Addie Davis was ordained in 1963 by Watts Street Baptist Church in Durham, NC.
“From Mary Magdalene to Waldensian women, Ursuline nuns, Moravian wives, Quaker sisters, Black women preachers, and suffragette activists, history shows us that women do not wait on the approval of men to do the work of God.” ― .
I take an hour or so every morning to review the broader religious news. I write my posts in the afternoon, or I have time off. Yesterday, I did some general cleaning and took the pugs to the vet. I joined in the annual pancake dinner at my church for Shrove Tuesday and stopped to get my husband his favorite chicken salad sandwich since he couldn’t get off work to attend. Looking at the news on my phone, I couldn’t help myself and said out loud, “They finally did it!” A few people stared at me,
SBC’s confusing history is causing the SBC’s gender problem today.
A few years ago, I had a discussion with a Lutheran pastor(not at my current church.) He asked about the turmoil in the SBC, particularly the disagreements regarding Calvinism. He couldn’t understand why the SBC, which has been around for a long time, had not decided on this issue and incorporated it into its statements of belief. I said that they had done this with many topics, often claiming the “autonomy of the local church” as the reason they hadn’t done anything about Calvinism and other matters.
Women have served as pastors, and I mean lead or senior pastors and theologians, throughout SBC history. For example, here are some pictures that prove the point.
Here is another short article titled Baptist Women: Ordination Within the Historical SBC.
One year after the SBC revised its “Baptist Faith and Message” in 1963, Addie Davis became the first Southern Baptist woman to be ordained to the ministry. Seven years passed before another SBC church ordained a woman minister, Shirley Carter.
Numerous SBC men affirmed the ordination of women, but bitter opposition remained among some SBC men–and women–who opposed the broader U.S. women’s movement.
Southern Baptists have long valued the priceless contribution of women as they have ministered to advance God’s Kingdom. The Baptist Faith and Message (BF&M) affirms the vital role of women serving in the church (see Article VI: “The Church”). The Convention recognizes the biblical language concerning the office of pastor. The BF&M statement says, “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.” The passages that assign the office of pastor to men do not negate the essential equality of men and women before God, but rather focus on the assignment of roles.
The Southern Baptist Convention also passed a resolution in the early 1980s recognizing that offices requiring ordination are rightly addressed to men. However, the BF&M and resolutions are not binding upon local churches. Each church is responsible to prayerfully search the Scriptures and establish its own policy.
Criswell adds to the problem by saying, “women actually run the church.”
Want to understand why the SBC expelled its largest church? Listen to W.A. Criswell
All while claiming to care about sexual abuse survivors but at the very same Executive Committee applauding a former Executive Committee president who presided over the mishandled reporting of abuse cases. But at least he has the right view on women as pastors
Criswell: “There are 10,000 ways that women can serve and serve effectively and beautifully. They do here in this church. The women actually run the church, there’s no doubt about that. My wife, these women, gracious alive, if I don’t get along with the women, I couldn’t pastor the church, I wouldn’t have a church. They exert an enormous influence in it, but they ought not to be the pastor and the preacher up there in the pulpit.”
Women of the SBC, you heard the man. You read it here. “The women actually run the church.” Seems like it’s high time to make your voices — and your callings — heard.
Hundreds of pastors speak against female pastors in the SBC
Until recently, there was disagreement on this issue in the SBC. What constitutes a female pastor in a church that should be disfellowshipped? In the following article, it looks like they want to eliminate female pastors “of any kind.” Hundreds of Pastors Call For SBC Constitutional Amendment Banning Female Pastors.
Hundreds of Southern Baptist pastors and seminary professors are calling on the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) to bar SBC churches from naming a woman “as a pastor of any kind.”
In a letter titled “A Call to Keep Our Unity,” Pastor Mike Law of Arlington Baptist Church in Arlington, Virginia, writes to the SBC’s Executive Committee in support of an amendment to the convention’s constitution. The proposed amendment states cooperating churches cannot “affirm, appoint, or employ a woman as a pastor of any kind.”
The pressure was on to “do something” since Saddleback Church pushed the issue. As you will see, it was ousted because the teaching pastor was female.
But the SBC’s largest cooperating church, Saddleback Church, ordained three women to associate pastor positions last year, igniting debate within the convention. The wife of Saddleback’s new lead pastor is identified as a teaching pastor, too.
Todd Benkert leaves the SBC’s Sec Abuse Task Force (SATF) because he reported two churches that featured Johnny Hunt to the Credentials Committee.
This was apparently a “no, no.”
Hiland Park and New Season are the two churches Benkert reported to the SBC Credentials Committee, asking the committee to investigate whether they should be declared out of fellowship with the SBC for platforming an accused sexual abuser.
According to SBC rules, any member of an SBC church may submit information to the Credentials Committee. The rub here is that Benkert isn’t just any person. Although he acted as an individual, he is known as a member of the Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force.
“It is clear I can best support survivors and advance reform in my role as an advocate rather than a task force member.”
In a brief statement announcing his resignation Feb. 17, Benkert said he had joined the task force “in order to speak to the task force rather than speaking for the task force.”Now, “in order to maintain my ability to speak and act according to my conscience on these issues without representing the task force, it is clear I can best support survivors and advance reform in my role as an advocate rather than a task force member.”
Benkert said he will continue to advocate for “broader reform measures across our convention of churches.”
Marshall Blalock didn’t seem to go out of his way to keep Benkert around. Rumor has it that Benkert was forced out.
Task force chairman Marshall Blalock issued a three-sentence statement thanking Benkert for his service and his passion to help abuse survivors.
At this point, let me pause and say:
Female pastors and SATF members who take things too seriously are in trouble.
The following should come as no surprise.
The SBC ousts Saddleback Church and four other churches with female lead/senior pastors.
The Executive Committee is playing it safe for now, but I bet more is coming. It appears they only targeted churches that have “certain” female pastors.
Saddleback was among five churches with female pastors who were deemed “no longer in friendly cooperation” with the denomination at a meeting of the SBC Executive Committee in Nashville on Tuesday.
The Lake Forest, California, congregation ordained three women from the stage in May 2021, a decision that rattled some Southern Baptists who believe the role of pastor is reserved for men. Then last year, Saddleback selected Andy Wood as Rick Warren’s successor and the church’s lead pastor, and his wife Stacie Wood came on as a teaching pastor.
…The Executive Committee approved the decision, also cutting ties with two churches that have female senior pastors (New Faith Mission Ministry in Griffin, Georgia, and St. Timothy’s Christian Baptist in Baltimore, Maryland) and two churches that have female lead pastors (Calvary Baptist in Jackson, Mississippi, and Fern Creek Baptist in Louisville, Kentucky).
I contend the SBC has not fully resolved the issue. Some churches have female pastors who aren’t lead/senior pastors. I bet those hundreds of pastors will still be unsatisfied and will come hunting for the rest of the women serving as pastors in more “lowly” positions.
Once again, the SBC appears to prioritize its gender problems over its sex abuse problems.
What does it mean to be disfellowshipped?
I found this explanation at an SBC Executive Committee site. Please note the emphasis on the “autonomy of the local church.” In other posts, disfellowshipping is equated with church discipline. In other posts, disfellowshipping is equated with “not being in friendly cooperation with” the SBC,
3. Does the SBC affirm the autonomy of the local church?
Once again, listen to the BF&M: “A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers.…” The autonomy of the local church, as well as the autonomy of associations or conventions of local churches, has been and continues to be, strongly affirmed by the SBC.
As Baptists know, the exercise of autonomy by a local church does not mean it will never be disciplined or disfellowshipped by another Baptist body. This happens occasionally when associations or conventions have conflicts with local churches that find no other resolution. From time to time, the SBC has refused to seat messengers when circumstances have warranted. This in no way contradicts the doctrines of the priesthood of believers or the autonomy of the local church. Rather, it affirms an equally true proposition — that the autonomy of one Baptist body does not nullify the autonomy of others.
Churches can appeal the decision. link
The decision can be appealed to the convention at least 30 days prior to the annual meeting, when the matter will be considered as part of miscellaneous business on the first day.
My understanding is that Saddleback will appeal the decision. This ought to be fun.
Churches can ask to be reinstated. link
I find it difficult to imagine a church being reinstated unless it changes. For example, they might demote the lead woman pastor to become the assistant pastor of women. I wonder what the committee would do then?
Reinstatement
Disfellowshipped churches who wish to be reconsidered for reinstatement of fellowship would do so through the Credentials Committee.A Registration Committee, appointed by the SBC president, will take the lead in registering messengers to the SBC annual meeting, a role previously handled by the Credentials Committee.
The Credential Committee also ousted another church due to a sexual abuse problem.
I think they added this one to throw a bone at those concerned about sexual abuse. According to NBC 15:
It deemed Freedom Church in Vero Beach, Florida, to be not in friendly cooperation “based on a lack of intent to cooperate in resolving concerns regarding a sexual abuse allegation.”
Freedom Church’s pastor, Richard Demsick, told the AP that the SBC has sent conflicting messages to the church. In a letter to national, state and local Southern Baptist entities, church leaders disputed any allegation of abuse, asked for additional information and said they planned to appeal any ouster.
According to Premier Christian News:
According to Baptist Press, Freedom Church has denied the charge “pointing to a matter investigated and resolved by the Anglican Church of North America.”
Oh yeah, they applauded Morris Chapman, who was named in the Guidepost Report, which makes me wonder what’s going on in the EC.
All while claiming to care about sexual abuse survivors but at the very same Executive Committee applauding a former Executive Committee president who presided over the mishandled reporting of abuse cases. But at least he has the right view on women as pastors.
That person who got the applause was none other than Chapman, who was discussed in the Guidepost report.
“In his position as General Counsel, Mr. Boto guided the EC’s response to sexual abuse allegations, advising the various EC Presidents under whom he served – Dr. Morris Chapman, Dr. Frank Page, and Dr. Ronnie Floyd,” the report say
This has gone on too long, and I didn’t discuss all the hoopla over Guidepost Solutions being hired to implement the database, etc. There is much to talk about there. So I will leave you to discuss this post until I post about Guidepost on Friday. I will also discuss the problem that has now arisen about the so-called autonomy of the local church. Some lawyers are excited…
I won’t even pretend to be surprised.
Women are no longer granted full membership in SBC churches in my area. We do not have the same rights and are not allowed the same influence or potential as the men in SBC churches. We can teach young children or other females, work kitchen, sing and/or play an acceptable musical instrument at the appropriate times – with the men’s permission. That’s pretty much it.
