Cheryl

Okay, more news to share with you all. I got a call this morning from the Frank Pastore radio show and they want to interview Richard and I on their Friday afternoon radio show at 4:25 broadcasting from Los Angeles, California regarding what has happened to our ministry here in Canada. The web site for Frank Pastore is frankpastore.com. I spoke to a fellow named Patrick and he said that Frank’s show on KKLA 99.5 is the top call-in show in LA. This an amazing opportunity to not only share what has been going on here in Canada (and what may come soon to the USA) but also an introduction to our ministry to many people who have probably never heard of us before. Praise the Lord!

pinklight,
Might be good if you posted the prophecy here, as it might encourage us all. 🙂

Hi folks,
I got an email today from Pastor Frank Campos in California and I found it so encouraging that I thought I would pass it on. It is an encouragement to stay the course and how trials are really meant to be an opportunity. Frank’s letter below:

“We will be in prayer over this circumstance. However, what a privilege to be in this place. The Lord has counted you worthy of the suffering. “Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.”

I hope to bring you encouragement sister. This is not about the ministry as much as it is about you, yourself. Trials do not mean resign. It means opportunity to enter into the sufferings of Christ. Paul said of himself, “to know Him in His sufferings.” Trials don’t produce faith, but when trials are received with faith, the outcome is patience. If difficulties are received in unbelief and grumbling, trials can produce bitterness and discouragement. This is why James exhorts us to “Count it all a joy” is faith’s response to a time of trial.

Sister Cheryl, we will stand with you in this time. Please count on our prayers and faithfulness to this. Nothing is ever lost in Jesus’ hands.

Always in Him,
Frank”

Thatmom,

Thanks for the link to your blog and your audio files. I would encourage those who post here to interact over there as well. I will have to carve out some time to listen to the audio myself.

The link you gave for kinism was alarming. I won’t delete the link because I believe in allowing people to check things out for themselves. I just hope that they don’t somehow find their way to this blog ;-] I don’t think they would like us very much.

Yes, you are right in that the church took a while to deal with the Jew and Greek part and then a great deal of time to deal with the slavery issue (slave and free). It appears that the hardest of all is the male and female part. I have often pondered why this is. In one of my bible study groups where I taught scripture to ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses, I asked this one question of the group and one young man piped up that the reason is because inside the male is the drive to dominate everything in sight. When we given women freedom in Christ, many men will see this as a threat because women have been seen as an easy target, ones that they can dominate and rule. When you try to take away a man’s kingdom, he will fight you rather than lose control. Now I can’t say that all men have this inside them or even that all men have the potential to be despots, but there are enough of them defending their kingdom to know that this is a problem area. For many of them there is a payout in feeling like they are the king of the castle. They are not about to share. Sometimes I also wonder if these Christian men only knew how much better it would be for them to have the load shared and to have someone they can trust working alongside them, they would not fight their sisters to stop them from using their God-given gifts for the benefit of men.

The other thing I think about is, how much of this struggle between men and women is not of human origin? After sin happened in the world God said that he would initiate an emnity between the serpent and the woman and between his seed and her seed. Is this struggle between men and women part of the struggle between the woman and the serpent? If I look at it this way, then I can have a more compassionate view of my brothers in Christ. They are not the enemy at all. They have been influenced by the enemy to hold back part of the body of Christ, but they are not the enemy. I think it is much more helpful for me to pray for these men and ask God to remove the blinders off their eyes, then for me to be hurt and insulted by those who are deceived. I need to be mad at the deceiver and love my brothers in Christ with a true love and true passion because they too belong to the Lord Jesus. I just so wish that we were at the end of the journey of the Church so that we were without spot and wrinkle and without shame so that we are all ready for Christ’s return. The more we work shoulder to shoulder with the entire church, Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female, the more we are in the very image of Christ who died for all of us and knit us together into only one body.

Light,
Thank you for your encouragement! It is the peace of God that comes down and surrounds us during times like this. We should feel very sad, but there is so much work to be done for the Lord that there is no time to feel sad.

