Kirk & Candace Cameron Teach Unbiblical & Unhealthy View of Wifely Submission

kirkAccording to a recent article at, child actor turned preacher, Kirk Cameron, recently stated that the Bible teaches wives to honor their husbands and “follow their husband’s lead (Source).” Kirk has traveled to over 200 churches in the last seven years with a “biblical” marriage message he calls, “Love Worth Fighting For.”

Kirk teaches that husbands should love their wives and not directly tell them to submit, yet telling wives to submit is literally part of Kirk’s nationwide message.

He states to the Christian Post:

“Wives are to honor and respect and follow their husband’s lead, not to tell their husband how he ought to be a better husband…When each person gets their part right, regardless of how their spouse is treating them, there is hope for real change in their marriage.”

As a female minister who has studied the Bible at a seminary level (in a conservative evangelical university), I can tell you that there is not one scripture in the Bible that calls for husbands to lead their wives. I assume that Kirk is referring to Ephesians 5:23 because his sister, Candace Cameron Bure, has made similar unbiblical and unhealthy statements (see video below):

I am not sure of Kirk and Candace’s biblical academic qualifications to make such strong statements, but obviously the two have studied the ancient Greek word “head” (kephale) very little. Since these two are “celebrity” Christians, who hold great influence globally, it is imperative that they understand how to read the Bible before making remarks that could easily lead to women being treated as “less than” in their marriages, and even to domestic abuse in some cases.

I did some intense work on the ancient Greek word “kephale,” which you can find below.

One does not have to go to seminary to be responsible with the theology they preach, but word studies are crucial in interpreting the Bible. It is unrealistic and naive to believe that ancient Greeks would use the word “head” in the same way modern Americans do.

It is evident that the Camerons subscribe to complementarian theology, but complementarian theology openly discriminates against women in both the home and the church, and many Christians (even conservative evangelical Christians) are working hard to dismantle such devastating and wrong biblical teaching.

We want to make sure that the world knows that Kirk and Candance Cameron’s so-called “biblical” views do not reflect our views. We believe their marriage approach to be unbiblical and unhealthy, as well as a poor witness to the world. In the video above, Candace leads us to believe that the only way Christians can have a godly, healthy, and long-lasting marriage is if the husband is the leader of the home. She states that a marriage does not work well with two leaders, which is simply not true. Many Christian and non-Christian couples have egalitarian marriages, and their marriages work quite well.

Candace also states in the video that she would allow her husband to make the final call for their family even if she knew that call would hurt her family. A woman handing over her will to her husband, even if his decisions will devastate their family, is completely unwise and unbiblical.

A wise woman builds her home, but a foolish woman tears it down with her own hands (Proverbs 14:1). 

When a wise woman sees danger up ahead, she will rescue her husband and babies, no matter the cost. We see profound imagery of God as a protective and fierce “mother” in the Old Testament:

“Like a bear robbed of her cubs, I will attack them and tear them asunder…” -Hosea 13:8 

“Like the eagle that stirs up its nest, and hovers over its young, God spreads wings to catch you, and carries you on pinions.” -Deuteronomy 32:11-12 

A husband who demands to make all the final decisions is not a Christian leader; he is a self-centered, spoiled child. Ephesians 5:21 calls husbands and wives to “submit to one another.” I have made a biblical case for the beauty of mutual submission in the post below.

A Biblical Case for the Beauty of Mutual Submission In Marriage

In an interview with Yahoo Parenting, Candace stated,

“I used the word ‘submissive’ [to describe my role in the marriage] because it’s from the Bible but people who don’t understand that see that as offensive…

I have to say, as a woman who has a master’s degree in biblical studies and understands the Holy Scriptures quite well, I find Candace’s remarks offensive because they come from a privileged American way of thinking.

First world complementarians do not consider the girls overseas who are forced to submit to their husbands as child brides. They don’t bother to think about the millions of girls who are selectively aborted because of their gender, the ones who are not permitted to go to school while their brothers are, and the millions of women who are forced to submit to men within the sex-slave industry and within abusive marriages.

Kirk and Candace’s hyper emphasis on “biblical” female submission within marriage is unbiblical, unhealthy, and dangerous.

Help Jory Micah Break the Glass Steeple by Following Her Blog

(Insert your Email to the Right or Below)

Find Jory Micah on Facebook: HERE.

Find Jory Micah on Twitter: HERE.


More from Jory Micah

What do we do with Joe Biden? (Guest Post by M.J.)

I must begin by clearly stating that my views do not represent...
Read More


  • Bure’s comment, “I allow him” is interesting. These types of words exhibit her privilege. I cannot imagine an Afghani woman saying, “As an act of submission I allow my husband to make the decisions.” In her context, she is not fabricating a hierarchy, a real one exists in which she has no legal or cultural power to *allow* her husband to do anything.

    • Afghan women can refuse to submit, depending on how much they are willing to pay…in the same sense as the Afghan women, in Candace’s case we, here, believe a real hierarchy also exists (in the churches) but in fact, but she has the power to deny him his authority…with possible consequences, depending on whether he intends to ‘allow’ it either…and how far he is willing to go…Candace still has the possibility of being abused, with legal rights, but often these are not accessed in time to prevent injury or worse…and then there is the woman who “goes back” and gets killed…the privilege is only skin deep for some women, (especially if they have no family or friends to help them). Our privilege is not universal even in North America even to the Candace’s of the west…as she and her husband age, ongoing stresses may inflate and become more of a problem…there are never any guaranteed privileges even outside the churches.

      • Women in places where wife beating, killing and maiming are culturally supported do not have choice, in my opinion. When the alternative to submission is drowning, burning, or losing teeth or an appendage (all ways of controlling females in parts of the Middle East and Africa), that person is not free to not submit. That would be like saying that the enslaved Africans in North America had a choice whether or not to remain enslaved, they might have chosen to pay a high price. For human beings, survival comes first, and only once survival is secure do we begin to make other choices in our lives.

        Kirk Cameron’s comments are deeply devaluing to women. A woman should not even voice ways her husband could make the marriage more workable for her? He prioritizes male pride over everything else, including the quality of the marriage itself. When one person in a relationship isn’t allowed input, that relationship will be lower quality than any relationship where both people can have input. This is my experience with complementarians in general: the husband being in unquestioned control is their highest priority, and they will sacrifice anything and everything to that goal.

  • “Wives are to honor and respect and follow their husband’s lead, not to tell their husband how he ought to be a better husband…When each person gets their part right, regardless of how their spouse is treating them, there is hope for real change in their marriage.”
    — This comment made my skin crawl. How can a woman in good faith allow her husband to tell her what to do or do as he says, ‘REGARDLESS’ of how he treats her?! That seems like a barbaric and outdated comment, which I suppose does tie in with what you said towards the end about Candace having a priveliged view on submission, because she may not have thought of what is going on in third world countries. I think a lot of people either ‘forget’ or pretend that practices of child marriage are long-gone in the days of history, but they really aren’t.

    I must say, I’m not religious (although sometimes I wish I were moreso – I was baptised and that was about it) your blog and views definitely spoke to me. I’ll def be adding you to my feed.

    • A man will never crawl out from under his wife’s nagging and criticisms to come to repentance and be a better man. The problem is that many wives try to take the place of the Holy Spirit in their husbands. instead we should honor and respect our husbands, which is biblical. We can also pray! Prayer is much more powerful than our criticism.

      • I agree with a lot of what you said. A wife is not to nag her husband. However, as his ezer kenegdo (strong rescuing help who is a fit partner), she is to mirror back to him what he does not see as God leads her to. This is not “taking the Holy Spirit’s place. This is doing her part in being his best friend and supporting him with her whole heart. And yes, prayer is a large part of the support of a husband and a wife.

        Any person who is not willing to hear truth spoken in love from their best and most trusted friend is short sighting him or herself.

      • The problem is certainly not that women try to take the place of the Holy Spirit in their husbands…the problem is patriarchy, period. (How can you say that when it is entirely the other way around)?

        As for women honoring their husbands, it is not a one way street McKenna! In fact you are adding your voice to the endless nagging of the church hierarchy. Only honoring and respecting ONE ANOTHER is biblical…”in honor preferring one another’…refers to all of us. “There is therefore now NO condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus”…women who condemn are, of course, in sin. But the nagging of men is so accepted that it is never mentioned, is it? Too many women are NAGGED about submission by pastors who badger women, while the man continues to oppress, and pastors, distressingly, insist that cowed women be even more submissive, more respectful as if it were possible to be submissive enough for some men! Like the gates of hell, there is no limit to the need of SOME men to have their ego’s stroked. “Hell and destruction are never full; so the eyes of man are never satisfied.” YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN, KING SOLOMON! Patriarchal men have no middle ground…the line has always been in the sand and the entitlement is written in stone. They refuse the command of Eph. 5:21-23 etc., to submit to their wives (and to one another). “If you don’t like it leave” is the standard response, and so women give in (or leave) and the problem continues. Patriarchy is Satan’s gift at the Fall to the sons of Adam.

      • Likewise, a woman will never crawl out from under her husband’s nagging (men nag too) and nonconstructive criticism to come to repentance and be a better woman. The problem is that many husbands try to take the place of th
        e Holy Spirit in their wives’ lives. Instead, husbands
        should honor (1 Pe 3:7) and praise (Pr 31:28) their wives, which is biblical. Husbands can also pray! Prayer is much more powerful than nonconstructive criticism. There is a distinct difference between nonconstructive and constructive criticism. Proverbs
        teaches the value of constructive criticism.

  • Ephesians 5:21 ‘R US…Amen! Preach it sister!

    Candace ‘WANTED TO MAKE HER MARRIAGE WORK” sure…in other words her husband wanted to get his own way and she acquiesced…here is that old untrue bleat that you can’t have two heads in a family so the man has to get his own way and you better believe that is God’s will…NOT. Well HER MARRIAGE, (if they are Christians) despite her allegations, ALSO HAS TWO HEADS, her husband and Christ, and guess who gets left behind in the mix? Right: Christ and of course his beloved Candace who is in bondage to hubby and who has lost a part of herself with this decision, likely never to be recovered or at best slightly recovered in old age when she wises up. The day she made the decision to give in, “she” died…how can God will that?

    And who says it is HER marriage…isn’t he married too? How hard is he willing to make HIS marriage work?…clearly, not hard enough to give up his own selfishness. What a fiasco..30 years from now she will be regretting the day she ever made this decision like so many other women who did the same. By the time they are 50 or so they realize that they are empty shells who forgot who they were 30+ years ago and primarily existed to fulfill their husbands dreams, denying their own until the hormones stopped and their brains began to function clearly again…that is one of the functions of estrogen…

    So for safety’s sake, ladies, we need to realize that even though our hormones encourage us to be agreeable, we better find a husband who is equally agreeable or we forfeit who we are. Estrogen or not, God did not make women or anyone to be unequal and James 2:9 and Matthew 7:12(Jesus) forbid inequality to anyone…so her husband is wrong, Complementarians are wrong. How bad is this, to take advantage of a woman’s hormones in order to keep them in bondage. If women must be agreeable, we must not forfeit our identity for Christ’s sake and the gospel. And woe to them who seek their own and not the good of others…men I’m talking to you Complementarians out there…shame on you for denying the truth of all this for your own entitlement and pleasure. These are the same men who hate Biblical feminism and claim it is culture invading the church because it asks for equality…double shame…patriarchal culture has had the churches in bondage for 2 millenia and still we find ourselves in cages.