Women are no longer allowed to talk in mixed-gender assemblies, or in mixed-gender classes, or in business meetings. We are forced to rely on men to be our voices with the church walls. I have watched/experienced the changing rules for women over the years. What it boils down to now for women: keep the kids out of the way during SS, procide gospelly man-approved music at the appropriate times, provide free catering and clean-up…… then sit down, shut up, and stay out of church business.
IMO, with each passing year women become less and less human in the SBC. (The information that has come out about the SBC in recent years have only served to strengthen my opinion.)
In any institution, why should a quasi- or psuedo-member be allowed to have a position of leadership???
And people wonder why I walked away.
Right now there are still many, many SBC churches with websites showing female “youth pastors”, “worship pastors”, “children’s pastors”, “women’s pastors”, etc. There are even some “executive pastors”. I presume those pages will quickly be scrubbed of the word “pastor”, and replaced with “director”, as many churches have done already?
Oh, “minister” is another handy semantic workaround, but questionable whether it’ll appease those all up in arms about this.
I Timothy 2:12 is clear on the issue. Case closed. Southern Baptist hold themselves out to be Bible believers. People who aren’t Bible believers can go to a Pentecostal/Charismatic, Episcopalian, Methodist, or many other liberal churches.
What reasons does Saddleback have for staying in the SBC? From the outside looking in, it appears that the SBC has way more to lose in this situation than Saddleback…
Beth Moore tells it like it is about the SBC patriarchy:
“I tried to reason that they are acting this way is because of Scripture … it’s somehow in their head that this is how authority runs in the church … I don’t think this is about Scripture; I think this is about power … when we care more about protecting our power than our people, we are in desperate need of reformation, not to mention repentance …”
https://abcnews.go.com/US/video/beth-moore-journey-after-parting-southern-baptist-convention-97345127
This just demonstrates that the SBC committees (Credential committee, Executive committee) sees pervert male pastors as OK to preach from SBC pulpits because they’re men. As for women, there is never, ever, EVER a time when it would be even be possible for the most moral, righteous and aboveboard woman to preach from an SBC pulpit.
Example: Johnnie Hunt s*x*lly *ss**lt*d a pastor’s wife, but he’s OK to preach from an SBC pulpit because he’s a man. No woman can ever preach, because just being a woman is enough to bar us.
Seriously, folks, it’s time to get out of the SBC when they will let a known perv preach from a pulpit, but there is no woman who ever can simply because we have XX chromosomes. The whole thing is disgusting. The God who had Mary Magdalene be the first witness to the Resurrection of Jesus is deeply saddened by this.
Susan,
Totally agree. They have 30,000 members.
So, are you saying the SBC of the past didn’t believe in the Bible? Could you tell me when the SBC became “Bible believers?” I was a member from 2001-2008. Was I in a Bible-believing denomination during those years?
I guess being known for misogyny is one way to try to get people to forget your church was founded to support slavery.
And people wonder why women are leaving the SBC and other churches. “The Struggle to Stay: Why Single Evangelical Women Are Leaving the Church” by Katie Gaddini is a poignant, respectful overview of why single women are leaving. It could easily apply to other women as well.
Furthermore, I agree Susan, I can’t understand why Saddleback wants to remain in the SBC–which has far more to lose than does Saddleback.
Yeah….. and SBC elites are starting to worry about finances. Booting out 30,000 donors won’t help.
https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2023/02/22/key-takeaways-from-top-southern-baptist-convention-executive-committee-meeting-2023/69903731007/
“ The executive committee’s liquid assets decreased by $6 million last fiscal year, mainly through costs incurred by abuse related legal expenses, executive committee members and staff explained at a session Tuesday.
The 50% loss in cash is evidence the current model for financing abuse response is “unsustainable,” executive committee interim CFO Mike Bianchi said Tuesday, relaying the auditors’ assessment.”
Now , if women would just keep their mouths shut ……..
Troy,
I was a Southern Baptist for 4 decades, and I never saw any of the men greet their brothers in Christ with a holy kiss.
1Cor. 13:12, 2Cor.16:20, and 1 Thes. 5:26. That’s clear times three.
Maybe not. This explanation comes to the opposite conclusion:
https://youtu.be/iqZQLAvgIWc
Nancy2(aka Kevlar),
It seems as if Troy doesn’t believe the SBC was Bible believing until this moment.
Paul D.,
Unfortunately, there is true in your statement…. The good old US is one of the countries that justified slavery on racial groups… i.e. some races are superior to others..
We will be “paying” for this evil for along time….. a SBC was “in the thick of this” trying to use the to justify it..
Nancy2(aka Kevlar),
With what you’ve described, the parallels with Islam are striking.
Troy,
Unless you are also trying to say that women shouldn’t wear gold jewelry or pearls (also in 1 Timothy 2) or that they will only gain salvation through having children (also in 1 Timothy 2), then there is room for interpretation in that particular verse.
There go most of the wedding rings in the congregation, and heaven help the woman who can’t have children.
Preach it.
Cherry picking Scriptures and applying a particular interpretation (which could actually be incorrect)?
What about all the women Paul mentions in Romans 16? I doubt they were mentioned because they made a killer loaf of bread. They must have been doing some amazing ministry for God to make sure they were mentioned so prominently in His Word.
I am not sure if you are saying what you actually think or if a large dose of sarcasm was omitted in the delivery. Apologies are proferred for assuming the former and responding accordingly below.
The sheer arrogance of declaring you have the one and only “correct” interpretation while all the other denominations listed don’t? I think His Word also speaks to the issue of pride and that it goes before a fall.
I think this is tangentially related to the original topic.
My husband is playing the “Florida man” game with Google just now. I curiously asked what happens if he tries “Florida woman,” instead.
Far fewer bizarre headlines, turns out.
Yet the SBC denominational leaders would have us believe only men are suited to leadership.
Pshaw.
I have documentation of a Southern Baptist lady preacher in the pulpit of the home church of the interim President of the Executive Committee of the SBC! A post on the church’s instagram account, Sunday, Aug 26, 2018, the [redacted] Baptist Church, Nashville. It’s a photo of her at the pulpit preaching, with men in the pews. Caption is “Rev [redacted] [redacted] bringing the message today”.
[the church purged (hid?) its Instagram posts after this man, a member, was named interim SBCEC President last year]
In 2018, this highest-level denominational bureaucrat was a leader in the Tennessee state convention of Baptists. Was even quoted in a Baptist Press article giving cover to a local association’s expulsion of a church for having a woman pastor, that it was not racially-motivated. He became VP of the SBC Executive Committee in 2019, and has been its interim President since early last year. He’s been a member of this same church throughout.
Huge, great big BINGO right there.
In 2000, Adrian Rogers who was Chairman of the BF&M Revision Committee, portrayed this addition as “what most of us believe”. Not “all of us”, “most”. And messengers at the Annual Meeting who voted on it were assured it would not be used as a Creed.
Tonight as I am writing this I have open the Executive Committee’s own SBC website, and what it says [what I’ve capitalized] contradicts what they’ve done this week.
“FAQ – Can women be pastors or deacons in the SBC?”
“…The Baptist Faith and Message (BF&M)…says, ‘While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture’….However, “THE BF&M AND RESOLUTIONS ARE NOT BINDING UPON LOCAL CHURCHES. EACH CHURCH IS RESPONSIBLE TO PRAYERFULLY SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES AND ESTABLISH ITS OWN POLICY.”
https://www.sbc.net/about/what-we-do/faq/
An ACNA church (“Freedom”) belonged to the SBC. This is similar to England and South Africa where Bentley / Wagner / New Frontiers / Vineyard / C of E / New Wine / YWAM / “Church Society” are all mixed up together.
They are no more Bible believing than many other churches, even ones with female lead pastors. Southern Baptists have been hiding sexuap abuse/abuses in their churches for decades. So, not Bible believing much at all.
Jerome,
IMO, the preamble of BFM is utmost important. BFM’s is suppose to be a confession of South Baptist’s common faith not a creed, not for controlling faith and practices of faith.
Women pastor/preaching are debatable issues in southern baptist life, not a cause for disfellowship. IMO, EC abused the spirit of BFM.
Troy,
Afterburne,
Sarah (aka Wild Honey),
dee,
Ken F (aka Tweed),
dee,
I’m firmly of the “American Irony” hermeneutic camp in this specific instance (even we English do it sometimes – e.g John Cleese). After all Troy is only citing sources. The whole SBC, and the whole neo calvinism, and the whole designer outlet religion scene, are satirists who forgot that they are satirising themselves. Caricatures of caricatures, caught in aspic * or amber, or fossilised **.
When I’m confused – however – is when most of you state how gracious bad religion is to boys and men (and I am eyewitness that it wasn’t), perpetuating the template.
And worse: you assume wrongfully men and women have to be married to each other. Martha Nussbaum in Upheavals of Thought p 464 reminds us that Immanuel Kant categorised both human love and sexual desire, with the former the important one and the second is meant to be incidental and voluntary in some cases, and not the other way round (my summary).
Or that all spiritual gifts are bad (HU Guy). At least every other occasion, please hint at your actual perspective everybody. “Conservative” and “liberal” religion alike (even charismatic and pentecostal), alleged Calvinist or alleged “Armenian” alike, ALL deny Holy Spirit endowing unvetoed, which is the ONLY reason why Christ ascended.
So most of you claim to discount sources when it suits you and not when it doesn’t.
Jeffrey Chalmers,
Bullseye. Indeed England was the original and biggest importer of evils into your country.
NOTES:
{ * “Reformed” is what the soggy meat in packets used to be called }
{ ** Like Bethelated, Torontulated Bromptosauruses }
Interesting language coming out of “the committee charged with finding the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee’s new president”:
https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/sbc-digest-sbc-ec-search-team-update-sbts-convocation/
“…Robinson, pastor of Hillcrest Baptist Church in Country Club Hills, Ill., said the team is taking its time, wanting to get it right…’We have a strong finalist group, and we’re just trying to pray our way through that group to be sure that we have the best person for the job – God’s person for the job’.”
[PERSON? Shouldn’t he have said the best MAN for the job? that they’re looking for God’s MAN for the job? Yes I’m being sarcastic]
For centuries, the eternal Vatican has had what it says somewhere, what it says somewhere else, what it says it says, what they say it says it says, etc. (Real believers simply said their prayers.) The SBC are enthusiasts for hermeneutics. The C of E like the Marie Celeste or that ghostly Dutchman, stay afloat precisely because wet planks and ropes bend (irony alert).