Lin, Greg, Psalmist, Truthseeker, Thank you for your prayers! We want to continue to fight the good fight but there are times that I lose sleep and wonder what the future holds for us. If you could prayer for continued boldness and for the Lord’s help in redeeming the limited time I have, that would be very, very helpful to me!

cokhavim,

Pastor Mark does bring his wife out and introduce her but she is obviously not a public person at all. I think he does quite well at speaking for women and he really gets the men to think. Would a woman do as well at getting men to think about what they do and why? I am not sure. I do believe that a woman has gifts that a man needs to benefit from. However when it comes to a man’s weakness, I am not sure he would hear it from a woman. Pastor Mark is gifted at getting the message across with a great deal of humor. The answer is not for women to be more submissive but to actually be stronger. I appreciated hearing this coming from a man. I didn’t feel that I missed anything and if you did feel like the teaching was missing something after you hear the series, you may want to write Mark Gungor and let him know. I just appreciated the way that he got his message across, his humor and the way that he spoke up for women.

No I don’t think I wrote more on this and I should do one more post when I get time.

Although I have heard that “aner” can also mean “people”, if that is the case, it would be an unusual meaning for the word that typically refers to a male or a husband. Paul also is very precise in his use of words so we should be able to assume that Paul (and the Holy Spirit) meant exactly what he said.

In 1 Cor. 11 Paul hones in on several very specific applications of a narrow view of a several wide application ideas in order to make a point. For example Paul says that the man is made in the image of God. Paul is not saying that the woman is not made in the image of God, but he highlights that the man is in the image of God to make his point. He also says that the man is the glory of God. Again he is making a narrow view of a wider application. The woman too is the glory of God but Paul has applied a narrow view to make a point. Lastly Paul also makes a narrow view of Christ being the head of the male (or husband). Since we know that Christ is the head of the entire body, we also know that Christ is also the head of the woman. Once again we see Paul take a wide principle and narrow it down to make a point. He is not excluding women in his points – he is focusing in on men for a reason.

So my question would be, why did Paul focus in on the men in this passage? What specific point was he making? I do not believe that Paul’s words are a mistake. There is a specific application to males here.

In the marriage relationship only the husband is called the “head”. The “head” and the “body” are vitally connected but they are not interchangeable. I agree that there is more to be said on Paul’s use of “aner”. I’ll put this one on my “to do” list.

Psalmist,
You make some very valid points! You also said:

“Though I caught wind of a bit of trouble in that pseudo-paradise in this regard. Apparently it’s not always so congenial for all the strong female proponents of female subjugation.”

Apparently this is so. It appears that the Bayly’s have lost Donna Carlaw for now as they didn’t defend her. I think that the “chorus women” are in a precarious position. They can be turned against at any time. It appears that the Baylys like other men to tell the women off and they won’t defend the women when they tire of them.

Corrie (#86 & #88),

Good posts! I too am reading from the bottom up today as I have been so preoccupied I have missed a lot. I like what you said.

“The fact remains that husbands are NEVER likened to God. They are told to be like Christ in their sacrificial love for their wives. Period. They are not told to be like Christ in His resurrection or in His glorious return. They are told to be like Him in His love. Period. Husbands are NOT Christ to their wife nor do they represent Christ to their wives. They are not mediators, prophets, priests or kings. The Bible tells us we are ALL a royal priesthood, husbands are never singled out as priests/mediators for their wife.”

Amen, sister!! My dear complementarian sister in Christ, you are just like us! You see things clearly in scripture just as we do. I also especially liked this:

“I do not believe that Christ is eternally subordinate to the Father. He was temporally subordinate in His incarnate state in order to do the work He came to do. Remember, Christ was crucified from the foundation of the World. Before Adam and Eve were created, Christ’s death, burial and resurrection were already planned. Christ is the Word who became flesh. All things were made through the Word/Christ. Christ is Creator. Christ is God. How can God be subordinate to God?”

This is especially encouraging to me because I was beginning to think that much of church had gone mad. The downgrading of Jesus to an eternally subordinate position is especially troubling to an apologist who has worked most of my ministry life helping Jehovah’s Witnesses come to know the true Jesus Christ, not the subordinated inferior “a god” of the Watchtower. Now we are a kinship to this same type of thinking in the church! Complementarians who say that Jesus as the eternal Word before he became man did not even want to strive to be equal with God in authority and position have lost their way. Their attempt to downgrade Jesus because they want to support the downgrading of women is beyond comprehension.

