{"id":290,"date":"2008-08-14T16:14:12","date_gmt":"2008-08-14T23:14:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/?p=290"},"modified":"2015-10-19T20:28:22","modified_gmt":"2015-10-20T03:28:22","slug":"is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/","title":{"rendered":"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

This post is a response to Randy Stinson\u2019s article titled \u201cIs Complementarianism a Merely Personal Conviction?<\/a>\u201c<\/strong><\/p>\n

In Randy Stinson\u2019s article it appears that there is a lot of fear that comes through even to the point of suggesting that if one is an egalitarian they will be affected negatively for their entire life, even to the extent that they may not remain in the Christian faith.\u00a0 I would like to unpack some of the key points of Randy Stinson\u2019s article to look at the underlying message to see how it brings a divisiveness into the body of Christ.\u00a0 Mr. Stinson gives a very telling statement at the beginning of this article:<\/p>\n

I believe it is possible<\/strong> for someone to be wrong on the gender issue, but still be a believer.\u00a0 So being an egalitarian does not mean you are not a Christian, but it does<\/strong> cripple<\/strong> the discipleship process for that person for the rest of their life<\/strong>. [emphasis is mine]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I personally do not ever recall reading egalitarian Christians questioning the salvation of their complementarian brothers.\u00a0 Rather than dividing from their brothers, egalitarians generally start with the thought that these are our brothers in Christ and the debate is only on the secondary issues of faith.\u00a0 However complementarians are more and more being pushed towards questioning the salvation of egalitarians.\u00a0 Note Mr. Stinson doesn\u2019t say that egalitarians who are evangelicals are<\/strong> our brothers and sisters in Christ but rather he says that it is \u201cpossible\u201d for egalitarians to be believers.\u00a0 He then makes a very bold statement that egalitarians are crippled<\/strong> in their walk with the Lord.\u00a0 His use of this word picture is designed to draw the conclusion that the egalitarian viewpoint is a disease that one can survive but with great damage to our faith.\u00a0 Mr. Stinson then goes on to draw a line in the sand with assumptions that are not only unproven but which are extremely divisive.\u00a0 He lists six points that he says are key areas of Christian theology and practice that are apparently crippled<\/strong> by the egalitarian belief:<\/p>\n

1.\u00a0 The authority of scripture is at stake.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Mr. Stinson greatly overstates his case in this point and draws the reader to the conclusion that egalitarians do not hold to the authority of God\u2019s word.\u00a0 While he says that the Bible \u201cclearly\u201d teaches that men and women have distinct and complementary roles in the home and the church he does not mention the fact that a growing number of evangelical Christians who strongly hold to the authority of scripture read the hard passages of scripture in their context and see something that is not so \u201cclear\u201d at all that there are differing spiritual roles for men and women.\u00a0 These same Christians hold tightly to the authority of the scripture and they do not teach people to disregard God\u2019s word but rather they teach that we should all read the hard passages in their complete context because God\u2019s word must not be interpreted in a way that causes one scripture to contradict another.<\/p>\n

2.\u00a0 The health of the home is at stake.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here Mr. Stinson equates the foundation of the home as one person \u2013 the husband, whereas scripture reveals that the one-flesh union of husband and wife brings a unity of authority to both mother and father. (Deut. 21:18-20; Leviticus 19:3 where Mother is even placed before Father; and Ephesians 6:1, 2)<\/p>\n

Mr. Stinson also says the egalitarian view is disobedience and \u201cthey will not have the proper foundation upon which to withstand the temptations of the devil\u201d.\u00a0 Where is such a thing listed in scripture?\u00a0 There is no scriptural reference for Mr. Stinson\u2019s claim.\u00a0 However there is an example of a wife going against her husband and taking her individual authority to pursue peace with King David whose servants had been insulted by her husband.\u00a0 The story is found in 1 Samuel chapter 25 and Abigail is said to be intelligent (1 Samuel 25:3) and one who had discernment (1 Samuel 25:33).\u00a0 She took authority over a matter and did not tell her husband who is described as a fool, a character trait that matches his name.\u00a0 Her wise action which was done in direct conflict with her husband\u2019s foolish decision actually saved her family.<\/p>\n

This hinders the sanctification of married couple\u2026<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Where is this found in scripture?\u00a0 The only \u201csanctification\u201d that is found in scripture regarding married couples is in 1 Corinthians 7:14 regarding an unbelieving mate.<\/p>\n