Now even politicians are nixing rule of law as among “national values”. Small aeronautical engineering fines are a tax deductible expense (doesn’t work so well for Turkish builders though).
Nihilists nixing females as human beings – and with them the equal value of males, including unmarried and boys.
Maybe if the SBC really went bankrupt, and the EC became a volunteer org with a lot less power and practically no money, there would be hope for the SBC.
As it is, it’s far too rich and attracts the corrupt and the corruptible. And they have way too much to lose for them to allow any changes for the better.
If you have no real arguments (plural!) to support your position, bringing up one verse bereft of context – and we’re always missing most of the context in Paul’s letter, because they’re half of a conversation whose other half, i.e, the questions the letters’ recipients had asked Paul, and the descriptions of the situations from which those questions arose – well, bringing up one verse bereft of context followed by “case closed” smells of trying to bully the other side into unthinkingly accepting your position, even one that’s not well supported by fact or argument.
And the claim that the SBC’s character, motivations and actions are above all “biblical” is so far out that it’s laughable.
Correction:
… because Paul’s letters are often half a conversation whose other half … we don’t know
I *really* must rein in my tendency to convoluted, nested sentences… – particularly when writing on my phone, where the combox is so small I can’t even see half of what I’ve written
I ask this sincerely.
Do any of the Wartburg readers know of a relatively large church [100 members] that meets this criteria:
FOUNDED by a female
CURRENTLY LED by the same female.
There are many many churches with female pastors; but it appears hard to find one that was founded by a female.
Of note: In the black populations centers; you can find tiny congregations in churches founded by and led by females.
Marg Mowczko writes about 1 Tim 2 in her latest article on her website. Troy should read it. So should Mahler and all the pastors railing against women pastors in the SBC. The SBC is not the only denomination to prohibit women from being pastors. My daughter is a Lutheran int an LcMS church who also confine the role of pastor to men. Marg is Bible believing! And she demonstrates through excellent exegesis how 1 Tim does not say what it might seem on the surface.
I know the history of the FUNDAMENTALIST TAKEOVER very well. This has been going on since at least 1979. No one who knows this history should be surprised at what the EC did this week.
Women Pastors, women leaders in the SBC are or will not be allowed.
The leaders will make it happen where no woman can have the title of Pastor. Nothing will be done about the sexual abuse that has gone on for decades.
I will not waste anymore of my time on the SBC. I’ve wasted too much time and energy and the SBC has only been getting worse.
Below covers it for me.
9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Read full chapter
Ecclesiastes 1:9 in all English translations
King James Version (KJV)
Tom Parker,
I live in a rural area. Things are slow here. It took a few years for the changes to trickle in here, but I have experienced it on a very personal level. I remember all too well what I use to be allowed to do in church.
I have lived through not only the changes in our churches, but the change in my husband, his attitude toward me, and the negative impact this change has had on our marriage…… the damage it has done….. the change in his attitude and behavior towards me. (After my husband retired from the military, he attended a small SBC affiliated Bible college.). Things still are …… difficult.
I’ve live through some rough times……. car wreck that nearly (and should have) killed me……. death of my first husband……. illness that did permanent damage to my body and my immune system …….. but nothing has had the kind of negative impact on me emotionally and spiritually as the damage religion had done.
But, I’m a fighter.
Grainne Mcdonald,
I was just about to find a link to Marg Mowczko’s latest post in response to Troy’s statement and other replies and was so happy to see someone beat me to it. She is a wealth of information when it comes to understanding passages as they were written originally
Every child of God who yearns for the genuine to emerge from the vast sea of counterfeit religion, who expects Christlikeness in church leaders, who longs to be treated equally in the Body of Christ regardless of race, class or gender … would agree with you Nancy.
“Saddleback has consistently given $100,000 annually to the SBC Cooperative Program since 2016”
https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/ec-removes-six-churches-from-cooperation-including-saddleback-church/
I spent 70+ years as a Southern Baptist (I exited when the New Calvinists took over). I can testify that I knew very few Southern Baptists who read the Bible on a regular basis and who prayed that the Holy Spirit would reveal Truth to them. The average Southern Baptist depends on the pulpit to instruct them, not the Holy Spirit … they would more aptly be called Pulpit Believers, rather than Bible Believers. Whatever theological flavor is in the pulpit is what they believe. Whatever theology they are indoctrinated with in Sunday School is what they believe. Those who wake from this stupor and who read the Bible themselves under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit eventually join the Done ranks … done with SBC but not done with Jesus. It wasn’t always this way … Southern Baptists used to be on track (based on my long tenure with them) … they were evangelists, they were mission-minded, they loved Jesus and their neighbors, their pulpits preached the Gospel (the real one).
“BFM2000 deleted the following passage from BFM63 that was intended to protect the statement from becoming a creed to enforce doctrinal uniformity. “Such statements have never been regarded as complete, infallible statements of faith, nor as official creeds carrying mandatory authority” (Preamble).”
http://www.centerforbaptiststudies.org/hotissues/dildayfm2000.htm
Southern Baptist leaders will give an account for a lot of things on Judgment Day … for the racial sins of their founders, for multiple divisive splits in the denomination over jots and tittles, for drifting theology, for shifting ecclesiology, for the “beauty of complementarity”, for unchecked sexual abuse in its churches, for unChristlike behavior before the world … but allowing women to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ in times past will not be one of them.
Christa Brown said in a Tweet this morning that one of the churches that was expelled for having a woman pastor was not part of the SBC.
*rolls eyes*
https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/spalding-county/ga-church-ousted-southern-baptist-convention-having-female-pastor-despite-no-affiliation/23IZSZH2FBGGZD7NTYVOMA2J7Y/
In a nutshell, it doesn’t matter a hill of beans what the SBC did in the past. They are free to do as they please today. And since churches are autonomous, it makes no difference if they are in or out. Unlike the UMC, ELCA, or ECUSA, they cannot take your building UNLESS you were foolish enough to borrow from them under one of those reversion clause fiascos.
Salvation doesn’t depend on being SBC. So those, women included, who agree with what they are doing today are free to stay. Those that don’t agree can simply walk away.
Some folks like liturgy. Some don’t. Some like contemporary music. Some don’t. Some ordain women. The RCC, the LCMS, and the SBC don’t.
I guess some like to beat their heads against brick walls trying to make every institution fit what they want. Much quicker, easier, and more effective to leave the others alone and just find where you fit, IMHO.
Blessed are the peacemakers.
Case NOT closed. Legitimate scholars who do not have to subscribe to an inerrancy pledge to keep their jobs believe that the Pastoral Epistles were not written by Paul.
And even if they were written by Paul, is there a reason why we should follow them beyond a belief in inerrancy? I mean, the Biblical texts generally accept slavery as a given and at no time is manumission (freeing slaves) ever presented as something believers have to do. Yeah, the Israelites were slaves, but they freed themselves. They didn’t wait around for Pharoah.
In a society where women were seen as male property, 1 Timothy 2:12 makes a perverse kind of sense. But we don’t live in a society where 25 to 40 percent of the population was outright owned by someone else, and women and girls were the property of their paterfamilias.
Maybe you want to go back to a time where slavery and female subordination was the law and backed up by the religions of the time. Not me. Jesus didn’t die for slavery and patriarchy.
That seems to be a pretty primary source for guidance for churches who are hiring staff. In order to become in compliance, would they then have to fire women on staff with a leader or pastor designation in their job description despite establishing their own policy as evidenced by their hires?
Firing such staff strictly in order to comply with the SBC policy – – or perhaps, under the threat of disfellowship since the SBC policy actually seems to go on a different direction given what is posted above – – could understandably carry legal ramifications. Those churches who would try to adhere to compliance in such a situation would seem to be between a rock and a hard place, especially if the church constitution/bylaws specify their congregational mission as being in association or in alignment with the SBC, supporting the cooperative program, and so forth.
And how does all of this go towards the issue of congregational autonomy versus the denomination having a say or seeking to have a say over specific things?
The Cleansing(TM) Has Begun
“Just like The Storm(TM), Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”
Privilege of Priestly Rank.
The Godly(TM) Can Do No Wrong.
As long as their Policy toes The Party Line from On High.
Just like the old USSR or Calvary Chapel.
They’ve already anticipated you, JDV:
“So-called ‘Laws’ of Men or WORD! OF! GAWD!”
“As for Me and My House, We Shall Serve The LOOOOOOORD!”
Headless Unicorn Guy,
And when they get called on it:
“PERSECUTION!!!!!!!”
Which is further PROOF of their Righteousness and Godliness.
Lather, Rinse, Repeat, Lather, Rinse, Repeat, Lather, Rinse, Repeat…
“Florida Man, Florida Man,
Doin’ whatever a Florida can…”
Romans 8:1-2
“Therefore there is now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus. For the Law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the Law of sin and death.”
Romans 8:35-39
“Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it has been written: “For Your sake we face death all the day; we were regarded as sheep of slaughter.”
“But in all these things, we more than conquer through the One having loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
The more Christianity goes sour with Entropy, the more it resembles Wahabi/Talibani Islam.
The more X-Treme, the more Godly.
linda,
Inclusivity is a testimony (marketing point) for those who practice this. Inclusivity of gender and race is the mark of one who follows Jesus.
Exclusivity based on ethnicity, race, social class, and gender is not morally superior, no matter what some theobros say, write, theologize, administrate, and preach. One might as well be following after the imams in towers in muslim countries. Christianity has its own Taliban with the initials of SBC, apparently.
The Christian imams may not have towers, but they may have their own stained glass idols.
No True Scotesmen, remember.
Not if it wasn’t Troy’s not-a-denom.
“ME SHEEP! YOU GOAT! HAW! HAW! HAW!”
I am so sick of Christianese One-Upmanship.
I thought I outgrew that crap when I got out of high school.
Silly me.
This meets most of your criteria.
The Happy Church in the Denver area. It moved a couple of times over the years and renamed themselves as Orchard Road Christian Center and now is known as Encounter Church.
It was founded by Marilyn Hickey and her husband some 60+ years ago. She was the driving force and the reason it became as big as it did back in the day (I think there were more than 1,000 in attendance each of the times I was there with some friends on a few random Sunday mornings in the early 80’s). I have no idea how large the church is now, but they are apparently large enough to still sustain 2 services on Sunday mornings.