“One thing that I do know is that Christ is God in the flesh. Through Christ all things were made. God the Father and God the Son are ALWAYS and EVER in agreement. They are ONE and it would be impossible for one to go against the other or even have a thought that would be different from the other.”

Amen!!! How is it possible for men who say they represent the evangelical church to now teach us that Jesus is subordinated in will as if he disagrees with the Father? Other than the incarnation where Jesus subordinated himself to become human and to take on the human will, Jesus has never been in any other position but One in will with the Father. Anyone denying that is denying the revelation of scripture.

Lastly I will quote you here:

“Not true when it comes to two sinful, imperfect, fallible human beings. Husbands are not God. Wives are not Christ. And patriarchalists really must stop taking analogies to this length because it borders, imho, on idolatry. Who would have the hutzpah to compare themselves to God?”

Oh my gosh, I really like you and what you have said! This truth was so clearly worded. My sister, are you sure you are a complementarian? I join with you and hope there are many more out there like you. It is time that the church pulls back the protective cover off of the self-made abusive hierarchists so everyone can see who they really are. This is not true Christianity. I see Jesus’ words in Matthew 24 come to life:

Mat 24:48 ”But if that evil slave says in his heart, ‘My master is not coming for a long time,’
Mat 24:49 and begins to beat his fellow slaves and eat and drink with drunkards;
Mat 24:50 the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour which he does not know,
Mat 24:51 and will cut him in pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Tiro3 (#89),

You said:

“Patriarchalists such as the ones on CARM regularly teach that women are ONLY required to be of a submissive attitude to their own husbands, their own fathers, and their own pastors. This leaves it acceptable to behave in an unsubmissive manner to ALL the rest of the body of Christ. So, out goes Ephesians 5:21 and a host of other Scriptures about loving the brethren and considering them and their needs above self.”

This is also one of the most amazing things that I have seen. It is women who push submission to the leaders but who refuse to give their submission to anyone else. On CARM, I have seen Diane be one of the most unsubmissive people ever and that is just amazing! She loves to state that egalitarians are egalitarians because they want to control people and to control men and they do not want to be submissive. But Diane and other strong complementarian women around the blogosphere have no sense of submission to the body of Christ in general. If there isn’t a “chain of command” that they are under, they won’t submit. I don’t see this in egalitarian women. I have been privileged to come to “know” many of you through this blog and through private emails and your attitude is so Christ-like and submissive that I just LOVE you guys! Okay, you boy guys too are submissive and respectful to the teaching of one who has no authority over you, has no “chain of command”, doesn’t demand that you obey or listen to me, but you have given me respect and are willing to consider what I have to say. That just blows my mind! Why is it that egalitarians are painted with the term “unsubmissive” but in reality they are submissive in practice, while hierarchist women pride themselves as submissive but in practice you rarely see any submission outside the “chain of command” group they are in? I also have been grateful for those of you who have given me counsel and have given me your wisdom when I really needed it. It is so easy to submit to those of you who have way more wisdom that I do and way more life experiences and who have an attitude of love. Submission draws us together because it really does treat the other person as being worthy of respect. This is the “way of the master”.

Light,
Thank you for your comments about the denomination not in general support of the Bayly brothers. That helps a lot.

Hi Deb,
As Tiro3 said, Welcome Deb!!

I too feel very close to complementarians who are respectful and who refuse to call their egalitarian sisters in Christ as sinners merely for their view on the issue of women in ministry. I am starting to think that there are quite a few out there like you that we just don’t hear about. I have just had way more experience with militant hierarchists (I hate to even call them complementarians) who are abusive and rude and who shame the name of Christ by their attitude and their conduct. Jesus has made it very clear that we are to love the body of Christ and he hates those who cause division among the brethren. We certainly are to defend essential doctrine and we can passionately defend our view of women’s freedom to use their gifts for the benefit of their dear brothers in Christ, but we are to do so with an attitude of love and respect because we are all “brothers” in Christ.

