Mara,
Welcome to my blog! I am so glad that you commented as Kaywas wondering if only a few are appalled at these kinds of statements.

I too think Kay’s idea of asking Pipe to present himself as a play in the “smacked down” class for a day. I wonder if he would have reservations giving this kind of advice out to others after experiencing the treatment instead of just talking about it.

It seems to me that one of the weakest areas of complementarianism is in the issue of an abusive husband. They seem to want to dance around the issues because after all the husband is the priest-king of the home according to their doctrine. That makes trying to “discipline” the husband a very touchy subject. How are they going to do that anyway? It is no wonder that most complementarian pastors will focus their advice with the wife and tell her to be more submissive. The subject of the king appears to be easier to counsel than the king himself. This is where the unbalanced nature of the comp argument shows up as weak and ineffective. This kinds of counsel make me very sad as it reminds me how a person’s doctrine can affect every area of their life.

sm,
You are correct in your understanding of what I was saying.

The problem seems to be a miscommunication from what I am saying and Mike is hearing. I say “teaching” and he hears “authority”. He is trying to put words into my mouth that I have not said or even thought. The hierarchist seems to operate only on an authority/submission mindset and cannot seem to think outside that box. That means that Mike has to interpret my words within his own mindset. But the “mindset” of scripture is not one of authority but of submitting to service. That means that the one who is to be the greatest is to be the servant of all. “Servant” and “authority” do not go together. A servants position is not “taking authority” over the sheep. It is a position of offering one’s service with humility and love for God. When I teach I do not “take authority” over anyone. I give them my wisdom and they are then required by the scriptures to evaluate what I have taught by the scriptures. This means that the scripture is the ultimate authority, not the teacher since the teacher is to be subject to the Word.

I have had much experience since the late 1980’s of successfully helping Jehovah’s Witnesses find freedom in Christ. To do this I had to understand what their words meant (they can use the same terms but the meaning is different) and then speak in a way that they can understand. I used their own language to expose the scriptural errors and teach the truth. I admit that I have not yet completely figured out how to communicate with a hierarchist to stop him from twisting my language and placing it in his own understanding.

Perhaps what I need to keep remembering to say is what I am NOT saying. i.e. I am NOT saying that teaching means a woman holds an authority over anyone. A woman teaching another woman is NOT taking authority over her because the student is to evaluate the teacher by scripture, therefore the teacher is not the FINAL authority.

Perhaps we need to ask the hierarchist to define authority. What authority does a teacher take over his/her student? If giving out information makes one in authority over another person, then look out because a woman cannot give directions to a man who is lost. A clerk cannot answer a male customer’s questions. Don’t call the telephone company because the woman who is answering questions about your bill might be in authority over you? It just seems like hierarchists live and breath authority. It all goes back to Adam. God gave Adam and Eve rule over the world and after sin entered the world Adam’s lust for authority was turned towards ruling people instead of the world.

That’s my two cents 😉

sm,
Oh, my, yes, you have identified other areas of possibly breaking of the “law” that I had forgotten about. I should have picked up on that because I am a video editor!

Is it less authoratative if a woman is teaching on a DVD? Hmmm…in reality I don’t think they really believe that. In my DVD set I quoted CBMW and got their permission for the quotes. I asked if they would like a review copy and they said yes. But Randy Stinson was the CBMW guy responsible for reviewing my DVD set. He apparently couldn’t stomach listening to the entire set and after previewing a bit of the DVDs he set them aside and eventually deposited them in the garbage. Well, at least they paid me for the DVDs since they failed to do a review.

sm, you are really pushing us to use our thinking caps today along with A. Amos Love!

sm,
Welcome to my blog! I hope you feel very welcome here.

What you have pointed out is one of my main beefs with those who seek to impose their “laws” on women. They make their point of view a law but they are unsure exactly how that “law” is to be played out. It becomes a subjective issue by all the “I think” men’s views who differ from each other without any consensus as to what constitutes the full “law”. But this is not the way God operates with His law.

So when these men are now responsible for supervising women they make all kinds of exceptions so that they can listen and evaluate her teaching. Then there are those who think that even this is a sin so they allow women to evaluate other women, but then who do the women evaluators report to? Is their evaluation an unlawful thing to be heard by a man?