1 Corinthians 7:14\u00a0 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Notice here that scripture lists first of all that an \u201cunbelieving husband\u201d is sanctified through his wife.\u00a0 Paul also says that an \u201cunbelieving wife\u201d is sanctified through her believing husband and the purpose is for the benefit of the children.\u00a0 Sanctification in the marriage is not listed in scripture as coming through a husband as if he was a leader of a subordinate person (the wife) but rather sanctification in marriage comes through a believing spouse whether a wife or a husband.\u00a0 Every other reference to sanctification is personal and has nothing to do with marriage.\u00a0 Mr. Stinson is very wrong in equating the sanctification of the marriage as having anything to do with complementarian belief and practice.<\/p>\n

and also introduces confusion about basic parenting issues such as raising masculine sons and feminine daughters.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Mr. Stinson as well as his organization called CBMW (The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) makes much of teaching about spiritual masculinity and spiritual femininity yet the bible teaches nothing about the spiritual way to raise masculine sons or feminine daughters.\u00a0 Christianity is not about following Jesus in a feminine way or a masculine way.\u00a0 All of us are to follow Jesus in the same spiritual way.\u00a0 We are all to be humble and to practice submission as Jesus did.\u00a0 The teaching that there is a feminine way regarding spirituality and a masculine way to spirituality is foreign to the scriptures.<\/p>\n

3.\u00a0 The health of the church is at stake.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Just like the home, if the church disobeys the teaching of 1Timothy 2, 1 Corinthians 11 and disregards the structure that God put into place for the community of faith from the beginning, then the church will be weakened.\u00a0 If the church is weakened in its convictions, it will be less effective in accomplishing its mission.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Here Mr. Stinson implies that 1 Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2 are a \u201cstructure\u201d that God put into place for the community of faith.\u00a0 Where is this \u201cstructure\u201d?\u00a0 1 Timothy 2 has no hierarchical structure listed.\u00a0 In 1 Corinthians 11 the inspired \u201corder\u201d of 1 Cor. 11:3 is not an ordered list of hierarchy nor does the rest of the passage list any authority of the man over the woman.\u00a0 Rather 1 Cor. 11:11 shows that the male does not operate independently of the female nor the female independent of the male (no hierarchy here at all).\u00a0 In fact verse 12 shows that first in creation did not bring preeminence just as the fact that the man now comes through the woman show that she is now preeminate.\u00a0 The preeminence is solely in God himself.<\/p>\n

Mr. Stinson also does not show how the egalitarian view of scripture weakens the church of its convictions in the essentials areas of faith or how the church is less effective in its mission of evangelization and discipleship.<\/p>\n

4.\u00a0 Our worship is at stake.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here Mr. Stinson makes a point that God \u201cnamed Himself\u201d father.\u00a0 God did not \u201cname\u201d Himself Father.\u00a0 His name is \u201cI AM\u201d<\/p>\n

Exodus 3:13\u00a0 Then Moses said to God, \u201cBehold, I am going to the sons of Israel, and I will say to them, \u2018The God of your fathers has sent me to you.\u2019 Now they may say to me, \u2018What is His name?\u2019 What shall I say to them?\u201d
\nExodus 3:14\u00a0 God said to Moses, \u201cI AM WHO I AM\u201d; and He said, \u201cThus you shall say to the sons of Israel, \u2018I AM<\/strong><\/span> has sent me to you.'\u201d
\nExodus 3:15\u00a0 God, furthermore, said to Moses, \u201cThus you shall say to the sons of Israel, \u2018The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.\u2019 This is My name forever, and this is My memorial-name to all generations<\/strong><\/span>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u201cFather\u201d is not God\u2019s name, it is his relationship<\/span> with us.\u00a0 While I do not advocate calling God \u201cmother\u201d, God has revealed in scripture his character that has motherly qualities.\u00a0 Yet to us, he has decided to be known in relationship<\/span> to us as a Father<\/span>.\u00a0 God is not \u201cFather\u201d because he is male.\u00a0 God is neither male nor female.\u00a0 God is Spirit and there are no \u201cbody parts\u201d in God that could make Him male.\u00a0 Rather, God is \u201cFather\u201d because this is the way that he choses to express his relationship to us.<\/p>\n

The very nature of our triune God is revealed in a biblically ordered marriage.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Where does scripture say this?\u00a0 If the \u201ctriune God\u201d is revealed in a biblically ordered marriage, who in the marriage relationship is the one corresponding to the Holy Spirit?\u00a0 Marriage is a one-flesh union of\u00a0 two equals.\u00a0 It is two people becoming united into one flesh.\u00a0 Marriage is not three persons united into one flesh.<\/p>\n

5.\u00a0 Bible translations are at stake.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2026my concern is that in the name of gender equality, the Bible is undermined and the very words of God end up being revised.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The English language has evolved so that words previously used in earlier generations do not have the same meaning today as they did in an earlier time.\u00a0 The Greek word for generic humans was translated into English as \u201cman\u201d.\u00a0 In the past it was understood that \u201cman\u201d meant human (meaning men or women), but today the word of God can be held back from being being crystal clear when the term \u201cman\u201d is seen in our day as meaning male only.\u00a0 If we use what is today a male term when a generic term is meant in the original Greek, would that be a good thing for the next generation?\u00a0 Is it wrong to \u201csharpen up\u201d the English if the original intent of the Greek word is kept intact and made clearer?\u00a0 We should be far more concerned about keeping the clarity and faithfulness of the original languages<\/span> than we should be concerned that the English word is changed.<\/p>\n

6.\u00a0 The advance of the Gospel is at stake.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ephesians 5 calls husbands and wives to relate to one another as a picture of Christ and the church.\u00a0 The picture involves the humble, sacrificial leadership of the husband\u2026<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Jesus is both God and man.\u00a0 As God he is Lord and Master and King.\u00a0 As the human Son, he is the husband of the church.\u00a0 This picture of Christ and the church is shown to be one of a unified body with Christ as the one who serves the church by giving her food.\u00a0 Jesus service is manifested through humble sacrifice to give himself<\/span> for the church.\u00a0 The husband is to serve his wife in the same way, but scripture never once calls the husband the leader of the wife.\u00a0 Neither does the scriptures say that the husband is to have a sacrificial \u201cleadership\u201d.\u00a0 What complementarians have done is added a word to the inspired scriptures.\u00a0 Without the addition to the text, the husband is pictured as serving his wife and giving himself up for her.\u00a0 The husband is never pictured as being a leader but is pictured as being a servant.<\/p>\n

and the joyful, intelligent submission to that leadership by the wife.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

When our tradition adds \u201cleadership\u201d to sacrifice, we have in effect watered down and devalued God\u2019s word in accordance with our tradition.\u00a0 We have also watered down the scriptures which say that Christians are to submit to one another.\u00a0 Submission is a \u201cChristian\u201d characteristic, not a feminine characteristic.\u00a0 The tradition that only the woman is to submit to the man takes away a key part of Christian maturity.\u00a0 We submit to one another, not only for the other person\u2019s edification, but so that we may receive from that one the benefit of the other person\u2019s gifts.<\/p>\n

Romans 15:2\u00a0 Each of us is to please his neighbor for his good, to his edification.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Should a husband submit to his wife\u2019s gifts?\u00a0 Should a husband please his wife for her good and for her edification?\u00a0 Common sense says that we are heirs together in Christ (1 Peter 3:7) and as heirs together we can benefit from each other\u2019s gifts.\u00a0 We cannot benefit from these gifts unless we submit to receive the gifts.\u00a0 Submission then is a Christian virtue, not a female virtue alone.<\/p>\n

Deviation from biblical teaching on manhood and womanhood distorts the picture of Christ and the Church, and hinders the advance of the gospel.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Not only is there no biblical teaching on \u201cmanhood\u201d and \u201cwomanhood\u201d, but there is nothing in scripture that says that the gospel is hindered by the church who has women taking their place alongside the men or by the home that has a united authority of Father and Mother.\u00a0 What this teaching does is attach the gender issue to the essential issue of the Gospel and this is wrong.<\/p>\n

Why is this issue so important? Because the message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ cannot be severed from the methods he has authorized to spread it. Homes and churches in which manhood and womanhood are prized advance the Gospel<\/strong><\/span> and<\/strong> the glory of God more accurately<\/strong><\/span> than any other kind of home or church.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Here is where the complementarian message has added itself into the gospel.\u00a0 Randy Stinson is essentially saying that the gospel preached by complementarians is \u201cmore accurate\u201d than the gospel preached by egalitarians.\u00a0 In essence the complementarian view of \u201cmen only\u201d leading in public teaching is part and parcel of the gospel message.\u00a0 One then cannot preach the full gospel that is necessary to save us unless one is also preaching concerning male-only leadership.\u00a0 No wonder so many complementarians are seeing egalitarians as heretics and as unsaved religious people who they must fight against.\u00a0 This is divisive and harmful to the body of Christ.\u00a0 In the last several years, the position of CBMW, of which Randy Stinson is president, has been increasingly antangonistic towards their egalitarian brothers and sisters in Christ.\u00a0 The position has been preached that egalitarians can be saved, but they must repent of being egalitarians.<\/p>\n

In the past there have been groups who have attached their own personal preferences to the gospel.\u00a0 Some claimed that one could not be saved unless one spoke in tongues.\u00a0 Now we have a group who are claiming that belief in male leadership is necessary as part of the gospel.\u00a0 This is an ungodly addition to the gospel. CBMW is guilty of dividing sheep against sheep by adding conditions to the gospel of Jesus Christ.\u00a0 May there be repentance from this divisive work before it further harms the body of Christ.<\/p>\n<\/body>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This post is a response to Randy Stinson\u2019s article titled \u201cIs Complementarianism a Merely Personal Conviction?\u201c In Randy Stinson\u2019s article it appears that there is a lot of fear that comes through even to the point of suggesting that if one is an egalitarian they will be affected negatively for their entire life, even to the extent that they may not remain in the Christian faith.\u00a0 I would like to unpack some of the key points of Randy Stinson\u2019s article…<\/p>\n

Read More Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[11,13,24,31,40,52],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-290","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-answering-complementarian-arguments","category-authority-and-leadership","category-complementarian-errors","category-egalitarian-vs-complementarian","category-headshipsubmission","category-opposing-viewpoints"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"\nIs Complementarianism merely personal conviction? - Women in Ministry<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction? - Women in Ministry\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This post is a response to Randy Stinson\u2019s article titled \u201cIs Complementarianism a Merely Personal Conviction?\u201c In Randy Stinson\u2019s article it appears that there is a lot of fear that comes through even to the point of suggesting that if one is an egalitarian they will be affected negatively for their entire life, even to the extent that they may not remain in the Christian faith.\u00a0 I would like to unpack some of the key points of Randy Stinson\u2019s article... Read More Read More\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Women in Ministry\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-08-14T23:14:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-20T03:28:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Cheryl Schatz\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Cheryl Schatz\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/\",\"name\":\"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction? - Women in Ministry\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-14T23:14:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-20T03:28:22+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#\/schema\/person\/47288f9588a290ab288bfdfb9c4eef29\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/\",\"name\":\"Women in Ministry\",\"description\":\"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 \u201cWomen in Ministry: Silenced or Set Free?\u201d This 4 DVD set answers the hard passages of scripture that seem to restrict women\u2019s ministry.\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#\/schema\/person\/47288f9588a290ab288bfdfb9c4eef29\",\"name\":\"Cheryl Schatz\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/efbf589c4a731d44dfcc39bcc33b901d?s=96&d=retro&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/efbf589c4a731d44dfcc39bcc33b901d?s=96&d=retro&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Cheryl Schatz\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/mmoutreach.org\/wim\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/author\/b692nplyxipl362mwh\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction? - Women in Ministry","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction? - Women in Ministry","og_description":"This post is a response to Randy Stinson\u2019s article titled \u201cIs Complementarianism a Merely Personal Conviction?\u201c In Randy Stinson\u2019s article it appears that there is a lot of fear that comes through even to the point of suggesting that if one is an egalitarian they will be affected negatively for their entire life, even to the extent that they may not remain in the Christian faith.\u00a0 I would like to unpack some of the key points of Randy Stinson\u2019s article... Read More Read More","og_url":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/","og_site_name":"Women in Ministry","article_published_time":"2008-08-14T23:14:12+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-20T03:28:22+00:00","author":"Cheryl Schatz","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Cheryl Schatz","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/","url":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/","name":"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction? - Women in Ministry","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-14T23:14:12+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-20T03:28:22+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#\/schema\/person\/47288f9588a290ab288bfdfb9c4eef29"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/2008\/08\/14\/is-complementarianism-merely-personal-conviction\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Is Complementarianism merely personal conviction?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#website","url":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/","name":"Women in Ministry","description":"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 \u201cWomen in Ministry: Silenced or Set Free?\u201d This 4 DVD set answers the hard passages of scripture that seem to restrict women\u2019s ministry.","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#\/schema\/person\/47288f9588a290ab288bfdfb9c4eef29","name":"Cheryl Schatz","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/efbf589c4a731d44dfcc39bcc33b901d?s=96&d=retro&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/efbf589c4a731d44dfcc39bcc33b901d?s=96&d=retro&r=g","caption":"Cheryl Schatz"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/mmoutreach.org\/wim"],"url":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/author\/b692nplyxipl362mwh\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6wpJ8-4G","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/290"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=290"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/290\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4224,"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/290\/revisions\/4224"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=290"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=290"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/strivetoenter.com\/wim\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=290"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}