I don’t think she is still “leading” the church, but she is apparently still involved (she is listed on their staff page: https://www.ecdenver.org/our-staff/) despite being 90+ years old. She has another ministry as well: https://www.marilynandsarah.org/
FWIW, back in the day it was an AoG church and very Pentecostal / Word of Faith oriented. I have no reason to think that has changed any.
I think Troy lit a stink bomb in the room here and then hustled out. 🙂
Women are the stronger of our species.
“These people are a stench in my nostrils, an acrid smell that never goes away.” (Isaiah 65:5 NLT)
Proffy,
Exactly… great way to “divert” the conversation….. to me, the core issue is “leaders” covering up their “misbehaving” buddies..
in the fundy world I grew up in, they focused more on “sexual misbehavior” more than anything else…
Except when their “buddies” get caught…
senecagriggs,
Oh no. Not you again.
You won’t like my answer and will disqualify it because the woman who founded this denomination is no longer leading it, for the simple fact that she died. Happens to the best of us.
But I count her whether you do or not because her denomination is still going strong and features both male and female spiritual leaders. Because unlike the greedy and self-preserving leaders of the SBC, the CBMW, TGC, and all other he-man woman-hater clubs, they believe God when He said that He would pour out His Spirit on all mankind and your sons and DAUGHTERS will prophesy.
Anyway, Aimee Semple McPherson founded the Four Square Gospel Denomination.
Sorta like Tom White trying to jump on the revival bandwagon: “I felt the presence of the Lord” … while remaining unrepentant over hiring a pervert-bud … you can’t feel the presence of the Lord unless you humble yourself, pray, repent, and seek God.
Without SBC women over the last 150 years, hundreds-thousands of SBC churches would have closed, particularly in rural areas. When the going got rough, faithful women rallied to hold many of them together.
In both Old School D&D and Traveller, our gaming group had a convention about character generation: If you rolled higher Strength than Constitution/Endurance, the character was male. If you rolled higher Constitution/Endurance than Strength, the character was female. If you rolled the same for the two characteristics, player’s choice (except for this one guy who was strangely obsessed with Herm characters…).
It’s worked in the past.
Trigger everyone into a flamewar about Homos or Theological trivia and while everybody’s at each others’ throats over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, the Troy slips out the back door laughing.
Like Paige “Bungalow Bill” Patterson on the windows of the SEBTS chapel?
After being Wondering Eagle’s regular troll for the past several months…
“HE’S BAAAAAAAACK!”
In all his Wide-eyed Innocence and Plausible Deniability.
And she was One Colorful Character.
Founded all the tropes of the Megachurch AND the Televangelist.
“Jesus didn’t die so you could be an A-hole…”
(still of Fred Phelps and family Doing their Thing)
“Jesus didn’t die so you could get Rich…”
(still of Jim & Tammy Bakker in their glory days)
— long-ago online music video I wish I could find again
Slightly off topic, but I just heard yesterday of a “Jesus Revolution” movie coming out about Papa Chuck and Lonnie Frisbee. I listened to an interview with Greg Laurie, who described Frisbee (in effect) as “JUST LIKE SAMSON, ONLY CHRISTIAN! Tm” I don’t want to be a wet blanket when my Christian friends get excited about this movie, but….. any help from you or Muff or Bridget or any other SoCal folks who might have had experience with the Jesus movement back in the day would be appreciated.
Some words from the extreme liberal Methodist, bible disbelieving, scripture denying, ungodly infidel John Wesley, from Sermon 98, Visiting [i.e., Ministering to] the Sick:
7. “But may not women, as well as men, bear a part in this honourable service [ministering to the sick]?” Undoubtedly they may; nay, they ought; it is meet, right, and their bounden duty. Herein there is no difference; “there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus.” Indeed it has long passed for a maxim with many, that “women are only to be seen, not heard.” And accordingly many of them are brought up in such a manner as if they were only designed for agreeable playthings! But is this doing honour to the sex? or is it a real kindness to them? No; it is the deepest unkindness; it is horrid cruelty; it is mere Turkish barbarity. And I know not how any woman of sense and spirit can submit to it.
Let all you that have it in your power assert the right which the God of nature has given you. Yield not to that vile bondage any longer. You, as well as men, are rational creatures. You, like them, were made in the image of God; you are equally candidates for immortality; you too are called of God, as you have time, to “do good unto all men.” Be “not disobedient to the heavenly calling.” Whenever you have opportunity, do all the good you can, particularly to your poor, sick neighbour. And every one of you likewise “shall receive your own reward, according to your own labour.”
I would say that Wesley was a proponent of the “beauty of Truth” rather the “beauty of complementarity.”
Women ensnared by New Calvinism, heed your sense and spirit.
Encounter Church:
https://www.ecdenver.org
Originally called The Happy Church, it was founded by Marilyn Hickey 60+ years ago.
She is listed on their staff page.
Don’t worry, folks. While the Cooperative Program will lose Saddleback’s money, Lifeway will still be making a profit on Rick Warren’s books: https://www.lifeway.com/en/searchpage.html?prod.dotcom.products%5Bquery%5D=rick%20warren
Yes, he had to get back to his office at Southern Seminary . . .
Michael in UK,
Mm… who exactly is the “you” that you’re addressing here? I did not say that patriarchy or complementarianism is good to all men and boys. (It is good to SOME, not all, and even then only on a surface level, in my opinion.)
I also did not say men and women have to be married. Where did you infer that from? My comment about wedding rings simply reflects the reality that many people in churches are married, many wedding rings are gold, and if we take the passage in 1 Timothy 2 literally, married women in churches with gold wedding rings would be “sinning” by wearing said rings.
And supposedly his Mother was an awesome woman herself, probably a lot of the reason for her sons’ character.
Afterburne,
Nice!
Thank you. I knew there were more and that better fit into the criteria listed by that guy who thinks men rule and women drool.
Women still do most of the labor, by far………. event planning and clean-up —— everything from VBS to weddings; stocking supplies for, well, everything —- from paper plates and table cloths to toilet paper to craft supplies to vacuum cleaner bags to emergency medical kits, everything; children/youth classes and activities; everything involving kitchen detail; cleaning the church – including the men’s restroom ……(when a boy vomits all over the floor in the men’s rest room, how many “complementarian” SBC men do ya really think would stoop so low as to clean it up?)
I know. I’ve done it all….. including the vomit thing in the men’s restroom.
And, I’ve seen some things get completely messed up because women are not allowed to speak at business meetings.
She was also partly the inspiration for a character in a wonderful book, “This Tender Land” by William Kent Krueger
She being Aimee Semple McPherson
senecagriggs,
Your comment has a selection bias error that causes you to ask such a question. There used to be women leading Baptist churches and teaching in seminaries. Then along came Paul Pressler and Paige Patterson, and these two “godly” men started a movement to direct women to the church kitchen and babies.
Of course, one does not see many women leading in the SBC today.. Patterson and Pressler were more concerned about covering up rape and domestic violence reports, written about Patterson on this blog or diddling young men, according to the Pressler lawsuits.
At the start of this post, I gave you three women: 2 ordained and one theologian in SBTS. Shut your eyes, Seneca, and don’t use logic, and you will be just fine.
Which is exactly what happens when women are denied their place at the table, their opportunities for leadership roles, and their voices in public discourse.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
Bingo.
I don’t believe that for a minute – that women are born or created stronger.
However, given our present “Christian” culture climate in the US anyway, women have to swim upstream to survive and maybe even thrive, every inch of the way. So, yes, as a result, women are stronger. Life for women, particularly in the more pious milieu, is definitely one heck of an uphill battle. And women are fighting religion. Not God, but religion. The same entity Jesus was fighting.
Thank you for this link. Very helpful. Maybe there actually is a place for women in the kingdom of God. When I walked away from church, it didn’t seem like it would matter since a woman had little if any value. Combine worm theology with complementarian theology and hyper-Calvinism and you get spiritual poison.
I may never set foot in a church again.
Nancy, you might enjoy this story by the author of Anne of Green Gables. Someone introduced me to it just last week. It sounds like it’s set in a Presbyterian church rather than a Baptist church, but it still reflects a lot of what you said here.
http://www.online-literature.com/lucy_montgomery/1902-1903/20/
And “servicing” their Biblical Manhood men on demand.
Any place, Any time, Any way He wants it.
“PENETRATE! COLONIZE! CONQUER! PLANT!
PENETRATE! COLONIZE! CONQUER! PLANT!”
I have certainly seen that here too. A lack of logical consistency overall. Although I admit that much of the time I have no idea what you are trying to say as you speak of names of people that none of us in the US are familiar with. I really have no idea where you are coming from much of the time. But I am likely not the first to mention this.
The movie isn’t going to be honest unless they talk about the fact that Lonnie Frisbee was gay, was apparently kicked out of two of the groups he founded, and died of AIDS. Given who is involved in this movie and who is centered, it looks for all the world like Lonnie Frisbee is going to be whitewashed, marginalized and downplayed in the “Jesus Revolution” movie. I base that on the fact that this movie is actually about Greg Laurie and Chuck Smith, and that Greg Laurie himself wrote an article about Frisbee last October that did not mention the words “gay” or “homosexual,” and only one instance of “AIDS virus.”
https://harvest.org/resources/gregs-blog/post/the-long-strange-trip-of-lonnie-frisbee/
I have NOT seen the movie, but I strongly suspect it’s a fantasy and doesn’t reflect reality, even if it’s somewhat soft-focus. Evangelical Christians have not dealt with the meanness displayed towards gays and people with AIDS in the ’80s and ’90s, and instead are circling back to the same old tropes in the ’20s. *shakes head* I’m so tired.
Jerome,
I noticed my church’s entire pastor/team/staff list has been wiped clean. It’s blank and empty. We have an ordained female teaching pastor so I suspect this is why
Luckyforward,
You made me laugh!!
Susan,
My thoughts exactly. The harm comes not to Saddleback’s local churches, but to the SBC, the fellowship there, national ministries and missions that will lose out from this loss, as well as funds usually given to the SBC from Saddleback’s tithes and offerings.
Ken F (aka Tweed),
Oh my gracious. Thank you, Ken, for leaving this link. I have heard forms of these explanations before but never so ones so clear and precise. And for the first time in my 50 years with the Jesus and the church, these passages finally make sense.
Luckyforward,
Bottom line, where the rubber meets the road, it’s all about power, money, and then there will be vice in there, too, somewhere. Where there’s power (privilege), and money (greed), vice always follows. The Dark Side. Black hole. The abyss.