I started to read the paper on mutual submission that your seminary President wrote and there is a sense of humility that is often missing in the complementarian camp. While I may disagree with some of his conclusions, I do respect his attitude. I have not finished reading it yet because I have been so busy. I will be writing a post very shortly about what is happening in my life and why I have been somewhat “absent” around here lately. I do appreciate that you have hung around and enjoyed what you have been reading. This is really what egalitarian women long for – to be heard and to have our gifts acknowledged that they are beneficial and needed for the common good of both men and women. Those of us who are deeply in love with Jesus long to serve him by treating each member of the body of Christ as special and worthy of our gifts. When we are forced to be prejudiced against our dear brothers in Christ merely because of their gender, it hurts us and ultimately this hurts the entire body of Christ too.

As far as the Bayly brothers, they are ones who seem to revel in dividing the body and pitting brothers against brothers. This should not be so in the church. The thing that really causes me to wonder the most is what strong women get out of following these kind of men. I certainly can see what naturally submissive women can get out of it. These kind of women have a need to have men take over their decisions and to hover over them as if they are childlike persons who are not capable of growing up and making their own mature decisions. But what do the strong women who repeat the abusive words of their male leaders get out of it? What do people like Kamilla get out of following the Bayly boys? I do not know her heart so I cannot judge her motives. However I do wonder if women like this have a need to be controllers but that they also have a need to work underneath the authority of these leaders so that it doesn’t appear that they are indeed strong controlling women? Thoughts?

I just don’t get how these strong hierarchical men allow a certain class of “special” women to speak out on their blogs. These women appear to get preferential treatment and are allowed to speak in a confrontational or even rude way to those who don’t agree with the hierarchal leader. I have been mulling this over in my head. Is it that these two kinds of people need each other and feed off each other? I am just throwing this one out for comments. Is it possible that strong aggressive women want to appear to be submissive and so they look for these hierarchical leaders and they emotionally fondle telling them how wonderful and right they are to be the “manly” men who take control over women. This meets the man’s need to be the one at the top of the heap and it meets the woman’s need to get special privileges so that she can appear to be submissive but be given full reign to heap abuse on those who disagree with the leader? Guys, I may be way off, but this is how it appears to me.

Lin,
May it never be said that I forgot your very Christ-like rebuke as well. You are to be included in my “bravo” post above. I apologize that I missed you to begin with. Your post was so very gracious and it too follows the standard of how to bring someone to task in the way that the “Master” instructs us to speak. Bravo!!!

Thatmom and Corrie,

Bravo! This is exactly the right way to call someone to account in a gracious way, upholding the truth in a respectful and Christ-like manner! I am honored to call you my sisters in Christ. We may not agree about everything on secondary issues, but sisters your love for Christ shines through you! Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!!!

Metacrock,

One other thing and this is the thing that I find very sad about CARM. It is easy to come away with a bad attitude when one sticks around CARM too much. There is so much bickering there and the love of the Lord does not shine through from the leadership at CARM. This is not the way it should be. When we are correcting others we need to do it in a gentle way remembering that the brother or sister in Christ belongs to us. In the body of Christ we are joined together and when we strike out at another brother in Christ, we are hurting our own selves. We are also being disobedient and God doesn’t bless disobedience. I would pray that the spirit that is prevalent at CARM would change and that there would come a spirit of humility and brokenness. God promises to lift up the broken vessel who is humble. He also promises to resist the proud. It is to our benefit to check our spirit and deal with a prideful spirit. It is not Christ-honoring to have a consistent attitude of attacking other Christians over secondary matters of faith.

Metacrock,

No offense taken at all. I don’t mind people arguing with passion. I happen to love people who have lots of passion. By the way, you may be interested to know that “a woman” absolutely can be a certain woman according to the Greek. When I was dialogging with CBMW two years ago they admitted that to me. I was told, though, that the accepted position was that “a woman” was all women and if I believed it to be a particular woman, then I would have to prove my point of view from the passage. I believe that I have done this quite well. This is why I always challenge people to show me who the “she” is from verse 15 and who the “they” are. It cannot be “she” AND “she” or “they” AND “they” because the inspired grammar says third person feminine singular AND third person plural. The only “she” one can find in the passage who is alive at the time of Paul’s writing was “a woman” whom Paul stopped from teaching. There is no other singular woman in the passage and “she” must not be confused with “they” or the passage is confusing and redundant.

