tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post3050917069055948917..comments2024-01-29T06:02:39.583-08:00Comments on Suzanne's Bookshelf: John Piper's Three StrikesSuzanne McCarthyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-45360970897142523272009-09-15T09:13:49.806-07:002009-09-15T09:13:49.806-07:00I also note that an 11 year old boy was killed by ...<i>I also note that an 11 year old boy was killed by a tornado in Ontario this week. What does this mean?</i><br /><br />That the kid would have grown up queer, of course.<br /><br />When did Theos become Zeus, throwing down thunderbolts and tornadoes and evil omens after his latest spat with Hera?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-72631051456988481392009-09-01T20:46:05.485-07:002009-09-01T20:46:05.485-07:00John Piper doesn't stop to think about the dam...John Piper doesn't stop to think about the damage he causes to children with his advice about abuse within the marriage.<br /><br />His ignorance just appalls me.Hannah Thomashttp://www.eaandfaith.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-65847423843831339882009-08-26T01:44:15.363-07:002009-08-26T01:44:15.363-07:00I think you are right that this sort of dependency...I think you are right that this sort of dependency is bad for both partners. There are, of course, "pay offs" for both partners in this "you are in control" scenario. However the burden of living with an adult who acts like a child or the burden of being an adult who acts like a child ultimately saps relationships.Also, far from being part of God's natural law, it actually isn't natural at all - grown ups were made to be grown up!Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-17846347675734521482009-08-25T12:19:31.468-07:002009-08-25T12:19:31.468-07:00I saw in my own marriage the fruit of the idea, &q...I saw in my own marriage the fruit of the idea, "he bears more responsibility; the buck stops with him; he has final say." The fruit was that we did things we shouldn't-- esp. financially, because I would say to myself, "I'm just submitting to him. It's his responsibility if we overspend (or whatever the issue was)." If I had felt my full, equal responsibility, I would have said, "I really don't want to buy that now." So when I would, instead, offer either very mild or no opposition, he would just go ahead, because I wasn't clearly communicating my own thoughts/feelings. The whole setup was bad for both of us. <br /><br />Now that we consider ourselves equal partners with equal responsibility, we are BOTH more careful with the finances! Go figure!<br /><br />I had another woman who believed in this less-responsibility thing tell me how nice it was. "I'll be sleeping like a baby while he lies awake worring about stuff." But in what sense is it being his "helper suitable" or "strong aid and companion" (better translation, IMO) if she's acting like one of the children, and all the weight of grown-up life is on him? In the long run, all that weight of unshared responsibility could affect his health!<br /><br />So, as far as him having more responsibility is concerned-- if the tree were good, it would bear good fruit, wouldn't it? If it bears bad fruit, maybe it wasn't a God-planted tree at all.Kristenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08252374623355509404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-25046992473685536822009-08-25T03:51:33.236-07:002009-08-25T03:51:33.236-07:00Thanks!