    • Judy I’m sorry that is such a load of crap.
      Clearly you are a sister and I respect that.
      But this rebellion against “biblical patriarchy” is totally unwarranted.
      Jesus was a HUGE advocate for women’s rights.
      Paul was a HUGE advocate for women’s right.
      And No one, no one , no one is claiming men and women are not equal partners in marriage.
      Kirk Cameron is not saying that.
      Candace Bure is not saying that.
      My wife views me as the head of our family. But that ONLY goes so far as me being a Godly husband.
      Neither Kirk nor his sister is claiming a woman should submit to abuse.
      Women wield great power in the home and in their relationship with their husband.
      Do some men twist the bible to justify abuse? You bet. Absolutely.
      But the answer is not to to twist the word of God.
      The answer is to hold men accountable to what God demands of them in scripture. THAT is what you should be focused on. God demands a tremendous amount from men. It’s not about the “rights and power” that the Bible gives men.
      It’s about what the Bible demands of men … and it is extensive. Focus on THAT and you will get better, more godly husbands and fathers.

      • Hi Bill…”The answer is to hold men accountable to what God demands of them in scripture. THAT is what you should be focused on.” I totally agree…the problem is that in 30 years in a Complementarian church the only person who held a man accountable in my experience was a Justice of the Court system here, who after 8 years of being hidden, finally charged a young man with sexual abuse of a minor…the elders kept this secret for much of that time and when the man was convicted he was welcomed back with open arms and the judge’s actions were decried as unjust by some of the men. Also the girl who was a minor was EXPECTED to confess to adultery, and when she refused they would not welcome her at all…she left.

        In my experience, women ARE continually held accountable to the men of a church, are told that the husband is a mediator between them and God, and frequently targeted for ANYTHING that might offend the men. You just haven’t experienced this kind of Complementarianism yet…and may never.

        Furthermore, if the doctrine teaches that a woman’s potential is limited while a man’s is not, how can you say they are EQUAL? You can SAY we are equal…but how about practicing what you preach?

  • I am so glad that you addressed this because Kirk and Candace are very influential. They are the Christian representatives to the world in many settings. I remember watching Candace on The View talk about this as if it were the Christian perspective. I was so frustrated wishing that there was someone present to give the other perspective within the Christian world.

    • I believe it IS the Christian perspective. We read in the Bible where it says wives are supposed to be submissive to their husbands. It does not say we are slaves to them, we and you can talk things over, but ultimately it is the man’s place to make the ultimate decisions in a marriage. If you read Ephesians 5:22-24, it plainly says a wife is supposed to submit to her husband. Also, on the women preaching, look at I Cor. 14:34 & I Timothy 2:11. When you change the Bible to justify your own agenda, you are treading on thin ice. You are misleading women and telling them it is ok when it is not.

      • @ Donna
        Nabal, who was stubborn and a poor listener, believed that he had the RIGHT to make the final, ultimate decision for his household. His final decision almost got him and all the men in his house killed. He would have died at the hands of king David had it not been for the wisdom of his wife.
        The men who accused Daniel, Achan, King Saul, Haman, Korah, Dathan, Abiram also made final decisions tha proved disastrous and deadly for their wives and/or kids.
        Some husbands make wise decisions. Some don’t. Husbands who exercise poor judgement have no RIGHT making final decisions for their wives and/or kids. The husband makes the final decision declaration isn’t universal, 1 size fits all, or necessarily biblical.

        • @ Donna:
          When you treat wifely submission, male headship and gender roles like a sweeping generalization, you are being counterproductive. You weaken a woman’s ability to be an effective EZER depending on what kind of man she is married (bound) to.
          You mislead men by fostering a sstubborn attitude that causes them to think that they know best simply because they are male.

          • Kim, if men read scripture that way they are lazy.
            They need to look beyond one line of scripture.
            Scripture is crystal clear and it does NOT call on men to be domineering and abusive.
            You dont have to change interpretation of scripture. You just have to look at scripture in its entirety.
            You cite Nebal.
            Let me ask you this … God called on the Hebrews to eradicate the Canaanites. Does this mean we should not be obedient to God because, in our minds, some of his commands are unjust?
            So let’s go over this again.
            The Bible does not demand blind obedience by wivs to their husbands.
            It’s all about trust.
            And if men abuse that trust and lose the trust of their wives, the marriage can surely crumble.

        • a triple ‘amen’ to you Kim…Abigail is considered by the Jews as a prophet, which she was…a very inspiring story indeed and vindication by God’s judgement on Nabal.

      • Donna, what Scripture specifically says husbands make the final decision? I can find no such verse but maybe I missed it.

      • Donna, first of all it is not Ephesians is EPHESIANS 5:21-14. Why are you so determined to ignore the primary point Paul makes that submission is a two way street?

        Secondly, have you ever looked up the Greek on the verses you is available online…and will show that your understanding of some of your quotations is based on faulty translation from the Greek.

        Thirdly, do you believe that God ordained Paul to introduce NEW laws for women that were never taught in the Old Testament and that contradict Paul’s Eleven crystal clear teachings that WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER THE LAW, (under grace instead). Then do you believe that, having taught this forcefully, Paul goes about to establish new laws that are in perfect agreement with the mentality of the Judaizers with whom Paul was at war? It makes no sense because in 1 Corinthians, Paul is answering questions from chapter 7 on (see 1Cor. 7:1)…and in the Greek there are no quotation marks to indicate that the verses you quote were likely a quotation of the Judaizers (verse 34-35) to which Paul is responding in verse 36. How do you explain that Paul seems to be so adamant that women are to be silent while he endorses so many women (in Romans) as well as Priscilla and Phebe as his ‘fellow labourers’ IN THE GOSPEL…in no way silencing them but even praising them as yokefellows…and he says “But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head:”, clearly giving instructions for WHEN they WILL pray and prophesy. You have a great deal to learn about comparing scripture with scripture when examining doctrines…something that is plainly taught in your churches but is never practiced when it comes to women: ‘for they say and do not’.

        These verses you mention are difficult and very unclear verses on which few can agree, while the plain and clear verses of scripture are many and they fully contradict your interpretation. So why do you major on muddy unclear scriptures when there are a multitude of very clear verses that contradict them, a notable one being Galatians 3:28? What about the manners of Jesus that fly in the face of the interpretation of these verses that single women out as inferior when Jesus’ own words in Matthew 7:12 teach equality…there is no other way to interpret what Jesus says here, right out of Jesus’ own mouth..words that deny that women alone are to be submissive. Jesus said no one is to lord it over one another in HIS church…so do you really think Paul is defying Jesus by teaching the opposite? Do you not see that it is a questionable interpretation of some of Paul’s words that you hold to, an interpretation that infers that God IS a respecter of persons when He is not. An interpretation that insists that men in the church BECOME respecters of persons when James 2:9 teaches that to respect of persons is SIN. “… is not my way EQUAL, is not your way UNEQUAL?” saith the Lord (Eze.18:25).

        Is the behaviour that results from your interpretation not sinful in that it permits men to always get their own way, it insists that they treat other men as preferred members the church, giving them all the benefits and the women continue to be treated as incapable and muzzled. Why did God give you a mind and a mouth to shew for His praise and go into all the world to preach the Gospel and then silence you…This was never taught in the Old Testament…and it isn’t taught in the New…it is inferred by patriarchal leaders who seem to be more in tune with their own needs than with the need of the world to hear about Jesus.

  • Good point, Angie. How is it true submission if he’s only in charge because his wife “allows” him to be? It’s funny-but-sad.

    I will note here that in my denomination, thousands of people around the world are missionaries. We bring them the messages of the gospel, including some radical departures from their own culture — things that have to change because they are eternal and biblical. Yet missionaries are taught, and practice, to step delicately around male domination and abuse of wives, not to take that issue on head-on but to gently tiptoe around it. Apparently treating wives as people (let alone as equals) is not an eternal, biblical issue.

    The truth is that we approach it in this way specifically because our denomination has accepted male headship theology and gender inequality, in practice if not totally in theory. That’s why our church is OK with missionaries sharing biblical issues that require people to do a 180-degree change from their culture — but treating women as equals is not one of those issues.

  • Kirk Cameron’s quote tells us a lot about why he has chosen the theory of God that he has.
    ““Wives are to honor and respect and follow their husband’s lead, not to tell their husband how he ought to be a better husband…When each person gets their part right, regardless of how their spouse is treating them, there is hope for real change in their marriage.”

    What stands out to me in this statement is that Kirk does not want his wife to criticize, critique, or tell him how to be a better man. He wants to facilitate his own change, decide himself, and doesn’t want to HAVE to do what his wife says even if she is correct.

    The fact that they MAY have made this work for them for now, does not mean that everyone should rearrange their marriage to the way they have. Every single human being is different. All men are NOT alike. All women are NOT alike. Marriages are really little miracles of two becoming as one. We need to let God do His work in each couple.

    One of the reasons that we have difficulty with the word ‘kephale’ as it is used in Ephesians 5 is that it is used in a metaphor of “head of and body of”. Both “head” and “body” are used in metaphor. The wife is to view her husband as her head (she already has her own physical head). The husband is to view his wife as his body (he already has his own body). Put that together with the reference back to Genesis where man and woman are to live as one and we see an entirely different picture of what Paul is trying to get them to see.

  • I’m curious about what you feel the scriptures mean in Ephesians 5:22 that says, “Wives, submit yourself to your own husband as you do the Lord.” I noticed you skipped over that verse in this article. This isn’t a very exegetical content piece if you only address v. 21 and 23 and leave 22 out.

    There are a lot of people out there that are teaching this same theology. Men and women that have gone to seminary, studied the original texts, walk away with this this way of viewing the different roles in a marriage. Why do you think that so many people who attend seminary, study the scriptures, study the context around the scripture, and seek to understand the culture in which the scriptures were written, come to a different understanding of what it means? I only ask that to say this- you can be a very very studied individual of the Bible and original texts- attend seminary- yet end up with a different theology than someone else.

    You can think that people who believe like Kurt are wrong for how they believe, and you can tell the world you think they are wrong. However, I don’t think that you can say that just because you have a seminary degree and studied the original text that no one else can draw a different conclusion than you. My husband is highly studied, went to Bible college, and seminary, took years of Greek and Hebrew, and holds a view that is similar to Kurt and his wife. You can think he is wrong, and that is fine, but it isn’t because he just doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

    That is my only real problem with this article, is that you make it sound as though anyone with the point of view that women are instructed to submit to their husbands because husbands are the head of the household are stupid. If they just went to seminary and studied the original texts, then they would know how wrong they are. I really can’t respect that, because there are many very well educated men and women that hold that view.

    It is my opinion that this is a place where we can agree to disagree.

      • Wow. Keelie brings up a very valid point and that’s all you have to say? You SKIPPED a very poignant verse and when asked about it you simply say “I included two exegetical posts. please see those”. You didn’t address at all what she said and it’s probably because you can’t. I have a degree myself in biblical studies, as does my husband. We also studied Greek and Hebrew. This chapter gives women and men different commands- not the same ones. Women are told to submit to their husbands while men are told to love their wives as Christ loved the church. This is an example of how marriage should function- wives submitting to heir husbands, the head of the home, while the husbands love their wives in the same self sacrificing way Christ loved the church. When each plays their part, it’s the biblical recipe for success. I submit to my husband as I do to the Lord, and the reason I can do this is because my husband puts me first, sacrifices himself for me, cares for me, and makes the decisions for our family based on his God-given authority of our home.
        I did not like this article because as Keelie tried to say, you’re presenting your opinion on the matter all the while ignoring one verse among the passage as well as deeming anyone with a degree would agre with you.
        You also only seem to validate the comments that agree with you while ignoring those that don’t.

