One of the reasons I wrote Beyond Authority and Submission was because of my concerns over what’s being taught about women and men in some facets of conservative Christianity. It’s not an esoteric, academic discussion. There are real world consequences. What we believe about the nature of women and men and how we should interact has wide-reaching effects on us as individuals and in our various relationships.
I’m working on a new project, and I need your help. My plan is to write more about the practical outworkings of prevalent beliefs about women and men. I’d like to use personal stories to illustrate the effects these teachings have had on real women, men, families, and churches. That’s where you come in.
I’d like to hear your stories, and I want to give you the opportunity to be heard. I’m curious what effect these teachings about women and men have had on you as an individual, on your marriage, on your family, on your church, or on your relationships. Whatever you’d like to share.
At the bottom of this post is a contact form. Messages sent through the form are emailed directly to me and do not post to the website. I want to protect your privacy. My plan is to change names and identifying information in the stories I use.
If you’d like more information, feel free to use the contact form to ask me any questions you may have.
As I mentioned recently, I’m co-hosting the Theology Gals podcast with Coleen Sharp. For the last several weeks, Coleen and I have discussed topics related to my book, Beyond Authority and Submission. It’s been great to have a chance to address these issues in greater detail. I’ll link them here in case you haven’t had a chance to listen.
To kick off the series, Coleen and Angela interviewed me about my book Beyond Authority and Submission: Women and Men in Marriage, Church, and Society. Beyond Authority and Submission with Rachel Miller
1 Timothy 2:11-15 is sometimes used to argue that all women are more easily deceived than men, but is this a correct understanding of the text? In this episode, Coleen and I discuss whether women are more easily deceived and the consequences of this view. Are Women More Easily Deceived?
Next Coleen and I discuss various views on masculine and feminine in the church. Should churches be masculine? Is there such a thing as masculine or feminine worship or piety? Masculine and Feminine in the Church
Our next topic was the purpose of marriage. Is marriage for procreation? Is it a parable of the gospel? Is it for our sanctification? Purpose of Marriage
Coleen and I interviewed Dr. Todd Bordow on the topic of divorce. Dr. Bordow is the pastor of Cornerstone OPC in Houston, Texas. He wrote his doctoral thesis on divorce. His paper is linked in the episode notes. Divorce with Pastor Todd Bordow
Editor’s Note: Pastor Jones and others have explained that they believe I misrepresented Doug Wilson’s comments on 1 Thess. 4:4-5. I’ve updated this article with additional context from Wilson’s blog.
When I wrote Beyond Authority and Submission, I knew that not everyone would agree with me. As I mentioned in the last post, I expected some people to disagree with what I believe about women and men in marriage, church, and society. A handful of men have written critical reviews, and I will address some of their concerns in the near future.
In an Amazon review, Pastor Mark Jones questions the accuracy of my research and accuses me of misquoting Doug Wilson and not citing the original sources correctly:
“She also displays a failure to properly read those she is disagreeing with. In some cases the citations do not even make any sense when you check the original sources. It is one thing to think Doug Wilson has bad theology, but you cannot misquote him and attribute things to him that he did not say. She does this a number of times, which shows it perhaps isn’t a mistake”
These are serious charges to make. I took considerable care in my research to quote and cite sources accurately. In addition to my own checking and double checking of my sources, the editors at P&R Publishing also made sure that the citations were accurate. Mistakes can be made, and it’s always possible that some error wasn’t caught. That’s why I’ve gone back through my book and compared each Doug Wilson citation with the original source.
I apologize in advance for the length of this article. Since Pastor Jones didn’t indicate which quotations or citations he found problems with, I can’t be certain which concerned him. What follows are every quote and citation of Doug Wilson in my book with the original source for comparison.
