Hannah Thomas

I suppose they could try a different approach. It does read strong I agree!

They have been rebuked in love before(CBMW), and they never acknowledged it. They won’t acknowledge this either. They do have a habit or ignoring things that don’t go along with their doctrine.

It should be interesting.

I doubt if they reworded with the spiritual pixie dust that CBMW loves to use would change anything.

I have to admit I have no clue what approach would work. How do you approach those that stonewall? I never have figured that one out personally.

Mark:
I’m not sure you understand the concept of blame shifting.

Eve told God what had happened to her. The serpent deceived her, and she ate. She told God this is what happened, and it did happen that way.

That isn’t blame shifting! Its telling it how it is.

Adam blamed God and the woman for the reason he ate.
You acknowledge the fact Eve was deceived. Are you trying to say Adam was also?

It seems to me that you are saying when you tell someone what happened – and the fact that it really did happen that way – you are ‘blameshifting’. The concept of blame shifting doesn’t work that way. Blame shifting is making excuses for what they did, and attempting to place the blame on someone else when they refuse to own their actions.

Eve did not do that – Adam did.

How can you say Adam was not cursed?

Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life. “Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you shall eat the plants of the field; (Genesis 3:17-18)

The curse of the ground was due to Adam. Therefore, the curse of the “ground” was, more likely, a curse directed against Adam for his transgression against God’s rules.

I don’t see diverting at all in what she said. I think you are missing the connection!

He knew the deception was going on, and choose to go along with the program. He didn’t step up to his responsibility – that all of us would be expected by God to take if we were in his shoes. No need for mention of ‘roles’ regarding that aspect. He knew it wasn’t right, and did it anyway. That was sin when he ignored NOT doing what he knew God would expect of ANYONE – not just the role of ‘men’. The bible states Eve was deceived, and didn’t get the same clear picture.

It was his responsibility to step up – just as anyone else in his shoes would have been expected to – and he stayed silent instead. There is no reading ‘roles’ into it at all. It’s something God would have expected in anyone placed in the same position.

I’m personally confused as to why you aren’t grasping this. His knowledge was the deception going on – why would he NOT be responsible for not stepping up to mention it or speak out against it? All mankind got dinged for it! He wasn’t removed from the garden because he didn’t do some ‘man role’ – he was removed due to sin. He saw sin and didn’t take responsibility to do something about it. Gender, roles, authority, etc don’t have anything to do with this. Its just what happened – plain and simple. Nothing else to read into on that aspect it would seem to me.

”’If Adam had a responsibility to his wife to stop the serpent decieving her then he had authority over her in that respect. Otherwise you could not say that Adam failed in his responsibility.”’

This makes no sense at all. In life when see a person being deceived by another God would wish us to point that out. We fail in our responsibility as a Christian if we sit back knowingly watching someone being deceived, and not say anything..and watch it happen. To me that is common sense, and has nothing to do with authority whatsoever.

If a women saw a man being deceived, and she sat back and went along with it she would be in sin. If she points the deception to him is she taking authority over him?

That is like saying anytime we point out wrong doing in this fashion we are taking authority over another. So if a friend was planning on doing business with an organization that you know has fraud in mine pointing that out is taking authority over them.

Pointing out the fact someone is being deceived would be a Christian responsibility, and something God would instruct us to do wouldn’t he? Its the principal of the thing, and I never did grasp how that is interrupted as authority. Its called doing what is right and proper to me.

I guess I’m a bit confused by the comment about Eve.

The bible states she was deceived, hook winked, conned, whatever you want to call it. She admitted the error or deception afterwards when addressed. Adam did not, but blameshifted over to Eve.

I guess his responsibility would have been to say something at the time when he was handed the apple, or when he knew she was being deceived. That to me would be the thing to do, but it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with headship.

I guess that comment lost me. How is that hinting at head?

My prayers are with him and his family.

Here is a quote from the church:

“Our congregational president was not trying to disrespect anyone. We have a wide number of households and a representative spiritual leadership of males who were asked to speak on behalf of their families so the meeting would not be over five hours,” said the Rev. Carl Schroeder, of St. John’s Lutheran Church, in the statement.
http://www.channel3000.com/family/22924665/detail.html

I guess 5 hours is to much time when you we look at someone’s job and future. To much time for his family that depends on the income. To much time to make sure their women are also comfortable with the decision.

Oh boy! What cowards! If they can’t stand the heat…as the saying goes.

”’They are trying hard to find a reason to hold women back in their spiritual gifts and they cannot find such an argument from the Scriptures so they fight against each other with one reason after another for why women are “forbidden” in leadership.”’

