Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 80 of 80

Thread: Your Views on Patriarchy

  1. #71
    tWebber Wildflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    148
    Amen (Given)
    67
    Amen (Received)
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrian View Post
    You keep insisting that God having chosen males to be the tie-breaker is equivalent to saying that women are deficient or inferior. I'm saying that being inferior doesn't logically follow
    Perhaps if I can rephrase it better.

    That all males get the supposedly needed "tie-breaker" vote over and above their wives means that males have a higher hierarchal position over their wives. This is obviously in any common sense understanding a "superior" position as it stands over and above the subjugated female position.

    That there is a superior and inferior relationship is obvious. Are you saying that you don't believe that holding the power of a "tie-breaking" vote doesn't also mean that the person holding that power is relationally superior in rank and position?

    What I'm saying is that because the woman must always, forever, and permanently take the subservient position in a heirarchal (complementarian) relationship means that women are ontologically (in their essence/nature) inferior.

    I can understand you not liking what I'm saying. But please don't call it illogical. "Superior" and "inferior" are hierarchally relational terms. And that's what so-called "Complementarianism" IS.

    I don't have the same hostility to the egalitarian view that you seem to have to the complementarian view, even if I am not totally convinced it is Biblical.
    I appreciate your grace.

  2. #72
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Oregon
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    91
    Amen (Given)
    70
    Amen (Received)
    28
    The problem with using "inferior" is that it is a loaded word, which most people associate with being of less value. My boss has the right to make the final decisions at work, but that doesn't mean I think I am less valuable as a person (or less skilled). In the complementarianism that I have experienced, the husband does not think the wife is an inferior person. There is still give and take, and both can still use their skills. The husband just has the ultimate responsibility for the household.

  3. Amen Sparko, Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  4. #73
    tWebber Wildflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    148
    Amen (Given)
    67
    Amen (Received)
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrian View Post
    The problem with using "inferior" is that it is a loaded word, which most people associate with being of less value. My boss has the right to make the final decisions at work, but that doesn't mean I think I am less valuable as a person (or less skilled). In the complementarianism that I have experienced, the husband does not think the wife is an inferior person. There is still give and take, and both can still use their skills. The husband just has the ultimate responsibility for the household.
    First, please let me say that I am very happy that you do not feel inferior. I don't believe you are ontologically inferior as a female, though if you took your own complementarian/patirarchal theology to its logical end you would end up seeing yourself as ontolgoically inferior, not just functionally inferior as in a boss/subordinate as you said you see your marriage now. But, I am glad that you don't personally take your own theology to its logical end. But there are many women who do and who stay in relationships with men who do not exercise their supposed superior position as egalitarian as your and your husband seem to do. Think of a woman whose "head" is like some of the posters even here on Tweb. Like in the thread in the dormitory which bears the same name as this one. Think of some of those men exercising their position as king and priest, as spiritual "head", as the one allotted the responsibility to guide and direct his subservient subordinate wife and family both spiritually and otherwise, the one with the final "tie-breaking" decision on ALL matters in church and home. This is what Complementarians teach. And its a dangerous theology that often is accompanied by greater rates of abuse and depression for women. Not to mention the damage to men as well.

    Consider this:

    "Wives, in traditional marriages, suffered significantly more depression and other mental disorders than men, working married women and unmarried women (Bernard 1982).

    In traditional marriages, wives had been beaten at "a rate of more than 300 percent higher than for egalitarian marriages (Straus, Gelles and Steinmetz 1980)."

    Violence is more likely to occur in homes where the husband has all the power and makes all the decisions than in home where spouses share decision making (L. Walker 1979)."

    https://www.godswordtowomen.org/Preato3.htm

    Second, please allow me to put here Merriam-Webster definition of "inferior":

    Definition of inferior

    1 :situated lower down :lower
    2 a :of low or lower degree or rank
    b :of poor quality :mediocre
    3 :of little or less importance, value, or merit...

    Please understand what I'm saying is that this inferiority (as in the above definition) is not limited to only a function when you are born and die as subordinate--then it really is part of your ontological nature--the essence of your IDENTITY. In Complementarian theology your female sex is inferior to the male sex which is superior in rank and is given the responsibility to make decisions for you even if you disagree. It's not a limited "function" as in a work boss/worker chain of command where you could go home and be free of it or quit if the boss is full of it. But as a woman you are given the identity and life as permanent subordinate to males in church and home. Your inferiority in the Complementarian hierarchy with the male sex permanently, completely, and comprehensively holding the superior position (of decision making in church and home) is due to his superior created nature as a male. That's more of a caste system.

