Kay

“It has served as a “standard” by which people could evaluate their faithfulness to the biblical teaching on this matter…
If CBMW had not published the Danvers Statement in 1988, there would be not one “complementarian position” in the evangelical world, but hundreds, resulting in much confusion,”

Can anyone say, “Placing ourselves up on a pedestal”?

Can we ask: Why, if not for CBMW, would there be “hundreds” of comp. positions?

“CBMW may say that women have equal value and worth in the eyes of God, however in reality their actions disprove this claim as they believe that God cannot communicate insights from his Word directly to a woman without going through a man.”

If THAT is not man-centered religion, then what is?

“Unfortunately it appears that John Starke will not be answering the questions we have. I have tried to engage CBMW since 2006 and silence is the only answer of preference for them.”

‘Hit and run’ does seem to be their usual modus operandi. (Mark the Aussie comp. excepted)

It doesn’t even make sense that they will not try to help us see the error of our way…unless, of course, they have no answers to back their teaching. 😉

Starke: “For Baxter, the husband is responsible for the normal teaching and instruction in godliness.”

What are we then to make of Timothy, whose father was a Greek? Paul wrote that “the geniune faith that is in you (Timothy), which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice.” Not a mention of faith being shared with Timothy’s father. In fact, during that time period it was known that grandmothers would carry out the religious instruction in the absence of Jewish fathers.

Is abnormal teaching and instruction in godliness sin?

John wrote: “1- Let me be clear, women are not to follow men into sin. There are plenty of actions that men can do that forfeit their leadership – abuse, abandonment, adultery, etc.”

John,
One more question, I hope you don’t mind. The “abuse, abandonment, adultery” are clear to all of us, but what are all those very unclear (“etc.”) etceteras?
And where can a wife find them plainly listed in Scripture, so that with her limited portion of wisdom she can discern them?

John,

Thanks so much for offering to answer questions about your view.

If “husband’s imperfections” are not sin(s) then what would they be? Lack of wisdom? Personal preferences?

How can a wife judge exactly what is sin if she gets only a portion of the full wisdom granted to her husband?

I find it rather odd that apparently sometime during the wedding ceremony a woman loses a great deal of her Spiritual discernment and yet this mysterious process is nowhere referenced in Scripture.

Or do you hold that all unmarried female believers are given less of the Holy Spirit’s guidance? And if so, where do we find this in Scripture?

Thank you in advance for addressing these puzzling questions.

…somehow I feel as though I started a chain reaction. 😉

“But this difficult Abigail character…
They just try to pretend she doesn’t exist.”

Along with Deborah, Huldah, Sheerah, the Prv.31 woman, Mary Magdalene…

“Would it apply if a woman stays single?”
Lin,
You and I both know the answer should be “no,” but many hierarchists have recently been teaching that all women need “a spiritual covering.” So, now we have some teaching that daughters must stay under their father’s authority until they marry and transfer it to their husband’s. And the older single women are assigned “spiritual fathers” to watch over them.

“the old testament – “wisdom” is a female.”

“But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.” 1 Cor. 1:27

“And how can she judge exactly what is sin since she only gets a portion granted from the man who professes to follow Christ? So, she is really stuck in a bad position.”
Lin,
That really is a bad position for a Christian – since we’re told to “walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please”…..or maybe Gal.5:16-17 applies to ‘men’ only? But, what a paradox that would be – without it how would the wife know when she’s desiring against the Spirit for more than her “portion?”
….never mind – I just recalled that comps solve that by having the ‘wise’ husband tell her…hmmmm…Can anyone say, “Circular?” Can anyone say, “Usurping the Holy Spirit?”

Starke wrote: “When something other than God is the desire of the heart, it begins to desire more than the portion granted.”

Is it just me, or is this a nonsensical statement?

Starke wrote: “Baxter recognizes the failures of husbands, since he was one himself, and there is no biblical expectations for women to follow their husbands in sin or submit to abuse. Yet, many may see the husband’s imperfections as an opportunity to exchange roles, as if he has lost his chance to lead.”

If “husband’s imperfections” are not sin(s) then what would they be? Lack of wisdom? Personal preferences?

Starke wrote:”What would cause a wife to rebel against the biblical mandate to follow the leadership of the husband? Baxter gives a few reasons:
Failure to believe God’s will is best. God’s design for the Christian family, which includes the structure of authority and submission, is best! God is wise and we, as sinners, need divine wisdom. He writes, “Who are you to assess God’s Word in a way different than his own qualifications.”

So, we are to believe that God’s Divine Wisdom is for wives to be in “joyful” submission to “the failures of husbands” and “the husband’s imperfections” ???

Again, what are these “failures of husbands” and “husband’s imperfections”?

