• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Meat Against Complementarianism

PeteR

PeteR

Moderator
Staff member
Real Person
Male
PeteR said:
Yesterday, someone sent me an article on The Transformed Wife blog that commented and shared an excellent podcast by Eric Conn and the Hard Man Podcast titled Against Complementrianism.
Click to expand...

I walked away from Complementarianism many years ago after having endured the oppression of slogging through Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology. Ultimately, what I learned is that I want nothing to do with Calvinism, at least partially because there is a deep anti-sexuality behind it and the theologies of John Piper and Wayne Grudem, not to mention what I consider to be a pretentious lack of faith in God's Sovereignty that puts them in the righteousness driver's seats instead of our Lord. They pay the latter lip service, but their main focus is on what they consider to be the near-crucial imperative to thwart the Adversary, never acknowledging that Satan can never best our Lord.

I further observed that, in each church I've attended that espoused some version of Complementarianism, on the surface it appeared that everyone was supposedly adhering to Biblical hierarchies and prescribed gender roles (no female preachers; most women wearing head covering in church; etc.), but the churches all seem to be absolutely dominated by shrewish women whose husbands cower around them -- and the pastors do whatever the uptight old biddies want them to do as long as they don't ask to give sermons; these pastors characteristically pepper their own sermons with negative talk about sexuality, which is then reinforced by choruses of blurted-out Amens and Hallelujahs from the women of the church as their husbands cringe. It just smacks to me of a different version of non-patriarchy.

The Hard Men podcast not only accurately points out that patriarchy has Biblical authority behind the authority it delegates to men, it also points toward a key point about why feminism, egalitarianism, Complementarianism and other squishy sociopolitical philosophies assert dictates that camouflage the authoritarianism that they themselves are covertly exhibiting: the use of the term 'responsibility' as a way to strip authority from men without denying women the benefits of all the chores they want men to do for them. The end result is thus the same for the modern Calvinists and the hard-core feminists:
  • Men are granted the responsibilities of adulthood and the privileges of childhood, while women are only held to the ultimate responsibilities of childhood while being granted the privileges of adulthood; and
  • Masculinity is only honored to the extent that it is in service to women: protection, provision, sperm donation and the completion of chores unsavory to women (any backtalk to be met with reminders that women do the hardest work [childbirth] and deserve to be compensated [reparations] for millennia of patriarchal oppression).
 
Keith Martin said:
most women wearing head covering in church
Click to expand...

The complementarian churches I'm familiar with all hated head covering. Grudem in the ESV mistranslated the 1 Cor 11 passage in a painfully horrible way to undercut headcoverings based on quite faulty reasoning.

Complementarianism always struck me as feminism in biblical sheeps clothing; which as I studied it more later turned out it really was. "COMPLEMENTARIANISM IS AN APPEASEMENT TO FEMINISM" that's a good way of putting it. As Keith points out, such churches never actually stand up to feminism but are run in the background by the women. That they specifically chose to invent a new word and reject ones like traditional and patriachy is a glaring red flag.

Keith Martin said:
oppression of slogging through Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology
Click to expand...

I'd have enjoyed it more if it bothered to actually give decent answers and not skip whole subjects because they were too difficult.

Until yesterday morning, I’m not sure I would have connected the terms ‘Marxist’ and ‘Feminism,’
Click to expand...

Feminism has been tried repeatedly; if you look at failing empires you find it. But a huge part of feminism's ascendancy today is the direct result of Marxism; it is their tool to destroy the family. The Marxists figured out around WW1 that the family and church were an impediment to the revolution. All the clownworld maddness about us today is because of their concerted plan to destroy the family in order to destroy our civilization.
 
Just listened to the podcast. It really was brilliant. I think we have found the new Dalrock.
 
cnystrom said:
Just listened to the podcast. It really was brilliant. I think we have found the new Dalrock.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I've read a number of his pieces and looking forward to more podcasts as I have time.
 
https://itsgoodtobeaman.com/servant-leadership-transforms-leadership-into-subservience/

Biblical servant leadership means “service [by] leadership.”

But evangelical servant leadership is not biblical servant leadership. If you doubt this, simply swap in a synonym for leadership next time you talk about it with someone. If you say “servant rulership,” for example, people start to get very uncomfortable. And if you dare talk about “servant lordship,” you’re obviously a misogynist who wants to make women his doormat.

In evangelicalism, a servant leader is not someone who serves others by rightly wielding the power delegated to him by God, so as to establish and maintain order. Rather, the relationship between “servant” and “leader,” mission and method, what and how, is inverted.

Evangelical servant leadership means “servitude [is] leadership.”
Click to expand...

and

A parodious vicarious atonement
This is what we mean by servant leadership becoming a parody of vicarious atonement: when happiness becomes the goal, rather than holiness, and when a man wielding power is treated as automatically despotic—as he is under feminism—he can no longer direct those under him to put on Christ (Romans 13:14; Galatians 5:24–25). He can no longer bid them to cast their troubles on Christ (1 Peter 5:7; Philippians 4:6). Putting on Christ is hard and frequently discomforting. Casting their cares on him requires faith rather than sight. If they are discomforted, clearly the servant leader is not doing his job; something is wrong; he should be taking that discomfort on himself. If they cannot see that everything is ok, he is failing to make everything ok. So the servant leader finds himself having to put on the troubles of those under him, becoming a kind of counterfeit Christ to them.

Needless to say, if your understanding of male headship ends up with something suspiciously like a totally different gospel, there’s a problem somewhere back down the line.
Click to expand...
 
Robhar said:
I listened to several. "What Is The Ideal Woman" is a masterpiece! I shared it on fb for all believing single guys to listen to. Sadly, no responses.
Click to expand...

Most don't want truth, they want their ears tickled. They want warm fuzzies and affirmations. A variation on this theme.
102619755_1326393217552712_2806168143790348914_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top