Jennifer

Amen, Anita! Beautifully said.

Thank you pinklight 🙂 So glad you have the wisdom to laugh at that junk.

Oh yeah, and one of the men on that foolish man’s comment section said that most men will never experience a truly submissive wife. Maybe they’ll find groups to help their grieving process?..

Oh yes, I just came across a man who was left by his wife a while ago and has since spent his time foolishly trying to make women sound like the selfish sex. He even said a son must separate from his mother in order to leave the world of “self-centeredness and selfishness”, and this is why men are told to man up, not “chick up”, because maleness is apparently superior. He’s of the hilariously ignorant mindset that since Adam sinned deliberately and Eve didn’t, Eve is worse! LOL He says woman (from Eve and on) decides that she will decide what’s right and wrong as it suits her, that this was Eve’s specific sin and now it’s all women’s, and this is why leadership was given to men, not women, because men must fight the feminine desire to make things center around the self. Women don’t see leadership the same, the little wolf said. Women see it as power, while men see it as great responsibility and sacrifice.

That’s right. One man says this constantly, because he doesn’t trust his own wife, and only hangs around sites where male-first thinking is promoted. He only quotes the Bible when wishing to put women second.

LOL Those comps do have a twisted sense of humor.

And I was just spammed, lol. It’s an honor, pinklight. The two of them will uphold BDSM clubs sooner than they’ll uphold any kind of equality. The woman there speaks of how freeing it is to have someone else make all the decisions and take responsibility; I don’t recall seeing that as men’s jobs. Cheryl’s right, they judge the success of relationships by sex and shock value, not Biblical doctrine. One woman, “Suz”, amusingly accused me of telling men to hand over their manhood; I’ve found it’s definitely a site to shake the dust from.

“The husband is the LORD of the family as Christ is LORD of the church”

This claim comes from a person called “Deti”, who seems to go off and on Christianity in general; he doesn’t often refer to it unless he’s looking for support for a woman’s submission. He also claims that it’s deliberate in the Bible for a woman’s submission to be mentioned first, because it’s more important than a husband’s job to love. He says we don’t submit because our husbands deserve it, which is true, but then lists all the ways a husband pours himself out for his wife, with a humiliating job and soul-breaking work if need be, which sounds a lot like he wants to justify the position of one-sided power he describes. Sadly, he feels he cannot properly love his own wife, because he says she responds better to dominating behavior and teasing comments. He needs prayers, because his wife has basically warped his entire view of men and women.

She’d say it’s just the opposite, that her man treasures her and listens to her and shows he cares with his headship. The guy in question amusingly said I’m not happy, like so many “leaderless women”. I should have told him God’s my leader; I aim more highly than that. I did tell him I’m only unhappy when my fearful tendency to think insanity online might be real flares up.

The author is a woman, actually, but it’s generally co-authored by a man and woman.

Cheryl, there’s a couple of complimentarians I know of who are, to put it mildly, very strange; they claim Catholicism, but since their engagement they blog mostly about sex, sexual desire and how heavy male dominance turns them on. They made this humorous post: and actually asked where your sexuality is, because apparently you forgot to plaster it all over the screen in your DVD about women. Clearly many prayers for them are needed.

[edit: blog author removed link]

Wow, that’s incredible! Andrew, it’s an honor to meet you here. I can’t wait to read your book!

Friends, I need prayers please; I’ve become snagged on blog posts elsewhere, where secular men are sharing advice on how to be dominant in relationships. One man, who agrees with this and has been mistreated by many women, posted a comment saying, Women, we love you and cherish you. You need to return this to us.” Know what happened? About four or five men answered him, saying, “Are you kidding? Those words are REPULSIVE to women! We can never say we need them, they hate weakness and vulnerability.” It was heart-wrenching to see this, to put it lightly; these men, and many women, are so terrified of commitment in our lost, tragic times. We’re scared of submission, scared of vulnerability. These men swarmed up, referincing a horrible guy who gives men advice to keep women in doubt, even jealous, of their feelings so they’ll never be bored and stray. God help us, please heal these men.

So go ahead and tell us Cheryl: is this Doug Wilson or Doug Phillips interviewing Paul? 😛

“I am sorry ladies, but there is nothing anyone can ever say to me to believe other than what God’s word says and what I have experienced”

We are going by what the Bible says, and what we’ve experienced.

“I’m not sure where the term co-leader came from, but I can not find it in my bible”

I can’t find the word subordinate or follower, interestingly.

I’m getting very tired of childish implications that we’ll lose our souls if we don’t buy a certain way.

“God created Eve to subservant to Adam, meaning she was to submit herself to him, which means that whatever he requested not demanded of her she was to obey”

Um, wrong. Where’s the Scripture that says that?

He was subject to God as a MAN, NOT in heaven. This belief didn’t even come about until recently.

Indeed, men’s itching ears make them want to be masters of women. And you stated a deadly lie, God is NOT boss of Christ; another twist made of doctrine to support the idea of human spiritual hierarchy. Paul stated the fact that women have two heads, Christ and their husbands. I believe the term “head” refers to a source of life and protection for a woman from her husband, but others here will givr you more details.

