Kay

TL,
I’ve pondered that as well. Sex/gender are terms used to distinguish biological differences. Before Eve, Adam had nothing from which to be distinguished. Hmmm…

Mark said: “Yes my wife and i are included in Eph 5:21 since we are both members of the Christian community. We are included in the ‘one another’ as are all Christians in the Church. We will submit to those in the Christian community that God places over us.”

Mark,

Does the wife have to obey the church authorities?
If so, do they have final say over the husband if it comes to that?

You have not yet explained why for YOU, “one another” does not mean “one another” but only “some to others?”

By your exegesis, YOU are not submitting to “one another” but only to “some others”- why are you excused from your own call for consistency in Bible exegesis?

pinklight,

On and on is right – just look back at #6 where Mark tries to find “authority” when it’s not in Greek. Notice he had no reply to that one at all. Just tack that one on to gengwall’s list (in Post#2) of all the things comps have to overlook.

Yes, the main point we have is that none of the hierarchist’s view squares with the Law of Love & “not so with you.”

oops! continuing..
…but a similar analogy.

“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

When I compare these verses, I see the mystery is becoming physically and spiritually one-flesh. As in the head/body analogy – as Christ is the head of His Body.
It’s not a Bridegroom/Christ to Bride/Church metaphor.

“However, I still find it interesting that he finds it necessary to say “head and ruler,” as if the word “head” by itself were still not quite enough to convey rulership.”

Kristen,
I find it not only interesting, but telling! Let’s take the word ‘orange’ for instance. Would Chrysostom have said, “orange and apple” if it really meant “orange and orange”?

Mark,
Think about the O.T. and how the Israelites wanted a king so they could be like the other nations around them.

“They said to him, “Look, you are old, and your sons don’t follow your ways. So now appoint over us a king to lead us, just like all the nations have.” But this request displeased Samuel, for they said, “Give us a king to lead us.” So Samuel prayed to the Lord. The Lord said to Samuel, “Do everything the people request of you. For it is not you that they have rejected, but it is me that they have rejected as their king. Just as they have done from the day that I brought them up from Egypt until this very day, they have rejected me and have served other gods. This is what they are also doing to you” 1 Sam. 8:4-8.

“When you come to the land the Lord your God is giving you and take it over and live in it and then say, “ I will appoint a king over me like all the nations surrounding me”.

These words of Moses were both a warning and a prophecy. Compare the words of Moses with the words of the people to Samuel in 1 Samuel 8:5:

They said to him, “Look, you are old, and your sons don’t follow your ways. So now appoint over us a king to lead us, just like all the nations have.”

In both texts, it is the people who demand a ruler, just as in both their motivation is to be “just like the nations.”

Mark,

Christian “Leadership” cannot be defined as a trait residing in an individual because that doesn’t fit the biblical model. Being a an “ensample” “sheep” is a mandate/command not an inherent quality.

Mark@5,

I have to disagree. I believe the warning is there because we humans so easily slip into pride by seeing knowledge as power.
Part of the problem lies in tying the word ‘leader’ to particular tasks. The world invests the leader with weight, with status, with power. It is a societal bias that values some roles over others. A race car driver is, in the eyes of the public, the most valued member of the team, in spite of the fact that the mechancics have just as much to do with success as the driver. Similarly, whoever we call “the leader” is considered the most important or the most powerful, creating an inevitable hierarchy.

Mark: “So what you are saying is that Church leaders are not in authority-
let’s see…
Tit 2:15 Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.
Does Titus have authority here over the congregation? Paul says don’t let anyone disregard him. Maybe you should consider if you are disregarding your church leaders?”

Kay: “The Greek word ‘epitage’ (translated as ‘authority’ there) is used to describe an injunction, mandate or command. This word does not relate to how we normally think of authority. In the KJV, epitage is normally translated as “commandment.”

Mark,
The English word ‘authority’ is not in that passage.

Mark: “What i said was not an attack at you at all. My point is simple- to reject servant leadership is to reject the model of Jesus himself. Jesus was both leader and servant!”

Mark,
How is that? I have not one shred of a problem with Jesus as Leader and Servant. And my point is that He is the Leader.
Jesus is the Shepherd of His sheep. Notice His warning to those who would teach His Word, that He sent them out as sheep among wolves, not shepherds among wolves.
“Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” (Matt 10:16)

Christ warned that no one is to stand in place of Christ as the Shepherd of His people – all are His sheep.
“Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.” Matt. 23:8-12

“For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.” 1 Peter 2:25
Preachers and teachers of His Word – what are they? Sheep, with more experience, who are given to pass on their knowledge and understanding to new and younger sheep, just as it was passed on to them by the “sheep” before them, “Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.” And only about Christ does it say, “Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.”

“The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.
Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care on him; for He careth for you.” 1 Pet 5:1-7

Nowhere, not once, does it say ‘male sheep’ or “rams” feed the sheep ‘under’ them.

Mark,
If anything I said to you came across as insulting, please understand it wasn’t meant that way. I was simply posing questions hoping you would think them over.

