Interestingly enough, my experience at a private Christian university actually opened my mind a lot more than my time in the secular environment at a community college. I was fortunate to attend a university with an emphasis on engagement with the world in all fields, and I met and listened to a lot of thoughtful, intelligent Christians whose views differed from mine. Growing up homeschooled and consuming a lot of Christian media (much of which I sought out myself), I had developed very rigid ideas around a number of issues, including creationism, sexuality, and abortion. It was a lot easier to dismiss opposing viewpoints when I knew about them primarily as "leftist" or "secular" positions that *real* Christians didn't hold (because those that did were presented as people who didn’t really respect Scripture, or who had caved to the pressures of secular culture). Getting to know real people who held these views, people I liked and respected, greatly increased my willingness to hear out opposing arguments and see weaknesses in my own arguments. In some areas, I changed altogether (ex. I am no longer a six-day creationist, and I now see that secular scientists dismiss creationism not out of fear, willful ignorance, or conspiracy, but because creationists tend to misuse science, use outdated arguments, and ignore inconvenient information). On other issues (ex. abortion and sexuality), my views became more nuanced and informed, and even if my moral judgements didn’t change, the policies I advocated for did, and I had a much greater ability to assume that other people were serious, thoughful, and well-intentioned, even if I disagreed with their conclusions.
I was surprised you said some of the sources she cited were from the 90's, because when I was in undergrad, at least some of my classes would tell us not to use sources more than a certain number of years old (as Rebekah points out). You also bring up good points about how much society has changed. Can confirm, as someone who was in middle school and high school in the 2000's at a Christian school, the purity culture was strong and it's taken a long time to disentangle from it. Also love how passionate you ladies are about honesty in research and holding Christian writers to the same standard!! Absolutely, when I had to write APA-style research papers in undergrad, step one was a literature review of actual academic journal articles.
“The image of us being different from the world is more important than (fill in the blank).” Like the Amish, thinking that using straight pins instead of buttons makes them more holy, while some of the most horrific forms of abuse run rampant through their communities. *We need another measuring stick.*
15:30 I have to get Sally's book! This is sounding like my experience. If you ask my husband if he is complementarian or egalitarian he will tell you he is complementarian, however our marriage functions much closer to egalitarian ... which I think I see quite a bit in my life in the evangelical church.
Complimentarian by name and egalitarian in function is not Piper and Grudem's complematarianism. The latter is a deceptive word in this arena. It advocates hierarchy by claiming equal value. That's hogwash.
"The problem that I have is that it just isn't done to normal scholarly standards that would pass even a first-year university check in in in most secular universities that are that are good. When I see so many Christians praising this work as being scholarly. It makes me really worried that we aren't going to be able to engage with the broader culture because we can't even work to their standards." Loved your ending comments by all 3 of you. Because of your deep love for Christ, you have compassion and concern for those who don't know Him. For those who don't know the truth. For those for whom books like Pearcy's are a stumbling block that they may never get past to see the truth. My daughter, who was homeschooled but later attended college, has some interesting discussions with her friend who was also homeschooled but never attended college. Her friend is fairly ignorant when it comes to the sciences and consequently does not vaccinate her children. As a nurse, I am appalled that she has been so led astray because of ignorance and fear that is unfounded. She does not understand in the least how statistics work, let alone peer reviewed studies. Nor does she understand the very basics of biochem and immunology. That is just one example. Not everyone needs to be a physician or a nurse to understand how vaccinations work. But everyone should have, at the very least, a handshake acquaintance with how the human body works. It is no different when it comes to Christianity. You are absolutely right: We must do better. We can do better. You have shown that. Thank you!
We homeschooled our children. Complementarianism withOUT hierarchy (Ron Pierce's term), mutualism (terrance williams) or egalitarian (multiple scholars) is rampant in the homeschooling community. I have seen exactly what you described. Those that espouse complementarianism WITH hierarchy don't actually practice it to the full extent of how Grudem and Piper, or the Danvers Statement say they should. Or, if they do, the wives become very manipulative to "get what they want," because they can't/don't have a voice and their needs go unmet by practicing one way quiet submission. Rebecca, I loved you blue paint sorority girls analogy. While you were talking I actually pictured individual moms laughing and giggling about their skin routine that they espoused but didn't actually follow, while the one mom who took their words to heart and followed it sat miserable and isolated in a corner wondering what went wrong and why it wasn't working for her. 35 years after starting our journey into homeschooling, I have seen the immense harm caused by those who espoused (but did not practice) hierarchic thinking in their marriages, as well as the irreparable harm caused by those who believed what they were wrongly told and actually had the integrity to practice what they believed.