In addition, the inspired word doesn’t say that she will be saved in childbearing (a verb). It says that she (singular) will be saved in THE childbirth (a noun) IF they (plural)… It is also future tense not past tense. This isn’t about things that have already happened in the past. This isn’t about some Greek myth about women being saved physically through some goddess helping women. That thought might sound good but it isn’t provable in the passage and it does not jive with the inspired Greek. Paul was very specific. He said “she WILL be saved….IF they….” There are actions that need to be done by both of them so that she (singular) will make it past her problems. Her salvation is hanging in the balance but Paul believes she will make it out of the error she is in and there is someone else in the picture who will help her. Her salvation does not come because of works, but the things that Paul has already stated in chapter one will be the very things that will keep her safe from deception and hold her in the truth.

The meaning is in the passage itself. It isn’t in Greek myth. The meaning is not in generic woman either. We either accept that Paul was inspired and wrote the exact words that God inspired or we don’t accept that. I accept that Paul wrote exactly what God wanted him to and I do this because I fully believe in the divine inspiration of scripture. No interpretation can be true when that interpretation ignores some of the divinely inspired words or the divinely inspired grammar.

Lastly Paul wrote in the book Corinthians about “a man” who 14 years ago was caught up into the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:3, 4). Paul didn’t say “this man” or “that man”. He just said “a man” yet we know for sure that it wasn’t generic man, it was a specific man. If Paul could specify a specific man by calling him “a man” in 2 Cor., then surely he could specify a specific woman in 1 Timothy 2:11, 12 and call her “a woman”. The proof is in Paul’s writings.

I don’t mean to be repetitious, but the full view is spelled out in my DVD set. If you can find a hole in the exegesis when you have seen the entire argument, you may win the prize. So far no one has been able to poke a hole in my exegesis although many have tried. Many more have been silent because the view makes sense of the entire passage.

Recently Rev. Michael Hicks said this about my exegesis:

“I am a Senior Pastor of a Foursquare Church. I have never been satisfied with the interpretations offered over several difficult verses which seem to restrict women in ministry. Not because I did not like them, but those interpretations left God Almighty constantly contradicting His word, or at least these interpretations. This DVD did an outstanding job of linking the passages together and answering them in a thoughtful and exceptionally Borean way. And they no longer make God out to be a contradictor of His own word. Wonderful job Holy Spirit, Thank you.”

I concur. I believe it was the Holy Spirit who made his word clear and understandable and he is the one who will receive all the praise.

Hi Metacrock,
I would love to post on your board but right now I am up to my ears in alligators. We are working on a DVD on the Trinity and we are in the midst of setting up a new corporation in the US and so there is major work involved in that.

Regarding my interpretation on 1 Timothy 2:15, this is an interpretation that answers why the verse in in the passage and how it connects to both chapters one and two.

I have researched other interpretations of 1 Timothy 2:15 and there are holes and problems with every other interpretation.

For example you write:

“It is not saying that child birth is the means of her salvation, but rather that it is an ordeal through which her election to the Kingdom will reamin secure.”

This is a problem in a couple of areas. The first problem is that nowhere is a woman’s salvation in question in scripture. The second problem is that “the childbirth” is a noun and not a verb so if we are going to pay attention to the inspired words, we wouldn’t get an action out of what is clearly a noun. The third problem is that the interpretation about a woman’s salvation being secure through the child birth process has nothing to do with the stopping of “a woman” from teaching. Paul specifically says “for” “and” and “but” in verses 13-15 connecting these verses all together with verses 11 & 12. You also said:

“Now Paul is not saying that women must earn God’s protection through holy living. But what else is going to say? He’s trying to quealch a movment toward immorality in the chruch, and immoral living does open us up to spirtual dangers. He’s just saying that if women stay in a close walk with the Lord they will be protected from the spirutal dangers.”

The problem with this interpretation is that it does not connect together with verse 12 and this interpretation makes the verse stand out like a sore thumb. Also Paul’s concern in 1 Timothy 1 is not immorality but false teaching and false teachers. If you say that women staying in a close walk with the Lord, they will be protected from the spiritual dangers of giving birth, this doesn’t make sense since there are no spiritual dangers in giving birth. I have also never seen any documentation that shows that giving birth was attached to a loss of salvation so this doesn’t appear plausible along with the other problems in the verse.