Since they can’t find it clearly in scripture maybe that is why they have the ‘doctrine’ in place. This isn’t emphasized clearly enough for us, so we we will write into the doctrine so we are covered. That way we can have our doctrinal non-negotiables. Its a means to the end. Its like they use it to cover their doubts, instead of studying more so they grasp what the word is saying.

”’Was it by accident the cunning Serpent approached Eve rather than Adam? Did not Paul say Adam himself was not deceived (he simply rebelled) but Eve indeed was?[19] Does this susceptibility presuppose some original imperfection in the female makeup? Hardly. Rather, it illustrates God never intended one size to fit all.”’

It seems their rebellion is insisting on ‘ruling over’, and we don’t need to discussion that nasty little rebellion part for Adam! No restrictions on the gender that DIDN’T get deceived, and just down right disobeyed God directly. Its an illustration of that no one size fits all. You directly sin against God, and you get the hold all the cards. You get deceived? We take things away. Do they seriously feel that is God’s nature?

Its so strange how they can’t see humans – just gender.

Kay –
I have often wondered if they have ever truly read that scripture, but I’m sure they have. I’m sure they have their own ‘twist’ to it as they do with other scripture as well.

Cheryl –
I’m glad you mentioned that 2 or more witnesses. Recently, I was reading an article about a fallen preacher that was sentenced recently. It seems his character was brought into question quite a few times, and Paige Patterson was contacted directly via the women. Each were told they needed 2 or more witnesses – per scripture – or he wouldn’t speak to them. He did in time distanced himself from the pastor, and then mentioned he didn’t have enough information to go on to act at the time. It showed – at least to me – how lowly some people truly view women. I mean a number of people approached him at different times, but because they were not together I guess it didn’t count. Talk about ignoring red flags due to being legalistic. I honestly don’t know how the man can live with himself.

I will be praying for the team and you and your husband this morning!

Waneta Dawn brought up a good point in one of her recent articles. They speak alot about how the serpent overruled the order that God placed on humans – man was created first, etc – and the serpent basically started the gender role confusion at that point.

Why would God endorse this confusion by going to Mary first to inform her of the upcoming birth? I mean wouldn’t he first wish to go to her ‘authority’ and ‘leader’ to clue him in first? Why would he do this once again at the tomb of Jesus, and appear to women and tell them to go and share the good news?

Are they assuming that God knew this confusion would always be in place, and just what went with it at that point? He figured these important times in our faith’s history needed to break his rules of order, because since we are so screwed up we couldn’t handle it
‘his way’ or something?

Remember the serpent ‘made her the spokesman and the moral guardian because that is exactly what should not have been done’ according to what they teach.

I read his second article to men.

It seems to me they clearly don’t have a clue what to do about the apathy he speaks about in his article, and that could be why they don’t answer the questions.

The model they speak of will work for people if they approach it in the proper attitude, but when apathy is used instead I don’t think they have figured out the proper approach to it yet.

When you state for women: If it is God’s design, then women need to find their joy and contentment in that design and not rebel against it.

Then mention the apathy towards God’s design towards men, and then state: “Those husbands that despise the word of God and live in willful ignorance do not only despise their own souls, but their families also.”

You need to have a different approach to that problem besides: it is God’s design, then women need to find their joy and contentment in that design and not rebel against it. Why? I would assume that the man’s apathy hinders their joy and contentment in the design, and they are clearly rebelling against it.

Banging the roles and the design is all fine and good, but where is the bang towards the apathy? When you spend to much effort towards asking a person to find their joy and contentment in their role, and basically ignoring the apathy that is clearly present in the home? It basically enables it to continue, and you can’t find to much joy in a design that is clearly not present unless you use denial.

We need to find solutions to the apathy, and I would hope that issue wouldn’t be placed squarely on feminism as well. To me at times? That is used as a scapegoat for not wanting to truly LOOK at something squarely in the eyes. Its an easy out, and blame shifting isn’t going to help one darn bit.

I truly have to wonder if these men understand how stifling their instructions sound to others.

I’m sure those that believe all this stuff truly don’t give that a thought, but those with a open heart have to feel it. It seems to me these men want to gobble up all the Glory for God to give to him personally. I mean women are for their ‘glory’, and men are for God’s ‘glory’. How much easier do the men have it if that was so?

Men (or humans in general) do not have a heart like God, and at times can never be satisfied with what they have. They may not even see the honor they are being handed, and those acts out of love given to them. God sees this, and yet according to their definition women need to be satisfied with what is given to them. They don’t see the women being robbed of anything.