As Beth Moore said “I don’t think this is about Scripture; I think this is about power.”
refugee,
I read it. I did enjoy it! Thank you.
A work of fiction written more than a century ago just for entertainment…..
Half of it is fact now.
I’m waiting with baited breath for the other half to become fact: for all of the SBC women in this age to leave all of chairs in the fellowship halls sitting askew; and all of the spills, splatters, and dribbles drying on the floor; collect their empty casserole dishes and go home. Let the men prepare and bring all of the food and do the setup and clean up for the fellowship meals. (As for me, I’ll be at Dairy Queen and ordering myself a Peanut Buster Parfait.)
I realize that not much is said about the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod but they don’t have women pastors, they don’t allow you to take communion with them unless you are in agreement with their view of the Lord’s Supper, and there pastors are forbidden from praying in a public event/setting with other believers who are not Lutheran.
“The only goal of Power is POWER. And POWER consists of inflicting maximum suffering upon the powerless.”
— George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four
“There is no Right, there is no Wrong, there is only POWER. And those who are too weak to have it.”
— Lord Voldemort
Born that way or created to be, I stand on my statement as a real-life observation in a generalized sense.
When the Red Army pushed the Wehrmacht far enough West so that the death camps got liberated, the vast majority of survivors were women.
Afterburne,
Thank you Afterburne – I recognize Marily Hickey’s name
dee,
Dee, it’s extremely hard to find a church founded by a woman and still pastored by the same women.
So the question is: why is this true? Women who certainly could EASILY START a church [ and be celebrated for it ] are not STARTING and maintaining churches. Yet we know that overwhelmingly churches have greater female memberships.
I would suggest that women are not emotionally/psychologically built to found and maintain churches. On the other hand it appears that women’s spiritual maturity is often the glue that appears to hold some churches together.
A conundrum.
BTW, Marilyn Hickey’s church [ ENCOUNTER CHURCH ] is lead by a man – Reece Bowling. Marily is of course retired.
Nancy2(aka Kevlar),
This short story in film (an interpretation), from Israel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Women%27s_Balcony
Same here. Battle through life, so ready for battle with what life brings. No entitlement so muscle ready, no matter what the little Pipe deems appropriate for women.
Dennis,
Ref the last two, ecumenism should be at individual and not organisational level. “Communion” was not meant to be an ordinance and it’s surely a relief to be excused this burden. Given that we are all supposed to be co-pastors, co-prophets, co-teachers, co-evangelists and co-apostles by our prayers, it may / may not be of importance how paid job positions are reserved. I speak with wide experience but no sentimentality.
John Smith,
And yet in his notes on 1 Timothy ch 2 he writes “ 34. Let your women be silent in the churches – Unless they are under an extraordinary impulse of the Spirit. For, in other cases, it is not permitted them to speak – By way of teaching in public assemblies. But to be in subjection – To the man whose proper office it is to lead and to instruct the congregation. Gen. iii, 16. 35. And even if they desire to learn anything – Still they are not to speak in public, but to ask their own husbands at home – That is the place, and those the persons to inquire of.”
What you quotes refers to what is ostensibly the work of deaconesses I think.
Communion is a burden? I experience it as quiet, prayerful joy.
Jerome,
The SBC did this to themselves. If this was such a necessary regulation, they should have written it into their BFM, etc., long ago. Their timing is just plain awful, and now everyone will know about the SBC, which throws churches out of the SBC for having women pastors but overlooks churches that feature Johnny Hunt and many other leaders and churches.
I would be there are many churches that have women speak in the pulpit on several issues. The EC is studiously overlooking those.
I still suggest it is a selection bias on your part.
Maybe that is because women are better at avoiding one of the things that are wrong with American evangelicalism: men who start a church and never move on, and 35 years later they’re still the church’s “head pastor”/”lead pastor”/CEO/apostle/whatever. Seneca makes this sound like a good thing, but I’m not sure it is.
That way the church becomes about them much more than it should be.
When churches become a personal fiefdom, a family business, “pastor Joe’s church”, it becomes much harder, institutionally and on a personal level, to question or criticise questionable decisions and developments.
Maybe it’s time to put a time limit on the maximum number of years a pastor can lead a church. I know some denominations outside the US that do this.
Also, who says that starting a new church in an area that’s already well served with churches (probably >95% of the US) is even a good idea? Maybe working within and for one that already exists, maybe not in a paid pastoral role, would be much more in keeping with NT patterns?
As it is, the entrepreneurial model of “church planting” in mostly SBC and non-denominational churches as well as evangelistic organizations seems like an aberration to me.
Also, this model that Seneca refers to seems like an ego thing. Women are often better at not letting their ego get in the way of things that need doing.
Spiritual maturity enables anyone to be emotionally/psychologically fit to found and maintain churches, regardless of race, class or gender. Churches fail where spiritual maturity is absent from church leadership regardless of race, class or gender … or where that authority is challenged and usurped by individuals and congregations without spiritual maturity. IMO.
Tom Parker,
Well stated. That was virility JP II time, also the moralising demoraliser Falwell.
Max,
Proof of non-autonomy from the boss denomination.
Friend,
Yes. We need a hierarchy of:
– what God does for individuals on occasions through holy things
– organisational statutory requirements (including inter-organisational)
– all the meanings in all the Scriptures
– teachings one receives from church teachers on various occasions / in reading matter
– what we are entitled to demand of God through high status figures
– the effect of our actions on others’ consciences (as well as our own)
and quite a lot of other things.
In a stable well run church / batch of churches with lots of beliefs, these issues may harmonise, or else risks seem to recede for a period. Hence the lesson may be simply, to avoid applying what works for you to what doesn’t elsewhere, because it has the same name and outward shape.
There’s a lot to unpack, in a short comment like “communion (as ceremony) is not an ordinance”. It shines to the heart of Mr Jesperson’s and HU Guy’s positions. It solves three-fifths of the problems Dee and Todd report, in one swoop. This is because it is about Holy Spirit gifts unvetoed (the meaning of Ascension).
My own temperament towards keeping my devotions emotionally / cognitively / practically simple is perhaps a clue to a gift to all for saying startling but probably useful things.
I also take the long view (and wide geographically).
I agree that Real Presence appears when actual communion is fulfilled (don’t stunt the growth of fellow adopted orphans in Father’s profitable firm Prov 21: 10-31).
dee,
Yes, and this has made it into the secular news cycle, too. It’s not quite the blow-up the sex abuse scandal was, but it’s out there and it’s not very, ahem, complementary.
I would suggest that women have been told for centuries that we could not start churches and on top of that, up until the last century or so, women had many legal impediments in their way to actually doing so. These factors, not acknowledged by you, are likely far more the reasons why there are very few women who found churches.
That said, within Catholicism, there are quite a number of women who have founded prominent religious orders, and they did it without or with minimal support from their male religious leaders. Teresa of Avila basically founded the discalced Carmelites by sneaking off from the convent she had vowed herself to, and setting up a much stricter, much smaller and very poverty stricken convent somewhere else in Avila. She was frequently quite in danger of having her convents shut down, but she found powerful, wealth or both male and female patrons who protected her and allowed her reforms to continue. I’d note that Teresa of Avila was doing this at the height of the Spanish Counter-Reformation and one of the biggest issues she had to deal with in stepping outside of bounds was that she might be accused of being a Protestant or a Jew* and subject to the Inquisition. She worked in dangerous times.
There are similar foundress’ stories for other Catholic orders.
As someone mentioned above, Aimee Semple McPherson founded the Foursquare denomination. The Seventh-Day Adventists were founded in part by Ellen G. White. As noted above, many individual churches would not have survived without the work of countless unnamed women.
*Teresa of Avila’s paternal grandfather was Jewish. Teresa’s father had to undergo a penance ceremony as a boy because his family was thought to have backslid (aka they were practicing Judaism secretly) after converting to Catholicism. Teresa’s father did a very thorough job of covering up his converso background to make it look like he was of sangre limpia (pure blood). It’s my understanding that Teresa’s Jewish ancestry wasn’t discovered until sometime in the 1900s and was initially suppressed.
“ I would suggest that women are not emotionally/psychologically built to found and maintain churches. On the other hand it appears that women’s spiritual maturity is often the glue that appears to hold some churches together.”
senecagriggs,
Your statement in itself is a conundrum.
We have the emotional and psychological fortitude to raise our children from conception to adulthood; dealing with the illnesses, the injuries, the discipline, the rebellion…….
Women are competent and often excellent teachers, business founders and managers, law enforcement officers…. the list goes on and on.
Yet, it is better to have people who are usually not as spiritually mature as we are in charge of our churches, ergo, be our spiritual leaders???
That’s a real head scratcher…
That story was fantastic! Thanks for the link.
And it makes no real world sense at all.
Worse yet, it places all women into category boundaries regardless of talent and gifting.
Mark Driscoll is an excellent example of this.
Mark Driscoll is the best example of everything wrong with modern Evangelicalism.
Mark Driscoll is a man’s man.
And Mark Driscoll is the greatest example of why men are not always the best choice for starting and leading a church.
https://julieroys.com/driscoll-demand-loyalty-divides-daughter-in-laws-family/
Old story, July 2021. But a good one for those who haven’t seen it yet. Controlling men seek power and love the traditions of men that disempower women, making them second and third class citizens of God’s Kingdom.
Perfect example of a spiritually immature, male, SBC mega church pastor:
https://baptistnews.com/article/can-pastors-please-stop-salivating-over-womens-bodies-in-sermons-a-response-to-jonathan-pokludas-objectification-of-the-perfect-woman/
Ousting churches with female pastors, still supportive of male pastors who have abused others, dragging their feet on abuse prevention implementation and whining about how much it’s costing……. and now this from Jan. 2023.
True. She is listed on their staff page. As such I would expect she still serves as a role model / figurehead if nothing else.
Not sure what I will be doing at 90+ years.
Nicely done! Glad I didn’t have a mouth full of coffee when I read it!
It does set them apart from so many men who seem to have a talent for grifting though, so there is that at least (eye roll).
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
Thank you Muslin for this important background and your insight. Desperated by moralism in religion, secular umbrellas increasingly “offered” “the ideal remedy” to young people hitherto wishing to consider themselves gay, namely a “more acceptable” category.
Primary purpose is not at anyone else’s expense, but saboteurs hijack every cause at every stage of the way. If there had been prayer when religion was trying to renew, it wouldn’t have become so moralistic with the horrific knock on effects in predation.