No wonder these ones can only say “I think”. There is nothing solid at all in their application from the scriptures. The boundary line appears to be placed just outside where the man stands. He is of course never outside the law when he is the one setting the subjective boundary. What hurts me the most for women in ministry is that these women are the ones who are hurt and discounted and discredited and the men don’t seem to care that their rules harm a sister in Christ when the scripture is not clear on the matter. Instead of working hard to find all the freedom they can for women, they set up all the ways that a woman cannot freely function in her gifting. It is no wonder that so many women feel like they are less valuable than Christian men. I believe that this hurts the heart of God because He is the one who has called, gifted and empowered His women and His Holy Spirit is being discriminated against because of the gifts He brings when He dwells in women.

A. Amos Love,
My brain hurts from your questions! 🙂
The issue is as you quoted – what have we made mandatory that is actually man’s tradition? Some people think that tradition is innocuous, but as the scripture says tradition can make God’s word to be of no effect.

Good words!

Dave #8,
Excellent questions! Your questions show that there is no biblical “line” that can be appealed to for complementarians. They must then decide on what is “sick” or not in a subjective way. This means that there cannot be any real justice because some complementarians will hold back a woman in one church while others will not hold back their women doing the exact same activity. Is being held back from doing God’s work a good thing?

Thanks for such good comments!

Sorry guys, I ran out of time today as I have been putting very long hours into video editing and year end accounting on our corporation. Hopefully I can pop in later as I take breaks. Keep all the great comments coming. I enjoy reading them as I have time. I will comment too myself as I have time.

Wayne P,
Welcome to my blog! I am very happy to hear your testimony of some of the things that have led you towards biblical equality. Awesome! I am trusting God that there will be many more men and women who will be touched by God to let go of their preconceived view of “gender roles” in order for the body of Christ to proceed full speed ahead in the work of God that he has planned for us.

I trust that I will be able to attend a CBE conference one day. I am joyful to know that it was a watershed event for you. Praise the Lord!!

Leanne,

Interesting that you mention Dennis Rainey’s book. I did a post on one of the chapter’s that was written by Bob Lepine. It is here http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/ I found that chapter to be especially troubling and there was a lot of debate over it as there were 140 comments that were generated on that post!

Welcome to my blog lmb!
I agree with your good comments.

Power and unilateral authority by one person in a marriage is not God-honoring. The model for Christians has always been servanthood not power. It is funny how the complementarian model has added the word “leader” to the word “servant” as if the wife needs someone to lead her other than Jesus. This reasoning causes people to see women in a less than equal light as she becomes even less than child-like. At least children grow up, mature and are able to make personal choices without having to have someone “lead” them. That is of course unless the child is a girl. Then she will grow up…sort of….to find someone who will take the position of being her leader. All this does is take away the focus from the Lord Jesus and onto a mere fallible man. Our husband is not to be our “leader” but he certainly can lead. Both the husband and wife can lead by example in doing what is right. But neither of them is to be the “leader” because one is our Leader, one is our Teacher, our Master, our Lord and the one who is owed full obedience. That one is our precious Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Hi Kay,
I too was a big romantic. That was 37 years ago for me. I always wanted to grow old with him…and now I see lots of signs that I am getting old! Not quite the way I envisioned it.

I too wish that God would just lay it all out so that we don’t have to struggle so hard to know what to do in each situation or just how to make it through each day. But God knows that we need to struggle and work things out because the struggle strengthens us. Just as a caterpillar in a cocoon will not survive if you cut the cocoon open, as it needs the struggle to finish the process of becoming a butterfly, God knows that we too need the struggle. At least I know that one day the struggles, the pains, the trials will be all over and this short time will have allowed us to mature in a way that will carry forward into eternity. Praise God for that.

Kay,

I see your post as an extremely powerful one. I am so glad that you wrote what you did!

I see that complementarians so often state that women who do what is supposed to be the husband’s “role” are in sin. You have clearly pointed out where it is impossible for her not to take over this “role” and how could it be a sin in this situation. Situational sin cannot be a universal law.

I also wonder if comps equally attribute “sin” to a husband who stays home with the kids as a service to his wife and family while his wife does outside the home what she is clearly gifted to do. Is now his cooking and cleaning and wiping a runny nose now usurping his wife’s “role”? Is he in sin? Often it seems to only go only way but this comes across as a bias. We are not to apply the “law” in a biased way.

The solution? Recognize that there is no such demands of God for husbands and wives to have “roles”. They need to work out their own marriage in a one-flesh union that works for them. This is what God has ordained and He gives us much grace and latitude to live out our one-flesh union.

Good thoughts tiro. Sorry for being out of touch for a week or so. It has been a busy time for me and I had family visiting too so that kept me away.

I would like to say that 1 Cor. 11:3 in context refers to one particular husband and wife as 1 Cor. 11:12 shows that Eve came from Adam thus Adam was her source just as all men come through the woman now. Verse 3 then cannot be used to say that a man is the head of all women. It isn’t an issue of a universal boss but the original source (Adam), the current source (mothers) and the ultimate source (God).

A Amos Love,
Thanks for all the encouraging poems and songs.

To fight for the right, without question or pause …
To be willing to march into Hell, for a Heavenly cause …

I pray that I will always be willing to fight for what is right yet with a gentle and respectful attitude especially with my dear brothers in Christ who differ on the issue of women in ministry. May I love them intensely while passionately arguing for the freedom that we have in Christ.

Thanks Thy Peace and pinklight for the links. I left a comment on Wade’s post. What a great talk! Thanks a bunch for bringing it to my attention.

I should also note that Mike has all comments on moderation. He is also a busy pastor so I don’t think he looks at the blog more than once a day. I would recommend that he moderates only for the first comment and once a comment is approved, that the comments should be free to post. That keeps a conversation much less stifled. It is especially important since Mike will be gone for a week. Anyone want to post on his blog this suggestion? That is if you agree with me 🙂

Dave,

I agree with your point and the command to love one another and to love God are the universal commands that are broken when one does not discern the body.

So for the record, Paul does repeat his warning:

1 Corinthians 11:27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.

and…

1 Corinthians 11:29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.

The law of love means that one should wait on your brother in order to have true communion.

If for example you remember that you have offended your brother you are to go to him to clear up the offense:

Matthew5:23 “Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,
Matthew 5:24 leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.

The reason to leave everything and go and be reconciled to your brother? Because the purpose of communion is so that we can be bonded together with our common salvation in the death and resurrection of Jesus. If your brother is offended and is not coming to church because you have offended him, it isn’t safe to think that as long as you are okay then you can take communion. We are to bring our brother with us so that he too is free to share in the communion with us. It is the law of love and acted out in the love feast as the body of Christ.

But it is great to know that even though 1 Cor. 11:27 is an example of the law of love, Paul once again practiced repetition so that we can be sure to understand.

Very good thoughts pinklight!

Mike has given what he “thinks” is a law that doesn’t have a second witness. It was a good try, however it does have a second witness in the context because Paul repeats the sin and says it in a slightly different way in the same context. Did anyone pick up that the “law” that Mike points to as not having a second witness was indeed repeated?

I have asked many people this same question – to show me one law in the scripture that is without repetition, without a second witness and no one yet has been able to give me even one such law and that includes Mike. I do very much appreciate that Mike tried. Many give up without even trying.

pinklight,

yet somehow “the presence of men” makes the situation ungodly?

This is the thing that really puzzles me too. If one really thinks it through, it seems as if men are somehow being discriminated against by God. They do not receive all the gifts that women do and if they are forbidden to receive part of God’s gifts, then is there something wrong with them?

3 A. Amos Love,

The Bible says when God operated on Adam,
“He caused a deep sleep to come upon Adam,”
It never says He woke him up again.

But keep on trying, please.

Very funny! Sorry again for both your posts making it into my spam box. That does happen occasionally. Any future posts should go through okay. I unspammed you 😉

pinklight,
I like your comment about “compland”. You have come a long way in the last couple of years in sorting these issues out. At least I think it has been close that long since I have been reading your thoughts. When I read what you write, I can see your thought process come through. You certainly are a “thinker”. 😉

Frank,
Excellent comments as usual! I wish in a way that my debate with Mike could go back and forth more to bring some of this stuff out, but we agreed that it would only be a question, answer, then a response each and that would be the extent of each set of questions. I very much appreciate that Mike would even do this as many comps would not engage like this at all. Also Mike wanted my answers ahead of time so that he could prepare his responses. So right now what I will be answering and responding to for the rest of the questions to me from Mike have already been done. Later on we will be posting Mike’s questions to me and my answers with both of our responses. Those have not been fully written yet. The fine points will certainly come out in the comment section. You will likely notice that my answers are a good deal longer than Mike’s. Whether I have more to say or whether Mike is just more concise than I am will remain to be seen 🙂

Anca,
Excellent point about the church and state being as one in Israel. So many people forget this. Thanks for reminding all of us!

davidbmc,
I agree that it is us who need the second witness. That is my point. Without a second witness, how can we be sure that we have not misunderstood what we think is a “law” that forbids women to teach men? A second witness is safe for “us”. God of course doesn’t need the second witness as He is God. We are not God and as fallible finite humans who are sinful, we are the ones who can be mistaken without a second witness given to us. In this, I too agree with Mike, although that is not likely how he meant it.