          • Ephesians 5:21 NEVER mentions husbands and wives should/must submit to each other! The entire chapter regards the church in general. In fact, Chapter 6 clearly states how a family structure should be set up. Another important verse you failed to mention is Gen 3:16 “To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.” How do you leave this out? I believe your seminary school failed you!

          • Sometimes I think Complementarians deliberately refuse to ‘get it’…they major on Eph. 5:22 while COMPLETELY ignoring the preceding verse in which the VERB for verse 22 exists (verse 22 doesn’t even have a verb “submit”)…they also ignore the following verses AS WELL…that the husband is to “paradidomi” himself to his wife…to put himself into her hands, as Christ put himself into the hands of mankind in submission…it is SUBMISSION of the man to the wife. But they miss this, conveniently, because it is not culturally acceptable to them.

            The section from verse 21-the end actually says….submit yourselves one to another, in the Lord, wives to your husbands and husbands to your wives…Paul teaches mutual submission, but Complementarians only follow verse 22….that is why they failed to understand why Jori didn’t mention it…it is assumed. What is missed is the first verse in the series(21)…everyone knows verse 22 as if it stands alone as a rule for women only…this is false teaching and serious error and does despite to the teaching of the character of God.

            As for Genesis 3:16 (Don Scott Jr. quoted) how bizarre that he loves this verse so much and thinks a seminary that doesn’t FOCUS on this verse as instruction for marriage has failed its students…”he will rule over you” is not a prophecy for all time, because if it were it would have failed…many husbands simply do not rule over their wives, but instead they love them as Christ loves. I pity the wife of Don Scott Jr…as he piously rules over her in disobedience to the teachings of Christ who INSTRUCTED WITH THIS COMMAND:

            “the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

            Like Christ, the husband is to minister to his wife, not rule over her…IF he is a believer in Christ.

          • “Ephesians 5:21 NEVER mentions husbands and wives should/must submit to each other! The entire chapter regards the church in general.”

            Don Scott, jr. are you suggesting that husbands and wives are not included in the church. I believe you are correct that it is referring to the church and that all the church, everyone, should be submitting to one another in the fear of the Lord. I do not see how we can exclude husband and wife from submitting to one another in that picture. Rather the next verse omits the verb when Paul addresses wives, thus verse 21 supplies the verb. This implies that the kind of submission the wife is to give the husband is the type of submission that we all are to give to one another: that is of respect, honor, yielding way, support and attachment to the Body.

        • Evelyn, I respectfully disagree. Husbands and wives are given the same directives and not different ones as you’ve stated. Husbands are directed to love and sacrifice for their wives. Love and Sacrifice=Submission. Submission=Giving preference for one another. In fact, the whole church body is given the same directive – to submit (give preference for one another) to one another. It’s all a matter of the heart and not a position of hierarchy in which the woman submits and the man leads.

          • When the woman submits to the man simply because she’s a woman and the man leads simply because he’s a man, it becomes an external position. When the focus is on the internal heart then submitting becomes about both men and women sacrificing and giving preference for one another. That’s the kind of love God calls us to.

    • I agree with Kelly. I have been a Christian wife for 37 years. I have been submissive to my husband, and our marriage had worked fine. I know this is how God intended it to be. We talk things over, but he makes the ultimate decision. I think you are the one who does not understand the Bible. I think you need to read further on the subject of marriage and leadership in the church.

          • “23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.”

            so where in that verse is there anything about a husband making any kind of decision for the wife, let alone the ‘final’ decisions.

          • Ephesians 5:23 says wives submit to your husbands but
            Ephesians 5:25 says for the husband to “paradidomi” himself to his wife or to put himself into her hands (submit to her)…Paul says this in order to complete his original cohesive teaching that begins in Ephesians 5:21 where he intializes the teaching with “submit yourselves one to another in the fear of God”… before he fleshes out exactly what he means…

            So I cannot see how this infers that either one has the final say…are there any other verses anywhere that teach this?

            Also…can you find any examples where God communicates with any woman through a man, her father, brother, husband? It seems clear to me that if God intended the husband to have the final say He would have made a point of it to never directly approach a woman but to rather go through the one who supposedly has the final say…yet God approached Samson’s mother directly, dealt with Hannah directly, dealt with Mary directly and with Elisabeth that way, not to mention Eve…I see not one place where this teaching is fleshed out by God or, likewise Jesus, ever dealing with a woman through the men in their lives. This seems to me to confirm that the woman is GIVEN BY GOD the right to make all final decisions concerning her

      • Thank you. This is the biblical teaching and this is the only way to live a heavenly marriage. Women fight this because their flesh is selfish and sinful and the idea of submission is offensive to them. But I don’t care what society thinks. I care what God thinks.

        • “Women fight this because their flesh is selfish and sinful and the idea of submission is offensive to them. ”

          I have to say that women who seek to castigate and paint as sinful anyone who does not view a non-salvic doctrine in the same way that they do, is skipping over a ton of Scripture that is much plainer and more required.

          Walk in Unity
          Eph.4:1 I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, 2 with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, 3 endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

          The Greatest Gift
          13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned,[a] but have not love, it profits me nothing. 4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

    • A LOT of people can be a lot wrong, Keelie R.

      “Ye have ONE MASTER, even Christ, and ALL YE are brethren”…Jesus.

      “All things ye would that others would do to you, do ye even so to them.”…how then can anyone claim authority in the church, without giving authority to everyone around them?

  • I find this to be a very interesting post. While I see the points you have made, I do feel like you haven taken some of the points Candace made and put a media-like spin on them. She is clear when she explains what she means by submissive when she says it is “meekness not weakness” and she goes onto explain that she is very adamant about her opinion and position on topics within her marriage. She also explains that if her husband were to make a decision to be a detriment to their family that he had taken great thought into account…which one would assume means that he would have thought out the decision and it wouldn’t cause turmoil for their family. I agree that there will be more than 1 leader in a marriage, but I don’t think there should be more than 1 leader on a specific topic. If you have one disciplinary with your children, then the other spouse should refer to them or use similar forms of discipline. When there are two leaders there is much room for disagreement. Deciding who will be in which role within a marriage is key.

    I do agree that the comments Kirk has made are completely out of line and would cause problems within a marriage.

  • Fundamentalism and Hyper-calvinism/neo-reformed have destroyed the Christian church. As a white American male, i’m ashamed by what is happening by white american “bro-preachers”

    • AMEN AARON! Tragic is the way Fundamentalism and variations have destroyed the church, not necessarily in general doctrine (in my view) but in the horrendous damage to the social interactions that have been destroyed by their willful determination to get their own way and throw anyone who disagrees with them under the bus. They surely fit the words of Christ who said “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” They condemn and criticize as if the Bible didn’t say “there is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus”…Their problem is that they think ONLY they are in Christ Jesus…and that is often questionable. The doctrine may be correct, in general, but that is why Jesus said: “do as they SAY but not as they DO…for they say and do not”

      And so the massive numbers of people keep leaving the churches…abused and bruised…including many emotionally fractured women.

      One woman here said she submitted for 37 years as is happy…note ONE. There ARE men to whom submission is not harmful…but if it doesn’t make them feel entitled special considerations, it makes them sinful…because absolute power corrupts absolutely…you can count on that,

      • A feminist cannot understand the things of the spirit because they are spiritually discerned.people who only see from the stand point of theology and mere human explanation and the fear of victimization never quite agree with God because fear negates faith.the fear of been taken for a ride by a husbands leadership,hence women fret when they hear the word leadership in the world of today .kirk is right .simply put, if you can understand the comparison the apostle Paul made regarding the relationship of the church and Christ as the same with that of a man and his wife then your fears and doubt will be erased. If it is OK for Jesus to lead the church with Gods anointing, and OK for the church to follow ,then it is OK for the woman To follow the husbands vision and anointed position as the God is the glory of man and covering so MaN is the glory of the woman.the man doesn’t have the final say as he is thought from gods exsmple to us to reason with the wife (God through prophet isaiah saying “come let us reason together”even as God gave us the privilege to reason with him in decision making he as the head of T he church with consideration to his love for the church’s interest has the final say.that’s the burden of leadership and sometimes even if the church doesnt agree
        Its the way of takes faith.
        Is man equal to christ in herachial order?of course not. So is the woman not equal in herachial order to her husband in a family.but treating each other with equity and fairness is a must and a different matter. Just like we were bought with a price as brides of christ so a man offers a bride price to the parent of a woman ,symbolic of christ ,and renames her just as we bear the name of Christ.marriage is a vision To promote God s kingdom and not just a fairytale in a fantacy island. Only pray thou woman to be married to a man who follows God and wear his anointed office well as a husband.And be like Sarah who called Abraham lord .meaning a visionier,a shepherd that leads to green pasture,a guide.not necessarily lording over her or controling.

        • Celestine Omu
          There are several helpful ways to discipline ourselves toward diligently reading God’s Word in order to help steer us toward rightly interpreting Scripture. Some examples are:
 whom was it written
          2.what were some of the problems and issues being discussed.
 do you think the original hearers or readers might have heard what the author was saying.
          4.Were there metaphors or idioms used….. how might they have been interpreted 2000 years ago.
          5.was it about an eternal truth we can all grasp
          6.was this about something specific, a specific problem, a specific incident
          7.can you see the context before and after the verses in question
          8.were there special words used in the original language not used elsewhere

          Contrary to the way some people use the words of Scripture, this is not a mystical book that we can grab ethereal mystical ideas and weave them together randomly. Every writer had a specific picture, a specific concept he or she was trying to bring to the hearers 2000-4000 years ago to draw them closer to God. Paul was very good at laying foundations, then building on them to walk people to his end points of a more spiritual walk with God. In other words, we cannot weave a scripture here, and scripture there and come up with a neat spiritual idea and rightly claim that is what Paul was saying. We must read the letters word by word, line upon line, a paragraph at a time, through to the end. Then we can look back and begin to see the pictures Paul was painting.

        • Celestine omu “A feminist cannot understand the things of the spirit because they are spiritually discerned.”

          I never thought a woman could be so outstandingly arrogant or so “point-perfect” brainwashed….but I was once like you…so I cannot condemn you more than I condemn myself for not being able to understand ALL the things of the Spirit of God. The ” rote ” manner of your response, shows me that you have closed the door to reason, despite your claim to reason, and you are just quoting SELECT verses, as I once did, not seeing the overview of ALL scripture, but majoring on a few handpicked verses that you have absorbed through precise, but limited teaching. I, like you, also condemned feminism for 30 years, until God graciously opened my eyes. During this period, God showed me the error of blind submission to patriarchy, how it inevitably leads men into gross sin, and how it became deeply and culturally ingrained sin in all descendants of the “Adams” (Gen 5:2 and called THEIR name, Adam) at the time of the Fall. That is why patriarchy is found in every culture, religion and race and is in no way a singular mark of Christianity, or even an acceptable mark of Christianity, but of sin…because patriarchy came in at the Fall with the conversion of our first parents to Satan, and it is Satan’s way, not God’s. Christ came to restore God’s way. How do I know patriarchy is not God’s way? Instead of obeying God’s teaching that IN CHRIST there is neither male nor female, patriarchy rears its entitled head and refuses Paul’s teaching, insisting that “he will rule over you” forever, even after becoming new creatures “in Christ”…contrary to God’s initial instructions that male and female are to “have dominion over … every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”…THAT IS GOD’S WAY! Yet, contrary to the message of Jesus that “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me… he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised…” too many continue to teach that, IN CHRIST, we are still under the law, under new laws for women, and that male and female are to remain in the state under which Satan put them at the Fall…a hierarchy based on sin rather than the equality that God created in the beginning and restored IN CHRIST.

