Comments on: The husband as king over the wife http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/ This blog is for dialogue on the issue of women in ministry and the freedom for women to teach the bible in a public setting. It is also for questions and answers on our DVD entitled "Women in Ministry: Silenced or Set Free?" This 4 DVD set answers the hard passages of scripture that seem to restrict women's ministry. Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:26:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Michael Terran http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2404 Michael Terran Sun, 10 Feb 2008 02:26:50 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2404 Hello Cheryl, You hang in there and God will indeed lead you by His Holy Spirit. Be strong and don't worry to much, God will give you the right words to speak in that very hour. Take care Hello Cheryl,

You hang in there and God will indeed lead you by His Holy Spirit. Be strong and don’t worry to much, God will give you the right words to speak in that very hour. Take care

]]> By: Cheryl http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2385 Cheryl Sat, 09 Feb 2008 02:23:52 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2385 Jennifer, I agree but I certainly don't think it is vindictive. God has a way of turning evil into something that is good. I am still waiting to hear back from the radio station when the date has been chosen for the airing, but I am confident that God will get the glory and what was meant for evil will be used for God's glory. Praise the Lord! Jennifer,
I agree but I certainly don’t think it is vindictive. God has a way of turning evil into something that is good. I am still waiting to hear back from the radio station when the date has been chosen for the airing, but I am confident that God will get the glory and what was meant for evil will be used for God’s glory. Praise the Lord!

]]> By: Jennifer http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2378 Jennifer Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:44:18 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2378 Matt's hatred has backfired and his radio show program is now showing your DVD!! I LOVE it! AAAughh! (sorry, is that vindictive of me? :P) Matt’s hatred has backfired and his radio show program is now showing your DVD!! I LOVE it! AAAughh! (sorry, is that vindictive of me? :P)

]]> By: "SAM" http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2330 "SAM" Sun, 03 Feb 2008 04:26:08 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2330 It doesn't sound like Christianity to me. "Imam" Doug Phillips? It doesn’t sound like Christianity to me. “Imam” Doug Phillips?

]]> By: rejoice http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2295 rejoice Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:04:12 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2295 .... and "subjugationist". Thanks Paula, I should have looked those words up in the dictionary before typing. …. and “subjugationist”. Thanks Paula, I should have looked those words up in the dictionary before typing.

]]> By: Paula http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2294 Paula Fri, 01 Feb 2008 13:09:00 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2294 But the comps have males not esteeming females as better than themselves. And yes, I prefer the terms "male supremacist", "hierarchialist" (no spelling of which the dictionary says is right!), or "subordinationist". But the comps have males not esteeming females as better than themselves. And yes, I prefer the terms “male supremacist”, “hierarchialist” (no spelling of which the dictionary says is right!), or “subordinationist”.

]]> By: rejoice http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2284 rejoice Fri, 01 Feb 2008 02:58:19 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2284 To esteem others better than yourself, would be a true complementary belief. I think a more accurate term to describe a belief of male dominance could be "male supremist" or "hierarchalist" . To esteem others better than yourself, would be a true complementary belief. I think a more accurate term to describe a belief of male dominance could be “male supremist” or “hierarchalist” .

]]> By: Paula http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2278 Paula Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:44:31 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2278 Egalitarianism is so simple: everybody "esteem[s] others as better than yourself", serve means serve, and equal means equal. But male supremacism has to have disclaimers to explain what limits a "king" has, where the line is between a boy and a man, and Pharisaical nonsense like whether a woman giving directions to a man is "authoritative". That's why there is no consensus on it, and why people keep claiming "misrepresentation", and why egals are always having to deal with "well, that's not what I personally believe so I don't have to defend that teaching". If the Bible's statements clearly supported male rule, then there'd be no room for so many variations in male-centric theology, or any need to figure out what to do with men who are abusive, especially when it is their own theology that is often cited as giving men this right. Of course they issue disclaimers about men needing to be kind, but they never can agree among themselves on the definition of abuse, or whether a truly subservient wife has the right to complain. There are too many stories of pastors telling abused women to just take it joyfully, even to the point of death, and using standard CBMW-type theology to justify it. Yes, we can indeed lay much blame for such things on CBMW. They give legitimacy to male supremacy, and people trust them. Their teachings have consequences, including the silencing of women's spiritual gifts and the turning of many from the gospel because it is alleged that God created all women as the inferiors of all men. Jesus said that Sodom and Gomorrah would stand up in the last days and condemn towns that had rejected him, and I believe the world will likewise stand up and condemn the silencing and suppression of women as taught by CBMW. Egalitarianism is so simple: everybody “esteem[s] others as better than yourself”, serve means serve, and equal means equal. But male supremacism has to have disclaimers to explain what limits a “king” has, where the line is between a boy and a man, and Pharisaical nonsense like whether a woman giving directions to a man is “authoritative”. That’s why there is no consensus on it, and why people keep claiming “misrepresentation”, and why egals are always having to deal with “well, that’s not what I personally believe so I don’t have to defend that teaching”.

If the Bible’s statements clearly supported male rule, then there’d be no room for so many variations in male-centric theology, or any need to figure out what to do with men who are abusive, especially when it is their own theology that is often cited as giving men this right. Of course they issue disclaimers about men needing to be kind, but they never can agree among themselves on the definition of abuse, or whether a truly subservient wife has the right to complain. There are too many stories of pastors telling abused women to just take it joyfully, even to the point of death, and using standard CBMW-type theology to justify it.

Yes, we can indeed lay much blame for such things on CBMW. They give legitimacy to male supremacy, and people trust them. Their teachings have consequences, including the silencing of women’s spiritual gifts and the turning of many from the gospel because it is alleged that God created all women as the inferiors of all men. Jesus said that Sodom and Gomorrah would stand up in the last days and condemn towns that had rejected him, and I believe the world will likewise stand up and condemn the silencing and suppression of women as taught by CBMW.

]]> By: tiro3 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2277 tiro3 Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:27:05 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2277 In addition, I always find it interesting that the proponents of male dominance want equal time to explain and qualify their beliefs but refuse to give such to those who oppose their stance. In addition, I always find it interesting that the proponents of male dominance want equal time to explain and qualify their beliefs but refuse to give such to those who oppose their stance.

]]> By: Cheryl http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2274 Cheryl Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:46:58 +0000 http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/01/22/the-husband-as-king-over-the-wife/#comment-2274 Paula, Yes, you are right in that I have seen this kind of thing before. It is easy to claim misrepresentation and then fail to show how that misrepresentation has been done. The first thing I did notice was that Donna gave no example of where I misrepresented the material I was quoting from. The fact is that I have given the link to the actual chapter of the book in question and I encourage people to go and read the material for themselves. If CBMW would like us to believe that the book greatly misrepresents their position, then perhaps they would want to take the offending material off their site instead of promoting a book written by one of their own and giving it prominence on their site. I am sure that Donna could lobby CBMW to remove the book and then I could adjust this article to read "a book that CBMW formerly endorsed on their site". Paula,
Yes, you are right in that I have seen this kind of thing before. It is easy to claim misrepresentation and then fail to show how that misrepresentation has been done. The first thing I did notice was that Donna gave no example of where I misrepresented the material I was quoting from. The fact is that I have given the link to the actual chapter of the book in question and I encourage people to go and read the material for themselves. If CBMW would like us to believe that the book greatly misrepresents their position, then perhaps they would want to take the offending material off their site instead of promoting a book written by one of their own and giving it prominence on their site. I am sure that Donna could lobby CBMW to remove the book and then I could adjust this article to read “a book that CBMW formerly endorsed on their site”.

]]>