In this first citation, I cite Doug Wilson as an example of someone who defines masculinity as having authority and taking initiative.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 108
Next, I cite Wilson as defining masculine men as assertive, confident, and not afraid of taking risks.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 108
In the original source, Wilson wrote:
Doug Wilson, Her Hand in Marriage, chap. 2, loc. 391-92, Kindle
I cite Wilson here as saying that women have a certain weakness as part of God’s design.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 109
In the original source, Wilson writes:
Doug Wilson, Reforming Marriage, 38
Here is a direct quote from Wilson in my book.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 110
And in the original source Wilson says:
Doug Wilson, Her Hand in Marriage, chap. 3, loc, 532-33, Kindle
In this quote from my book, I cite Wilson as an example of teaching that if women leave the protection of their fathers and husbands, they put themselves at risk of being assaulted or raped. I use Dinah here as an example of a woman who was raped.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 111
In this next selection from my book I quote Wilson as saying men should be “resident theologians” in their homes.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 135
In the original source, Wilson writes:
Doug Wilson, Reforming Marriage, pg 40-41 (pg numbers from the revised 2005 ed)
It is possible that this citation is slightly off in the page numbering. I think this is a matter of different page numbers in different editions or versions of the book. If it is an error, I’ll happily ask the publisher to make a correction. But the quote does appear in the book as shown above.
The next quote I used at the beginning of a chapter. It’s a direct quote.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 153
The original source:
Doug Wilson, Reforming Marriage, pg 80
Here I cite Wilson as saying men were created to be dominant leaders.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 154
In the original source, Wilson writes:
Doug Wilson, Reforming Marriage, pg 24
In this selection, I cite Wilson as one who writes about the significance of the length of women’s hair.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 158
This selection is another direct quote from Wilson. In the editing process, while rearranging this paragraph from paraphrase to direct quotation, the word “most” was added. I apologize for the error. I’ve asked the publisher to correct it however possible.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 158
The original source with the surrounding context:
Doug Wilson, Her Hand in Marriage, chap. 3, loc. 688-89, Kindle
Here I cite Wilson as teaching that a man has authority to overrule promises or decisions his wife or daughters make.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 159
After a lengthy discussion on Numbers 30 and other passages, Wilson writes:
Doug Wilson, Her Hand in Marriage, chap. 1, loc. 295-96, Kindle
To give greater context for his whole discussion, here is another brief excerpt from the same chapter:
Doug Wilson, Her Hand in Marriage, chap. 1, loc. 173ff, Kindle
In this selection, I cite Wilson as an example of teaching that women are called to help men in the work God gives to men.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 160
These are all of the Doug Wilson citations and quotations in my book. I also cited Pastor Jones once in my book. Apparently he’s said elsewhere that I didn’t accurately represent what he wrote. Here is the citation in question.
Rachel Green Miller, Beyond Authority and Submission, pg 168
I cited Pastor Jones’ blog post as an example of someone who considers friendship or companionship in marriage to be a downgrade, a diminishment of the marriage relationship. Here are the relevant sections of Pastor Jones’ post:
Mark Jones, “My Spouse is My Best Friend”
It certainly was not my intention to misrepresent Pastor Jones or his beliefs. I believe my use of his post was a fair representation of what he wrote.
As for the Doug Wilson citations, did I “misquote him and attribute things to him that he did not say”? You can see in these comparisons that I have accurately quoted, cited, and represented what he’s written.
It’s one thing to disagree with an author. It’s quite another to accuse her of mishandling original sources. Perhaps Pastor Jones should retract his public accusations.
It’s been an interesting month since my book, Beyond Authority and Submission, launched. I’ve heard encouraging feedback from many readers. I’m thankful that what I’ve written has been helpful for so many. That’s an answered prayer.
As I was writing, I knew that there would be push back from certain corners of the Reformed interwebs. I’ve been writing and blogging for over a decade now, and I know what to expect. I even address it in a section of my book on women writing and speaking about theology. The responses are often all too predictable.
The following excerpt is from Chapter 13, “Prevalent Teaching on Women and Men in the Church.”
