Complementarianism: Essential or Expendable? (Panel I)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ส.ค. 2024
- Greg Gilbert, John Piper, Ligon Duncan, Russell Moore
If a child were to ask you what it means to be a man or woman, would you be able to biblically respond? A pastor’s view on the role of men and women has major implications on how he shepherds his flock in displaying the gospel in life and marriage. The Bible teaches that men and women are equally dignified image bearers of God, yet were created with different roles.
I really like what the Pastor (idk his name) said around the 13:00 minute mark. As someone who grew up and lived an egalitarian, that’s a very refreshing perspective for me. I normally wouldn’t even be listening to this but I’m surprised how sound and non-sexist that was.
What did that guy mean when he said single women submit yourself to a future husband you don’t know? How can you do that?
By shutting off your brain.
I take it to live your life with the idea that you will have a husband one day. Keep yourself pure, etc.
It’s none sense.
How about inviting women to be in the panel?
Can't have that--don't want to piss of the apostle Paul who died hundreds of years before we understood that women were valuable.
@@vilicus77 Right, you mean from the Bible that asserted and established women as equal long before even Jesus, against cultural norms? Or should we say women are valuable in an evolution survival of the fittest world where we are only mere protoplasm swimming about? I can't quite figure out which view uplifts women as equal and fully valuable. Do help me
@@jamesramelli8847 Evolution doesn't have a god dammed thing to do with this topic--whatever your strange interpretation of it is.
You know that it is the Christian Right and the secular left strongly disagree over women's issues. The left wants to educate women, pay them more, and let them make their own reproductive choices. That is a fact you can't sidestep.
@@vilicus77 What does politics have to do with this? I bring up evolution because it's the most popular secular worldview out there, and it directly links to the value of human beings. I'm saying that, if you don't adopt the Bible's high view of women, what view do you have to establish women as valuable? Certainly can't be from evolution
@@jamesramelli8847 Evolution is not a secular worldview. It is scientific fact. I don't see how you are confusing the two.
The Bible does not have a high view of women. 1 Timothy reads, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” That is exactly the opposite of a high view of women. Maybe you mean the men are so high they are looking down on them.
Women did not get anything near equality until the 20th Century in the West. Are you seriously trying to convince me that uneducated fishermen and goat herders in the Middle East were progressive two thousand years ago? Hell no they weren’t.
Just wondering.... why is there not any women on the panel? Because they are talking about how we are equal but have different roles and it’s not what people think about men being bullies... so why not have a women on the panel?
Agree with Chloe - where are the women in this chat? If we complement each other wouldn't you want a balanced panel? Typical.
Ana Andrade side note nothing against any of the men on the panel I have listened to John piper a lot and he seems to be a very caring man the other guys I don’t really know anything about them but they seem cool but again if we what to have conversation about equal but separate roles maybe included us 🤷🏻♀️
@@CE-gb9rj absolutely. For me it's simple: by their fruits you will know them. The men I know who are obsessed with this complementarian view to an extreme, show no fruit, quite the opposite. If I'm honest, I think this topic is a waste of time. Perhaps these guys should be more focussed on loving God and others and proclaiming the gospel rather than spending countless hours trying to justify why a women can't teach. (Of course if it's a foreign country where no teaching exists, that's fine... because, as someone once said to me "in that situation, a women teaching is better than nothing ")... Anyway...
Ana Andrade if women are so unqualified why would God send us in at the most desperate of times? Haha
And I agree we should just be teaching the word of God more then we focus on gender roles I do think it is an important thing not that important though
@@CE-gb9rj most of these men were probably taught Scripture by women growing up and are where they are because women taught them. Oh well.
How then do you explain the position Phoebe held in the Bible? I would like to ask Paul this question also. Seems his instructions are not clear and have caused confusion. Scripture I understand is God inspired. So was this a typo, or meant in other verses as wife and not women? One thing for sure, the enemy has used this subject to delay the growth of the church in so many ways. And to define the position of a man or women is not difficult at all. Their service in ministry is just as purposeful as in a marriage.
