Lin

Things every Knox lover should know:

1. He was one of the small group of plotters who killed Lord Darnely
2. At 50, he married a 16 year old. Even his colleagues questioned this action.
3. He was not above colluding with Elizabeth 1 to carry out his missions even after referring to her as one of the ‘monsterous regiment of women’.

Nice guy. Big Hypocrit

“The vast majority of Arminian denominations – particularly of the Wesleyan variety – seem to lean toward egalitarianism, while most Calvinist churches seem to be staunchly complementarian in their views.”

Perhaps with Wesleyan that is true. That was my experience with a Wesleyan University. However, from what I have seen workign with megas (most are comp) and the SBC, most are comp. The exceptions might be Pentecostal or the Charismatics. But not SGM churches which are extremely patriarchal. It would definitely be an interesting study. Comp seems to cut across the Arminian/Calvin divide. At many churches comp teaching is a big seller. It is not only a huge draw for new members but the seminars, conferences, literature and books are big sellers and bring in money. Don’t be fooled, Free Willers can be very hierarchical. :o)

“I don’t understand why these guys are this arrogant and boiling with anger.”

You nailed it. They are always angry and if you question them (followers) they always become insulting. Even the humor has an edge about it.

“I’d heard that Rick Warren is also pretty authoritarian and requires that a covenant be signed stating that people won’t challenge the elders or question the pastor.  Does anyone know if this is an urban myth or not, or where I would have heard this?”

They used to have a membership type of covenant. I do not know if they have one now. Probably had to do with new member orientation. Most mega’s have those and have a list of things about being a member. What it said was more subtle. It talked about not critisizing the church or the leadership or saying negative things about them. It is done in a more Rah, Rah manner. Like school spirit for churches

I have been away from megaland for a few years now and understand some things are changing. People are leaving faster than they are coming. Never believe the numbers. They don’t even know them for sure.

It isn’t the gospel that is the problem but what he adds to the gospel and the way he ministers that will hurt his ministry and eventually the name of Christ.

I think this has already happened because the topic is always ‘Driscoll’, what he does or says. He is the focus and the draw. That scares me more about him than anything. It is part of the whole celebrity Christian thing we have in this country. Cult of personality.

There was another comment on Wade’s blog that I thought made a very important point. The commenter said something to the effect of whether God is building the church or man. One thing we need to realize is that man CAN build large churches that have very little to do with Him.

A wolf can have what looks to be good doctrine.

My friend, Cindy K, shared this with us a while back and it is worth repeating here:
Dr. Paul Martin on Doctrine/Behavior

Dr. Martin also included some interesting information about what the Bible has to say about false teachers and wolves in sheep’s clothing.

Of the 210 verses that refer to false prophets, priests, elders and Pharisees, here is a summary of their content:

99 verses (47%) concern Behavior
66 verses (31%) concern Fruit
24 verses (13%) concern Motives
21 verses (10%) concern Doctrine

It is interesting that most Christians who deal with apologetics, false teachers and Bible-based cults are most concerned with doctrine only. When discussing the patriarchy movement on SharperIron.com and ibelieve.comearlier last year, I was told by many that it was not appropriate to discuss much of anything save these folks’ misuse of Scripture. But doctrine represents only a small portion of what Bible speaks about concerning false teachers, essentially only 23% of what the Bible points out as problematic.
According to the Scriptures, we should be very concerned with both the behaviors and the fruit of spiritual leadership in the church and in parachurch organizations. This is not gossip or mean-spirited criticism but what Scripture actually teaches us to observe.
Dr. Paul Martin (an evangelical Christian) is CEO and Founder of the
Wellspring Retreat & Resource Center

tiro, this has been very true for me, also. Meeting and conversing with you, Cheryl, Paula, Don, Cindy K and many others has been very edifying to me. I have learned so much from each of you.

It is exciting to know that we WILL meet one day for sure. :o)

“Barb writes that healing from such spiritual abuse entails finding someone to confide in to help unravel the abuse and lay it down in order to experience healing.  She lists the steps to recovery and gives hope that there is wholeness to be found.  Often wounded healers can reach back and help those who are going through the same process that they themselves experienced.  Talking things out with someone who understands or is just a good listener can be comforting and healing.”

This is harder than it sounds. There could be some very close to you that will NEVER understand because they have no experienced it. These can be folks who love you but are not there and will think you are going overboard or being unforgiving or disrespectful to the leader or something. YOu learn not to talk about it and then find yourself even lying about why you do not attend church there or why you stay away from certain people. Folks do not want to hear negative truth about an organization they think is great. They accuse you of gossip if you tell the truth. This is a huge hurdle. It is part of what is so isolating.

In my situation the abusers are kind of well known and well loved by even those not in the church. Because they are so ‘high up’ most folks do not know them as they really are. They know them by their public persona.

There really is a double edged sword for some. Even others who have been spirutally abused by the same folks are quiet because it affects their whole life…even their employment in some respects because of the far reaching influence of these well known folks. It is best if they just keep quiet because it is like fighting a huge PR machine. You will never be believed.

Yes, reading sexuality into this is ridiculous. But, we do have the exact same problems today with outward adornment. This is an area that is touchy because it can get into legalism real fast. But, I do get weary hearing some of the conversations at church about name brand stuff. At my former mega seeker church the conversation  was about how many different fur coats some women had. It was considered cool to have one to wear with jeans to go shopping in. (sigh)

I can relate a story about my mom which I think fits this scripture. My dad would periodically buy my mom very expensive clothes which she was uncomfortable wearing. One Easter he bought her a beautiful Chanel suit. She explained to him why she could not wear it on Easter Sunday. She was upfront as a choir director and did not want to make the women who did not have new clothes feel bad. She felt like she would be flaunting them. Some would call that legalism. But I knew her and knew that she really wrestled with this.  She liked to look nice but JC Penney nice. Know what I mean?

Cheryl, you are precious to me so please take care of yourself. I do agree that Jesus never fails so we must keep our eyes on Him. I was reading something a few days ago about those in the Body who hurt us…sometimes it is very cruel….about the only thing we can really do in most cases is focus on the Glory of God. His greatness and Sovereignty. But, I know you know that.

I pray that I will be a soft place for others to land when hurt by the Body.

And what about the length of time? They did not come right after he was born as we always see taught.

Thanks Don. My mom had pointed this out to me as a kid. But it seems no one wants to believe it. It really is amazing how we will believe tradition over actual words in scripture.

BTW: Some friends brought me back some francincense from the ME last year. When I finally got it to burn, it smelled wonderful.

“A person who pushes for equality in the Church to their own benefit is doing it from their own flesh and not from a pure heart.”

But John, your interpretation gives you MORE than equality. It gives you superiority over a whole group of believers: Women.

You have misunderstood about equality. Paul makes that clear in Gal 3:28. I don’t have to ‘push’ for it. The Holy Spirit gifts me…not a human. Jesus Christ became our High Priest. A slave is just as important as a noble in the Body of Christ.

“The mistake the visible chuch makes today is to assume that since a person is in leadership then they have been chosen by God to be there.”

I completely agree with this. A title conferred by men means very little.
“eadership in churches today owes more to a “corporate” type system than it does to God’s intended system for picking people for leadership.”

I also completely agree with this. But, I would say that leadership is a tricky word to use for the Body of Christ. There are differnt functions and all believers are gifted to edify the Body. We are all SERVANTS…even elders, pastors, etc.

There are no pink and blue spiritual gifts.

John, All we are asking is for you to show us where this ‘law’ is in scripture. We know it is not Gen 3 because that is NOT a law. God is always very clear about His laws. They are not vague and we don’t have to read into them.

So, where is the law that says woman must be silent (Greek meaning must not speak) in the Body of Christ? And why would Paul contradict himself by assuming woman are prophesying and praying in the church in other passages in Corinthians? Why would he say ALL may prophesy in verse 31? Or why in 11:5 is Paul assuming women are already prophesying in the Corinthian church when he addresses headcoverings? This makes no sense. Paul is not contradicting himself.

Paul is also saying in verse 35 that it is ‘shameful’ (some translations say improper) for a woman to speak. That word  “shameful” in Greek means vile and filthy. Would Paul be saying that a woman speaking in the Body of Christ as vile and filthy?

No, he would not. But we KNOW for a FACT the Oral law teaches exactly that…a woman’s voice is vile and filthy.

“In regards to the statement in verse 35: “As also saith the Law”
Does not find its root in the oral law. Its inception comes from Genesis 3:16:
To the woman He said:
      “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
      In pain you shall bring forth children;
      Your desire shall be for your husband,
      And he shall rule over you.”