“which of course means you have to reject the very model of Jesus himself!”

Mark,
Why would you say that to me? I mean honestly?? We’ve been conversing here for months. When I have questioned your faith? All I asked you to do earlier was think about the links of what you yourself wrote. I think you really just came tonight to hurl insults at the most convenient egal. Well, I’m not into that. It’s very late here – so ‘good night.’

“Of course they do, they are just repulsive to our generation- that’s the only difference.”

Mark,
People in arranged marriages were who Paul was writing. Would you find being bound to an arranged marriage with a woman of your parent’s choosing to be repulsive?

When Jesus spoke of the rulers of the Gentiles who “lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them.” Jesus said that this was NOT God’s plan. In verses 27 and 28 Jesus said that “whoever wants to be first must be your slave.” In other words, a person cannot, by birth or by force of money or might, become “first” in God’s order. Instead, he or she will have to become a “slave.” They will have to forfeit their *own* “authority” in order to be in God’s order.

Paul was saying that the minister of God has a MANDATE to preach those things regardless of their immediate approval or rejection. “in season, and out of season.”

Mark,
Is it Titus’ own personal authority? Really?
The Greek word ‘epitage’ (translated as ‘authority’ there) is used to describe an injunction, mandate or command. This word does not relate to how we normally think of authority. In the KJV, epitage is normally translated as “commandment.”

Mark,
You say: “I agree submission is something we do. A wife is told to submit to her husband. She has to choose to do it, it cannot be demanded by the husband. God demands it, not the husband.”

Please read what you wrote yourself. The One with the right to demand it Is the one in authority – and in this case, as you point out yourself, that One is God. She is told by God to do it and if she disobeys, then she is clearly disobeying GOD – NOT her husband.

The husband has no inherent “authority” – God and God’s Word is the authority. It’s not husband’s personal authority obtained from God. The authority belongs to God. Paul didn’t take authority over people, but rather authority over error and false doctrine.

Craig@358,
Sadly, that is one of the hazards of a long thread of comments – I hope you stick around in spite of it. Too bad we can’t all simply sit in the corner coffee shop and discuss. Certainly would simplify things. 🙂

@324
“2. Do Church leaders have authority?”

It’s not their own personal authority obtained from God. It is the authority of God’s Word. The authority is God’s. Paul didn’t take authority over people, but rather authority over error and false doctrine.
Jesus said, “*All* authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

“What is Apollos, really? Or what is Paul? Servants through whom you came to believe, and each of us in the ministry the Lord gave us. I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused it to grow. So neither the one who plants counts for anything, nor the one who waters, but God who causes the growth.” 1 Cor. 3

And “Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.” John 13:12-17

Why do complementarians/hierarchists want to place personal authority and obedience to themselves (or what they term their “servant leadership”) in these passages?

Cheryl,
@316 – beautiful description and aren’t we blessed!

TL,

This is an important observation:
“This latter sense is preferred, as it matches the other active participles’ voice and it fits Paul’s point that believers should not act as though drunk (passively under the influence of another source) but actively make choices following the Spirit’s leading.” pg’s 136-137”
I’ve enjoyed some of Cohick’s other works.

gengwall@274,
Some time ago, I read your posts and appreciated them very much. Perhaps you are correct that Eldridge’s basic point is good – it would be great if you (or someone else) would write a book that’s actually biblically sound. Like say, one tempered with Christ-likeness as the mark for one’s aim….

“Many men do not feel they need to qualify their beliefs on this issue to a woman who disagrees.”

Can anyone say, “Pride?”

“When there was a group of men in our church who applauded the book “Wild at Heart”, they started going around calling the women ‘beauties’.”

Can anyone say, “Objectify?”
….where’s my Pepto?….

Lydia@259,
Another side issue with this: I’ve encountered a number of young wives who get “into” CBMW/comp theology without/before their husbands are indoctrinated and then either manipulate their husbands into assuming aspects of “authority/headship” or lament the fact that their husband refuses to lead because the wives feel shamed for not being able to adhere to the “rolebook.”

“This is awesome! I can’t possibly lose! Sign me up.”

LOL, gengwall, it does have the perfect appeal, doesn’t it?!!!

@254 – pardon the sentence construction…I need another cup of coffee 🙂

cont…

Actually, Mark and NN try to soften it so much they redefine “authority” to be “male’s serving” when pinned down.

“2. Because they must have women obeying these man made interpretations or the whole comp structure fails. So, they teach this in a way that makes it sinful for a women not to obey.”
Lydia@217,

Yes, and I believe this is the hinge on which the entire comp/hierarchist’s door swings. That is exactly why their focus is on the woman’s role – getting her to supply the man/husband with authority. Notice how “soft” comps, like Mark and NN, would never say that the husband “takes authority over” or “enforces” his authority??

We have discussed this on Cheryl’s blog several times. They have designed the perfect Control Paradigm – since to even question it makes a woman guilty of unsubmissiveness, if not worse.