Ken F (aka Tweed),
Thus:
– in I Ti 2 a woman being redeemed by child bearing I always put down to something not plain or general. It latches onto the OT (which itself has a meaning, incidentally).
– “to have authority over” isn’t “to have authority over” anyway. It means to not carry out a specific spooky ceremony over; “teach” is because teaching preceded ceremonies (as it still does in orders, movements or guilds).
– All the NT is one entire string and lacework of adverbial clauses based on filling with Holy Spirit UNVETOED after Ascension (the ONLY reason Christ came).
– Protestants don’t like Peter because he was a papist! Peter says Paul’s teachings are deep, he DOESN’T say Paul’s teachings are nasty!
– “This rock” meant where they were holding that conversation at the time and its insights. Duh!
At times there was little prayer and at times there was much. That is the issue that affects whether the churches are able to defend the world’s young from predation, or not.
Muff Potter,
God will ask us whether we begged Him that the skulls of our religious leaders wouldn’t be among those paving the road to hell. The apostleship of young girls and boys, women, men, the more sorts the better, is what makes the difference: not the amplifying pastors.
Megawatts aren’t worship: supplication is. Is supplication being taught when children get taken away after the first hymn only to turn up in the coffee queue? I was taught the Our Father and the Glory Be and I didn’t have to get taken outside to learn those. Dumbing down came later.
Soon, I’ll explain why the main meaning of James gets ignored. (It’s the same as above really.)
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
And yet there are good reasons for believing Paul did write the letters.
“ Until recent times the church has always believed that Paul was the author of these letters. This is because letters written in the ancient world always carried the name of the sender at the beginning. In each of these letters Paul’s name appears in the opening greeting (1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1; Tit. 1:1) and there is no reason why modern readers should reject this clear evidence of authorship.
On what grounds then do the critics object to the traditional beliefs about Pauline authorship and the inner trustworthiness of these three letters? They do so on the following grounds:
• The Greek syntax of all three letters is rather different from Paul’s usual style, judged by his major letters such as Galatians and Romans.
• A high proportion of Paul’s words (vocabulary) is unusual when compared with his other letters.
• The theological teaching contained in these letters does not contain much of the typical Pauline doctrines such as justification.
• The historical and geographical references do not fit into his travels, as recorded in Acts and his other letters.
• The kind of church organisation presented in these letters is more rigid than that of Paul’s earlier letters (e.g. 1 Corinthians), and has more in common with the second-century churches with their presbyters and bishops.
When these different arguments are brought together in this way they call for a reasoned defence of Paul’s authorship. Without going into all the details of such questions, since this can be done by consulting more scholarly introductions and commentaries on these letters, the following explanations can be offered in reply.
• A person’s grammatical style and choice of words can change over the years as studies of great writers and orators have shown. When Paul wrote the Pastorals he had been an active Christian leader and correspondent to the churches of his mission field for at least thirty years.
• There is a strong possibility that Paul himself did not write the Pastorals but didctated to a scribe. Luke was with him when he wrote 2 Timothy (2 Tim. 4:11) and definite similarities exist between Luke’s literary style and vocabulary and those of the Pastorals. Since Paul used a scribe in writing Romans (Rom. 16:22), deciding what is usual Pauline style and vocabulary becomes a bit more complex.
• Style of expression and choice of words are largely decided by the topics of conversation. In the Pastorals, Paul is addressing a different set of issues from those in Romans or Galatians. In those letters the issues are largely theological; in the Pastorals the issues are organisational and practical.
• Although the practice of composing documents under the name of some notable religious leader instead of one’s own name (what we call pseudepigrapha) was common among the Jews at that time, it raises serious ethical issues for Christians claiming to follow the truth.
• Several of the unmistakable tenets of Paul’s gospel, such as salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ apart from works, are strongly asserted in these letters (e.g. Tit. 3:4–7).
• The local and personal references, mainly in 2 Timothy, make perfectly good sense on the assumption that Paul was freed from his Roman imprisonment at the end of Acts, and moved around the Mediterranean again for several years. This assumption is supported by early Christian writings (e.g. 1 Clement).
• The church organisation of these letters, consisting of overseers and deacons in the local congregations, is not peculiar to them, but goes back to Paul’s earlier writings (Phil. 1:1) and practice (Acts 14:23).
• No Greek manuscripts exist which do not give Paul’s name as the author of these three letters.
• The critics of Pauline authorship disagree among themselves as to which verses and parts of these letters are from Paul, and which have been inserted by his disciples at a later stage.
For all these reasons, as well as others that can be found in more scholarly sources, Paul’s authorship of the Pastoral letters can be confidently accepted as being based on sound evidence and reasonable arguments.
But does it really matter who wrote the Pastorals? The answer to that is yes, because by treating these letters as secondary writings of the New Testament (deutero-canonical), their distinctive teachings on such important and current issues as the place of women in the church, faith as propositional belief, Christian ethical standards and normative church order, can be marginalised and explained away. So the question of Pauline authorship is not merely an academic one, rather it is of decisive importance if the churches are to listen to this portion of the Word of Christ in the New Testament canon of writings which is uniquely fitted to guide them through the post-modern era.”
(Douglas Milne’s Commentary on them)
Is this potty-mouth of the NeoCal tribe?
Deep Throat Driscoll is “Just Like Andrew Tate, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”
Right down to the obsession with getting it Orally.
Gives whole new meaning to the phrase “Moral Oral”.
Priests and popes have done it a lot in my observing, in their guilt following their neglect of belief and prayer in my young day, and that has now fuelled the “christians” horridly discussing children’s private parts in public.
Pokludas is part of vice signalling: more totally depraved than thou. He didn’t invent it, he needs to pray the prayer of Daniel 9: 3-21 of repentance by proxy for his own elders.
p.s how come everybody that has seized part of the media manages to stroll “nonchalantly” into Asbury? Where’s their awe?
This all reminds me of a yelling radio preacher I heard once in the late Seventies/Early Eighties, who made the following statement With Authority(TM):
“EVERY CULT IN HISTORY WAS STARTED BY A WOMAN!”
Ava Aaronson,
Agreed, and there’s also familiarity and a teeny tiny comfort zone: “I know these guys, and I know guys who are like these guys.”
So funny. And so easily disproven.
It’s also provable that there are more cults started by men than women.
But you can’t tell them that. Their mind is made up. Don’t try to confuse them with the facts.
I’m glad I can joke around with guys on this site about this. It helps me remember that guys like senecagriggs are the exception, not the norm.
I need that reassurance from time to time.
Thank you.
“ Is this potty-mouth of the NeoCal tribe?”
Max,
I don’t know about his language usage, but …..
I was curious about his theological education (I could find evidence of none), so I visited the church website and the Facebook page. The church is definitely reformed, and there is ample evidence that John MacArthur is his homeboy.
Sarah (aka Wild Honey),
Yes, I was drawing generally on all those who had responded to Troy in various ways. I have since shifted hermeneutic camp, to Luckyforward’s.
In the following I’m addressing fellow commenters as a whole:
1 – the ref. to gold is about a really intense form of ostentation. Indeed in naming a metal Paul was probably ironic in that he only know of mundane forms of gracefulness and not the more or less occultish projections (with motives behind them) he was trying to have discouraged. He actually does recommend gracefulness.
2 – I find it genuinely impossible to tell the difference between repetition of something to be lampooned, without sufficient clue that one is lampooning it, versus endorsing it. Hence some small comment or clue is valuable to all and not just me, to help us not go round in “circles” like recently!
This is all about whether one believes the real meanings in Scriptures, or devalues Scriptures / thinks Scriptures and all other texts and speech are meaningless (only in a different sense from the church villains). And whether one really believes there are genuine spiritual gifts unvetoed (the ONLY reason Jesus ascended), or that all spiritual gifts are rubbish.
Prayerless and unbelieving religion does not help males (to pick one of those examples). It tried to officially turn me (partly by proxy) into what it succeeded in turning some of my peers into, against girls, women and boys. It didn’t happen like this in everybody’s district, but variation aids deniability.
Prof Martha Nussbaum has written extensively on legislation, discrimination, shame, emotions, the sexual abuse crisis, and book / film / music reviews.
* In his clip (link given by Ken F), W P Young cites being filled with Holy Spirit which needs to accompany indwelling.
I might have first found this link on TWW. Paul Young is considered a heretic by many conservative Christians, but I find his writings thoughtful and compelling. His theology is actually very old. I highly recommend his book called “Eve.” I had a chance to meet him in person a few years ago. I told him Eve seemed to be the works of Katharine. Bushnell retold in a novel. He said that is exactly what he did. I also highly recommend her book “God’s Word to Women.”
There’s at least one MacArthur-worshiping pastor in most communities across America. They are a scary bunch who give Jesus no authority in their churches, proclaiming “Thus saith MacArthur” as the final word on everything.
If this is the MacArthur I think it is, he combines HyperCalvinist Predestination with Rapture Ready Dispy. I cannot think of a worse combination.
The Dwarfs are for The Dwarfs, and Won’t Be Taken In.
dee,
Dee, you just can’t find churches founded by women and maintained by the same women. They basically don’t seem to exist.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
He’s The Master’s Seminary, Grace Community Church, “Beth Moore go home! “ Mac Arthur.
Same one.
Got real famous for defying the Public Health Department during COVID.
You know the shtick, “‘Science’ Falsely So_Called or WORD! OF! GAWD!”
Gus,
I was thinking the same. I doubt the traits required to start and then stay at the helm of a new megachurch or movement are laudable in a follower of Jesus. If one gender has a monopoly on that sort of egotism, is that really something to brag about
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
That is a great story. To paraphrase Beth Allison Barr, history shows women don’t wait for men’s permission to serve God as they feel called to do.
Oh they exist.
But another thing you have to keep in mind, when women do start things that are successful, there usually always opportunistic males looking to take it over.
I saw this in the homeschool movement in real time. It was completely started by women. But when certain men saw that there was money to be made, they got involved, which the women didn’t mind because women are inclusive. But the next thing you know, the men took it over and away from the women. And once they took it over, it became all about patriarchy rather than educating children at home. Because those men are exclusive and don’t honor the founders of the movement.
So from what I’ve personally witnessed, the reason women often aren’t in charge of what they start, it’s because of the sins and greed and arrogance and controlling spirit (aka spirit of Jezebel) of men, not the weakness of the women.
“ But another thing you have to keep in mind, when women do start things that are successful, there usually always opportunistic males looking to take it over.”