Some conservative Christians debate whether women should blog and write about theology. Some say that it’s fine. Others say it’s appropriate only if they are writing, blogging, or podcasting to a female audience. A few say that it’s inappropriate, because men shouldn’t learn theology from women.1
Some are also concerned about women bloggers and writers correcting or addressing false teaching. That kind of confrontation is considered by some to be contrary to a woman’s nature as yielding and submissive and to put her in a position to judge or lead men.2 Women who write or speak publicly about theology, especially if the topic involves false teaching, are likely to get one of two responses. Those who disagree with them will often tell them, “You can’t correct a man—especially a pastor/ teacher as respected as So-and-So. You’re a woman!” The response isn’t much better from those who share their concerns. From those people, women may very well be told, “I appreciate the work you’re doing. But you shouldn’t be doing this, because you’re a woman.”3
In these ways, women in the church are being restricted beyond the boundaries that the Bible sets in place. Instead of being respected for their essential contributions to the ministry and life of the church, women are being treated as unnecessary accessories when they follow the extrabiblical rules and as rebellious troublemakers when they don’t.
See Tim Bayly, “Rachel Miller and Valerie Hobbs: Where Is the Apostle Paul When We Need Him?” Baylyblog, September 4, 2015, http://baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09 /rachel-miller-and-valerie-hobbs-where-apostle-paul-when-we-need-him.
Wow! Thank you all for your help in getting the word out about Beyond Authority and Submission. Launch week has been a great success. Congratulations to giveaway winners Casey Maura and Alissa Hollander. Please check your email for a message from me. I’ll need your mailing addresses.
I’m pleased to announce that Coleen Sharp has asked me to be the new co-host for the Theology Gals podcast. I’m looking forward to being a regular part of the podcast. You can listen to my interview with Coleen and Angela in this week’s episode. And because she guessed correctly on Twitter, Brianna Lambert has also won a copy of my book.
Thank you all for your encouragement. Happy reading!
I’m pleased to announce that my book, Beyond Authority and Submission: Women and Men in Marriage, Church, and Society has been released today! There have been some glitches with Amazon about when the book will be available, but there are plenty of opportunities to purchase the book today.
To celebrate the launch of my book, I’m giving away two copies!! To enter the giveaway, please leave a comment on this blog post. You’ll be entered extra times for sharing this post on social media. Just let me know in the comments where you shared. Winners will be announced early next week. Thanks!
Note: Amazon is currently backordered, but more copies are on their way. WTS bookstore and the other links here have plenty of copies ready to go.
Amazon (and Kindle) link– if you buy a hardcopy from Amazon, you can download the Kindle version for free.
In this last excerpt from my book, Beyond Authority and Submission, I want to discuss the importance of our ordained leaders being qualified. While the Bible limits ordination to qualified men, not every man is qualified or called to ministry. What happens when all men are treated as leaders and potential leaders?
Beyond Authority and Submission: Women and Men in Marriage, Church, and Society will be available September 3. You can click the links to pre-order on Amazon or Barnes and Noble. A Kindle version will be available on the release date.
A focus on masculine authority in the church diminishes qualified
male ordination rather than promoting it. If churches consider men to be
leaders simply because they are male, it can lead to the ordination of
unqualified men or of men who haven’t been called to leadership. As we have
discussed, the Bible restricts ordination to qualified men, but that doesn’t
mean that every man is qualified to lead.
Besides the ordination of unqualified men, other types of damage
are done when disqualified church officers aren’t removed and when unordained
men do the work that only ordained leaders should do. Certain aspects of church life should be
done by our ordained leaders, such as preaching the Word, administering the
sacraments, and performing the disciplinary function of the church. The attitude
in our churches shouldn’t be “These are roles for the ordained leaders, but any
man can do them in a pinch.” When just any man, ordained or not, is allowed to
carry out these roles in the church, it undermines the importance of ordination
and the ministerial work that ordained leaders should be doing. It also
contributes to a masculine culture in the church—one in which men are
prioritized over women in the church’s work.
When churches focus on training men, they often pay little
attention to what the women are learning. Some think that it doesn’t matter too
much—it’s only the women. And so false teaching creeps into the church by way
of poorly trained and neglected women.[1]
[1]
See Aimee Byrd, No Little Women: Equipping All Women in the Household of God
(Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2016), 31.
The next excerpt I want to share from my upcoming book, Beyond Authority and Submission, is from Chapter 6: “Later Feminism and the Conservative Christian Response.” Part of the history that I cover in the book is the various waves of feminism and how society and the church responded to them. And how the response to feminism has shaped our beliefs about women and men.