        • Celestine omy…you said “.the fear of been taken for a ride by a husbands leadership,hence women fret when they hear the word leadership in the world of today”. I wish that were the case!

          Dear Celestine…this isn’t a FEAR of being taken for a ride by male leadership…it is a FACT in many Christian homes and churches…it is one of the main reasons for Biblical feminism…Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Churches’ historically ignoring Ephesian 5:21, have led to this poison fruit.

  • Hi Jory, great blog post as usual. 🙂

    Kirk’s statement troubled me – he said, ““Wives are to honor and respect and follow their husband’s lead, not to tell their husband how he ought to be a better husband…When each person gets their part right, regardless of how their spouse is treating them, there is hope for real change in their marriage.””

    (#1) Kirk states (wives) are not to tell their husband how he ought to be a better husband. Several years ago a pastor in a church I was attending at the time said from the pulpit that he would never take instruction or help from his wife – he saw that as wrong – he also admitted he wouldn’t handle it very well (being instructed by his wife in some area where he needed to grow). These kinds of statements are a reflection of pride. Last time I checked pride is not one of the fruits of the Spirit. 😉

    (#2) If wives cannot ever share or give instruction to their husbands about an area of their lives where they could improve in their marriage relationship, then how is the relationship supposed to grow in honesty, openness, and intimacy? While the husband can instruct the wife (at times treating her and speaking to her as a child and not an equal) the wife cannot say anything instructive to her husband – even if it helps their relationship. Again, Kirk and Candace’s ideas of marriage do not benefit both spouses. Their ideas/beliefs clearly point to and support a patriarchal/complementarian relationship instead of one of equals with equal authority and value.

  • “It is very difficult to have two heads of authority. Doesn’t work in military. You have one President…when you are competing with two heads that poses, can pose a lot of problems.”- Candace

    hmmmm… the Ephesians 5 passage not only begins in vs 21 with mutual submission but Paul summarizes this in vs 31 saying the goal is that two become ONE FLESH. So the point isn’t that some ONE has to be in charge in order to “get along” the point is the marriage is to be a unique and sacred relationship in which two people are so united and so mutually serving and mutually sacrificing that they lead and live together unified…as one. I am so tired of listening to comps compare marriage to organizational leadership or military leadership and ignore that Paul has given us a perfect God-inspired analogy… a head and a body connected together as ONE. No power plays, no my way or your way but OUR way. Yes, it may be harder to live and operate mutually but only because it requires both spouses to grow and mature in love and service…but isn’t that the goal of discipleship?

    • This is an excellent point. I am a member of the military, and it’s a completely absurd comparison. If my wife and I were entering a combat zone, someone would need to be in charge to make sure that we were both on the same page when there is no time for questions in the midst of a life or death situation. But since that is never the case, when my wife and I are trying to make decisions, we both come to an agreement on the best way to proceed. That is my way of submitting to her and her way of submitting to me out of reverence for Christ. I literally can’t imagine sitting her down and informing her of all my decisions and commanding her to obey my orders.

      • Having spent 30 years as a Complementarian, I sympathize with the many women here who still believe they are right in their one-way submission. Thankfully God opened my eyes to show me that I was wrong when the evidence was thrown in the face of our congregation that the men who had claimed leadership where enabled in their sin and wickedness by the acquiescence of submissive females. We had created a monster, so to speak, by giving men absolute power for all those years and were shocked at how that power enabled them to be blinded to their fallibility, arrogance and license that led to gross sin and even legal issues.

        Absolute power was never intended by God and the lives of the Bible’s Pharisees is proof of this. Jesus’ many ‘woes’ to the Pharisees came because these men were so full of their own power that they had become dyed in the wool sinners…note they had no feminists in those days to warn them. Patriarchy is no friend to men…it is the road to Hell for them. “It shall not be so among you” is the antidote directly from Jesus…and when servanthood is abominable to men it is a sure sign that they have not seen the light of Christ. Women who submit to patriarchy, as if it is God’s will, need to ask themselves what is in it for ‘me’…yes that is likely why you support it. Pastor’s wives, elder’s wives, deacon’s wives are usually the one’s who defend patriarchy the most vehemently. It enables them to retain their higher positions in the church and ‘lord it over other women’…beware, ladies, that you are not supporting patriarchy in order to manipulate and control others!

  • Kathleen….ah survival…not likely for many Afghan women is it? The ones whose ‘beloveds’ pour boiling oil over them or acid…who kill them for their own honor…I was sort of being facetious…but also remembering the courageous women of Liberia who took the men to task and won…they defied the men with courage…so it can be done en masse…but no, not alone…never alone, ladies.

    But we have our own Donna Jones’ here too … … you don’t have to go to Afghanistan to hear the horror of the black hearts of some men.

    The ladies of Liberia:

    • Wow, Judy. Amazing stories. Sometimes truth is rough. But we all need to stand up, face it squarely, and fight for the principles that Jesus teaches. The world and the churches in this world will never have the peace in our souls that we so desire until we see ourselves as humans first. We all have potential to contribute to the Body of Christ. When those who are authentically gifted are pushed aside for the inordinately bold but without the spiritual expertise, then the Body suffers. Christ suffers. We all suffer.

  • I, too, am a female minister who has studied the Bible at the accreditation level and I COMPLETELY AGREE!!!
    So many scriptures are taken completely out of context and most Christians have no idea what they’re reading or believing. Reading it from the Greek/Hebrew yields a COMPLETELY different perspective!! High five to you. I saw this post on the Blogging Boost group and replies were turned off… so I had to come here to show my support.

  • I tend to think that one of the reason that the complementarian and egalitarian commenters here are talking past each other is that a sympathetic reading of complementarianism from Paul yields something surprisingly similar to egalitarianism in practice. After all, if the husband is obeying the literal words of Paul, he is sacrificing himself to the uttermost in order to serve his wife, and ensure her growth and flourishing. So for those in complementarian marriages who feel that your marriage has been blessed and successful, I am glad for you. And for those of us who favor instead the egalitarian model, we need not discount the experiences of people who have found fruitful marriages modeled around what we would argue is an unbiblical and unnecessary system of hierarchy.

    Don’t get me wrong; I’ve been around some pretty horrific examples of self-proclaimed patriarchal families where the women were not permitted to attend college, or for that matter, marry without their father’s permission. So I am not saying that the complementarian model is inherently harmless or never subject to abuse in its more extreme applications. But I think that we are falling into the trap of oversimplification if we suggest that all complementarian marriages are characterized by a domineering semi-abusive husband and a meek and silent wife.

    Put another way, those of us who believe in the egalitarian principle of mutual submission would presumably say that Paul is defining the man’s role of submission to his wife in his call to live a life of self-sacrifice dedicated to her. But complementarians also believe that a man is called to live a life of self-sacrifice for the sake of his wife (after all, they have the same Bible). That means, thankfully, that complementarian marriages, for all their lousy theological theory, are often characterized by a much more harmonious foundation of mutual respect and support than the theory by itself might otherwise suggest. Of course, many of you have seen examples that are far more disconcerting, but we need not flatten all distinctions among complementarians to sustain our objection to the theoretical system. After all, they are our brothers and sisters in Christ.

    • HD…nicely spoken, and what you say is largely true, but the bottom line is that Egalitarianism does not give place to the devil while Complementarianism does. The Egal interpretation allows no man of black heart to USE DOCTRINE to justify his intentions. The Comp. view is USED by those men who have no intention of loving their wives, to justify the lies to the woman’s family, the deceit, the manipulation and the destructive relations in the church that result from the ways in which such men vindicate themselves and their behaviour. They use the doctrines to deceive their pastors and everyone and to maintain power over their victims who SEEM to be disobedient to the LAWS that were never supposed to be in place in the first place, according to the same teacher (Paul) who it is claimed introduced these LAWS in the first place. Paul did not install new laws, we can rest assured that he WOULD not, when he plainly taught we are no longer under the law but under grace. It is illogical to think that he would then go about to introduce new laws that were never in place in the Old Testament.

      Comp. interpretation of these 3 or so muddy and confusing verses out of 30,000+ verses in the Bible is absolutely aberrant in light of the Character of God and the life of Christ and God’s direct relations to all the women of the Bible. God is a God of Liberty, Equality and Justice, Mercy and Truth. He came to set at liberty them that are bound and to undo what the Pharisees did to the woman who was “bent out of shape”…He is altogether lovely and he loves his daughters too much to set them up and permit, if not promote, a way for destructive men to use HIS WORD to justify their secretive, home-bound imprisonment and maltreatment. …’neither give place to the Devil.’ Eph 4:27

      • Also well said.

        You bring up a good point about how some gender hierarchalist men use their reinterpretation of the marriage scriptures to deceive family and church to think they are being good husbands. Rather in fact they are operating in hidden deep abuse. And then when the church is divided into male and female groupings this abuse goes very deep.

  • Jesus said ” But be not ye called Rabbi:for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.”

    So what are we discussing here? Who is your Master, ladies? Gentlemen? How many masters have you? ONE. Men, who are your siblings…your equals? Women who are your siblings…your equals?

    As Matthew Henry says : “Ye are brethren, as ye are all disciples of the same Master. …but it will by no means be allowed that one of the scholars step into the master’s seat, and give law to the school…”

    Egalitarians 1 Complementarians 0

  • Jory it’s easy to do the biblical and theological gymnastics you do to make your political point.
    And let’s be clear. No one is saying that women should be submissive to men as a gender.
    What the Bible DOES say is that a man is the head over his wife as Christ is the head over the church.
    However, The Bible ALSO says that a husband should love his wife with the SAME SACRIFICIAL LOVE Christ has for the church. In other words, give everything and be willing to give up everything.
    So yes Jory, some people will twist scripture to be abusive.
    But you dont fight that by twisting it yourself.
    It’s just not that convoluted.

      • You must of missed the days they thought, husband’s are the heads..but should move their wives as they love Christ…paraphrasing. …

    • Bill Gilman…why is it so important to maintain Complementarianism? And what is the point of headship if it has nothing to do with inequality?

      If it is so simple, then why not just forget the doctrine of Complementarian inequality and retain the rest?

      Are you really willing to give up your superior authority and entitlement and submit to your wife? If so then there is no issue.

      • Complementarian inequality is a misnomer.
        There is nothing unequal about the arm and the leg. Different roles of same importance and power.

        If you believe the Bible advocates the superior authority and entitlement of men then you are reading it wrong.
        Authority? Yes.
        Superiority? Not at all.
        Entitlement? No way.
        HUGE responsibility and demands? You bet.

        Here is my best analogy. The pastor of a church is given a certain level of authority. Not absolute or abusive by any means. But authority nonetheless.
        But with that authority comes HUGE responsibility that is not given to the rest of the congregation.
        For example, James 3:1 — Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.
        Jesus also says that anyone who leads a little one astray, it would be better for them to be cast to the bottom of the sea with a millstone around their neck.
        It’s clear that Authority is not some prize …. it is a demand and a responsibility.

        • Bill, I agree IN PRINCIPLE ONLY: “Authority is not some prize”

          I’ll let YOU tell them that! ☺ (but between you and me…they won’t believe you…and they end up with all that cash to do with as they please because women have no say in such matters…not fit for it, you know!)