Kay,
It did take me awhile to come to the place where I could even consider reading from those who wrote such disparaging words against women. My heart hurt from their attitude. However I have come to understand that it is maturity that brings one to the point that realizes that everyone has their own blind spots and we must read everyone with discernment. Only the Bible is without error. We, the body of Christ, are still fallible.

As far as Mike goes, I know that he has moderation on his blog and he has little time to put into maintenance of the blog and that would include reading the comments. He has asked me to format the posts for him and he has chosen to have one graphic where I just update the “part” number whereas I prefer to have a new graphic for each post. So if he doesn’t have your comment up yet, it may still go up. If he doesn’t post it, for whatever reason, you are free to post here. My only condition is that people remain respectful and don’t name call. I rarely have to moderate out parts of people’s comments and it is rare that I don’t allow a comment to go through because it is that bad. People that come to my blog appear to be very special, decent people and boy do I like that!

9 Frank,

Thanks for your good comments.

One thing that I would like to note is that most complementarians leave out verse 15 while stressing that 1 Timothy 2:12-14 is transcultural and for all time. Verse 15 causes them a lot of trouble with their interpretation of the prohibition so they let it slide as if verse 15 is not necessary to understand the passage. I have said before that verse 12 cannot be understood without verse 15. Verse 15 sets the defined grammar, the concern that prompts the prohibition and the solution to the problem that defines the specific components that are necessary to the interpretation of verse 12. Those who have ignored the connection between the end of the prohibition (verse 15) have taken the church into bondage by hog-tying half of the church and limiting the effectiveness of the body of Christ.

Secondly the issue of Deborah has caused many to view the “place” of a woman’s ministry as limited to outside the church while misunderstanding that the people are God are God’s congregation (OT) and the church (NT) and the building that they meet in is not. Where Deborah did her judging should not be the issue. It is the fact that she did the work of a judge that is the issue. When some side-step her work and make the “place” of her work the issue, they are in essence providing a smoke-screen to try to hide the legitimacy of Deborah’s God-ordained work and position in the congregation.

Alison,
You said:

2. If God didn’t intend for women to be leaders, why did He give them leadership gifts?

This is a question for complementarians that has really bugged me. No one doubts that women have these gifts. The gifts are evidence for all to see. However comps must either say that the gifts are to be limited in some way to the presence of other women or it appears that God taunts women by giving them gifts that they must refuse to use. Having a gift and then having to deny the expression of that gift would make God out to be a tormentor. Better that He didn’t give women these gifts, then that He would give the gifts and deny their use.

The question for those who believe that the gifts can be used but only with other women, would be to show these gifts being used in the scripture in the presence of only women. While the older women are told to teach the younger women to love their husbands, the bible never says that the older women are told to teach the younger women about the bible. I believe that the absence of one woman teaching other women the bible is because the usual pattern in the life of the church was for one’s gifts were for the use of all (the common good). Any other usage of one’s gifts is not the norm in the life of the church. The women did not go into another room and teach other women. The women stayed in the congregation and used their gifts just as Paul said – for the edification of the church.

BTW, I am really frustrated today as my internet has gone down twice during the time I was trying to post this comment. I have a technician coming on Tuesday. Hopefully I can get my next post up on Monday as Mike and I agreed that would be the next date for our joint posts. If I am unavailable for awhile, I am probably out walking or cleaning toilets as I wait for my internet to show up again for a few minutes before it goes down again. (Mutter, mutter, mutter).

Anca,
Excellent points!

Kay,
Sorry for taking so long to respond. On top of the DVD project that I am working on, my internet was off periodically throughout the day and then last night the electricity was off. That’s what I get for living in a small city in the mountains. While the electricity and internet are unreliable at times, the scenery is beautiful so I guess it balances itself.

I really do appreciate when lurkers come out and give me some feedback on this blog. I can’t tell you how much that encourages me! It is a blessing to know that my work has touched even one person. So to know that I have touched you, Kay, and encouraged you while equipping you to spread the good news about God’s view of women, has blessed my socks off! Thank you!

Kay,
Welcome! I am so glad that you found my blog.

I also think that the statements many complementarians make leads many people away from that view. For if they claim that the texts are “clear” then why is it they don’t all agree? Why is it that some have a stand that a woman cannot teach a single man inside or outside the church, yet some believe that a woman can teach her husband or another man? If there was a universal law against women teaching the bible to a man, then they would all be in agreement. Their disagreements are a huge red flag that what they claim is clear cannot be so clear after all.

And if men get to tell women what to do as if she has no power to make a decision for herself, well…then it appears that she isn’t equal after all, that is according to their own view.