Cheryl: I can certainly understand your husband’s position if he places as much effort as you do within his ministry. I’m sure his beam of pride towards his wife’s work is enough for him right now. lol I’m sure he has beam of pride going in the other direction as well (you)!

Did anyone read any of the responses this man got to his story?

Some of them? All I can say is just WOW! I loved his response!

You have to earn the right to practice your complementarian theology!

”’He will always strive for the ideal of agreement.”’

This scripture doesn’t say strive for the ideal in his sense of this. The bible is very clear, and he has no trump card of the ‘last word’ in this circumstance. If they attempted to use any common sense at all they would realize WHY that would be!

I’m sorry but the way they setup this ‘leadership’ and ‘authority’ situation for themselves – it makes it very hard to deal with those that refuse to treat the family as they claim they should. The fact that they truly never spend in real time that reality of life for some? To me is shows they don’t know what to do about it. I have seen them touch on the subject of cruel authority within the home, and it was always followed by a BUT to the woman. They never grasped the fact that when you do that? You are handing the cruel man a trump card he will use next time. Yes dear but remember the BUT!

There is reasons for the ‘no authority’ in this sense within the intimate times. If you use your authority you create fear, intimidation, violation, among other things. You don’t ‘strive’ for agreement. The bible is clear – you get one or you don’t go there. Its like they don’t think these things all the though! I mean HELLO! Please attach some common sense to this! Maybe God had a reason for what he said?!

I will use a saying I heard years ago, “Gag me with a spoon!”

”’I think “Christ has ALL the authority…” is on the right track. The key then is to get them to understand that in this respect, Christ can not be compared to any man, be it a husband or a church leader or the pope or anyone. This “realm” if you will, of Christ’s authority, lies outside teh human realms in which Jesus models husband/head. Does that make sense?”’

That makes good sense to me gengwall. We can’t compare ourselves as humans to the son of God. Everyone should strive to be more like him, but to say we can take the authority he has and Lord it over others at the same time? I don’t know about you all, but I see Christ earning that position in the eyes of those that followed him on earth and saw his miracles and were blessed with his words and presence. He showed them WHY we should be believe, and left us with a yearn for more. He spoke about faith, obedience, and his Father in Heaven. He then left us with a choice to accept him or not. (I realize my visual is simplistic) The two types of authority they speak about are not comparable at all. Jesus has loads of extras on his side (lol) that they will never have, and the leaders of the church, home, etc have fallen on their face to many times without the humble nature that Christ had. We are human afterall right? To me that is huge ingredient they seem to overlook – well one ingredient.

Jesus won people over and earned their respect, honor, faith, etc. He stated he did these things for his Father, and not because he was born male. It seems due to their gender they expect it, and let you know GOD told them they could. Not the same nature to me!

Why they don’t see the difference? I have no clue. True leaders in the christian home doesn’t need to proclaim all they proclaim. They don’t due to the humble nature that they learned from their example in Christ our Lord. Why they miss that connection is beyond me. Why they cant see why others would claim they are attempting to grab power instead of earning the honor, respect, and faith in them as a good man is beyond me.

One aspect you WORK towards, and the other? WELL – not so much!

Sigh. They take a sinner (man) and ask him to play Jesus (sinless). How can a sinner play the part of sinless? Sinners SIN! Yikes I wouldn’t even want to near that – pretty close to tromping on pride and arrogance!

Its like they are saying man is a substitute teacher for Jesus since he isn’t here in the earthy form anymore. They want the authority, respect, and position of the teacher that out with God right now (instead of out sick like teachers are). You need to treat me as you would treat him if he was here in the earthy form.

“And men who lust for power and authority continue to dishonor women and deal treacherously with them.”

This is what feminism saids, not what complementarians say. It is disappointing to hear these type of things. If egals think that comps are lusting for power and manipulate and downgrade women it will be very difficult to ever dialogue effectively on these issues.
—————————————————–

Mark feminism isn’t the only camp that feel this way at times.

There are men all over this earth that fill that sentence quite nicely, and I’m sure you could even think of some.

Its hardly a ‘feminism’ belief alone, and no offense comps do love to say that word for some reason. I realize its a hot button word for alot of people, but it can be used to divert a sense of truth from some men as well. You need to keep that mind the bible does speak of man’s thirst for power, and YES it does happen within the church as well. I have wonder what phrases they coined at that time to divert away from the subject.

Does that mean EVERY man that is comp follows this for his own personal power? No.

When I read some the responses from comps with it comes to a ministry I deal with personally? I seriously have to wonder if some parts are pushed a tad to much (to put it nicely), and YES that is what you end up with! I also find in alot of places that is very hard to accept. The ‘f’ word is normally thrown out there as well when it is pointed out. Its a signal to me they have ended the discussion, and they won’t even go near the spiritual abusive ways the men have used scripture to harm their family.

