Because Christianity is bigger than Biblical manhood or Biblical womanhood

Something fantastic happened this week. It really gave me more peace of mind.

Someone asked me, who have been a Christian for 25 years now, if I am a Christian.

But wait. That is not the fantastic thing. It is only the first sentence of the story. I will get around to the fantastic part just now. Read the rest of this entry »

The Greek/Roman society of New Testament times was very patriarchal. It was also very condoning of gay relationships.

In Plato’s Symposium it is written:

The original human nature was not like the present… The sexes were not two as they are now, but originally three in number; there was man, woman, and the union of the two, of which the name survives but nothing else. Once it was a distinct kind, with a bodily shape and a name of its own… the primeval man… had four hands and the same number of feet, one head with two faces, looking opposite ways, set on a round neck and precisely alike; also four ears, two privy members, and the remainder to correspond…

Terrible was their might and strength, and the thoughts of their hearts were great, and they made an attack upon the gods…

Thus they were being destroyed, when Zeus in pity invented a new plan: [a plan of separating them into halves] …and they sowed the seed no longer as hitherto like grasshoppers in the ground, but in one another; and after the transposition the male generated in the female in order that by the mutual embraces of man and woman they might breed, and the race might continue; or if man came to man they might be satisfied, and rest, and go their ways to the business of life. So ancient is the desire of one another which is implanted in us, reuniting our original nature, seeking to make one of two, and to heal the state of man.

Each of us when separated… is always looking for his other half. Men who are a section of that double nature which was once called androgynous are lovers of women; adulterers are generally of this breed, and also adulterous women who lust after men. The women who are a section of the woman do not care for men, but have female attachments… But they who are a section of the male follow the male, and while they are young, being slices of the original man, they have affection for men and embrace them, and these are the best of boys and youths, because they have the most manly nature.

Some indeed assert that they are shameless, but this is not true; for they do not act thus from any want of shame, but because they are valiant and manly, and have a manly countenance, and they embrace that which is like them. And these when they grow up become our statesmen, and these only, which is a great proof of the truth of what I am saying. When they reach manhood they are lovers of youth, and are not naturally inclined to marry or beget children – if at all, they do so only in obedience to custom; but they are satisfied if they may be allowed to live with one another unwedded…

Read the rest of this entry »

Long before I was into egalitarianism, I was into teaching children about God. My child evangelism mentor taught me Charles Spurgeon was almost right when he said:

A child of five, if properly instructed, can as truly believe and be regenerated as an adult.

Actually, we should change and become like children to enter God’s kingdom:

Matt. 18:3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

So, Spurgeon would have been more correct if he rather said: Read the rest of this entry »


This blog post is not a teaching, but a question. Feel free to comment if you have an idea what the answer is.


“Eph. 5:21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

22 Wives, (submit yourselves) to your own husbands as to the Lord.”


All believers should submit (mutually) to one another (which proves that submission is not about being lower in an authority hierarchy). And wives should do it (submit? submit mutually) to their own husbands.

I wonder if Paul could have meant: Read the rest of this entry »

Karen D asked on A Travelogue of the Interior if there is a difference between complementarianism and patriarchy. Here is what I think:

IMO, there is a spectrum difference. I think 2 ideas are enough to qualify the holder as complementarian: Read the rest of this entry »

In a recent thread in a Facebook group, a woman in a position of church leadership grieved that she was called “in open rebellion against God’s word” by being a woman in a church leadership position.
To which Deborah Downs answered (with a quote she previously wrote on her blog:

“When we come down to the basics of the polarities, two truths remain. If I am called to the priesthood as a complementarian then I am extraordinary. If I am called to the priesthood as an egalitarian then I am ordinary. But in neither instance can I be construed as disobedient unless God has never and will never call a woman into leadership. But He has, and He does, therefore, I am either extraordinary or ordinary, but disobedient I am not.”

Dawn Wilson, also a female pastor, had an answer too. Once again, it points back to God and his calling, not what others think:

Those throwing this at you … to quote Sheldon … think they are having a BAZINGA moment .. as if they got you and now you have nothing to reply …. they have said the final all ending word.

Frustrating … yes … but not enough to go up on the ledge

My Scripture response to those who throw this statement at me is this …

1 Thessalonians 2:4 but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not as pleasing to men but to God , who examines our hearts.

I throw the weight back on God and God’s approval of me and His examining of my heart motives. My BAZINGA right back at them!

Trigger warning: Sexual abuse of a teenager, and condoning of it


This is yet more evidence that the Christian church, at large, does not understand or care about abuse:

take downChristianity Today’s Leadership Journal published an article  by a convicted ex- youth pastor, who sexually abused a teenager when he was in a position of trust over her. The nature of this article is not “I am a criminal, who caused this girl a lot of pain, having a long-term effect on her views on trust, relationships, sex, self-esteem, God and spirituality. I also hurt my wife, and others who trusted me.” It is: “I stumbled into an affair. We both did wrong. Now things are bad for me” – with a lot of preaching in between.

Many writers are telling them why they should take down the post, but this far, they are taking down negative comments instead. Commenters on more than one source told me, since yesterday, that they have left comments on that entry – and their comments were taken down. One say comments went from 75 to 15 in a few minutes, at another stage more than 20 comments disappeared again… Read the rest of this entry »

Tag Cloud


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 105 other followers