Beyond Authority and Submission: Women and Men in Marriage, Church, and Society will be available September 3. You can click the links to pre-order on Amazon or Barnes and Noble. A Kindle version will be available on the release date.
It’s not that conservative Christians believe that the feminist movement didn’t do any good. They do—but they also believe that women were content until the feminist movement. As one complementarian book explains, “Male-dominated culture, or patriarchy, isn’t the problem that feminism made it out to be. It’s not the real reason women were unhappy, if they really were unhappy. Why not? Because if it were, women would be happier after the feminist movements successes, but they aren’t.”[1]
Much of what’s being taught about the nature of women and men and gender roles in marriage, church, and society started out as a response to the feminist movement—or at least to aspects of it. For example, the belief that feminism makes men effeminate and turns women into “‘men’ who happen to be biologically capable of having children”[2] has led to particular definitions of masculinity and femininity.
As the anti-suffrage postcards did, some conservatives today depict feminists as being loud and aggressive, demanding of their own way, ambitious, and career-oriented. This goes against what they believe women were created to be, as we will see in the next chapter. Let’s see how this reaction to feminism has influenced conservative Christian teaching on the nature of women and men.
[1] Mary A. Kassian and Nancy Leigh DeMoss, True Woman 101: Divine Design; An Eight-Week Study on Biblical Womanhood (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2012), 137, nook.
[2] Voddie Baucham Jr., What He Must Be: . . . If He Wants to Marry My Daughter (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2009), 152.
[3] See Kassian and DeMoss, True Woman 101, 118–20.
This next excerpt from my upcoming book explains the title Beyond Authority and Submission. Authority and submission are important aspects to some of our relationships, but they shouldn’t be the whole of our discussions about women and men. A hyper focus on authority and submission can cause us to lose sight of important biblical themes.
Beyond Authority and Submission: Women and Men in Marriage, Church, and Society will be available September 3. You can click the links to pre-order on Amazon or Barnes and Noble. A Kindle version will be available on the release date.
In conservative Christian circles, many conversations about women and men start and end with authority and submission. Who’s in charge? Who’s allowed to do what? These are reasonable questions to ask. At the same time, the Bible doesn’t start and end with authority and submission—it is Jesus’s story from first to last. If we miss that message, then it doesn’t matter what else we believe. No good deeds or proper understanding of women, men, and gender will save us.
That doesn’t mean that authority and submission aren’t important. We shouldn’t dismiss them—but they aren’t the focus of the Bible. When we concentrate on maintaining a hierarchy—or on overthrowing it—we forget our unity and interdependence and our call to mutual service. Women can become completely dependent on men and devoted to serving their interests; men can forget their need for women and can focus more on enforcing submission than on serving their wives and families.
Contrary to what popular culture states, women and men are not from different planets. We’re complementary—more alike than different. Without denying the differences, we need to stop defining women as the polar opposite of men and vice versa. Such divisive definitions create and encourage unnecessary conflict and set up unrealistic and unbiblical expectations for how women and men should behave.
Paul frequently refers to fellow believers—both men and women—as his co-laborers. The word he uses, sunergos, means “a companion in work.”[2] As we will see in the next sections, co-laborer captures the sense of what we were created to be and what we are called to be in Christ.
[1] Michelle Lee-Barnewall, Neither Complementarian nor Egalitarian: A Kingdom Corrective to the Evangelical Gender Debate (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016), NOOK, addresses the biblical themes of unity (see 24–25) and leading through service (see 108–9).
[2] Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, s.v. “sunergos,” available online from Bible Hub, accessed June 18, 2018, http://biblehub.com/greek/4904.htm, Strong’s number 4904.
Yesterday, I reposted an article on what I believe about women and men and why I’m not a feminist or an egalitarian. Part of my article discussed how complementarianism as a movement has been defined. There was some confusion over my comments, so I’d like to make some clarifications.