Regarding women's suffrage, is it equally tragic that men feel the need for the right to vote and don't trust the more powerful to make decisions on issues that effect them? Why is the cutoff for democracy at the point where women are enfranchised?
Not to mention that, in many cases, women *did* have very good reasons to distrust men. This was, after all, the age of the temperance movement, which was motivated by how many husbands were drinking aways their paychecks and mistreating their wives and children. The problem wasn't that women's trust was being eroded, it was that men were responsible for the erosion. (And what about single women? If the idea is a household vote, then why do single *men* get votes and not single women, even if they are widows with children?)
What is really weird to me is seeing women argue against women being allowed to vote/saying women being given the vote ruined society. (Granted that seems to be a very small fringe group.) There was a British suffragette back in the day who literally died fighting for women to be able to have the right to vote; she threw herself in front of a racehorse at the Epsom Derby.
First of all, I really appreciate *both* Rebecca's passion and animation, and Sheila's unflappability. Also, ~37:40, that's a great way to suss out marital health! I know when I was in the Comp life, I would also have answered that I was happy, because I was SO intent on cultivating "godliness with contentment", "forgiveness" (which was really more like emotional self-abandonment, w large dose of practical permissiveness, because you know, submission; and total neglect of Matt 18), along with relief that he wasn't as bad as the bad husbands in Comp marriage books. But I would have had to answer your detailed questions, w NOT being heard, or helped, or rested, etc.
Yay! I saw an interview with Nancy about her book and was wondering the whole time what your take was on her claims and research. Thank you! Edit: That is super weird that Nancy would respond by saying she's letting the complementarian men define complementarianism for themselves 🤔
About the discussion about standards of research and scholarship: Too many evangelicals have fallen into the same problems that the hyper-leftists got exposed for in the Grievance Studies Hoax a few years ago - except that evangelicals are doing it from the other side. SIGH. 😔
Exactly! When we become activists rather than scholars, we do badly, no matter what side we're on. Dogma can't coexist with seeking truth. But Jesus can!
@@SheilaWrayGregoire”When we become activists rather than scholars, we do badly.” Wow … this is such a profound statement for **so** many subjects, regardless of ideology.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm starting to see that more with a lot of different things. Like, the left has these ideas that lead to terrible things but then the right have ideas that lead to the same terrible things but for a different reason. It's like a psychotic Morton's Fork except with higher stakes.
Yes, egalitarian men make better husbands, for sure! (I edited my word:) We are an equal team, we work together on things, we grieve together, we laugh together, we learn together, we unlearn together, we seek God individually and together.....it's wonderful! What's the difference between complimentarianism and egalitarianism?
Complementarian men believe in hierarchy, and believe that they are in authority over their wives and so get to make the final decisions, while egalitarians believe that marriage is an equal partnership.
I’m confused. If you’re asking what the difference is between the two “types”, then how can you make the declaration that one of the two types is “better”?
Is it religiosity that contributes to better outcomes, or is it more so the community and the feeling of being a member of the community that lots of religions offer that provides better outcomes?
Great question! Some studies have tried to break that down. Personally I think it's very likely that the community aspect is a huge part of it. There's also a self-selection effect--those who choose to dedicate themselves to religious involvement tend to be a certain kind of person. But we also know that certain self-actualization markers lead to better outcomes--like feeling as if you have a purpose in life; acting altruistically. And those things are more likely for religious people. So I think it's likely a combo, but the community aspect is huge.
@@SheilaWrayGregoire thanks! Asking because I used to be very religious and now that I'm not, the loss of community was something very hard to adapt to. I think we need more community gatherings for people no matter the religion people find themselves in
I wish Gottman would speak out about how his research is being misconstrued by people (especially Eggrichs) to support their complementarian theses when his research is so strongly pro-egalitarian.