    In your boss/subordinate example you gave that is only limited to a function, it is not comprehensive nor permanent. It is only for a limited function: a work situation. It says nothing of your created nature as a female. But in complementarianism your whole gender is subordinate always and forever in church and home.

    In a work relationship you can excel and one day become a boss. You could work hard and be competent to lead. But in the permanent and comprehensive inferiority of women in the complementarian system, there is no amount of skill, work, etc that you could ever do to gain maturity and competence in making "final" responsible decisions in home and ministry. You are permanently forbidden from growing in this maturity and experience. Even if God gave you gifts and skills to competently make these kinds of decisions. You will never be able to use your full potential as an image bearer of God. Never be able to fulfill your commission to "rule and subdue" the earth but will always, under complementarian theology, be forever and always "ruled and subdued" by the males who were created to be superior to you. That's Complementarianism.
    Last edited by Wildflower; 09-12-2017 at 08:36 PM.

  5. #74
    tWebber Wildflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    148
    Amen (Given)
    67
    Amen (Received)
    30
    Egalitarians are fighting for gender equality. Complementarians are fighting to always keep one gender in a superior position.

    All egalitarians want is gender equality, but Complementarians want permanent male superiority in church and home.
    Last edited by Wildflower; 09-12-2017 at 10:12 PM.

  6. #75
    Thread Killer QuantaFille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thulcandra
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    897
    Amen (Given)
    288
    Amen (Received)
    409
    Wow, Wildflower. You seem to have only started this thread to tell us complementarians how we should modify our beliefs to conform to what you (mistakenly) think complementarians should believe, if only we thought it out logically. I have to tell you that I am a very logical and analytical person, and if ever there was a complementarian who would have come to the conclusions you do, it would be me.

    There are roles open only to women, and ones open only to men. The relationship between them in marriage should mirror the one between Christ and his church. The logical conclusion of your position is that the church can overrule Jesus if she sees fit. Do you honestly believe she can?

    My point in asking about bearing children is that God made men with certain abilities and roles, and women with others. That the one can't do what the other can doesn't make that one less valuable as a person. That a man cannot get pregnant does not make him worthless as a human being. That a man cannot have the church leadership role of children's minister does not make him worthless. That a woman cannot "wear the pants" at home doesn't make her worthless, either. As Celebrian pointed out, decisions have to be made together. You seem to think that if we were really practising complementarians, we stupid women wouldn't give any input to our amazing husbands when it comes to making decisions. Nothing could be further from the truth. For instance, I'm better with money than my husband is. When it comes to that, we discuss our options together. He gives a great deal of weight to my words because I have more experience there, but he is responsible for the final decision. The vast majority of the time, he agrees we should do what I suggest.

    You mentioned several times that we must believe that we have to have a husband to be our "king and priest". This is false. I haven't met a complementarian yet who didn't believe in the priesthood of the believer, except Mormons (they are a different story altogether though).

    As for how all of this makes me feel, I feel like I am what God intended me to be. He gave me certain gifts and qualities and I should use those in his service, to the best of my ability. How that fact could cause depression is beyond me.

    I have never, ever ever ever been taught in church that I am "inferior" to men. The fact that you keep using that word tells me that you do not at all understand our position. All are the same in Christ; there is neither male nor female. We are valued equally, that is all. We have different roles, and women do not have to answer to God the same way men do. Men carry the greater burden there, and I for one do not want it myself. One gender is not better than the other. It seems like all you really want is to have input in decision making, and I tell you, we have that here.

