Sunday, February 14, 2010

A God Given Power Imbalance?

Not long ago I wrote about my distress that Carolyn McCulley, who I have admiration for in some areas, had a speaking engagement in Vancouver. Women who assent to the subordination of women do not demonstrate that subordination is a good thing and acceptable to some women. No, they clearly demonstrate the fragility of the human mind, the susceptibility that we have to be indoctrinated in a false belief.

One of the authors which she endorses is Ken Sande who writes about the phrase "weaker vessel",
    A third possibility is that the passage is warning husbands to be sensitive to the God-given power imbalance in marriage. By God’s design, husbands have greater authority, and wives have less. If a husband misuses his authority, it can frustrate and embitter his wife. If each of these implications is taken into account, this passage serves to warn a godly husband to value his wife highly, to be realistic about her capabilities and limitations, to guard against misusing his authority, and to will treat her with great tenderness, sensitivity, and respect.
So now God is a sadist who designed women to be weaker so some of them could receive the benevolence of their partners; and the rest, women both here and around the world, could experience rape and violence. Good for you, Mr. Sande. Depravity indeed!

It is true that women cannot compete with men in the Olympics, but women have other strengths. Women are different from men, but not weaker in an absolute sense. If women were really so weak, then some men would not have to waste so much bluster indoctrinating women into their own subordination.


Don said...

Women cannot compete in ski jump at Olympics.

Here is a case where the WORLD RECORD HOLDER (the current best regardless of gender) cannot even compete.

How wack is that!

Mara Reid said...

God abhors a false balance and differing measures. Pr 11:1

If this is so, then why did He create one in men and women?

He did not. Historically, men have relentlessly undercut women to create this unbalance that God doesn't approve as demonstrated by God incarnate (Jesus) on this earth.

Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain shall be lowered.

God is not the author of such imbalances. Sinful people are.

gengwall said...

The whole quote is presumptuous, but this in particular is quite disturbing:

"...serves to warn a godly husband to value his wife highly, to be realistic about her capabilities and limitations, to guard against misusing his authority,..."

What, pray tell, would those limitations be. Are not women equally gifted with men? Are they not equal image bearers? Are they not equal heirs? (Peter says so in the same passage!) Are they not equal custodians of the earth with equal dominion over it? Cerainly Sande must have some ready proof texts that point out these God given limitations. Or maybe he just assumes them as much as he does GOd given male authority.

Gem said...

Do you think that a wife is more vulnerable than a husband to being hurt within marriage?

I do; and I think that is what Peter/God mean when they speak of her as "weaker" and what Paul/God mean when they say:

“but even as the assembly is subject to Christ,
so also [are] the wives to their own husbands in everything.” Eph 5:24

There's no "vice versa" statement about husbands to that-->wives are more affected; husbands have more power to hurt their wives; or to "wilt" their wives, as Firefighter Michael in the movie "Fireproof" put it:

“A woman’s like a rose.
If you treat her right, she’ll bloom.
If you don’t, she’ll wilt.”

Gem said...

It is a kind of "God given power imbalance"

Gem said...

In Eph 5:24 "is subject" is passive indicative which means its the description of a fact not a command for a behavior.

Sande's use of the term "authority" is inappropriate IMO and just muddies the waters. Power is better. His wive IS SUBJECT/vulnerable to him. He best be careful how he uses/misuses that POWER.

Rod said...

God-given power imbalance? is that the conservative politically correct way for saying "oppression"?