I grew up with a comp background. When it was time that my grandparents needed to be removed from their home due to Alzheimer, etc. my mother asked for help from their church (and her’s when she was a child). My grandfather due to his condition and other factors was pretty darn scary, and hard to manage. He was a danger to himself and everyone else. Mom was afraid of him at that point, and state was very individualistic. They told her she had to remove him on her own, and that is WHY she asked the church for help. They basically refused due to not wishing overstep his leadership.etc. It totally threw me for a loop! He and his wife were sick, and needed help. They KNEW because they couldn’t control his behavior at church, and stopped picking them up on Sundays for church after 65 years. They blew us off until it came time they were afraid he might die in his home, and pressured the state to step in. Sounds like from what we heard pretty much threaten them if they didn’t remove them the church would do something. It was to late at that point, and he died within a couple of days.

lol you don’t want to call that a type of oppression that’s fine! I will call it a warped sense of ‘leadership’ along with other things. My grandmother suffered as well, and this wasn’t some fly by night church. It was big, powerful, and in a large city. One that popular comp speakers would love to visit and preach at.

That man wasn’t in the position to speak of his role, because his mind was GONE! My grandmother was at a HUGE risk of being hurt very badly, and they wanted to STILL respect his role of HEAD. You have to admit that is a bit ugly don’t you think?

When you know things like that happen you have to expect a bit backlash, and throwing the F bomb out to deal with it looks like diversion. Seriously if you want to place an end to these ‘myths’ than deal with them head on, and don’t go around the subject like that!

You are brave and I appreciate your presence here personally.

I have an uncle that was a comp missionary, and I have to tell you even HE thought what happened to us was awful. When you have those that PUSH those roles a bit to hard? To me it leaves common sense behind with alot of basic human happens in people’s lifes. I’m thankful they coerced the state to remove him before he did die in the home, but at times I truly resent that they abandon him in his true time of need. Roles wasn’t needed – common sense and compassion was.

Okay – I’m shutting up now. lol sorry!

We use the ‘man was created first so (fill in the blank)’, and yet when women are asked to go and spread the good news first? It doesn’t count for much. The order in which things happen is important in Genesis, and yet not important to signal anything later on?

what is a salvic issue?

”The damage this one man has done to the SBC is beyond repair. The downfall of a once great denomination continues. I keep wondering when women in the SBC say enough is enough.”

Personally Tom? I think it would be more highly effective if more men stood up, and said ‘enough is enough’.

”Apparently there is a groundswell movement to restrict women to certain “roles” and there is even a teaching that unless women stay in their God-ordained “roles” as wives and mothers and refrain from teaching men, God will remove His hand of protection from them and allow them to be deceived by satan.”

It amazing to me that they worry about the women so much that they completely miss the fact that the bible normally speaks from both sides of the equation.

I will never forget the day that Uncle – a Baptist missionary – saw the split of the SBC over the roles of women with such disgust. He looked at us and told us, “If I had known they were going down this road with their attitudes towards women? I wouldn’t have chosen to be a Baptist when I decided to do my work for the Lord.”

It seems that statement from Adam keeps resurfacing! If they feel when they can’t get people to ‘do church right’ its that ‘woman you gave me! She won’t let me ‘rule over her’ they way you had in mind!”

Its such a blessing to see men like my Uncle here, and in other places in my life. I know there are others within the Baptist church that don’t have this view of scripture, and I hope they rise up against this teaching. lol We know they will use the women to help them as well! Heck they will support them as well when the woman wants to lead in some fashion as well. Its okay to see gifts and not just gender.

I seriously have to wonder if this is all based within insecurity at its very core. They are being deceived that their version of roles that has allowed them to Lord it over people is good.

Mara: I heard that story told one time to show that how a ‘male’ child was spared (Isaac) when he was to be killed, and the sacrifice was stopped. They compared it to the story of this poor girl, and I thought WOW people will twist all kinds of things to show their points.

The bible to me seems quite clear there is no favored gender no matter how much people wish to attempt to prove it. People are the ones that are sexist, and it sad that they don’t see it at times.

What are you thoughts on the story of Jephthah, and the sacrifice of his daughter?

I also have no issue with what some coin soft comps either.