    The extreme version of this is practised by some groups, true, but they should be corrected to practise it the way it was intended, not be persuaded to give it up entirely (as I suspect is your motive, if I've read between the lines correctly).
    Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

  7. Amen Cerebrum123, Sparko, Celebrian amen'd this post.
  8. #76
    tWebber Wildflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    148
    Amen (Given)
    67
    Amen (Received)
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaFille View Post
    Wow, Wildflower. You seem to have only started this thread to tell us complementarians how we should modify our beliefs to conform to what you (mistakenly) think complementarians should believe, if only we thought it out logically. I have to tell you that I am a very logical and analytical person, and if ever there was a complementarian who would have come to the conclusions you do, it would be me.
    I don't doubt that you are a logical and analytical person. I just think you are missing the difference between "funcitonal" and "ontolgoical" inferiority. And, for those who understand the difference, I wanted to ask them how they cope believing in a God who deliberately made them ontologically inferior to males. It's an identity issue that touches on both God's and our identity.

    There are roles open only to women, and ones open only to men. The relationship between them in marriage should mirror the one between Christ and his church.
    Oh, I'm quite aware about certain "roles" being open only to women. Like nursery duty and women's ministry. But feel called to help guide the church, to teach His people (not just women and children)? No, you are most definitely not hearing from God if your a complementarian woman. No, much worse...you must be power hungry or something...but def not hearing from God.

    The logical conclusion of your position is that the church can overrule Jesus if she sees fit. Do you honestly believe she can?
    If I were still a complementarian, I wouldn't believe that the "church can overrule Jesus" by allowing women to take up roles such as Deborah, Priscilla, and Junia. But I wouldn't accept the complementarian answers given to those questions, either...so I'd have to search the issue out. Actually, I did all that and I'm now egal. BTW there is a thread started in Christianity 201 if you wanted to discuss the scriptures.



    My point in asking about bearing children is that God made men with certain abilities and roles, and women with others. That the one can't do what the other can doesn't make that one less valuable as a person. That a man cannot get pregnant does not make him worthless as a human being. That a man cannot have the church leadership role of children's minister does not make him worthless. That a woman cannot "wear the pants" at home doesn't make her worthless, either.
    There are certain biological functions that are limited to the sexes, true. Yes, 100% true. Are you saying that spiritual leadership is a biological function? Does biology have a bearing on spirituality? So men are created spiritually superior (as in the boss) and women are biologically created spiritually inferior (in a spiritual chain of command)? So women CANNOT lead men due to her biology? So Deborah...


    As Celebrian pointed out, decisions have to be made together.
    Which is an egalitarian position.

    In a complementarian model, the man doesn't *have to* ask his wife for her input (but "should" if you are a nice complementarian). In a complementarian model the man gets the "final say" in any and all matters, even if his wife disagrees (though he "should" be very nice about it while he does it). In a complementarian marriage the man has to decide and enforce what is best for his wife, even if she doesn't agree, though he "should" be sensitive to her while he takes this authority over her. Just softening up the language doesn't negate the facts. In a complementarian marriage the husband decides for the wife, even if she disagrees, but he "should" do this with grace, love, etc.

    You seem to think that if we were really practising complementarians, we stupid women wouldn't give any input to our amazing husbands when it comes to making decisions.
    No, indeed. I'm sorry you have not understood what I'm been saying, I really don't think you are stupid. Not at all. I think that you and all women have been just as potentially gifted as men with intelligence, competence, and leadership ability. No, I do not think you are stupid at all.

    And, I am also sorry that you somehow think that egalitarians wouldn't give any input to our amazing spouses. We would, and do. It is the complementarians who think men should-but-don't-have-to allow their wives to give input. Egals are all about equal input and working things out. Comps are about one gender being in ultimate control over the other even tho they "should" (but don't have to) allow input from the other. But I am glad that in your particular complementarian marriage that you function more like egalitarians. That's so important to your well-being as a woman.

    For instance, I'm better with money than my husband is. When it comes to that, we discuss our options together. He gives a great deal of weight to my words because I have more experience there, but he is responsible for the final decision. The vast majority of the time, he agrees we should do what I suggest.
    That's great that he listens to your input. But in the complementarian model that you espouse, he doesn't have to. It's great that you have such an egalitarian leaning husband and home.

    But I truly am sorry that both you and he believe that though you are the one better with money and have more experience that he still gets the "final say" because of his superior rank as husband in your complementarian marriage. He bears this ultimate responsibility because of his biological function or the order of man's creation?

    You mentioned several times that we must believe that we have to have a husband to be our "king and priest". This is false. I haven't met a complementarian yet who didn't believe in the priesthood of the believer, except Mormons (they are a different story altogether though).
    Good, I am very glad of this. I wouldn't want you believing that. Even so, you function as if you do believe it as you believe that your husband is your "head" who rules over you (makes decisions for you even if he's nice about it and gets your input before he makes the final decision).

