Marg Mowczko

“The fear that concerned men, that they would lose their priority if women were allowed to have freedom to make their own decisions, has been a consistent fear that was even used against the gospel.”

I completely agree! Despite what the Complementarians piously assert in their arguments, I believe that at the heart of their concerns is a phobia and a mistrust of women’s abilities. They simply do not trust women to be in positions of power, and so they insistently forbid them to be leaders, or even co-leaders, in the home or in the church. 🙁

[I have had the same qualms expressed in the other comments about appropriateness of some of the things Esther was urged to do by her adopted dad.]

I believe that the unrealistic demands in this letter, and its polemic tone will do more harm than good to the egalitarian cause.

Kristen (20)
Such a good point!!!
Do you know the page number where that Kenneth Bailey makes that point?

Thanks for your article Cheryl. I find your theme of the humble God very thought provoking.

I have found the insistence by some Christians for male authority in marriage to be inconsistent with the counter-cultural value of humility exemplified by Jesus and taught in the New Testament, etc. (Not to mention the Biblical values of selflessness, equality and unity.)

[I know this blog entry is already a couple of weeks old, but I’m new to this site and have been reading some of the older entries.]

I’m intrigued by MacArthur’s statement that women ” . . . are delivered from being thought of as permanently weak and deceivable and insubordinate” by bearing children.

So does that mean that Complementarians will let mothers teach in churches? I don’t think so.

I am genuinely disappointed by the subjective and illogical nature of many of the Complementarian arguments.

I have an increasing number of articles on Biblical equality on my website:
http://newlife.id.au/tag/biblical-equality/

I truly don’t understand the friction that this discussion (and many like it) generates.

Why are some Christians opposed to the notion of mutual submission in marriage? What do they perceive are the problems of mutual submission? Do we even understand what submission is?

Perhaps submission is just the opposite of rebellion.

I few times in the NT the word for submission (hypotasso) is used with an alpha prefix. (This is equivalent to an “un”, denoting the opposite.) The KJV translates this word as “unruly” in Titus 1:6 & 10. The NIV translates it as “rebellious”. (This word is also used in 1 Timothy1:9.)

I continue to believe that mutual submission is God’s ideal in the marriage relationship.
http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/submission-in-marriage/

Certainly in larger organisations it is necessary to have leaders and authorities; however I’ve often wondered, when there are only two people: husband and wife, why does one need to be “the authority” and one need to be “the follower.” You would hope that Christian couples would have the wisdom and maturity to work things out together, mutually.

Marriage is a unique, intimate relationship. You can’t compare it to coastguards, etc.

God’s ideal in marriage is complete unity, affinity and equality.

PS Thanks for the welcome. 🙂

Hi Cheryl,

I believe that God’s ideal in relationships, including marriage, is mutual submission.

I have written an article on submission that (among other things) looks at what Peter instructed “civilians”, slaves, wives, husbands and young men about submission (in 1 Peter). The article is at http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/submission-in-marriage/

Just thought you may be interested