    • “Twisting.”…”political”…”gymnastics”…you use such nasty unfounded accusations and insinuations. I sense a bitter and hostile spirit in you! Is that from the Lord? Why do you think Egalitarianism is Political while Complementarianism is Biblical? But then I have come to realize that this is an issue of the soul and psyche of those whose addiction to power and control is so intense that only a movement of God can separate them from this obsessive pacifier called power. Patriarchy really has nothing to do with Scripture except that it describes it, while encouraging its demise in Christ. Egalitarianism,on the other hand is God’s way from beginning to end as He works His truth through society, dismantling slavery, status and establishing righteousness.

      • I would contend that in scripture, Egalitarianism and Complementarianism are not opposites.
        Both are true.
        Complementarianism does not mean men and women do not have equal rights.,
        Rather, Jesus describes us all as different parts in the body of Christ.
        Same for husbands and wives.

        • Bill Gilmer, with respect, you say “Jesus describes us all as different parts in the body of Christ.” Yes HE does. Only problem is that in many churches the pastors and elder (all male) tell women that ‘God would never call you to do THAT!”…as if they speak for God. Big problem! The Pharisee, Gamaliel had more wisdom :”And now I say unto you, Refrain from these (women), and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.” If Christ set us at liberty why do Complementarians insist on taking it from us?

          And with that, I ask you “”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.”

          As for husbands and wives the command is still in Ephesians 5:21…Submit yourselves one to another in the fear of God…they may be different parts, but they must submit to one another because they are one in Christ…and He has already broken down the wall of partition between them and set them on even ground…headship has nothing to do with inequality or Christ would not consider Himself to be equal with God who is His head! Therefore a ONE WAY submission is simply not called for by Paul…”in honour preferring one another”….

    • I have to agree with you. Just because a woman chooses to serve her husband in a submissive manner does not connotate abuse. When people resort to defending the anti-submission by bringing up that it leads to sexual abuse and demeaning the woman simply shows smallminded thinking. Daycare would open the gates to child kidnapping or abuse of children. Schools for girls open the gates to sexual abuse or sex trafficking. That is the same train of thought. The Camerons speak about women following their husbands leads in their relationships, NOT being slaves or mindless sexual beings. Why is it people get their backs up to this extreme? Take it easy people. Beware of extremes. ANYTHING in extreme is not good. My husband and I live a pretty non-favored lifestyle, but it is not abusive or demeaning. I am safe and cherished and loved more than a lot of women I know, but I defer to my husband in most things in our life together. We have been married 20 years and I couldn’t trust one man more in my life than he. People would be suprised by our dynamic when they have seen how in love we are and how well we relate to each other. Don’t judge what you don’t understand.

      • Tina…If your husband is not submitting to you, as well as you submitting to him, then you are missing the point Paul made: that the husband is to ‘paradidomi’ himself to his wife…to put himself into her hands. This is submission as Ephesians 5:21 dictates…that we are all to submit ourselves one to another in marriage. It is not to be a one way street~! Headship or not! “God was IN Christ, reconciling the world to Himself”…there is even mutual submission in the Godhead and Jesus and The Father were equal despite us being told that The head of Christ is God…Jesus wasn’t really alone on the cross…and Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with God who is is head.

        A husband is not a mediator between God and the wife. All he can do is submit to her and in submitting he shows his love, as a wife does, and as Christ did. As Jesus paradidomi-ed Himself, submitting to the hands of man, so does the husband. Otherwise there are TWO heads in the marriage: Jesus AND the husband…My pastor said that two heads in a marriage is a monstrosity, only he meant that a wife was to have no power to reject anything her husband did or said. He was wrong and his teaching injures the souls of many men whose hearts become puffed up with pride under such teaching. Jesus ALONE should be the head of a marriage.

        If your husband escaped the pride, you may be happy about that. But you are also teaching your children by your marriage. You will learn that, in the end, unlike your husband, your sons may not escape the sense of entitlement that Complementarian theology teaches, and your daughters may find that the men in their lives are not like their father…as my mother did when she married…to their sorrow.

        The theology is just plain wrong headed and dangerous, for too many people, to be safely taught. The exceptions who don’t succumb to sin under that teaching do not prove it correct…they are just exceptions, that’s all.

    • Scripture does not say that a husband holds authority over his wife. What Scripture DOES say is that no Christian is to exercise authority OVER anyone.

      Matt. 20:25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. 26 Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. 27 And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

      Also, Ephesians 5 says that: “2 And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.”

      IOW all believers, men and women are to love sacrificially. That includes wives and husbands.

      5:21 submitting to one another in the fear of God.
      NLV 21 Be willing to help and care for each other because of Christ. By doing this, you honor Christ.

      This is summarized by Paul as respect in vs. “33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.” Think about this, submission is summed up as a form of respect. Vs. 21 tells us that we should all hold respect, i.e. submit to (honor, yielding, attaching as part of a whole, consideration, etc.) for each other.

      As well, do consider that when Paul was speaking to THE WIVES, he told THE WIVES (i.e. not the husbands) to view the husband as ‘head OF’, not ‘head over’. The preposition ‘of’ is quite different than the preposition ‘over’. While ‘over’ can indicate position and rank, ‘of’ does something quite the opposite. The word ‘of’ indicates connection, association, identity, origin, substance, etc.

      And because Paul admonishes the husbands in a similar way telling husbands to view wives as their (connection, identity, substance, etc.) very own body, we can determine that this is a metaphor, not a command to cut oneself up and reattach body parts. The picture Paul is trying to paint is one of operating in unity, interdependence and harmony.

      vs.30 For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. 31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.

    • Bill Gilman, reposting this so you will see it:

      Scripture does not say that a husband holds authority over his wife. What Scripture DOES say is that no Christian is to exercise authority OVER anyone. vs. 26 may be the only place in Scripture where Jesus says “it shall not be so among you”.

      Matt. 20:25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. 26 Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. 27 And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

      Also, Ephesians 5 says that: “2 And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.”

      IOW all believers, men and women are to love sacrificially. That includes wives and husbands.

      5:21 submitting to one another in the fear of God.
      NLV 21 Be willing to help and care for each other because of Christ. By doing this, you honor Christ.

      This is summarized by Paul as respect in vs. “33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.” Think about this, submission is summed up as a form of respect. Vs. 21 tells us that we should all hold respect, i.e. submit to (honor, yielding, attaching as part of a whole, consideration, etc.) for each other.

      As well, do consider that when Paul was speaking to THE WIVES, he told THE WIVES (i.e. not the husbands) to view the husband as ‘head OF’, not ‘head over’. The preposition ‘of’ is quite different than the preposition ‘over’. While ‘over’ can indicate position and rank, ‘of’ does something quite the opposite. The word ‘of’ indicates connection, association, identity, origin, substance, etc.

      And because Paul admonishes the husbands in a similar way telling husbands to view wives as their (connection, identity, substance, etc.) very own body, we can determine that this is a metaphor, not a command to cut oneself up and reattach body parts. The picture Paul is trying to paint is one of operating in unity, interdependence and harmony.

      vs.30 For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. 31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.
      We as believers and as spouses are to live in such honor, respect, utter closeness in interconnectivity, that we are perfectly harmoniously united. As Jesus says, they SHOULD know us by our love of one another, as Jesus (The Word) and the Messiah, the Holy Spirit, and God are ONE unit in 3 persons.

  • Hi Tami, Thanks..we must speak what we know! The problem here is that the Complementarian INSISTS that women ARE equal to men. THEN they say that a loving wife always lets the husband have the final say. ( If that is love then they need to be reminded that they are commanded to love their wives in the Bible, and, according to THEIR definition of love, that means always giving the WIFE the final say…incongruity, no?)

    In all honesty, if a wife always GIVES her husband the final say she is actually sinning against him, not only creating the impression that she is incapable of really thinking things through as well as he, but also that therefore, he alone has all wisdom…a sure road to pride and gross wickedness for him, not to mention an entirely UNFAIR burden on the man. It is in truth a cop out by the woman, a cop out to taking the responsibility of adulthood, on the woman’s part. Who wants such a wife? Also, who wants such a husband who has been given absolute power, or just as bad, who wants to be so callous as to make him take the blame for ALL that will go wrong because he was ‘forced’ by doctrine, to always decide? It is all off the mark of common sense and what marriage is…a RELATIONSHIP between TWO people, of PARTICIPATION AND BELONGING. The reality of Complementarian marriage is an ARRANGEMENT of unequal persons who must believe that they are ‘pretend’ equal…not a real relationship of real equals.

    THEN the male leaders insist that women cannot fill many positions of RESPONSIBILITY in the church because we are women, and we are to have no access to either the money or the decision making process of what is done in the church and YET they expect us to TITHE with our money over which dispersion THEY have all control. It is called taxation without representation over which MANY AMERICAN MEN FOUGHT A WAR. Clearly they see the wrong in this, at least when it comes to THEM!

    Then they go on saying HOW can we women do not understand that we ARE equal to men (when we clearly are not permitted to be)! Now I know why the people who first inhabited the West said ‘WHITE MEN SPEAK WITH FORKED TONGUE’. Either they know they are lying to women or they just can’t see the lies that their CULTURE and TRADITION have instilled in their brains, blocking their ability to recognize the truth. This is the CULTURE of Patriarchy that has blinded them so they cannot comprehend their Bible. We women want to “Grow up” into accountable, reliable and mature adults, and they won’t let us! This is why we are leaving the churches…to finally be treated as we are and what the Bible SAYS we are…accountable adults (who must give account to God).

    Ironically…all the while, the government is trying to make us all, both males and females, into dependent children…depending on them in exchange for all our money!Ah socialism, the ultimate descent into the darkness of endless irresponsibility and powerlessness for us all. It is responsibility and enterprise and risk taking that made America great and is real life…and we women want to be a part of it, not merely backroom observers!!!

  • One should wonder who created the submissive wife rules. Well, maybe it was some self serving male pigs, that wanted complete control over women, sexually and financially. That certainly makes more sense than women are not capable, or do not deserve equality. It is a gigantic con job, and unfortunately many women fall for it. Some to the point where they exists in a totally abusive relationship, and feel they must. It is complete BS.

    • WayneMan…I almost agree with you except I don’t like to call anyone “pigs” or any derogatory names, even if it is possible they deserve them…I sure don’t like being called names either as we all deserve respect, even in our ignorance…at least that is my view.

      • I agree Judy, and I do apologize. I try my best to refrain from ugly labels, even when people may be dumping on me. This happens to be a hop button of mine. I donate regularly to a local battered women’s shelter here, and have seen so many times where a husband or boyfriend use this Biblical notion to justify horrible behavior, when it is apparently the one single correlation they have with the Bible at all. Even some that are not violent, simply use this as a self serving club, because they are so extremely self centered. It is nothing less than a self esteem, hope, and dream destroyer for our female population. How many remarkable contributors to society that have been silenced because of a patriarchy mentality, we will never know.

        • WayneMan.. no need to apologize to me…but it truly is enough to may one weep…and never stop! I have seen women so hamstrung by this theology that it cannot be of God…and it is damaging to men too, in so many ways, not only to those who become more and more confirmed in their entitlement and arrogance but to those other men who find these men appalling and are also thrown under the bus by them as soon as these evil controllers sense that a man is against their ‘old boys’ club. It even causes gross sin in women who become misogynistic in support of the power they attain through their power hungry husbands. I cannot see how anyone, who is capable of thinking beyond the barest idealism can think this doctrine is of anyone else but Satan working to cramp the church’s ministry, seeking whom he may devour…would to God that more men would see the cripples coming out of shelters and disfunctional homes, IF THEY DO ESCAPE. It really burns me that there are Egalitarians out there who flaunt their ‘modernism’ by boasting of going to Complementarian churches to try to convert them…which of course includes financial support and giving them your presence to enable others to use you as an excuse for remaining…they are better fought from outside, in my view.