Hi John,

Saying that this is the inception of this ‘law’ in the NT does not make sense from many angles. First of all, Jesus came to redeem us from the law and secondly, the above is NOT a law. It is a consequence of sin. Just like you are not in sin if you work in an airconditioned office and are not a farmer toiling on the land. Even farmers are not in sin for using fertilizer and such. And, if we follow your interpretation that Gen 3 is a law and even proceeds to the NC, then any woman using pain relief in childbearing would be in sin. So, you really get into some serious legalism if we follow your interpretation using Gen 3 as a law instead of the consequence of sin.

Many hard comp scholars even admit that the reference to the ‘law’ in 1 Corinthians 14 cannot be Gen 3.

Is there another place in scripture where this ‘law’ in 1 Corn 14 is referenced? We cannot find it. But we know that God made The ‘law’ clear. God is never confusing about His law.

But we DO KNOW for a FACT what Paul is referencing: The Oral law because the Oral law says exactly that! A woman is to be SILENT and the Greek means SILENT not just quiet. Check that out and see. BUT, we know that Paul goes on to REFUTE that in verse 36. YOu may want to check the Greek on verse 36 very closely. You will see that it clearly negates verses 34 and 35.

“This does not mean that a man should be a tyrant over his wife. What it means is that the Man in God’s plan, after the fall, was to be the Spiritual Head!”

John, Kephale does not mean authority in this verse. It means unity and the whole passage is about unity and mutual submission. Had the Holy Spirit wanted to communicate ‘authority’ in these passages He would have inspired a very clear Greek word for authority. There are several of them already used quite clearly in the NT.

If we go with your interpretation then women have 2 “authorities” as believers. They have Jesus Christ, their High Priest and a husband. Are you suggesting with ‘spiritual head’ that your wife must go through you like an OT priest? Is there a human layer between her and her Savior? If not, then what does ‘spiritual head’ mean?
John, I am very sad to see your view of over half of all believers. Many of these are single women, widowed and divorced. Many of these need love and support of their fellow brothers in Christ. Not more rules and roles that are not of Christ. “Roles” is an invention of man. We are to BE in Christ. Not play a part that entails works.

John, Also, if I may, I am a bit perplexed that I feel the need to defend the wrong notion that I want ‘superiority’ over another. That whole concept is not Christian at all. Eph 5:21 should be our touchstone here no matter if we are elders, pastors or the church janitor. WE are to mutually submit to one another as believers.

What we are discussing here is more about the freedom to exercise our spiritual gifts which are given by the Holy Spirit to edify the Body.

I am at a loss when someone mentions ‘roles’. I do not see that concept in scripture anywhere. That is a Frenchword denoting a ‘scroll’ which was used to learn lines to play a pretend character. A role is something we ‘pretend’ or do. As Christians we are to ‘be’ in Christ.

“Paul was not qouting the Jewish Oral “Law” of the Pharisee’s in this passage! These were Paul’s words! Paul’s instructions on how women should conduct themselves in a gathering of the Corinthian Church Body! And if there was ANY Apostle who clearly showed that Gentile Christians were not under any Jewish  Oral “Law” it was the Apostle Paul!”

Hi John,

As we can see by the verse, a ‘law’ is being referred to here. It says specifically, “…as the law also says”.

Can you reference this law? It does exist but not in scripture.

If I understand you correctly, you believe that Paul is ‘making a new law’?

Verse 36 really clears up the misunderstandings for us as it negates verses 34 and 35. And this is even more clear as we see Paul refering to women praying and prophesying in the Body in other parts of Corinthians.

I have really learned a lot from Jon Zen’s articles on his web site, searchingtogether. You may want to provide a link to this journal.

To add to this,

They interpret the childbearing passage as a ‘work’ of sanctification meaning women (plural) should stay in their ‘role’.  This makes no sense when taking all scripture into account.
And it is cruel in many ways for the poor Christian women out there who cannot have children but follows the comp teachings.

Their job as “keeper” of the door to the church unfortunately is restricting the Holy Spirit as they work hard to keep him out with his work through his female “sons”.  Such a shame.

Like Diotrephes.

Trying to make the church masculine can have medical implications. A mega church here in town wanted to replace their atrium carpet with something more masculine. (The color scheme was a mauve) so a few staffers, with the approval of the elders, chose a geometric design. Since the area to be covered is the size of several football fields, it was not only a great expense but a great expanse of geometric design. The first Sunday after it was installed quite a few people became dizzy and nauseated and ambulances had to be called for a few serious cases.

So, it had to ripped up at great expense to start over.