“What’s in a name? Leadership that does not involve selfish unilateral choices but strives for the ideal of agreement smells like mutuality.”

sm,
Perhaps the subject matter has tainted their doctrine.

Things put forward by CBMW don’t normally smell that good. Case in point John Starke’s blog post:
“It is important to realize, when reading Baxter and the Puritans…They simply assumed the clear, biblical teaching of a husband’s authority in the family and a wife’s JOYFUL submission. So then, at one level, Baxter?s direction for women wouldn’t sound too different than John Piper’s or Wayne Grudem’s.”
A sample of Piper’s advice:
“If it’s not requiring her to sin but simply hurting her, then I think she endures verbal abuse for a season, and she endures perhaps being smacked one night, and then she seeks help from the church.”

oops, make that last line: as Christ is the head of His Body.

Nicole,
You are very welcome. Not to worry – I didn’t read it as self-pity. Thanks for sharing your experience.
I’m glad you are moving forward. Take heart – none of us are doing a “perfect” job. 😉

Sometimes, we lose sight of the fact that our main goal is not having ‘the perfect life’ or ‘the perfect marriage’, but that we know Christ and grow in Him.

“Or perhaps you don’t know that the man who joins his body to a prostitute becomes physically one with her? The scripture says quite plainly, “The two will become one body.” But he who joins himself to the Lord becomes spiritually one with him.” 1 Cor. 6:16-17
“”For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church.” Eph.5:31-32

The more I compare these verses, I do not think that in Eph. 5 Paul is referring to Christ and the Bride (Church). I think the mystery is becoming physically and spiritually one-flesh. As in the head/body analogy – as Christ is the head of the Church.

Nicole,

You have obviously learned very well many lessons from your parent’s relationship. I’d like to encourage you to take these lessons you have learned and move forward in your own adult life.

I know you “know” this, but it bears repeating, nothing in you is lacking and children are not responsible for their parent’s marriages. Period. It is perfectly o.k. to grieve the loss, but we must move forward and accept the fact that we can’t change the past. And it does not have the power to ruin our tomorrows…unless we allow it. We need not be bound by fear.

“I noticed when asked if a wife may initiate sex, you responded a wife may “indicate that she would like to have sex” and that she may “woo” her husband?”

I would just luv to know how “woo”ing is not leading/or attempting to lead one’s husband into sex. ?? That’s right up there with “joyful submission” – it’s different because they say it is different…

sm,
You certainly left no stone unturned. Excellent – I think we should have those bronzed those for you!

gengwall,
I am glad that you noted for Jim the importance of the context and the original audience or recipients of Paul’s letters.

Jim,
A clear example of this is found in 1 Cor. 5:1-2: “It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst.”

While this one is obvious, bear in mind that we don’t know ALL the background or every person each of the letters targeted.

“Cherry picking at its ungodly extreem.”

And amongst all the rules, where, pray tell, is the Holy Spirit?

The comp. books I’ve read and sermons I’ve heard make Proverbs 31 sound more like a “to do” list of duties rather than an example of a godly wife. Verse 16 when not ignored completely is glossed over. (she works from home, not “out in the world”) Also glossed over vs.24; and vs. 26 is watered down to knowing how to say things “kindly and sweetly.”

“They simply assumed the clear, biblical teaching of a husband?s authority in the family and a wife?s *JOYFUL* submission.”

CBMW has added the word ‘joyful’ in front of submission so many times – I’ve asked people to find the verse on “joyful submission” – funny, it’s not in there. So, why would they keep placing the two side by side?

“God is wise and we, as sinners, need divine wisdom. He writes, “Who are you to assess God?s Word in a way different than his own qualifications.”

Odd they put these two sentences right next to each other???

“It is a demonstrably false position and it wasn’t worth the effort to argue endlessly with them.”

It seems to me that so much of how we view God and His Word is due to our attitude ‘eyes’ – I tend to see God as “the Hound of Heaven.” Others see Him as the “rule maker.” Yes, He is Holy, but that doesn’t necessarily outweigh His Mercy.
(even though it doesn’t look like it – this does relate to with the conversation…)

gengwall,
How about the gist of the responses?

…you know what I mean?? We’re usually fouled when we do, and fouled when we don’t. 😉

gengwall,
I think that I ‘get’ what you’re saying…”But since when has that stopped a comp?”
So, now I’m wondering – since when did logic, facts or science stop a hierarchist?? Normally, they foul egals for introducing ‘outside’ worldly, social, etc…evidence.

Do you mind revealing the response, if any, from the comp? (if printable in mixed co.)

Just curious, gengwall – so, then why did you ignore my response #139:
“gengwall,
That’s not in the text. 😉 “