P41 Mustang,
I’m just curious, how did you arrive at the moniker you post with? It was the “P51” mustangs that escorted their sister ships the B-17’s over Hitler’s Germany; and they were charged with shooting down the Focke-Wulf’s, not their sister ships. By the way, I’m a man who’s rejected a patriarchal model of Holy Writ as untenable by reason , common sense, and objective scholarship.

The evidence continues to mount that God is also a rational being, and never intended the church to have a unilateral hierarchy based on gender, doesn’t it?

Paula, That’s exactly what I meant by the crack I made in post #24
about the lizards caught between a man-hole cover and heavy traffic.

The metaphor is typically Southern Californian; you have two choices, a mainline denomination that is egal, but inching toward apostasy, or you can get flattened by a patriarchal authoritarian regime in one of the mega-fellowships.

Take your pick.

Reading Grudem is like driving on a Mobius strip; before too long, ya can’t tell which end is up…

21 by Lin:

Yes I know what you mean about the mainline churches who are egalitarian but tend toward liberal theology, contemplative prayer, and other new age trappings, I am in one at present. (ELCA Lutheran).

Those of us there, who are of like persuasion (Bible-believing), keep our mouths shut too and don’t rock the row boat. We are a support group for each other in our adult Sunday School class.

Our only other alternatives are the mega congregations like Calvary Chapel and Evangelical Free, which tend toward hyper-fundamentalism.

Most of us have been there, done that, and don’t wanna go back.
We’re kinda like lizards caught between a man-hole cover and heavy traffic.

It’s really too bad when one ideological faction of Christendom cannot just amicably and realistically concede that outside of the essentials (Athanasian Creed), not all Christians agree upon what the Scriptures teach.

I for one am more amazed at what the Bible does not say as opposed to what it does say concerning faith in Christ and Christ alone.

History does repeat itself in cycles though, and I do see the complementarians breaking off and creating a kind of eastern empire, much in the same way Constantine did in the 4th century.

Cheryl,
Guys like Matt Slick do not repent of anything.
They are like the Talmudic Rabbis who know, and can pronounce on any question that might arise from scripture, right down to the last cumin and anise seed. The likelihood is high that in addition to thanking God that he is pre-destined to watch unregenerate wretches like me burn in hell, he probably thanks Him that he wasn’t born a woman too.

Cheryl,

I am in complete agreement. That’s why it’s crucial to keep blogging on these issues and exposing them for what they are, flat-out false teaching and tyranny over women who exist in the shadow-worlds of these belief systems.

What has to be remembered about most of the stuff that comes out of the CBMW site is that it is just re-packaged goods from John Winthrop’s Puritan theocracy in 17th century Massachusetts. Gone are the whipping post, the ducking stool, and the stocks; but the basic doctrine of male federal headship is still intact.

Even though Lepine tries to couch it in kinder and gentler 21st century terminology, the doctrine of absolute patriarchy is still the framework of his writings. Here’s a quote from John Winthrop’s speech to the Massachusetts General Court in 1645 on natural and civil liberty:

“Such is the liberty of the church under the authority of Christ, her king and husband; his yoke is so easy and sweet to her as a bride’s ornaments; and if through frowardness or wantonness, etc., she shake it off, at any time, she is at no rest in her spirit, until she take it up again; and whether her lord smiles upon her, and embraceth her in his arms, or whether he frowns, or rebukes, or smites her, she apprehends the sweetness of his love in all, and is refreshed, supported, and instructed by every such dispensation of his authority over her.”

Not much has changed in the 300 and some years from Puritan Massachusetts and CBMW. A husband is still priest, prophet, king, and federal head in authority over his wife. WAIT!!! they now concede that it’s no longer ok to “slap the little woman around”…

I’m a Vietnam era vet who became involved with the Calvary Chapel movement back in the early 70’s. Back then as now, they taught and continue to teach, that certain offices in corporate church settings are exclusively for men, and that women are forbidden to execute them.
For a long while, I too believed that this is just the way it is; no arguments, no exceptions, no wiggle room, Paul the apostle said it, it’s God’s inerrant word, and that settles it. My own journey from cookie-cutter fundamentalism is too long to relate here, but there came a point at which I could no longer reconcile the over-arching message of scripture with the doctrine of only partial enfranchisement for women.
If there are any of you who have chanced upon this blog-site out of curiosity, divine intervention, or what have you, give Cheryl’s WIM dvd’s a fair hearing, think critically and decide for yourselves whether or not God has a unique law prohibiting Godly women from preaching and teaching sound doctrine. Above all, search the scriptures yourselves and decide for yourselves what God’s word says and does not say.

