The last holdout

Monday, August 26, 2013 is Women’ Equality Day.   It was 97 years ago that women were given the right to vote in national elections.  Women still could not serve on juries, and it was not until 1975 that all states allowed women the privilege of serving on a jury. Or to be more exact, it was not until 1975 that all women in the United States could be judged by another woman instead of by men only.

We live in two worlds.  We live in a world where women gained legal rights for equality, but where women have lost their Christian rights for equality.

Monday as we contemplate why it wasn’t until 1920 that women were given civil rights to vote, remember those women who bucked the system and demanded your rights – my rights.  They were not demanding just their own rights, but they were looking into the future where all women would be equal.

Today I salute modern-day men and women who are demanding rights for all women in their churches and in their homes.   We are not there yet.

Pray for equality for woman who God said was made in His image. Pray for equality in the last holdout against women’s equality.  The first place where women should have been equal is proving to be the last place where she will find equality.


About bwebaptistwomenforequality

Shirley Taylor writes with humor and common sense, challenging the church body to reclaim equality for Christian women.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

72 Responses to The last holdout

  1. Val Sanford says:

    Thanks for the post! I had no idea women weren’t allowed to sit on Juries. I too am proud of today’s men and women working for equal opportunity around the globe for women and girls.


    • Welcome! Like you, I didn’t think about it. The very injustice of it now astounds me. You can more at He said that in 1973 all 50 states allowed women to vote, but in almost 20 of those states, women were given exceptions that were not given to men. It was in 1975 that that practice was declared unconstitutional because it kept women from having a jury of their peers. I just want to shake women up! I cannot understand how young women can go to church each Sunday and hear that their men are to make all leadership decisions for them and their family.
      Churches use the same arguments that women have had to put up with for years to get the right to vote and serve on a jury. Have you read my book Dethroning Male Headship? It is available on Amazon.
      Thank you for stopping by. Please continue with us as we follow the footsteps of those women who won for us the right to vote and be on a jury.


      • Michelle says:

        They use the less obviously offensive words…I still don’t see how it gets missed that the churches are actually pushing the idea that a husband has permanent, comprehensive authority over his wife.

        I recently broke the above idea down, giving examples of the way that authority over one is typically limited by scope, time, or both,* in an email to a friend who is in a VERY “soft” comp church.

        I have no idea what her response will be. I felt very awkward writing it, but we rarely see one another in person, and I’m starting to feel it’s my responsibility to speak up for the truth of biblical equality in my personal relationships. I know how to post on the Internet, and how to edit articles for other people, but this is more difficult.

        *I originally read this argument in “Discovering Biblical Equality”, in the section by Rebecca Merrill Groothuis.


  2. Kristen says:

    As late as the end of the ’60s, a woman who wanted to buy a home had to find a man to cosign for her in many states. Sometimes a 50-year-old woman who had no husband would have to have her 18-year-old son cosign on the deed. So she was less capable than her 18-year-old kid.

    And many churches still treat women this way. It’s outrageous.


  3. Kristen says:

    Sorry, there should have been a question mark after the word “kid.”


  4. sunshinemary says:

    Hello Ms. Taylor,
    One of my readers left a link to your blog on my site. I run a traditional Christian anti-feminist blog. I am not here to troll you but rather to try to understand your position. Can you summarize for me how you reached the conclusion that the Bible does not give husbands headship over their wives, does not require wifely submission, and does not forbid women to teach men in the assembly? I’m sure you are aware of the verses which call for headship and submission and forbid women to be pastors (teachers of the law). How do you reconcile those verses with your beliefs?

    Thank you for your time and God bless.


    • Welcome! We are glad to hear from you. I don’t mind if you are here to troll me. I welcome your comments. All your questions are answered in my book Dethroning Male Headship. Now a question for you? Exactly which scripture gives husbands leadership over their wives? Read the story of Sarah and Abraham. God told Abraham to follow Sarah’s leadership “Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” Now turn to 1 Peter 3 and read where Peter says that a wife’s example (leadership) may lead the husband to Christ. 1 Corinthians 7:15-16 says the same thing. This is all in my book. Read my book and then we can discuss it more. My book quotes the Bible all through it, such as the above examples. It provides the answers to your questions.


      • sunshinemary says:

        Hello Ms. Taylor
        Thank you for your response. I have not read your book, but I do want to point out that I said this:

        Can you summarize for me how you reached the conclusion that the Bible does not give husbands headship over their wives, does not require wifely submission, and does not forbid women to teach men in the assembly?

        But you responded with this:

        Exactly which scripture gives husbands leadership over their wives? Read the story of Sarah and Abraham. God told Abraham to follow Sarah’s leadership “Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”

        First Corinthians 11:3 says:

        But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.

        The Bible says that the husband is the head of his wife and that the wife is to submit to him as unto the Lord. Leadership is not the same thing as headship. I look at headship and submission as being a Captain/First Officer kind of relationship. My husband is the Captain (head) of our marriage, but that does not mean that I do not have any leadership roles within the marriage. First officers (wives) have many areas where their husbands trust them to take on some leadership, while understanding that wives are still ultimately under their husbands’ authority.

        For example, I have a leadership role with many aspects of our financial decisions. My husband trusts me to make decisions and keep him abreast of whatever he needs to know. Ultimately, he has the final say, but he trusts me to lead our decision-making in that area because I am knowledgeable about that. I can make these decisions without subverting his headship.

        May God bless you.


      • Mary,

        Leadership is the same as male headship, patriarchy, hierarchy. You may not think so, but I can guarantee those who taught this to you believe that.

        My husband is the one who brought it to my attention that Baptists were not fair to women. I worked for Baptist General Convention of Texas for almost 15 years, and when the BF&M 2000 came out, it clamped down hard on women. Until 1998, that was not the case with Baptists.

        In Colossians it says: “Submit to your husbands as fitting in the Lord.” What does that mean? When Colossians added the words “as fitting” it changed the meaning of Eph.5:22. Eph 5:22 would be making a husband part of the Trinity. The apostle Paul would NEVER give husbands authority with Christ, which husbands would have if they were part of the Trinity. Do you believe earth husbands can be part of the Trinity on earth? Because that is exactly what you are teaching.