Don't forget that Paul also addressed Andronicus (male) and Junia (female) as apostles! Also her name can not me transformed into a male name. The language won't allow that!
Phoebe is said to host a church at her house. That does not mean she pastored and was the elder of that church. Andronicus and Junia were apostles, but they clearly weren’t of the most well known apostles or the apostles appointed by Jesus.
Ephesians 5 say to submit one to another then outlines what that means practically. It says nothing about authority or 'roles'.
John Piper at about 22 minutes proposed the question that egalitarians never answer but provided no answer himself. Neither did the following speaker say anything that Piper claimed the egalitarians say!
I find it very strange that there is no women included in this panel. How bizarre.
Hi Laura. I don't know why no man has responded to your comment, but I can give you my response to a woman such as yourself and other women who have commented on the alleged appearance of bias of the panel, simply because there are no women on the panel.
Just going from scripture, we know from Genesis 3:17 that God held Adam accountable for hearkening to the voice of his wife and doing what God told him not to do.
Men who have been around the block know that they need to know God's will and by comparison they are not so interested in what women have to say.
There is no need for women to be part of the panel because the panel consists of men who are thought leaders on the topic.
Women who are up with the state of restoration of Divine order would not want to be seen or heard on such a panel because to do so would contradict the Truth they (both men and women) espouse.
If you find it strange or bizarre, it is because you don't understand the very thing they are talking about, - though they never really got to enunciate the intricate workings of how God has designed men and women to work together with Himself, in unison, and in spite of our fallen and ignorant yet redeemed state.
The Truth is not up for grabs, - there is no debate. It's like a Prophet does not need the approval of the people he delivers the word of God to.
Men who know the Truth about masculinity and femininity, know that it's for them to know and for women to find out.
In other words, he as a man is not what he is in relation to woman.
He is what he is in relation to Christ, and because he is what he is in relation to Christ, (and Christ in turn to the Father), he has a basis to relate to woman spiritually.
Men who know the Truth know it is unconstitutional to debate with women as they would with another man because it denies Divine Order.
Truth is not something that can be negotiated or compromised; - that sort of approach is based on ignorance and spurious equality.
Men and women who are finding their way under the common mind-set can find the Truth unfathomable because there are subtle lies that have blinded their minds.
You have to ask yourself, "Given that women are so wonderful in so many ways, and no man comes into the world but by woman, - What is it that makes men equal to women or gives them equivalency ?"
When you know the answer to that question, you will be well on your way to understanding Divine Order.
You have probably found most of what I have said unpalatable. Be that as it may, I hope it helps .
@@warwick2849speaking of prophets, consider Miriam, Huldah, Philip's daughters.
@@raywilson353 They are Prophetesses.
What do you want me to consider about them ?
@@warwick2849 they were women who spoke God's word to men! You seem to me to be a man very comfortable in you "God ordained" leadership position of "divine order" whatever you think that means. Adam was held responsible for his sin, not for listening to the woman!
@@raywilson353:-) Basically, God said, because you deferred to your wife and you did what she wanted you to do instead of siding with me and what I told you not to do...
One of the main inferences of the account of the fall, is that if the serpent had approached Adam directly, he would have told him to buzz off.
You have to wonder what Eve said to Adam, and what was it about her that made him defer to her, and to disobey God after he had been so closely involved with God in the creation process.
Obviously it was a set up and the serpent was let loose and Christ was slain from the foundation of the world, so it's all par for the course.
Also, God did not say anything to indicate that he held Adam accountable in any way for Eve's sin, yet she was clearly implicated in his sin, and then God clearly makes the woman's desire inordinately towards the man and gives the man a mandate to rule.
I see that as God setting up a work dynamic between men and women.