First, here are my beliefs about women and men. These are what I believe:
God made man: male and female in the image of God
In Christ, male and female are equal before God
Husbands are called to sacrificial, servant leadership of their wives, loving them as Christ loves the church
Wives are called to voluntary submission to their husbands, submitting to them as the church submits to Christ
Ordination is restricted to qualified men in the church
Marriage is between one man and one woman, ideally for life
Men and women need each other and depend on each other
The following beliefs about women and men are prevalent in complementarian teaching (I’ll get to that in a moment). I do NOT believe the following:
women were created to be submissive, responsive, soft
men were created to be leaders, providers, strong
men are supposed to be priests for their families
women are supposed to be at home and not in the workforce (unless there’s a really good reason, but even then)
divorce is wrong even when there is biblical justification for it
the eternal subordination of the Son, especially as it is applied to men and women
all women are rebellious feminists at heart and men must put down that rebellion (an interpretation of Genesis 3:16)
To clarify, these are commonly taught within complementarianism. That does not mean that everyone who calls him/herself a complementarian believes these things. I know many do not. As I said immediately following this list in my article, the point was that when I critiqued these particular teachings, I was called a feminist, a closet egalitarian, or a “thin” complementarian, i.e not a “true” complementarian. The comments were somewhat tongue-in-cheek, because no one should have to hold to these beliefs to maintain their conservative creds.
But my comments about what makes a “true” complementarian are based in fact. Each of those points on the list are taught by the people who founded and defined the complementarian movement. Brief history lesson (for those who may not know), in response to the feminist movement (2nd wave), some concerned Christians founded the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW). They chose the term complementarian to describe their beliefs because it “suggests both equality and beneficial differences between men and women.” They rejected traditionalist because it “implies an unwillingness to let Scripture challenge traditional patterns of behavior” and hierarchicalist because it “overemphasizes structured authority while giving no suggestion of equality or the beauty of mutual interdependence.” [1]
The Danvers Statement, which was published in January 1989, outlines CBMW’s philosophy. In addition to the Danvers Statement, CBMW published a collection of essays on complementarianism in 1991. The collection, which was edited by Wayne Grudem and John Piper, was published as Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism. Together, the Danvers Statement and this publication define complementarianism as a movement. Since then, many of the founders and council members of CBMW have written extensively on biblical manhood and womanhood. These writings are what I referenced in my summary.
Here are some examples of CBMW authors defining complementarianism as I summarized.
Women were created to be submissive, responsive, soft:
At the heart of mature femininity is a freeing disposition to affirm, receive and nurture strength and leadership from worthy men in ways appropriate to a woman’s differing relationships.
John Piper, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2006), 48.
Softness is at the core of what it means to be a woman … A woman is a responder. Having a receptive, responsive spirit is at the core of what it means to be a woman. A godly woman is an “amenable” woman – an agreeable woman. … It finds its expression in married life through a wife’s submission to her husband. But a soft, amenable disposition isn’t just for married women. It’s for women of all ages, regardless of marital status.
Mary Kassian and Nancy Leigh DeMoss, True Woman 101: Divine Design (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2012), 63, 69-70, Nook version.
Men were created to be leaders, providers, strong:
At the heart of mature masculinity is a sense of benevolent responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women in ways appropriate to a man’s differing relationships.
John Piper, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2006), 36.
Strength refers to a man’s manhood—his potency, virility, and procreative power.
Women are supposed to be at home and not in the workforce:
When a wife goes to work outside the home, often her husband and children go through culture shock. Suddenly the husband has added to his vocational work increased family assignments. He is frustrated over the increase in his own assignments and guilty over his wife’s increased fatigue and extended hours to keep up at home. God did give the husband the responsibility of providing for the family (Genesis 2:15). To sabotage his meeting that responsibility is often a debilitating blow to the man personally and to the marriage. A woman’s career can easily serve as a surrogate husband, as during employment hours she is ruled by her employer’s preferences. Because the wife loses much of her flexibility with the receipt of a paycheck, a husband must bend and adapt his schedule for emergencies with the children, visits to the home by repairmen, etc. This leaves two employers without totally committed employees and children without a primary caretaker utterly devoted to their personal needs and nurturing.