“if we cut to the core of things… there is a shame and significant anxiety around what is woman, feminine, female.  I truly believe that this reveals a hatred of woman and is part of what needs healing in this world.  So much fear is created and fear is not from God. ”

I tend to think it is more ‘blame’ than anything. Something has to be blamed for the results and the blaming of women for the state of the church in Christendom is cultural. It is a backlash to the change in the secular culture of the 60’s and 70’s. Secular feminism is blamed  quite a bit for the state of Christianity today

I maintain that when women were thought to be inferior and unequal they had more freedom of serving in the church than they do today in some mainstream denominations. So, there is definitely a ‘fear’ componet to this.

Cheryl, I once spent 11 days in an unairconditioned quonset hut in 100 degree weather facilitating strategic planning with 1 General, 10 Colonels, 2 Majors, 1 Captain and one Sargent Major. All men. Every afternoon, we played golf. At the end of the first week, one of them looked at me and said, you know, I forget you are a gal because you are like one of the guys.

I never had a better compliment. :o)

You know, this thinking has more serious ramifications than we think. It is part of the ‘roles’ and expectations that are assigned with gender in the comp movement.

This was really brought home to me listening to the testimonies of several Born Again Christian men who came out of the homosexual life. There were quite a few that did not fit into the stereotypical ‘male’ role. They were artistic, musical, etc. but were expected to be interested in sports, hunting and more masculine pursuits. This made them think there was already something wrong with them because they were drawn to design, art or theatre.

Homosexuality is not always the result of this thinking but most of these men were very young and followed their talent which led them to those who ‘accepted’ them and the outcome of this can be serious.

We need to be very careful what we declare is masculine or feminine. My daughter loves rocks, leaves, the outdoors and her favorite color is orange (sigh). She hates ruffles, bows, and fussy girly clothes and could care less if her hair is brushed or not. Not every girl wants to be a princess and saved by a Knight as John Elderidge writes.  All this focus literally makes people believe there is something inherently wrong with them when there isn’t. It gets their focus off of who they were created to be in Christ.

Thanks Don!

“I agree we are all legal hiers thru adoption, just that there does not need to be any mapping of a woman to a legal son, what counts is being a legal heir. ”

Don, I am a bit confused as to what you are trying to explain in your comments. I take it you do agree that women are full heirs but I do not understand the above comment when scripture says ‘sons’ and Paul went to the trouble to write there is no Greek, Jew, etc., in Christ. The point of this post was to show that Galatians 3:28 is about more than salvation.

I am not sure what all the different cultural inheritance laws at the time have to do with this outside of what the Judizers may have thought  and were teaching. Just color me confused!

It was just a few years back that a CBMW alumni insisted to me that Galatians 3:28 was only referring to equality in salvation. I was blown away by this view. Now, I am seeing this taught all over the place by comps. Could it be because so many have brought up this verse when hearing all the narrow ‘role’ teaching from comps and they needed an interpretation to fit their teaching?
You have done a great job outlining why their view cannot be correct. One reason is because so much comp teaching is that being in your correct ‘role’ is part of the sanctification process. (If you are a woman you submit and if a man you ‘lead’). They also use the childbearing verse in 1 Tim 2 for being in your role for sanctification.
It is a sad thing when works become a part of salvation and sanctification

Cheryl, Tell Lorrie and Keith that I am praying for them both.

“I think there are helpful things to learn in a marriage from gender differences, but personally I don’t see any value from learning about gender differences in the church.”

Even too much focus on this outside of physical differences is dangerous in a marriage. Wars happen, people die of illness young, etc., and a spouse finds themselves taking on all responsibility of the family.

I can remember my dad being so incredulous about the fact that men did not have their wives involved in family fiances, dealing with repairs, etc. This was because several families we knew the husband died unexpectedly and these young widows were lost about many things outside of their domain. My mom and dad helped them with all these things.

Back then, unless the husband directed it, the widow could not even get money out of account! She could not get loans, etc. Thankfully, many of those laws have changed. What is ironic is that my dad died when I was 13 but my mom carried on because she knew how to deal with all that stuff and was a business woman in her own right.

We can take all this gender stuff too far.

Cheryl, this is a great topic! I am so glad you posted this. WE are spending so much time and money in Christendom on gender differences that are leading us away from Christ and focused on the wrong things. You have brought it back to the main thing which is salvation and abiding in Christ.

“So, although I agree that we are equal spiritually, I suggest that we may pursue spirituality quite differently.”

gengwall, I would be interested in hearing what you mean by this and perhaps some examples.

Paula, I have had the same experience as you. My full name is a typical male name and in business when corresponding by e-mail or letter, even over long periods of time, most think I am male. So much of what we think about genders is cultural.