        Do you have any reference in the New Testament where Jesus equated husbands with being Lord to their wives? Or any scripture where he tells women that after his death, they would be bound first to their husbands, and if their husbands told them wrong, then they would allow Christ to supercede the husband?

        Can you give me any reason, or instance where and why Jesus would take second place with a woman’s husband. God, Jesus,Husband, wife & kids.

        You give military examples. Jesus never gave a military example for the kingdom of God. Why would you?

        You just think you have a leadership role with your husband. You have the job of doing the things he doesn’t want to do, or doesn’t care if you do it. Because you have given him Male Veto Privilege in your marriage. That means that if you make a decision that he doesn’t agree with, then he has veto power over you. So, in effect, every decision you make is filtered through “does he agree with this?”

        Egalitarians believe that husbands and wives mutually submit to each other. It is not expected in the marriage that the husband has the final say in decisions. So yes, we submit to our husbands, but they also submit to us. That doesn’t mean women run the household, but it means they share the running of the household.

        Mary, there is NO bible scripture that tells women in the 21st century that they must submit to their husbands – which means ALL males. Because wives who must submit to their husbands, must also submit to ALL males, and you see this when churches will not allow women to be deacons, pastors or preachers, or to teach men in Sunday School. Women are required to submit to ALL males. Even your male children are in favor of the church more than you are.

        This is Muslim teaching. It is also Orthodox Jewish teaching. We are Christians, saved equally by he blood of Jesus. He came to do away with the law, but you are accepting a new set of laws for yourself, and are requiring it for all women.

        Please read my book. I am a Christian. I am a Church Secretary. I have served in every position a woman can do in a church. I love the Lord, and so does my husband, and children. I have been married to Don for almost 52 years. I don’t seek to lead you astray. I do want you to enjoy the full benefits of being a child of God, and accepting the freedoms that Jesus Christ gave us.

        Please write again. I will be glad to answer more of your questions.


        > Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 04:12:16 +0000 > To: >


      • infowarrior1 says:

        The law of god applies for all time. Only the temporary ceremonial laws were repealed. In the same vein that the ten commandments apply for all time so too does scripture. Regardless of culture or time.


    • Mara says:

      I encourage you, sunshinemary, to read Shirley’s book. I’m halfway through it and it lays out example after example, in easy to understand terms, how God doesn’t follow these rules you have outlined above. Women teach men in the Bible. There are biblical examples. Women DO take leadership roles in both home and church. And the words of Jesus do not support your above interpretations of Paul. The words of Jesus kick the legs out from under your interpretation of Paul’s words to the Ephesians and elsewhere.

      We could lay out the examples here, but they are researched and listed in Shirley’s book, for those who are brave enough to read it.


  5. Ton says:

    I’ve seen what women voting has lead to, it’s nothing good. Women leadership in the churches has lead to a weak, effeminate church and a sick, ungodly culture where children are murdered in the womb.

    Congratulations ladies


    • Ewwwwww! Welcome, anyway! I am glad to hear from you. Just a quick lesson in biology. Those babies got in the wombs by men who did not care enough to use protection against a pregnancy, and then many provided the money for an abortion. I don’t agree with abortion, but it is not a one-sided thing. Man cannot be absolved of their responsibility in abortion. Now what on earth are you talking about with women voting? Men have voted for some real rascals, too, you know. For your information, men are the leaders in churches. They are the pastors, the deacons, the elders, teachers of men. Women get the serving food and tending to kids, and teaching other women parts. Have you actually attended church recently?


    • Mara says:

      Shirley, apparently Ton needs a crash course in history since he/she has displayed utter ignorance.

      But rather than lay it all out here let me link to a Christian, homeschool mother’s blog who sets the record straight.

      Ton, I urge you to come up out of your ignorance and get more informed so that you don’t make such stupid and uninformed accusations.

      the suffragettes and a woman’s right to chose:

      (hint, abortion went on, A LOT, before the women got the right to vote. And most abortions were instigated by… wait for it… wait for it… M.E.N.!!!)


  6. Ton – You sound very self righteous. Did you know that in the U.S. approximately 89% of homicides are committed by men? I’m sure that God knew what He was doing when He gave the responsibility of bringing forth life to women and women alone. If He gave it to men, the abortion rate would be much higher. Or do you fool yourself into thinking that men would commit 89% of murders but not 89% of abortions if given the responsibility?

    SunshineMary – Have you ever considered that maybe the “women passages” are not accurately translated or interpreted? For instance, in the 1 Corinthians 11 passage, men teach that they are the image and glory of God. However, the Bible is clear that Jesus Christ is the image and glory of God. When one understands that Jesus Christ is the image and glory of God, it changes the passage completely. God bless.


    • Mara says:

      On the abortion thing, something is completely lost on most men and the Religious Right.

      But I hear of it because my parents are on the board of a home for pregnant women. They see first hand women who want to keep their babies and they are working to support those women who want to make that choice.

      Often times the woman WANTS to keep her baby but she is being greatly pressured, either by her parents (including the father) or her boyfriend (baby-daddy who can only be male) to abort. She wants to make the right choice, the choice of life, but those who should be supporting her are pressuring her and sometimes even threatening her financially or otherwise to abort.

      I actually heard one father say that if either of his daughters turned up pregnant he’d drag them by the hair to the abortion clinic himself. This is a man talking, not a woman. This is a man pushing abortion on women, not a woman.

      So this is NOT the clean cut, “women are evil because they abort their babies” dynamic that Ton is convinced of. It is much messier than that. And Ton better wake up and figure that one out so he/she can stop looking so ignorant when he/she comments on things he/she doesn’t understand.


    • Thanks for the good words about the book. Do you know that I have asked many people to show me the scriptures where men are to lead women, but none have come up with them. One complementarian said that it is in the theme of the Bible, but then he insisted on an exact wording from Paul to say that women can preach. He discounted Jesus altogether.


      • Estelle says:

        Hi Shirley, there is Esther 1 v 22 ‘He sent dispatches to all parts of the kingdom … proclaiming that every man should be ruler over his own household…’ but, seeing as the proclamation comes from the pagan ex-husband of Queen Vashti / future husband of Queen Esther, I don’t think we’re meant to listen to him!


      • Hi Estelle. Glad to hear from you. Well, now you know, there are many scriptures you can quote from the OT that we do not take literally. You don’t kill your neighbor if you find him or her working on the Sabbath. I don’t live in the OT days, or the New Testament days and neither do you, yet churches want women to adhere to some of those rules, not all, but chosen ones. Therein is the rub. Who chooses? Each church chooses how it demeans their women, and they are all reading the same scripture, but they interpret it different for practice in their church. Each church chooses how they want to ignore the actions of Jesus Christ toward women. Each church chooses how it ignores how Paul treated women by allowing them to be leaders.

        Quickly, find the scripture for me that tells me that Jesus decided that an earthly man should rule over women even before or after his resurrection! Quickly, find for me the scripture that tells women why they must be ruled over by an earthling after Jesus died for them.


  7. robert yates says: is a good website to check the actual greek and hebrew texts.
    Man lordship over woman before the fall. Woman made for man. Adam named woman and all the animals before the fall and named her eve after the fall.
    Genesis 18 Now the Lord God said, It is not good (sufficient, satisfactory) that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper (suitable, adapted, complementary) for him.
    19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every [wild] beast and living creature of the field and every bird of the air and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them; and whatever Adam called every living creature, that was its name.
    20 And Adam gave names to all the livestock and to the birds of the air and to every [wild] beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found a helper meet (suitable, adapted, complementary) for him.
    22 And the rib or part of his side which the Lord God had taken from the man He built up and made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.
    23 Then Adam said, This [creature] is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of a man.
    24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall become united and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
    9 But the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, Where are you?
    16 To the woman He said, I will greatly multiply your grief and your suffering in pregnancy and the pangs of childbearing; with spasms of distress you will bring forth children. Yet your desire and craving will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.
    17 And to Adam He said, Because you have listened and given heed to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, saying, You shall not eat of it, the ground is under a curse because of you; in sorrow and toil shall you eat [of the fruits] of it all the days of your life.
    20 The man called his wife’s name Eve [life spring], because she was the mother of all the living.
    1 Peter
    Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh. For this is commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering wrongfully. For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us,[f] leaving us[g] an example, that you should follow His steps:
    “Who committed no sin,
    Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;
    who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer[i] of your souls.
    Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear. Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel— rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God. For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters you are if you do good and are not afraid with any terror.
    2:4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,
    2:5 [To be] discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
    1 Timothy
    2:11 Let the woman learn in SILENCE with all subjection.
    2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to USURP authority over the man, but TO BE IN SILENCE.
    2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
    2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
    2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
    1 Corinthians
    11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
    11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
    11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
    11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
    1 Corinthians
    14:34 Let your women keep silence in the communities: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith The Law.
    14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a disgrace for women to speak in the community.
    Colossians –
    3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

    5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
    5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the community: and he is the saviour of the body.
    5:24 Therefore as the community is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in EVERY thing.
    5: 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
    1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.
    Numbers 30 .
    8 But if her husband refuses to allow her [to keep her vow or pledge] on the day that he hears of it, then he shall make void and annul her vow which is upon her and the rash utterance of her lips by which she bound herself, and the Lord will forgive her.
    12 But if her husband positively made them void on the day he heard them, then whatever proceeded out of her lips concerning her vows or concerning her pledge of herself shall not stand. Her husband has annulled them, and the Lord will forgive her.
    13 Every vow and every binding oath to humble or afflict herself, her husband may establish it or her husband may annul it.
    14 But if her husband altogether holds his peace [concerning the matter] with her from day to day, then he establishes and confirms all her vows or all her pledges which are upon her. He establishes them because he said nothing to [restrain] her on the day he heard of them.
    15 But if he shall nullify them after he hears of them, then he shall be responsible for and bear her iniquity.
    16 These are the statutes which the Lord commanded Moses, between a man and his wife, and between a father and his daughter while in her youth in her father’s house


    • Welcome Robert! We are glad that you joined in. I notice that you do not give any of Jesus’ words. Particularly you should have used at least some Matthew 23 where Jesus told the Jewish leaders that their law had become more important than people. I do believe that his Words to women should be represented in this long list. You can find that in my book.

      Have you purchased burqas for your wife and daughters?


      • Mara says:

        Yep, it’s amazing at how absent the words of Jesus are in Robert’s tirade. There is absolutely NOTHING from any of the Gospels represented in anything he typed. Therefore nothing he typed has any gospel to it.

        Which is funny considering that a voice spoke from heaven that said concerning Jesus, “This is My Son, My Chosen One, Listen to Him.” (Matthew 17:5, Mark 9:7, and Luke 9:35)

        Obviously, the words of Jesus carry far more weight on any topic than anything any of the prophets or apostles said at any time, ever.

        Here is what Jesus said:

        Matthew 23:8 But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ.

        Luke 22:25 And He said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who have authority over them are called ‘Benefactors.’ 26 But it is not this way with you, but the one who is the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like the servant. 27 For who is greater, the one who reclines at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at the table? But I am among you as the one who serves.

        But Robert doesn’t want to listen to Jesus because Jesus doesn’t say what Robert’s itching ears want to hear. He only wants to kick the bedrock of Jesus Christ out from under the epistles and the law. Robert wants make the words of the prophets and apostles directed toward their particular cultural situations the bedrock of Christianity rather than allowing Jesus to have His rightful place as Author and Finisher. Robert makes Moses, Peter, and Paul the authors and finishers. poor misguided Robert.

        Sorry, Robert. But according to the One we are supposed to be listening to, God NEVER gave lordship over women to men. Lordship over women was something men stole for themselves, usurping the One who is supposed to be our leader

        The Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence (is forcibly entered) and violent men take it by force (seize it for themselves). (Matthew 11:12)

        Robert, you better get your filthy, power grubbing hands OFF of the authority that belongs to God. You put yourself in a very precarious place by your assertions.


  8. robert yates says:

    Thanks for responding to my comment.
    Husbandry: the care, cultivation, and breeding of crops and animals.
    Man created first, 66 books of the bible were written by men, temple priests were men, Jesus was a man, jesus called 12 men, Church Elders, Bishops, and Deacons of new testament men. elders in revelation were men. Seems like a common theme.
    I am under the belief that literal scripture interpretations that were present over the centuries carry more weight than the liberal interpretations that we have now but could you share some scripture insights you have found? You really have to question any new doctoral interpretations over the past 150 years including pre-tribulation rapture. There is actually more scriptural support for a man having multiple wives and servants/slaves then there is for female church leaders.
    I believe the same principle applies to the US constitution. Wouldn’t you think the federalist papers and Supreme Court decisions and interpretations of the constitution from the 1700s-early 1900s carries more weight than the liberal interpretations of today. The constitution can only change via an amendment process. I don’t believe after 200 years somehow congress can find some dormant power they previously did not have. Example The Federal Govt was only granted power for alcohol prohibition via a constitutional amendment, meaning they did not have that power. Well how does congress have the power for drug prohibition today? Maybe a misinterpretation of the commerce clause and necessary and proper clause but there was no constitutional amendment.

    5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy The Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.
    5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no way pass from The Law, till all (the prophecies) be fulfilled.
    5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least COMMANDments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the Kingdom of heaven.
    5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall EXCEED [the righteousness] of the lawyers and politicians (who were also priests), ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of heaven
    Luke 16:17″But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.
    Mark 3:13-19
    13 Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him. 14 He appointed twelve[a] that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach 15 and to have authority to drive out demons. 16 These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter), 17 James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means “sons of thunder”), 18 Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot 19 and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.


    • So Jesus didn’t want any women. Cut through all that Male superiority and this is what you will find:Jesus told the Caananite woman that he came to Gentiles as well as to Jews, and her told her first.Jesus told the Samaritan woman that He was the Messiah that they had long been expecting, and he told her first.Jesus told a Jewish woman to sit at his feet and learn.Jesus told Mary at the tomb that he had risen, and he told her first.

      > Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2013 02:59:58 +0000 > To: >


  9. Mara says:

    It is true that husbandry, an Old English term, means the things that you define. It is an agricultural term that came from Oid Norse.

    However. And this is a HUGE however.
    It IS an Old English term that has NOTHING to do with anything Hebrew or Greek. Therefore, superimposing it onto Biblical text defiles the Holy Writ.

    Please don’t hold up this misunderstanding on how languages work as some kind of proof of your doctrine. It doesn’t.

    Also, there is no proof that all 66 books of the Bible were written by men. Several are of unknown authorship. Assuming that they were written by men is just that, an assumption. It is not proof of anything.

    Also, yes Jesus came to fulfill the Law and Prophets. But you MUST define the law as HE defines it. Not by how you define it.

    Matthew 22:37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”

    Any interpretation of the Law not founded in the love of God and the love of people is a perversion.

    Again, Jesus is the bedrock that the foundation of the Law and the Prophets is to be built upon. Building on the foundation of Moses or Paul without the foundation of Jesus but rather the foundation of culture or social preference is building your doctrinal house on sand. In essence you use Moses and Paul to define and mold Jesus rather than using Jesus to define Moses and Paul. This is a grave error leading to abuse and misunderstanding of the Gospel.

    Also, Jesus said that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle (a gate leading into Jerusalem) than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God (Matthew 19. Mark 10, and Luke 18).

    Men who insist on being the Husband or the “Master of the House” and to carry this wealth on into the Kingdom of God… It is impossible. Your insistence on your wealth and cultural position exempts you from fulling entering the Kingdom of God. It makes men “play actors” of a being a followers of Jesus. They may be saved. But they are on the outskirts of what God wants to do in this world.

    Also, ignoring Deborah, Priscilla, Phoebe, Junia and many other God ordained and God approved female leaders doesn’t make them go away. Men try to sweep them under the rug because the existence of these women doesn’t support the warped view of God and the Bible that men desperately cling to.

    So, again, Robert. I ask you to get the true bedrock of Jesus Christ and His Words built under your doctrine. Until you do, you will never really understand Paul or Moses. You will only continue to use Paul and Moses to cancel out and redefine the words of Jesus into a false Gospel that is unable to save.


    • robert yates says:

      Mara, Jesus saves you that should be the focus. But other issues are not so clear cut and women in church leadership is one of them that is why there are many denominations and different debates throughout the centuries: Sunday vs Saturday worship, Once saved always saved, Do you need to be baptized to be saved, baptized in the name of the father, son, holy ghost or baptized in the name of Jesus, baptized in the Holy Ghost, can gentiles be saved, if gentiles can be saved do they have to follow the law of Moses now?, circumcised?, is slavery still permitted, is polygamy still permitted, speaking in tongues? are instruments allowed in worship, what type of instruments allowed for worship only ones found in the bible?, is tithing mandatory, communion with alcohol, I am sure there are many more.
      so in your opinion are Paul, Moses, and Peter false prophets? And are all 62 books of the bible outside of the four gospels are they inspirited by God?


      • Mara says:

        Paul and Moses are not false prophets. They were very important men who spoke to their own cultures and their own generations, trying very hard to make the people of their times understand the limited amount of understanding that they had of God. What they brought was good. What Paul said to the Ephesians was good. He told men to stop lording it over their wives as the rest of their culture did and to take the attitude that Jesus had. And he told Ephesian wives to fear their husbands because of their subjected position that they had in the Ephesian culture (and all of the Greco Roman Culture of his day). Paul it using the Aristotle household codes as a point of reference and turning it upon its head.

        Modern men don’t get that Paul is speaking to the household code of his day. And instead of seeing it as a teaching tool or springboard for getting the words of Jesus, “love your neighbor as yourself” going in the GrecoRoman households of the day, men use the words of Paul to rip away the freedoms that Jesus bought for women on the Cross.

        I’m not saying that Moses and Paul are false. I’m saying that men have misunderstood and misinterpreted what they have said in their own time with their own cultural limitations as mandates from God that usurp rather than complement the words of Jesus.

        Robert: “Mara, Jesus saves you that should be the focus. But other issues are not so clear cut and women in church leadership”

        I agree with your here and want to take a moment to complement you.

        Sometimes my manner can be sharp. It’s mostly from dealing with arrogant men who what to use the Bible to put women down. Though I very much disagree with your doctrine concerning women, I still appreciate how patient and non-insulting you have been toward me, trying to win me over to the way you see things.

        But you must understand that you can’t.

        I’ve “been there done that” with the limiting doctrine that men have laid on the backs of women. And when I turned my eyes to heaven and to the Bible and asked God why He favored men so much and chose to make me a lesser being, a woman, He opened up the Bible and showed me that He didn’t say what men have said concerning women. He made me equal in salvation AND position.

        Anyway, I’ve heard all the arguments against female leadership and have seen them all fall in a rubbish heap when held up to the full council of the Word, history, and culture. I’ve also seen women leave Christianity because men have presented God as a Male Chauvinist Pig when He wasn’t. It was the men doing the teaching who were chauvinists and who were slamming the door of heaven against women looking for love, truth, and justice. Male headship doctrine is none of those things. It is false, unjust, and very unloving.

        Peter and Paul didn’t teach it. But their words to their times have been twisted to mean things that they never intended for all time.
        I wish I could help you see that. But I understand that you feel convinced of you position and that your doctrine puts you in a higher seat, therefore you do not feel the injustice of it against your sisters. Perhaps, if you could ever put yourself in our position, you might question the traditions of men that have brought us to this point.

        If not, then I wish you well as long as you keep “Jesus saves you that should be the focus.”


  10. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
    (Eph 5:24)

    Does this mean that I can completely ignore Christ and still claim to be in His church? Can I chuck the entirety of scripture now since it’s clear that Christ and I have been made equals in the same way husbands and wives are and I don’t want to do it His way anymore. Why should I?


    • Welcome! I am glad you art laughing. Not sure what about, but laugh if you will. I laugh, too, at the lengths men will go to claim a power that belongs only to Jesus Christ. Sure, you can chuck the entirety of scripture if you please. After all, you have picked out certain restrictive scriptures and snuggled them against your chest. Why not just throw the whole thing away? Because you have completely ignored Matthew 23 about the religious leaders loving the law more than they love people, you have ignored how Jesus gave his message to women. So just make a clean sweep, because what you chose to keep is harsh, unloving, and elevates earthly man to a position next to God.


      • So we’re basically going with Ephesians 5:24 is legalism? Are we to believe that the holy Spirit inspiring Paul to write this message to men and women in Ephesus was harsh an unloving as well? The neighboring versus requiring a man to love his wife and give himself as Christ gave himself to the Church should probably be the very next to go, expecting sacrifice on that level seems pretty harsh and unloving, and far far far from equal.


      • Read the whole passage of Ephesians 5. It tells men to love their wives and not beat them – treat them as they would their own bodies. You wouldn’t give yourself a black eye, don’t give her one. Men did, and still do, beat their wives. This passage is telling men how to behave. Not women. Women knew that if they displeased their husbands, they were beaten. Paul says don’t do it. Love your wife as you love your own body. (Art thou still laughing, that would make husbands and wives equal).

        So, is it loving or unloving?

        Exactly how is a man to give himself to a wife like Christ gave himself to the church? What picture do you paint for this? A man hanging on a cross for his wife? Or a man treating his wife with love?

        > Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 15:05:41 +0000 > To: >


      • I Art laughing, there is one more thing you need to know. Jesus has already hung on the cross for women. That is the ultimate. There is not one thing on earth that man can do for his wife that even comes close. Why should women take a substitute for Christ? We have Christ!

        What we don’t have is love from pastors, seminary professors, bloggers, and men like you who want to keep men inserted in between God and women. To do that, makes man divine. If man is divine on earth, then yes, throw your Bibles away. I will throw mine away, because I will not accept a faulty human as a substitute for Christ.

        > Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 15:05:41 +0000 > To: >


      • God is laughing at postmodernism. Pretending that men are not being asked to love sacrificially is an ignorance of convenience. What is the glue that is supposed to hold modern marriage together because a husband trying to emulate Christ’s sacrificial love towards the Church is apparently silly, in the same way that it is silly for wives to submit as the Church does to Christ to their husband. When the Bible gives us Jesus Christ and the Church being a model for man and wife in marriage and vice versa what do you have besides your opinions on social justice to refute it. Not much from what I see.

        I was curious, now I’m not. God is still laughing.


      • I don’t think God is laughing at anybody. I think those are tears. Tears for ignorance. Tears for his female children. Tears for people such as yourself who have a closed mind.

        Postmodernism is not a sin. Going forward is not a sin. Understanding God as He is revealed to us, is not a sin. Closing your mind to the love of God for all, is a sin.

        Yes, it is silly to believe that man can model Christ in a marriage. You must read my book Dethroning Male Headship and you will see just how silly it is, and how unscriptural it is.

        Open your heart to God. Open your heart to love. How can you love your wife like Christ did the church, and speak in such a way that demonstrates a lack of love for women? You should be on your knees every morning praying that God will give your wife the same kind of relationship with Him, that you have. But you don’t. Instead you are browbeating your wife in comments to blogs such as this. You are elevating males (yourself) instead. You are standing on the back of your wife and all women. That is not love. Sharing equally is love.

        Open your heart to love.

        > Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 15:34:07 +0000 > To: >


      • Mara says:

        Ephesians 5:24 says “But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.”

        However the phrase “ought to be” IS NOT part of the original Greek. Go to the link. You will see that “ought to be” is in italics which means a translator ADDED those words that don’t belong due to HIS cultural back ground or what HE felt should be their.

        Ephesians 5:24 ACTUALLY says “But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives to their husbands in everything.”

        Paul is making a factual statement about the condition of wives in the GrecoRoman culture. He IS NOT make a rule for wives to follow. He was stating something that was known by all in his time.

        Then he goes on to tell husbands how they had better treat their wives, who lived in a subjected position, if those men wanted to claim that they followed Christ. They could not take advantage of their elevated position in that culture over women while claiming some kind of godliness. He appeals to the fact that Jesus has an elevated position over the church and uses it to teach men how to use their elevated position in the Roman Empire to love and prefer their wives. He IS NOT using it as a picture for men in the Kingdom of God because this would to puff them up, make them think more highly of themselves than they ought to, and to make women feel inferior and like second class citizens in the Kingdom of God.

        Be ever so careful about what you decide is a command.
        It is better to start at the bedrock, the two greatest commands uttered by Jesus:
        “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength. And love your neighbor as yourself.”

        Then build on it the foundation of the Law, like the 10 Commandments, which NEVER tell men that they are the head of their wives.

        And the Prophets and Apostles who decried injustice and lack of love.


      • I have the greatest respect for women I know who are wives. One in particular demonstrated for me submission in a way that I will never forget. Because of it I submitted to and came to forgive my earthly father and eventually understood more fully how to submit and receive the heavenly Father’s love. I’m glad not all women are fighting so vigorously for equality that they have forgotten how to deny themselves and reflect the sacrificial heart of Jesus Christ. Somewhere in all of this the message of the Cross seems to have been lost, to the point where you even asked how a husband would demonstrate this to his wife. Jesus called us all to deny ourselves, take up our cross daily and follow him. There is equality in Christ.


      • Art, Art, Art! We submit to Christ. But you are telling all women, that first they must submit to their husbands, and then to Christ. Or to even make the decision whether or not their husbands is being Christlike, and then choose Christ over their husbands, but first it must be filtered through a husband.

        You do not have to be the middle man! Christ freed you from that liability. Women do not need a middle man. Just as you don’t need a middle man. You and I both can go directly to Christ.

        > Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 16:15:03 +0000 > To: >


      • Nah, women first submit to Christ and then their husbands. The reason that they submit to their husbands is because they fear the Lord (as in 1 Peter 3:2). It is not because there is anything inherently good in the husband or that he is superior to her in any way. It’s not that he is more favored of God or closer to Him in hierarchy. The submission is required because sovereign God asks it. Husbands that don’t get this I believe are walking where angels fear to tread. Getting between a Godly and obedient wife (that is not double minded as described in James) and the living God is no place to be for a disobedient and proud man.


      • Read my blog today and find out exactly what 1 Peter 3 means. You’ve got it wrong.

        > Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 16:32:03 +0000 > To: >


      • I’m not sure how you take “chaste conversation coupled with fear” and convert that to ‘if you do not fear as you keep following Christ”.

        It seems that there is a categorical postmodernist aversion to Godly fear. Seems like there is an awful lot of Bible to erase going down that path. My latest blog entry:


    • Retha says:

      You know, if you had a Bible that puts words that are not in the original, but translated into the original, in grey like my e-sword KJV, the text would be (I use brackets as I can’t do grey in comments) :
      Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so (let) the wives (be) to their own husbands in every thing.
      It was a statement of what was, not a command. And “being subject” could certainly not mean obeying every order. Because all believers should be subject to (some translations use another word, but the Bible Greek use the same word as in :24) one another, and we can’t all obey the commands of every believer while they obey all our commands.


  11. Mara says:

    Art: ” The submission is required because sovereign God asks it.”

    You know what, Art. You are right. Since Paul wrote it, that must mean it is from God for all people of all times. Who are we to decide that any part of the Bible is written specifically to a certain group of people, even if it specifically says who it is written to like the Romans or Corinthians or Galatians or Ephesians or Thessalonians.

    If Paul or Peter wrote it to one of those groups, then it all trickles down to us and we must obey every jot and tittle.

    Based on this understanding of the Bible, then I must direct you to a doctrine that so many men and women refuse to obey because our post modernism makes us uncomfortable with.

    It is the doctrine of the Holy Kiss which is referred to BY NAME more often than male headship.

    Here are the ignored verses of the Bible that YOU MUST OBEY because of how you demand everyone else read the Bible.

    Romans 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you.

    1 Corinthians 16:20 All the brethren greet you. Greet one another with a holy kiss.

    2 Corinthians 13:12 Greet one another with a holy kiss.

    1 Thessalonians 5:26 Greet all the brethren with a holy kiss.

    Now get on out there, Art. Stop laughing and take this doctrine serious since the Sovereign God asks it of you.

    (Note, yes, we are all called to submit to one another as written in Ephesians 5:21. We ladies aren’t saying that we are not to submit. We are. But we are not to be buried under extra submission that men don’t have and have our gifts and callings buried by a total misunderstanding of what Paul is trying to say to the Ephesians.)


    • I don’t have the least bit of a problem with a holy kiss, as a matter of fact I’ve learned a lot from it. I see your point that it was a quaint regional and cultural custom as is washing feet. i don’t have a problem with either. I certainly wouldn’t preach or speak against them. Nowhere do I see those compared to how Christ relates with the Church.


      • Mara says:

        How Christ related to the church was that He washed the disciples feet. You must not have been paying attention to that place where He was directly relating to the men who would be later be leaders in His church and teaching them how they were supposed to be directly relating to everybody else in the church including women, children and slaves. He used that and many, many other illustrations to kick the legs out from under all hierarchy teachings of men. All of them. Including the teachings that misguided individuals use to try to create a hierarchy of men over women.

        Paul was not reinforcing man made human hierarchies when he addressed the Aristotle household codes in Ephesians 5. He was kicking the legs out from under them, first by stating in Ephesians 5:21 that we are all to submit to one another. Then he drew attention to how people could apply “love your neighbor (which includes your wives, children, and slaves) as yourself” while they still lived in the crooked, fallen, darkened world of the first century church steeped in hierarchy which included slavery, patriarchy, and child abuse.