Dorothy Patterson, “The High Calling of Wife and Mother in Biblical Perspective,” in Piper and Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 375.
Divorce is wrong even when there is biblical justification for it:
I don’t think the Bible allows divorce and remarriage ever while the spouse is living.
John Piper, What Jesus Demands from the World (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2006), 303.
Taken together, Jesus and Paul teach that divorce is not an option for believers. The only exceptions that they allow are in cases of immorality or desertion. Neither Jesus nor Paul says that a person must be divorced if there is infidelity or desertion. They are simply saying that it can be permissible in those two situations … Nevertheless, covenant faithfulness within marriage sends a message to the world about Christ’s covenant faithfulness to his bride. For this reason, upholding this icon of the gospel ought to be a matter of first importance to every Christian spouse – even when that spouse has what would otherwise be legitimate grounds for dissolving the marriage.
Denny Burk, What Is the Meaning of Sex? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013), 134-135, emphasis original.
After all, God exists as one Godhead in three Persons, equal in glory but unequal in role. Within the Holy Trinity the Father leads, the Son submits to Him, and the Spirit submits to both (the Economic Trinity). But it is also true that the three Persons are fully equal in divinity, power, and glory (the Ontological Trinity). The Son submits, but not because He is God, Jr., an inferior deity. The ranking within the Godhead is a part of the sublime beauty and logic of true deity.
Raymond Ortlund, “Male-Female Equality and Male Headship Genesis 1-3,” in Piper and Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 103.
But subordination is also possible among equals: Christ is equal to God the Father and yet subject to Him (Philippians 2:6-8); believers are equal to one another and yet are admonished to “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Ephesians 5:21). In fact, one can be called to subordinate himself to someone who is inferior, as Christ submitted to Pontius Pilate, making “no reply, not even to a single charge” (Matthew 27:11-14). The mere fact that wives are told to be subject to their husbands tells us nothing about their status. It is the comparison of the relationship between husband and wife to the relationship of God the Father with God the Son that settles the matter of status forever.
Dorothy Patterson, “The High Calling of Wife and Mother in Biblical Perspective,” in Piper and Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 374.
At this point we must object and insist that authority and submission to authority are not pagan concepts. They are truly divine concepts, rooted in the eternal nature of the Trinity for all eternity and represented in the eternal submission of the Son to the Father and of the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son.
Wayne Grudem, “The Meaning of Kephale (“Head”): A Response to Recent Studies,” in Piper and Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 463.
The discussion about the creation of man in His own image – male and female He created them. The discussion about creation of male and female took place between members of the Godhead. It may have been between all three: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But at the very least, it involved the Father and the Son, as Scripture draws parallels between that relationship and the relationship of a husband and wife. When God created man and woman, He had the dynamic of His own relationship in mind. God created the two sexes to reflect something about God. He patterned the male-female relationship (“them”) after the “us/our” relationship that exists within the Godhead. He used His own relationship structure as the pattern. Paul confirms, in 1 Corinthians 11:3, that the relationship between a husband and wife is patterned after the relationship between God the Father and His Son. … God purposefully created marriage to reflect the headship structure that exists within the Godhead. But He also created marriage and sex to reflect some other truths about the Trinity. … the Father and Son experience a divine intimacy. Their relationship is one of closest communion. Communion in marriage bears witness to the spiritual, divine intimacy between the members of the Trinity.
Mary A. Kassian, Girls Gone Wise in a World Gone Wild (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2010), 139-140.
Virtually every woman is a feminist to one degree or another.
Mary Kassian and Nancy Leigh DeMoss, True Woman 101: Divine Design (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2012), 110, Nook version.
I hope this helps those who didn’t understand my previous article. These quotes are a brief sampling. There are many more examples of these beliefs and how they’ve influenced what’s being taught in the name of complementarianism. In my book, Beyond Authority and Submission, I go into greater detail and address why these are not biblical views. If you have questions, please feel free to contact me in the comments or through my About page.
[1] John Piper and Wayne Grudem, eds., Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism (repr., Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2006), xv.
A Daughter of the Reformation 