          • I don’t quite follow your

            “It really burns me that there are Egalitarians out there who flaunt their ‘modernism’ by boasting of going to Complementarian churches to try to convert them”

            statement. To me Egalitarians and Complementarian are somewhat opposites. One being equally shared roles versus shared but different roles. I kind of fall somewhere in between, but more on the Egalitarians side with mutual negotiations for responsibilities that cannot easily be shared. Also, under full disclosure, I am an atheist (x-Christian). So equality for all human beings is a typical trait we atheists (not speaking for all atheists, but most) generally hold dear. My wife and I have been married 47 years. We have lived a pretty traditional life, I worked she raised our kids, but we negotiated that when married. I acquired degrees in engineering and computer science, she was not interested in college. However, I have never felt that helping to cook, clean, laundry, shop, etc. was not also part of my job as well. Since my retirement, I have dedicated my efforts to doing all the things she is interested in, since she made so many sacrifices for me. We have done oil painting, soap and candle making, boating, fishing (yes she loves to fish, I really don’t). She is very creative and has taught me a lot about non-scientific topics, that I would have never done on my own (I am pretty much a geek). It has worked out very well.

          • Wayne, may I ask why you felt it necessary to walk away from belief in Jesus as the Messiah and become an atheist? And also why then are you dialoguing with Christians on a Christian blog?

            Not being critical, I am just interested in whatever you feel that you can share.

          • I did not wake up one day and decide to be an atheists. It was a couple year process. Many things just kept bugging me that simply do not make sense. Basically, these were the things that bothered me, and no one could give me reasonable answers.
            1) lack of any actual verifiable evidence (scriptures, god)
            2) many religions, all with the same or similar claims
            3) randomness of belief system based on birthplace
            4) issues with scripture unbelievable stories
            5) conflicts with scriptures and reality via science
            6) the earth is very hostile to sea/land animals (??)
            7) earth is very hostile to children (disease, food ??)
            8) the earth is pretty hostile to humans (tornadoes, earthquakes, lightning,..)
            9) supernatural elements have never been proven

            As for your second question, I actually don’t remember exactly how I got here. I saw a headline article on Kirk Cameron on Patheos.Com that caught my eye. Being a hot button as I mention before, after looking at several articles I somehow ended up here. The reason I posted at all, was hoping that some readers stuck in an abusive relationship might possible consider they do not deserve that life. I have no interest in de-Christianizing anyone. Most of my family are still Christians. I can explain my 9 reasons in more depth if you ask, but that is not why I stopped by.

            Best Wishes.

          • Hello again, WayneMan,

            Reading your list caused me to take a day to think about this. Finally, as I often do, I was just left with wondering how does anyone find the Lord. It is such a deep conundrum. I am a teacher and not very experienced at evangelizing, or arguing over the reality of God.

            Even stranger still is that I found God when I wasn’t even looking for Him. I had just arrived in Hawaii on the island of Oahu. It was so beautiful: the ocean, the sunsets, the incredible foliage. I found myself doing weird stuff like studying the mathematical perfection and balance in some of the trees and flowers. Finally, it just dawned on me with perfect clarity. Life in it’s essence was just too perfect to have happened by chance. There had to be a genius mind behind it all. There had to be God.

            I just stood there with that thought, contemplating the deepness of what I just thought. And then it happened. Out of nowhere, somewhere, but not my thinking …. an idea was presented to me. “Yes, and God is waiting to hear from you.”

            W.O.W. what an idea. I could talk to or with God! I thought about that idea for a few seconds. and…. Why not! So, I started talking at least to God. Pouring out my astonishment and thoughts about life, beauty, and so much more. Eventually. I started really talking; asking questions. I never thought about the ramifications of what it might mean if God answered me back. And God did.

            Our conversations were the beginning of healing for me. Eventually they led me to lay down my life to God; to give Him my life with freedom for God to lead me to become the woman He wanted me to be. I trusted God completely. God touched my life with His Spirit. He changed my life, healing me from deep wounds. I would never go back to life without God and Jesus in it. It was such an incredible realization to know that He had laid down His life for me long long ago. It almost seemed like Jesus knew I would be born and waited for me to wonder about Him.

            Now 47 years later, it would be impossible for me to conceive of life without Him in it.

            I don’t expect this to impact you the way that talking to God impacted me. I’m just sharing. I don’t understand how anyone could not be moved by God’s love for us in Jesus. I thank you for causing me to think again about how precious it is to be a Friend of Jesus as it says in John 15.

            I wish you much Aloha, Wayne. And I pray for God to bless you.

          • Glad you found that TL. I too was a believer until around 20, when these unanswerable questions could no longer be denied by me. Yes, there is beauty in nature, but it has had 4.5 billion years to get there. There is also many more horrifically ugly parts of nature, that to me can only be explained by random evolution.

            Best wishes.

          • random =
            1. proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern:
            2. Statistics. of or characterizing a process of selection in which EACH item of a set has an equal probability of being chosen.

            Random and evolution do not go together. Nothing has ever been created randomly. Nothing can evolve randomly. Evolution requires a deliberate repeated process. Creation and evolution go together. Creation is the starting point. Evolution carries on the pattern that was started.

            Rather than trying to debate creation and describe, categorize, etc. what human thinking is incapable of creating thus incapable of understanding but mere bits of, why not reach out to God for real. There are probably billions of people who have done that with life changing improvements for their lives.

            So, don’t bother answering because debating over the reality of God is generally fruitless, which is why I haven’t taken an interest in it. How can one intelligently discuss what they have not experienced. And you didn’t come here for that, right. I just hope that at some point you think about what I shared of my life experience with God Almighty. Your choice. 🙂

          • I also meant to add, I have had a very blessed life. But I prefer to call it some luck and a lot of hard work. Like I said above, we have been married 47 wonderful years, have wonderful children and grandchildren, none of which have ever been in any trouble with us or the law. We all have good health, although my son is down a kidney, because he donated the other one for his wife in a three way kidney exchange. I had a career I loved, and it paid well enough that I was able to fully retire at 57. I have spent the last 9 years spoiling my wife, kids and grand kids, and donate time and money to several charities. Not too bad for an “evil” atheist. LOL

          • 🙂 not all atheists are evil, WayneMan. 🙂

            It sounds like you have done your best to do good as you understand it. Nice to hear.

          • TL,

            “It sounds like you have done your best to do good as you understand it. ”

            Thanks. I am not perfect, but do what I can to improve the world for myself, my children, my grand children, and people in general. A sad point about religion is, most claim I am doomed to hell for eternity, whereas Charlie Manson can love God with his last dying breath, and he is OK. That is some kind of messed up justice.

          • WayneMan, I sympathize with your sense that women need protection, but you need to know that Dawkins and some other atheists are just as hostile and arrogant about women as Christian men can be. Here is a detailed example for you:
            As an aside, as for your claims about Christian faith, the saying ‘truth is stranger than fiction” came about because it is true… Now, minimal research on your part, for example, regarding the fossil evidence for evolution/creation would show that only the creation model fits with the facts of fossil evidence…see AND I also found your triple claim of the earth’s hostility to man odd, if you know the Bible, for it clearly teaches that any hostility to man was originally caused by man. Before that it was all VERY GOOD. Have you ever considered that the earth is in fact A ‘PRIVILEGED PLANET” unlike any other place in the universe, originally well designed for man’s pleasure and survival. Some diseases seem to have come about from eating animals like dogs that were never meant to be eaten by people because these animals were scavengers designed solely to dispose of bacteria that have now, because of man’s disobedience, entered the human body…our own fault for rejecting God’s dietary laws given for our protection. Nations that rejected God and eat/ate monkey brains, dogs, cats, rats…etc…are the nations that are probably the originators of some worldwide epidemics. You also claim the well thought out cycles of nature that maintain the temperature, fertility and viability of the Earth are signs of hostility to humans…frankly, most of these processes are cleansing and restabilizing features that keep our world livable. As for supernatural elements not being proven, why should they, since they are supernatural, not natural? If you cannot trust God who claims to love us and gave us life, why would you choose rather to put your trust in man, through whose actions all your doubts arose in the first place?

          • There are always jerks in any group, so pointing to a few atheists jerks in no way paints atheism, no more than pointing to the Westboro Baptist Church, or Jim Jones should paint all Christians.

            Ok, if you really want to get into this: you give a reference by Duane Gish, as if that is a valid authority on fossils or evolution. He is a biochemist, not an paleontologist. He is also a director at the Creation Institute whose very purpose for existence is to support Genesis. Anything to the contrary would tumble that house of cards, so his book is completely suspect and biased.

            Darwin developed his evolution and natural selection conclusions simply from observations and limited fossil collections. The same conclusion was discovered independently by Alfred Wallace, but Darwin published first. Modern DNA mapping, gene mutations, and many more layers of fossils were completely unknown to Darwin, yet all of those new discoveries completely support these conclusions.

            As for nature, it is many horrific characteristics, I would say sadistic characteristics if by design. Most all sea and land animals must brutally kill and eat some other poor creatures to survive (by design?). A child under five dies every 5 seconds (yes every five seconds), from natural diseases or starvation (by design?). There are countless deaths from random natural lightning strikes, earthquakes, tornadoes, volcanoes, … (by design?). No matter how people try to spin this, they are simply excusing the inexcusable. I am not a god, and could have easily done better than this. How about give everybody photosynthesis like plants, so eating is replaced by simply getting a little sun once in awhile. No predators necessary, period. Then we could get rid of the wacky reproductive system intermingled with our sewer system. Who would designed that on purpose? Oh, and no diseases period (no cancer, no malaria, no polio, no small pox, …). No earthquakes, no tornadoes, no volcanoes. We could still have free will, but without all the natural death and destruction. If a god had all power all knowledge, this could have been an easy option.

            And even if you buy the Adam and Eve story, so god is punishing millions of people (men, women, children, babies) and animals, because these 1st two people decide to fall for his trap. If that somehow excuses the last 3000 years of death and destruction of millions upon millions, good for you. I have to wonder what kind of “loving” god would do this. The most logical reason for me is, because there is no “designer”, and our environment just is what it is.

          • WayneMan said: “I am not a god, and could have easily done better than this.” Wow this comment of yours says it all doesn’t it? You certainly seem, to me, to be impressed with yourself, and angry with the God you do not believe in, instead of the sins of your forbears that brought all this destruction upon us, no? Of course you don’t believe in sin either, and have no grounds to be able to judge what is right or wrong outside your own opinion…a convenient way to live if you don’t want your behavior challenged, eh?

