly not like Islam (and other world religions), but in some ways, as taught and practiced, it is exactly like Islam.

    (Some forms of Christianity also resemble, at times, Hinduism and Mormonism, regarding certain teachings about girls, women, and marriage.)
    (continued in part 2)

    Liked by 1 person

  94. (part 2) Re:
    D said,

    This site’s purpose is to expose abuse, mainly abuse on women. It seems those that practice Sharia Law embrace misogyny.

    I do honestly wonder, if it were legal in the U.S.A., if some of the more severe complementarian branches, persons, and churches would be fine with allowing male Christians to do things such as stone female Christians to death for committing adultery, having premarital sex, or being raped (i.e, “honor killings”).

    I wonder if there are not Christian guys out there, like Doug Wilson, Paige Patterson, or John Piper, who believe in patriarchy or comp, who would be fine with male Christians throwing acid in the faces of women for whatever they consider infractions.

    I can seriously see some of these guys supporting such practices – which happen in Islamic communities – and justifying it, by claiming to find “biblical” support for it.

    Currently in the USA, these guys cannot really get away with severe abuse of women, but they try, and their type of theology already aids as a basis for men who want to abuse women.

    You have Patterson coaching women to go back and get hit some more by an abusive husband, and you have stuff like this (done in the name of Jesus Christ):
    Humiliation at Hephzibah House: Restriction and Control over Restroom Breaks – from “Under Much Grace” blog

    Liked by 1 person

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s