Not to be talked to huh? Then who am I sposeta’ talk to? Is it all by formula and someone’s spin on what constitutes orthodoxy? All I know for certain is that Jesus bled and died for me and that when he did, the curtain separating me from himself was torn from top to bottom. With all due respect to Dr. Ware and his hard earned credentials, he didn’t bleed and die for me, but the one who did bleed and die for me will in no wise cast me out when I call upon him.

Good grief Cheryl and teknomom! How do these guys come up with
this stuff??? It’s almost as if they’re repeating the abuses of the Papal hierarchy, and yet still wanna claim to be the paragons of protestantism??? Oh well, like they say these days, go figure!

I think a lot of this stuff goes back to the old “descriptive” vs “prescriptive” arguments. Wayne Grudem, who is known in some circles as “the godfather of complementarianism”, maintains that since Huldah spoke to just five guys and that it was done privately and not to Israel as a corporate assembly, it was ok in God’s eyes. Grudem also maintains that there is a sharp distinction between the role of prophesying and teaching among God’s people both in the Old and New Testaments. Sharp distinction? How so? As Kevin Giles has pointed out, both scripture and human utterances when under the Holy Spirit are the very words of God, and to elevate one above the other is special pleading. Let’s get down to brass tacks here. What this whole controversy revolves around is Paul’s famous first letter to his protege (Timothy) in Ephesus. If it is a descriptive refutation of false teaching, that is, the Apostle’s response to a specific situation in the Ephesian congregation, then we can move on with confidence that the reformation did not end with Luther and Calvin, and that it is ongoing, with us as an organic unity. To say that it is prescriptive (1 Tim. 2:12) is to say that Paul is now our new Moses, our new law-giver, and that Christ’s efficacy at the cross is only partially fulfilled for women, and that they are only partially enfranchised in the Body of Christ. I for one, flatly reject the prescriptive interpretation.

Excellent entries Cheryl. As always, you focus on what scripture says and does not say with regards to women’s roles in the churches. I look forward to your DVD series on the trinity. What does the scripture say? What does it not say?

Teknomom, I could never understand it either. Why try and model something on a fallen earthly order that has failed the test of time? You’re observation is crack-on, the last thing we need is another “leader” to blaze our trail for us. God knows we’ve had too many of them already. Kings, governments, clerics and oligarchies all start out with the best of intentions, but they all slide into eventual corruption. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Jesus said “the kingdom of Heaven is within you…”

Michael, Good post brother. Here’s the thing in a nutshell. Complementarians now know that unless they can tie Paul’s supposed prohibitions against all women teaching and holding positions of leadership in the churches to a linear hierarchy established at creation and one present in the Trinity, their whole thesis of non-negotiable gender-roles will fail just as any other non-essential belief system in the church universal. If they can tie the universal subordination of women to what they see as a linear hierarchy in the Trinity, they will have assigned an implied creedal weight to it and made it an essential doctrine. Anybody who doesn’t buy into it or who dissents from it in speech or in print will be considered non-Christian, infidel, heretic and unsaved.

In reference to post # 14 by Charis, Good object lessons from the book of Esther to be sure. In general though complementarians will just brush these instances aside as incidental and not pertinent to the issue of patriarchal authority. They will agree that they’re part of the inerrant and inspired text, but they will vehemently deny that they have anything to do with what they believe is God’s established patriarchal order from Eden.

Hey Everybody, I just read a critique of Kevin Giles’ book over at CBMW and they claim up and down that eternal subordination is what the church fathers taught and the church universal has believed all along until we radical egalitarian feminists came on the scene. Hmmmmmm…. funny, but when I read the Athanasian Creed in my old Lutheran hymnal (Concordia 1941) it says no such thing. Regardless of what some guys in the early centuries of the church said or didn’t say, what does the Bible say or not say on the subject?

