Friday, July 04, 2008

The debate continues

Some of you might be interested in reading a discussion between John Hobbins and myself at the CBE Blog. Enjoy.


Anonymous said...

Sue, Upon some research on Grudem, I came across this interview:

I saw the link to your 'comments' were not your comments at all, yet there was a whole page dedicated to Grudem answering your 'charges' and I also saw the insults about your lack of Greek Scholarship. Gee, Sue, who do you think you are questioning the great Grudem? And you are a woman to boot!(Sheesh)

To say that I am disappointed in Warnock is an understatment. I could not find your original comments (even though he put a link in that only takes us to more Grudem) to Grudem YET there is a whole page that we are to assume he is answering your exact questions with no chance for clarification or rebuttal. Funny how they kept your original questions out.

It really is arrogance to think you have to attend seminary to be able to learn Greek. They sound more like Popes.

But, it gave me better insight into what you face when you question the 'authorities'. Not very fair of them, either, not to make that link to your actual questions of Grudems teaching. Not to mention misleading and unethical.

I am even more concerned becasue Grudem is to the point of being worshiped in many seminaries. His books are official textbooks and I can see in so many comments that his exact words are on the lips of these young guys.

If Grudem says it, they believe it. If CBMW says it, they believe it.

Gem said...

at the link:
Sue said:
This means that if the wife cooks a meal and cannot find the required vegetables in the market that day, and has chosen a substitute, she is in a state of non-submission.ENDQUOTE

John replied:
I have yet to meet one who regards their wife as in non-submission because she “cannot find the required vegetables in the market that day.” Your example sounds like an odd little story from the Talmud - which is full of marvelous and beautiful anecdotes, but off-color ones, too.

There must be someone who believes what you imply complementarians generally believe. But with all due respect, you are setting up a straw man.

If he only could walk in my shoes for a bit... I could tell stories... but if I did you might assume my husband was dealing with an utterly incompetent IMBECILE rather than a grown up woman with a brain (and even degrees) :(

THE REASON I ALLOWED IT WAS BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO "OBEY GOD". That is very frustrating to me. At times I have felt very betrayed by various teachers, ministries, Bible translations I used to trust and respect. :(

I really don't think my husband would have become soooo difficult if I had known way back at the beginning of our marriage 25 years ago (like I know now) that I have corresponding authority . He's every bit as much a victim of the bad theology as I. He was deprived of a help MEET for him for some 22 years of our marriage. :(

Gem said...

over there Sue said:
I sat and listened for three hours. She asks, how will I get the windows cleaned. “I can’t do the higher one’s myself, and I do not have permission to call someone in. I have no knowledge of our finances and I am not allowed to hire people.” The husband is quite wealthy BTW in a highly paid profession.

Man do I identify! Only, I have degrees, I had a profession. Doesn't matter. There was no difference in his control and my sense of powerlessness.

I believed a LIE! She needs to come out of agreement with the LIE that she has no authority!

(easier said than done, Sue. twas a long and painful process, but I have no regrets! )

Suzanne McCarthy said...


This friend of mine has an MA and she is really brilliant. But she does not have a viable profession at the moment.

It can happen to anyone, it doesn't matter how smart you are. But I do think that some women because of their personality type will just dig in and not get sucked up in it.

Anonymous said...

John Hobbins is using the CBE blog to vent his hatred of egalitarians.

Suzanne McCarthy said...

Still, I’m delighted to see you make the distinction: hard and soft comps. Since you use the term comp, you now say, to refer only to hard comps, I am now confused as to why the “we” of which you speak should wish to knock Sarah Sumner of all people, or class her as a (hard) comp of all things.

This statement that John made about me is provably false. That should be enough to discredit him.