            With all due respect, it doesn’t matter if Duane Gish was a floor cleaner by trade. The point is that his arguments on the true absence of proven fossil evidence for transitional forms, that should consist of untold millions of such fossils, if your current vast ages theory of evolution was true, are irrefutable. That is why he eventually became the director of the organization. You are saying because he was director therefore he had to argue that way…talk about arguing backwards from conclusions,Wayne! I hope that is not how you reasoned against God! (Because it is ☺)

            You might note, also, that Darwin’s premise on cellular and evolutionary simplicity has proven to be wrong. Darwin actually said:”If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case.” He, of course, couldn’t look very far with the instruments of his day. These have now been found in massive multiples starting with the discovery that a cell is not just a simple “round thing with a nucleus”: Darwin’s theory of the ‘simple’ cell. The more recent discovery of the incredibly complex structure of the cell is an example, in itself, that that even the smallest parts of such a cell could not have been formed gradually, but had to be in place from the start in order to function. Another easy example for me is the brain and head of the woodpecker whose structure and protection, if not in place from the very start, would have self-destructed by the first few thrusts full force into the trees. It is called ‘irreducible complexity’ and proves the necessity of fully formed creation.

            God and His hand of love for mankind, in nature, are clearly seen, despite the level of intelligence of a person, unless they wish not to see. He does not force a person to see but He will apparently hold them accountable for their decision, and since you seem to think you alone are in charge, perhaps that will be how you discover the truth in the end, in the despair of knowing that you are not. I hope this will not be the case.

          • Judy,

            “Wow this comment of yours says it all doesn’t it? You certainly seem, to me, to be impressed with yourself, and angry with the God you do not believe in”

            No, I am actually a pretty modest person. What you do misunderstand is, one of the reasons I am an atheist is because the world is the way it is. I cannot imagine any god entity with all knowledge and all power, that would create such a horrible environment when so many many options would have been less blood and guts survival. Either this entity is a complete mad sadist and loves pain, torture, and destruction, or the entity does not exists. I choose option 2. I am not mad at a god at all, no more than you could be mad at Thor or Hanuman. They do not exist.

            ” instead of the sins of your forbears that brought all this destruction upon us, no?”

            And maybe this makes sense to you, but what kind of a god entity would punish millions upon millions of people based on what their ancestors did thousands of years ago? Would you punish your children in horrible ways, if you discovered your great great great grand father murdered his neighbor. Of course not. It just makes no sense.

            “and have no grounds to be able to judge what is right or wrong outside your own opinion…a convenient way to live if you don’t want your behavior challenged, eh?”

            I absolutely have grounds for morals, and thankfully not from any scriptures. I have explained elsewhere, all you need is 3 simple rules (hurt bad, help good, or neutral). Beyond that, scripture simply introduces unnecessary and negative social rules. The Bible is full of sanctioned by god murder, rape, slavery, genocide, discrimination, and incest. Society certainly does not need these morals at all.

            “With all due respect, it doesn’t matter if Duane Gish was a floor cleaner by trade. ”

            With all due respect, Gish lives in a conflict of interest. He cannot possibly admit any fact that goes against Genesis or his organization crumbles. His buddy Ken Ham for example (part of that same organization) states that dinosaurs and humans coexisted, because the earth must be only 6000 years old to fit Genesis. Yet they all completely ignore a well documented fact that no dinosaur fossils have ever been found in any dig anywhere on the planet above the KT line, and no human fossils have ever been found in any dig anywhere on the planet below the KT line. They simply pretend like that is not a fact, and that the Flintstones cartoon was a documentary. So no, I see anything from that organization as suspect. The fact is there are thousands of publications that show support of evolution from fossil records, DNA, and laboratory proof that gene mutations and micro evolution occur frequently in nature.

            “the brain and head of the woodpecker ”

            No, what creationist want to do is pretend that evolution says , “Presto, first it was a turtle, now it is a woodpecker. That makes no sense.”. Of course that makes no sense. But if you follow the DNA mapping and fossil records, you can see that these changes happened over thousands, sometimes hundreds of thousands of generations. So the woodpecker did not just pop into existence one day. It was a very slow steady process from some prior species.

            “He will apparently hold them accountable for their decision”

            And yes, I hear the words all loving, but the words just do not match our reality. As that lion crushes the throat of a baby gazelle, as it must do to survive, or the 3 children that just died from disease while I was typing this sentence, I just don’t see the love. And as an atheist I often get your line above in a different form. “You are doomed to eternal hell and torture.”. The message is simply “Love me, or I will hurt you.”, which is the trademark quote from an abuser. Again, it just does not match reality, and for me, there is no god makes much more sense.

          • WayneMan…you said “To me Egalitarians and Complementarian are somewhat opposites. ” Exactly…that is why I can’t understand why some who fully believe in Egalitarian are openly saying ( on a different blog ) that they deliberately attend a church that does NOT believe in Equality, I suppose in order to convert the people there from their Complemetarianism to Egalitarianism…doesn’t make sense to me either…better to support your own side and gain strength from there.

  • P.S. WayneMan…An important note is that the ‘few atheist jerks’ you compare to Westboro Baptist church include “The” atheist leader par excellence, Richard Dawkins….as Teitel noted, it was under his tutelage that the woman was widely insulted by other atheists…as she noted Dawkins comments were treated by atheists like ‘The voice of God”!…not really an apt comparison, I think, to the “rare” oddities you mentioned, but right from the top of atheism they were now using science, instead of doctrine, to belittle women regarding man’s “superior evolutionary psychology” over women…and saying “when you can no longer use scripture to subjugate women, why not use science!”…I wish you were right about this, but it seems you are not.

    • I would say that many of the unmerited deeply denigrating attitudes towards women originated with Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle starting in the 400 B.C. era. They used human logic and reasoning to promote white wealthy males as the natural leaders and only ones worthy enough to make decisions for the rest of humanity. And yes, they were sort of Atheists in that some of them believed in the multiple gods of the time.

      Human reasoning on it’s own is faulty at best. We need the Word of God and His Holy Spirit guiding us to find the sanity of God’s Love for all that Jesus came to demonstrate and prove.

      • TL,

        “Human reasoning on it’s own is faulty at best. We need the Word of God and His Holy Spirit guiding us to find the sanity of God’s Love for all that Jesus came to demonstrate and prove.”

        Yes to the 1st part, and no to the 2nd. Human reasoning can be faulty, but religion is the last thing we need. As for morals, those are an outgrowth from any society that realizes that, in order for that society to survive and prosper, you need empathy based rules. The three basic rules are simply:As for morals, those are an outgrowth from any society that realizes that, in order for that society to survive and prosper, you need to make empathy a priority. Then three basic logical rules emerge, of which all laws can be based on.

        1) activities that intentionally harms someone else (physically, financially, emotionally) are BAD
        2) activities without expectations, that helps someone else (physically, financially, emotionally), are GOOD
        3) just about everything else is either neutral or a tragic activity (accidents)

        Morals are just that simple. It is not rocket science, and nothing divine. In fact religion often introduces unnecessary and even negative “morals” upon society (discrimination, desegregation, women must obey, protesting at soldiers funerals, flying planes into buildings, burning witches, bashing gays, … just plain ugly behaviors). A kind of social cancer. But of course the more society teaches to value empathy for others as a priority, more item 2 action you get happening (and more goodness). None of this requires religion at all. Of course some people are driven by ego, selfishness, no empathy, etc which can and will violate any rules. An interesting point is, our prisons are filled with Christians, yet the atheist population for prison is almost nonexistent (1/10 of 1%).

        • “Human reasoning can be faulty, but religion is the last thing we need.”

          Here you are seeing something that is actually inherent in the Scriptures. You’ve probably heard of the saying that religion is humanity’s way of trying to reach God on their own terms, but relationship (which is what Christ offers) is God’s way of reaching down to offer to humanity what they cannot manufacture on their own. No one can force their presence on God.

    • “not really an apt comparison”

      The entire Catholic church see women as second class citizens. The entire Mormon church sees women as second class citizens. Quakers and Amish see women as second class citizens, … and many more. Dawkins is a jerk and does not speak for the atheist community. In fact there is no atheist authority or leader. We have no doctrine to tell us who to dislike or discriminate against. (One of the really wonderful points of being an atheist.) Dawkins, Perkins (although I like Perkins), et al, write books to make money, but they in no way are the voice of atheists.

      • All in all WayneMan…this doesn’t say much for many of the male gender, does it? An interesting study of psychoses and fixations can be done with the subject of misogyny. Glad to hear you don’t take to Dawkins’ view….are your good qualities because you believe you are basically good or because you followed Christ for a time? ( You might find Wayne Jacobsen’s books refreshing, especially “So You Don’t Want to go to Church Anymore?” and “The Jesus Lens” that takes you through the Old Testament through the later revelation of who God really is, through what we know about Christ. (“I and the Father are One” “If ye have known me, you have known the Father”). He has an interesting take on why some passages of the Old Testament seem to teach an angry revengeful God in light of the ways of God in the flesh: Jesus.

        You are right that, in general, all religion and philosophy is anti-woman…started at the Fall when Adam complained to God “The woman THOU gavest me”…right after he traded God’s rule in for Satan’s, where the world now is (the current god of this World is Satan).

        So, WM, are you sure that it truly is God’s fault what Satan has made of the World through his followers? Until the end, the world is in Satan’s hands when he will be destroyed by the Conquering Christ and those who have chosen Him. God made it all very good. Ironically, Dawkins view of God actually defines Satan: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” Dawkins doesn’t know it is the heart of Satan he describes…the deceiver and destroyer who has turned atheists against God as he did our forefathers in the Garden.

  • WayneMan said atheists rules for moral living:
    1) activities that intentionally harms someone else (physically, financially, emotionally) are BAD
    2) activities without expectations, that helps someone else (physically, financially, emotionally), are GOOD
    3) just about everything else is either neutral or a tragic activity (accidents)

    The first two are good biblical teaching as well….no oppression (100 times in Bible) and “By Grace are ye saved, through faith, AND NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast.”..but the third surprised me…Christians believe this too…and don’t blame God for them…but you do in your primary comment! You insist that God is to blame for all the tragedy. Ironic, no, if you are an atheist?

    • Judy,

      “The first two are good biblical teaching as well”

      Yes, it is basically the golden rule, but I don’t need the Bible for that at all. It has been traced back to Egypt as far as 1650BC, and more commonly attributed to Confucius in 500BC.

      “..but the third surprised me…Christians believe this too…and don’t blame God for them…but you do in your primary comment! You insist that God is to blame for all the tragedy. Ironic, no, if you are an atheist?”

      That 3rd one just say some things are neither good or bad, and some things are tragic accidents. And no you are not hearing me. I do not believe in any god entities. I cannot possible be mad at something I do not believe exists. Let me say this. Look at a religious demographics map sometime. It is painfully obvious that your religion (of course the one true one) is based on where you were born and raised. Do you lose sleep worrying that you are in the wrong club, and you are doomed because you do not worship Hanuman, a Hindu god. Are you angry at Hanuman because you were born in the wrong community and now doomed? Of course not, because I am pretty sure you do not believe in Hanuman. I do not believe in Hanuman nor your god. There are no gods period.

  • WayneMan…The following comment you made is simply unacceptable because you fail to see that there are things SANCTIONED, or prescribed, in the Bible and, on the contrary, there are things DESCRIBED in the Bible that are in no way sanctioned, including these that you insist are sanctioned by God…You say, “The Bible is full of sanctioned by god murder, rape, slavery, genocide, discrimination, and incest.” Of course, WM, this is not the case…Since God repeatedly commands there is to be NO OPPRESSION of any kind, the things you mention are simply describing the endlessly wicked ways of mankind from the Fall…not advocating them and not glossing over the sins of our ‘heroes’. God says “Is not My way Equal…is not your way Unequal?”…All the behaviors you describe are the sins of mankind, and we do not need to ‘blame’ our forefathers for our own sin, because there is no one free from it… (There was one case where killing was sanctioned was during the occupation of the promised land, to remove the moral pollution from the land they were to occupy so they would not be tainted by the idolatry there and turn to gross sin…but of course they didn’t do it).