I agree Don, It’s too bad but some will find mariololtry under every rock. I for one find the Magnificat one of the most ineffable beauties ever written. I think though that the tendency to diminish the importance of Jesus’ mother is more of an American protestant thing. Probably inherited from Winthrop & Co. (1600’s New England) Bach wrote some of his most beautiful stuff in honor of Mary.

Consider also the biological machinery of human reproductive systems. Sperm is cheap whereas eggs are dear. How is this significant? Does it have any bearing on the promise of Messiah to Eve? We know that Jesus’ blood was not tainted by human male DNA at conception. Is there a connection to what transpired at the beginning other than the patently obvious?

Excellent Observation Cheryl, I had always wondered why, as claimed by the scholars at CBMW, that if male federal headship was established by God prior to the fall, the woman is not commanded to leave her parents and cleave unto the man? As the text reads it’s the other way around. The text does not support a linear male hierarchy at all. If anything the text shows that this original beauty is based on matrilineal kinship. And incidentally? Despite all their Talmudic posturing (Rabinical tradition) about the filthiness of women, whether one is a Jew or not is determined by whether or not one’s mother’s bloodlines are Jewish.

Cheryl, I did post one response to John Piper’s condemnation of women serving in combat. It went something like this: “Hmmm… I’m wondering how the Russian women who fought the Wehrmacht and the SS in the Ukraine would receive a cleric who told them that it’s against God’s law for them to do so…” And yes throughout most of their stuff over there I’ve noticed the arithmetic they use to make the secondary issue of gender a mandatory part of the Gospel.

Hey All, I just went over to the CBMW site and I’m wondering if anybody else has noticed how inaccessible they are? I mean here at WIM we have an open forum town square type of environment in which anybody is welcome to post and be heard so long as it’s civil and does not violate the bounds of accepted propriety. I’m noticing quite the opposite at CBMW. It’s almost as if John Winthrop’s ideal is still the norm over there. There is only what the clerical leadership says there will be. No discussion, no dissent, no exceptions unless of course you echo the ideology of the clerical oligarchy. No wonder Roger Williams left Massachusetts and founded Rhode Island! By the way, I love this little Rhode Island we have here!

Amen Cheryl !!! As I sat here reading, I could hear Beethoven’s “Ode To Joy” playing in my head and in my heart. LET FREEDOM RING !

Good post teknomom! I agree that we’ll never be able to convince the hard-core old guard of protestant fundamentalism to admit women to the boyz-club. They’re too far gone into their own traditions and regulations although they insist that those regulations are God’s own. What we can do is as you say, hold the beacon of freedom aloft much as Lady Liberty does in New York harbor. Providence willing, there will be some gifted women freed from tyranny enough to step out from under the yoke and not be afraid that they’re sinning against their Creator for exercising what they’ve been endowed with.

Cheryl, Post nr. 37 of yours is wonderful news! Even though Calvary Chapel tends to be a gender-based hierarchy to a man in the upper echelons of their leadership, the mere fact that a Messianic Rabbi wants to spread ideas of liberty and emancipation among them is very telling. It means that the spark of freedom which burns in every human breast will not be extinguished by tyrants.

Cheryl, Count me in

Cheryl and Kerryn, I think that they (church governments) don’t “get it” because they feel that men (anthropos) must be governed. They must be led by their betters. If men must be governed, then it follows that all aspects of church life must be regulated, even the exercise of spiritual gifts. In effect they are following the world’s model of authority. Never mind that it’s God who gives the gifts in the first place, we’ll (church leadership) decide how they’ll be used.

Cheryl, Good illustration in post nr. 9 above. Another simple example would be the case in which one of the doors in the Sunday School wing of the building is squeaking terribly. Should we hire a contractor at God knows how much per/hr. to fix it, or does somebody simply take it upon him or herself to tap down the offending hinge pin and give it a couple-o’-squirts of dura-lube? Your point is well taken that one’s gifting in the church is not the province of any ecclesiastical (man-made) body. And as you’ve made it abundantly clear, these gifts when bestowed by God himself are not to be hindered by the whim and fancy of men.

Justa Berean, If you remember in the film: The Fellowship of the Ring , Galadriel’s opening narration (played by Cate Blanchett) tells us that power is what the race of men (anthropos) desire most of all. We are all infected with it to one degree or another. Fortunately though, most of us have learned to live and let live to where the infection does not become pathological.