Mara R,
And the women’s names get erased.
Mara R,
“Oh they exist.
But another thing you have to keep in mind, when women do start things that are successful, there usually always opportunistic males looking to take it over.”
_____
You’re saying that a man will ultimately rule? You could be right.
Nancy2(aka Kevlar),
““ But another thing you have to keep in mind, when women do start things that are successful, there usually always opportunistic males looking to take it over.”
Mara R,
And the women’s names get erased.”
__
You are saying a man will ultimately rule? You could be right.
The Countess of Huntingdon’s Connexion (around since the 1700s):
https://www.cofhconnexion.org.uk/about-us
“The Connexion was founded by Lady Selina Shirley, Countess of Huntingdon, during a season of revival that saw a dramatic expansion of Gospel influence that transformed society on both sides of the Atlantic. The Countess welcomed all who would make the proclamation of the Gospel their priority and we are proud to remain in that tradition.”
“To her dying day the Countess retained a personal interest in every one of her Chapels and made the final decision on ministers’ appointments.”
http://www.rosedalechurch.org/about.html
“Rosedale Community Church is a community centred evangelical church, part of the Countess of Huntingdon’s Connexion.”
“We are led by our Pastor, Bethany Burrage”
= New Calvinism
The “beauty of complementarity” is an ugly thing.
Nancy2(aka Kevlar),
Even today, wannabee ‘prophets’ try to commandeer and take over that which belongs to God.
It’s so bad that the Ashbury people have closed their doors to outsiders. This is because too many men wanted to conquer, possess, and take over that which did not start with them or belong to them. They took advantage of Ashbury’s initial inclusiveness and tried to make a name for themselves pushing themselves to the forefront in opposition of the teachings of Jesus (Mt 20:25-28)
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/february/asbury-revival-outpouring-protect-work-admin-volunteers.html
And this, again, displays the sins of men. It does not display what senaca wants it to display. It does not display that God designed men to rule and women to be subjugated and ruled. We are all to have the attitude of servants lifting one another up and encouraging each other to good works. The church is broken. And seneca holding up the broken pieces and trying to make it about hierarchy is a joke. One that he doesn’t get. One he doesn’t want to get because he desperately clings to his privilege which makes it impossible to get through the eye of the needle.
(Say what you will about Ashbury. I know very little. But I’m not the least bit surprised that Celebrity Christianity has been trying to crash that party and make it all about them. Narcissism is an ugly thing. It has no place in the Body of Christ.)
We cross posted. And we are both talking about how ugly something is. Looking at something from different angles. Cool.
I consider one of the greatest things George Washington did was step down after two terms in office thereby setting a precedent for future presidents. For an institution to survive it has to have a relatively secure way of passing leadership on to the next generation. For any leader to hang on until death (barring death at a young age) is a bad sign (well one could use the hereditary method but that has its drawbacks also).
I note that the Society of Friends looks to several female leaders, early and later, such as Margaret Fell. They were/are never much into single permanent leaders though people might be recognized as having a particular vocation (e.g., John Woolman on slavery abolition or Elizabeth Fry on prison reform).
As for the “beauty of complementarity” that only exists if people each with their own individual set of abilities and vocations, which may change over time, work together to produce a greater whole. Decisions are by consensus. Think Sacred Harp music, different voices, no set leader.
The Friends are the most egalitarian congregations I’ve encountered. If folks don’t know, many Quaker congregations practice silent worship, with people speaking only if prompted by the Light.
Jerome,
The Countess of Huntingdon denomination in Britain – about 27 churches
___
Bellsyewgreen – Pastor John Saunders
Bolney Village Chapel – Pastor Simon Allaby
Broad Oak Chapel – acting pastor Chris Smith
Cradley Chapel – pastor Ken Hart
Goring Free Church – Pastor Nigel Gordon-Potts
Hailsham Gospel Mission – Minister Dave Sweetman
Mortimer West End Chapel – no pastor, a leadership team
New Connexions Free – Pastor not listed; church contact is russell Grief
Rosedale Community – Pastor Bethany Burge – 6 people in leadership, only 1 man
Sheppey Evangelical – Pastor Joe Gregory
Shoreham Free – Pastor Peter Earle
South Street Free Church – Pastor David Batchelor
The Countess Free Church – Pastor Karl Relton
Woodmancote Church – Pastor Andrew Hiscock
Wormley Free – Pastor Ben Quant
Zion Community – Pastor Tim Dennick
NOTE: 4 or 5 churches were currently without pastors
Wow! That article is so bad so many ways. Lonnie became spiritually sterile apart from Chuck’s systematic teaching of Scripture, did a little drugs and immortality, and even took to wearing a clerical collar! And there’s this odd description of Smith’s wife Kay as “dutiful” – especially in the light of Smith allegedly dabbling in a little immorality of his own and almost trading her in for a newer model.
That’s because Wesley changed his mind over time about women in ministry. He wrote his Notes in 1755. The sermon Visiting the Sick was written sometime after 1780. Wesley originally held that women could not be elders, in line with the typical Anglican dogma. Over time, however, women approached him and argued that they could not only serve as preachers, elders and deaconesses, but that God had gifted them and was calling them to their gifts. He resisted a long time. His own mother, Susanna, persistently (stubbornly) insisted that women could teach and preach. He finally relented and issued a “trial” license to preach to a Sarah Crosby. Her ministry was highly fruitful and clearly honored by God. Wesley gave in and began ordaining women to ministry.
Today, his mother, Susanna, would probably be regarded as a liberal feminist by most evangelicals. In fact, she was a deeply devout, highly self-educated, intelligent, and spiritual lady. A lady of remarkable and stubborn faith. She valued scripture, prayer, a close walk with God, a disciplined life, and education.
People who mind their own P(s) and Q(s) and who don’t do the kinds of things to others that they wouldn’t done to them, don’t need to be ruled.
Christendom as a whole has been too slow to embrace the New Testament ideal of equality regardless of race, class or gender (Galatians 3:28).
“ This is because too many men wanted to conquer, possess, and take over that which did not start with them or belong to them. “
Mara R,
A three decade long scientific study (Buffalo University, NY) showed that males are almost twice as likely to have a narcissistic personality disorder. Categorizations: leadership/authority, exploitative/entitlement, grandiose, exhibitionism.
I wonder, in which subsets of our society are we most likely to see these traits on full display?
And don’t need to rule.
“ The “beauty of complementarity” is an ugly thing. “
Max,
Yeah, but only from one side.
The other side can’t see the ugly because they benefit from the ugly. The ugly satisfies their narcissistic appetites.
Where sin abounds, yes. This is what tends to happen. It is the sin of patriarchy. It was the spirit of the age when Jesus was born into the world. He was born during a time of deep darkness and oppression, the Roman Empire that was extremely patriarchal.
But in the Church, the Body of Christ, we are not supposed to rule and lord over people. Jesus specifically speaks against this in Matthew 20:25-28.
Now present day patriarchs are trying to drag us back into the dark ages because they desire to rule as the gentiles do rather than obey Jesus. They twist the words of Paul to contradict the Words of Jesus. Then they completely ignore what Jesus taught.
So, unless you are into anarchy or Darwinism (or some other -ism) rather than Christianity, I’m not sure what your point is.
Good corollary.
Thank you!
They have studies on this as well.
Narcs like positions of authority, like being cops, CEOs and… wait for it… clergy.
AND narcs are are drawn to churches with strict and oppressive gender roles. That’s why there are so many of them in those circles.
It’s almost as if Paul’s writings are to be adhered to like ultra-orthodox Jews follow Torah.
“It’s almost as if Paul’s writings are to be adhered to like ultra-orthodox Jews follow Torah.”
++++++++++++++++
paul’s writings easily transfer to a checklist on a clipboard.
much easier for monitoring (for monitoring others, and oneself if one needs a series of “if x, then y” things for machine-like predictability and control.
Jesus’ teachings, not really. seems to me he was more about principles. which leaves tons of ambiguity and unknowns about the “how”.
…which really suits the complexity of life in all its variety and i would imagine infinite combinations of things.
actually, i think paul was more about principle, too. we only have snatches of his thinking – we don’t have the source material which he was replying to.
but really…. should we be treating his stuff as equally authoritative as Jesus’ stuff?
You will find narcissists in professions where they can control people and elicit adulation. You will find it in “full display” in mega-church, as celebrity “pastors” strut their stuff. Of course, mini-church also has its share of these sickos.
Indeed. It was a man who coined that phrase, not a woman.
I’m not a complementarian, an egalitarian, or a vegetarian. I agree with Paul when he said “Gone is the distinction between Jew and Greek, slave and free man, male and female — you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28) … clarifying some gender-role Scripture that he had spoken earlier.
Hard to see the Ugly when you personally benefit from that Ugly.
The Other Guy’s Ugly, though, if Fair Game.
With these guys, the only choice is “equally authoritative” or “more so” (as with Hal Lindsay’s Late Great Planet Earth).
[sarc]
“After all, what did that Rabbi from Nazareth know?
WE’re The Ones Who Have The Direct Line To God!”
[/sarc]
Penetrate, Colonize, Conquer, Plant?
The side that has to Feel the Whip held by the side to whom it is a beautiful thing.
Everything Washington did in public during those eight years was with the understanding he was establishing Precedent for all future Presidents and Congresses. They knew they were starting Tradition.
They develop “Dictator’s Disease”, just like a certain V.V.Putin after the same number of years.
I kind of thought about that guy who said those words when I wrote what I did.
The passages about silence and head coverings were responding to matters we don’t know about.
The Love Chapter (I Corinthians 13), though, sets a wonderful vision and standard, worthy of Jesus.
God gave Paul a mind, and he gave minds to the rest of us too. We should feel free to think and differentiate.
Friend,
“We should feel free to think and differentiate.”
++++++++++++
hear hear.
it’s lonely being a free spirit in this religion, though.
elastigirl,
Read your comment from yesterday and nodded as I was reading it because my spirit was in so much agreement with it. But didn’t have anything to say at the time except “I agree” and I generally don’t make those comments unless I need a place holder in a long, fast moving thread for when I pick up reading the next time.
But now I’ve slept on it and still think it’s a good comment that doesn’t need much added to it.
But along the same lines, I’ve complained about the church calling the Bible, especially Paul’s letters, as an “owner’s manual” for life. They didn’t have anything like an owner’s manual back then. They were far more organic and connected to nature and the natural world.