I concur with some of what was said on this video, - however, I believe that the "Silence of Adam", and the "Innocence of Eve" are doctrines of Demons.
The silence of Adam is designed to lend weight to the Innocence of Eve, which in turn is designed to bolster Eve's original desire to be like God and get something which was allegedly denied to her.
I also, am not totally on board with the "Complimentary" concept because it lends weight to the idea of reciprocity.
Woman was made for man not man for woman.
They were not made equally for each other - They are not equally the glory of each other - They are not equally the head of each other.
When God made Adam, the man in person, before Eve the woman, was made, - Adam was complete, - the image AND Glory OF God, but God said, "it was NOT GOOD that man should be alone".
Man is not his own glory, and he is not his own head.
Neither is the dust his head. - (just to cross that silly idea off).
Neither is woman her own glory, nor her own head.
Both man and woman are the glory of the one who is their head.
The fact that we have to spell out the obvious highlights the dilemma we face with our carnal mindedness.
I prefer to define my belief as "Divine Order" which includes the changes that God made after the first "Adam" (which includes Eve) took knowledge of Good and Evil.
The changes to nature and woman's biology and relationship to man, were made by fiat of God. They didn't just happen as a nasty consequence of the fall.
I believe God made those changes to institute a work dynamic and ensure that things would still work out in spite of the knowledge of good and evil.
I also, believe that if women will not cover, Paul really meant what he said when he said their hair should be shorn off.
Either woman was made for man or she wasn't.
Either woman is the glory OF man , and man is the image and Glory OF God, - OR they are not.
Either the head of woman is man, and the head of man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God, - OR they are not.
We, (I include myself), are so beset by pride and ignorance while we try to cobble together our understanding of Divine Order, that we are all too ready to conjure up something that will pacify our fears and appetites, rather than find the truth that ministers to our greatest need of redemption.
I believe the mistakes "we" are making is that we are not taking enough notice of the things of God which are clearly seen, - Romans 1:20.
The EQUIVALENCY of men and women is explained in 1Cor 11, however, while man is the image and glory of God, that image is commonly diminished in our eyes because of many subtle lies and ignorance etc, yet at the same time women tend to outshine men on the "natural plain".
Men are the image and glory of God - but where is God ?
By comparison women are ever in our face.
One of the main inferences of the account of the fall, is that if the serpent had approached Adam directly, he would have told him to buzz off.
The other interesting question is why would God make the woman's desire inordinately toward the man and give the man a mandate to rule over the woman after they had knowledge of good and evil ?
Also, why did both Jesus and Paul teach that men are better off being eunuchs if they can manage it ?
Wow so many comments from people biased by their own anger and agendas. Sad.
Yeah just like the guys on this panel. Who are they to tell anyone what to do? Lol😃😄🤣
Assuming you haven't watched it, based on your previous comments.
I still haven't heard/found any specific examples of the women's roles in the Church through Complementarianismisafuzzywuzzy.
I see that "it's" the way in scripture but need help practically applying it. Please help.
1disciplemichael, how is it that you see that its the way in Scripture? Which verses are you looking at?
1disciplemichael It seems that Piper's approach to scripture on women's roles in the Church is to bar women from merely overseership (eldership) and allow them all other roles. That seems to make sense of the scripture on the topic (1 Timothy 2) in my mind as well.
This leaves open positions of deacon, bible study leader, financial coordinator, seminary professor and whatever else the Church may need/want.
Note carefully that the passage doesn't cite a supposed inferiority in a women's teaching as a reason for making the restriction. The explicit reason seems to be to call back to Adam's failure to honor his God-given responsibility for his "one-flesh" "helper", Eve. The restriction of eldership reminds us to trust God's judgement concerning any role may ask of us. Careful though- this interpretation doesn't say that the relationship between Adam and Eve should be a model for that between men and women in general.
I have been studying this issue for hours, not because I don’t understand it, but because I need more ways to describe the logic of it to my best friend.