I love this! Thanks you so much! But I have some questions if some of you can guide me, complementarism talks about marriage or about the role of women in the church or both? Because I think most Christians context have a problem (at least in my city: temuco, chile, South America, very especific) with the role of women in the church, you know as a pastor, diacon, etc etc. Thoughts?
It's interesting that this article popped up on AlterNet while I was watching this video -- "Idaho Trump-loving megachurch pastor opposes a woman’s right to vote". It's so sad this type of mindset is still coming up, especially from influential leaders.
I love the thought of preching what your practice ... that is, after all, what Jesus did, and what Paul did. Pethaps some of the problems we have come from preaching something other than out practice...
Wow quite an impressive discussion on what is good research! Question-hard complimentarians would charge that egalitarians are feminists. I have listened to a few feminist talk and I would say that is not a fair assessment. What are your thoughts about their charge of feminism?
Feminism is merely the belief that men and women are equal. Not the same--but equal and should be treated as such. Politically some who claim feminism make a variety of different stands on things, but feminism is merely a belief in egalitarianism. I don't know why it has such a bad name. What's wrong with believing that men and women are equally made in the image of God and equally called to serve Him?
Thanks for your reply. I agree with your definition, but I am afraid that is not what it means to many people today. In one of your podcasts you and your husband said the greatest problem the church faces is post-moderism and I strongly agree on that point. Thanks again. I will continue to listen to some of your podcasts as I have time.
I have never seen a feminist say they knew for a long time that they wanted to be a mum or heard a feminist say something positive about husbands or men. You've blown my mind. Why do feminists keep this a secret?
Hmmm… why is male headship being conflated with abuse and being touted as the same thing? like unless a husband is domineering and cruel to his wife he can’t be complimentarian? Huh! It’s confusing because I’m trying to figure out which verses in the bible that complimentarians use to make their case say “male headship is being domineering, cruel and inconsiderate of your wife’s feelings” Perhaps the problem here is seeing a correlation between male headship and abuse and lumping that in with biblical headship, but those are not the same things. And it’s a shame you can’t see that. If a women is married to a men who doesn’t take her opinion into consideration, who is domineering and cruel he is not leading in a loving a sacrificial way. That is not biblical leadership, and what needs to be corrected is not biblical leadership but this husband who thinks abuse is leadership. But in case you weren’t aware there are toxic views of male leadership in none Christian societies, but lumping all forms of views of male headship together and not differentiating between them particularly the abusive forms is deeply problematic.
You are painting the standard rosy version of a loving husband who would never abuse his supposed God-given authority over his wife. Two points that show the problem with this. (1) I have seen several stories of women being shunned and excommunicated from churches for refusing to return to abusive husbands. I have never heard of a single man ever being officially disciplined in church for “abusing headship”. This tells me the point of this teaching is not about having a healthy relationship it is about women “knowing their place” despite all the empty rhetoric about how it is good for women. (2) What kind of man *wants* to have authority over his wife? Jesus told us not to seek to “lord it over” others. As a follower of Jesus, if I honestly believed that God had given me authority over my wife the first thing I would do is lay that down and serve like Jesus did. This is what complementarians SAY they do, but the fact that it is SOOOO important for everyone to remember that THE MAN IS IN CHARGE reveals that it is clear they are not truly serving anything other than their own interests.
@@MommaLooas Christians we believe that Jesus was God in human form. He could call twelve legions of angels. He was all powerful and deserving of all worship. Yet he called the lowly fishermen around him “friends”. The night before He gave His life for us all He washed the feet of those disciples. To me this is in complete and total contrast to men saying “My wife better submit to me because that’s what the Bible says” Why does a husband need to be a leader? Why can’t a husband and wife be co-heirs of God’s grace and commission? Does God really trust His sons more than his daughters? I am not closed minded as you say. In fact, I used to believe as you do because I was taught that was the only truly Biblical position. The problem is it just didn’t square with what I saw in the person of Jesus. Then I found all the amazing resources on places like Christians for Biblical Equality which show there is a long and deep scholarship that supports a more equal view of men and women in the Christian church.
I hope someday you will have the experience of being in a relationship where who is in charge is just not an issue. I am glad it sounds like you have a husband who is a joy to you. Many women are not so lucky yet the church tells them to submit to bad men because of a misinterpretation of these Bible verses you are quoting. You have said that I lack understanding and am cherry picking Bible verses and I forgive you for this false accusation. Please remember that I told you I used to believe like you so I know all the verses. The Bible is truly countercultural because Jesus turns all authority on its head (Matt 20:26) not because it reinforces the way the world has always worked since the fall (I.e. men over women rather than the two caring for His creation together)
Gotta love how people who disagree with you are casually dismissed as just not understanding how little they understand. I think Keith understands quite well what you are trying to say, and the flaws inherent. On a different note, you made the statement that Jesus both served and exercised authority. My question is, whom did He serve, and over whom did He exercise authority? Looking at the answer to these questions can be quite illuminating.
All you state is stats and statistics…. -0- bible verses. Ultimately if Gods word is final authority. 22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. (Ephesians 5:22-24, NASB) Men are to be the leaders in the home. Because Gods Word says so. I know that’s hard for you women to hear because you live to usurp the role of male leadership. Yeah you definitely don’t want to deal with verses or Gods Word. Just stick to the stats.
Verse 21: Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Why start at verse 22, when the verb "submit" isn't even in it in the original Greek? It gets its meaning from verse 21, meaning that wives submit to their husbands IN THE SAME WAY that we all submit to one another?
@@NoahFred29attitude, pal, attitude. When “wives submit” is pounded while “husbands love” isn’t even mentioned, we’ve got trouble with a capital T. Based on what you said, your Bible apparently has the “husbands love” part blacked out, and I don’t have any interest in being around people whose Bibles are in such a state.
Great job presenting the FACTS! It's important to break down and show people what they believe according to how they FUNCTION, not just in theory.
Interestingly enough, my experience at a private Christian university actually opened my mind a lot more than my time in the secular environment at a community college. I was fortunate to attend a university with an emphasis on engagement with the world in all fields, and I met and listened to a lot of thoughtful, intelligent Christians whose views differed from mine.
Growing up homeschooled and consuming a lot of Christian media (much of which I sought out myself), I had developed very rigid ideas around a number of issues, including creationism, sexuality, and abortion. It was a lot easier to dismiss opposing viewpoints when I knew about them primarily as "leftist" or "secular" positions that *real* Christians didn't hold (because those that did were presented as people who didn’t really respect Scripture, or who had caved to the pressures of secular culture). Getting to know real people who held these views, people I liked and respected, greatly increased my willingness to hear out opposing arguments and see weaknesses in my own arguments. In some areas, I changed altogether (ex. I am no longer a six-day creationist, and I now see that secular scientists dismiss creationism not out of fear, willful ignorance, or conspiracy, but because creationists tend to misuse science, use outdated arguments, and ignore inconvenient information). On other issues (ex. abortion and sexuality), my views became more nuanced and informed, and even if my moral judgements didn’t change, the policies I advocated for did, and I had a much greater ability to assume that other people were serious, thoughful, and well-intentioned, even if I disagreed with their conclusions.
I was surprised you said some of the sources she cited were from the 90's, because when I was in undergrad, at least some of my classes would tell us not to use sources more than a certain number of years old (as Rebekah points out). You also bring up good points about how much society has changed. Can confirm, as someone who was in middle school and high school in the 2000's at a Christian school, the purity culture was strong and it's taken a long time to disentangle from it.
Also love how passionate you ladies are about honesty in research and holding Christian writers to the same standard!! Absolutely, when I had to write APA-style research papers in undergrad, step one was a literature review of actual academic journal articles.
“The image of us being different from the world is more important than (fill in the blank).”
Like the Amish, thinking that using straight pins instead of buttons makes them more holy, while some of the most horrific forms of abuse run rampant through their communities. *We need another measuring stick.*
15:30 I have to get Sally's book! This is sounding like my experience. If you ask my husband if he is complementarian or egalitarian he will tell you he is complementarian, however our marriage functions much closer to egalitarian ... which I think I see quite a bit in my life in the evangelical church.
Complimentarian by name and egalitarian in function is not Piper and Grudem's complematarianism. The latter is a deceptive word in this arena. It advocates hierarchy by claiming equal value. That's hogwash.
"The problem that I have is that it just isn't done to normal scholarly standards that would pass even a first-year university check in in in most secular universities that are that are good. When I see so many Christians praising this work as being scholarly. It makes me really worried that we aren't going to be able to engage with the broader culture because we can't even work to their standards."
Loved your ending comments by all 3 of you. Because of your deep love for Christ, you have compassion and concern for those who don't know Him. For those who don't know the truth. For those for whom books like Pearcy's are a stumbling block that they may never get past to see the truth.
My daughter, who was homeschooled but later attended college, has some interesting discussions with her friend who was also homeschooled but never attended college. Her friend is fairly ignorant when it comes to the sciences and consequently does not vaccinate her children. As a nurse, I am appalled that she has been so led astray because of ignorance and fear that is unfounded. She does not understand in the least how statistics work, let alone peer reviewed studies. Nor does she understand the very basics of biochem and immunology.
That is just one example. Not everyone needs to be a physician or a nurse to understand how vaccinations work. But everyone should have, at the very least, a handshake acquaintance with how the human body works.
It is no different when it comes to Christianity. You are absolutely right: We must do better. We can do better. You have shown that. Thank you!
We homeschooled our children. Complementarianism withOUT hierarchy (Ron Pierce's term), mutualism (terrance williams) or egalitarian (multiple scholars) is rampant in the homeschooling community. I have seen exactly what you described. Those that espouse complementarianism WITH hierarchy don't actually practice it to the full extent of how Grudem and Piper, or the Danvers Statement say they should. Or, if they do, the wives become very manipulative to "get what they want," because they can't/don't have a voice and their needs go unmet by practicing one way quiet submission.
Rebecca, I loved you blue paint sorority girls analogy. While you were talking I actually pictured individual moms laughing and giggling about their skin routine that they espoused but didn't actually follow, while the one mom who took their words to heart and followed it sat miserable and isolated in a corner wondering what went wrong and why it wasn't working for her.
35 years after starting our journey into homeschooling, I have seen the immense harm caused by those who espoused (but did not practice) hierarchic thinking in their marriages, as well as the irreparable harm caused by those who believed what they were wrongly told and actually had the integrity to practice what they believed.
Regarding women's suffrage, is it equally tragic that men feel the need for the right to vote and don't trust the more powerful to make decisions on issues that effect them? Why is the cutoff for democracy at the point where women are enfranchised?
Not to mention that, in many cases, women *did* have very good reasons to distrust men. This was, after all, the age of the temperance movement, which was motivated by how many husbands were drinking aways their paychecks and mistreating their wives and children. The problem wasn't that women's trust was being eroded, it was that men were responsible for the erosion. (And what about single women? If the idea is a household vote, then why do single *men* get votes and not single women, even if they are widows with children?)
What is really weird to me is seeing women argue against women being allowed to vote/saying women being given the vote ruined society. (Granted that seems to be a very small fringe group.) There was a British suffragette back in the day who literally died fighting for women to be able to have the right to vote; she threw herself in front of a racehorse at the Epsom Derby.
Rose-colored glasses - they WORK. Until they don’t.
So, so true!
First of all, I really appreciate *both* Rebecca's passion and animation, and Sheila's unflappability. Also, ~37:40, that's a great way to suss out marital health! I know when I was in the Comp life, I would also have answered that I was happy, because I was SO intent on cultivating "godliness with contentment", "forgiveness" (which was really more like emotional self-abandonment, w large dose of practical permissiveness, because you know, submission; and total neglect of Matt 18), along with relief that he wasn't as bad as the bad husbands in Comp marriage books. But I would have had to answer your detailed questions, w NOT being heard, or helped, or rested, etc.
Yay! I saw an interview with Nancy about her book and was wondering the whole time what your take was on her claims and research. Thank you!
Edit: That is super weird that Nancy would respond by saying she's letting the complementarian men define complementarianism for themselves 🤔
Wow I LOVED Alisa Childers for a long time and she's pushing complimentarianism to the point that I no longer want to see her videos
About the discussion about standards of research and scholarship: Too many evangelicals have fallen into the same problems that the hyper-leftists got exposed for in the Grievance Studies Hoax a few years ago - except that evangelicals are doing it from the other side. SIGH. 😔
Exactly! When we become activists rather than scholars, we do badly, no matter what side we're on. Dogma can't coexist with seeking truth. But Jesus can!
@@SheilaWrayGregoire”When we become activists rather than scholars, we do badly.” Wow … this is such a profound statement for **so** many subjects, regardless of ideology.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm starting to see that more with a lot of different things. Like, the left has these ideas that lead to terrible things but then the right have ideas that lead to the same terrible things but for a different reason. It's like a psychotic Morton's Fork except with higher stakes.
Yes, egalitarian men make better husbands, for sure! (I edited my word:)
We are an equal team, we work together on things, we grieve together, we laugh together, we learn together, we unlearn together, we seek God individually and together.....it's wonderful!
What's the difference between complimentarianism and egalitarianism?
Complementarian men believe in hierarchy, and believe that they are in authority over their wives and so get to make the final decisions, while egalitarians believe that marriage is an equal partnership.
22:07 and following.
That sounds egalitarian, not complementarian.
I’m confused. If you’re asking what the difference is between the two “types”, then how can you make the declaration that one of the two types is “better”?
Sorry guys, I was thinking egalitarianism 🤦🏻♀️ Got my words mixed up!
Thanks!!
Complementarian men by and large come from churches that attract narcissistic men or create narcissistic men.
Great episode
If husbands have the final authority, why did God provide them an ezer/helper?
And why did God provide women brains and a voice.
Is it religiosity that contributes to better outcomes, or is it more so the community and the feeling of being a member of the community that lots of religions offer that provides better outcomes?
Great question! Some studies have tried to break that down. Personally I think it's very likely that the community aspect is a huge part of it. There's also a self-selection effect--those who choose to dedicate themselves to religious involvement tend to be a certain kind of person. But we also know that certain self-actualization markers lead to better outcomes--like feeling as if you have a purpose in life; acting altruistically. And those things are more likely for religious people. So I think it's likely a combo, but the community aspect is huge.
@@SheilaWrayGregoire thanks! Asking because I used to be very religious and now that I'm not, the loss of community was something very hard to adapt to. I think we need more community gatherings for people no matter the religion people find themselves in
I wish Gottman would speak out about how his research is being misconstrued by people (especially Eggrichs) to support their complementarian theses when his research is so strongly pro-egalitarian.
I love this! Thanks you so much! But I have some questions if some of you can guide me, complementarism talks about marriage or about the role of women in the church or both? Because I think most Christians context have a problem (at least in my city: temuco, chile, South America, very especific) with the role of women in the church, you know as a pastor, diacon, etc etc. Thoughts?
You should have Nancy Pearcy on your show.
It's interesting that this article popped up on AlterNet while I was watching this video -- "Idaho Trump-loving megachurch pastor opposes a woman’s right to vote". It's so sad this type of mindset is still coming up, especially from influential leaders.
Is that Doug Wilson?
@@lisajohnson4744 That's what the article says.
Thought so. Yeesh.
I love the thought of preching what your practice
... that is, after all, what Jesus did, and what Paul did. Pethaps some of the problems we have come from preaching something other than out practice...
Wow quite an impressive discussion on what is good research! Question-hard complimentarians would charge that egalitarians are feminists. I have listened to a few feminist talk and I would say that is not a fair assessment. What are your thoughts about their charge of feminism?
Feminism is merely the belief that men and women are equal. Not the same--but equal and should be treated as such. Politically some who claim feminism make a variety of different stands on things, but feminism is merely a belief in egalitarianism. I don't know why it has such a bad name. What's wrong with believing that men and women are equally made in the image of God and equally called to serve Him?
Thanks for your reply. I agree with your definition, but I am afraid that is not what it means to many people today. In one of your podcasts you and your husband said the greatest problem the church faces is post-moderism and I strongly agree on that point. Thanks again. I will continue to listen to some of your podcasts as I have time.
I have never seen a feminist say they knew for a long time that they wanted to be a mum or heard a feminist say something positive about husbands or men. You've blown my mind. Why do feminists keep this a secret?
🔥🔥🔥🎯💯
Hmmm… why is male headship being conflated with abuse and being touted as the same thing? like unless a husband is domineering and cruel to his wife he can’t be complimentarian? Huh!
It’s confusing because I’m trying to figure out which verses in the bible that complimentarians use to make their case say “male headship is being domineering, cruel and inconsiderate of your wife’s feelings”
Perhaps the problem here is seeing a correlation between male headship and abuse and lumping that in with biblical headship, but those are not the same things. And it’s a shame you can’t see that.
If a women is married to a men who doesn’t take her opinion into consideration, who is domineering and cruel he is not leading in a loving a sacrificial way. That is not biblical leadership, and what needs to be corrected is not biblical leadership but this husband who thinks abuse is leadership.
But in case you weren’t aware there are toxic views of male leadership in none Christian societies, but lumping all forms of views of male headship together and not differentiating between them particularly the abusive forms is deeply problematic.
what does a healthy view of male headship look like?
You are painting the standard rosy version of a loving husband who would never abuse his supposed God-given authority over his wife. Two points that show the problem with this. (1) I have seen several stories of women being shunned and excommunicated from churches for refusing to return to abusive husbands. I have never heard of a single man ever being officially disciplined in church for “abusing headship”. This tells me the point of this teaching is not about having a healthy relationship it is about women “knowing their place” despite all the empty rhetoric about how it is good for women. (2) What kind of man *wants* to have authority over his wife? Jesus told us not to seek to “lord it over” others. As a follower of Jesus, if I honestly believed that God had given me authority over my wife the first thing I would do is lay that down and serve like Jesus did. This is what complementarians SAY they do, but the fact that it is SOOOO important for everyone to remember that THE MAN IS IN CHARGE reveals that it is clear they are not truly serving anything other than their own interests.
@@MommaLooas Christians we believe that Jesus was God in human form. He could call twelve legions of angels. He was all powerful and deserving of all worship. Yet he called the lowly fishermen around him “friends”. The night before He gave His life for us all He washed the feet of those disciples. To me this is in complete and total contrast to men saying “My wife better submit to me because that’s what the Bible says” Why does a husband need to be a leader? Why can’t a husband and wife be co-heirs of God’s grace and commission? Does God really trust His sons more than his daughters? I am not closed minded as you say. In fact, I used to believe as you do because I was taught that was the only truly Biblical position. The problem is it just didn’t square with what I saw in the person of Jesus. Then I found all the amazing resources on places like Christians for Biblical Equality which show there is a long and deep scholarship that supports a more equal view of men and women in the Christian church.
I hope someday you will have the experience of being in a relationship where who is in charge is just not an issue. I am glad it sounds like you have a husband who is a joy to you. Many women are not so lucky yet the church tells them to submit to bad men because of a misinterpretation of these Bible verses you are quoting. You have said that I lack understanding and am cherry picking Bible verses and I forgive you for this false accusation. Please remember that I told you I used to believe like you so I know all the verses. The Bible is truly countercultural because Jesus turns all authority on its head (Matt 20:26) not because it reinforces the way the world has always worked since the fall (I.e. men over women rather than the two caring for His creation together)
Gotta love how people who disagree with you are casually dismissed as just not understanding how little they understand. I think Keith understands quite well what you are trying to say, and the flaws inherent.
On a different note, you made the statement that Jesus both served and exercised authority. My question is, whom did He serve, and over whom did He exercise authority? Looking at the answer to these questions can be quite illuminating.
All you state is stats and statistics…. -0- bible verses. Ultimately if Gods word is final authority.
22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.
24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. (Ephesians 5:22-24, NASB)
Men are to be the leaders in the home. Because Gods Word says so. I know that’s hard for you women to hear because you live to usurp the role of male leadership. Yeah you definitely don’t want to deal with verses or Gods Word. Just stick to the stats.
Man oh man I’m glad I’m not married to you.
@@lisajohnson4744 why because the Bible is my anchor, the Bible is my light. The Bible is my guide. The Bible is my source of truth?
Verse 21: Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Why start at verse 22, when the verb "submit" isn't even in it in the original Greek? It gets its meaning from verse 21, meaning that wives submit to their husbands IN THE SAME WAY that we all submit to one another?
I don't see the word "lead" in the verse you cited......
@@NoahFred29attitude, pal, attitude. When “wives submit” is pounded while “husbands love” isn’t even mentioned, we’ve got trouble with a capital T. Based on what you said, your Bible apparently has the “husbands love” part blacked out, and I don’t have any interest in being around people whose Bibles are in such a state.