Well quite and it did occur to me how COU...Thanks!<br /><br />Well quite and it did occur to me how COULD you continue to really respect such a man? ( man?)<br /><br />Piper and his ilk should really stop worrying about controlling women's behaviour and mindsets and turn their attention to their very damaged and damaging ideas about masculinity. Anyone who needs to control others to prove they are strong is working from a position of inner weakness and insecurity.<br /><br />IF we could give men permission to be tender and to value themselves for who they are ( not some ridiculous idea about who they ought to be) we might begin to see some progress. I don't think we do this, even in mainstream "liberated" society.Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-2455053593713107872009-08-24T07:14:30.973-07:002009-08-24T07:14:30.973-07:00Hi Sue,
I like the way you articulate this on you...Hi Sue,<br /><br />I like the way <a href="http://suem-musingaloud.blogspot.com/2009/08/for-bible-tells-me-so.html" rel="nofollow">you articulate this</a> on yout blog. You write,<br /><br />"Piper is also really concerned about how the wife is going to say," no" but still make it clear that she respects this man and submits him as her leader, he honestly seems to see the woman's continuing submission as the main matter to be resolved." <br /><br />A good analysis. Thanks.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-64815727071959030902009-08-24T07:03:26.571-07:002009-08-24T07:03:26.571-07:00Hi,
A lot of posts about this. An excellent artic...Hi,<br /><br />A lot of posts about this. An excellent article as well. I have recently blogged about Piper - or more about fundamentalist applications of "scriptural truths", but I don't know as much about him as you lot do - not sure I want to!<br /><br />I can see he is the worst sort of legalist, it is hardly a step from the taliban, who recently mooted this law allowing men to withold food from wives who refuse sexual demands ( unsure if it was brought in.)<br /><br />However, I sort of thought , "Oh, those American bible belt weirdos" - but today in my good oldlocal UK Christian bookshop ( Wesley Owen - I know it is evangelical but..) I found a number of books by Piper. A quick flick through made me feel queasy!<br /><br />Is this stuff ever that far from home?Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-43185095563898874072009-08-23T08:12:36.999-07:002009-08-23T08:12:36.999-07:00"Mars Hill would not be a mega church if Dris...<i>"Mars Hill would not be a mega church if Driscoll dragged Grace around by the hair like the Neanderthal his opponents paint him to be. I know there are a lot of women who have been hurt by Mars Hill, but have you conveniently forgotten the many women that have joined Mars Hill to make it into the megachurch it is today?"</i><br /><br />Driscol is a somewhat private person on some things. I don't know that anyone could say much of anything about his family life because we don't know the particulars. He does say some things from the pulpit that are quite bothering. That is all anyone can comment on.<br /><br />As well, Driscol has a silencing policy that tries to forbid anyone complaining about anything in his church. So whatever not so good things that are going on (and there are) it is difficult for those outside his church to get a good grasp on it. I've seen and experienced those tactics from the Sheparding Movement. They are in fact common tactics of individuals who engage in excessive controlling behaviors.<br /><br />Complementarian men are generally the ones who make the decision of what church to go to. Thus, a married woman's contribution to Mars Hill mega church status would be pretty nil most of the time. Women have been known to endure much in the name of and for the sake of male dominance. It certainly doesn't mean they agree or approve. And perhaps we should take a look at the amount of people who are and have left and why. Since most of those don't talk about it, the ones who do talk represent more than themselves.<br /><br />There must be a reason why Mars Hill is a mega church, but I'm not so sure they are indicative of true Christian spirituality and anointing. But I could be wrong on that. God does not remove his gifts even when we misuse them. Even in a spiritually challenged way, people get saved. And that is worth a lot.believer333https://www.blogger.com/profile/03480546499577897857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-83406116825832743692009-08-23T06:56:28.509-07:002009-08-23T06:56:28.509-07:00"I know there are a lot of women who have bee..."I know there are a lot of women who have been hurt by Mars Hill, but have you conveniently forgotten the many women that have joined Mars Hill to make it into the megachurch it is today? There aren't 8000 men going there to hear the weekly pep talk from the coach. There are a thousands of women who have found something very positive in the preaching of Pastor Mark and the community of Mars Hill. You can't discount their experiences because it doesn't fit into your view."<br /><br />Blake, A lot of people moved to Guyana to drink kool aid with Jim Jones. If there is one argument we should avoid it is: if many people like it, it must be good. <br /><br />Suzanne, Sorry if I brought up something uncomfortable. Mark uses his marriage relationship examples in teaching quite a bit.Lydiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17367390474045060624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-84149676138183110162009-08-22T21:05:04.585-07:002009-08-22T21:05:04.585-07:00Blake,