She believes in God, but she’s hesitant to be an actual Christian, because she sees passages like this and thinks that Christianity promotes inequality.
She simply doesn’t understand the difference between equality of value and difference in function.
I really, really hope it’s not an issue that drives her away from God, because her mom has brought her up with a very feminist mindset, and she simply cannot understand why women cannot or should not do everything and anything that men do.
You might want to read “Neither Complementarian Nor Egalitarian”. Also, the book “Worthy” amd the blog “My Only Comfort”.
These guys really do enjoy the echo chamber!
Yes Reaction formation and Confirmation bias.
The word of God is clear. You are free to disagree, but what they say is of Christ’s relationship with the church.
@@oliverallen5324 it's sad how many people think they are smarter than God...
These views may turn her away from Christianity! Sadly. The bible is a book about the patriarchy & no matter what sweet words you use to describe the role of women, they are regarded as less important than men. You cannot get away from that fact.
You can only have that interpretation if you are equally under the common mind set.
Are they all blowing away gen.3:16 to please women rebellion against man authority ?? Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
we see that denominations are men made domination going deeper and deeper into chaos .Christ is the only way not men.
What about the man's punishment? Being required to work and took the land from sunrise to sunset? I don't hear any pastors ever commanding men to go out and work the land. No, it's ok for them to work in their air conditioned offices behind s desk...or s pulpit while commanding women that they must endur birth pain and being ruled by her husband.
Genesis 3:16 is a curse due to the fall and does not apply to believers in Christ who are set free from all consequences of the fall.
Genesis tells is that Eve was punished for disobeying God’s authority, not man’s.
@@rebekahguilder602 Where did you get that silly idea from.
I guess you're not married and you haven't had a baby otherwise you would know that women are still having pain in child birth.
John Piper thinks egalitarians only quote Galatians 3:28 to support equality. Actually, egalitarians use the whole Bible to support equality and justice for all. Jesus came to give people life to the fullest (John 10:10), broke all curses, brought women to equality, racial hierarchy, social-economic justice. Women provided financially for Jesus (Luke 8:1-3, and no where does Luke describe men providing for him). Complementarians distort the Genesis story...Adam and Eve were equal, Eve was his "ezer"...ezer is used 16 times by God describing himself as an equal and ally (Where does my help / ezer come from? It comes from the Lord..., etc.) And, Piper claims that "head" can only mean "authority." He's blind..."Head" in the metaphorical sense means "source."
If Eve was equal to Adam, why then does the scriptures tell us that "And the eyes of them both were opened", not after the woman ate the forbidden fruit, but after the man ate the forbidden fruit?
Gen:3:6: And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7: And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
Equality before God does not mean equality in age, strength, skill, experience, understanding, knowledge, purpose, authority or position.
This simple truth is found most easily in sports. In his prime, Michael Jordan was the top Basket ball player on the court. I have yet to hear of a woman ( a female born with two X chromosomes ) basketball player being able to do the exact same things that Michael Jordan did.
Scripture does not teach us that sin entered into the world as the result of one man's and one woman's sin, but as the result of man's sin.
Romans 5:12: Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Romans 5:17: For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
18: Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19: For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Jesus did not change the order of authority and dominion to bring about today's notions of "equality" between the sexes, but to restore the original authority and order of God's kingdom on earth. Such order and authority which will not be fully realized until Christ returns and establishes His kingdom on earth and sets all things in their proper place and their proper order.
The fact that you used social-economic justice tells me all I need to know about your approach to the scripture. Liberal politics has no place in the Body of Christ.
