JayneK

“. . . because they did not have an answer to her explanation of the Greek from the original Greek manuscripts, but also because they told her as a woman that she was to be quiet.”

Neither of these are reasons they gave for asking Suzanne to be quiet. In the first case, you are making assumptions about their motives. In the second, you are misrepresenting what they said, as Suzanne herself has told you. This makes a poor impression on me. (Although it does leave me favorably impressed with Suzanne.)

Perhaps you meant well by setting up a public forum for discussion with Kamilla, but it was not respectful to make such a decision without consulting her. This is not neutral ground. You were, in effect, forcing her into a position where she would be out-numbered by a hostile audience. I find her refusal to participate quite understandable.

“. . . complementarian blog that is known to be rather unloving towards egalitarians”

I have not come across any egalitarian blogs that I would describe as loving towards complementarians so why expect the reverse. Regardless of who is more correct doctrinally, I don’t see that either side can claim the moral high ground. I have seen less than gracious behaviour from people on both (as well as gracious). And both sides have banned dissenting commenters. I myself was prohibited from posting comments on an egalitarian blog: http://thatmom.wordpress.com/2007/12/03/are-patriocentric-views-of-a-womans-role-causing-homeschooling-freedoms-to-be-at-risk/
(I expect people here to think Karen was justified in her decision, just as complementarians defended the Bayleys’ decision.)

It is often easier to notice the ugly attitudes and personal attacks coming from the other side than our own. It is often easier to excuse negative behaviour from those with whom we agree than those we do not. It is tempting to adopt an attitude of “not only are we taking the right position, but we are just nicer people too.” Just remember that many of the people with whom you argue are thinking the same thing.

As for the Bayly brothers, they have a blunt and forceful style that I can understand some may find off-putting. It doesn’t bother me personally. Their interpretation of Scripture makes a lot more sense to me than the opposing position. And I see nothing wrong with their attitude toward women. The speak to and of their wives and daughters with respect and affection. The only interaction with me personally was kind and affirming (but then I was agreeing with them.)

I haven’t even gotten to the Trinity yet and I have run out of time. It is just as well. I don’t enjoy this area of theology.