Actually no, the Bible does not say man is head of the house, and we don’t believe being head of his wife means being “boss”.

No problem at all. Thank you for the offer, but I’m happily caught up 🙂 I’ll probably be reading the first several comments later today. After reading some of your words, I just wanted to double-check your stance; the first thing I saw were you and Cheryl dissecting Scriptural details and the thought, “Oh no, it’s another difficult comp” ran through my head. After reading some of the details, though, I was greatly relieved to see that you were actually presenting what looked like an air-tight case for the egal position; just wanted to make sure 🙂 Many thanks for presenting this passage so painstakingly. Your conclusions are greatly encouraging!

Geesh, it wasn’t in doubt. I arrived here at the end of numerous comments, saw that you and Cheryl were disagreeing about the semantics of something and took a while to decipher it. I just wanted confirmation since you were using details and words about the original language I’ve never heard before. Thanks.

I’m simply trying to confirm where you stand. Are you an egal who believes women are not forbidden to teach men?

So, Gengwall: basically, you’re an egal who believes that Paul was basically saying that all women should not practice false teaching/dominion over their husbands?

TL, you’re brilliant!

So true, Mara. Patriarchals think they get to model God, as someone else said, but that women should only model Christ…when He was broken on the cross.

Cheryl, to answer your much earlier brilliant observation, “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?”

You pretty much answered this question with the last sentence and the several sentences afterward: the most extreme women do wish to appear “submissive”, like Jennie Chancey and the unpleasant Carmon Friedrich. Kamilla’s another breed, though, in the sense that I’m not sure she actually believes she needs authority over her, nor does she seem to care to give any impression that she’s submissive in spirit the way the other women do. I think instead she’s one of those who blatantly sees the spoils evident in patriarchy: while it clearly isn’t beneficial to women, certain members of it do spoil, coddle and flatter their females, while others enjoy letting their truly snappish wives butter their egos in public and snarl at women who stand taller than they and their husbands. Kamilla has no husband, but she has tapped into the Baylys’ agenda and is clearly their most treasured female. I’m guessing this is both because she flatters them most and mirrors their unkind spirit best, rather like the bulldog or small terrier adorned in the same outfit as its master. And as we know, with certain canines, the master enjoys giving the dog a long leash so it may snarl at others and even lets it run loose occasionally, to show its meagerly sized but razor teeth to anyone the master doesn’t like.

I’d never noticed before that the Baylys tire of some of their prized females (and yes, I’m using animal-like terms here deliberately, as these people remind me especially of the harsh patriarchal baboons and their harems I just saw on the Discovery channel). Just as well; perhaps they’ll lose more followers this way. The observation skills and analysis I see on this site have been brilliant.

Indeed, thank God for folks like you and others here! 🙂

I’m so grateful for all these blogs, for Kathryn Joyce’s book “Quiverfull” which totally exposes the Vision Forum cult-think, and for Karen’s podcasts on patriocentricity, several of which I’m getting on CD 🙂 I do wish more in Grudem’s own camp would call him out.

Thanks, Cheryl. Indeed, the people who don’t see this in the Baylys don’t wish to, but they truly should have MORE challengers. If they do, though, I guess they don’t last long on their own blog. I’m so glad to find them elsewhere, like here! What really amazes me is how unapologetically rude some people are to you personally.

Speaking of nice comps, I recently found a book of original psalms by the Baylys’ late father, Joe Bayly, called “Psalms of my Life”. It looks beautiful and I plan to buy it. Their father seems to have been looked up to as a great writer and good man, so it amazes me how his sons came to be so proud. I hope that’s not unkind of me to say, but the one persistent attitude on their blog is pride that I’ve seen again and again.

Btw, if I haven’t told you already, BOTH your DVDs about the Trinity and women in ministry were amazing blessings to me. They were so thoroughly researched and artfully made! Grudem’s words about God being subordinate as helper are the most shocking thing of all: how is he still credited as a teacher?? Many of his wolf supporters try to tear down critics of his book on Amazon.com too; is the world flat? I’m so glad you addressed them in the Trinity DVD. And to think: was this blog post where you first heard about his claims thus? (I can’t recall who brought it up).

Ok, maybe I’m slow but I was just re-reading the top of this post and only now saw Kamilla’s email response to you. My gosh… The mannerism of these people never ceases to shock. The fear of easily-defeated women like Kamilla is all too clear, almost stunningly so at first. It rather makes sense to me that the Baylys’ blog background is black and this one’s white; seems to illustrate the fact that truth is shown here in the open, while the extremely aggressive patriarchals prefer to stay in their shadowed domains where the seeds of their doctrines better flourish.

And I’m not saying this about all comps either! (Or even most regular comps, which the Baylys and Kamilla are not). Some are awesome Christians.

No probem. I’ve seen her at her nicest and this unstable aggression that comes and goes is very troubling.

Indeed, Cheryl. Couldn’t be that she knew you were already educated in a superior fashion, could it? 🙂
I still pray for the constant kindness and patience you have for others.

Just so you know, Cheryl, Mrs. Webfoot is Donna L. Carlaw. I trust you remember her from last year, was it? Just for future reference, in case she decides to visit again. I’m glad her comment was short and sweet.