I do not find any complementarian ever teaching that Adam and Eve were not equal in worth. I think Jamie, that is a strawman argument. In fact, if you watched till minute 27 this same point is clarified. And neither has the question ever been whether women provided for Jesus. I think that would even be a worthy argument if it was true that women provided for Jesus as their husband. I do not find any complementarian arguing that women cannot give toward the sustenance of their Pastor, which would be a parallel example. In other words, women giving to any ministry is never a topic of discussion at all! As for 'head' not meaning authority, is it not true indeed that Christ as the head of the Church is her leader? How do you separate the two? In what setting do you find a 'head' that does not lead? Head of a firm? Head of a family? Or the head of the church? And yet, and yet, if you watched to the end, Piper does not disagree that 'source' is inherent in the word 'head.' He addresses that as well. And yet, the questions they raise remain unanswered.
You are right. The only places that refute this is Paul's Epistles. Peter doesn't talk about it, the entire old testament doesn't talk about it. And, Jesus doesn't talk about it. There is reason to suspect that there has been a deliberate attempt to corrupt the Bible, and for Satan to suppress half of the gifts of humanity. Many social evils were brought to dust because women stood their ground. Compare to medieval times of women's worth being assigned to man's desires and his identity, had only destroyed them. The greatest sign for the Bible truly standing to uplift and free the woman, (not to usurp a man's position, but to have her own God-willed authority), is seen in the transformation Christian cultures has brought to countries of the world, for women's positions. So I believe, God is still working, though man still holds on to the greed for power and subjugation.
@@byamukama I find your arguments to fit the same description. Because throughout Jesus's parable you can see women doing business, and Mary Magdalene as a procurer of oil. Women were not forbidden from following Him. Pheobe and other women established churches. There's a clear conspiracy in trying to subjugate women, where the English Bible translators and the Catholic Church Bishop's, coming from Greek cultures of misogyny, to have meddled with scripture. Many a times, the translations referring to women, are worded differently, than when it was used to describe men. The same word. This is Satan's crafty trick to use men's egoes to suppress half of humanity and their gifts. The gifts of the spirit are poured out equally. You can see this selective nature and contradictions throughout the new testament, where a common commandment wouldn't be applicable to women, because these two places in the Bible are in stark contrast. Rightly dividing the Bible and preventing falsity to enter into the church, is what will make way for the great awakening
I wonder how these men would feel if the roles were reversed?
Doesn’t matter because Scripture doesn’t say that.
Probably not great. I will be honest with you, I am a young man that leans towards complementarianism. I completely understand how this sounds to women. It feels like a "go make me a sandwich" mindset. It really isn't. I don't want to downplay how difficult it is for women to hear this, but please hear where I am coming from. I don't see this as a great gift that my future wife should "submit" to me. I see it as a responsibility. I am terrified. I have to protect her. I have to love her like CHRIST. How can I meet the standard of Christ? I can't abuse this responsibility, and if I do I will be responsible to God. If I abuse this I will be held accountable.
So, again I am not downplaying how difficult this is for my sisters in Christ, but please understand how difficult this is for young men like myself.
Gal 3:28 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Mat 22:28 Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
Little children are male and female, but they do not marry. Except ye be converted, and become as this little child, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
_
Question, what does Paul mean by "in Christ, there is neither male nor female"? That is, practically what does he mean?
Question, are we still male and female in the kingdom of heaven?
Did Jesus become a hermaphrodite after he was resurrected ?
The bible does promote inequality .
Divine Order is what it teaches. A father and son who treat us how they would want to be treated if they were us.
I am appalled by how the men can only see their worth in women who tend to serve their husbands and children. Then why does women have God given instincts to lead and transform. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that women are mentally incapable. Deborah lead the Israelites and the valiant men, reverenced her, and honored her, as they would any other prophet. Did God tell her to shut up, you're but a woman? No. And Phoebe's description of Deacon has been changed to servant. It's clear that the Bible has been meddled with. In Corinthians, the verses asking women to learn from their husbands, was added in later. The scholars have agreed upon that. And, it goes against what Jesus asked Mary to do.- Learn from Him directly!