    I don’t expect you to take the time to really understand the scriptures…you have chosen your way. But even the divorce that Moses allowed was not sanctioned by Christ who said, “…that Moses allowed it because of the HARDNESS of your hearts…but in the beginning it was not so”. Many wicked things done in His name are hated by God. It takes time to understand scripture, if you care to plumb the depths and really question God directly (come let us reason together, saith the Lord) and seek answers…you just can’t read it like any other book…you need to think, and not just follow someone’s regurgitated messages…it is in this that the depth and soul of God is discovered and He becomes a soul-mate for some. I have discovered many things that are not taught in the monotonous format of religious institutions or even in the superficial conclusions of a Dawkins…”blind pitiless indifference” indeed! How motivating and inspiring to gaze at a sunset, mountain grandeur, beautifully designed creatures, birds of unimaginable colours, beautiful people of every nation and all of one blood, the joy of life, the joy of having known and loved others, the excitement of medical innovations, delicious nourishing food, good books, kindness, mercy, righteousness, justice, sacrifice for others…so much to wonder at and delight in and yet Dawkins concludes “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.” I guess there really is a Scrooge ☺

    • Sorry Judy, but it’s all in there. And you want to have it both ways. The Bible was all inspired by the word of god, except those parts that are unpleasant. And god created the heavens and designed the earth, but he is not responsible for the blood and guts ugliness the earth seems to require. Either it is, or it isn’t, an “intelligent design”.

      Just a few examples

      (Samuel, speaking to Saul, relaying the “Lords word”…)

      1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.


      NUMBERS 21:3 The Lord gave the Canaanites over to Israel, who “completely destroyed them and their towns.”


      NUMBERS 31:17-18 God commanded Moses to kill all of the male Midianite children and “kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.”

      and lets not forget the genocide of virtually every man, woman, child, and infant, and kittens and puppies on the planet, when he orders the big flood.

      Genesis 6:7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

      And before you replay the “you hate god”, I do not believe any of it. These stories are unbelievable, if not outright impossible. The scriptures were simply written by men, who were superstitious, lacking in knowledge of how the universe actually worked, and fighting for control and power over other people. It is full of blood, guts, slavery, and rape because it was written by men during a time when that was common place. There is no verifiable evidence that any of it is true (other than some city names, which I can find in a James Bond novel). It is no different that the Qu’ran or the Book Of Mormon, or even L Ron Bubbard’s Scientology (really out there). Mostly fiction.

  • WayneMan said :”Either it is, or it isn’t, an “intelligent design”.” Well what do you think of the design of your mind?…Is it not capable of reasoning, making decisions, choosing what you will and will not believe. Do you not have free will? Is there no intelligence in your design? What of the body that constantly heals itself, if treated right? What of the cycles of nature and the LAWS of nature. Who made them? We could not do science without them. Are you forced to believe in God? You can despise all that you are and have, and decry the poor design, or you can wonder at it…that is your choice.

    There is no doubt that the Israelites were ‘feeling their way’ through the world and some of them saw God as an angry God, and were in awe and fear of him, imposing their own vengefulness on their understanding of His nature. There is no doubt that the truth is there with the faulty veneer of human interpretation. This human interpretation is, even today, questionable, particularly in the debate between Complementarianism and Egalitarianism, or over Slavery etc. Some have more insight than others. We still struggle through until we begin to “see” God and then we know we have found the Truth. It is through the Jesus Lens when we see who God really is that we get to know that some who wrote of their knowledge of God had no idea of God being a creator who really sought to reconcile with His creation. They were not capable of thinking God’s thoughts after Him and even the best of men today aren’t fully able, either. “But God was IN Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them.” It was only when people finally got it…that this Jesus was truly the compassionate, healing and caring Creator who would take all their sin upon Himself to rescue them…that they realized they had tried to kill Him…and were unable to do so…and that He was the real misunderstood God whose kingdom is not of this world “else would my servants fight”…not the human OT interpretation of God at all. He wasn’t here to fight wars of the flesh, but of the soul and spirit. Many of the things He seemed to have done in anger were not anger at all, but ‘surgery’ to protect as many as possible…like the raging mother who sees a swarm of bees around her little child. She appears to the child to be angry with the child when she is actually defending the little one. She sees the danger when the child is just fascinated by the buzzing sounds. There is no doubt that much Old Testament, like your quotes, were God’s message through a naturally insufficient human understanding of God, but the truth as Humanity saw it. (As you see it). It is finally, in Christ, that we see and begin to understand more fully, the real heart of God and His delight in spending time with the people He made. It is an expanding Revelation and masterpiece working through the medium of history. For those who find Him there is such a great romance. Sorry you missed it.

  • WayneMan…you said “So the woodpecker did not just pop into existence one day. It was a very slow steady process from some prior species. “I love this!… and the first time, and the umpteenth time, one of the ‘prior’ species, without all the necessarily features of special designed brain AND skull, beak AND eyes, that were specially designed to withstand the enormous pressure of banging ones head into a tree repeatedly, committed suicide trying to get those bugs, and woodpeckers never evolved, because the earlier design just couldn’t survive even one week in their search for food in the tree trunks. How do you explain that the so-called previous species, without these complex features could possible become a woodpecker without the PRIOR design already there…the reason is, what I suspect you already know, and it is called “irreducible complexity” or the fact that there are many creatures that could not survive ‘evolution’ if they didn’t already have the features that are required for survival…they have to be prepackaged, already to go…there aren’t any other birds that aren’t woodpeckers already, that have, even now, the complex structures necessary to do the job of, say, a huge pileated woodpecker…have you seen the excavations? The eyes, the beak, the skull, the brain even the amazing tongue…too many necessary features to come together to make a creature that could survive, over millions of years…ridiculous! This evolutionary explanation is kind of hilarious ( as it describes ALL THE FEATURES that supposedly evolved before a woodpecker could get a meal…if you believe this you have certainly got the gift of radical faith. There is no way that a slow process like macro-evolution or even punctuated equilibrium can explain these creatures either:The Bombadeer Beetle, the Giraffe: … Check your assumptions @

    • Judy,

      Religiously funded research organizations would literally be destroying their own very existence to admit to anything contrary to Genesis. Those groups have a deep vested and personal interest in the “belief” of Genesis, otherwise the religion becomes suspect, they lose their power over believers, and literally lose their jobs. They have been seen to completely ignore things like KT fossil layer findings. My background is computer science and electrical engineering, so not a qualified evolution expert. For me it boils down to logic fitting the evidence we can observe, measure, and test. Here are the facts I actually know.

      1) We know for a fact (proven by thousands of comparisons and repeatable experiments) that slight changes in DNA can produce slight changes in a species.
      2) We know for a fact (can reproduce it in the lab) that DNA can be randomly tweaked by external agents like X-ray or cosmic rays.
      3) We know for a fact (can and do measure it) that earth is bombarded by these agents all of the time (solar flares and other cosmic events).
      4) Global samples (from Italy, Spain, Siberia, United States, …) show several mass extinction periods (like the KT ban) where creature fossils found below that ban vanish everywhere on the planet above that ban for very long period of time, then slowly recover or never recover.

      If as much as one fossil was found in the wrong layer, the theory would be wrong, but that has never happened. If macro-evolution was not true, we would not expect to find these ordered layers. If Genesis is correct, we would find tons of fossils of every species, including human, all piled up on top each other all over the world, even in one mass layer when the Great Flood allegedly happened. That has never been observed, ever. What we see are very distinct periods in the layers with gradual overlaps, sometimes no overlaps. For example, dinosaur fossils have never been found anywhere in the world above the KT layer, ever. Evolution is corroborated by a multitude of sciences, paleontology, geology, biology, biochemistry, genetics, organic chemistry, molecular biology, and anthropology. What we observe just does not fit the stories in Genesis.

      A huge issue with creationist’s understanding of evolution is, asking for an observed instance of macro-evolution. It is a flawed question, because evolution never claimed to produce presto transformations. It’s like asking at which specific second a baby grew taller. To move from one species to a new one occurs over many many thousands of generations. Imagine a 10,000 word document. The 1st character being bright red, and gradually to the very last character being bright blue. Which character in that 10,000 word document could you say is no longer red, but is now blue. It is a very slow gradual process. However, there are plenty of observable instances of micro-evolution transformations, such as the Lenskis experiments where bacteria developed entirely new features. Evolutionary biology is an actual science. Several drugs being used right now were developed through evolutionary biology and genetics, based on the Theory of Evolution. It actually is useful and it actually works.

      There are a 1000+ peer-reviewed papers in scientific publications, from no less than 84 scientific organizations (like the Academy Of Science) supporting evolution, and zero scientifically approved papers opposing it. If you are going to claim it to be wrong, you need a rigorous amount of counter evidence for every single prediction evolution has made and shown accurate.

      It is your right to believe whatever you want. The difference between us is I really don’t care if evolution is somehow disproved. I simply follow mainstream science, and put my money on what makes the most sense based on the evidence. I would certainly be shocked and surprised, but not devastated if wrong. However for you, the conclusion that evolution is the reality would shake or destroy your entire belief system (Genesis, and therefore the entire Bible is now suspect). So I understand why you vigorously defend creationism, and deny the evidence that supports evolution.

      We will have to agree to disagree.

      • WayneMan…you completely misunderstand creation science in many ways.
        1) It is no way incumbent on anyone to insist on this belief in a literal Creation….it is only because of the scientific evidence from hundreds of scientists with valid PhD’s who recognize the error of macro-evolution, that such organizations exist; some former atheists.There are also many Christians who do believe in evolution and who have no concern about the subject.
        2) Micro-evolution is not disputed by anyone…of course there are always changes within species…they just don’t change from one species to another…wolves to whales as I saw at one scientific display. Kinds remain kinds…unless they interbreed and become sterile…which kind of shows the permanence of species boundaries.
        3) There are also different theories about how fossil layers were laid down, and there are thousands of fossil layers all over the earth…just no proven intermediary species fossils on their way to becoming a different species.
        4) Adaptation by the extinction, in an area, of certain characteristics in a species, is not evolution…i.e.the infamous peppered moth ‘proof’…and does not create new species, in fact it is a failure to thrive, not an upward trend, and creates a smaller gene pool for the future.

        We do need to stop hogging this blog, though, so I agree to disagree. In the meantime, I hope your descendants continue to remain in the human species, unless they become extinct due to the usual destructive nature of gene mutations and a narrowing gene pool. I know you don’t believe anything I have said…so no need to comment further. Blessings! Ciao!

  • Yes, cause Candace’s husband is CLEARLY holding her back and making her submissive, forcing her to put her family, career and him before all else. That is why she wrote a book, joined The View, runs a winery and still does sitcoms and movies. Jory Micah, do you have nothing better to do than find trivial things to complain about?

    • Kara, I have a million better things I could do with my time, but I choose to take the time and use my education to address theology that leads to grave harm to women and girls. It really does not matter what Candace does or does not do, as most of these folks who teach “female submission” suffer with extreme cognitive dissonance (rarely practicing what they preach or even knowing how to put their theology to real application); what matters is that her theology and philosophy (when actually put into practice) often leads to the domestic abuse of women in other marriages. These women may not be so privileged as Candace to have kind husbands who does not beat the crap out of them or control their wives by requiring obedience in the name of the Bible or God. So, at the end of the day, this post is not really about the Cameron’s, but about their theology that destroys many lives.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *