CBMW on women and the devil

Is the CBMW willing to bring back witch hunts?

The answer is yes and unless you read it for yourself, you will not believe it. Newly selected president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Denny Burk, in his vision for CBMW seeks to enforce the Danvers Statement, and create wider acceptance of it.  The Danvers Statement is the modern day equivalent to the Malleus Maleficarum (The Witch Hunter’s Bible) which caused the deaths of thousands and thousands of women who were accused of consorting with the devil.

Women consorting with the devil was a strong belief in the Middle Ages, and it has not disappeared in Christian circles as is seen in the Missions and Vision statement by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. If a woman becomes too strong, usurping the authority of the husband, she is guilty of inviting the devil into the home, according to the CBMW.

See for yourself! The CBMW will tell you today that the devil finds an entrance into the home when husbands do not demand submission (structure their homes with wifely submission) and when women do not submit to a husband’s authority. Read their website under Missions and Vision:

“If families do not structure their homes properly, in disobedience to the teachings of Ephesians 5, 1 Peter 3, and Colossians 3, then they will not have the proper foundation from which to withstand the temptations of the devil and the various onslaughts of the world. This hinders the sanctification of married couples and also introduces confusion about basic parenting issues such as raising masculine sons and feminine daughters.” (CBMW.org)

Shockingly, this is the same language found in the Malleus Maleficarum (The Witch Hunter’s Bible). Wikipedia quotes Michael Bailey (Battling Demons, 2003, University Press):

“The text argues that women are more susceptible to demonic temptations through the manifold weaknesses of their gender. It was believed that they were weaker in faith and more carnal than men. Michael Bailey claims that most of the women accused as witches had strong personalities and were known to defy convention by overstepping the lines of proper female decorum.” (feminine daughters)

The Malleus Maleficarum asserts that three elements are necessary for witchcraft: 1) the evil intentions of the witch, 2) the help of the Devil, and 3) the Permission of God.

Look closely at number 3. THE PERMISSION OF GOD. This is exactly what the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood believe when they tell you that God has a submissive design for women. They are saying that God permits women to be susceptible to the devil.

Women, do you hear that! Do you see it! Can you live with it!

Jesus was not concerned about raising masculine sons and feminine daughters, nor was he concerned with wives submitting themselves to their husbands, and neither did he indicate that husbands were strong enough to keep Satan from entering into a family.

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood believes that when wives submit themselves to their husbands, this enables families to withstand the devil’s temptations and the onslaughts of the world. If you believe that is the gospel, then you need to find yourself a real Bible.

It is 2016. Denny Burk, are you listening? Have you let the power of the devil blind you to the Word of God?

Advertisements

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.

4 Responses to CBMW on women and the devil

  1. Cindy K says:

    Shirley, can I repost this on my blog?

    Like

  2. pnissila says:

    Shirley,
    This is somewhat unrelated, but something that shocked and angered me upon hearing, yesterday.

    I was clicking my way to the news on cable and came across a “sermon” on Christian television given by a very famous Southern Baptist preacher. His topic was his view of wifely submission–and some efforts to support it from outside the Bible. He proceeded to yell about how, from the time menstruation starts until the onset of menopause, for fourteen days of the month it’s like the “days of wine and roses” in the home, while for the other fourteen, it’s “days of storms and thunder.” He was trying to make the point, I think, that (obviously malfunctioning) female hormones are more evidence supporting wifely submission.

    How absolutely inappropriate and disrespectful–for women of all ages sitting in his “church”…

    And a faulty generalization, at that. Is he, now, some kind of OB/GYN, specializing in diseased or genetically degraded female reproductive systems? And does that shape his theology, of all things?

    He said nothing, on the other hand, about how men can become “stormy” due to hormones when, say, their prostate glands enlarge and they lose some sleep because they have to get up several times during the night to pee.

    He said nothing about the “midlife crisis” that seems to be hormonally related for men…

    I was not raised in the South or Southern Baptist, thank God, but is this the kind of stuff they actually teach?

    Once again, how absolutely inappropriate and disrespectful toward women of all ages, not to mention flying in the face of grace–and God’s creation. He owes the women of his church a public apology, but I suspect that will never happen.

    If he is an example of the, for lack of a better term, body-function-focus of Southern Baptist pastors, no wonder they apparently have such a hard time comprehending grace and our new life in Jesus Christ, and the One and Only Head of the Church–the same Jesus.

    P.

    Like

    • No, to be fair, most do not preach this way. Women themselves are partly to blame with the PMS giggles and excuses of a few years ago. However, we don’t hear that now and I think this pastor was still in the PMS mode. But I will not cut him much slack. He is a grown man and should know better. I think he was acting like we did as kids when we could say “Hell” and “damn” because hell was biblical (at least we thought so) and damn held back water. I think he got a kick out of it because he was preaching and preaching gave it a legitimate word to use. Have you checked him out on Google? Send your letter to him! Let him know how offensive and immature he is being. Plus unChrist-like. Thanks for sharing this.

      Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s