I have asked people to stop suggesting thi...Blake,<br /><br />I have asked people to stop suggesting things about Mark and his wife. <br /><br />However, I am unaware of how Mark differs from Piper, Grudem and Ware regarding women. I am truly unaware of the differences. <br /><br />I hope you don't feel that I didn't listen. Thanks for your efforts to communicate. I know we are rather set in our ways here. Sorry bout that.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-40469074402997436112009-08-22T20:55:57.769-07:002009-08-22T20:55:57.769-07:00Suzanne,
I think it is clear that people are sugg...Suzanne,<br /><br />I think it is clear that people are suggesting that Mark oppresses his wife by virtue of his complementarian position. Isn't oppression a form of mistreatment?<br /><br />In my (maybe errant) view, Driscoll's complementarianism is distinctly different from Piper, Grudem and Ware's. I don't align with Piper, Grudem and Ware's complementarianism. That's why I've tried to explain and show how Driscoll's is different and better (or at least how I've heard him). I don't think I'm achieving what I hoped, so unless Kay has more words to exchange I'll make this my last post for this thread. I appreciate the discussion and thank you for your excellent blog. God bless.Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10557557130782165768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-68952752257531230952009-08-22T20:44:57.813-07:002009-08-22T20:44:57.813-07:00Kay mentioned some extreme examples. The facts are...Kay mentioned some extreme examples. The facts are that at my age half of all women are single. They now need to provide for themselves, and for many of them, their children. They need to organize their pension. They need to care for parents and siblings. <br /><br />A good proportion of married women are the main providers in their own family. So more than half of all women my age are the main providers in their own home. <br /><br />This is because we are human. Some women have always been single, some divorced, some widows, and some have husbands who are unemployed, sick, impaired, etc. etc. <br /><br />Welcome to the real world. Either Christianity is for real people or it isn't.<br /><br />I can't think of one good reason for husbands having more decision-making authority than wives, except inasmuch as it pertains to one's own job or function, but not over the other person in the marriage.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-53146667329384950282009-08-22T20:38:50.310-07:002009-08-22T20:38:50.310-07:00Kay,
There are exceptions to the rule. The scena...Kay,<br /><br />There are exceptions to the rule. The scenarios you mention seem like fine examples of exceptional circumstances. But to use an exception to deny the merit of an absolute ideal is a profound logical misstep. For example I could rephrase what you just said in terms of murder. If the bible says thou shalt not murder, but we as Christians (assuming the non-pacifists) allow for an exception when it comes to war one doesn't completely discard the moral imperative and biblical command that murder is wrong and war is horrible.Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10557557130782165768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-13180438747019444292009-08-22T20:36:43.035-07:002009-08-22T20:36:43.035-07:00There are a thousands of women who have found some...<i>There are a thousands of women who have found something very positive in the preaching of Pastor Mark and the community of Mars Hill. You can't discount their experiences because it doesn't fit into your view.</i><br /><br /><br />I don't think the popularity of the belief should contribute to our assessment of whether it is morally right. <br /><br />I also don't think anyone has come close to saying that Mark mistreats his wife. I am uncomfortable with this being discussed and I think we should respect their privacy and just go back to the general issue. <br /><br />Personally I see Piper, Grudem and Ware as being more influential. In my view, Driscoll is as complementarian as they are but I don't want to single him out on it. <br /><br />It is a doctrine which reduces the responsibility and authority of women, which restricts their function and decreases their ability to conduct a normal adult life. For some, it causes a lot of pain. For others, perhaps not. For all women it is a diminishment and restriction, unless this is somehow evenly balanced by other means of influence.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-78630765729396235392009-08-22T20:05:31.171-07:002009-08-22T20:05:31.171-07:00Blake,
Take into consideration that Christian mar...Blake,<br /><br />Take into consideration that Christian marriages do encounter circumstances and tragedies beyond their control that render the husband unable to lead, protect or provide for anyone. My perspective on the husband having the protector, provider, spiritual leader role changed because of situations I've encountered in the lives of friends and family members with disabilities, illness and aging who could not fulfill this "role" no matter how much they wanted to.<br /><br />How could it apply to the life of my friend whose husband suffered a brain injury leaving him in a near vegetative state? God has called her to lead, protect and provide for her husband. My grandmother also had to fill this "role" for a number of years as Alzheimer's took over my grandfather's mind and body. <br /><br />If a biblical "role" can have even one exception, how can it be a command for every marriage?Kayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09453828432678482030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-20941818385449312242009-08-22T18:45:46.289-07:002009-08-22T18:45:46.289-07:00Lydia,
You said that "what comes out of the ...Lydia,<br /><br />You said that "what comes out of the mouth is in the heart." It is also true that actions come from what is in the heart and as I recall the saying goes "actions speak louder than words." Mars Hill would not be a mega church if Driscoll dragged Grace around by the hair like the Neanderthal his opponents paint him to be. I know there are a lot of women who have been hurt by Mars Hill, but have you conveniently forgotten the many women that have joined Mars Hill to make it into the megachurch it is today? There aren't 8000 men going there to hear the weekly pep talk from the coach. There are a <b>thousands</b> of women who have found something very positive in the preaching of Pastor Mark and the community of Mars Hill. You can't discount their experiences because it doesn't fit into your view.<br /><br />I'm aware of all the events you mention. I don't know what happened with the two members. It is disappointing that things turned out the way they did. Yes, Mark put his foot in his mouth again. I wish I was privy to what happened, but I'm not. However, Mars Hill is still going strong. Acts 29 is expanding fast and a lot of people are coming to Christ all over the world. Pastor Mark will answer for his sins before, but I would like to remind you that even Paul praised God for the evangelists that were sharing Christ even if for selfish motives. Whether or not Mark is in that crowd, I don't know. I don't think so and you disagree, so that's just where it will have to stand.Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10557557130782165768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-49983835943310879962009-08-22T14:34:50.368-07:002009-08-22T14:34:50.368-07:00Blake, what comes out of the mouth is in the heart...Blake, what comes out of the mouth is in the heart. With Driscoll,the problem is that foot in mouth is continual.<br /><br />You may not be aware of his blog post right after the Ted Haggard scandal. I mention it because when one adds up Driscoll's teachings, it looks serious. But he always 'apologizes' but then does it again and again.<br /><br />He said the biggest reason for pastors drifting in marriage is because their wives let themselves go. Then he went on to describe the fat, ugly preachers wives he has seen.<br /><br />So, he was putting the blame on women. Just like he did when he called them gossips, evil and easily deceived. (Would that make him continually a willful sinner?)<br /><br />Of course, the outcry was immense so he took to blog post down and 'apologized'. <br /><br />I could not help feel sorry for Grace. What if she gets breast cancer and has a mascetomy or a face disfiguring accident. She will always remember those original words. That her looks are incredibly important to the relationship. (Never mind his vulgarity in describing sex)<br /><br />It is funny how folks can listen to Driscoll and hear different things. Usually it is women who find him repugnant. But more and more men are, too. Do you realize my 8 year old could never be allowed to listen to one of his sermons because of the vulgarity? How could I explain he is a pastor?<br /><br />Are you familiar with his coup d etat' with leadership of his church and his firing of two ministers who dared disagree with him. And his subsequent sermons on those 'who question' him?<br /><br />He also once said at a conference (I heard him with my own ears) say that every thing he says on stage is directly from the Holy Spirit. He was proud he uses no notes. <br /><br />The man is downright scary and I grieve for young men who are following him and being led astray by one I think is preforming for the audience and reveling in his celebrity status.Lydiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17367390474045060624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-69493349930637719162009-08-22T13:51:38.178-07:002009-08-22T13:51:38.178-07:00"I do think there is something to men having ...<i>"I do think there is something to men having a kind of "the buck stops here" in God's eyes"</i><br /><br />When each person stands before the Judgement Seat of God, we will be judged only upon our own sins, our decisions (accepting another's decision makes it ours), our own actions (inactions are a type of action). No one can pass on their sin to another to be responsible for. No one can truthfully tell another human being that if they do what we ask, we will be responsible for the doing of it (and suffer the consequences) and not them. <br /><br />IMO that is part of what happened in the Garden of Eden.believer333https://www.blogger.com/profile/03480546499577897857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-56297966715950601762009-08-22T13:43:37.980-07:002009-08-22T13:43:37.980-07:00I don't think complementarianism is just about...I don't think complementarianism is just about Driscoll, or even mainly about Driscoll. However, any man that stands in the pulpit and tells women that they have less authority than men, is endangering women and children in some way or other. This is my view. <br /><br />It hurts, of course, to see male egalitarians some of them, so well respected and treated as brothers ... but us women .... ?<br /><br />I don't think complementarianims can be redeemed. However, complementarians, as individuals ... often behave like egalitarians, as some comp preachers admit. And vice versa, BTW.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-77535108800571488092009-08-22T13:31:40.923-07:002009-08-22T13:31:40.923-07:00Suzanne,
Driscoll is a fan of a lot of thinkers t...Suzanne,<br /><br />Driscoll is a fan of a lot of thinkers that would not agree with each other on a lot of issues. I doubt he would sign his name to everything Grudem writes. I realize Grudem has had a significant impact on Driscoll's theology, but my impression (and I could be wrong) is that that particular quote from Grudem may be one of the areas he would disagree with him or at least give a very nuanced interpretation. Until Driscoll writes his own systematic theology we're left to speculate how all the influences he talks about work together to shape his theology. He often quotes Calvin, Luther, Augustine, Kierkegaard, J.I. Packer, John Piper and others, but he never quotes all of them on one subject especially what he would call a second hand doctrine like women leadership.<br /><br />I wouldn't characterize myself as afraid of egalitarianism. I disagree with it, but I embrace the scholarly contribution that the egalitarians are making to biblical studies and theology. The arguments for complementarianism don't seem to have changed much ever, so I take more inspiration from the work the egalitarians are doing than the complementarians. Complementarian men are too stuck on fighting a battle when it would be more helpful for them to stick firmly to their commitments while exploring more ways to be humble, loving servant leaders which I think they could learn a lot about from egalitarians.Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10557557130782165768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-62651783876613128702009-08-22T13:14:43.074-07:002009-08-22T13:14:43.074-07:00Sorry for a third post in a row. I missed Mara...Sorry for a third post in a row. I missed Mara's second post when I posted the first two.<br /><br />When it comes to the SBC and its leadership one of my constant criticisms has been the complete lack of diversity in its ranks especially with regard to gender. I would love to see more women on the various boards and committees in the SBC and more minorities and more people that aren't born and/or raised and/or serving in the South. The problems of the SBC are primarily the cause of its Southern insularity. Some might think it's spiritual in nature which I would agree with, but the symptom that is easiest to deal with and not being dealt with is the lack of diversity in SBC leadership. I don't think the SBC as whole is suffering the spiritual problems that seem to be so common among the southern white men running everything.<br /><br />I actually have less problem with women in leadership when it comes to congregationalist and democratic structures because I think the biblical support for such structures is not there or at least is not as strong as the case for presbyterian and episcopal structures. I figure if a church or denomination is going to use an unbiblical structure they can at least be consistent and make more room for diversity. My advocacy for complementarianism becomes stronger when referring to elder-led and episcopal structures.<br /><br />As I said before, I think language is insufficient to demonstrate the complementarian position as I see it biblically. I must admit I am a perfectionist and want to have my cake and eat it too. I don't want to confess egalitarianism but I more readily admire egalitarian couples than most complementarian couples. My perfectionism wants to confess complementarianism because I see it as the most biblical option, but many complementarians would probably suspect I'm egalitarian in my actions even though I'm not. My complementarianism just works itself out in subtle ways most of the time.<br /><br />I think Driscoll's complementarianism is more subtle than people realize, but because he's such got such a loud and forceful character on stage he misrepresents his position and people too easily dismiss and malign him (his chronic foot in mouth syndrome doesn't help). I would like to think that the complementarianism I am presenting in this discussion is very close to the heart and intention of Driscoll's complementarianism. I could be wrong and am not above correction by those who are closer to the Driscolls than I am. I could be applying too much of my own hopes and wishes to Driscoll's view. I don't think I am because I think I could back up most of what I say with quotes from his sermon audio if I really desired to put that kind of work into it. If anything I've said does misrepresent Driscoll's real thought then I suspect he and I would just disagree on that point because what I am presenting is essentially my view of complementarianism. I've just always attributed my view to the teaching of Driscoll since he's been who I've gleaned the most from as I've listened to him.Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10557557130782165768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-41511298894855316182009-08-22T12:59:20.780-07:002009-08-22T12:59:20.780-07:00Here is some clarification on one point anyway. Gr...Here is some clarification on one point anyway. Grudem wrote,<br /><br />"Marriage is intended to be a reflection of the divine order in that submission by the wife in marriage reflects the submission of the church to Christ. Help her to see that in neither case is the submission mutual. Christ does not submit to the church, but vice versa, and likewise the husband does not submit to the wife. These roles are not open to redefinition, reinterpretation, or adjustment. Any change represents a deviation from the divine purpose, rendering a marriage no longer reflective of the relationship between Christ and the church." <br /><br />Pastoral Leadership for Manhood and Womanhood. Page 205<br /><br />This gives the distinct impression that a man dishonours God if he ever submits to his wife. It is quite simply a wrong doctrine. Driscoll has become a great Grudem fan in the last year of so. <br /><br />I have no comment on Driscoll's personal life.<br /><br />The truth is that egalitarianism does not entail doing anything wrong. It has been defended by many honourable scholars and wonderful role models. I don't know why people are so afraid of it.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-78690791799699958532009-08-22T12:33:20.657-07:002009-08-22T12:33:20.657-07:00(cont.)
You also quoted someone saying,
"(1...(cont.)<br /><br />You also quoted someone saying,<br /><br /><i>"(1)As leader in the household, God has made the husband responsible. (2)The husband is responsible for the protection of his wife and children. (3)He is responsible for providing for the needs of his family. (4)He is responsible for the spiritual leadership in the home. (5)God will never hold a wife responsible for a poor decision of her husband."</i><br /><br />I need to dissect this, so I have numbered the sentences for easy reference. In an unnuanced way I agree with sentences 1-4. In a nuanced way I am a pacifist so I cannot agree with certain interpretations of sentence 2 that include violence. With sentence 3 I would prefer it be stated more along the lines that the husband is responsible for making sure the family is provided for which may mean that the wife is the one that works. Driscoll would disagree with my stating this so generically because he prefers to say the opposite and then admit exceptions when his arm is twisted. I think I'd be more lenient than even he is on exceptions or even the fact that their may need to exist such a thing as an exception to this rule (I'm undecided as to whether or not male provision as a biblical ideal means it being a rule a congregation holds families accountable to). My nuanced interpretation of sentence 4 I think is being given throughout this dialogue in this comment thread. Sentence 5 I wholly agree with you is a lie of Satan.<br /><br />Mara,<br /><br />I didn't come at his Peasant Princess series as it being the authoritative interpretation of the Song of Solomon. I think it is an interesting interpretation and would encourage people to use it as one of many interpretations to study if they wanted to better understand Song of Solomon. I personally have not studied the book enough or other interpretations of the book to decide for myself how much I agree or disagree with Driscoll's take on it. Nonetheless I still think there is much practical wisdom that can be gleaned from his sermon series apart from any consideration of the authority or validity of his interpretation.Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10557557130782165768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-52528818775767921792009-08-22T12:32:46.034-07:002009-08-22T12:32:46.034-07:00Suzanne,
I thank you for continuing this discussi...Suzanne,<br /><br />I thank you for continuing this discussion and that you're not put off by the direction it's gone. I think we agree a lot on this issue actually. You say,<br /><br /><i>"On responsibility, there is no such thing as a mother being less responsible to God for her children than the father is. In fact, it is only in horror that I have read complementarian women say that the good side of complementarianism is that the father is more responsible for the outcome of decisions than the mother is."</i><br /><br />In a sense I both agree and disagree with this. I agree that a mother is as responsible for the direction of her children as the father is. I also agree with your disgust that complementarian women think they are getting off more lightly in the relationship with regard to their responsibilities than the male. The decisions we make that we are responsible for as Christian men and women give God glory and none of us should take lightly how much or little glory we give to God by how we live. I think this complementarian woman is taking far too lightly how her actions and her view of responsibility affect the glory she gives to God. In this sense I think men and women are far more equal in the eyes of God than the language used by complementarians suggest.<br /><br />At the same time I still think there is something valid in the exegesis of Adam and Eve and Paul's letters and other places in the Bible that the complementarians give. The problem I think is that 'more' and 'less' are very subjective terms that mean pretty much nothing when we are at the judgment seat of God. So in that way genders being more or less responsible clouds the issue of real Christian obedience. On the other hand I don't see another way to talk about it (excluding embracing egalitarianism). I do think there is something to men having a kind of "the buck stops here" in God's eyes, but I don't know that it can be expressed without a healthy example lived out in front of people. I think the actions matter more than the words when it comes to teaching biblical complementarianism.<br /><br />I can't say I've got this figured out. In some sense I'm not sure proper complementarianism can be explained because the language needed is too easy to misunderstand. The people I most often hear talk about complementarianism around me are often not people I look up to as model relationships. I can't say I know Mark and Grace personally, so I can't even say I look to them as a model relationship. I do know who I do look up to as models of good Christian marriage and when I hear Pastor Mark talk about his view of Christian marriage it is those particular couples that come to mind. What draws me to Pastor Mark is that (in my humble opinion) he is as close to egalitarianism as a biblical complementarian can be without being egalitarian. Most complementarians I've met and heard from don't give women nearly the freedom Pastor Mark does and don't live what they preach even if I do agree with them.<br /><br />You quote someone as saying,<br /><br /><i>"Men should no more submit to their brides than Christ submits to his."</i><br /><br />Whoever said this has a fundamentally wrong view of men and humanity. Men are not God. Christ modeled for men (and women) servant leadership, humility, love and many other qualities. Jesus does not submit to his bride because he is God and His bride is not. Men and women are equally fallen and to not take into account our need for accountability from each other seems to me a grievous error bound to become problematic.<br /><br />(to be continued...)Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10557557130782165768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19505042.post-63438338447469846182009-08-22T12:22:44.436-07:002009-08-22T12:22:44.436-07:00Driscoll: "when it comes to leading the churc...Driscoll: "when it comes to leading the church, women are unfit because they are more gullible and easier to deceive than men."<br /><br />Blake: "Why couldn't it be the case that women on average are more prone to particular sind and blindspots while men are more porne to other sins and blindspots."<br /><br />Well, when it comes to leading the church, was it you who said the SBC is being led by a bunch of doofuses?<br /><br />Historically, it has been men who have started the lion's share of cults. It is the men, pastors and elder boards and deacons who have shipwrecked churches. Sure, women haven't lead that many. But that's because the men won't let them and say they are unqualified. I'd say the men aren't really qualified either.<br /><br />Guess we are all in a fix since no one is qualified to lead.<br />Driscoll's version of Paul disqualifies women and history disqualifies men.<br /><br />The solution? Perhaps men and women could rule together, you know the way God made it in the first place, in the garden. Then they could help each other with their blindspots. Wouldn't it be nice to have such balanced leadership in place in the church?<br /><br />MaraAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com