        So yes, foot washing IS a very hands on relating of Jesus to His church. Not some quaint regional custom. The first shall be last and the last shall be first. Any man who wants to Lord it over me better be willing to wash my feet. If he isn’t, then he has no place of leader ship. I, on the other hand, don’t mind washing feet. or butts, or other things. And I can do it without thinking that I now get to go lord over someone else because I KNOW that is not what the gospel is about. It is NOT about men lording over women or women lording over men. This is why we stand against the false male headship doctrine. It completely misses everything that Jesus tried to teach us.

        And since you don’t have a problem with a holy kiss, then I guess your next assignment is to go greet everyone in your church with it tomorrow, men, women, and children. Otherwise you are disobeying God’s command. Hopefully nobody gives you a black eye for obeying scripture so well.


      • Maybe you missed the part where Stephen, Peter and Paul (the church) were all martyred in obedience to Jesus.

        Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus. And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it. But when they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves, Saying, What shall we do to these men? for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it. But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name. And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.
        (Act 4:10-20)


  12. Mara says:

    Art: “It seems that there is a categorical postmodernist aversion to Godly fear. Seems like there is an awful lot of Bible to erase going down that path.”

    No, it’s a Biblical aversion to fear.

    I John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.

    We love is not perfect, then their is fear.

    So does this mean you want to erase I John 4:18 going down your path?


    • Not in the least. When we abide in Him we will not have fear. What happens when we consider departing from Him? It is fear that keeps us in His love. Are you “perfected in love” or are you like Paul still working our your “salvation with fear and trembling” as described in Psalm 2:12?


      • Mara says:

        Fear involves punishment.
        Hierarchy involves punishment.
        Those who lord over others have some way of being able to punish those they lord over. This is what men do when they teach that they have lordship over their wives. It conflicts with the Lordship of Jesus Christ. It give a woman two heads, Jesus and her husband.
        Yes, those who are disobedient to Christ have cause to fear. But those who have sought His heart must cast off the fear of men including their husbands.
        Male headship doctrine in the 21st century is a bringing back of women under the GrecoRoman law where a woman had cause to fear her lord husband. Male headship teach makes her a daughter of Hagar rather than daughter of Sarah. It is time to cast out the bond woman, Hagar, the Household Codes of Aristotle, the Laws governing the Roman Empire, and to receive our mother, Sarah, the free woman.

        Male headship is slavery and bondage, worldly and fleshly, having it’s roots in the fallen nature of men, women, and their relationships. The old, fallen ways cause great fear in all, especially women. The new ways of freedom in Christ releases us from fear and into freedom.


      • That is the interesting basis for a cult.


      • Mara started on a journey towards God on a path called Jesus and the moment she set her foot on it she “arrived”.

        And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
        (Php 2:11-13)

        Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.
        (Heb 3:12-15)


      • I approve with caution. I looked at your website. Please understand that this blog is solely about Biblical women’s equality. Nothing else. We will not enter into any other kind of discussion. We stick to the Bible and to the subject.


      • Mara says:

        Wow, Shirley.
        Art really doesn’t understand what is going on around here.
        She really thinks she has us pegged and is letting us have it with her perceived superior understanding.
        She hasn’t understood my comments from the start. If she did, she wouldn’t have chosen the Scriptures she did because they say nothing to what I am speaking.

        But in case anyone else here is wondering what I actually am saying rather than what Art has projected upon me because of her prejudice, I’ll sum it up here.

        The Bible says that we are to submit to one another:
        Matthew 23:8-10, Luke 22:25-27, Ephesians 5:21. It is mutual and back and forth. It is not one way. It is not one people group to another and not the other way around.
        Art thinks I’m saying women don’t have to submit. We do. We all do. If I were to decide to lord it over someone else, anyone else, male of female, I would be just as guilty as the men who try to use scripture to lord over women. It is a sin no matter which gender practices it.

        We are to submit to people, not every wind of doctrine. We are definitely to approach the Word with fear and trembling because it can be screwed with and has been screwed with, immensely, to undercut, cancel out, and otherwise (dare I say it?) reject the chief cornerstone of Jesus. Male headship rejects the chief cornerstone of Jesus and puts manhood where Jesus belongs.

        Therefore, though we approach the Word with this concern, we are not to fear men. Arbitrary hierarchy among people naturally produces fear. Lawless prople need laws outside themselves to govern every part of their lives.and enforcement to keep them from hurting themselves and others. But the people of God should not be like this. The Law of God should be written on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). They are very easy.

        Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and strength.
        Love your neighbor as yourself.
        And Paul says that we are to owe not man anything except love.
        We do not owe them fear. We don’t even owe them submission, though our love should make submission to one another and concern for one another a core part of our lives. If we do not love people, then we do not love God. (I John 4:20-21)

        Art has been the drinking the anti-woman kool-aid her branch of Christianity. She has been told she must drink it if she wants to prove she loves God. So rather than actually listening to what is going on around here, she jumps to ridiculous conclusions and tries to shame, scoff, and mock us into submission to the wind of doctrine that she believes is essential to salvation and the Gospel.

        I hope someday she will be able to converse here and make her arguments in a more persuasive manner rather than just trying to run over people roughshod with random scriptures while making little sense and contributing nothing to the debate.
        That is my hope for her. But I’m not holding my breath.


      • I doubt seriously that Art even read your comments. It is like sticking her fingers in her ear and say “lalalalallalal, I can’t hear you!.”

        > Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 13:55:40 +0000 > To: >


      • Mara says:

        Footnote on what I said on today’s comment at 9:55 am

        The two greatest commandments that should be written on our hearts are easy to remember. Not necessarily easy to obey. They can be, in fact, very difficult to submit to. Especially when people laugh in your face and in the face of the hurting, and when they mock and scorn you and fire outlandish accusations against you.
        When those things happen, from sister or brother, then a person must rely on the Holy Spirit to help them overcome.

        Though I have removed myself from conversing directly with Art due to her disrespectful and shaming tactics, I have not removed myself from trying to obey the commandments of Jesus in regard to her.


  13. No “fear” in Christ?

    And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD; And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears: But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
    (Isa 11:1-4)

    Also note that equity comes to the meek.

    For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king. Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
    (1Pe 2:15-21)

    Or you can pick up a pen and start a letter writing campaign, suggest that whole denominations are “man-made pens”, march around with picket-signs, rally and write books, but I don’t see any of that outlined in the Bible. We’ve turned in patient suffering for the squeaky wheel method of social activism. Just like Jesus demonstrated, right?


    • Actually, Jesus went to the Temple and turned over the money changes with a whip. If you want some of Jesus, you must see all of Jesus. And Jesus in no way treated women as less desirable than men for his kingdom.

      > Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 16:57:49 +0000 > To: >


    • I sure am glad that Jesus didn’t go to Pilate ‘demanding his rights’.

      All of this “demanding” makes me think that somebody besides the meek are going to inherit. Maybe the most demanding are really going to get what they demand. Seems completely out of step with ALL of the word except those parts that talk about the sin of rebellion.


      • You see what you want to see. To me, men demand that they be the head of the woman and house and church. Now read what you just wrote from my point of view. And then go look in the mirror because you demand a closeness to God that you don’t biblically have. Goodbye

        > Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 17:08:30 +0000 > To: >


      • Yes, and when men demand they are every bit as out of step with the Bible as when women do it. There is an organic hierarchy of submission in the body of Christ, nobody needs to assert superiority or equality in the body. It’ man made organizations that are the battlefield for this nonsense. What the worlds definition of equality has seeped into the organizations that identify with the organism of Christ. Paul talks about diversity in the body, part that are less “comely” receiving more honor. This is of course completely unacceptable in the worlds value system.

        Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
        (1Co 12:22-25)

        Instead the feminist wants to come along and staple the EXACT same methodology that they use to take over politics/atheism/business and everywhere else. Are we suggesting that the body of Christ is identical to a political office, a board room or an atheist conference? I find it very striking that the same strategies that were used by radical activists to achieve equality are being aimed at Christ with the expectation of the same results. That seems like extreme hubris to me. We are equal precisely because none of us have any “rights” at all.


      • krwordgazer says:

        The Body of Christ and the man-made hierarchical structures made by churches are not the same thing. And I always think it’s interesting how it’s those on the lower levels of the hierarchy that are told they shouldn’t have rights. It’s as if we were reversing Jesus’ parable of those at the banquet” “Now, you in the top positions hold your seats! It’s you at the bottom who are being uppity and need to stay in the lower places.”


      • krwordgazer says:

        BTW, Paul demanded his rights in Acts 16:37. And there is nothing in the passage or in any other writing of Paul that indicates he, or God, thought he did anything wrong. There are times to demand rights. And no passage of Scripture gives part of the Body of Christ the power to cause another part to suffer, while saying, “Don’t demand your rights! Turn the other cheek while I slap you!”


      • I find it interesting that Jesus apparently uses the same tactics as the Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem when it comes to correcting the body of Christ. The same tools that are used to achieve equality in the world are precisely the ones He’s leading women to use in the Church. Who knew just how Godly radical feminists where?!


      • Retha says:

        It is strange how Art isn’t really getting what (s)he says. “The meek shall inherit the earth” – used to defend one-sided leadership (non-meekness) in one gender, to someone like Shirley who does not have to demand rights from her husband, but whose husband supports her in her writing, writing to defend others.

        And Biblical meekness is not being a wimp and accepting whatever happens, but the Greek means putting your strength under the control of another – God in this case. If men actually had to be in control as some say, the meekness message of Jesus (the meek shall inherit the earth) would mean that women, not men, would inherit the earth.


      • Some scriptures just don’t apply to Art! He/she chooses which ones to believe. And he chooses those that put women down. He does not choose those that elevates ALL Christians, women included.

        > Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 22:09:56 +0000 > To: >


  14. krwordgazer says:

    Shirley, good for you, saying “Goodbye.” Art, or “God is Laughing” or whatever she wants to call herself, is trolling this blog. She has also conflated the two meanings of the word translated “fear” in some Bible translations– but “fearing” God and being afraid of people set above us in man-made hierarchies are two different things; and the Bible definitely says not to fear the latter, for “perfect love casts out fear.” Nor do I believe God is laughing at our sincere efforts to be free of those hierarchies. Instead, Psalm 2 says God laughs at the members of man-made hierarchies who attempt to set themselves above the Son.


    • No, God is laughing at those who would cast off restraint:

      Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
      (Psa 2:1-4)

      He laughs at people who think that they can organize a movement against the body of Christ as if they were getting a speaker banned from a college campus. He laughs at women that march around in the street dressed like prostitutes and claim that they are marching for “equality”. He laughs at the old women who instead of teaching the young women modesty and chastity instead cheer them in their promiscuity, He laughs at those hierarchies and leaders that are very clearly in this day promoting the casting off of restraint. He holds them in derision.


      • krwordgazer says:

        By your reasoning, then, Martin Luther was in the wrong and should never have published his 95 Theses or stood against the church of his day. But the restraints he wanted to cast off were not of Christ. And neither are the constraints we seek to cast off. I say again, the church’s structures and the body of Christ are not the same thing.


      • The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
        (Tit 2:3-5)

        Equality? Where does it say anything about equality? Maybe this is why the divorce rate in the “Church” is going to exceed the divorce rates in the world? Someone fell down on the job?


  15. Mara says:

    Thanks for trying,Kristen.
    But her mind is made up. Don’t confuse her with anything that doesn’t line up with the agenda of her overseers.
    She doesn’t listen to anything we say anyway so there is no point in wasting any more time or energy on making her cranky or giving her reason for any self-indulgent laughter.
    Cheers all.
    Have a good week.
    I plan to.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s