    As for how all of this makes me feel, I feel like I am what God intended me to be. He gave me certain gifts and qualities and I should use those in his service, to the best of my ability. How that fact could cause depression is beyond me.
    You have obviously not felt a call to those ministry functions that are forbidden to you as a woman. I have, and it IS depressing. So much so. Not only to be rejected out of hand because I'm a woman and therefore couldn't be hearing from God if I believe I'm to fulfill this particular call in ministry, but then suspected on top of it. "Why" does she want to be an elder? "Why does she want to be a teacher (not just in the nursery or women's-only studies) Oh--she must be _______. Fill in the blank, I've heard it all.

    I have never, ever ever ever been taught in church that I am "inferior" to men.
    I'm truly grateful for this, QuantaFille. Your're not inferior. You may have understood the inferiority inherent in the complementarian position better if you ever felt like you were called to teach a mixed group of men and women or if you felt you were called as in elder.


    The fact that you keep using that word tells me that you do not at all understand our position.
    I put the dictionary definition in an above post. I've used the word correctly. Men are superior in rank to women in church and home (as evidenced in holding the "final say" and the head leadership positions at church), therefore, according to the definition of "inferior" women are inferior in the complementarian model. If you wish to counter this, please use the dictionary definition and apply it to how males and females are to relate to each other church and home in the complementarian model.

    All are the same in Christ; there is neither male nor female. We are valued equally, that is all. We have different roles, and women do not have to answer to God the same way men do. Men carry the greater burden there, and I for one do not want it myself. One gender is not better than the other. It seems like all you really want is to have input in decision making, and I tell you, we have that here.

    Why do men need to carry the greater burden? Are you not capable enough to share equally in carrying the burden? Do you need men to carry this for you instead of carrying equally together? I believe women are just as capable as men to share the burden of leadership. In fact, its part of our original commission. No "final say", no "greater burden of responsibility".

    The extreme version of this is practised by some groups, true, but they should be corrected to practise it the way it was intended, not be persuaded to give it up entirely (as I suspect is your motive, if I've read between the lines correctly).
    Corrected, how? That men should be *extra nice* when they exert their authority? Sure, that's a step in the right direction but it doesn't solve the inequality problem.
    Last edited by Wildflower; 09-13-2017 at 02:37 PM.

  9. #77
    Thread Killer QuantaFille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thulcandra
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    897
    Amen (Given)
    288
    Amen (Received)
    409
    Every time I type a reply, my phone eats it. I want you to know I'm not ignoring you, just waiting until I get a minute to sit down at my computer.
    Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

  10. #78
    tWebber Wildflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    148
    Amen (Given)
    67
    Amen (Received)
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaFille View Post
    Every time I type a reply, my phone eats it. I want you to know I'm not ignoring you, just waiting until I get a minute to sit down at my computer.
    I understand, totally. Please, as you are able. I appreciate your interest.
    Aragorn: What do you fear, my lady?

    Eowyn: A cage. To stay behind bars until use and old age accept them and all chance of valor has gone beyond recall or desire.

    Aragorn: You are a daughter of kings, a shield maiden of Rohan. I do not think that will be your fate.

  11. #79
    Thread Killer QuantaFille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thulcandra
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    897
    Amen (Given)
    288
    Amen (Received)
    409
    I've stayed up way past my bedtime to type this. If there are typos, I blame that. Also, I did see one disjointed paragraph in preview mode, but when I went back to fix it, it disappeared...
    Anyway, here you go. A subsequent reply will probably have to wait until I have computer time again as my phone will eat any reply that I have to work on in sessions, e.g. in bits and pieces during breaks at work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildflower View Post
    I don't doubt that you are a logical and analytical person. I just think you are missing the difference between "funcitonal" and "ontolgoical" inferiority. And, for those who understand the difference, I wanted to ask them how they cope believing in a God who deliberately made them ontologically inferior to males. It's an identity issue that touches on both God's and our identity.
    God did not make anyone inferior to anyone else. All are equal in God's sight. Period.