If you haven’t seen my DVD set yet, you will want to get a copy. The argument is set out step by step on the entire passage if you can find any holes in my argument once you have seen the entire argument, I would welcome you to show them to me.

Elizabeth,
Welcome and thank you for letting us know! It is such a shame that these kind of tactics are happening with those in an apologetics ministry who are there to uphold the truth. It appears that denial and accusation are the favorite attacks and when that doesn’t work then removal of the evidence is the next best thing. Sometimes I wonder what the game plan is. If they continue to remove everyone who disagrees with them, then it appears they are acting like a cult. This is how cults get 100% agreement among their members. They remove those who do not agree and the way they do this leaves those who are silently in disagreement afraid to speak up. This is not God’s way.

Greg,
I loved that! I’ll take that straight edge and that compass. It is God who draws the lines and the circles and we get to be the tool in his hand. If we fail to remember that (and I am reminding myself here) we fail to give him credit when he is due that credit. The wisdom of the Holy Spirit will out-think any one of the world’s smartest and most educated people. Greg, your words have a real beauty to them. Thanks again for that reminder and the elegant way that you phrased it.

Greg and Paula,
I am SO jealous! You guys are WAY above my head. Oh, boy, that was a hard one for me. Way to go Paula! And Greg, we will have to work down the list a little so I can one day qualify for an “A”. I am just glad you found your match.

Greg,
You are way smarter than I am ’cause I have no idea what you said.

Regarding being corrected here, I don’t think it should be a problem for Kamilla. The Trinity is such an important topic that it really does deserve to be discussed.

Suzanne,
That is an absolutely incredible quote. I really don’t know how any Christian could read that and not see how God has been downgraded. Thank you for giving this quote. It will come in very useful.

Thank you Suzanne for being willing to dialog with those who believe differently than you do. What a wonderful, godly attitude you have and I trust that we all can learn from you!

JayneK,

Once again, please read my statement. I was not giving out their heart motive. I do not know the reason why they did what they did. The comment that they treated her bad was connected to the fact that they did not give an answer to her Greek. I did not question the heart motive.

You are right in that they did not say anything about her being a woman. However they told Suzanne, a woman, to be quiet and I have not seen them tell a man to be quiet who disagrees with them. If you can show me where they treat men the same as women (telling them to be quiet) then I will stand corrected. Since they believe women are to be quiet and not teach men, then telling a woman to be quiet falls right in line with this. Again, if they treat men the same way, then I stand to be corrected.

“Are you referring to the comment from Tim Bayly which said:
“Is there a woman reading this blog who would be so kind as to speak to Cheryl privately, as a Titus 2 woman, and explain to her why she should be quiet and learn Scripture before trying to teach Trinitarian doctrine again, publicly?” He neither specified Kamilla nor used the word “reprimand”. If this is what you refer to then your comment was misleading.”

This is the public call to reprimand me. Mr. Bayly did not specify Kamilla’s name but she is their friend and took him up on his request. It matters not that he didn’t use the word “reprimand”. Telling someone to be quiet and that they do not know Scripture or the Trinity is certainly classified as a reprimand. My question is are you here to take Kamilla’s place and reprimand me? If you are, then please make it known so we know where you stand. If not, then that’s fine. Kamilla has stepped back and I can accept that she would not want to “teach” or “rebuke” publicly.

Christians need to treat each other with love and respect and Jesus loves his body and gave his life for the church which is his body.

JayneK,
Welcome!

“In the first case, you are making assumptions about their motives.”

Thanks for your comments. No I wasn’t questioning their motives, I said that I was shocked because they treated her poorly and had no answer to her Greek explanation. God only knows what their motive is for that. Regardless of the motive, they came across as harsh to someone who should have been treated as a sister in Christ.

“In the second, you are misrepresenting what they said, as Suzanne herself has told you. This makes a poor impression on me. (Although it does leave me favorably impressed with Suzanne.)”

I disagree with Suzanne because I did not see them tell men who disagreed that they were to be quiet. They believe that women are to be quiet in the church and as elders in the church, they silence women who disagree with them. I certainly could be wrong and they may show disrespect to men too, but I haven’t seen it. I do believe that Suzanne has been extremely respectful to the Bayly brothers and has shown a Christ-like attitude to them.

“Perhaps you meant well by setting up a public forum for discussion with Kamilla, but it was not respectful to make such a decision without consulting her.”

Why was this not respectful? Kamilla has been publicly sent to reprimand me by the Bayly brothers. If I want to have this reprimand done in public, then this should be my decision. If she was going to do it publicly without asking me first, then that would be disrespectful, however since I am the one to be corrected, I choose to have it done publicly. Since I have asked anyone who would be commenting to do it in a respectful manner and since I am the one who can edit out or block anyone from being disrespectful this is a safe environment for her – much safer than the Bayly blog is for egalitarians. This blog was set up as a place to have respectful dialog and I think that has been successfully done.

The whole issue regarding the secondary issue of women in ministry is whether we have a right to separate from our brothers and sisters in Christ over disagreement over secondary doctrines. I do not believe that we have that right since Christ told us that we are to love one another.

The issue of the Trinity is not a secondary issue and it does lend itself to a strong defense of the faith so that Jesus is given his proper place of honor and respect as an equal member of the Trinity in his will and his work. This will be a big part of the Trinity DVD that we are working on. The Trinity has come under attack in many ways and we cannot stand by and let it happen.

I hope that helps!
Cheryl

Cokhavim,
Welcome!
The seminar series had lots more jokes about the men than about the women so I guess since he is a member of that “people group” he would have a right to joke about them, eh? He is also teaching an audience that is made up of Christians and non-Christians and some of them probably would be offended to have a woman teach the men. I found his style to be rather refeshing in his honesty and I do enjoy humor a lot even when I get to laugh at myself. Some may not enjoy this kind of approach and of course we cannot please everyone.

As far as Mark being an egalitarian, he has women who are pastors in his church and he does not make the “fix it” of the problems in the marriage on the women to submit more. He makes it clear that personality types are for individuals not genders to that one who is dominant may be the woman and one who is naturally submissive may be the man. We cannot force a personality type on any one gender and I think he does a good job at explaining this.

When I was done watching the series, I became quite aware that what I had thought was patience and submissiveness for 20 years was just willingness to accept not getting what I needed. That is going to change and I can see now that this isn’t selfishness. That was a great help for me and I wish I had learned this many years ago. I am still nice and still naturally submissive but I realize that it is okay to ask for and get what I need and how to get it 🙂 My husband agrees.

Yup, we all look at things in a different way. I see things differently. What tweaked with me was that even though I have been married for almost 36 years and know my husband better than anyone, I got an understanding of WHY he does what he does. It caused us to talk about the whys not just the whats. My husband has always been my best friend since I was 15 and I do know him well, but I got a new appreciation for his thinking process and for that I am most grateful. Perhaps others might not like the information, but I LOVED it and it was good for me. I do appreciate that others may not feel like they have any needs but I sure needed to have a huge glimpse into my husband’s head and he into my heart. Praise the Lord for that and pass the tissues!

I am off again for the day. If I am slow in answering, that is why. There will be a personal update later too because much has happened in ministry regarding the persecution from the government.

Hi Justa Berean,

It is odd about what happened to the rest of your post. Your post also went into the moderation file although you shouldn’t have been there before you have posted before. I don’t know what happened. I am on the road right now and back into the office by Tuesday so no time to try to figure out what happened. If you can remember what you wanted to say, post away!

Jennifer,
The last Pastor who told me that I would go to hell if I did not repent of teaching the bible to men, will not communicate with me about the women’s issue. He now says that he believes that somewhere along the line I will repent of my sin because he does believe I am a Christian sister. I told him that I will not be repenting of teaching the bible to men because scripture does not call it a sin nor does scripture tell me to repent of this “sin”. If I am wrong, then he should take the time to correct me. Since he doesn’t know how to correct my exegesis and he cannot answer my objections to his view and the contradictions that I have pointed out regarding his complementarian belief, he has chosen to not answer me and say that we must agree to disagree. I see him as a brother in Christ, but honestly if I was in his position and really believed that I was in sin, I would work hard to convince such a person from scripture of that fact. This failure to contend for the faith appears to me to be a serious flaw in their complementarian view.

Thank you for your blessings! I do believe that my brothers and sisters in Christ who are complementarians deserve my love and respect and I do desire to treat them this way every opportunity I have whether I agree with them or not on this secondary issue.