I was reading an article today:
http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4535&Itemid=5

I found the sermon that it was referring to, and uploaded it to internet archive like I do most things before they disappear for good! lol! http://www.archive.org/details/WorseCaseScenarios

This man took so much time trying to tip toe though the tulips regarding the message he was trying to get across. He claims he was talking about ‘worse case scenarios’ as far as marriage goes. How the abuse wouldn’t be the worse part, but the part about the spouse refusing to reconcile and work on issues as the worse part. That’s fine – okay then. He feels if all help from the church falls on deaf ears with him? He feels she needs to live the Sarah Principal – the scripture you mentioned earlier. He also feels that you need to make sure your sin didn’t influence his. YET before you claim yourself innocent he wants to remind his audience that has never never met a victimized spouse who responded perfectly to their spouse’s sin against them. In other words – look for your sin because its IN THERE somewhere!

Sigh. He is right I have never met a perfect person either here on earth, and I doubt anyone will any time SOON! When you play these games to avoid acknowledging that abuse exists? Its damaging to the people involved. When you wish to use scripture as your spiritual pixie dust to wave around, and avoid it all together? Do they not realize they are in sin as well? I mean with their advice they have handed her burden back to her, because it was to much for them to handle. YOU deal with it, and learn to suffer as Christ did! He never told you that your life will be pain free after all!

His whole production was ‘take the plank out of your eye’, and hinted around about submission in ways as well. He gave this huge case for the plank. How silly it looks for one with a huge plank to go to someone with a speck and say something. So now the plank is her influence to make him sin, and his speck is the abuse?

Its downright exhausting at times to listen to these games they play with scripture, and NOT deal with, expose, and help the oppressed if the oppressor refuses any help at all. Tell her to live the Sarah principal, because we did our part – WE ARE DONE!

Its like where is the backbone in these men that preach this junk? Did it break during the acrobats they played during the sermons? Ugh.

I wish to give a hardy AMEN!

They have registries for sexual predator’s. They need to make a list for ‘enables domestic violence’ so families know which church to stay clear of.

I speak with enough of these women that come from this background, and I don’t think people realize how much damage is done … and how long it takes to deprogram them.

I seriously have to wonder when I read these things how people like PP react to things that small children do when they haven’t grasped the role deal in their families yet.

I have this picture of my young toddler son that followed his big sister everywhere. She was playing with her little friend in her room one day, and he was ‘allowed’ to play with them (I know SHOCK!). The girls came down to show us a fashion show of all these old ladies clothes we got in a garage sale. Next thing we know our son walks in after they dressed him up with her stockings and tutu…lol! ALL PINK! He loved it (was 2 yrs old at the time), and was jumping around like a ballerina!

Can you imagine the Patterson’s having a heart attack on the spot?

I mean I love to remind my son of that story, and he will be 13 next month. He grins at me, sighs…and does the traditional, “MOMMMMMM! REALLY!” With people that the PP’s? All I can picture is a great THUMP on the floor!

Sigh. It just seems like crazymaking to me.

I mean it seems that women are so deceived, and that is the reason we don’t understand the teachings! We have no chance of understanding it. We are deceived by the very nature of JUST being.

WOW and it all started by not asking permission to talk to a snake. If she just asked ‘permission’ to speak maybe we would have had a chance! I mean he would have said NO right?

Ugh.

gengwall:

You asked:

Hannah – I would love to understand your definition of “role” and how that relates to the activities of daily living that a husband and wife engage in. I see no evidence in scripture that either spouse has a unilateral “job” as it relates to the operation of the family. I therefore assume you are referring to roles on a more spiritual plane, although again, I can’t quite put my finger on any passage of scripture which outlines such a division of labor within the marriage. I am quite curious to know what my “role” is as a husband and, more importantly, what practical activities I need to unilaterally engage in to know I am fulfilling that “role”.
—————
I think you are getting a response from Piper’s Representative (cut and paste), and what I said mixed up. I was told I didn’t understand ROLES, and when I wrote my piece. It had nothing to do with roles. lol I’m not sure where the roles part even came up to be honest! I have to be honest I think it was a diversion on the part of the gentleman that came.

I think I was being told I was attacking the character of Piper, and didn’t know enough about him before I spoke out against what he had to say on the matter. He never directly told me what it was that I said that he had a problem with. He told me instead he was nice and Godly man, and pretty much I shouldn’t be saying these things.

I had to giggle a bit to be honest. It sounded like an ’emotional’ answer, and I thought women only used those tools. To me there was nothing of substance within his reply. What I wrote had nothing do with roles. It had to do with the damage the children would have to endure as well if people followed his advice. It makes me question what type of response his church would have to the abusers as well. If they can’t remind the women that she needs to get to safety – which I honestly wonder if he feels she has the right to – what kind of response would he give to an abuser anyway…ya know? I mean you don’t wait until its over, and go and get the church. You find a way to safety when you can.