There seems to be a misinterpretation when Paul asks the men if they were the only ones who received the gospel. When Jesus was ascending to heaven, he told the women and men together to preach the gospel.
I totally agree with you. Society does not work best with this model. It works best when men and women are treated equitably. This doesn't mean exactly the same, but it does mean giving the same rights and opportunities for women to flourish.
@@lw498 yeah. I have the same view. We have different abilities, but each human being is made in God's image with unique gifts. Women are equally capable of teaching, leading, and achieving.
Hey did they say in the panel women are only for being wife’s and mothers? 😬 I must of missed that if it was said.
:-) It may seem right or convenient to embrace some sort of socio sexual androgyny, but I have found that women are sexually dominant, but vulnerable, while emotionally rudimentary but dependent; - whereas men are sexually rudimentary but dependent, while emotionally dominant but vulnerable.
There are irrefutable observations to be made which broadly define the nature of men and women.
When we are able to make the right observations , and get our head around one concept, and then another and then integrate them, for woman, and then do the same for men, and then see how the two concepts function in relation to one another with various forces involved we can get an over view of what's going on.
That's when the definitive authoritative statements in scripture make sense.
You're right of course that it is shocking that men unfortunately primarily define themselves in relation to women or in contrast to women.
But that's why women are commanded to to see to it that they defer to their husbands.
Women simply don't have the same head status as men, and neither do men have the same body status as women.
The harsh realities of life demand that we take these things seriously.
When women are un-affirmed in the glory of their femininity i.e. what they are in relation to true man, they don't appreciate their body status.
They also don't understand the seriousness of the emotional vulnerability of men .
The influence of the carnal mentality of women on the sub-conscious of men is what provides the fertile soil for deviancy in men who identify women as the authority figures, and themselves as primarily physical sexual beings in competition with women.
I am certain that most women are un-affirmed, although they are the sexual potentates, and they tend to want to usurp authority or assume the same head status as men, which is the same as usurping authority over them, which is of course counter productive, except in the case of emergent men who learn to keep their focus on God and not be distracted by contentious or strident women however competent they may be.
I am certain that Individualistic Sexless efficiency, barren women and passive ineffectual men, is not God's ideal of grace and harmony.
Egalitarianism is the way.
It's the way down the drain, which is where our culture is going; let's lead the way
@@scythermantis It's literally equality.
@@j-mshistorycorner6932 “Liberty and equality are mutually exclusive, even hostile concepts. Liberty, by its very nature, undermines social equality, and equality suppresses liberty - for how else could it be attained?”
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
@@j-mshistorycorner6932 "As the demand for egalitarianism and the eradication of masculinity accelerates, there's going to be a longing in the unconscious for the precise opposite of that, right?
The more you scream for equality, the more your unconscious is going to admire dominance."
Jordan Peterson
@@scythermantis Oh please
Do these guys even know Hebrew?
Yes.
@@Mattchew2232 I doubt it.
In fact I guarantee that they don't.
Are you defining "know" as having studied and able to read Hebrew? Or are you defining it as not understanding it a certain way- which shows their knowledge is poor?
@@Mattchew2232 TF Torrance for instance said that it was his task to evangelize the foundations of Western thought.
Part of that foundation is the union of Neo Platonic philosophy with Christian revelation ( the Hebrew mind).....started by Augustine.
As you know these are two completely different ways of knowing.
Greek philosophy is inherently dualistic....Zeus...Prometheus ( our current evangelical penal substitutionary model for example).
The Hebrew mind is onto-relational...face to face knowing.
These guys aren't aware they have built their house on shifting epistemological sand.
Check out C Baxter Kruger at www.perichoresis.org
@@bilbobaggins4403 So your first comment wasn't about their ability to read Hebrew, but their presuppositions. That wasn't clear and came off as insulting (not sure if that was your intention).
I would say you're mistaken, as least when it comes to John Piper. He's someone who is very epistemologically aware.
go home