We come from an industrialized point of view. And when we try to cram the Bible down into a clipboard or owner’s manual situation, there’s gonna be trouble.
I’ve called people on using Ephesian’s chapter five as the “trouble shooting” section of the Big Owner’s Manual from the sky. That is what the book “Love and Respect does to that chapter.
He’s not loving you like you want? Respect him more. That will fix everything!
She’s not respecting you the way you want? Make sure she knows you love her. Silver bullet!
This doesn’t work. I know. I tried.
Add me to the Free Spirit Club that wants to love Jesus in spite of the rigid, legalistic clipboard Christians that have overtaken the churches.
John 3:8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it is coming from and where it is going; so is everyone who has been born of the Spirit.
This reminds me of a youth minister who told us that God doesn’t tell us what to eat for breakfast. He also told us that God did not want couples to hold hands before marriage. I really wanted to say, “What’s worse? Cap’n Crunch, or holding hands with your fiance?”
Jesus healed others on the Sabbath. I’ll take Jesus’s approach any day.
In what book of the Bible, chapter & verse, did God say that?
Friend,
“He also told us that God did not want couples to hold hands before marriage. I really wanted to say, “What’s worse? Cap’n Crunch, or holding hands with your fiance?”
Jesus healed others on the Sabbath. I’ll take Jesus’s approach any day.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
good grief…. common sense only goes so far in religion before fear, paranoia and the need to control flares up again with raging flames.
brings to mind riding a bike with no hands.
i remember seeing other kids riding with no hands and i wanted to be able to do it so bad. so i taught myself, letting go little by little.
first letting go of the handlebars with one hand for a split second… then a 2 seconds… 3 seconds… then switching hands…
then letting go of both hands for a split second… 2 seconds… 3 seconds…
before long i was coming home from school riding along, no hands, relaxed & leaning back & casually holding my books to my chest, and letting the laws of physics do the rest. smug as can be.
.
.
turns out i wasn’t really letting go, but rather trusting in this invisible force that i could feel kick in — this invisible centrifugal force (i think that’s what it is, at least).
I didn’t notice it at first. but the more i risked letting go, and risked doing it for longer periods of time, the more it ‘rose up to meet me’ (so to speak).
goodness, my religion makes everyone terrified. terrified of faith in the invisible — faith, the raison d’etre, for which they pat themselves on the back thinking they have.
Don’t forget “Mane, Mane, Tekel, Uparshin”.
elastigirl,
“goodness, my religion makes everyone terrified. terrified of faith in the invisible — faith, the raison d’etre, for which they pat themselves on the back thinking they have.”
+++++++++++
sorry – didn’t like how that sounded.
“Some” are like this.
the context i’m mainly thinking of is instilling fear and terror in people who are in the sphere of one’s influence.
and the next screwed up step is controlling them through fear and terror.
…of goblins
the scary goblins running here, there, and everywhere and the horrible bogeyman who’s going to flush you down the toilet!!
Nowhere does it say any such thing, but if you (generic you) look hard enough, and are clever enough, you can manufacture just about anything you want from the Bible as raw material.
Let’s face it, much of what they (both reformed and non) teach is a fear-based religion.
Fear that if you (generic you) do not ‘believe’ a certain way, you’re going to hell when you die.
It was your forward motion, staying in motion, that kept you going, and also kept your front wheel tracking true.
Centrifugal force had zero to do with it.
But yeah, it was a good illustration anyways.
Certainly. It’s the stuff that New Calvinism is made of … just to note one current example of where Scriptural eisegesis has led many astray.
And once you’e been immersed in it, you will never be able to completely get rid of it.
Like Frodo after he bore the Ring to Mount Doom, some of the damage will be permanent.
You will never be completely free of the God of Wrath who personally hates your guts.
Inertia in general, with some help from the gyroscope effect (itself a corollary of inertia).
Wish I still had my high school physics notesheet covering most all of Newtonian physics.
But in the Zero-Sum game of Power Struggle, there is NO third alternative. Only Dom or Sub, Top or Bottom, Master or Slave, Hold the Whip or Feel the Whip, Kill or Be Killed, Eat or Be Eaten.
“When you play the Game of Thrones, there is No Middle Ground. You Win or You Die.”
— Queen Cersei Lannister
As ex-SBC, I walked away to great joy because departure is a renouncement of the “new” reformed Calvinism creeping in to choke what was once a S. Baptist “priesthood of believers,” treated equally in the eyes of a loving all-comers God.
We can only completely love (as Jesus directed) a sovereign and glorious God not of controlling predestination but of caring freedom who wants us voluntarily to choose mutual, loving and equal relationship as non-puppet humans according to the way, truth and life of Jesus. The alternative deity made in John Calvin’s murderous vindictive image (a hyper-patriarch predestining to hell before birth much of humanity regardless of their later character or choice) is not the God of Jesus, or of my forebears.
That Calvinist deity is as tyrannical and terrifying as the worst portrayals of pagan gods requiring child sacrifice. (No wonder the “new” reformed try to sidestep the import of their own theology with word play of disingenuous semantics to divert the congregants.) Nothing can mask that this is not our God of love.
All believers who deeply trust Jesus have cause to renounce the false deity of Calvinism, and the corollary male “headship” doctrines Jesus never taught, as idolatrous. Too many “new” reformed/Calvinists are like the biblically reported demons who come as though angels of light with their sparkling public presentation and funding development skills — but it’s always a con (or a cover for those who enjoy subjugating women).
I call all forms of Calvinism out as being three-fold enemies of: (1) the love of God, (2) the gospel of Jesus, and (3) the purpose of the Holy Spirit.
For the goodness of people overall, so that the gospel of Jesus Christ prevails over the contrary hard-hearted Calvinist/Augustinian/neo-Platonic determinist philosophy, I pray that all “new” reformed/Calvinist leaders fail to keep or gain adherents of their twisted doctrine — also that their congregants authentically re-group into true “ekklesia” called out to love God and one another equally for carrying out God’s good will.
The love of God and the power of the Holy Spirit lets me love those misguided dangerous Calvinist leaders enough to pray for their restoration and redemption — instead, as John Calvin arranged for his enemies in Geneva, of political murder. By his poisonous fruits, we know John Calvin and those who follow him instead of Jesus.
Nancy2(aka Kevlar),
Amen, sister! Not seeing your comment until later, I posted a standalone comment far below your beginning of this comment thread, and to support your departure from SBC, here it is again:
As ex-SBC, I walked away to great joy because departure is a renouncement of the “new” reformed Calvinism creeping in to choke what was once a S. Baptist “priesthood of believers,” treated equally in the eyes of a loving all-comers God.
We can only completely love (as Jesus directed) a sovereign and glorious God not of controlling predestination but of caring freedom who wants us voluntarily to choose mutual, loving and equal relationship as non-puppet humans according to the way, truth and life of Jesus. The alternative deity made in John Calvin’s murderous vindictive image (a hyper-patriarch predestining to hell before birth much of humanity regardless of their later character or choice) is not the God of Jesus, or of my forebears.
That Calvinist deity is as tyrannical and terrifying as the worst portrayals of pagan gods requiring child sacrifice. (No wonder the “new” reformed try to sidestep the import of their own theology with word play of disingenuous semantics to divert the congregants.) Nothing can mask that this is not our God of love.
All believers who deeply trust Jesus have cause to renounce the false deity of Calvinism, and the corollary male “headship” doctrines Jesus never taught, as idolatrous. Too many “new” reformed/Calvinists are like the biblically reported demons who come as though angels of light with their sparkling public presentation and funding development skills — but it’s always a con (or a cover for those who enjoy subjugating women).
I call all forms of Calvinism out as being three-fold enemies of: (1) the love of God, (2) the gospel of Jesus, and (3) the purpose of the Holy Spirit.
For the goodness of people overall, so that the gospel of Jesus Christ prevails over the contrary hard-hearted Calvinist/Augustinian/neo-Platonic determinist philosophy, I pray that all “new” reformed/Calvinist leaders fail to keep or gain adherents of their twisted doctrine — also that their congregants authentically re-group into true “ekklesia” called out to love God and one another equally for carrying out God’s good will.
The love of God and the power of the Holy Spirit lets me love those misguided dangerous Calvinist leaders enough to pray for their restoration and redemption — instead, as John Calvin arranged for his enemies in Geneva, of political murder. By his poisonous fruits, we know John Calvin and those who follow him instead of Jesus.
It’s annoying yet typical —because the internet has been overrun with misinformation by the “new” reformed YRR/ Calvinists and other controlling men of putative faith — to see so many links by apologists for the pseudepigraphic (fake) Pauline pastoral letters ostensibly to Timothy and Titus from which scriptural “inerrancy” and male “headship” doctrines derive contrary to anything Jesus taught as biblically reported to be gospel.
Here’s a better and more accurate link from Oxford University as to the overwhelming majority of credible scholars who agree that Paul did not write those pastoral “epistles”: https://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780190276393/student/ch17/summary/
There are countless scholars who, if you were to assume the authenticity of the Pauline-attributed pastoral letters, from the original language better translate them into English not to exclude women from church leadership, speaking to adults in religious meetings, or equal partnership in marriage.
However, the point of the Oxford University scholarship compilation suggests to me that we should not rely on these pastoral letters for anything but a look into the fallen human condition, as reproof for not faking texts that will be mistranslated and mainstreamed later to discriminate against the female half of humanity.
Scholars by overwhelming agreement note that the pastoral letters of Paul were not written by him but by one imposter — not in Paul’s lifetime, linguistic usage or style of writing but later by an unknown somebody at a second-to-third century time when Christian gnosticism and hierarchical male leadership organization had developed through Roman influence.
The scholars use modern historical critical analysis as well as scientific dating of manuscript copies, because there are no documentary “originals” of any of Paul’s writings (or any parts of the New Testament). The only manuscript copies that still exist typically come from church-related collections.
The earliest manuscript copy of a NT text is a fragment from the Gospel of John, Rylands Library Papyrus P52, dated as early as the first half of the 2nd century. Other manuscript fragments and partial copies date from second-to-fourth centuries, whereas Paul’s evangelism and genuine letter-writing began, scholars generally agree, around 50 A.D.
We do not have to burn our Bibles to stop viewing the prejudiced translations into English of questionable Pauline letters as “inerrant.” The gospel, as reported biblically by John, identifies Jesus as God’s living Word, and to cast Pauline pseudepigraphic letters as a higher authority than Jesus is idolatrous. Let’s do better!