    Oh, I'm quite aware about certain "roles" being open only to women. Like nursery duty and women's ministry. But feel called to help guide the church, to teach His people (not just women and children)? No, you are most definitely not hearing from God if your a complementarian woman. No, much worse...you must be power hungry or something...but def not hearing from God.
    What do you tell the man who wants to be a children's minister? That is not his role, so you tell him no. Does that make him inferior to women?

    If I were still a complementarian, I wouldn't believe that the "church can overrule Jesus" by allowing women to take up roles such as Deborah, Priscilla, and Junia.
    That is not what I meant by "overrule". Pastors and ministers etc. do not "overrule" Christ in the course of their duties. I meant, can the church tell Christ "I don't like the way you're doing that, we need to sit down and talk about how it should be done"? Marriage mirrors Christ and his Church, where Christ is the head and the church submits to his will. Egalitarians believe that there is no head in marriage, so in what way does marriage mirror Christ and the church? Does the church have the ability to veto Christ's decisions regarding her well-being?

    (By the way, what denomination did you come out of that has left you so scarred?)

    There are certain biological functions that are limited to the sexes, true. Yes, 100% true. Are you saying that spiritual leadership is a biological function? Does biology have a bearing on spirituality? So men are created spiritually superior (as in the boss) and women are biologically created spiritually inferior (in a spiritual chain of command)? So women CANNOT lead men due to her biology? So Deborah...
    My point in bringing up biology is to demonstrate that God made men and women different, and that even on a biological level we have roles. Was he wrong to do so?

    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaFille
    As Celebrian pointed out, decisions have to be made together.
    Which is an egalitarian position.
    And a complementarian one. We are to submit to each other as brothers and sisters in Christ, with the man having responsibility for the final decision as head of the home as Christ is head of the church.

    In a complementarian model, the man doesn't *have to* ask his wife for her input (but "should" if you are a nice complementarian). In a complementarian model the man gets the "final say" in any and all matters, even if his wife disagrees (though he "should" be very nice about it while he does it). In a complementarian marriage the man has to decide and enforce what is best for his wife, even if she doesn't agree, though he "should" be sensitive to her while he takes this authority over her. Just softening up the language doesn't negate the facts. In a complementarian marriage the husband decides for the wife, even if she disagrees, but he "should" do this with grace, love, etc.
    He does have to. Niceness has zero to do with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaFille
    You seem to think that if we were really practising complementarians, we stupid women wouldn't give any input to our amazing husbands when it comes to making decisions.
    No, indeed. I'm sorry you have not understood what I'm been saying, I really don't think you are stupid. Not at all. I think that you and all women have been just as potentially gifted as men with intelligence, competence, and leadership ability. No, I do not think you are stupid at all.
    I worded that in a way that seems to come from your perspective. As if that is how you see my point of view. Like I must think I am of inferior intellect, abilities, etc.. It wasn't meant to sound like I think that you think I am actually stupid.

    You are implying that if I follow my position to its logical conclusion, and still hold to that position, then I should think I am stupid if I am to be consistent. You asked how do we complementarians cope with the belief that we are either inferior to men, or not allowed to function as if we were anything else. I'm saying we don't believe we're inferior, and that we are allowed to function as if we're not.

    And, I am also sorry that you somehow think that egalitarians wouldn't give any input to our amazing spouses.
    I didn't say that, or even imply it anywhere.

    We would, and do.
    Good.

    It is the complementarians who think men should-but-don't-have-to allow their wives to give input.
    No.

    Egals are all about equal input and working things out.
    I know.

    Comps are about one gender being in ultimate control over the other even tho they "should" (but don't have to) allow input from the other.
    You have strange ideas about us.

    But I am glad that in your particular complementarian marriage that you function more like egalitarians.
    We don't.

    That's so important to your well-being as a woman.
    No, I don't think so. Why would it be? If my marriage turned out to be egalitarian, it would damage my well-being because I would, according to my understanding of scripture, be living outside of God's pattern for my life.

    That's great that he listens to your input. But in the complementarian model that you espouse, he doesn't have to.
    In the complementarian model that you used to espouse, you mean.

    It's great that you have such an egalitarian leaning husband and home.
    We really don't.

    But I truly am sorry that both you and he believe that though you are the one better with money and have more experience that he still gets the "final say" because of his superior rank as husband in your complementarian marriage. He bears this ultimate responsibility because of his biological function or the order of man's creation?
    Because God says so. Why does it make you sorry that I am following my understanding of God and scripture?

    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaFille
    You mentioned several times that we must believe that we have to have a husband to be our "king and priest". This is false. I haven't met a complementarian yet who didn't believe in the priesthood of the believer, except Mormons (they are a different story altogether though).
    Good, I am very glad of this. I wouldn't want you believing that. Even so, you function as if you do believe it as you believe that your husband is your "head" who rules over you (makes decisions for you even if he's nice about it and gets your input before he makes the final decision).
    You kept mentioning it like it was a standard part of complementarianism. Why do you think my husband and I function as if he is my priest? That's a really odd claim to make. "King", I can reasonably see thinking that, but priest? What?

    You have obviously not felt a call to those ministry functions that are forbidden to you as a woman. I have, and it IS depressing. So much so. Not only to be rejected out of hand because I'm a woman and therefore couldn't be hearing from God if I believe I'm to fulfill this particular call in ministry, but then suspected on top of it. "Why" does she want to be an elder? "Why does she want to be a teacher (not just in the nursery or women's-only studies) Oh--she must be _______. Fill in the blank, I've heard it all.
    God gives leadership skills to a lot of people, not just men. There are leadership positions open to women but not men, and there are those open to men but not women. There are some that are open to either/both. For the record, I am not a fan of the idea of a micro-managing God who calls people to do ultra-specific things (most of the time, anyway. For exceptions, see: Noah, Moses, et al). I think he just dumps skills and aptitudes into you and expects you to do the best you can with what you get. If you have leadership skills, then look for opportunities to use those skills. God won't fault you for doing what you can with what you have.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaFille
    I have never, ever ever ever been taught in church that I am "inferior" to men.
    I'm truly grateful for this, QuantaFille. Your're not inferior. You may have understood the inferiority inherent in the complementarian position better if you ever felt like you were called to teach a mixed group of men and women or if you felt you were called as in elder.
    The idea that a woman can't do certain things in church on account of being "inferior" isn't even a concept in my church. If a man wanted to teach a high school girls' Sunday School class, and he's told "That's not a role God gave men", would he be justified in thinking he was made to feel inferior?

    Regarding elders, I think it depends on what you mean by the term. Different traditions use it differently. If you mean it in the capacity of a mentor or advisor (officially designated or not), approachable by members of the congregation, then not having female elders is just irresponsible. As for teaching, I think it depends on what you wanted to teach and in what setting. If it's, for instance, a class on marriage, then not having a complete couple teaching it together would be weird and kind of awkward. If it's a home ec class, call me sexist but I would hope that a woman would be teaching that one.

    I put the dictionary definition in an above post. I've used the word correctly. Men are superior in rank to women in church and home (as evidenced in holding the "final say" and the head leadership positions at church), therefore, according to the definition of "inferior" women are inferior in the complementarian model. If you wish to counter this, please use the dictionary definition and apply it to how males and females are to relate to each other church and home in the complementarian model.
    I don't think the word even applies. The word "inferior" should never even come to mind. Is the church worth less than Christ? Then why would he bother redeeming her?

    Why do men need to carry the greater burden? Are you not capable enough to share equally in carrying the burden? Do you need men to carry this for you instead of carrying equally together? I believe women are just as capable as men to share the burden of leadership. In fact, its part of our original commission. No "final say", no "greater burden of responsibility".
    The word used in Genesis to describe Eve as Adam's "helper", is only elsewhere used in the Bible to refer to God's help to mankind. Men can't carry the burden completely alone; they need women to help them. But we are helpers, not co-carryers.

    Corrected, how? That men should be *extra nice* when they exert their authority? Sure, that's a step in the right direction but it doesn't solve the inequality problem.
    No. Like I said, niceness has zero to do with it. I think the view of complementarianism that you have been taught is twisted. If I've not yet conveyed what I see as a more biblical (if not more workable) version, then please ask me to clarify.
    Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

  12. Amen Celebrian amen'd this post.
  13. #80
    Thread Killer QuantaFille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thulcandra
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    897
    Amen (Given)
    288
    Amen (Received)
    409
    Did I kill the thread?
    Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

  14. Amen One Bad Pig, JB DoulosChristou amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •